Yesterday, the death of E3 was announced.
The organizers of the conference say it will continue but in July rather than May and downsized to an elite fraction of its legendary size. The cause:
The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) shindig has been a staple of game industry life since the mid-1990s. However, the larger exhibitors have jointly decided that the costs of the event do not justify the returns, generally measured in media exposure.
Publishers believe the multi-million dollar budgets would be better spent on more company-focused events that bring attention to their own product lines rather than the industry as a whole.
Well placed sources say the news that larger exhibitors were pulling out had prompted urgent meetings among publishing executives. They decided that, without the support of the larger software publishers and hardware manufacturers, there would be no point in continuing.
The buzz among my friends in the videogame industry was immediate and mixed. A marking executive at a major publisher told me it was great news, that they do a month and change of intimate events at each of the half-dozen major buyers where their games get better attention. It's not like the lightning rounds at E3 -- ten minutes behind closed door and onto the next meeting -- and happens later in the year, closer to code-lock for Xmas releases.
As someone with videogame production experience, I know how sucky it was to have to make a demo for E3. You had to start in February at the latest to make the mid-May event. Whatever you created was couldn't be used as the publicly released game demo and you created so much garbage code just to make it work, integration was a wash.
On the flip side, all those smaller publishers and many developers are losing a lot. E3 was a single place to meet the industry (these guys don't necessarily have the resources to fly all over the country and wine/dine WalMart) and generate buzz for their products. Big game publishers, the Electronic Arts' of the world have healthy marketing budgets, but with some E3 booths and parties costing into the seven figures, why not spend that dough on private events that can't be co-opted by someone's else's better marketing or games?
I did a little Web search and found what I think is a pretty smart article and forum, on BBC News. The Brits are sharp about their games and I was fortunate to work for a few of them when I was in production, so here's some savvy opinions regarding the impact:
The net result will be that the smaller games companies will get squeezed out, or at least relegated to a local motel in the hope that someone stops for a coffee on the way to Microsoft, EA or one of big names.
Julian Cook, Ashford, Kent
I think this is a good move for the videogame industry, but i will miss all the fireworks & drama.
Mark Smyth, Belfast
This part of the text made me smile: "But the owners of E3 say the expo will change for 2007 to reflect changes in the videogames industry." Does this mean its going to evolve into a sub-standard sequel or yet another rush-released franchise title?
Carl Johnson, Las Venturas, San Andreas
...gamers shouldn't worry too much, given the size of the industry (and the big releases planned next year) someone will step in and create something new to take its place, E3 will become distant memory.
Harry Sagger, London
This is a great shame. Still I guess it was the next logical step for them after getting rid of the "booth babes" ;-)
Miles Henderson, Ipswich
Goodbye booth babes, ta-ta massive influx of talented videogame makers into Los Angeles for a week every May, farewell you elusive Sony Playstation party ticket.
GAME OVER.
No comments:
Post a Comment