What is the story with those dominion ads??

[Ironhawk]

Ok, I dont know if anyone else posted about this, but what is the story with those Dominions ads with the scantily clad chick? Or the one of just a picture of her legs?? I mean, yeah she's hot and thats great but wth does that have to do with Dominions? Is this just a stupid marketing stunt then? Am I the only one who finds it offensive?

[Baalz]

lol, here's the 7 page long discussion:

http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=593480

[Tuidjy]

You got it the wrong way around. It's a stupid marketing stunt, but the woman is hot.

[Ironhawk]

LOL man yeah did I miss the thread on this one!

I love the suggestion that she should be hugging a furry Bog Beast doll. That would definitely make the ad move from the realm of offensive to just funny for me http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif At least it would have some kind of relevant content.

[Carkaton]

Yeah, ask budweiser or godaddy or doritoes if advertising with hot chicks that has nothing to do with the product is a stupid marketing stunt.

[Ironhawk]

In those ads, at the least, they have some product imagery or some other kind of attempt to link the women with the product. Here its just stripped bare to into some kind of ridiculous pretense for advertising.

[NTJedi]

Well I estimate the shrapnel marketing team examined the characteristics of gamers which enjoy TBS games. Based on the DOM_3 ads I can only assume the marketing team noticed 99.8% of the TBS gamers were male. Knowing males have a strong visual drive they decided to give it a test. I estimate within 6 months the marketing team will know whether or not it's working... if it's working then we'll see the ads continue.

Personally I feel a more successful ad would have a photo of one of the geniuses within history or a wise war figure within history combined with a simple phrase:
"Here's a strategy game which would even challenge {historical genius}. "

[Cerlin]

Well obviously they are trying to take advantage of the stereotype that gamers, who are assumed to all be pre-pubescent boys living at home, cannot resist the siren lure of a half naked woman. No matter what she sells. I have been offended by this even when I WAS a younger, and the feeling only gets stronger. Its not that the woman arent attractive, its like Ironhawk says, the blatant commercialism is offensive to assume that we are all so easily manipulated.

[Wrana]

Well, we ARE easily manipulated. BUT - these ads are shown to people who already bought the game for the most part. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
I would take it in the context of Annette's pseudo-news releases about "Succubi in Heat", etc. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif If she wants to use her position to make fun of everybody, herself and this position included - that's fine by me. However, I have a pair of corporate-hippies among my friends, so may be too omnivorous... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[DonCorazon]

Hot woman who wants the quintessential geek product is what makes this ad funny and not just gratuitous.

[Renojustin]

It's not funny. It's not effective. It's just plain stupid.

As Turn Based Strategy players in general, and Dominions 3 players in particular, I think I speak for all of us when I say that we prefer substance over graphics.

[vfb]

According to the Shrapnel Blog, it was (is?) very effective, at least in terms of click-through rates. Sorry, lost the link to Scott's blog post. In marketing, the ends justify the means, and besides, no bog beasts were harmed in the making of the ads.

It's funny to me because it's completely blatant. There is no attempt at all to even try linking the sexual exploitation to the game.

Anything that contributes to additional sales and the success of Illwinter and Shrapnel is good IMO. I have sufficient faith in the developers to believe that this marketing campaign is going to have no influence on the game itself.

[Wokeye]

I think they are quite ironic?, playful and bloody funny. The bog beast versions are even better.

Yes they are stupid, dont at all relate to Dom3, and are potentially offensive, but the fact that we have a 7 page post plus this post about them means they get attention and hold attention. Bingo!

[S.R. Krol]

vfb said:
According to the Shrapnel Blog, it was (is?) very effective, at least in terms of click-through rates. Sorry, lost the link to Scott's blog post.



Here it is. (http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/blog/2008/04/06/)

[lch]

vfb said:
I have sufficient faith in the developers to believe that this marketing campaign is going to have no influence on the game itself.


A few changes that are going to happen during the next patches so the game becomes more appealing to the target audience: Seduction and Corruption will be played out in some kinda dating sim fashion. Blood hunting will be played out in some other kind of mini-game as well (no details) (especially not about how the Sanguine Dowsing Rod is going to be involved). Users can pay for optional extra content which upgrades their boring plain units with cool stuff to impress their unsuspecting MP enemies, like steam-powered chainsaws, nail guns and dragon-based airstrikes. The game will be shipped with a Dorito XL bag and a cool Bud light.

[lch]

S.R. Krol said:

vfb said:
According to the Shrapnel Blog, it was (is?) very effective, at least in terms of click-through rates. Sorry, lost the link to Scott's blog post.



Here it is. (http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/blog/2008/04/06/)


I *did* mention that I've been clicking on the ads 25 times whenever I saw them, and I usually never click on them at all. When I was still under the impression that it was supposed to be some kinda april's fools joke, that is.

P.S.: Plus, those new ads are the only thing that I see. This sweet Firefox extension named AdBlock+ filters out all the other stuff by default, and that extension is extremely popular, if not mandatory. So other people might just not see any of the other ads, too, and thus no clickey.

P.P.S.: Oh and regarding this piece from the blog: "Reaction to the ads have been extremely positive [...] there’s a nice forum thread currently at five pages [...] You even have one community member who changed his avatar to the ad for a while and is now using it as his sig, currently slightly modified." - the word you are looking for is "sarcasm".

[DonCorazon]

Renojustin said:
It's not funny. It's not effective. It's just plain stupid.

As Turn Based Strategy players in general, and Dominions 3 players in particular, I think I speak for all of us when I say that we prefer substance over graphics.



Well funny is a matter of opinion in most countries luckily.

I tend not to take things too seriously and find it amusing to see a beautiful scantily clad woman craving an extremely complex turn based computer strategy game that I cannot even convince some of my geekier friends to attempt to learn. And I admit that I am probably at my geekiest when I spend time combing through the forums trying to figure out the best way to kit out Rhuax, Elemental King of Fire to help aid the Jomonese nation fend off the evil Lord Fiddlesticks of Pythium.

But hey, if you want to be all serious and let this offend your sensibilities because we are braniac strategy gamers only interested in intellectual content then cheers! You are definitely in the target demographic.

[Lingchih]

I've always taken the as a joke, and find them quite funny.

[AlgaeNymph]

Although the model in the first ad has nice legs, I'd also like to see pictures of scantly clad men, pretty-boy underwear model types. Once you have naked boys, it won't be sexist anymore. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Hope Scott's blog post alerts him of new comments.

[PvK]

Gee, I enjoyed it as a parody of advertising.

[vfb]

DryaUnda said:
Although the model in the first ad has nice legs, I'd also like to see pictures of scantly clad men, pretty-boy underwear model types. Once you have naked boys, it won't be sexist anymore. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif.



That's been taken care of:

http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Number=595375&bodyprev=#Post595375

[Renojustin]

My biggest gripe with the ad isn't the obnoxious patronism or blatant, and ineffective, attempt at being 'sexy', it's the fact that the woman in question looks like some kind of retarded bondage Borg.

[Endoperez]

Renojustin said:
My biggest gripe with the ad isn't the obnoxious patronism or blatant, and ineffective, attempt at being 'sexy', it's the fact that the woman in question looks like some kind of retarded bondage Borg.



Please don't prove him wrong by posting retarded bondage Borg porn.


These ads are visible everywhere on Shrapnel Games' forum. The fact that the Dominions community ALSO sees them is insignificant - the target audience seems to be people who have bought other games published by Shrapnel Games. I'd much rater like to see these ads outside Shrapnel site, because most gamers here like hardcore strategy games and have heard of Dominions. People outside this community might or might not follow a link like that, but they might wonder what Dominions 3 is. If they bothered to read about it and had ever played any kind of fantasy kingdom game, chances are they'd be interested, because the game is just so awesome.

I also expect that Shrapnel knows what kind of people buy and play Dominions. I think it's mostly people over 25 and under 40, with people under 16 and over 50 totalling under 10% altogether.

[Kristoffer O]

vfb said:
I have sufficient faith in the developers to believe that this marketing campaign is going to have no influence on the game itself.



Oh dear, it has had an effect!
I'm sorry! There will be some male nudity in the new patch http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Sombre]

We've already got the alternate costume of the lord of fertility. Do we really need more wang? Of course we do.

[VedalkenBear]

Speaking for myself, I find the ads rather tasteless.

As far as 'hot women' liking these games, there is no logical reason why they shouldn't; one of my friends in high school was the head of the Dance Team (and looked it), and was the Captain of the Hurricanettes at UM her senior year there... and majored in Computer Engineering. If she didn't graduate at least Magna Cum Laude, I will be very much surprised.

[Ironhawk]

Yeah, even after all the commentary about how its a joke and whatnot, I still find the ad offensive. I think if they'd just made even the slightest head-nod to dominions, like the Bog Beast furry doll or something, I would have been able to swallow it.

And to your comment Wokeye: yeah I understand the advertising concept of "any attention is good attention", but in this case I cant say I agree with it. I mean, this ad campaign has lowered the degree of respect that I have for Shrapnel as a whole. How can a campaign be considered a success if it is alienating a repeat buyer?

[Evil Dave]

I found the ad (well, the "fluttering corner" bit) distracting, and added shrapnel to my noscript block list. In that sense, the ad has been a bad for them, since I no longer see any of their ads.

