HEAD BLOG

Microsoft seem unable to commit

Now you see it, now you don’t. Microsoft released their new branding device and company tagline yesterday.

And then withdrew it.

It drew the usual polarised opinions on Twitter and then, just a few hours later, was taken down. The tagline was for real but the logos, which showed the Microsoft product family, were not, in fact, new logos. Rather, they were an example of “a standalone treatment to show the flexibility of joined brands” (Engadget).

The opinions, the polarisation, the hate, all of these are de rigeur for any new brand these days. When opinions (such as mine) can be released and propagated within seconds, it’s inevitable. What’s interesting, to me at least, is that Microsoft chose to withdraw them.

Brand design is such a personal art. You either love the logo or you don’t really care. Even the haters will continue as usual once their bile has sunk back again.

So why would Microsoft back down?

When it comes to creating logos to reflect brands, many companies, large or small, want to please everybody. They want something that (as Steve Jobs once proposed) becomes a jewel. Everybody loves jewels. They sparkle, attract our attention and are worth a fortune.

What’s more, we love them instantly.

Open the box and what do you see? That’s right, treasure. And desire plays out upon our faces. It’s the reaction beloved of companies.

When that reaction is lessened, for whatever reason, a company can be thrown into turmoil. They sense a lack of love and fear that will reflect upon their business.

It’s easy to see why Microsoft would do the same.

With Apple being the… ummm… being so well loved by consumers, Microsoft feel threatened. Witness the constant faltering and self doubt over many of their product launches lately. They get buzz but then lose it through the self doubt and inaction. Apple announce a product and then release it. Apple love themselves, Microsoft don’t.

They need to realise that many people are happy with what they produce. It might not be passionate, it might not be vocal.

But they show commitment nonetheless. They should understand that self doubt is infecting their brand more than any perceived criticism.

A little self-love would inspire far more confidence than the efforts of analysts and graphic designers.

Everything in life can be boiled down to a scene within a movie. Worse still, everything can be gently steered towards a scene within a movie.

This simple, but invasive truth is colouring every move I make.

When a friend tells me about teaching English as a foreign language I immediately think of the scene in Good Morning Vietnam where – well, if you don’t know it then chances are you should probably leave this blog for now.

Similarly when I’m mid-flow in an argument I might say something straight from a film. I do. I can’t help it. If the time is right then it just has to play out that way because it felt so good when I saw it played out by Pacino or, ummm… Cage.

It doesn’t stop there.

I’ve even steered an argument towards being able to deliver a line. I haven’t yet managed the “sell crazy someplace else” line but I know exactly how I could push someone towards it.

Clearly, there’s a problem.

The thing is, life and relationships are one thing. It’s easy to start arguments just to be able to deliver a killer line. Life and relationships aren’t serious enough to take steps to prevent myself from doing it.

But creativity, dear god creativity, is.

Imagine my horror, yes, the horror, the horror, as I stare at a piece of copy I’d spent five WHOLE minutes on writing only to realise that somebody else had written it before me.

It’s embarrassing is what it is.

It’s also an area to be keenly aware of throughout the creative process. Sometimes an idea can feel so good, so reassuringly familiar, that it must have been done before. And often it has.

Death is not the end of course and our culture is filled with talented people who make use of this creative saturation and make it their own. Look at Spaced – filled with snippets of other works it remains decidedly its own creature throughout. Self-awareness, keenly expressed, is its hallmark and its creative territory.

Then there is the love-him-or-hate-him Tarantino whose oeuvre is built upon references to popular (and not so popular) culture. Again though, it’s his own spin on these things. His own experience which is brought to bear upon the subject matter that makes the difference.

And that, in the end, is key. It is experience which guides our hand in all these matters. Personal experience. And that’s something that turns a mediocre argument into a divorce settlement.

In 1983 I received a ZX Spectrum. The one my dad bought had 16k (smaller than this Word file) but could be upgraded to 48k by sending it off again.

I don’t remember why he did it this way but I remember having to be very patient around Christmas until the postman finally delivered the newly upgraded home computer.

Many people my age will have been through the same experience but what made my ZX Spectrum different to everyone else’s was the case it sat in whilst I learned the art of up, down, left, right, fire and the basics of Z80 assembler language.

The case was built by my dad and it was a beauty. It held the computer, the tape drive and had space for an armful of cassettes hidden by a lid as well as providing a neat solution for channelling the cables. It was even designed to raise the computer to a comfortable angle of 20 degrees; dad certainly was keen on me doing a fair bit of typing as well as playing games.

