GameSpot Gut Reactions: E3 Changed Forever?

The GameSpot staff weighs in on their initial impressions of the news that E3, as we know it, is no more.

by

This past weekend, shocking news hit the Internet in the form of reports that E3, the single biggest event in the game industry each year, might be on its way out. Apparently, big game publishers had decided to pull their support of the event, possibly because E3 was just too expensive to justify the time, effort, and cost of sending out crews of staff to attend the event, prepare new demo versions of the games, and spend millions on swanky booths for the show floor. This morning, the Entertainment Software Association issued a statement suggesting that it will be changing to "a more intimate event" for press and industry professionals. It later clarified that the event will now be called the E3 Media Festival and will be moved to July. We sat down with ESA president Doug Lowenstein to find out exactly what this means for the event. But we've also got the GameSpot staffers on hand to weigh in with their gut reactions. Be sure to add your own thoughts using the comments form below.


I remember walking through one of the hallways of the Los Angeles Convention Center on the final day of E3 2006. A large, garish yellow sign hung from the rafters: "See You Next Year! E3 2007, May 16-18." Yeah, well maybe not. The Electronic Entertainment Expo, as we know it now, is due for an overhaul, largely at the behest of the biggest publishing names in the business.

Welcome to the new E3. The drinks in the fridge will be charged to your room account.

What do the largest publishers get out of this restructuring? First and foremost, they save a ton of money, not having to deal with the costs of travel for employees to Los Angeles, not to mention renting of expensive floor space of the Los Angeles Convention Center, building a flashy, costly booth, and bringing specially designed E3-ready demos of their games. And the bigger companies won't have any trouble promoting their big games anyway, in a more controlled, cost-conscious manner.

For the smaller players in the industry, however, it's a different story. Despite the cost overruns and the logistical hurdles, E3 is a great place to put your game, your accessory, your product in front of a centralized and eager group of buyers, media, and potential customers that is unrivaled by any other event on the calendar year. The signal-to-noise ratio can be unnecessarily unbalanced but, as a small company, it's been a necessary risk.

Still, there could be costs to all parties, some of which may not be immediately felt. Assuming E3 moves to a boutique arrangement, with small settings for exhibitors to showcase their wares, the cachet of the event is likely to wither, as publishers focus on their own home-grown events to build buzz for their products. It's nothing new--publishers already have lavish pre-E3 events now. I can't help but wonder if those private functions will simply morph into the new standard, with all-in-one exhibitions becoming passé. As a side effect, mainstream press coverage--which loves to cover the glitzy shell of E3, if not its gooey insides--will likely be greatly reduced in this boutique arrangement. And speaking of media, the change brings up questions of how my role as a video games writer will change without an E3 to gush over every May.

Is it growing pains? Is it a warning sign of things to come? Or is it a healthy correction for an event that had become bloated and self-defeating? It's probably all of these things. It's hard to argue against publishers saving money, be they big or small, especially in such a volatile industry. But while companies' bottom lines are dictating this change for the short-term, only hindsight will determine whether or not the E3 restructuring will pay dividends in the long-term.

As much as everyone likes to complain about E3, I'm going to miss the megashow nature of it. Oh, I'll be honest in that I won't miss the breakneck pace, having to push my way through huge crowds, and the stifling heat of the convention center after-hours, when the air conditioning is turned off. At the same time, I've come to recognize that the madness of E3 is something special. I will miss the sheer grandeur of the show, its media-circus atmosphere.

I've heard grumblings for years that companies have been unhappy about the state of E3, and how they have to spend more and more money and resources to compete. Every year the sound and light show that is E3 escalated, and it has gotten to the point that publishers have to send emissaries to neighboring booths to ask them to dial down the volume because it's so deafening. It's just not worth it, especially if you consider that a publisher can easily blow millions of dollars to create an extravagant booth, fly hundreds of employees to LA and put them in hotels for a week, and then watch as some other publisher steals all the thunder and the E3 crowds. Far easier and cheaper to simply have your own dedicated event, where you can control everything and not have to worry about what the competition is doing next door.

Does this mean I won't see Spielberg anymore?

Still, as a student of history, I realize that this is a chapter closing. The megashow symbolized everything that was both great and not so great about the industry. Having every upcoming game in one place was simply an awe-inspiring experience, but not so much fun was the catering to the lowest common denominator with scantily-clad booth babes or the marketing of sequel after sequel rather than original ideas. Yet I'm also a bit apprehensive about this smaller E3 format. One of the nice things about the megashow is that it draws positive mainstream press coverage like no other event. E3 has become the "face" of the industry, and I just don't know if a "smaller" E3 will be able to say the same.

I suppose if I had to fix E3, I'd stick with the large format, but I'd enforce stringent admissions rules to get rid of the thousands of people that don't need to be there. So "yes" to the buyers from each retail chain, the ones responsible for the bulk orders of each game; but do we really need every manager, assistant manager, and part-time sales clerk from each store there? And while we're at it, let's crack down on the media badges so that only real news organizations get in. Also, if the NFL can have a salary cap, why can't E3 have a booth-spending cap? Keep the arms race in check, and get the escalating costs under control. I'd try that, and if that didn't work, then I would go with the smaller format.

