Forums > Off Topic > Hide my head I want to drown my sorrows.
JPaterson (9502) on 11/14/2006 3:42 AM · Permalink · Report
I was going to post lyrics, but I don't feel like editing with a break at the end of the every line.
I saw a commercial for Gears of War, and I have to say, it's one of the best game commercials I've seen. In thirty seconds, without showing an ounce of violence, with this song playing over the spot, really gives off a feel for the game, and advertises it quite well. Some people have said it would've been better showing chainsaw kills for thirty seconds; I say fuck you to them. The song and clip shown does more for the game then a thirty second violent clip would.
Anyway, the title is from the song Mad World. Originally performed by Tears For Fears, I believe the version by Gary Jules is much better. He seems to have the perfect voice for the subject of the song.
Well that's that. Off to the land of sleep.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66360) on 11/14/2006 1:17 PM · Permalink · Report
Just caught this on the tube tonight while receiving my weekly dose of Simpsonian sacrament; after watching a moody animation of a soldier running through rainy streets, diving into a dark room and getting snacked on by a giant spider, I made a little "huh?" motion with my hands. My roommate started making fun of me, mister so-called video game expert, declaiming it the best, most intriguing video game commercial he'd ever seen. (I qualified myself as a retro-gamer, but he would have none of it.)
Unpacking my "huh" gesture: 1) the lack of interface and radical shifts in camera angle suggest that what we observe isn't gameplay, but rather a computer animation (or in-game cinematic?) inspired by or intended to evoke themes in the game? What is the game like? Do you play the soldier, or the spider? The game's title clarifies nothing either. (Nor, I should add, does Mobygames, yet.)
2) what is the connection, if any, between the visual spectacle presented and the accompanying soundtrack, no part of which has anything to do with rain, spiders, gears or war?
The TV spot just left me confused. Is it an ad for a game or is it a short film? The only hook I left with is that the contents of the game will dispatch human players effortlessly. Should that be sufficient incentive to motivate me to purchase it for my hypothetical Xbox 360?
It all seems the logical multimedia extension of using screen shots on the backs of box covers to sell games: this doesn't necessarily tell you anything about what the game is about or what the gameplay is like -- the game may not look anything like the commercial and almost certainly doesn't sound like it. However, our advertising division put this presentation together and decided it was most likely to elicit product consumption from the focus-grouped target market due to the abstract, pessimistic feeling it leaves you with. Six out of ten 25-year-old males preferred the short film to any information about the game's subject and style!
Of course, I don't understand most advertisements.
Игги Друге (46653) on 11/14/2006 4:41 PM · Permalink · Report
Advertisements for tampons rarely show menstruation, but smiling women in a good mood who ride horses and play golf. Just like this game ad of yours.
Pseudo_Intellectual (66360) on 11/15/2006 1:18 AM · Permalink · Report
I would assume that "Xbox 360", "Xbox 360 Live", or the "Jump in." phrase would allude someone to the fact that it is a game.
The closest I got to that from viewing the obviously not-in-game footage (due to the numerous unplayable camera angles -- dag, I need to see what I'm shooting, not THAT I'm shooting) in the ad was that it was demonstrating the graphics capabilities of the new platform -- highlighted by extra audio effects on the music when the 360 logo came on screen. If anything, it seemed more like an ad for the console than for the game.
JPaterson (9502) on 11/15/2006 1:29 AM · Permalink · Report
A lot of game TV spots are of cinematics; few are actually in-game footage. The purpose of the ad is to sell the game. Whether or not they do that by showing gameplay or pre-rendered videos doesn't matter.
If anything, it seemed more like an ad for the console than for the game.
Well, yeah, it is. An advertisement for a game leads to people who are interested which leads to people who may consider it a "system seller" who may buy the system when they purchase the game. And for those who already have the console, buying the game gives Epic money, which in turn gives a portion to Microsoft in licensing.
So... yes. It is an advertisement for the console.
Matt Neuteboom (976) on 11/15/2006 3:27 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Considering we dont have many video game commericals, let alone good commercials, I truly loved it. They could have blasted techno music with scenes from the game of him chainsawing, but instead they chose an atmospheric scene with a cool song. I can respect a video game commercial for that.
....and about the tampon commercials, it also seems to apply to other commercials as well.
My brother noticed one commercial in particular. It has a woman climbing to the top of a mountain, or riding a bike, or overcoming some great obstacle. Then she turns to the camera and says non-nonchalantly "I have genital herpes."
Its just like "wtf?", if you had genital herpes then why did I just see a scene of you climbing a f***ing mountain? Did you the mountain give you herpes or something? I also notice about these commercials that its ALWAYS a woman, and that she always has this super-hot husband.
And like the tampons, riding a bike on a sunny day isn't the image I get when I think of genital herpes...
Slug Camargo (583) on 11/15/2006 4:20 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Matt Neuteboom wrote--]a majority of people who have STD's are gays [/Q --end Matt Neuteboom wrote--] Well, that has to be one the top-5 most obtuse, bible-belt-like ignorant statements I've read in the last 20 centuries or so.
Actually, "the gay cancer" was the name they gave AIDS back in the early 80's, so I guess someone forgot to set their clocks to point to the 21st century.
Foxhack (32100) on 11/15/2006 7:07 PM · edited · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Matt Neuteboom wrote--]...despite the fact that a majority of people who have STD's are gays and needle sharers (or maybe I'm only thinking of AIDS?). [/Q --end Matt Neuteboom wrote--]The winner for the most ignorant comment made today is...
Sexual preference has NOTHING to do with anyone having a sexually transmitted disease. Several factors are taken into account - such as economic, social and religious status. There's a reason why AIDS is ravaging Africa: most people there don't know about condoms or don't bother using them at all.
Needle sharers are in fact one of the biggest causes of the disease spreading so easily, but they're not the only reason. All these little things add up, just like that.
Oh, down here, romantic walks on the beach and candlelight dinners are used in herpes commercials. And old people dancing, eating ice cream, and laughing... advertise Viagra.
Sorry for calling you ignorant. I don't know what other word to use... ignorance isn't that bad in Mexican Spanish, but I know how it's understood in American English...
Maw (832) on 11/15/2006 9:16 PM · Permalink · Report
I remember reading a stat that says 70% of STD victims are heterosexual. Still, I think there's probably a higher incidence of AIDS in the gay community. The anus just isn't designed for sexual intercourse and the disease matter has an easier time getting into the bloodstream.
(No-one seems to know how many people are gay, I've heard figures everywhere from 1% to 15% quoted).
Игги Друге (46653) on 11/15/2006 9:11 PM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Matt Neuteboom wrote--]I also notice about these commercials that its ALWAYS a woman, and that she always has this super-hot husband, despite the fact that a majority of people who have STD's are gays and needle sharers (or maybe I'm only thinking of AIDS?). [/Q --end Matt Neuteboom wrote--]
You forgot Africans.
Matt Neuteboom (976) on 11/16/2006 12:16 AM · Permalink · Report
I was actually going to reply something in my defense, but considering that anything and everything I say with just exacerbate the situation, I am going to delete the comments.
Zovni (10504) on 11/16/2006 2:15 AM · Permalink · Report
WTF??? You actually edited your post??? Man... well seems to me that there is no reason to make any big deal about this or the post, but just so you know I've seen n00bs getting banned for doing what you just did. You don't weasel out of a thread by un-doing your posts....
Matt Neuteboom (976) on 11/16/2006 2:39 AM · Permalink · Report
Well hey, the post was incorrect anyway. What I truly meant to say was way different than how I actually wrote it. I didn't mean any offense to gays but for some reason people took offense to it, and flamed me for no good reason. And so, I delete the message.
Thanks for the warning though, no idea that what I did was actually a taboo on a forum. It seems like if you post a message though, you should have your own right to take it back then, wouldn't it?.
Zovni (10504) on 11/16/2006 3:02 AM · Permalink · Report
Not so much taboo, not even nettiquete I would say. After all the only one who gets hurt by doing that is you and your credibility... I think I understand why you edited the post, but understand that seen from the other side it looks as if you couldn't take the heat and pressed the "weasel-eject" button and covered your tracks so no one ever figures what's the deal....
Really once again it becomes clear just what a nice and mellow place the MG forums are... as in most forums I know doing this kind of thing is grounds for banning (and there are many forums which simply don't allow you to edit posts). The general idea is that if you open your mouth... you'd better be ready to deal with what comes out.
Игги Друге (46653) on 11/16/2006 3:12 AM · Permalink · Report
This post used to say a lot of bad things about your mother, but I edited after the whole world could see.
Foxhack (32100) on 11/16/2006 7:51 AM · Permalink · Report
[Q --start Matt Neuteboom wrote--]Well hey, the post was incorrect anyway. What I truly meant to say was way different than how I actually wrote it. I didn't mean any offense to gays but for some reason people took offense to it, and flamed me for no good reason. And so, I delete the message.
Thanks for the warning though, no idea that what I did was actually a taboo on a forum. It seems like if you post a message though, you should have your own right to take it back then, wouldn't it?. [/Q --end Matt Neuteboom wrote--]It's not so much 'taboo'.
It's just that many people, myself included, are tired of seeing people believing the same stereotypes that have plagued certain groups for years. You said something that, well, was ignorant - and ignorance is simply a lack of knowledge. Meaning of course that you just didn't know what you were talking about, but that's easy to fix. Just read up on things. ;P
I'm sorry if I went off like that. But being what I am... well, it kinda got to me.
Indra was here (20755) on 11/17/2006 11:47 AM · edited · Permalink · Report
Now play nice boys or we'll have a sulking streak in our hands. Let people learn from their mistakes before you burn them.
If they don't, Zovni can let trumpets roar.