Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

April 20, 2010 -

A promotion for the release of Splinter Cell: Conviction in New Zealand, complete with an armed “Sam Fisher,” went awry, causing members of the public to dive for cover after someone screamed “He’s got a gun!”

According to the New Zealand Herald, a man dressed as Fisher, with bandages wrapped around his hands and a fake gun, pointed his weapon at bar goers in Auckland’s Viaduct Basin. Someone thought the weapon was real and yelled a warning, causing the people in the bar to take cover. Police were called, and even though they thought the gun was real, they managed to diffuse the situation without hurting anyone.

Regional distributor Monaco Corporation had hired an unnamed marketing agency to setup the stunt and claimed to know nothing about a gun being involved.

Monaco Marketing Manager Duane Mutu apologized for the stunt, saying, “This was by no means an attempt to get cops down there and get this sort of exposure. It was just marketing gone wrong."

Senior Sergeant Ben Offner offered, “We consider these types of stunts to be very ill-advised and have real concerns a similar one may one day end in tragedy.”

Note that the story refers to Splinter Cell: Evolution, but the just-released title is called Splinter Cell: Conviction.


Thanks Ryan and Iheartassassinmaids!


Comments

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

That's funny.

 

 

"It's better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." - Montgomery Gentry

"It's better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." - Montgomery Gentry

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad


Look like this guy just got

 

*putting sunglasses on*

 

convicted

 

Yeaaaaaahhhhh!!!! (CSI: Miami music playing)

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

It wasn't me! I was set up! You can't do this to me mdo caine!

Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

It's a real shame the instant CSI site is down, otherwise I'd totally link it here.

 

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

They managed to diffuse the situation?  Neat.  I didn't realize situations could be scattered or spread out.  ;)

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

Whoever thought this up needs to lose their job.

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

*facepalm*

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

This is the best advertisement ever.

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

Good thing our old pal JT taught us that there is no such thing as bad publicity (I mean, I discovered Bioshock and System Shock thanks to him).

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

I don't recall him saying anything about BioShock. Was it his comments about 2K?

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

I think he was one of those on the "Bioshock let's you brutally murder children" party wagon.

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

Even bad publicity is good publicity. This ad agency should go to the clink.

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

 Really? They didn't think this could possibly go badly?

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

I have a feeling if someone was just 'joking around' the would be in jail right now.

 

But because it was related to commerce, somehow it makes it non-criminal.....

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

I hope who ever thought this was a good marketing plan gets fire for this.

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

Re: Splinter Cell Marketing Goes Bad

Somebody pass this along to Mayor Menino and explain that THIS is what an inappropriate marketing campaign looks like.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm
DanJAlexander's editorial was and continues to be grossly misrepresented by her opponents. And if you don't like a site, you stop reading it - same as not watching a tv show. They get your first click, but not your second.07/28/2015 - 11:40pm
TechnogeekYes, because actively trying to convince advertisers to influence the editorial content of media is a perfectly acceptable thing to do, especially for a movement that's ostensibly about journalistic ethics.07/28/2015 - 11:02pm
Mattsworknameanother07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
Mattsworknameyou HAVE TO click on it. So they get the click revenue weather you like what it says or not. as such, the targeting of advertisers most likely seemed like a good course of action to those who wanted to hold those media groups accountable for one reason07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
MattsworknameBut, when you look at online media, it's completely different, with far more options, but far few ways to address issues that the consumers may have. In tv, you don't like what they show, you don't watch. But in order to see if you like something online07/28/2015 - 9:12pm
MattsworknameIn tv, and radio, ratings are how it works. your ratings determine how well you do and how much money you an charge.07/28/2015 - 9:02pm
Mattsworknameexpect to do so without someone wanting to hold you to task for it07/28/2015 - 9:00pm
MattsworknameMecha: I don't think anyone was asking for Editoral changes, what they wanted was to show those media groups that if they were gonna bash there own audiance, the audiance was not gonna take it sitting down. you can write what you want, but you can't07/28/2015 - 8:56pm
MattsworknameAndrew, Im asking as a practical question, Have gamers, as a group, ever asked for a game, or other item, to be banned. Im trying to see if theres any cases anyone else remembers cause I cant find or remember any.07/28/2015 - 8:55pm
Andrew EisenAs mentioned, Gamasutra isn't a gaming site, it's a game industry site. I don't feel it's changed its focus at all. Also, I don't get the sense that the majority of the people who took issue with that one opinion piece were regular readers anyway.07/28/2015 - 8:43pm
MattsworknameDitto kotaku, Gawker, VOX, Polygon, ETC07/28/2015 - 8:41pm
MechaTama31So, between pulling a game from one chain of stores, and forcing editorial changes to a media source, only one of them strikes you as being on the edge of censorship, and it's the game one?07/28/2015 - 8:41pm
Andrew EisenHave gamers ever tried to ban a product? Can you be more specific? I'm not clear what you're getting at.07/28/2015 - 8:41pm
Mattsworknamethey should have expected some kind of blow back. But I didn't participate in that specific action07/28/2015 - 8:41pm
MattsworknameAndrew Youd have to ask others about that, I actualyl didn't have much beef with them till last year, so I can't speak to there history. I simply feel that gamesutra chose politics over gaming and chose to make enimies of it's prime audiance. For that,07/28/2015 - 8:40pm
Andrew EisenI'm still not clear on how Gamasutra was lacking in accountability or what it was lacking in accountability for.07/28/2015 - 8:38pm
MattsworknameAndrew: You and I agree on most of that. I don't diagree that there should ahve been other actions taken. Now, I do want to point something out, casue Im not sure if it's happened. Have gamers ever tried to have a product banned?07/28/2015 - 8:37pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician