Yeah, I see what you mean, but the main problem for me is I don't especially like either of the two regular hostsFirefilm said:
No Right Answer: Jim Sterling Says E3 Isn't Worth It
- Thread starter Firefilm
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It would require 3rd party arbitration, but it would be nice if some of the points made were weighted. You could replace the drinking round with a round for the solid arguments, which could score up multiple points for each argument made. There's been a few times I've watched, and one side has a lot of weak points, and the other has fewer, but stronger arguments to be made. The new round could allow someone make one really good argument and score 5 points over the weaker arguments being made against it.Firefilm said:
I dunno what to think of E3 at this point. It's a huge marketing convention... for its own sake? I'm going to ask tomorrow if some people know what E3. They most likely won't know.
Anyway, I think that the E3 is just too much marketing to the same crowds. What's the use of marketing to us? Especially when we just look for relevant information about a game.
Marketing is nice and all, but we need the world's eyes on it if it's going to cost a lot. And I'm not seeing those eyes, I'm only seeing 'our' eyes.
Anyway, I think that the E3 is just too much marketing to the same crowds. What's the use of marketing to us? Especially when we just look for relevant information about a game.
Marketing is nice and all, but we need the world's eyes on it if it's going to cost a lot. And I'm not seeing those eyes, I'm only seeing 'our' eyes.
The only thing I disagree with Jim about is getting rid of E3 altogether. I just think something about it should change so it's less off-putting and more inviting to game players. I'll come back for more once I one up with a plan for it.
I agree with Jim on this one. E3 has become more and more of a joke over the last few years.
I still have my E3 2004 coverage DVDs (they don't make them any more :< )
Back then, E3 still had the problem of making you get excited over games that didn't existed and make you want to spend money that you didn't have.
But at least when you eventually got the game it looked improved from E3. Today you have to wander if what you see is even what you get.
I don't think the salutation is to stop E3 but maybe to stop the industry from having so much control over it.
Put in some rules and Guidelines. Make it so that you?re not allowed to show alpha footage.
If you don't have a finished game to show then you shouldn't be showing it. Everything that is showed at E3 is used to create hype and advertise products and aren?t even finished yet, and I find it ridiculous that they stamp a ?Work in Progress,? to evade false advertising.
If it's not finished then why are you showing it.
In short, while E3 might have some nice things to show it's been abused by the games industry as a way to broadcast advertising with no responsibly.
I think with some decent regulation from a third party E3 would be a lot better.
I still have my E3 2004 coverage DVDs (they don't make them any more :< )
Back then, E3 still had the problem of making you get excited over games that didn't existed and make you want to spend money that you didn't have.
But at least when you eventually got the game it looked improved from E3. Today you have to wander if what you see is even what you get.
I don't think the salutation is to stop E3 but maybe to stop the industry from having so much control over it.
Put in some rules and Guidelines. Make it so that you?re not allowed to show alpha footage.
If you don't have a finished game to show then you shouldn't be showing it. Everything that is showed at E3 is used to create hype and advertise products and aren?t even finished yet, and I find it ridiculous that they stamp a ?Work in Progress,? to evade false advertising.
If it's not finished then why are you showing it.
In short, while E3 might have some nice things to show it's been abused by the games industry as a way to broadcast advertising with no responsibly.
I think with some decent regulation from a third party E3 would be a lot better.
Funny thing is, Nintendo, despite all the idiots saying they didn't show up, did show up, and they completely wrecked the competition. The Digital Event was fantastically presented (makes the press conferences of old seem archaic), didn't miss a beat, and had great content, including what is probably the most inventive new IP this gen, Splatoon. But they didn't stop there, with hours upon hours of streaming content from the Treehouse, and that's not to mention the Smash Bros. Invitational, and Nintendo had the biggest booth at the show, too.
But, yeah, I do think E3 feels like a show that's severely pointless. There are other gaming expos out there, and despite what Dan says, Hollywood doesn't actually have an equivalent to E3. The examples he used? Those are awards shows, for pete's sake, they're nothing like E3. The closest Hollywood has is maybe Comic-Con, but only for certain types of films.
In the digital age, E3 feels like an anachronism. Nintendo had the right idea when they changed things up for their presentation, and they've even been announcing big games outside of E3 on their own terms via Nintendo Direct. Why bother with the ridiculous and expensive stage presentations when you can go for tightly-edited, cleaner pre-recorded streams instead?