After reading today's press release from the ESA, I was left with one big question.

Where are these "small meetings" going to take place?

The press release states it will all still take place in LA, but no mention of the LA Convention Center. And I think that was intentional. My guess is that they are going to take place in hotel rooms and meeting rooms throughout Los Angeles and Hollywood. And this puts me in a very, very bad mood.

As if it wasn't already hard enough to get out on the show floor to do proper coverage of games for the world to see, now it appears the media will have to travel all around a city to various hotels or other locations to provide top-notch coverage. And if you work in a video group (e.g. GameSpot Live), you have to worry about lugging around cameras, tripods, and lighting all over the city, too. It gets heavy and your back doesn't like it. Trust me, it sucks.

Does this mean goodbye to the heralded E3 live stage show?

Then there's the big impact that E3 has on the public. Not only do the interactive entertainment media, GameSpot included, converge on the show, but so do the mass media. E3's glamour was definitely a big part of the reason why stations like CNN would cover the show, and, in my opinion, a new low-key setup where demos are spread across meeting rooms or hotel rooms will just force them to look away for the most part.

When cutting back E3's grand style, I wish the ESA would have worked with all parties it would have an impact on--especially the industry media, who by far puts in the most man-hours during the week of the show. Our bodies and minds are put to an extreme test every year, and that's with most of the stuff we need to cover confined to one huge building. Just imagine how much harder it might be on us with us having to spread ourselves out all over a huge city.

While retailers and other industry audiences are indeed important for E3, I strongly feel the interactive entertainment media is by far the most essential part of it. We give the world the inside scoop on everything that is E3. The public largely looks to us when trying to determine what games from E3 they should keep their eye on as development progresses. So, outside of the exhibitors themselves, I feel we, the media, should have had the opportunity to put on our word of what we feel could have been done to make E3 a better conference for everyone. For example, I have a feeling we would have all made a push to move the conference to San Francisco, home to most major video game media outlets as well as a number of game developers and publishers. That alone would have made it easier on all of us with the new setup. Oh well, we can't always have our way.

If I wanted to, I guess I could claim that this isn't a big surprise. But it is, just because of how huge a part of my life E3 has been for the past seven or eight years. It started out as a trade-only event, and then it expanded to include the press but turned into a kind of taboo-consumer-event-that-wasn't-really-taboo. You know what I mean. Every year, as soon as May rolled around, all anyone talked about was getting into E3--how old we needed to be to get in, how much we'd love to go, and most importantly, what tricks and shortcuts we could use to sneak in. Because it wasn't just about the games anymore--it was about the loud music, the free giveaways, and the beautiful women who would let you stand near them!

The image search results for "E3". Pretty telling, I'd say.

Not only did E3 seem to become less and less about the games, but it also seemed like the show couldn't figure out exactly what it was supposed to be. In 2005, there was actually a concerted marketing effort to get more people to pay the expensive ticket price to get in and experience what an exciting and fun show it was, an effort that I felt was grossly irresponsible. The single most important event in the game industry became a mixed-message consumer event ("This is an industry-only show and you must be 18 or older and have ID and credentials...to see the hottest new games and consoles in the world before anyone else! It's all here: games, beautiful women, and excitement!!"). The cat was basically out of the bag: How could you get these stowaways to stop sneaking in, not to mention telling their friends about how awesome E3 was and how they, too, should try to sneak in? With the halls of the LACC full to bursting with people who had absolutely no business being there, E3 seemed to lose most of its value as an actual trade event. By 2006, it seemed like having an honest-to-goodness public shindig would make much more sense.

In the short run, I guess it's a relief that we apparently won't have to worry about E3 being the monstrous event it traditionally is. In the long run, I'm a lot more concerned about what kind of message this sends to people outside the game industry. For better or for worse, E3 was something that caught the eye of both the mainstream press and Wall Street...and this change could mean challenging times ahead for a business that, for the last few years, has so proudly claimed to be bigger than Hollywood.

As the E3 rookie on the GameSpot team, I was thrown directly into the thick of things this past May. It was the first E3 I had the pleasure of attending, and I barely had time to catch my breath between filming the mad rush to the Wii line, the insanity of the Sony press conference, and the constant bombardment of gaming news coming from every direction. My experience from E3 was slightly different than the average attendee given I spent nearly every hour working from within the confines of the luxurious GameSpot booth, but there's still something to be said for three straight days of just being immersed in what has been called the mecca of video gaming. Until I attended E3 it had always had that air of mystery, being that "closed doors" conference that seemed to draw anyone and everyone from around the world. In fact, while I was working diligently in May 2003 during crunch time on one of my final college projects, one of my project partners even found the time to make the six-hour drive overnight, make use of his E3 pass for one single day, then arrive back at school that evening to finish his part of the project. Truly a mecca.

The only event that warrants stacking PC monitors on top of each other.

So with the news of the ESA favoring a "smaller, faster, cheaper" E3, I have to say I'd fall among those that are sad to see the end of an era. And while so many of us lament the change, we all have to admit it was inevitable. Smaller publishers had difficulty in getting their games noticed, and the crowd was becoming more and more diluted each year. Fines were being levied against publishers for both the rising noise levels and booth-babe midriff lines. E3 was just getting too big for its britches.

