Best gaming memes of the year.

TEKK3N

In no particular order.

Blizzard - Diablo IM:    "Don't you guys have phones?" (he asks to a bunch of PC nerds)
Bethesda 1 - FO76:      "It just works" (no Todd, it really doesn't)

Bethesda 2 - FO76:      "There is a shortage of canvas" (seriously?)

EA/Dice - Battlefield 5:  "You don't like it? Don't buy it" (best advice ever, thanks EA)

Seriously, waddafuq is going on with AAA game publishers, is there a shortage of marketing graduates or something?
Isn't communication important for these people?

Do you think Gaming publishers are underestimating the gaming community?
Granted we gamers made it pretty easy for them in recent years, I understand why they are so casual with their actions and statements.
But it's the tide finally turning?

TheScavenger

Blizzard - WoW: "You think you want it, but you don't" (referring to classic WoW)

think that was from this year

TEKK3N

TheScavenger said:

Blizzard - WoW: "You think you want it, but you don't" (referring to classic WoW)

think that was from this year

I think it was 2017 Blizzcon.

JeffSpicoli

This thread needs a poll

TEKK3N

thunderC said:

This thread needs a poll

Granted

Amathe

These companies have people hooked on cash shops. You don't have to be respectful of someone who is an addict.

MadFrenchie

It's worth noting the Battlefield 5 "you don't like it, don't buy it" was not referencing title quality, but pushback that it would feature women on the battlefield.

There's nothing wrong with telling ignorant consumers lambasting your title for including female avatars to shove off.  That's not a fair critique of the title's quality as a video game, because it's a video game and not a documentary (not to mention that females served in WWII anyways).

Pemmin

MadFrenchie said:

It's worth noting the Battlefield 5 "you don't like it, don't buy it" was not referencing title quality, but pushback that it would feature women on the battlefield.

There's nothing wrong with telling ignorant consumers lambasting your title for including female avatars to shove off.  That's not a fair critique of the title's quality as a video game, because it's a video game and not a documentary (not to mention that females served in WWII anyways).

I remember it being more about the prosthetic arm, neon blue face paint, and the katana(in the western front) in the reveal trailer calling into question the authenticity aspect that the battle field franchise formerly strived to achieve. Then the gaming media bringing up the female aspect of it.....causing unneeded controversy from outside sources not even interested in the game.


the comment "you don't like it, dont buy it" was rude at the time and poor PR. could have easily went with "we are trying to appeal to our female fan base with a female model, and there is historical precedent for females on the battle field. Please give the game a chance" ...this would have been a more appropriate response.


There is everything wrong with telling customers off...they are paying your salary and the salary of everyone else in your company. its literally shooting yourself in the foot. 

JeffSpicoli

MadFrenchie said:

It's worth noting the Battlefield 5 "you don't like it, don't buy it" was not referencing title quality, but pushback that it would feature women on the battlefield.

There's nothing wrong with telling ignorant consumers lambasting your title for including female avatars to shove off.  That's not a fair critique of the title's quality as a video game, because it's a video game and not a documentary (not to mention that females served in WWII anyways).

alkarionlog

Pemmin said:

MadFrenchie said:

It's worth noting the Battlefield 5 "you don't like it, don't buy it" was not referencing title quality, but pushback that it would feature women on the battlefield.

There's nothing wrong with telling ignorant consumers lambasting your title for including female avatars to shove off.  That's not a fair critique of the title's quality as a video game, because it's a video game and not a documentary (not to mention that females served in WWII anyways).

I remember it being more about the prosthetic arm, neon blue face paint, and the katana(in the western front) in the reveal trailer calling into question the authenticity aspect that the battle field franchise formerly strived to achieve. Then the gaming media bringing up the female aspect of it.....causing unneeded controversy from outside sources not even interested in the game.


the comment "you don't like it, dont buy it" was rude at the time and poor PR. could have easily went with "we are trying to appeal to our female fan base with a female model, and there is historical precedent for females on the battle field. Please give the game a chance" ...this would have been a more appropriate response.


There is everything wrong with telling customers off...they are paying your salary and the salary of everyone else in your company. its literally shooting yourself in the foot. 

I only ever saw a mention of females on a battle was she was a nurse, only saw female fighting on films and games, woman did send several men to the frontlines, but in combat? don't think I saw a mention of it

and yes i'm calling the bait

alkarionlog

TEKK3N said:

In no particular order.

