March 6, 2010
Bad Ads: Misrepresentation in
Video Game Advertising
By: Dan Liebman
If you’re reading this, chances are
you’ve been exposed to countless advertisements each year. When it comes to
video game ads, the television remains a major media outlet for showing off the
latest groundbreaking titles and photorealistic graphics. Of course, our modern
games have yet to reach true photorealism. Most games are rarely mistaken for
“real-life” footage. The transition between a living actor and a scene from a
video game is still quite jarring, as most audiences can still differentiate
between the two; something about the game footage just doesn’t “look quite
right.”
For this reason, it seems almost
necessary for game footage to be supplemented with something extra. For a
high-profile title like Mortal Kombat II, the high production values of the TV
spot are clear. Live actors sprint across the screen, donning exotic costumes in
a strange, appropriately “otherworldly” environment. It’s undeniably exciting
for those deeply entrenched in the MK mythos; for the uninitiated, it certainly
piques curiosity.
While the use of digitized sprite
characters helped to distinguish the unique look of Mortal Kombat, the marketing
budget is often seen as the only restraint in commercial production. As
technology improved, more advanced graphics could be rendered – at least for
pre-rendered footage, if not in the game engine itself. A few short years ago,
Electronic Arts thrilled audiences at the annual E3 show with their teaser
trailer for the latest Madden. The players moved fluidly across a field flecked
with flakes of snow, their faces richly detailed, puffing vapor as they barked
in the chilly air. Surely, this was the start of the next generation everyone
was hoping for.
Shortly thereafter, folks came to
learn that they weren’t seeing footage of the actual game, but a
computer-generated simulation. The footage was created for commercial purposes,
to entice and attract the consumer. Many became irate and blamed Electronic Arts
for misrepresenting their product. However, these tactics are nothing new for
the industry, and there is certainly no sign of letting up. Less turbulent was
the response to Halo 3’s famous Superbowl ad, which contained impressive
graphics that surpassed what players were getting in the game itself. None of it
mattered – the ad captured the adrenaline and atmosphere that Halo fans devoured
hungrily, and many seemed to simply enjoy it for what it was.
Far greater was the fuss made over
the trailer for Killzone, which underwhelmed critics and consumers alike after
being promoted with “artificial” footage. As Electronic Arts geared up for the
launch of Bioware’s highly anticipated Mass Effect 2, it was obvious their
marketing wasn’t about to hold back. Copious amounts of lush CGI flooded the air
waves, matching and perhaps surpassing the quality of the modern theatrical
blockbuster. As one of the best looking games on the market today, Mass Effect 2
shouldn’t have required much enhancement for the purpose of a short TV spot. It
seems many games are expected to have explosive, pre-rendered footage these
days.
It is possible that the discrepancy
between in-game footage and pre-rendered cinemas has been the cause of much
complaining. The most recent TV to come under fire was Dante’s Inferno, which
sported exclusively pre-rendered imagery far beyond the contents of the game
itself. Even if this technique becomes popular, there’s no getting past the fact
that it upsets people who shell out $60 on a game, only to be disappointed that
the product fell short of their expectations. Some would say this is the uglier
side of misleading advertising in the game industry.
At least some companies seem to be
taking responsibility for their product. Some ads show off appealing imagery,
while specifically (and sometimes proudly) telling the viewer that they’re
seeing “actual gameplay footage.” Take a glance at the ads for Uncharted 2, and
as anyone who has played the game can tell you, the game’s genuine graphics
leave little to be desired. While not quite as immersive, such commercials
effectively sample the quality of a truly great game, directly asking the
consumer to look at this game, and make their own judgments.
As games become more capable of
producing lavish graphics like these, the issue of “misrepresentation” may begin
to fade – at least in terms of graphical fidelity. The ideal advertisement will
capitalize on the greatest strengths of a game. At the same time, it is the
responsibility of the consumer to recognize the nature of the advertisement; it
is foolhardy to interpret any ad in its most literal sense. Sometimes, creative
symbolism is the only way to convey the intended themes and mechanics of a video
game. Whether the experience lives up to the lofty promises set by the TV spot
is a matter of personal interpretation.