General hint to ad guys: annoying the customer is bad.

[DonCorazon]

You guys must get offended a lot if you live in the US. Not sure how you could even watch TV here given all the programming you must find offensive, if the Dom ad falls into that category.

[Sombre]

I don't find it offensive, I find it lame. I have little respect for people who would advertise dom3 that way, regardless of how successful.

[Ironhawk]

DC, I see what you are saying - and the truth is that I dont really watch that many ads on TV (thanks to my DVR). But that said, I have come to expect low-brow advertising for low-brow products like Budweiser, etc. And occassionally I will get offended at something else anyway. Its just sad to think that Shrapnel, an indy game publisher is choosing to resort to this kind of advertising when they arent even competing in the mainstream space.

[DonCorazon]

I guess I see it more as ironic (the juxtaposition of pin-up model craving uber-geek product) and thus humourous as opposed to gratuitous.

The two bikini clad women fighting in a Bud commercial is what I'd call just gratuitous (that said, I must confess to enjoying that commercial http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif.

There is certainly more titillating material on the web than the Dom 3 ads, but I respect that people might find all this offensive.

Luckily for me I find it funny. I don't like feeling offended.

[Saulot]

Despite not caring for the ads one way or the other personally, IMHO there is no such thing as bad publicity.

As far as I can tell ads which are humorous, controversial, divisive, mysterious, or otherwise memorable, are the most successful.

You're all noticing the ads, thinking about them, and some of you are even physically taking the effort to talk about them.

Threads like this one, and the previous one (which was 7 pages afaik) which were started to complain about the ads, just reinforces whatever reasoning there was to create them in the first place.

Edit:
(This is very much a win/win for the ad creators, because whether you like the ads or dislike the ads, you're feeling something. This reminds somewhat of Oblivion (a la vaultdweller), where because it was called an Action/RPG every Action part that was off and complained about was replied with "duh it's an RPG!", and every RPG part that was off was replied with "duh it's an Action game".)

[Sombre]

In what sense? We all already own the game so who cares how much we talk about the ads on here? It proves nothing. To someone who has never played dom3 (a prospective buyer) there's nothing to talk about and nothing controversial. Just another crappy advert. It isn't like I'm going to be pointing my friends to the adverts to convince them to buy dom3 either. If anything I'd now be wary of pointing a prospective buyer to this site without telling them to please ignore the stupid adverts.

I don't buy that "look you're talking about them, they must work" logic. They'd get even more reaction on here if the women were naked riding crocodiles covered in jam and eating flaming tophats with chopsticks. Does that mean they should have done that? Well yeah I guess it does.

[Wrana]

To Ich:

so the game becomes more appealing to the target audience: Seduction and Corruption will be played out in some kinda dating sim fashion. Blood hunting will be played out in some other kind of mini-game as well (no details)


It was the 1st April post, for Cthulhu's sake! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
You may find the humor in question a sick one, but don't say that you didn't get it from acronims included (the engine mentioned here was named LAME, iirc!).
As for ad-munchers, etc., it just seems that they are not used by enough people to enter into equation. Probably if we would advocate their use actively enough... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Saulot]

Well yes, we all bought a copy, and some even more than one (belated Christmas gift for my brother, heh) but the shrapnel site does cater to more than just Dom3 players, though it is debatable how interested others would be in Dom3, after all historical wargaming is quite different from Fantasy TBS, and quite different from Scifi 4x.

[vfb]

I'm pretty sure the ads appear on other sites. I found out about Dom3 by clicking through an ad on the AC or Civ forums, can't remember which one.

[lch]

Wrana said:
It was the 1st April post, for Cthulhu's sake! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
You may find the humor in question a sick one, but don't say that you didn't get it from acronims included (the engine mentioned here was named LAME, iirc!).


Huh, what are you referring to? The Aprils fools forum thread? I didn't really read that one, just glanced over it.

I was just ad-libbing. But if things progress in that direction you may soon crown me as the great visionary that foretold those changes.

[VedalkenBear]

I can tell you this much totally honestly. If I didn't already own Dom3, and I saw that ad, I would be mightily disinclined to purchase it.

This is also true for any product IW makes in the future, since I assume the ad ran with their consent. If not, IW, please let me know.

[lch]

IW was as surprised as the rest of the forum members. I'd suppose that Illwinter is taking care about developing the product, and Shrapnel of everything else, including decisions regarding how to advertise and market it.

[Ballbarian]

You guys must get offended a lot if you live in the US. Not sure how you could even watch TV here given all the programming you must find offensive, if the Dom ad falls into that category.



I am in the "not offended" and "indifferent" camp, but I turned off cable TV. Pure crap that I could no longer watch with my 2 young daughters even on the network channels. Now I am either working on the computer, or for entertainment we will rent movies or watch select programs on hulu. I get a good laugh when someone at work refers to one of the latest and greatest reality shows and I get to respond "Never heard of it." http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Ironhawk]

Yeah I concur with VedalkenBear. If I was a prospective buyer and happened to be curious about the hot chick ad appearing on <insert random forum here> and clicked on it only to find Dominions 3. I would be like ... "was this a joke?" and then, realizing that it wasnt I would think to myself "what the f--k is wrong with these people?" and then immediately close my browser.

That is in fact the thought process that went through my head anyway, now that I think about it. Heh.

[S.R. Krol]

lch said:
P.P.S.: Oh and regarding this piece from the blog: "Reaction to the ads have been extremely positive [...] there’s a nice forum thread currently at five pages [...] You even have one community member who changed his avatar to the ad for a while and is now using it as his sig, currently slightly modified." - the word you are looking for is "sarcasm".



That's the thing though Ich, ultimately it doesn't matter what the reason is/was--love it, hate it, feel it's clever, feel it's the dumbest thing you've ever seen--when the final result is that it's sparking a reaction. I mean Hell, we've already had one thread go on for seven pages and now we're in a second thread at three pages on the ads. So hey, it works.

***

A general comment to some other posts (not by you Ich, just want to make a catch-all posting here) concerning whether we advertise elsewhere. We do. Obviously on our site we're going to be pimping our products, hence nothing but Shrap banner ads, but we hit a number of sites with varying types of ads so there are plenty of "normal" Dom 3 ads out there. In fact, we have had some "normal" Dom 3 ads rotating on BoardGameGeek.

[DonCorazon]

How are those BGG ads doing? I tried to refer some people to Dom 3 on a thread over there dedicated to the upcoming Conan fantasy war board game but got jumped on by a some serious geeks who only wanted to discuss Conan even though there is little to discuss since the game has yet to be released.

[S.R. Krol]

Things may have picked up recently DonCorazon but at least initially it's been very disappointing. ::shrug:: Unfortunately it's always a gamble. Places you think should provide a great response provide nary a peep, while some backwater IP address suddenly doubles your exposure. I recall we once got a lot of traffic for the game based on some comments someone made on of all things, a political blog.

[DonCorazon]

I may pipe in over there again but this time will pick a general thread and see if I get some traction.

The thing is they are generally pretty uptight over there. A while back, a faction broke off to form the Fortress Ameritrash blog partly out of protest to some of the snooty Eurogaming vibe of the website. It was those guys that gave me the idea that Dom3 should advertise on a boardgaming website because one of them posted a review on a PC game. That might be a useful place to pick up a few more customers.

[S.R. Krol]

Agreed. BGG is an excellent database source, but personally I think it leaves something to be desired as a community. Woe be to you if you make a Geeklist that doesn't pass muster!

Michael Barnes (of F:AT fame, or if you prefer, infamy) actually was (or may still be doing) a board game column for Gameshark. I will admit that I'm not a fan of Barnes although it has nothing to do with all the forum drama that he's been involved in. Here in Atlanta he was part owner of a game store, Atlanta Games Factory, that promised 30% off all their games. They were trying to compete with places like Boulder, Thoughthammer, etc, but as a retail store. Great idea, only problem was in reality it was only a small selection of games that were discounted. It felt a lot like bait-and-switch, and then the store imploded when one of the owners locked the others out and yet more drama, only this time in real life, ensued...

[DonCorazon]

SR Krol: Yes, it was Barnes that wrote the review for the PC game I was referring to - can't remember the name but it was post-apocalypse war game. I don't know much about him personally but he was pretty prolific and at times funny.

Interesting. Well, I will keep trying to push the game. Would like to see commercial success to motivate further development so I am not just altruistic or a fanboy but hope to live to see Dom 4 or other cool indie games.

And I like to support small businesses, especially those with hot girl ads. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[sector24]

I'm surprised by a lot of the responses here. I am totally desensitized to advertising, seeing as how you encounter it everywhere these days. I look at those ads and think to myself, "Wow, that girl in the black dress has really skinny ankles...what do I want for dinner?" It does not even approach the point of clever, lame, offensive, or any other emotional response. I wonder if you guys are genuinely offended or if you're just waiting for the patch to come out. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[S.R. Krol]

You're thinking of Neuroshima Hex. (http://fortressameritrash.blogspot.com/2007/07/ameritrash-from-poland-neuroshima-hex.html)

[Ironhawk]

S.R. Krol said:
I mean Hell, we've already had one thread go on for seven pages and now we're in a second thread at three pages on the ads. So hey, it works.



