Because satire is never even-handed when it's being used as propaganda.
That is not what propaganda looks like.
|
Right, good. You saw the cartoon, and what you took away from it was: "Wizards of the Coast sees me as a whining troll for it to poop on."
Why, then, is it that people in my shoes didn't come away from that same cartoon thinking "Wizards of the Coast sees me as a simpering mindless kobold minion?"
That's why people in your shoes aren't offended--you weren't on the receiving end of the nastiest barbs.
I'd like to go on record to say I didn't get into 4th edition for real until recently. I used to have an issue with some of the complaints spoken by a lot of people now (simplicity or too restrictive or whatever else ... all of which I now go on record to say "Not really").
... I still thought it was hilarious.
And all the gnome bits were comical too. Good stuff.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
Because satire is never even-handed when it's being used as propaganda.That is not what propaganda looks like.
It actually is. Propaganda's very much prone to "blunt instrument" approaches and reducing a discussion to the simplest of labels. Since the ad deliberately presents an appeal to emotion, rather than any sort of factual presentation, it the criteria for propaganda. Most advertising qualifies as propaganda, really. And mockery can still be used in propaganda, as this political ad illustrates.
You might be under the mistaken impression that all propaganda is political. Heck, it isn't even all *bad*. But even if we go towards the shifted definition that propaganda has to promote an agenda, that ad qualifies through the use of the internet troll metaphor. That is to say, people who complain about this edition should be defecated on, which like it or not, is on at least one level the message of the ad. I'm sure they thought it was funny when they made it, but it's still a rather shallow joke.
One of these things used sarcasm to make a point.
Ah, sarcasm on the internet. It works so well. I'm surprised it was taken out of context here, actually, I've never seen that happen before. Bizarre, really. In most cases it is well delivered, and well received, often disfusing otherwise tense situations. Never have I seen it misused, poorly applied, or used as a justification retroactively for a statement that may have been unreasonable but furiously typed in the heat of the moment. I am sadden by its unique and unprecedent situation here.
|
|
One of these things used sarcasm to make a point.Ah, sarcasm on the internet. It works so well. I'm surprised it was taken out of context here, actually, I've never seen that happen before. Bizarre, really. In most cases it is well delivered, and well received, often disfusing otherwise tense situations. Never have I seen it misused, poorly applied, or used as a justification retroactively for a statement that may have been unreasonable but furiously typed in the heat of the moment. I am sadden by its unique and unprecedent situation here.
Heh.
Now that was funny. And nobody even got pooped on.
One of these things used sarcasm to make a point.Ah, sarcasm on the internet. It works so well. I'm surprised it was taken out of context here, actually, I've never seen that happen before. Bizarre, really. In most cases it is well delivered, and well received, often disfusing otherwise tense situations. Never have I seen it misused, poorly applied, or used as a justification retroactively for a statement that may have been unreasonable but furiously typed in the heat of the moment. I am sadden by its unique and unprecedent situation here.Heh.
Now that was funny. And nobody even got pooped on.
"You know, if there's one thing I've learnt from being in the Army, it's never ignore a pooh-pooh. I knew a Major, who got pooh-poohed, made the mistake of ignoring the pooh-pooh. He pooh-poohed it! Fatal error! 'Cos it turned out all along that the soldier who pooh-poohed him had been pooh-poohing a lot of other officers who pooh-poohed their pooh-poohs. In the end, we had to disband the regiment. Morale totally destroyed... by pooh-pooh!"
General Melchett
I'm probably a little late to this party, haven't been on the boards in a long long time for various reasons but I want to comment on a few things that were still being discussed around page ten or so...
That commercial about D&D through the years. What struck me as off about that one was that in all of the previous editions everyone seemed bored until it showed 4e. I found that rather amusing instead of offensive. I also found it amusing that while the ad featured dramatizations of the flaws of older systems it did nothing save flash to a laptop webpage to give any real indicator of 4e and it's features. So a fact about the ad: it spent most of the time highlighting the flaws of the previous edition and did nothing to give us any real information on *why* the new edition was so much better other than that they were obviously so much more excited to be gaming then than they were in the previous editions.
* Note: Playing 4e at varying levels on D&D game day, I'm sorry, combat doesn't move as fast as they depicted in those little cartoon renderings in the previous ad.
* Opinion: That description about second edition and THAC0? Honestly, I've only seen new players confused by it. Once it was understood what it was it came as easily as rolling a d20 applying a bonus to hit a DC. If they wanted to show off a flaw of 2nd edition they should have had someone going "What? I'm a dwarf and I can only hit level 12 as a fighter? Are you serious?!" Racial level limits were so horrible >.<
Grappling being convoluted? Nah. This is personal opinion but at one point while playing 3.5 my players and I finally had enough. "Alright," someone said "Let's just read the damn rules." we did. When we were done we all bore confused looks on our faces. "Wait, this is what we've been whining about? These are actually rather simple."
The issue with grappling wasn't so much that the rules were convoluted, it was that it was something that came up so rarely no one bothered to really invest the time in learning the rules. Meaning whenever something grappled (like damn near anything with tentacles) everyone wound up cracking open the rule books so they could find out what the rules were.
