
| Luis Guimaraes |
|
|
Am I the only one finding it funny that the reason this campaign failed so miserably is because it's ridiculously and needlessly, erm... "linear"?
"Target identifiable by:" [shows list of pre-made offensive stuff] Maybe because players are too dumb to write interesting or actual funny stuff themselves or you know, they might write something offensive... |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Benjamin Leggett |
|
AMEN PREACH IT.
I realize "dickish young men" buy games, but the rest of us do too, and our purchasing power (and possibly our influence) is greater. But then the big gaming industry is trying to ape Hollywood, which does exactly the same thing and has for years. Another big hangup for me is that all of this involved *Hitman*, which used to at least attempt to be stylish and classy, or at least as stylish and classy as a game about murdering people for hire can be. I'd be more forgiving of stripper-nuns in, say, Saints Row 3. As it is, my immediate response to both of these kerfuffles was "Oh hey, another reason for me not to want to play this game." |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Ryan Creighton |
|
|
The article strangely tries to point out a disconnect between the marketing and the game, or its creators' intent. From the other criticisms about the game, it seems like this marketing piece was a GREAT fit for the game. The problem is the *game*, not the marketing.
You can play a haunting, poetic piano ballad over your Gears of War commerical ... church it up all you like, but it's still just a dumb dudebro action video game about chainsawing aliens. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Isaiah Taylor |
|
|
I was one of the people who was 'totally siked' to buy Hitman this year and then I saw ads for it. It was one of the few times I'd been turned off from playing a game that 'could have possibly been' a great game.
|
|
|
| Justin Kwok |
|
|
As someone who used to work in marketing... it's easy to see where this kind of thing stems from. Marketing is pure numbers. The "market" for M rated games tend to be "dickish young men." At least that's the way they see it as it's been that way for a while.
The biggest problem is that marketing doesn't take into account the new. You can't quantify the new because people can only give you an opinion based on things they've already seen. You can only quantify the past and make decisions based on the past. Anything new automatically starts with a big "0" beside the figures that marketers use to make decisions. There's a story I often tell to illustrate this. I was in a department store trying to buy a belt on a wednesday. But there was no body around to help or even pay. I walked to another department and they said "We've found that nobody buys belts on wednesdays so we don't staff that department." It didn't even occur to them that maybe the reason nobody buys belts on wednesdays is because there's no one to buy them from. Ask a marketer about the success of Star Citizen (almost at $7 million in their crowdfunding) and they'll be bewildered. Their data says that nobody buys Space Sims... their data is probably twenty years old. Nobody buys them because nobody makes them. Edit: grammar |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Peter Christiansen |
|
|
I find it interesting that a marketing campaign so terrible that it goes down in flames in a single hour could be greenlit in the first place. Whether this was made with or without input from the developers, you would think that it would have set off red flags somewhere.
The question I want to know is whether this is the result of some terrible and pervasive groupthink among the marketers (and/or Square Enix), or if it did raise red flags and some "dudebro" (very apt term, thanks Ryan) in some position of power pushed it out in spite of objections. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Paul Marzagalli |
|
|
Too late in the day to write anything in-depth, so I'll just put on my Devil's Advocate hat and weigh in with some comments for discussion and debate...
Why must a broader "more inclusive" industry *not* have these things? This makes "inclusive" sound homogenized, which is something that I imagine would worry any creator/developer. This is a foolish app for a franchise I have never played a game of, but judging by their whole campaign, they targeted the game where they wanted it. The app sounds like a variant of the party game "Cards Against Humanity" - meant to be so outlandishly offensive that it can only be construed as humor. They could have chosen to do things differently, but they didn't want to for creative and business reasons. This gets into the sense of whose responsibility this is, and for purposes of this comment, I will posit that as far as the games themselves go, it is *not* the responsibility of the artist or business to be inclusive or socially-minded if they choose not to be. If that means they lose out on potential profit or alienate potential players, this is a decision that they live or die with. For the rest of us, working to create a broader, more inclusive industry means building up and out, not trying to kill off those elements which offend your personal beliefs. That seems rather Moral Majority-ish. Video games may be a multi-billion dollar industry, but they are still an artform and it is not necessarily the best thing to start pressing for a universal form of "acceptable." Looking forward to the thread on this article. I thought last week's "#1ReasonWhy" comments section was fantastic, and I hope for the same here. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Owen Faraday |
|
This is a totally worthwhile article and an admirable sentiment. Here's the problem: marketing people don't understand ANY of the stuff they're selling.
