[Tim Brooks]

This is in reponse to Jurri's post:

I should imagine that a company in the entertainment industry would have some concern for the values and image it chooses to project.

Sure we do. Howvever, that does not mean that our values are your values. We would have a hard time doing anything if we tried to please everyone. In fact, it is impossible. The negative response to these ads pale in comparison to those who have written us about being 'sacriligous', 'warmongers', and just all around bad citizens of the planet earth for publishing wargames and fantasy products that truly offend the far right christians.

This does not speak well of your morality to those who care about the issue.

We are telling you that some of your customers feel estranged by the choices the company makes.

We know. Hardly a day goes by when someone is not offended by something we do. So should we close the business, because people everyday are offended by the choices we make as a company?

There being people who do not care of this issue or even favour exploitative marketing does not make this complaint any less significant for those who do care, it only makes the complaint matter less in the eyes of a company that cares more of the bottom-line than good corporate citizenship.

All I can say is that it must be hard for you living in the world we do with that attitude.

Frivolously dismissing actual customer feedback is, again, your prerogative, even if many businesses would value and weigh heavily such grassroots signals that might reflect significant issues for large customer segments.

Well another thing that we will have to disagree on. I don't see where Scott or Annette did anything frivolous in this thread. The only mistake they made was jumping in this thread in the first place. And attacking them really doesn't solve anything. The person you should be attacking is me. I am the only person in this company that is responsible for what we advertise and how we choose to advertise it.

...you may well decide to scoff upon the concerns raised here

So, let me get this straight. I don't agree with your position, so I am scoffing at it? That's a leap don't you think?

Or perhaps you have numerous customers for whom 19th century attitudes to objectification of women are a selling point?

I wonder if the women portrayed in the ads, who are professional models and were payed for their time, would agree with that statement. We should have asked! Funny, I never even considered asking such a question.

can’t speak for others here, but for myself I can say that I object rather strongly, even hostilely, to objectification of women in service of crass consumerism.

You must have a hard time buying almost anything. Cars, beer, cleaning products, vacuum cleaners - I just saw a commercial last night for a vacuum cleaner that showed a woman in a white silk dress vacuuming the floor. Now, I have seen my wife, my mother, my friends wives and mothers, my girlfriends, and various other relatives vacuum many floors. And know what, in 50 years I have never seen one woman vacuum the floor in a white silk dress cut three inches above the knee with a neckline so plunging that it was hard to imagine just how everything was staying in place with that extreme back and forth movement. I wish I could rememeber the manufacturer of the product, because I am sure that that is one you would want to steer clear of.

Objectification of women? Don't the women have to decide for themselves if they are being obgjectificated? I mean, the vacuum lady was smiling, and appeared quite happy. I wonder if that was because she was probably making $200 an hour to vacuum some floor that probably wasn't that dirty to begin with. I know my wife doesn't smile like that when she vacuums our floor. My wife probably feels more obgjectificated. Of course, my wife doesn't make $200 an hour to vacuum our floor.

The gaming hobby has a dark history in this regard and while these advertisements might be appropriate (if transparent) for furniture, lipstick or women’s shoes, in service of a fantasy adventure game they are pure exploitation.

Well we were going to blood sacrifice some virgins for the ads, but we couldn't find any. (Thanks vfb)

Neither the visual style nor content matter here bears even passing relation to the advertised product;

Exactly. Pssst, I let you in on a little secret... that's the point.

Similar advertisement campaigns have been judged in Finnish courts as demeaning and patently offensive, unfit for public consumption.

Wow! Really?

I have no desire to associate myself with this travesty of modern marketing, and while others are of course entitled to their own values, I do not like these values displayed in places I frequent or make purchases in.

Okay. I am sure there are those here that will miss you but we understand your position now.

Are you trying to intimate that you are not sorry for your actions, but regret that some are offended? You have no claim to an apology for the latter without regretting the former, you know – I for one am not inclined to forgive you when you do not even confess that there is room for offence in what you have done here.

What a load of crap. We had a customer write in that it has been two weeks and he has still not recieved his game. Obviously it was lost in the mail. Now I personally am sorry that he has had problems and we as a company are sorry he had trouble; we know how frustrating that can be. So we can't apologize to the customer unless we regret sending him the game in the first place? Well, we did apologize and I am pretty darn sure we meant it. And we sent him another game, so obviously we didn't regret it.

The first step to conciliation is seeking common ground; false humility does not become anyone.

Neither does false indignation.

Do you get the point of that statement?

If you don't like the ads, don't buy our products and don't frequent our site. Pretty simple really.