As for the Mike Merls article? Their customer service sucked, their advertising campaign was poorly done, and I'm just plain not interested in their system and the glut of books they've put out. The only WotC products I'll buy are their map tiles which I think are a damn clever and spiffy product. Their minis are sort of Meh and the fewer numbers they put out at higher prices than before kind of got me to stop buying them. Ultimately, people can have their 4e, and I'll have my plethora of games, and if I bash the system it's probably in relation to the Skill Challenge mechanic or just for some playful laughs with my players that really don't mean anything to me.
Now it's time to dine on the flesh of cow with tasty sauces thrown in.
Another note: I am an omnivore, meat is delicious, as are vegetables! Especially with sauces.
Final note: I love the cartoon ads, the animator of bitey's castle is amazing and does some impressive stuff with flash. None of the cartoons have offended me at all though I suppose I can see how the troll thing might rub some people the wrong ways.
Truly final note: I'm a monster, RAWR!
What's more, the troll getting pooped on wasn't a compliment. There's no possible way it could be meant as a compliment, unless I was a pig that enjoyed eating fecal matter.Right, it wasn't. I used a compliment by way of example because it is a very common way in which we, as human beings, predict reactions on a daily basis.
It was more of an insult, and insults kinda follow a different vibe than compliments.Actually, it was more of a satire. It wasn't intended to insult anyone, just like their depiction of 4e fans as the kobolds wasn't intended to insult anyone.
Subtle difference being, the kobolds weren't getting s@$$ on by the almighty dragon. Wasn't exactly even-handed satire there.
Right, good. You saw the cartoon, and what you took away from it was: "Wizards of the Coast sees me as a whining troll for it to poop on."Why, then, is it that people in my shoes didn't come away from that same cartoon thinking "Wizards of the Coast sees me as a simpering mindless kobold minion?"
To assume someone is a mindless minion, all they have to do to deny that is to think, "hey, I'm no minion. I play what I want." You're not exactly wiping dragon poop off your brow.
According to your logic, all these ads were brilliant, well-received, and insightful. WotC is doing wonderful with the gaming community and everyone is happy. Nobody is actually offended, because according to you we can't be. This whole thing is just the product of one or two disgruntled customers, nothing more. This is all just a dream. Nothing more to see here...
Regardless of any of our opinions, the sheer volume of people who say they were offended, across all manner of forums, blogs, articles, etc, should tell you that something went wrong. As I've said before, the fact that this thread even exists, and has gone as long as it has, is a testament to this idea. For Mearls to make an article even hinting at this says there is a problem.
You don't see anything offensive. That's fine. Some people do. You're arguing for the intent of the ad, we're arguing over the result. We're not going to see eye-to-eye if we're looking in different directions.
Perception=Reality in marketing
It doesn't matter what you INTENDED to do, how your audience REACTS to what you do is important. So if I interpret the message from their marketing that WotC doesn't consider me a valued customer anymore, that is my reality, and I will react accordingly.
Of course WotC didn't want to offend their customers. No sane company that wishes to remain in business does that. However ... you can send out a message that is received the wrong way. It happens all the time. There is a whole science called Communication (with a degree program at most colleges and everything) that teaches people how to get their message across correctly.
When a company misreads their consumer's mood, disasters can and do occur. Sometimes humor doesn't translate. Sometimes, what marketers consider edgy and brilliant in a boardroom translates into mean-spirited and stupid to the intended recipients once put out into the ether. It's all context.
The market always tells the truth. The truth is, 4e is doing fine, but it has lost some market share. My personal opinion is that a large part of this is attributable to some really poor marketing decisions. Note, I said opinion, not fact. The truth is, the facts of the matter are hard to quantify. All that can be known is that there is a thriving community with excellent 3pp participation involved in Pathfinder. And that is good enough for me and my gaming dollars.
If WotC would consider doing some projects in 3e or even 2e or 1e, I think they would win a lot of fans back. I think (IMHO) that re-releasing the older accessories in PDF form would be an olive branch that would heal a lot of bad feelings. We shall see what the future brings.
+1,000
/endthread
This would be a brilliant commercial.CR was definitely worth it to me (preorder price), but the rules sure need to be rewritten.Scene 1.
Interior. Night. Four Nerdy Players sit around a table in someone's basement, playing Castle Ravenloft.
Nerdy Player #1: "These rules are a mess."
Nerdy Player #2: "My turn is taking, like, twenty minutes."
Nerdy Player #3: "I'm so confused."
Nerdy Player #4: "I want my mommy."
Scene 2.
Exterior. Day. Three Hip Friends sit at a poolside table. The Coolest Guy Ever arrives, holding a board game.
Coolest Guy Ever: "Check it out everyone! Castle Ravenloft, Second Edition!"
Rock music starts to play. Girls in Bikinis emerge from the pool, carrying cans of Mountain Dew and fistfulls of Castle Ravenloft Second Edition game pieces. The Coolest Guy Ever starts playing the game with his three Hip Friends.
Hip Friend #1: "This new edition of Castle Ravenloft is awesome!"
Hip Friend #2: "I don't even need to look at the rules!!"
Hip Friend #3: "This amazing 2venture warrants three exclamation marks!!!"
The Coolest Guy Ever jumps up on an adjacent table, plays a guitar solo in the direction of the game board, and game pieces dance around impresively. Girls in Bikinis gawk at the Coolest Guy Ever, their expressions showcasing equal parts amazement and sexual desire.
Coolest Guy Ever: "Thanks, Castle Ravenloft Second Edition! I'm just glad I'm not some lame troll who lives in his mother's basement, hates America, and plays that old 'Practice Edition' of the world's greatest game!"
