upnorthsox
Veteran
Oh sure, now he's concerned with how cancelling E3 will effect others when earlier he was simply smitten at the idea of not having to go to E3.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Yes, something brought up by a few indie developers on Twitch shows in the past whenever the specter of E3 going away was discussed. While there are certainly other conventions E3 was the largest WRT developer, publisher and investor involvement.
It may not be something he'd been consciously aware of until more indie developers talked to him about how important a large convention like E3 can be for them. And even if he was aware, he may not have understood the scale of its importance to a broad spectrum of developers who aren't already associated with a large publisher.
Again this doesn't mean that E3 is necessary. But something of a similar scale as E3 with the primary focus being on the publishers, developers and investors is, IMO, needed. The other conventions around the world are either smaller or are far more focused on public interactions rather than publisher, developer, investor interactions.
Additionally, for many casual gamers, having a Singular time each year where a ton of gaming related news is released is convenient and very nice to have. Again, it doesn't have to be E3, as long as there something else similar where pretty much every large publisher releases information on games that are releasing or in the pipeline.
People like me just don't have the time to follow every gaming site or ever gaming forum or ever publisher. I like having 1 week a year where a large amount of gaming news is disseminated to the public. I don't care when it is or who organizes it or what country it happens in. Just as long as there's one time a year where a large gaming info dump happens. And I'm not alone, I've heard this from a lot of people including people that would be considered core gamers AND people who think E3 isn't necessary.
Regards,
SB
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
And yet the article mentioned other event like GDX and PAX so these meetings clearly don't only happen because of E3.
Am I the only person who read the article?
but E3 is the largest of the group. That's sort of the point of what everyone is getting at.And yet the article mentioned other event like GDX and PAX so these meetings clearly don't only happen because of E3.
Am I the only person who read the article?
Yes there are multiple conventions in which these meetups do happen; but not all the deals are done in a single day. Perhaps they meet at PAX and are interested but want to see more before they invest. They wait to see it again at the next convention and so forth.
At the end of the day, these contracts can be upward to a million dollars or more, with that amount of cash people will want to meet in person and see the progress before they put forward money.
Look I get your point about how you think it's useless, but it's clear that to many groups it's still useful.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
E3 is larger because it's padded out with press and the public - who don't matter if the goal is put devs in touch with publishers. GDC is by far are the largest event full of people who actually matter in this regard.
I didn't say it's useless, it's just the world has moved in terms of engaging with the largest body of gamers. Many of the largest players in the industry apparently agree, hence why they aren't at E3 anymore.
Covid-19 might be the impetus for new methods to be created? As I say, alternatives are certainly possible these days. E3 is legacy methods created before remote meet-ups and whatnot. As a physical product isn't needing to be shown, unlike investment in a new invention or board-game or somesuch, there's no need for a physical meet up. The industry could (and should) get together to work out a way of finding and supporting games. Or...companies can compete. EA could come up with a submission portal, "show us your game," and then Ubi would try to one-up them, and so forth. That's the more usual approach, devs having to fill in 100 different forms for 100 different people, until someone pulls it all together into one form. That's how it's been with Film Festival submissions. You used to have to submit to each individually, then Withabox was created to submit to multiple festivals through the one portal. That one commanded a fee; I think there's a newer one that's free.
Nothing in the world stopping the game industry doing similar, except a will and leadership.
Nothing in the world stopping the game industry doing similar, except a will and leadership.
E3 2021 is back on the table and has dates outlined ... https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2020-04-04-the-esa-sets-dates-for-e3-2021
The ESA has announced the dates for its next E3 conference: June 15 to 17, 2021.
The news was shared with partners this evening, with the ESA saying it would hold a "reimagined" event next year.
E3 2020 was cancelled as of last month due to COVID-19, with the ESA saying at the time it was "exploring options with our members to coordinate an online experience to showcase industry announcements and news in June 2020."
However, there is currently no update as to whether or not the ESA is still planning a digital event in 2020.
The news was shared with partners this evening, with the ESA saying it would hold a "reimagined" event next year.
E3 2020 was cancelled as of last month due to COVID-19, with the ESA saying at the time it was "exploring options with our members to coordinate an online experience to showcase industry announcements and news in June 2020."
However, there is currently no update as to whether or not the ESA is still planning a digital event in 2020.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
In one of those extraordinarily rare celestial events, I agree with eastman.
E3 has been a cornerstone event for many gamers for 20+ years but it's raison d'être - it's reason for being for those who do not speak French - was to communicate from industry to media to consumers - which has long since been a chain with one-too-many parties. If you ever went to E3 or PAX or Gamescom, you would immediately realise that certain events were aimed to consumers/fans and the other was tethered to a communications channel that no longer needs to exist. I still remain optimistic that E3 can evolve but they need to accept reality that publishers do not need E3 to communicate with gamers, abandon the profiteering for such communication, and accept that E3 for gamers is a time/place that still holds significance and capitalise on that.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
In one of those extraordinarily rare celestial events, I agree with eastman.
Also, for industry to communicate to industry. That was arguably the larger purpose of E3 than the Industry to Media connection. But close enough that you can consider them equal focuses of the event.
It's only due to the start of print media dying that E3 attempted to directly incorporate a tiny bit of direct consumer interaction.
But even the industry to industry portion of it fades a bit with AAA publishers focusing on a smaller and smaller pool of funded games. And indie publishers are more focused on the fringe events like PAX or regional conferences that most never hear about. PAX is relatively large now, but it's still more on the fringes. In addition less hardware companies means less need for multiple meetings between publishers and developers and hardware companies (addons, accessories, etc.).
That also makes me think of one of the unfortunately consequences of the internet and easy spread of information. The more easily information is available the less tolerant consumers are for multiple brands offering the same type of product. IE - they'll gravitate towards the 1 or 2 companies consistently offering the higher rated product (even if it's only marginally better than say the next 3-10 companies products).
Regards,
SB
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
The industry does not need E3 to communicate. Industry will do what it does the other 51 weeks of the year.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
The industry does not need E3 to communicate. Industry will do what it does the other 51 weeks of the year.
Which would be for small startup game developers to get ignored by large publishers.
E3 helped make larger publishers more approachable for smaller developers.That goes for the hardware side of things as well. With hardware startups meeting with game developers or publishers to get their thing supported. Doesn't happen as much as it used to.
Sure, you can do those things the other 51 weeks of the year. But for cash strapped developers, it's the difference between having to expend money to meet multiple publishers once a year at one event or spending cash multiple times a year in an attempt to meet multiple publishers across the globe.
E3, conveniently put everyone in the same place at the same time significantly reducing the cost of industry to industry meetings. You get bits and pieces of that at other events, but nothing on the scale of E3, which is why it was so important for so long.
Much of this can now be done over the internet, of course, but face to face meetings are still preferred in many cases. Hence, Phil Spencer mentioning making multiple trips to Japan to talk to Japanese game developers and publishers. I'm sure there was also a lot of face to face meetings leading up to MS acquiring all of those developers recently.
Of course, for that example, MS has money to burn in order to accomplish these things. But for smaller developers chasing the large publishers, they don't have that luxury.
Regards,
SB
Why do you think society won't adapt? If there is a need for publishers to find promising indies, they'll find a way to do it. If you give them a way, like E3, they'll use that, but once that's taken away, they'll find some other solution.Which would be for small startup game developers to get ignored by large publishers.
We are Borg.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
That was my point about E3 losing significance even there to an extent. The trend lately has been for smaller catalogues from the larger publishers making it more difficult for new and/or smaller developers to get picked up by larger publishers. Now, there are still avenues there. EA, UBIsoft, and Square Enix have a program to push select indie developers. But, I believe, that's more of a case of the publisher going after an indie they are interested in versus an Indie trying to convince those publishers to pick them up.
But, even with that, you don't see as many situations nowadays of a large publisher picking up an unknown or relatively unknown developer and giving them a AAA budget to work on. Like say when Infinity Ward got its start with Activision with the first COD.
It's also far easier for small developers to self publish now thanks to Steam as well as some of the smaller indie storefronts like Itch.io. That further impacts E3's relevance to the industry.
So, something like E3 is still really important, even though there's various things all chipping away at the importance it held say 20 years ago. If it goes away the impact will be felt, just not as hard as it would have 10 years ago.
If it goes away, which it likely will, there will be no choice but to adapt. Whether the adaptation that happens is as good, worse, or better? Who knows?
Regards,
SB
I don't understand. If pubs aren't publishing indie titles any more, what's the value of E3? What are the deals happening at E3 that are at risk?
Silent_Buddha
Legend
There's less of it, not an absence of it. And while the big publishers are more averse to risk and thus relying more and more on a smaller catalogue of games from proven developers, there are plenty of smaller publishers that have popped up.
E3 thus remains as an economical way for smaller publishers and developers to have multiple meetings with multiple different developers or publishers versus trying to arrange meetings at different times of the year in different locations around the world.
Regards,
SB
Similar threads
- Locked
