作者：Christopher Heine

在过去12年间Tribal DDB Worldwide首席执行官Paul Gunning一直都在为麦当劳，佳得乐以及农业保险公司State Farm等公司进行游戏内部广告的测试，但是最近他发现这一细分市场虽然拥有一定的用户基础但却鲜有发展。

他在ClickZ电话采访中说道：“游戏中存在的广告机遇并未受到重视”。

Gunning对Zynga、EA和动视在这一领域的做为颇有微词。

“对于他们来说广告并非什么重要的业务”他说道，“Zynga是否是否因为上市了才晓得要通过广告增加收益？EA首席运营官是否知道自己的公司拥有广告？也许他们甚至不知道谁在运行这些广告业务，或者说比起游戏他们甚至不知道这些广告为公司赚得了多少利益。”

Gunning提示道，我们现在所损失的盈利机会已经非常巨大了。

他表示：“我们面对的是巨大的游戏基础，而同时我们也不应该忽视人口因素的吸引力。”

in-game ads(from archive.psfk.com)

游戏品牌应该借鉴Facebook内部策略

以下是Gunning在ClickZ采中的对话内容：

Gunning：我们所说的游戏不再是孩子们在地下室玩的Xbox游戏。如今的游戏更加趋于身体上的互动，它们不再只是创造出久坐不动的体验。所有的刻板印象都将消失。这不再只是12岁孩童才能玩的游戏，这是6至80岁的所有群体都能够尝试的游戏。也就是说这是适用于好几代人的娱乐方式。我们可以在此拥有许多“妈妈”和“祖母”，我们面对的是手机游戏和社交游戏。既然玩家会在游戏中花费如此长时间，为何不在电子游戏中设置广告？为何这里还未形成一个巨大的广告平台？为何广告对于EA来说还只是一小部分收益来源？为何Zynga现在才开始计划雇佣广告专业人士？

我们应该说服Zynga和微软等公司中的哪些人去做出改变？

需要听取这些建议的人也就是那些真正关心公司收益的人，也就是C suites（游戏邦注：公司的最高管理层，包括CEO，CIO，CTO等）们。而现在他们需要做的便是理解广告的作用。我并不是说他们需要理解广告是如何影响用户，而是需要理解广告行业的复杂性。他们需要清楚谁知道如何向品牌呈现出更好的广告平台，并如何从研究者的立场上去证实它。之后他们还需要找到一些懂得大规模出售广告的人。

Zynga和EA是否应该复制Facebook的策略并创建属于自己的代理团队？

他们的确需要这么做。但是他们不仅需要创建一个广告销售团队——因为他们可能会说“我们拥有这样的团队”，而是应该创造一种广告文化。EA主要是通过零售方式出售游戏，所以他们非常清楚零售环境。他们甚至也知道沃尔玛的零售策略。他们知道如何摆放商品或者在过道两端陈列商品的益处以及营销手段。因为这是他们一直在使用的方法。而他们同样也需要一些同样非常了解广告的人士——如果他们真心在乎广告的话。而如果他们并不在乎广告，他们甚至不会愿意去谈广告，更不会说“我们是认真的”之类的话。

他们还需要做些什么？

面对着各种选择，我们也还未能证明电子游戏广告便是其中最优选择。只有当我们最终能够通过研究证明广告比其它选择更加有效之时，广告才能真正派上用场。除此之外我们还需要注意创意问题。许多创意能够有效地整合到游戏中。而对于那些希望把握住创意机遇的大品牌来说这更是其发展的根本要素。目前游戏中的广告机遇并不受到重视，它们只是一种背景图像。而只有当它们能够创造出一个绝佳的广告体验环境（并证明广告的有效性）时，游戏中的广告才能真正得到回报。

你如何比较游戏广告与传统营销中的广告？

我认为我们可以将游戏广告与数字广告进行比较，或者也可以将其与其它娱乐形式或平面广告做比较。我们可以思考一下游戏广告是否与电影广告具有同样的吸引力和效力？

我想是的。

的确是这样的。就像你与别人一起走进电影院并期待着观看一部2个小时的电影一样，这当然与通过数字视频录像机观看15分钟的《宋飞传》（游戏邦注：美国喜剧系列）的感受不同。这是观众坐在电影院中才能够感受到的心态，而这与玩主机游戏的心态也是一样的。

因为这比观看电影更具有互动性，而这是否能够进一步突显广告的吸引力？

这也是我们需要研究的问题。我认为广告应该变得更加强大且更让人印象深刻。它应该能够驱动玩家的购买意愿。但是在我们真正去衡量其规模前广告的效能还是未知的——尽管用户规模正在壮大。就好比宇宙中的机遇越来越多，而我们却还不能创造出比12年前更加吸引人的广告一样。

而如果是基于广告平台进行比较呢？

我将再次以Zynga为例，因为它是我们这次谈话内容的典型例子。每天有上千个广告陆续被推出，而人们会在休息时间消化这些广告内容。我想将其与一些较短的广告做比较。我想拿平面广告与之相比。有趣的是现在那些在等待孩子们放学的妈妈们不再是坐着浏览杂志，而于专注于自己手机上的游戏。也就等同于她们开始抛弃平面广告了。

游戏中的广告应该是怎样的？

这是我之前谈过的内容。如今的游戏广告还不够强大，我们不能拿《Words With Friends》中的条幅广告与《Vogue》（游戏邦注：涉及时装，化妆，美容，健康，娱乐和艺术等的时尚杂志）中的广告做比较，但是我们肯定能够找到一种方法让游戏中的广告也具有同样的影响力。游戏中的广告将从互动性中寻找突破口，因为它们不管是屏幕还是视觉效果都不及《Vogue》中的全页广告。而如果用户能将眼球从《Vogue》转移到智能手机上，那么问题也就解决了。但是我本身却不这么这能解决问题，因为这会让我对广告更加反感。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Tribal DDB CEO Calls ‘B.S.’ on Gaming Ads

Christopher Heine

Tribal DDB Worldwide CEO Paul Gunning has been testing in-game advertising for clients like McDonald’s, Gatorade, and State Farm for 12 years, and these days he’s lamenting a niche that refuses to grow up even though its users have.

