Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
E3

Did E3 Just Gasp Its Last Breath? 142

Posted by timothy
from the my-last-breath-will-be-a-sigh dept.
Ian Lamont writes "This year's E3 is over, and there's already talk that this could be the last one. Even before the conference started, a slew of studios announced they wouldn't be taking part, citing high costs and other 'business reasons.' At the conference itself, 'there were no huge game announcements, and Microsoft didn't even bother having Bungie show up to talk about the next Halo release, claiming that the company wanted to "shorten the presentation."' Electronic Arts CEO John Riccitiello said he 'hated' E3's new format, adding 'either we need to go back to the old E3, or we'll have to have our own private events.' Crave also noted there are no solid plans for next year's show. On the other hand, people have predicted E3's demise in previous years, and they turned out to be wrong."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Did E3 Just Gasp Its Last Breath?

Comments Filter:
  • Old Vs. New (Score:5, Informative)

    by TitusC3v5 (608284) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @06:19AM (#24260983) Homepage
    Old E3: New games, for gamers, and coverage by gamers.
    New E3: New games, for the PR/Hype machines, and coverage by journalists pretending to be gamers.

    Yeah, no idea why it's dying...
    • Re:Old Vs. New (Score:5, Insightful)

      by thetoadwarrior (1268702) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @07:00AM (#24261145) Homepage

      Old E3: New games, for gamers, and coverage by gamers. New E3: New games, for the PR/Hype machines, and coverage by journalists pretending to be gamers. Yeah, no idea why it's dying...

      No problem is that E3 was always supposed to be a industry only sort of thing. To help show off the new & upcoming stuff to get retailers interested to buy up these new games for the holidays. But people posing as journalists kept getting in and with the internet it just got out of hand.

      It became less about games and about how much you spent on half naked girls for sweaty virgins to harass. There is no qualification for being a journalist on the internet, which is good for a lot of things, but it's not good for E3 as it was taking the focus off games.

      The industry still has a lot of growing up to do. The fact it's probably the only indutry that can't seem to hold a major business event without turning it into softcore porn should concern people.

      As much as people want to tout that gaming is growing it's not really. The numbers they use against movies includes everything including controllers, power leads, etc. We're losing imagination and genres because everything is so similar that they dare not risk doing something new. Plus they have to raise prices to keep going and we can probably expect price to rise during the next generation.

      Does that sound like a healthy world domination industry? I don't think so. The only thing they do have going for them is that gamers do tend to be more obsessive about their hobby than others so they can count on there being a certain level of sales.

      In fact I think the reason they taken to pussifying the term hardcore gamer into core gamer is because it doesn't mean the same thing anymore. It means that's their core audience that will eat up any old shit they shovel they sell as long as it's a sequel, features lots of guns and gang of hulking space marines of questionable sexuality.

      • by PopeRatzo (965947) * on Sunday July 20, 2008 @07:08AM (#24261191) Homepage Journal

        it's probably the only indutry that can't seem to hold a major business event without turning it into softcore porn

        You say that as if it's a bad thing.

        I'd suggest that the more major business events that turn into softcore porn, the better.

        • Re:Old Vs. New (Score:5, Interesting)

          by N3Bruce (154308) <n3lsy@com[ ]t.net ['cas' in gap]> on Sunday July 20, 2008 @07:47AM (#24261383) Journal

          Ever go to a Motorcycle show? Seriously, they are crawling with scantily clad females, along with lots and lots of outrageous costumes, posters, and artwork on the bikes themselves. Heck, I wonder if say the makers of GTA or the like wouldn't do well to get a booth at one of these events.

          • Being that I'm not in the motorcycle industry the only event I'd go to is one for the public and they're geared towards yuppies who think they're bad ass when they dress up like hell's angels sso of course they're full of women who wouldn't give those guys the time of day outside of the convention.

            Gaming has the same problem as US politics. No one actually cares about all the options or who is actually better. It's all about who can blow the biggest wad of cash to say they're the best.

            The hysteria tha
        • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

          by AndGodSed (968378)

          You say that as if it's a bad thing.

          Exactly - the babes at one of these events is the most action some of these geeks will ever get. Let them live a little.

          • Go to a porno convention. That'll be 10 times better than E3.
            • by AndGodSed (968378)

              Sorry, now real tech there - so it's lost on most geeks. E3 has it all - babes AND tech ftw

              • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

                by Anonymous Coward

                Sorry, now real tech there...

                I see you've never been to a porn convention.

        • Re:Old Vs. New (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Cadallin (863437) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @10:17PM (#24268923)
          Yeah, what about the various Erotic Industry Expos? And seriously, you're also ignoring tons of other industries where the equivalent of "booth babes" is a major tradition. Motorsports, Cars, Motorcycles, ATVs, etc? But you want to be "higher brow" than that stuff? Why? What does that even mean?

          This is just the most horrible legacy of the Victorian era. "In order to be legitimately intellectual, you have to be chaste and restrained." Horse shit, and further, geeks ought to damn well know better. All that legitimate, intellectual Sci-Fi and Fantasy geekdom is associated with? Gee, no deviant or open sexuality there. No sir.

          Oh yeah, except that's one of both Sci-Fi's and Fantasy's major features! Do I even need to justify this? Come on! Robert "Nudist, Promiscuous, Free Love" Heinlein? David "Chimpanzee Strippers" Brin? I can keep going all night folks, those are just two examples from different eras of Sci-Fi. Now, except for a smaller number of respected authors (because let's face it, the line between low-brow fantasy and straight up "Romance" novels is pretty thin), Fantasy has suffered from the blight of Tolkien's legacy, and that sad old fart was a totally misplaced Victorian.

          The further and further I get from being prepubescent, the lower and lower my estimation of Tolkien falls. The totally neutered picture of middle earth he paints is really depressing, or alternatively, hilariously homosexual (twelve male dwarves and a histrionic male hobbit - let the innuendo begin). Nobody in his world ever gets to have a non-tragic, positive sexual relationship. Its terribly sad. Why shouldn't there be wild (but female positive, intellectually and emotionally gratifying) wild Elf sex (or wild human-elf sex for that matter) the same way we get human sexuality portrayed in Stranger in A Strange Land? Of course we do, but its rarely handled by writers we actually want to put pen to paper.

      • by Joebert (946227)
        Buy a brothel & fill it with every trendy thing you can find, now.
      • by Inner_Child (946194) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @07:23AM (#24261279)

        The industry still has a lot of growing up to do. The fact it's probably the only indutry that can't seem to hold a major business event without turning it into softcore porn should concern people.

        You, sir, appear to be forgetting the porn industry. Turning business events into softcore (or hardcore) porn is what they do.

      • Re:Old Vs. New (Score:5, Interesting)

        by rsmith-mac (639075) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @07:45AM (#24261373)

        Here here! This year's E3 was a success in working as it was designed. Restricted crowds meant that journalists and buyers could easily see (and try!) everything they needed to, and unlike last year everything was located close-by so that people weren't so spread apart. For an event that's about the quick & effective dissemination of information, this year was marked by... the quick & effective dissemination of information.

        The only problem with this year's event was that there was very little to show. The few publishers that had stuff were tempted to throw their own events so that they could hog the spotlight for the day, and everyone else is mid-development cycle after the hulking mass of games released in 2007. The fact that publishers didn't have much to show off and everyone was accordingly unexcited has nothing to do with E3, that's a matter of poor planning on their part.

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by somersault (912633)

          Here here!

          "Hear, hear!"

          Which makes more sense from a "you guys should listen to that!" perspective?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by LS (57954)

        The industry still has a lot of growing up to do.

        The nature of the discipline of game development is that it requires creativity, and creativity and eccentricity/immaturity often go hand in hand.

        • I would buy that if the industry had creativity but a company like Epic knocking out nothing but Unreal sequels or GoW sequels or Square-Enix knocking out Final Fantasy 500. Don't forget all the Mortal Kombat sequels which have recently taken a step backwards rather than forwards with MK vs DC since DC won't allow their characters to be attacked with proper fatalities. None of that is creative or imaginative.

          By that logic Game Cock should have the most creative titles rather than some tard in a chicken c
        • by Cadallin (863437)
          You've got it. You've got two routes to go creativity wise: the one marked by schoolyard perversity, or the one marked by Dirty Old Men.
      • Re:Old Vs. New (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Kokuyo (549451) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @10:18AM (#24262543) Journal

        The fact it's probably the only indutry that can't seem to hold a major business event without turning it into softcore porn should concern people.

