Re actual contest pics:
Their website and facebook pages have both already been taken down.

I'd like to reiterate that I don't find booth babes (overly) offensive, it is the contest that I don't like.

Phew, well I'm mentally exhausted.
I'll probably respond more tomorrow.

Quote: Original post by Trapper Zoid

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
You don't have a right not to be offended.

Yes, but it's also valid to point out that something is offending, and for us to debate why it is so and whether it needs to be

I agree. So we examined what was "offending," and some of us came to the conclusion that it was a selective interpretation of a partial reading of the material - in other words, looking for offense - and now we're kind of looking for a new subject that's worth discussing.

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
I agree. So we examined what was "offending," and some of us came to the conclusion that it was a selective interpretation of a partial reading of the material - in other words, looking for offense - and now we're kind of looking for a new subject that's worth discussing.

But this was a marketing campaign. The initial impressions given by a campaign are important. If the initial impression offends someone, they're not going to be interested in a "full reading" of the material (especially if said material is in the form of a photoshopped tattoo on a bustline).

I agree with Osha that it's pretty clear to me that this contest is designed squarely for 15 to 25 year old straight males, and is doing so by playing the titilation card pretty blatantly. And it's also clear that some people find this objectionable. As a marketing campaign, it's attracting certain subsets of people and repelling others.

I suspect the target market for the game Dante's Inferno is essentially the teenager-to-young-adult male market. However it's also not just marketing for the game, it also rubs off on the Comic Con, EA as a company, and games in general. I do think ads like this helps reinforce the "toys for boys" impression that video gaming still has.

Plus I also have a general objection to base titilation as a marketing campaign because it's just, well, tacky. It's a really cheap way to grab attention. I guess if the game itself really was just a titilation device it would be understandable, but from the Wikipedia page for the game it's more of a grim action/adventure thing. Lust's just one of the nine circles. Heck, it's even got a save-the-princess love story as the main motivation, which doesn't really gel with the contest theme.

It just reminds me of the gaming magazines I used to buy in the nineties to read the latest news, where half the pages were near soft-core porn, and even an ad for a flight simulator with no actual models of people in it would have half-naked models in it. It was hard for anyone outside gaming circles to take the industry seriously with that kind of publicity.

Quote: Original post by Trapper Zoid
But this was a marketing campaign. The initial impressions given by a campaign are important. If the initial impression offends someone, they're not going to be interested in a "full reading" of the material (especially if said material is in the form of a photoshopped tattoo on a bustline).

Caveat: is there anyone in the target demographic that was offended by the material? There are lots of people who, upon reflection, concluded the material could be perceived as offensive, and might be inappropriate, but how many heterosexual males ages 18-34 who might be interested in a gritty romp through the nine circles of hell were offended by photoshopped cleavage?

In other words, looking for offense. The ad was perfect for its target demographic. Yes, it was cheap and tacky, but so is its target demographic.

Quote: I do think ads like this helps reinforce the "toys for boys" impression that video gaming still has. ... It was hard for anyone outside gaming circles to take the industry seriously with that kind of publicity.

You're too preoccupied with what people outside gaming circles think. People inside gaming circles really don't bat an eyelid at this; they may find it distasteful, but they don't view it as representative of EA as a whole, much less of gaming as a subculture. People outside of gaming will seize on anything as a negative, and while this may provide more ammunition for them, so what? Is it going to stop people who enjoy games from playing them? Are you, personally, going to boycott an unrelated really good game because it's published by EA, and EA ran this promotion? I hope not, because if you are (and I've read such hollow bullshit on Ars) then you need to grow the fuck up.

If you want to have a discussion about objectification, exploitation and sexism, have the discussion. We're talking about an item that won't warrant a footnote, eventually, while ignoring the essential text.

Skimming over the description of the game in the wikipedia entry, I'm severely disappointed. Dante as PTSD crusader? Beatrice murdered? Dante meeting Virgil in hell rather than the dark wood? The story is classic as it is. It doesn't need to be dumbed down in order to make it exciting. The wikientry doesn't say if the gamemakers condemned contemporary political figures, but Dante did in his original. Dante even had the guts to put Muhammad in the 8th level of hell. I seriously doubt EA has the fortitude to try that with this game. In the end, I think EA wanted a Diablo rip off and figured it could steal from such an old text without having to pay royalties. That it would employ a bad-taste marketing gimmick shouldn't come as a surprise.

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
Caveat: is there anyone in the target demographic that was offended by the material?

If the target market is 18-34 hetrosexual males who would be interested in a game set in Dante's Inferno, then yes. There's me. [smile] But see Lessbread's comment, as I agree.

Quote: You're too preoccupied with what people outside gaming circles think.

The world outside gaming affects us. Case in point: it's not the Australian gamers who want all R18+ games banned here.

Plus you need to consider people outside gaming circles if you want that circle to expand. It's all very well to appeal to a certain demographic with a well targeted campaign, however I think it's counterproductive if that campaign is also saying "Go away, we don't want you" to another demographic.

Quote: Are you, personally, going to boycott an unrelated really good game because it's published by EA, and EA ran this promotion? I hope not, because if you are (and I've read such hollow bullshit on Ars) then you need to grow the fuck up.

For an unrelated game? On its own, no. However it certainly hasn't helped endear EA to me. If I'm on the fence then repeated stunts like this from the Acclaim Book of Marketing will swing me against the label.

For the game itself? That's a complex issue. If it wasn't for the controvesy I'd not have heard of the game, so if anythig it has actually increased my chances of getting the game purely because it's now a known entity. However, the fact that a stunt like this was needed makes me think the game is a shameless cash-in. Like Lessbread, I'd actually be interested in a Dante's Inferno inspired game - if it was a decent mix of classic Dante and modernised Inferno. However, I'm fairly convinced now that this is a shameless God of War rip-off - so I'd need pretty solid proof it's above that before being interested.

And if a company decides to do a blitz of these kinds of campaigns for the bulk of its products, such as Evony? Then I'll avoid them, regardless of how good the game is reported to be.

Quote: Original post by Trapper Zoid

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
Caveat: is there anyone in the target demographic that was offended by the material?

If the target market is 18-34 hetrosexual males who would be interested in a game set in Dante's Inferno, then yes. There's me. [smile] But see Lessbread's comment, as I agree.

You misread my comment, or rather you ignored the follow up, qualifying question. I'm not asking if you're an 18- to 34-year old heterosexual male with an interest in The Divine Comedy; I'm asking if you're an 18- to 34-year old heterosexual male with an interest in Dante's Inferno, the upcoming video game from Electronic Arts. In essence, I am suggesting that the audience of individuals interested in the game - which has been known of for a good long while - is perfectly targeted by that lame ad. Name me one person on the whole internets who was previously excited about this game and feels this ad was inappropriate.

Quote: The world outside gaming affects us. Case in point: it's not the Australian gamers who want all R18+ games banned here.

Plus you need to consider people outside gaming circles if you want that circle to expand. It's all very well to appeal to a certain demographic with a well targeted campaign, however I think it's counterproductive if that campaign is also saying "Go away, we don't want you" to another demographic.

What's your plan to appeal to those who want all R18+ games banned?

Quote: ...if a company decides to do a blitz of these kinds of campaigns for the bulk of its products, such as Evony? Then I'll avoid them, regardless of how good the game is reported to be.

That's something I think we can all agree on. [smile]

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
You misread my comment, or rather you ignored the follow up, qualifying question. I'm not asking if you're an 18- to 34-year old heterosexual male with an interest in The Divine Comedy; I'm asking if you're an 18- to 34-year old heterosexual male with an interest in Dante's Inferno, the upcoming video game from Electronic Arts. In essence, I am suggesting that the audience of individuals interested in the game - which has been known of for a good long while - is perfectly targeted by that lame ad. Name me one person on the whole internets who was previously excited about this game and feels this ad was inappropriate.

Uh, Clive O'Leary! He's pissed. Okay, I made him up, but he should show up as a reference in Google soon. [smile]

Actually, I wasn't kidding in that I would have been interested in a game with Dante's Inferno as a theme, even one loosely inspired. I'd just never heard of the game before this contest. Heck, I didn't even know the game after I'd heard of the contest, because it wasn't that clear on the picture of the poster. Part of my dissing of this contest is that it was really bad at projecting the name of the game to me.

Quote: What's your plan to appeal to those who want all R18+ games banned?

This is a bit off-topic, but honestly? My plan is to wait for the roadblock, South Australian attorney-general Michael Atkinson, to leave politics. He's pretty much given indication that he's not going to budge for anything. Once he's gone I think things will start moving. It's the laziest of lazy plans, but it's got a fair chance of working.

More on-topic: the reason why Michael Atkinson is so opposed to this is because he doesn't want adults-only games falling into the hands of minors. He comes across to me as one of those who thinks games are mainly meant for kids, which I partly think is due to gaming having not yet fully matured as an industry. That's just a matter of time as well, but I don't think it helps if game marketing helps marginalise themselves. I don't want a repeat of the Comics Code in games.

Quote:

Quote: ...if a company decides to do a blitz of these kinds of campaigns for the bulk of its products, such as Evony? Then I'll avoid them, regardless of how good the game is reported to be.

That's something I think we can all agree on. [smile]

It really doesn't help having this debate when the whole damn Internet is full of those blasted Evony ads. WHY WON'T THEY GO AWAY?!!

Quote: Original post by Trapper Zoid
More on-topic: the reason why Michael Atkinson is so opposed to this is because he doesn't want adults-only games falling into the hands of minors. He comes across to me as one of those who thinks games are mainly meant for kids, which I partly think is due to gaming having not yet fully matured as an industry. That's just a matter of time as well, but I don't think it helps if game marketing helps marginalise themselves. I don't want a repeat of the Comics Code in games.

Never happen. We live in the internet era now: nobody can prohibit access to any specific kind of content. The fantasy comics of the Comics Code era had to be printed and delivered, which gave an agency within the jurisdiction of the country to hold responsible. In contrast now all one has to do is host the site in a very liberal company and keep the registration information shadowy (employ a decent Swiss bank or lawyer).

It's really mostly about demographics. Video games as a distinct medium are a little bit over 30 years old. In another 20 years we'll have a generation of politicians who will have grown up with video games, and probably played them through college and their early jobs, at least - or had good friends who did. The "what about the children" bleating will ring hollow to a generation of parents who played games as children. The scare will be over, and the circle will expand almost automatically.

There's no need to pander. Just be patient.

Besides, most AO/R18+ games suck, and are available through more dubious means if you really have to play them. Plus, does the OFLC's censorship extend to digital distribution? Will they monitor your network traffic and block a download if its digital signature resembles a restricted game? I don't live in Oz, so I don't want to be too flip, but this does seem like less of an issue from a pragmatic perspective, and more of an objection on principle.

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
There's no need to pander. Just be patient.

I think that's basically the tactic most people are taking on this particular issue over here...

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi
Besides, most AO/R18+ games suck, and are available through more dubious means if you really have to play them. Plus, does the OFLC's censorship extend to digital distribution? Will they monitor your network traffic and block a download if its digital signature resembles a restricted game? I don't live in Oz, so I don't want to be too flip, but this does seem like less of an issue from a pragmatic perspective, and more of an objection on principle.

Don't get us started! It's a total joke, really.

Oh, and I agree that most R18+ game suck. It's just the principle of the thing :-)