This statement is a total trivialization of the point tho, Krol. You are making the grand assumption that since the ad has provoked debate that it will be insured to also bring higher Dominions/other Shrapnel Game sales. How can you just assume this when at least myself and several others have said we were offended by it and have lost respect for Shrapnel?? You'd think our opinion would actually count for something, given that we have proven we are loyal repeat customers...

[quantum_mechani]

Just to play the devils advocate here... an add featuring a swastika would no doubt generate a lot of threads and and discussion, while not necessarily being a good thing.

[vfb]

In accordance with Godwin's Law, I declare this thread dead!

[S.R. Krol]

@Quantum_Mechani: Yeah, but c'mon. We can talk about potential extremes but why? As it stands these are terribly tame ads.

@Ironhawk: No assumption, just facts that it has indeed brought much more exposure than the other ads. Does exposure equal instant increase in sales? Hard to say, but then again marketing isn't always about specific products but awareness. You see a billboard with 'Just Do It' on it. No product. But you automatically recognize it's Nike, right?

So if the ads pique someone's curiosity and they check us out but don't buy Dom 3, that's still good. Maybe during the visit they discovered Eat Electric Death! or War Plan Pacific or winSPMBT.

I'm also curious by something. You say that as a loyal repeat customer the fact that you find the ad offensive should mean something. So, what should we do? Remove them?
What about the loyal repeat customers that don't find them offensive? Don't their voices count?

As they say you can't please everyone all the time. If you don't like them they're not forever. Nature of the beast is ever changing.

I'd also like to point out it's not like we aren't listening. We're not squashing opposing viewpoints, or anything draconian like that. But we've been happy with the performance of the ads and so until that changes, we're sorry, but they shall remain.

[Foodstamp]

Lighten up. Even my girlfriend thinks the chick is hot.

[Jazzepi]

Personally I think the ads with the women on them are stupid. If you're going to try to sell a product, then you should advertise the product. The banner ads that were animated screen shots of the battles were much better.

It's a good thing I'm already playing Dom 3, ads with scantily clad women on them, with text that has too low contrast with the background, and is too small to read anyways, wouldn't have brought me here.

Jazzepi

[capnq]

DonCorazon said: You guys must get offended a lot if you live in the US. Not sure how you could even watch TV here given all the programming you must find offensive, if the Dom ad falls into that category.

I don't watch much TV, either, although that's more because I find it either depressing or offensively stupid. I'm not sure I'm even going to bother buying a converter box when they switch to all digital broadcasting next February.

[Wrana]

To Ich:

what are you referring to? The Aprils fools forum thread?


Precisely. It contained all things that you mentioned. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
As for visionaries - frankly, I have enough where I live. And I read Exile, too. So, while you are in good company, you just have no chance of getting a crown in it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif
And direction in which things DO go has enough darker tendencies without seeing one in just black humor of some punks-gone-within-system.

[Ironhawk]

S.R. Krol said:
I'm also curious by something. You say that as a loyal repeat customer the fact that you find the ad offensive should mean something. So, what should we do? Remove them?



Of course not. I'm not like organizing a protest or embargo or something - I dont expect the opinion of a single person to count for much when weighed against the marketing budget. But if you are actually serious in asking what you should do instead of making a rhetorical platitude, then what you should do is tell your marketing dept to at least make a *head nod* towards actually selling a product rather than pandering to the lowest common denominator.

[VedalkenBear]

I might also point out that someone should keep track of the relative 'for/against' positions. And, as Ironhawk states, a little more thought into the advertising would help avoid future unpleasantness.

However, given Shrapnel's responses in this thread, I can say that they've lost at least one customer.

[Mozkito]

Cerlin said:
Well obviously they are trying to take advantage of the stereotype that gamers, who are assumed to all be pre-pubescent boys living at home, cannot resist the siren lure of a half naked woman.



You have no idea how many times I clicked those ads

[Endoperez]

And I have no idea what ads have to do with the thing advertised.

A good ad may get me interested, and if I'm interested, I'll buy a game. A bad ad won't make me interested, so I won't buy the game. If I'm interested in a game and see an ad, it doesn't really do anything, does it?

What I don't understand is a bad ad making people NOT buy a game they already are interested in. This last one is what people claim Shrapnel has done. Well, whatever, but to me the ad matters less than the pretty pictures in the cover, and those don't matter at all.


As I said, I have no idea what ads have to do with the advertised product - it existed before the ads, and it will be the same even after the ads. It's the same, nothing has changed. I'm tired and rambling, but why would anyone be interested in ads, except to laugh at them and make fake bog beast plushie ads, which this threads hasn't had at all.

[S.R. Krol]

VedalkenBear said:
However, given Shrapnel's responses in this thread, I can say that they've lost at least one customer.



Hunh, wha? So if we announced Dominions IV tomorrow you wouldn't be the least bit interested? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Guys, unless there's an ad running I haven't seen I'd like to point out that (a) All the women are fully clothed. There's not even a bikini-clad model, chainmail or otherwise. About the most 'revealing' article of clothing is a garter. (b) The most suggestive position is laying on a couch. No one is spread eagle, or bending over shot from behind, etc.

The women could very well be selling watches, shoes, or hair care products. They're just silly ads. You're playing a game with blood slaves and false gods in it. Is an attractive (fully clothed) women really something to get in a lather about?

Obviously you guys have already bought the game. If the forum was being flooded with people who don't own the game, discovered us through the ads, and registered just to ***** about the ads that would be rather interesting. But that's not happening, nor I think there is a danger of that occurring.

Relax. Have some fun. Don't like the ads? Block them with your browser. In the history of computer gaming these ads aren't going to be making anyone's Top 10 Offensive Ad Campaign lists...

[Wrana]

To Ironhawk:

what you should do is tell your marketing dept to at least make a *head nod* towards actually selling a product rather than pandering to the lowest common denominator.


Well, that theory is slightly dead & have been so at least from 90s... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif So no marketing-guy in his right mind (whether THAT's possible is another question) will hear to such a heretical notion. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif And you said youself that you understand that the single person's opinion has no chance to be heard... Maybe you should either try for a full-scale campaign or just spit at it & be on your way?
To SRKrol:

not even a bikini-clad model, chainmail or otherwise


And WHY? Chain-mail bikinis are a time-honored tradition, after all... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

[DonCorazon]

Lowest common denominator!? Sir, I am offended.
Just because I openly admit that my dream is to play Dom 3 with a scantily clad Salma Hayek does not me a lowest common denonominator.

Sir, have you not yourself ever felt the inclination to gaze upon a beautiful woman? Have your eyes ever lingered overly long at a Budweiser ad. Do not fear the stirrings in your loins and strike out with wrath at the creators of your desire.

We had a senator here who did much the same until he was caught playing footsies in the men's bathroom with a cop.

Nay, let your lustful nature loose and frolic in the woods.

DC of Pangea http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

[Ironhawk]

S.R. Krol said:
Obviously you guys have already bought the game. If the forum was being flooded with people who don't own the game, discovered us through the ads, and registered just to ***** about the ads that would be rather interesting. But that's not happening, nor I think there is a danger of that occurring.



To hear a comment like this from someone attached to Shrapnel only confirms that I really should be losing respect for them. Effectively you have just told me that since I am not a prospective customer you dont care. Great. Good to know.

Now when you actually do release Dom4 or <insert other game I might buy here> I will know to reconsider.

[Omnirizon]

I have to agree with everyone that says the add is funny. It is so completely tongue-in-cheek I don't see how anybody can find it offensive (unless you don't like girls). But then again tongue in cheek is, by definition, humor in a subtle lack of seriousness.

[Sir_Dr_D]

I think that some of you are over reacting.

The point of the add isn't so much as using sex to sell the game, but rather using shock value to sell the game. The adds are meant to be ironic, which makes them eye catching ,and funny. I like them.

[S.R. Krol]

Ironhawk said:

S.R. Krol said:
Obviously you guys have already bought the game. If the forum was being flooded with people who don't own the game, discovered us through the ads, and registered just to ***** about the ads that would be rather interesting. But that's not happening, nor I think there is a danger of that occurring.



To hear a comment like this from someone attached to Shrapnel only confirms that I really should be losing respect for them. Effectively you have just told me that since I am not a prospective customer you dont care. Great. Good to know.

Now when you actually do release Dom4 or <insert other game I might buy here> I will know to reconsider.



Unnh, no, I don't think that was my point. All I was saying was that the ads are meant to bring new eyes into the fold and all the complaints in the thread are coming from people who already own the game. If it was truly something so offensive (e.g. "John Romero is going to make you his *****") then I would assume that there would be some sort of furor from folks outside the community. There isn't.

And again, I really don't understand where the hostility comes from towards the ads, or frankly anything in this thread. You have a concern about the ad. Others don't. And then I'm sure there is a huge percentage of people who feel nothing either way. Everyone has an opinion, and everyone's opinion is valid.

Can you honestly say that because you don't like a banner ad campaign you'll have to think about purchasing a game? Not buying a game because the uninstall wipes out your registry, I can see that. Buggy, broken games that never get fixed, I can see that, too. But a banner ad campaign? Really?

I'll leave you guys with a paragraph from the blog regarding the banner ads when they first went up...

