Each week Dennis McCauley contributes The Political Game, a column on the collision of politics and video games:
For more than a decade the Electronic Entertainment Expo was a must-see event for game retailers and media types. While it's true that in recent years E3 had become an exercise in wretched excess, that was, in fact, a large part of its charm. By day E3 featured massive, massively noisy game displays laid out end to end to end in the cavernous main halls of the Los Angeles Convention Center . By night dozens of game industry parties kept L.A.'s bartenders and sushi makers off the unemployment lines and gave a generation of scruffy game journalists an all-too-brief taste of the good life. In 2006, its final year as an extravaganza, a reported 80,000 people streamed past E3's exhibits.
But beyond that, E3 put the modern video game business on the map. You could be certain of national T.V. coverage from all of the major networks. The top newspapers were there as well. The media coverage of the show's bright lights, booth babes and nonstop bells and whistles made mainstream America sit up and take notice of a form of entertainment it had previously held to be child's play, and for geeky children at that. Of course, the gaming press went absolutely nuts during E3 week, pushing screen shots and trailers and interviews and whatever else it could get hold of to millions of eager readers.
To paraphrase Mick Jagger, I used to love you, E3, but it's all over now.
After the 2006 show game publishers decided they were spending too much money. Doug Lowenstein, the respected ESA president who started E3 in the mid-90's, read the writing on the wall, polished up his resume, and moved on to greener pastures. In between Doug's departure and the arrival of his replacement, Michael Gallagher, the ESA threw together a low budget, patchwork show in Santa Monica for 2007. For a variety of reasons, it bombed.
"Compared to E3's better times, it was the equivalent of holding the show in a closet."
|
With the show back in L.A. this year, attendees were hoping to recapture some of that old E3 glory, but it was not to be. If anything, this year's show was worse than Santa Monica. Not only was it poorly planned and poorly executed, but holding it in the LACC was a cruel, if unintentional joke. E3 veterans who recalled the glory days when the massive confines of South Hall and West Hall were filled to the brim with towering game exhibits stared blankly at the locked doors of those once-bustling rooms. This year's show floor, such as it was, amounted to four rows of small booths in a drab room off the Convention Center's main hallway. Compared to E3's better times, it was the equivalent of holding the show in a closet. One major industry figure I spoke to quipped that the Into the Pixel game art exhibit had more square footage devoted to it than the show floor. At one point in mid-show I stood next to a former high level game company exec who waved his hand at the nearly vacant lobby outside West Hall and summed up his feelings in a single word: "Appalling." Ubisoft North America president Laurent Detoc, told the San Francisco Chronicle, "E3 this year is terrible. The world used to come to E3. Now it's like a pipe-fitters show in the basement."
I can't disagree.
But it wasn't just a couple of money guys complaining. Game industry worker bees complained that scheduling press conferences on the same days that the expo was open led to no-show appointments as some overbooked media types opted for the press conferences instead of their scheduled meetings. And then there was the embarrassment of having only 50 people show up for Gov. Rick Perry's keynote. Or less than a hundred for the ESA CEO's state-of-the-industry speech. And, without the big E3 buzz, the national media stayed away in droves. It didn't help that there were no major announcements or surprises to speak of at the show. GTA on the DS? Cool. Got any game play footage? No?
Never mind.
"It didn't help that there were no major announcements or surprises to speak of at the show."
|
You can lay some of this, of course, at the feet of the ESA, which operates the show. On the other hand, it was the game publishers who wanted to spend less money on E3. As the saying goes, you get what you pay for. Without the substantial E3 revenues of the big years, the ESA was forced to raise its membership dues, reportedly by as much as 400%. And some publishers(Activision, Vivendi, LucasArts, id, Crave to date) have bailed because of that. Don't be surprised if a few more jump ship now that the show is over, leaving the ESA in even worse financial straits. Eventually the lack of revenue, be it from E3 or membership dues, translates to cutting back on the services that the ESA provides to the industry: lobbying, IP protection and free speech issues.
So, were game publishers better off with an expensive E3 and a healthy ESA to represent their interests or with a terminally ill E3 and a fragmented, underfunded ESA?
The answer seems obvious. What's also obvious is that you can go ahead and schedule that trip to the beach you were planning for next July. You won't be coming to Los Angeles.
E3 is dead.
Dennis McCauley is Editor of GamePolitics.com and writes about games for the Philadelphia Inquirer. Opinions expressed in The Political Game are his own. Reach him at 
_thumbnail.jpg "i am 8-bit: 2008")
(Page 1) Reader Comments
Reply
Of course there isn't going to be as many game announcements coming out as there was 2 years ago, when the PS3 and Wii was about to launch, and 360 was just beginning to show what it was capable of. If you ask me, these writers should suck it up and quit complaining.
The people who go to E3 bitched when it was huge so the ESA made it a small, all-business kind of event, now the same people are bitching that its small.
On top of this is the continued drain of attention. As much of E3 for the big guys was the attention for the little guys. Small but interesting games could garner a great deal of attention at the large shows. Instead they are opting out of E3, feeling that their chances are better with other shows (whether Penny Arcade or Gamecock shows).
Besides, lets face it. You attract more attention with a big block party than a cocktail party.
In previous years, there used to be many articles about the convention itself that barely touched on the games. How did those articles help publishers? But now, without the spectacle of the convention, the news is reporting on the actual content of the presentations. For example, Google news lists over 400 articles about Nintendo's controller add-on, including mainstream press like The New York Times.
If fanboys want a convention, they can go to PAX. Leave E3 for the real journalists.
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/07/13/japanese-hardware-sales-june-30-july-6-e4-edition/
Sora, you 'agree completely'? Ten bucks says you weren't even there.
gaming in a way is dieing
its becoming more cut and dried more of a set science as it gets more and more mainstream games sell easier slap a well known name and then bump it up another number and the game will sell
through this the innovations of the old time in gaming are dissappearing the wonderment and feeling of excitment to make new things is quite gone because like all things gaming is a buisness and when a buisness learns exactly how hard they need to push to sell they push exactly that hard
and through this gaming is dieing
Reply
I'll agree though that this week went past with barely a whisper. The only things to catch my attention were the keynotes of the big three and lets face it they all sucked.
E3 used to be a huge event in May that had people shouting throughout the internet. Still fond memories of the days when the Wii was first announced and demoed at E3.
This E3 disappointed me. I want some middle ground. Don't have as lavish an E3 as before but please do more than people did this year. The GDC is becoming bigger and thats just not right.
Reply
Reply
Reply
kidding, we know what it is, but otherwise it was a recap of stuff that we either A: already knew about or B: don't particularly care about. Shigeru Miyamoto even went so far as to say that Nintendo will no longer use E3 as a venue for their big announcements pertinent to core gamers, and more or less said to expect more of this year in the future, at least from them.
Microsoft blew their collective awesome reveal load back at that press event a while back, and Sony's show was nothing we hadn't seen coming from a mile away
Which isn't to say that the show was utterly dissatisfying. However, it wasn't three days of head-exploding awesomeness that we all remember from even two years ago
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Then again, knowing today audience and investor nothing will change. I can only hope that maybe there will be a slight improvement or at least some thing worth wild to see at E3 next year.
Reply
Reply
Reply
This year? Nothing but disappointment. I didn't see any games I especially wanted, other than Gears 2, but even that seemed lack-luster. Final Fantasy? Who cares. If I had wanted to play Final Fantasy, I would have bought a PS2 a long time ago. The dashboard redesign was a big disappointment. Avatars? Come on, Microsoft, that doesn't appeal to your core audience.
The only thing I was truly excited about? The counter on Bungie.net. I was waiting, I was going to go to bed early so that I could see the announcement as soon as it popped up at 7:07:07. What happened? Microsoft cancels the announcement.
Possibly the worst E3 I've ever seen. Previous years I tuned in to G4's coverage nonstop. This year? I watch the Microsoft keynote, sped through Nintendo's, and half watched the Sony announcement. The on-the-floor coverage? Yeah right. The games are boring, the interviews are boring, and there were no real "WOW!!" announcements. Final Fantasy is hardly a huge announcement in my book.
Reply
FFXIII for Xbox360 wasn't worth speaking of? The newly-revealed Xbox360 dashboard wasn't worth speaking of? The new Wii attachment that provides 1:1 movement translation wasn't worth speaking of?
I mean, yeah they didn't announce the Star Wars MMO at the show, but sheesh. There were a couple of major surprises (I thought).
Reply
Reply
It will always have a special place in my heart.
Reply
This crap needs to stop. The real gamers are getting sick of it, and last time I checked all of my friends who aren't into gaming, still aren't into it.
Reply
But they kept raising the price and took it to Georga??? When it final came back to California it had already started to die. The abandoned the public. Keept chopping off what was good. And finally the game companies them selves. Its a marking geek show and that not good.
Reply
Reply
This event is unsalvageable. Let it die.
Reply
Seriously though, I really hope PAX continues to grow into something that can replace E3. PAX is open to everyone, and it is an absolute blast. Last year was my first, and I plan on it being a tradition now.
All PAX needs is a little more attention from the big 3 in the way of press conferences and I think the deal will pretty much be sealed.
Reply
I have every confidence that this is the right decision, and that it will be easy for them to continue running the event in accordance with that decision. They pull in a ton of people and run a very successful event.
If I didn't have a wedding that weekend I'd be going this year X.x Next year, though, I already have my rooming arrangements taken care of. I never actually got to attend a "real" E3, but somehow I feel like I'll be able to live with that after hitting up PAX =D
E3 isnt dead, it will still be one of the biggest gaming events next year and the year after that. How many times is it going to die anyways?
Reply
E3 will never be as big as it used to be and that's quite a shame but the industry as a whole has NO ONE to blame but THEMSELVES.
