So, this is a games industry event. Who is harmed therefore, when the focus shifts more "intimately" to games? First off, all the free junk, and pr was trying to promote the games, or at least the makers. The gaming media go there for the games; those game players that watch coverage of the event, largely do so for the game coverage. The mainstream media...You could say they're getting the word out, but...(and I'm not American, but if what Jeff says is accurate about the type of interviews he endures - and I'm not suggesting that it isn't) we've just identified a second mass of illegitmate attendees. Word can always be gotten out to the game players via marketing when the time's right, (funded by a portion of the cash publishers saved, perhaps, from the reassessed E3?) Publishers win too, because their games are seen in more detail, with more indepth and relevant coverage being borne of this. I don't believe this to be a win/lose balancing act between the industry and the game fans. For example, the pre-E3 media briefings. Platform holders are fully aware of the amount of people's attention that they govern for that hour. It's a powerful platform for them to deliver their message. They won't abandon that opportunity. Then, for the games coverage itself. Why were things becoming increasingly shown "behind closed doors"? Publishers know who they want to talk to. They do want to talk to the larger media bodies, therefore these guys are admitted. They might not allow footage to be recorded, because they don't want their big game being touted about on some site for which no domain registry info can be found, past two days before the launch of E3. Publishers know that the editors here can convey information about what they've seen to the readers effectively, and they've got a far larger audience to inform. So, currently, now the shock's long-gone, I think that overall we'll all be better, when it really is "all about the games".

I don't need all those HD ports and all the rest. (Everything bar HDMI can be upgraded at the user's discretion , with the hard disc being exchangeable for any size storage of the user's choice, according to Phil Harrison.) I also strongly agree with farseer74 about the PS3 resembling at this point a trojan horse, designed to get BluRay into people's homes. Unsurprisingly, as a GAMES fan, this proposition does little for me. It needs to be about the games, which SCEE don't seem to believe it should, from their most recent comments. They're trying to pitch it atm as a cheap next-gen media player, that plays games, for goodness sakes! The lack of a 20gb SKU would be really dumb. Simple as.