Support NeoGAF

[Oddduck]

I don't disagree with Sessler. But I do wonder if this is being blown out of proportion.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

The only way I see Nintendo stealing some light is if 3D Mario Wii U blows us all out of the water.

 

[Meelow]

lol that was funny though

That made me smile.

Lol

 

[kingocfs]

If Microsoft can piss away 15min on ESPN coming to Xbox Live, Nintendo could easily slap together enough bullshit to cover a 1hr pomp and circumstance press conference. That implication is flawed at best, idiotic at worst.

It really doesn't take much to connect those dots. They're ducking behind closed doors, save for a little foray at their booth, and it portrays a lack of confidence. These big, highly publicized E3 conferences are pretty great for showing off your products, especially with the mainstream coverage that they attract - why would Nintendo skip that opportunity? Especially when they're hemmorhaging money.

 

[mentalfloss]

It really doesn't take much to connect those dots. They're ducking behind closed doors, save for a little foray at their booth, and it portrays a lack of confidence. These big, highly publicized E3 conferences are pretty great for showing off your products, especially with the mainstream coverage that they attract.

I have yet to see any quantification of the contrast in output of mainstream coverage between both types of events.

Can someone confirm how many media outlets will be producing news based on an E3 Nintendo conference vs. how many would produce news based on an E3 Nintendo direct event?

Or are we just assuming this is a PR failure because Adam Sessler says so?

 

[Zen_Arcade]

Yep. This is the crux of the argument here.

The real point of contention is the message this may send to the media, and to possible consumers who aren't Nintendo fans already waiting with baited breath for the next Nintendo Direct. In that sense, a lot of us think that message and presentation matters, and that Nintendo bowing out of a traditional press conference, no matter how much sense it may make on their end, will send the wrong message. A lot of people feel it will send a message of weakness, and that that message will be reflected in the press.

If the press are anything but happy with this new approach then they are inept and useless past the point we ever imagined.

They are getting special hands on time with the video games they came to experience and report on. If anything they're getting more focus at E3 then ever before.

This would be like Roger Ebert getting mad that a studio set up private press screenings of their upcoming movies instead of making him sit at a conference where clips of the movies are buried in between sales numbers and random musical guests.

 

[Calamari41]

It really doesn't take much to connect those dots. They're ducking behind closed doors, save for a little foray at their booth, and it portrays a lack of confidence. These big, highly publicized E3 conferences are pretty great for showing off your products, especially with the mainstream coverage that they attract - why would Nintendo skip that opportunity? Especially when they're hemmorhaging money.

Not only are they still having a press conference for these members of the mainstream press, but what evidence do you have of E3 presentations actually improving the performance of games? Why do GTA and Pokemon sell worldwide like wildfire, but a keynote, "Winner of E3" game like Metroid: Other M sinks like a rock when its released?

Or are we just assuming this is a PR failure because Adam Sessler says so?

Judging by Sessler's video, he completely misinterpreted what Nintendo is doing. He doesn't think that he, a member of the press, will get to see or play any Nintendo games. People in this thread going nuts have only looked at his headline. They don't understand what is actually going to happen, but more importantly they actively do not want to understand.

 

[MYE]

I said it before and I'll say it again... Nintendo hasn't gotten a fair shake from the press since at least 2001.

That's probably the main impetus behind Nintendo Direct in the first place. I think they want the message to be available directly from them so if the press want to twist it or downplay it, that's still cool, but people can decide for themselves if they want to be excited or not on the merits of video and screenshots everyone sees at the same time.

It's pretty smart when it's clear there's a significant section of the press who doesn't like what you do.

This is part of why I'm loving this move and kinda hope the other two do the same.
Gaming journalism is generally so fucking worthless that having to see things through their lens is something I put up with more than anything else.

We need them for hands on impressions but thats it. This move of phasing them off of the equation or downplaying their worth in all of this, puts the happiest smile on my face

 

[royalan]

If the press are anything but happy with this new approach then they are inept and useless past the point we ever imagined.

They are getting special hands on time with the video games they came to experience and report on. If anything they're getting more focus at E3 then ever before.