Dear God,
Please let Scott Betts invest his entire future in marketing or some other endeavor that demands great public relations skills for success.Amen.
This would be a brilliant commercial.CR was definitely worth it to me (preorder price), but the rules sure need to be rewritten.Scene 1.
Interior. Night. Four Nerdy Players sit around a table in someone's basement, playing Castle Ravenloft.
Nerdy Player #1: "These rules are a mess."
Nerdy Player #2: "My turn is taking, like, twenty minutes."
Nerdy Player #3: "I'm so confused."
Nerdy Player #4: "I want my mommy."
Scene 2.
Exterior. Day. Three Hip Friends sit at a poolside table. The Coolest Guy Ever arrives, holding a board game.
Coolest Guy Ever: "Check it out everyone! Castle Ravenloft, Second Edition!"
Rock music starts to play. Girls in Bikinis emerge from the pool, carrying cans of Mountain Dew and fistfulls of Castle Ravenloft Second Edition game pieces. The Coolest Guy Ever starts playing the game with his three Hip Friends.
Hip Friend #1: "This new edition of Castle Ravenloft is awesome!"
Hip Friend #2: "I don't even need to look at the rules!!"
Hip Friend #3: "This amazing 2venture warrants three exclamation marks!!!"
The Coolest Guy Ever jumps up on an adjacent table, plays a guitar solo in the direction of the game board, and game pieces dance around impresively. Girls in Bikinis gawk at the Coolest Guy Ever, their expressions showcasing equal parts amazement and sexual desire.
Coolest Guy Ever: "Thanks, Castle Ravenloft Second Edition! I'm just glad I'm not some lame troll who lives in his mother's basement, hates America, and plays that old 'Practice Edition' of the world's greatest game!"
Dear God,
Please let Scott Betts invest his entire future in marketing or some other endeavor that demands great public relations skills for success.
Amen.
Yes, Castle Ravenloft.
Than say that. Otherwise, I assume CR means challenge rating and consider you gullible to buy challenge rating. I might also try to sell you landmarks :P
My mind went to places it shouldn't at first.CR was definitely worth it to me (preorder price), but the rules sure need to be rewritten.What's CR?
You mean proper, chaste places? After all, as a succubus demon, you should dive headlong into profanity, perversion, lust and deviation.
Personally, I thought he was lobbying for the legalisation for crystal meth. Damn addicts! ;-P
Marshmallows. Who the hell could possibly be offended by marshmallows? They're so spongy and tasty.
Marshmallows? Get the heck out of here with your racist crap! "Put those whites on sticks and put them in the fire" Keep your damn witch hunt euphemisms to yourself. Hate criminal!
(Yes, I made that up, It's not my opinion, but we both know that there are probably people on this planet who think like that)
Love Heinlein. Sucked in as a pubescent by the old Whelan Friday cover....that jumpsuit just....just....teasingly ready to melt off of that f-fu-frame....promise of zero-g......gnng....
stayed for the sheer genius of it all.....
That's unnecessary cheezecake! Selling books to crotches. Turning women into sex objects and abasing them to make more money in the potential sex offender camp!
(Same as above: Not my opinion, but this time, we're probably even more in agreement that there are people who think that way.)
I'm really prepared to not attribute it to "stupidity" per se, but.....perhaps....lack of ability/skill on that front.
I have two problems with that:
1. We're not talking about some two-guy label who just got into the business enticed by the glorious opportunities for vast riches and masses of adoring fans and groupies that are the reality in OGL/GSL publishing, having just written their first 10page PDF-only "book" in an all-nighter and made the ad after a small party, their minds a war zone between exhaustion, caffeine, day-dreaming, alcohol and some other, illegal substances.
We're talking about wizards of the coast, not exactly a small company, and owned by hasbro, a billion-dollar company with thousands of employees. Sure, they're not really Big with a capital B, but I'd say that they have people around who have studied marketing.
2. Everyone can screw up, sure. It can always be stupidity. But you can't tell me that they're still oblivious to the effect their crappy ads had. So they could have offered an explanation and apology about that, something like "Sorry this offended some of you. We never intended it to be insulting and just didn't think things through!" or something like that. Especially if they want unity.
You don't get to demand that chasms be bridged unless you do some of the work, too. Especially if you did a lot to create the chasm in the first place.
And if they're still oblivious to this, the sheer scope of stupidity involved will discourage me from buying their stuff as surely as anything else.
|
My mind went to places it shouldn't at first.CR was definitely worth it to me (preorder price), but the rules sure need to be rewritten.What's CR?You mean proper, chaste places? After all, as a succubus demon, you should dive headlong into profanity, perversion, lust and deviation.
Personally, I thought he was lobbying for the legalisation for crystal meth. Damn addicts! ;-P
I was more thinking different name for a rooster and a ring actually. Likely cause I had just watched Shoot'um up where the chick reaches in that one guys pants and yanks one out.
The market always tells the truth. The truth is, 4e is doing fine, but it has lost some market share. My personal opinion is that a large part of this is attributable to some really poor marketing decisions. Note, I said opinion, not fact. The truth is, the facts of the matter are hard to quantify. All that can be known is that there is a thriving community with excellent 3pp participation involved in Pathfinder. And that is good enough for me and my gaming dollars.
Speaking from personal experience, they did lose because of all they did during/since 4e was announced.