Twenty seven years later and a bunch of us are sat, surrounded by flat screen monitors, Apple Macs and games consoles, discussing the latest in user experiences as represented through video games. Everything around us has been designed and mass produced to fit everyone.

The ubiquity of product design is not lost on us as we consider what it is that makes for a user experience. At the heart of this is speculation over whether the new boys on the block (Microsoft and Sony) have any chance of challenging Nintendo on their home turf of motion control.

The thing about the Wii is that it was conceived and designed as a mass-market, motion controlled device. Every part of it from the way in which the Wii-motes were made to emulate an average TV remote, to the limited graphics and chunky option screens, was part of what made the Wii grandparent friendly.

It worked.

Beyond most people’s expectations, it worked.

The user experience that Microsoft and Sony now want to emulate wasn’t added on afterwards, it was built in.

So does that make it any more robust? Does it make it any more likely to succeed? Where does the user experience end and the gimmick begin?

I’m not sure you can discount bolt-on solutions to user experience. Buzz and Guitar Hero were essentially exactly that and they intensified the idea of mass market gaming. The Eye-Toy back on the PlayStation 2 felt like an idea needing a market but Nintendo certainly solved that with the Wii.

And that is, perhaps, where this issue becomes more complex. Nintendo defined their own audience by knowing what it wanted to achieve with motion controlling whereas Microsoft and Sony are “lumbered” with an existing audience who are all very vocal about what they expect from gaming. I remember arguing against the flood of moans regarding the Wii name. The existing gamer base was hostile towards the very idea of “soft” gaming, an approach I feel has been behind the perception of gaming as a pursuit for the less socially able amongst us. Will they view the new user experience in a positive light?

The two companies must certainly hope so because on the flip side of that coin is a public who may already be convinced that the 360 and PlayStation 3 are for the gamers, the stereotypical gamers locked in their bedrooms screaming about Red Dead Redemption.

In such a world, the task becomes how to convince both camps that the user experience is one worth buying into because not everyone has a dad who will make that experience feel personal.

Every once in a while someone says something that makes you want to reach for the bucket. The comment is so loaded with pseudo- intellectual sugar  that overdose is instantaneous.

The headline statement here is one such comment. It carries self importance about its person like a student at a sit-in and if you’ve any sense you’ll be walking on by with a shake of your head.

But I see morbid curiosity keeps you here. Quite right too because every criticism of advertising you might have, every design bugbear you hold, all can be answered through that swollen claim.

Advertising and design goes wrong when the creatives and marketeers involved forget that they are problem solvers. Some of them appear to be brand evangelists, others appear to be artists, none of them produce anything like the commercially appropriate work they ought to whilst those millstones hang around their necks.

It’s easy to spot them too. Designs that don’t function as they ought to. Image taking precedence over usability. A complete lack of message.

Watch for them all because in their steely good looks are more bullshit statements than our claim to be problem solvers could ever make.

These says the term ‘brand’ has become a catch all for any company thinking about reaching into the hearts and minds of consumers everywhere. It can be summarized as a logo and, occasionally, a set of principles which the company tries to ring fence as being typically theirs.

It’s easy to see why they take this view of course. The super companies such as Google, Microsoft, Apple and… ummm… Head First occupy the places in the minds of people that can be identified as ‘brand aware’. When asked, consumers will probably be aware, not only of these companies logos, but also of their ideological standpoints.

What right thinking, emergent company wouldn’t want a piece of this action? To them, getting the brand right leads inexorably to prominence, take-up and financial success.

Allow me to tell you a little story.

A friend of mine started a company providing services to children. On a casual consultancy level, I was asked to chip in on the subject of brand.
My friend was very keen on creating a brand.

I probed a little deeper in order to ascertain what, exactly, was meant by ‘brand’ and, sure enough, the concept appeared to be linked tightly to logo.

That’s not right, I said. Brand is different to design. Think of brand as something you earn through great service and a lot of time. And even then, turning your company into a brand takes a whole lot more than making sure you maintain your logo according to a designer’s style guide.

Look at Coca Cola, I said. That’s a brand. However we may feel about it, whatever we may see in the difference between the public face they market and the reality of their business practices, they can be clearly identified alongside specific values.
And that isn’t because they have slavishly followed design guidelines down the decades. It’s because they have vigorously marketed their product alongside a very particular viewpoint. It has cost hundreds of millions and taken decades.

Even those companies for which brand status has come quicker haven’t fallen into the trap of being restricted design-wise. Their service has come before all else and that is what has shaped any design elements to their promotions.

And those elements have changed over time, adapting, as they should, to changing tastes, expectations and technologies.

So the next time a designer (or a client) insists that you must present everything in a certain colour in order to adhere to brand guidelines, do them a favour and tell them to Google ‘brand’ for a while.

Everyone at Head First, even Jeni, is a big fan of packaging. We work on enough of it to hope beyond hope that print will survive digital downloads and that even vinyl will make a substantial comeback just so we can enjoy the pleasure of owning something tangible again. Opening that iPhone box, unboxing the special edition Modern Warfare 2 – these are things that bring pleasure to the senses and it would be a shame to dismiss this as an unecessary part of the purchasing process.

So we thought it would be nice to show off the latest series of special packs we have designed, this time for Ben 10 Vilgax Attacks.

Isn’t it lovely? Don’t you just want to touch it?

The worst piece of advice, professionally at least, was to throw out the rule book. As a student studying creative writing it seemed a strange sort of direction, especially coming off a module where we’d discussed how Auden was estimated to have tried almost every form of poetic structure going.

To me, rules aren’t there to be broken, not really. I like the way structure (whilst we are on the subject) channels ideas and even informs their exposition. Yep, when it comes to the rule book I’m there chapter and verse.

So it’s always strange when the way you crack a design job wide open is by ignoring rules altogether. Recently we had to think differently for an online job and the best way, we found, was to throw out the rule book.

Sort of.

What we did was to ignore convention by asking ourselves what if this wasn’t an online job. What if it were in a different medium altogether.

It got us thinking.

Differently.

So we still followed rules. Just not the ones we were meant to.

I swore to myself when I was initiated into the Cub Scouts that I would never, ‘pon my honour, ever make a pun as bad as that one. As with most things in life, however, promises are made to be broken. Circumstances change and what seemed like a good idea at the time now looks dated and out of step.

Enter 2K Games, a company we’ve had dealings with in the past and for whom we have nothing but love and affection. OK, you can sidestep the client loving if you like and skip to the part where we say they came to us to request a new perspective on their International website. The world of HD video was passing them by and the amazing visuals they had in their games wasn’t being shown to full effect.

Head First came up with a new look which evolved the great work done previously and which would enable 2K to showcase their games in line with modern technology. Times continue to change, of course, and we’re aware that we’ll soon be beaming the demo packs straight to the cerebral cortex.

But we’ve got an App for that.

In addition to the design work, something within Head First just doesn’t stop thinking and we have also put in place several neat sub-branding opportunities for use in subsequent development.

We’ve been following the series of articles about cover art over at Kotaku very closely indeed. Here at Head First we understand that cover art is a vital part of the marketing mix. For some games it is the only form of advertising a game will get and so conveying the right degree of quality and content is essential.

It’s not, of course, the last word. The under-discussed back of box is an area that serves a vitaly important role in helping consumers decide whether or not the game is for them (and this goes for pretty much any related product subject to the whims of casual browsing – books, films especially).

If you’ve not read our ‘hilarious’ take on the process of buying games then you can catch up here.

Right. The laughs are dying down and it’s time to outline a few of the reasons why the back of box is so important.

It’s estimated that 40% of purchases are impulse. That’s a pretty big chunk of people deciding right there and then to buy a game. They could be gamers who have a vague idea of the sort of game they are looking for or they could be Ma and Pa, looking to buy a game because little Johnny has eaten his peas.

Now that’s a pretty diverse audience right there but let’s assume they have all missed your advertising campaign, or at least that it’s not the influencing factor. Price and packaging are key factors in this (showing how a proper sales strategy – something games don’t do that well – and cover art is important).

It’s the back of pack that is interesting because that can make a real difference here. Ma and Pa may well be looking for cover art that resembles what they’ve seen before so they will be drawn to “that sort of thing”. That means they will be picking up the box and taking a closer look. They need to be impressed and convinced that the game will be right.

The back of box can do this by being impressive and by being clear as to its message. Great visuals will give an idea of what the game will look like but how do you go about doing that? Is one big screenshot better than five smaller ones? One might be impressive but five smaller ones might give a better impression of the varied gameplay. Then again, five smaller screens might get lost in translation as the detail becomes too small to make out so maybe you opt for a montage of screens to make, in essence, a new piece of cover art derived completely from the game itself.

Or maybe you get brave and decide that your screenshots look pretty much the same as those of the competitor. That’s not an unreasonable stance to take. Nor is it anything to be ashamed of. The quality of games these days is remarkable. Having something “just” as good as the competitor isn’t bad, it’s “just as good”. And even if it is only marginally better – is that really noticeable in the screenshots or do the elements that make it better come across during your involvement?

In which instance you can see a strong case for doing something different on the back of box. Making an argument, or a claim – “Makes Modern Warfare 2 Look Like Jet Set Willy” you might opt for over a simpler image just to show that your visuals are amazing too.

There’s no correct route.

The decisions made when designing the back of box art depend on all the questions, all the intended audience data and the ultimate goal of the publisher.

Ok, so your customer has seen the ad you placed in obscure.weekly, made the effort to view your clever viral email featuring the talking monkey, wandered over to view the game trailer and then waited for two hours in order to get a bus into the city centre where they rushed into the nearest video game store and began hunting for the dazzling box art they have now committed to memory thanks to it featuring heavily on all your communications. You couldn’t afford to wallpaper the store with it but that’s ok, your customer knows what to look for thanks to a bit of clever wordplay on the ads. Copywriting, as we all know, is the ONLY thing that matters when it comes to marketing.

After ten minutes rearranging the stock on the shelf so that the first letter of each game now spells out a pretty rude word followed by “lol”, your customer has the box in his hands.

Life is good. Close this one sale through the power of marketing and you’re on your way to LA and the big time. Screw the PR, this was all your doing.

But wait. Is that a wobble? Is that doubt creeping into the customer’s mind? It’s been a few hours since he last connected to the Internet and, well, attention spans aren’t what they used to be. Times gone by would see us retaining information from before conception but these days we’re lucky if we remember what we lol’d about on our last Facebook update let alone what game we were about to buy.

Hang on. Where was I?

Oh yes, thank god for Outlook tasks.

He has the box but there’s a wobble. The pack next to yours, by chance of titling and the newly arranged order of things alone, has a pretty similar looking design. The competition’s robot looks even shinier though. And it has a woman standing next to it. Damn, why didn’t you think of that? You have women in your game and the lack of a shiny robot was SUPPOSED to convey the intensity of the battle. You really dropped the ball on that decision didn’t you? Two robots, one battle scarred and one shiny might have done the trick.

So what have you got up your sleeve to nudge the customer in the right direction? In your direction? There has to be something? Online advertising won’t work here. The POS is only being displayed in Bulgaria and the store manager, well, you’ll sort him out once the sequel to last year’s mostly successful game comes out. Then he’ll learn what purchasing power means.

At least the customer is still holding your pack. That’s something isn’t it? If he’s not distracted anytime in the next five seconds then chances are his eyes will get back to it. They have to at some point in order to successfully put it down. You factored for that right? Replacing packaging on the shelf can be a pivotal purchasing moment.

It’s not looking good. Although… that, there. Is that a twist of the hand? Yes. It is. The customer is flipping your game over and looking at the BACK OF PACK. Oh beautiful. This is where you’re home and dry. This is where 80% of your budget went because you knew that this is the meat of the matter. If cover art is the brawn then back art is the brains. And nobody marries the brawn. Right?

Let’s move on.

On the back you’ve thought about the information. Properly. This is where the customer begins to consume information. This is where they learn that there are TWO robots and ONE woman in the game. That’s good. He likes robots but couldn’t deal with more than one woman in a game. It’s not a game for girls.

You’ve thought of the three best features in the game and explained them v e r y  c l e a r l y in 4 words or less. You’ve added every variation of screenshot to make sure he knows that there are different terrains, different enemies, multiplayer, single player, puzzle solving, action sequences, storytelling, customisation, personalisation, social networking features, voice activated missile silos, dressing up sections (in armour because this isn’t, y’know, a girl’s game), rollercoaster high adrenaline, face shaking, ball shrinking, horror comedy tragedy grandparent friendly motiondetectingdancecrazysingtillyourvoicebreaksthen come-out-fighting-with-the-girl-on-your-arm-and-the-robots-beneath-your-personally-selected-boots gameplay.

Yep. When it comes to weaving a compelling argument around that back of pack we can safely say you’ve covered every base.

Hold on a minute. He’s put it down. He was only pretending to look at the game whilst he checked out the cute girl choosing her PS3 game in the aisle opposite.

Didn’t think of THAT now did you?