User talk:Elizabethan Insulter

Sometimes I use this page to get text out a corporate network! Until I get caught, that is.... Sorry *insert large financial company here*

How important is a product's marketing?

Marketing means a lot of different things in my mind - it's the initial product teasers, it's the stage presentations at product shows, it's the interviews with developers, it's the inklings of rumors drifting out from behind locked doors, it's final productplay trailers, it's the box art, it's the menu screens, it's the introduction cinematic and the title screen, it's even the end credits, and the reviews and features about the product.

All of these vastly different aspects converge to create this congealed mass of expectation within an audience. Products have very little time to affirm or deny those expectations, and the more marketing there is, the smaller that window becomes.

I need to learn the more technical terms to the "marketing" things I just listed, but for the time being, I'll stick to "marketing." Back in the day, marketing was simple. Kids would buy products based on the box art, even if they had no idea what the product was behind the art. In today's hit driven market with lumbering giants of products, marketing has become increasingly complex. From television advertisements to PAX booths, developers have to work hard to mold the expectations of their audiences. They have to pour millions of dollars and precious man-hours to set up intricate marketing ploys to perfectly craft these preconceived visions of their product.

But why should they have to do that? Can't people simply enjoy a product for what it is? To evaluate the aspects of the naked product presented in front of them? To censure a product for something beyond its control - for a bad PR department, ignorant executives, or uncommunicative console manufacturers - surely can't be right?

Nothing exists in a vacuum. Unless you have a person who purposely puts themselves in a bubble to avoid any scrap of information, then it's impossible to prevent the influence of marketing forces on the concious. Just as it is impossible to ask people to abandon all memories of their ethnic, cultural, and natural heritage and become part of some homogenous international race of humanity, it's impossible to ask people to ignore marketing information surrounding a product. It's ultimately naive to think that any product can or should be judged without these external (and deep down truly irrelevant) forces.

So developers are put in a major conundrum. They have to create a product that will appeal to those "in the know," who follow video product press, frequently watch video product commentaries, and play a large number of products each year. At the same time, they have to appeal to those who in the general public: the people who buy maybe three to four products a year that aren't Madden, Call of Duty, or Halo. Companies have to aim to get this general audience because they need to not just break even, but make five times or even ten times more than their initial investment. And because products are expensive as HongKong, new IPs are hard as HongKong to market. Just as people are more likely to buy the same band of car as the one they had before (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brand_loyalty), people are more like to stick with the IPs they trust, and not risk 60 bucks on a dud. So Devs desperately need those "exclusive funded by Dew pre-order DLC bonus map-exclusive weapon skins" to get what ever extra attention to products from the general public - even if it means harming the expectations of those "in the know."

The effect of marketing "mistakes" has varied impact depending on the surrounding marketing. The most prominent "mistake" which has been plaguing developers of the current-gen consoles has been "misleading" trailers. The first major example of this was Ubisoft's Watch_Dogs, which exploded onto the scene in E3 2012 with a jaw-dropping reveal trailer. The product seemed to be the hope for the future of video products. Glossy and stylish graphics that spoke to a deep underlying discomfort with the strange technocracy developing within our society, slick gameplay that seemed truly organic and free-form, and a story-hook that sent shivers down your spine in anticipation. While the product would be delayed for close to year, hinting at the underlying rot, the demos that the devs had given to the product press seemed to present a product that reflected that initial vision. However, the final product was nothing even close to the world presented in that E3 trailer - and most obvious was a massive graphics "downgrade." When modders found files within the PC release of Watch_Dogs that allowed the product to play with the originally demoed graphical settings, the producing public was livid. The complex city presented in the E3 trailer was reduced in a one button does all limited and contextual system. The plot elements from the trailer where almost completely stripped from the game, and remain only as an easter egg. Playing the game, you can feel the cut plot elements missing from the game, like white-out on a birthday card. Watch_Dogs seemed poised to become the next 'big thing' and it seemed like Ubi really wanted it to be the next AC product. (They still market Aiden Pierce's hat as if it's as iconic as the AC hood.) But it's ended up as nothing but a disappointment, a 5 year multimillion dollar project that might as well belong in the budget bin of a run-down Target in Albuquerque.

But then for other products that commit the same mistakes as Watch_Dogs, it doesn't seem to matter that much. The two examples that stick out most prominently have been the Witcher 3 and Dark Souls 2. DS2 came out last year with some already dampened expectations: series director Hidetaka Miyazaki was focusing on a then-unseen project, while it seemed like the 'b-team' was putting out another DS product for the sake of maintaining the brand. DS2 stumbled into a similar trap as Watch_Dogs, releasing trailers that used an impressive lighting engine that made the typically muddied Souls products look actually beautiful for once. Even worse than Watch_Dogs, DS2 released a beta on the PC that had that lighting system, and then was forced to scale it down when they were unable to optimize it properly for the final product. It stirred a small controversy within the die-hard DS community, but ultimately it had little effect on reviews and public perception of the product. Expectations had already been lowered, and From Software communicated well enough with the community about the planned "downgrade" that it became a non-issue.

