Do Trade Shows Benefit Gamers?

Thanks to The Adrenaline Vault for its article discussing the actual significance of videogame trade shows, now that "e-mail, Internet press releases, cell phones, faxes, personal digital assistants and the like make communication and transmission of information virtually instantaneous among developers and vendors." The piece makes the suggestion, with regard to "trade shows like Comdex, CES and E3", that: "In earlier days, people were attracted to attend the national conventions because of all the novelty present. Now, new software and hardware products seem more evolutionary than revolutionary, with a lot of copycat items that differ from what is already out there just through cosmetic differentiation." Do shows like E3 matter as much as they used to?

The advent of the internet

[foidulus]

probably helps to make them more irrelevant. Before, I had to scour high and low for scant screenshots or game info. Now all I need to do is head on over to one of the multitude of game sites and I can get more info/screenshots/previews than I could ever use.
Kind of makes going to the shows a lot less thrilling, I already know what will be there.
Of course, the booth babes still could make it worthwhile!

Yes, yes they do.

[Demon-Xanth]

Having actually been to E3 in 2001, I can say that they definately make a difference because they show what exists and what should be given top priority. Looking at the GBA with picture didn't do much for me, but actually seeing it in action impressed me. I was able to get a feel for each of the now 3 major consoles. Smaller manufacturers can get thier products displayed in a place where it can make an impact if it's worth making an impact.

Excuse me?

[Anonymous Coward]

E3 used to be for gamers? Where the hell did you get that from? In all of E3's history, they were NEVER open to the public. E3 has never been about wooing gamers. You just can't build a successful business or product just by catering to the few thousand who attend a trade show if they were just gamers. E3 is about wooing *retailers* so that they will stock your product in the coming christmas season (and beyond). E3 is about wooing the press so that they will talk about your product. These people affect a company's sales in huge multiples. Individual gamers on the other hand will maybe buy one copy, so they are hardly the target of this show.

It's the press that have really glorified the tradeshow beyond its original intentions. Back before E3, games were unveiled at CES (Consumer Electronics Show). You'd find some magazine coverage of this show, but it was much more low-key, so fewer people in the general public really paid attention.

Now, you get all this over-hyped "wowie zowie" type of coverage of the show, with trailers being released and television shows going in and showing us what's there, etc,etc. Blame the media for making E3 seem to be something bigger than what it is.

Re:The advent of the internet

[FortKnox]

In this same vein, E3 gets the game magazine writers excited, which spills into their writing, which gets the gamers excited. Its all about getting your message and hyping up the gaming community. That's what sells games.

E3--Great Networking Opportunity

[DaFlusha]

E3 provides a single, physical place where people developers, publishers, distributors, retailers, and even press can meet face-to-face and have discussions. This kind of thing is invaluabe to the industry. The whole public-spectacle thing may be outdated (it is, in fact, my least favorite part of these events) but events like E3 are still 100% necessary for the growth of the industry.

That and a lot of developers spend all their time making their own games; they're too busy to really follow every game in development via the Internet. E3 is a great way for developers to see what other folks are doing and to kind of, you know, party a little. Though in my opinion, the Game Developers Conference is a better place for that than E3...

Re:Excuse me?

[MMaestro]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but was it not the same media and retailers who used to scoff at Nintendo and video games as 'just for kids' back in the 80's? I distinctly remember video stores and kids toy stores rivaling those of so-called 'video game stores' back then.

Just because it was 'low-key' doesn't mean it wasn't geared toward the public, it could've meant that no one took them seriously at the time and now they're riding the way of video games being a multimillion dollar business. By your logic booth babes should be non-existant at the show, photos of the main floor wouldn't be a dark, neon lit room, and showgoers wouldn't have to sit on the floor/stand in the back just because of overattendence.

After all, in the past those 'few thousand' who attended a show were pretty much the bulk of your entire audience.

It never was for gamers

[LordZardoz]

It was for the Game Developers, Publishers, and Press.

E3 is not about getting gamers on board with the latest products. It never was, and for that point, is barely needed. What it is about is giving a chance for developers to get publishers to look at their games that they would never otherwise get. It is about getting the suits with money to figure out where to spend that money.

Also, it allows the press a chance to play two games likely to compete against one another and figure out which is more fun.

And it lets game programmers like me figure out what the hell everyone else is doing so we can try to do the same, only better.

END COMMUNICATION