Marketing Effect 3

[fnartilter]

Hahaha, that little convo snippet between Shepard and Joker pegged Joker perfectly!

The first few hype trailers for ME3 were great! Starting with the one of the sniper holding up in Big Ben, London with the internal monologue bit. Then there was the other one that was sort of like a newscast. Aaand, there was a third, I think?

Then the real marketing trailers came out, and I watched one. It was a marketing trailer, not sure how else you can put it. People just need to realize that these extra gun DLCs and stuff have no affect on the actual game.

Just like in ME2 there was a slew of little item/cosmetic DLCs as well. They didn't add or detract anything from the game. The only difference was they weren't advertised so In-Yo-Face.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

The portrayal of Mass Effect 3 in EA's marketing doesn't match the game.

Very true. I am particularly annoyed with the lack of Fem Shep after all the hype about her.

However, I do have issue with something you said: NOTHING can have as many errors as Mass Effect: Deception. Your average self-insert ME Fanfiction is more canon than Dietz's abysmal novel.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Marketing Effect 3

The portrayal of Mass Effect 3 in EA's marketing doesn't match the game.

Read Full Article

I understand what you mean when you reference Portal 2 Shamus, but it seems some people just don't get it.

With Portal 2, people whined about the purely optional, co op only hat thing. The people who did bomb it, are just irrational haters of the idea, but are too stupid to understand that it's purely fucking optional and has no effect on the main game.

With Mass Effect, it should be receiving far more ridicule for this DLC shit because it very well could affect how the game plays. When the the DLC extras start affecting the game as a whole, people should be upset over it and not upset over some stupid fucking optional hats that don't change anything. Now since none of us have played it yet, we can't be certain that any of this DLC will change anything. If it does, we should all draw the line there. Nobody should have their game experience altered from the intended product because we didn't go out and buy some stupid action figure to get a gun in the game.

I really doubt having one extra gun is going to change the game as much as you are making it sound....
This just sounds like self entitlement at its worst. If you are really so upset that you have to rant on a forum (or article) about not having a gun or some other minor things because you didn't buy a toy or a special edition, then you probably weren't very interested in the game to begin with.

 

[Forktongue]

When I first saw the "Not too distant future.." add Shamus talks about, I thought it was a lot more terrible at first when it seemed like a serious ad. Once it was revealed as a joke I just rolled my eyes. The thing is, I marked this up not as another terrible EA ad but another terrible GameStop ad.

So was this ad developed my EA's marketing department or just approved by it? It struck me more as an ad put together by a marketing department for a retailer who most likely had little to no backstory on the game and were just going on the fact that they were promoting a bonus gun for per-ordering with them.

 

[CleverCover]

Nope, I completely ignore all ads for videogames now, especially EA ads. Their marketing team is the shit. They never represent what they game will be like. For the truth, you have to go to reviews or demos.

Or Valve ads, that seems to be the only decent videogame ad I've ever seen in recent times.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

Yup, Mass Effect 3 sucks and so does EA. I wish it'd just be released and go away so I never have to hear about it again. I already decided not to buy the game due to all the BS. I'd probably orgasm if the game bombed horribly but obviously it won't.

 

[gambler778]

The commercial with Garrus seems really nitpicky here. It was meant to be funny. And in the commercial, the Shepard with Garrus is clearly male, so of course Garrus is going to refer to him as a "man." The entire article just seems really forced to me.

 

[FallenPrism]

How much of this is Bioware/EA? I know the developers have to design the DLC in the first place, but how much of this was pitched/is being handled by an outside marketing company? Or at least outside marketing consultation?

I simply mean to suggest that it may not entirely be the creators themselves who aren't showing care in the marketing like they are in the game and world.

Speaking as someone who actually has not played more than a couple minutes out of the whole series thus far, this campaign seems very effective (on me at least) at grabbing the attention of people not already engaged in the ongoing narrative. Current fans were sold on 3 as soon as 2 ended (I imagine.) This marketing is trying to pick up new fans.

Sorry, but some misrepresentation of the game and what it stands for sounds like standard marketing faire to me.

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

Shamus I think I love you.

I mean... I agree with you. Again.

 

[Oro44]

I'm confused here. I don't remember any hate towards Portal 2, while ME3 is receiving all of the hate. Also, when ME2 came out, there was a commercial where Shepard teleported the bad guys into a toilet. The trend of silly marketing gimmicks isn't exactly new.

 

[Still Life]

I agree that there is a dissonance between what Mass Effect is supposed to represent at its core and what is being represented through a lot of the marketing. I think, in a lot of ways, Mass Effect is nigh impossible to market to established fans because the things make the experience memorable don't make for great bullet-points on a marketing statement.

I have never been more excited for a game to be released before, however most of the marketing has been lackluster for a fan who is on board for the intimacy that is offered in a character driven narrative.

Quotes such as '[w]e fight or we die...' are taken out of context and used as catch phrases which inherently shift attention away from the merits of the franchise and give the impression of a throw-away, Friday night action film. Playing the demo, I actually found that piece of dialogue appropriate in its given context, as our hero (avatar) is trying to rouse Earth's leaders to act while the Reapers are descending around them.

Despite a lot of silly marketing, I really enjoyed the launch trailer and a few other choice trailers that weren't trying to force 'stratified' DLC upon me as a consumer. Being able to see how weapons are customized, the voice cast, the story elements and also have a taste of the spectacle is what wets my appetite for Mass Effect 3.