"We’re here to sell games. We want people to be aware of our games, and I’m fairly certain our developers want the same thing. We’re always going to be looking for new ways to attract attention and get more eyes on the games. Whether it’s experimenting with social network sites, or running off beat ads, we’re going to try out new methods. See what works and what doesn’t. We’re an independent publisher. We’re not going to ever get the cover article, or be the exclusive story on some cable show. We have to approach things differently. What all this means is that the ads aren’t going anyplace. To those couple of folks who aren’t keen on them, sorry."

[Annette]

Ironhawk said:

S.R. Krol said:
Obviously you guys have already bought the game. If the forum was being flooded with people who don't own the game, discovered us through the ads, and registered just to ***** about the ads that would be rather interesting. But that's not happening, nor I think there is a danger of that occurring.



To hear a comment like this from someone attached to Shrapnel only confirms that I really should be losing respect for them. Effectively you have just told me that since I am not a prospective customer you dont care. Great. Good to know.

Now when you actually do release Dom4 or <insert other game I might buy here> I will know to reconsider.



I'm sorry, but I don't see where Scott is saying we don't care about you as a customer. He's saying that you are not the target audience for the ads.

Of course we care about customers. I think you've been around long enough to know that we continually provide excellent post-purchase support to our customers. I am saddened to think we would lose you, or anyone else, as a customer because of a banner ad running on our site. Please allow me to share some of the feedback we've had just in the past couple of months through our customer support center:



"wow! great service, thanks a bunch :-)"
- Patrick T., April 9, 2008

"Very fast response. Thank you," - Alfred E., April 9, 2008

"\o/ That worked, all is well now http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif Thanks for sorting this out for me."
- Jason N., April 9, 2008

"I will continue to support your company as titles come out. Thanks for the quick response. My best to you all." - Dave O., March 17, 2008

"Thank you very much for the good customer service :-)"
- Raf G., March 12, 2008

"Thank you for your great customer service." - Jack H., February 18, 2008

"Thanks. Customer support here is quick." - Angelo S., January 16, 2008




As a 47 year old female, I don't find the ads offensive. I think they're out of the ordinary and bizarre, something that will attract attention. Obviously, our opinions differ, and that's what makes the world go 'round.

At any rate, I hope you would judge us as a company based on the quality of our product and the service we have provided you - not on an ad and the subsequent discussion of such ad.
We apologize that our banner ads offend you.

[Tuidjy]

I am offended that none of the follow-up ads has come anywhere near the first.

1. The woman in the first ad was arguably better looking.

2. The first add had a strategically placed cushion. None of the rest do, and
Dominions is a strategy game.

3. The woman in the first ad looked Scandinavian. Dominions is a Swedish game, right?

4. The ATF ad has all the recent Dominions ads beaten. Our game is better, why
don't we get a gun or a helmet or at least milk?

I demand a new Dominions add with a Bog Monster, and a sword, and blood. And the
lady from the first ad. Or I will never pay for a sixth copy of Dominions III. Unless
I make another geeky friend.

[Dedas]

Bog beast? Did anyone say bog beast? I LOVE bog beasts!

Seriously, Shrapnel Games have my utmost respect. Saying that they don't care about the customer is just plain wrong as they are now on the boards caring for us. They are great guys you know. In fact I haven't found a company made up of nicer and more professional people than those with Shrapnel Games.

Thank you.

[cupido2]

Tuidjy said:
2. The first add had a strategically placed cushion. None of the rest do, and
Dominions is a strategy game.



LOL! Now we found the missing link of the ad to Dominions!

The third ad with only the legs could be some of the missing parts of Holger the Head. Or is she/he/it wearing Chi shoes? Who knows.

All I want to say about the ads is, that they gave me some good laughs in the forum discussions (e.g. the bog beasts and the quoted post).

[capnq]

S.R. Krol said: Can you honestly say that because you don't like a banner ad campaign you'll have to think about purchasing a game?

I can honestly say that the current ad campaign made me hesitate before referring someone to this site for information. That has never happened here before.

[Herode]

Wow http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Not me. Those ads make me laugh, and pleased some more folks also. They are fun because they are "out of topic".

Come on, boys, showing a woman in an ad is NOT evil. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

[Salamander8]

Herode said:
Wow http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Not me. Those ads make me laugh, and pleased some more folks also. They are fun because they are "out of topic".

Come on, boys, showing a woman in an ad is NOT evil. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif


Agreed. I fully admit to not only liking to look at attractive women, scantily clad or not, but that the whole thing here is amusing and interesting and certainly not offensive.

[Saxon]

The adds don’t fit in with the style of the rest of the site. It jars. I think this is part of the reaction, it isn’t the Shrapnel style.

Ladies in game ads, not a problem. Check out the cleavage on some of the characters I have played in various RPG!

Legal point. I hope you have permission to use the images, as I suspect they were not specifically captured for your ads. That is the only real possible problem I can see. Well, beyond the fact this thread is overly long for no good reason.

[Dedas]

Wrong! It is the site that isn't in style with the ads! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Ironhawk]

S.R. Krol said:
Can you honestly say that because you don't like a banner ad campaign you'll have to think about purchasing a game?



Yes. I've actually said it twice now. Its even a thorn in my side every time I come to check the forums http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Some think the ad is funny - I can see thier position but still I point out: where is the punch line? Where is - as other posters have humorously mentioned - the "bog beast plushie"? While I appreciate sarcasm as much as the next person, this one falls flat.

Others think that the ad is not suggestive... ummm, well you do know that you can be sexually suggestive without just popping your t*ts out, right? I'm not saying the ad is pornographic or that the girl is not hot, simply that it is in particularly bad taste and has not even a flimsy attachment to the subject material it purports to "advertise".

[Archonsod]

"The world needs more beautiful women".

[Edi]

I find some of the reactions to the ads puzzling. My own reaction to them was a straightforward

"WTF?! *ponders* Oookayy... That's unusual..."

But that was it. I didn't feel like Shrapnel was disregarding or disrespecting its customers. Ads generally do little for me. This series of ads is one of the few I've even noticed for years. The only other one I can consider memorable is one of the TV ads for a product of the company I work for and that one sent the blood pressure of everyone working in the tech support department spiking to the 500 range.

The response from some people here has me absolutely stupefied because when I read the arguments, the only output I get when trying to process them is "Does not compute". Perhaps that's just me, though. *shrug*

[Jurri]

S.R. Krol said:
All I was saying was that the ads are meant to bring new eyes into the fold and all the complaints in the thread are coming from people who already own the game. If it was truly something so offensive (e.g. "John Romero is going to make you his *****") then I would assume that there would be some sort of furor from folks outside the community. There isn't.

And again, I really don't understand where the hostility comes from towards the ads, or frankly anything in this thread. You have a concern about the ad. Others don't. And then I'm sure there is a huge percentage of people who feel nothing either way. Everyone has an opinion, and everyone's opinion is valid.



I should imagine that a company in the entertainment industry would have some concern for the values and image it chooses to project. Certainly us private citizens often enough care of right, wrong, and what others think of us. It is your privilege to weigh the eyeballs earned by exploitative marketing against the reputation hit your company takes in the eyes of those who care, and then act according to your estimation. This does not speak well of your morality to those who care about the issue.

Whether the majority of your customers care about this matter or even whether your company might benefit from this business practice is, however, beside the point when the concerned segment comes to complain. We are telling you that some of your customers feel estranged by the choices the company makes. There being people who do not care of this issue or even favour exploitative marketing does not make this complaint any less significant for those who do care, it only makes the complaint matter less in the eyes of a company that cares more of the bottom-line than good corporate citizenship.

Frivolously dismissing actual customer feedback is, again, your prerogative, even if many businesses would value and weigh heavily such grassroots signals that might reflect significant issues for large customer segments. You do not even have to pretend to care of the issue, you may well decide to scoff upon the concerns raised here – that will win you no favour with the offended customers, but perhaps there are other rewards, like seeming decisive and confident in your public relations decisions. Or perhaps you have numerous customers for whom 19th century attitudes to objectification of women are a selling point?

Personally, however, I am taken back by both this campaign and this seemingly rash attitude. I find it difficult to believe that I see you defending sexist and blatantly improper exploitation here in this thread. One would – one should – think that such would hardly be beneficial to a company at all interested in its public image.

I can’t speak for others here, but for myself I can say that I object rather strongly, even hostilely, to objectification of women in service of crass consumerism. The gaming hobby has a dark history in this regard and while these advertisements might be appropriate (if transparent) for furniture, lipstick or women’s shoes, in service of a fantasy adventure game they are pure exploitation. Neither the visual style nor content matter here bears even passing relation to the advertised product; this is most clear-cut as a case of female exploitation. Similar advertisement campaigns have been judged in Finnish courts as demeaning and patently offensive, unfit for public consumption.

To put it more simply, I have no desire to associate myself with this travesty of modern marketing, and while others are of course entitled to their own values, I do not like these values displayed in places I frequent or make purchases in.


Annette said:
We apologize that our banner ads offend you.

And what's up with this double-speak? Are you trying to intimate that you are not sorry for your actions, but regret that some are offended? You have no claim to an apology for the latter without regretting the former, you know – I for one am not inclined to forgive you when you do not even confess that there is room for offence in what you have done here. The first step to conciliation is seeking common ground; false humility does not become anyone.

