As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

The Booth Babe Policy

2

Posts

  • chicazulchicazul Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I have little against scantily-clad people, so long as it is appropriate to the context. For example, I am far more forgiving of revealing outfits if they are part of a costume. (Related: a ban on revealing costumes would effectively ban cosplay of female characters from most genres of games and comics. Unfortunate, but not a topic that can be resolved by PAX.)

    Caveat to the above: I love cosplay, but I expect people in costume to have some familiarity with the character they are dressed as. The informal policy of all attendants needing to know what they are promoting is essential. In my ideal world, booth attendants would have either unisex attire (i.e. preferably tshirt + normal pants or skirt) or be in game-related costume--and they would always be an employee or fan who was genuinely interested in the game.

    The traditional booth babe model of attractive-but-uninformed eye candy sends messages that are demeaning to all concerned: it implies that females are valuable only for their looks, and that male gamers will lose critical thinking skills if you shake some boobs at them. I also find that I resent the presence of too many people who are neither gamers nor geeks at "my" convention.

    chicazul on
  • PinderPinder Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Filled the mother-fuck out.

    I basically used two examples of "booth babes" in my survey, one appropriate, one not in my opinion.

    1) Someone mentioned the woman in costume for Sins of a Solar Empire at Stardock. What people might not know is that she was actually one of the game devs. I discovered this (to my delight) when I had her and the other devs sign the copy of Sins that I bought there. Her costume was awesome, she knew about the game, and was incredibly nice and inviting. Bravo all around. Another example of this was the lady dressed as the Velvet Assasin to take pictures with in front of that booth. Sure, she was attractive, and sure she was probably just hired for promotional purposes and maybe didn't know that much about the game itself, but she was dressed as the main character of the game, and her costume was relevant so I see no problem there. These sorts of "booth babes" (hell, they could even be male characters, too) are fine and even encouraged.

    2) The "PSP Go" girls at the Sony Booth one year. Booty shorts, and low cut tops, with a PSP Go strapped to their waist for you to try out. It was a transparent and insulting ploy to try and draw people in using nothing but sex appeal. The girls there existed solely to have a PSP strapped to them and to have breasts. I personally think it insults the intelligence and character of the PAX community to think that we're so simple minded as to fall for this. If the only purpose the girls served by being there could be just as easily served by a kiosk with a PSP on it, then they're completely extraneous, a net negative, and shouldn't be allowed.

    Bottom line, if I like your product and want to buy it, I will. If I think your product sucks and I don't want to buy it, I won't, not even if it's strapped to someone with a great rack.

    Pinder on
    This signature intentionally left blank.
  • chicazulchicazul Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Batty wrote: »
    How is that any firmer moral ground than using a pretty girl in a bikini to promote your product at a trade show?

    First and foremost, because PAX is not a trade show. Everything about PAX was designed from the point of view of the gamer, the fan. What is awesome to do at a gaming convention? Play games with friends and strangers, see talks from game developers, listen to geeky music, etc. Seeing the expo hall is a part of that, but it is not the whole point.

    Plus, as most people in this thread have said, booth babes are insulting. "Promoting your product" by sticking a bikini-clad girl in front of it is a blatant attempt to manipulate the male intellect via his penis. Even to the extent that this works in getting attention, guys know they are being manipulated, and often resent it. This is not so much offending delicate sensibilities, as telling your prospective customers, "We look down on you and think you are too stupid to notice".

    Note that I said attempt to manipulate the male intellect. To women, that pretty bikini girl says "You do not matter to us as a customer" and "Girls are only valuable as eye candy". The gender ratio at PAX is far more balanced than most people expect, precisely because PAX is so fun and doesn't encourage blatant sexism. For all the offensive things that Penny Arcade does, they aren't big into promoting negative stereotypes of women.

    TL;DR PAX is about having fun, and being condescended to sucks.

    chicazul on
  • ACC3SSACC3SS Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    ploogle wrote: »
    I personally wasn't thrilled when I saw the people at the Borderlands booth last year. I'm all for having people dressed up as *modest* game characters to promote the product, and if they know about the game that's even better.

    I'd actually use the Borderlands girls as a good example of booth babes. The one I spoke to while playing the demo was very knowledgeable about gameplay features.

    I think Jedi Knight Karl said it best...
    i don't care if they are scantily clad as long as they know their product backwards and forwards.

