Slashdot Mirror


Questioning the New E3

This year's E3 is substantially different than events of the past, with an easily navigated show floor just one of the signs of the changing times. There are a number of questions up in the air as to what the new face of E3 means. Hideo Kojima (creator of the Metal Gear series) went on record at the Konami conference saying that he considers the new format a waste of time. Game|Life's Chris Kohler has a piece up on this subject, and he says that the new E3 is all about the status quo: "Yes, there were press conferences. But when Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony all decide to only show their 2007 games (for the most part) and hold back on announcing huge news (entirely), you know something's up with the venue. At any rate, gamers hoping for some kind of shift in momentum, no matter which direction, didn't get their wish. This year's E3 is all about maintaining the status quo. Typically, it's been the 'battle of the press conferences' to see who 'wins E3.' This year, everybody surrendered."

17 of 86 comments (clear)

  1. 3 letters.... by RuBLed · · Score: 2

    PAX

  2. E3 Is Perfect Now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    E3 is meant to accomplish two things:

    1) Publishers and developers to all be in one place to have meetings, sign or work on deals, and all the other face to face work that goes on to get projects in motion

    2) A concentrated press event for companies to show off their stuff

    Over time E3 became a magnet for fanboys to find a way in to the show to get free promotional material, lamely try to pick up on the local LA strippers working as models, and in general just clog up the place.

    E3 is perfect now. I don't know of anyone who actually is involved with game development who doesn't love the new format.

    1. Re:E3 Is Perfect Now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Right, bad bad fans, disgusting fans who show their interest in an inappropriate way, rather than applauding the 10th reincarnation of the same old idea. No, they have a point. E3 was designed as an industry event meant for industry members and press. It was never meant for fans. The idea was to invite a bunch of people together from the industry, then whip out your proverbial cocks and have the press measure them to see whose was biggest. Honestly, the fans who did "crash the show" could be quite the annoyance, especially if they were making it hard to impossible for press people to cover the event and therefore report E3 to the people who either: a) had the decency not to show up or b) could not afford to fly to LA and weasel the way into E3.

      If you think that it is a good idea to exclude customers from an ENTERTAINING EXPO , you probably agree to Rock concerts only with music journalists, about as intelligent as excluding fans from E3. But I am glad that the "jouralists" can listen to the "press conference" without being disturbed by common people. First, E3 == Electronic Entertainment Expo. I would like you to find me an expo/conference not designed for industry insiders and press. As a person who attended RSA Conference, I can tell you the expo floor could be impossible to navigate at times when people who payed for the Expo-only access over ran the place. I think most full conference attendees completed most their time at the expo during the first night of the conference. There are car shows that are the same way. The fact is this happens in every industry (expos that are only supposed to be industry and press).

      I do not see how you can equate a rock concert to E3. A rock concert is available to the public through ticket sales by the venue or artist. E3 was supposed to be exclusively for press and insiders with strict control of admission. No matter how you spin it, the fans were "crashing" the show.
    2. Re:E3 Is Perfect Now by Aladrin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm not questioning the initial purpose, but I am going to question the destruction of a highly-successful business.

      E3 filled a niche so well that the entire world was taking note. Instead of running with their fame, they decide to gimp themselves and return to their roots.

      This is actually not the first time something like this has happened!

      When I was young, there was a yearly food expo in Tampa. (I think it was in Tampa.) We used to go every year and check out all the booths and get the free goodies. This often included free food samples, such as tiny (like 2") loaves of bread from Wonder and such. 1 year, they decided that the pesky customers (who paid admission!) were in the way and they didn't let us in. Guess where that expo is now? It's non-existant. Turns out the vendors found it an excellent way to promote their product to customers, instead of trying to promote it to the middle man, and get the middle man to promote it to customers.

      That's what E3 was. Gamers all over the world worked themselves into a frenzy each year about each and every game announced at E3. Even the dumb games that were way overhyped saw fanboys for their products.

      This year, none of that. The closest a consumer can get is a video feed via XB-live/PS-network or some bad-grammar blogger on a game news site. Many stated their intention not to participate beforehand, and all the ones that -did- participate only announced games that will release very soon.

      Did anyone learn anything from any of the conferences? MGS4 - might be PS3 exclusive... Yeah, we knew that. We got a more solid release date on Mario Galaxy. They could have announced that without a major conference. The Wii is getting a fitness game... -yawn-

      Just because you succeed in executing your battle strategy does not mean you will win the war. Any decent tactician will tell you that plans never go right, and you must constantly adapt. E3 is attempting to stick to the original plan and it's killing them.

