Report: ESA Committed to Holding E3 in 2009

July 23, 2008 -

The Entertainment Software Association, which operates E3, has told GameSpot that despite rampant criticism of this year's expo the game publishers trade association is already gearing up for the 2009 show.

No additional details were provided. GameSpot attributes this quote to to an unnamed ESA rep:

As we do every year, we're beginning the process of surveying exhibitors and attendees to determine potential changes to the Summit. Once this is completed and shared with the ESA's Board of Directors, we will make an announcement about the specifics of the 2009 E3 Media & Business Summit, which will occur.

GP: While it is the nature of organizations to put on a brave face, there are a couple of facts that need to be weighed against the ESA rep's comments.

The first is that since E3 '08 wrapped up less than a week ago it seems a bit early to commit to a 2009 show. One might expect that exhibitor debriefs as well as a thorough E3 post-mortem need to take place in order to sort out what went wrong and determine whether it is fixable. That's especially true given the fairly widespread negative reaction to this year's expo, including this rather definitive comment attributed by the San Francisco Chronicle to EA CEO John Riccitiello:

I hate E3 like this. Either we need to go back to the old E3, or we'll have to have our own private events.

Moreover, the ESA rep's comment seems to imply that the ESA will tell the board of directors (which is comprised of top execs from ESA member game publishers) what's happening with E3, but we'd expect it will be the other way 'round. And since EA happens to be chairing the ESA board this year, one has to wonder. 


Comments

Re: Report: ESA Committed to Holding E3 in 2009

If even EA thinks soemthing is bad for the industry, you got a problem.

Re: Report: ESA Committed to Holding E3 in 2009

I keep hearing a lot of people saying that this year's E3 was a big let down.  On the other hand, I did watch a little of the show on G4 and some of their post-show wrap-up as well.  The show may have been a disappointment, but there were some incredible looking games.  Games such as Infamous, Dark Void, Fallout 3, and Fable 2 (to name a few).  So if there were some awesome games, how can we really say it was a let down?  Sure, there weren't any surprises, Nintendo was stingy, the keynote was delivered by a politician, and a few other things, but the games were there.  And isn't that what we really care about?

Re: Report: ESA Committed to Holding E3 in 2009

Part of the problem is that the games WERE NOT there. Traditionally, most games on the floor are the holiday releases for that year, or at most, summer releases of the next year. How many games at this year's E3 will get released by summer 09? Not many. And pushing that date back to holliday 08, we start to get an even smaller number. Then tack on how many playable demo's were available and we start to reach that magic number 0. Sure there were a few games that caught the public's eye. But I'm willing to bet a large majority of games that people are excited about from this years E3 will be showing up again at E3 09 (if they even have one).

Finally, tack on the fact it cost the ESA $5 million when they decided to change to a smaller venue, and you realize that the ESA dropped the ball... big time.

Re: Report: ESA Committed to Holding E3 in 2009

E3 was Epic Fail.  Finish it ESA!

Re: Report: ESA Committed to Holding E3 in 2009

Private events sounds good to me -- we could get a year-long series of conferences across the continent instead of just waiting on the slow trickle of an increasingly irrelevant annual summit.  (We don't get a whole lot of gaming shows in Ottawa.)

---
The Mammon Industry

---
Fangamer

Re: Report: ESA Committed to Holding E3 in 2009

Good for them I suppose.  Glad they're committed to a concept no one else cares about.  Yeesh.  No wonder companies are leaving.

"Even if it was online gaming that somehow inspired him to kill his parents, he must have realised at some point that they wouldn't drop any good loot." - GP member, Doomsong
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonyes it help a sub section of the poor, but hurt both the middle and upper class. in the end way more people were hurt than helped. also, it hurt most poor people as well.04/16/2014 - 12:13am
SeanBJust goes to show what I have said for years. Your ability to have sex does not qualify you for parenthood.04/15/2014 - 9:21pm
NeenekoSo "worked" vs "failed" really comes down to who you think is more important and deserving04/15/2014 - 7:04pm
NeenekoThough I am also not sure we can say NYC failed. Rent control helped the people it was intended for and is considered a failure by the people it was designed to protect them from.04/15/2014 - 7:04pm
NeenekoIf they change the rules, demand will plummet. Though yeah, rent control probably would not help much in the SF case. I doubt anything will.04/15/2014 - 1:35pm
TheSmokeyOnline gamer accused of murdering son to keep playing - http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2014/04/15/21604921.html04/15/2014 - 11:50am
Matthew Wilsonyup, but curent city rules do not allow for that.04/15/2014 - 11:00am
ZippyDSMleeIf SF dose not start building upwards then they will price people out of the aera.04/15/2014 - 10:59am
Matthew Wilsonthe issue rent control has it reduces supply, and in SF case they already has a supply problem. rent control ofen puts rent below cost, or below profit of selling it. rent control would not fix this issue.04/15/2014 - 10:56am
NeenekoRent control is useful in moderation, NYC took it way to far and tends to be held up as an example of them not working, but in most cases they are more subtle and positive.04/15/2014 - 10:24am
PHX CorpBeating Cancer with Video Games http://mashable.com/2014/04/14/steven-gonzalez-survivor-games/04/15/2014 - 9:21am
Matthew Wilsonwhat are you saying SF should do rent control, that has never worked every time it has been tried. the issue here is a self inflicted supply problem imposed by stupid laws.04/15/2014 - 8:52am
E. Zachary KnightNeeneko, Government created price controls don't work though. They may keep prices down for the current inhabitants, but they are the primary cause of recently vacated residences having astronomical costs. Look at New York City as a prime example.04/15/2014 - 8:50am
NeenekoI think free markets are important, but believe in balance. Too much of any force and things get unstable.04/15/2014 - 7:25am
NeenekoWell, the traditional way of keeping prices down is what they are doing, controls on lease termination and tax code, but it will not be enough in this case.04/15/2014 - 7:24am
Matthew WilsonI said that already04/14/2014 - 4:22pm
E. Zachary KnightMatthew, The could also lower prices by increasing supply. Allow high rise apartment buildings to be built to fulfill demand and prices will drop.04/14/2014 - 3:48pm
Matthew Wilsonthe only way they could keep the price's down, would be to kick out google, apple, amazon, and other tech companies, but that would do a ton of economic damage to SF, but I am a major proponent of free markets04/14/2014 - 2:54pm
NeenekoThe community people are seeking gets destroyed in the process, and the new people are not able to build on themselves. Generally these situations result in local cultural death in a decade or so, and no one wins.04/14/2014 - 2:09pm
NeenekoWell yes, that is the 'free market', but the market is only a small piece of a much larger system. The market does not always do the constructive thing.04/14/2014 - 2:06pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician