Don't use real brands in your games/novels

Not because you can't, but because you often can in novels at least— but shouldn't, because you're giving mega corps free advertising.

I mean there's other good reasons too, like "inventing dumb fake brands is half the fun", but that's plenty reason already. Don't lick boots, even if they taste like Oreo.

@glassbottommeg damn… strong disagree I think. Saying a character drank a Coke is just life. Hanging out behind the Taco Bell is a real thing people do. Hanging out behind the Taco Schmacko isn’t. If your story is taking place in the real world it’s okay to set it there. We live in a world full of brands. It’s also fine and great to make a subtly different AU where the same amount of brand presence exists but it’s all fake. It just won’t seem like it takes place in real life (in this one way)

@ja2ke soda, pop, regionally appropriate slang. Taco shack (or truck). Convenience store. local five n dime. Diner. Bodega. Pancake place.

Using the actual brands does little but instantly date the media 10 years from now, and materially supports their dominance in culture. Which sucks! Why help them? You can do better!

@glassbottommeg @ja2ke I'm with Megan on this, but I also watched the Bill & Ted movies with a friend the other day, and I struggle to think of what would land as well as "Strange things are afoot at the Circle K" does
@Cheeseness @glassbottommeg strange things are afoot at the circle k is a perfect example of when it is correct to use a real thing. I see lots of concern in this thread that something will get dated or a brand will become not cool. so what? Imagine if half life had shipped with this Fruitopia machine. It would be good, not bad, that it’s dated. I’m not saying drown your work in brands but I think “don’t use them” as a rule is incorrect. Representing the specifics of world as it is, has a place.

@ja2ke @glassbottommeg Separate from the concept of referencing brands, the context a work was created in is an intrinsic part of it IMO, and intentionally obscuring that can be potentially be disrespectful to your work and audience.

Still feel hugely uncomfortable with my work subsidising brands' presence and power in culture unless it's something I'm personally invested in, though!

@Cheeseness @glassbottommeg I guess for me I just think it’s powerful as hell that you can point a video camera at the real world and put an actor in the middle of it, and you’re telling a story that immediately feels true and real because it’s in that place. And the idea of re-creating that reality through the lens of an artist drawing or modeling it or a writer describing it is interesting and valid as hell. To say the camera can do it but the artist or writer can’t because capitalism… nah.
@ja2ke @Cheeseness @glassbottommeg i hate capitalism as much as anyone in this thread and i think specificity is good. citing a present day brand is just unexciting to me, i'd almost instinctively reach into a nearby parallel reality and make an -alike that better captures the spirit of the times. whereas for a period piece of any kind i love citing Fallen Brands like Fruitopia, as it reminds us that with the exception of a few immortal (mostly boring) brands, "this bullshit too shall pass".
@ja2ke @Cheeseness @glassbottommeg on the other hand if i wanted to tell a present day story that was explicitly addressing current events, eg The Wire, i'd absolutely use real boring everyday brands because the content of the story would absolutely not be doing those brands any favors.
@ja2ke @Cheeseness @glassbottommeg i think my most strongly held opinion on this topic is more that these decisions (real vs fake, time period, cultural context, views of the creator on each thing they're depicting no matter how minute) do, always, matter, even if we initially feel they don't, and if an artist has put that work in i'll pretty much always follow along to see where they take it.