      Look at it another way: Many great inventions were an accident to the actual product being developed. If they'd said 'that isn't what we were aiming at' and discarded it, it would have been extremely stupid.

      Sure, E3 is welcome to do whatever they want with their expo... But that won't stop everyone from telling them how stupid they are.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    3. Re:E3 Is Perfect Now by Mikya · · Score: 2, Funny

      E3 is perfect now. I don't know of anyone who actually is involved with game development who doesn't love the new format.

      So in other words you don't know is actually involved with game development? ;)

    4. Re:E3 Is Perfect Now by TheBlackSwordsman · · Score: 3, Informative
      E3 is perfect now. I don't know of anyone who actually is involved with game development who doesn't love the new format.


      Did you even read the article summary? Last I checked, Hideo Kojima was "involved with game development".

    5. Re:E3 Is Perfect Now by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You really know jack assed shit about E3, let alone how a convention is run don't you? Press has ZERO trouble covering everything. The main show you see everywhere online is pretty much just allot of glitter. The people who you say should be there have whats called appointments setup. Only reason they may not get their crap done is because they were dicking around trying to win the latest GeForce Nvidia is giving away (those buttons were stupid as hell last year). Only people who have trouble covering such setups are bloggers, and lesser sites. Now while I'm of the opinion bloggers have ZERO valid press credentials, lesser sites need an oportunity to get a foot in the door which the main show is for. They get to fight through the fans to make contancts. With the current setup that is a whole hell of allot harder. This is in effect, mostly slamming the door shut on people who wish to start a site or mag up without allot more startup time.

      I've been to E3 on all sides of the fence: developer, press, and as a fan. Now while I'm all for kicking a HUGE ammount of the slobbering masses out (banning retail clerks was BIG plus this last year), but how the show is now is just crappy. If they'd just check credentials a little better, or just outright do away with the free passes anyone can get (make the entry fee $100 minimum) it'd make sure allot more people were there for reasons that don't coencide with "it was a 30 min drive from my home".

  3. Re:Seemed mostly superfluous by MoonFog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    IGN has a video from a Madden 08 event. Now, naturally, football players are present. By all means, that makes at least some sort of sense. However, this event is held in Hollywood, with almost nothing but actors and stuff present apart from the players themselves. IGN even interviews one of them who admits he doesn't even FOLLOW SPORTS!

    Generating hype around your product appears to be more important than delivering on content. E3 appeared to be just that. I, personally, prefer like you suggest to simply download some trailers and preferrably trailers that show in-game footage and footage of someone playing the game, as well as downloading demos.

    I won't cry much if E3 goes away and companies rely more on the internet like you suggest.

  4. E3 nintendo news by joe+155 · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://ms.nintendo-europe.com/e32007/enGB/index.ht ml?feature=4Qs_Rj-SZwwItyhbXcTIfqhPN_a3EmxF

    This page has the info from ninty about the E3 show, sure I guess a lot of it we might have heard of before, but Wii Fitness was a new one to me. The work out board looks pretty cool too, if they make a way to make it higher then you could do step exercises with it as well. All in all I'm glad I've got a wii/DS combo.

    --
    *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
  5. What new shit? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have you seen anything new lately? What's new about the 2 millionth first person shooter or the n-th RTS game? Or the "08" sequel of a sports game?

    It's really braindead. Basically the most minuscle change in an interface is hyped as if it was the pinnacle of development (wow, in Supreme Commander you can now zoom in and out all the way, what innovation! This will change the world of RTS forever!), and a few new units that do essentially the same they did in earlier incarnations, just with different animations, are enough to make a game "totally new and improved".

    Or the "new" MMORPGs? Where is the big innovation?

    Wake me up when a game company comes up with something REALLY new. Basically I think that's why E3 and other "game conventions" are failing. Why bother going there to see the same old shit in new graphics? And now even without boobies...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:What new shit? by Aladrin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hey, I love innovative games as much as the next guy, but true innovation does -not- happen all that often. It would basically mean an entirely new genre, because otherwise everyone will just say 'That's just an RTS mixed with an MMO' and say there was no innovation.

      I challenge you to come up with a game concept that is truly innovative. I sure as hell can't do it.

