Vendor Logos in Games ?

[Doomtrooper]

I'm not sure about the whole decieving issue you brought up, but the idea of advertising IS to get your brand recognized so that the consumers will buy it. What exactly is wrong with that? And how is a simple logo going to trick somebody? I think you're making logos a bigger deal than they really are. Sure, logos will get the advertising brand recognized.. but what's wrong with that?

Whats wrong with what ?? This is the PC graphics business not a console, a person should be entitled to buy whatever brand video card and still look the same/perform the same..my main beef is misleading the consumer.."the way it is meant to be played' is currently owned by a ATI card..and has been for 5 months...or longer depending on the persons preference..
Someone picks up UT 2003 running a Geforce MX or a Radeon and runs like crap..they see the logo and think "I need a Nvidia card to run this game'...So this developer just made a sale for Nvidia which is not ideal for other companies, and the consumer was also mislead as of right now the card to have is a 9700/9500 pro.
Referring to 3DFX is not even close, the logo was in the driver and detected glide games..and their was even a option to disable it in the driver panel.
Logos should be in the driver like 3DFX so if a feature is supported like PS 1.4 a ATI logo flashes up..or PS 1.1 a Nvidia logo..that way the person who just laid down $400 on their new card doesn't feel like he made the wrong decision.
The Logo in UT 2003 was one of the reasons my copy was returned to EB..along with poor script and bot protection and very poor CTF maps...the logo really pissed me off though.

 

[Doomtrooper]

Because its the game that's interesting, and not the eye candy? (NWN is a perfect example. I never even noticed the water, and it didn't change how I played it)

Never noticed it ?? Lol...half of the world is water and fantasy games are about a visual experience no different than Lord of the Rings..do you think the movie would have been such a hit if it wasn't for the incredible amount of detail that went into that movie so far...

 

[RussSchultz]

Funny, all the fantasy games I play are all about the story.

I certainly didn't sit through Wasteland and Bard's Tale, or UltimaI for the eye candy.

Edit: or Zork, or Adventure.

 

[Riptides]

Referring to 3DFX is not even close, the logo was in the driver and detected glide games..and their was even a option to disable it in the driver panel.
Logos should be in the driver like 3DFX...

Well i was just referring to the 3dfx logo as its the only other one to appear at the beginning of specific games, but for specific reasons, not b/c they PAID *still assuming* to have it there.

My pondering makes me wonder does it start with Nvidia now ?
And will it end up where GTA XII comes out with the main char wearing Nike leisure wear, using S&W branded guns, and eating at taco bell ?
Not that i would really mind product placement, but what if we have to sit thru commericals or licensing logos at the beginning of games if it gets to this point ?

I think it would help dev's offset the cost of making a game by liscensing out to product placement. In fact that might be a boon to the industry. But at what point does having all this logo flashing at the beginning of a game begin to jade the average gamer/consumer ? Where instead of feeling he spent 50 bucks on a game, he feels he spent 50 bucks on a commercial ?

 

[demalion]

Funny, all the fantasy games I play are all about the story.

I certainly didn't sit through Wasteland and Bard's Tale, or UltimaI for the eye candy.

Edit: or Zork, or Adventure.

On the one hand, of course the story matters, and you are free to not care about graphics.

On the other, of course graphics matter, and you are free to care less about the story.

But it is also possible to care about both. This isn't a revelation, is it?

I think it is pointless to dismiss graphics completely to excuse a game being graphically enhanced by brand and not by feature set.

The water in NwN is the only element of the graphics that I found poorly executed. If it had used EMBM or some more appealing effect, then I can buy "not noticing" but the difference is extremely obvious. From my personal experience, I missed the shiny water not because the shiny water looks so great, but because the non-shiny water looks so UGLY to me.

I'm puzzled as to why you started arguing down this path.

...

To the thread in general concerning logos...
Hmm....who claimed logos on a box were equivalent to the full screen, animated, high-impact logo present in UT2k3? No one that I saw..did I miss it? So why are we comparing the easily ignorable logos on a box that we put aside after opening to something than a consistent and extremely focused audio visual advertisement?
Sounds like the rationale that is giving us pop up/over ads and whatever is next in the internet ad arms race.

 

[Sharkfood]

This is a pretty big topic, and one I'm sure lots of people will have different feelings about.

My personal feeling- I paid $XX for the game, so therefore my contribution is what funds the game. Not some 3rd party.

It's like paying $29 a month for some website subscription, but then having pop-ups with advertisers every time you go to use the website paid for. Who's paying for it? The consumer or the advertisers? Can't have both.

