Forums > News > Looks like another case of 'Look at Me!' disease...
Ronald Diemicke (1181) on 2/15/2007 7:10 PM · Permalink · Report
Kotaku has a story on a faux press release by the 'x-treme' developer Running With Scissors about how 'The Postal Dude' (from the Postal series of games) might be the father of the recently deceased Anne Nicole Smith's baby. This is blatantly another shameless attempt at marketing and is definitely one of the more extreme cases... but when is it too much? But hell, in this case, they aren't even promoting a game, just doing whatever they can to keep themselves in the limelight. While I wouldn't expect any less from these guys, it seems to me like this line of good taste. Is this going too far with trying to market yourself? Likewise, what do you think is the worst blatant case of shameless marketing for a game you've seen?
Foxhack (32137) on 2/15/2007 8:19 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Ronald Diemicke wrote--]Likewise, what do you think is the worst blatant case of shameless marketing for a game you've seen? [/Q --end Ronald Diemicke wrote--] The "Name your baby Turok" thing from the N64 era. I think it was Turok.
Reborn_Demon (127) on 2/15/2007 9:22 PM · Permalink · Report
I remember reading a playstation 2 magazine (to which i no longer subscribe) when I stumbled across a full-page thing which said something about a british secret agent being held captive in some foreign country, apparently written by a relative of the agent and the letter went on to say that the "agent" cannot be saved because the goverment denies all knowledge of his existence, andso the author of this letter begged people to send letters to the goverment, like a plea, in order for them to get involved. Anyone who would reply would recieve those weird bands that the UK went crazy for during the time of the "Make Poverty History" era.
Later on in a gaming forum I had found other people who had stumbled upon this letter, and some thought it to be a real case, but it was found out to be an advertisement for the 'Cold Winter' game. I can't remember if the letter had 'THIS IS AN ADVERTISEMENT' sign on it and if it did - it was sure easy to miss. But honestly, faking stuff about secret agents and goverments simply crosses the line.
D Michael (222) on 2/15/2007 11:37 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
Well, just as important as content is context. I can't imagine anyone taking something like that seriously when the ad is in a PS2 game magazine. Put the same ad for the game in Soldier of Fortune magazine and it's a whole different story.
Indra was here (20746) on 2/16/2007 11:45 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Kitsune Sniper wrote--] [Q2 --start Ronald Diemicke wrote--]Likewise, what do you think is the worst blatant case of shameless marketing for a game you've seen? [/Q2 --end Ronald Diemicke wrote--] The "Name your baby Turok" thing from the N64 era. I think it was Turok. [/Q --end Kitsune Sniper wrote--]
Hmm. I kinda like that ad.
At least I'm still laughing...
Accatone (5173) on 2/16/2007 2:10 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
There was an ad (two full pages) for Tomb Raider III where you could see an incredibly huge Lara Croft image lying on some kind of a beach with almost no garments on her and she says: "It's hard to believe but I just get better and better!" And under her words there is contact information for "LARA clothing and merchandise brochure". You can see only 4 very small screenshots from the game at the right side of the second page. They were obviously trying to sell Lara Croft, not the game itself!
Riamus (8446) on 2/16/2007 10:02 PM · Permalink · Report
That's probably the same image as is on The Last Revelation disk holder (US).
Indra was here (20746) on 2/17/2007 2:58 AM · Permalink · Report
Rule #1 in marketing...at least that's what they told me.
Sell the sizzle. Not the steak.
Accatone (5173) on 2/17/2007 10:58 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
There was also an ad for the racing game, Screamer that shows you a real crash scene where you see a rollover. The blurb on this picture says, "Every Christmas The Roads Are Full Of Mad Men. Join Them." This advert has won PC Format's "Best Advert in PC FORMAT" award in 1995. The comment of the magazine for the ad is as follows:
"Virgin's advert for Screamer is pretty controversial to say the least. True, it's quite offensive; true, it's wholly without taste; but, like it or not, it certainly makes a lasting impression, and that's what good advertising is about."
