Spot On: Industry reaction to the new E3

  • By Staff, GameSpot
  • Posted Aug 1, 2006 11:26 pm GMT

Console makers, publishers, developers weigh in on word of a downsized summer showcase for gaming.

The Electronic Entertainment Expo is undergoing a metamorphosis, but it remains to be seen whether the event that emerges in July 2007 will be a beautiful butterfly or a Kafka-esque nightmare. To get a cross section of opinions on how the shake-up will impact the industry, GameSpot News went to a wide array of representatives from companies large and small, from developers to publishers to analysts to advocates. Here's a sampling of their reactions to the news.

Microsoft:
We are very supportive of the ESA's decision in providing a new vision for E3. Over the past 12 years, the industry has grown and matured, and it's great to see the show evolving to meet the needs of the industry. The show continues to provide enormous benefits from a key media, retailer, developer, and partner standpoint.

Nintendo:
Nintendo is forwarding all E3-related questions to the ESA.

Sony:
For the past 12 years, [SCEA] has participated in [E3] and has used it as an opportunity to communicate to the industry and consumers our vision for gaming and entertainment...As an ESA member, we support the board's decision to pursue other types of events that can better address the needs of our industry and further its growth.

Larry Probst, EA CEO and chairman: (in an investor conference call today)
We fully support the decision that was made by the ESA board. We think it makes good business sense. We see that as the appropriate evolution of the E3 event. And in terms of cost savings, it will save us multiple millions next year.

Activision:
We support the ESA's decision to evolve E3 into a more intimate event.

Capcom:
Capcom is fully supportive of the ESA and its board, which we have representation on. Currently, we are fully committed to all ESA activities, including E3.

Sega:
Sega has been, and will continue to be, a supporter of E3, and the value that it brings to the video game industry. As E3 has grown, so too has the fragmentation of the audience in recent years, making it difficult to derive the value that was originally intended. As the industry continues to mature, so, too, will our industry events in order to compensate for this growth. We are excited to be a participant in the next iteration of the show in 2007.

Ken Levine, cofounder, Irrational Games:
Like most things, it's probably good for the big boys and probably bad for the little guys. If you've got a bunch of games to show, you can host a giant event, fly in journalists, give them good food, have the Spice Girls reunite, etc., and spread all those costs across all those big games. If you're a small publisher with just a couple of titles, well, then you're kind of hosed.

I'm just surprised this didn't happen sooner. Some of the biggest games at E3 had very low-key presentations. We were fortunate enough this year to have a great response to BioShock, and we were just showing it off in a tiny little room on a medium-sized television. I'm sure that didn't make some of the big guys spending zillions of dollars on the same show floor very happy. I'm sure there are big players wondering, "Why bother? We'll just do our own thing where there's no competition."

I think the biggest loser is the "universal awareness of the games biz" in the sense that there's no longer a single event for the mainstream press to wrap their head around. It was sort of like an annual holiday where the "Live at Five" anchor-bots talked about the game industry for five minutes. I always thought that was good for a laugh.

Michael Collins, executive vice president of LA Inc, the Los Angeles Convention and Visitors Bureau:
The move-in time for these exhibitors has been extraordinarily long, so for the month of May, a very large part of that high-demand sales season has been blocked. Now we can put that high-demand season back in the marketplace. I think no question about it, it is going to be a loss, especially for '07 and maybe for '08, but I doubt much beyond that. It's not good news. It's not the kind of thing we would like to have happen. But the extent of which it is a loss is not clear.

Jamil Moledina, executive director of the Game Developers Conference:
This is definitely the smart move for E3 in delivering targeted value to publishers. Connecting with the right people in an intimate, static-free environment is a critical element of any game industry event and is, in fact, a key principle of the Game Developers Conference. The ESA will be releasing more details over the next couple of months, and my expectation is that by trimming away the more extravagant elements, you're going to see a highly distilled publisher-retailer event.

