Would you rather see a Nintendo live press conference, or a Direct/Digital Event at E3 this year?

Live is the way to go. Digital events are too isolated

Live conference, definitely...but, it would have to have Reggie front and center.

Agreed.

Ninty need to look at something like E3 2006 to continue their momentum.

Live stage press conference without a doubt.

Live stage press conferences are much more fun. Plus, I think not having a big live stage press conference when Sony and Microsoft both have one gives the perception that Nintendo is not as important as Sony and Microsoft.

I strongly believe that part of the problem with the Wii/WiiU era of Nintendo is that they could not be taken seriously in the west by being nonpresent for E3 or having embarassingly disconnected conferences when they did show up.

E3 is the Super Bowl of gaming for the western world. Acting like the aunt with Alzheimer's at a family reunion has left a lot of gamers mystified (at least, I certainly have been). When they did get great games like Bayonetta 2, for instance, there was next to no platform for them to get the word out on what was obviously a labor of love for their platform. I hope they have their ducks in a row this year because they have a very good platform to evangelize. I'll even go so far as to say that the majority of gamers deeply love Aunt Ninty and would love to see the stem cell/Switch therapy turn her into the woman we grew up loving again.

I would like to see a live conference.

Their Live is the worse version of the two. So direct for me.

Time to put on your big boy pants, Nintendo. Have a live presentation and take your lumps like the rest of the companies.

Live press conferences have a tendency to go disastrous which can be entertaining as hell.

Live conference, it's more exciting, I really like to see how the crowds react, plus there are plenty of funny cringe worthy .gifs to be made.

Digital Event.

Let's face it, they were laughed out of E3, so better they did their own thing and at least doing something stupid would be even less of a blow.

Obviously.

?????

I see you are living in your own paranoia fueled fantasy world again...

When was their last E3? Oh yeah, the year the world was apparently supposed to end (and banked on by History Channel and Roland Emmerich). How well did that go? To say good would be a lie.

Again, laughed out. And just having booths isn't really the same, given their history.

Why do people love live conferences so much? Recorded events go so much better (look at Nintendo E3 2014). The only things I see in live events are

1.- Awkward silence 2.- Lame jokes 3.- Suits talking about things most people won´t care about 4.- Demos that sometime won´t work 5.- Some crowd noises.

Of the 5 things I mentioned, the last one can be recorded too so you don't miss "dat feeling of excitement".

So they had a bad E3 performance (after which they chose to not do stage shows because they had the worst stinker of a console they had ever had, and nothing was going to change that so they chose to ride it out), and they were laughed out? Was Sony laughed out in 2006? Was Nintendo laughed out in 2008? Was Microsoft laughed out in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013? Do you really lack all sense of perspective?

Also, what the f*ck is up with your completely irrelevant references?

Didn't mind Direct but preference is always Live conference! :) :P

Digital Direct + Tree House.

No reason to stop what has worked for them now.

It wasn't just a bad performance. It was a bad performance that followed an exit after the nasty reception. Neither Sony nor MS had it ANYWHERE near as bad even at their worst. And that's saying something given Sony's 06. And 2008 wasn't Nintendo's only other bad year. 2011 wasn't great either.

Nintendo didn't exit after the nasty reception. Get this. The two events are unrelated. They were not related. Correlation is not causation. And there is no correlation here, let alone causation. Gamers' memories are short, you're only as good or bad as your last E3. Evidenced by:

Neither Sony nor MS had it ANYWHERE near as bad even at their worst. And that's saying something given Sony's 06.

This bullshit statement

Bullshit in what way? Even if/when I do eat the crow you dish out, I still think they should avoid E3 pressers.

you people are crazy. nintendo's e3 conferences are the only ones that i even find my self enjoying for the most part

all the other guys have a bunch of suits get on stage and try to crack jokes to seem hip for the kids or show a bunch of NON GAME FOOTAGE or have a significant chunk of their conference be dedicated to sports crap (sorry, just can't stand sports games, i understand they have a huge audience)

nintendo, for the most part, seemed to have a more lighthearted approach to their shows. they've had their misteps, some the worst in the industry, but i still find their stuff much more palatable even when showing stuff i don't necessarily find interesting.

i know it's a very dated reference but just look at the ds reveal vs the psp reveal. the ds was sold as something exciting with good energy coming from reggie and few snippets of gameplay footage to finish us off. the psp's reveal was like they were showing a fucking calculator. it was so dry and business-like and when they showed it the air was just dead like "woopity fucking do." just no fun in comparison.

okay, i'm rambling, waaaayy too much caffeine today.

edit: i completely side-stepped the point of the damn thread. yeah, i'd say live is my preference.

Live conferences can be interesting, but their Switch reveal had all sorts of awkward moments: whether it be the half-awake translator, the quiet audience of business men, the abrupt transitions, etc. Of course it's quite hilarious, but all in a rather... negative way.

Digital presentations are clear, crisp, and to the point. The jokes and skits are well done, the awkward moments on purpose, the speakers clear and concise (as well as the translators), and we get straight to the good stuff for the most part.

I can go either way, but digital is more visually interesting and entertaining.

I want another live conference! That live Switch reveal was gold! How will they top the couch and the crazy guy with the Splatoon guns?

Live of-course ?

F*ck it, we'll do it live!

If Reggie made a promise that Nintendo's E3 event will be large, then a live press conference would fit that promise.

kind of surprised how many people want to see nintendo go back to live conferences.

directs work better because they're polished, focused presentations of upcoming games. no opportunities for stage mishaps or technical difficulties, none of the awkwardness/cringe that defines almost all E3 press conferences these days to some degree (ubisoft in particular, and nintendo during the wii era).

live conferences are only entertaining for audience reactions.

How about the fact that "giant enemy crab" is still a meme, yet PS4 is dominating. Has nothing whatsoever to do with History channel and the bullshit shows they ran (holy shit that might have been the most distantly related "point" you've ever made).

Now, I agree with you that they shouldn't go back to live stage shows. But not because I can catch Duck Dynasty on tuesdays at 8, 7 central on Fox. There are actual reasons that the Nintendo Directs made a lot of sense.

With the Wii U basically written off, they could count on a captive audience of faithful to tune in to wherever to catch announcements and of course, picked up by gaming media, the two groups that cared at all for the Wii U.

They are more snappy in pacing, able to be as long or short as Nintendo wants.

They are far cheaper to produce, take less effort and have far less room for errors as they are edited and can be reshot. (do you want to get translator-chan in trouble again?)

The one benefit I can think of to a stage show is presence and possibly more coverage just from the fact they're doing one. They did a live presentation for the Switch reveal because they wanted to cast that huge net and make it feel big.

Personally, I'm not convinced that they need one. Are we really saying that there's a huge gap with people who watch E3, people who are interested in Nintendo, and people that would only pay attention to a big stage show? Seems like a small part of the ven diagram to me.

You bring up E3 related memes like "giant enemy crab", but you know what ELSE is a meme? Ravi from 2008. Reggie's face in 2012. Don't act like Nintendo escaped from that, because they didn't.

At least we agree that Nintendo should STAY the **** away from E3 pressers.

@nintendoboy16: I never said they got away from memes, the internet never forgets. Nobody had gotten away from memes But the idea that it's prevented them from doing it is laughable.

We didn't agree on anything. Just after where I explain why the digital events worked for them, I gave a very good reason FOR them doing it, I just don't personally see it as a huge advantage, but again, I'm just playing armchair CEO here. And not the kind who entertains the notion that Cloud Strife kicked Reggie's dog, let alone anybody caring in 2017.

Okay, bad misreading on my part, but still, I stand by what I said.

Of course, bash me for my personal disdain for a character in a fighting game. How dare I voice a damned opinion... WAIT a damn minute!

I honestly don't care about hearing fake claps and cheers

Or, even better...E3 2004! Give us another Twilight Princess-style reveal and trailers of awesome games like Resident Evil 4.

Digital is the way to go. Live shows are all corny and embarrassing.

Being digital didn't stop the Switch presentation being corny and embarrassing though.

I myself prefer a proper, full-on live event.

That said the Directs are great for quarterly updates (or even monthly updates, if need be) for the upcoming games/news of the platform(s). However they'll never reach the "hype" of a live event (IMO).

The Switch presentation was live

Check and mate.

In an age where information travels faster than the speed of light live events feel archaic. You can get the same information out there by spending less money and just showing trailers and gameplay footage. Playing a game on stage never works. Video game industry folks have no personality or showmanship. These are introverts who are asked to awkwardly show up on stage and speak in front of hundreds of people and it never works. The hype is all the same, live show or no. Nintendo really got it right dumping live events for digital ones. Considering we're all watching from our computer screens what's the difference anymore? It's a gargantuan waste of money and resources.

The pre-recorded bit were not live and they was just as embarrassing as the live sections. All that finger clicking

That was also live haha.

I agree it was embarrassing though

That makes no sense what-so-ever! Everyone's been asking Nintendo to come back and do live stage at E3 for years now and digital was okay but it got so tedious over the years now and I'm glad there going back to live. Granted, Nintendo has a good start with Switch and it makes sense to go live now during the Switch hype raving.

I actually prefer their Directs, but it won't bother me either way as long as they keep their Treehouse. The Treehouse was my most watched event from last years E3

I always thought the events from Nintendo were quite boring

I would prefer a digital event. The digital events flow very quickly and show more game footage you get from a live press conference. Live press conferences typically amount to corporate-types getting up on stage and patting each other on the back for an hour and a half or so while about 30 minutes of game footage gets shown.

It'd be nice to see them try a live show again, especially if they've got a lot of big announcements to make like Reggie has teased.

Overall though, I don't care. As long as they've got good games to show off, I'll be happy either way.

I do not like live shows, thy are 90 percent dull.

So here's the thing. A digital event has many advantages: Your people can prepare and be comfortable, your 'live' demo's don't need to worry about interference, and it costs 10 times less to do.

I don't know a single advantage of doing the same thing on stage. I guess maybe the critics might cover you more if you do a live presentation? Seriously, why should they?

I don't mind that they do. I'm looking forward to this. As a consumer I am liking this, because normally they don't do live presentations and they seem very confident about this. Like so many things, that makes me excited. But a digital event would have been fine with me, too. I can't say that I fundamentally understand the decision. Maybe it has something to do with Scorpio.