Quantum Break is set in the 'real world', and Remedy needed to use real phones, computers and cars, because these items appear in both the game and the live-action show... might as well get paid to do it, right?

And what's the alternative?
Would you prefer they turned down the money and made a cheaper game?
Or should they have kickstarted production of their own functional 'no-name' products?

AAA videogame development isn't getting any cheaper... Even R* cuts costs by using 'versions' of actual places/products/people in games like GTA, but they still get sued everytime they 'infringe' on real-world copyrights, not-to-mention the defemation lawsuits.

Your just pissy that it's Microsoft... same goes for whoever wrote this 'article'.

I think the difference is that everybody DOES use Apple phones in the real world.

Exactly... kind of hard to imagine Apple funding a Microsoft exclusive.

So you have to be an Xbox fan to tolerate anything and don't disagree? Am I on IGN?

"And what's the alternative?
Would you prefer they turned down the money and made a cheaper game?
Or should they have kickstarted production of their own functional 'no-name' products?"

How about MS being their publisher and owner of the IP(if they are) ensuring the quality with the budget? You are telling me that for quality they need to do this? So much for fanboys always bragging about MS pockets

GTA has always tried to simulate American cities and curture. And as far as I know and seen, there's no product placement or adverts there. You point is invalid (unless you can point me to an example found in GTA of course). Also didn't see anything on Infamous SS Seattle but again, my memory could fail me

At least your TV show hypothesis makes some sense

I'm saying that Remedy chose the most cost-effective option available to them... all games have a budget and I'm guessing Remedy went well over their initial estimates - the multiple delays, casting changes (leading to 'reshoots' with their custom mo-cap tech, which isn't cheap), the out-of-nowhere PC version and things like Beth Wilder no longer available as a playable character make me think that Quantum Break cost considerably more than either Microsoft or Remedy expected.

Getting non-Microsoft phones and tablets would have cost money which could have been spent elsewhere, and Nissan probably offered more than Toyota, so it was their crappy car that got a little screen-time... How does that ruin a game?

As for R*, My point was THEY DON'T USE REAL S#!T because if they did they'd spend the rest of their lives in court... that said, the radio stations do use licenced music, which occasionally references actual places, people and products, and that even something as innocuous as 'illegal' background music has landed them in court.

Even the undisputed champions of the industry make compromises... Sam Lake is a f#@kin' auteur, and I don't believe for one second that any of this 'sponsored content' was in any way detrimental to Quantum Break.

THIS is killing me.

Thing about product placement is that it's so obviously a product placement, and often times it deters from the overall experience, or becomes a focus of a scene that could be better served focusing on something more in line with what is considered cinematic. It breaks the immersion.

While QB had a couple places where it was glaringly obvious that time was spent to focus on the product, I didn't actually feel that it was so over used to be annoying. But there were times where it was questionable.

However, other places can use product placement and not be so out of whack, because the products themselves actually fit into the flow of the game/story, and focus isn't drawn to them so much that it's distracting. For instance, James Bond movies now always have Sony phones in them, yet the make and model isn't mentioned, and Bond doesn't sit there holding it up next to his face with a pithy comment. It's worked more naturally into the story...like he gets a phone call, and they show the screen and he answers. Even when Ford sponsored Casino Royale, they made it more into a joke, and it was funny and you didn't think about the product placement....and you know what, he made it seem cool. I'm loathe to use Transformers as an example since it was rife with product placement, but the use of GM cars didn't detract from the story, because...well they were cars. On the other hand, the XBox and Mountain Dew things were so obviously there as product placement that it just didn't work.

How a freaking Nissan on the side of the road, which happens to be in front of a big ass Nissan logo which just looks out of place, and why Jack would care about it given the circumstances is just stupid, and so glaring that it breaks the immersion. I mean, at what point ever has someone ever seen a Nissan and taken the time to look at it, and comment about it in some way? Heck, I love Nissan cars, have owned 3 of them in the past 10 years, and recently almost brought another one but opted for a Ford, but I never have reveled in their awesomeness....particularly the rather mundane ones used in the game.

I don't decry the practice of product placement at all. I agree it can bring needed funds to a production, and mitigate the risks of producing expensive projects. but the use of product placement should just be more natural, and those sponsoring such things need to stay out of the development studio.

As far as being set in the real world, do you think that people are going to notice that that Ford truck is actually a Fjord truck? If focus isn't given to the object, no one is going to care. There was one game on the PS3, can't remember which one, which had "Phony" phones and alarm clocks. Thousands of games and movies release without the need to have branded products taking focus, and people just accept that they are representative of a certain kind of object. If you want real world, then show tons of different kind of cars. Not one brand which happens to conveniently show up everywhere. Sure it's fine to accept money for it, but marginalize it and do it on their own terms. Games are not a nascar race car lineup.

@gangsta thats just because you fall into the exact same category.