By Steve Boxer
So how was the “downsized” E3? Does it still deserve to be spoken of as on a par with E3s of old? Or was it a dead loss. One advantage of only having a small number of personnel from the UK games industry out at the show was that we could solicit the views of people who remained in the UK.
Our first stop, in pursuit of a truly independent point of view, was Nick Parker, proprietor of Parker Consulting, and one of the only games industry analyst we’ve ever met whose judgement we actually value. Like the vast majority of us, Nick didn’t make it out to Santa Monica, but he kept a very close eye on proceedings.
So, how did the big three platform-holders do? “First off, Microsoft got its bad news out of the way last week, which I’m genuinely feeling was a brave move and the right move. It didn’t drop the price of the Xbox 360 – which, again, was quite brave and showed it was sensible not to over-react – and focused on its catalogue.
"Sony was making the right noises about the PlayStation 3’s price-point, but it’s a shame it hasn’t done the same thing over here. I think for their U.K. consumer, that’s a shame – but I’m sure there will be a PS3 price-drop before Christmas over here.
The PSP announcement was interesting: it shows the company is still supportive of the format. But none of its announcements were really surprising.
"Nintendo was quite quiet, I think", he concludes.
And what of the show itself? “I don’t know whether the format was the same this year – whether publishers got the same level of exposure and noise in that environment. I don’t consider it as a standard E3 – there was not much announced that we didn’t know about already.”
So who stood out at the show? “Sony seemed to be moving in the right direction – it made most of the noise at E3. It always said that this time round, it won’t rely on exclusives but on in-house developers – we’re all waiting to see what Phil Harrison can deliver. But it’s clear that the PlayStation 3’s big Christmas will be 2008 – there will be two or three titles this year, but the big guns will come out next year.”
So, how would he sum up E3? “It has been a generally flat E3 – I don’t know if that is how it is going to be in the future.”
He’s right, of course – and that leaves us wondering whether there will even be an E3 next year.
So how was the “downsized” E3? Does it still deserve to be spoken of as on a par with E3s of old? Or was it a dead loss. One advantage of only having a small number of personnel from the UK games industry out at the show was that we could solicit the views of people who remained in the UK.
Our first stop, in pursuit of a truly independent point of view, was Nick Parker, proprietor of Parker Consulting, and one of the only games industry analyst we’ve ever met whose judgement we actually value. Like the vast majority of us, Nick didn’t make it out to Santa Monica, but he kept a very close eye on proceedings.
So, how did the big three platform-holders do? “First off, Microsoft got its bad news out of the way last week, which I’m genuinely feeling was a brave move and the right move. It didn’t drop the price of the Xbox 360 – which, again, was quite brave and showed it was sensible not to over-react – and focused on its catalogue.
"Sony was making the right noises about the PlayStation 3’s price-point, but it’s a shame it hasn’t done the same thing over here. I think for their U.K. consumer, that’s a shame – but I’m sure there will be a PS3 price-drop before Christmas over here.
The PSP announcement was interesting: it shows the company is still supportive of the format. But none of its announcements were really surprising.
"Nintendo was quite quiet, I think", he concludes.
And what of the show itself? “I don’t know whether the format was the same this year – whether publishers got the same level of exposure and noise in that environment. I don’t consider it as a standard E3 – there was not much announced that we didn’t know about already.”
So who stood out at the show? “Sony seemed to be moving in the right direction – it made most of the noise at E3. It always said that this time round, it won’t rely on exclusives but on in-house developers – we’re all waiting to see what Phil Harrison can deliver. But it’s clear that the PlayStation 3’s big Christmas will be 2008 – there will be two or three titles this year, but the big guns will come out next year.”
So, how would he sum up E3? “It has been a generally flat E3 – I don’t know if that is how it is going to be in the future.”
He’s right, of course – and that leaves us wondering whether there will even be an E3 next year.
Read More Like This
Comments
Joji 16 Jul 2007 15:59
1/3
Speaking from a gamers point of view, searching all the show coverage over the net, my overall view is that of it lacked anything we didn't know already plus it lacked atmosphere and games amazingly.
It seemed a very fragmented affair, scattered across hotel rooms and an aircraft hangar. Many games even Spong would have missed or not covered, because only the larger likes of IGN etc have the man power to see and cover. Exactly how does this new format help games again, when only the bigwigs get exposure?
Amazed by Nintendo's lack of DS games coverage, let alone Wii games. Sony had the best conference, and even that could have been better. Perhaps the fact that Sony, Ubisoft etc are now hosting their own events, away from E3, that when they show stuff at E3, most of its good but an afterthought. Unless its new stuff for 2008, what really is the point of this show (apart from playing Metroid 3, Halo 3 etc, for the first time and such)?
They need a big rethink on this supposedly better format and fast, otherwise it will die, just like ECTS and others. Like i said elsewhere, take some tips from TGS, add public attendance, shake, bake and improve.
It seemed a very fragmented affair, scattered across hotel rooms and an aircraft hangar. Many games even Spong would have missed or not covered, because only the larger likes of IGN etc have the man power to see and cover. Exactly how does this new format help games again, when only the bigwigs get exposure?
Amazed by Nintendo's lack of DS games coverage, let alone Wii games. Sony had the best conference, and even that could have been better. Perhaps the fact that Sony, Ubisoft etc are now hosting their own events, away from E3, that when they show stuff at E3, most of its good but an afterthought. Unless its new stuff for 2008, what really is the point of this show (apart from playing Metroid 3, Halo 3 etc, for the first time and such)?
They need a big rethink on this supposedly better format and fast, otherwise it will die, just like ECTS and others. Like i said elsewhere, take some tips from TGS, add public attendance, shake, bake and improve.
hollywooda 16 Jul 2007 16:09
2/3
For me (being a 360 owner) E3 was still awesome & i'm glad they still have it, (even if it's downsized) XBOX Live had a ton of trailers, demo's & press coverage of the days plus a few freebies & with all the coverage on the Web & Gametrailers it was cool to have all the new stuff to look @ & get excited about. Yer it would of been nice for some of the developers to of given us a few more playable demo's, (i mean come on!, stranglehold has been hanging around forever!, would it kill them to give us one level!) but overall i was happy with it.
Joji 16 Jul 2007 18:09
3/3
Coverage over at gametrailers was all that really got me through the lack of Live demos. Blue Dragon and Ace Combat were welcome, but Surf's Up...WTF? Didn't need to see videos on Live when the net already provides that service.
I was all for getting excited, as I usually do for E3, but I fear the changes have hurt the show more than improve it. The sight of large developers and publishers just blinds many you to the lack of small outfits, who can't get a look in. Thus, who benefits and what games are we really missing from E3? A good example of this is Mirror's Edge, which I've seen no coverage of at E3, even though EA are developing/publishing it.
Only games I saw there that I want in 2008 were ironically Mario Kart and Dark Siders (and Mirror's Edge), as there were too few 2008 games shown to know what's coming, compared to late 2007 games.
I was all for getting excited, as I usually do for E3, but I fear the changes have hurt the show more than improve it. The sight of large developers and publishers just blinds many you to the lack of small outfits, who can't get a look in. Thus, who benefits and what games are we really missing from E3? A good example of this is Mirror's Edge, which I've seen no coverage of at E3, even though EA are developing/publishing it.
Only games I saw there that I want in 2008 were ironically Mario Kart and Dark Siders (and Mirror's Edge), as there were too few 2008 games shown to know what's coming, compared to late 2007 games.