FFSOMGLOLOLOL

Hear that? It's the sound of the point going right over your head.

Those are good points that I hadn't considered. But you know what they say, "there is no bad press". Fair enough. So you like this rule because it will supposedly make traffic more fluid. Somehow, I doubt that's the reasoning behind this ruling, as they have only banned booth girls and not anything else that might cause "traffic jams" in the expo, such as maybe giving out promo gifts.

what <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You know... the whole thing with the priest actually being the Devil... you know? Uh... that's actually not my name. But you're right. Don't argue with me, I'm always right and it's pointless.

It was a thinly veiled allegory about the Catholic Church.

No, nobody's getting hurt. If anyone, then it would be the hunky male models that aren't being hired for that kind of jobs, and I haven't seen any of them complaining yet. What you or me think we know about marketing, or our thoughts on how it should be conducted are rather irrelevant, as there are people who do that for a living. There are set rules, set strategies that do work, and that is a fact. Anything else is just speculation. That's why I said it's outside of the scope of this discussion. If they say sex sells, even in video games, you're going to have to deal with it. I neved said otherwise. That, however, is the problem of the people who actually buy games based on sexy advertising, not the problem of the people who make that advertising. They do that just to make a profit, not to create agenda-driven social conscience or improve the human race. Money is money. Do you go home and brag about your busy day at the office? I know I didn't brag about it when I had to lift boxes for eight hours a day in exchange for laughable wages. Something else such as... what? If an article is being made about the features in E3, there's only so much you can say without repeating yourself. You can't comment on something that doesn't exist. Yes, I suppose you could write lengthy articles about the quality and advantages of the linoleum used as floor covering, but that wouldn't be much better than talking about booth girls. That's your fallacy right there. For that argument to be valid, you would have to prove that relevant information is not being published because of the booth girls. But I think you already said that was not your intention, so the point is moot. Your own determinations? Such as the reckless assumption that a reporter that is on the business of relaying quality gaming news would rather talk about booth girls than the subject of his work? Whatever. So? Exploitation how? Claiming that a girl in a bikini intended as eye candy is being "sexually exploited" is not only "highly debatable" but also quite disrespectful to people that are actually being sexually exploited. Well, sorry. That's how it works. There's an antropological explanation for that, but I don't want to go into it, and I doubt I'd change your mind if I went on a long, boring rant, anyway. I'll just say than when it comes to sex drive, we're still animals, driven by hormones. So, basically, you don't like what evolution has delivered. A shame, because there's not much that can be done about it, even more so considering we've effectively switched evolution off for the human species. An unrealistic view, if I may say so. And calling booth girls "sex objects/decoration" is not only a straw man, but it's also quite disrespectful towards those girls. It's not like it's the girls that are being sold. It's not like they're being demeaned in any way. They just stand there, smile, and get paid. I wish that was my job. And about the "single kind of what's acceptably sexxy", well, that's when biology meets marketing. Some things are not sexy, period. Fit bodies are, at least for males. It's hard-wired in us (as in something no amount of lame humanist conditioning can change). That is not to say it's the only thing males can ever find sexy, mind you. It's just something that triggers an automatic, uncontrollable reaction. Sure, maybe somebody considers 200kg old bald men or women sexy, but that's not mainstream. And therefore, they are not important enough a target group to warrant dedicated advertising.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To each their own, I guess. It's not like anybody is getting hurt with that. There are much worse things to "be repulsed by". I agree with you here. That's outside of the scope of the discussion, though, as I'm not a marketing guy, and I suspect you aren't in that sector either. The fact is that marketing people seem to think that sex sells here too. I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to put that idea to the test, but on the other hand, there's no problem with sex being used as a marketing strategy in deodorants, just to use your example. That's speculation. I can't really say either, but I suspect it's more about hypocrisy than anything else, when the complaints aren't about stupid stereotypes such as the bikini power armor.

Guys, guys. In case you didn't notice, Volourn won the thread in like, page 3. Heh. And here I thought it was a plus to know what the hell are you bashing. Silly me. It will be Fallout. They paid for the license, which means it belongs to them, not to you. If they say it's Fallout, it's Fallout, and you can't do jack about it. )

Those are good points. However, I guess you'd also want to lob grenades at them if they were waiting in line, say, to get a NWN2 t-shirt, right? Does that mean they should also ban expositors giving out promotional gifts? Yeah. Somebody needs to do something about the social stigma that porn entails. Meh. That may very well be the case. It was a honest question, by the way. However, that still does not prove that games are not getting any publicity because of IGN mentioning the amount of crazy hot girls in minimalistic suits in E3. And I repeat the argument I made before, if a game is getting replaced by scantily clad girls in a gaming news report, then that game isn't that interesting to begin with. Huh? There are no "lame" marketing tricks. There are efficient and inefficient marketing strategies. That's about it. If you feel the need to take a shot at something, then have a look at the people who are actually driven off from good games because their stands do not feature hot cyber vixens from outer space. That's what it comes down to, anyway. Having hot girls around seems to be a profitable marketing investment. Why the hell shouldn't they benefit from that investment? It's not like anyone is getting hurt with this, outside those companies that don't want /can't afford to do it. But that's capitalism, folks.

What gaming news source writes an article entirely about booth babes and doesn't mention the game they advertise? Because if you actually know of any, I'd like to know too, so I can avoid them. Pretty much. That's irrelevant, though. The decision affecting me does not change the fact that it's a hypocritical, anachronical, and random ruling. Why don't they ban short skirts or tight pants too? And if I was a marketing guy, then it would affect me, as it would make my job harder for no good reason. Well, I have never been to E3, that's true. But I've been to comic fairs where there's a lot of these booth girls, and instances of much more sexually provocative lure than girls in bikini. So... whatever.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Do you pay more attention to articles about booth babes when you're searching for articles about games? That's what I have my porn for. So? By that logic, you could ban the use of plasma displays larger than certain dimensions, sound equipment more powerful than a random standard, giving out promotional gifts, or whatever. Again, I don't approach or get away from a stand depending on booth babes. It's nice to look at them alright, but for the most part, I just don't care about them. The ruling itself is stupid because it's anachronic. You can have games that allow you to splatter somebody's guts and brains all over the wall, but you can't have girls in bikini on the same stand. Mindboggling idiocy, alright.

If a booth babe can distract you from a game, then it's a really poor game. ) They're just eye candy, so there's just so much you can do with them. It's not like you can take them home or anything. Another stupid ruling, that's what it is.