But, yeah, I do think E3 feels like a show that's severely pointless. There are other gaming expos out there, and despite what Dan says, Hollywood doesn't actually have an equivalent to E3. The examples he used? Those are awards shows, for pete's sake, they're nothing like E3. The closest Hollywood has is maybe Comic-Con, but only for certain types of films.
In the digital age, E3 feels like an anachronism. Nintendo had the right idea when they changed things up for their presentation, and they've even been announcing big games outside of E3 on their own terms via Nintendo Direct. Why bother with the ridiculous and expensive stage presentations when you can go for tightly-edited, cleaner pre-recorded streams instead?
Ive had this thought on E3 for a long time now its been years since ive been really hyped for anything every year im just seeing more and more of the same thing i mean ffs squeals squeals squeals. It fucking says somthing of the state of E3 when i search gametrailers, gamespot, giantbomb and NONE OF THEM had ANYTHING on Warhammer40k Eternal Crusade, then i noticed it was all about the big guys, the ones that churn out the same kinda crap al the time the same guys that can afford to piss away money on advertising., i dont know its turned into the movie industry
Jim is right, but then again thats nothing new. What really stuck in me is Dans quote aboutindustry reacting ti us realizing its a shit game. well, if we look at historic examples the industry either blame us, fake ignorance or outright tell us we dont know what we want and they know better. so no, that doesnt really work. oh and to use your A:CM example and your Robocop example - both are financial success.
you want the industry to have less control over industry organized even for its own industry (E3 is NOT for the consumer, never was). umm okay that would never happen. they could easily bribe their way out of any rules anyway.Magmarock said:
Bingo. The Oscars is an awards show which is the marketing home run for directors, producers and actors. Yes, there is buzz about next projects and it dives into the cult of celebrities like nothing else but the original focus of the event is a celebration of the art form. E3 isn't about the art of video game entertainment and celebrating the creative people behind it, its simply about securing the most pre-orders before the work is even finished.Madkipz said:
The product hasn't been on the shelf, they can promise anything they want. Like Jim said, they get to selectively show you the bits they polished solely for the trailer. Most people can spot the 'trailer' shots of major films, the shots written in exclusively for the pre-release hype. Nobody can miss the 'trailer' areas of a bad/rushed video game. When you're in a game, you can spend hours looking at all the minor details if you really want. A film flashes before your eyes, that's what makes 'movie magic' practically work. It's an abuse of trust that happens all to often in gaming. We trust that what their showing us is representative of the game as a whole. Publishers know this and will push this to the limit.
I have only spent money on one game before its released and I'm still waiting to see how Star Citizen will turn out.[footnote]Though I'm very optimistic on this one obviously, why else would a broke University student find 300 bucks to throw at a website? =P[/footnote] Nobody but investors spend money on a movie before post-production is even finished. Years ago I thought E3 would be a fun event to get ahead of the curve. These days, I'd rather just wait and see. My money is finite and I'm patient enough to watch how it all pans out after launch.
Anyway, loved the quote of the week!
The idea of E3 isn't bad, but what it has become is horrible. I think that Nintendo stepping away from the big press conference was a good idea because the press conference has become less about the games and more about the conference. So many things on stage were not games, but gameplay ideas. Heck, EA had nothing to show and had no business holding a press conference. Did we really need a press conference to tell us that EA is going to release a whole bunch of sports games this year? The only reason EA held a press conference was to say, "We had a press conference at E3"
And the people that say that Nintendo wasn't at E3 think that E3 is about the conferences. Nintendo had a huge presense. They had huge lines, a bunch of internet offerings and actually had games for people to play.
And the people that say that Nintendo wasn't at E3 think that E3 is about the conferences. Nintendo had a huge presense. They had huge lines, a bunch of internet offerings and actually had games for people to play.
At least Jim got closer to my sentiment about E3. He did get a bit confused at the end, where he wanted other people to go to E3 and still have it, he'd just cover it from home.
E3 still exists there man, you are being PRO E3 with that statement.
I don't really even FOLLOW E3. I view E3 as game trailers, I've been burned too many times in the past by trailers getting hype for a series that just does not work for me.
You mentioned one game running on a high end machine, as one of the ways to fake a trailer. but there are many many others. And anything besides a 'lets play' is wholy inaccurate representation of the game. AFTER the game has been released, and probably to be fair after all its patches are out.
And THAT puts me like at least a year behind the cutting edge trailer crowds.
I will make an exception for Bethesda who has apparently tenure for the moment, as they haven't made a bad game since Oblivion, and even Oblivion wasn't that bad since it came with a toolset which fixed the glaring balance issues thru mods.