I worked in advertising and PR agencies for years. Big, prominent ones with global accounts. Most of the people in marketing are great folks - but they're in marketing because they're frustrated journalists, failed novelists, and generally aimless people with business degrees. Nobody goes into marketing because they love cars, or soap, or video games. The advertising and PR industries believe (rightly, to an extent) that being an advertising creative or a PR strategist is a skill onto itself, one that doesn't necessarily require familiarity with the client's business. Remember that the big ad agencies represent dozens of different clients in wildly different sectors - very few people at any ad agency will ever have an intimate understanding of what their client does. As a result, when Advertising Agency X wins the Honda account, or the Ivory Soap account, or the Square Enix account, they don't go around asking "who loves cars or soap or games?" They look around to see who has time to work on the account, and stick those people on it. I worked on accounts for major car companies, mobile phone makers, and microprocessor makers. Nobody working on any of those accounts knew the first thing about any of them. Marketing people don't care about video games as a medium. But they also don't care any of the other crap they're selling either. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Ian Welsh |
|
This and their nun advertisement are why I won't be bothering to buy the game. Congrats on turning off a likely buyer.
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| Lyon Medina |
|
|
I think the pull was intentional, created news and buzz around the gaming industry. This really feels like a strategic move from Square Enix, seriously one hour? There is no way any company could manage that unless it was intentional that it was going to be taken down in a hour, or at the very least they knew it was not going to be on the app store for long.
Honestly I understand the rage from everyone and the fact that this is really a tragedy of marketing. That all makes sense and is understandable, but please focus on the fact that this really had nothing to do with the game from my view point. Yes the marketing is more horrible beyond all measure. There is no disagreement there. But being Hitman fan I would like to judge the game by only looking at the game. (Which I haven't played yet but I plan too soon.) Honestly yes we should be angered by this but we should focus it to the people who made these decisions to allow this very career suicidal app (Which let’s face it, no one who was a part of creating this app should ever get work again.) be the target of our disgust and anger. By all means if you have played the game and hate it for that fact that is a bad game that is good too. Just saying to keep issues separate so that you can properly evaluate the circumstances. |
|
|
| Maria Jayne |
|
|
I can't believe nobody pointed out how bad this idea was, we're either at a stage where the wrong people make decisions in marketing or there is nobody willing to even question those decisions for fear of repercussion.
Of course, it's probably a huge success, for something only up for an hour, plenty of people are talking about it. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| Justin Sawchuk |
|
And what if there target demographic was these "dickish young men", maybe they were going after the call of duty crowd. I guess it just didnt work out
|
|
|
| Andrew Webber |
|
"Obviously it's the perfect time for a Facebook advergame that encourages you to bully your friends about their breast size."
Obviously, it's the perfect time for agenda-driven professional grievance mongers to selectively choose items to complain about. Or did you not know that there were male-targeted insults in the FB promo game as well? Leigh, do you have any experience or background in games? A quick search shows nothing. Seems to me that you only write articles when you have a flimsy premise to get all 'outraged'. Are we supposed to applaud that? "Here's why you should be angry." And there's the perfect summary of the problem with professional grievance-mongers like Alexander. They want you to be angry. They'll do anything - twist stories, omit key info, exaggerate - to get you angry. Because it gets you to believe their agenda, to read their nonsense, and promote them. This is like those news programs that find some insulting comment made in private, go out in public and find people, repeat the comment to their face, ask them if they're insulted, and then misdirect their anger towards the private source taking no responsibility whatsoever for their role in the matter. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Bryan Provencher |
|
|
With regard to this article: Amen.