    ACC3SS on
  • UsagiUsagi Nah Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Pinder wrote: »
    Filled the mother-fuck out.

    I basically used two examples of "booth babes" in my survey, one appropriate, one not in my opinion.

    1) Someone mentioned the woman in costume for Sins of a Solar Empire at Stardock. What people might not know is that she was actually one of the game devs. I discovered this (to my delight) when I had her and the other devs sign the copy of Sins that I bought there. Her costume was awesome, she knew about the game, and was incredibly nice and inviting. Bravo all around. Another example of this was the lady dressed as the Velvet Assasin to take pictures with in front of that booth. Sure, she was attractive, and sure she was probably just hired for promotional purposes and maybe didn't know that much about the game itself, but she was dressed as the main character of the game, and her costume was relevant so I see no problem there. These sorts of "booth babes" (hell, they could even be male characters, too) are fine and even encouraged.

    2) The "PSP Go" girls at the Sony Booth one year. Booty shorts, and low cut tops, with a PSP Go strapped to their waist for you to try out. It was a transparent and insulting ploy to try and draw people in using nothing but sex appeal. The girls there existed solely to have a PSP strapped to them and to have breasts. I personally think it insults the intelligence and character of the PAX community to think that we're so simple minded as to fall for this. If the only purpose the girls served by being there could be just as easily served by a kiosk with a PSP on it, then they're completely extraneous, a net negative, and shouldn't be allowed.

    Bottom line, if I like your product and want to buy it, I will. If I think your product sucks and I don't want to buy it, I won't, not even if it's strapped to someone with a great rack.

    This is an excellent distinction! I am pretty much ok with Booth Babe Type 1, and totally not ok with Booth Babe Type 2.

    Survey is filled out Robert, and I promise I limited myself to one use each of "bimbo" and "hiney"

    Usagi on
  • BattyBatty Registered User new member
    edited May 2010
    Pax isn't a trade show? See all those manufacturers promoting their products? That's a trade show.

    Chicazul: Why is it so important for you to destroy other people's fun for you to have fun? I don't tell you not to do whatever it is you do at the show. I'm willing to tolerate your actions to a reasonable extent, why can't you do the same?

    It may be hard for you to accept, but those models who appear at shows like this are real people trying to make a living. They can make $300 a day or even more for special costume or training requirements. Will you get some hateful satisfaction from knowing a woman had to drop modeling as a career because this avenue was cut off by people like you?

    Batty on
  • UsagiUsagi Nah Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    PAX is more of a gamer party/consumer show than a trade show, Batty. And regardless of how silly I think the idea that preventing booth babes from working at two shows out of thousands in North America is going to change their livelihoods, you may want to tone it down a bit.

    Usagi on
  • Moe FwackyMoe Fwacky Right Here, Right Now Drives a BuickModerator mod
    edited May 2010
    One weekend a year isn't going to make or break somebody's modeling career. PAX has always been about the gamers, ALL the gamers, and allowing women to parade around wearing next to nothing in order to draw attention to a booth sends three messages.

    1. Hey guys, look, boobs! Oh by the way, you should buy our product
    2. Hey girls, this is what you should look like if you want a boyfriend. By the way, we don't really care about you as consumers
    3. Hey everybody, our product isn't that great, be distracted by this model while we convince you to give us your money.

    Those messages are contrary with what PAX stands for.

    If a booth wants to have somebody in a revealing costume at their booth, that person had better know at least as much about the game as any of the other people working the booth that day, and that costume had better be related to their product(s).

    Moe Fwacky on
    E6LkoFK.png

  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Batty wrote: »
    Clicking back through a few recent Penny Arcade comics, I see the F-word being used in the presence of a nursing mother, a bestiality reference, a monster with penises for eyes... basically an endless series of attempts to be as offensive as possible. How is that any firmer moral ground than using a pretty girl in a bikini to promote your product at a trade show?
    Yeah, my opinions on this aren't particularly strong. I voted a 3. But srsly. I dig professionalism, and enforcing it is legit. But we aren't Amish, and being hypocritical and pretentious isn't exactly the same thing as "keeping it real."

    Also, words like "babe" and "skimpy" are among those things which are in the eye of the beholder. Maybe we should be not so sensitive to what people wear or how they choose to make a living, and if it does bother you, then avoid the booth. If booth babes show up, but then enough people started avoiding booth babe booths on the floor, they'd disappear that day and never come back.