This would be like Roger Ebert getting mad that a studio set up private press screenings of their upcoming movies instead of making him sit at a conference where clips of the movies are buried in between sales numbers and random musical guests.

...the press ALWAYS gets hands-on time with the games. That's the whole point of E3. As far as we know for sure that aspect of Nintendo's E3 presence hasn't changed drastically. I mean, when have Nintendo not giving select members of the press hands-on time with their software at E3?

 

[equippedwithtowel]

Yep. This is the crux of the argument here.

Again, EVERYONE knows we will still get the games. Everyone understands the ways in which Nintendo's presence at E3 will not be changed. People need to stop harping on that; everyone already fucking knows.

The real point of contention is the message this may send to the media, and to possible consumers who aren't Nintendo fans already waiting with baited breath for the next Nintendo Direct. In that sense, a lot of us think that message and presentation matters, and that Nintendo bowing out of a traditional press conference, no matter how much sense it may make on their end, will send the wrong message. A lot of people feel it will send a message of weakness, and that that message will be reflected in the press.

A lot of people feel that is the LAST thing Nintendo needs right now because of their current position with the Wii U. Hell, I'll go out on a limb and bet that if Nintendo were riding high with Wii U, selling hundreds of thousands of units a hardware and software a month, half the people who see this move as a bad thing wouldn't care. But viewed in the context of Nintendo's disadvantaged position with the complete and total failure of the Wii U (thus far), forgoing the traditional E3 presence just seems foolish. It's all about perception.

Besides, it's not like Nintendo's NEVER been negatively impacted by framing their message incorrectly. But hey, we'll see in time how this plays out...just like we saw in time that Nintendo's positioning of the gamepad as the main focus of the Wii U in advertising DID lead to consumer confusion like many people said it would (and many people denied on the grounds that it was a Nintendo strategy, and Nintendo strategy always lead to success...in some wacky world)

Except you are creating the message to suit the narrative that you already saw.

How is a live/pre-recorded event indicative of the quality of the content in a clear enough manner to reasonable make such assumptions?

 

[airmangataosenai]

And none will. It s not so much about whether Sessler is right and more about Nintendo always being wrong. Not even Sessler can justify his beliefs, how can anyone else can?

You're right, everyone else is just too dumb to understand Nintendo's brilliance besides their loyal fans. Our bad, this is a great move that will surely propel them to the top market position again.

 

[Calamari41]

You're right, everyone else is just too dumb to understand Nintendo's brilliance besides their loyal fans. Our bad, this is a great move that will surely propel them to the top market position again.

Just so that we all know Nintendo's move, can you please explain, in detail, what Nintendo has said they are planning to do with this year's E3? Not what Sessler's headline says. What Nintendo said.

 

[Kimawolf]

If the press are anything but happy with this new approach then they are inept and useless past the point we ever imagined.

They are getting special hands on time with the video games they came to experience and report on. If anything they're getting more focus at E3 then ever before.

This would be like Roger Ebert getting mad that a studio set up private press screenings of their upcoming movies instead of making him sit at a conference where clips of the movies are buried in between sales numbers and random musical guests.

Bingo. Hit the nail right on the head. I am sure movie reviewers would prefer to sit through a private screening of the movie, not sit through Usher dancing about Iron Man 3, followed by how great the studio is doing in revenues. Mind you in this analogy, movie reviewers would STILL have access to the numbers stuff in a different place focused squarely on the numbers.

 

[-MB-]

They aren't bowing out. Thats peoples impressions because they can't fucking read.

They've specifically said they'll be at E3, the only difference is instead of piling all the information into a stupid overblown bloated conference it'll be sectioned off into three different events so that every one gets the information and attention that they care about most.

It's their impression because thats what they want it to be. And they scream it from the rooftops hoping it sticks with the mainstream.

 

[Fey]

Yep. This is the crux of the argument here.

Again, EVERYONE knows we will still get the games. Everyone understands the ways in which Nintendo's presence at E3 will not be changed. People need to stop harping on that; everyone already fucking knows.