        You obviously have never been to any major car convention.

        • True but most cars are boring especially when you can't drive them so I would need breasts to entertain men.

          Games, on the other hand, I love so I rather play games then pretend the girls standing near them find me interesting.
      • Re: (Score:1, Redundant)

        >The fact it's probably the only indutry that can't seem to hold a major business event without turning it into softcore porn should concern people.

        Uhh, cars, motorcycles, and boats aren't made by industries? News to me.

      • It got out of hand? It got successful. As for booth babes (and noise) .... being stricter with rules of conduct for stand holders and tightening the reigns on credentials are two different things. They could have done one without the other.

        They chose to do both, I can't fathom why ... it's obviously not going to be making them more money.

        • It's supposed to make money though from getting retailers to buy their wares not by selling tickets. Otherwise why not open it to everyone?

          CES gets by fine with some level of maturity not seen at E3 for ages. Gaming is still being aimed almost exclusively at teenage boys (excluding Nintendo) which was fine when I was a teenage boy but I'm not anymore and I've been playing games since the early 80's. Sadly, aside from graphics, not much has changed aside from things becoming more homogeneous over the year
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by iocat (572367)
        Clearly, you haven't been to SEMA... Anyway, as someone who's attended all 14 E3s ('95 - '08 inclusive), I can say that the "Booth Babes" as a concept were way over-rated, over-discussed, and over-focused upon by people who'd never attended the show. There were always a few booths that had some skantily clad women in them, but generally only for stage shows, which also featured scantily clad dudes, and people in costumes. Not much different from any stage show. A few people tried to raise some publicity by
      • by Vacuous (652107)

        I'm willing to bet the softcore porn industry's events often contain copious amounts of softcore porn too.

        See, gaming isn't the only one!

      • Re:Old Vs. New (Score:4, Insightful)

        by LrdDimwit (1133419) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @06:07PM (#24266665)
        > [P]roblem is that E3 was always supposed to be a industry only sort of thing. To help show off the new & upcoming stuff
        > to get retailers interested to buy up these new games for the holidays. But people posing as journalists kept getting in
        > and with the internet it just got out of hand.

        Except that when the guys running the show actually took steps to return E3 to what it was "always supposed to be", it collapsed. It seems to me that the real problem was everybody thought E3 was supposed to be what you're describing, less a spectacle than a trade show, when in actuality E3 really WAS about the spectacle. It was about generating hype and buzz, and getting interest directed at a title not by selling it to retailers (as claimed) but by making a name for the title among gamers. E3 got people's attention, the way all carnival sideshows do. All that other stuff happening in the meetings, that was all important, but the soul of the show was ... the show. Otherwise why did removing the glitz kill the show?

        Not that E3 didn't have problems. It WAS getting out of hand. But I think tbe real problem is nobody recognized the purpose of E3 had shifted, so when they tried to fix it, they broke it. E3 had become a glitzy hypnotic attention-grabber for every gamer who speaks English, across the whole world. All those retailers, etc? They looked to E3 to make decisions because they were following the crowd, not because they were the crowd.
      • by riceboy50 (631755)

        E3 was always supposed to be a industry only sort of thing

        It seems like they have started making it more like you suggest, but the interest in it has started to drop off, so now they want to change it back. Hmm, let's think about that.

    • by UseCase (939095)

      Exactly.....

      E3 hype, gamer buzz, swag hording and hot booth chicks was the most exciting part. We gotta get gamer hands on controllers and they need to be blogging there asses off. Of course company PR reps are going to make there games sound like the shiz, this is what they are paid for.

      We need real gamers floating around.

      Checks and Balances

    • Gaming, computing, and porn! Guaranteed turnout.
  • by Kumoe (1234022) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @06:22AM (#24260987)
    So will this make the User-created conventions (eg PAX) more attractive to the gaming companies? They seem to want to be more willing to engage the customer-base where they are comfortable, so hopefully they will start to make these events more accessible.
    • by Bieeanda (961632)
      PAX attendance has grown at an astronomical rate since its inception, and last year the jackholes behind 'E for Everyone' tried to use its popularity to boost their own, and hilariously failed.