    Yar on
  • Moe FwackyMoe Fwacky Right Here, Right Now Drives a BuickModerator mod
    edited May 2010
    Yar wrote: »
    Batty wrote: »
    Clicking back through a few recent Penny Arcade comics, I see the F-word being used in the presence of a nursing mother, a bestiality reference, a monster with penises for eyes... basically an endless series of attempts to be as offensive as possible. How is that any firmer moral ground than using a pretty girl in a bikini to promote your product at a trade show?
    Yeah, my opinions on this aren't particularly strong. I voted a 3. But srsly. I dig professionalism, and enforcing it is legit. But we aren't Amish, and being hypocritical and pretentious isn't exactly the same thing as "keeping it real."

    Also, words like "babe" and "skimpy" are among those things which are in the eye of the beholder. Maybe we should be not so sensitive to what people wear or how they choose to make a living, and if it does bother you, then avoid the booth. If booth babes show up, but then enough people started avoiding booth babe booths on the floor, they'd disappear that day and never come back.

    You would be surprised to learn how flawed this reasoning is.

    Moe Fwacky on
    E6LkoFK.png

  • BigRedBigRed Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Pinder wrote: »
    Filled the mother-fuck out.

    I basically used two examples of "booth babes" in my survey, one appropriate, one not in my opinion.

    1) Someone mentioned the woman in costume for Sins of a Solar Empire at Stardock. What people might not know is that she was actually one of the game devs. I discovered this (to my delight) when I had her and the other devs sign the copy of Sins that I bought there. Her costume was awesome, she knew about the game, and was incredibly nice and inviting. Bravo all around. Another example of this was the lady dressed as the Velvet Assasin to take pictures with in front of that booth. Sure, she was attractive, and sure she was probably just hired for promotional purposes and maybe didn't know that much about the game itself, but she was dressed as the main character of the game, and her costume was relevant so I see no problem there. These sorts of "booth babes" (hell, they could even be male characters, too) are fine and even encouraged.

    2) The "PSP Go" girls at the Sony Booth one year. Booty shorts, and low cut tops, with a PSP Go strapped to their waist for you to try out. It was a transparent and insulting ploy to try and draw people in using nothing but sex appeal. The girls there existed solely to have a PSP strapped to them and to have breasts. I personally think it insults the intelligence and character of the PAX community to think that we're so simple minded as to fall for this. If the only purpose the girls served by being there could be just as easily served by a kiosk with a PSP on it, then they're completely extraneous, a net negative, and shouldn't be allowed.

    Bottom line, if I like your product and want to buy it, I will. If I think your product sucks and I don't want to buy it, I won't, not even if it's strapped to someone with a great rack.

    ^^
    This is what I have been saying all along. I think the booths that do #1 are awesome. moreso if they have devs that want to dress up.

    End of thread, Cut here:

    BigRed on
    <MoeFwacky> besides, BigRed-Worky is right
  • DjiemDjiem Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I think Pinder's post says it best. There are good booth babes and bad ones, and I fully support the good ones. However, whatever decision the PAX staff takes, including banning all booth babes because they make attendees uncomfortable, I'll stand behind it.

    Djiem on
  • ashridahashridah Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Djiem wrote: »
    I think Pinder's post says it best. There are good booth babes and bad ones, and I fully support the good ones. However, whatever decision the PAX staff takes, including banning all booth babes because they make attendees uncomfortable, I'll stand behind it.

    The trick, of course, is to find some way to convince the casual observer that person X is doing 1), not 2). Unfortunately, no matter how well this line is drawn, there's always going to be people who see person X dressed up in some kind of semi-revealing outfit, and think that they're booth-candy.

    The better question is: Do we really care if someone gets that impression, even if it's completely wrong, and that the booth-candy is in fact a dev or PR person who really loves their subject material, and happened to dress really well for the part? Or is the damage that gets done every year, along with the repeated refrain of "no more booth babes!" going to be unavoidable from this situation?

    ashridah on
  • VisionOfClarityVisionOfClarity Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I don't care about them. They're at NYCC and I've never had an issue with them there, including some blatantly obvious attention grabbing ones. I'd rather the booth babe over the poorly attempted cosplay Harley and Ivy I have to see at every NYCC. There are some things you can't unsee. If we're limiting vendors I think the con goers should be as well in terms of covering up.

