Iva Demilcol
Member
"Vita owners are a bunch of perverts"
-Jim Ryan, next week on gaming magazines.
-Jim Ryan, next week on gaming magazines.
everyone with the "but the full quote!" stuff
the full quote is still shit
sizzle reels aren't effective. great. I can agree with that. you can still show games outside of a sizzle reel! no one is forcing them to relegate every single indie game to a sizzle reel.
Yeah, I think a fully focused conference outside of E3 that has a ton of indie announcements is just a much cooler thing than a sizzle reel. I can't even remember any of the games that was in the MS indie sizzle reel. Not because they weren't memorable, but because it was just so much info at once.
I don't think indie games have much to prove anymore. They are here, they are making tons of cash, and I don't think they need to be shown right after the new Halo trailer or the big Uncharted game to prove a point ("hey this game is just as good as a AAA game!"). Now, I don't think that's a bad thing either...but my personal preference is for E3 to be all out "big" game titles.
Microsoft's conference was basically 75% indies. I didn't like it. (And I didn't really like Sony's conference this year either).
There's a good middle balance with indie games. Neither MS or Sony achieved it this year, and if it wasn't for the PSX conference later this year I'd totally be bummed out.
That's only part of it. His main point is regarding commitment to indies vs. something like VR. Sony has established they are committed to indies, that's not something in question like it might have been at the start of the gen.
The VR example is to demonstrate they see VR titles the same way.
"Vita owners are a bunch of perverts"
-Jim Ryan, next week on gaming magazines.
That's only part of it. His main point is regarding commitment to indies vs. something like VR. Sony has established they are committed to indies, that's not something in question like it might have been at the start of the gen.
The VR example is to demonstrate they see VR titles the same way.
To the people saying read the article or that's not what he meant, I've read the full article and although the headline is a bit sensationalist the context in which you can take the actual quote is open to interpretation. Which is a fuck up for any suit to make.
The guy just keeps saying the wrong things, like he could get this point across without throwing indies under a bus.
He is basically the PlayStation Yusuf Mehdi. Right intentions, wrong execution.
Great to see so many trying to defend him or justify what he says though, lol.
everyone with the "but the full quote!" stuff
the full quote is still shit
sizzle reels aren't effective. great. I can agree with that. you can still show games outside of a sizzle reel! no one is forcing them to relegate every single indie game to a sizzle reel.
theirs literally thousands.. hell millions of indie devs that will probably disagree with him
Just because you are an indie developer doesn't mean that you are right about this.
DefinitelyMicrosofts indie sizzle reel was the highlight of their show for me, and it means a lot to indies to be featured at a conference, so Ryan is acting really arrogant even in the full quote.
I am 100% sure you're right.
It's awful to say...but No Man's Sky really ruined it for a lot of indie devs. That game got 2-3 E3 showcases, and more outside E3, and was just a complete disaster at launch. They've really turned things around since then and it's a much better game these days, but I get why Sony might be hesitant in putting up another big indie title on their stage again. Should that dissuade them from doing that again? Hell no. But I think putting just one title up at your conference is not the best idea. I don't think multiple titles work either, as MS showed this year. I do think there's a middle ground but my personal preference- get indies their own awesome showcase platform and show off the best big budget titles you got. I'm surprised that's even controversial, considering we consume content in so many different ways that E3 seems like a general announcement period more than the be-all end-all mega release hype-stravaganza it used to be.
Don't think many are defending the fact that he's terrible at PR. But that the full quote isn't problematic...
I don't think indie games have much to prove anymore. They are here, they are making tons of cash, and I don't think they need to be shown right after the new Halo trailer or the big Uncharted game to prove a point ("hey this game is just as good as a AAA game!"). Now, I don't think that's a bad thing either...but my personal preference is for E3 to be all out "big" game titles.
...I mean, of course?
This thread and the dozens of negative articles that quote will generate says otherwise.....
Jim Ryan on PSVR: "Why does this thing even exist, really?""Vita owners are a bunch of perverts"
-Jim Ryan, next week on gaming magazines.
But I only just got one."Vita owners are a bunch of perverts"
-Jim Ryan, next week on gaming magazines.
I'm saying that those things were such huge stories that they would have been detrimental and benficial no matter where they were shown. Those things didn't blow up because they were at E3. They blew up because after E3 ended it became a sticking point. And it would have became a sticking point if Microsoft did nothing but detail their launch plans in a regular Youtube video or blog post. It being at E3 didn't gain or hurt exposure for anyone.Are you genuinely saying that Sony and Microsoft's 2013 E3 presentations ($399, Used Games, Always Online, etc) made NO impact on how those two consoles sold the following holiday? Optics from E3 mean alot. They won't be the end-all be-all, but they drive fan emotion and devotion.
Additionally, those indie devs are going to appreciate the advertising in front of a huge global audience. Even if most console owners never see the press conference, those games are still being exposed to players who may have never found them overwise.
Negative articles that show the full quote are problematic or that he sucks at PR?
Cause a shitty headline and click bait articles don't mean much for actual content.
The quote isn't shit just because you might have a different philosophy. That's not why this thread was made and thats not what's being discussed.
That's only part of it. His main point is regarding commitment to indies vs. something like VR. Sony has established they are committed to indies, that's not something in question like it might have been at the start of the gen.
The VR example is to demonstrate they see VR titles the same way.
Sony had a particular set of things they wanted to show and limited time. Should they have cut footage of some of their huge 1st party titles to show random indies available on multiple platforms? No company would do that. There is no moral imperative for Sony to show indie games at their E3 presser.
Nothing Jim said was inflammatory. I actually agree with him about showing a montage of indies; it's pretty pointless and tells us nothing about the indies they're showing.
With that said, I would like to see Sony give some stage time to indie titles. Instead of a montage of 20 games they could just feature 2-3 notable indies.
Both. Why give him the rope to hang himself? He didn't have to put his point across in the way he did, that's PR101. He should know better but after the last few days, maybe he doesn't?
nah the quote is still shit. you can disagree of course but that's my take.
this isn't an either/or scenario. they can show their commitment to both. especially since their conference this year was on the shorter side compared to what they've done previously.
like I said above Sony's conference was a bit shorter than it usually is so they wouldn't have had to cut anything. I don't think this was a case where they had a limited amount of time and couldn't fit in more content, it's that indie games were not a priority for them at E3 this year which is a shame.
And then they show all of the VR games in a quick sizzle reel. Yeah, i don't think Jim really knows what he is talking about.
Exactly. Why single out indie games as something not worth showing at E3? A short sizzle real with a glimpse of gameplay for 10 indie games would be less meaningless than showing a target render for a AAA game without gameplay.Not that I wholly disagree with the point you want to make, but "they are here, they are making tons of cash" also applies to most AAA releases, so it kind of invalidates the purpose of E3 as a whole if that's the criteria you use to stop showcasing something there.
I mean, I didn't disagree with you that he's terrible at PR. He is.
Still doesn't make the full quote problematic. That sites will run clickbait articles and this thread is the way it is shows issues with more than just his lack of PR skills.
That's the point of the quote though?
They established their commitment to indies. Now they need to for VR, which is an area up in the air. Yea, I don't disagree on the content of the conference but that's seperate from the meaning of his point.
Exactly. Why single out indie games as something not worth showing at E3? A short sizzle real with a glimpse of gameplay for 10 indie games would be less meaningless than showing a target render for a AAA game without gameplay.
again, this isn't an either/or scenario. they can show their commitment to VR and their ongoing commitment to indie games. one does not come at the expense of the other.