      PAX doesn't need a shot in the arm, it just needs its directors to stick to the format they've established. Oh, and reports of hilariously misguided coattail riders [penny-arcade.com].

    • That E3 is going to get smaller seems to have been a forgone conclusion. Once they announced their new format, word from everybody I was talking to said companies were already jumping ship and going over to PAX and it would take the place of the old E3, and that the new E3 would wither and die. They are biased towards PAX as we all live in Seattle, however they also are in the industry working for the various game companies up here. It seems that many game companies aren't really hot on the idea of an 'indu
    • PAX is not E3. PAX was never meant to be E3. It's simply a (huge)gathering of like-minded people who enjoy playing games. In fact, if they experienced the same problems that E3 is: discouraged vendors, they wouldn't give a damn, simply because it isn't about fanfare or showing up the competition. Now, if you want to look for an E3 replacement, the Game Developers Conference (GDC) seems more appropriate. It's oriented more around the development of games rather than the playing of them. The booths are less e
  • by kaos07 (1113443) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @06:24AM (#24261003)
    Booth babes!
    • by Syrente (990349)
      Or "interesting content" in general. Rejoice at E3 where we show you more trailers that you've already seen at lower resolution on the internet!
    • by ErikZ (55491) * on Sunday July 20, 2008 @08:22AM (#24261579)

      People laugh, but hot women are a huge part of the Entertainment industry, getting rid of them was dumb move.

      Seriously, when was the last time you've heard "I'm sorry, there are just too many hot women here. They have to go."

      • by Ihmhi (1206036)

        From your wife at a party...?

      • by icsx (1107185)
        Thats what you get when industry is being controlled by businessmen in suits. They are not gamers, they do not care anything else than numbers and money. We need real gamers to say what we want to see.
    • by Dun Malg (230075)

      Booth babes!

      I believe that's properly spelled "boof babes" to get across the common pronunciation.

      The last E3 I went to was in 2001. I can't imagine an E3 without boof babes. Really, it's not just the babes, it's the aspect of spectacle. Waiting in line for a chance to see the beta of that MS WW2 FPS game was like a day at disneyland. And across the street, from E3, in the GodGames "promised lot", where they served booze and fired T-shirts out of a shirt cannon before showing a VERY early demo of GTA III on a big scr

    • by Haoie (1277294)

      Why not Booth Boys?

      Oh yeah. Right.

  • I thought... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I thought last year was billed as the last E3 after it was done...

  • E3 is the new BSD. Constantly dying. Unsubstantiated predictions of doom an gloom.
  • by rsmith-mac (639075) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @06:42AM (#24261075)

    This was an exceptionally insightful comment made on Voodoo Extreme that I am reposting, with full credit to the author. It hits the nail on the head, so to speak.

    ProphecyVE

    Its become what it should have always been in the first place, an industry trade show. What it turned into before they switched the format was just a nightmare. A huge convention center packed with millions of sweaty nerds all clamoring to see an actual GIRL who is playing a VIDEOGAME. OMGOMG. It wasn't a trade show, it was just a marketing free for all.

    And of course the execs don't like it. They got to feel like they were rockstars before, watching guys with huge guts packed underneath Star Wars parody t-shirts salivate for their crappy port of Unoriginal Game 9. At the current E3, they have to act like actual business people, and answer actual questions.

    • Tangential Comment Ahead warning duly served:

      MockHysteria
      Who cares if you are "giving credit"? How dare you post exclusive content from another site so only they can get the eyeball views on their ads from their exclusive? I'll only accept this post if you also post the *permission* granted to repost the comment.
      /MockHysteria

      Or is the secret that no one outside the **AAs, **Alliances, and certain other entities is really that rabid about copyrights?

    • by PopeRatzo (965947) *

      watching guys with huge guts packed underneath Star Wars parody t-shirts salivate for their crappy port of Unoriginal Game 9

      You say that as if it's a bad thing.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by mooreti1 (1123363)
      Perhaps E3 has become what the organizers want it to be. Perhaps the execs are held to a certain level of professionalism now. None of that matters, though, if the game studios and designers decide that this E3 format isn't worth the time and investment to be a presence. If an exec doesn't feel like answering hard-hittin' questions from a professional reporter (you go get that Pulitzer, boi!) they just won't go to the show. Period. And if they can't get the CONSUMERS interested in a game then it's a waste o
    • by Anpheus (908711) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @10:14AM (#24262499)

      Honestly, given how little information has actually been released about any games shown at E3, were there "actual questions" being asked?

