Huge mobile ads
- Thread starter malfcn
- Start date
- Status
dave is ok
aztek is ok
This is going to cause the amount of mobile visitors using an ad block to jump considerably.
People don't mind ads, they mind bad ads.
People don't mind ads, they mind bad ads.
Pretty much this. Larger ads only, ok I'm good with that. Redirects, videos, popup ads, vibrating ads? Nope.
Yeah there really is a point where smaller profit margins need to be accepted. Screwing over your loyal customers doesn't usually end well.
I don't mind these ads too much as long as they don't eat my data but I'm paranoid that worse is coming.
I wondered if I just hadn't noticed or if it was a new thing. Weird.
As currently implemented, these units should be serving pure first party Google only, nothing funky, and Google's Adwords file size limit is stated as 150KB maximum regardless of the ad unit's dimensions or media type (including if it's html5, it looks like?), as far as I can discern from theirAdwords policy info doc. They have separate policies for ads served on Youtube and so forth, but that shouldn't apply here.
I mean, we just have a couple hours of metrics here, which are not an accurate gauge of anything since the network's algorithms adjust based on content keywords on the page and performance of the ad units, but early indicators are that the new units are viable, while the old ones were not.
This was largely left unaddressed up 'til this point because the desktop side was the workhorse for the site's ad revenue and the mobile site only accounted for a small percentage of overall traffic, so the fact that the mobile ads were falling off sharply as mobile standards changed (to what you see here) wasn't a pressing concern, but in the last 12 months or so adblock rates have become astronomical on desktop-gaf and additionally there has been a significant shift from desktop to mobile usage within the community, so leaving things as they were on mobile was flat out untenable.
Again, this is an experimental deployment and feedback is being taken into account. If the placement of that footer rectangle is causing actual usability problems with navigation, for example, we can adjust placement and so forth, but in personal use so far it hasn't seemed to cause me any issues in utilizing the footer navigation effectively, whether with the main control bar or the quick-jump to top of page, and there doesn't appear to be any particular ambiguity about the boundaries of the ad space itself, so it's probably just a matter of a small adjustment period being necessary to feel comfortable with the navigation again.
That doesn't sound too bad and I can deal with the size I guess but I'm curious, and I'm sorry if this has been answered historically - what's your position on offering a paid for ad free membership?
People laugh and joke about Gaf Gold, and I rarely pay attention to the back story, but seriously - Gafs a great site and I would support it directly if it meant no ads.
Aye yai yai, hope the finance of this site isn't huge of a dire.
Is it against the rules to inquire about or discuss site finances?
Admiral Woofington
Member
Ok guys, this is the point I offer to pay for monthly fees to get rid of ads, these gigantic ads are a bit much and I don't want to take away from your revenue by using an adblocker. I could deal with the small rectangle ads on top and bottom, but the top ad is a bit bigger and the bottom is a full on square.
Please heavily consider it, even consider opening up a Patreon where i can donate money monthly and fuck it if I'm donating I'll use adblockers guilt free.
Please heavily consider it, even consider opening up a Patreon where i can donate money monthly and fuck it if I'm donating I'll use adblockers guilt free.
half a moon
Banned
I keep getting an add saying I have 1 new message. Better click and read dat shit.
People are just annoyed now because you can't miss the ad lol. It's actually "perfect" placement for the ad if the goal is to get us to notice ads
If you are scrolling fast your brain thinks that bottom ad is a pic in a post and actually look harder at it than most ads on a site. If you jump to the bottom of the page using the arrows then you are greeted with almost a half screen ad
If you aren't making more money from that giant ad versus a smaller banner ad, then I'd change it. User functionality is the same, but the user experience changes as every page now has your brain soaking up an ad message almost unavoidably. And it makes you want to block them since every page now reminds me to buy something off amazon
If you are scrolling fast your brain thinks that bottom ad is a pic in a post and actually look harder at it than most ads on a site. If you jump to the bottom of the page using the arrows then you are greeted with almost a half screen ad
If you aren't making more money from that giant ad versus a smaller banner ad, then I'd change it. User functionality is the same, but the user experience changes as every page now has your brain soaking up an ad message almost unavoidably. And it makes you want to block them since every page now reminds me to buy something off amazon
blame space
Banned
I really should buy a vitamix.
WrenchNinja
Member
Okay I thought there was something wrong with my phone or something
theepicoftyler
Member
I understand ads have been a delicate issue on GAF, but have any steps been taken regarding mobile redirect ads? (I.E. the ones where I never see GAF but just randomly end up in the Google Play store or some miscellaneous shady website)
I actually haven't seen this in a few weeks, but I was just curious. I never saw any official response to those threads.
blame space
Banned
are we allowed to openly mock the ads because if we are I have no issue at all with these new big ones
Cute Dragon Here
Member
I'm mostly fine with the new ad format, but the bottom ad does seem so big, they're practically desktop-sized to me.
