Interstitial ads pay quite a bit more than say ... ads on as part of the application itself.
In response to SuperToby12
SuperToby12 wrote:
DarkCampainger wrote:
Unfortunately, when it comes to advertising, the more annoying and unavoidable it is, the more it pays. If you could mute, minimize, or otherwise ignore the ads, companies wouldn't bother paying for them. This is the same reason it isn't simply a static banner ad in the pager: it wouldn't generate nearly as much revenue.

I'm curious to see what the rates are for the new ad system Tom is working on (@Tom, is it for standalone games only, or will games on the hub also be eligible?). It might end up being reasonably affordable for players/developers to "buy out" the ads for their favorite games and keep them ad-free.

That doesn't make any sense at all. Ads are ads. No matter in what form, they do the same. You shouldn't force people to listen to things they don't want to listen. Ads should be interesting, and they are if done right. If done right people wouldn't mind seeing or listening to them, but when they hear sounds they don't want to hear or the ad is not enjoyable at all, it's a bad ad. If ads are gonna be implemented, they should be implemented the right way.

What didn't make sense? He simply stated you make more money off ads if they are unavoidable to the point they get annoying.

No one likes Ads, they annoy everyone. If they where placed in a place where no one would be annoyed by them, they wouldn't even be visible.

$10 for 90 days.. $0.09 a day. My 15 year old nephew could afford that. Just buy a membership if it bnothers you so much.
In response to DarkCampainger
DarkCampainger wrote:
I'm curious to see what the rates are for the new ad system Tom is working on (@Tom, is it for standalone games only, or will games on the hub also be eligible?). It might end up being reasonably affordable for players/developers to "buy out" the ads for their favorite games and keep them ad-free.

I'm thinking the following:
* $5/1000 plays (which is more than we make from the ads themselves, which pay variable rates)

* Applies to both pager ads and standalone.

* All cuts from BYOND subs (currently at 20% but the dev could raise that) go towards this fund. So if you have a game that sells a few subs a week, that will most likely keep it ad free.

* We'll implement a per-hub currency/credit system to encourage sales, and the same cuts will go towards this system.

So if a very popular game like SS13 were to have subs in some branches, it could probably be kept entirely ad-free without further intervention. That is a bit of a special case due to the hub sharing so I'm thinking about how to handle it (ideally we want each branch of a game to have its own hub, but still be consolidated under the main branch). A topic for another day.

In response to Tom
Tom wrote:
DarkCampainger wrote:
I'm curious to see what the rates are for the new ad system Tom is working on (@Tom, is it for standalone games only, or will games on the hub also be eligible?). It might end up being reasonably affordable for players/developers to "buy out" the ads for their favorite games and keep them ad-free.

I'm thinking the following:
* $5/1000 plays (which is more than we make from the ads themselves, which pay variable rates)

* Applies to both pager ads and standalone.

* All cuts from BYOND subs (currently at 20% but the dev could raise that) go towards this fund. So if you have a game that sells a few subs a week, that will most likely keep it ad free.

* We'll implement a per-hub currency/credit system to encourage sales, and the same cuts will go towards this system.

So if a very popular game like SS13 were to have subs in some branches, it could probably be kept entirely ad-free without further intervention. That is a bit of a special case due to the hub sharing so I'm thinking about how to handle it (ideally we want each branch of a game to have its own hub, but still be consolidated under the main branch). A topic for another day.

Tom, can you please make it so you can actually minimize the windows? I feel like it's an invasion of.. well, something. I really don't like how we're forced to look at them because we can't minimize them.

Howey wrote:
SuperToby12 wrote:
DarkCampainger wrote:
Unfortunately, when it comes to advertising, the more annoying and unavoidable it is, the more it pays. If you could mute, minimize, or otherwise ignore the ads, companies wouldn't bother paying for them. This is the same reason it isn't simply a static banner ad in the pager: it wouldn't generate nearly as much revenue.

I'm curious to see what the rates are for the new ad system Tom is working on (@Tom, is it for standalone games only, or will games on the hub also be eligible?). It might end up being reasonably affordable for players/developers to "buy out" the ads for their favorite games and keep them ad-free.

That doesn't make any sense at all. Ads are ads. No matter in what form, they do the same. You shouldn't force people to listen to things they don't want to listen. Ads should be interesting, and they are if done right. If done right people wouldn't mind seeing or listening to them, but when they hear sounds they don't want to hear or the ad is not enjoyable at all, it's a bad ad. If ads are gonna be implemented, they should be implemented the right way.

What didn't make sense? He simply stated you make more money off ads if they are unavoidable to the point they get annoying.

No one likes Ads, they annoy everyone. If they where placed in a place where no one would be annoyed by them, they wouldn't even be visible.

$10 for 90 days.. $0.09 a day. My 15 year old nephew could afford that. Just buy a membership if it bnothers you so much.

