Three thoughts on the "new" Min-E3
by Blake Snow 
{ Aug 2nd 2006 at 10:30AM }
Uber-hip, SF-based GigaOM reacts to the death of E3 as we know it. Their mixed thoughts on the smaller, E3 Media Festival are as follows:- Less (no) booth babes a good thing: "...the whole thing had become a public relations disaster that conveyed to the outside world the not-inaccurate impression that the industry was dominated by cheesy sexists oblivious to the vast market for games outside the 18-34 dude demographic."
- More game press, same result: "As described, the new 'targeted' version of E3 will cater even more aggressively to the gaming press. This is a problem, because gamer magazines and websites are notoriously uncritical of the industry's offerings, dependent as they are on advertising from the major publishers, and a readership comprised almost exclusively of young male fanboys."
- Less gamers equals more sequels: "In his announcement, ESA's Lowenstein says future E3s will create a 'more personal dialogue with the worldwide media, developers, retailers'... oddly forgetting to name, you know, gamers."
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Derbeste @ Aug 2nd 2006 10:43AM
"more personal dialogue with the worldwide media, developers, retailers'... oddly forgetting to name, you know, gamers."
HA! What a great fruedian slip right there. Clearly the runners of E3 know where they make their money.....and it's not from us gamers. They are a glorified set up for advertisers and it is the advertisers who pay them.
Gamers don't advertise. Developers, retailers, and publishers do.
I guess at least they aren't trying to hide that they care more about our wallets than the part of our body it sits by.
/goes back to looking for his cheese in a maze.
Justin @ Aug 2nd 2006 10:45AM
- gamestop, ebgames, wal-mart employees, go to hell. your fanboyism made e3 into the debacle that it is.
-i wish i could've went to e3, it was a boyhood dream of mine.
- booth babes forever
- this is an industry event, e3 will be so much better sans fanboys.
there, i've covered every comment. please lock the comment section.
Cabbage @ Aug 2nd 2006 10:53AM
While the new streamlined E3 may not benefit the larger, blinder publishers, but since the cost of admission will go down it may allow smaller developers a chance to show off what they have. I think it will be a good thing to not let every Joe Gaming-Site-Owner show up.
32_footsteps @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:07AM
You're forgetting - since most of the people involved in the industry were gamers well before their involvement, they figure they have enough gamers already attending.
Of course, it would be interesting to compare gamers as a whole versus gamers who get involved in the industry... is the industry truly representative of gamers as a whole, or are only certain segments getting involved?
hemmy @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:08AM
E3 is a *trade* show. Not for gamers, not about booth babes. I for one am glad this is happening. There is nothing worse than going to the E3 to see young obnoxious and annoying people who clearly have nothing to do with the industry clogging up the area, gawking at boothbabes. Employees of chain stores should be banned outright. Age restriction should be enforced (leave the teeny boppers at the door, too many kids manage to get in). Running a dumb blog is not a credential, stay the hell out.
Derbeste @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:11AM
"Running a dumb blog is not a credential, stay the hell out."
Posting on a "dumb blog" is even less prestigeous.
Take your own advice.
Justin @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:16AM
isn't this a blog?
Justin @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:17AM
and hemmy, do you have plans to steal christmas and put out cigarettes on aboted fetuses too?
Jdoki @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:21AM
@5
Bit of a blanket statement at the end there!
'Running a dumb blog is not a credential, stay the hell out'.
While I agree that many (most?) bloggers lack talent, credibility, or any sense of journalistic integrity, there are a few using blogs as an effective means of side-stepping the 'reviews for cash' that big name gaming sites lack the backbone (or finances) to refuse.
JesusXP @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:25AM
likewise with post #5, E3 was never a "gamers" event, nor was it open to the public. Shit hit the fan this year, as you could tell if you watched the live coverage on G4. It was a ZOO! Definately cost the big companies a ton of money to show off, and in reality it was unneccessary. I believe its starting to turn alot of Developers into Diva's (cliffy-b). As long as the technology and games are demonstrated, its still gonna be good. The only downpart looks like personal time with the builds are gonna be limited if not non existent.
SuicideNinja @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:25AM
This seems to be becoming a bigger deal than it really is. I'm sure many have dreamed of sweating amongst the salivating throngs of loose video gaming cannons at such a show, only to be shown flashing lights and a cluster of women in tight shirts.
