somme Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 To be fair though he was an avid WoW player and talked about it all the time. Naming a character after him, at the fans request, seems like a fitting tribute to me.
Glen-i Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 To be fair though he was an avid WoW player and talked about it all the time. Naming a character after him, at the fans request, seems like a fitting tribute to me. Oh good, someone finally explained what Blizzard did. Thank you. The way everyone was going on about it, you'd think it was some kind of content people would have to buy. Now that would be cashing in. Isn't this exactly what everyone here has wanted? Just with a Zelda game. It happens in WoW, now it's disrespectful? Why is that?
Cube Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 Isn't this exactly what everyone here has wanted? Just with a Zelda game. It happens in WoW, now it's disrespectful? Why is that? I've been saying that Nintendo should leave it for now then contact his family once enough time has passed. Perhaps if Blizzard had added him quietly and let the community see the mark of respect, but all I see are the many news articles about the announcement.
Glen-i Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 I've been saying that Nintendo should leave it for now then contact his family once enough time has passed. Perhaps if Blizzard had added him quietly and let the community see the mark of respect, but all I see are the many news articles about the announcement. OK, so it was handled poorly? But even if they did do it quietly, do you think there wouldn't be news articles? It would not take long before someone noticed and the internet reacted.
Sheikah Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 I've been saying that Nintendo should leave it for now then contact his family once enough time has passed. Perhaps if Blizzard had added him quietly and let the community see the mark of respect, but all I see are the many news articles about the announcement. I would be honoured if my father had such a profound effect on people that tributes were made within games. Especially if I knew my dad was already renowned in gaming circles. No different to how if a famous tennis player died and Wimbledon was on, they might immediately hold a minute's silence the same day at the beginning of a match or maybe a day after it happened.
Pestneb Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 OK, so it was handled poorly?But even if they did do it quietly, do you think there wouldn't be news articles? It would not take long before someone noticed and the internet reacted. My problem isn't that it was handled poorly, I think it was handled fantastically, they got their publicity with seemingly no backlash whatsoever. My problem is it has been done callously. Take the Nintendo adverts - They approached Robin, he was lending his name to this product, they got his consensus and maybe he chose to do this for free, maybe he asked for pay as he would rightly be entitled to. As a professional, Mr Williams has certainly left a HUGE mark on our culture, and so them incorporating him into the game, as a mark of appreciation of his talent I think is an appropriate gesture. My problem is that as a man, I feel a certain amount of his dignity is taken away by using his recent death as a way of bolstering a companies exposure, which is what those statements were about. Having said that, everyone is different, I hope I have been unduly harsh on the intentions of those companies, also that Mr Williams family view the situation differently to myself and more in line with a number of others who have posted. Perhaps I should end by saying it would be nice if Nintendo can at some point find a fitting tribute to a man who's professional legacy will remain with us for many years to come
Mr-Paul Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 I would be honoured if my father had such a profound effect on people that tributes were made within games. Especially if I knew my dad was already renowned in gaming circles. No different to how if a famous tennis player died and Wimbledon was on, they might immediately hold a minute's silence the same day at the beginning of a match or maybe a day after it happened. The thing is, Robin Williams doesn't really have a lot to do with gaming - yes he was a gamer but hardly an influential figure in the industry. It doesn't really compare to a tennis player being commemorated at a tennis match. Yes, he's had a profound effect on people's lives, but through film, not gaming.
Sheikah Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 Who cares? The link is still very definitely there, and they're making a tribute to him because of the respect they had for him. I literally have no idea how this is being interpreted as selfish since it really isn't going to translate through to profit. The folk on here who are finding fault with that are coming across as very jaded.
Pestneb Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 since it really isn't going to translate through to profit. Notice in lots of sports you get brand names, the names of sponsors? They don't do it because they particularly care for the sport. It's for brand exposure. Brand exposure = profit. That's why they are willing hundreds, thousands, even millions just to have a brand name on a shirt, or the body of a car, or on sports caps. We may seem jaded... but perhaps only as much as you seem naive by that statement!
