Video Game Communications Keeping it Classy with Tomb Raider 2 Fiasco

Oh, video game industry. I feel like that school councilor who has that one mischievous brat constantly coming back to the office. I rub my eyes with deep sorrow and say, “You were just here! We’ve been over this a hundred times. Why do you keep doing this?”

That brat is the video game PR industry. I can rant, rave and scream at the top of my lungs hoping those in charge would treat 2014 as a year to speak to the gamers instead of at them. Well, the add-wizards were at it again last week during Europe’s biggest gaming convention Gamescom.

Oh no, Jared. What happened?

During the convention the some of the biggest gaming companies presented exciting updates to their games while announcing new titles. This year Microsoft announced the highly anticipated sequel to “Tomb Raider” called “Rise of the Tomb Raider.” The catch was the wording after the announcement, which the presenter said, “Coming exclusively to Xbox holiday 2015”

So it’s a timed exclusive during the holidays so Xbox can compete with Playstation’s “Uncharted 4.” No big deal.

That’s what most of us assumed. Gamers generally know that exclusives of major franchises like “Tomb Raider” is bad for business as a whole. A company that wants more money will certainly go where the is money to be made. I thought it was a smart move for Microsoft the have a strong title exclusive to their system during a lucrative time for buying games….

But no, no no, my friend. The further clarification on the wording to this announcement is what caused the controversy. When my “favorite” journalist Geoff Knightly clarified the exclusivity just for the 2015 holiday, Xbox Studios global product marketing director Aaron Greenberg corrected him by indicating that it wasn’t just for the holiday, but forever.

That’s not all. The developer of “Rise of the Tomb Raider’ Crystal Dynamics released a post on their Tumblr defending their choice to be an Xbox exclusive. While neither Crystal Dynamics nor Microsoft specifically said, “This is a timed exclusive.” or ” This game will never be on the Playstation or PC.” But it was heavily implied from CD’s post and Greenberg’s reaction that “Rise of the Tomb Raider” will be on Xbox One and stay that way. The post says,

“As you may have seen, we’ve just announced that Rise of the Tomb Raider, coming Holiday 2015, is exclusively on Xbox.”

The wording from Crystal Dynamics suggests it’s an Xbox exclusive. The “coming holiday 2015” is phrased in a way that it’s provided as additional information, not a qualifier. The sentence is essentially “Rise of the Tomb Raider is exclusively on Xbox, and it’s coming Holiday 2015.”

I bet that caused a lot of anger among the gaming community.

You bet it did! The neckbeards were enraged. There was rant, after rant, after rant. Some say that any press is good press, but there were claims of boycotting anything from Crystal Dynamics and selling their Xbox Ones.

Was it overreaction? You bet. It’s a game, and I really didn’t think “Rise of the Tomb Raider” would be 100 percent exclusive. But the vocal nerd rage made its way across the internet and caught the attention of the head of Xbox Phil Spencer who said in a Eurogamer interview,

“Yes, the deal has a duration. I didn’t buy it. I don’t own the franchise.”

While I’m glad the controversy has been explained, to a degree, I don’t care for the way Spencer explained it. Phrases like “I don’t own the franchise.” or “My job is not to talk about games I don’t own.” rub me the wrong way. It feels like he’s distancing himself from the internet rage while staying vague and uncaring. Did he have a PR rep tell him to say those things? I understand he’s the head of a huge organization, but his wording is… odd…

What’s the moral of the story? I need a TL;DR!

Long story short – be honest. I don’t know what CD or Xbox were trying to achieve by making fans think “Tomb Raider” would be completely exclusive to a single console. Gamers who play games like “Tomb Raider” are very consumer focused and want games from transparent developers and publishers.’

Microsoft has been given a lot of hate recently. Many have claimed that I have been a part of that hate, but the finger of blame isn’t easily pointed in this situation. Everybody seems to be pointing at some elusive nothingness, which wouldn’t have been the case if they were just honest in the first place.

Why Video Game PR Is Kicking Off 2014 Horribly

It’s no secret that I’m obsessed with the video game industry. It would be a dream to someday work in video game communication/marketing/branding.

At the beginning of this month, I saw a tweet from the director of Evolve PR, one of the leading public relations firms specializing in gaming, asking how to improve video game PR in 2014.

How can we improve video game PR in 2014?

— Tom Ohle (@EvolveTom) January 6, 2014

While a novice like me who hasn’t worked in any professional manner in the gaming PR scene isn’t qualified to give any thought-provoking answers, the question has stuck with me. With two new consoles looking to impress their freshman year, a make-it or break-it situation for Nintendo and the inclusion of Steam Machines, 2014 looks like a critical year for games.

Then Microsoft and Machinima had to screw it up.

Basically, Microsoft paid a large amount of money to various YouTube personalities to give positive influence on their newest console – the Xbox One. One of the biggest YouTube gaming networks, Machinima recently ran a campaign called “XB1M13” That featured very positive press for Microsoft and featured gameplay footage.