True, I still remember this ad, but just because it "makes a lasting impression", it does not always mean that it is "good advertising". What do you think about it?
Luis Silva (13443) on 2/17/2007 6:42 PM · Permalink · Report
Define "good". If you still remember it after 10 years, then it surely made it's point as an advertisement, thus being "good". Of course, it could be less agressive and still make quite an impact (the Segata Sanshiro ads are a good example of that), but as far as advertising a product, I'd say it is quite good.
Maw (832) on 2/18/2007 2:08 AM · Permalink · Report
I'm getting seriously annoyed reading the replies in this thread. I mean, are people seriously so stupid that they keep falling for this kind of crap? Isn't there anyone out there with a brain?
Another example: on the cover of Eli Roth's Hostel DVD they say it's "based on real events." Read: the director was surfing the web and found a site that supposedly allows you to kidnap and kill someone for a fee. He didn't look into it any further, has no way of knowing that it wasn't a prank or a joke, but he still claims his movie is "based on real events."
Indra was here (20746) on 2/18/2007 4:27 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Maw wrote--] [1] are people seriously so stupid that they keep falling for this kind of crap?
[2] Isn't there anyone out there with a brain? [/Q --end Maw wrote--]
[1] Yes.
[2] Hardly.
Lighten up Maw, or you'll be shocked how the majority of the population is (a) really doesn't care about anything (b) doesn't have the IQ to think about the issue (c) anything else, refer to the above.
I was shocked about this many years ago. I was more shocked later that to a certain extent I was one of them.
Besides, what IS important and what IS NOT important unfortunatley is a matter of subjective opinion and historical background. Intelligence is not a universal consensus. It takes many many years to finally realize that we are not as smart/wise as we assumed ourselves to be...darn it.
Accatone (5173) on 2/18/2007 11:18 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Maw wrote--]I'm getting seriously annoyed reading the replies in this thread. I mean, are people seriously so stupid that they keep falling for this kind of crap? Isn't there anyone out there with a brain?
Another example: on the cover of Eli Roth's Hostel DVD they say it's "based on real events." Read: the director was surfing the web and found a site that supposedly allows you to kidnap and kill someone for a fee. He didn't look into it any further, has no way of knowing that it wasn't a prank or a joke, but he still claims his movie is "based on real events." [/Q --end Maw wrote--]
This thread is about the "worst blatant cases of shameless marketing for a game we've seen" and what do we feel about them. We express our dissatisfaction about all those marketing "manipulations" so I don't really understand "so stupid", "kind of crap", without "brain" thing you are referring to!??
I just looked at imdb for Hostel and it says, "Tarantino and Roth said later on an Icelandic talk show that they have no idea if the website was real or not." It seems that he doesn't claim that his movie is "based on real events". Also (again from imdb) "trailers bill the movie as 'inspired by true events' " and as you said DVD covers of the film claim that it is "based on real events" so here we again turn to "marketing manipulations" and that's what we're talking about in this thread.
Indra was here (20746) on 2/18/2007 4:20 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Accatone wrote--] True, I still remember this ad, but just because it "makes a lasting impression", it does not always mean that it is "good advertising". What do you think about it? [/Q --end Accatone wrote--]
My sister works in the advertising business. From what I learned from her, for the "advertising people", good advertising MEANS "makes a lasting impression". Not the "good" from us the non-advertising people.
So if the ad itself is crappy, but people remember it, then the ad has just fulfilled its primary duty. Constant repetition of the ad is also an irritating way to do this.
The only reason why advertising people don't make the ad 'too offensive' is because they might get in trouble with the law or major social sanctions...
Accatone (5173) on 2/18/2007 11:42 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Is making a lasting impression is the ultimate goal for the advertisement business whether their ads are crappy, offensive, without taste, etc. or not? I don't think so. Yes, I still remember the ad for Screamer but I didn't play it or buy it (I didn't buy Tomb Raider III either). So the ads have failed to sell the product to me, so it is not really a "good advertising" (of course, at least in my case). I always stay away from the ads that hide their products under fancy, shiny pictures or words. I ask myself where is the game I might buy in this ad, where's the screenshots (of course not the cinematics; it's the real in-game shots that I'm talking about). I always respect those who are not afraid of showing their games. And that's probably the only thing I can count on in an ad for a game.