Jason Della Rocca, executive director of the International Game Developers Association:
At this stage, we can only speculate at what the restructured event will really look like. It is important to note that publishing companies constitute the membership and board of directors of the ESA. So, they are ultimately deciding for each other. Change is usually a good thing...

Michael Pachter, analyst with Wedbush Morgan Securities:
I think that the right way to look at E3 is to step back and ask yourself why we have the show in the first place. From the publishers' and the developers' and the console manufacturers' perspective, the reason they have the show is to generate positive press about their products. I'm not sure that there are 60,000 people who matter in generating positive press. I think there are 5,000 people who matter, and then 50 million who matter because they actually buy the products. I'm not sure that next incremental 55,000 who show up really influence opinion making.

I think you can downsize the event and accomplish the same goal. If the reason for the show is to promote your products to industry decision makers, whether they be retailers or the media or investors, then you should be able to do that by limiting attendance to the media and your investors and your retailers...Professionally, I get just as much out of meeting the companies individually and doing a little half-hour demo with everyone I care about.

I think that's patently obvious that we're going to lose [the spectacle of E3]. But if you watch the 11 o'clock news during E3, they don't show anything. The news is "The video game industry has its annual trade event," and they show these guys walking around dressed as Spock or whatever. I guess that makes the public is aware that there's an event, but it doesn't make anybody go buy a game. And certainly you've never, ever seen mainstream coverage on ABC News that says the game of the year was BioShock.

Evan Wilson, analyst with Pacific Crest Securities:
It's difficult to say exactly who wins and who loses, because we don't know what the final incarnation of E3 will be. However, there is a significant expense associated with the publishers' show floor presence at E3, and they likely feel that the investment was no longer paying dividends. This change was likely driven by them, and so they must be considered a winner even if the changes end up not being beneficial.

Game fans clearly lose if this results in less access for game journalists. E3 was a fantastic event for game-to-game comparisons and progress updates. It drummed up a lot of buzz at a time that usually sees a lull in the release schedule. E3 was also a marquee event for the financial community, although it is unclear if that will change.

Tom Ohle, director at Evolve PR, which represents developers including Stardock (Galactic Civilizations II: Dread Lords) and CD Projekt (The Witcher):

For the last few years, it's become increasingly difficult to get business done at the show, as the number of "exhibits only" badges have been on the rise. It's been a lot of, "Hey, do you guys have some posters?" instead of useful business.

A few industry factions will be hit relatively hard by the loss of E3, including smaller developers and publishers, as well as lower-tier media outlets. The smaller developers and publishers--including some of Evolve's clients--see E3 as the most important media event of the year; it's the only time they can show their products to a ton of editors over the course of a few days.

The lower-tier media outlets have counted on E3 as one of the only chances they have to get face time with publishers. It's unfortunate, but a lot of PR reps will simply ignore those lower-tier outlets completely without having met them face-to-face; and by doing so, they'll likely increase the dependence on top-tier media and the competition for highly visible coverage.

Overall, though, the loss of E3 shouldn't really impact major publishers too much; they have the money to schedule frequent media tours or large-scale editors' days.

I'm all for the emphasis on private meetings, but that could have been done without scaling back the show so much. I do think we need some sort of large-scale media event. E3 was a good place to network and reach a lot of media, from international television networks down to fan site operators.

John Welch, president and CEO of PlayFirst:
I hate the crowds; they get in the way of checking out the specific things we need to see in between meetings. Business always gets done behind closed doors at E3, not on the show floor. With a more intimate conference, we might be able to actually hold a conversation on the show floor.

Joseph Olin, president of the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences:
Nothing I have seen or heard would lead me to think that the leading ESA member companies, who are the ones who initiated this evolution, would abandon an event that will still command an incredible amount of coverage from retail partners and the media. ESA companies still want a successful E3, it's just that the benchmarks for defining success are being recalibrated to reflect how business is done today and for the next few years.