For the consumer who might be reading this I’d like to point out that you are not without a voice when corporations choose not to heed your moral norms: not only can we be unambiguous in making clear our stance, but we can also make our own choices in the marketplace. If you feel strongly about sexual exploitation in gaming and the marketplace (or other corporate citizenship issues for that matter), then let the offending companies know what you as a community member expect of them. In the short term the company might prefer that no voice be raised in critique (they are all infallible, after all), but you do no service to any party by staying quiet: if their own sense does not tell them what is good and proper, they will not learn from your passivity.

And should the company scoff at your concerns (as seems to be the case here, at least for now), you may well opt to vote with your wallet, as they say. There are other games to play besides Dominions (I’m partial to doing some internet Diplomacy this summer, myself) and there are other communities for discussing the game as well. They have the right to choose their methods of advertisement, and you have the right to choose whether to give them your business, it's as simple as that.

[AlgaeNymph]

Herode said:
Come on, boys, showing a woman in an ad is NOT evil. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Or men, and I'm not talking about fat'n'hairy porn stars put in as a gag. I want boys so pretty that they'd make straight men go gay. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

[vfb]

So Jurri, what do you do if some "concerned segment" gets offended by blood sacrifice of virgins in the game? Take 'em out?

[S.R. Krol]

All right folks, just to prove that we do listen we'll be launching a new ad campaign soon. It will still feature beautiful women hawking Dominions 3 but they will be clad in burkas so as not to offend anyone. How about that as a compromise?

Finally I'd just like to point out that we're running ATF ads in the same vein and yet I don't think we've had one person worry about those. I guess that's just a different crowd.

And with that I don't think there's anything more I can add to this discussion. Everyone play nice now...

[DigitalSin]

Yay, burkas!

[Ironhawk]

That's great Krol! Let me know when you get those out.

Before you go I'd just like to say thanks for not understanding and for being disrespectful. You did a bang-up job of representing Shrapnel!

[Tim Brooks]

This is in reponse to Jurri's post:


I should imagine that a company in the entertainment industry would have some concern for the values and image it chooses to project.



Sure we do. Howvever, that does not mean that our values are your values. We would have a hard time doing anything if we tried to please everyone. In fact, it is impossible. The negative response to these ads pale in comparison to those who have written us about being 'sacriligous', 'warmongers', and just all around bad citizens of the planet earth for publishing wargames and fantasy products that truly offend the far right christians.


This does not speak well of your morality to those who care about the issue.


http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif


We are telling you that some of your customers feel estranged by the choices the company makes.


We know. Hardly a day goes by when someone is not offended by something we do. So should we close the business, because people everyday are offended by the choices we make as a company?


There being people who do not care of this issue or even favour exploitative marketing does not make this complaint any less significant for those who do care, it only makes the complaint matter less in the eyes of a company that cares more of the bottom-line than good corporate citizenship.



All I can say is that it must be hard for you living in the world we do with that attitude.


Frivolously dismissing actual customer feedback is, again, your prerogative, even if many businesses would value and weigh heavily such grassroots signals that might reflect significant issues for large customer segments.



Well another thing that we will have to disagree on. I don't see where Scott or Annette did anything frivolous in this thread. The only mistake they made was jumping in this thread in the first place. And attacking them really doesn't solve anything. The person you should be attacking is me. I am the only person in this company that is responsible for what we advertise and how we choose to advertise it.


...you may well decide to scoff upon the concerns raised here



So, let me get this straight. I don't agree with your position, so I am scoffing at it? That's a leap don't you think?


Or perhaps you have numerous customers for whom 19th century attitudes to objectification of women are a selling point?



I wonder if the women portrayed in the ads, who are professional models and were payed for their time, would agree with that statement. We should have asked! Funny, I never even considered asking such a question.


can’t speak for others here, but for myself I can say that I object rather strongly, even hostilely, to objectification of women in service of crass consumerism.



You must have a hard time buying almost anything. Cars, beer, cleaning products, vacuum cleaners - I just saw a commercial last night for a vacuum cleaner that showed a woman in a white silk dress vacuuming the floor. Now, I have seen my wife, my mother, my friends wives and mothers, my girlfriends, and various other relatives vacuum many floors. And know what, in 50 years I have never seen one woman vacuum the floor in a white silk dress cut three inches above the knee with a neckline so plunging that it was hard to imagine just how everything was staying in place with that extreme back and forth movement. I wish I could rememeber the manufacturer of the product, because I am sure that that is one you would want to steer clear of.

Objectification of women? Don't the women have to decide for themselves if they are being obgjectificated? I mean, the vacuum lady was smiling, and appeared quite happy. I wonder if that was because she was probably making $200 an hour to vacuum some floor that probably wasn't that dirty to begin with. I know my wife doesn't smile like that when she vacuums our floor. My wife probably feels more obgjectificated. Of course, my wife doesn't make $200 an hour to vacuum our floor.


The gaming hobby has a dark history in this regard and while these advertisements might be appropriate (if transparent) for furniture, lipstick or women’s shoes, in service of a fantasy adventure game they are pure exploitation.



http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif Well we were going to blood sacrifice some virgins for the ads, but we couldn't find any. (Thanks vfb)


Neither the visual style nor content matter here bears even passing relation to the advertised product;



Exactly. Pssst, I let you in on a little secret... that's the point.


Similar advertisement campaigns have been judged in Finnish courts as demeaning and patently offensive, unfit for public consumption.




Wow! Really?



I have no desire to associate myself with this travesty of modern marketing, and while others are of course entitled to their own values, I do not like these values displayed in places I frequent or make purchases in.



Okay. I am sure there are those here that will miss you but we understand your position now.


Are you trying to intimate that you are not sorry for your actions, but regret that some are offended? You have no claim to an apology for the latter without regretting the former, you know – I for one am not inclined to forgive you when you do not even confess that there is room for offence in what you have done here.



What a load of crap. We had a customer write in that it has been two weeks and he has still not recieved his game. Obviously it was lost in the mail. Now I personally am sorry that he has had problems and we as a company are sorry he had trouble; we know how frustrating that can be. So we can't apologize to the customer unless we regret sending him the game in the first place? Well, we did apologize and I am pretty darn sure we meant it. And we sent him another game, so obviously we didn't regret it.


The first step to conciliation is seeking common ground; false humility does not become anyone.




Neither does false indignation.

Do you get the point of that statement?

If you don't like the ads, don't buy our products and don't frequent our site. Pretty simple really.

[Edratman2]

I agree with the posting by Tim Brooks.

I stayed out of this because I could not figure out why so many people were indignant about ads that are similar to the cover photgraphs I see on magazines in the supermarket checkout line.

A key principle of the game is capturing slaves and sacrificing them. I have never seen threads complaining about this. I'm fairly sure this concept should be more abhorrent to many more people than slightly provocative pictures of attractive women. And I can see more exposed female flesh in 2 minutes at the local mall than these inoffensive pictures depict.

I'm also sure that if you limit your purchases to goods that do not use attractive people in their ads you are probably limited to buying 10 penny nails, Draino and white socks.

[Sombre]

Seems to me there's quite a few people who won't be buying any shrapnel products in the future, based on the adverts and the two threads they've spawned.

I don't want to say that of myself, because I wasn't about to buy any of your products beyond the Dominions series, so it would be a bit hollow. However as a user of these forums I am thoroughly unimpressed by Shrapnel's response in this thread. Half your responses seem to be mocking or purposely misreading objections raised. Case in point, the idea that the amount paid to the models or their willingness to do the job has anything to do with whether the adverts objectify women. Either you're trying to make a seriously flawed and childish argument or you're mocking a concerned customer.

I expect if I do get a response it will essentially be 'I don't care what you think' mixed with a charge of 'false indignation' and an invitation to leave your forums. I do not wish to leave because I really like the community here. My opinion of Shrapnel has done a total 180 though.

[Foodstamp]

Dominions allows you to kill people by the thousands including sacrificing virgins. This game allows you to practice magic, and become a god. There is nothing wholesome about this game in the traditional sense. Yet, clothed women put in a little banner with the words "I want my Dominions" offends you all?

I am absolutely amazed that people find violence and murder more acceptable than sexuality. It reminds me of where Hillary Clinton freaked out over GTA. She wasn't angry that you could run around town killing old ladies with a shotgun. She wasn't disgusted by the fact that the primary character is a drug dealer, car thief etc. What offended her was the possibility you could download a mod a view a sexual scene in the game.

Most people will have sex at least once in their lives I hope. While I would hope no one ever has to kill anyone, sacrifice a virgin, or attempt to ascend to god hood through murder of their neighbors. Yet, in our societies, sexuality is more taboo than these other things. Makes no sense at all, period.

[capnq]

Tim Brooks said:
There being people who do not care of this issue or even favour exploitative marketing does not make this complaint any less significant for those who do care



All I can say is that it must be hard for you living in the world we do with that attitude.

Yes, it is. Most of us recognize that complaining about it isn't going to make one whit of difference, though, so we don't bother.
If you don't like the ads, don't buy our products and don't frequent our site.

I already own every available Shrapnel product that I'm interested in, and there's only one more thing in the pipeline that I was planning to buy before this sophomoric ad campaign started.

If I didn't feel that monitoring the Space Empires forum was part of my "duties" as an admin for the Play-By-Web site, I would cut back on my visits to Shrapnel's site until this travesty burned itself out.