Sure, not all of those who went Paizo would have followed had they gone 4e with their APs, but many would have. Others would still buy Dragon and Dragon as well as 4e books if there were still really there.
Of course, for us fans, the situation turned out to be pretty good: Those who don't like 4e have a great, living system in Pathfinder, and those who like both have more options.
If WotC would consider doing some projects in 3e or even 2e or 1e, I think they would win a lot of fans back. I think (IMHO) that re-releasing the older accessories in PDF form would be an olive branch that would heal a lot of bad feelings. We shall see what the future brings.
While I doubt that they'd develop anything for an older edition of D&D, or another company's system (like PF), the PDFs would be a great first step.
Especially since their official explanation about why the PDFs were pulled is as believable as the Hamburgler promising not to steal any hamburgers ever again.
So Red Dragons represent 4e and by extension all 4e players/fans. And Paizo put out ads of their icons attacking a red dragon, heck they even used it for the cover of their core book.
Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion one can draw from that advertising campaign is that Paizo thinks it is ok to attack all 4e players and fans, perhaps both figuratively and literally. Paizo is a company that does advertising, and thus they must know how their advertisements would be interpreted. Thus this is the only reasonable conclusion one can come to.
EDIT: pres man's philosophy to purchasing products. If a company creates a product I want and sells it at price I am willing to pay, then I will purchase it. I could care less how they actually advertise it or even how they treat me as a customer (assuming I get the product at the price and condition and timely fashion I agreed to). If they want to call me a poop-head, who cares as long as they produce a low-priced well developed product. It is not like I have to sit in the same room with the jerk-wads.
So Red Dragons represent 4e and by extension all 4e players/fans. And Paizo put out ads of their icons attacking a red dragon, heck they even used it for the cover of their core book.
Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion one can draw from that advertising campaign is that Paizo thinks it is ok to attack all 4e players and fans, perhaps both figuratively and literally. Paizo is a company that does advertising, and thus they must know how their advertisements would be interpreted. Thus this is the only reasonable conclusion one can come to.
** spoiler omitted **
See above.
Because satire is never even-handed when it's being used as propaganda. There may be the standard denial "Oh no, we're even-handed and we lampoon everyone" but a clear agenda always comes through and one side always gets the most pointed barbs. That's why people in your shoes aren't offended--you weren't on the receiving end of the nastiest barbs.
I just watched that thing again. While you can make connections between those kobolds and the 4e fans but don't have to, the jab at those who don't like 4e couldn't have been clearer. It wasn't just any troll who was pooped on. It's not a case of people interpreting it as a veiled insult against those who don't like 4e.
It was a troll writing stuff on a computer, repeating the things most often repeated by those who didn't like 4e. It couldn't be clearer if they just flat out came out and said "Hey, you wankers who don't like what we did with 4e? You're a bunch of trolls and we s~@@ on your head! Go away and die for all we care!"
Wait, that would have been clearer. But not by much.
Anyway, to get into the spirit of what the "other side" has been doing: If you do not see that this was a clear insult against those who didn't like 4e, you need to contact someone to abduct you and de-program you like they do with victims of religious sects.
And if you find that insulting, you're just too thin-skinned! :D
(Damn, that really sounds horrible.)
One of these things used sarcasm to make a point.Ah, sarcasm on the internet. It works so well. I'm surprised it was taken out of context here, actually, I've never seen that happen before. Bizarre, really. In most cases it is well delivered, and well received, often disfusing otherwise tense situations. Never have I seen it misused, poorly applied, or used as a justification retroactively for a statement that may have been unreasonable but furiously typed in the heat of the moment. I am sadden by its unique and unprecedent situation here.
You're right, but why does my tension increase when I read your words?
I was more thinking different name for a rooster and a ring actually. Likely cause I had just watched Shoot'um up where the chick reaches in that one guys pants and yanks one out.My mind went to places it shouldn't at first.CR was definitely worth it to me (preorder price), but the rules sure need to be rewritten.What's CR?You mean proper, chaste places? After all, as a succubus demon, you should dive headlong into profanity, perversion, lust and deviation.
Personally, I thought he was lobbying for the legalisation for crystal meth. Damn addicts! ;-P
So it's a place where your mind (among other parts of you) should totally go, as a succubus! ;-P
I didn't even think about that one. And it's not even on urban dictionary (and their first definition of CR is quite naughty)
All forms of adverstising assert some type of control over your decision making process, whether is the previous systems you play are too complex, or offering backwards compability. There is a hint of truth in any advertisement, otherwise how could you be influenced?
Regardless, I would hope we all have the ability to make decisions on what we like, versus what other people say or do.
I didn't get in an uproar about the claims of backwards compatibility with Pathfinder.
But like religion, or politics, some viewpoints get so firmly entrenched, there is not much to done to change some peoples minds. I actually considered Pathfinder first, but my friends wanted to play 4E. But I am influenced like everyone else, and all this negativity on 4E, basically led me to avoid Pathfinder.
So I guess we all choose the bed we sleep in. But it doesn't hurt to take a step outside of yourself from time to time, to get some perspective.
I really don't think they cared as much if theirs ads would insult people....WotC not being staffed by completely idiots had to know the changes to the game they were making and to the FR would alienate some people from buying their product. I mean if nothing they can look at the previous editions of the games...or any other things that has fans emtionaly involved(IE Star Trek...Star Wars...JDM vs US cars...PC vs Mac.).