All we really want in the end is the info. We don't need the fluff associated with an out of control trade show fully of non-representative pre-rendered FMVs and journalists running amuck like headless chickens making stories out of even the unimportant aspects.
chris w @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:40AM
I am depressed about there being no more E3. Now I won't get to have sex with hot new booth babes every year.
Justin @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:42AM
ugh, you elitists need to shuuuut uuuuup.
Todd @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:47AM
Comments 6-7 are just critical, obviously by people who have nothing to contribute, only out to make themselves feel good. Comment 8 is uncalled for. What does E3 have to do with Christmas and cigarettes? Sheesh.
E3 became a glorified swamp of cosplayers, booth babes, and free loot. Game companies go to E3 for bragging rights and to add hype (and money) to their new line of games. Deals are to be made, advertisers get on board, and money switches hands. This is hard to do with all the other crap getting in the way. I'm sure plenty of developers were interrupted wheeling and dealing by young kids who wanted to know when the next Sonic was coming out, and for what system.
supadude5000 @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:48AM
"This is a problem, because gamer magazines and websites are notoriously uncritical of the industry's offerings, dependent as they are on advertising from the major publishers, and a readership comprised almost exclusively of young male fanboys."
Do you really believe this? Sure there are some magazines that do this, but not all.
"'more personal dialogue with the worldwide media, developers, retailers'... oddly forgetting to name, you know, gamers."
E3 was never for the "gamers". E3 is put on by the ESA as a means for publishers to market games to the media and retailers. Regular Joe Schmoes shouldn't even be allowed in the Convention Center, but year after year more people "sneak"(it's not that hard) into the show, thus adding to the misconception that this show is about "gamers" getting their sweaty hands on the latest games. You want a "gamer" event? Go to PAX, TGS, or LGC. Also, I don't understand, "Less gamers equals more sequels"?
hemmy @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:51AM
"Posting on a "dumb blog" is even less prestigeous.
Take your own advice."
1) It's "prestigious".
2) I'm not using my posting on a blog as a credential to gain access to the E3. Your point is retarded at best.
3) I didn't say Joystiq was some dumb blog, just illustrating that others use their own blogs as a credential when it couldn't be more insignificant to the industry.
Thanks for playing anyway.
Derbeste @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:53AM
@Todd
"Comments 6-7 are just critical, obviously by people who have nothing to contribute, only out to make themselves feel good."
Does anyone else see the irony in this statement?
btw....I did contribute in comment #1. I just thought hemmy was being a dumbass and made my opinion known.....on a blog! What a shocker huh?
hemmy @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:57AM
"and hemmy, do you have plans to steal christmas and put out cigarettes on aboted fetuses too?"
No, Justin, your Christmas is safe with me. I also wouldn't waste a cig on an aborted fetus, that might ruin all the good stem cells I could harvest :)
Todd @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:16PM
Yes, I realize the irony in my post, it was done with purpose and delight.
Derbeste @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:16PM
"1) It's "prestigious"."
Noted. I don't run spell check on a blog. Don't plan to in the future either...and oddly...I don't feel bad about it.
"2) I'm not using my posting on a blog as a credential to gain access to the E3. Your point is retarded at best."
If you can assume Joystiq is, I can just assume you are. And if you aren't saying joystiq is....see comment #3
"3) I didn't say Joystiq was some dumb blog, just illustrating that others use their own blogs as a credential when it couldn't be more insignificant to the industry."
Obviously your ability to write clearly is up there with my spelling. I wasn't the only one that thought you were taking a shot at Joystiq. We just thought the attempt was "retarded at best".
"Thanks for playing anyway."
Your welcome. Thanks for letting me win.
TMoney @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:42PM
Derbeste
It just needs to be said that that is one of the weakest arguments I have ever seen on this site. Hemmy was obviously not trying to get into E3 by posting a comment on Joystiq. He made it pretty clear that many bloggers, with no real influence or ties to the gaming industry, use a minor blog site as a way to get to E3. They are let in even though they add almost nothing to the industry and are there as gamers first, and journalist second.