The real point of contention is the message this may send to the media, and to possible consumers who aren't Nintendo fans already waiting with baited breath for the next Nintendo Direct. In that sense, a lot of us think that message and presentation matters, and that Nintendo bowing out of a traditional press conference, no matter how much sense it may make on their end, will send the wrong message. A lot of people feel it will send a message of weakness, and that that message will be reflected in the press.

A lot of people feel that is the LAST thing Nintendo needs right now because of their current position with the Wii U. Hell, I'll go out on a limb and bet that if Nintendo were riding high with Wii U, selling hundreds of thousands of units a hardware and software a month, half the people who see this move as a bad thing wouldn't care. But viewed in the context of Nintendo's disadvantaged position with the complete and total failure of the Wii U (thus far), forgoing the traditional E3 presence just seems foolish. It's all about perception.

Besides, it's not like Nintendo's NEVER been negatively impacted by framing their message incorrectly. But hey, we'll see in time how this plays out...just like we saw in time that Nintendo's positioning of the gamepad as the main focus of the Wii U in advertising DID lead to consumer confusion like many people said it would (and many people denied on the grounds that it was a Nintendo strategy, and Nintendo strategy always lead to success...in some wacky world)

That's just jumping to baseless conclusions, though. Nintendo has said almost nothing about how they'll present, apart from the fact that they won't do a live presentation. They will STILL be having a conference for the press and for the retailers. But they will be presenting their information differently to the consumers. That is all.

They will still be at E3 and still have a big presence at E3 and will still be doing everything normally, but they will be showing off their announcements differently to us, in a pre-recorded fashion. That's all we know at this point, and making any conclusions based on that is silly.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

...the press ALWAYS gets hands-on time with the games. That's the whole point of E3. As far as we know for sure that aspect of Nintendo's E3 presence hasn't changed drastically. I mean, when have Nintendo not giving select members of the press hands-on time with their software at E3?

I'm speaking from the presses point of view. Sure they always get hands on time. Roger Ebert could go to the movie theater down the street from my house, buy a ticket and sit with other people who aren't concerned with the fact that he's there to critique film. But I'm sure he prefers private press screenings where everyone else has the same objective and he isn't bothered by whatever distractions you experience at a public screening.

Same thing happens here. Private event, no public presence. No loud crowd for them to compete for their attention for. Everyone there is there for the same reason. Its a better environment for these people to experience the games which means better impressions for us.

 

[Shalashaska161]

It really doesn't take much to connect those dots. They're ducking behind closed doors, save for a little foray at their booth, and it portrays a lack of confidence. These big, highly publicized E3 conferences are pretty great for showing off your products, especially with the mainstream coverage that they attract - why would Nintendo skip that opportunity? Especially when they're hemmorhaging money.

Because it costs a ton of money to put on these huge shows, and you're still competing with news from not only Sony and Microsoft but from every other corner of the industry. There is a reason Sony has been showing off 90% of their e3 games on the lead up to the show the last couple years. Nintendo doing away with the big conference is a logical extension of that. Doesn't mean I won't miss the spectacle though.

And Nintendo made a profit (albeit a very small one) this fiscal year. That's the opposite of hemorrhaging money.

 

[KingSnake]

I would say that the fact that Nintendo trust more the playable demos to be shown to the journalists than a nice marketing presentation proves actually that they have full trust in the greatness of the respective games. They are really expecting that the press will be wowed by the demos. So I can't wait to see them and to read what the media have to say about them.

In the end, even if there is a live event you never know 100% what's with the demo (see Watch Dogs at PS4 event or the same Watch Dogs showing always the same areas of the game). I would be happy to be a games journalist to have this unless I am looking for tabloid news, of course.

 

[MYE]

Its quite amazing how much importance some seem to be giving to the "message" this move triggers in their minds, when we all know none of this shit matters when announcements start rolling.

Nintendo Direct is free. Its not like the build-up is there to sell you tickets for the show. This isnt a movie, and this announcement isnt the trailer trying to lure you in.
Whatever conclusions people seem to be drawing from the smallest of things, will suddenly vanish when the curtains roll in everyone's PC screens.

