PR Guy: Games Should Be Judged on Quality, Not Brand Name

[Greg Tito]

PR Guy: Games Should Be Judged on Quality, Not Brand Name

According to one promoter, videogames should get exposure based on fun they are, not how popular the last game in the series was.

The eternal problem of the entertainment business is that people are stupid. Not all of us are, of course, but even if you think you're a super smart guy who is immune to marketing, chances are you've bought a videogame sequel or two simply because of the recognizable title. The public is more inclined to read about games from bigger publishers with big names attached to it like all of the god damned Call of Dutys and Final Fantasys out there. For all that pundits decry the lack of innovation in videogames, it can be damn tough to get people interested in a really good game if it doesn't have a strong pedigree. As a guy who's job it is to get people to play a game, Tom Ohle is frustrated with that system. The founder of Evolve PR, Ohle works for videogame companies both big and small and he has found it difficult to get the press interested in what he believes are great games.

"As a PR practitioner, it's ultimately my job to ensure that my clients' products are seen," Ohle wrote on his blog today. "How can one hope to achieve success with a great game when you can't even get someone to look at it? Visibility is tantamount to success ... or at the very least, it lays the groundwork for success, and it needs to be backed up with a great product. But achieving visibility for a low-profile game can be nothing short of disheartening."

Ohle discusses specific examples of games that he's led the PR charge for and how he's experienced lackluster response such as Anomaly Warzone Earth. "The game has been universally praised by reviewers, and at $10 is a ridiculously good deal. Everyone who plays it loves it," he said. "Does that translate to sales and, further, success? Not necessarily. The game's reviews have been buried or quickly wiped off front pages, replaced by coverage of whatever major publisher just held a press event that day."

Ohle realizes that he may come off as a complaining PR guy, but he has a point that can't be denied. If we complain so much about our industry releasing endless sequels then we must start caring about games from companies that we might not immediately recognize.

"In an industry that so often complains about derivative sequels, soulless big-budget productions and a lack of risk-taking, isn't it about time we started focusing on quality?" Ohle asked. "Shouldn't those companies looking to push the boundaries of the medium begin to reap the rewards? If things keep going the way they are, we'll never shed the $60 price point, we'll get sequels to major franchises every year, and we'll all keep complaining and wishing things were different."

The problem is a chicken-and-egg one, I think. The audience votes with their dollars or their clicks and the videogame publishers and press respond with what products are the most popular, which then further cuts down on what is produced giving the audience less incentive to try new products. And while there are outliers that Tom Ohle himself recognizes, like Minecraft and The Witcher, it would be great if more publishers felt that they could take risks by offering brand new experiences.

And it would be even greater if the videogame press felt that it could champion lesser known games that showed real promise as much it did the latest from Activision or Electronic Arts.

Source: Evolve website [http://evolve-pr.com/2011/04/19/the-case-of-the-great-game/]

Permalink

 

[Irridium]

This reminds me of a game made by the great Tim Schafer. A game so amazingly unique, so fun, and so charming. A game praised by all who played it, a game that was amazing.

This game was Psychonauts, and the general gaming public fucking ignored it. Until it faded into obscurity, then its popularity skyrocketed somehow. Gamers be hipsters I guess.

Gamers all cry for new things, but few are actually willing to take the risk and buy the new thing. If your not willing to spend $50-$60 on a new IP, then why should the publishers/developers be willing to drop $20-$50 million on making the games?

This stuff takes risks. From both sides. And if your not willing to dive in and take a chance, then what you'll get are tons of sequels.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Unfortuntately, sequels and high-profile developers are much more marketable.

The only real things we can do to give success to more unknown titles is the classic power of "word of mouth". But boy, is that POWERFUL.

I'd never seen an ad for Amnesia or Minecraft, and they've both gone on to be very successful.

The only issue I really have with this man's thoughts is the word "quality". Quality is different to everyone. There is no industry standard for "quality".

 

[Luke5515]

Some parts of this make sense, but some brands are just better than others. There's no doubt about it. There are some brands that are popular and in the spotlight because you know, for the most part, that they will be well crafted and at a certain level of competence.

 

[Low Key]

One must look at games the same way we look at movies. There are many amazing independent films, but they certainly don't get the press they deserve. Occasionally they do, just the same as games, but most don't. That's just the nature of the beast. As far as big names go, yeah, they are going to get looked at more because they have a track record of being good (or at least popular..."good" is subjective) and people would rather go with something proven than risking their money on something new. It sucks sometimes, but besides movies, the same goes for just about anything. That's why most people still use a Windows OS, eat at chain restaurants, drive known car models, etc.

One must also look at the usual games people play. Does the typical gamer really care if someone else deems a "risky" game fun? Not necessarily. If it's outside of the typical gamer's lexicon, they might not enjoy something another person with a broader taste would enjoy. If we look at game reviews for some independent games, there could be plenty good reviews, but all it takes is a handful for someone to completely disavow the game. Likening it to my own experience, Yahtzee has done that for me on a few occasions. Others may have said the game was fun, but I would rather keep my money for a sure thing than a possible lemon.

 

[Woodsey]

This reminds me of a game made by the great Tim Schafer. A game so amazingly unique, so fun, and so charming. A game praised by all who played it, a game that was amazing.

This game was Psychonauts, and the general gaming public fucking ignored it. Until it faded into obscurity, then its popularity skyrocketed somehow. Gamers be hipsters I guess.

Gamers all cry for new things, but few are actually willing to take the risk and buy the new thing. If your not willing to spend $50-$60 on a new IP, then why should the publishers/developers be willing to drop $20-$50 million on making the games?

This stuff takes risks. From both sides. And if your not willing to dive in and take a chance, then what you'll get are tons of sequels.

And correct. People call for it, but they don't show it with their wallets.

(I haven't played Psychonauts by the way xD).

Also: fellow PC gamers. If you pirate The Witcher 2, even to "demo" it, I will go super saiyan on you.

 

[Legion]

Dragon Age 2's frosty reception by gamers is enough to show that brand name doesn't mean everything. The sales are a lot lower than expected, the ratings from the users are low, and the complaints about it litter every gaming forum there is, especially Bioware's.

The only issue I really have with this man's thoughts is the word "quality". Quality is different to everyone. There is no industry standard for "quality".

Indeed, especially when you consider things such as Minecraft, a game with incredibly simple graphics which could be argued to be "low quality", but it is something nobody cares about because it's not trying to be visually outstanding.

 

[Exterminas]

Ya.
And dogs should stop licking themselves.

How is this even News? Everyone knows that this is how it should be. And everyone knows that this isn't reality and never will be until there is a solid norm to measure "fun"

 

[Irridium]

Also: fellow PC gamers. If you pirate The Witcher 2, even to "demo" it, I will go super saiyan on you.

As will I. Whoever pirates Witcher 2, I will hate with all my being.

 

[Tulks]

Call me cynical, but would Mr. Ohle say the same if his firm represented one of the sequel-spawning industry superpowers rather than the smaller, lesser-known devs?

Also, something about the term "PR practitioner" makes it sound like some form of dark art.

Well, more like a dark art.

 

[tomtom94]

Unfortunately Activision pays better and brings more traffic.

Them's the breaks.

 

[Low Key]

I am seriously hyped about a game called Firefall and I know absolutely nothing about the development team.

You're full of crap.

You're not the typical gamer. I'd venture a guess most people here aren't.

 

[Tom Ohle]

Dragon Age 2's frosty reception by gamers is enough to show that brand name doesn't mean everything. The sales are a lot lower than expected, the ratings from the users are low, and the complaints about it litter every gaming forum there is, especially Bioware's.

Fair point... but offer any indie developer a chance to get as many sales as Dragon Age 2 (regardless of how short of expectations they may have fallen) and as much coverage as DA2 got in the leadup to release, and they'll be thrilled

I am seriously hyped about a game called Firefall and I know absolutely nothing about the development team.

You're full of crap.

Errr... well, just because one, fifty or even five thousand people are hyped about a game doesn't mean it'll be a success, or that the devs will get the coverage their game deserves. The argument is that if you're excited about Firefall, maybe other people should be. But unless someone in a position to do so TELLS other people about it, they won't ever hear about it.

The only issue I really have with this man's thoughts is the word "quality". Quality is different to everyone. There is no industry standard for "quality".

[/quote]
Absolutely... in this case, "quality" would rather mean something that has exceptional... uhh... qualities. That could be a very unique gameplay element, beautiful visuals, addictive gameplay, top-notch production values... whatever. The point is that a lot of big-budget games totally lack those qualities but still get the love and, as a result, the sales.

 

[Tom Ohle]

Call me cynical, but would Mr. Ohle say the same if his firm represented one of the sequel-spawning industry superpowers rather than the smaller, lesser-known devs?

Also, something about the term "PR practitioner" makes it sound like some form of dark art.

Well, more like a dark art.

Well, I've worked with the best of 'em (started out by working at BioWare) and yeah, I still feel that way . Of course I'd be less inclined to go and ***** about it, but y'know.

And yes, PR practitioner sounds awful. Wanted a different word than "rep" or "executive" or "doer"

 

[Legion]

Dragon Age 2's frosty reception by gamers is enough to show that brand name doesn't mean everything. The sales are a lot lower than expected, the ratings from the users are low, and the complaints about it litter every gaming forum there is, especially Bioware's.

Fair point... but offer any indie developer a chance to get as many sales as Dragon Age 2 (regardless of how short of expectations they may have fallen) and as much coverage as DA2 got in the leadup to release, and they'll be thrilled

Absolutely, but what you have to remember is that an Indie developer typically spends significantly less on game production and advertisement, and so for them to make that kind of money and to gain that kind of attention would be a lot more noticeable for them (like Minecraft).

When you consider the huge budget companies such as Bioware have, as well as the fact that they must have spent a tonne on advertising, their sales have probably shown them that people are not impressed with them rushing out a product that has as many issues as it does.

Also: You have been lurking for 4 and a half years? That's got to be a record. Welcome to the forums.

 

[Tulks]

Call me cynical, but would Mr. Ohle say the same if his firm represented one of the sequel-spawning industry superpowers rather than the smaller, lesser-known devs?

Also, something about the term "PR practitioner" makes it sound like some form of dark art.

Well, more like a dark art.

Well, I've worked with the best of 'em (started out by working at BioWare) and yeah, I still feel that way . Of course I'd be less inclined to go and ***** about it, but y'know.

And yes, PR practitioner sounds awful. Wanted a different word than "rep" or "executive" or "doer"

Fair enough. Given that few here dispute that smaller houses need more visibility, how would you suggest they go about properly exposing themselves? Word-of-mouth and grassroots support only seem to work in indie-friendly circles...

And how about "PR champion"? Or "PR proponent"? Yeah, there's almost no word that makes it sound less sinister. Could be worse, though. Could be "lobbyist".

 

[Jordi]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this guy's job to promote games regardless of their quality? In a sense, it seems to me that this guy (and colleagues) are part of the problem. Ideally games (and everything else) should be judged on their merit. Marketing's job is to make people "judge" a game on how well it's marketed.

I agree that it would be better if gaming websites would be somewhat immune to this though, and pay just as much attention to less visible games if they sound interesting or if they turn out to be fun.