MapMan said:
Who hasn't? there are just too many fallouteers here to go wrong with free Fallout
How to sway video game press on Washington Post
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
Who hasn't? there are just too many fallouteers here to go wrong with free Fallout
Autoduel76
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Silencer said:You mean they actually provided 40k hotel nights, twenty thousand fancy meals, and stuffed all the nightclubs in Korea with invitees?
Nope. Not what I meant. What I did mean is that providing the space for an event for 20 thousand people costs more than 2 hotel nights and meals for 40 people.
Brother None said:
No. It simply provides a different type of control. All that controlling the environment means is that you have the setting that you want. It has nothing to do with controlling individual people. Blizzard wanted a rock concert type atmosphere. Bethesda wanted a movie theatre type atmosphere for their unveiling.
Brother None said:
There is a very limited difference. The reviewer doesn't pay, either way. Have you been on many business trips? Its a job perk that people love to take advantage of, no matter who's footing the bill. If you are going with the assumption that a writer is going to be swayed simply by the fact that he is able to have these paid for trips and meals, then the fact is that he is going to get them for any media event, no matter who pays for it.
I think its a bit far fetched to think that is going to corrupt his integrity.
Brother None said:
Again, what is the purpose of Blizzard's type of unveiling? You don't think that seeing a crowd of 20 thousand rabid fans has an effect on people? Ever go to a concert or a sporting event? It creates euphoria to be in that kind of environment. People can physically feel better than they normally would. Its simply another way to try to influence people to provide an atmosphere that will get them excited.
And, monetarily, it would have cost more than bethesda would have flying 40 people out and putting them up for a weekend.
I am aware of that, it's just that you should consider that per capita, instead.
Should a big company with extremly popular titles, in your opinion, present it's products to a wide, or a narrow audience, eh?
Should a big company with extremly popular titles, in your opinion, present it's products to a wide, or a narrow audience, eh?
MapMan said:
Well, you have to license it from Interplay to release it like that, maybe it was cheaper that way. Or maybe it was just a mistake. Who knows?
Autoduel76
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Silencer said:
Well, I suppose it depends on the title. I don't think one is inherrently better than the other and, from a capitalistic standpoint, I would expect a company to present its product to an audience that will give them the best return on their investment.
You, Sir, are quite cynical
Autoduel76
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
I don't think I'm cynical. But as somebody that would like to retire before I'm too old to enjoy it, I don't begrudge anybody for trying to make money.
whirlingdervish
Brahmin Cavalry Commander
Autoduel76 said:
So according to you, a company that wants to make lots of money and who doesn't find the fans to be all that important would choose an audience that will soon be writing immaculate reviews that will bolster the sales of their upcoming 20 million dollar investment?
That describes Bethesda to a T!
Whereas the lowly Blizzard invites those stupid worthless gamers... for whom the games were made... but without buttering them up and bribing them to like it.
hmm.
I think that the fans of the game who are actually going to be shelling out real dough to buy the product, might actually have a greater ROI.
Autoduel76
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
whirlingdervish said:
Personally, I find the idea of putting people in a concert-type setting in Korea as "buttering them up", but that's just me obviously.
Autoduel76 said:
Yeah, they really had to manipulate people to react positively to the title they had been literally begging for, for years.Autoduel76
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Brother None said:
Its absolutely psychological manipulation to put the media covering your game into an environment like that. If you don't think they were going for that effect, more power to ya, but companies don't throw away that type of money out of benevolence.
Autoduel76 said:
Now you're arguing equivalence of using an excited reaction that's already there with creating an excited reaction as Bethesda is doing? Man,
againAutoduel76
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Brother None said:Now you're arguing equivalence of using an excited reaction that's already there with creating an excited reaction as Bethesda is doing? Man,
The excited reaction wasn't already there. There weren't 20 thousand people just hanging out in the street. They paid to have an event and let 20 thousand people come. That's manufactured.
Despite the fact that many people don't like this Fallout, Bethesda could have gathered 20 thousand excited people to come to a gaming event too, if they wanted to go that route.
*cries out loud*
IN YOUR FACE BETHESDA
IN
YOUR
FACE
sorry, couldn't hold it back
well, i think it's poor if companies have to "buy" game testers for good promotion. A little promotion is of course okay, but a big event including a party, paying for everything and probably giving them presents is a bit much and obviously made for influencing what they write... that's just poor
advertisments are okay, but this goes too far imho
especially if i look at what most of these guys wrote about the game afterwards
IN YOUR FACE BETHESDA
IN
YOUR
FACE
sorry, couldn't hold it back
well, i think it's poor if companies have to "buy" game testers for good promotion. A little promotion is of course okay, but a big event including a party, paying for everything and probably giving them presents is a bit much and obviously made for influencing what they write... that's just poor
advertisments are okay, but this goes too far imho
especially if i look at what most of these guys wrote about the game afterwards
Autoduel76 said:
No they couldn't, and you know it.
And even so, it's still not the same as highly catering a select group of pre-selected game reporters to get each of them to give a positive multi-page preview. You're still failing at showing how these two things are even remotely similar.
Autoduel76
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
Brother None said:
What? Of course they can. If they hosted a party at a stadium, in the DC area and allowed Joe Public to come, they could have easily have gotten 20K
Brother None said:
The same? Well, it's an entirely different strategy. But, Its still simply a matter of throwing a ton of money at a situation to make the media excited about your product.
You are failing at showing how Blizzard's method of paying for hype is any "better" than Bethesda's.
Autoduel76 said:
Autoduel76 said:
I am? I'm sorry, I thought I already said "you're arguing equivalence of using an excited reaction that's already there with creating an excited reaction as Bethesda is doing."
And you are still not seeing the difference of money is in how much you spend to convince people per-person, which is why your "ton of money" remark is irrelevant.
Blizzard works with the excitement about their game that's already there. They don't have to worry about who gets to see it, they talk to fans as much as media. Bethesda uses money and a press party to get gaming press to talk about a game they wouldn't normally talk about, and to talk about it more excitedly than they would otherwise.
Riding the wave of excitement vs. manipulating the media to create excitement. Your attempts to equate the two are kinda funny.
According to the Game Informer article the game has about a year still to go in development, regardless of the show/meals/hotel expenses and so forth a lot of shit can change in a year. Besides if you were offered to take the trip Bethesda offered would you turn it down?