Recently the ESA has had to defend its honor from lawsuits from several different states. The outcome has been unanimously that fining businesses that sell games or forcing M-rated games to have different packaging or be kept in a separate place is just unconstitutional. And rightly so. The thing that irks me the most about all this, however, is not that gaming is being attacked on all fronts right now, although that is annoying. The thing that is most irritating is that new states every other month are popping up to file similar suits when they have overwhelming evidence (in the form of the other states that lost) that they will lose. I get they want to make a statement about what our children should and should not be able to have in their own hands, but could they possibly try to make said statement without costing us billions of dollars? Because that is who loses the most out of all this, not the gaming companies or the children. It is the average taxpayers who pay 30 % or more of their paychecks to the government, who then throws that money away on something they know has no constitional merit and thus no real chance of winning. The only real winners here are the lawyers representing the states and the ESA. And no offense to lawyers, but that is a depressing thought. The government does not seem to care all that much about violence in movies either. I have not played Manhunt 2 yet of course, but I cannot imagine that there is anything in that game to match the disgusting things on display in Hostel and its sequel. That is a gore porn, and unless the protagonist of Manhunt 2 starts feasting on the private parts of his victims, I don't see how the government can keep up this double standard.

E3 2007 has long come and gone, and for the most part I would call it less than successful. Most gaming journalists have sounded off and said they were for the most part happier and felt they were able to see more than in E3's heyday of more than 50,000 fans daily. I think they are missing the big picture though. It is all well and good that their jobs are easier to accomplish than before, and I understand a desire to have more time with the games and producers of said games. But I mean E3's main goal is publicity after all, and I for one felt that this year the games got less of a spotlight than in years past. For example, local TV news stations all across the country would broadcast the grand spectacle that was the E3 of old. This year I heard nothing from the mainstream press, and for an industry like gaming that is still young and trying to establish its identity and prove itself amidst the controversy Ms. Clinton and her colleagues like to stir up, the old E3 attracted mainly positive attention across the board. With E3 going through its personality change, a power vacuum opened, and people started claiming that the Penny Arcade Expo, the Leipzig Games conference, or TGS would spiritually take its place. The one that came closest was TGS, but still it is not the same as having a great gaming show in America.

So how do we fix this conundrum? 1. Well, for starters, move E3 to the middle or end of August. Developers complained that in May their products were not close to being ready to show off, but the middle of July did not seem to be that much better for most of them. August is right at the cusp of the competitive holiday season, and more developers would have more to show. Also, with Blizzcon, Quakecon, and Sony's yearly FanFaire, August has become the go-to month for gaming conventions. I say we make August National Gaming Month (what better month than the dog days of summer when it is painful to be outside?) and set up an official Academy so we can have our own legitimate awards show akin to the Oscars (sorry, Spike TV and G4oria, you guys are just not gonna cut it). But I digress. 2.The one unanimous thing people said they did NOT like at this year's E3 was the way different events were at different hotels. So I think having a central location is necessary and practical. So just do it already, ESA. 3. Still have 2 or 3 days for just journalists, but also have 2 days for the general public to attend. The main keynote speeches for the big 3 could still happen during the days with the press, and it would be up to them if they wanted to have their own second speech for the gaming crowds or just TV monitors recapping the main parts of their keynote while gamers sit in line to try demos. It's not like the gamers at the old E3 were not spending inordinate amounts of time in line waiting, so why not give them something to look at while they sit and wait? Trailers of the new games or big announcements would go over very well, I am certain. 4. The ESA can still set guidelines for the open to the public days. If they want to set a cap for the amount of people at 40,000, that's their decision. If they want the booth babes gone or to come with a dress code, that is their prerogative. If they want a cap on the amount of square feet each publisher can have, I think they can probably take care of that easily too.

The main point I am trying to make is that E3 served a purpose beyond just showing gamers what is coming soon for their favorite consoles. It also served as a gateway to the rest of the mainstream press, an important one. More importantly, it gave regular gamers the chance to get their hands on the games they were most excited about and then go back to their blogs and give their own personal opinions. I think there has to be a happy balance between the E3 of old and the new. What do you guys think? Can't E3 be everything to everyone?