But I think they thought that what they were doing would gain more people buying their product than who would leave. They went for a marketing campaign set ou to attract younger people...and the 'cool' kids...with all of those 'hip' words and in general a very negative sterotypical ad campaign. So I really just don't think they cared about the people they knew they were going to loose anyway.
I just think they gambled very badly in that they lost more people than they gained(or maybe it broke even) and have been loosing people ever since 4th ed came out. That is why we will see a change in D&D very soon. I mean they are doing so many thing like they did in the lead up to 4th ed...and with Mike Mearls articles and the numbers(Hasbro can't let Pazio tie them for sells)...I really have to think 5th ed is on it's way.
Hopefuly they will have a better ad campaign in place...
You're right, but why does my tension increase when I read your words?One of these things used sarcasm to make a point.Ah, sarcasm on the internet. It works so well. I'm surprised it was taken out of context here, actually, I've never seen that happen before. Bizarre, really. In most cases it is well delivered, and well received, often disfusing otherwise tense situations. Never have I seen it misused, poorly applied, or used as a justification retroactively for a statement that may have been unreasonable but furiously typed in the heat of the moment. I am sadden by its unique and unprecedent situation here.
A mystery indeed.
Hmm.
Hmmmm.
Probably because I'm a jerk.
Why, then, is it that people in my shoes didn't come away from that same cartoon thinking "Wizards of the Coast sees me as a simpering mindless kobold minion?"
Because simpering mindless minions never see themselves as simpering mindless minions...
Also alot of their fan base loves kobold for some reason...I don't get it myself...so it could be hey they are going to have PC kobolds. Or kobolds rule kinda of idea.
CR was definitely worth it to me (preorder price), but the rules sure need to be rewritten.Scene 1.
Interior. Night. Four Nerdy Players sit around a table in someone's basement, playing Castle Ravenloft.
Nerdy Player #1: "These rules are a mess."
Nerdy Player #2: "My turn is taking, like, twenty minutes."
Nerdy Player #3: "I'm so confused."
Nerdy Player #4: "I want my mommy."
Scene 2.
Exterior. Day. Three Hip Friends sit at a poolside table. The Coolest Guy Ever arrives, holding a board game.
Coolest Guy Ever: "Check it out everyone! Castle Ravenloft, Second Edition!"
Rock music starts to play. Girls in Bikinis emerge from the pool, carrying cans of Mountain Dew and fistfulls of Castle Ravenloft Second Edition game pieces. The Coolest Guy Ever starts playing the game with his three Hip Friends.
Hip Friend #1: "This new edition of Castle Ravenloft is awesome!"
Hip Friend #2: "I don't even need to look at the rules!!"
Hip Friend #3: "This amazing 2venture warrants three exclamation marks!!!"
The Coolest Guy Ever jumps up on an adjacent table, plays a guitar solo in the direction of the game board, and game pieces dance around impresively. Girls in Bikinis gawk at the Coolest Guy Ever, their expressions showcasing equal parts amazement and sexual desire.
Coolest Guy Ever: "Thanks, Castle Ravenloft Second Edition! I'm just glad I'm not some lame troll who lives in his mother's basement, hates America, and plays that old 'Practice Edition' of the world's greatest game!"
Ever consider writing an Ultimate Power Ninja movie script?
You know, a lot of this could have been avoided if they just bothered to have a focus group for the ads to check what the reaction would be.
Real world story: A number of years ago, I was part of a focus group critiquing the ads for the Rosicrucians. That's right, the secret society that advertises in the back of magazines.
There was a stack of ads the advertising company had come up with. The smiling ad guy was there, handing them to us, trying to get us all to agree with him that the ads were fantabulous and to convince his client to buy them all. His client, the Rosicrucian elder, a very distinguished white-haired old gentleman who looked exactly like what you'd expect to see for the head of a secret society, stood to one side, looking like someone who'd just eaten a bad lemon while attending a funeral.
Oh, the point of the ads? To get new blood into the organization since everyone was getting older. I think the parallel here should be obvious.
Most of the people in the room were the sort of cheerful people who don't like saying anything bad to anyone, especially the smiling ad man who kept aggressively smiling at everyone the whole time. The exceptions were myself, being a writer used to critique groups, and an older woman who'd worked in marketing and wasn't going to hold her tongue for anyone, especially when she was being paid to give an honest critique of a marketing campaign. We formed a tag-team giving straight feedback.
The worst ad showed some woman in a dingy cubicle looking dolefully at a woefully out-of-date computer monitor with the caption "Is there something missing in your life?" Our answer? Why yes, obviously you need a new computer!
The ad guy said that the computer in the photo could be updated, but our point was that no one likes to be told they're a loser and that they need your product to fix their pathetic life. Anyone with half a backbone will be thinking No, I'm fine, but you suck, and so does your product. What you want to tell people instead is that they're winners but you might have something they'd enjoy or that will help them win more.
The only ad in the stack which we (meaning myself and the woman who'd worked in marketing) felt would have any chance of succeeding, or at least not turning people off, was the one with the same model from the dingy cubicle photo but instead this time got up with a pith helmet and a hiking stick perched on some mountain peak somewhere looking off in the distance with a pensive expression. The caption was something like "Are you looking for something new to explore?" The subtext of course was that this woman was obviously successful enough to afford a hiking vacation and a bunch of gear from an outfitter and was probably quite pleased with her life but maybe looking for something new.
In a remarkable bit of alchemy, the ate-a-bad-lemon expression had migrated from the Rosicrucian elder to the ad guy, and the elder actually smiled as he thanked the two of us personally.
The woman on a mountain peak add was the one they ran, with a few twists and improvements in the captioning.
Subtle difference being, the kobolds weren't getting s*%@ on by the almighty dragon. Wasn't exactly even-handed satire there.
That's your rebuttal? That one portrayal is arbitrarily worse than the other?
But okay, I'll play your game. Consider this: if the kobolds had been the ones getting crapped on by the WotC-dragon, we still wouldn't have been offended.
To assume someone is a mindless minion, all they have to do to deny that is to think, "hey, I'm no minion. I play what I want." You're not exactly wiping dragon poop off your brow.
All someone has to do to deny the troll portrayal is think, "Hey, I'm no troll. My arguments are well-reasoned."
Apparently that's too much to expect.
According to your logic, all these ads were brilliant, well-received, and insightful.
Nope, that doesn't follow from my logic at all.
WotC is doing wonderful with the gaming community and everyone is happy.
Neither does this.
Nobody is actually offended, because according to you we can't be.
Or this. In fact, I'm explicitly saying the opposite: plenty of people are being offended by this (or are behaving as though they are), because looking for new and exciting ways to widen the self/other gulf against something you're disgruntled with to begin with is something that we humans have a strong proclivity for.
This whole thing is just the product of one or two disgruntled customers, nothing more. This is all just a dream. Nothing more to see here...
You have a really odd way of deciding what I must be trying to say.
Regardless of any of our opinions, the sheer volume of people who say they were offended, across all manner of forums, blogs, articles, etc, should tell you that something went wrong.
Yes, here we are in agreement. There is, undoubtedly, something decidedly wrong about how things turned out.
You don't see anything offensive. That's fine. Some people do.
Some people certainly went online and behaved in a way that one would, if one were offended by something. The bit you and I disagree on is that you think that behavior was motivated by a genuine feeling of personal insult derived from a satirical cartoon, and I believe that behavior was motivated by the very human desire to get offended by things that someone you don't like does.
You're arguing for the intent of the ad, we're arguing over the result.
I'm arguing that the gaming community is smart enough to be able to decipher the basic intent of the cartoon, and that should inform the result. What we had, instead, was a bunch of people who probably did understand the intent of the ad, but chose to act as though the intent of the ad was something else entirely, because it was easier to get worked up over it that way.
What you want to tell people instead is that they're winners but you might have something they'd enjoy or that will help them win more.
Hundreds of marketing execs just asked their assistants to track down Charlie Sheen's phone number.
Because simpering mindless minions never see themselves as simpering mindless minions...
So people in my shoes are actually simpering mindless minions?
Man. One side is trying to convince the other that the ad is satire and that they aren't all actually trolls, while the other side is trying to convince the first that the ad is completely accurate and that they're all actually simpering mindless minions.
This is some Olympic-level mental gymnastics we're witnessing, here.
Subtle difference being, the kobolds weren't getting s*%@ on by the almighty dragon. Wasn't exactly even-handed satire there.That's your rebuttal? That one portrayal is arbitrarily worse than the other?
But okay, I'll play your game. Consider this: if the kobolds had been the ones getting crapped on by the WotC-dragon, we still wouldn't have been offended.
Okay, I'm confused. Here you've been saying the whole time you aren't a kobold minion, and now you refer to them as "we"? Sure, makes sense.
To assume someone is a mindless minion, all they have to do to deny that is to think, "hey, I'm no minion. I play what I want." You're not exactly wiping dragon poop off your brow.All someone has to do to deny the troll portrayal is think, "Hey, I'm no troll. My arguments are well-reasoned."
Apparently that's too much to expect.
See, there's the difference. Right there. They used what were reasonable complaints(Gnome in the MM?), painted a troll face on it, then proceeded to defecate all over it. I'm a little more frustrated that they attribute anyone who disagrees with them as a troll more than I am the whole pooping dragon bit. We didn't even get a retort. They didn't show what could've been a reasonable disagreement, no, they showed a troll. "Don't agree with us? You're a troll and we poop on you. Good day sir."
Nobody is actually offended, because according to you we can't be.Or this. In fact, I'm explicitly saying the opposite: plenty of people are being offended by this (or are behaving as though they are), because looking for new and exciting ways to widen the self/other gulf against something you're disgruntled with to begin with is something that we humans have a strong proclivity for.
Try harder. You keep saying that this is all based on preconceived notions, that we are looking to be offended when it's never been the case where I'm from(anecdotal evidence to be sure). Like I've already said, I was a WotC fan up to this point. I've handed that company literally thousands of my dollars over the past 16 years, and I don't regret it. My fellow gamers and I play lots of different systems, some like them more than others, but it's never been "fear of change" or "WotC is the enemy!" in my experience. I walked into the oncoming approach of 4e with high hopes, I wasn't one of the doomsayers. The ad campaign dashed those hopes quite a bit.
We can go rounds with anecdotal evidence all day and not resolve anything. The longer you keep painting every disgruntled former WotC customer as one convenient story package, the more you blind yourself to the actual gray areas and deny that "oh look, a customer is genuinely unhappy with something a company did, not just for internetz fame", the more people are going to prove you wrong.
Is it just me, or are large swaths of pages 18 and 19 of this thread missing?
What sort of flame war did you guys get up to over the weekend?
Actually, I'm pretty sure the posts that were deleted were part of a rather elaborate impromptu fictional alias drama. Don't worry, you didn't miss anything terribly epic.
Is it just me, or are large swaths of pages 18 and 19 of this thread missing?
What sort of flame war did you guys get up to over the weekend?
some knight bloke decided to have a fight with this wraithy geezer. otherwise nothing interesting happened...
Interesting story
Very interesting indeed. As annoying as they can be, the focus group exists for a reason.
I believe no one is actually trying to convince anyone of anything. They're all just trying to bludgeon the other side into submission with their opinion.
Stop trying to bludgeon me with your opinion that I'm trying to bludgeon people with my opinion!
Because simpering mindless minions never see themselves as simpering mindless minions...So people in my shoes are actually simpering mindless minions?
Man. One side is trying to convince the other that the ad is satire and that they aren't all actually trolls, while the other side is trying to convince the first that the ad is completely accurate and that they're all actually simpering mindless minions.
This is some Olympic-level mental gymnastics we're witnessing, here.
What? That was a joke? How could take it as anything other than humor and satire...boy you must be irrational and suffering from nerdrage because everybody I know thought it was funny even the 4th ed fans...
I nean have you not read any of my post...I never have a bad opinion about anybody who enjoy or play 4th ed. Heck some of my best friends in the world play 4th ed...I don't hold it against them(it is after all a game). I am not some anti-4th ed fanatic here. Why would you think I actualy meant that above as anything but a joke.
Wow if you are offended by that than there must be something wrong with you.
The above is satire...of your arguement here. IE I don't care if you don't find it offensive...People did. Too many people in fact to just point it as some fringe nut group. The marketing campaign was a failure...because
1) It tried to be funny and was not.
2) It tried to be hip and was not
3) Because a larger amount of people do find it insultive.
It is impossible not to offend somebody out there...but it is really not that hard to not offend alot of the people out there...as somebody said before Focus groups are a good thing.
Okay, I'm confused. Here you've been saying the whole time you aren't a kobold minion, and now you refer to them as "we"? Sure, makes sense.
Oh, man. Is this thing that you're doing here intentional? You justified one group of people getting offended because the depiction associated with their "side" of the edition wars got pooped on. I'm saying that even if the kobolds were pooped on instead, we wouldn't have been offended. Why do you think that is?
See, there's the difference. Right there. They used what were reasonable complaints(Gnome in the MM?), painted a troll face on it, then proceeded to defecate all over it. I'm a little more frustrated that they attribute anyone who disagrees with them as a troll more than I am the whole pooping dragon bit. We didn't even get a retort. They didn't show what could've been a reasonable disagreement, no, they showed a troll. "Don't agree with us? You're a troll and we poop on you. Good day sir."
"Agree with us? You're a mindless sycophant and we can do whatever we want and you'll still worship us. Good day sir."
You're still trying to push the idea that there is some fundamental difference between the two portrayals that makes it totally okay for one side to be offended, but that prevents anyone on the other side from actually being offended.
I'm telling you: there is plenty of room to find reasons to be offended by either portrayal, if you're so inclined. What you're glossing over is why one side was so inclined, and the other was not.
Try harder. You keep saying that this is all based on preconceived notions, that we are looking to be offended when it's never been the case where I'm from(anecdotal evidence to be sure). Like I've already said, I was a WotC fan up to this point. I've handed that company literally thousands of my dollars over the past 16 years, and I don't regret it. My fellow gamers and I play lots of different systems, some like them more than others, but it's never been "fear of change" or "WotC is the enemy!" in my experience. I walked into the oncoming approach of 4e with high hopes, I wasn't one of the doomsayers. The ad campaign dashed those hopes quite a bit.
Except, I assert, it had nothing to do with the ad campaign.
We can go rounds with anecdotal evidence all day and not resolve anything. The longer you keep painting every disgruntled former WotC customer as one convenient story package, the more you blind yourself to the actual gray areas and deny that "oh look, a customer is genuinely unhappy with something a company did, not just for internetz fame", the more people are going to prove you wrong.
Again, I'm not saying no one has cause to be disgruntled with WotC. I'm saying that the ad campaign is a scapegoat that makes WotC look worse than the reality of the situation would have it.
If people are disgruntled because they don't actually enjoy the game (or, rather, haven't enjoyed the game) because of the design decisions, that doesn't really make WotC look that bad. They made design choices that some people disagreed with, but whatever. That's how design works.
If people are disgruntled because WotC offended them personally, suddenly WotC is justifiably viewed as the BBEG.
I believe that what's going on here is that a lot of people got upset with WotC over, primarily, design - specifically, how they perceived that design would affect the game they held dear. Concerns (often irrational or unfounded) were voiced, and those concerns snowballed as they were bounced back and forth by people who were already rankled at WotC for things they had done during 3.5, or perhaps the 4e announcement itself. It evolved to the point where some people were angry at WotC for the design choices made in 4e. But they understood, consciously or not, that it's silly to get so upset over design decisions (not impossible, mind you, just silly).
To justify their animosity towards WotC, they started hunting for new and exciting reasons to embellish their portfolio of 10-things-I-hate-about-WotC. They found a couple fairly innocuous ads and discovered that it was really quite easy to be offended by something if you wanted to be.
