Remind me to stick my posts onto the OP next time

There's some stuff that is really wrong with a lot of the arguments being posted here.

UU is taking the ad too literally. I don't think they are targeting youngins, not by a long shot. I saw this commercial on the onion a week or so ago and I thought it was pretty funny. I'm prolly repeating other people's points but... They are going for easy selling, and shiney graphics sell. Regardless of the quality of the game, graphics sell. I'd love to have gaming companies produce better games, but yeah....

I also have to agree with (whoever it was) that said that UU is always jabbing at things saying how messed up they are, when in fact they're really not that bad. UU rants a lot about shit that don't deserve to be ranted about, like at all. Like seriously. What the fuck did this ad really make you SOOO distraught that you had to go on the internet and complain about it? Like I mean really, what the hell.

A friend of mine mentioned this ad in a conversation. He commented how funny he thought it was. Ad success.

Portal was a good game. Valve is a good company. I'll admit that there are some things I don't particularly like about sc2, but it's not shit, it has some good qualities. A lot of effort was put into the game and it shows in the quality of the melee and other things.

@Tikels

Have u really read All of the posts??
It's funny how you sound Distraught while you're arguing that I'm distraught. I see what you did there

Read this post first in its entirety: http://www.staredit.net/281121/

What you can say is that I came in with my usual hatred of gaming giants such as EA, and failed to really argue my point, mostly because I needed time to develop my argument, and secondly because Cardinal was already here being a bitchtrying to denounce me.

At this point, I'm probably not going to argue about the effectiveness of the commercial. Again, persuasion is very subjective, and my attitude towards this form of commercials has long gone down the drain. It is distasteful, and doesn't compel me to buy the game. Moreover, gory, bloody graphics does not a game make, as I've learned through a painful experience as I shelled out 60 bucks for a shitty, A title game, that's all graphics and nothing else.

So, again, please read this: http://www.staredit.net/281121/ - It keys in on the core reasons behind why I feel these sorts of commercials should not be encouraged.

Now gimme some time to argue my third point about the problems of the way games, such as Dead Space 2, approaches the Survival Horror genre.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Feb 19 2011, 9:27 pm by UnholyUrine.

I just wanna point out that, I started to go through the paragraph and point out every logical flaw, every mistake, but then I realized arguing on the internet is stupid and time consuming.

I actually hadn't read what you said about sc2 in that post prior to a few minutes ago, my comments about you dissin sc2 were completely coincidental to this conversation.

I just want you to know that what you put down is just totally mentally retarded.

You'd know better than me than saying someone's retarded without describing why isn't going to solidify your points or make you look good in any way..

If you really believe that I shouldn't question the merits of SC2, and neither should I question the concepts behind the commercials, then don't post here. This is about discussion and questioning the reasons, not trying to denounce who's got the right ideas and who's got the wrong ones.

I've already tried the best I can to avoid an outright argument with Cardinal, and now you're here to say that I'm retarded. You're going to need to explain why you feel I'm mentally retarded in lieu of topic in question.

---

Hold on a bloody moment.
Where in these posts did I diss your beloved SC2 anyway?
The most you can say I did was that I used SC2 as an example of disappointment.
The "No chat, no lan, crazy custom map system" are all true examples I'm taking from b.net2.
Where do you even formulate ur arguments anyway?

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Feb 20 2011, 5:16 am by UnholyUrine.

It's time to get back on this again. This time, I have even greater gunfire. So to speak.

A person that I've fully admired and respected has recently made a video about EA's marketing team. His ideals are very similar to mine, probably because he has persuaded me to think this way. If you are put-off by the centricity of the video, and feel that Daniel Floyd doesn't warrant himself, then I highly advise you look at his videos. He covers a lot of basis of game designs.
Anyway, watch this: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2794-An-Open-Letter-to-EA-Marketing

There are several things that I want to point out from this video.
Mainly that
1) EA's marketing team has done things like this before. This isn't something they're beyond doing.
2) EA's has lost money making gimmicky controversial advertisements before
3) EA's advertisement hurt everyone, including the company itself.

I wish to strengthen my Point 1, that these Mom Commercials have nothing that can help sell the games.

Daniel Floyd has laid on a point that I think a lot of people who argued against me have missed. That if you like the game's appeal or you think that you'll enjoy buying the game, you are already biased, and will like the game for its merits. You are not, however, buying this game because of these commercials.

EDIT: Here, I found a perfect parallel example

The commercial's funny, and it definitely gets you thinking about XBOX, which makes the commercial somewhat effective. But, like the Mom Commercial, it will never convince people who aren't going to buy XBOX's in the first place to buy one.

There really needs to be a standard that has to be set amongst gamers. A lot of us pre-order games without knowing the final product (poison_us).. A lot of gamers think that games will never fall into the hands of legal restrictions, which is evidently false, as the state of California has recently rehashed their fight against games, and has received the Supreme Court's attention. Whether the case is still on, I don't know.

Lastly, and most importantly, a lot of us choose a game not because the game is genuinely good, but because of the amount of Hype (aka Marketing) that a game has had.

Interactive media can do so much better than running and gunning aliens/Nazis. But as long as the consumers still gobble up mediocre/repetitive titles, there'll be no evolving. If we don't push the envelope, then this media may very continue to stay as mere toys for children to play with. I think it can do so much more.

---

Anyway, on to point 3. I believe that Dead Space 2, and games like DS2, such as Resident Evil 5, exhibit identity problems when it comes to being Survival Horror.

This is sort of abstract from the commercials, as I'll be talking about the psychology of fear and stuff. Not really about the controversies. I also have to say that Fear and Horror is subjective, so I'm not exactly advocating for a revolution here. I'm going to state what I feel is wrong. Lastly, and most problematic is that I have not played Dead Space 2. But I can infer from the play through I've had with Dead Space 1 and RE5.

The biggest problem with these games is that... after getting used to the game and playing it for around an hour or so.. it's just not Scary.
My theory behind it is that the developers behind DS1, DS2, and RE5 wanted their games to have the tried-and-true Action-RPG style of gaming. In short, they were too chicken to innovate. What we end up with are Games that are Super Immersive, puts you in the correct tension and feeling, and then turns on the lights and shouts HAPPY BIRTHDAY every time you actually start playing the game!

The combat behind DS1 and RE5 takes up most of the game, and they aren't particularly scary. Once you've gotten the item management down, and figured that Vents = where Baddies Spawn, it's pretty much a Grind.

Fear is psychological. Fear is of the Unknown, the abnormal. Fear is Helplessness... and these games have great potential to instill these sort of fear. But when they give you a Partner to fight with.. or gives you a Buzzsaw which can rip shit to pieces.. it isn't very scary. You can say that you will dread every enemy because they're ugly and behave in zombie like manners, but honestly, there's no feeling of helplessness.

Compare it to Fear 2's famous Grizzly Bear attack. I mean, running from a Rabid bear where ur only weapon is a Camera? That's fucking scary. Even after you've failed that challenge 10 times, you're still peeing your pants.

Or, if you will, compare these to the truly Horrifying games, like Silent Hill. The city that you stroll in is empty. There're no monsters popping out from every garbage cans. The fog is deep, and you can only make out so much. The atmosphere sets in, and your mind is playing tricks with you. Literally. Most of the fear is from your own imagination. The game only needs to give obscure hints of danger, and let you create your own monster.

So what are these games ultimately about? Well... gore. They're games about disgusting games. Unfortunately, the developers weren't good in English, because they thought that the "horror" in Survival Horror means "Horrible".. because the Enemies in Dead Space are Horrible - in the sense that they're atrocities.. not that they're designed badly. These baddies may be Horrible looking, but they do not Horrify you.
These games are like the SAW movies. The first SAW movie was maybe cool.. for like a guy flick just to see who'd squirm first... but after 3 reiterations, the SAW movies are butt-stupid. It's just all gore and nothing else. IT'S NOT SCARY!

(Disclaimer: SAW movies have a different sort of thing going for it. And that is the Psychology behind each scenario, and anticipating the victims' behaviour)

k. typed this super late.. so u'll have to excuse my not so posh English this time around.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Feb 25 2011, 5:35 pm by UnholyUrine.

Sorry to double-post.

I have found more articles and stuff to help me with my arguments.

Aside from the video I've posted: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2794-An-Open-Letter-to-EA-Marketing ...(Seriously, go watch it)... there have been numerous issues surrounding EA, and articles written about this.

No one's being a blind hater here. It is the people who categorize others with well composed arguments into haters in order to decrease the importance of their arguments that are being blind. So, go ahead and read this: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/experienced-points/8672-Experienced-Points-EA-Intervention

It states the main points of the video I've posted above. Even for me, I felt that EA was just being their corporate self, simply valuing money over other things. But really, with all these evidences, it's hard to ignore them anymore. The attitude that EA has towards the gaming industry right now is Killing it, and it needs to stop.

What I'm doing here is merely raising awareness, and trying to convince you all that changes do need to be applied.

The most pressing matter is the current legal action that's trying to demote Video-Games from being protected from the First amendment, aka Free Speech. Again, it is naive to think that Video-Games will forever be protected under law, or that it will not fall under legal restrictions. If you wish to read more about the legal pursuits, go to this link: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_281/8356-Battlefield-Washington

I liked this sentence a lot. It sums it up pretty much.

A thing I'm completely missing in all these arguments is that EA is infamous for using their customers as beta testers so they can release half finished games.