Yesterday, I asked you guys what you were looking forward to at E3. Today at Gamasutra, I've written an editorial about what I'm not looking forward to -- the scripted conversations.
Grilling some of my developer pals and acquaintances recently, I've been surprised to learn the extent to which the conversations we have with them during demos and previews are carefully pre-scripted and re-rehearsed, right down to the catch phrases and buzz words they hope we'll associate with their games, e.g "ultimate" "AAA" "blockbuster" "open-world experience" "high-intensity" "explosive" et al.
Look, marketing, I understand. Before I was a writer I worked doing low-level PR support in both product-oriented boutiques and in larger companies, and I get the necessity of trying to impose your language. But today, I've argued for why this isn't such a good thing for games, given the nature of the community.
It's an expansion, or rather, a specification of the rant I gave at GDC -- since my nervous-rambling presentation (during which I "ranted" and was promptly embarrassed by the tidy, well-constructed presentations my peers gave), I've been hoping to revisit the topic in a clearer, more specific way, so in a way, this is that.
The fact is, when you cut the BS, the press respects you, and respect goes a long way toward fair -- and often favorable -- coverage. Check it out, huh?
(header image is from Osamu Tezuka's "MW," which kind of blew my mind when I read it for the first time over this past weekend. post title is the name of a fab track from Grizzly Bear's Veckatimest, which anyone with ears should listen to and enjoy.)
12 comments:
As much as I'd like for this to happen all around, I like Aubrey's first comment on your article:
"Arms race"
It's going to be something that developers become more efficient at manipulating, be it directly or through marketing. I guess I just don't really expect these kind of things to ever go away. I do however, expect some to break "the system" so to speak. It lets dicks like me dole out judgment with far more certainty than I already do.
~sLs~
Ah, but the issue isn't that the game developers shouldn't tow the company line by reading a script, I think, it's more that the corporate mentality is one of "do this and it will be successful. No, we don't care if you have proof that it isn't, you'll do it anyway because that is our corporate way, because it is the corporate way of all others."
That's why I tend to have something of an issue holding down a job - I react to corporate BS with such vitriol that I tend to self destruct.
So, in order to have people talking honestly about their game - or as honest as they can, as you have to understand they still want to sell units. In order to have that, you have to destroy the indestructible, that being said corporate culture.
I'd love it if that happened, and would love more honesty.
I just have a problem with companies spending millions on PR that doesn't really work to be honest. You can spend that money on making the game great and you can see why some things are perceived to not sell well.
I agree we should just get the developers or something out there to speak about the game and that would make a lot of people sit up more.
Do you think, though, that a certain responsibility has to lie with us press folk not to simply regirgitate over-enthusiastic press releases and marketing buzz?
No name-naming, of course, but one of our writers at Resolution recently approached me about a preview he was writing. He'd been shown an early build of a reasonably well-covered game, and wasn't at all impressed. The result was uncertainty at how to approach the preview: it's just not the done thing to slam something before it's out. Do you think that needs to change as well?
Maybe if marketing realises we're not going to be taken in by this nonsense, they'll stop preaching it...
Lewis: Yeah, I think I noted in the editorial that the press' lack of skillz allows it to be taken advantage of.
That's not to say we should slam something before it's even out, but I think better communication on process between developers and press could help us understand independently what we're seeing in full context beyond "this looks good" versus "this looks bad" when it's too early to really tell. That could allow us to do previews that are neither inappropriately positive nor prematurely negative, but are simply informational.
One of the great (and surprising) aspects of PAX was the exact opposite of this pitfall you mention.
There were a few booths with developers. Having a conversation about anti-piracy with one of the founders of Ironclad was a real treat. I'm not even a journalist!
It's kinda depressing when marketing jumps on you. That happened at the larger booths (specifically Nintendo.)
They were helpful with some information... but their passion was a little 'canned.' It was pretty boring, honestly. If E3 is entirely like that, I'm glad I don't attend it.
@SVGL
Since you're talking about commercially driven catch phrases, are you saying that the onus is more on the press' side ("press" as in the commercial firm that supports it, not the abstract institution) or the games' publishers/developers?
And while you're at it... please also ask companies to go for stakeholder value, not just shareholder value....
Please, let's be honest: this is a hopeless cause. The only way you can revolt is by A) not publishing those kinds of wordes and B) ultimately getting the public to not buy the game.
otherwise money talks and BS walks. And if the BS is making the money than it is a walking advertisement ;-)
"post title is the name of a fab track from Grizzly Bear's Veckatimest, which anyone with ears should listen to and enjoy.)"
I think you just upped your own awesome level.
veckatimest is OBLIGATORY for awesome, not bonus :)
Totally nothing to do with the post besides the image, but I'm going to continue in my comics nerd vein (especially as I'm now considering a career in it): I am blown away by those two panels. Because they look like Aubrey Beardsley. Only Beardsley didn't make comics. So maybe it's P. Craig Russell? No, it's the guy who did Astro Boy! Fuckin' A. Osamu Tezuka could draw anything he dreamed of, in any style that took his fancy, and I'm going out to buy MW tonight. End of aside.
Buy it, Ben. Because even I, miss firmly not-a-comics-person, think it's flippin' brilliant. I still can't get it out of my head.
Post a Comment