Summer industry event remaining in Los Angeles for at least three more years; E3 2013 scheduled for June 11-13.
Los Angeles, California will continue its run as the host city for the annual Electronic Entertainment Expo through 2015, the Entertainment Software Association announced today. The organizing body also announced that E3 2013 will take place on June 11-13 at the Los Angeles Convention Center and surrounding venues.
Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said he was actively involved in negotiations to keep E3 in the southern California city. "My office was committed to doing whatever it took to keep the largest annual conference that the city hosts here for another three years," he said in a statement.
The annual gaming gala has been held in Los Angeles for 16 of its 18 years of existence. Other host cities have included Santa Monica, California (2007) and Atlanta, Georgia (1997).
The new three-year agreement with the ESA and the city of Los Angeles also makes sure that E3 will "continue as scheduled" during the major construction plans for downtown LA, including groundbreaking on the new Farmers Field.
In June, ESA president Michael Gallagher said E3 might relocate in 2013 if issues over the construction were not resolved. At the time, he said "if we can't resolve them, we are preparing to go elsewhere." The ESA did not identify which locations it was scouting for a possible move for E3, but San Francisco, New York, Chicago, and New Orleans were reportedly candidates.
the thing is E3 is no longer the thing anymore. the developers have their own events now. look at EA, or Capcom, or Activision (ugh). console makers have one, heck ouya had one and asked folks to chip in on development! at comic con developers actually let gamers play the games! E3 is not like tokyo game show, or gamescom where they allow THE CONSUMER play the games, not some old guy from the new york times trying to sound hip. they only let the press in. if E3 wants to get the consumers attention in america again, they will have to make it open to the public. not just crappy networks like G4
I agree! I don't understand why they would hold on to an outdated model of Industry only when the FANS would gladly pay hundreds to just step through the door and LOOK at the games.
I've been fortunate enough to attend some E3's and I can safely say that most of the important industry meetings are done PRIOR and during the first 2 days of the expo. So the fact that they won't open it to the public on the last day is just mind boggling.
Not only will there be a packed crowd, but even if you charge $100 for just one day I guarantee the tickets will STILL sell out. I had random fans offering me $200 for my last day pass this pass E3. A part of me is still regretting that decision...
E3 generates roughly $40 million for the LA through hotels, convention parking, food, etc. And the 3rd day is generally empty. If they allowed the public, I can see E3 generating up to $50 million.
Nice. I sort of think it'd be cool if it rotated to Chicago or NYC, but I also live in LA and go every year since I'm in the industry. So yeah, I don't mind that it's not open to the public. It's already packed with 60,000+ people, so how the heck is the public supposed to fit. Just go to ComicCon or PAX or something else open to the public.
another 3 years. i said good move by the ESA. L.A. is the REAL home of E3! always by video game fans!
I've been to 5 E3 conventions so far & I wouldn't mind if it went to another city...simply to change things scenario-wise. I reckon another country like France, England, Australia or Canada would be nice. LA is still good don't get me wrong but if you are like me & go year-in, year-out, you would like to see gamers & different gaming atmospheres from other parts of the world.
If E3 is to stay in Los Angeles for the next several years, I wonder how the convention will be conducted once Farmers Field is under construction.
@thom_maytees A lot of tax breaks and temporary space to accomdate E3. If E3 was smart, they would include an exit-clause if they deem that its insufficient to host the expo in LA.
This is a win/win for both sides. E3 gets to stay in glitzy LA and LA gets the money generated by E3.
I'm concerned that expo hype is damaging to the industry, as some games are over-hyped to the point of being misleading about their true value (SWTOR anyone?).
Whatever, I can't get in no matter where it is.
Although it would be cool to have it near me.
I'm excited about these upcoming E3's. The last few haven't been great, but I can't wait till the new systems are coming out and every developer in the industry is trying to get the dominating games on them.
Great news to hear. I can still drive 20 minutes to get to the convention rather then having to fly to another city.
I think that if LA failed to get a deal going, then the 2nd potential city would have been Las Vegas or even San Diego. A majority of the gaming industry hails from the West Coast.
Even with this new 3 year contract, I hope that E3 has some exit-clause attached to its contract if the construction the football stadium (whenever if ever it happens) becomes a hassle. Or at least a some financial/tax breaks..
E3 generates roughly 40 million for the city during the convention.
I guess the world will have to wait to know the joy of waiting in line with fat people sweating their butts off so you can play 15 minutes of the newest Star Wars game.
California seems to be the best Place for E3. It is too hot to live in California, But E3 seems to fit nicely there.
Washington DC would be cool if you ask me like the Verizon Center or Kennedy Center...I want something as awesome as E3 to be at the east coast.
For now. Give it a few years and the entire tech industry will relocate to Arizona. California is in massive debt, high as heck taxes and too much traffic.
good to make games and fast distribution in those states. if a person in Los Angeles have a quention about a game, is just pass in the corner and putt the foot in the EA's center ground.
Content you might like…
Users who looked at this article also looked at these content items.
Playing Xbox One games on somebody else's console will also require a check-in every hour. Full Story
- Posted Jun 6, 2013 3:41 pm PT
Xbox boss Don Mattrick believes concerns over connectivity are overblown, recommends Xbox 360 for those without an Internet connection. Full Story
- Posted Jun 11, 2013 5:52 pm PT