Blizzard - Diablo IM:    "Don't you guys have phones?" (he asks to a bunch of PC nerds)
Bethesda 1 - FO76:      "It just works" (no Todd, it really doesn't)

Bethesda 2 - FO76:      "There is a shortage of canvas" (seriously?)

EA/Dice - Battlefield 5:  "You don't like it? Don't buy it" (best advice ever, thanks EA)

Seriously, waddafuq is going on with AAA game publishers, is there a shortage of marketing graduates or something?
Isn't communication important for these people?

Do you think Gaming publishers are underestimating the gaming community?
Granted we gamers made it pretty easy for them in recent years, I understand why they are so casual with their actions and statements.
But it's the tide finally turning?

btw you want to know what is going on? player being doormats to companys giving then money don't matter the crap they make, that is what is going on

Pemmin

alkarionlog said:

Pemmin said:

MadFrenchie said:

It's worth noting the Battlefield 5 "you don't like it, don't buy it" was not referencing title quality, but pushback that it would feature women on the battlefield.

There's nothing wrong with telling ignorant consumers lambasting your title for including female avatars to shove off.  That's not a fair critique of the title's quality as a video game, because it's a video game and not a documentary (not to mention that females served in WWII anyways).

I remember it being more about the prosthetic arm, neon blue face paint, and the katana(in the western front) in the reveal trailer calling into question the authenticity aspect that the battle field franchise formerly strived to achieve. Then the gaming media bringing up the female aspect of it.....causing unneeded controversy from outside sources not even interested in the game.


the comment "you don't like it, dont buy it" was rude at the time and poor PR. could have easily went with "we are trying to appeal to our female fan base with a female model, and there is historical precedent for females on the battle field. Please give the game a chance" ...this would have been a more appropriate response.


There is everything wrong with telling customers off...they are paying your salary and the salary of everyone else in your company. its literally shooting yourself in the foot. 

I only ever saw a mention of females on a battle was she was a nurse, only saw female fighting on films and games, woman did send several men to the frontlines, but in combat? don't think I saw a mention of it

and yes i'm calling the bait

there was cases of women impersonating men in order to fight. it's also irrelevant because the controversy  was about the other things mentioned...the female avatar is only mentioned because the arm and paint on the original cover art was depicted on the women. at the time the accusation was that EA/Dice was trying to appeal to the fortnite crowd at the expense of authenticity.

MadFrenchie

Pemmin said:

MadFrenchie said:

It's worth noting the Battlefield 5 "you don't like it, don't buy it" was not referencing title quality, but pushback that it would feature women on the battlefield.

There's nothing wrong with telling ignorant consumers lambasting your title for including female avatars to shove off.  That's not a fair critique of the title's quality as a video game, because it's a video game and not a documentary (not to mention that females served in WWII anyways).

I remember it being more about the prosthetic arm, neon blue face paint, and the katana(in the western front) in the reveal trailer calling into question the authenticity aspect that the battle field franchise formerly strived to achieve. Then the gaming media bringing up the female aspect of it.....causing unneeded controversy from outside sources not even interested in the game.


the comment "you don't like it, dont buy it" was rude at the time and poor PR. could have easily went with "we are trying to appeal to our female fan base with a female model, and there is historical precedent for females on the battle field. Please give the game a chance" ...this would have been a more appropriate response.


There is everything wrong with telling customers off...they are paying your salary and the salary of everyone else in your company. its literally shooting yourself in the foot. 

There were some mentioning prosthetics or other things such as standard uniforms (even though there's literally a documented case in a female fighting in WWII WITH prosthetics), but it got swallowed up by idiots complaining about the female avatars ignorantly.

Sure, EA could've responded more diplomatically to that vocal group, or they could've ghosted them to more diplomatically address the other issues (i.e. prosthetic usage).  But the group had already been given the facts to refute their stance by other gamers on the internet multiple times before EA responded because it wouldn't die.

Even so, disputing artistic liberties with a setting isn't nearly the same level as broken games or griefer's-dream-glitches.  I mean, do we shit on Wolfenstein because Hitler never actually owned a mecha-battle suit, and there were never genetically altered German supersoldiers as shown in those games?  We do not.

Phry

2018 has to be the year of the 'meme' personally i think the Blizzard guys fateful words of 'don't you guys have phones' will turn out to be one of the most iconic, probably up there with the npc memes.
While a guy on a stage is liable to say something in the moment that is just hillariously bad, the others can't really make that excuse, really makes you wonder what their PR departments are paid for 

ConstantineMerus

Phry said:

2018 has to be the year of the 'meme' personally i think the Blizzard guys fateful words of 'don't you guys have phones' will turn out to be one of the most iconic, probably up there with the npc memes.
While a guy on a stage is liable to say something in the moment that is just hillariously bad, the others can't really make that excuse, really makes you wonder what their PR departments are paid for 

It would've been awesome if a Freudian slip had occurred:

"don't you guys have credit cards?"

cheyane

Tough choice between the canvas and the phone.

JeffSpicoli

ConstantineMerus said:

Phry said:

2018 has to be the year of the 'meme' personally i think the Blizzard guys fateful words of 'don't you guys have phones' will turn out to be one of the most iconic, probably up there with the npc memes.
While a guy on a stage is liable to say something in the moment that is just hillariously bad, the others can't really make that excuse, really makes you wonder what their PR departments are paid for 

It would've been awesome if a Freudian slip had occurred:

"don't you guys have credit cards?"

Blizzards board of directors 

Phry

ConstantineMerus said:

Phry said:

2018 has to be the year of the 'meme' personally i think the Blizzard guys fateful words of 'don't you guys have phones' will turn out to be one of the most iconic, probably up there with the npc memes.
While a guy on a stage is liable to say something in the moment that is just hillariously bad, the others can't really make that excuse, really makes you wonder what their PR departments are paid for 

It would've been awesome if a Freudian slip had occurred:

"don't you guys have credit cards?"

as hillarious as that would have been, it was the Blizzard guys honest exclamation, he really sounded as though he thought what he was saying should have been obvious, i think what he meant to really say was something along the lines of 'if you guys have phones and you like diablo then this is going to be awesome' 

TEKK3N

alkarionlog said:

TEKK3N said:

btw you want to know what is going on? player being doormats to companys giving then money don't matter the crap they make, that is what is going on

I cover that in the second part of my post.

In fact the thread is more about that, than the memes.

I was trying to make a fun thread while talking about a serious issue.
The amount of PR slip ups from senior company directors in the last couple of years is astounding.
They are totally care free about what comes out their mouth.
But what I noticed is that now even fanboys are starting to take this issue a bit more seriously and that is reflected by the poor sales of their games.

MadFrenchie

TEKK3N said:

alkarionlog said:

TEKK3N said:

btw you want to know what is going on? player being doormats to companys giving then money don't matter the crap they make, that is what is going on

I cover that in the second part of my post.

In fact the thread is more about that, than the memes.

I was trying to make a fun thread while talking about a serious issue.
The amount of PR slip ups from senior company directors in the last couple of years is astounding.
They are totally care free about what comes out their mouth.
But what I noticed is that now even fanboys are starting to take this issue a bit more seriously and that is reflected by the poor sales of their games.

It's not even the PR that's bringing the brunt of it; had FO76 been an epic game, PR blunders with a bag would've been disappointing but likely wouldn't have stunted sells.  Shitty reviews indicating your game was a half-assed cash grab?  That'll get under consumer's skin in a way CE items (by definition only a concern for a small percentage of buyers) can't.  By the time the bag gaffe occurred, gamers were looking for a last straw to break the camel's back.  Bethesda kindly obliged.

TEKK3N

cheyane said:

Tough choice between the canvas and the phone.

Personally I think EA "You don't like it, don't buy it", it's far worse, even if it's less funny.

I think it is just plain stupid and denote a level of arrogance that has no place in business.

It is a given that if I don't like something I am not going to buy it, you don't have to remind me that. So it's a shit advice to start with.
But the fact you are saying that about one of your own product is criminal.
To me it translates as "Our product is so awesome that we don't need your money".
You need an ego as big as a dinosaur to say something like that.

But the funniest one is "There is a shortage of Canvas", I cannot even start to comprehend how someone could come up with such a lame excuse.
This is High School material at best.

MadFrenchie

TEKK3N said:

cheyane said:

Tough choice between the canvas and the phone.

Personally I think EA "You don't like it, don't buy it", it's far worse, even if it's less funny.

I think it is just plain stupid and denote a level of arrogance that has no place in business.

It is a given that if I don't like something I am not going to buy it, you don't have to remind me that. So it's a shit advice to start with.
But the fact you are saying that about one of your own product is criminal.
To me it translates as "Our product is so awesome that we don't need your money".
You need an ego as big as a dinosaur to say something like that.

But the funniest one is "There is a shortage of Canvas", I cannot even start to comprehend how someone could come up with such a lame excuse.
This is High School material at best.

