Slashdot Mirror
Video Game Advertising Reaches New Lows
Anonymous Coward writes "The Guardian is reporting that Acclaim is attempting to purchase advertising space on gravestones of the recently departed in order to promote its new game ShadowMan 2. This certainly takes the encroachment of commercial messages on public space to new levels." I understand RockStar is looking for a molotov cocktail partner...
Well, ok, maybe they said they wanted to buy space on graves, but let's face it, it wouldn't happen (unless Eminem's mum died I guess). It's just good publicity - hey they've just pulled in a few thousand nerds if nothing else!!
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3
:^)
And, as mentioned in their news for the comic, this itself is old news. They've since taken up the cause of promoting a Irish lad who has been waiting in line for Turok 2. Why? Only the boy himself could know, apparantly.
Ryan Fenton
Last posted to Slashdot in March. Same article.
The phrase "pop-up advertising" could take on an all-new meaning...
~Ahem~ Ok. I'll go home now.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
.. but the advertising is already working. I doubt they'll even get it on headstones. Someone will make enough fuss to prevent it. But all the while, guess what, they're getting free advertising off this fuss. Now everyone on Slashdot knows about the game. People reading the news will know, eventually more people will go, "Hey did you hear about Acclaim, they're trying to advertise video games on graves."
Thats the advertising they want, they could care less about having a little plaque on a grave. Seriously, how many people are going to see that headstone other than family members and grounds keepers? The pay off is in the shock and hype. We're feeding it right now.
..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
I can't believe the number of sites that have fallen for this. The amount of game players that'll see an ad in some corner of a graveyard is rather miniscule compared to the amount of people who'll read about all the hubub on thier favorite geek or regular news site. When Acclaim backs off the idea as they were planning to do all along we'll all know all the initimate gory details of Shadow Man 2 because we've read dozens of articles about their "despicable advertising plan", now who here can say they knew there was a Shadow Man 1? Not me.
Bad publicity is better than no publicity at all.
This has less to do with the video game company and more to do with advertising in general. In order to get heard above the increasing din of pitches and advertising, companies are resorting to ever-increasing and controversial tactics.
Today I sat through 13 *previews* and 8 ads in the movie theatre. More than 35 minutes of captivity in the theatre alone. Now the broadcasters want to devote the lower quarter of my screen to advertising, I caught a cable station (TNN) doing pop-ups for American Express and Time-Warner cable just won't leave me alone about their AOL high-speed access.
The issue is that the guilty parties have to make more money each quarter to keep Wall Street off their backs. Wall Street better get ready for a consumer revolt, because I'm getting tired of it all.
You think that's bad?
Try this!
(Mostly work safe -- strange for rotten.com)
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
You know, I'll bet that kid who commited suicide after an Everquest binge was sponsored by... Nevermind. That was too easy ;)
You need a FREE iPod Nano
I'll take one of those ads on my headstone in a heartbeat. Rather, lack of heartbeat.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
Are you kidding? Are you nuts? You'd never take a quest to destroy the Pepsi-golem! Pepsi would never be associated with golem-like activities! You uneducated beast! Pepsi is associated with puppies, mom, love, apple pie, and most of all, hipness! You'd get past the Golem by giving him an ice-cold Pepsi, and after a single swig, it'd turn into Britney Spears, sing the latest hit, and bounce^H^H^H^H^H^H^H walk away, allowing you to pass.
(Corporate sponsered games would probably be as boring as the corporate sponsered games you can find on your local Happy Meal box. "The latest Disney licensed character's need something to make them happy. Unscramble the letters to find out what they need! : HAPYP MAEL.")
And your problem with your Palm Pilot stems from your reprehensible behavior with regards to the Marlboro Man! You do not ride past the Marlboro Man, you ride up to the Marlboro Man and type: " ASK MARLBORO MAN THE WAY TO FLAVOR COUNTRY ". (aside: Apologies if I've forgetten the details of that ad campaign...) He'll give you a cigarette, the you smoke it. Several sexy woman (or men, depending on what gender you claimed to be attracted to on your initial 6-page 'voluntary survey' you were required to fill out to play this fine game) will come out, and one of them will upgrade your "Palm Pilot" to a WinCE machine, which can later be levelled up into a MICROSOFT X-BOX, which will handily defeat the Playstation2, as Sony didn't pony up as much dough as Microsoft.
(Hint: If you type the secret code I WANT TO CARRY BILL'S BABY at the X-BOX level-up screen, you'll be able to watch an animation of Steve Jobs being crushed by the Windows logo! Mega-awesome! It makes me want to buy extra copies of Windows XP2005 just to play it safe!)
Really, these games are pretty cool, if a little easy. One last parting hint: Try typing BARE 'EM, BRITNEY while the Britney-golem is singing, and you'll get a nice surprise from the FBI (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Corporate America).
In other words, by the definition above, the phrase could be reconstructed "No one has [so far] volunteer[ed]" or (by flipping the clause) "So far, no one has volunteered."
I just realized that there is no other simple construction that uses the infinitive; every alternative I can find changes the infinitive to a past tense. Actually, I think that's exactly what the sentence needs. My preference would be the construction "No one has yet volunteered" -- a simple change, but one that makes the phrase substantially less ambiguous.
I just checked the Associated Press Stylebook and The Chicago Manual of Style, and couldn't find a definitive reference in either for this construction. (How I wish I had a copy of Strunk & White by my desk...) If anyone can find a reference to support (or to refute, I'd be interested), please post it. Thanks!
"Anything is better than IE, and you can quote me on that." -- Wil Wheaton.