Some of the comments (whining) in here is really quite hilarious. Some of you are acting as if all the publishers got together and decided to shut down game production and stop video games altogether. E3 is NOT the be all and end all of gaming. It's becoming smaller, not disappearing entirely. Does there really need to be a huge mega-booth filled with babes in order for gamers to get excited about "Game X" or "Console Z"? Does a more "intimate" E3 mean that it will be filled with less information or less big announcements? I mean, Geebus, it's an industry show. Shouldn't the industry have a say in how they present themselves? Gamespot can still show the live streams of the press conferences and they can still have a live (most likely more subdued) interviews from the expo. Hell, I'm betting the developers will still be clamoring to do streams like Gamespot's live show. Does no one else covet substance over excess? E3 may have less flash, but I don't get the impression that also equals less information. There should still be plenty of good stuff to get excited about where E3 is concerned and more than enough content to warrant an extention to my GS subscription.
E3 (currently) is like having a dog that runs away from home, flys to Sweden, gets a species change operation, and comes back home as a cat. You have that cat put to sleep and you go get a new dog. Time for a new E3.
1. Any Myth 2. Any Starcraft 3. Any Sims 4. Zelda: Wind Waker (I've never gone farther than the first island) 5. Super Mario 64 (never owned an N64, I went thru a huge anti-cartridge phase in '96)
SpiritOf's comments