[Humakty]

I fully agree with foodstamp, and others saying that they can't see the point about complaining on a relatively decent (hey, they're dressed, ever seen a shampoo ad on TV ?) advertisment, when I spend my games killing thousands of people, sacrificing virgins and sending my succubus seduce commanders (I guess they have to do more than a single smile...).

Oh my god, a woman showing her legs ! And this one doesn't have her tchador on ! She's looking at me in the eyes ! I'll call the pope right now, he'll excomunicate all those heretics at shrapnel games !!

[Sombre]

Foodstamp said:
Dominions allows you to kill people by the thousands including sacrificing virgins. This game allows you to practice magic, and become a god. There is nothing wholesome about this game in the traditional sense. Yet, clothed women put in a little banner with the words "I want my Dominions" offends you all?

I am absolutely amazed that people find violence and murder more acceptable than sexuality. It reminds me of where Hillary Clinton freaked out over GTA. She wasn't angry that you could run around town killing old ladies with a shotgun. She wasn't disgusted by the fact that the primary character is a drug dealer, car thief etc. What offended her was the possibility you could download a mod a view a sexual scene in the game.

Most people will have sex at least once in their lives I hope. While I would hope no one ever has to kill anyone, sacrifice a virgin, or attempt to ascend to god hood through murder of their neighbors. Yet, in our societies, sexuality is more taboo than these other things. Makes no sense at all, period.



So your argument is that complaining about these adverts and playing Dominions 3 means we find violence and murder more acceptable than sexuality? That's ridiculous.

You might have a point if Dominions was using violence, sex and blood sacrifice in a crude and exploitative way to sell copies to idiots. If it was like Postal or a porn game or something,.. but it isn't. It's essentially a fantasy strategy game. It isn't /about/ gratuitous violence. You might have an argument that GTA is, though I would definitely take issue with that too.

These adverts are clear cut. They have nothing to do with dominions or any of its themes. They are just lame sexploitation. And yeah, that's common enough in the industry and beyond. Is that reason to accept it now it's been brought to Dominions 3?

[Endoperez]

I have to say I have only just now begun to accept that some people have really, truly been offended by these ads. I thought the complaints were extrapolated and out of proportion, but I think people really meant them - and have really meant them for over four weeks.


I have trouble finding anything offensive about the ads, so if my earlier comments belittled your opinions and you were offended, I'd like to apologize. I don't understand what this is all about, and I have a feeling I'm not the only one. I think I might have to read both threads and see if I can find what this is all about, by reading everything as if it was written without a hint of humour or sarcasm.

[Tim Brooks]

You might have a point if Dominions was using violence, sex and blood sacrifice in a crude and exploitative way to sell copies to idiots.




It isn't /about/ gratuitous violence.



Come on Sombre. The last three Dominions ads before the "I want my Dominions 3 campaign" showed two factions in battle, a lightening bolt burning up a row of warriors, and a spell being cast to burn up a group of warriors.

Here's some interesting numbers (I am showing this to you guys because I know alot of you are interested in how things work in this crazy business):

First a little background - these are industry wide numbers. An average banner ad campaign will recieve between .10 and .20 percent clickthrus. That is 1/10 of one percent to 2/10 of 1 percent. A campaign is considered successful if it receves .30-.40 percent clickthrus and the top campaings come in at around .50 percent clickthrus.

Now, the last four Dominions 3 banners from January thru March 2008 received an average clickthru rate of .15% with the top banner receiving .20%.

The "I want my Dominions 3" campaign started April 1. We have run 4 banners so far. The average clickthru rate for these banners is .65%!!! The top performing banner's clickthru rate is 1.19%!!!

Since the start of the "I want my Dominions 3" campaign Dominions 3 pageviews are up 53% over the last three months combined. That works out to a 354% increase if taken on a monthly (average) basis. Sales of Dominions 3 are up 20% over last month - and last month Dominions 3 was a monthly special at $7.00 off (I think that was the sale amount).

Now, you can be offended by the ads, that is your right. And you can think less of Shrapnel Games, that is also your right. But the bottom line is that Shrapnel Games is in business to sell games There are many reasons why a developer will choose, or not choose, us to publish their game. But the bottom line is sales, period. If we lose a developer because we offend their sensibilities, well that is too bad, but for a publisher it is much worse if we lose a developer becuase we can't meet or exceed their expectations on sales.

[Sombre]

Come on Sombre. The last three Dominions ads before the "I want my Dominions 3 campaign" showed two factions in battle, a lightening bolt burning up a row of warriors, and a spell being cast to burn up a group of warriors.




Yeah, they showed actual gameplay. They gave an idea of what dom3 is about. Spells, armies, formations of troops fighting huge gods and monsters. If those ads were about using gratuitous violence to sell the product they would have used completely unrelated violent material, just as the current ads use completely unrelated pictures of women.

I can't believe you're seriously comparing the two sets of ads or suggesting the former ones were all about violence. If you had to describe dominions in a few key words, would violent or bloody be amongst them? It would be fair for plenty of games which actually DO use gratuitous violence to sell, but not dom3.

On a related note: Have you actually played dominions 3? I'm starting to doubt it.

[Tim Brooks]

Ahh, gratuitous violence. I was hung up on the violence word. I see now. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/confused.gif


If you had to describe dominions in a few key words, would violent or bloody be amongst them?



Well yea, since that was what we were advertising. You know it is very hard to advertise the strategy element of a game. Unless we used a couple of people deep in thought, but then they would be "unrelated pictures" of people which is also taboo. Or are you suggesting that beautiful women may not want their Dominions 3?

Okay, I am just having a go at you. Sorry. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

The last I'll say here is what I tell all the people who write us each month saying we are heretics and doing the devils work by publishing fantasy and role playing games:

Opinions vary, please feel free not to support us.

[Shigure]

I can't speak for the others who are annoyed by the ad campaign, but I can tell you why I do not like it: not because it is offensive (as you say, the image is tame), but because it is insulting. The ad is basically saying "We know our target audience, and we think they are shallow enough that the best way to lure them in is with a cheesecake shot and a generic quote". Now, maybe it's true. Probably it is true, which is why you are finding so many people who are overreacting to it -- nothing hurts like the truth. But regardless of whether it's true, there is a perceived insult there.

(And don't try with the "you're not our target audience; you already bought the game!" line again. In a technical sense it is true, but all of us were part of that target audience at one point, and buying Dominions didn't magically grant us a resistence to pretty ladies.)

[Tim Brooks]

Or men, and I'm not talking about fat'n'hairy porn stars put in as a gag. I want boys so pretty that they'd make straight men go gay.



and


I demand a new Dominions add with a Bog Monster, and a sword, and blood. And the lady from the first ad. Or I will never pay for a sixth copy of Dominions III. Unless
I make another geeky friend.



DryaUnda & Tuidjy:

Marketing asked me to inform you that they are listening. Check back on Sunday...

[Dedas]

Yahoo! Marketing is the best. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

[Agrajag]

I've been gone for quite some time due to internet and computer problems. (That are still ongoing http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif)
So I'll just post my opinion on some main points in this huge thread:
>>The ads are funny
I think they are mildly amusing, which is more than I can say for most commercials.

>>The ads objectify women
1) Pfft.
2) It's not the duty of Shrapnel Games to strengthen the moral fiber of society, they just want to sell games.
3) I don't think there's any problem with ads objectifying women, the real problem is when people objectify <anyone>.

>>Gratuitous violence
Is awesome.
Exploding piles of gore and blood?
That's what you call fun!
Seriously, these are games we are talking about.

>>boys so pretty that they'd make straight men go gay.
I'm not gay, but if there were boys pretty enough to make me go gay then I probably wouldn't mind (in the same way I wouldn't mind dying since I'd be dead.)
Also, adblock+noscript http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif (so I only saw the first one since it was reposted in many ways)

[Foodstamp]

When I first saw the ads, I thought they were supposed to be ironic. I thought the women in the ads with Dominions were supposed to be a juxtapose of advertisement that we were all supposed to take as being funny and oddball.

I am really amazed that people are offended and feel Shrapnel games is trying to insult their intelligence. When I see these ads, I applaud them for daring to be different and mixing two completely different things together to draw attention.

[Wrana]

To Foodstamp:

Yet, in our societies, sexuality is more taboo than these other things. Makes no sense at all, period.


Well, the society with taboo on sexuality was the one which conquered most of the Earth's surface and got into space. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif
You can call it amazing (which is the best http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif ), illogical or even perverted, but you shouldn't doubt its efficacy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif And it's all about efficacy, right? (At least so positivist science tells us).
And so you probably shouldn't wonder that people who are fascinated by this conquest are less-than fond of overt demonstrations of sexuality... However, this isn't the case here at all! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
To All:

but because it is insulting. The ad is basically saying "We know our target audience


This is the key. (I don't want to place long quote here - the thread is long enough already! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif ) For people who feel insulted by such ads it's just a sign - of not exploitation of women, but of their own exploitation which is waved before their noses. So the Foodstamp's analogy is quite off the mark: while there are pornographic computer games, there aren't those in which player is just an object of outside manipulation (sorry, forgot the TV! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif But we are speaking of the computer gamers here - and they by definition prefer to be somewhat active...). And just as everybody had had sex, everybody also is quite familiar with marketologists who "know what you want" MUCH better than yourself. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
And this is why I both find ads humorous - as they just bring the fact that these "knowing" ones actually just don't care the freck into light - and the humor somewhat sick - as the fact that ones who don't care are considered knowledgable isn't actually THAT funny.
Dixi.
Hope that it's the last post in this thread.

