Why I Dislike Kevin Butler Ads

That's right! I am not a fan of Kevin Butler ads (anymore at least), and I'll tell you why. But first, know that this is not a big deal to me, it's more of a fun article (and a way to toss my name into the PSN giveaway hat at the desperate last second). Though I suppose a fun article shouldn't be so negative... but, whatever.

Point is, don't take it too seriously. Moving on, there are three problems I think the ads have:

1) Kevin Butler ads feel like an ad about Kevin Butler
2) He ruins the tone of certain games
3) He is a poster boy for internet fans

1) Now, I did find him humorous when he first debuted the “It Only Does Everything” ad campaign. But slowly, he turned into a pretty big bore. The biggest issue I have with him is that he manages to steal the spotlight away from the games he is supposed to be advertising. I can recall many of his antics, and as a result, the games in those ads are more of an afterthought. On top of that, I just don't understand some his material. I know fans love it, but his newer stuff hasn't really made much sense to me, and I just want to see the game being advertised instead of being told a story about Kevin Butler's latest situation.

2) I can't help but compare his ads to Microsoft's. Strictly speaking, I feel Microsoft still does a better job. I last remember the Fable 3 and Halo advertisements, and man, were they something. Even a game like Fable, which I found to be pretty standard and forgettable, was over-glorified as this huge epic game. Remember the Revolution ad?

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

This was for freaking FABLE! When has anything in Fable reflected what you see in the ad?

Now, compare this to God of War 3's ad: http://www.youtube.com/watc...

See the issue? A game like God of War surely deserved better. For comparison's sake, let's look at God of War: Chains of Olympus' ad: http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Now THAT was much more epic. You can see the tone of all three games, and you can truly see Microsoft's ability to generate immense hype for even their tamest of games, and Sony's ability to highlight the moods of the games they advertise (the PSP ad).

The Kevin Butler ads furthermore sometimes tell you briefly about a game. The standalone PlayStation ads, however show you and narrate to you. Microsoft ads hypnotize you and truly sell you a product that you may not even be interested in!

So, the problem of tone then, is that Kevin Butler rips out the mood of certain games, and turns them into a comedy gag. Seems pretty anti-climatic to me. The KB ad itself shows only a few seconds of gameplay, and some of it isn't even the main focus of the ad.

3) He is overrated and much too loved by internet fans, and I think this is where the translation between the average consumer and internet core fans gets misinterpreted. As well, his praise on how beneficial he is to Sony also gets blown out of proportion here. Kevin Butler is, by far, a great marketing mouthpiece for the fans. But, really, that's all he is. Outside of the internet, I feel his is pretty irrelevant to Sony's marketing. He is able to poke at the competition and get away with it, but once again, who outside of the internet saw the PlayStation Move's “Buttons” promo and really cares?

Some Likely Counterpoints:

1) Stop whining! Everybody hated the first PS3 campaign, and the Kevin Butler ads were better

Not true in my opinion. Personally, I loved the debut ads for the PS3. Why? It did what is was supposed to do: highlight the most special thing about the PS3, its raw, alien power. Kevin Butler ads may be a spunky way to highlight the PS3's return to roots, but Sony's PS2 ads were also pretty creepy:

How to score E3, using 'SCIENCE'

It seems every other article submitted to N4G in the run-up to E3 feels the need to perpetuate the misconception that the event is some kind of fanboy e-peen measuring contest. It would appear that only one of the big three can walk away with the title of E3 ‘win’ but
“wait”, I hear you say, “isn’t that just a matter of opinion?”
yes... yes it is.

However, opinion is not an exact science and without a panel of judges, free from the infection of bias, bribery and conflict of interest that this industry is subject to, how do we accurately measure which company’s fans can strut about wearing cycling shorts in the comment section for the next few weeks?

As always ‘SCIENCE’ has the answer!

Using only a Biro pen, a half-soggy bar coaster, a group of gaming friends, beer and a whole lotta ‘science’; I have devised an ‘infallible’ system of logic to determine a ‘winner’ eliminating corrupt opinion altogether!

This genius system (unscientific opinion added for effect) is a simple points-based system where the 'winner' is seen as the company with the most points at the end of each presentation. The scores are distributed as follows:

**** 1 point = 1cm of e-peen. AAA is intended to mean big budget, non-motion controlled, disc-based game and not a reflection of the game’s final quality. For the purposes of eliminating opinion completely ‘casual’ will mean any game aimed at children or 100% motion controlled (I know that may not be completely accurate regarding some games but the line had to drawn somewhere, for science) ****

5 points for:

1. Announcing a new, exclusive, core, AAA game
2. Announcing a new, exclusive, AAA IP (stacks with number 1)
3. Showing actual gameplay of any AAA game (not in a trailer)
4. Showing new hardware in reality i.e. not just a trailer/picture or specs (consoles, hand-helds, tablets and phones only)
5. Announcing the purchase of any game development studio
6. Announcing a console price drop

3 points for:

1. Announcing a new, casual game
2. Showing a new trailer with actual gameplay in it. (game 'reels' do not count)
3. Obtaining 3rd party exclusive content (not timed)
4. Announcing new hardware but not showing it in reality (consoles, hand-helds, tablets and phones only)
5. Console re-design/new model