Topic: Should Nintendo do a live E3 next year ?

No, the digital events have worked quite well. Obviously this year's E3 wasn't great for Nintendo, but that wasn't the fault of going digital, 2014's event was amazing. It helps set Nintendo apart from the crowd, and I think it's more polished and shows the games off better.

Well sure, that's what an argument is. I said that the Directs work, @rallydefault replied saying that my opinion was wrong. I defended my point of view with points that have not yet been challenged. So yeah, that's what an argument is. If I thought you guys had a good point then I wouldn't have defended my point of view. And now you two are trying to defend yourselfs by saying I'm wrong to think you guys are wrong rather than actually challenging my argument.....

Last I checked the thread topic was "should Nintendo do a live E3 next year" not "a thread for people who agree they should have a live E3 next year to all nod in agreement". You're entitled to your opinion only as far are you're able to defend it. If you can't defend it then junk it.

Also I saw your post in the other sub-forum in that now-locked topic. Take this as my response to your ultimatum there. I don't agree with you on that point either for reasons others mentioned and I explained. And for both this topic and that one I think I should just say that if you can't handle people having a different opinion to you then maybe you should avoid the internet entirely. Because the internet is full of people who disagree with one or all of your views.

I believe that puppet show is done to hide Iwata condition. now everyone already know that fact. nintendo will do live like they normally done. they can reupload on youtube anyway.

Live isn't like they normally do though, a direct is the norm even before Iwata was ill.

They made plans months in advance. Iwata looked healthier prior to E3. Also, Iwata wasn't terminal. Takes a himself said it was sudden.

They haven't had a live show since 2012. I don't think it has much to do with Iwata's health at all. I mean he didn't show in 2014 or 2015 but in 2013 they didn't have a live show and....

Someone's new to the party...
They've been doing Directs for a while now and E3 2014 had...

and the famous

...and here's Iwata (I'm not gonna cry...) at the end of the E3 2013 Direct where he mentions how they weren't going to do a presentation like previous years (starts at 38:55)

Hello again. Live show all the way. Because that's how I feel!!!!

But you know what would be cool? Let's talk about something that actually matters...like...how much money do you think Microsoft spent to have that darn car lowered from the ceiling at this E3? Or do you think the car company did it for free, because hey, free advertising?

Here are some ideas that get some good attributes of both a live and pre-recorded presentation.

1. Do a pre-recored presentation, but stream it in an E3 theater, and broadcast the reactions from that on certain public streams.

2. Introduce live segments into the Nintendo Direct presentation. It could be live from Nintendo's studio, but it would still be live, allowing for the audience verification to occur.

I feel like that is taking the worst parts of both and smashing them together

How so?

In my opinion, nothing destroys an announcement like hearing the crowd yelling in the middle and not hearing the whole title. Live demos are messy and normally don't show off the best of a game or making those demos causes certain areas of a game to be designed differently, because of the demo.

Something that I like from digital events are how I can get excited about announcements without other people interrupting or ruining the moment and what I like about seeing new gameplay is seeing it happen well. It is silly to me when someone is getting beat up a lot and their health is barely affected or when a controller disconnects and we are looking at their pause menu for 5 minutes. Also by having live game demos shown from Nintendo HQ means people need to be there to play them and who do you want to play? Put someone that isn't important there because you want the creator at E3 or have the creator show off the game and have them miss out on talking to press at E3? I don't know, I just don't like it, sorry.

I don't really care what Nintendo does next E3, as long as they learn when to announce stuff.

This year's E3 presentation could've announced/shown off EarthBound Beginnings, the Smash 4 DLC, and Fatal Frame, but they saved those bombshells for before and after their E3 presentation, where they could've put announcements for the games nobody needed to spend half the presentation learning about, like Metroid, Amiibo Crossing, and Mario Maker.

I would have loved for the Smash Direct to announce Lucas and Roy and the Release Date for the day of the Direct, then have the Ryu Announcement in the Direct then release the DLC after the Direct. That could have been cool lol

Well critics need to stop pretending that the Digital Event was the only thing they did...when it wasn't

Maybe not, but it is the main event of E3. When the other announcements outshine it, there's something very wrong with the content of their presentation.

Good points, both. But yea, they do need to acknowledge that the "main event" is the main event for a reason - you should probably do most of your big announcements for the largest audience. If you announce too many things on the show floor and during the little Treehouse things, you're running a big risk of not reaching the largest audience possible.

Not just the treehouse stuff guys. The NWC got a lot of coverage and the games that they would usually do a stage demo for were shown. Super Mario Maker for example, they demoed it multiple times during the week. It never got a better display than at the NWC final. Then last year obviously they wanted to demo Smash Bros and what better way to do that then with a competition?

I mean if we want to talk about coverage lets go back to the youtube numbers. The NWC is the third most viewed video on Nintendo's channel behind the 2DS reveal trailer and the trailer for New SMB 2. If you add up all the videos which contain the Nintendo Direct for 2015 on Nintendo's officially channel you get 1.7million views. The NWC is currently at 3.1million views, for the one video. The Direct for E3 2015 is behind the Smash Bros Direct, the Splatoon Direct and the E3 2013 Direct.

See the thing is, while you're all arguing about what format gets the more coverage for what. Nintendo actually has the stats. They'd have the demographics of the viewers for each format even. They know what gets the attention of viewers on the internet. And it's not a live audience.....

@skywake: But you're missing numbers for probably the biggest distributor of all the live conferences. Twitch. I wonder if Nintendo has estimates on how many views that would bring in.

Plus, this is all from Youtube. And I'll confess, I'm not clear on whether Nintendo ACTUALLY streamed this stuff through Youtube, or are these just views "after the fact," so to say? In other words, I think this data is fundamentally flawed. Without including Twitch data or, at the least, data on what the other "Big 2" clocked on their live conferences this year, you really can't say that one format has more views than another. And also, the whole "after the fact" thing vs. live streaming needs to be rectified.

Like...hrm...maybe I need to explain a big better. So the Youtube video of the Champsionships got like 3 million views, right? And you're saying the E3 Direct was a lot less than that... well, I mean, what if the Sony/Microsoft Twitch streams alone were getting about 1.5 concurrent viewers? And that's not counting the streams in other languages (which anybody who watches eSports knows that can be almost as much as the English stream)...uhm...yea, hopefully you get what I'm saying.

What? If the LIVE audience presentation of the Nintendo World Championships got more views than the E3 Direct, isn't that defeating your own point?