Also, the "go to bottom" button at the top of a mobile page could use some tweaking. As it is right now, it's very likely to show not much useful content in the last post, followed by a huge amount of ad area, and the bottom tool bars. Perhaps tweaking it to scroll to an earlier point might help.
Also, the "go to bottom" button at the top of a mobile page could use some tweaking. As it is right now, it's very likely to show not much useful content in the last post, followed by a huge amount of ad area, and the bottom tool bars. Perhaps tweaking it to scroll to an earlier point might help.
Ray Wonder
Founder of the Wounded Tagless Children
Wouldn't have noticed.
As I've mentioned, adblock rates on desktop-gaf are at >65% and climbing, and you'd probably struggle to find a large, resource-intensive, entirely-free-to-use website (which is independent and not burning VC money by the truckload waiting to hit critical mass marketshare to *then* sell out and immediately monetize obnoxiously, or any equivalent where big corporate is absorbing continuous losses as part of a broader strategy), that has as unobtrusive an ad footprint as we do. That used to be enough to keep adblock rates down somewhat, but things have changed on the internet as a whole lately, blanket-adblocking has become the norm, and free sites reliant on advertising revenue are struggling to find viable solutions.
Tough to blame the end-user at this point, though. Standard advertising protocols have advanced with all the tracking cookies and crap to target ads more effectively, user experience can go down the drain with browser slowdown from resource intensive ads, sites can go way too hardcore with their number of ad units to the point where it's difficult to get to the actual content, etc. etc. It is what it is.
I've always been hard-line opposed to taking money from the community. There's just something fundamentally more satisfactory about providing a free service that millions of people utilize and enjoy without taking anything directly in return, just dropping a couple banners in the top and bottom of the page and calling it a day and having that be viable. That being said, any time I enjoy a free ad-supported service and use it regularly I go straight for the subscription to remove the ads, because I flat-out fucking hate ads, personally. So, well, there probably should be some sort of option for people who are going to adblock no matter what, or who won't adblock out of respect but loathe ads, to have an option to get away from the damned things in clear conscience.
That's an *entirely* separate issue than this mobile ad update, though. I'm not going to incentivize a hypothetical GAF Gold model by intentionally sabotaging user experience in the default ad-supported layout, and while an ad-free option is being explored this year due to very vocal demand and the decline of traditional advertising models and that giant SSL deployment hassle, it's not currently being implemented as part of some nefarious scheme with the first step being to freak everyone out with bigger ads on mobile. It's just on the list of things to potentially explore at some point. This mobile-gaf ad deployment is an unrelated test, to attempt to allow for the mobile ad units to actually have viability and relevance so that the dramatic shift to mobile usage isn't actively harmful to the site anymore. It is looking like, so far, these units are in fact dramatically more viable, particularly because they dynamically adjust based on the class of device you're browsing on (third world device gets minimalist units; modern smartphone gets the leaderboard and the rectangle most folks are seeing; high res tablet gets standard desktop banners).
That being said, some of the more extreme reactions are being taken with a grain of salt at the moment, because honestly, you're still talking about *two* basic Google ad units per enormous page of content, both entirely outside of the boundaries of the content itself. If that sends you into a rage, well, y'know, I can turn it off and look for other solutions instead, but two ad units per thread page, with no anchor ads or interstitial ads or pop-up-and-enter-your-email bullshit or any of the myriad other current generation bullshit schemes, is a hell of a lot better than what I tend to see elsewhere.
Regardless, though, will take all the community feedback into account.
Parakeetman
No one wants a throne you've been sitting on!
The previous sizes were fine but the newer massive block on the bottom is what personally is not cool. Had zero ussues with double banners before this.
The increased size of the top banner is a non issue for myself.
The increased size of the top banner is a non issue for myself.
Ray Wonder
Founder of the Wounded Tagless Children
Ok well I'm in for an actual real life Gaf Gold. Can I preorder?
SynthFetish
Member
I've been getting some audio interruption today on the site, not sure if one of the ads is trying to start a video or play a sound clip telling me I've won an iPod. I took GAF off my white list to test, sure enough no interruption. Whitelist and it happens again.
nicoga3000
Saint Nic
Real talk - with how much I'm on GAF, I'd happily pony up some cash to legitimately remove ads.
The huge mobile ads suck mostly because it kind of hangs my mobile browsing up a bit. Even on wifi, it doesn't like it.
The huge mobile ads suck mostly because it kind of hangs my mobile browsing up a bit. Even on wifi, it doesn't like it.
Commanche Raisin Toast
Member
i can get used to the top banner being larger now, but the bottom one is just too big.
it would be great if it was the same size as the one at the top.
it would be great if it was the same size as the one at the top.
I think I speak on behalf of everyone when I say that, after the years of service you've provided for us, we'd be more than happy to contribute a small fee to remove the adverts and help keep the community going. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, NeoGAF is one of the best communities I've been a part of, if not the best. A small annual fee is a small price to pay to remove obtrusive adverts because, in the long run, we're helping to keep the community alive. Another forum I used to frequent offered a premium membership that removed ads, and gave subscribers more customisation options, such as larger avatars/signatures, coloured usernames, custom tags/user titles, and more.
