-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Almost 2 months later- was the Nintendo E3 Direct a better method?
- Thread starter metalslimer
- Start date
I think Nintendo Directs do well at maintaining hype, but they certainly don't create it.
Nintendo might have had enough for a mediocre conference had they not shown most of their 2013 3ds news and the Sega partnership announcement during previous NDs. That and a stage demo or two could have made for a fairly disappointing, 1.5 hour conference as opposed to a definitely disappointing 40 minute Direct.
Nintendo might have had enough for a mediocre conference had they not shown most of their 2013 3ds news and the Sega partnership announcement during previous NDs. That and a stage demo or two could have made for a fairly disappointing, 1.5 hour conference as opposed to a definitely disappointing 40 minute Direct.
Diablohead
Member
It got their points across just the same as me watching them on a stage but it also felt rather lack luster, there was hype since it was E3 but then it felt like a pre-recording and had no major bombs in it, there was no live crowd reactions and felt like they just did not care as much as they used too.
If they do the same thing next year I do hope that they spice it up a bit, more in depth looks into their games or some sort of fan/user interaction, anything is better.
If they do the same thing next year I do hope that they spice it up a bit, more in depth looks into their games or some sort of fan/user interaction, anything is better.
MrSaturn99
Member
After experiencing that horrendous stream? Absolutely not..
DidntKnowJack
Member
Nintendo Direct is great, but it shouldn't have been a replacement for a proper E3 press conference. So, no.
Mushroomer25
Member
Conceptually, it works. The majority of people stream these events online, and the live event itself is pretty pointless. But good GOD did they botch the execution. The stream was nothing short of unwatchable.
D
Deleted member 13876
Unconfirmed Member
Barely, most of the streams were borderline unwatchable for big durations of time.
Wait, what?
Honestly? Yes. If they'd had a new "third pillar" to announce, or a new 3DS variant they would have needed the stage. As it is, the Direct method (heh) cuts down the chance of embarrassing technical failure on stage, embarrassing miscommunication on stage, and no one except conference attendees--a small number of the people who would have watched the presentation--gets a different experience.
Brainiac 8
Member
I love the Nintendo Directs they do, but in the end, no. I think Nintendo should do a regular show next year solely so people don't think they vacated E3 like everyone did this past year.
Forsaken82
Member
That was April to June i thought...
The Direct was july...
Not saying it did any better between June and the end of July, but at least use relevant info.
Which could also have happened if the presentation was live on stage. This didn't happen because of the format.. It happened because of the way they chose to distribute it. Had they made a live presentation with the same stream would achieve the same result. This is not the point.
Save 'N Quit
Banned
Watching the NA stream freezing constantly was a horrible experience.
Had to switch to the JP stream just to see the MK8, X, and SSB4 trailers.
Had to switch to the JP stream just to see the MK8, X, and SSB4 trailers.
RomanceDawn
Member
I say Yes. Aside from the feed getting all messed up, what was actually shown resulted in nothing different than what could have been. Plus the Developer directs were great.
DragonSworne
Banned
I wonder if Iwata will announce his retirement through a Nintendo Direct.
Hell no, idiotic thing to do given how much mindshare they lost during E3 to the masses. That and the stream for Nintendo Direct was fucking awful and nothing but lag and skipping in the stream. It was so bad I missed on witnessing several announcements as they broke, and had to watch the archived version on Nintendo's Youtube channel afterwards.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
I can see why they did it as there wasn't much content there but it was bad. The video wouldn't even play properly live and we didn't get any new reggie gifs 
Bony Manifesto
Member
The E3 Direct? That was definitely June 11th.
Forsaken82
Member
well anyways, my argument still stands
I would hardly use 2 and a half weeks (assuming that number is using the entirety of June and not just through May 31st) as a large enough sample size.
Linkstrikesback
Member
If they had anything exciting to show, either method would have worked.
As it is, at least the Nintendo direct method saves them from preparing a full on presentation where they had nothing.
As it is, at least the Nintendo direct method saves them from preparing a full on presentation where they had nothing.
Shadow Hog
Member
No, strictly because it funneled everyone who wished to lend an ear into one stream, which buckled under the pressure and became a choppy, skippy, unwatchable mess.
If they took the concept and spread out the Direct to multiple streams - perhaps letting the big gaming press websites have a copy to stream simultaneously - then it'd be negligible, if missing some of the big spectacle of a stage show. But as it was this year, it was a bad idea.
If they took the concept and spread out the Direct to multiple streams - perhaps letting the big gaming press websites have a copy to stream simultaneously - then it'd be negligible, if missing some of the big spectacle of a stage show. But as it was this year, it was a bad idea.
yeah the stream itself didn't work, and that was an issue, but think about it. the biggest thing people cheered at during sony's e3 conference was the fact that they were continuing the existing policy of not implementing drm. nintendo's streaming sucked, but a lot of the problem with it was presentation.
i'd say the content was there. they made a couple of new announcements, showed us some known, but previously unseen games, and kept it all going at a pretty good pace. at the very least, it lacked the fluff that was there in the other conferences and would have been in their own.
but people want spectacle. they want miyamoto with a shield and sword. they want to see him as a conductor. they want to see the comedy stylings of sce. that stuff is memorable, and presentation matters.
Well since mostly every game shown hasn't come out I'd say its hard to gauge what its done for the general public. The norm doesn't run out and buy a system based off hype and waiting.. when the games come it will be the true testament... where most of the good ones wont be till 2014. I know people on Facebook and crap who talked about Smash when E3 was happening..not like those people are going to run out and buy a Wii U when the game wont be for another year.