So, in as much awe of E3 I was when I first arrived, I was more amazed at the amount of effort put forth by the GameSpot crew, both on and off camera. We were there with the mission to tackle a monster, one that grew stronger and more adversarial with each passing year. While I had always imagined that I'd be wandering the show floor among that wide-eyed crowd with my schwag bag in hand, my first E3 experience instead changed that dream into a mountain to climb, a raging river to be crossed--a growing challenge that, until today, I had looked forward to confronting each year. Now the ESA has gone and slain the dragon for us, and we are left in uncertainty as to what sort of E3 will be rising out of the ashes. Whatever will take its place will no doubt be a more effective vessel for the industry as a whole, but it won't nearly be the same Everest it once was. I, for one, will miss that.

So, is E3 going the way of the dodo? It's surprising news to many of us; I certainly never thought that it would happen, but when pondered from a distance, I think it's probably for the best. I've been to a relatively modest number of E3s compared to some of the editors here, having a mere three trips to LA under my belt, but still--each time I go, I can't help but think how big and unwieldy the event has become. There's a bit of self-satisfaction that comes along with wrestling your way through crowds to make your next appointment and filing your story in between bites of a soggy roast beef sandwich, but I'd easily trade that feeling for the ability to sleep in a bit, be able to fit more appointments into the day, and walk around a somewhat sedate setting to catch up on the upcoming games, without having to worry about possibly waiting in line for half an hour to do so.

Getting around the show floor at past E3s has involved some interesting techniques for maneuvering through--and above--the crowds.

I don't think there are many journalists that will disagree with me on that count: The ability to work with fewer distractions and a bit less noise will be a boon to us--and to most of you out there in Internet-land, too, to be honest. With a more relaxed working environment, I think the product that goes up on GameSpot will only improve. That may sound selfish, coming from someone who's been to E3 before--judging from the reaction on our forums, I'm sure plenty of our readers are disappointed that they won't be able to attend an E3 in its old form, which has become something like the High Mass for game fans. Honestly, though, I doubt many of the organizers and exhibitors are worried about what gamers think. While some titles will be impacted by the loss of the word-of-mouth effect that can come when lots of people get their hands on a small-stature game that's a load of fun, the AAA, high-budget titles will still get their coverage in the press; the publishers just won't have to spend millions of dollars for floor space and elaborate booths to engage in ultimately meaningless battles with their competition over who has the weirdest loot giveaways.

Speaking for myself, anything that can reduce the sheer headache of going to E3 is a boon. It'll be interesting to see how this turns out, but so far, I'm liking the changes.

Reading the news about E3, it's hard not to feel disappointed. That week in May is by far the most exciting time of the year in the video game industry. The sheer scope and spectacle of the show is impossible to fathom if you haven't been there. It's not unheard of for a single company to spend $20 million or more on floor space, a booth, staff, planning, marketing and publicity, and so on. Imagine how many games could be developed with that kind of money. Even if eliminating E3 as we know it saves a company only 20 percent of what it would have otherwise spent, that's a sizeable sum of money that can be put toward developing new and better games.

The show's over, send it all back.

Aside from the money, there's the logistics to consider. It takes a tremendous effort from thousands of people to coordinate everything that goes on during E3. But what few people outside the industry realize is that most of the big news about E3 doesn't even come from the show. Every year companies hold pre-E3 events to show off their games in a more intimate setting, which works well for the company because it can count on your undivided attention, and it works well for journalists because it spreads the workload out over several weeks rather than a few days. Then there are the press conferences that take place in the two days leading up to the show. There are the big three, of course, but there are also conferences from companies like Square Enix, Konami, and Capcom. These conferences are where the massive, earth-shattering news breaks, so by the time the convention center opens its doors everyone is coming down from all the recent announcements, which makes the actual show feel anticlimactic and unnecessary.

That's just me being practical, though. Deep down, I will miss the excess of E3. There's something to be said for coming together en masse as an industry and celebrating what it is we're passionate about. It's crowded, loud, and exhausting, but it's also exciting, dramatic, and often shocking. For that I will miss E3, but I understand why the ESA and game publishers are looking for alternative ways to do business, and I'm all for it.

Of course, it's much easier to say this in retrospect, but I think some of us sort of saw this coming. Over the last couple of years, the value of E3 has changed pretty dramatically. More and more importance has been placed on the pre-E3 press conferences, and most of the major publishers have already been holding their own preshow events to show off at least partial E3 lineups to the press ahead of time. So by the time the show floor opens and the throng of already-sweating young men make a beeline for whatever they think is the hottest thing at the show, the show is practically over. Most, if not all, of the big information has already been revealed by that point. Our job switches over from "cover the biggest games as quickly as possible" to "find out what's left and see all of it."

If you had time to sit on the floor and wait in this line all day, you were pretty much part of the problem.

So, if you're a game publisher, why spend all that money to build a big, dumb booth just to impress the 60 or 70,000 people who attend the show? Most of those people simply don't matter in the grand scheme of things, and at the end of the day, that expenditure isn't getting their games much more visibility. The people who need to see those games for business purposes (big retail buyers, creepy investment types, sketchy media types) will see them "behind closed doors" in some stuffy meeting room, so the booth experience is mostly lost on them, as well. The best thing I can say about the experience of attending E3 is that it's really improved my ability to weave my way through a crowd while trying to get from one place to the other. How is that crowd (which is often composed of people who are inexplicably sitting down on the floor and gawking at some free flyer that was shoved into their hands) benefiting the game industry?

