Violent Videogames Blamed for Negative Brand Reception, Too
There's a fine line between adding to realism with in-game advertising and blatantly selling out. One can actually improve the game's atmosphere, and the other is a quick road to riches. There is, however, another factor to consider. According to a new report, advertising in violent videogames can backfire and actually create a negative perception of the product being pitched, as well as lower brand recall.
Researchers at The University of Texas at Austin came up with that conclusion, and noted that women in particular are sensitive to ads in violent games.
"Although violent video games are very popular and can reach a young, highly engaged audience, their effectiveness as an advertising medium is questionable," said Jorge Peña, assistant professor in the Department of Communication Studies and one of the study's authors. "Our study demonstrates that featured violence diminishes brand memory and primes more negative attitudes toward the brand."
Researchers carried out the study by dividing participants into two groups. One group played through a violet game with avaters brandishing guns and shooting it up in rooms covered in blood. The other group weaved their way through the same avatars, only they were weaponless and the rooms were soaked in water.
"Brand recall and recognition, and attitudes were significantly lower for participants who navigated violent videogames compared to those who navigated the non-violent videogames," according to the study. "Women that played the violent videogames developed even more negative brand attitudes than women exposed to the non-violent videogames (11.29 percent decrease in brand liking). This could be attributed to women typically having less experience playing violent videogames, or men -- who typically play more violent videogames -- being desensitized to the violence and not noticing it."
Does the study hold any merit? That's something advertisers would be wise to look into as spending on in-game advertising is expected to be a billion dollar industry next year.
Comments
Comments are closed on this article
![]()
A9JE
August 31, 2011 at 7:15pm
I wouldn't mind seeing a ford in black ops nuketown map, or timberland boots on my soldier running down the hill. I would actually enjoy seeing brands in games, like in GTA, we all know burger shot is suppose to be burger king, or mcdonalds, but that's not gonna stop me from going to burger king, or mcdonalds. So maybe it has a different affect on women, or maybe I'm just ignorant, but if the brand is used properly, I don't see any harm. If fallout 3 used the real brand for their soda, will that make coke look bad, I don't think so. after spending a whole day in a abandoned super market, seeing all the empty nuke cola bottles, I get a bit thirsty for one myself. So I say, advertisers, welcome, as long as you are paying for that spot, the developers should see more green, and we should see game prices drop down.
![]()
Holly Golightly
August 31, 2011 at 5:04pm
When I play a violent videogame... I would play the ones in which you stab the enemies. To me, guns do not seem very realistic. They are hard to get... At least here in New York City... I do not know. But, with that said, I hate in-game advertising, and when they do, they are selling out. So I am highly likely to hate that brand very much so.
As a woman, who plays a lot of video games on my computer, I do not think in-game advertising is very realistic, and does not reach out in any positive way at all what so ever. However, I like games that take place in realistic settings. Like hacking computers in an office, or driving your car at speeds the police department can not catch up to. Things like that.
I run Ad-Blockers on my browsers, sure would be nice if the ad-blockers can work in videogames. This study holds a lot of merit indeed. It definitely is not bogus. As a female gamer, I can relate to this. Still, I would prefer all of my games to have no advertising at all. Is it do hard to ask for? Advertisers are a bunch of thugs that like to ruin people's quality of life. To hell with them!
![]()
A9JE
August 31, 2011 at 7:25pm
"To me, guns do not seem very realistic. They are hard to get... At least here in New York City..."
Are you sure it hard to get, because if you try you can find one, let me see, try uptown or maybe one of the boroughs around you. Better yet get on the 1 train and take it to the last stop, their you will see a guy in a rain coat, don't ask me why, and walk up to him and tell him "It's too cold today, I need some heat" He'll take care of you. XD JK
![]()
Holly Golightly
August 31, 2011 at 11:13pm
Well, it is hard to get legally then. I do not think it is nice to stereotype the "outer" 4 boros as gun blazing ghettos. I do not think it is that easy... And I think I am right on this one. Plus, there are always undercover cops that fool buyers and sellers. So there is some crack down...