The context makes EA's less egregious than things like Blizzard and Bethesda's gaffes.

EA was attempting to respond to a specific group of players pushing an agenda that had little to do with qualitative merits of the game.  Setting and aesthetic choices are not objective or binary features; see my Wolfenstein example.

EA should've been clearer about the direction maybe, but when your head honcho literally tweets out about how the previous title had two folks riding a horse with flamethrowers, so DICE isn't trying to go for setting realism, and players still kick up a fuss about a woman, or a prosthetic limb?  Then I can see why EA/DICE may have thought the obvious needed reiterating.  They addressed it reference the previous title, but gamers wouldn't let it go.

TEKK3N

MadFrenchie said:

TEKK3N said:

The context makes EA's less egregious than things like Blizzard and Bethesda's gaffes.

EA was attempting to respond to a specific group of players pushing an agenda that had little to do with qualitative merits of the game.  Setting and aesthetic choices are not objective or binary features; see my Wolfenstein example.

EA should've been clearer about the direction maybe, but when your head honcho literally tweets out about how the previous title had two folks riding a horse with flamethrowers, so DICE isn't trying to go for setting realism, and players still kick up a fuss about a woman, or a prosthetic limb?  Then I can see why EA/DICE may have thought the obvious needed reiterating.  They addressed it reference the previous title, but gamers wouldn't let it go.

I am aware of the context the sentence has been said.
But that's not the way you deliver it.

In these cases all you have to say is something along those lines:
"At EA we believe in diversity and strive to share our believes through all our games whenever is possible. We understand that some people might not agree with it, but we still believe that's the right thing to do."

I basically said the same thing Patrick Soderlund said without sounding arrogant AF.

Most of the people complaining about BFV approach are fanboys who bought every single Battlefield game, and felt the game was losing its identity.
So saying something so abrasive as that, it's like spitting on the plate you are eating from.

MadFrenchie

TEKK3N said:

MadFrenchie said:

TEKK3N said:

The context makes EA's less egregious than things like Blizzard and Bethesda's gaffes.

EA was attempting to respond to a specific group of players pushing an agenda that had little to do with qualitative merits of the game.  Setting and aesthetic choices are not objective or binary features; see my Wolfenstein example.

EA should've been clearer about the direction maybe, but when your head honcho literally tweets out about how the previous title had two folks riding a horse with flamethrowers, so DICE isn't trying to go for setting realism, and players still kick up a fuss about a woman, or a prosthetic limb?  Then I can see why EA/DICE may have thought the obvious needed reiterating.  They addressed it reference the previous title, but gamers wouldn't let it go.

I am aware of the context the sentence has been said.
But that's not the way you deliver it.

In these cases all you have to say is something along those lines:
"At EA we believe in diversity and strive to share our believes through all our games whenever is possible. We understand that some people might not agree with it, but we still believe that's the right thing to do."

I basically said the same thing Patrick Soderlund said without sounding arrogant AF.

Most of the people complaining about BFV approach are fanboys who bought every single Battlefield game, and felt the game was losing its identity.
So saying something so abrasive as that, it's like spitting on the plate you are eating from.

Again, it was said that way reference Battlefield 1 and V's releases.  

https://twitter.com/ogabrielson/status/1000042205850079232

"First, let me be clear about one thing. Player choice and female playable characters are here to stay."

"We want Battlefield V to represent all those who were a part of the greatest drama in human history, and give players choice to choose and customize the characters they play with."

"The Battlefield sandbox has always been about playing the way you want. Like attempting to fit three players on a galloping horse, with flamethrowers. With BFV you also get the chance to play as who you want. This is #everyonesbattlefield."


It absolutely was addressed publicly in a way that explained their stance professionally.  That just wasn't enough for that small, vocal group of folks who continued to bitch because the answer they got wasn't "okay, we give in."

Consumers aren't always blameless in these situations.  I feel EA's case here is an example where gamers acted very irrationally.

JeffSpicoli

OG_Zorvan said:

At first i laughed, but what really sucks about this is the more money the industry makes the worse it will get.

Gutlard

2018's been one shit show after another, so it's hard to pick just one turd... Luckily, I've never felt like I've gone through the ringer until this year; just a drained husk crawling toward 2019. 

Nowhere to go but up RIGHT?!?!?!

If 2018 is, "The year that dev's lost touch," I wonder what 2019 will be. Hopefully, "The year that dev's bought a clue and really turned things around."

Gut Out!