Free demos? Sure- load them up with logos, pop-ups, advertisements and what not. They just don't belong in the game to any level as the consumer paid for the game, and likely paid full price as well.

I can understand advertising funds in full-release games if the advertiser is going to pay part of the retail price. Unfortunately, on a shelf of $54 games being the "norm" retail price, a game with a bunch of advertisements versus one without at the same price is just sickening.

I say that if NVIDIA wants to splash their advertising all over games- fine, just make sure they are either: a) free, or b) at a substantially reduced price. A $54 retail game selling for say, $30 as "NVIDIA" paid the remaining funds seems fair. But trying to target a $54 retail game, which is also loaded with 3rd party advertising is just loopy, IMO.

It seems to me you are making the consumer pay in full for someone else's billboard.

 

[dksuiko]

my main beef is misleading the consumer.."the way it is meant to be played' is currently owned by a ATI card..and has been for 5 months...or longer depending on the persons preference..
Someone picks up UT 2003 running a Geforce MX or a Radeon and runs like crap..they see the logo and think "I need a Nvidia card to run this game'...So this developer just made a sale for Nvidia which is not ideal for other companies, and the consumer was also mislead as of right now the card to have is a 9700/9500 pro.

Your main problem with the logo is that the slogan is "The Way it is Meant to be Played"? Geez, how stupid do you think people are? That's marketing speak! And I'm sure that almost everyone exposed to that ad knows it. That's like screaming at the makers of Right Guard sports stick for saying "Anything less is considered uncivilized." "What?! I'm not uncivilized and I use Oldspice! YOU ARE MISLEADING ME!"

We are hit with advertisments everyday, everywhere we go. I think the majority out there would recognize "The Way it is meant to be Played" is just simple marketing speak. If, however, there are people stupid enough to buy into that, ATI isn't powerless to play the advertising game along with them.. something they definately aren't new to.

 

[RussSchultz]

I'm puzzled as to why you started arguing down this path.

He asked:

why would somone buy a game running a ATI card if the game was sponsored, optimized and tweaked with Nvidia hardware

To which I answered:

Because its the game that's interesting, and not the eye candy?

I'm certainly not disallowing him to be focused on eye candy, but he asked for a reason and I gave him one. In my opinion, (generally) RPG and adventure games aren't about eye candy, but about plotline and puzzles. I didn't see it as an argument, either. He asked; I answered.

 

[dksuiko]

They just don't belong in the game to any level as the consumer paid for the game, and likely paid full price as well.

I can understand advertising funds in full-release games if the advertiser is going to pay part of the retail price. Unfortunately, on a shelf of $54 games being the "norm" retail price, a game with a bunch of advertisements versus one without at the same price is just sickening.

But we're talking about a simple logo here, one that'll be there for less than a few seconds (or even less if you can just press ESC) and logos on boxes, not full-blown 5-minute long commercials. I'd agree with the lower prices for games if they bring in extremely long commercials and ads that are seriously hard to get rid of. But how bad are these current logos? They take very little time. Most of them you can press ESC and skip past it all. How much of a problem are they?

Unless you've actually seen a high-priced game that really does have a serious load of advertisements - all of which are hard skip passed, I just don't see them as much of a problem. Even back in the days with the Nintendo, there's always been logos when you started the game. They are nothing new.

 

[Doomtrooper]

Your main problem with the logo is that the slogan is "The Way it is Meant to be Played"?

Nope my problem is the gameplay (Ut 2003) was not even close to the original, and pimping a single IHV put the icing on the cake. Maps for CTF were horrid, huge system requirments for graphics marginally better then some Quake 3 mods. Whoever made the call to bring back the flak cannon needs their head examined.

Geez, how stupid do you think people are? That's marketing speak! And I'm sure that almost everyone exposed to that ad knows it. That's like screaming at the makers of Right Guard sports stick for saying "Anything less is considered uncivilized." "What?! I'm not uncivilized and I use Oldspice! YOU ARE MISLEADING ME!"

I see you are another person who thinks people spend hours reading forums and reviews to determine their purchase...that is not reality..almost all retail sales are sold by the salesmen..and he is only as bright as what the company he works for tells him...and in the odd case the salesperson is educated..
Don't believe me..head down to any chain..Best Buy, EB etc...and ask the salesmen what card he reccomends.

 

[dksuiko]

I see you are another person who thinks people spend hours reading forums and reviews to determine their purchase...

