Burnout advert branded "irresponsible" by ASA Comments by Games Industry.biz

haha i cant c why people take this stuff so seriously... its a game ffs. I dont know any1 who takes the in game world into real world situations...

if some 1 sees the advert are they gona really wana drive as fast as possible and think they r gona get points for crashing into other road users or anything like that

btw still half asleep so hope makes sense

"I dont know any1 who takes the in game world into real world situations... "

Well if you don't know anyone that does, it is very much apparent then that no one does.

Wasn't there a complaint back when Burnout 2 was released too? I remember showing a ticket for speeding gave you a small discount? I'm not sure though.

Pff. I'm getting sick of this watchdog mentality. Fuck them, I'm getting in my car now.

@wayne

spot on. I know every1.

Do u knw vry 1? Wow. 133T.

Etc.

I guess that was stepping over the mark a little.

Just hope this doesn't spill over into another violence in games is wrong argument!!

Cos personally I find the violence in games makes me a more relax in real life. People just have to except the humans are violent creatures. Maybe if the world leaders played more violent computer games then the world would be a more peaceful place.

Bloody idiots. It was a daft slogan to try and get away with.

If they didn't expect this response, someone wasn't doing their job properly.

@souljacker2000

What the hell is with this replacing one with 1 all the time. This isn't the 80s you know. ;)

I wish they had banned this ad before i went on a handbrake rampage round asda's carpark

"The Advertising Standards Authority determined that the implication of the advertisment was likely to cause serious or widespread offence."

37 people its hardly a lot is it.

thank you for pointing this out. From now on my 1's will become ones. Ill make an effort just for you Kangarootoo...

I wish it was the 80's

Jayce and the wheeled Warriors
Mysterious cities of gold..
thundercats.

der tolle emil - The Burnout 2 thing was Acclaim offered to pay any speeding tickets you got on the way to buy the game on the day of release.

@souljacker2000

Yay \o/


...secretly I wish it was the 80s too. If it was, I would totally allow you to use 1s instead of ones. I'm dead generous like that.

"37 complaints were received"

"the implication of the advertisment was likely to cause serious or widespread offence"

Erm, so either it caused widespread offence, or it only offended 37 people in the entire country.

Which is it ?

I wish it was the 80's

Jayce and the wheeled Warriors
Mysterious cities of gold..
thundercats.

Trapdoor?

@Nomgle

Complaint numbers are representative. Not everyone actually puts pen to paper.

For example, OFTEL (who manage TV ads and so on) reckon that for every complaint that they actually receive, 600 people were offended but didn't bother to contact them. not sure what the numbers may be like here, but its reasonable to assume the same logic applies.

@kangarootoo

Cheers much appreciated.. if you ever wana use 1s.. just come n ask me

@aldo_14

shit completely forgot... how could i
/slaps wrists

@aldo_14

http://www.hotukdeals.com/forums/showthr...

"Wasn't there a complaint back when Burnout 2 was released too? I remember showing a ticket for speeding gave you a small discount? I'm not sure though."

On the day that game launched, EA refunded all your speeding tickets, basicly encouraging you to break the law.

@kangarootoo - And there in lies the problem. 37 people were offended enough to complain. Fair enough.

Many more may not have liked the advert but were not offended enough to bother to complain. So based on some crazy logic this advert gets banned. 1000's of complaints I wouldnt argue but 37 is just someone deciding its easier to get the advert banned than have to explain to 37 serial complainers why it was not.

Been through something similar myself recently where something has been banned due to a couple of complaints!!!! Never mind asking the rest of us if we are actually bothered or agree.

EA: "This ad was a terrible misjudgement and as a result we will not be using it again now that our marketing campaign for this game is over."

I would say the fact they chose not to defend it is another boring "No it's OK, we've got the publicity we wanted" from the marketing fuckwits.

Good thing Americas Army is, like, soo not real life.

Adverts are always checked before release, although some (the infamous Nivia nipple) sometimes get through only to be retracted later. They're pulled all the time, only you don't read about it so can't get all "appalled and shocked at censorship" on your favourite internet site. They're not targeting video games here, you have to remember advertising is a very, very powerful medium and you need to go with what's appropriate both for your target audience and when/where that advert is going to be used. For example, if EA were thinking of using it in a roadside billboard, that'd hardly be the most fantastic idea in the world... and ASA have to think of that.

Yeah, whatever.

On the PSP, the burnout game you should be playing is Legends, anyway.

@Souljacker2000 and lennon

The advert is offensive because we have a problem with joyriding and car thefts. If you have seen the advert you would know it effectively says vent your anger on a car. Even the image suggests the event is a passtime.

37 complaints are taken as 37,000 offended people based on the logic that for every one complaint there will be at least a thousand other people who were offended but, too embarassed or intimidated to complain. This is how TV adverts are rated too. The base it on the fact that so many thousands will see the advert. Basically it takes a lot to get someone to actually write to the ASA. This is why each complaint is taken so seriously. They don't actually pay much attention to repeat complainers so these will be 37 unique complaints with valid reasons in the complaint.

The online gaming community is becoming guilty of mirroring the ESRB and ASA in having seemingly knee jerk defence reations to complaints about anything game related. Yet it is our industry that has gotten itself to this stage by not self regulating.

We should have know that any industry that isn't self regulated to a good standard is inviting the relevant government bodies to step in and regulate their asses for them!

Once again the gaming community show their retarded mentality, whaT a bunch of fucking morons. Good Job we've got people keeping a check on you freaks and your never ending search for killing and crashing in games.

