Nintendo has been putting its own twist on E3 over recent years; the last few shows have seen the likes of 'Nintendo Directs' and 'Digital Events' being presented online, replacing the traditional live conference setup that we still see today from other publishers with a video of pre-recorded footage. It seems that this new method isn't set in stone, however, and we may well see Nintendo return to the more standard way of doing things.
In an interview with GamesBeat, senior director of corporate communications at Nintendo of America, Charlie Scibetta, was directly asked about Nintendo's latest presentation trend. Apparently, the format is chosen based on the type of content being shown that year, presumably aiming to show the games in the most suitable way possible for maximum selling power.
"We decide each year what to show in the booth based on the content we have. We also do the same when it comes to what we want to do in Nintendo Direct or a presentation. In the past, we’ve done presentations where we brought thousands of people together and demoed live on stage. With the last four or five years, we’ve done more of the video approach. It’s really whatever we think is the best way to bring those games to life."
Naturally, with this in mind, it would make sense to imagine a potential return to live conferences in the future (if the games on show that year would work best in a live environment). Scibetta went on to confirm this, while also suggesting that we might one day see "something completely different".
"We think that Nintendo Direct recently has been a nice way to do it because we’re able to package interviews and gameplay and fine-tune it, so it’s a nice tight presentation. It’s an efficient use of time. It’s a good way to bring these games to life in a video format. In the future, we might go back to a presentation. We might stick with video. We might do something completely different. But it’ll all be based on what we have to show that year."
Do you like the Nintendo Direct format? Would you prefer to see a return to the more traditional conference setup, or maybe something else entirely? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
[source venturebeat.com]
Comments 66
Can't see how it would be better for anybody : I don't feel like Nintendo's style is very compatible with a "big event conference"
Nintendo's E3 shows used to be more unique and magical when they were live on stage, in my opinion. Most of Nintendo's greatest E3 moments are from that time too. The Direct format is also nice, though.
They don't need a conference, the forced applause and woo-wooing in other conferences is embarrassing.
I hope not, returning to live conferences is just asking for more 2008 style trainwrecks. Directs are the best approach for sure!
I miss the live conferences. But I think we can all agree that the problem this year was the lack of content. Bring back BIG E3s from Nintendo!
As much as I thought the presentation of the E3 video was poor, it's usually much better than the old conference style
Nintendo needed the live conferences in the Wii days to show off motion controls. Now that motion controls are old hat, they should just focus on the games themselves. This year was just a letdown in content, not in style.
As a Japanese company with the majority of their games coming out of Japan, it makes sense for Nintendo to address an English speaking audience (and the rest of the world for that matter) in a pre recorded manner. Plus it’s easier to keep surprises with the direct.
Can’t see it changing any time soon.
I've got mixed feelings about this. I really love live conferences: Microsoft was great and so was Bethesda and Ubisoft. But E3 2012 with the whole Nintendo Land was just so bad. The whole thing with the E3 Direct is that things can't go wrong; no awkward parts, just a nice edited presentation. The only problem this year was content and Nintendo raising expectations.
As long as they improve their presentations. You don't show up to E3 with a 25 minute presentation on smash and nothing else important for the other 20 minutes. Nintendo were afraid to have conferences during the wiiu era where they were a joke with nothing to show. Now they at least have sales numbers a a fraction more to show, so maybe they can return if they do it right.
For me this year was just a letdown in style, not in content.
Focussing on one game this much always bares the risk that those who are not that interested in that one game, will be disappointed.
I loved the style of the presentation of 2015 and 2016 reaaally much. 2017 was alright, though.
I love when they are playful and witty in those videos. And I think videos are the best way to do so without having cringey moments. Watching some of the other presentations this year and also regarding the Switch-presentation in January 2017, the format of a presentation is really waaay to stiff for the fun stuff they are presenting.
It wasn't really the format that was the problem so much as buzzing through 30 games in 10 mins and then spending the whole rest of the presentation on Smash 4.5. They're just about the launch they online service, Bayonetta 3 must be finished fairly soon and they somehow gave the impression they don't have a lot going on.
I feel like a video format is better simply because it feels more flowing and faster than constantly cutting back to a stage.
The main one that sticks out for me is the Revolution reveal
And give up. . . .control?! Now that doesn’t sound like Nintendo’s style.