      When the technology didn't exist to realize certain genres, it was a lot easier to come up with ideas for new games. Now, we have far more power than we need and that's not holding us back anymore. Nintendo tends to innovate with hardware instead. Powerglove, zapper, etc. There's not much of that left either, though. (I'd love to see a return of the powerglove for the Wii, but that's not innovation.)

      Puzzle games still have innovations happening, but they don't appeal to nearly as many guys as the non-puzzle (action) games do. (Yes, I know women and old people have started gaming.) I like puzzle games, but if given the choice between an good RPG and a good puzzle game, I'll almost always pick the RPG.

      So again, name an innovation that would appeal to the 'typical gamer'.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    2. Re:What new shit? by Kohath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Games are not about innovation. Games are about FUN.

      If you have a fun game that people have already played, and you add a minor tweak to it that makes it fun to play all over again, that's a good thing. It's a success. The goal of having FUN was achieved.

      New concepts in games that are not fun are failures, even if they are the most innovative thing ever.

      If you don't like games or if you're bored with them and you want something different, maybe games aren't really for you. Maybe find a non-videogame hobby for a while.

    3. Re:What new shit? by elFarto+the+2nd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yep, I saw something new at E3:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YzpfhAMBR8

      Regards
      elFarto
  6. E3 by Jaaay · · Score: 2, Insightful

    became worthless after everyone got the internet and gets the latest news constantly, there's no real surprises anymore. 10 years ago it was a more exciting event that most people were reading about in gaming magazines only.

  7. A bit of history, and this is what you get. by Darlok · · Score: 4, Informative

    Previous posts have alluded to this, but here's a bit of history to explain what's happening. IDG didn't kill E3 to replace it with this new format. The exhibitors did... Sony, Microsoft, EA, etc. The only way trade shows succeed is if they make money by serving as a marketing tool connecting the manufacturers with the industry buyers. There's much more effective methods of reaching the gamer community than buying an expensive booth and hiring large-breasted women.

    The top exhibitors at E3 banded together and vowed to not return after last year, effectively killing the show. IDG scrambled to react, and came up with this new format in an attempt to woo exhibitors back, and continue the event. This year was something of a test. If the top companies decide the new format was an effective way to reach wholesale buyers and network with other people in their creative and supply chains, it will probably continue. If they decide it was not, E3 is most likely dead for all time.

    As wild an event as it used to be, there's no return on investment for companies to slug it out in front of a seething mass of gamers who wiggled their way in to grab bagfuls of booth swag and monopolize the demo units. It's supposed to be an industry event -- not a public event -- and the new format more strongly reflects that. Actual industry insiders apparently DO like the new format much better, though I think the jury is out on whether they liked it enough to continue. Especially in light of the emergence of other, more focused gaming conferences like the Sandbox Symposium coming up in August.

    It's not the big flashy public event it once was... but then again, it was never supposed to be that in the first place. It had to change into this, or it would no longer exist at all.

    --
    Notice: Your mouse has been moved. Windows will now restart so this change can take effect.
    1. Re:A bit of history, and this is what you get. by Darlok · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah. Sucks, but face it. The smaller companies don't have the financial ability to support a show like that -- trust me when I tell you that shows aren't cheap to produce, and "old E3" was even moreso than others. In a very pure sense, the big guys were subsidizing the event that the little guys could take advantage of. Is it any wonder that they decided it wasn't in their best interests to do so anymore? Yeah, the consumer and the market as a whole suffers, but E3 was not, and is not, a substitute for a good marketing plan. It was ALWAYS supposed to be an industry-insider event, so the fact that it grew into a public platform was probably more luck than strategy.

      If it survives (and that's a serious IF), I expect costs will come down and future events will have more accessibility to smaller firms. This year was all about appeasing the big players who would have happily scuttled the show entirely, otherwise. The small firms need to band together and find a cost structure that makes sense, and they can afford, if they want this sort of forum. The rabid fan-base will find somewhere else to congregate, without doubt.

      --
      Notice: Your mouse has been moved. Windows will now restart so this change can take effect.
  8. Change change change by d3l33t · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The fact that e3 has become televised, and also streamed live over the internet allows thousands to enjoy the conference without actually attending. Making it perfect to communicate to the consumer on a large scale level, while also catering to the gaming business by allowing hands on demos to a select group. It's evolved, sure, but what hasn't?