Why The Game Industry Needs In-Person Shows Despite The End Of E3

Skewed and Reviewed kick off 2024 with a look at the need for in-person game conventions with the End of E3 and compares the cost-cutting methods of Hollywood who still value in-person events.

[gold_drake]

so, this article didnt tell me why we NEED to have in-person shows like e3, other than the authors nostalgia and remembrance of covering one of these shows.

but it also doesnt mention everyone outside of america who have never had the chance to see it in person either haha
we had to watch the darn livestream, if they had it available, at 3am in the morning haha with lags amd crashes (not all the time)

while i think these shows are great and all, i dont really "need" to have them. people are busy, im busy. id rather watch a livestream than to book a flight, a hotel etc.

but theres still pax and all of that.

[Garethvk]

I did mention that you cannot have hands-on and meetings with key people and the excitement. Europe has Gamescom and had Paris Games Week and N.A
Needs an industry event again.

A Livestream does not even come close to what was lost. I much prefer seeing and playing the games in person and asking questions to developers and marketing people versus watching talking heads doing shtick on a scripted showcase with a carefully edited video.

[gold_drake]

"need" is a strong word for it, imo.

"good to have it" would be a better way to describe it.

and sure, gamescom is in se germanland, paris week in .. paris.

most people dont rly care for it anymore. they either tune in to a livestream or vod or read about it online.

but opinions are opinions. if u think we Need them, then there ya go.

[Garethvk]

I think the industry needs them. The rank and file public not as much but our coverage is greatly limited via livestreams compared to what it was to say nothing of streams. Hands on previews Re very limited as well as we used to play big games months before release.

[ApocalypseShadow]

I get what you're saying. In person is always preferable with a hands on. Because there are those like myself that like to try before buying. That likes physical mostly over digital.

But having said that, I think it's more *your personal need* than a need for the industry itself. You need to be the middleman giving your point of view, possibly your own personal bias or subjectivity or objectivity to the equation. *We* as gamers don't actually NEED it. We can come to the same conclusions, positive or negative about a game as you can.

Companies like Sony or Nintendo used to sit back and watch others give their take on things that were negative to the message or had an agenda. Especially during the PS3 era of website bias, swag bags, advertising hand shakes, biased video, free laptops, etc.

Companies like Sony took the reigns and decided to let their base see for themselves what the games look like, than through the eyes of some journalists, bloggers and vloggers looking to cash in on click bait and advertising.

Delivering their message directly to the consumer killed a lot of that nonsense. You see the developers, you see the game, and in many cases, you can speak to these developers on discord than worrying about some article's take on something.

It's not that I want you to become obsolete. But for some, I'm glad it killed their business practices. Also, we live in an era where these games could be streamed directly to the consumers after the presentation from Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft that gives that hands on of a game. They just have to implement that technology and make it high quality without latency. And *WE* as gamers can speak to each other on a preferred media platform and give our opinions on the gameplay we just experienced. Many journalists have not been fully honest on games before release because they fear losing their backstage pass and free gifts. We would know just by playing if a game is something we want. Remote play is possible now without lines, without expensive trips, etc.

To close, Sony has sold mostly 50 million PS5 consoles, over 110 million PS4 consoles and Nintendo has sold over 120 million consoles without a journalist take. They delivered their message and it's still reaching the consumers they are targeting without spending the millions of dollars on in person setup at a venue

I get what you're saying. I lived through the whole era when E3 was created and watched. But I don't need it and never been to one. And really don't need a journalist to tell me what to like or dislike.

[EvertonFC]

The ques for 1 game were 4 hours long for the most part, that's NOT fun.

[S2Killinit]

The problem with live shows was that it became all smoke and mirrors and a show of things not related to gaming. Therefore I would argue that it added a new layer of cost to the game developers and console holders that necessarily will need to made up for. Either we the consumer have to pay for that cost or the developer/manufacturer will have to bear the cost thereby taking away from profits leading to smaller studios dying out.

Remember xbox buying celebrities to make appearances? Thats a good example of unnecessary cost.

[JackBNimble]

You don't need to go to the movies either, you can sit on your ass and watch any number of streams but that doesn't make it any better then actually going out.

This generation has become so spoiled and lazy.

[gold_drake]

booking a flight and a hotel aint the same as going to the movies, but pop off i guess ha.

[Garethvk]

Streaming cannot replace the communal experience of event films.

[EvertonFC]

Actually it does, for one it's cheaper eating my own snacks at home than over priced pi** take cinema prices. 2 it's About £150 to take the family to the cinema or £15 for a new cinema release and watch at home on my awesome 4k TV.
3 We can pause the film when needed, sit in the warmth of our home and have no di*kheads talking through the movie.
That's called using your brain, not being lazy or spoiled dude.

[TheColbertinator]

I'd rather publishers send out closed betas to garner gamer concern and interest like how we had demos back in the day.

I don't miss E3 as much as I loved it at one point but that era is long gone.

[Garethvk]

There is a need but refinement was and is needed.

[Zenzuu]

Sad to see it go. It was a great event for gamers and developers all around the world getting together and celebrate gaming as a community.

The announcements of new games/hardware, hype, surprises and seeing live audience reactions, it's something only events like E3 are able to bring. It will be missed...

[hombreacabado]

if its going to be anything like the game awards where celebrities that dont even play games are there and its just full of fluff and commercial crap than no we dont need in person shows. we just end up watching the trailer montages the next day anyway.

[Shiro173]

To be honest E3 was one of my favorite times of the years when I was younger. I couldn't wait for all the big conferences and new announcements. It was hype even if nothing good was announced we had cringe moments to laugh at.

[frostypants]

E3 was not originally intended to be open to the public. It was an industry/media trade show only. A fun one, but still a trade show. When they opened it up it became a circus, and the slow decline began.

[mastershredder]

Absolutely not. The in-person show became a spectacle directed at people it was not intended for. This is why it died. For those relevant, other events had already taken it's place. E3 became a money sucking consumer game-media and fan pacifier. Yuck and Nopes. GDCs and CES is the way now.

Cost-cutting methods of Hollywood? Holy hell, where did you pull that rabbit out of?