    VisionOfClarity on
  • Sleet01Sleet01 Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I think one of the primary differences that people forget when they equate cosplayers and booth babes is that cosplayers are us, members of our community, and paying con-goers. They are choosing to dress the way they do as a show of solidarity, of support for their favorite games, or to have fun. The booth babes are generally not given a choice about their dress, are employees of exhibitors or temps hired for the duration of PAX, and are there just to make a buck. I, for one, have no problem allowing the former but putting the kibosh on the latter on this basis alone, leaving aside the valid arguments about tackiness, comfort level, kids, female gamers, etc.

    Sleet01 on
    And it's oh, boys, can't you code it <huh> and program it right;
    Nothin' ever happens in this life of mine.
    I'm haulin' out the data on the Xerox line!
  • Sleet01Sleet01 Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    ashridah wrote: »
    The trick, of course, is to find some way to convince the casual observer that person X is doing 1), not 2). Unfortunately, no matter how well this line is drawn, there's always going to be people who see person X dressed up in some kind of semi-revealing outfit, and think that they're booth-candy.

    The better question is: Do we really care if someone gets that impression, even if it's completely wrong, and that the booth-candy is in fact a dev or PR person who really loves their subject material, and happened to dress really well for the part? Or is the damage that gets done every year, along with the repeated refrain of "no more booth babes!" going to be unavoidable from this situation?
    What does it take away from the devs to have them dress casual while promoting their games? If they're that dedicated to the game and that interested in gaming in general and cosplaying as the character in particular, can't they cosplay on their own time while attending the con as a member of the general public?

    Sleet01 on
    And it's oh, boys, can't you code it <huh> and program it right;
    Nothin' ever happens in this life of mine.
    I'm haulin' out the data on the Xerox line!
  • DjiemDjiem Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Sleet01 wrote: »
    ashridah wrote: »
    The trick, of course, is to find some way to convince the casual observer that person X is doing 1), not 2). Unfortunately, no matter how well this line is drawn, there's always going to be people who see person X dressed up in some kind of semi-revealing outfit, and think that they're booth-candy.

    The better question is: Do we really care if someone gets that impression, even if it's completely wrong, and that the booth-candy is in fact a dev or PR person who really loves their subject material, and happened to dress really well for the part? Or is the damage that gets done every year, along with the repeated refrain of "no more booth babes!" going to be unavoidable from this situation?
    What does it take away from the devs to have them dress casual while promoting their games? If they're that dedicated to the game and that interested in gaming in general and cosplaying as the character in particular, can't they cosplay on their own time while attending the con as a member of the general public?

    If an attendee can cosplay out of love for their game, devs should also be allowed that, I think.

    Djiem on
  • HeleorHeleor SeattleRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Djiem wrote: »
    If an attendee can cosplay out of love for their game, devs should also be allowed that, I think.

    There's a big difference between cosplay and just dressing to attract attention. The question is, is it possible to ban one but not the other?

    Heleor on
  • PimpMethodPimpMethod Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Pinder wrote: »
    Filled the mother-fuck out.

    I basically used two examples of "booth babes" in my survey, one appropriate, one not in my opinion.

    1) Someone mentioned the woman in costume for Sins of a Solar Empire at Stardock. What people might not know is that she was actually one of the game devs. I discovered this (to my delight) when I had her and the other devs sign the copy of Sins that I bought there. Her costume was awesome, she knew about the game, and was incredibly nice and inviting. Bravo all around. Another example of this was the lady dressed as the Velvet Assasin to take pictures with in front of that booth. Sure, she was attractive, and sure she was probably just hired for promotional purposes and maybe didn't know that much about the game itself, but she was dressed as the main character of the game, and her costume was relevant so I see no problem there. These sorts of "booth babes" (hell, they could even be male characters, too) are fine and even encouraged.

    2) The "PSP Go" girls at the Sony Booth one year. Booty shorts, and low cut tops, with a PSP Go strapped to their waist for you to try out. It was a transparent and insulting ploy to try and draw people in using nothing but sex appeal. The girls there existed solely to have a PSP strapped to them and to have breasts. I personally think it insults the intelligence and character of the PAX community to think that we're so simple minded as to fall for this. If the only purpose the girls served by being there could be just as easily served by a kiosk with a PSP on it, then they're completely extraneous, a net negative, and shouldn't be allowed.