After the campaign, an email was leaked containing the agreement between Microsoft and Machinima detailed that YouTube posters on the Machinima will get financial bonuses for promoting the Xbox One, as long as the agreement was kept secret.

Legal? Moral? Both?

It’s not my place to argue whether or not this deal broke the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) guidelines, but I do have a problem with how the situation is handled.

Yes, companies do this kind of work all the time, maybe not this underhanded, but companies have been targeting mommy bloggers in the same way for nearly a decade.

My problem is that Microsoft has officially distanced themselves from the situation by saying that the “secret keeping” was not in their agreement, and any disclosure restrictions must have been Machinima to their YouTube personalities.

Really? I mean, really?

Machinima has apologized, but who thought this was a good idea? Did anyone in the PR or marketing for either company see this? When dealing with social networking sites like YouTube, you know transparency is VITAL.

That’s why YouTubers are enraged. They expect honest opinions from trusted sources. How can trust be built when opinions are bought under the table? I have no problems with a company giving a product to be considered, but they have to risk the potential negative press it may cause.

Opportunity abound.

That’s why negative press is important. It’s a chance to know either

• What target audiences see as a problem, which will give direction to improving said product.
• Which psychographics favor the products as personal choice, then market toward them.

Putting something in a realm where real customers give their real opinions about a product isn’t easy, but it’s a good way to learn and grow in the long run instead of spending money for a few quick bucks right now.

Am I off base? Let me know if you’re a business owner and think I’m a crazy hippie.

Did Gaming Journalist go Too Far at the VGX?

Spike’s annual train wreck known as the Video Game Awards (VGAs), now VGX Awards, streamed this weekend with more eye-rolling, sighs, and groans than previous years. Instead of making it an extravagant event like the Oscars or Grammys as they have before, they went with a more intimate setting.

There was no live audience except when cutting to…  The Loiter Squad… as they performed music from Grand Theft Auto 5, awkwardly tried to fill time by chanting “potatoes,” talked about shoulder pads, or dry humped the air. The change was good in theory, but made for three hours of shame within the gaming community.

Why did they change it to VGX? Because video games are EXTREME!!!!!

The change also included celebrity co-host, Community and The Soup’s Joel McHale, who trash-talked gamers, the event and main host Geoff Keighley – One of the most prominent gaming journalists in the business.

You can read more about the disaster that is the VGX Awards on Forbs, Kotaku or YouTube. Going over the problems this joke of an awards show has and the solutions to making it better is a whole blog series people smarter and more talented than me have already made. What really caught my attention was the way Geoff Keighley poked and prodded game studios and developers for information well beyond what was being discussed on the program.

Don’t expect breaking news from a giant corporation, because NintenDONT.

There was a segment during the show when president and chief operating officer of Nintnedo of North America Reggie Fils-Aime revealed a playable character in the upcoming Donkey Kong game. Granted, the majority of the target demographic doesn’t care about about such a minor announcement. but Keighley wasn’t satisfied with that revelation. Hiding behind the “fans online,” he asked on more than one occasion during the interview if there was any more information Nintendo wished to reveal. It even led to, “What more do you want?” proclaimed by Fils-Aime.

I know journalist are always on the lookout for the next big scoop, and I know Keighley and Fils-Aime have a bumpy history, but it’s not the wisest move to corner the President of a large company who probably has hours of media training from some high profile PR professionals. They came to present Donkey Kong, and that’s it. Keighley, as a prominent journalist, probably has more reliable sources for that kind of information. He should know that this is a company that ignores huge conferences like E3 and instead announces games through their own telecasts. Stop trying to capture rainwater when you can get a drink at the river.

It’s an awards show.

There’s a quote Keighley said after the debut of an impressive indie game that made me questions his purpose for hosting the VGX.

“…That’s what this show should be abut is showing you games that surprise you from places you wouldn’t expect…”

It makes me feel like he’s using the guise of an awards show to break news and get an inside scoop on gaming releases, which is making video gaming and gaming journalism a pitiful spectacle that isn’t advancing either industry.

Objective journalism brought to you by Doritos and Mountain Dew.

The point of an awards show is to pay tribute and show respect to the studios and individuals who have devoted years and poured their soul into making the best games they can. If an awards program wants to be respected, it has to be about the awards and not focusing on the commercials and reveal trailers for the latest release. There’s no exclusive preview for the next James Bond movie at the Academy Awards. Spike needs to decide if they want to be a reputable awards show or change the X in VGX to “expo.”

Are you hosting or reporting?

What makes a good host? I don’t claim to be an expert in being an emcee, but a good host should provide quality entertainment while keeping the ceremony going on schedule. At no point have I ever seen an awards host grill winners or celebrities to leak information or get an exclusive scoop. It’s the VGX Awards not “20/20” or “60 Minutes.”

If a host is interviewing people, they should focus on the labor of love and creative process that went into making those games instead of trying to pry information out of them. Awards are about them, not a way to advance your career.

What do you think? Am I being too critical about Geoff Keighley? What do you think about the state of gaming journalism?