| bdbdbd said: I think Kitler nailed the spot here, as well as did NikkoM. Sega really did prove that it does what Nintendon't by exiting the hardware business, but the kind of advertising doesn't work in the current generation context, if at all these days. Basically the Segas ads back then were all targeted to kids who needed something to make them feel being "better". Currently, the market is twice as big as it was back then and the kids market is dominated by PS360, when the "attack" ads would have very little impact on Wii as a whole. Also, the people familiar with "does what Nintendon't" are grown-ups today, and know to call similar advertising as BS, by experience. But, there is "attacking" marketing; viral marketers basically don't do anything else and the Sony/M$ PR is badmouthing the competition by a large part. |
Sega's Ad campaign was nothing short of brilliant. They were taking on Nintendo at near monopoly status and they had to rip and claw market share from Nintendo almost every step of the way. They went from arcades to a major presence in the home console environment with their Master System/Genesis thanks to those ads.
Saying that kids dominate the market and wouldn't respond to such ads today is ignorant. Children imitate their rolemodels and often aspire to be cool and have toys "the big kids" do. One of the reasons teenage ads are often so powerful is that they appeal not just to teenagers but the generation just below them.
Finally, Sega's exit from the market was not due to poor advertising, it was due to poor decision making and hardware support. If anything, their powerful advertising methods were one of the factors they prolonged their stay in the market.
