Recently, I got a book discussing marketing tactics used by various groups and companies. This reminded me of a standard tactic all gamers are familiar with: the licensed game.
I would say that the licensed game is a mixed bag, but its more like a box of chocolates comprised of only the icky (insert type you hate) ones. Most infamously, a movie franchise game nearly destroyed the video game industry: E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial. No doubt, Atari was banking on the popularity of the movie, critically acclaimed even to this day, to boost sales of the game. However, several factors lead to the lackluster quality of the game itself. From what I can tell, the game's design was rushed and not fully tested. Many posit it as the worst game ever made. I would not contest its low quality, but I've played some other pretty bad games.
For instance, there is the NES game The Adventures of Gilligan's Island which I have the (mis)fortune of owning. Game-play and controls are frustrating and almost impossible.
Atari made a port of Pac-Man for their Atari 2600 system. It too was a horrible game, being a lousy port of the much-loved classic.
In some-what researching this article, I came across many other terrible examples. Celebrity tie-ins. Inappropriately violent games. Real-life killings turned into games. Good games ported badly. However, a lot of them, as with the ones above, had one thing in common: they came from a franchise or recognized "brand." The book I'm reading, Brandwashed, describes a "brand" as a widely recognized character or emblem that sells a product, or, occasionally, is the product itself. Coca-Cola is a brand. Celebrities are "brands." The author has a very broad idea of what brands are. He goes on to talk about the sneaky tactics that companies use to sell their products.
Of course, this is exactly what video game companies and the entertainment industry do when they produce licensed games. They capitalize on our familiarity with and love for various movies and characters. Just as Ronald McDonald sells fries and Big Macs, characters like E.T. and Superman are used to sell games, whether they are good or not. I personally don't go in for licensed games much, besides ones that I know are good, like the famous GoldenEye 007 for the N64. However, my brother occasionally gets into moods in which he is completely absorbed by a brand. He'll get the toys, games, movies, etc... Recently it's Transformers. So among the recent, good games like the pre-Autobot-emigration Transformers games, he also has games based on the recent movies. Somehow he manages to get through them.
He claims that he likes them. I believe him, since lately, he's been using his own money to buy games. However, part of it is due to Hasbro and the various game companies. (Transformers is an interesting case itself. An entire franchise that exploded from one TV series designed to sell toys. But, alas, a different topic for a different article.)
My diagnosis on licensed games is that companies and players should be wary. Often, licensed games are created only to capitalize on the success of a movie or a game. Occasionally, a game rises above the rest of the shovel-ware and becomes a fan favorite. As I said before, though, it's still an uphill battle. The temptation is too strong to release licensed garbage in order to make a few extra dollars. However, there is still hope.
No comments:
Post a Comment