The logistics of GS E3 coverage, year after year, is not only very expensive, but really BIG. The amount of cables, hard disc drives, switches, routers, cameras, batteries; and equally thelive streaming, data shovelling, uploads, downloads and general traffic during the E3 ...is gigantic.

A couple years ago the ONLY place to follow E3 online was ... Gamespot.com. True, you had some other websites (most of them smaller, or it was Yahoo! etc..) but when Gamespot started live webcasts from the floor, there was NO other place video game fans wanted to be.

AND YET, many video game publishers and their Marketing & PR handlers STILL treated video game websites like some Charles Dickens characters: dirty little children, who probably also steal. The access for online-only media was restricted, as far as I know the old stories.

You had your BIG video game print magazines, you had your mainstream media national newspapers and TV, who were most welcome and even International Press courted in private sessions behind closed doors. Not the online only outlets. Around that time, when Gamespot & others were trying to convince the publishers, that these websites had a wider spread and more audiences (before Google Analytics) Gamespot seemed to took their fate in their own hands and decided to do something: they covered E3 by doing a live show from the floor*.

At that time, Gamespot - to my rather poor recollection - broke record after record for a video game website. Most visitors, most clicks, most hits, most video streams. They teamed up with Akamai to keep up with the traffic from all over the world. Gamespot had a loyal fanbase and did the 'social media' thingy long before it became a thing called Twitter. Gamespot's success made publishers and competitors react. Covering E3 via live-streams became 'a thing'. Giving access to online-only media is now nothing special. It was a process, but big publishers recognized the value in giving enthusiast online press and even amateur bloggers access to their (still highly controlled) marketing messages. They learned, that their fans want access. They know it so well, that they started to skip the middle-man and are trying to bond with their customers directly (Facebook, Twitter, Blogs) - but there still is a value in having 'Partners' covering their games.

Just like print magazines, E3 lost it's importance for the mainstream public over the years, but not for retailers or media. Game companies learned to control their message and trickle information throughout the year. The build up for E3 is going on a month before the show (media events). E3 is still the most important event - despite the rise of other events (GamesCom in Europe is now bigger in size). The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) making E3 a big size public media event again after the Dark Year in 2007 (and the big publishers doing their bid), was the right choice. It needs to be visible to mainstream America. It needs to be a more public event. The success of GamesCom in Cologne proves the value of a mixed event (part business partners/media - part public/fans).

So, let's enjoy another crazy year from the best place you can get during E3: not from the floor of theLos Angeles Convention Center, but rather... fromyour home - avoiding the noise, the waiting lines, the endless floors, the bad food, bad demo environment, no-access behind-closed-doors stuff -following all the news and updates instantly when they are 'unlocked' and watching the live video stream from this very website? (with an additional post-mortem daily recap in the evening by the drinking Renegades from GB)

*I never worked for CNET nor Gamespot. I don't know how things really happened and why. I am just recollecting elements from my memory. If I am factually wrong, feel free to correct me or call me out.