Again, thinking about "winners and losers," the smaller, specialty companies who introduce their products at E3 in Kentia Hall or surrounding properties will find it more difficult to reach "buyers" or to create buzz about their products or services. And from the opposite side, I imagine that the other trade shows--Leipzig, Tokyo, GameCity--on an international level, and certainly shows like GDC and even the Academy's D.I.C.E. Summit have the opportunity to pick up support and interest from other members of the interactive-entertainment community and media.

I guess the best thing we can all do is to continue to create forums that can showcase the incredible products and talented people who create games so that more people will consider video games and interactive entertainment as their first choice for fun.

A number of other publishers, developers, and industry figures contacted by GameSpot indicated they simply weren't going to talk about the changes.

233 Comments

  • judesalmon

    Posted Aug 8, 2006 9:28 am GMT

    I think a lot of people are missing the fact that E3 was never meant for 'gamers' - it's an event for companies to show their games to journalists. The current format isn't ideal for this, so a smaller event makes sense.

  • basan

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 9:56 pm GMT

    /sign @ Ken Levine

  • comthitnuong

    Posted Aug 6, 2006 10:23 am GMT

    it seems that most people are in favor of it

  • twtech

    Posted Aug 5, 2006 11:57 am GMT

    I think that in time, E3 or something like it will be back. Nobody was forcing companies to put together grandiose displays at the old E3. They did it because they wanted to attract as much attention as possible to their games. The door will now be open for another show to take its place, or for the "new E3" to morph back into the old one.

  • DarkGord

    Posted Aug 5, 2006 1:54 am GMT

    Ken Levine nailed it!

  • Kbs64

    Posted Aug 5, 2006 12:34 am GMT

    It'll be interesting. This will probably let other new or exciting titles not to be over looked by the more popular and well known titles.

    You guys know "Beyond Good and Evil", right? Well that game was great but it got over looked by Halo and other popular titles.
    So this should be interesting!!

  • Destroyeron13

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 10:56 pm GMT

    ESA sucks.

  • Jumoka1

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 5:35 pm GMT

    Its all EA's fault. They spend milliions of dollars on surround sound to show off the same old maddens, NBA Lives, Harry Potter, and other crap we see from them every year. So when a smaller company gets more press then they do, (because the smaller developer's games are better), EA wants to pull out.

  • Petrol123

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 3:26 pm GMT

    Having an intimate knowledge of the gaming industry , I see this as a good move for the ESA. The spectacle that is E3 is great from the fanboy/girl standpoint but the amount of money that goes into these events is enormous. From a financial standpoint, it makes more sense for these uber companies to reduce the size of the venue and make it more personal and intimate. I foresee more 'Hollywood' style openings for games to create awareness and smaller venues like they have off-site during the E3 event (these BTW are where are the celebs/high profile media/lucky arse fanboys/girls get to have an intimate meeting with the key heads and where they give out the best swag). The people that are most hurt by this are the smaller developers who will not benefit from having event goers pass by their booths on their way to see other companies, leaving them to less exposure. This may in turn spark a creative way to market their product but only time will tell. Lastly, the people hurt the most by this turn of events... The Booth Babes... Who will be sending them to college now? Is this goodbye forever Lisa? ^_-

  • timmccracken

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 2:25 pm GMT

    As a 'member of the industry' I have been lucky enough to see 3 E3s. Cali twice and Atlanta. This last year I heard a bit of griping about how insane it is, how most presenters don't know press from public, and it is a nightmare for PR. Surprisingly a lot of people who normally go pleaded to be excluded because it's a taxing experience.

    Well screw that. I will miss E3 and think this decision sucks. Everything you heard about it being a gamer's wonderland is true. It was.

    All I can hope is Gamespot will take up the torch and beef up their own convention. Last year it was fun, but tiny in comparison to E3. Now that gamers have no where else to go, something has to happen. Hopefully the spirit will be reborn.

    And EA will be forced to blow millions on an amazing display.