      I don't feel particularly represented by a journalist who isn't a geek. Having said journalists be the only people who can attend an event means I'll get more information on 3Q earnings, less information on the games being presented. You can see a lot of that in the fact that most of the games shown had no playable demos whatsoever. What's the point? Most of the journalists attending probably don't play games.

      So, yeah, I'd like there to be pudgy star wars nerds ogling booth babes in between really hard hitting questions about whether or not the next LucasArts game is going to appeal to him. Because if anyone in the world is going to be able to ask questions relevant to the game, it's that guy.

    • At the current E3, they have to act like actual business people, and answer actual questions.

      Unfortunately, actual questions posed by other business people . Which has extremely limited marketing potential.

      As a "consumer" I don't really care how much money they expect to make, or what a "price point" is. I care what the product is and how much it will cost me.

      So, if they wanted E3 to be an industry circle-jerk, then they can do that and see how it works out. But if what they really wanted was something

    • by bigstrat2003 (1058574) * on Sunday July 20, 2008 @11:30AM (#24263167)
      Here's the weird thing. If the execs hate the current format of E3, and the gamers hate the current format of E3, why the hell are they still keeping it!? Those are the only two groups of people E3 is about, so if it's not meeting the needs of those groups... change it.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by 6350' (936630)
        Because E3 isnt about either of those two groups. Its about press and retailers.
  • E3 is dying (Score:5, Funny)

    by SnowZero (92219) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @06:45AM (#24261089)

    E3 is dying, Google trends [google.com] confirms it.

    • by Paolo DF (849424) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @06:59AM (#24261141)
      aww, come on! Your ID is too small for not knowing that it has to be Netcraft!
      • by Paolo DF (849424)
        ...and please, *no* wooshing sounds! :-)
      • by SnowZero (92219) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @08:06AM (#24261463)

        aww, come on! Your ID is too small for not knowing that it has to be Netcraft!

        Quite the contrary, you must be new here. Netcraft's sole purpose is to confirm the death of BSD. Since BSD is dying, and there can be no doubt about that, Netcraft's days are also numbered. Thus we must seek out alternatives in what little time remains.

      • by aj50 (789101)

        Surely you're aware that almost all of Netcraft's analysis concerns servers, not visitors.

        Google (with all their user search data) are in a much better position to comment on the popularity of E3.

        (Netcraft does have site visit data collected from their toolbar but google's sample is much larger and less biased.)

    • We can also see there that GDC (the quiet conference with good independent developers in decent numbers) and PAX (a party without the media focus on new stuff to get in the way) are each doing well.

      I like to think that E3's two conflicting halves are now split, as they should be.

    • by Fri13 (963421)

      http://www.google.com/trends?q=slashdot&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=0 [google.com]

      Yeah, E3 is dying but so is slashdot because there is so many "+5 Funny" Hunters.

  • Format is unworkable (Score:5, Interesting)

    by abigsmurf (919188) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @07:06AM (#24261165)
    This was an awful E3 plain and simple.

    Microsoft probably had the best show of the three big companies purely for the FFXIII coup (biggest announcement of the show was a port. That about sums it up) but still took a few hits on it's blatent ripping off of Eyetoy and Mii's. Not to mention the pulling back of the Bungie announcement which was a smack in the face to fans. Overall though they same out slightly stronger than they went in.

    Sony's was mediocre. Most the time they talked about games we knew were coming and the new announcements were only pre-rendered footage. They came out the same as they went in.

    Then there's Nintendo. They couldn't have chosen a worse strategy if they'd tried. The Wiimote add on was interesting but they showed it off with yet another mini-game collection. The Wii is hardly lacking in these. Worse still, Wii music was unvieled and shown to be a pretty rubbish toy that looks like it'll be fun for 5 minutes at most before you never play it again. Animal Crossing was a reasonable unveiling but everyone knew it was coming and it was just too similar to the GC and DS versions with no innovation other than a well designed mic (that apparently is great for picking up voices across the room.

