With E3 ending last week, Ive been hearing a lot of post E3 news on all of the podcast and gaming websites. One thing that seems to always come up is comparing the new E3 to the old E3. How much worse it is now than it was before or vice versa. Of coarse we all heard that Peter Moore complained about E3 saying it is “soulless”, and I agree completely.
Why did they change it? it was the biggest gaming event of the year, had plenty of press, plenty of attendees it was 4-5 days of excessive gaming information and fan fair. Why would you take something that popular and change it?
Well from what I understand a few companies complained, saying that they were spending too much money and wasn’t getting enough in return. In other words, they were having a “not so good” year or few years and started whining about it. That’s what I think now and that’s what I thought back then. Sony of all people were one of the first to complain. But look at Sony at that time. They were fresh off of 2 years of people bashing the PS3. They weren’t the E3 darlings anymore they were being shown up by Microsoft. The momentum was swaying away from them and they were for a time the punching bag of gaming. So they complained.
On side note, This is indicative of the tech industry and shows how immature the whole tech world is in general. Not immature as far as people’s individual maturity, but the industry. Anytime companies have a bad year, start complaining about the structure of things, pretending that they aren’t having a bad year, and it changes the whole industry then something isn’t right. Think about this, if you go to a restaurant and the food is horrible, can the restaurant complain that too many people are sitting down when they eat then the whole restaurant industry remove every chair in every restaurant? No that would never happen.
Ok, Im off my soap box
What do I think about E3? Frankly I think they ruined it, and it is a shame. Right now, what they have done is excluded everyone except the larger size gaming press, then put limited numbers on how many from each of those publications can attend. I keep hearing, from those larger gaming press outlets, that as far as getting information its better. They have more time to sit with game makers and really write more informative articles. But is that true?
I think the only thing it does is make E3 more exclusive, I feel like there is way less information than before, and I dont think there is any better quality articles than there ever was. Yea the media outlets that are fortunate enough to attend feel that way, cause most of their competition cant attend and when they write about something, only a few other press outlets know about it, instead of everyone knowing everything at the same time. Its a real coup for the IGNs, and the 1Ups and frankly the only benefit of the new E3 are to those people.
With anything, if you take away the competition, the remaining players will get slack. And that was very obvious with this years E3, game makers are actually holding off on announcing things that they would’ve announced 3 years ago. Mainly because of the lack of all the extra press. Its causing E3 to really not be a big deal anymore. Anytime Microsoft is holding back on a Halo announcement, at E3, there is something wrong.
So like I said at the beginning, I think the ESU needs to look at taking E3 back to what it was before. Maybe put the limits of booth space etc, like they have now, but bring the people back, make it an event again.