MAG 2: Pass Costs Onto Advertisers

This thread really got us to thinking. http://tinyurl.com/3vbwy3l we couldn't agree more. We've officially recanted on our suggestion to add subscription fees to MAG.


We all know that with the direction that MAG is taking, its evolution could give us something never seen before in a shooter. It could realistically create a sub-genre/series that could exceed COD in popularity if done well. Wouldn't that be a great pitch to potential advertisers and sponsors? Fans of games like MAG always talk about how the lack of an advertising budget hampered MAG. They also talk about new features they would love to have and how much a small subscription fee would help the game. So? What if advertisers and sponsors absorbed the advertising, production, subscription fees and server costs?

A recent post by NickelUK mentioned using advertisements during loading screens to pay server and developmental costs. He's got a point. There's plenty of money that potential sponsors and advertisers would gladly pay to pimp their products to people who might buy them. When we consider this, subscription fees seem almost lazy, like the easy way out. Charging customers when there are large corporations who would benefit greatly from a captive audience who has no choice but to view them? Would a 15 second movie teaser really ruin your online experience?

Wouldn't a weapon be the natural weapons to advertise in a shooter? Take the Desert Eagle or Barrett .50 cal for instance. Product Placement works! You think its an accident that those guns are as popular as they are? What gunmaker with half a brain wouldn't leap at the chance to expose potential customers to their products? Look at games like Madden for instance. Is Electronic Arts the only developer smart enough to use advertisers to keep high quality online play free? They shouldn't be. Do you think Reebok or Nike cleats make a bit of difference when it comes to gameplay? Not in the slightest, these are polygons we're talking about, its all visual. Players could literally be barefoot and run at the same speeds. Seeing footwear marketed everywhere certainly adds to their popularity. Also, its not an accident that Under Armor lobbied so hard to be in Madden 12, and only a fool would think they did so free of charge. Would it hurt gameplay to have to choose between a Heckler& Koch MP5 or a Remington Magnum sniper rifle? We doubt it.

There's really no limit to the amount of products that games with depth and potentially huge production costs could market: movies, softdrinks,clothing, eyewear, weapons. We've heard gamers who lack foresight passionately criticize advertisements and other "disruptions" to their game sessions, predictably these are usually the same people who whine and complain about the price of games and consider subscription fees to be a "deal breaker" although these are the very same elements that keep these costs from being passed onto consumers.

In the end it can only be a benefit to gameplay and an added element of realism if nothing else. JUST DO IT ZIPPER.