  • Ubersj

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 2:16 pm GMT

    First off everyone needs to calm down.
    This isnt about greed. Small developers will get even more spotlight with the new format now that they wont get lost amoug the million dollar lightshows that the big mult-developer companies put up. 2ndly nobody that posts here will ever go to e3 anyway dont kid yourself its not like its a public show.
    All the Big news and sweet tidbits come from the back-room demonstrations to the media anyway. which is what the new event is all about. strip away the loud overlaping music ,the $million+ signs and setups , and you will have everyone on even playing feild. The small guys and big guys will all get their shot at showing off what they have. Not to mention the Big 3 press conferances reveal most of the goodness the day before the show anyway.
    IGN(oh no) posted an interview with a designer at SIlicon Knights, who said that e3 is a hinderance to teh development cycle of every game, they must take the time out of the process and take a chunk of a game and polish it to the best of their ability. For something that isnt going to ship for 5-18 months it puts a solid roadblock, slowling or ruining a games development.

    The new format keeps all the good stuff you get from E3, the interviews the demonstrations, the juicy tidbits and trailers, Except now its in July which is closer to the end of the development ( Thus cooler/more compleate trailers and demos) And the media (websites and magazines TV) can get a look at more games because they can manage their time better.
    E3 isnt dead its simply cleaner and going to run alot better and I promise you all that next year you wont notice a difference in the amount of coverage of games.


  • roareh

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 12:21 pm GMT

    forward THIS to the ESA

    "you wangs"

  • Deathwing13

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 11:52 am GMT

    "It's a good business decision", yes and unfortunately that's not what gaming should be about. The game industry is successful because of the FANS, not the companies. WE are the one's who buy into their products and keep them running. Money of all things, is why they want to downsize E3. Pretty much the general consensus of the companies were "Hey, we get to save a few million dollars by not investing as much in E3; Awesome!"

    Yea, but what does a few million dollars mean to them? The gaming industry is one of the largest and rapidly growing industries in the world. Billions of dollars go into the industry every single year (and that's on the rise). So why is it that in the end, the FANS, of all people, get shafted.

    Stop worrying about your pocket-change, Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and pay a bit more attention to your fans. Don't just fall in when the ESA thinks they can make a better and more efficient way of changing E3 geared more towards business. Remember, we're the fans, you owe us that much.

  • V_E_I_L

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 10:54 am GMT

    keep your fingers crossed for upcoming E3

  • blakeehill

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 10:29 am GMT

    Let me tell you, as somebody in the industry that spends the month and a half before E3 prepping videos, arguing with producers over how late we can wait to record new footage from the latest build, and watching the booth design budgets go into the more-than-i-make-in-several-years range, I have no problem with this. Personally, sure, I'll miss the show, the tshirts, and maybe even the booth babes. Maybe. But from a worker bee standpoint, this could save a lot of time and effort, which can be put into things the ENTIRE public can appreciate, like better tv trailers, rather than just the several thousand that manage to con their way into Media passes. I have no fear for the little guys either... a truly good game will get noticed, e3 or not. This just makes e3 less of a p*ssing contest.

  • Tolkien13

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 10:05 am GMT

    Nintendo is probably asking in the emails like "What the hell and we have to say in public we support you? why? ZOMG.

  • DarknessOfFate1

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 9:58 am GMT

    wow a truck load of asskissing.

  • ffgothic

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 6:18 am GMT

    [This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]

  • ert47

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 3:23 am GMT

    4X6X9X: "TRADERS!!!! YOU ALL HAVE STAB USE ALL IN THE BACK!!"

    Translation... "traitors, you all have stabbed us in the back"


    Nintendo's comment was confusing...

  • 23d4gfh7

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 3:02 am GMT

    Something tells me this has more to do with sony wanting to take over the show and less to do with them caring about rebirth.

    I just hope to god it doesn't turn into a big microsoft & sony hype fest.