You could make the argument that E3 is the time when the mainstream press sits up and takes notice. It seems like I'm interviewed by at least three news crews from the Los Angeles area every year and asked, "So what does all this mean?" But those all invariably end up being fluff pieces that never really say anything meaningful about games; they're all just about how crazy it is that the convention is going on.

I'll miss the three-ring circus feel of the whole thing. It never failed to deliver a full week of absolute insanity and a healthy dose of sleep deprivation. A hall full of plain-looking meeting rooms, if that's this trade show's eventual fate, simply won't be the same. But a scaled-back, more focused show just makes sense. Unless you're the guy who vowed that 2007 would be the year that you finally scammed a badge and went to the show. If that's the case, you're probably sort of pissed.

I've had a great time at all nine of the Electronic Entertainment Expos that I've been lucky enough to attend, but every year I spend the weeks leading up to the event dreading it. As a spectacle and as a place to catch up with industry friends that I rarely get to see, E3 is great, but as an environment to work in during our busiest week of the year, I can think of plenty of other places I would rather be. The sheer size of the Los Angeles Convention Center means that you invariably lose a chunk of each day just moving between booths for meetings and such, and when you fill the place with freebie-hungry nerds armed with oversized bags, the whole experience can get quite frustrating and unpleasant.

At EGN, every company's meeting area is the same.

That companies like Electronic Arts are finally waking up to the fact that the event is overly expensive for the returns that they get comes as no surprise to me. A similar thing happened to the European Computer Trade Show several years ago, when Activision started a trend by using the money it would normally spend on an ECTS booth to host its first "Activate" event. Journalists and retailers from all over Europe were invited to Activate and got to spend two or three entire days checking out Activision's games and meeting with the people working on them. At ECTS (or E3), meetings typically last no longer than an hour, and in that time we're often expected to spend time with a handful of different games. Other European companies followed Activision's lead and there hasn't been an ECTS since 2004, and anyone who was unfortunate enough to attend that one will almost certainly tell you that it doesn't really count.

I'd hate to see E3 go the way of ECTS, but I'd love to see it turn into something resembling the underrated Game Stars Live and European Games Network events that were held at London's ExCeL center in September 2004. The two events, separated by a large lobby area, took the forms of an open-to-the-public mini-E3 and a hall filled with sterile meeting rooms, respectively. Game Stars Live gave companies a chance to show off their latest games to good effect, and EGN afforded them a quiet haven away from the crowds, where meetings and interviews could be conducted without fear of distraction or interruption.

Why any company would fork out millions of dollars to have a booth at E3 is beyond me, frankly. Surely they'd be better off hosting or participating in a smaller event where they don't have to spend big to compete with other companies for attention, where they can spend more than 10 minutes presenting each game to journalists and retailers, and where giant bags full of free branded T-shirts, keychains, badges, rubber balls, caps, stickers, pens, and other crap are a distant memory. Sorry E3, but I'll take quality over quantity every time.

It's funny to see this news finally hit, because you always hear rumblings during E3 that that particular year is going to be the last one. No one really pays it much heed, because such a thing seems insane. Yet here we are. Though we still haven't heard the news about what this new E3 is going to be, outside of downsizing into a more "focused" event, it's the end of an era for a lot of folks. In a lot of ways a change was inevitable. After dealing with publishers and developers for ages now as we set up show coverage, it was obvious that E3 as we know it wasn't working out so well. The combination of the cost, timing, and overall effort required for such a massive dog-and-pony show has spiraled out of control in recent years. While the show's always been a pissing contest to a certain degree, as everyone tries to one-up each other with their games, the last few years have added a crazy amount of pageantry as publishers have busted out with booths that rival small Aztec pyramids. A smaller, more intimate event implies the focus could shift back to the games, which would be awesome.

A new kind of E3 might be good news for smaller developers.

As for a suitable replacement, a small intimate show is one option. But I think the bigger issues are timing and exposure. Given how game development is going right now, May isn't the best time. It's invariably smack-dab in the middle of a dev cycle and puts a burden on dev teams to make sure they have something cool to show off. What's happened lately is that dev time gets eaten up by having the team focus on an E3 demo, in addition to the working on the rest of the game; this is bad. As far as exposure goes, getting seen has always been an issue for smaller companies. E3 as we knew it tended to lend itself to overshadowing anyone who didn't have an eight-story booth with flashing lights. A new E3 could be cool if it were more intimate and offered a more level playing field for all developers and publishers. Fan-fave developers like Red Octane and The Behemoth, both of which have made outstanding games, kicked it in Kentia. Hopefully a new E3 would give the little guys a better chance at being seen.

E3 2006 would have to be the craziest E3 I've ever been to, if for no other reason than it was the only E3 I've ever been to. Like many game players watching E3 from the sidelines I was absolutely giddy to attend what has arguably become the biggest gaming event of the year... So while I was doing cartwheels and preparing my E3 survival kit, I was also well aware that the show is in reality no more than a high-budget version of those timeshare pitches my parents used to drag me to as a kid--but instead of a toaster, you walk away with a free mini USB drive. (Note: 372 toasters later, my parents actually did break down and sign up. Who knew it works?)

