E3 renamed, rescheduled, and drastically resized

  • By Brendan Sinclair, Tor Thorsen, GameSpot
  • Posted Jul 31, 2006 10:40 pm GMT

[UPDATE] ESA president reveals 2007 expo will be held in July at a Los Angeles hotel--and will only have around 5,000 attendees.

While next year's newly downsized Electronic Entertainment Expo remains slated to take place in its longtime location of Los Angeles, the show is apparently going to be leaving behind its traditional May date on the calendar.

An industry analyst and a representative of the City of Los Angeles Convention and Visitors Bureau have both told GameSpot that the event's organizers at the Entertainment Software Association mentioned moving the show to July.

The idea behind the move is to give publishers more time to polish their holiday releases, the analyst said. Publishers apparently weren't pleased at rushing their schedules to have late-year releases ready for the show each May.

[UPDATE] This afternoon, ESA president Douglas Lowenstein confirmed for GameSpot that E3 2007 will indeed take place in July, though he could not pin down specific dates. He also mentioned that the event will no longer be held at the Los Angeles Convention Center, but instead will take place inside conference rooms at "at least one" hotel in the city.

[UPDATE 2] As one might expect, the relocation from the sprawling LACC means that attendance at E3 2007 will be just a fraction of the previous year. Speaking to the Wall Street Journal, Lowenstein said he expects around 5,000 people to be on-hand at next year's event, way down from the 60,000-plus-size mob that stormed the expo this past May.

Lowenstein said the drastic reduction was in response to exhibitor dissatisfaction with the spectacle E3 had become. "Some companies were frustrated because E3 was such a huge, sweeping event it became increasingly difficult to get their messages out," he told the WSJ.

Lowenstein also revealed to the WSJ that E3 is also getting a new name. Starting next year, the event will be called the "E3 Media Festival," hinting that it may offer more than just games.

382 Comments

  • Sky_King_64

    Posted Jul 23, 2008 7:25 pm GMT

    The announcement now seems almost tame and logical, but the aftermath obviously wasn't.

  • ZeroTae

    Posted Jan 30, 2007 3:02 am GMT

    You know... i just leave in brazil... can just watch online and goin to E3 was the dream of my life!
    But... reschedule the event doesnt do anything for its good.. comon, it makes even better!!
    However... the resize and the new name are just pathetic... comon.. E3 was the biggest event of video game in the year!! Everyone knows about the E3... and just changing it so drasticly... i dont know... i just dont agree

  • hye_03

    Posted Sep 3, 2006 6:41 pm GMT

    this is surprising enough to leave me speachless...

  • GrandMasterLuis

    Posted Aug 17, 2006 2:43 am GMT

    Cpt-Lemi: I apologize for getting so angry at you, but I was just upset by the tone you addressed the sort of people I work with, considering their hard lives and (somewhat meager, considering the work they put in and very little job security these days) salary they have.

    But I understand where you could assume it would be a developer's fault. In essence, the 'deadline' thing is simply so once they show it, it's a better game, and it'll be better received. It seems odd right now, but come next July, when you're watching E3 game previews online or seeing hands-on impressions by the Gamespot folk, you'll see more of the titles will be much nicer, and closer to ready for launch.

    Poki3: You're right, this isn't entirely for gamers. We can all (as gamers) blame the ESA for this. But then again, it's only logistics... move the show up, get a smaller place, get more media and less fans AT the show. What does this add up to? More exposure with a less overhead cost.

    P.S. I don't like the name either.

    P.P.S. I found a refrigerator that deserves an Emmy, at least: the one on Roseanne. That thing's been slammed shut so many times you'd think it was a stunt fridge

  • Poki3

    Posted Aug 16, 2006 6:18 pm GMT

    Maybe this thing was done for the sake of Developers, I don't know 'cause I'm not one of them, but definitely not for the sake of gamers. I really wouldn't be surprised to see a protest or two next year... if not something worse. Gamers can have a short fuse...

    ...still, that really doesn't do anything for me. East Europe is to far from LA and I always watch my E3 online ^^;

    PS: "E3 Media Festival"? Less people, more to watch? Give me a break and keep it a Gaming show! What's next? An Oscar for my Refrigerator?

  • Cpt-Lemi

    Posted Aug 16, 2006 3:16 pm GMT

    He's right, and when you're right you're right... though I did make it seem slightly against developers didn't I ^_^;; but anyways, I do blame the ESA, and I agree with Luis that my attack seemed a little bit unfair. I don't think developers as a whole are asses, but I imagine that bigger companies are in some way pouring into this **** about deadlines, why even give us that excuse? E3 isn't meant to be a release date, it's supposed to be a preview no? The idea, the principle of E3 is as I said, more then just a show now, it's a name to everyone. It's the principle of the idea, why take it away... it draws so much attention, what messages aren't you getting across?

    I guess it's different when you hear it from a professional, so I retract some remarks, but I hold to the idea that it should still be held. Why take something with so much publicity away? And this is why I'm enraged at corporations and the ESA more then the developer, it just sort of saddens me that the deadline excuse came up. Flashy light and girls? It's a convention... that's what they are... I just want that one aspect of it back... it's a convention... you can still have your board room meetings, but for the fans atleast give us this... we look forward to it every year!

    And on the note of the salaries, thanks for the update It helps to have information even if it's being blasted at you through underhanded insult, though I deserve it. My remark, I figured that people at Bungie (who released Halo) make a **** load of money based on the title, but I'm assuming again, it's the corporations, which is where I kindly re-direct the comments. My apologies Luis~

  • shizwill03

    Posted Aug 16, 2006 4:59 am GMT

    I think I am going to cry.

    I always wanted to go to E3....and now they are doing WHAT?!

    GOD I wish I had millions of dollars to host my OWN E3.....in my hometown Philly.....

    We got the space and the hotels to support 60,000+ people EASILY.

    This is a true heartbreak.

  • Cpt-Lemi

    Posted Aug 16, 2006 1:18 am GMT

    O this is wonderful, absolute f***ing genius... the corporations and their desired messages.. F*** you... E3 wasn't just some show anymore, it was more then that. E3 is a house hold name for every gamer on the planet! We all dream of going there, watch the reviews, read the articles. Sure, it had flashy new gadgets and thousands of hidden ad campaigns, but the fans ate it up! Why would you take it away!? You can't release a game fast enough... f*** you, what are game developers doing these days? Being paid a s*** load for one title, then sitting on their a$$es... this is unfair, and wrong. Out of respect for your customers, gamers mainly, you should still hold the expo! For god sake, the revenue you generate alone based on what we saw, what we now desire is immense! So you move it to a downsized board room! Fine, have your boardroom, but for god's sake keep the f***ing expo! It's a game of supply and demand... you supply to us, we demand what we see at shows like E3... we read it all on gamestop or where have you and desire this and that, the new console. We all add our two cents, the gaming industry has a preemptive response from a gaming nation! And you take it away? Do you like F***ing yourselves? Our opinions allow you to improve before the game even makes the market! What a load of bulls***... it's not like we'll just stop gaming... but what a sad point in gaming and electronic history this is...

  • AL13NK1LL3R

    Posted Aug 15, 2006 11:38 pm GMT

    wtf is this.. it so stupid... i always dream about goin there...
    come on,

  • GrandMasterLuis

    Posted Aug 15, 2006 7:41 pm GMT

    VFG:

    How can you claim such a thing? It's not their fault. If a publisher is going to release a title for the holiday season, shouldn't have to have it ready 7 months in advance. 6 is a little more reasonable.

    And E3 was never about the fans. Never about the business. It was purely about the GAMES. There won't be 5,000 developers/publishers/men in black suits there. It will be the media. It's to cut down on the frenzy and craziness that was E3, and expand into the strong, powerful show that will be E3 Media Festival.

    Edit: I spoke to soon when I said 'It wasn't about the fans.' Of course it was. But it's like CES (Consumer Electronics Show). People go there too, but not as much as E3. Do products still make it out? Of course. Do people see them and go nuts over them? Of course.

    They won't be cutting you off from the games, no sir. The new July schedule will allow them to show you better, closer-to-finished games, and the smaller environment will allow you to get a more GAME-FOCUSED show, not a more camel-toe focused one.

  • VFG

    Posted Aug 15, 2006 5:33 pm GMT

    Retarded. E3 was for publishers to show off what they were cooking. If they can't have games ready in time to show to the press it's their own fault. They basicly are saying screw the fans and the press and are making it more about closed door buisness deals and negotiations.

  • GrandMasterLuis

    Posted Aug 15, 2006 2:06 pm GMT

    Thanks for that Carmensk. Kinda funny you say that... this is the first newspost I ever comment on, and I have yet to ever post on the forums :-D

    Xenigma, I believe it's certainly still possible that smaller companies will be shut out, but I think if anything, there's 5000 visitors... gaming press.