Sheikah Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 (edited) We may seem jaded... but perhaps only as much as you seem naive by that statement! Nope, it's definitely just a case of you who is jaded :p (and almost certainly wrong, lest you can provide evidence this would boost their income in any significant way). Also like for like comparing Blizzard to brands like Nike is pretty silly. Blizzard aren't trying to be a 'cool' and relevant brand like Nike, they're not making clothes people want to be seen in or trying to assert a statement. Their business model requires people to know about their game and to want to play it. This would be one of the most arbitrary and ridiculous ways to get people to know about their game. Enough so that I'm saying that that's not what they were trying to do. Their best way of advertising has always been to make an MMORPG that is better than every other MMORPG, and everyone with even a passing interest in the genre has come to know it for that reason. Even if better MMORPGs have come along, the mechanics and standards they introduced have been replicated and they have rightly claimed the MMORPG crown through making a great game. Apparently the event organisers of WoW are humans. Humans who, I have on good authority, may have on time to time watched the odd film and maybe even come to like the actors in them... Edited August 18, 2014 by Sheikah
somme Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 WoW has been around so long it doesn't really need any more exposure. People either want to play it or they don't. I think it's a lovely gesture by them, but it won't make me go back to play it. I really don't think their intention is to emotionally blackmail or coerce me or anyone else into returning/signing up.
Pestneb Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 Nope, it's definitely just a case of you who is jaded :p (and almost certainly wrong, lest you can provide evidence this would boost their income in any significant way). Also like for like comparing Blizzard to brands like Nike is pretty silly. Blizzard aren't trying to be a 'cool' and relevant brand like Nike, they're not making clothes people want to be seen in or trying to assert a statement. Their business model requires people to know about their game and to want to play it. This would be one of the most arbitrary and ridiculous ways to get people to know about their game. Enough so that I'm saying that that's not what they were trying to do. Apparently the event organisers of the games are humans. Humans who, I have on good authority, may have on time to time watched the odd film. lol. If you read my post you'll notice I didn't actually mention any brands by name. but maybe you'll actually read what you wrote: Their business model requires people to know about their game and to want to play it. and a definition of advertising: the act or practice of calling public attention to one's product, service, need, etc. and : click on the name to find out who this "world of warcraft" fellow is and you get informed that: The world's most epic online game is free to play for the first twenty levels! Enter into a world of myth, magic, and legendary adventure. Of course I suspect that you are in troll mode so I'll leave it there. Anyway, do we think we'll hear any updates on when Zelda U is likely to get released soon? I've heard suggestions of a direct coming soon, might they let us know what quarter to expect the game in?
Glen-i Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 [quote name=Pestneb;1702713https://twitter.com/Warcraft/statuses/499373912291938307 click on the name to find out who this "world of warcraft" fellow is and you get informed that: The world's most epic online game is free to play for the first twenty levels! Enter into a world of myth' date=' magic, and legendary adventure.[/quote] Yeah, see, now that's handled poorly.