 

[royalan]

Except you are creating the message to suit the narrative that you already saw.

How is a live/pre-recorded event indicative of the quality of the content in a clear enough manner to reasonable make such assumptions?

It's different in that Nintendo's bowing out of yet another thing the other guys are doing.

I think the mistake you're making is assuming that everyone's going to look at this from the positive angle that's obvious to you as a fan. In reality that's unlikely. And the proof of this is all around you. Just look at the headlines this announcement generated. Are you seeing the media set this up as some big, smart new direction that will net us the same info we always get? No. They're framing it as "Nintendo Not Doing Press Conference At E3" because that is the most obvious thing. Unfortunately, it also doesn't sound good.

 

[CTLance]

Hrm. My take on this. Conjecture incoming. Probably nothing new anyway.

I think I can see why they're separating fanboys, press and industry talk into two events and some videostreams: Maximum PR efficiency. They can go all-out on weaselwords in the "insider" show, give flashy displays for us mothbreathing chucklefucks that follow them closely anyway, and most importantly spend far more time and effort to properly brainwash press people.

Particularly the timing with the press indoctrination event right before E3 starts could hint at that. Gaming journos could, in theory, go "Yeah, Killerguns vs XBoob on nextGen 740 looks awesome and plays nice, but you know, I played Weegee and the 4 Monstercoins U and other games I absolutely cannot talk about, and boy, while they might not look like much, they play like a dream. Nintendo really knocked it outta the park with this one!" with all that entails.

Problem is, if that's their angle, then the WiiU games (/apps/etc) need to be spectacular. Absolutely mindblowing. Something so good they'll come out and line up for another showing. Again and again.
And frankly, while I am a Nintendo fanboy I absolutely don't see that happening with Nintendo, especially as it is now, crippled by HD conversion and sales woes.

Also, that still doesn't excuse the missing live conference. Sure, the dollar to exposure rate of such a huge livestreamed event when you are competing against other hot items and already have informed the public beforehand is probably pretty abysmal.

Still, it's like the mating display in the animal kingdom*. Hugely wasteful, ignored 99% of all time, but shows you're healthy, fertile and willing. That's the entire point of this whole exercise, and E3 is just the same, only for large videogame industry entities. When they don't participate in that song-and-dance customers and press alike might see this as a sign of weakness. I absolutely agree with Sessler on this. It's a dangerous tactic.

*

Spoiler

OK. That was weird. I'll admit that much. Sorry for the mental image of Iwata&Co in bright plumage doing elaborate courtship displays.

 

[-MB-]

I'm speaking from the presses point of view. Sure they always get hands on time. Roger Ebert could go to the movie theater down the street from my house, buy a ticket and sit with other people who aren't concerned with the fact that he's there to critique film. But I'm sure he prefers private press screenings where everyone else has the same objective and he isn't bothered by whatever distractions you experience at a public screening.

Same thing happens here. Private event, no public presence. No loud crowd for them to compete for their attention for. Everyone there is there for the same reason. Its a better environment for these people to experience the games which means better impressions for us.

Don't think using Roger Ebert as a comparison is appropriate atm, with him just being dead and all.

 

[Sadist]

But it's never been confirmed that Nintendo's "undecided format" will be a Nintendo Direct.

What keeps Nintendo from stating in a press release a month before E3 about this new format, hyping it because it contains big announcements and telling everyone this will replace the live presser on the 11th of June or something.

"Hello this is Satoru Iwata from Nintendo with this special "Nintendo @ E3*" video. As you see, this year we decided against a big and live press conference. I know some of you were looking forward to seeing a live show with onstage demo's, exciting reveals and Miyamoto in a giant Pikmin suit stomping on Reggie. However, we felt that such a show in which we used sixty minutes to communicatie everything towards three types of audiences. These audiences all have different interests regarding our software, so we decided to split everything in three.

This will be your part of E3. In this video we'll discuss everything about Wii U and upcoming software.