    Bottom line, if I like your product and want to buy it, I will. If I think your product sucks and I don't want to buy it, I won't, not even if it's strapped to someone with a great rack.

    Good pont! If ya want to see booth babes like the psp go girls then go to the car shows like DUB.
    BTY: Done

    PimpMethod on
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Pinder gave the best example. Allow me to try to turn that into a set of rules:

    1. All representatives working at a given booth must be knowledgeable about the product.
    2. All "uniforms" must be "business casual"; no shorts, no midriff, no cleavage.
    3. All "costumes" must thematically appropriate to the product.

    I think this covers pretty much the gamut of situations you might run into on the Show Floor, and this is largely what I said in the survey.

    Houn on
  • HeleorHeleor SeattleRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Houn wrote: »
    2. All "uniforms" must be "business casual"; no shorts, no midriff, no cleavage.

    ...Wha?

    Heleor on
  • DjiemDjiem Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    What about a huge barechested buffed-up dude cosplaying Kratos and handing out flyers?

    "TAKE THIS COUPON, FOOLISH MORTAL, OR DIE FROM MY BLADES!"

    Djiem on
  • DeciusDecius I'm old! I'm fat! I'M BLUE!Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    That would...actually be kinda awesome. Would be something like the guys playing Klingons at Star Trek: The Experience in Vegas. They were a little too into their roles, but not in a bad way.

    Decius on
    camo_sig2.png
    I never finish anyth
  • AltDeleteAltDelete Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Survey'd.

    I agree with the policy and wouldn't mind seeing it enforced a little more aggressively. That might limit the scenario where someone is having their friend take a picture with him and the pretty one, taking up half the Exhibit Hall walkway and blocking attendees. No one knows how to use a friend's camera, so you end up with someone fumbling with the shudder speed for twenty seconds while the babe forces a smile and fifty blocked PAX goers stare at an increasingly embarrassed man.

    At the end of the day it's the decision of the PAX makers. No matter how byzantine the rule, exhibitors have months in advance to ask questions, plead their case, and plan accordingly. If an exhibitor shows up on Friday with 3 chicks and only a single bikini to split between them, Khoo and Co. should feel free to ask them to find some pants or find the door.

    AltDelete on
  • BattyBatty Registered User new member
    edited May 2010
    For the life of me I can't reconcile some of the points of view expressed on this thread with the content of the Penny Arcade site. This site routinely publishes content that many people, including some of the same types of people posting in this thread, would find offensive.

    How can you be offended by a girl in a bikini but not be offended by a giant scrotum and an exploding penis, both of which have been featured on Penny Arcade? To me this seems like a hypocritical double standard that doesn't make sense.

    I'm sorry, but I am not going to allow the PAX founders the luxury of pretending to take the moral high road on this issue after reading their panel about masturbating to the "vaginas of the sea".

    Batty on
  • Moe FwackyMoe Fwacky Right Here, Right Now Drives a BuickModerator mod
    edited May 2010
    We're not offended by the girl in the bikini. We're offended by the tactic of a girl in a bikini being used as a method to draw people towards a booth. We're not there to see the girl in the bikini, we're there to see the product and feel insulted that a company thinks they need to resort to sex appeal marketing in order to get us to buy/demo their products.

    Moe Fwacky on
    E6LkoFK.png

  • BrokenAngelBrokenAngel Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Batty wrote: »
    How can you be offended by a girl in a bikini but not be offended by a giant scrotum and an exploding penis, both of which have been featured on Penny Arcade? To me this seems like a hypocritical double standard that doesn't make sense.

    I think you are missing the point here. We as a overall group are not puritans by any means, we don't have anything against scantily clad people, we are not prudes (In fact spend 5 minutes in PAX IRC and you will likely be warped for life) and we don't think sex is bad.

    What we are against is the concept BEHIND booth babes. Scantily clad girls are great in some circumstances, the beach, burlesque shows, keggers ect. PAX however is not one of those circumstances. PAX is about coming together as a community, about having fun and sharing a common hobby no matter your gender, age or anything else. And anything that would demean and offend such a large portion of people should likely not be a part of it. Why force a large portion of your attendees to be uncomfortable?

    I mean sure you CAN get a stripper for your grandparents anniversary party, but why? (YMMV, I'm sure some grandparents would love a stripper ;P)

    BrokenAngel on
    k9mk2carn.pngeleventhdoc2carn.png *Proud Head Girl of Slytherin & Team Red*
  • DjiemDjiem Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Also, Batty, don't forget that it seems most of us are ok with a knowledgeable booth babe which would prove that point that it's not the girl that annoys us as much as the gratuitous tits-to-sell attempt of some companies.