I never liked you, anyway!

So last year's E3 saw me running around with 80 pounds of video equipment, a sweat-soaked mash of pulp that used to be a floor map, and a vague idea that I need to go "that way." In all seriousness, it was pretty tough, productionwise, to get good coverage of the event. While flashing lights and loud noises might attract people to your booth, it's not so great for a guy trying to get clean footage of your game. Though it might be enticing to sit and debate whether that 15-foot Optimus Prime sculpture would fit in my apartment (it wouldn't), I really spent a good amount of time in transit and hurdling other attendees so I could get that Super Monkey Ball footage everyone wanted.

In the end, the carnival atmosphere is a lot of pomp and circumstance that I personally think gets in the way of what we really want to see, the games. A smaller, more intimate E3 might allow developers to spend more time getting their games ready and less time determining the toxicity levels of 103 simultaneously running fog machines. On that note, my favorite booth at E3 was probably the tucked-away Warner Bros. setup. Not only was it subdued and off the beaten path, it had fresh coffee and, more importantly, giant plates of cheese. With fewer people sweating themselves silly to get a wink from a booth babe, we were able to spend the time to get the coverage we wanted. I guess we'll see if the new direction E3 is moving toward will actually eliminate some of the excessive spending and flair or just relocate it to individual locations and separate events. Really though, at the end of the day, those mini USB drives kind of suck.

When I walked into the office and Alex told me E3 was canceled, I thought it was just another one of his sick Monday-morning jokes. Now I've had the chance to parse that information and hear what my coworkers and fellow E3 attendees have to say about the subject, and I'm still not laughing. Sure, turning the industry's three-ring circus into a bunch of meetings behind closed doors will allow information to be dispersed more quickly and effectively to the people who then turn around and report on it. Hell, journalists will probably even be able sleep in the month of May 2007. But I don't want that. And I'm pretty sure that most people who are absolutely bananas about video games, especially those who have never gotten to attend E3, feel the same way.

E3 is the only place you can find rad celebrities and pasty game geeks under one roof.

I've been to seven E3s. During the first two, I worked for a developer and had to show off the games to journalists as they made their way around the show floor. Then, I went one year just to keep track (for said developer) of what all the competition was doing. The year after that, I went purely as a tourist, using my contacts at the developer to net tickets for me and my boyfriend at the time. After that, despite my connections and the fact that I was freelancing reviews for a small Web site, I managed to attend because I was working a retail outlet at the time. The last two years, I went with GameSpot, last year being the most arduous because I only got to play mobile games for the entire show. This year was trying, but it was my favorite of them all (besides my first, of course), since I was able to spend the entire time meeting with developers, talking about games, and interacting with GS readers/viewers on our daily live show.

I know that the spectacle of E3 has always blurred the show's focus. Instead of being about games and their quality, it has become about getting hysterical and excited and free schwag and sexy ladies, and all that nonsense. But that doesn't mean I can't love a spectacle just the same, especially since it's about the subject which I hold most dear, video games. E3 is responsible for some of my most precious memories in my adult life. You never forget the first time you see God of War running, or the time you first meet Greg Kasavin, who you've totally admired for like, five years, or the time you had to stand behind Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen while they sign autographs so that perverted old men won't take pictures of their butts. Seriously, that part was kind of gross, but the rest of E3 is awesome.

So whatever it becomes, I'll miss the old E3, the place where I can bump into friends in the game industry, the noise, the chaos, the mayhem, and the excitement of it all. Big kisses, E3. We'll miss you.

This just in: E3 as we know it is dead. Hundreds of out-of-work softcore porn models call for national day of mourning.

For the first five minutes after reading the initial story about E3's "restructuring" this weekend, I was in quite a state of shock. I didn't really want to accept that the world's biggest industry event, a yearly staple of my life for the last eight years, was basically dead. At least, dead in the sense that the event I knew and recognized was completely gone. Then, I started to think about things more rationally, and recalled that just this past E3, I had lamented (as I had multiple times in recent years) just how obnoxious things had gotten. A smile then crossed my face.

Now where will South Korean girl-bands of indeterminate and ultimately irrelevant musical origin end up playing when they come to the States?

Listen, by no stretch of the imagination am I just going to pretend this is an out-and-out good thing. Considering how much capital went in and out of that show, and what a huge event it was for us media types, scaling back on such a huge thing can't look like anything but the industry, in some fashion, tucking its tail between its legs and slinking off into the night. But, even so, one has to admit that E3 was just getting too big for its britches. E3 had become less an industry trade event and more an excuse for every dork with a fan site or Wal-Mart employee tag to clog up the lines to play the games, eat overpriced corndogs, and get pictures standing next to women with improbable figures. Sure, I'll miss some of the craziness on some level--namely the level of a kid who used to find illicit ways to get into the show before he was even 18, and has a whole drawer full of Bruce Campbell autographs collected over the years before getting a real job in this industry--but on a purely professional level, it makes sense. And really, what does spending all that money on stage shows and big giveaways and gigantic booths really, actually get a publisher? Ninety-five percent of the people reading E3 coverage are getting it from the major sites that don't give a crap about any of that. And those major sites only take up about several hundred people's worth of the invitees to E3 every year, if that. Do we really need the three kids from www.geocities.com/townhall/GameBarn/index.htm and a thousand EB clerks from the vast, lonely stretches of the Midwest seeing this stuff every year? No, of course we don't.