The way videogames convey access to guns is false. Like for example, Silent Hill 3, you can find a shotgun in a train which the gun is inside of a semi open christmas present. That is not very realistic. Or how Left 4 Dead magically has a table full of guns located in a hospital. Even Resident Evil 5 was a bit unrealistic... A magnum inside a hut in Africa?
Chances in me finding a table with guns and grenade launchers are very less likely. However, it is much easier to find a knife. So videogames with knives are better violent games than ones with rocket launchers.
![]()
TerribleToaster
September 01, 2011 at 5:45am
I would disagree here.
As a place becomes more unstable and conflict arises (i.e. a zombie apocalypse) people who have access to weapons or know how to get access to weapons and people who will sell weapons tend to gather and stockpile them (I know the first place I'd head is the local army reserve armory; which contains everything you have mentioned as hard to find). And some of these people die or disappear due to instability/conflict leaving you with weapons caches scatter out all over the place as well as random weapons that were left behind in random places (such as on a subway train) when a situation arises that calls for them to abandon the weapon in order to protect their own life (or someone else's).
Stuff like this becomes even more common when in hot spots in contested zones, which in a game, is exactly where you would be.
Yeah I think games sometimes over do it a bit, but it would be far more werid that, assuming zombies are overrunning New York City, all you can find are knives for a weapon. It's pretty hard to walk anywhere now without seeing somebody (normally police) who are carrying a gun and there isn't even a single zombie around.
![]()
A9JE
September 01, 2011 at 12:20am
" I do not think it is nice to stereotype the "outer" 4 boros as gun blazing ghettos."
I was just joking, but the stereotype does exist. And it's not realistic to find guns in a hospital, the same way zombies don't exist. And in a way it's better if games aren't realistic because then most people will lose sight of whats real and whats a game.
![]()
ScytheNoire
August 31, 2011 at 10:44am
Way too subjective.
What was being advertised?
How was it being advertised?
Was the target audience (women) gamers to begin with?
I highly doubt that if you advertised Razer products inside a video game to a target audience of mostly male TF2 players inside the game that they would react negatively to that brand.
This entire test seems bogus and probably not done properly.
![]()
Nimrod
August 31, 2011 at 1:55pm
I dont think so. It reads just like any other psych test of this type ive ever seen. its legit.
![]()
TerribleToaster
August 31, 2011 at 9:28am
I wish I could hear more about the experiment, but the one thing that is sticking out to me so far is how exactly it appeared in the games?
I.E.
Take a violent game involving McRonald's:
Was you gunning down countless Donald McRonald zombies as they tried to kill you?
Or was it you teaming up with Donald McRonald in an effort to stop a horde of zombies from killing you both?
In the first version it give you a negative impression of McRonald's (as they are trying to kill you).
In the second version it gives you a positive impression of McRonald's (as they are trying to help you).
It can even be more subtle than this.
[I'll insert the rest after i figure out why the hell this part triggered the spam filter]
![]()
TerribleToaster
August 31, 2011 at 9:56am
Well I had a nice example of how a much more passive advertising campaign could be spun positively or negatively in a violent game, but the spam filter doesn't seem to care for it (regardless of how I reword it).
Makes me wonder why we have this spam filter seeing as the spam still get's through on a daily basis without the spammers altering their message other than a new tinylink every once and awhile while the filter will stop a legitimate post for god knows why since it won't tell you what exactly what in your post constitutes as spam.
![]()
Dman222123222
August 31, 2011 at 7:26pm
try not making the post too long, check grammer, and dont use any brand names
works for me most of the time
Edit: this post triggered the capcha
really bad captcha
![]()
Raswan
August 31, 2011 at 8:59am
How about UT-Austin offers their assistant profs a class in how to actually conduct a study? Unless it's being misrepresented by the article you linked, it's a complete crock.
" One group played through a violet game with avaters brandishing guns and shooting it up in rooms covered in blood. The other group weaved their way through the same avatars, only they were weaponless and the rooms were soaked in water."
No mention that stimuli are signifcantly lower for the second group, so they actually have time to look around and notice brand placement? Or about the fact that statistically women play fewer video games than men, so their recognition of those brands while "shooting it up in roms covered in blood" would be even lower? How about some research design skills here, people?
Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook
Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.
