    Djiem on
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Heleor wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    2. All "uniforms" must be "business casual"; no shorts, no midriff, no cleavage.

    ...Wha?

    Basically, I'm trying to avoid this:

    (spoiler contains booth babes)
    booth_babe.jpg

    Now, costumes, there's far more leeway on skin; if the character's in a metal bikini, then the costume's fine to do the same. It's appropriate in the context of the product. The wearer still needs to know the product.

    Houn on
  • chicazulchicazul Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Batty wrote: »
    Pax isn't a trade show? See all those manufacturers promoting their products? That's a trade show.

    Chicazul: Why is it so important for you to destroy other people's fun for you to have fun?

    Woah, woah, seriously? I may have worded my post poorly, but I don't recall setting myself up as a moral arbiter determined to impose sharia. I take offense to being berated on strawman arguments.

    I maintain my stance that PAX is not a trade show. The expo hall is, sure, but that is only a small portion of the event. I spend 72 hours each fall "at PAX", but only 2 or 3 in the expo. This whole survey/discussion is about keeping the expo hall in line with the spirit of the rest of PAX, which is decidedly more gamer-friendly than marketer-friendly.

    I, like most of the other commentors, have no problem with pretty girls existing at PAX, in whatever attire they choose. This survey is about a marketing ploy that many of the target audience say doesn't fit with this event.

    I find it hard to believe that expressing a common opinion about tacky marketing equates to "destroy[ing] other people's fun". If you cannot have fun without being surrounded by bikini models, you might question whether PAX is the right convention for you.

    chicazul on
  • strebaliciousstrebalicious Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I really could care less either way. Booth babes or no, it's not going to make me any more or less likely to buy an item. I let the product stand on its own legs. Why don't people, when confronted with a booth babe, just do like my friend does when he goes to a 'buy me drink' bar: just call them a whore and they leave you alone.

    strebalicious on
    camo_sig2.png
  • HounHoun Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I really could care less either way. Booth babes or no, it's not going to make me any more or less likely to buy an item. I let the product stand on its own legs. Why don't people, when confronted with a booth babe, just do like my friend does when he goes to a 'buy me drink' bar: just call them a whore and they leave you alone.

    Seems to violate Wheaton's Law...

    Houn on
  • nervenerve Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I really could care less either way. Booth babes or no, it's not going to make me any more or less likely to buy an item. I let the product stand on its own legs. Why don't people, when confronted with a booth babe, just do like my friend does when he goes to a 'buy me drink' bar: just call them a whore and they leave you alone.

    You really have to ask why?

    nerve on
  • AbsintheMindedAbsintheMinded Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    As per the Kotaku article on our little discussion here, the all-knowing Khoo has been quoted as saying "Our definition of a "booth babe" has been a model (male or female) that has been hired to stand/sit in skimpy clothing to market the product. If that person knows the product inside and out then it's less of an issue"

    Accordingly some of these cosplaying Devs, and educated product reps in slightly more well-ventalated attire we've been discussing as 'good examples' of booth babes, aren't really considered booth babes by the PA standard.

    I've always personally felt that if the person in question is on the company's regular pay roll (or was at least trained to know their product enough to sell it instead of selling their appearance/outfit/cleavage) and they are not someone the company ordered from a catalog a few days before the con, then that person is not a booth babe regardless of gender or choice of attire. Accordingly I don't care what they wear as long as they aren't breaking any state laws with that choice.

    As for actual booth babes.... logistically speaking we have a hard enough time fitting all the attendees into the expo hall, I don't like needless people taking up useful space.

    AbsintheMinded on
  • Curse-TenCurse-Ten Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I know for PAX 09 they had some promotional for Grand Turismo (actually all I know is that it was a racing game) so they had women with DS's with them to promote them walking around. There was one who lingered by the Bean Bags and we got to talking.
    No doubt she was hired about her looks but she was very kind and actually seemed happy to talk to someone about something other than awkard attempts to skirt around the game to flirt with her. I even charged her DS when it died. I tried to ask more about the details about her job (like how much she got paid, hey I was interested and as a girl maybe I could be one. Just kidding :p!) but she couldn't tell me because of policy so I let it drop.