I'm not altogether convinced that a scaled-down E3 will really work, simply because I'm not even sure what it would look like. But I'm willing to give the ESA the benefit of the doubt...for now. So, in the meantime, sing all the elegies you want for the E3 of old, but trust me when I say that if you'd spent as many days of your life as I have covering that monstrosity, you'd be welcoming change, too.

Anybody who's been doing actual work at E3 for the last several years knew the show was at risk of collapsing under its own monstrous weight. The need for a more tightly focused and less expensive, less demanding convention is obvious. It's hard to make your meetings on time when you're fighting through the throng of schwag-toting game fans stampeding to play the Wii. Dozen-foot subwoofers don't really aid conversations between potential business partners, or between developers and those who want to report on their games. A couple hundred free T-shirts aren't anywhere near enough to get the word on your game out to the right people.

Add a sustained 80 decibels and a strobe light. Not an environment conducive to work.

Basically, E3 was not effectively serving the interests of those for whom the show was initially created, so it needed to change. I'm both surprised and impressed that the bigwigs at the ESA were forward-thinking enough to actually effect this change so fast.

Who benefits from a smaller E3? Just about everybody. Publishers can put the millions they'd spend on their E3 booths, travel, and so on to more effective use at their own smaller events. Developers won't have their tight production schedules interrupted when they have to spend six weeks polishing a canned E3 demo. The press will have more-thorough access to the games they'd be seeing at E3 anyway, and, ultimately, the readers will reap the benefits when they absorb more and better text and video coverage of the games they want to know about.

Let's face it: E3 has become a very loud, expensive circus that was only fun for those who had no legitimate reason to be there. (Sorry, game-retail clerks.) The focus should be on the games, and that's what this restructuring is all about.

There's no better proof that the world of games is changing, and drastically, than the news about how the Electronic Entertainment Expo as we know it is no more. This came as a shock to a lot of people, including me. After all, E3 has come to symbolize the game industry. So in hindsight, then, maybe the announcement isn't such a surprise after all, seeing as it's been well-documented that a lot of things about the games business are going to have to change in order for it to continue to grow and prosper.

Companies like Blizzard won't have to go to ridiculous lengths like this for next year's E3. That makes practical sense, but in another way, it's sad news.

On the other hand, if you're a game player, you've got good reason to be disappointed right about now. E3 is sensational and amazing, and online and other media coverage of the event has improved in many ways during the past few years. Getting to absorb all the info online, without having to wade through huge crowds or wait in long lines, is possibly better than being there in person. But if the event ends up being a lot more "intimate," it may not be nearly as interesting to those of us who love E3 because of the sheer sensory overload on display.

I think the world still needs an event like E3, where the entire game industry can get together and showcase its upcoming lineup. As long as next year's iteration still serves as a place where new game announcements are made, where progress is shown on games known to be in development, and for those working in the game industry get together to meet and greet, I think everything will be just fine.

I've gone to every E3 for the past 12 years, and I got started writing about games right before the first show. So to me, having grown up next to E3, this really feels like the end of an era. The show had its problems, but it was always an amazing experience. I'll be anxious to see what it's like next year, and I'd better get together with the editors here to talk about how this may impact our coverage plans. And if the new E3 won't be as exciting as it used to be, at least it went out with a bang.

Discussion

553 comments
mastersword007
mastersword007

sad......Farewell E3.....we will miss you......*sob* :'(

Dark_Jak47710
Dark_Jak47710

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

chicken_123_pie
chicken_123_pie

This is probably the best that could come out of the gaming industry. It will increase revenue that I'm sure will greatly impact the way we get to see it. Sure only half of what was coming out of this years E3 was released will be shown to the public but do we really need to know what games are going to look like. Trailers are good a couple of months before release but a year before, that's just not realistic. If people see what's coming, they want more. E3 should be completely classified to the industry so that they can make sure that only the best can come out of things. I know that as soon as I saw the Halo 3 trailer I thought that they would have been just about done but then reality kicked in and I realised that I'd have to wait another year in order to savour the euphoria of playing one of the best titles in history. If they had not of shown that I wouldn't have been disappointed. When will people start listening to me? I know what the people want.

Harleydrgnldy
Harleydrgnldy

E3, for any gamer, was something to look forward to. Even if you were not amongst the lucky ones that could wrangle their way in, you still talked about it before it started, refreshed the pages of your favorite websites when it did start, and discussed/argued about it afterwards. The screenshots, the reviews, and, ugh, even the ladies of the booths were all a part of an iconic experience that we longed for each year. To take away this institution and leave us flat and without substance is nothing short of torture. Right now there is a little part of every gamer that is weeping.