@dystome Gotta love people who just can't accept Smash bros. Ultimate as a NEW game in the installment.
I hate listening to the conferences. Too much self-aggrandizing for my blood. Sony, Microsoft and Bethesda were all terrible. They need to work on their presentation skills
I don’t mind the Direct approach, less faffing about. It however is all about the content. Nintendo has to acknowledge that E3 is big and is expected to be where publishers unveil new projects and show their latest upcoming projects. Many of us don’t care if we get just brief teases. Yes, it fuels “hype culture” but thats basically what E3 is all about.
This year’s Direct, the majority felt more like a Smash Direct that would have worked at any time of the year.
Nintendo's problem is the content of the announcements, not the format. Having almost nothing to announce but Smash Ultimate is what killed this presentation. Switching to a live format wouldn't have changed that, it's their policy of only showing games coming out in 6-9 months that needs to change.
I think the Direct format works perfectly fine; it gets straight to the point and saves us from potential embarrassment.
I wish they'd change two things though; 1) focusing on one big game needs to go, especially after 2018's overkill, and 2) the E3 Direct should be bigger and better than any of the Directs spread throughout the year, it shouldn't be comparable to a January mini Direct.
Live Direct or Video presentation Direct, both of them are Okay for me, as long....
DO NOT use 30 minutes to explain everything about One game Only (Like last Nintendo Direct that explain Too Long about Smash Bros Ultimate) !
It wasting the time and Couldn't explain the other upcoming games !
I like the directs, but my favourite part of Nintendo’s E3 coverage is the treehouse. It’s always in depth and informative stuff and they occasionally throw a sneaky announcement in there. No other publisher does this and I think that’s a shame.
I prefer the Nintendo Direct format. It's quick and to the point.
I hope more companies move towards something similar going forward.
@GammaPhonic
I too think that Direct and Treehouse really combine well.
You get the info that something exists and a small trailer from the Direct and everything more in depth like gameplay or background info is told in the Treehouse-parts.
Doesn't matter to me either way, I'm only there for the games and if you don't have any that I like then you won't get my support.
Yeah, the direct approach is the best approach. Nintendo kind of “wins” every E3 just because their show isn’t such a bore to get through.
If this is a response from Nintendo because of ppl complaining about the E3, it it isn’t because of format, it’s because of volume.
Efficient use of time? HAHAHAHA
I still think the Direct works better than a live broadcast for Nintendo, considering their former live presentations.
I think two things were a problem this year; pacing and no funny moments. Smash got far too much time, and the other things got too little. I started to zone out halfway through the smash bit. Better pacing would have been better.
Nintendo has had fun moments in their directs. This year was so serious, and it becomes bland as a result. It felt more like an infomercial instead of the big gaming period of the year.
Don' they say this every year though? I prefer the video presentation to the awkward live presentations with the technical issues and the hammy forced enthusiastic acting. Can anyone name a better E3 moment then puppet Reggie doing 64 push-ups.... I think not!!
In before the "Miyamoto coming on stage with sword and shield" moment
That’s good to know, bout time they talked about their E3 Presentations from when they were forgoing Press Conferences.
I have mixed views on this. The Direct style works really well as far as time management, since it seamlessly jumps from announcement to announcement... however, I miss being able to hear the audience reaction to the content being shown. It builds an incredible hype and just makes it feel like it’s not just me sitting on a couch, watching the presentation unfold, alone, haha. A perfect example is the reaction to the Twilight Princess announcement. I’ve seen the trailer by itself, and it’s good, but every time I watch the E3 reveal of it, I’m nearly moved to tears. I miss those days.
I won't pretend to be an expert, but I don't see the point of "going back" to conferences when other companies' are progressively becoming [Company] Directs on stage with a big screen. Although I may be just selfishly skeptical because on YouTube it all looks the same in the end? XD Since the format is for Nintendo alone to decide on, it's a very idle talk anyway.
Move away from the Direct format? That's what everyone should be doing. There's no need for E3 press conferences these days.
No awkward pauses for cheers/laughter.
No technical issues (looking at you Skyward Sword).
No pauses between trailers like waiting for the next presenter to walk onto the stage. Or Sony having to move their entire audience this year and proceed to stall for 10 minutes.