[Dedas]

Check out the new ad guys! I know you will be pleased with the frisky hunk. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

But where o where is our beloved Beast of Bog?

[vfb]

I think the ninja is pretty ambiguous. But very pretty nevertheless. Is it a ninja girl? Or a ninja boy with an eyebrow kit.

And good thing I was forewarned, and wearing my protective goggles, or I would have caught teh gay from the frisky hunk for sure! Yeah!

[VedalkenBear]

That new ad definitely seems to be better than the previous...

Edit: Oh, come on! You reference Gift of the Heavens in a Dominions ad and don't show a comet? Work with it! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[llamabeast]

I don't really mind too much about the ads. Well, I think they're shoddy and poor, but I'm not interested in discussing them particularly. However, I'm really disappointed by Shrapnel's reaction to their customers' opinions here.

I think it's absolutely fair enough to say "you have a right to your opinions, but on this occasion we're going to follow our business model and go ahead with our campaign; we're sorry that not all of you will like it". But the staff have been outright mocking and sarcastic here - why?

If someone like Jurri, an important part of the community, is driven away from the forums just because Shrapnel staff couldn't make the effort to be polite and thoughtful, I am appalled. And ultimately it is shooting yourself in the foot, since the community here is, I believe, very important to Dominions' success.

Previously I've always been impressed by Tim's responses on the forums. Here I have to agree with Sombre and say my opinion on the company has taken a complete 180. How can you be so careless with your customers' opinions?

[VedalkenBear]

I agree with you, llamabeast, at least so far as Mr. Krol is concerned. I have said as much to him, and I am following up with as much 'lambast' as I can in the correct channels. Annette, to me, has the mentality that you say would be 'fair'. The difference in the tone of their responses is incredible and cannot be understated from this customer's POV, at least.

Having said that, the newest ad is a vast improvement over the recent debacle. It honestly looks like Honor Harrington. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[llamabeast]

With regard to the adverts themselves: I find myself picking up game boxes with attractive girls in chainmail on the front and so on, so there's no doubt that kind of thing works (sadly). I think that, apart from those exploitation arguments etc, the main problem with the old adverts was that they just looked poor. It looked like someone had downloaded a picture of a girl and written some text on in MS Paint.

The new ninja looks much better. I think adverts with at least some marginal link to the subject material are much more effective.

I also predict that the male model one will do disastrously.

[llamabeast]

Oh - one sad thing about the ninja advert is that "Dominions" is misspelt. Careless.

[llamabeast]

And, while I'm posting away - does anyone else think the ATF girl looks like she's just been drinking milk?

[Amhazair]

Oopsie. We get a second new add. While I the ninja girl is either a girl, or pritty enough to make me go totally gay, the other guy is definitely a guy. And made me remember why I'm straight.

(I also agree 100% with Llama's post, but I didn't want to get involved in an inflamed discussion about the adds, so this will probably be the last serious comment I make about them)

[Foodstamp]

@Llamabeast

Yeah..."Got Milk?"...."Got War?"...get it? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

@everyone else

If that ninja is a woman, then we need to get her taken off here; that is exploitation.

[llamabeast]

I don't think I've heard "Got Milk?". Hmm, obviously that one was wasted on me. I thought the sunlight was just catching her lip.

[Endoperez]

The lack of i " Dominons 3." ninja add is really annoying. I don't mind the others, but that's sloppy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

[Foodstamp]

llamabeast said:
I don't think I've heard "Got Milk?". Hmm, obviously that one was wasted on me. I thought the sunlight was just catching her lip.



Do a quick google of "Got Milk?", click images, and all will become clear.

Coincidentally, we talked about the "Got Milk?" ad in marketing this semester. In Mexico, they tried running the "Got Milk?" ad which I believe would translate to "Tiene Leche?". What they didn't know was that the literal translation in Spanish is "Are you lactating?".

[cupido2]

Perhaps they meant dominoes?
But it is time now to get back to the real problems of this world, like the crappy PD of Bandar Log that prevent it from winning any game.

[sector24]

At first I thought the "If you don't like it, GTFO" response was uncalled for. But well before that, Annette apologized and Tim explained the business reasons for the ads and their success. These arguments were met with "You don't mean it!" and "It's still exploitation and you're all evil bigots." So what exactly is there to say at that point? I guess nothing, which would have been better than an attempt at making light of the situation. Tim admitted that the best thing Shrapnel could have done was to not respond to the thread at all because of the clear lack of any rationality in some of the arguments.

I still wouldn't tell people to get the *uck out of here if they don't like it, but when you're met with that kind of opposition there's really nothing else to say. There are several bad ways to handle it, but no really good ones.

[Sombre]

Endoperez said:
The lack of i " Dominons 3." ninja add is really annoying. I don't mind the others, but that's sloppy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif



All the adverts are sloppy. They look like they've just nabbed some random image off a google image search and added "I want my dominions 3" with an image editor. It isn't even an interesting font, probably just the default.


I guess I'm not being rational though, in the face of evil bigotry.

[VedalkenBear]

To state something here that I said to both Mr. Krol and Annette (and received different responses to), it is (theoretically) fine if you don't think the previous ads were offensive. However, the response to the criticism was that 'you shouldn't be offended'. This is equivalent to stating, "I will tell you what your morality should be." As for myself, I will not accept that.

Edit: Just saw 'male' ad. Just as bad (if not worse) than the aforementioned ads. Sheesh...

[Baalz]

Are you freaking kidding me? I've been ignoring this thread until I wondered what you guys have been talking about for 15 pages. Are there really so many people with such thin skin?

Even if you don't like pretty girls how in the world does "I don't think that advertisement will be effective" transition to "shrapnel hates us and I'm boycotting them"? Why does anybody suddenly care *so* much about the Shrapnel advertising campaign? Seems like a lot of people walking around looking for reasons to be offended.

I mean really, realize that the summary of much of this thread is 1) I don't like ads with pretty women and 2) I'm not going to buy Shrapnel games because they ignored my opinion on their advertising campaign.

Honestly, I have no idea how anyone could be regularly accessing the internet and find *that* ad so offensive, but as that's just my opinion I'll follow that up with a suggestion that you just block/ignore stuff that does offend you...that's how you generally should deal with people who have different values than you do.

[VedalkenBear]

The fact that you completely mis-summarized the main issues talked about in the thread shows that you did not really read the thread.

Your first statement is incorrect because I quite like the Ninja ad, so it's not _just_ pretty women. Read my other posts in this thread for an enlargement on this. The second statement is inaccurate because it's not that they ignored my opinion (though they did); it's the fact that I choose not to support people who use such advertising styles.

I think it should be considered a given that you should please people who you want to buy your product. As such, I would also consider it a given that people who you displease will not want to buy your product.

[Baalz]

No, I didn't completely mis-summarize, I selectively summarized deliberately to emphasize my point. I'm fully aware that you have a reason you consider valid to get on a high horse, my dismissal of this as an objection to "pretty women" was an implication that I find your position both in the minority and fairly silly by underlining that the whole basis of both the ad and the objection is because people like to look at pretty women. The fact that you find this silly reason so compelling as to cause you not just to be unable to ignore it, so important you're not satisfied to lodge a complaint, so vital as to force you to take the action of boycotting Shrapnel is unfathomable to me.

Ok, you didn't like the ad and you're taking your ball and going home. I can't believe that this is such an important issue to you and my suggestion stands that you'll have a much less stressful and more enriching life if you can just learn to ignore the low brow humor of the guy sitting next to you instead of trying to get him thrown off the bus and when that fails deciding that you'll do without bus service yourself.

[otthegreat]

Thank you Baalz! I've been following this thread (sad I know) but could not figure out how to put my thoughts into words. You have said what I couldn't figure out how to.

[Sombre]

Way to continue your misrepresentation Baalz. No-one has demanded shrapnel change their ads, they have simply expressed their opinion of them and concluded they don't want to have further dealings with that company. It isn't because they 'failed' to get their way, it's because they have a problem with Shrapnel's conduct.

It isn't just my opinion of Shrapnel that's been lowered based on this thread. The way people with reasonable concerns are being deliberately misread, mocked and attacked by other members of the forum is just pathetic.

[DonCorazon]

Lighten up everyone

The guy in the new ad is actually KO!

[Tuidjy]

> DryaUnda & Tuidjy:
>
> Marketing asked me to inform you that they are listening. Check back on Sunday...

Awesome! Now that's what I am talking about! Any chance you guys include the
full picture (as opposed of a wide but not very tall one) in the game box? :-)

No, serious, that is a damn nice ad, at least for this particular 40 year old
gamer. And congratulation for your choice of models, although I do not think
that this is the lady from the first ad. Just as great looking, and the exact
right expression on her face.

[Rathar]

I think it's awesome you guys talked yourself into implied naked male advertising for dominions. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

[Foodstamp]

LOL you old hens.

[Jazzepi]

Please post the click through rate on the male ads.

Jazzepi

[DonCorazon]

I am sure it is skyrocketing out here in San Francisco.