Nope, but I don't think they are dead stupid neither. Like I said earlier, "if there are people stupid enough to buy into that, ATI isn't powerless to play the advertising game along with them."

 

[Ty]

The Logo in UT 2003 was one of the reasons my copy was returned to EB..along with poor script and bot protection and very poor CTF maps...the logo really pissed me off though.

Blame the developers for caving in. They got paid in one form or another for it.

As much as we might gripe about advertising in software, it's yet another unfortunate path that the games industry have followed Hollywood for and it's here to stay - e.g. Sims Online.

 

[Grall]

It seems to me you are making the consumer pay in full for someone else's billboard.

Shark, I couldn't agree more to that.

I'm not buying ut2003 PERIOD for that stupid logo at the start of the game, and neither will I buy any other game I know throws advertising in my face when I start it up. I don't care if the game's godly awesome or not, I won't buy it.

And I actually OWN a GF3, I still hate that Nvidia logo. I thought it would be just in the demo, but in the full game too? What the hell were Epic THINKING? I'll keep my OWN counsel of what hardware to buy, thank you very much! Final straw for me is that the advertising doesn't even affect the retail price. Okay, FINAL straw is that the game isn't original at all actually. It's just guys with guns. RtCW is so far the only original deathmatching game because its multiplayer implementation ISN'T a deathmatch! Mods like Team Fortress etc came up with the idea, but only RtCW truly *enforces* the idea of teamwork and cooperation. You CAN'T pick up ammo from the level, so you NEED luts. You CAN'T pick up health packs from the level, so you NEED medics. Some things MUST be dynamited so you NEED engineers, etc... UT2003 is just another game in the crowd of guys with guns. Doesn't matter which game mode you play, it's guys with guns. You shoot and you kill, that's all it's about (with minor variations like carrying a ball or a flag to a specific place).

Stupid game.


*G*

 

[demalion]

I'm puzzled as to why you started arguing down this path.

He asked:

why would somone buy a game running a ATI card if the game was sponsored, optimized and tweaked with Nvidia hardware

To which I answered:

Because its the game that's interesting, and not the eye candy?

I'm certainly not disallowing him to be focused on eye candy, but he asked for a reason and I gave him one. In my opinion, (generally) RPG and adventure games aren't about eye candy, but about plotline and puzzles. I didn't see it as an argument, either. He asked; I answered.

Hmm...I didn't read his question as an absolute, but as an indicator. I.e., if asked "Why would someone shoot themself in the foot for $1000?", I read your answer as something like "If they have a prosthetic foot, it wouldn't matter to them." A valid answer if true for them, but it doesn't change that shooting your foot is a bad idea in general, no?

Your reasoning would allow any and all graphic features to be brand-enabled for any game where "graphics don't matter" to you...which is just plain circular, as you are free to decide that for yourself for any game type you wish. As I said, I'm puzzled as to why you chose to conduct a discussion that doesn't go anywhere.

 

[jb]

Maps for CTF were horrid, huge system requirments for graphics marginally better then some Quake 3 mods. Whoever made the call to bring back the flak cannon needs their head examined.

The flak cannon was one of the most popular UT weapon, heck some (not saying I would) would say that UT is not "UT" with out the flak cannon. The graphics that UT2k3 engine can do is one of the best (if not the best) you can find today. Now I am not so sure UT2k3 brought the best of that out. But the mod teams will. Remember 75 to 80% of this work was done my DE as Epic only did parts of it...

I also dont understant that comment you made about scripting and bots?

 

[RussSchultz]

As I said, I'm puzzled as to why you chose to conduct a discussion that doesn't go anywhere.

I'm wondering the same about you.

To repeat: if the game has enough going for it, things like sparkly water don't mean a whole lot--which is one reason why somebody who owns an ATI card buy a game that has the 'nvidia logo' on it. The majority of people who bought Unreal, didn't have a card that supported the extra textures. Quake got played by folks who couldn't support glQuake or vQuake.

The basic premise of the game is not ruined if a bit of eye candy is missing. And yes, OF COURSE, its an individual thing. I just think most people have less "scruples" (if thats what you want to call them...ideological hangups would be another) about playing a game that favors one vendor or another when its a game they want to play.

So, my answer should read to you: "if it didn't hurt, sure I'd shoot myself in the foot for $1000"

 

[demalion]

As I said, I'm puzzled as to why you chose to conduct a discussion that doesn't go anywhere.

I'm wondering the same about you.