Sheikah Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 (edited) lol. If you read my post you'll notice I didn't actually mention any brands by name. And yet, your comparison was directly applicable to the brand that I proposed, which is why I rendered your comparison invalid. The kinds of brands you touched on (e.g. 'Nike') have different ways of advertising their product to a company like Blizzard. Even though Blizzard advertise, they're not just putting out their name or logo like Nike do with tick marks. That's why if this was an advertisement then it would be pretty meaningless. With something like Nike, they want their brand and logo plastered across every surface or piece of clothing that they possibly can. With WoW, it's about getting across their message: what it is, and what you're getting. and a definition of advertising:the act or practice of calling public attention to one's product, service, need, etc. Of course I suspect that you are in troll mode so I'll leave it there. The main problem here is that you think any form of public engagement is necessarily intended to serve as advertising. Well, that, and that you're clearly lacking common sense. This way of thinking is wrong on a number of levels since it essentially strips the humanity from the event organisers of the game, who like RW just as much as anyone else. To take the definition of advertising at face value in order to counter my point is also pretty facile. Because you could very easily apply that definition to this, too: Following 13th November, these will be the new prices of recurring subscriptions (with the old in parenthesis): 30 Days - £9.99 (£8.99) 90 Days - £28.17 (£25.17) 180 Days - £52.14 (£46.14) ^ Courtesy of Eurogamer and various other websites. So, tell me, is this also advertising? For it certainly drew attention to the brand and product. Suddenly, you might then realise - just because something is widely reported through the media, doesn't mean that they were intending to advertise their fucking game. Geez. Yeah, see, now that's handled poorly. The only way you can that is to make the link in your head out of choice. Of course their username will link to what their game is about; it's their official twitter account. It doesn't mean that the message was posted as a way to hook people in who were searching for RW but had never tried WoW. if it was, that seems like a really obscure way to go about advertising. These accounts are often manned by 1 or 2 low level staff anyway who are unlikely to be posting this at the orders of marketing. C'maan. Edited August 18, 2014 by Sheikah Automerged Doublepost
Mr-Paul Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 Who cares? The link is still very definitely there, and they're making a tribute to him because of the respect they had for him. I literally have no idea how this is being interpreted as selfish since it really isn't going to translate through to profit. The folk on here who are finding fault with that are coming across as very jaded. I personally see nothing wrong with people expressing their condolences, and wasn't saying that Blizzard were being selfish - just pointing out the flaw in your argument, that the link is a lot more tenuous than the tennis one you presented, and how in these sorts of situations it can come across as "jumping on the bandwagon" even if the feelings are genuine. Anyway, can we talk about Zelda again please :p
Sheikah Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 (edited) I personally see nothing wrong with people expressing their condolences, and wasn't saying that Blizzard were being selfish - just pointing out the flaw in your argument, that the link is a lot more tenuous than the tennis one you presented, and how in these sorts of situations it can come across as "jumping on the bandwagon" even if the feelings are genuine. Anyway, can we talk about Zelda again please :p It wasn't a flawed argument. He was a player of World of Warcraft, just as a tennis player could have played at Wimbledon. It doesn't matter if one is more experienced in their associated 'game' than the other, because at the end of the day it's the thought that counts coming from an organisation with a link to that person. I was using the tennis analogy to point out that absolutely nobody would think 'it's too soon' or 'attention-seeking', if a planned silence or tweet performed at Wimbledon was then reported in the news. Then again, you also have to remember that on a forum of rampant Nintendo fanboys, it's not uncommon for people to make arguments out of essentially nothing if it relates to the counter position to whatever Nintendo have done. Edited August 18, 2014 by Sheikah
Mr-Paul Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 It's really not the same. Let's say George Clooney plays tennis in his spare time. He dies. He then gets a tribute at Wimbledon. You'd think the link was tenuous at best. That's the same as the Robin Williams situation. He was not a significant figure in the WoW community, so you can see why some would be puzzled by tributes to him. Personally, I have no problem with the likes of Blizzard doing this in his memory, and don't think it's attention seeking, but you can't really compare it to someone who has played at Wimbledon having a minute silence. The tennis player is significant in that field, Robin Williams isn't significant in WoW. Which is why some may see it as something other than genuine tribute.