Luis Silva (13443) on 2/18/2007 12:12 PM · Permalink · Report
The primary goal of advertising is raising consumer awareness, which might lead to higher sales. Not everyone who sees an ad is going to buy a product (assuming that means a cracking 100% of ads fail in their purpose), but, as you demonstrated, it AT LEAST made you aware of the product enough to mention it later. Someone who is reading this thread might think "now, I'm looking for a racing game to play in my older rig, I wonder if this Screamer is any good". Reduce from 10 years to 10 days, and the result would be a successful ad campaign.
However,"ads that hide their products under fancy, shiny pictures or words." remembered me of JoĆ£o Diniz-Sanches (former EDGE editor and a contributor at the national gaming rag) talking about the ad campaign for FFVII which used no gameplay pictures at all, only from FMVs, which led to more than a few returns of gamers disgusted with controlling a fetus.
Deadly Dudly (2232) on 2/18/2007 3:33 PM · Permalink · Report
Its even worse when you have advertizing that really catches your eye but the game turns out to be a big steaming pile!
Maw (832) on 2/18/2007 8:57 PM · Permalink · Report
[quote]So if the ad itself is crappy, but people remember it, then the ad has just fulfilled its primary duty.[/quote] But if the only reason people remember it is because it's retarded, isn't that negative publicity in the long run? I have no experience in advertising so I don't really know what I'm talking about, but surely there must be ways of getting an ad to stick in the person's mind without them going "man, that was a dumbassed ad" every time they recall it.
[quote]This thread is about the "worst blatant cases of shameless marketing for a game we've seen" and what do we feel about them. We express our dissatisfaction about all those marketing "manipulations" so I don't really understand "so stupid", "kind of crap", without "brain" thing you are referring to!??[/quote] That was the same thing I was doing, wondering who would fall for it and why those people haven't been removed from the gene pool yet.
Shoddyan (15006) on 2/19/2007 3:57 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Maw wrote--] But if the only reason people remember it is because it's retarded, isn't that negative publicity in the long run? I have no experience in advertising so I don't really know what I'm talking about, but surely there must be ways of getting an ad to stick in the person's mind without them going "man, that was a dumbassed ad" every time they recall it.[/Q --end Maw wrote--]
As far as I can tell, marketing is not about "the long run" in any way. All marketing I've ever experienced has been aimed at short-term gains.
Riamus (8446) on 2/19/2007 5:37 PM · Permalink · Report
Personally, if an ad really annoys me, I refuse to buy the product even if it is good. However, I'm in the minority in that respect. Most people will buy a product if they feel it will fulfill their needs, regardless how annoying the advertising is. So bad advertising still works because, as mentioned, it increases the awareness for those kinds of people.
I'm sure everyone remembers that stupid line, "I've fallen and I can't get up." It was really annoying hearing that constantly because it was so fake. Yet, they're still around and they still have that trademarked quote (though they display it rather than say it these days).
Zovni (10502) on 2/19/2007 8:39 PM · Permalink · Report
If anyone is seriously interested in learning the thinking behind marketing and the advertisement industry you should take a look at "The Fine Art of Separating People from Their Money " a serialized documentary hosted by Dennis Hopper that covers pretty much everything there is to it. An entire episode is devoted to shock tactics, and some of the examples and the thinking behind it can be pretty interesting.
Marko Poutiainen (1151) on 2/21/2007 11:47 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Zovni wrote--]If anyone is seriously interested in learning the thinking behind marketing and the advertisement industry you should take a look at "The Fine Art of Separating People from Their Money " a serialized documentary hosted by Dennis Hopper that covers pretty much everything there is to it. An entire episode is devoted to shock tactics, and some of the examples and the thinking behind it can be pretty interesting.[/Q --end Zovni wrote--] Or, if you don't mind reading, a very good book is Robert B. Cialdini's Influence: Psychology of Persuasion. Ordered mine from Amazon and it's a real eye-opener.
