The End of E3?

Ground Glass writes "Next Generation is reporting that E3 as we know it is finished. The games industry has lost its most glamorous show." Update: 07/30 21:18 GMT by Z : A reader wrote in with a link to an Ars Technica story saying that the event is to be downsized, not cancelled. From that article: "At the end of the day, the reason is very simple: ten years ago, you needed a big trade show to generate buzz and hype. It used to be that COMDEX was a special event because so much new stuff was unveiled, and this was the only way to see it. Now, however, information comes down the pipe faster than ever, and companies are wondering if there's really any benefit to spending the big money on displays only to share the floor with other competitors looking to out-wow attendees." I guess we'll see in a day or two what the future of E3 looks like.

PAX to fill void?

[aapold]

Wonder if PAX could sort of by default become the big gaming convention...

PAX [pennyarcadeexpo.com]

Massive damage = walkout?

[Lave]

Hmmmm, Should I say it? Hmmmm,

Do I dare?

So.... these rumours, I think, that maybe, the "big-player." Pulling out. Could be.

Based on no evidence other than historical battles, giant crabs and real time weapon change

....Sony?

Too much public MASSIVE DAMAGE? It pretty much provided a focus point for the interweb community (aka early adopters) to turn against them. Maybe they don't want anymore showcases where they have to say words like "six hundred and ninety nine united states dollars" to the world anymore - when a press release would be nicer.

*runs and hides*

Re:Massive damage = walkout?

[Lave]

Yeah - I know - but I was trying (badly) to make that point. Sony must realise how silly they looked with all the memes that came out of there conference. I think the same information they showed at E3 presented in press releases and "exclusives" would have worked much better for them. And I'm sure they had too.

I wasn't even bashing Sony - just pointing out all the ridicule that come to them from E3.

My personal feelings on the cancellation are actually really positive. Hopefully games like PoP; Sands of Time won't get lost amongst the crowd anymore. Which will stop more "eXtreme" remakes like Warrior Within - in order to make them more E3 friendly.

Siggraph

[Anonymous Coward]

Odd that this comes out right as Siggraph 2006 starts up

It's Because they Banned Booth Babes

[Ryouga3]

I'm not joking about this(see title). Booth babes are tremendously important to bringing in customers, and if E3 sends the message that they're taking a puritanical attitude, they only tick off the vendors who spend lots of money to set up booths, and discourage people from coming to the show.

Re:Good Riddance

[nick_davison]

E3 represented everything that was wrong about the games industry.

Playing a video game can be a serene repose from the world, not unlike a quiet read of a good book.

And you'll notice just how popular novels have become compared to videogames in terms of mass market. I've lost count of the number of times I've heard people say, "Why must kids waste their time on novels. If only we could get them to embrace videogames in the same way!"

Don't get me wrong: I love books and my wife's a writer. That doesn't change the simple fact that people vote with their wallets and videogames as they stand, however much elitist views may wish otherwise, are dramatically more popular with the average young person than books are right now.

I am glad there are great novels out there. I am glad there are great, deep, meaningful gaming experiences to be had too. But I'm also enough of a realist to accept that forcing such experiences on the masses that simply don't want them - and lamenting an industry that successfully targets what they do want as "everything that's wrong" - isn't that sensible.

About the best I can really say is, "E3 symbolizes everything that appeals to the masses but I personally don't like."

At the end of the day, it's an industry: It will attempt to make as much money as possible. If the masses want something, it will figure that out so it can profit from it and thus morph in to it. If the masses hate something (and really vote with their wallets rather than writing whiney posts and then still buying Halo 17), the industry will figure out how to sell them what they want then too. That the industry continues with bloated E3 shows and the like implies, ideals aside, it is exactly what the masses want. If anything, I think it's telling the biggest complaints were that this year's E3 had less booth babes (a decision made to chase ideals, ignoring how people actually act) and totally drowned out the righteous but ultimately not backed up by real action complaints about excess.

It's interesting to me: In Buddhism, in psychotherapy, in Dr Phil's books, you name it, they always talk about the error of making "should statements" - judging how the world should be and getting upset when it isn't, rather than accepting how it is.

Me, I accept the industry is simply how it is and, accepting that, enjoy finding great games within its breadth, enjoy reading great novels, enjoy watching my wife's writing process, and then - accepting E3 - go have fun with the excess on the years that entertains me too.

Re:Interesting twist..

[Babbster]

I think you're right on the money here. While the week of E3 is obviously big in terms of the amount of game information, screenshots, etc. released, the number of people who actually get hands-on with the stuff at the convention is rather small. With the continued increase of non-industry people attending, it becomes an even worse deal with the "important" people (read: the representatives of the big gaming news outlets and the retail executives who might influence what gets put on store shelves) either being squeezed out or attending the semi-private showings off the floor. The big publishers would be far better off focusing their E3 money on flying the press to their locations and demoing the games more intimately. They'd spend less money and probably make a bigger splash with the games on which they want to focus, spreading out over the rest of the year.

I don't know how bad it would be for the small, independent developers to lose E3, though I have to say I don't think it would matter much. When I've followed E3 via the Interweb, I rarely, if ever, find out about the "tiny" games anyway. A much smaller convention consisting entirely of those small developers would probably work better for them in any case.

If it's true, I don't think it will be a big loss. As a non-attending consumer, without E3 I'll probably end up with the same pre-release information that I've gotten for years. It will probably be more timely as well given the number of times E3 coverage has made me excited for a game, only to wait another two or more years before it gets released.

Re:Just tweek $x/sq.ft. and $y/visitor

[Kalewa]

Are you kidding me? It's already ridiculously expensive to get in. No, E3 has always been a big self-centered circle jerk for the game industry and media. I won't be at all sad to see it go and be replaced with something more gamer-oriented. The "gaming media" is a joke, and doesn't need a special event in their honor.

Am I the only one...

[east coast]

I think this proves that I'm no longer a geek: While I appreciate the newsworthiness of this article, am I the only one who has absolutely no sense of loss? Frankly the comings and goings of the e3 thing never really made a difference to me. If I'm looking for gaming news I go to game sites, granted, there is trickle down but I've never once went to a site to see their e3 coverage.

As for booth babes? Please. Being all hot and bothered over women in bikinis and such at a gaming convention is along the same lines as beating off to a Victoria Secrets catalog. I have an internet connection if I was really that desperate for boobs.