Google is pumped up about ads in mobile games and thinks you should be too.
You wouldn't be blamed for rolling your eyes, considering the message comes from a company that makes most of its money off advertising. But Jeff Birnbaum, head of gaming partnerships at Google, says that the smarter ads it has in mind pop up less frequently and lower the likelihood of annoying gamers. Relying on ads for revenue also means a publisher can offer you a complete game, rather than one that constantly nudges you to pay for extra lives or levels.
Birnbaum's enthusiasm for getting Google more involved in mobile games underscores the enormous potential in the market, which was worth an estimated $13 billion last year, according to researcher PwC. While almost all of that revenue comes from in-app purchases -- those levels or lives that cost you extra -- Birnbaum believes advertising will start to catch up because it represents an untapped area of growth.
"We're at a bit of a tipping point right now," Birnbaum said in an interview last month.
The Mountain View, California, company's push has an impact on gamers too. The search giant believes it can provide a better experience by serving you ads that target your interests.irnbaum points to an extreme case to show that Google-powered game ads can work in the best interests of both player and developer. When Etermax, the Buenos Aires-based creator of the hit mobile game Trivia Crack, agreed to stop sticking in commercials from any ad network other than Google's AdMob system, it produced some helpful changes for players.
The ads were more consistent, so if players wanted to close a video spot, they would find the button to tap in the same place every time. Tapping into just one ad network also means that the game runs fewer video ads and that individual players are less likely to run into repeat viewings of the same commercial.
"Seeing the same ad all over and over again...you don't like it as a user, you don't like it as a publisher, and you don't like it as an advertiser, too. It's bad for everyone," said Maximo Cavazzani, founder and CEO of Etermax.Birnbaum points to other benefits, such as speed, for game players when developers use fewer ad networks. Typically, a mobile game with advertising has multiple systems feeding ads to fill available slots in the game. These vendors bid in real time to fill that opening, but the seconds it takes to determine a winner add up to the time a player must wait for the spot to load, he said.
The more ad networks that a game includes, the bulkier the game is to download and store on your device, Birnbaum added. This means the next time you're deciding which storage-hogging app to delete so you can fit more photos on your phone, you may put in your crosshairs a game loaded up with ad vendors.Still, game advertising is bound to be a nuisance in the way that all commercials are, said Stephanie Llamas, director of research and consumer insights at video-game researcher SuperData. The least offensive ads pop up without interrupting play, she said, but more lucrative ads are going to be more disruptive. "Advertising in mobile games is going in the direction of all advertising online," she said. "People have learned to tune it out."
In newly industrialized countries, though, advertising in games is particularly vital, noted Fabien Nicolas, vice president of marketing at analytics company App Annie. Up to 70 percent of game maker revenue is coming from ads in places like India and Southeast Asia, where small incremental purchases are a greater burden on tighter disposable incomes, according to Nicolas.
Even in places like the US, where games are heavily weighted to in-app purchases, pressure is building on developers to squeeze more value out of the vast majority of players who never spend a dime, according to Nicolas. "We're going to see the makers who are really excelling at in-app purchases try to figure out how to monetize the other 95 percent," he said.
Apple defeats U.S. class action lawsuit over bag searches
Apple Inc (AAPL.O) defeated a U.S. class action lawsuit brought by Apple retail workers over bag search practices at the company's California brick and mortar outlets, according to a court ruling on Saturday.
The decision, from U.S. District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco, came in a case where employees sued to be reimbursed for the time taken by Apple to search their bags to ensure they did not steal any merchandise.
At least two Apple retail store workers complained directly to Chief Executive Tim Cook that the technology company's policy of checking retail employees' bags as a security precaution was embarrassing and demeaning, according to court filings made public earlier in the case.
Lee Shalov, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, said they are disappointed by the ruling and intend to explore all options, including a possible appeal.
An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment.
Class members in the bag search case included more than 12,000 current and former employees, according to a previous ruling.
Plaintiffs Amanda Frlekin and Dean Pelle alleged that "screenings", or bag searches, designed to discourage theft, are conducted every time sales reps leave the store, including for meal breaks. Lawsuits from within Apple's ranks are rare.
In the ruling, Alsup said Apple workers can choose not to bring a bag to work, and thus would not be subjected to the delays of a search. No Apple employee filed court papers asserting a special need to bring a bag, Alsup wrote.
"Rather than prohibiting employees from bringing bags and personal Apple devices into the store altogether," Alsup wrote, "Apple took a milder approach to theft prevention and offered its employees the option to bring bags and personal Apple devices into a store subject to the condition that such items must be searched when they leave the store."
The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California is Amanda Frlekin et al. vs. Apple Inc., 13-cv-03451.
HTC mocks Apple's '1984' ad
It's not easy to have fresh ideas.
It's slightly simpler to do something that's been done before -- and that's sometimes worked.
However, is it wise to do something that's been done before and hasn't worked?
HTC believes that the way to enter into real people's hearts is to create a pastiche of Apple's legendary "1984" ad and do it with all the aplomb of a coal miner practicing macrame with a pickax.
HTC's new ad for its One A9 phone attempts to prove that buying the phone is the way to be different.
It's an expression of rebellion. Well, if your version of rebellion is to run along a perfectly white dining table and smash a few things, while the dining mannequins stare straight ahead and look at you not at all.
t's hard to imagine how this ad was conceived and thought inspiring. Or even different.
Motorola tried to launch a tablet during the 2011 Super Bowl with a mockery of the "1984" spot. At least it was decently shot, even if it disappeared quickly into the ether of indifference.
You know that this HTC ad isn't exactly inspirational, or even made with confidence, because it has titles running through it that tell you how to feel: BE DIFFERENT. BE LOUD.
May I speak loudly and say this ad isn't different but merely a touch vacuous? HTC has made some excellent phones, but it's struggled to find a brand image that touches people the way they like to be touched.
It's tried stars like Robert Downey Jr. It's tried Gary Oldman. It even tried mocking Apple in April, with an ad that suggested the company's iOS software for the iPhone is an illness. Why this now? HTC didn't respond to a request for comment.
It may well be that Apple is a touch Big Brotherish these days. But if you're going to mock that, create something memorable, something that people can get behind, something that unhappy citizens will talk about and pass along to their fellow rebels.
Even a Che Guevara testimonial might have had more impact than this.
No comments:
Post a Comment