So here's a game you've been waiting for *shows Retro Studios title*

And so on

* Placeholder title.

 

[royalan]

I'm speaking from the presses point of view. Sure they always get hands on time. Roger Ebert could go to the movie theater down the street from my house, buy a ticket and sit with other people who aren't concerned with the fact that he's there to critique film. But I'm sure he prefers private press screenings where everyone else has the same objective and he isn't bothered by whatever distractions you experience at a public screening.

Same thing happens here. Private event, no public presence. No loud crowd for them to compete for their attention for. Everyone there is there for the same reason. Its a better environment for these people to experience the games which means better impressions for us.

...who do you think gets invited to the press conferences already? That room of obnoxious people is already comprised of press and industry people with the same objective.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

Don't think using Roger Ebert as a comparison is appropriate atm, with him just being dead and all.

Travers, Roeper, whoever. Point still stands. You get my meaning.

 

[Calamari41]

It's different in that Nintendo's bowing out of yet another thing the other guys are doing.

I think the mistake you're making is assuming that everyone's going to look at this from the positive angle that's obvious to you as a fan. In reality that's unlikely. And the proof of this is all around you. Just look at the headlines this announcement generated. Are you seeing the media at this up as some big, smart new direction that will net us the same info we always get? No. They're framing it as "Nintendo Not Doing Press Conference At E3" because that is the most obvious thing. Unfortunately, it also doesn't sound good.

The media (Sessler) posting verifiably incorrect information as a headline (Nintendo ain't bringing games to E3!) is a justification for what Nintendo is doing.

Let's use the Wii U reveal as an example. As it was, Nintendo confused some members of the press as to whether it was a Wii add-on or a new console. So the CNN writer hears the presentation, walks out of the conference and writes an article calling it an add-on. If the reveal had been done the way they are thinking of doing it this year, the CNN writer would have immediately gone up and actually used the gamepad with a Nintendo rep and been able to ask questions, like "So is this an add-on or a new console?" Do you not see the benefit of something like that?

If Sessler had learned of this announcement in the type of setting that Nintendo will be utilizing, he would have been able to say to the Nintendo rep "I can't believe you aren't letting us see or play games at E3," and the rep would have been able to set him straight before he could go online and work trolls up into a frenzy over false information that he misunderstood.

 

[Hermii]

Don't think using Roger Ebert as a comparison is appropriate atm, with him just being dead and all.

Substitute it with any other movie reviewer in your mind. You get the point he was trying to make.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

...who do you think gets invited to the press conferences already? That room of obnoxious people is already comprised of press and industry people with the same objective.

There are other people on the E3 floor during the three days of coverage after E3 you know? People other then press attend E3. Now press don't have to compete with those people for time playing Wii U games.

Also your statement just hammers home the fact that video game journalists need to grow up and act like actual press before they get respect for the job they do.

 

[mentalfloss]

Judging by Sessler's video, he completely misinterpreted what Nintendo is doing. He doesn't think that he, a member of the press, will get to see or play any Nintendo games. People in this thread going nuts have only looked at his headline. They don't understand what is actually going to happen, but more importantly they actively do not want to understand.

I'm getting that impression as well.

I really get the feeling that Rev3 and guys like Sessler and Gerstmann (as much as I appreciate their contributions to the industry) are in the pockets of some notable publishers and even the hardware manufacturers.

 

[airmangataosenai]

I'm getting that impression as well.

I really get the feeling that Rev3 and guys like Sessler and Gerstmann (as much as I appreciate their contributions to the industry) are in the pockets of some notable publishers and even the hardware manufacturers.

.... Wow.

Anyone who knows anything about either of these guys will get a hearty laugh out of this. Sessler is practically king Nintendo fanboy and Gerstmann was fired for literally doing the exact opposite of what you're suggesting.

 

[mentalfloss]

.... Wow.

Anyone who knows anything about either of these guys will get a hearty laugh out of this. Sessler is practically king Nintendo fanboy and Gerstmann was fired for literally doing the exact opposite of what you're suggesting.

I know Gerstmann's history. Doesn't mean he doesn't get kickbacks - it's the perfect cover.

