New Feature Posted: E3 2004 Report: Part 3 - Observations & Trends

[Dale Weir]

While other sites may be content to cover the facts and figures of E3 in endless detail, GameCritics.com would like to take this opportunity to reflect on the experience from a larger perspective. Here are the viewpoints of Brad Gallaway, Scott Jones and Kyle Orland reading between the lines of the convention, the games, and the industry.

You can read the rest here: http://www.gamecritics.com/feature/r...ons/page01.php

[Nicato]

*Sigh* I don't know about you, but I find it tiring when people privileged enough to go to E3, complain about it. Justified or unjustified, I'm already jealous that I can't go and you can. Must you break my spirit by filling space that could be otherwise spent on shining some light on the finer points of the show, on complaining about it's shortcomings, Brad? .

Admitedly, some clever solutions are brought up. Loud music and even louder people do seem annoying...but I just can't shake the fact that Brad is--by game years--old. He should be getting a discount at Gamestop by now. . But seriously folks, it comes across as cynicism.

Scott Jones' critique was too sober. Beside the inside joke-y references, it was nothing special, IMNSHO.

The clever metaphor at the end was a nice save, but it couldn't save Kyle's article from being dull, pun intended. . Hardly anything insightful was detailed. Here is hoping that the upcoming lesser-knowns feature suggested is more adventerous.

[EnduroGamer]

I just want to announce the solution to the problem that Brad mentioned (too many fanboys, not enough industry people, long lines, etc., etc., ) and while there could be mandatory checking of paystubs to get into E3, I don't expect many to like the intrusion of privacy (people tend to keep their earnings close to the vest), but there is a much better solution.

Move E3 to Hawaii. Or North Dakota. I prefer Hawaii.

Move it to someplace that takes a good amount of money to get to, that doesn't have an enormous population of raging fanboys, and then give companies a discount on the booth fees to make up for the added travel expenses. After all, the Fargo Convention Center land can't possibly be as expensive as the LA Convention Center?

The problem that I see is endemic to the location. Get E3 the hell out of Los Angeles!!! Move it to Topeka or freaking Little Rock, Arkansas, or to Fairbanks, Alaska, but get it the hell out of LA.

[chaostrophy]

The link isn't working for me, I get:


Not Found
The requested URL /feature/...ions/page01.php was not found on this server.

Apache/1.3.29 Server at www.gamecritics.com Port 80


And I don't see a link to the article on the main page.

[GC_Thom]

I think any reasonably sober evaluation of E3 has to come to the conclusion that in terms of journalism, it's a pretty worthless event, useful mainly in terms of networking and for causing EB employees to hyperventilate.

It's hard to avoid being cynical when the event itself invites such criticism so throughly.

FURTHER EDITED TO ADD: Also, for anybody complaining about not being at E3: If you really wanted to be there, you could. Seriously. It's not that hard to get in, and if you aren't there...well, you didn't want it enough. Sorry.

EDITED TO ADD: The link in this post should be working correctly now. Some sort of odd concatenation in Dale's post.

[frogofdeath]

Originally Posted by GC_Thom

FURTHER EDITED TO ADD: Also, for anybody complaining about not being at E3: If you really wanted to be there, you could. Seriously. It's not that hard to get in, and if you aren't there...well, you didn't want it enough. Sorry.

Thom has a point folks. I went this year though I really had no business being there. If you can't get to L.A. due to monetary reasons that's one thing, but actually getting into the event, which costs nothing, is not all that hard.

That being said, I thought the Observations piece was well written. Honestly though, I found it quite short and am a little miffed as to why your complete coverage is taking so long to be posted on the site.

[chaostrophy]

I think some of the critics who talk a lot about the glut of sequels and licensed games, the dearth of creativity, etc. are forgetting about Sturgeon's Law. The majority of games (or albums, or books, or movies, or paintings, or whatever) out there have always been crud, and IMO it doesn't really matter whether a derivative, uninspired game has a known name attached to it or not. Sequels aren't always retreads and all-new games aren't always innovative...for example, which is the more original and interesting game, Final Fantasy VIII or Legend of Dragoon? Of course it's possible for a series to wear itself out with too many sequels and not enough progress between them (Silent Hill, which I once loved, comes to mind) but many franchises do an excellent job at staying exciting over time (Final Fantasy, Gran Turismo, and Metal Gear, for instance).

As for trends that I've noticed from reading coverage of E3, it seems like RPGs are finally starting to move away from the standard fantasy setting en masse, which is a good thing IMO. There's the varying shades of horror in SMT Nocturne, Digital Devil Saga and Shadow Hearts Covenant, the Chinese myth-influenced Jade Empire, the far-future SF of Xenosaga II, etc. The new attention given to Shin Megami Tensei and its spinoffs by Atlus USA is especially promising, and given how long-running and popular the series is in Japan, it could be the start of something big. I keep hearing about how games are starting to adopt and appeal to hip-hop culture (one of the 1up editors called it "thugification"), and SMT, if marketed right, could have a lot of appeal to goth, industrial, and metal crowds. Maybe a small niche compared to hip-hop, but considerable nonetheless.

Also, about the fanboy topic, how do you really determine who's a fanboy and who's a journalist? It seems like with web journalism, blogging, etc. the line between the two has become increasingly blurred. I find that the majority of the game coverage that's worth reading comes from people like the critics here who don't earn their primary income from writing about games, in other words, people who would traditionally be called hobbyists or fans, not journalists.

I can understand how the crowding could be a problem though. One possible solution is to follow in the footsteps of Tokyo Game Show and add a couple of days to the show where it's open to the public. I would think that would be better than having an entirely seperate show for non-industry people as it would save transportation and booth setup/teardown costs.

[Brad Gallaway]

Also, about the fanboy topic, how do you really determine who's a fanboy and who's a journalist? It seems like with web journalism, blogging, etc. the line between the two has become increasingly blurred. I find that the majority of the game coverage that's worth reading comes from people like the critics here who don't earn their primary income from writing about games, in other words, people who would traditionally be called hobbyists or fans, not journalists.

i fully agree that the "fringe" industry folks like bloggers,GC-style sites, and so on should still attend and take part. the folks i was talking about in my piece were the HORDES of obviously not-involved-in-games-media-in-any-way types that were clogging every inch of the floor. the sweaty Zelda-t-shirt-wearing guys who have thier "business cards" written by hand on a sheet of notebook paper, and who have never written a review or think piece in their life. if you removed everybody who had NOTHING to do with the games media in any way, my guess is that E3 would have been at least 50% less crowded, and probably a greater percentage than that when you consider that the media check-in is in one modest medium-sized room and the "floor-only" check in takes place in the massively gargantuan foyer and requires a small army of staff plus support to handle the huge,snaking lines. all i'm saying is that the requirements for entry are ridiculously easy to meet... like Thom said, if you wanted to go, you'd go. it's that easy.

I can understand how the crowding could be a problem though. One possible solution is to follow in the footsteps of Tokyo Game Show and add a couple of days to the show where it's open to the public. I would think that would be better than having an entirely seperate show for non-industry people as it would save transportation and booth setup/teardown costs.

i believe they already tried that once, and the show was absolutely overwhelmed with people, even more so than it is now. i could be wrong, but i remember reading a piece about why they didn't try that again.