The other product worth noting was the Witcher 3. While this controversy was much smaller, it's still of value to compare to Watch_Dogs. Witcher 3 was another game that seemed to usher in the new hope for the next-generation of products. The relatively linear and limited Witcher series was dipping into the ocean that is Open World, and the trailers showed a game that seemed too expansive and detailed to be true. Ultimately, that turned out to be the case, and the final retail version is a step below the released trailers. While many top-of-the-line computers still struggle to run the Witcher at its highest settings, once again many producers were upset that their expectations had been betrayed. However, the Witcher 3 delivered on so many other promises that it had made over the course of its marketing cycle that the graphics controversy hasn't seemed to have made an impact on its reception. The Witcher 3 was presented a vast open world, with a story you care about, and streamlined combat that would appeal to series veterans and newcomers - and it delivers on all three aspects, going above and beyond current industry standards. It helps that the Witcher 3 is still a stunningly beautiful game, from living, breathing forests, to faces that don't look like they came out of some strange reverse fantasy where horses wear human masks to look like idiots on the internet. Finally, their Polish developers, CD Projekt Red, have gone out of their way to communicate and support the community surrounding their game, effectively marketing themselves along with the game. It's hard to get angry at a group of devs that have to put up with so much and are still committed to drm-free releases and free dlc. Thanks to all of this marketing work, when the game was first released and a litany of bugs were exposed, many people were willing to over look them. One that caught my eye was a frequent complaint of input-lag or slow response in movement. However, it seemed that most people were willing to play through this issue, and eventually just "got used to it." It seems like the marketing of the game was good enough to really increase that window of time that people have to affirm or deny their expectations. Instead of chucking it after that first two or three hours, people endured what they considered a major fault to continue playing the game. It's a luxury that very very few games have.

So the ultimate point of this long-winded and most likely unnecessary introduction is that marketing and expectations matter. When games are 'hyped' and build a high level of anticipation, the disappointment of missed expectations only compounds negative reception, as in the case of Watch_Dogs. When expectations aren't that high anyway, marketing mistakes have much less impact, as seen in DS2. Finally, when expectations are high and many of those expectations are reached, the singular marketing mistakes are over-looked.

A very few of you might agree with the general conclusions of this introduction, but also have a small complaint - the comparison with Watch_Dogs to DS2 and Witcher 3 is unfair. Watch_Dogs is a fresh new IP coming on to the market, with nothing to set the baseline expectations for the public. DS2 and Witcher 3 are well established franchise that have a history of excellence, which propels the player to push forward past the initial problems and see the games for what they are. No one knows what to think when it comes to Watch_Dogs, but everyone knows to be disappointed when Miyazaki isn't on the team or to be patient with a CD Projekt Red game. This take me to my final point of this intro (thought I was done? hahahahahahahaha):

The sins of the forefathers are always the hardest to overcome. Sins of the forefathers Akiba's Trip

Sri Lanka is a beautiful place. It's a land of pristine beaches and ancient temples. My memories of the island are saturated with slow summer days resting on a balcony, or lighting sparklers under a equatorial night-scape. But permeating all of these memories is a dark undercurrent of violence that I feel like I can never escape.

For the past thirty years, Sri Lanka has been in an uneasy state of civil war. There are two major ethnic groups in Sri Lanka, the Sinhala majority and the Tamil minority. Much of the south and western parts of the island are predominately occupied by the Sinhalese, while the north and parts of the east are Tamil. Some Tamils feel that the Sinhala controlled government will never be able to represent their needs, and years of discriminatory policy and societal repression have not helped to assuage these concerns. The LTTE formed in the early 80s with the goal of creating a Tamil state in the north, Tamil Eelam. The roots of this conflict extend for generations, and I've done much of the history of this conflict a disservice, but I don't have much time or desire to write about it.

Ultimately, this civil war has reaped nothing but bloodshed for my ancestral home. The LTTE pioneered the suicide bombing technique, while the Sri Lankan government would innovate the controversial Long Range Reconnaissance Petrol. For a long time, it felt that no where in the country was safe - that the long fingers of violence could worm their way into any place. You'll be hard pressed to find a single Sri Lankan family that was not touched by the years of violence. Mine included.

My uncle was an executive at a bank in Sri Lanka. One spring day, he left his office for lunch. A LTTE suicide bomber targeted his bank offices. His secretary was killed, and my uncle suffered significant head trauma.

Multiple surgeries and years later, my uncle still has seizures. He's a successful and well-to-do lawyer, but it's a part of him that he's forced to hide from the rest of the world. It's a palpable and omnipresent reminder of the effects of violence, and one that's very close to home.

So how can I not play certain products and feel not a single pang of guilt? How can I look my uncle in the eyes after committing acts far worse than what was done to him in a virtual world? As a child, my grandmother would explain to me the precepts of the Buddha - that it was not enough to just do good acts, that I must also control my mind.