EPTOn June 25 2012 22:03 Zorkmid wrote:
Two words:
Sponsored Decals
Two words:
Sponsored Decals
Nothing gets a sponsor's message out there like five 10 pixel wide pictures that are visible for five seconds at the beginning of the game.
Ideas on how to give more exposure to sponsors - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
AmericanUmlaut
Germany2573 Posts
Nothing gets a sponsor's message out there like five 10 pixel wide pictures that are visible for five seconds at the beginning of the game. | ||
|
Fueled
United States1610 Posts
| ||
|
Fueled
United States1610 Posts
On June 25 2012 22:07 AmericanUmlaut wrote: Nothing gets a sponsor's message out there like five 10 pixel wide pictures that are visible for five seconds at the beginning of the game. Many players have started to put their sponsors in their clan tag. Like IM and MVP. You only hear their full name at the start and you'll maybe see it for a split second if the observer scrolls over one of their buildings/units. I think decals is another good idea to add just a little bit more to the game. | ||
|
FreudianTrip
Switzerland1983 Posts
On June 25 2012 21:34 kafkaesque wrote: Marketing these days sure seems to do a splendid job when consumers ask themselves how they can help companies. I can relate to liking a product. My guitar is the most awesome piece of wood I ever held, my cell is super convenient. However, I don't kid myself into believing Fender or Samsung are altruistic philantrophists who just care about me being happy. They make sound business decisions, financially valid and prudent measures to sell their products. Why would I care about making them more money, giving them more exposure, even at the expense of my viewing pleasure? Bro don't you get it? If we don't send them a tweet every time we send a text saying "Just told @MollyIsACunt that she is awesome with my @Samsung Galaxy Nexus #txtin" then Samsung will stop making phones. It's that simple. The idea that you're on the same side as a multi-million multi-national company because they threw some pocket change at you in the street is retarded. edit: By the way if you really want to artificially inflate ROI (which is what Logos on maps is as it doesn't create extra awareness, just creates more of the same awareness) then just set up a bunch of fake Twitter and Facebook accounts with some Indian dudes face as a pic and just tag the sponsors in it saying how awesome they are. | ||
|
FreudianTrip
Switzerland1983 Posts
| ||
|
DeadBull
421 Posts
It is really weird... | ||
|
J1.au
Australia3596 Posts
| ||
|
SupLilSon
Malaysia4123 Posts
On June 25 2012 22:07 AmericanUmlaut wrote: Nothing gets a sponsor's message out there like five 10 pixel wide pictures that are visible for five seconds at the beginning of the game. Do you have any idea how much money companies pay to have their logo or brand name flashed for a split second in a movie? Subtle doesn't mean ineffective, especially in marketing. | ||
|
lorkac
United States2297 Posts
On June 25 2012 21:34 kafkaesque wrote: Marketing these days sure seems to do a splendid job when consumers ask themselves how they can help companies. I can relate to liking a product. My guitar is the most awesome piece of wood I ever held, my cell is super convenient. However, I don't kid myself into believing Fender or Samsung are altruistic philantrophists who just care about me being happy. They make sound business decisions, financially valid and prudent measures to sell their products. Why would I care about making them more money, giving them more exposure, even at the expense of my viewing pleasure? You're looking at this from a very selfish point of view. You know why you have a guitar? Because companies make money off people selling guitars. If companies could not make money off selling guitars--the generation after you won't have it. Discussions such as these is not about how to make games more enjoyable *right now* it is a discussion on how we would prefer the industry to move forward as a community. So instead of companies tossing darts in the dark like MLG did with its PPV system (and getting flak for it) the community (such as Totalbiscuit) is trying to more directly gauge what would be a more effective system to use to fund esports. Because a system is *needed* it is simply a question of *what* that system should be. Now you might enjoy tournaments going back and forth from non-stop ads to casters talking non-stop about sponsors to ads on the map etc... back and forth like a retarded confused jack in the box--or maybe you could just tell them which ad system annoys you the least. Commercials non-stop seems annoying to you? Then maybe we need logos on maps? Logos on maps annoy you? Maybe we need to have more commercials? etc... Now you might prefer commercials because you simply have adblock--but that is the same thing as saying you don't like commercials. If it gets around that people simply use ad-block non-stop then they'd just do what happens in basketball and pause the game for a few minutes every so often to run ads. Would you prefer that? Because no matter which system is used--ads *have* to be present and it *has* to be unavoidable. Because Sponsors don't want to spend money on something and get no exposure because of it. Now if you prefer to not have a say in it, then you simply don't say anything. If you prefer that there be no ads at all--then that's the same as not having a say in it. Because in the end tournaments *do* have to be payed for. I'd understand you not understanding this if your still in high school, but I'm assuming that you at least could afford your own guitar if you wanted to use it as an example of product/cost/sponsorship. Because let me tell you, there's a reason that you know what company made you guitar. And there's a reason you understand what I mean when I say that my friend loves his gibson. It's all advertising. Please be smart enough to understand that the reason you're able to say "I don't kid myself into believing Fender or Samsung are altruistic philantrophists" is because their advertising worked like a fucking charm on you. You being able to say that you don't want to support fender or samsung is exactly their goal. That you can look at your fender and its the same exact thing as saying that you're looking at your guitar. That's what esports needs. | ||
|
FreudianTrip
Switzerland1983 Posts
On June 25 2012 22:16 SupLilSon wrote: Do you have any idea how much money companies pay to have their logo or brand name flashed for a split second in a movie? Subtle doesn't mean ineffective, especially in marketing. Ugh, my head hurts. Using sponsors that are already there and visible (which they should be if they're doing it right) and having their logo brandished for an extra half a second every 30 minutes is worth absolute peanuts. The reason why product placement is worth a lot more is because it's not seen/alluded to before or after that. It's unique and it's not competing with other brands OR it's own. The one exception to this being Back to the Future obviously which they then created a special edition of the shoe that would have extra visibility to make sure people didn't forget it. ![[image loading]](http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01992/nikesFuture_1992359c.jpg) No-one wore Nike's like that, hell they didn't even release these shoes till 25 years later. They were designed to be extra visible for an hour and a half (hence why they go up so high and are a lighter colour compared to his jeans) For all you shoe fans out there, let's have a close-up on how effing ugly these shoes actually are ![[image loading]](http://www.shoewawa.com/assets_c/2011/09/back-to-the-future-shoes-thumb-435x333-120222.jpg) Jesus | ||
|
kafkaesque
Germany2006 Posts
On June 25 2012 22:17 lorkac wrote: I'd understand you not understanding this if your still in high school, but I'm assuming that you at least could afford your own guitar if you wanted to use it as an example of product/cost/sponsorship. Because let me tell you, there's a reason that you know what company made you guitar. And there's a reason you understand what I mean when I say that my friend loves his gibson. It's all advertising. Please be smart enough to understand that the reason you're able to say "I don't kid myself into believing Fender or Samsung are altruistic philantrophists" is because their advertising worked like a fucking charm on you. You being able to say that you don't want to support fender or samsung is exactly their goal. That you can look at your fender and its the same exact thing as saying that you're looking at your guitar. That's what esports needs. So your point is that just because I'm able to say which company made my sweet ass Strat, I tend to prefer their products? I know little about marketing and less about economy, but that doesn't seem sensible to me. Buying stuff, I look at a specific product, try to analyze its properties as objectively as I can and try to compare it to others in the same price range. I prefer a Strat over a Les Paul because of its sound, neck and fretboard, not because (predominantly) one is made by Fender, one is by Gibson. 25 years later, Nike has made billions of their fucking overpriced shoes and still I'm not able to buy a fucking hoverboard. Such a letdown, fuck the future. | ||
|
kafkaesque
Germany2006 Posts
| ||
|
BriMikon
United States82 Posts
| ||
|
lorkac
United States2297 Posts
On June 25 2012 22:29 kafkaesque wrote: So your point is that just because I'm able to say which company made my sweet ass Strat, I tend to prefer their products? I know little about marketing and less about economy, but that doesn't seem sensible to me. Buying stuff, I look at a specific product, try to analyze its properties as objectively as I can and try to compare it to others in the same price range. I prefer a Strat over a Les Paul because of its sound, neck and fretboard, not because (predominantly) one is made by Fender, one is by Gibson. It seems you really don't understand the point of marketing. The goal is that when someone says fender or when someone says gibson you do not ask "its that car company right?" How is that done? It's done through branding and marketing. If gibson plastered its name all over SC2 maps/games (whichever ad system is chosen) the goal is for when some dude decides to play guitar for the first time they'll go "I don't know much about guitars at all, let me check google" and when they get to a page with a list of different guitar brands they will see gibson and be like "that's a guitar company" and hopefully they won't think "that's the guitar company sponsoring the GSL" but specifically that they think of gibson as a guitar company. Now that you have peeked through and have a preference on what guitar your using, people can ask you "what type and by who?" and you can say "its a strat by fender" and he can say cool--because I like that sound so I'll buy fenders if they sound like that. The goal is not for you to see the word fender and suddenly jizz in joy and run out to buy a guitar. It's actually exactly as it is called--name recognition. Not mind control. | ||
|
SupLilSon
Malaysia4123 Posts
On June 25 2012 22:25 FreudianTrip wrote: Ugh, my head hurts. Using sponsors that are already there and visible (which they should be if they're doing it right) and having their logo brandished for an extra half a second every 30 minutes is worth absolute peanuts. The reason why product placement is worth a lot more is because it's not seen/alluded to before or after that. It's unique and it's not competing with other brands OR it's own. The one exception to this being Back to the Future obviously which they then created a special edition of the shoe that would have extra visibility to make sure people didn't forget it. No-one wore Nike's like that, hell they didn't even release these shoes till 25 years later. They were designed to be extra visible for an hour and a half (hence why they go up so high and are a lighter colour compared to his jeans) For all you shoe fans out there, let's have a close-up on how effing ugly these shoes actually are Jesus Now my head hurts. I don't get how the McFly's relate to Starcraft except that they are both from the future. And I guess all those big name companies don't know jack about business, apparently paying for 1 minute of Superbowl Add time a year for millions of dollars isn't worth peanuts. | ||
|
mechavoc
United States664 Posts
A pro sport doesn't exist without money. Your favorite pros will not dedicate their lives to perfecting their craft and play SC2 without money, your favorite events will not happen without money no GSL, no Dreamhack, no MLG.... all of those are put on TO MAKE MONEY. So looking at adds is the smallest price you can pay to get hours and hours of entertainment. The OP is obviously a practical person who wants to generate ideas which can be used to help expand the appeal of SC2 to sponsors which in turn will create more events and more entertainment for all of us to enjoy. Those with the angry anti add responses need to step out of the dream world and into the real world, and if they don't want adds better start sending MLG and Dreamhack subscription dollars, and feedback that they would rather pay for content than watch adds. Ideas: In watching other sports there is typically a sponsor for the "best" of the day. For example there could be a sponsor for best play of the day in a baseball game, or MVP player. So at a big event we could have the Kingston Hyper X high speed micro of the day winner. Best match of the day Or the best comeback sponsored by .... Could be a nice way to keep players interested and doing there best when they are out of the top prize as well as they can always win a best of X prize. | ||
|
Fueled
United States1610 Posts
I think it is kind of interesting and a bit funny about the huge negative backlash in this thread about ads. I know...its almost as if the Sponsors and Ads are the devil. But seriously, without Sponsors where would this scene be? Would we have the quality of skill without Sponsors? Probably not since Sponsors are making it possible for players to play 10+ hours a day to get better. And hell, if that means running a few extra ads, tweeting about Sponsors, putting a decal of the Sponsor in-game or adding logos to the map then so be it. | ||
|
Fueled
United States1610 Posts
Ideas: In watching other sports there is typically a sponsor for the "best" of the day. For example there could be a sponsor for best play of the day in a baseball game, or MVP player. This is actually a really good idea. The local MLB team for my area is the NY Yankees. They have stuff like, "Land Rover Drive of the Game, Chevys Player of the Game, Cadillac Scoreboard", etc... So at a big event we could have the Kingston Hyper X high speed micro of the day winner. Best match of the day Or the best comeback sponsored by .... Yep. All good ideas. | ||
|
toiletCAT
Qatar284 Posts
I'm sure there's more to it than "just adding a bunch of decals" Sure we can argue day and night about whether or not ads is a good or bad idea, but money speaks for itself, and you don't. It won't matter how much of a StarCraft fan you are, money over your dead body, my friend, and money will find its way, one way or another. | ||
|
Technique
Netherlands1542 Posts
I understand the need for it, but imo it's already rather intrusive. Especially like these ''hot pockets'' commercials at mlgs that they don't even sell globally. So pointless. Besides this is a small community, people DO notice team sponsors on shirts/websites/interviews. | ||
| ||