[Rathar]

The problem as I see it one one of a lack of context. The "offending" ads showed a sexily dressed woman with the text of "I want my dominions 3". Now We all know what is meant by that but We are in the know. Imagining it from an outsiders position they wouldn't have much of a clue what was being sold although on this forum they would have to presume it was a game. "Dominating women? What?"

This imho is one of the main things which differentiates this ad from other ads which use sex as a selling point. Beer ads at least show ladies drinking beer/being around guys drinking beer. Car ads are almost always accompanied by well, a car.

The ATF ad was used as an example of "Why don't you have a problem with this one then?!" and again I believe it is context. Foxy lady but she is in a helmet and holding a firearm. While I highly doubt your units in that game resemble buxom blondes it at least implies that the game is combat oriented. (Sorry, I haven't played ATF, maybe it does have buxom units!)

Remember, sex sells, but stay away from implying you are selling sex. I'd bet that if you had the same model slinkily sitting by a computer you'd have gotten horny monkey hoots of approval

There is also, for me at least, a bit of a disconnect selling dom 3 with sexiness as the game has uhh no sexual references whatsoever. (Unless you are playing Pangea in certain eras, sexy ladies don't come up in dom 3. At all.)
A bit of a perhaps weak argument for being baited and switched but whatever just trying to think up some viewpoints.

All a long-winded way of saying that it just doesn't jive with the game. Oh and you folks frothing negatively about this should take a step back, drink a beer or suck on a popsicle and relax as it really isn't an earth-shattering thing.

/5 cents

[Argitoth]

You know how much a waste of time it is to tell everyone on an internet forum how you dislike this or that? Tell everyone what your morale opinion is? It's a damn waste of time, lock this thread so people can get a life.

For freaken sake, this is an internet forum, you don't know anyone you are talking to, yet some of you want to waste time getting angry, arguing...

[Dedas]

It wasn't totally pointless as we now got a frisky hunk to look at. That is what we wanted, right? Right?!

[kasnavada]

I liked the old ad better.

I agree with argitoth though, even if I have a slightly different point of view. I find the discussion and endless trolling about things that don't even register as trivial matters for most people rather funny.

[Foodstamp]

kasnavada said:
I liked the old ad better.

I agree with argitoth though, even if I have a slightly different point of view. I find the discussion and endless trolling about things that don't even register as trivial matters for most people rather funny.



Sorry, fully clothed women were too heteroerotic for you; the old ads are gone forever!

[DigitalSin]

Ehehe, these ads sure are causing a lot of conflict. Thank god we finally have gender neutrality in the ad-world!

[llamabeast]

I suggest we all simply stop posting about this. It's become a sour topic. I remain disappointed by Shrapnel's responses, but think it really isn't important enough to let it damage our enjoyment of the game or the forum. After all, Shrapnel aren't really that important to the game as far as we're concerned - they ship the game to us and give us the forum, and that's it. KO and JK are the important people, and they remain legends in their own time.

[Sombre]

I agree with Llama. I have expressed myself on this topic and it isn't worth me arguing about it further.

[lch]

Well, it looks like Shrapnel has pulled all of the new ads but the "Kill Bill" one now. Thank you for that. This year's April was a really long one, huh?

I didn't get the time to voice my criticism on the ads appropriately, but you know my position on this. My biggest problem was that it was just a lame way of advertising. Like many others already said, the ads didn't have anything to do with the product and they just looked plain unprofessional. The girls were certainly hot, but that "I want my Dom 3" line looked as if some teenager just created his first banner for his Myspace page. It certainly was not in line with the usual quality of your other ads.

Now all that remains is the samurai one, and that's fine by me - at least she is holding a sword! Honestly, chain mail bikini's are cool in my book. As long as an ad for a fantasy themed strategy game like Dom3 looks anything like it, okay.

Edit: Oh no, wait. Smiling surfer dude is still with us. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/Sick.gif

[Amhazair]

lch said:
...Oh no, wait. Smiling surfer dude is still with us...

Now, now. Now you're jumping to conclusions. Just from the looks of that one guy you're assuming he's a surfer.

It would be just as valid for me to conclude from their looks that the chicks in the previous adds were obviously passionate wargamers. As clearly, from all the women I know that I have seen scantily dressed and look that hot, not a single one was not a wargamer. With which I obviously proved the relevance of the first set of adds. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

[lch]

Amhazair said:
As clearly, from all the women I know that I have seen scantily dressed and look that hot, not a single one was not a wargamer. With which I obviously proved the relevance of the first set of adds. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif


That sounds like subtleties in definition. Are we talking about the empty set here?

[sector24]

Paul Walker took a lot of time out of his schedule to do that ad you know.

[Amhazair]

I never heard about the empty set as scientific terminology, but it does sound a lot like you're on to me. Don't tell anyone else though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

And in fact, the set isn't quite empty, but a sample size of one doesn't prove that much, does it?

[Omnirizon]

I've said pomo is a good way to interpret this add.

additionally, now that I think about it, Rizter's work on American worship of consumption may offer some insight. He long reveled over the reverence with which we treat advertising; it is as if an advertisement is some sacred symbol in our cult of consumption. Advertisments that do not make sense or seem bad to us are some kind of sacrilege. The minimalist Dom3 add of a suggestive woman and stark simple "I want my Dom3" breaks all tradition with "wargame ads" and does not compute with people who look for some kind of universality and centrality in their cult of consumption; thus they find it offensive. Notice to those who dislike it, it isn't the hot girl, it is that the ad makes no sense, or doesn't have anything to do with dominions.

[Foodstamp]

I saw a Dom 3 ad with a woman in it again today. I thought you guys were on top of this?

[lch]

It seems that there is a neverending supply of lascivious looking female war gamers who are jonesing for Dominions 3.

[Lingchih]

Yeah, I like the new one with the lascivious looking woman. It's quite nice.

[DonCorazon]

lch said:
It seems that there is a neverending supply of lascivious looking female war gamers who are jonesing for Dominions 3.



Heaven?

[Folket]

Are we war gamers? I can see that people who like war games would like dominions, but still.

I just wanted to say that my father was quite upset when I told him I was collecting virgins for sacrifices.

[Omnirizon]

I have to nod to folket.

I don't like wargames. they bore me to tears. When I read that dominions 3 was, in fact, a wargame, the thought struck me as something plainly plausible, but which had never occured to me. Dom3 is a _war_game? I had to consider it carefully. I guess it kind of fits the bill, but not really. For one it isn't full of stuffy stuffiness stuff. Rule one of wargames is that they must be stuffy. Look at all the ads for all the other wargames on this site (I've pointed this out before) they all tout their "stuffinexity" and "attention to obtusivity". Dom3 has "ambiancivity" and an "attention to funability" with a slight taste of "interestingly game-enhancing buggivity"; but clearly no stuffiness. I don't think wargames in general appeal to Dom3 players, and I think Dom3 may appeal to wargamers, but they would probably prefer something a little, you know, stuffier.

I always kind of pictured the Dom3 players as a little hipper than your average wargamer. Not so concerned with complexity or detail, as much as the ambiance and fun of a game. Now given the reaction over some silly ads, maybe not.

BTW, why are their no black woman, or latina women, or indian women? How bout a persian woman? Rawwwr. Put a tiger in my tank. Persians are easily the hottest women alive. Indian women are a close second. Why do you think they produced Kama Sutra while the Europeans produced the inquisition. I demand a Dom3 ad with a non-white female.

[Agrajag]

I always kind of pictured the Dom3 players as a little hipper than your average wargamer.


I'm/you're so unhip it's a wonder mine/your bums don't fall off.


BTW, why are their no black woman, or latina women, or indian women? How bout a persian woman? Rawwwr. Put a tiger in my tank. Persians are easily the hottest women alive. Indian women are a close second. Why do you think they produced Kama Sutra while the Europeans produced the inquisition. I demand a Dom3 ad with a non-white female.


I demand a Dom3 ad with a tentacle monster* and a Japanese schoolgirl.
*-maybe a "Dark Vines"?

[Omnirizon]

Agrajag said:

I'm/you're so unhip it's a wonder mine/your bums don't fall off.



I play Dom3 on a Macbook while listening to an Ipod and drinking a latte while eating a scone in a downtown coffee shop and talking condescendingly about... everyone else. Therefore I am _hipply_ playing Dom3.


I demand a Dom3 ad with a tentacle monster* and a Japanese schoolgirl.
*-maybe a "Dark Vines"?



Kinky.

[lch]

Agrajag said:
I demand a Dom3 ad with a tentacle monster* and a Japanese schoolgirl.
*-maybe a "Dark Vines"?


Dark Vines stun their victims, wouldn't be that exciting. The Bog beast is still available, though.

[DonCorazon]

Rune smasher would work well as only the truly hip would understand the implications.

[sector24]

Omni, can I borrow a copy of your dictionary? My vocabulary is significantly lacking esotericity. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

[Lingchih]

Folket said:
Are we war gamers? I can see that people who like war games would like dominions, but still.

I just wanted to say that my father was quite upset when I told him I was collecting virgins for sacrifices.



Yes, we are wargamers. We are extremely twisted wargamers, but wargamers all the same. You can't deny it... look at all the geeky posts. We may not be running up Napoleonic cannon to support, but it is basically the same. I don't play classic war games anymore though. Dominions is about all I play on that front.