@DeadlyMustard: Ah, if so, I must have forgotten. I got the game when it came out, so I likely wasn't paying much attention. But hey, at least it isn't Sonic Boom.
Sounds like an explanation from a man who isn't interested in answering this question anymore. He's probably tired of talking about the franchise. He ended it six months ago. He probably want to move on. Wouldn't blame him. He never seemed interested in giving the zombies an origin.
Jfc, and I thought Mr. X was nerve wracking. Tyrant seems terrifying enough with weapons, but they gave him a friggin flamethrower?! He doesn't need one of those! Looks great, can't wait to play it.
I agree. Why would Sony want to get wrapped up in a battle with MS at E3? It doesn't make sense. Sony doesn't want the focus to be on which system is better. Look, we all like to argue about which system is better, which has better games, which one sells more, etc. But each company does well and no matter who is 'better', neither Sony, nor MS are going to suffer in the console war. All three of the major companies do very well and any amount of arguing about which one is better is irrelevant. So, why would should Sony care about trying to compete at E3 with MS over console reveals when they can just do their own thing and have their own attention all to themselves? Sony will do their own thing at some point soon and not have to worry about sharing that event with anyone else. It's a smart move and Sony will benefit from it.
Truth is, none of the big companies need E3. E3 is a product of a time when the internet didn't have the massive presence and impact it has in our lives today. It was necessary at a point. Now, we get everything we need from the web. Smaller developers will find much more benefit from E3 as a way to give a big reveal for their games and products. Even Xbox doesn't need E3 and could probably generate just as much traffic for their new system as Sony and Nintendo by holding their own event separate from E3.
Last year was a little more dull for E3 without Sony, but I can't say it was necessary and it's not really necessary this year either. Sony does their own thing throughout the year and that's all we need. The PS5 is coming out end of year and we'll get all the info we need on it from Sony directly. Why should they waste money on a big, extravagant presence at E3, when they give us everything we need 3-4 times a year? Last E3 demonstrated that it is becoming less and less relevant by becoming a less and less interesting showcase for the public to get gaming info. We're inundated by it all year long. Sure, some of the conferences are good fun. Keanu coming out for Cyberpunk was huge, but for the most part, E3 has become a much less relevant necessity as we've had more access to gaming info and demos as time's gone on. Sony's doing the smart thing here by saving money and still giving us the same thing we'd get from them at E3, but throughout the year.
@barcaazul: Sure it's better. Why do they need to waste money going to E3 when they can just do their own thing 3-4 times a year and give us the same info we would get from E3? Most people who get info on future gaming don't go to E3, since it's an industry event. So that means that any games that might be playable won't matter to most people anyway. So what does that leave? Game trailers, news, and videos, which we can all get year round anyway. They don't need a big, expensive event to give us those things.
@johnd13: My theater didn't have that reaction. I agree, it was poorly executed. Still not a bad idea. I actually find the idea of the heir to the light side and the heir of the dark side of the force defying their fate to be a good idea for a Star Wars saga. In this case though, it was poorly developed and needed a lot more time to be fleshed out.
Pierce_Sparrow's comments