You may have already spotted this article on Advertising Age, suggesting that Sony is developing its plans for a PS3 in-game advertising system. From the report:
The maker of the PlayStation3 system will offer an open platform, meaning in-game-ad-serving companies Double Fusion, IGA and Google-owned AdScape all will be able to sell ads in games that run on PS3, according to people familiar with Sony's plans. The three companies will strike deals with the major game publishers creating PS3 games, such as Electronic Arts, Activision and Ubisoft. Increasingly, those who score the plum publisher deals will turn out to be the winners in the competitive and fast-growing space.
This open approach contrasts with the in-game advertising system on Xbox 360, where ads are all brokered through Massive. But how does it effect gamers? Well, it doesn't. Much. The increased competition between ad-servers will mean better rates for advertisers, of course, but it may also mean that the companies will seek to provide a better service. The Advertising Age piece quotes James Belcher, a senior writer at eMarketer who suggests, "Everyone's playing around with the best model - how to charge, what gamers will and will not put up with."
It's the latter part that may affect us. Will the likes of Double Fusion and IGA be seeking better ways to implement ads? In most studies, gamers have tended to say they're happy with in-game advertising as long as it's subtle and in context - maybe these factors will come more sharply into play in an open market.
This whole issue will become more interesting when Sony finally debuts its Home virtual social environment. Here, without the narrative restrictions forced by games, advertisers could be free to plaster their ad banners, trailers and promo games on every digital surface. What effect will competition have on this unappetising scenario?