D
Deleted member 13876
Unconfirmed Member
The way they distributed could be linked to the format change. I don't remember this happening any other year. Seems the press conferences always have some redundancies set up.
they showed off a lot of games in a condensed period. the amount of games shown rivaled sony's bloated conference and surpassed microsoft's. of course, they were showing every game they had at their disposal.
Barry Burton
Member
Streaming issues aside, I preferred the Nintendo Direct over their standard press conference. Quick & to the point, games games games, it skipped a lot of the fluff and gave me what I want to get out of E3. The only other issue I had with it is that Iwata does a pretty terrible job of conveying why a certain game is something to be excited about. They should have someone else do the presentation, or have multiple presenters to spice it up a bit.
I hope they continue to do the direct instead of a big press conference. The pageantry and spectacle of the shows does absolutely nothing for me, and is tangential to what I'm really interested in seeing. This year's direct was one of the few times where I could say afterwards, "I am interested in getting most of what they showcased." They've got to fix the technical aspects of it and make the presentation less sedate, but I like the concept itself and I think there's a lot of merit to it.
Most of the big press conferences are tough to sit through with their bloated lengths and filler content, even Sony's this year almost had me nodding out towards the end as it stretched on and on into the night, before they started dropping bombs. And Nintendo has probably been the worst offender, with god-awful press conferences far more often than not. If the Nintendo Direct means I don't have to suffer through the punishment of watching another boring Nintendo press conference, I say keep going with it. Logistical problems aside, it was fine.
I hope they continue to do the direct instead of a big press conference. The pageantry and spectacle of the shows does absolutely nothing for me, and is tangential to what I'm really interested in seeing. This year's direct was one of the few times where I could say afterwards, "I am interested in getting most of what they showcased." They've got to fix the technical aspects of it and make the presentation less sedate, but I like the concept itself and I think there's a lot of merit to it.
Most of the big press conferences are tough to sit through with their bloated lengths and filler content, even Sony's this year almost had me nodding out towards the end as it stretched on and on into the night, before they started dropping bombs. And Nintendo has probably been the worst offender, with god-awful press conferences far more often than not. If the Nintendo Direct means I don't have to suffer through the punishment of watching another boring Nintendo press conference, I say keep going with it. Logistical problems aside, it was fine.
Devilgunman
Member
Better to who?
For gamers- I don't really see differences btw live conference and Nintendo direct so I'm ok with that.
For themselves - No. Nintendo didn't gain any new audience. People watching ND already own their products which is not the target they should be chasing after.
For gamers- I don't really see differences btw live conference and Nintendo direct so I'm ok with that.
For themselves - No. Nintendo didn't gain any new audience. People watching ND already own their products which is not the target they should be chasing after.
E3 streams have always failed. ALWAYS.
I don't remember any other year where I could watch one without stuttering or without having to change stream halfway through.
Bony Manifesto
Member
Well no, it doesn't account for the whole period, but I do feel it's more important than you're suggesting. After all, retailers look at what Nintendo announce at E3 when deciding how much stock to order, and the message they were given was a very clear 'we don't have anything of note for the Wii U until the holiday season, come back then'.
moltonasty
Member
They didn't have enough substance to support a E3 press conference, so I believe YES they did make the right call with the ND.
would a live conference made the WiiU sell better? retroactively on top of that? lol, some people...
who laugh at it? I saw no significant difference in coverage.
The "no" guys really need to work on their argument, because evidence show it really wasn't that different.
I think it was the better method for this year simply because Nintendo choose to reveal 99% of those games several months before (which was great, but it came at a price). They lost a lost out on the surprise factor ,but in hindsight, it was necessary evil in order to show Nintendo's commitment to the platform. Unfortunately, even doing that didn't help encourage more consumers to be early adopters based on Nintendo's current sales data.
However, they still could have done fairly well if they did a regular conference because they had a solid lineup of games between 3DS and Wii U that fans want. Plus,l most of those games got positive impressions. The E3 Lineup was strong between 3DS and Wii U, so Nintendo did a great job of bringing the type of software most fans have been waiting for. Overall, despite the lack of surprise, it was a better lineup than even 2010's for both handheld and home console.
For 2014, I think Nintendo can go either way, but I'd prefer they don't reveal new games especially when it is already close to the timing of E3.
However, they still could have done fairly well if they did a regular conference because they had a solid lineup of games between 3DS and Wii U that fans want. Plus,l most of those games got positive impressions. The E3 Lineup was strong between 3DS and Wii U, so Nintendo did a great job of bringing the type of software most fans have been waiting for. Overall, despite the lack of surprise, it was a better lineup than even 2010's for both handheld and home console.
For 2014, I think Nintendo can go either way, but I'd prefer they don't reveal new games especially when it is already close to the timing of E3.
Can't say for sure, but man, regardless of everything, I've have killed to see the audience's reaction to Super Smash Bros. goodness, Platinum's hardcore qualities, X's trailer and Mario Kart eye candy. Reveling on the hype, a la Twilight Princess' reveal. That's what I'm gonna miss the most.
Actually, if the catastrophe that was the past E3 was deemed worthy of a formal appeareance, this year's couldn't have been all that bad.
Actually, if the catastrophe that was the past E3 was deemed worthy of a formal appeareance, this year's couldn't have been all that bad.
Uno Venova
Banned
Not sure, if the Direct actually had exciting announcements and was on a reliable stream, it would have been received much better.
damn
MaximoffZero
Banned
This. Did they really underestimate the number of hits that bad?
Yea, I know a direct at the end of the quarter wasn't going to suddenly sell millions of consoles. It was the delivery of the post that made me say it.
Forsaken82
Member
it is also possible that people were expecting a price drop to be announced at E3.
I know I was