You don't seem to understand.
Making ads less annoying doesn't mean anything in this case at all. You're comparing daily ads to the ads that are on the program itself. Making them obnoxious and even being unable to minimize them so you can't do something in the background is just idiotic.
In response to SuperToby12
I've seen some ads that pause when they lose focus. Maybe you'd like those instead, so you don't miss anything as you multitask. Ads are shown to be seen and hopefully clicked, not ignored (of course I haven't clicked an ad in my life, but that has nothing to do with it).
In response to SuperToby12
I've put 90 days on a membership for you.

You can stop complaining about ads now, you can go turn them off in your account settings.

Hopefully this topic can be closed now. <_<

Ads are on everything, deal with them or open your wallet.
In response to Howey
Howey wrote:
Ads are on everything, deal with them or open your wallet.

The English language doesn't support the necessary diction to express how much I agree with this statement.

For the people whining...

If the ads bother you that much, throw $10 to Tom and Lummox for a few months of membership. If you're too entitled to do that but are still complaining about the ads, go somewhere else. Honestly, that Naurotard game you log onto every day can't be that much fun.
In response to Solomn Architect
And this is the kind of attitude the forums doesn't need. Seems both sides need some growing up to do.
"If you used product and haven't paid for it then you are the product" - random quote from the internet.

In this case your ad viewing pays for product, or you can pay normally with money.
The simple fact is that if a website does not sell a product (I should clarify here; I mean "product" as a physcial good, or also the electronic content; as in subscription-based services), then it has to make its money off of ads.

This is the only working business model that the internet has come up with. You make a site that has content that draws in viewers, and you smack them in the face with ads.

Every site lives on this. Facebook, Yahoo, even Google. Every blog you've ever read. Every image site (theChive, for example). Every YouTube channel you've ever subscribed to.

Every single one of them. They make their money (or the majority of it, anyway) from ad revenue.

Hell, it's like this for other media as well. Magazines? The subscriptions are not their true source of income (which is why they all tend to have more ads than content pages) Television? Whether or not you use your DVR to skip them, every cent a TV station makes is off of ads.

And the content on all of these providers? All cleverly designed to draw in more viewers. (which is why BYOND needs better content; we need to draw in more viewers) SEO practices for websites? Only there to make the site easier for random viewers/surfers to find; so they can see your ads.

And unfortunately, by their very nature, ads must be as in-your-face (or ears) as possible, because they need to wrench your attention away from the content that brought you in. This is why as soon as the common bandwidth would allow it, internet ads came with sound and video. This is why TV commercials are almost always louder than the show itself.

This is just how it works, people. There's absolutely no good in complaining about it.
In response to SuperSaiyanGokuX
Advertising is no different from any other method of selling a product. The difference is simply that the buyer is an advertiser and the product is you, the end user.
In response to MisterPerson
MisterPerson wrote:
Advertising is no different from any other method of selling a product. The difference is simply that the buyer is an advertiser and the product is you, the end user.

This is a good point (and also what Zaoshi's quote above is referencing)

Content creators/providers do their best to create/provide content that will draw in the largest number of viewers, which are "sold" to the advertisers.
In response to MDC
No, just the people complaining. I have this attitude because it sickens me to see such crybabies complain about ads when they're not even helping BYOND get rid of them by actually, I don't know, donating to BYOND or buying a membership? My child doesn't even cry that much, Jesus.
In response to Solomn Architect
Solomn Architect wrote:
No, just the people complaining.

Exactly, not all of them are complaining.

I have this attitude because it sickens me to see such crybabies complain about ads when they're not even helping BYOND get rid of them by actually, I don't know, donating to BYOND or buying a membership?

Not everyone is loaded with cash, or is old enough to even use a credit-card.

My child doesn't even cry that much, Jesus.

Good for you.
It's unfortunate that any criticism against these ads leads to insults like "entitled" and "children" and "crybabies."

I totally sympathize with BYOND, and if they need advertisements for this service to stay afloat then I'm all for that. Go ahead and put ads everywhere! On the site, on the client, in-game, etc. It's not the ads themselves that people dislike, it's the loud and intrusive ones like we have now.

Some would like to argue that because we aren't paying then we have no right to "complain," but try to understand that us cheapskates are the ones who populate the game(s) for those who do pay. No, that isn't to say that what we say goes - but to say that our arguments and criticism are just as valid.

Then some might argue that "oh, you can't wait XX seconds?" Yes, I most certainly can. However, in a game like Space Station 13 I can honestly say that because of the ads I have lost out on several round-startups. What does that mean? That means I lost the job I was hoping to play or even a chance at being an antagonist. Actually, that is why I'm making this post here. It's not the end of the world but I don't think ads should interfere with the game like that.