I do wish that marketing would stick their DLC policies up their fucking ass and blow it out the window. I think consumers need consistency and cohesiveness and the selling of Mass Effect 3 leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Waaghpowa]

I really doubt having one extra gun is going to change the game as much as you are making it sound....
This just sounds like self entitlement at its worst. If you are really so upset that you have to rant on a forum (or article) about not having a gun or some other minor things because you didn't buy a toy or a special edition, then you probably weren't very interested in the game to begin with.

You missed the point then jumped straight to entitlement, congratulations sir. I do not care for any of this DLC nor do I care about Valves hats.

The point was that Portal 2 received so much rage over something that did not affect the game. All it affected is how a player character looks during co op. All of the DLC EA is attaching to all this extra stuff directly affects the main game in the form of special weapons, armor etc. Hat doesn't change anything while guns could change something.

So then why is it that people will whine and rage over aesthetic hats but not over in game weapons that can only be received if you buy all their extra stuff? Simple answer? People are massive idiots and hypocrites. Bioware gets a pass while Valve gets screamed at over giving people the ability to optionally wear a hat. Those people should be whining about ME3.

 

[BaronIveagh]

Personally, I think that all this advertising is just an effort to hush up the nearly continuous leaks, most of which are being received in a heavily negative light.

Basically EA trying to milk it as fast as possible before word of mouth really can get around.

 

[Darth_Dude]

I have a theory, all this marketing is aimed at the COD demographic right?

Thats genius. Because everyone else is going to buy it anyway right? Why not focus on a new market?

 

[RedDeadFred]

I really doubt having one extra gun is going to change the game as much as you are making it sound....
This just sounds like self entitlement at its worst. If you are really so upset that you have to rant on a forum (or article) about not having a gun or some other minor things because you didn't buy a toy or a special edition, then you probably weren't very interested in the game to begin with.

You missed the point then jumped straight to entitlement, congratulations sir. I do not care for any of this DLC nor do I care about Valves hats.

The point was that Portal 2 received so much rage over something that did not affect the game. All it affected is how a player character looks during co op. All of the DLC EA is attaching to all this extra stuff directly affects the main game in the form of special weapons, armor etc. Hat doesn't change anything while guns could change something.

So then why is it that people will whine and rage over aesthetic hats but not over in game weapons that can only be received if you buy all their extra stuff? Simple answer? People are massive idiots and hypocrites. Bioware gets a pass while Valve gets screamed at over giving people the ability to optionally wear a hat. Those people should be whining about ME3.

My apologies I misunderstood your post. I thought YOU were whining about the guns affecting gameplay. I see your point now. I didn't actually know that people were outraged about the Portal 2 hats. Isn't that the same as Valve's micro-transactions in TF2?

However, is this point he's making actually true? I could be remembering wrong but I'm pretty sure a lot of people have raged about the in-game weapons. IMO Anyone who rages about either of these things is a self-entitled jerk (which is what I mistakenly thought you were).

 

[Waaghpowa]

My apologies I misunderstood your post. I thought YOU were whining about the guns affecting gameplay. I see your point now. I didn't actually know that people were outraged about the Portal 2 hats. Isn't that the same as Valve's micro-transactions in TF2?

Yes, kinda. What few items there were, and by few I mean like 5 things, are also available simply by playing Portal 2 single player. Why anyone would buy the items when they just get them from playing is beyond me.

However, is this point he's making actually true? I could be remembering wrong but I'm pretty sure a lot of people have raged about the in-game weapons. IMO Anyone who rages about either of these things is a self-entitled jerk (which is what I mistakenly thought you were).

Of course people have raged about it, but the point is that it hasn't received equal or greater ridicule. If Portal 2 could receive all that crap for the hats, then why isn't Mass Effect getting a hurricane katrina level of shit storm?

 

[RedDeadFred]

My apologies I misunderstood your post. I thought YOU were whining about the guns affecting gameplay. I see your point now. I didn't actually know that people were outraged about the Portal 2 hats. Isn't that the same as Valve's micro-transactions in TF2?

Yes, kinda. What few items there were, and by few I mean like 5 things, are also available simply by playing Portal 2 single player. Why anyone would buy the items when they just get them from playing is beyond me.

However, is this point he's making actually true? I could be remembering wrong but I'm pretty sure a lot of people have raged about the in-game weapons. IMO Anyone who rages about either of these things is a self-entitled jerk (which is what I mistakenly thought you were).

Of course people have raged about it, but the point is that it hasn't received equal or greater ridicule. If Portal 2 could receive all that crap for the hats, then why isn't Mass Effect getting a hurricane katrina level of shit storm?

Maybe it's because people feel more betrayed by Valve because in so many gamer's eyes, they are a spectacular developer who can do no wrong so when this minor offence (if you could even call it that) occurred, people felt betrayed.
Bioware on the other hand is owned by EA and I guess people just don't feel as surprised or betrayed when EA does something like this.

This is the only "reasonable" explanation I can think of.

 

[Waaghpowa]

This is the only "reasonable" explanation I can think of.

The only reasonable explanation is people are hypocritical morons. Hats do nothing and affect nothing. There's absolutely no reason for anyone to get so worked up over something so trivial. Then again, this is the internet. Valve does offer special cosmetic items for TF2 when you pre purchase a particular game, but it doesn't change the fact that they do absolutely nothing.

 

[RedDeadFred]

This is the only "reasonable" explanation I can think of.

The only reasonable explanation is people are hypocritical morons. Hats do nothing and affect nothing. There's absolutely no reason for anyone to get so worked up over something so trivial. Then again, this is the internet. Valve does offer special cosmetic items for TF2 when you pre purchase a particular game, but it doesn't change the fact that they do absolutely nothing.

Ya, you're right. People are just dumb.