  • RazMasters

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 2:43 am GMT

    Ken Levine's comment was great. After I read the part about the Spice Girls, I lol'd. Seriously, he and SEGA were among the few who felt inclined to give a comment that wasn't totally by-the-book. SEGA's was still an official company statement, but at least it wasn't "we're copying this out of "Generic Replies," page 37, paragraph 4, modified to fit the situation." It was more of a thoughtful paraphrase.

  • 4X6X9

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 1:12 am GMT

    TRADERS!!!! YOU ALL HAVE STAB USE ALL IN THE BACK!!

  • Slash_out

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 12:59 am GMT

    Tch... E3 just won't be E3 anymore, who cares about something private? We are just a step from "Our last game will be the center of our next reunion at the E3, you are welcome in exchange of good reviews from you". They don't need an E3 for that, they can already do that all year long. E3 was E3 because it was BIG, they were a LOT of people, and a LOT of game, it was like euphorique, what's so great about a closed reunion of some old people, talking to themselves.. ?

  • magicalclick

    Posted Aug 4, 2006 12:56 am GMT

    This is probably because major compnies have to attend many other conferences, like Summit, GDC, X05, TGS, and so on. And recently, they all have certain level of major announcements and demo. Not to mention each major publishers host their own event. Basically major companies have to cut down cost on E3 in order to do better in other shows.

    IMO, E3 represents the whole US gamming industry. Down size it means down size the industry as well. And E3 is a place where you can compete. If each company shows their stuff on different show, it is really hard for us to determine which game is better. Well, I guess this is what they intend to do.

  • darknferno12

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 11:29 pm GMT

    as long as we get MORE news on the games i could care less. Everyone doesn't seem to mind or at least the important ones (developers)

  • SuperVegeta518

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 10:53 pm GMT

    I always enjoyed watching E3 on G4. Now all I will do is go to gametrailers to see the newest videos since it doesn't have the same buzz around it any more.

  • PringerOtaku

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 10:08 pm GMT

    As long as we still get the shockers and press conferences in one form or another, goobye E3, you were obsolete. Rebirth... we'll see.

  • GCN49

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 9:02 pm GMT

    all I have to say at the moment is that I'm saddened to think that I will never be able to go to E3... even when I get into the game journalist business...

  • Rated_R_Gamer

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 8:46 pm GMT

    I dont think Nintendo likes this

  • PatLTornado

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 2:53 pm GMT

    Yeah, we all saw this coming a decision by the industry to sell off thier biggest gaming show for corporate money. To be honest E3 has basically declined since SEGA's departure in 2001, it's all about money not about gamers at all. Which is why I always look forward to TGS instead.

    Here's to hoping that SEGA will return to the console market sooon.

  • lordpickle

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 2:40 pm GMT

    So here we go, the large companies that care nothing about games get to consolidate their power over the industry meanwhile the small companies get **** over again. People will say, "Get over it. That’s capitalism." One: I prefer quality over quantity and a sure as hell trust a small dev more in that department than I do the EA's of the gaming industry. Two: how do you expect the little guys to compete if they can't show their product. EA has a budget for marketing that is probably in the millions so the little guys need events like E3 to create buzz about their products.


  • XlpranksterlX

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 2:28 pm GMT

    Everyone acts like its a bad thing...

  • sacredBed

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 1:15 pm GMT

    lol at nintendo's response


    but seriously. this is like taking out trailers and commercials for the movie industry and making screens smaller with no surround sound in theatres cuz "smaller screens are less expensive and mono sound is more intimate".

  • HellecticMojo

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 12:04 pm GMT

    I have no idea how to react to this

  • t_walk1

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 12:01 pm GMT

    THE FUTURE PREDICTED
    The Future Predicted:


    2010- In the news today, E3 closed it's doors for the last time. The Once loved gaming spectacle has, for the past several years plummited in popularity and relative ability to speak for an industry that has grown beyond the scope of the now defunct event. Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony officially announced they would be pulling out of E3, deciding to concentrate more on thier own company specific conventions. Several pale skinned gamers, dressed in various character from Mario, and Snake, to Halo's Master Chief and badly made Stormtrooper costume said thier final goodbye to the former superbowl of gameing this afternoon. We will miss you E3, and we hate you ESA. In other news....