So there's things to gain removing the live audience but what do you lose from not having them? I argue you lose nothing. Would hearing people cheer have made the Metroid Prime 4 announcement last year more exciting? Of course not.
Keep the directs for the rest of the year, but yes, get back on that live stage and bring back the fun, excitement, and embarrassment too.
Let's get E3 back to its roots.
I dunno, the Direct format itself is fine by mine. They did some really cool quirky stuff in the past, that I cannot imagine would work well or at all during a live conference. Having said that, the way the handled it this year - with not cool or quirky stuff - and basically turning their presentation into what should have been a dedicated SSB-Direct needs to be readjusted significantly for next year.
In the end though, it does simply not matter whether it's live of prerecorded as long as the content ist there.
@RETRO_J How was 2018 a disappointment?! Easily one of the best E3's Nintendo has had in awhile.
In my honest opinion I think Nintendo should be doing a bit of both for their E3 press conferences.
Have Reggie walk up on stage and personally introduce us to the kinds of things we'll be seeing this year and step away again to let the screen do the talking for whatever game is to be revealed. Interviews can be done on screen too so they don't have to awkwardly translate for developers either, they can use subtitles, plain and simple.
Now Nintendo already have the right idea from what's said here: depending on what's shown at the current year at the time, should effect on how they present it.
Got a big hitting game like a new Zelda or 3D Mario? Even Metroid would warrant maybe some kind of musical performance to accompany the trailer.
A lot of people say Nintendo should stick to just Nintendo Direct formats and to which I say: You're missing the point of E3.
Yes anyone can agree that E3 is about the games but E3 is just as equally about the balance in showmanship too.
If you don't show any presence at E3 then tell me exactly why you should be at E3 instead of making your own separate event away from the thing. The E3 Treehouses are good too so keep those but when it comes to the main event I can actually appreciate what the other companies do even if they mess it up sometimes.
Ubisoft especially captures what E3 is about whether you love or hate their shows. They make use of the stage and being able to physically see how passionate the developers are is wholy welcome in my arms.
Hell some of you forget that Shigeru Miyamoto himself absolutely loves having an audience and being on stage. He was literally AT Ubisoft's stage demonstrating that fact and he did that LAST year too.
So all in all I think Nintendo have the right idea based on what they've said here. In my opinion Breath of the Wild's reveal was amazing but that would have been amplified by an audience witnessing that live. Truly would've been a more than stunning moment.
This year made sense as a Direct format. They didn't have a lot to show so I believe they made the right decision in not having stage presence. But I have to stress again that if you like Nintendo Directs, that's fine, but if you think a Direct format means they "win" E3 then I have to ask you reevaluate what it means to actually be at E3.
@Nin10outof10 If you're a fan of Smash Bros, maybe. I'm not saying there aren't a lot of Smash Bros fans but they honestly didn't show a lot to warrant it as their "best". Think about how other people might view something first.
I'm also aware that I'm the minority in wanting stage shows back but I'm honestly not surprised that people's only reason for not wanting them back is to "avoid the cringe". Like that's literally down to how Nintendo present it. Not because it happens to be on a stage.
Next thing you're gonna tell me is that the stage show Sony did when they revealed the Final Fantasy 7 Remake was "cringey" and "rubbish". If you can't admit at least that was good then dear lord don't even bother I guess.
Because why would they even bother continuing Iwata's legacy?
Nintendo has really lost its soul...
I think I prefer the old format of small Nintendo Direct. I love that they are designed like special surprise events. I also like that they indeed are most of the times fine-tuned, sweet and informative.
Change the format however you want. If you have cool games to announce and meaningful footage to share, most of us should be happy. Key word being "should."
Shuntaro Furukawa is about to take over Nintendo so it will be up to him.
@dystome the total silence on it at E3 suggests to me Bayonetta 3 is not at all close to finished.
I like the efficient use of time with the direct. I really don't care for conferences that create this mini show within a show. Maybe I'm getting old but I like the direct approach. Show me the games cause really that is all I'm there and let me get back to my day.
@Kyranosaurus I completely agree with you. People just don't seem to get the point of E3. It's about being there, and not just with a booth/multiple booths, or an after show, but also presenting live.
Sure, live presentations have their cons, but they definitely have more pros, where hype is concerned, and that is indeed in large part due to the audience responding to the reveals.