At the end of the day if it's either these ads or BYOND closing shop.. well, I'll happily take these ads. However, I believe there are alternatives.
In response to User Account
User Account wrote:
It's unfortunate that any criticism against these ads leads to insults like "entitled" and "children" and "crybabies."

That's pretty much how it goes with any debate/argument around here. If you're not in agreement with the majority, you must be underage and/or spoiled.

I totally sympathize with BYOND, and if they need advertisements for this service to stay afloat then I'm all for that. Go ahead and put ads everywhere! On the site, on the client, in-game, etc. It's not the ads themselves that people dislike, it's the loud and intrusive ones like we have now.

Ads don't really bother me too much either. Hell, I've clicked on handful because they appealed to my interest. However, I've ran into a few ads that were loud and just outright annoying. I've yet to actually go "This loud and annoying advertisement is just what I need! *click*", so I can definitely see your point.

Some would like to argue that because we aren't paying then we have no right to "complain," but try to understand that us cheapskates are the ones who populate the game(s) for those who do pay. No, that isn't to say that what we say goes - but to say that our arguments and criticism are just as valid.

Pretty much see the first part of my response. I encourage you and whomever else to speak up when/if you come up with a suggestion/feature request to help improve BYOND.

Then some might argue that "oh, you can't wait XX seconds?" Yes, I most certainly can. However, in a game like Space Station 13 I can honestly say that because of the ads I have lost out on several round-startups. What does that mean? That means I lost the job I was hoping to play or even a chance at being an antagonist. Actually, that is why I'm making this post here. It's not the end of the world but I don't think ads should interfere with the game like that.

Definitely sounds like a bad time. I'm not much of a "BYOND gamer" so I find it difficult to relate. Maybe if Tom adds in the feature he's been talking about to remove ads by $cost/#plays, it'll smooth out that whole ordeal for SS13 players.

At the end of the day if it's either these ads or BYOND closing shop.. well, I'll happily take these ads. However, I believe there are alternatives.

Indeed. If you go for all or nothing, you're gonna have a bad time. It'd be nice to have a middle ground, and hopefully that's what Tom will eventually provide.
In response to User Account
User Account wrote:
Then some might argue that "oh, you can't wait XX seconds?" Yes, I most certainly can. However, in a game like Space Station 13 I can honestly say that because of the ads I have lost out on several round-startups. What does that mean? That means I lost the job I was hoping to play or even a chance at being an antagonist. Actually, that is why I'm making this post here. It's not the end of the world but I don't think ads should interfere with the game like that.

To me, this is just a poor design on the part of SS13. Perhaps it's not fair to lay the blame at the feet of a fragmented source that lives to today from so long before these ads were ever a whisper of a thought, but that's how it is. The system changed in a way that is (at least temporarily) necessary, so if it "breaks" a game or two, it's on those games to correct the issue.

Maybe SS13 really can't be made to work around the new pre-game ads (it sounds like it basically requires a server reboot between rounds, just for clean-up purposes), and that would be unfortunate. And maybe the promised alternatives will help to alleviate/eliminate the issue for SS13 players.

But until then, I feel that you really don't have any right to complain.
However, I do question the effectiveness of those pre-game ads. If they require a click-through to pay off, they'll likely never pay, because who is going to click an ad when they're already in the middle of something (trying to load a game)?

Presumably, people only click on ads when they're interested in the product, because clicking an ad will take you to that product's website for further information, and the potential to buy something. A person would only click an ad when that person has the time to look at the product's site (and potentially go through the purchasing process).

And that time is not when a game is loading for them.

An ad played during this time will likely never be clicked, by anyone (unless it is compelling enough to make them not care that they were about to do something else)
In response to SuperSaiyanGokuX
SuperSaiyanGokuX wrote:
However, I do question the effectiveness of those pre-game ads. If they require a click-through to pay off, they'll likely never pay, because who is going to click an ad when they're already in the middle of something (trying to load a game)?

Presumably, people only click on ads when they're interested in the product, because clicking an ad will take you to that product's website for further information, and the potential to buy something. A person would only click an ad when that person has the time to look at the product's site (and potentially go through the purchasing process).

And that time is not when a game is loading for them.

An ad played during this time will likely never be clicked, by anyone (unless it is compelling enough to make them not care that they were about to do something else)

That's a really good point. This begs the question; do the ads only pay for click thrus?
In response to SuperSaiyanGokuX
SuperSaiyanGokuX wrote:
Maybe SS13 really can't be made to work around the new pre-game ads (it sounds like it basically requires a server reboot between rounds, just for clean-up purposes), and that would be unfortunate. And maybe the promised alternatives will help to alleviate/eliminate the issue for SS13 players.

This is the case. SS13 is not designed to run without a reboot. While you could say this is 'bad design', there are fairly strong technical reasons for it. Being that SS13 is a huge part of the player base (seriously, look at its numbers), it does need some special consideration. I can't imagine the ad revenue that game generates is inconsequential.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5