But yea, if you watch the way they pour over Bioshock it seems a bit too eery for them not to be getting a little sumfin sumfin on the side.

 

[Calamari41]

I know Gerstmann's history. Doesn't mean he doesn't get kickbacks - it's the perfect cover.

But yea, if you watch the way they pour over Bioshock it seems a bit too eery for them not to be getting a little sumfin sumfin on the side.

I think this Sessler issue is just a misunderstanding on his part. I wouldn't hold any Bioshock love as an example of payoffs, because I wasn't paid and I loved that game in a more over the top way than Sessler did.

 

[KongRudi]

Not only are they still having a press conference for these members of the mainstream press, but what evidence do you have of E3 presentations actually improving the performance of games?

This is the opportunity publishers have to get all the gaming press from the western hemisphere to come and watch your upcoming stuff.
It make sense to make it a presentation, and show a bunch of your stuff coming the following year.
The E3 conference will go on despite Nintendo not having a press conference.

Let's assume Nintendo holds a closed event for 30 invited journalists.. Meanwhile Ubisoft runs a even infront of of 500 journalists, and stream the event to 2 million people.. What will be talked most about? The big event..

Yes, we'll see trailers and videos later, but then there is also 1000 other trailers to check out.. Nintendo could have a time when everyone were looking at them, instead they just strut their stuff to a select few journalists. :-/

 

[Brewster's Wallet]

The press does because they are not in the room. The general audience doesn't because it's no different for them.

I'm kinda leaning this way, to be honest.

 

[Calamari41]

This is the opportunity publishers have to get all the gaming press from the western hemisphere to come and watch your upcoming stuff.
It make sense to make it a presentation, and show a bunch of your stuff coming the following year.
The E3 conference will go on despite Nintendo not having a press conference.

Let's assume Nintendo holds a closed event for 30 invited journalists.. Meanwhile Ubisoft runs a even infront of of 500 journalists, and stream the event to 2 million people.. What will be talked most about? The big event..

Yes, we'll see trailers and videos later, but then there is also 1000 other trailers to check out.. Nintendo could have a time when everyone were looking at them, instead they just strut their stuff to a select few journalists. :-/

Nintendo has not indicated that there will be any fewer journalists invited to their press conference this year. And in addition, they will have a full game-reveal-hype stream for fans, as well.

 

[-MB-]

Substitute it with any other movie reviewer in your mind. You get the point he was trying to make.

This wasn't about me not getting the point, this was purely about using Ebert specifically.

 

[royalan]

The media (Sessler) posting verifiably incorrect information as a headline (Nintendo ain't bringing games to E3!) is a justification for what Nintendo is doing.

Let's use the Wii U reveal as an example. As it was, Nintendo confused some members of the press as to whether it was a Wii add-on or a new console. So the CNN writer hears the presentation, walks out of the conference and writes an article calling it an add-on. If the reveal had been done the way they are thinking of doing it this year, the CNN writer would have immediately gone up and actually used the gamepad with a Nintendo rep and been able to ask questions, like "So is this an add-on or a new console?" Do you not see the benefit of something like that?

If Sessler had learned of this announcement in the type of setting that Nintendo will be utilizing, he would have been able to say to the Nintendo rep "I can't believe you aren't letting us see or play games at E3," and the rep would have been able to set him straight before he could go online and work trolls up into a frenzy over false information that he misunderstood.

Now you're arguing something completely different. This new format does not gaura tee a perfect Nintendo show at all.

You admitted it yourself: Media left last E3 confused because Nintendo confused them. Nintendo chose to be needlessly vague and not paint a clearer picture of what the Wii U was. That wasn't the format's fault, it was Nintendo being pointlessly vague and unclear about their products as per the Nintendo usual. This new format comes with no gaurantee that Nintendo will be more efficient in that regard.

We're not arguing the quality of the information. We're arguing how it's presented.

 

[equippedwithtowel]

This is the opportunity publishers have to get all the gaming press from the western hemisphere to come and watch your upcoming stuff.
It make sense to make it a presentation, and show a bunch of your stuff coming the following year.
The E3 conference will go on despite Nintendo not having a press conference.