Retards

"On the day that game launched, EA refunded all your speeding tickets, basicly encouraging you to break the law."

That's clever, seeing as Acclaim published the Burnout games back then!

car theft and vandalism are dont by mindless thugs, many of them are addicts who dont play/ cant afford games..

I believe its just a pr stunt

@lennon

But I think the basis of any complaint system is to respond only to complaints, not to ignore complaints if the majority don't really care.

When it comes to adverts, I'm not sure anyone really has strong positive feelings much of the time. Either an advert offends, or you have no particuylarly strong feeling about it. On that basis, banning based on offense seems the sensible route. I might not mind an advert, but where is the value to me to have it persist if someone else if offended by it?

Maybe I am just very community spirited :)

"Basically it takes a lot to get someone to actually write to the ASA."

Do you really believe that? I have worked with a couple of people who would complain about anything and everything.

I know people who have written to the military to complain about helicopters flying over there car and to BT for birds crapping on them when they walked under telephone lines. 37 people is not enough people for this sort of thing to be taken seriously.

@ Mrbiggles - Is it still ok to use such terminology. Careful someone might write a letter of complaint!

"On the day that game launched, EA refunded all your speeding tickets, basicly encouraging you to break the law."

Pack of twats.


@bigo

Oh ffs. Its not that bloody straight forward. It never is. Why whenever this issue comes up do somepeople try and reduce it to "watching TV does not make me a murderer". No one is bloody suggesting it does!

Every. Cocking. Time.

@penhalion

Good post.


@lennon

"I know people who have written to the military to complain about helicopters flying over there car and to BT for birds crapping on them when they walked under telephone lines."

Your experience is purely anecdotal.

"37 people is not enough people for this sort of thing to be taken seriously."

Actual proper research suggests that it is.

This won't affect EA in any way though, mainly as the marketing campaign for this game would of been over months ago.

They just have to avoid it for the next Burnout.

"They just have to avoid it for the next Burnout"

Actually, they could probably just do the same thing again. And by the time it gets pulled or branded "irresponsible" it will have done the job.

I suppose I retract my original "If they didn't expect this response, someone wasn't doing their job properly." comment. They porobably did expect this, and someone WAS doing their job.

Are some people here so blind by thier super-liberal views that they can't see how increadibly irresponsible this advert was?

This whole "everybody is picking on us" mentality seen in the gaming community is beginning to get annoying.

GIEF LINK

Anecdotal yes (I never claimed it was representative of the populace) but the point is that people will and do complain about everything whether it makes any sense or not to them or anyone else.

Research may suggest that figure is right and I guess there is nothing I can do myself to prove its wrong but I just dont believe 37 people is enough. Is it ok to for me to challenge this research?

"Are some people here so blind by thier super-liberal views that they can't see how increadibly irresponsible this advert was?

Exactly what scale of irresponsibility are we using here? If a billboard poster that hints at vehicular violence is 'incredibly irresponsible', that doesn't leave much room on the scale for things like leaving your child alone in a bath with a toaster balanced on their head, and that kind of thing.

Or, to put it another way, what was the actual chance of anyone really, actually being harmed as a result of this advert? I would say the answer is so close to zero as to be impossible to calculate.

It was in poor taste, possibly. But 'incredibly irresponsible'? Pull the other one.

@The Bodybuilder

"This whole "everybody is picking on us" mentality seen in the gaming community is beginning to get annoying."

+1

To be fair to the ASA, it was a pretty stupid advert really, particularly considering the other racing-game Ad which came under fire showing cars chasing around a high street. That's the kind of thing I'd expect from a Take-Two advertising stunt.
EA are obviously aware of how daft they'd been as they've pulled it without any fuss, for which they get a little kudos.

@lennon

"Is it ok to for me to challenge this research?"

Absolutely, in fact I demand that you do :D

With facts mind...

Well what do you make of the number of people that felt they had to complain about Celebrity Big Brother? I believe the totals was in excess of 40,000. Ok thats maybe an extreme example of complaints but it does prove that people are prepared to complain if something upsets them enough.

"Well what do you make of the number of people that felt they had to complain about Celebrity Big Brother? I believe the totals was in excess of 40,000."

So, by the complaints-to-actual-people-offended formula posted on this thread, about 40 million people in Britain find Big Brother offensive?

Actually, that sounds about right. :)

@PlugMonkey - Fair point. Hadnt thought of it like that. :)

@lennon

Big brother has a bigger "installed base" than Burnout ad viewers I would think. But the same logic still applies to some degree.

Way more than 40k people will have been offended, its just than 40k of them decided to actually complain. I think that the BB situation was widely considered as more offensive than this add, which will adjust the numbers too (though I do think there was also some bandwagon action going on in that particular BB case).

@Kanga:

Did you miss my post then?

Everyone else seems to have done...

To reiterate, Acclaim were responsible for the Burnout speeding ticket PR stunt (remember the change your name to Turok for a year/name your baby Turok, and Shadowman gravestone controversies?), not EA. They picked up the series from Burnout 3: Takedown onwards.

An example of advertising I wouldn't condone, but undoubtedly they knew to expect this reaction. They're getting a lot of free publicity for getting the ad banned.

@BBIAJ

Yeah I did. Err, try writing bigger or something ;)

@Rirekon

EA didn't pull the ad, they'd already finished using it ages ago.

And how many people banned for speeding do you know who have blamed Burnout in court ?

Then there's the constant crash scenes we see in movie adverts, are they all going to be banned now too ?