They bitched and bitched and now they have what they deserve.
If these "hardcore" gamers are serious about getting the real E3 back then they need to band together and create something like it, attract sponsors, and invite lots of gamers there. However there needs to be rules and stuff. None of this chaotic sh*t.
Reply
Reply
Reply
So in 2007 there is a pared down show, where you can get real work done, but that's no good because there's too many places to drive to, and why can't they just have it all in one place like they used to.
So this year they move it back to LA, keep everything in one place, make it easy for people to get to what they wanted and cover everything they need. That of course, is crap. We really want the old feet hurting, bored booth babe stalking, waiting in line behind 300 fanboys, headache inducing, money wasting, sweat smelling E3s we used to have. Long live the non-revolution.
I guess that's one thing about E3 that hasn't changed, the complaining.
Reply
The real story here is not that E3 is "dead." The real story is that gaming is growing up.
This "news piece" misses the real story. How? Look to established forms of media like film and television.
To wit: please name for me the single major event in film or music or books or television that the players pour ALL of their money into and base ALL of their release schedules and info around.
Exactly. These other mediums are all grown up, they're no longer novelties. They don't need to release all of their "hit" product at "holiday" ... they have a mature pipeline that's not dependent on a big stunt. Yes, they have events like Cannes and the Oscars and the Grammy and Emmy Awards, but these events are actually taken seriously. Because they are serious about them. They aren't circuses. They're events based around craft and art, and the *people* doing the work.
Does anyone think that mainstream media - as this opinion piece claims - ever really took gaming seriously because of E3? Certainly, it got *noticed*, but is that the same thing? It became an obligatory news item in major media markets for a day or two in May (now July), and just a mention at that. Some stately blond woman saying that "Gaming has descended on Los Angeles!" and showing a clip of the Army guys rappelling down from the chopper across the street from the LA convention center. Cut back to the anchors shaking their heads and smiling ... those crazy gamers! ... say something about gaming generating of $20b worldwide last year (golly!) and cut to commercial.
That's what the gaming industry's millions bought them: novelty status. Not a bad thing at all! But they're done with that now, and so is the culture. Most people - over 65% - play games now. And have for a while. And the spectacle is stopping. It doesn't need need to happen anymore.
The real story is not that E3 is "dead." The real story is that gaming is growing up.
The gaming press - while I personally love and have loved and will continue to love it - is really kind of a joke. A cool, punky, counter-culture joke, but a joke nonetheless. This "press" is having a conversation with itself. It's a bunch of critics talking to a bunch of critics. "Reviews" are extensions of pub/dev marketing arms 4 out of 5 times - they quote the press releases and present it as news and collect their paychecks. When they don't, they often review with no objectivity, just opinion. Here's an example, and a personal one at that: I worked on the "Thrillville" franchise for LucasArts - a kids game series aimed at 8-12 year olds. Review after review that said "I guess if I was 10, this might be cool, but I'm not, so it basically sucks: 6/10."
By the way, think this kind of "reporting" has no impact? Those scores affect the metascore - the average of major gaming sites' scores for a game. Those scores are often used in legal contracts to factor the developer's share of the profits. Thanks for giving the game a 60! Suddenly you start to understand why the "haters" aren't actually cool ... why they actually do suck. It's easy to hate ... it's hard to create. What's the *real* story here about this game? In this case, and in 99% of them, it's never reported.
Supposed journalists write lengthy, dramatic "news items" on the death of E3 ... year after year. Oh, and have you heard for the last few years that PC gaming is dead, and that EA sucks, and Microsoft is evil, and that we all need to get back to point-and-click adventures? Where are the stories about what it takes to assemble a team to make a game like Mirror's Edge? What is the reality of the business side of staggering two full time teams on a franchise like Madden? Where is the reporting that covers the deal that former LucasArts pres Jim Ward brokered between LucasArts, EA, and BioWare? Now that it's all in the open, I can say it: I used to work there ... I know ... that's a REALLY interesting story. Wouldn't a REAL journalist GET that story? If I were a gaming journalist, I would be tracking Jim Ward down right now to get the inside scoop on that deal. I'd be unrolling my North Face bag on his porch. Now THAT'S a story.
The reality is that fewer and fewer of us care about the "gaming press'" mourning the loss of their ritual E3. We've got Penny Arcade for that, and they do it way better. What about the growth of the medium they're supposedly covering as journalists?
No disresect meant, but please go visit http://www.variety.com/ for an example of what real reporting on a medium is all about.
Gaming is growing up. I miss E3 too because as a developer attending since 2000, I miss the parties and connections with friends. I'm sure the folks in the film industry in the 1930's had strong opinions when the studios started to decentralize then as well. But film grew from a novelty under total corporate control to an art form because of that movement.
As gamers, isn't that what we really want from - and for - gaming?
Or do we really just want Tony Hawk on a half pipe in the middle of West Hall and chicks with torches?
Well, okay ... that was kind of fun ...
Reply