Gizmo Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 (edited) Christ guys, companies can't win. If they ignore it they are being callous, if they make a statement they are being opportunistic...can't they just like the guy and want to pay tribute, like millions of others have done on social media? Just because media outlets pick up the nice gesture and publicise it doesn't mean that's why the company did it in the first place. Can't people just be nice? It's really not the same. Let's say George Clooney plays tennis in his spare time. He dies. He then gets a tribute at Wimbledon. You'd think the link was tenuous at best. That's the same as the Robin Williams situation. He was not a significant figure in the WoW community, so you can see why some would be puzzled by tributes to him. Personally, I have no problem with the likes of Blizzard doing this in his memory, and don't think it's attention seeking, but you can't really compare it to someone who has played at Wimbledon having a minute silence. The tennis player is significant in that field, Robin Williams isn't significant in WoW. Which is why some may see it as something other than genuine tribute. Cliff Richard is a famous tennis fan and has links to Wimbledon, you think they wouldn't do something in his honour? Robin Williams is a famous video gamer and has links to WoW, they named a character after him. Seems fair enough to me. I'm sure if a non-famous person related to the game died - say, a developer or something - they'd name a character too. Edited August 18, 2014 by Gizmo Automerged Doublepost
Sheikah Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 (edited) It's really not the same. Let's say George Clooney plays tennis in his spare time. He dies. He then gets a tribute at Wimbledon. You'd think the link was tenuous at best. Now who is doing the poor comparisons? World of Warcraft IS the game that he played AND the organisation that recognised him. If George Clooney played at Wimbledon, that would be the organisation that recognised him too. Except, in your comparison he hasn't played at Wimbledon. This is really beyond the point that I was making anyway. He was not a significant figure in the WoW community, so you can see why some would be puzzled by tributes to him. Speak for yourself. You could very easily argue that such an important figure playing and endorsing a game makes players of that game aware of his connection. I'm pretty sure players of WoW wanted some kind of tribute, much like people asked Nintendo. Also, do you even play WoW? If you don't it would seem odd that you're arguing how close he seems linked to the game, if you're not even that involved with the game yourself. Christ guys, companies can't win. If they ignore it they are being callous, if they make a statement they are being opportunistic...can't they just like the guy and want to pay tribute, like millions of others have done on social media? Just because media outlets pick up the nice gesture and publicise it doesn't mean that's why the company did it in the first place. Can't people just be nice? This is exactly what we've come to realise, isn't it? I haven't slagged off Nintendo because they can choose to remember him how they want. Likewise, people are also assuming that companies paying tribute are heartless machines and that every keyboard stroke is made with the pure intention of profit. Edited August 18, 2014 by Sheikah Automerged Doublepost
Kav Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 As much as I've fallen out of love with Nintendo and my WiiU as of late (more since getting my PS4) I'm looking forward to this game sooooooo much! Easily more than any other game, even though we know so little about it. That's just what Zelda games do to me!
Hero-of-Time Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 As much as I've fallen out of love with Nintendo and my WiiU as of late (more since getting my PS4) I'm looking forward to this game sooooooo much! Easily more than any other game, even though we know so little about it. That's just what Zelda games do to me! I used to be like that but after things like Phantom Hourglass and Skyward Sword I'm a little more wary about the franchise. For me it's no longer the untouchable series it once was. It got a little goodwill back with Link Between Worlds though.
Pestneb Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 As much as I've fallen out of love with Nintendo and my WiiU as of late (more since getting my PS4) I'm looking forward to this game sooooooo much! Easily more than any other game, even though we know so little about it. That's just what Zelda games do to me! I'm not the biggest fan of the Zelda series, but seeing what little I have, and hearing what little info there is out there about the game, I am very interested in how it turns out. Looking good so far though.
EEVILMURRAY Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 Gonna just throw a few nuggets in here for flava flav. That's the same as the Robin Williams situation. He was not a significant figure in the WoW community And to be honest Robin Williams wasn't really a significant figure in the Zelda community. He just liked the series and it inspired his child's name. It's not really much different than @Mokong and his pr0 Zelda tattoos. The only difference is that A) he's not forcing his appreciation upon someone else* and B) he's not famous. And it's mainly due to B that Mokong will not have a petition created for him to have his name in a future Zelda title when his time comes. *It's up to fate whether Zelda would actually turn out to be a fan of the series. Personally I don't think she is as much as she/others would make her out to be. Kakariko Town?! No way an actual fan would make such a mistake.
Happenstance Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 Im not a fan of the 3D Zelda games but I am at least interested to see what direction they end up taking this with the open world stuff.
Glen-i Posted August 18, 2014 Posted August 18, 2014 *It's up to fate whether Zelda would actually turn out to be a fan of the series. Personally I don't think she is as much as she/others would make her out to be. Kakariko Town?! No way an actual fan would make such a mistake. I know, right? She even chose Greninja on Smash! The nerve... You're probably right, though.
Recommended Posts