    She mentioned that PAX is a lot more laid back when it comes to the attendees so apparently she's been to others.

    So all in all I'm a little torn, she was a good example of a person who I got a good impression of but on the other hand she wasn't in the main lobby so she wasn't clogging the halls. She wasn't in cosplay so not many people would take pictures of her. I think in the Expo hall which is already very crowded is a bad place to have a girl in skimpy outfits walk around.

    I've been to Sakuracon where the escalators can get clogged if a good cosplayer is walking around out there. I know what it's like to have to clog around a photographer trying to get the perfect pic of Busty Babe McBikinibottoms and I've been the cosplayer being stopped every five seconds and I've also been the photographer getting yelled at for blacking paths.

    Curse-Ten on
  • feitocomfrutafeitocomfruta Denver, Colorado, USARegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I think the consensus seems to be more the concern with "knowing the product" over the outfits. If I may though, here's my thinking.

    Most of these "booth babes" are temp agency or modeling agency hires that are in college. I fully support them being paid to sell games and advertise for companies (heck, I wanted to do that as a job for CurrentTV in college, so I understand the motive). However, they don't need to show off their bodies and degrade themselves to sell stuff. Hooters' girls are more tasteful than some of these groups can be.

    And yes, cosplay is different, but I say that if you have to wear something that may be more revealing, wear a nude bodysuit underneath to make sure nothing pops out unexpectedly. Otherwise, feel free to look like a complete dork.

    feitocomfruta on
  • sickdollsickdoll Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    "Let their be Booth Babes!"

    as long as they know their product.

    sickdoll on
  • MasterHeliosMasterHelios Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    As I stated in the comment section, I feel like I don't need sex appeal to make me interested in a game. If I can only be lured into looking at a display by the attractive woman standing next to it, I'm not going to be interested in the product, and therefore I tend to avoid booths with babes since it makes me feel like the product itself isn't good enough to make me interested without the sex appeal.

    Cosplay I can excuse to an extent, but I don't like it being an excuse to have booth babes, like what happened with Bayonetta (last?) year. I really liked Bayonetta but I was completely turned off it when I saw the booth for it, only regaining interest when I actually saw the product.

    TL;DR: IMO no babes, except in cosplay, except when they're nothing but babes in cosplay.

    MasterHelios on
    Roses are red
    Violets are blue
    お前はもう
    死んでいる
  • JDDMichaelJDDMichael Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I thought I would offer up my thoughts on this in the hopes that it may have some impact.

    I spent a lot of time at PAX 2009 taking photos of the Cosplay that was on display there. I saw some really amazing work, and most of it didn't involve excessive amounts of skin. I appreciate the female form as much as the next guy, but on a purely technical level I tend to be really really critical on people that lean on skin to make up for an otherwise crappy costume.

    That being said, I ultimately appreciate it when the costume is appropriate for the character even if that means it is going to be very revealing. If it looks like the character, and the character is normally showing a lot of skin, then have at it. I commend anyone that can dress like that and not feel weird about it.

    Oddly enough, I have a dramatically different response to titillation outfits (think stripper or thong type beach wear) at a convention. While my eyes may find it passingly pleasing to look at, I have a real hard time not feeling a bit insulted by the whole thing (and too embarrassed for the model to take a picture). I am not going to buy a video card because they had strippers at their booth. And the implications that the company feels it had to go that direction in order to push their product is that I need to take a very careful look at the product itself. If you can't sell it on its own merits, then you have a problem.

    Obviously if a game involved beach activities (maybe a beach volleyball type game) I'd give a pass on the bikinis, but I certainly wouldn't embrace it as being "cosplay" in any real sense of the word.

    I think that if the booth babe visually depicts a character in the game, and they could walk down the street without being arrest, it should be okay. If it is irrelevant to the product, then no freaking way.

    JDDMichael on
  • HakkinslashHakkinslash Registered User new member
    edited May 2010
    Cudos to Pinder! You pretty much expressed my feelings on the subject. The only thing that I would add comes from a personal perspective. I am fascinated by marketing strategies. In a way, they are just moves in a meta-strategy game. Without "booth babes", the companies either have to A) have a product that outshines any marketing ploy, or B) come up with some very inventive marketing that speaks to gaming hearts. I am really looking forward to whatever they come up with!

    Hakkinslash on
This discussion has been closed.