Slashdot Mirror
New E3 Show Announced - Smaller and Invite-only
fiorenza writes "The ESA has announced the date and venue for the new E3 show, which is to be renamed the E3 Media and Business Summit. The show has move moved from May to July, and next year will take place on July 11-13 in Santa Monica, California. Doug Lowenstein, the president of the ESA, said that past attendees wanted a smaller more formal show that would be oriented to the media instead of the consumer, so it will now be invitation-only and many of the 'events' will actually take place in hotel suites. It looks like other gaming shows will need to step in if the glitz and glitter of E3 is to be saved."
That's E3 losing half their "fan"-base. I predict that in a few years, we'll see some other expo put E3 out. Just you watch.
This just means it will be more of a chalenge getting in, unlike the last two years for me :p
This is a serious question.
I have read that PAX is not, cannot, be a replacement for E3.
I can accept this; I just wonder aloud: "What is the purpose of E3?" What essential role did it play?
Its a double-edged sword. We're still getting just as much gaming news as at last year's E3 and its nice to know the publishers won't be wasting money on "booth babes" and other promotional non-sense. Its still a shame, E3 turned from a media expo to a gaming holiday. This is just going closer to its roots.
We DO have the Games Convention in Leipzig, Germany (http://www.gc-germany.de/), which I believe is one of the best candidates to be the next gaming show with size of the E3. Although it is in Germany, it has greatly increased in popularity over the last few years, as more and more international game developers come there to show their stuff. But we will see.
Will there still be booth babes?
Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick Two.
prostitutes
It looks like other gaming shows will need to step in if the glitz and glitter of E3 is to be saved."
Does the glitz and glitter need to be saved? Have you ever played a game and said "I wish they didn't work so hard on this game. If only they had rushed it out to stores prematurely or had fewer people working on it, they would have had more money for E3 glitz and glitter."
That glitz money has to come from somewhere.
> I think video games hold back many smart kids from becoming truly skillful in other areas of computing.
... and ...
And writing in blogs and forums holds back many smart kids from becoming truly skillful in other areas of computing.
And heavy involvement in music holds back many smart kids from becoming truly skillful in other areas of computing.
And digital photography and video work holds back many smart kids from becoming truly skillful in other areas of computing.
And
There are only 24h in the day. *Anything* you do prevents you from focussing on and becoming skillful in other areas of computing, and it doesn't even need to be a computer-related subject.
Was there *ANY* point at all in what you wrote?
And WTF, somehow you linked that to E3? Have you even *heard* of logic?
Why? What's the point of 17 web sites having "booth babe specials" and regurgitating what everyone else has? Or of actual journalists (or at least the best the games media can scrounge up) getting real floor-time with the demonstrators and games. Or more budget being put towards people who can actually talk about the games, or a few more TVs for videos or demos?
So, uh, yeah. This is hardly the end of gaming. In fact, the lack of stupid distractions will probably help us actually, I don't know, be informed.
You want a party? Organize a party. This is a media event that simply got out of hand, and is being reeled back to where it should be.
Is this really the way E3 want to be going? the whole point of it was mass exposure to the gaming industry along with the public. It was a spectacle, an event and being over the top was part of it. Now there are many other expos like this in other industries which run well, and the main reason for that is that the exhibitors have a reason to be there other than displaying their product (most usually it is networking with those in the same industry (an example being web expos, trading links/traffic etc)). However in the games industry, a rep from Nintendo isn't exactly going to hop on over there to the Sony booth and start discussing how they can do business, because in this industry it is done a lot higher up. E3 had some core problems and mis-management only aided these, along with the fact that so many people use the internet to get their news (Gamespot, IGN etc) that they don't need the previous magazine coverage of the event or even the event in order to stay in touch with what is happening. I think the decline of E3 is only bringing in a new era for the way that the games industry interacts with critics and fans alike.
Business Voyeur
No, they're called escorts.
Does God treat us as servants or friends? Check my homepage.
...
Sounds like the G8 political summit. A whole lot of talk, almost no mass public attention and a whole lot decided without the input of the people years before it'll eventually take effect. How is this for the better again?
Would somebody PLEASE think of the booth babes!
The only thing that ever seems to come out of E3 anymore are false hopes and shattered dreams. Its a hype show and usually based more of impossibly lofty goals and expectations rather than the reality of game making. Perhaps without E3 we will have less vaporware and dissappearing features and more games that are not rushed out the door with huge flaws that require patching before the game is even played.\
The only negative to the disappearance of e3 is perhaps the exposure for the small developer, unable to afford the suites, catering, booze and escorts the big guys have, many small games are never going to get the opportunity to get traditional exposure that E3 offered. But then maybe thats part of the intention.
Would be open to the public, would encourage thousands and thousands of people - no matter who they are - to come to the event and play, indulge in the joy of game-playing, immerse themselves in a weeklong festival of games, games, and nothing but games. New releases could be made during this period, game companies would be able to plan their schedules around the week-long event, big surprises and huge capers could occur, and the general public would be actively involved - not because they were 'allowed' to, but because they're simply a big part of the event.
