On the effectiveness of packaging design
An old boss of mine challenged me as to the effectiveness of packaging.
“I could put this product into paper bags and it would still sell” he declaimed.My eager heart raced as the opportunity to stand up to this ignorant ogre presented itself. I found myself upright, the chrome legs of the cheap leather chair scraping quickly backwards.
“But only to perverts” I announced before reclaiming my seat and rejoining the meeting. My last statement in the matter was a little more humble as realisation welled up.
“However, there are an awful lot of those about to sell to.”
Of course, a product sold in a paper bag is bound to attract attention but I got his point. He felt that going to any trouble (and for trouble, read “expense”) with pack design was a waste of time (and for time, read “expense”). For him it came down to the desirability of a product. If people were queuing up around the corner because your product had all the hype or all the originality then who cared how the pack looked?
So does good design only matter when the product is either poor or has to compete against similar products? This has to be one of those posts where the answer can only be no. As designers we are preconditioned to believed that good design matters. But what do you think? And how do we even set about showing design effectiveness? Is this a case of proving a negative? Unless two designs (one “poor” and one “good” are launched into the market with the same spend then how do we disentangle the many elements of marketing to discover where effectiveness lies?
If in the future all video games become digital downloads (without packaging) could all products compete equally at point of purchase without the added value that is built into some packaging? I guess the value and edge would come down to additional content provided by the publisher to tempt consumers. Will there still be room for good creative and design within this structure?
I think good design on packaging matters. You might have a good product but it is very slack to assume that everyone who walks past it on the shelf will know that. Especially with games. A gamer may buy a game they want as soon as it is released, but what about the rest of the games on the shelves? What if they are just browsing?
Packaging is there to let the customer know what the game is about and to make it look more exciting than the rest of the games surrounding it. If it is a shoot-’em up, an rpg, a sandbox game, a racing game or a puzzle game you should be able to see which type of game it is immediately from the packaging. Then it has to look better than the rest of the games in that genre. Some game inlays have so little work put into them that it makes the game itself look dire – that isn’t the sort of message you want to send out. Good design on packaging indicates a superior product inside (whether that is true or not!).
Of course, this is just what I think!
Good packaging will always matter, because it is the exterior/packing which first catches peoples eye, regardless of whether it is a superior/inferior product.
If i see a Resident Evil game packaged in a pink case covered in flowers, im not gonna buy it. But if i see Barbie Goes to the Races with Leather Face on the front, im gonna buy it.
of course with digital downloads becoming more and more popular, packaging isnt used, but everyone said that the same would happen with CDs, and yes, downloads are extremely popular, but CDs are still sold and always will be.
There is too much money in marketing for it not be used/needed.
WWDDD
I think if Barbie sported Leather Face then your purchase might well be offset by thousands of young girls running screaming from the shop
I think packaging is a catchall phrase that will change over time. Ultimately it’s about making the product stand out and that will always be essential. It may not end up being printed but even if it’s reduced to an icon in an App Store then that will be the packaging and the design is vital.
Thanks for your kind comments re: our new website.