Game Journo Objects to Army's Presence at Best Buy RE5 Launch Event

March 21, 2009 -

As GamePolitics has reported, the U.S. Army has taken a fair amount of heat in recent times over its use of video games and game-related events for recruitment.

Over at ripten, Chad Lakkis notes with a disapproving eye the Army's presence at a Best Buy midnight launch event for the recently-released Resident Evil 5:

I couldn’t help but notice the “GO ARMY” recruitment tent mixed into the Best Buy Resident Evil 5 launch party video... I don’t mind the idea of recruiters but what I do mind is the methods by which they often recruit.

This isn’t the first time the U.S. Army has been accused of blurring the lines between gaming and recruiting. Promoting an official U.S. Army videogame and lacing their official army game website to contain soldier bios designed to look like videogame stat cards is youth marketing at its finest. Look at all the stats you can wrack up kids - assuming you don’t die first.


Comments

Re: Game Journo Objects to Army's Presence at Best Buy RE5

You know just as well as anyone else here that the M rating has no real effect on people <18 acquiring games. I'd wager that at absolute minimum 30% of the crowd at this event was under 18.

<snips argument>

Calling this guy an idiot because in a single article he objected to a single event in a larger picture is rather dull, don't you think?

Joe Camel, The Flintstones, the cowboy ads, the movie placements, all of these were used to get kids to start smoking. The video game industry and the army both use the same phenomona to recruit new players and soldiers respectively. Don't you think for a second that the 80s army cartoons (G.I. joe, etc) weren't meant to make kids join the army.

Re: Game Journo Objects to Army's Presence at Best Buy RE5

 Oh, it's you again eh.

I think Austin has covered the main points pretty well here. In looking at previous posts by you it seems you're faily reactionary in the "SAVE THE CHILDRENZ!" vein. I don't see what your point is with the 30% minimum under 18. I imagine that's probably true, or pretty close.

The thing is, as Austin said, retailers of video games are the best industry at applying the age ratings as evidenced by that study mentioned on GP a while ago. They're there because someone is there to get it for them, although I'm not sure if carding standards would drop at a launch event.

The point is, the Army recruiters are there because the game is rated M, which is definitely within the age that they go for.

If they were at an elementary school or something, I could see your argument, but it just doesn't seem to apply here.

Re: Game Journo Objects to Army's Presence at Best Buy RE5

You're right, all those kids at best buy were getting Resident Evil 5 without being ID'd, I'm sure.  But wait; someone over 18 had to come with them, and those people are eligible for military service.  So it doesn't matter that there are people in the crowd under 18 (or 17 as is the age listed on the box), the game is obviously made for adults and older teens, the event was obviously geared towards an older group, so your entire argument lacks any basis.  This was a great place to do some recruiting, as well as a good way for some local recruiters to get in on the zombie fun, and maybe even get some practice for the real zombieocalypse.

Calling this guy an idiot after having read his moronic article and watched the video is actually a great way to sum his whole stance up in a sentence, actually.

The website isn't being marketed to the same demographic that the Flintsones and Joe Camel were marketed to either, nor is the American Army game or Resident Evil 5 when it comes down to it, so your comparison is a poor one.  Once again, this was an event geared towards people 17 and over, not children, and I doubt very much that there were many people there under high-school age, so your whole 'they're trying to brainwash children' line looks like bullshit to me.  But how about you watch the video, read the original article, and then try and argue your idiotic point again.

Re: Game Journo Objects to Army's Presence at Best Buy RE5

All of us have been on this site long enough to know that M-Rating is about as strong as requiring persons in the U.S. to be 21 or over to consume alcohol.

----
Papa Midnight
http://www.thesupersoldiers.com

----
Papa Midnight

Re: Game Journo Objects to Army's Presence at Best Buy RE5

Actually, if you recall, Best Buy is a very good retailer insomuch as carding people.  Another point is that in order to get the game, SOMEONE had to be over 17. 

The real point here is that this is a great marketing idea, not the Army trying to peddle violence to children.  The author of the article may not be capable of wrapping his head around the idea that the Army doesn't know who will show up to this launch event, but knows damn well that the event is for a game that requires SOMEONE eligible for service to buy.  It's a magnificent marketing idea (though the whole stats card thing seems ridiculous, and I don't want to believe that's true) and well placed, and your claim that the M-rating isn't being upheld runs counter to what the FTC has to say, and between the two, I'll pick their data on this one.