..
There would be sufficient organization to let the industry communicate amongst itself - heck, why not set up a back-end "Dealer Network" so that all the regular business deals could be done amidst the chaos of releases, parties, highscore table overflows, etc.
I mean, honestly, the more this E3 business comes out, the more it seems like its being run by people who are actively suppressing the whole point of Games in the first place: TO HAVE FUN. Surely, there has to be a way to align "TO MAKE MONEY" with "TO HAVE FUN" in a big event in such a way that everyone wins, and for me that would mean taking off all the barriers to entry to the temple that the E3 priests have been erecting, and making it a huge worship-fest of games, games, games.
The more a person profits from Games, it seems, the more they lose sight of the original point in the first place. This happens in all industries of course - the tired, old, rich, millionaires jealously guarding their temples from the hoards of the new, eager, un-enlightened masses from which they themselves, once, were also borne
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
8 kinds of prostitutes?
The problem with these shows going "behind closed doors" is that there will be zero reason for any company going to the show at all, in any form. The same companies can easily just invite the press to their own events at different places if all they want is a place to show reporters their recently announced products.
As for the "booth babes" being either good or bad, it depends. The web sites that show them as a feature in the reporting are a big part of the problem since the idea really is to show off the products the company will be selling. For those who attend the shows though, they were considered a part of the entertainment and atmosphere of the show to attract people to their booths.
The cost for vendors to go to the shows may have gotten out of control, and moving the location somewhere else may have been in order, but the nature of the shows should not have been changed in my opinion. It's FUN to go to these type of shows in person, and they will be missed by those who really did understand that the shows really were about seeing the new products that were being developed, and not just about being a source of information.
A part of the problem may also be that the game market has been imploding with more sequels that show off the next generation of the same crap we see today for the most part. New graphics and effects engines may have a certain "cool" factor associated with them, but they don't change the gameplay all that much. When physics processing gets to the point where you can blow a hole in ANY wall(perhaps with repeated shots or explosions), and allow the player to move through that hole it will finally make a PPU worth buying for the average gamer, but until then, it's the type of thing that won't make the average person want to buy one as just one example of a hyped product doing nothing for gameplay.
First and for most. E3 is not for fans. I have to start here because of the stupidity I see everywhere about it. "Oh I gotta go to that" Want to know why we now have this format? Because of those stupid ass fans. Why would companies want to have huge trade shows for the media where 50 percent of their time is talking to whiny fans? Simple, they don't. At least not E3, E3 is for the industry, for the people in the industry, for the people who report on the industry.
Hint: They don't care about your stupid "blog" that your mommy reads. This is a trade show. So no PAX is not going to replace it TGS isn't going to replace it. This is exactly what they wanted. Now you'll have private showings because fans can't get it out of their head that they should be allowed in to this. If you're bitching and moaning about this move, guess what? You are the exact reason why this move was made.
Second, Large companies potentially killed E3. Now I'll ignore Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony, because they have a reason to be that large. They need to sell their hardware. But explain to me why EA needs a booth that costs more than most development cycles? E3 is about telling the media/press about their stuff, showing their technology to others who might license it and learning about the industry. How does DJs blasting music help that? Answer: It doesn't.
EA has constantly been leading the pissing contest at E3. Good for them, but when small indie developers who can't get exposure any other way get over shadowed, the purpose of the confrence is lost. E3 isn't about booth babes and rap music, it's about games again. It's about getting exposure for companies that can't fly out every media organization when they have something to show off. It's not for EA, Activision or any other name you'd know. If the media came and got information on 30 games in a day, that's great. That's what they want, they don't need to go around and have to be distracted.
Finally the new format is exactly what's needed. You need something where there's less of a pissing match (again EA and others....), you need the media and industry ONLY, that means no fans and low amounts of Game Store employees. You need private rooms for some stuff, public rooms for others. Finally you'll want to control the size of the event because E3 was getting whorish near the end.
I'm hopeful to go this year, and no I'm not contridicting myself. For the first year I work at an actual game company and I really would like to go to see this thing. I've never been to one because I really didn't have a reason. Yes it's the "in thing" but guess what, the doesn't make it right to go. There's now PAX for the fans, and that's where you guys should go. E3 is for the industry itself, and that's where I want to go.
I could go on but that should be enough for most of the people with misunderstandings. The simple fact is the idea "I gotta go" is what killed it and I just see more people acting like they are going to continue to kill it. Want to keep E3 around? Stop trying to get in and the good E3 will return. Want to go? get a job in the industry, simple as that.
(Of course, I say this as someone who has been boycotting my own hometown Festival in Toronto, because it got too stupid/greedy/corporate a few years ago. But I see the advantage of the event to content producers.)
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.