Unfortunately, the admins and moderators began to neglect the subscribers, and the community as a whole, and the whole place turned to shit. As far as I know, the community is still alive, though inactive. I have no reason to doubt that if they did a better job at managing the community, it'd be alive and active. They're corporate sellouts, though, and sold out to the big man to line their pockets. I believe, as do many others, that you - and NeoGAF as a whole - would not do similar, and would instead continue to provide us with the service we've all come to know and love. As you've said, money isn't something you're particularly interested in (where we're concerned) so would/should have no reason to take our money and run.
In short, if you want to start offering a paid subscription service to the community that offers an ad-free experience, maybe with a few extra perks, for a small annual fee - go for it. I'll be straight there signing up to show my support for NeoGAF. And I can imagine many other people would do so, too. As I've said, what you've done is nothing short of amazing. From a personal standpoint, you've provided a great community to post in, with a wide variety of topics to pick from and discuss. From a business standpoint, you've made your mark in the gaming industry, where our feedback and opinion is taken into account, and given a place for developers/publishers/journalists to interact with the people they work their asses off, and allow them to show their passion. You've done and achieved what others can only dream of.
#TeamGAF
Audioboxer
Member
Won't be against the rules, but it's a private site and EviLore doesn't have any legal basis to have to disclose personal figures to members. He explains the adblocking stuff affecting running costs though so that's really enough to know a board this size is costing more to maintain that it once has previously. Especially if more people are using GAF on mobile now.
You'll need one hell of a T&C for donations if they go live. I can just imagine users thinking that means ban-proof, or refunds on getting banned lol.
Ray Wonder
Founder of the Wounded Tagless Children
If I can have an animated avatar I'll pay $10 a month
Astral/H3X
Member
I've only used Mobile GAF for a few moments today, but noticed the big giant ass ads. I don't really have a problem with them being huge, however my main concern is that people are reporting ads with *video* on them. Data is at a premium for me, and beyond that if an ad starts playing freaking video and audio I immediately leave whatever website I'm on, no questions asked. As long as there's no video (Do you guys have a DNSUnlocker infection? Lol) on the ads *I* am fine with the new ads, but I can't waste my data.
nicoga3000
Saint Nic
Give me large ads over this shit. This will destroy my mobile browsing experience.
Audioboxer
Member
An animated avatar that only you can see but no one tells you only you can see it.
Admiral Woofington
Member
Good response evilore. Hopefully the ad free option, or a Patreon to maintain payments of running the site monthly, comes through this year. I'm not entirely freaking out over the ads but right now they're a bit much and as someone who absolutely abhors ads I could handle the small rectangles in the top and bottom, the big square at the bottom is too much though. Now I'll likely go out of my way to not browse on mobile of the bottom one is here to stay. A compromise of an ad the same size of the bigger rectangle at the top is something I could deal with without too much issue though.
Ray Wonder
Founder of the Wounded Tagless Children
With the option to turn them off, or have them still on mobile? I'm sure there's a way.
Very frustrating to say, but it's really difficult to pinpoint malicious auto-redirects, because the person affected doesn't even see the ad that triggered it, so can't provide many useful details, and this sort of stuff is explicitly against the Google advertiser ToS and is an auto-suspension if an advertiser is caught putting it into an ad they run. What's supposed to happen is Google is supposed to have proactive quality control of the ads they serve, preventing malicious ads from being served by them in the first place, or instant catch-and-suspend if not, like in the good ol' previous decade or so. This is pretty much intermittently affecting every site serving banner ads currently, as far as I can tell, unfortunately. Still looking for a solution.
megarockexe
Member
They're not scaling consistently then. Couldn't the smaller banners stay on mobile? Instead of these weird double-height banners. Or just blank space? I'm not getting the large block ads at the bottom though. But that would be too much.
nicoga3000
Saint Nic
If that's an option, I wouldn't mind. But anything that further dampers my mobile browsing experience immediately goes on my shit list.
Honest question - is there a reason why NeoGAF hasn't offered a donation service to help cut down on the operating costs? Even something where you can donate 'x' money a year and get a little symbol next to your name or a colored name or something stupid and arbitrary like that.
Audioboxer
Member
PeskyToaster
Member
I didn't notice the top banner ad was different and i'm okay with the bottom one. Whatever, you guys have some room to be annoying because everyone is so much worse. I know this site wouldn't do us too badly so whatever you guys need to make it work.
PartTimeWarrior
Banned
You'd pay $10 to have a dancing icon?
Ray Wonder
Founder of the Wounded Tagless Children
I haven't decided what I would have. It might be dancing. It might be doing something else too. Now my hopes are up.
I don't adblock everywhere, but it's something I only experience here. Being legit here. This is the only site where I've encountered weird audio-only adverts and full-page redirects. It's weird and I don't understand it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll