odiv posted:

Yeah, I started reading that, then skipped to the bit about how to get games, then decided I'd much rather spend money than whore myself out on social media sites for games.

I guess they could use the exposure though.

That reminds me, I need to pick up Shogo.

glug posted:

I bought Lionheart.. that last interplay game or somesuch. While it is now too late.. is it any good? Anything I should know?

AxeManiac posted:

Seriously, if you are worried about twittering something, you are doing it wrong. I tweeted the poo poo out of that. I want free games.

Swamp Zero posted:

They're not free. You just worked for their advertising as surely as walking around with their name on your t-shirt.

glug posted:

or posting in an internet thread about gog.com

Swamp Zero posted:

They're not free. You just worked for their advertising as surely as walking around with their name on your t-shirt.

Swamp Zero posted:

Not really, because you're on a forum because you want to talk about stuff relevant to the forum topic. Presumably, you're not following someone on twitter so you can read about whatever random advertisement he got talked into making.

odiv posted:

Yeah, I started reading that, then skipped to the bit about how to get games, then decided I'd much rather spend money than whore myself out on social media sites for games.

I guess they could use the exposure though.

That reminds me, I need to pick up Shogo.

AxeManiac posted:

Seriously, if you are worried about twittering something, you are doing it wrong. I tweeted the poo poo out of that. I want free games.

glug posted:

I guess that's where I'm an old luddite and you might not be. I don't use twitter, and if I did, I couldn't imagine having a bunch of followers because if I had anything worth a poo poo to tell any of my friends, I would just tell them, or use our private forums. I cannot for the life of me figure out why anyone not-famous and not a business has any reason to broadcast 140 characters about anything at all, or why anyone would follow them to hear that.

vvv - that's my point. It's not like we'd be advertising this crap to 1000s of people. You have more of a chance of bringing GOG to someone's attention just by posting in (and bumping) this thread.

FearOfABlackKnob posted:

The twitter thing took me 3 seconds to do.

FearOfABlackKnob posted:

Oh no the 10 spammers and half naked women who are promoting their websites in my twitter are victims. Nooooooo.

SixOhSix posted:

This style of advertising has been around forever in some form. Also, everyone who complains about social networking and this form of advertising should probably catch up with the rest of the world and read some scholarly material on it. Granted not everyone goes into marketing and will actually understand or care about this stuff, but before you bitch about it you should at least realize the genius behind the modern methods of advertising, because it sure as hell is better than the annoying drivel being pumped through television.

quote:

If, for instance, I want to sell video games, it is not sufficient to blanket the country with a direct appeal, such as:

"YOU, buy a GOG video game now! It is cheap. The best gamers play them. It will last for years."

The claims may all be true, but they are in direct conflict with the claims of other game sellers, and in indirect competition with the claims of a radio or a motor car, each competing for the consumer's dollar.

What are the true reasons why the purchaser is planning to spend his money on a new car instead of on a new game? Because he has decided that he wants the commodity called locomotion more than he wants the commodity called game? Not altogether. He buys a car, because it is at the moment the group custom to buy cars.

The modern propagandist therefore sets to work to create circumstances which will modify that custom. He appeals perhaps to the home instinct which is fundamental. He will endeavor to develop public acceptance of the idea of a game room in the home. This he may do, for example, by organizing an exhibition of video game systems designed by well known manufacturers who themselves exert an influence on the buying groups. He enhances the effectiveness and prestige of these systems by putting in them rare and exotic materials, like Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. Then, in order to create dramatic interest in the exhibit, he stages an event or gathering. To this ceremony key people, persons known to influence the buying habits of the public, such as a famous designer, a popular artist, and a well-respected manufacturer, are invited. These key persons affect other groups, lifting the idea of the video game system to a place in the public consciousness which it did not have before. The juxtaposition of these leaders, and the idea which they are dramatizing, are then projected to the wider public through various publicity channels. Meanwhile, influential architects have been persuaded to make the music room an integral architectural part of their plans with perhaps a specially charming niche in one corner for the video game. Less influential architects will as a matter of course imitate what is done by the men whom they consider masters of their profession. They in turn will implant the idea of the game room in the mind of the general public.

The game room will be accepted because it has been made The Thing. And the man or woman who has a game room, or has arranged a corner of the parlor as a game corner, will naturally think of buying a game. It will come to him as his own idea.

Under the old salesmanship the manufacturer said to the prospective purchaser, "Please buy a game." The new salesmanship has reversed the process and caused the prospective purchaser to say to the manufacturer, "Please sell me a game."

Swamp Zero posted:

It's not so harmful in your case But I guess not everyone uses twitter like that? Or maybe they do I don't know!


It's genius therefore you should not complain? Is that what you're trying to say?

It's not better than television advertising except if you mean better at advertising. Which it is. You can filter out television advertising, you can't filter out every random friend on a social site that got conned into being an advertising bot to his personal relations.

SixOhSix posted:

^^ welp that covers it pretty well also.


You can complain, but the instant response you will get from anyone that has knowledge in marketing and communications will simply be 'if you don't like it, then clearly you're not the target audience.' It's cheap, effective advertising. In actuality you're participating in it by posting in this very thread in reality. Even if it's griping, you're bumping the thread, increasing post count, and causing it greater traffic that will cause information about the site to reach more eyeballs. Hell, even not talking about specifically GoG, you most likely are unknowingly advertising a multitude of companies and products for free. The only reason you have a spite about this, is because you're made more aware of it actually, and that's simply because they're giving the opportunity to pay you in some form (if you're lucky, granted).
Think about it, in reality a good chunk of this forum is free advertising for a lot of products.

Swamp Zero posted:

That's also the response I'd get from a genius rapist hedge fund manager or other type of criminal.

I don't get if you're defending it, just challenging my knowledge of the subject (why?), which admittedly isn't that much, or just being excited about something you learned and want to talk about it. I don't have to "think about it", I already thought about it a long time ago, and so have most people around here. I know it sounds exciting but it isn't really all that complicated to get the general idea.

Also no, you're incorrect about the second part of your post. There is a difference in me bumping the thread or someone posting twitter advertisements. I am, and everyone else in this thread, is interested in GOG. He is, you could say, explicitly subscribed to the subject matter. A random dude on your twitter list isn't.

Swamp Zero posted:

It's not so harmful in your case But I guess not everyone uses twitter like that? Or maybe they do I don't know!


It's genius therefore you should not complain? Is that what you're trying to say?

It's not better than television advertising except if you mean better at advertising. Which it is. You can filter out television advertising, you can't filter out every random friend on a social site that got conned into being an advertising bot to his personal relations.

Jinnigan posted:

If you think you're at all exempt or uninfluenced by advertising then you are completely unaware of the way advertising works. But that's about the norm, since that's the whole goal of modern advertising.

http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html

doctorfrog posted:

I hate to contribute to a thread derail, but this headline on arstechnica.com seemed derail-relevant: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/07/sony-responds-to-nintendos-3d-attacks.ars

"As Nintendo mocks Sony's 3D approach, Sony says the two firms should cooperate to make 3D commonplace. But their approaches are at odds: Nintendo wants to sell you a gaming system, while Sony wants to sell you a new living room."

It also seem true these days that there's a lot more interest in creating cute little marketplaces to sell virtual products, than actual products themselves, such that the stores themselves outweigh the importance of the product. The products are more like doorways that lead you into gift shops, like how Disneyland rides empty out into toy stores. Name a device, and you can bet it has a Tom Nook's in it, selling virtual crap.

And of course, both Sony and Nintendo are selling game 'living rooms,' the 3DS is just another one you'll be carrying around with you.

That said, I don't really care, I just want some good games I haven't had a chance to play yet, and GOG delivers. I'm a whore. I'm over it.

glug posted:

I bought Lionheart.. that last interplay game or somesuch. While it is now too late.. is it any good? Anything I should know?

Periodiko posted:

Lionheart's devs more or less had the first area created, and then they ran out of money and frantically created a bunch of lame dungeons and rushed the game out the door. So no, it sucks.

SixOhSix posted:

That really described the overall level of work done in Interplay's later years. The most unbelievable is the one interview Retronauts got with someone who was part of the Star Trek game they were working on right before the whole company collapsed.

CaudaVenenus posted:

Why did they collapse by the way ? They had some decent licenses, what was/were the games that put them under ?

SixOhSix posted:

Veotax posted:

I'm such a big Journeyman fan that I even brought an old Mac to play Pegasus Prime; the remake of Journeyman 1, after my Mac emulator stopped working after upgrading to Windows 7.

tentaclesex posted:

I only ever played the original Journeyman (and I loved it). How was Pegasus Prime?

I'm gonna go buy J2.

Veotax posted:

Very nice; I like it more than the original game, personally.

Jinnigan posted:

hey. hey guy. read my post. the post that talks about advertising? that post. read it, guy.

AxeManiac posted:

I'm not reading it unless you put it on a shirt.

I'd totally wear a GOG shirt, free games or not.

Overwined posted:

OMG you guys stop saying G*G you're just giving those corporate schills free advertising!!! Now I have to go to my freshman level "Radical Communism in a Post-Modern World" seminar!!