Friday, December 18, 2009

Review of wiki on "Advertising in Video Games"

This is a post to review a group-wiki "Advertising in Video Games". The review covers the content, argumentation and formal side of the wiki.

I start with what I see first when looking at the wiki - the way the wiki is built and presented by the group. The front page consists of the list of group members followed by the title of their section of the article. From this list understanding the structure and the logic of the article is not as easy as could be - there is no logical sequence of the parts, no correct table of contents.

Derived from the tool used - Wikiversity - the wiki parts have good functional side of the content and referencing. It is easy to move inside the article and to see the references using the links. Again there is a weakness in the consistency while authors do not share the approach to references and use different styles for that. Not all the authors have made use of the wikiwersity functionality concerning the referencing.

Content

The wiki contains the following articles:
  • History and the involvement
  • The business of the in-game advertisement
  • In-game advertising on mobile
  • Impact of video games advertising - introduction and review
  • Types of financing development of the games and players attitudes toward in-game advertising
History and involvement gives overview of the beginning and first advertisements appearing in games. The content is brief but comprehensive to get the understanding of the birth and following development and the ways the advertisements are used. The discussion ends up with examples of profitability to companies, developers as well as the players. The section could be better structured and have some subtitles to clarify it. The references of this part are in wiki style but not enough detailed, as the reference section give no hint to the web page listed.

The in-game advertising business section is well-built, has logical sequence and structure with subtitles. It includes target audience, numeric data about the market and different types of advertisement. The section sums up both the benefits and the controversies or weaknesses. There are some factual controversies between two authors, which indicates lack of collaboration of the authors.

In-game advertising on mobile is probably the latest approach of the field and well covered by the author. It seems to me it could be better structured or structured some other way around while the article contains several very short subtopics which could be connected to one. The whole part is a bit shorter in comparison to other authors, but it is also reasoned while being a new field and additional information on that is surely to be growing fast in coming years.

Impact of video games is a long and thorough section. The introduction is very long in comparison to other parts and could have been either shorter or left aside in cooperation with other team mates who also covered the introduction to the field. The main topic comes at the second part of the article and is covered fully and is a very interesting reading.

Players attitudes and financing development gives a lot of interesting information. Even if the connection between title and contents stay somehow confusing all together, the content is very good. The questions raised are well answered and reasoned. References are well formed and used.

All authors have reached the goal of giving thorough overview of their topic and reasoning the argumentation. The reader can find sufficient facts about the development of in-game advertising, reasons behind it, different ways of placing the ads as well as the aimed audience and their attitudes toward the games with several kinds of ads.

To point out the main weakness and strength would be - lack of coordination and cooperation on covering the topic as a whole on the one hand and giving great amount of information and analyze the variety of sides of the field.

It was very good reading and for sure with some more effort on cooperation and integration a great consistent wiki article could be constructed.


(I am aware that the group did not know there was a request for a consistent article worked on as a team, therefore their approach was not wholesome. Even though I give my critique/opinion based on how I understood the task.)

No comments:

Post a Comment