  • Unholyone123

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 11:48 am GMT

    The industry is growing and maturing, get over it! Whats with all of this "little guy" bleeding heart crap? That's part of being in a competitive industry, if you can't compete, you lose! You're certainly entitled to your opinion and speak it freely on these boards, but keep in mind that these BIG companies were all "little guys" at some point or another. I personally will not miss E3 as it was...the ESA made the right decision.

  • priestinacloset

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 11:31 am GMT

    lol its all lawyer manufactured garbage up until the irrational games guy then it starts getting a little more intelligent and not sounding like a prefab legal statement welcome to big gaming please take a seat next to big oil and big buisness...

  • insertlinehere6

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 10:51 am GMT

    Well...that sucks! I feel so bad for small developers since that's like a blow to the man marbles. Goes to show how even videogames don't escape big corporate take-overs.

  • chrisp1

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 10:17 am GMT

    oh no! a business where you have to spend money to make money??? A travesty it is!

    Translation: we don't want to spend money but we want the same media converage and hype so lets filter out all the loyal fans that are ultimately responsible for our success. We'll just say we're making it more 'intimate.'

    If it were up to me I would tell them to suck it up and play fair but its not up to me and ESA will do whatever it wants.

  • galstyan

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 9:25 am GMT

    Well, I guess we will see what will happen later.

  • Jab_Jackal

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 7:56 am GMT

    "besides how else are Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft going to build massive hype for their new consoles???"

    Well from now on....

    With Spreadsheets.. Duh !

  • cyber360

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 7:54 am GMT

    I hope the reason nintendo isn't commenting is because they are mad, and are trying to ask why they are changing this and threating ESA that they will pull out of the Hotel e3, and bring back Spaceworld! I want Spaceworld again.

  • mark_unix

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 7:37 am GMT

    e3 dint use to be fun for users, it was only an elite who could go.
    these days everyone can come which made e3 a pimp with whores...

  • counteralex

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 7:25 am GMT

    Guys listen! Not any of the ESA's members give a crap about what we are saying right now! So if you want E3 back, its as hard as having a war between hardcore gamers and ESA members! SO think about it, complaing about all this isn't going to change anything so just face the facts, E3 IS GONE! FOREVER!

  • sabbath622

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 7:20 am GMT

    i have to strongly disagree with mark_umix comment: (well E3 used to be a business dealing event and not really a gaming expo.
    it should be a dealing event instead of a commercial whore fest... ) i disagree its very fun to check out E3 every year, even if its only watching the press conferences on gamespot, and besides how else are Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft going to build massive hype for their new consoles???

  • ivar27

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 6:56 am GMT

    Well, at least there is still Tokio... right?

  • cybermario

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 6:54 am GMT

    Im thinking the only reason these big companies are agreeing with the moves made by managers of E3 is so they won't be booted from the downsized version.

  • mark_unix

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 5:30 am GMT

    well E3 used to be a business dealing event and not really a gaming expo.
    it should be a dealing event instead of a commercial whore fest...

  • tr00pa_26

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 3:36 am GMT

    who are all those people?

  • zminos

    Posted Aug 3, 2006 3:13 am GMT

    I feel for the reporters in a sense.

    they are the ones that have to do the work that I read here in NZ.

    every E3 has been a mixture of reading and online.

    The games I buy and the reviews I read rely on informed decisions I get from E3 via online and print.

    So now some bright sparks think "that's not cool as it costs too much"

    I as a consumer look to gamespot as such for the news on gaming ( ie suppreme commander and hey thanks for titan quest as I bought it ) and now well...

    What I can say and it makes me off my face STS with joy is that Armageddon is finally comming to Chritchurch NZ and I will be there.

    screw those jaffas lol

advertisement

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Tags

activision   capcom   e3   e3 2007   ea   microsoft   nintendo   sega   sony   spot on

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!