    Nintendo fans were promised hard core games to fill the empty schedule up till xmas and we get more of the same crap we've been seeing from lazy third party publishers and Animal Crossing. Nintendo have serously alienated a good portion of their gamer fans and lots of people will either have their console gathering dust for a long time now or simply flog their console.

    Overall E3 should get gamers excited but all this show has done is make them bored and that can't be healthy for the industry.

    Sure it may have only cost them $500,000 rather than $2,000,000 for a stand but what good is that if you get very poor PR and make people wonder why they have your console over another.

    Hopefully they'll pull something out for Leipzig or else it looks like we'll have to wait till TGS for reasonably exciting announcements.

    • by hitmark (640295)

      as long as it gets someone to buy a wii, nintendo is happy. unlike microsoft or sony, they make a profit on each device sold rather then toss the device at the customers and hope they buy enough content to make up for the "gift"...

    • ...Hard core games

      I know nobody reads nintendo power but you should read up on Mad World... It's a pretty damn hard core game.

      There was also about 6-7 pages detailing new games coming out for the Wii... The only bad thing about the Wii right now is that everybody ignored it at first; that's why they're not getting many new third party games. Everybody headed ass-first to bury themselves in PS3/360 developpement, thinking "hah, nintendo? yeah my ass.".

      And of course it does take a while for first party games

  • It's different now. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Grey Ninja (739021) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @07:08AM (#24261185) Homepage Journal
    A few years ago, I would have killed to go to E3. But I was but a humble student, with no game industry affiliations, and more importantly... broke.

    Since then, I've graduated and become an actual developer. I go to two events a year. PAX and GDC. E3 is obviously something I could go to, and I might if I was in the area. But it doesn't have much draw for me anymore. And I could honestly care less about the booth babes. I want actual content, and E3 isn't even a shadow of what it once was. That would be PAX. I get PAX for the consumery-side of me, and I get GDC for the professional side. There's no place for E3 anymore.
    • by trawg (308495)

      Actually I found the new format E3 way better (going as press). This was my first one since it shrunk and I found it much easier to check out games and get more time with developers. I've been thinking more and more in the last few years it should try and evolve with the times to become more of a press event and less of a consumer/developer event - GDC kicks its ass in terms of developer content anyway.

      It was a little on the small side - there just weren't that many titles available (especially in PC games,

    • you are right. GDC is the real industry convention. E3 was just a big show and it would stick around as a show but not something with actual content. It should just become a con for not the industry but as a big marketing machine. So many people have their eyes on E3 back when you could "sneak in" and whatnot. GDC has actual content.
  • all it will take (Score:4, Interesting)

    by thermian (1267986) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @07:08AM (#24261195)

    This year there were reduced presentations, next year, it may be that many big companies don't go at all, so visitor attendance will reduce.

    That'll be what kills it when it dies, because the attendee's won't think the price worth paying if too many major players aren't coming.

    Since they will have to find somewhere to showcase their products if it does die, there will either be a new event created, or they will find some other way of achieving the same goal.

    Personally I'd like to see smaller events round the globe. Speaking as a brit who doesn't like travelling into the prison state any more, I can't see myself attending any large events which are US only.

    • by DanWS6 (1248650)

      Speaking as a brit who doesn't like travelling into the prison state any more, I can't see myself attending any large events which are US only.

      You mean returning to your prison state right?

      • by dkf (304284)

        Speaking as a brit who doesn't like travelling into the prison state any more, I can't see myself attending any large events which are US only.

        You mean returning to your prison state right?

        You forget, you've got the TSA.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by 8tim8 (623968)

      >Since they will have to find somewhere to showcase their products if it does die, there will either be a new event created, or they will find some other way of achieving the same goal.

      From what I've read here and elsewhere, the point is that E3 is dying because there are zillions of other places to hype a new game. E3 represents a significant expense for companies: they have to rent the booth space, fly people in, house them, etc., and they get zero dollars of productive time from their workers during

  • by nurb432 (527695) on Sunday July 20, 2008 @07:21AM (#24261257) Homepage Journal

    As an economy tanks, 'discretionary entertainment' funds is the first to go.

