Slashdot Mirror
E3 - So, How Did It Go?
With all of the journalists at last week's E3 event home and rested, the post-game analysis is definitely something to take note of. The elbow room at Barker hanger was appreciated, but many folks were frustrated that the hotel and hanger format was hell on shoe leather. Despite that, everyone seemed to appreciate the ability to actually hear and play the games, even if it meant that they couldn't make it around to every single title this year. The only person I saw saying that the event was an unqualified failure was Michael Pachter, the well-known games industry analyst. Calling the event 'a terrible disappointment', Pachter lamented the almost complete lack of coverage from the mainstream press; a result of the removal of the public and consumer-focused elements of the show. For the views of industry heavyweights, Kotaku put the question to Sony's Jack Tretton, Microsoft's Peter Moore, and Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto. Their quote from Tretton summed it up nicely, I think: 'From a personal standpoint I think we need to figure out why we're doing E3.'
From a personal standpoint, they do need to figure that out. It's a waste of time and money for games that already cost too much and take too long to produce. If they really need to put all of their eggs in one basket and announce everything in one fell swoop of wasted efforts, then they could start their own individual conventions... It seems to work well enough for Blizzard and Id.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
"The only person I saw saying that the event was an unqualified failure was Michael Pachter, the well-known games industry."
Did anyone read this before posting it? I mean subtle spelling and punctuation mistakes slip through, but there's a freaking word missing here.
Michael Pachter, the well-known games industry.
You'd think he'd appreciate the event a bit more seeing as how it was thrown in HIS honor!
"From a personal standpoint I think we need to figure out why we're doing E3."
Yeah, Jack, I think you do. Could you also figure out what you're doing with the PS3 while you're at it, please? Because, to the rest of us, it looks like you guys don't have a clue.
Lies (that $1,200 bounty), deceptions (compatibility), misinformation (price cuts that aren't price cuts). Is there a Sony strategy in the pipeline that doesn't involve being dishonest with its customers?
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
He may be the only one calling it an unqualified failure, but he's not the only way to say it was horribly managed and very hard on the journalists.
Since the whole POINT of the show is now the journalists, shouldn't it have totally centered around them?
The big complaint: Everything was spread out. Every vendor had a different hotel, and the display hangar was 20-30 minutes away. There was -no- way to get to each conference on time, and people actually started to skip conferences that they didn't deem worthy of running for.
Several journalists also noted that you had to have an appointment to try a game and you were SOL otherwise. There was no chance to walk by a booth and suddenly find a great game that nobody else noticed yet. You HAD to know they existed, or at least that the company was worth talking to, beforehand.
The vendors loved the fact that they didn't have to move an inch, though some said "can't" instead of "don't have to".
All the vendors had a vastly scaled-down offering to show, and very few had anything that hadn't been already announced and releasing before year end.
Yes, E3 has successfully contracted their span and have very little to offer the gamers that wanted to hear news of their games. Unfortunately, the target audience (journalists) wanted exactly the same thing and also didn't get it.
So while it was not an 'unqualified failure', I think it still deserves the failure label.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
My concern is that over the long run the big console makers and publishers will abandon E3. Rather they'll just host their own private events where they can schmooze their own had picked gaming media friends however they like. This would leave the smaller developers with no showcase to show their wears. Although for all I know this may already be the case to a certain extent... :(
From a consumer's standpoint, it was terribly boring. Most surprises you could count on one hand. Last year's E3 was much better, in my opinion.
But this year's E3 wasn't bad. It just seemed not to be... for us. Nintendo's presentation seemed especially aimed at investors and other developers. The sooner you can get someone to join your platform, the sooner you can have a lot of great third party titles, which has been a Nintendo console weakness the past ten years. The message seemed to be, "We're doing well. Developers, join us if you haven't already done so. It's worth the investment of time and money."
Sony's was actually wonderful, compared to last year's embarassment. At least most of the games announced seem to be available in the next 18 months and not years and years off.
Microsoft's I didn't see.
Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.