ChrisMitchell
ChrisMitchell

A better thing could not have happened, think about it the companies won't be spending millions and millions on the E3. instead they will be (hopfully) putting the money into the games themself, short of that they won't be rushed to have content available for the E3 months before they are ready. We might even get to see more REAL GAME futage and less of that 'pre rendered' stuff that you see now. In closeing Life Will Go On .... and Change is more often than not a Good thing. :-)

Destroyeron13
Destroyeron13

In looking at it from a neutral perspective it is probably a good idea. However my true feelings flame otherwise. ESA sucks, they could've done a lot more things then change the whole show. If theres not going to be an E3, I hope the developers just make their own shows and completely abandon the "Electronic Media Expo" or whatever the hell it is. Burn ESA, burn.

SpartanV
SpartanV

i agree with jasons' idea to limit the amount spent per booth and to be selective about the representatives for the companies to be buying the games. E3 is a great thing, something that should definatly live on. i believe that if this idea to make things small goes through that it wont stand the test of time. and we'll see E3 back to its grandeur again. after all its the fans that drive the industry.

spoungerob01903
spoungerob01903

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

phalluman
phalluman

oh well. something different will come along. or once it all gets figured out, e3 will come back, but the companies wont have to spend so much money on giving people free crap anymore.

Zippo_Fire
Zippo_Fire

Well, I look at this way who cares E3 may have been cool for some people but the crowds the money spent for what to come out with a crappy game or delay the game is kinda crappy. Id rather hear news from the game developers themselves on there own websites because 1 its cheaper 2 it doesn't take time from them developing a game to make a quality product. I don't know how many games that looked awesome at an E3 convention ended up a total flop or half assed. So maybe the game developers will put more money into there projects and make more quality products. So good riddance if it means better games and less crap on the market.

ZeMadCrammer
ZeMadCrammer

If no E3 means i get my hands on a game 4 months sooner, screw E3. E3 takes a ton of time away from game development. Look at Spore. GG on that one.

tonycolbeth
tonycolbeth

there is no reason to live (jumping off a bridge)

yahoobr
yahoobr

how will we know the deep secret stuff of the best games in line for shipping? o___o that can't happen!!! o_O

korfbalbob
korfbalbob

as long as I can still play my favourite games it's fine to me. it might be a pity not to know what is coming out on the gamemarket. but know the gamemakers will release everything through the whole year.

elite11
elite11

This sucks the bigest ass ever,I was never able to get to e3 ,but this still sucks

Reven240
Reven240

Corperations taking over gaming, how nice.

gamecube120
gamecube120

I think people will actually want to go MORE now that E3 is getting more secretive. This wouldn't be true 6 or 7 years ago, but E3 has gotten so much publicity now that it's like attending a hollywood soiree.

edison5do
edison5do

bad!!,GooD!!....Depend, that frkin game Show was just a pain downstair, cause thx to them all the magazines pass 1 whole year making revs of the same games and they're coming out the next one,on the other hand we'll never know !!for what games we have to save the money for!!. ESO APESTA!!!

drixpill
drixpill

Man this sucks i really wanted to go to at least one E3. O-well ill live.

Checkmated
Checkmated

WTF? E3? GONE? Anyone please tell me today is 1st April Can't live without E3 Where's the big benefactors???

Thrasher91604
Thrasher91604

Fine by me. Gamespot should spend the time doing careful reviews and fixing this buggy website. Who wants hyped misinformation on unreleased games from conferences like E3?

hampton2003
hampton2003

cheers to everyone who has never gone to an E3(like me). we will never know the pain and suffering shared by those who have attended the show for years...... no tears, just silence.......... now go play halo or something, you'll feel better. bloody hell i miss E3. -hampton2003

mikley28
mikley28

If they are saving tons of money on E3 then maybe the price of the games will drop?

quills_GW
quills_GW

man..this is really a let down to all gamers ...: (

capthunt
capthunt

As long as Gamespot will stil be able to have their awesome live E3 shows along with all the reviews, previews, vids, etc then ill be fine, even still... this is a great loss

Van_Cleef
Van_Cleef

I made a post about E3 needing to change a few days before this year's show. I was in favor of a change then, and I don't see this as anything but a good thing for the average consumer now. I agree with some of the editors complaining that E3 is a noisy mess, but I'll say that it is not only so for the media on the scene. It's a mess for all of us sitting at home refreshing Gamespot every 5 seconds, complaining on the forums that a video hasn't started. It's a mess to figure out what has been updated, what new pages sites are using for E3, where to click, when will the press conferences happen and when will they be available for download. Even when you're tracking all your favorite games, it is still hard to find out what's going on with them. Ultimately, a lot of news gets lost in the transition. There's so much interference from every source: the volume of news itself, the occasional site crash, the delayed press conference, the manic forum poster creating fifty posts covering the same topic (and the overreacting moderators banning the first person to create a thread discussing the ludicrous PS3 price). Notice that I did not once mention the big spectacle of the actual show itself. That is because I don't get any of that, except through the language of the occasional buzzed journalist. No one here on the other end of the data stream enjoys any of the show girls or the lights, the 80 decibels. It's not hard to find pictures of these same girls on the internet sans Walmart / IGN employees. I can only see that this jibber jabber probably makes organizing all the news a lot harder on the journalists. It's a lot of waste, in my opinion. I can see why the media guys will miss it. It's a nice perk, but there will be other parties throughout the year, I'm sure. Lastly, the date change is a good thing, but it is too little, too late. Having the major cavalcade of videogame news hit during final exams every year throughout college and law school was no fun. I, for one, am glad it's moving to July. I just wish they had done that sooner.