Let's assume Nintendo holds a closed event for 30 invited journalists.. Meanwhile Ubisoft runs a even infront of of 500 journalists, and stream the event to 2 million people.. What will be talked most about? The big event..

Yes, we'll see trailers and videos later, but then there is also 1000 other trailers to check out.. Nintendo could have a time when everyone were looking at them, instead they just strut their stuff to a select few journalists. :-/

Tales From my Ass Episode III : Revenge of the Made Up Shit

 

[Zen_Arcade]

This is the opportunity publishers have to get all the gaming press from the western hemisphere to come and watch your game.
It make sense to make it a presentation, and show a bunch of your stuff coming the following year.
E3 conference will go on despite Nintendo not having a press conference.

Let's assume Nintendo holds a closed event for 30 invited journalists.. Meanwhile Ubisoft runs a even infront of of 500 journalists, and stream the event to 2 million people.. What will be talked most about? The big event..

Yes, we'll see trailers and videos later, but then there is also 1000 other trailers to check out.. Nintendo could have a time when
everyone were looking at them, instead they just strut their stuff to a select few journalists. :-/

They're still having a conference. It just wont be broadcasted. They're getting a special event where the press can privately play games. How is that not better then sitting in a chair watching a conference that is just as much about flashy guests and sales numbers as it is about games?

Like I said, if any of the press enjoys the old way of presenting E3 more then what Nintendo is trying to do then we should be even more worried about how bad gaming journalism is then we already are.

 

[mentalfloss]

Let's assume Nintendo holds a closed event for 30 invited journalists.. Meanwhile Ubisoft runs a even infront of of 500 journalists, and stream the event to 2 million people.. What will be talked most about? The big event..

Last E3 I listened to quite a few podcasts about the coverage. Many journalists were admitting on these shows that they were just reporting what they saw in the live stream of the E3 presentations.

There was really no advantage to having a bunch of people packed into a stage because the news coverage after the presentation was essentially the same.

Where there differences was on the floor, after the presentation - when these journos got their hands on the games.

 

[Wildstar75]

Im with Sessler on this! Big mistake, but they could offset it with a megaton bringing it home strategy.

 

[Calamari41]

Now you're arguing something completely different. This new format does not gaura tee a perfect Nintendo show at all.

You admitted it yourself: Media left last E3 confused because Nintendo confused them. Nintendo chose to be needlessly vague and not paint a clearer picture of what the Wii U was. That wasn't the format's fault, it was Nintendo being pointlessly vague and unclear about their products as per the Nintendo usual. This new format comes with no gaurantee that Nintendo will be more efficient in that regard.

We're bot arguing the quality of the information. We're arguing how it's presented.

Right, but my point is that this new way of presenting can only help the issue of being "pointlessly vague and unclear." The press will get their conference and then immediately start using the product. This can only help. If Nintendo is confusing in front of just the journalists, they would have been confusing if that same conference were streamed. I'm not trying to guarantee perfection, I'm just saying there is now a chance to clear up questions that the press may have before they write their articles.

 

[royalan]

Right, but my point is that this new way of presenting can only help the issue of being "pointlessly vague and unclear." The press will get their conference and then immediately start using the product. This can only help. If Nintendo is confusing in front of just the journalists, they would have been confusing if that same conference were streamed. I'm not trying to guarantee perfection, I'm just saying there is now a chance to clear up questions that the press may have before they write their articles.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see if the press sees it this way.

But, so far, judging by the headlines...they don't.

 

[Calamari41]

I guess we'll just have to wait and see if the press sees it this way.

But, so far, judging by the headlines...they don't.

As I said before, that's because they misinterpreted what Nintendo just announced. Which is a point in favor of the new way of doing things, because these misconceptions will have a chance to be addressed before a guy like Sessler can post a video about it. In no way am I guaranteeing that it will be perfect, or even work. I'm just saying that I understand what Nintendo actually announced.

I am looking forward to seeing how it works out.