People not liking that, or thinking that is either scripted or cringe worthy, should probably not be watching E3, and should just pick up the news that interests them, from their favorite gaming website(s), so they can pick and choose what they actually DO want to see.
And yes, Sony's presentation was bad, and the whole audience moving thing was actually kind of baffling, but this was probably the exception. I can't remember Sony having screwed up so badly in any previous E3 or other event, and minor screw ups are normally part of almost every presentation, but that is inherent to things being live, and for me, that actually WAY more gives me the sense of actually being there with them, than watching a pre-edited, completely faultless video presentation.
But a mix of both would indeed be good. A bit of Direct, but Nintendo people still being on stage to present them. And you hit the nail on the head where Miyamoto is concerned. He may be getting on a bit, but he LOVES being there, and it shows, and that to me is actually highly infectious/contagious, making me feel it too.
I also don't get people calling Microsoft's and Bethesda's presentations bad: they were probably the two best and most professional presentations of the entire E3, this year. Next to no screw ups, good games, and solid presentations.
Bethesda's even had some good comedy segments, which also showed that they have no problems with making fun of themselves, and in my book, that's only a good thing, because it shows an innate ability to put things in perspective.
All in all, E3 is about presenting your company and your products and creating hype in the industry and with your target audience, and showing a pre-made video presentation, that you could literally broadcast at any given day of the year (signifying that it isn't special at all), just isn't a good replacement for that.
Why not all 3? I'd like to see them present themselves live, with Reggie walking on stage, being Reggie, spinning a yarn about Nintendo philosophy - really ham it up, and hint at what will be shown.
Then he asks the audience to sit back for a live viewing of a 20 minute long sizzle reel(Nintendo direct style), so those watching at home feel included in the energy and excitement at the presentation. Have a few guests walk out and talk about their future projects, even if all they have is a few development screenshots.
Immediately after the live show, Reggie tells the crowd and viewers at home that a few of the games shown have demos available at the close of the show. Leave the surprise for everyone to check the eShop on their own.
Keep in mind, the Online service will be active as well, so they could easily drop some new, hot retro games as another surprise or two. This could easily be their best presentation ever with such a "for the fans" format.
I like directs more.
@ThanosReXXX Exactly all that. Whether some people think E3 is relevant at all these days is an entirely different discussion but point is that if you can't make the effort to put the E3 magic of a live show into E3 then you might as well not have an E3.
Why should Microsoft attend E3? Why should Sony attend E3? Why should Nintendo attend E3? To give us something they could show at any time of the year?
Exactly as you said it. The more personal and interactive you are to the audience, the bigger deal you are at E3 in my eyes.
Hell Ubisoft this year when they showed the DK Mario and Rabbids trailer with the LIVE music accompanying the trailer onscreen is EXACTLY why people should be pumped for live shows.
As much as people complained about it. EVEN when Nintendo ended that one stage show with Nintendo Land fireworks, I still found it a little endearing and appreciated that they still wanted to make it a little special to the audience present.
Nintendo isn't going to hit it big every year, but why do the few cons have to outweigh the overall joy of the pros?
Done well, I could care less about the format. As long as the end result delivers.
@Kyranosaurus Yup. Agreed again.
On a side note, since you mentioned it: E3 is most definitely still relevant, and very much for the same reasons, AND for companies being in direct competition with their industry peers, and for meeting with press, investors and developers/publishers. The hype created during such an event, doesn't just work its magic with the target audience, but also with those specific groups.
Some of the best deals were made at events like these, and it's also easier to get people to showcase stuff or to invite people to your behind closed doors sessions. No need to compare agenda schedules to see when a meeting can be planned: it's E3, everybody is already there...
Please, please no conference. A pre-edited Direct is much better because there's no opportunity for audience interaction cringe.
Leave the cringe to Ubi and EA....we don't need Nintendo to take that mantle again.