Bethesda has quite the new age old school mindset when it comes to games. It released Fallout 3, let it get modded by the community, then released New Vegas which had many of the popular mods people used for Fallout 3. Which is different than any other established company and the newer kickstarter or other indy titles. Its Unique and the reason Bethesda can get away with releasing ... poorly made games in terms of stability and balance issues, is within a week of release someone will go thru the toolset FIX the issues, and release them to the community.
But back to E3, the industry has been lying to me with trailers for so long that I don't even care about whats coming out. once its been out, and its been proven to be not bad by actual people then its worth checking out.
As such for a gamer, E3 serves no purpose, and for journalism, again no purpose because If anyone could tell if something was going to be good there wouldn't be this problem, but NOBODY can.
So is it worth it for publishers? I mean if Xbox learns that 'kinect sports rivals' looks like the version with the previous Xbox, and people still don't want to play it or deal with the kinect. I watched a video of that where it had half an hour of setup where the guy had to get on his hands and knees to get the picture taken, per player, per game.
and Xbox needs people to tell ...don't try to sell this to people, don't try to bundle it with your system. DO pretend its a cartridge of ET and bury it in the desert. I don't care how much you spent or what people were thinking. Cut your losses and fire anyone in Kinect R + D.
You aren't an airliner. People won't put up with that stuff. You are with an OS, Windows is an airliner. you can do what you want with windows and office, bundle the kinect with THAT, and people will buy it because they have no choice. but if they have a choice. they will get the PS4.
which would be valuable for XBOX to know.
E3 still exists there man, you are being PRO E3 with that statement.
I don't really even FOLLOW E3. I view E3 as game trailers, I've been burned too many times in the past by trailers getting hype for a series that just does not work for me.
You mentioned one game running on a high end machine, as one of the ways to fake a trailer. but there are many many others. And anything besides a 'lets play' is wholy inaccurate representation of the game. AFTER the game has been released, and probably to be fair after all its patches are out.
And THAT puts me like at least a year behind the cutting edge trailer crowds.
I will make an exception for Bethesda who has apparently tenure for the moment, as they haven't made a bad game since Oblivion, and even Oblivion wasn't that bad since it came with a toolset which fixed the glaring balance issues thru mods.
Bethesda has quite the new age old school mindset when it comes to games. It released Fallout 3, let it get modded by the community, then released New Vegas which had many of the popular mods people used for Fallout 3. Which is different than any other established company and the newer kickstarter or other indy titles. Its Unique and the reason Bethesda can get away with releasing ... poorly made games in terms of stability and balance issues, is within a week of release someone will go thru the toolset FIX the issues, and release them to the community.
But back to E3, the industry has been lying to me with trailers for so long that I don't even care about whats coming out. once its been out, and its been proven to be not bad by actual people then its worth checking out.
As such for a gamer, E3 serves no purpose, and for journalism, again no purpose because If anyone could tell if something was going to be good there wouldn't be this problem, but NOBODY can.
So is it worth it for publishers? I mean if Xbox learns that 'kinect sports rivals' looks like the version with the previous Xbox, and people still don't want to play it or deal with the kinect. I watched a video of that where it had half an hour of setup where the guy had to get on his hands and knees to get the picture taken, per player, per game.
and Xbox needs people to tell ...don't try to sell this to people, don't try to bundle it with your system. DO pretend its a cartridge of ET and bury it in the desert. I don't care how much you spent or what people were thinking. Cut your losses and fire anyone in Kinect R + D.
You aren't an airliner. People won't put up with that stuff. You are with an OS, Windows is an airliner. you can do what you want with windows and office, bundle the kinect with THAT, and people will buy it because they have no choice. but if they have a choice. they will get the PS4.
which would be valuable for XBOX to know.
I've been playing video games for...well for 30 years now actually, and I've never paid any attention to E3. It's never influenced my game purchases, or given me any unique/vital insight into the gaming options out there for me. I spot something that looks interesting, either by trailers on gamesites/youtube, or that I happen to read in something like Gamerinfo.
My primary influence for games is communication with friends and random exposure via trailers, then I research more.
Honestly, I didn't really hear about E3 until probably 10 years ago. I figured it was just some electronic symposium or something, and didn't know it was game related until later.
Zero concern for E3, didn't care about it then, don't care about it now.
My primary influence for games is communication with friends and random exposure via trailers, then I research more.
Honestly, I didn't really hear about E3 until probably 10 years ago. I figured it was just some electronic symposium or something, and didn't know it was game related until later.
Zero concern for E3, didn't care about it then, don't care about it now.