    Let's say, there's 100 major publications (I'm being charitable) and 10 people (once again, overboard) from each one. That's 1,000 people. Now, I don't know if their 5,000 people includes the folks in the industry, but if you take them into account, there's maybe 10 people per booth (usually 5-10... 3 or 4 working the crowd, the others behind the scenes) and say 100 games. I've usually only heard of maybe about 100 games at E3 anyway, unless you can name to me 100 games that came out within the last 6 months (post E3 '06). Then again, not even all of those were at E3.

    If that's the case, 10 x 100 (developers at show) = 1000. 100 x 10 = 1000 (publication folk). That's only 2,000 by now! There's certainly room for 3,000, which will probably be friends of developers, or just plain lucky people.

    If anything, it won't be the NUMBER of people that matter, but more the size they do it in. But since they say 'at least one hotel', what they'll probably do is rent out an entire floor of a hotel, and make it into the convention rooms, but I'm not sure. Maybe they'll run the show in sequence (this day, 20 developers show their games in one meeting room, with a projection screen and a few demo boxes, 30 minutes downtime inbetween shows) and that sounds like a plan.

    Although, yes, you're right Xenigma, it's still possible for the little guy to be pushed out, but at least now it'll be feel a little more legitimate.

    What's worse: not making it to your friend's party or getting there and no-one talking to you?

    Edit: Another thing, the worst than can happen in the 'we don't get noticed' situation is that the publication doesn't feel like visiting the booth (small chance, as they'll have enough time and at least one has to care) or you're presnetation is in the farback rooms (if that's how they do it).

  • Xenigma

    Posted Aug 14, 2006 9:10 pm GMT

    I have to wonder if this will really help balance out the showings from different companies. Unless some sort of maximum is put in place, smaller companies could still be shut out, because I believe that 5,000 is still a fairly large amount of people, and the space will be smaller. Beyond that, I can live without ever seeing the former version of E3, because the more I look back at it, the more it seems like it would just be too much to handle. I'm still finding all the information I need from TV, magazines, and online, so the change shouldn't be too bad. Just be glad it isn't being eliminated entirely, but rather becoming more specialized. We won't know until July, but the change really shouldn't make much of a difference in the long run.

  • Carmensk

    Posted Aug 14, 2006 7:48 pm GMT

    I don't normally post on GameSpot, but I have to say GrandMasterLuis, your comment was especially smart. E3 had turned into pretty much a frenzy as anyone who has seen photos online can say, and it definetly seemed a lot of publishers that have a smaller presense in the USA, such as SNK Playmore, were muscled out by the big boys, thus hurting things later on. If a smaller E3 is what it will take for more games to come in the US, then I welcome it with open arms.

  • Shai182

    Posted Aug 14, 2006 3:48 pm GMT

    well this news have it ups and downs as for now i can only see Downs and think that in 2008 they will reinstate to old E3 convetones

  • GrandMasterLuis

    Posted Aug 14, 2006 2:54 pm GMT

    This downsize is not a bad thing at all. Working at an up-and-coming independent developer, it is certainly something that will help us greatly.

    My board and I (myself and 3 others) have been stressing over the fact that E3 is so huge. See, at E3, you have Sony, with their huge screen and huge crowds because of their huge names, Microsoft with their huge screens and huge crowds because of their huge names, and that goes the same for Nintendo!

    Other publishers don't have humongous booths, but they draw crowds by what they show: dumb red-headed chicks dressed up as Bloodrayne, stupid asian girls in bikinis for DOA. I mean, it's nonsensical.

    Now, to be honest, booth babes were cool. They always will be. But it's unfortunate that some games aren't as well known because horny retards are heading to the booths with the boobs. Presentation is one thing, exploitation of an adolescent mind is another.

    Did anyone here by Psychonauts? Please? Anyone? That game scored an 8.8 on here. ALMOST an Editor's Choice possibility! And how many of you bought Dead or Alive: Xtreme Beach Volleyball? I'm sure there's at least a few folks who can admit to this one. That scored a 6.0. Almost in the mediocre category.

    Now, that's not to say that it's a horrible game, nor to say Psychonauts is an incredible game. But if you guys weren't retards, and looked for good games instead of the boobs, you'd actually have better things sitting on your shelves, not things you might wanna hide when anyone respectable comes over.

    Downsizing E3 will allow smaller developers to showcase their games. They won't get less coverage because Gamespot, IGN, or whoever, will be able to play all the games. Before, they only got hands-on impressions if the developer gave them a pre-copy, or if they had enough time to make it to the front of the line. But then again, with 100 horny geeks, how were they gonna make it to the low-hype title, if the big-name one takes them a lifetime and a half to play?

    Also, how many of you guys really get the 'hype' from other people? A good amount of you, actually. But where did those people get the hype? It wasn't a chain that started with some idiot who went to E3. It's because one person went to Gamespot, or IGN, or whatever, and said 'This looks great! Gamespot says it's fun! Check it out, Todd!' Todd goes 'WOAH!' and shows Jake. Jake shows Jimmy. Jimmy shows his brother. Brother shows his girlfriend. Girlfriend shows her chick friends who are gamers. But where did it all start? Someone who read it on the internet.

    E3 started in the mid-90s, when game shows weren't huge. When the Internet wasn't as widespread, and when we didn't have gaming sites like Gamespot. What would occur then, is mediua people, as well as regular folk, would have to come to the show, and say how much they liked it, on top of the magazines that said that they liked it. But now, there's the internet, and there's not as much need for people's hype, because the internet is so much easier to access.

    If I say 'Game A is so cool! I saw it in EGM!' Person 2 is gonna say 'Cool, can I see the article?' If they live within my area, I can show it to them. Or else, they'd have to go the store, find a copy, or ask someone they know who has it... no-one's going to trouble through all that.

    But I can say 'Game A is cool because Gamespot played a preview and they enjoyed it!'. Person 2 says 'Can I have a link?' You link them, they see it, they can start the hype wagon all over again (if they like it or not).

    I've talked a lot, but I hope this clears things up. I've never actually attended E3 yet. Actually, E3 2007 was going to be my first visit, and it was going to be as one of the developers. I will miss the atmosphere, but at the same time, I'm OK with bidding it farewell.

  • Lionheart47

    Posted Aug 10, 2006 12:16 pm GMT

    I totally agree with Dark...gotta save the Booth hunnies. Without our support they won't have anywhere to go.

  • siversonicboom

    Posted Aug 10, 2006 10:42 am GMT

    listen to Darksparten

  • DarkSpartan104

    Posted Aug 9, 2006 7:50 am GMT

    What about the poor booth babes? I'd be more than willing to adopt one. SAVE THE BOOTH BABES!

  • rvelado

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 7:50 pm GMT

    I bet the majority of people who are complaining about the move are gamers who weasel there way into the show. Maybe they made an ameture website, or a phony retail store. If anything the change will benefit more gamers. The downsizing will allow credible journalists into the show to report and feed us the info, without having to wait for "goofyvidegamesnews" websites from getting in the way. I'm sure gamespot, ign, fox news etc. will get more face time with games and we will benefit from this. Come on how many us really go to all those websites you see at E3 to get there show news. Just imagine Gamespots live coverage without all the chaos and noise going on in the backround. I see a great opportunity for industry members to work and show off great games that we will all benefit from during Christmas time.

  • yoshifarmer

    Posted Aug 7, 2006 11:49 am GMT

    OMG!How could they do this. And with a new crappy name?In a hotel also?This is just bad!!!! The "old" E3 had exitement,fun, and made gamers all around just explode with excitement when new games or other things were shown to them for the first time. All the sounds there just brought up a mood and it just made you feel special for being a gamer. Now it's in a hotel. And in conference rooms in "at least one" hotel. WTF?A possibility to have E3 Media Festival in conference rooms in only one hotel. Sure they're trying to save money but you gotta spend money to earn it. If you don't spend as much then you're not gonna make as much. And with other things mixed in? What are they trying to do? I hope that every single person that goes there will only go where games are and the other booths with Ipods or like other crap will be totally ignored so they'll never come back. The date doesn't really matter but everything else? ESA....what have you done?

  • Ellisand

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 11:02 am GMT

    Dudes! Im like thinking. That since the aspect of "Gaming" has become BIG, and VERY big, this downsizing of E3 really wont affect us. Like, know why!? Because we just download demo's now'a'days anyway!!!! Flippin XBox Live, and PS3 Online!?!? Dude's! We will get our demo's and game video's, we already are! The developer's are able to reach out now via the interweb! Developer's are gonna save moolah now spending less on their big ol' screens and asian hottie's to show off their games; And dump it into the important stuff, like feeding their developer's while they slave away at the comp's making what we crave for. Why wouldn't halo 3 demo on xbox live? Metal Gear Solid has alway's demo'd. Why not over the internet? or via EGM? or whatever else? Spend that money's on a console and internet instead of plane ticket's and hotel room's dudes.