Actually, I'm trying to find the way back from the odd seeming detour I'm commenting upon, not go to the end and keep bouncing off the wall there.

Look again at my text (the part you didn't quote) for an explanation of how. What you "repeated" only supports my statements, it doesn't respond to what I pointed out about the circular nature of your response.

[So, my answer should read to you: "if it didn't hurt, sure I'd shoot myself in the foot for $1000"

Well, that reads the same to me as the other answer I provided. Consider my replies "repeated" in response. Is this detour done now?

 

[RussSchultz]

I don't see what you're having issues with.

The topic was about "are logo's bad?". Somebody asked if logos were a problem to begin with. He responded by saying stating that was a silly question and followed up with (perhaps rhetorically) "why would somebody buy a game optimized for a different card" as to show that logo-ing was a problem because nobody would buy a logo'd game. I responded with "because people might care about the game itself rather than the logo" to suggest why logoing wasn't a problem. How is that a detour?

But, I guess this detour (?) is done. Yet another discussion between us that is on two completely different wavelengths--I guess.

/stumbles off in confusion.

 

[demalion]

I think I see where the problem is.

...
The topic was about "are logo's bad?". Somebody asked if logos were a problem to begin with. He responded by saying stating that was a silly question and followed up with (perhaps rhetorically) "why would somebody buy a game optimized for a different card" as to show that logo-ing was a problem because nobody would buy a logo'd game.

There it is, I think. That "perhaps rhetorical".

The post you refer to went like this

Are logos even a problem to begin with?

Hmmm I think that is a pretty silly question, why would somone buy a game running a ATI card if the game was sponsored, optimized and tweaked with Nvidia hardware.
...

Nothing in that text (or the rest that I didn't quote) leaves any doubt in my mind that, as I first stated, it was meant as an indication of "what the problem was" and not a question to be taken literally. Note, this more a case of "figurative" versus "literal" rather than it being purely rhetorical...it can be answered as an indication by arguing that, for example, the "optimized, sponsored, and tweaked with nVidia hardware" benefits ATI users as well. That line of response is not a dead end (not that I'd agree with it in this case), but arguing "graphics don't matter" is.

I responded with "because people might care about the game itself rather than the logo" to suggest why logoing wasn't a problem. How is that a detour?

Because it has nothing to do with logos not being a problem, but instead simply states "some people might choose to ignore the problem". See the prior "shooting in the foot" example, as previously stated.

 

[Doomtrooper]

The flak cannon was one of the most popular UT weapon, heck some (not saying I would) would say that UT is not "UT" with out the flak cannon.

I disagree, the Flak Cannon was the most hated weapon in the original UT, spammage galore and don't even have to aim. We did a survey on the ladder forums and the complaints about that weapon were 100 times more than any other, we even fired off emails years ago to epic showing the poll...I heard one of the lead programmers likes it and why it was brought back.
JB I have over 20,000 hours in the original UT and I was in the Top 20 in CTF in UT 2003 using no binds or aim bots, ...I have alot of time invested in UT 2003..but all my clan mates agreed...it simply doesn't have the gameplay the original had...possibly due to the leak but bind scripts were rampant.

The graphics that UT2k3 engine can do is one of the best (if not the best) you can find today. Now I am not so sure UT2k3 brought the best of that out. But the mod teams will. Remember 75 to 80% of this work was done my DE as Epic only did parts of it...

I disagree again, trying loading up Quake 3 arena or some other older Quake 3 mods done with that engine..the graphics are at least equal to UT 2003..heck underwater in Arena there is even a trail of bubbles coming from the models...
The system requirements are a joke to run the game with any kind of detail and framerate for decent play.. I was averaging a whopping 40-50 fps with detail at medium,
Even a 9700 has a hard time handling this DX7 engine...be better off running a 5GHZ CPU if it was available.

I also dont understant that comment you made about scripting and bots?

No server side CHSP for Public servers or Match...aim bots were out and so were script binds galore...no PURE server mod.
Yes script binds are cheating IMO, can you fire the lightening gun, switch to the shock rifle and execute a double in 2 seconds on the keyboard ??
I watched a player using a aim bot run around with the lightening gun..never used anything else..never missed and had like 4 godlikes in all 4 maps.

http://www.insidemacgames.com/news/story.php?ArticleID=6377


I was also very dissappointed with Epics comments from Vogel on this forum about the Ultra High Rez Textures requiring a Nv30 due to its 256 megs of ram..yet all reports so far show it only having 128 megs.
If they want to favor one IHV, they can do it without my money.