Derbeste @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:56PM
"It just needs to be said that that is one of the weakest arguments I have ever seen on this site. Hemmy was obviously not trying to get into E3 by posting a comment on Joystiq."
oh dear....
ok....let me explain irony:
i·ro·ny ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-n, r-)
n. pl. i·ro·nies
1. The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning.
2. An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning.
3. A literary style employing such contrasts for humorous or rhetorical effect.
I am WELL aware that Hemmy is not trying to get into E3. To think that would be "retarded at best".
I was ironically making the insinuation that OBVIOUSLY NEITHER WAS JOYSTIQ. Furthermore it was making the statement that Hemmy's implication that they were looks just as REDICULOUS as my comment if someone were dumb enough to take it literally.
TMoney @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:09PM
Derbeste
You still don't get it and probably never will, but Joystiq and other blogs DO USE THEIR BLOGS TO GET TO E3. The vast majority, mabye not joystiq, are there as fanboys.
Todd @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:25PM
Damn Derbeste, it seems as if you have some kind of chip on your shoulder. Of course I'm coming to this opinionated conclusion from my observation of your posts. There is no reason rag on the posts of others, just accept the free speech of others.
Derbeste @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:26PM
"You still don't get it and probably never will, but Joystiq and other blogs DO USE THEIR BLOGS TO GET TO E3. The vast majority, mabye not joystiq, are there as fanboys."
Source? I'm sure you have SOMETHING to back that up. Find me where Joystiq has done that.
If I need to accuse "Joystiq and other blogs" of something without a source or evidence to "get it", then your right...I probably never will.
Derbeste @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:31PM
@Todd
Yeah....I am a bit snippy today. I don't know where it is coming from either
I just feel a bit....bantery. I probably should tone it down a bit. Burning bridges is not a usual motive of mine. /blush
I still don't think it's right to accuse and label joystiq without cause when we are clearly benefitting from the stories they bring us.
Sorry if I feel the need to defend them. Though your right. I can do it without attacking.
Sorry for that.
hemmy @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:37PM
Tmoney, don't bother with Derbeste. You obviously understood what I was getting at, despite my poor 'ability to write'. :)
I never implied Joystiq was a dumb blog, or that they were using it to get into E3. I couldn't care less if they were. I was referring to the kids and others that slap one up overnight and use it as a credential.
I've seen it year after year and it wasn't getting better. I don't need to make clear that Joystiq is a long standing, significant presence in online gaming journalism, and if one thought I meant otherwise, I'll have to declare the notion "REDICULOUS" [sic].
Rare Hare @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:41PM
Derbeste, it appears as though you've been flatout pwned. Unfortunately, there is no joy in pwning a newb.
This entire string of arguments has to be the weakest and most pitiful I've ever read. EVER.
Derbeste @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:48PM
In an attempt to curb my enthusiasm, I'm going to change my tone, but still disagree, Hemmy.
To say, "Running a dumb blog is not a credential, stay the hell out."
IN a blog is an implication on blog you are IN.
I'm not the only person posting that thought the same thing.
You clarified later, but I already found your original tone sassy ("get the hell out")....so I got (probably overly) sassy back.
I'm still going to ask for some evidence to back up your claim that "other dumb blogs" slap themselves together for that purpose.
Once you do, I'll relent.
However, if all this has proven one thing, it's that E3 really does need a change if this is how people react about it.
epobirs @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:01PM
There is a bit of a difference between a site tied to one of the world's major media empires (Weblogs Inc. is owned by a little outfit known as AOL Time Warner) and the site Billy runs out of his bedroom with a $10 a month hosting account.
Fanboys were a problem before the web but the web exacerbated the issue of who claimed to be press severely. At the same time the web also made many people consider why they needed to attend these shows any longer. That was a contributor to the death of Comdex.
Mr. Au is delusional if he thinks buyers for large retail chains go to E3 to see how gamers react to the offerings. One of the primary reasons this changes is happening is that those buyers are finding E3 unpleasant at best. The bulk of the video game sales in the US are handled by fewer than two dozen big retail chains. It is far more cost effective to stage a small dog & pony show just for those guys.
Big game companies still looking for a trade event to reach smaller retailers may start showing up at CES again. The amount of gaming content there has steadily increased in recent years. Sony and Microsoft will have booths there for other stuff, so adding some space for any post-Xmas PR won't be a surprise.
Zsavior @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:14PM
Low and behold it is exactly as I said, they are going target their show to the press they pretty much own, who spins what ever they give as greatness. What kills me is the elitist attitude the industry has towards the gamers, as if they make the industry and not the consumer.