Still I loved the Digital Events. They made them big spectacles, made them matter. The Regginator buildup. Iwata x Reggie. Muppets, claymation reggie. The long introduction by Iwata. They made it a once a year special event to see for E3. Since Iwata passed, they've reverted to just a common "random day of the year" quick Direct. Nothing special, no special presentation, not even a word from Nintendo leadership (the whole point of being |DIRECT| to intro or guide the show.) I feel Iwata stopped stage shows for direct communication, in part because it was too difficult for him to spend that much time rehearsing the English portion for weeks and weeks every year, and after Iwata they don't really know WHAT to do, and upper management wants to just do it as cheap as possible so its 'just a random direct video thrown together in 5 hours. It didn't even have Koizumi hosting. It had an odd interlude with Reggie that didn't anchor the whole feed.
My hope is that the incoming president next week, who is fluent in English will take over being |DIRECTLY| to us once again. It's not a |DIRECT| anymore....it's an Indirect. It was |DIRECT| because it was from the president to the fans. It was meant specifically to address the seeming disconnect with nintendo management and the consumer by having him bring us news himself. Without him they defaulted to disconnect again as though the fist of Yamauchi looms above them.
@ThanosRexxx Squeenix and Nintendo moving to video I feel has less to do with "cringe" and more to do with, most of the people who are at all valuable to speak to an almost entirely English speaking audience speak no English. Video lets them bake in the translations somewhat cleanly, while live you have the speak, delay, speak, delay. A presentation makes less sense for them both. Most of those key people are indeed there, but a live stage isn't always ideal. We saw the Switch reveal and how awkward that presentation went. And then there was Wii Music. While the live show has value, it's also true that EA, Microsoft, and Bethesda's shows are in fact, not actually at E3. E3 starts Monday. They hold their shows at different venues that do not go through E3 event admissions prior to the E3 start. Sony and Ubi are really the only actual E3 live shows now.
The traditional press conference can die off as a whole IMO. Video presentations are much better.
Thanks to social media the announcements get spread like wildfire regardless
I love how he put emphasis on efficiency, and this years' E3 Direct was anything but that, with third parties getting about 30 secs of screen time total and SSBU getting 23 minutes.
Conferences are more exciting to me. But I can see it being expensive to rent out a theater just to host one. So I understand why they’d want to save the money and make a video presentation instead. Or if they’re afraid a demo would crash, they’d go for a video.
@NEStalgia I don't think that's a decisive factor at all. The Treehouse works perfectly fine with the on-hand translators, and so could on stage presentations, much like they always used to do in previous years. (and most of those were also done by native English speakers, so there never even really were that many presentations in need of translation anyway)
In general, I see a lot of other people commenting completely missing the point, thinking that the E3 is there for them, and as such, they decide/think that the online presentation is the better solution.
But that is just the point: it's NOT about an online/digital presentation being better or more convenient, and it's most definitely not about reaching the masses of the audience, like some people seem to think. People that do, don't get the meaning or the purpose of an event like the E3 as a whole.
It's about getting face to face with your peers in the industry and with the press, AND with developers/publishers. Having them all on hand, in one concentrated spot is far easier (and in fact even cheaper) than making your own, separate appointments with them, because that would take more time, and in corporate life, time is money.
And the cost of the investment for the event is only a drop in a bucket compared to what they spend on annual R&D and marketing costs, so what they would save isn't even enough to use as a marketing budget or any other significant purpose.
Here's an interesting article, from one of the leading sites in the industry itself, that explains in great detail what the costs for exhibiting at a game convention really are:
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-02-21-the-costs-of-exhibiting-at-a-video-game-convention
@ThanosReXXX I think treehouse worse because the guest devs aren't the actual presentation hosts though, they're just interviewees as part of a group panel. It keeps pace moving, with scenes of play etc that it doesn't feel as stilted as it would on a main stage where the actual presenter needs to be translated. It (almost) worked for the Switch launch because they were in Tokyo, but the US translation got spotty. They even had Andrew Wilson there! It was like the bestest E3 show ever, right? And Wilson's spot was derpy(er than usual) because he had to have Trinen translate (the reverse effect of Nintendo at US E3 was there with Wilson at a Japan event.) Square's shows usually had a presenter at a podium speaking with translators off the side translating for them, and in truth their video showcase this year was more watchable...live is great, but only if people can actually communicate with the audience. It's not that a stage show for Nintendo with a bunch of English speaking figureheads wouldn't be great, but since they don't have that, I'm not sure it's a better solution.
