Cliff Hicks eagerly awaits the release of Black, a game that has been described as "gun porn" by its developer. Send CZ-75 centerfolds to [email protected].

　　So what is it about fishing in video games that's so appealing? It's probably a lot of the same reasons that people like fishing in real life. It's very relaxing to watch your line and bobber and wait for a bite. Repetitively casting and recasting your line can be almost hypnotic in its monotony. I think the main thing is that fishing minigames are just simple fun. I have no desire to play actual fishing video games, in which you have to worry about esoteric details like the type of bait you're using, the clarity and temperature of the water, the lunar cycle, and fish-finding sonar. I just want to catch fish. So, hopefully, as developers think of ways to harness the power of next-gen platforms to create crazy destructible environments, ultrasweaty perspiration technology, and whatnot, they won't lose sight of the simpler things that make games fun.

　　The name's placement...product placement. Licensed to shill.

　　Honestly, whether a game is fun or not should be the most important thing in developing a game. But having spent the better part of three years working for various development studios, I can tell you that the almighty dollar figures into it a lot more than just the fun. Unfortunately, "is it fun?" isn't always as important as "will it sell?" or even more importantly, "how much can we make?"

　　To be fair, game-development costs have only gone up over the years, so the stakes are higher. Long gone are the days of a single person coding an entire game (with the possible exception of RollerCoaster Tycoon developer Chris Sawyer, of course). Nowadays, it takes a big team to put together a truly successful, big-name game. Because of this, game companies are always in search of a way to cut corners and make just a little more money. With, for instance, advertising.

　　A recent study claimed that game players actually like the idea of advertising in games. A lot of people questioned this study--and rightfully so--but here's the catch: Advertising can be beneficial to games. The study basically summarized how advertising can be beneficial to games, and that's if it reduces the cost of the game without significantly impacting the game itself.

　　Don't worry, ma'am, we'll have you safe in...hey, game rentals?

　　Advertising in games is, honestly, nothing new. You can go all the way back to Wipeout and see Red Bull taking out ads. This kind of thing is common in racing games, and apparently sports games are next. With all the background advertising that sports fans are subjected to, introducing ads to the background of games like the Madden NFL series should be a natural fit. As long as we're not seeing barbarians clad in Gap T-shirts in the next Warcraft game, we should be able to handle a little bit of advertising, if it keeps costs down.

　　Have you ever wondered why you don't pay for basic television? Or radio? Or why a newspaper costs so little? That's because you aren't paying for it. The model is set up so that advertisers subsidize most forms of media. Advertisers pay for their ads, and those ads pay the staff and production costs of whichever media form you're looking at. That money pays to develop whatever it is you're watching, reading, or listening to. If something (a television show, for example) is more successful, then it will cost more to buy the ads that will run during that specific time. So, a television ad will cost you two different rates, depending on if you're running it during an episode of the hit TV show "Lost" or during a not-so-in-demand "Night Court" rerun.

　　Of course, the invention of TiVo has changed how this works, too, because television consumers can just fast forward through ads these days. So, product placement has become the important thing--getting that product in the show. Have a character drinking a Pepsi, or wearing Nike shoes. And games may be moving this direction, too. If the next Tony Hawk game only cost $29 because Vans shoes sponsored it, would you honestly complain?

　　For movies and television shows, ads are often sold as part of a package. That's how reruns and daytime programming still end up with ads, because when you buy ad space during, say, the season finale of "House," you also get ad time during "America's Craziest Police Chases During Animal Attacks 8" as part of the deal. For example, if you wanted to buy ads for a game, like the next Madden, you'd need to buy ads in a small-budget, unknown game first.

　　It sounds like we're going to be flooded with advertising in the future whether we want it or not, so the key is to make it tolerable. Advertisers know this, but it's still an untested, unproven ground. And advertisers hate risk. They like safe, predictable things, like knowing exactly how much exposure they're going to get--how many eyeballs will see their ad, for example. All of this further increases the franchise mentality even more than it already exists. The answer to this franchise deadlock, of course, is serial games.

　　For many years, television was under the impression that shows had to be self-contained. You needed to be able to watch any single episode without knowledge of the rest of the series. Shows like "24" and Lost have contributed a lot toward getting rid of this mind-set. The idea of the "long-form" serial episodes is making a return, allowing television to tell epic stories with much more room for character development, plot, and intricacy. The idea of gaming adapting this model isn't as odd as it might sound.

　　Companies like Telltale Games and Ritual Entertainment are already starting to try it. Develop the engine, build some of your assets, and release an "episode" of the game. If it sells, make another. Will it work? It's hard to say. But here's the thing--it's less expensive to try than it is to spend three years trying to make a premium game, only to have it backfire in your face.

　　Games are changing. They're not developed in a vacuum anymore, or by five guys in a basement. And to get more original properties out there game publishers are going to need to find new ways to support the risky games. In the end, advertising won't drop the cost of games, because, hey, companies like making a buck any way they can. But the funding just might give unproven games a chance. So if that means I have to see Carl's Jr. ads plastered over Burnout Revenge so Criterion can develop a game like Black, well, that's a price I'm willing to pay.

　　Next Up: New Year's Resolutions by Andrew Park