The thing is I have a feeling if the American took a more asian idea about videogames this sort of attitude would not be a problem. E3 though it was a supposed to be "trade" show was as much for the gamer as it was for the industry. In american there is no real show for the gamer, and the reason is obvious: they don't respect the gamer enough to make one. See the industry can be summed up in the many remarks from sony spokesmen, no matter what, they believe their offerings will sell because we have to buy it. To tell the truth they are right most times, it is time for gamers in America to make the industry cator to us. Canceling a show we found very near and dear to us is just a way to restructure E3 so only the media can get the information they deem important. The industry figures this will work because where else will they get their info from. This tends to work sometimes because gamers feel they need some sort of validation that what they are playing is great, beyond their personal taste. The japanese on the other hand if they don't like it they don't buy it, and no amount of spin will change that, Because of this fact Magazines have more freedom to be truthfull because there is no incentive for the industry there to force them to lie, instead a better product has to be made for them. They also have a game show catored for the viewing public or else nobody will give a damn.
My point is this, E3 is being restructured because the industry in America believes they can force feed us what they feel like and we will accept it. We are rediculed by the publications we buy, our channels or destroyed to force us to watch programming that has nothing to do with our interest, and the expos we love are dismanteled when they can't buy the right reaction the industry wanted. There is only one way to combat this and that is to ignore what is force fed to us, until we can see for ourselves. If you can't play the demo at your local best buy,Eb, or Gamestop screw em. Ignore sites and publications, in which we know they are santized to love anything EA drops in their laps, I'm looking at you GAMESPOT! Oh it is easy to crap on it one week later after all the intial buys during its release, but how about that hands on sneak exclusive you saw! You mean you had no clue that the game was a swelting piece of elephant poo, but I digress they are not the only offenders.
The point is the gamer in america has to show the industry that they give them their jobs not the other way around. EA, Activsion,Sega lives to serve us, and when that fact is forgoten we forget about what they produce. See at the end of the day we will still work, in or jobs, whether it be flipping burgers, or building rockets, if video games die tomorrow will will get up and go to work, a little less happier, but still alive. On the other hand if we stop buying their crap they will be working a van down by the river muttering to themselves where could they have gone wrong. It is time the industry learns they listen to us not talk down to us, and if they can't understand that they can sell their games to somebody who cares.
Rare Hare @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:15PM
"There is a bit of a difference between a site tied to one of the world's major media empires (Weblogs Inc. is owned by a little outfit known as AOL Time Warner) and the site Billy runs out of his bedroom with a $10 a month hosting account."
Or a site run off of geocities or the like, which is free. Sometimes I forget Joystiq and Engadget are actually blogs, because they maintain a professional appearance and don't exhibit the same behaviors as the typical, say, MySpace user.
Austin @ Aug 2nd 2006 4:55PM
If the E3 people dont step back up they will just get replaced. Dont restrict (ie booth babes), make it the biggest thing yet. Sell that idea to the big developers and the hardware people for next gen presentations and the dreams of all those gammers to stand in line for hours to play a demo will be alive again. You cant go wrong (booth babes and games), and thats why there will be a vacume of demand. Knock knock bitch opportunity is at your door.
epobirs @ Aug 2nd 2006 5:18PM
#30
Z, there are numerous events open to the public each year. E3 was never run right because the volume of fake press was already quite high at CES and they came right over to E3 at the first year.
One such show that has grown rapidly:
http://www.pennyarcadeexpo.com/index.php
John @ Aug 3rd 2006 8:51AM
Your comments: When it comes down to it, everyone who is upset about the loss of the old E3 is, deep down, upset because any hopes that THEY would get to go to E3 someday have now been dashed.
The first headlinessaid E3 was Canceled, which would defiantly tug at our collective heart strings, but we now know that's not the case and we should have a better understanding about the reasons and benefits for this.
Magus @ Aug 3rd 2006 10:39AM
Journalists arnt critical enough thers a reason for it. We have seen many slants or critical opinions on common or every day things. I have one simple question for you if you really believe that.
When was the last time you saw an exclusive anything be critical or negative?
...because i can assure you there are enough willing people battling for an exclusive review or interview to ensure you get what ever result you desire...even if its completly innacurate.