    E3 Wont be some big expo that 60,000 people have to fly around the world for. It will be "Content" and the community of gamer's that are posting on this site, and everyone else. 60,000? try Million's. No hotel room's, but server's. And Broadband, and your in home screen's!! Asian hotties you might have to acquire by some other mean's =P

    Game On!

  • Shingo

    Posted Aug 5, 2006 6:46 pm GMT

    *sigh*...........................................................................................*sigh* ................................................*sigh* ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... AAAAAAAAAARGH!!!!! I WANTED TO GO TO E3 WHEN I GET OLDER THIS MOVE REALLY ISN'T NECESSARY BOO ESA & SONY & THQ AND MS! Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo







  • JediMutant

    Posted Aug 5, 2006 2:31 pm GMT

    Damn... Going to E3 was on my list of stuff to do before I die...

    And now my sister can't get that vanity plate CUATE3!

  • Deadly_Guy

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 9:43 am GMT

    Since I never ended up going to E3, this doesn't affect me too much. Yes, I would have liked to go while it was the huge expo that it won't be. However, if this gives the companies more money to put into their games, I'm more than happy to make the exchange.

  • mr_goodbyte

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 8:57 am GMT

    well...im not really sure how this will affect E3...i just hope its for the better, and the developers get to show off better games than ever before

  • wowblast12

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 1:52 am GMT

    This sucks all I can say is the following.
    2007 games better be as good as then can possibly get.
    There better be something for the public I mean id rather not watch a movie of a upcoming game I'd rather try a demo. Point im making E3 allowed the public to test out the games and get feedback on what needs to be improved upon and what could be added to give the gamer as much entertainment as they could get out of there games. You can't get a really good idea of how a game will feel and play unless you played it first hand. Thats what E3 allowed you to do now thats taken away so I say unless they the companies find away get lots a hype then seels may be a little lower come 2008.

  • eddy_jr

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 4:24 pm GMT

    E3 Media Festival?!?!? That's a gay name dude!!! that's a load of crap... E3 is suppose to be a joy for gamers, not an "exclusive" meeting between mostly developers. This sucks...

  • MadGamer132

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 1:31 pm GMT

    "media festival"?, hmmm this topic is tooooo serious now.

  • Flimsyfishy

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 1:16 pm GMT

    ok... i know this might stretch it, but who knows, perhaps the esa has something up their sleeves... i would hope that they come out with a new videogame festival like e3... but i doubt that will happen. who knows, this will make us look over to japan for the trade show conference they have over there...

  • galstyan

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 9:22 am GMT

    OMG..C'mon!

  • animemog

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 2:31 am GMT

    Oh noes, I'll never get to experience the craziness of E3 now. But, it's no big loss. E3 was madness and viewing the streams and recordings of the previous show, I'm glad it's getting downsized.

    Come on, 60,000 people? They're wise to save E3 at this time instead of continue to spend billions of dollars in an auditorium that contains even more people the next year around.

  • BORGIAS

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 11:55 pm GMT

    WE HAVE THE FIRST AND THE LAST WORD ABOUT EVERYTHING BECAUSE OUR TASTES, OUR NEEDS AND OUR WALLETS HAVE SHAPED THE INDUSTRY IN ITS CURRENT FORM. THE ELIMINATION OF E3 IS A SLAP IN OUR FACES BECAUSE IT DESTROYS THE PRESTIGE THAT WE HAVE ACHIEVED IN THE PAST YEARS, THE PRESTIGE THAT FORCES THE MEDIA TO ADMIT AT LAST THAT VIDEOGAMES IS ONE OF THE LEADING FORMS OF ENTERTAINMENT AND NOT JUST A HOBBIE FOR KIDS AND IDLE PERSONS. NOW WHAT; WE HAVE SHOWING TO THE WORLD THAT WE DONT HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO BATTLE AND OVERCOME THE OTHER FORMS OF ENTERTAINMENT, THAT WE ARE AND WE'RE ALWAYS GONNA BE IN THE MINOR LEAGUE. CAN WE ACCEPT THIS INSULT;

  • Freeon

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 8:40 pm GMT

    Read the journal article it gives you a better picture of why they are downsizing.