Re: Game Journo Objects to Army's Presence at Best Buy RE5

So in other words, when dealing with honest and reliable retailers, solid.  In my experience the M-rating (and the requirement to be over 21 to purchase) has succeeded for the most part, after it's sold not so much, but after it's sold, it's not the retailer's or the industrie's failing anymore (for either industry).

Advertising for the Army at an event that is going to get 17+ Males who at least like shooting things with fictional guns (it was for RE5 after all) sounds like fantastic marketing.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Did Microsoft pay too much ($2.5 billion) for Minecraft developer Mojang?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenKrono - Many of the people pushing gender issues aren't nice people? I'm sure not everyone's a sweatheart but so far, everyone I've seen with such a critique had absolutely nothing to back them up.09/19/2014 - 10:46am
InfophileI think there's a qualitative difference between a site and a hashtag though. GP can ban anyone from commenting, so they can have the image they want. But anyone can use any hashtag and try to poison it. Granted, that hasn't happened to the other one yet09/19/2014 - 10:13am
E. Zachary KnightKrono, your comparison to GP does not work. We do not need to get rid of GP, because no one associates GP with trolls and abuse. The same can't be said for gamergate.09/19/2014 - 10:09am
Krono@Michael You don't remember the "other hashtag" because no one actually uses it. We're talking 836,983 uses of #gamergate over it's lifetime, and 8,119 for the "alternative". 47,129 uses on the 18th vs 41. With #notyourshield at 140,133 uses & 5,209 uses09/19/2014 - 9:48am
Kronoresearch it. Changing tags to get away from trolls would be like wiping GamePolitics and restarting under a new name to get away from people calling Jack Thompson a filthy names in the comments section.09/19/2014 - 9:35am
Sleaker@quiknkold - seems like all that page is is a bunch of random developer opinions and rumors that we're supposedto do what with?09/19/2014 - 9:31am
Kronoas an opportunity to push back against them. It's one of the things muddling the issue. @conster A new hashtag would do nothing to improve anything. Trolls will simply follow to the new hashtag, and it will confuse the issue for anyone attempting to09/19/2014 - 9:25am
Krono@Andrew aaah. Yes, I'm sure there's some of that. Part of the problem is many of the people pushing gender issues are not very nice people. Basically the latest incarnation of moralists we've seen in the past couple decades. Naturually some will take this09/19/2014 - 9:23am
quiknkoldhttp://www.nichegamer.net/2014/09/real-gamedevs-sound-off-regarding-the-gamergate-controversy/09/19/2014 - 8:35am
MaskedPixelanteMeanwhile, in news that actually DOES matter, Scotland voted "NO" to Scottish independance.09/19/2014 - 8:20am
ConsterSeriously? "We shouldn't make a new hashtag - it's better to associate ourselves with psychos than to decrease our visibility"?09/19/2014 - 7:54am
Michael ChandraI forget what it is exactly, but there already is another hashtag that some use, exactly to separate themselves from the abusive behaviour. So don't bother lying to me.09/19/2014 - 7:06am
quiknkold2 to 3 or more09/19/2014 - 6:53am
quiknkoldMichael Chandra : I'll say this. The only reason they havent used another hashtag is because it would look like a form of dividing the arguement. Using another Hashtag has come up, and they feel like if they made a new hashtag, it'll split the debate from09/19/2014 - 6:53am
Michael ChandraYou want a debate? Build a wall between you and the poisoned well. Make clear you despise it, despise the behaviour. Then get into the other issues you are troubled with, and don't say a single word again about the poisoned well.09/19/2014 - 3:46am
Michael ChandraAnd someone claiming #notyourshield was to be taken serious, when chatlogs show they wanted it going to hide even more harassment behind? Yeah, not buying a word you're saying. You poisoned your own well.09/19/2014 - 3:45am
Michael Chandraallegedly fired over giving a game a mediocre review and the company threatened to pull ads? Sorry but I ain't buying this.09/19/2014 - 3:45am
Michael ChandraBut people arguing this is horrible and just about ethics, even though there's very little support that journalistic integrity was actually violated here, while they never spoke up when a journalist was09/19/2014 - 3:43am
Michael ChandraIf people start with condemning the way GamersGate was used as a misdirection, then use a better hashtag, that would work in convincing me they mean it.09/19/2014 - 3:43am
Andrew EisenOoo, this one came down to the wire! https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/749082525/nefarious09/19/2014 - 1:03am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician