So...Grey Carter said:
I mean, I agree on the second point, more or less, but the first. What? Were the last two Bioshocks not successful?
Ken Levine on BioShock Infinite's Bro-Tastic Cover Art
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
I mean, I agree on the second point, more or less, but the first. What? Were the last two Bioshocks not successful?
I recall something similar with Borderlands 2 - on one side you had your required people-with-guns pick, while on the flip side you got something a bit artier. Or I suppose, you buy the collectors edition, which will probably have something a bit more "refined" on the cover. Or the Songbird Edition, if you're feeling particularly flush.burningdragoon said:
I was only pointing out how many of them followed that formula (using visual examples) yes, the game is about a white guy who shoots things and of course it make's sense that the cover art would show that white guy, shooting things, but that doesn't answer the problem as to why so many of them need to also include explosions, or why the game needs to star a white guy in the first place. If you notice quite a few of them also follow the same composition (guy is in the center with some stuff going on around him) and quite a few of them also have dark hair. There is a visual formula these people are following.Treblaine said:
I don't think it would be too hard to find an appropriate middle-ground in the whole art vs appeal thing.
How about this?
Broker and Elizabeth on one of the larger, more open floating islands. They're both standing, damn near terrified, as they witness the start of an apocalypse, taking up the majority of the cover. Buildings with fire and smoke coming out of the windows, people gunning each other down in the streets, flags burning on the flagpoles they're still attached to, Songbirds, Handymen, Boys of Silence and that George Washington animatron thing adding to the chaos. The two characters would only be taking up a small section of the cover near the bottom to free up more space.
It conveys the a good amount of the game's content, (story premise, enemies) and ignorant onlookers will look at it and go "OMGSPLOSHUNS".
How about this?
Broker and Elizabeth on one of the larger, more open floating islands. They're both standing, damn near terrified, as they witness the start of an apocalypse, taking up the majority of the cover. Buildings with fire and smoke coming out of the windows, people gunning each other down in the streets, flags burning on the flagpoles they're still attached to, Songbirds, Handymen, Boys of Silence and that George Washington animatron thing adding to the chaos. The two characters would only be taking up a small section of the cover near the bottom to free up more space.
It conveys the a good amount of the game's content, (story premise, enemies) and ignorant onlookers will look at it and go "OMGSPLOSHUNS".
I'd love to see a cover of just Columbia, floating in the air. The whole city, from far away. I think that'd look pretty sweet, but I guess you need more for a cover. I was disappointed in this, but hey, it's the cover of a fucking box. I'm just gonna focus on the game now.
I've said before in another thread about the box art and I'll say it again: even if the image is horribly generic, if it's what works then that's what they'll use. I can't really blame them for resorting to the lone hero image since that's what's popular right now.
Got to love the industry defense force, so bloody blind they can't even except facts directly from the devs... I guess it's easier to keep the flamewars burning that way.
But really this is about the same as how Bioshock 1 made it's mark, their entire marketing was about the graphics, they would talk about nothing other then graphics on all their outings because at the time that was the big cheese to sell.
Kept me away for years but numpties were buying it up like mad, so yes it does work, sadly this is the optimal way to make money and quality.
But really this is about the same as how Bioshock 1 made it's mark, their entire marketing was about the graphics, they would talk about nothing other then graphics on all their outings because at the time that was the big cheese to sell.
Kept me away for years but numpties were buying it up like mad, so yes it does work, sadly this is the optimal way to make money and quality.
ME3 wasn't artistic integrity and every-one knows it. It's well documented that the ending of ME3 was scrawled on the back of a napkin by one guy over a weekend who ignored all out-side input then dumped it on the dev team last minute. Them crying "Artistic integrity" was a way to justify their lazy ending without admitting their massive failure.BreakfastMan said:Wait, then what was the Mass Effect 3 controversy, what with all of it's talk of "artistic integrity", about? I am so confused...Sylveria said:
OT: I can see the logic behind what he says, but it is a damn shame we didn't get something more interesting nonetheless. Ah well, here's hoping the game is as good as it is being hyped to be!
You know what anyone getting their panties in a twist over this, needs to re-evaluate what makes a game good. Is it the cover art? Of course not. This is the second thread I've seen on here about this. Unless the content of the game has changed, who fucking cares if it's got Stubble-Chin-Shotgunwielder on the cover. It could be a picture of puppy dogs, as long as the core of everything I've read about this game hasn't changed.
On it's face? Nothing. If there was a choice between turning Bio-shock in to Halo 5 or putting on a box-cover specifically engineered to entice the dumbest, drunkest, side-ways-hat-wearing, frat bros, I think we'd all rather have the box cover. But, I think this is going to backfire. If they go in thinking this is going to be some 'Merica romp over corpses of the brown-race-du-jour, they're going to be disappointed and likely start review-bombing cause they were miss-lead. Or, even worse, they buy it and then start bitching that it needs competitive multi-player.Jonny49 said:
I can't understand why people would care about what the box art looks like. Much less rage about it. What matters is the game.
Why not do what Resistance 3 did? People complained about all of the logos, and just wanted the image. They made the cover double sided and you could just turn it inside out, and have just the image, no logos except the developer's logo.Grey Carter said:
People actually still buy games based on (just) box art?
If you are going into a store to pick up a rental copy (game or movie), I could understand you just take a look at whatever the store currently has. But actually buying a game based on just box art? No...
If you are going into a store to pick up a rental copy (game or movie), I could understand you just take a look at whatever the store currently has. But actually buying a game based on just box art? No...