    • by Manchot (847225)
      That may be true, but video games are a relatively cheap form of entertainment. For about $50, you can get tens to hundreds of hours of entertainment. That's much cheaper than a movie or a nice dinner (though it still doesn't even come close to book-level).
  • ..just make it the way it was. Nothing wrong with booth babes, plus, it'll attract more people and get more coverage. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
  • <p style="fanboy">For the past decade, Metal Gear Solid was what kept E3 alive. Without Hideo's involvement, this was bound to happen.</p>
  • Don't worry. If E3 just gapes its last breath I'm sure someone will fork it.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    I've never been to E3, and am just a game player that checks up on the info coming out of it at various websites. In all honesty, from my end of the spectrum I didn't really see anything majorly different. The only thing lacking was the announcements of "games so epic they'll blow your head off just thinking about them, but they won't be playable for another five years!" I really think if anything could be said about this E3 being slow, is mostly that this is just a slower point in gaming where 90% of th

  • Just read an article that video game sales in the US were up something like 53%...someone is doing something right trade show or not.
  • Thank you for not using the overused "E3 has jumped the shark" type title for the article!

  • One for journalists (original and the last two E3s) and one for pure gamers (old E3 style)?

    • by Nataku564 (668188)
      I believe they tried that with their E For All. It failed spectacularly, from what I remember.
  • To answer this question, we just ask ourselves "what was the biggest announcement at this year's E3?". I really can't think of anything that wasn't announced last year (really the only thing I liked was Spore, which I plan to get for PC when it comes out).

    Nothing groundbreaking was really announced that people didn't already know. Microsoft announced Gears of War II (which is a dumb Xbox game that EVERYONE already knows is coming out soon).

    The only announcement I didn't expect that I WAS looking forward to

  • ... in the Sonic the Hedgehog costume stopped coming, it just wasn't the same. But since he still attends Tokyo Game Show it explains where the future is.
  • E3 is the new Apple. It will continue to have its "final" conferences for at least 5 years by my guess.

  • I found it strange that Blizzard announced Diablo 3 several weeks before E3. It seems to me that, that would be something that in the past they would have waited for E3 to announce.
    To me that's a good sign that E3 has become irrelevant. Like a lot of other people have said, gaming websites are a much better venue for announcing upcoming games and consoles.

    I imagine in the future the only people attending E3 will be Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony. They'll only be attending to announce their new consoles which

    • Blizzard announced D3 at the Blizzard Worldwide Invitational. Same with starcraft 2. Really, blizzard has the type (and size) of fan base, as well as such a massive aura/presence, that they can easily support their own conventions. There's Blizzcon, and the Worldwide Invitational. And enough people and reporters go there, that they may as well. It adds to their aura of awesome.

      To be fair, there was a moderate amount of nice announcements at E3. They might not have been the unveiling of a brand new game, but
  • E3 was terrible for gamers, except the elite few who had the magic press pass hookup or those who wanted to spend ungodly amounts on a badge. Tokyo Game Show on the other hand, was 1,000¥ or TEN DOLLARS. Twelve with tax. Even at 20 or 30 or 50 bucks, that kind of pricing would beat the living crap out of E3's monumental fuck you to gamers. It's like ESA hated gamers, but loved the gamer money and game industry money. You can love me for my money, just don't think that it lets you get away with spou

  • E3's death has only been predicted for 2 years now... This year and last. That's because it was the previous year they announced the format change.

    E3's creators are unable to deal with that their show WAS and keep trying to make it what they want.

    Newsflash: Developers don't WANT what E3 wants. Developers want a way to tell the entire public what's new and exciting. E3 demands that they only tell journalists, who then tell the public. So the last 2 years have seen reduced presentations, with some devel

  • I really hope the current attempt at E3 dies. The old E3 format had issues but it was actual an important symbol for the industry. I wrote a post yesterday about why the games industry needs E3. [alwaysongames.com] In it I argue that E3 was presented gaming culture, whether you like it or not.

    And instead of using it as a forum to celebrate gaming and welcome the tons of gamers who flock there trying to sneak in, ESA ruined it by trying to make it focused on the business side of the convention.

    PAX is becoming much more popu

"Well, social relevance is a schtick, like mysteries, social relevance, science fiction..." -- Art Spiegelman

Working...