TruSake1
TruSake1

All they had to do is get rid of ALL the expensive stuff that they don't need! Why have expensive shiny booths for? So many damn monitors for? All those expensive women who do nothing but stand around and wear little clothes? (ok, maybe keep the women, all you really need is one woman per booth) And why not let the public come in? Just a few hundred, charge per entrance and there are people that would pay for it.

alpha_company
alpha_company

It's for a greater good! May the force be with e3... :D

Cronjob
Cronjob

Why are consumers freaking out over an INDUSTRY PROFESSIONAL expo being changed?! Despite how it may have been presented in the last three years, it is an INDUSTRY show. Every industry has one. It isn't for consumers. It shouldn't be for consumers. It should be a show for industry professionals to show and view each other's stuff. If you want the consumer stuff, go check out games at CES.

Matt_Tacular
Matt_Tacular

e3 does earn them money, the hype from e3 alone draws a larger crowd to watch what's going on, alot more people watch the majority of e3, and so alot of people get to see game videos and demos they wouldn't normally get to see. about a third of the games i bought, i bought because i saw them at an e3.

Andrew0824
Andrew0824

I really don't think it's that big of a deal, unless you are someone who actually attended E3. Otherwise, who cares? We gamers will still be marketed to, I promise.

PozzoGnome
PozzoGnome

Honestly people...E3 was one of the most bizarre yet entertaining events out of the year, even if you did not like videogames. I have been going the last few years and I think it is great for the industry, especially for the small company. I have discovered alot of cool low hype games from E3. See, companies like Microsoft and Sony (who pushed for the end of E3) will have alot of hype for their games or systems regardless of E3. Especially Microsoft, they unveiled their XBOX 360 with Frodo boy on MTV. I will go so far to say, the end of of E3 is the end of the "golden years of gaming". So I am making a pledge, I will not buy the products from the companies who pushed for the end of E3 (Sony and Microsoft). Yup you heard me right! Those dirty bastards took my E3 away from me *snif*...well, it looks like all I have to look forward to is the Wii from now on.

fingerhead
fingerhead

What does a once a year Event impact the game industry i like the E3 but i dont care if its gone. U know when ur favorite game comes out and if ur such a great fan u would buy and play it anyway. But to safe money thats just useless. They will eventually make demo's for other people and stuff so i dunno what is the big deal they earn millions of money in the gaming industry so i say wtf. lol

Imposter9000
Imposter9000

So what? I'm with the companies on this one. It costs way too much money simply to feed the curious, or the finatics that "can't wait two months!". Sure it's great to see all of the new games and such that will be coming out, but not at the expense of quality. Think about it. Companies have to rush to put together demos and organize the "perfect E3 presentation" and etc. and they are essentially just giving themselves unnessesary stress. I say hold E3 once every three years, make it even more amazing, and keep the teasers to the magazines. Let the gaming companies have a break for once. In my opinion, you finatics out there that are having break downs over this are very inconsiderate and care only about your own gratification, and not the companies that have been feeding your selfish lust.

sean987
sean987

Sure e3 is alot of money but it is possible if e3 is gone the gaming industry will drop down bad,with disappointed fans(like me) i would find it hard to ajust to gaming with out e3. One of the reasons i play games is because of e3, it is so exciting to see all these knew games coming out and the wondering about what will come out in the future.

younglynk
younglynk

This is something that will change the way i look at the month of may, i get excited cuz i can watch channels such as G4 and online webcast like gamespot to tell me what is happening in the gameing world. Hopefully E3 wont change into the hotel model cuz seeing those big screens and the loud bumping music will take eoo much away from us the consumers because thats what gets our attention in the first place.

vaskodogama
vaskodogama

what the hell? we have fashion shows too, why they didnt shot them down too? i cant believe it.....

CaptainCrazy
CaptainCrazy

I agree with foever, if these greedy company's want to save money why don't they spend some of it developing original, compelling games and stop soaking us for over priced garbage. E3 doesn't need to be put in check, it's game prices.

george33387
george33387

And do you think that if they put the price at 30$-40$ all gamers will buy them original? I heared **** like this:"By shaouting out and supportind the protests we shall save the kind of passion (games) that we all love because the end of E# may be the beggining of the end for the gaming". Start all users buying at least 1 original title per year and 1-2 from your favourite titles and you will see that E3 will revive and the gaming industry will become bigger than hollywood!!! They dont get money because you see NBA 2006 at E3 but 70% buy it pirated from their neighbour! You wanted it with your behavior and it happen at last!

george33387
george33387

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

foever86
foever86

So..those companies want to save their money eh..? well then let's see if they make much better games and/or lower the price after saving a few millions from it...because in my opinion, more than half of game makers make crappy games that I don't want to pay 50 - 60 bucks and taxes.

SP33doh
SP33doh

the big publishers don't need E3. it's pointless. I would LOVE to see a new E3, open only to smaller developers though. (read, not nintendo, sony, microsoft, EA, we'll throw in ubi and a few others too)