Yes, it's a story package. No, it doesn't apply to everyone. And, above all, it's merely my opinion and probably can't be proven to any real degree of certainty.
But I think you're pushing for an explanation in the wrong place. The animosity towards WotC has little or nothing to do with the troll getting pooped on. They could have made fun of the kobolds in the most vicious, close-to-home-hitting way imaginable, and it wouldn't have mattered because the people who might have identified with the kobolds went into the cartoon with an eye for amusement and satire. The people who ended up identifying with the troll might have watched it to be amused, but they also had something else lingering in the backs of their minds: that nagging desire to find more ways to be upset with WotC. When the troll got pooped on, that desire swung to the forefront.
Also, where the heck did "internetz fame" come from? No one has talked about that.
All someone has to do to deny the troll portrayal is think, "Hey, I'm no troll. My arguments are well-reasoned."You know, if someone would call me a simpering mindless minion I'd clearly feel offended though I'm absolutely sure that I'm not simpering nor mindless nor a minion. Just sayin' :)
Right, if someone actually called you that it would be pretty harsh. You'd have a right to be upset with them, especially if it was untrue.
But, again, the cartoon was satire on the edition wars. The portrayals were personified versions of the exaggerations of the worst qualities of both sides.
What? That was a joke? How could take it as anything other than humor and satire...boy you must be irrational and suffering from nerdrage because everybody I know thought it was funny even the 4th ed fans...
No, the whole point of my phrasing it as a question was so that you'd answer "No."
I don't believe that you think we're simpering mindless minions. I believe that the logic you used backed you into that corner, and I was pointing it out so that you could backpedal a little and figure out what led you down that path.
What? That was a joke? How could take it as anything other than humor and satire...boy you must be irrational and suffering from nerdrage because everybody I know thought it was funny even the 4th ed fans...No, the whole point of my phrasing it as a question was so that you'd answer "No."
I don't believe that you think we're simpering mindless minions. I believe that the logic you used backed you into that corner, and I was pointing it out so that you could backpedal a little and figure out what led you down that path.
Actualy it was just a joke. And the rest of my post seemed to just go over your head...
I really just don't believe in generaliation of any particular group. Not everyonee who find the ads as offensive is being irrational...as I don't believe that 4th ed is a board game...or a MMO or any of that. Generalization are often very sloppy and and often have little to do with reality.
WotC has made some serious blunders in the past(in my opinion)...and I have not seen them do anything that has changed(in my opinion). To think they have...and that some how 4th ed is special is just as irrational. The old saying 'fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me' comes to mind.
|
|
But, again, the cartoon was satire on the edition wars. The portrayals were personified versions of the exaggerations of the worst qualities of both sides.
Even if it was satire, it could have been meant in an offensive way nonetheless. Now I'dont think that it was meant as an insult but I can understand why it could come across as such. Roleplayers are often much more invested in their hobby as most other people. And in the heated atmosphere at this time I think it wasn't the smartest move to make fun of the situation (especially in a way which could be and in fact was misunderstood).
Even if it was satire, it could have been meant in an offensive way nonetheless. Now I'dont think that it was meant as an insult but I can understand why it could come across as such.
I can see why certain people would get offended by it, but I don't think that the marketing is to blame for the offense. At best, it was a catalyst. At worst, a scapegoat.
Roleplayers are often much more invested in their hobby as most other people. And in the heated atmosphere at this time I think it wasn't the smartest move to make fun of the situation (especially in a way which could be and in fact was misunderstood).
Clearly, it was not the smartest move to make, but D&D has never been known for having stellar PR. But it's telling that you didn't see anyone's opinion of WotC improve after it was pointed out to them that the ad wasn't meant in anything resembling an insulting way.
Among the mistakes that WotC made was overestimating the level-headedness of the gaming community.
Clearly, it was not the smartest move to make, but D&D has never been known for having stellar PR. But it's telling that you didn't see anyone's opinion of WotC improve after it was pointed out to them that the ad wasn't meant in anything resembling an insulting way.
I don't ever remember them saying that. Though than again I was not that insulted by that ad...so I was not looking for it. But did they apologize for it? If so that I would atleast people forget about the ads if they can't just forgive them.
Also I disagree PR was great during 3rd edition. The marketing campaign for 3rd edition was light years better than that of 4th ed(ok that may not be saying much).
Clearly, it was not the smartest move to make, but D&D has never been known for having stellar PR. But it's telling that you didn't see anyone's opinion of WotC improve after it was pointed out to them that the ad wasn't meant in anything resembling an insulting way.I don't ever remember them saying that. Though than again I was not that insulted by that ad...so I was not looking for it. But did they apologize for it? If so that I would atleast people forget about the ads if they can't just forgive them.
Also I disagree PR was great during 3rd edition. The marketing campaign for 3rd edition was light years better than that of 4th ed(ok that may not be saying much).
Any examples of 3e ad campaigns? 3e was what brought me back into the fold from years and years of unrepentant White Wolf, and I recall White Wolf's occasional anti-D&D comments/ribbing of a questionable nature("If you can't handle this, go back to killing orcs"). Did 3e ad campaigns malign 2e at all?
By the way, a post over on ENWorld reminded me that, in the vein of offering meaningful concessions with the olive branch, WotC has recently begun to open up their sponsored play areas at cons (DDXP, for one) to all editions of D&D, not just 4e. Not a huge deal, I know, but it's something.
Finally, something good in this thread! Every little bit helps.
-The Gneech