Game developers need to stop wasting our time with trailers

Default_picture
Monday, June 25, 2012
EDITOR'S NOTEfrom Sam Barsanti

I do love an exciting trailer, but Jon has a good point about how poorly they actually convey anything about a game. I know I’ve bought a few games based on fun demos, but I can’t remember the last time I bought one based solely on an exciting trailer....

Dude Space

E3 2012 was packed full of trailers and controlled demos. While that’s great for certain audiences, capturing the mindshare of dedicated gamers requires a different approach.

The ‘Dude Space’ moniker floating around after EA showed Dead Space 3 spread like wildfire and did nothing to help already waning enthusiasm for the franchise. Gears of War: Judgement received similar rolling eyes when it was revealed that it will, in fact, simply be more Gears of War. I personally resigned to apathy when Watch Dogs and The Last of Us -- which had been looking stellar up until that point -- decided to pull out the guns and deploy the same old chest-high walls.

However, there was always a refrain of, “Well, maybe they just need to show that for the trailers,” and I think that’s the root of the problem. Publishers need to actually show demos to enthusiast audiences like us and leave their trailers for TV.

For the 16 to 25-year-old “dudebros” who are often seen as the core audience for games, trailers work great. The marketing team knows what they want: dudes shooting dudes, dudes fist-bumping dudes, dudes screaming at dudes to shoot more dudes, and probably some sweeping orchestral piece to accompany all of it. This formula works because that audience isn’t consuming games for games’ sake. They’re consuming them as part of their action-blockbuster entertainment. To simplify, that trailer for Dead Space 3 is competing far more with Ridley Scott’s Prometheus than, say, a game like Guacamelee.

 

For that audience, the product is demonstrated perfectly. They’re comparing the entertainment value of that game to a movie, TV show or any other similar use of their time. They are totally legitimate consumers (let’s not try and declare superiority here) but they are different than the audience that is listening to every announcement at E3, and probably different than the audience that is reading this article.

How do you decide whether or not you want to pick up a book at the store? You read the blurb on the back. What if you want to go see a film on Friday night? You watch a trailer. In both of those cases, the experience of the piece may be compressed down but the medium still stays the same. For those who value games in the same way that book-lovers value novels, it’s important to see the game in a playable form, or better yet, to get their own hands on it.

Trailers are popular with advertising teams because they have almost no barrier to entry. You click on a YouTube link from anywhere in the world that has some kind internet and eventually a brief section of the game will be shown to you. Every frame has been meticulously selected, and because of that it’s impossible to damage the experience. This is as opposed to the other option, which involves downloading a few gigabytes of data, having a system to run the game, and taking the time to actually play a bit of it. The developers are also allowing players to access an unfinished build of the game where the experience cannot be directly controlled.

X-COM Enemy Unknown

What publishers need to understand is that, while a low barrier to entry is necessary for mass audiences, it’s not a bad idea to still cater to your die-hard fans during events like E3. I can guarantee you that the new batch of XCOM games did not rise up just because some CEO tripped over a stack of the old classics lying around on a dusty hard drive.

Enemy Unknown -- which was once seen as the off-shoot strategy companion to the upcoming first-person shooter -- is now the series’ new debut, and it doesn’t take a great leap of logic to attribute that to the die-hard fan base demanding a more traditional XCOM reboot. 

But what about Dead Space’s fans? Well, they're just going to be left wondering why the horror franchise they loved so dearly has now become another Gears of War. With those horror fans gone, I have to wonder how Dead Space is going to compare to the dozens of other run-and-gun shooters on the market. My guess? Not well.

 
Problem? Report this post
JON SOLMUNDSON'S SPONSOR
Comments (10)
Default_picture
June 25, 2012

Great article!  Couldn't agree more.

Ever since publishers stopped making demos (on disc---remember those times) I've stopped purchasing games, unless they are highly recommended by like-gamers or a gaming community.  I was never swayed by trailers into making a purchase.  I appreciate the artistry, but it never traslated to a purchase.  Specially nowadays where most games run on a track in order to trigger a cut-scene.  For example, COD/MOH.  Now I save $60/game, since most of the Single Player will be available on YouTube for me to follow/ experience the storyline.  It doesn't matter who played it, or how awesome the player who recorded it, it all have the same results.  Triggered by the cutscenes.

Hence, I appreciate Indie Developers like Blackfoot Studio, who are creating an old-school-Ghost Recon + Rainbow Six circa Red Storm.  As a matter of fact, the developer is a former Red Storm employee.  He and his compadre of three, are making a FPS, that has multiple path.  So each one has a different experience.  Hence, up to now, its rare to see a Ghost Recon Walk-thru, because, GR, offered multiple ways to play the game. 
Hence it was important to Red Storm to release a demo, for a gaming Community to understand what the game was about, and not how it looks on a 3-minute trailer. 

FPS shooters should give support to Blackfoot Studio's Ground Branch Kickstarter http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/670743543/ground-branch so they get their FPS gaming back.

And no, I do not work for Blackfoot Studio!  I just appreciate a game developer who doesn't bulls1t me with trailers.  Other Developers should follow suit also.

Default_picture
June 25, 2012

Personally, I use actual gameplay to judge a game.  Trailers are often pretty, but often useless in telling me what I want to know about a game.  Quick Looks from Giant Bomb are my favorite way to decide whether or not to buy a game.

I may be different but I don't read blurbs on a book cover to pick a book or watch a trailer to go see a movie.  I do a bunch of research into something before I buy something.  Maybe that's just me. :)

Default_picture
June 26, 2012

Ah, that's totally fair, though recently I've become more fond of going into experiences as 'blind' as possible. Of course, those Quick Looks are a notable exception... I enjoy them far too much to forgo watching almost every single one (eventually).

Lolface
June 25, 2012
I'm sorry, but I'm terribly confused by this article. The title and editor's note imply that the article is all about the irrelevancy of game trailers (all of them? cg teasers?), but the article is mostly about your disaproval with the direction that Dead Space 3 is taking. That's fine and everything (and I happen to agree), but what does that have to do with trailers? While EA did show a trailer for Dead Space 3 during their press conference, they also presented a live on-stage demonstration of the game(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIoVusUQNHo). In fact, I'm willing to bet that you formed your opinion about the game based upon the gameplay shown during that 7 minute on-stage demo rather than a 90 second trailer. Also, both Last of Us and Watch Dogs, which you claim to be apathetic about, were also presented as live on-stage demonstrations, with actual gameplay shown. In fact, the only game mentioned that was shown at e3 in trailer form only, thus a complete waste of time, was Gears of War: Judgement. So again, I don't know what this article is about. As a commentary about the direction Dead Space 3 is heading and how EA is changing it to conform to more popular shooter standards, the article works fine (especailly the closing paragraph).  However, as an article about trailers being poor marketing tools, there isn't much of an argument being made.
Default_picture
June 26, 2012

Unfortunately all of the 'demos' shown to the public are controlled segments of the game just as hand-picked by marketing staff as the footage you see in trailers. I am of the belief that those demos need to be made available to players.

For publishers that's a pretty big risk. They're opening unfinished code up to an international audience who are free to tear it to shreds, analyse every ounce of it and display all their findings in videos and articles.

As a current student of marketing, I have to disagree with their conservatism. The goodwill earned by giving players more than is expected far outweighs the drawbacks of having an unfinished product in circulation -- you can see that in the success of Minecraft, or more arguably Skyrim.

Though it didn't make it to the final article, I proposed 'cloud gaming' services like OnLive as the perfect method to provide very short, low barrier demos possibly during events like E3.

Yes, it's not feasible for every game, but a 10-15 minute snippet of gameplay in my hands would hopefully do much to quell my concerns, or at least justify them.

Default_picture
June 26, 2012

I agree.

Demos are the only way to get me interrested in a new game, unless I already happen to like the developper (in wich case the trailer doesn't do any good either except spoil things).

CG teasers are plain lies. Even gameplay trailers are useless: you don't know how much of is is scripted, how it is representedative of the rest, how it controls etc.

Demos, reviews or reputation are the only way to go.

Default_picture
June 26, 2012

I actually despise demoes, they usually make those just as controlled and tantilizing. I've purchased many games based on demoes that mislead me as to their quality and overall game layout. Not all deomes are evil, such as random sandbox demo for crackdown, but I don't trust them on the whole.

I don't usually get games when they come out unless I'm already convinced its coming from a world-cass developer and is the rarity that deserves the benefit of the doubt on release day. So my new strategy is to wait until people start posting walkthroughs on youtube, then I got to a random part of the game somewhere in the middle and just watch.

You get to the see the game at its purest. This has led me to many more informed purchases.

Jon_ore
June 26, 2012

I have another complaint about video game trailers: There are too damn many of them. I wonder whether people are really more likely to buy a game after a $25 million marketing campaign has been pumped into it.

Case in point: the Avengers film has all of two full-length trailers, plus cuts and teasers thereof. Gametrailers.com has 25 trailers on the page for Mass Effect 3. TWENTY-FIVE. Many of them just pimping out whatever store-exclusive pre-order bonus was available. Is that really necessary? Maybe the super-high threshhold of when a videogame is profitable could be mitigated by a less spastic marketing campaign.

100media_imag0065
June 26, 2012

I mostly ignore game trailers personally. They do nothing to convince me to buy a game, and more often than not will convince me to not buy a game. Mostly, game trailers just make me angry. They do three things inparticular that really drive me nuts.

1) Live action. Dear God do I hate live action trailers. It tells me nothing about the game. It doesn't show me the game, how it plays, what it looks like, who the characters are. Nothing. All it tells me is that the game isn't looking good, so they have to use live action to tout the game. Pre-rendered trailers and trailers that only show cutscenes are also a massive turn off to me.

2) Showing off all the good parts. Movies do this as well. Why the hell would you show off so many cool parts in your trailer and give everything away!? If I had a dime for everytime a scene in a game that should have been incredible simply fell flat because I had already seen it in a trailer, I'd have a hundred bucks.

3) False advertising. How many times have you seen a trailer for a game, bought said game, and realize that it is little like the trailer. Dead Island is a great example. But there are many others. Deus Ex: Human Revolution is another great example. I understand that you want the game to look as cool as possible, but manipulating the in-game camera and framing the action to make it look more bad ass, while at the same time not telling us that we won't actually be seeing or playing the game that way, is false advertising.

I do have to disagree with you putting The Last of Us in the same category as Gears of War. The last of Us is not a cover shooter. When you do find weapons, which from what they have previewed isn't common, you only have a few bullets. Most of the time, you are without weapons.

Unlike Gears, the cover system in the game is mainly designed to actually hide you, unlike 99% of cover in other games. Cover here is used to hide from enemies, sneak around them and flank them with whatever melee weapon you may be holding. It's also worth pointing out that you can play the game without killing, or using a gun.

This is the main reason why I don't agree with putting The Last of Us in the same vein as Gears. Gears is a straight up third person cover shooter. You can't not kill everything in Gears. In The Last of Us, you can totally ignore the few guns, and even sneak past enemies instead of fighting them. Those two games couldn't be more different in terms of combat and strategy.

Default_picture
June 28, 2012

Sometimes it's better to just watch gameplay trailers to find out what a game and it's gameplay is about, rather than just reading about a preview article about a particular game that does a poor job of describing the gameplay mechanics with press release screenshots.

Even if the gameplay elements in the trailer are handpicked, it still does a far better job of telling me what the game is about than any preview articles, also sometimes you can see where the tone of the game is going from the trailer. A humurous game with a equally witty trailer is sometimes enough for me to get a buzz over it, so yeah gameplay trailers are still pretty useful 

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.