Indra was here (20746) on 2/20/2007 7:13 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Maw wrote--]but surely there must be ways of getting an ad to stick in the person's mind without them going "man, that was a dumbassed ad" every time they recall it. [/Q --end Maw wrote--]
Oh, we also forgot the matter of what target market the advertisers are going for. There are "different tastes" in advertising. For medium to low income, the 1st priority is "eye-catching and embedded in brain", since usually these are the casual-passerbys.
For instance in my country, one of the high rating ads are shoe/sandal commercials. Why because they repeat the same 3-5 second ad 3 times in a row. Obviously tasteless since it only shows the brand, but people remember it.
Though I personally would not buy such products because of those ads, a lot of people really don't care...
Unicorn Lynx (181676) on 2/21/2007 2:30 AM · Permalink · Report
That's true enough. But not all commercials are so bad or primitive. I remember seeing a Sprite commercial: it began with all kinds of half-naked girls dancing and drinking a fictional soft drink from pink bottles, with a stupidly sounding song saying "Kookie-bookie is the best drink, sexy girls drink only kookie-bookie!". Then suddenly the commercial freezes, the camera zooms out, and you see the whole thing was just a... TV commercial. A simple-looking young man is sitting in front of the TV with a bottle of Sprite. He smiles, opens the bottle, drinks and says: "I'm tired of those commercials. When I'm thirsty, I know what I want".
And my favorite one is commercial for some kind of ice cream; you see a guy and a girl kissing on a beach at night; they prepare to make love, but then the guy obviously notices he has no condom, so he goes to a nearby closed shop with a condom-selling machine standing outside. He fished out a coin, but then suddenly notices another machine, selling those ice creams. After a moment of hesitation, he goes to that machine, buys an ice cream, and eats it, forgetting everything else! Now that's a strong one; I really want to go and buy an ice cream which is better than sex! :)~
Shoddyan (15006) on 2/21/2007 3:47 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Unicorn Lynx wrote--]Then suddenly the commercial freezes, the camera zooms out, and you see the whole thing was just a... TV commercial. A simple-looking young man is sitting in front of the TV with a bottle of Sprite. He smiles, opens the bottle, drinks and says: "I'm tired of those commercials. When I'm thirsty, I know what I want".[/Q --end Unicorn Lynx wrote--]
Really sneaky though... they managed to fit the sex-sells fleshy girls in to advertise their product and then denounce that practice in the same breath. I've seen beer commercials doing this tactic too, and it almost annoys me as much as if the commercial had just been an actual "fleshy people everywhere" product sell.
Accatone (5173) on 2/21/2007 10:32 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start WildKard wrote--] Really sneaky though... they managed to fit the sex-sells fleshy girls in to advertise their product and then denounce that practice in the same breath. I've seen beer commercials doing this tactic too, and it almost annoys me as much as if the commercial had just been an actual "fleshy people everywhere" product sell. [/Q --end WildKard wrote--]
It's sex and its all kinds of connotations that do all the work, attract "masculine" attitude to its web. Whether it's hidden in an ad or not, it seems the only reliable way to sell your product in the marketing business. That ice-cream ad Unicorn Lynx is talking about (also the Sprite's) is even more hypocritical than those ads that do it directly. They seem to be clever in their own sense, and yet they do the same work. Then, I ask myself, what is it that makes them intelligent? I guess they do really think that they can hide their real purpose and that's why they are so dead wrong!
Unicorn Lynx (181676) on 2/21/2007 2:37 PM · Permalink · Report
Sure, those two commercials also involve sex, but they do it in a humorous way (in the first, having a "commercial inside a commercial"; in the second, implying that ice cream is better than sex). I don't see anything hypocritical here, for me it's just humor.