We've been marketing mature games to boys instead of men and women for long enough. Time to grow up. |
|
|
| Kenneth Wesley |
|
Leigh's right. Sales executives and marketers within the industry act completely disconnected about video games and who plays them. I remember on a game I worked on I saw an email that went into the thinking of a game and it was basically a chart of percentages from other games.
They just continue to make this industry a place where we're can't be talked to, treated like, or be looked at like adults. And to everyone calling out Ms. Alexander for getting angry over this, attacking her won't change that there are severe problems that make video games a hostile environment to be in. Doing things just for the 'buzz' is an outdated way to sell video games because it's not needed. There are ways for video games to be sold and talked out without making people feel unwelcomed or made fun of. Nintendo and Valve seems to know how to do it. |
|
|
| Mike Griffin |
|
|
Dear Square Enix:
Call me next time before greenlighting this type of campaign. I would have helped you separate good buzz from bad buzz. Hiring-on external e-marketing firms specialized in another sector of entertainment to concoct an offensive and tacky Facebook campaign doesn't exactly speak to confidence in your own internal teams. |
|
|
| Jim Butler |
|
|
Let's be fair to marketers and not paint all of us with a broad stroke. There are some damn ingenious marketers that have worked on games, and there are some idiots that should be tossed out the nearest airlock.
There are crappy game developers as well. They're the exception, not the rule. The Hitman plan was misguided and insulting. An adult at some point should have killed this on paper before it ever emerged as part of an overall plan. Development and marketing (and lots of other groups) have to work together to win. Clearly, that didn't happen here. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
| Johnathon Swift |
|
|
Agree on every single point and then some.
I'm playing Far Cry 3 right now, and loving it! Except for the utter trash story about some "bro's" perfect dream where they are a California adventurous punk with rich parents that gets captured by pirates (really?) and then escapes to have your brother shot before you by the antagonist. OMG PEEERFECT revenge fantasy! For someone I probably avoid associating with socially perhaps. But the game seems to assume that's the person that's playing it. So did the advertising campaign. I literally learned this game was actually an open world exploration game first from a friggen graphical white paper at this years GDC. The game had been announced months before, and I learn what it actually is about besides a fantasy I want no party of from a technical paper? That's just... an utterly fantastical failure in every respect. Much in the way of Triple A game marketing is a cringe inducing failure today. The Hitman thing was just the most abhorrent and sensational of these screwups. |
|
|
| Christian Nutt |
|
|
This has the odor of the British "take the piss" culture that just doesn't translate to America at all. Between the Britishisms ("ginger", "shit" as an adjective) and the attitude, it's clear this came from the other side of the pond (where the junior marketers who wrote it are probably now moaning, to use another Britishism, about Americans' lack of a sense of humor and not learning anything.)
This doesn't make it okay -- and John Walker, a British critic at Rock Paper Shotgun, was the first to call foul on this, for valid reasons (cyberbullying is a serious issue.) Just reminds me of my mystified fresh-expat British boss at my last job, completely bewildered at why the entire editorial staff didn't spend the entire day insulting each other viciously in the office. |
|
|
| Daniel Martinez |
|
|
And here I thought SquareEnix were being diligent when they hired other marketing talent above me. I would feel schadenfreude about this if I didn't care about the company; but instead, I feel like less than trash now. Thanks.
|
|
|
| Kelly Kleider |
|
I would sum it up as disappointment. I'm disappointed that they are just pressing a series of tired buttons, like Maxim from 10 years ago. The killer nun thing they did was their "A" game :(
Because this is their second blunder which doubled-down on the first, an apology will seem disingenuous. |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
| Emppu Nurminen |
|
|
....do I reckon right, but wasn't the developers side as bewildered of the reaction for their Nun video? How that makes it marketers fault, if whole brand was okay with creepy, exploitative violence to begin with?
|
|
|
| Muir Freeland |
|
|
The twenty minutes or so I just spent reading this article and its comments are the most time I've ever spent thinking about a Hitman game.
|
|
|
| David Mata |
|
Simple fix here, don't like it, don't buy it. Things like that will make it work out eventually.
|
|
|
More: Console/PC, Business/Marketing, Exclusive