游戏邦注：本文是一名玩家的心声，他认为广告赞助版本的手机游戏最好选择合适的广告形式，否则将影响用户的游戏体验。

几天前，我下载了由Pik Pok开发的《弹指橄榄球》（Flick Kick Field Goal Kickoff）的iPad版本。游戏的介绍说该软件“今日免费”，我以为自己一文不花就下载了原来的付费游戏。

a swiffer ad popping up in a ipad game

但后来却发现免费游戏并非没有代价。游戏速度很慢，玩起来很卡，我玩了5分钟，就显示时间到了，屏幕上立即出现了一个离奇的视频，推销Swiffer的地板清洁产品，视频上有个妇女穿着一身沾满泥的套装，背景音乐是Heart乐队的《What About Love》(如上图所示）。

这个视频广告让我回想起了浏览视频网站Hulu或者是某一电视网络网站时弹出的东西，这个广告出自于一家名为Transpera的公司之手。

Transpera是一家位于旧金山的公司，它的定位并不怎么清晰，它把自己称为“关注网站”（Attention Network），“通过手机互动视频广告，吸引消费者对品牌的关注。”

我不清楚为什么地板清洁产品的广告会出现在足球游戏里，为什么我会成为它目标用户。但事实就是这样，不用说，我会写这篇文章就表示它真的引起了我的注意。但我有点惊讶，它在这款游戏上花了多少钱。

这并不是第一个出现在手机应用上的广告，很早以前就有人表示，这类“富媒体”广告在手机平台上越来越普遍（游戏邦注：比如大部分Android手机游戏都有广告）。但我忍不住想，究竟什么样的免费游戏，才值得我去忍受这些干扰性的广告，像《弹指橄榄球》这类的休闲游戏就不行。我想这些广告如果出现在内容更丰富（如进入新关卡前）的大型游戏中会更合适。

目前大多数游戏都提供两种版本，一是广告赞助版本，一是可跳过广告的付费版本。有时候没有广告的游戏也只要花99美分，如果你很喜欢这个游戏，想多玩下，这似乎也很划算。

但我想将来iPad上大部分的游戏都会融合付费模式和广告赞助模式，以大幅度降低消费者玩游戏的费用。这让开发商可以投入更多的资金开放游戏，而不用担心游戏卖12.99美元或者9.99美元没办法吸引足够的用户（大多数游戏价格如果超过了4.99美元，就很难卖得好）。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，转载请注明来源：游戏邦）

Ads in iPhone/iPad games getting too intrusive?

(Credit: Screenshot by David Carnoy/CNET) The other day I downloaded Pik Pok’s Flick Kick Field Goal Kickoff for the iPad. The description said something about it being a “free app of the day,” so I thought I was getting a paid app for free.

Low and behold, after about 5 minutes of playing the game, a time out was called on the field, and a somewhat surreal video popped up on the screen advertising the Swiffer floor-cleaning system, complete with women in mud suits and Heart’s “What About Love” playing in the background. (see the full ad here).

The video ad, which reminded me of something I’d get while watching a show on Hulu or a TV network site, came my way courtesy of a company called Transpera.

Transpera is based in San Francisco and not exactly transparent. It bills itself as the Attention Network, “fostering pure, undivided attention between consumers and brands, through interactive mobile video advertising.” It claims that video ads on its premium ad network “consistently outperform mobile display, online display, and online video across all brand metrics, including lift in purchase intent.”

I’m not sure how the Swiffer ad ended up in a football app or how I ended up being the target demographic for it. But there it was. And needless to say, since I’m writing this article, it got my attention. But I was a bit taken aback by how much it took over the game.

This is not the first video ad that’s appeared in an app on a mobile device and there’s long been talk of these types of “rich” ads becoming more prevalent on mobile platforms (plenty of Android games have ads). But I couldn’t help but wonder how much of this sort of intrusion I was willing to tolerate in exchange for playing the game for free. For a casual game like Flick Kick Field Goal Kickoff, I don’t think I’d actually be able to tolerate it. For a more substantial game that had natural pause points (i.e., levels), I could see it working better.

At this point, many games come in both an ad-supported version and a paid version that allows you to skip the ads. Sometimes the ad-free version only costs 99 cents, which seems like the way to go if you like the game and plan to play it a lot.

However, in the future, I could see major iPad games that combine a paid model with an ad-supported one to essentially subsidize the cost of the game for the consumer. That might allow developers to sink more money into developing the game without worrying that it wouldn’t be able to find a big enough audience at a price like $12.99 or even $9.99 (the majority of apps are hard to sell in huge quantities at anything beyond $4.99). （Source：cnet Reviews）