 

[Lord_Byron28]

Right, but my point is that this new way of presenting can only help the issue of being "pointlessly vague and unclear." The press will get their conference and then immediately start using the product. This can only help. If Nintendo is confusing in front of just the journalists, they would have been confusing if that same conference were streamed. I'm not trying to guarantee perfection, I'm just saying there is now a chance to clear up questions that the press may have before they write their articles.

We've had how many Nintendo Directs now? I think every one of them has been pretty clear. I'm not sure why it'd be any different.

 

[Dave Long]

They're still having a conference. It just wont be broadcasted. They're getting a special event where the press can privately play games. How is that not better then sitting in a chair watching a conference that is just as much about flashy guests and sales numbers as it is about games?

Like I said, if any of the press enjoys the old way of presenting E3 more then what Nintendo is trying to do then we should be even more worried about how bad gaming journalism is then we already are.

Having attended a few E3s myself... as press and as retail... I can tell you with very firm honesty that many of these so-called games journalists do NOT really play the games on display. If they did, more of them would have known God Hand existed before it was released, as a specific example. It was playable on the show floor with at least four stations, and it was incredible. No one was playing it, because it wasn't in the narrative.

They will now jump in and tell you how they don't have time. They aren't able to check out the games they want to, etc. but I was there and watched it first hand. They're full of shit. Many are lazy, not very interested, and they are really just there to go to parties, see their PR and journalist friends and have a good time. Very few care about you as a reader and attend to do actual work.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

Having attended a few E3s myself... as press and as retail... I can tell you with very firm honesty that many of these so-called games journalists do NOT really play the games on display. If they did, more of them would have known God Hand existed before it was released, as a specific example. It was playable on the show floor with at least four stations, and it was incredible. No one was playing it, because it wasn't in the narrative.

They will now jump in and tell you how they don't have time. They aren't able to check out the games they want to, etc. but I was there and watched it first hand. They're full of shit. Many are lazy, not very interested, and they are really just there to go to parties, see their PR and journalist friends
and have a good time. Very few care about you as a reader and attend to do actual work.

They're holding the event the same time at the same time their conference would be. If what you're saying is true and people don't show up to that event when they would usually sitting in a chair watching Ravi Drums then we should just demolish the entire video game journalism industry and find people worth a shit.

 

[Effect]

To the second, obviously remains to be seen. But for my part I have to echo the others' sentiment in that I'm not going to go tracking down a bunch of Nintendo Directs. I don't really watch PlayStation Blog or Major Nelson stuff either. But I would have watched all 3 conferences (now 2). For whatever that's worth - maybe not much in the grand scheme of things.

People are wrongly making a big deal out of having to find a Nintendo direct. It's no different then finding the right stream to watch the E3 conferences. In fact it's actually significantly easier. When they go up all gaming sites link to them as they are immediately up on YouTube. They are always streamed from the same place. Nintendo.com. That's it. There is no searching involved. If you wish to view past ones then just head to their YouTube channel but that's as much effort one needs to put out. When the ones leading to E3 or at E3 are announced all sites are very likely to put it in their news sections. You have no choice but to see post related to it on NeoGaf.

This talk about having to track down a Nintendo Direct or the weird idea that it involves work must stop. It's misinformation at best and outright lying by some others at worse.

They're holding the event the same time at the same time their conference would be. If what you're saying is true and people don't show up to that event when they would usually sitting in a chair watching Ravi Drums then we should just demolish the entire video game journalism industry and find people worth a shit.

If that happens and those that complain about Nintendo should be called out by those that did show up and took the time to actually play the games and be informed. I have no doubt that some in the gaming media won't show and will be some of the first to run their mouths.

 

[equippedwithtowel]

They're holding the event the same time at the same time their conference would be. If what you're saying is true and people don't show up to that event when they would usually sitting in a chair watching Ravi Drums then we should just demolish the entire video game journalism industry and find people worth a shit.

I'd let Bill Murray take a swing at it.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

I'd let Bill Murray take a swing at it.

I think Bill Murray would succeed at anything he tries. Truly a King among men.