  • HaloGamer1222

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 6:00 pm GMT

    "Lowenstein said the drastic reduction was in response to exhibitor dissatisfaction with the spectacle E3 had become. "Some companies were frustrated because E3 was such a huge, sweeping event it became increasingly difficult to get their messages out," he told the WSJ."

    Well maybe if "those" companies could make better and more exciting games then maybe that wouldn't be a problem.. Maybe they just need some loudspeakers or something. Honestly I didn't see anything wrong with E3... I am actually suprised to hear that Microsoft was pushing for these changes since... HECK!, they had a whole media screening for about an hour that aired on G4 and even on here... That was just for one of the 3 main companies...

    I agree with you guys protesting because I was saving up money to go to E3 before I leave for college... Guess not! It's a disappointment to say the least, but seriously there is really nothing we can do about it... If you guys need me to sign a protest then I personally will sign each and everyone...

    This is once again another sign that the media and government and the rich control us and basicly everything around us and everything that even remotely entertains us... Like with Hilary Clinton and her fight against video games... Tsk, tsk, tsk

    Peace out and Thank you

  • darthpeter5

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 5:38 pm GMT

    I hoped to go to E3 for the first time next year, but now I can't , because some retard in a suit thinks its better publicity to throw a bunch of know-nothing execs in a room and invite the media than actualy make an effort to atract consumers.
    I guess another nice thing in the world is gone.

  • LanceK17

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 5:35 pm GMT

    That sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • upuratut

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 5:20 pm GMT

    this story just keeps getting worse and worse..

    we'll see how the big name companies react with lower game sales due to the lower hype in new releases.. it's all gonna be a retarded chain reaction...

    i know after hearing so much hype about oblivion from e3 last year, i was really excited to get the game and went out and bought the special edition dvd as soon as it came out..

    this next year? i guess i'm going to find my hype somewhere else..

    lame...

  • mexisnake

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 4:42 pm GMT

    I guess I'll have to infiltrate that hotel Solid Snake-style. E3 2007, here I come!

  • LinkLovesWii

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 3:13 pm GMT

    Great now ill never go to E3 unless i become president of nintendo of america hahahahahahah world domination

  • Red_Cloaker

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 3:02 pm GMT

    I guess its all due to sony

  • Faelas

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 1:44 pm GMT

    ALL the small companies won't be there... Big guys earn, small ones loose...

  • LINK2K9

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 1:16 pm GMT

    Cheapass developers. :/

  • CaptainCrazy

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 11:36 am GMT

    The new E3 will no doubt be better for media coverage but they really need to seriously think about holding a different event maybe a few days later that is open to the public. But then again, since these big corps dont' seem to want to spend the money on a nice looking booth and festive atmosphere, it would probably be pretty bland. I think E3 is we know it will never be the same again.

  • ramyar_1987

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 11:30 am GMT

    I cant go to E3 so i dont care what they will do to E3.

  • buckw1lde

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 10:43 am GMT

    All the people who are whining about E3 being downsized need to take a closer look at the nonsense coming out of their mouths. E3 is about gaming companies showcasing their upcoming products to the media who in turn pass that information onto the general public and create hype for future game releases. If they are making E3 smaller, first, the game companies win because they can dump more cash into actually making games rather than having the biggest booths. The media wins because they can actually test out the products and give them decent previews, instead of trying to catch a glimpse while 100 people's heads are bobbing in and out of the way. Finally, the consumer wins because the result of quality media coverage on quality products is MORE quality games getting to a MORE informed public. Get it through your heads - E3 is not a circus or an amusement park. It's a TRADE SHOW. Yes its a show for entertainment products but don't forget that it's a business like any other.

  • KristoffBrujah

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 10:37 am GMT

    Yeah, it will be much easier to "get your message out" when less people are involved, and it becomes "less of a spectacle." /sarc

    What a dumb*&$#
    Take a marketing class, you geek. A spectacle helps to SELL your stuff. Nobody cares about your "message," they just want to see and buy the game.

  • Xx_InuYasha_xX

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 10:02 am GMT

    I think it's a good thing and a bad thing. On the plus side, it will (hopefully) mean more in-depth coverage. On the minus side, it won't be as lively and full of excitement.

    Hmm... Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

  • coastalliving

    Posted Aug 2, 2006 9:06 am GMT

    Maybe they're planning something bigger in a different country or coast?
    Or smaller events all around the world? Multiple times a year?
    Let's hope this is a positive look on video gaming.

advertisement

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!