“Opportunities that exist in gaming are [B.S.],” he said, speaking in a phone interview with ClickZ. “They are background images.”

Gunning lays quite a bit of the blame at the feet of platform companies like Zynga, Electronic Arts and Activision.

“Advertising is [B.S.] to them,” he said. “Is Zynga really just selling advertising because they’re now public and they got to squeeze every dime they can for Wall Street? Does EA senior management even know they have advertising? They couldn’t even tell you who runs it or how much money it makes since it’s small compared to what their game titles make them.”

The monetization opportunities currently lost are epic, Gunning suggests.

“The gaming base is just massive,” he said. “And the demographics are really attractive.”

Gaming Brands Should Follow Facebook’s In-House Strategy

While addressing the plodding evolution of in-game ads for 15 minutes on Monday, Gunning covered a lot of ground. Here are highlights from a frank conversation with the agency CEO:

Gunning: We are no longer talking about kids in their basements playing Xbox. The games are more physically interactive. They don’t necessarily produce this sedentary experience. All those [stereotypes] are going away. It’s not just 12 year olds anymore. It’s six year olds to 80 year olds. We know that. It’s multigenerational. We have a lot of moms and grandparents. And its mobile, and it’s social. The time spent is massive. So why isn’t the advertising in video games…why isn’t that platform gigantic? Why is it only a single digit – a low single digit – of the revenue for Electronic Arts? Why has Zynga just now started to hire advertising people?

ClickZ: Who in organizations like Zynga and Microsoft needs to be convinced of this message for things to actually change?

PG: The people who need to hear this are the ones concerned about revenue. So the C suites need to hear it. Now, what needs to be done about it, though, they need to know how advertising works. By that I don’t mean they need to understand how advertising affects the consumer. They need to understand how the industrial complex of advertising works. They need people who know how to show a better advertising platform to brands, how to prove that from a research standpoint. Once you have that, they need people who know how to sell it at scale.

CZ: Should Zynga and EA copy Facebook’s strategy and build up an agency-like team in-house?

PG: That’s exactly what they need to do. They need to build…not just an advertising sales force. I am sure they would say, ‘We got that.’ They need to build an advertising-based culture. Electronic Arts sells oodles of titles via retail. I guarantee you they know how the retail environment works. They know how Walmart does this stuff. They know where to stack them and about end aisle display and merchandising. They know retail inside and out because that’s where they are making all their dough. Well, actually, they need the same kinds of people in their organizations who know at the same level about advertising – if they care. If they don’t care, who [cares], right? If not, then don’t talk about advertising. Don’t say, “We’re serious about it.”

CZ: What else needs to be done?

PG: Advertising inside video games has not proven itself to be a better choice with all the other freaking choices out there. Until they actually address it from a research standpoint to prove to the industry that it is a more effective platform than other choices, it’s not really going to go anywhere. The second area is creative. A lot of them have some good in-game integration. It’s cute. But that creative canvass is still rudimentary for big brands that expect “lick the screen” creative opportunities. Opportunities that exist in gaming are [B.S.]. They are background images. Until they create an environment that makes for an optimal advertising experience – and prove that it works – it’s never going to pay off when I think it could easily pay off.

CZ: What would you compare in-game advertising to in the traditional marketing world?

PG: I think we can compare it to other types of digital advertising. And I think we can compare it to other types of entertainment and print advertising. Let me throw out this possibility. Can advertising in a game have as much attraction and efficacy as theater advertising?

CZ: I think it could.

PG: So do I. You have someone coming in and expecting a two-hour entertainment experience. They are definitely not sitting down to watch 15 minutes of Seinfeld on the DVR. It’s a mindset where they are sitting down to get transported. That’s the same kind of mindset with console games.

CZ: Since it’s so much more interactive than watching a movie, though, does that make the ad impression more or less powerful?

PG: Well that’s where the research needs to come in. My contention is that it should be more powerful, more memorable. It should drive better purchase intent. But until we measure at scale and tell that story, it’s unknown – while the audience gets bigger. It’s like the universe has gotten bigger for the opportunity. And we haven’t done anything to make the advertising more attractive than where we were 12 years ago.

CZ:What about a more common comparison in terms of ad platforms?

PG: I’m going to use Zynga as my [platform] example again because it’s the poster child for this conversation. There’s freaking thousands of [ads] being rolled out every day, being consumed during these sort of snackable times. I would compare that to other types of short-form advertising. I would compare it to print. Anecdotally, I think everyone would tell you in the pick up line for school that moms no longer sit there and flip through magazines. They are on their phones and playing games. Right there, they are taken away from the print exposures.

CZ: What should the in-game advertising look like?

PG: That’s the creative canvas part I was talking about. Right now, it’s not strong enough. You certainly can’t compare an ad in Vogue that a mom may be looking at in a school pick up line to a banner ad that’s on Words With Friends. And I don’t think creatively the two will ever be on par, but there’s got to be a way that the one in the game can be similarly impactful. And it’s going to have to be the interactivity of the ad because the screen and the visual impact aren’t going to compare to a full-size Vogue ad. But if the eyeballs are moving from Vogue to the smart phone, it’s got to be addressed. And I don’t think it’s being addressed, which is pissing me off.(source:clickz)