BUT the videos need to count. They need to be big. They need to have well translated messages from the CEO, executives, etc presenting their vision to the audience no less, and maybe more boldly than on stage. These last 2 years of phoned in "every day Direct" that are less eventful than the February direct are just weird and lame and demonstrates they don't care about E3 much. The English speakers at their shows means, Reggie, Bill, Howard (in the day)....NoA sales suits that have nothing to do with the actual product. It was like the EA show. Nintendo's shows are best with actual devs and leaders. Koizumi, Miyamoto, Takahashi, Iwata ( ), Masuda, Kimishima....people that make the gears turn. As it is the investor briefing is more exciting than E3....the real leaders give real info.
Your'e right about people misunderstanding E3, but then...when I look at the vendors there...they seem to have missed the point too these days and see it as a sales event more than a conference.
"The booth" is the part that matters, and Ninty always has an attention gathering booth with a lively crowd and a big line. For press, for investors, for partners, that's a good show (plus the back room stuff.) I think it's "us" the fans that are more worried about the delivery of the presentation than business partners (and enemies), Nintendo is as "there" at the show as MS, Bethesda, and EA who's own theater shows are outside E3. Attendees get nothing more from MS and EA than they do from Ninty. If Ninty held a big stage show in Tokyo it would be the same difference I suppose.
Ultimately for them I'd guess it's about avoiding embarrassment, and always being in absolute control of the message. Much easier to do this way, and I suspect that's more important for them than anything else. Hard to argue against the strategy when they've banked more than Sony, Panasonic, and Toyota....
Bethesda tried this route last year but reversed this year. Squeenix is giving it a go now. We'll see.
"Live" for the attendees, we get the Sony Shuffle
@NEStalgia Depends on your definition of "worse". You were the one that was so enamored with Trinen's performance hosting and translating, so it certainly IS possible, as long as the pre-show planning is done right.
Both Microsoft and Bethesda showed that a professional looking show, with only minor hiccups can actually be done, and the thing is indeed that these videos can NEVER bring what a live presentation brings: hype, crowds, a sensation of being there, and people/companies having to put their best foot forward.
And like I said: it's also about the money, and the time you might want to spend, as a company, on advertising/pandering to the media, resellers, developers and/or publishers. Just imagine a board of directors having to make all these appointments separately: when is who available, and when can they all meet on the same day, AND have enough time in their agenda to hold a meeting for whatever purpose?
Depending on the number of people necessary to hold those meetings, you're potentially talking about a tenfold of the number of meetings that are held during an E3 conference, and as such, it will cost WAY more man hours and all other costs involved for traveling to and fro, and people not doing the jobs they were actually hired for, because they're stuck in the umpteenth meeting.
That is why the E3 is a FAR more cost-effective solution for all parties involved, for those kinds of goings-on. Which, coincidentally is also why it's a business convention first, and a public convention second, or even third. It was never even meant as something publicly accessible, originally.
And setting aside for a moment what kind of screw ups live presentations can potentially cause, it is still true that companies go above and beyond if they have to perform in front of a live audience. Making a presentation video is SO much easier and more relaxed and stress-less, that it just doesn't contain that same spirit, no matter how sleek and wonderful the end result may be.
I actually had more fun watching the Treehouse sessions than the actual Smash... errr... E3 Direct, this year.
As for Square Enix: with what they did, I seriously wondered why they even bothered to show up. It was all rather pathetic, for a showcase that's supposed to wow audience, shareholders and potential partners.
@ThanosReXXX But Trinnen's not a person of real import. He's, no offense, a marketing and sales guy. There is nobody from NoA that matters more than slightly. Not bill, not Reggie, not Sam, because NoA is just a sales office with a localization unit. Anybody worth being on a stage, needs translators (excepting the new CEO of course, things may change.)
For the appointments, the key figures are on hand. Maybe not Kimishima....Yamauchi, Iwata always went. Kimishima lived here half his life, I don't know why he doesn't go. But Masuda, Ishihara, Miyamoto, Takahashi or Koizumi are usually on hand at one of the biggest booths on the floor. So it's just the presentation part, not the opportunity part that's missing.
Well this year's direct was just...not E3 worthy. If were talking video vs live you have to go back to Iwata's Digital Events. They did do those big, and that man ALWAYS brought an energy like no other, whether through a screen or not. I was never jubilant, but always giddy just beneath the surface. Yeah if we're talking about this year and last year? There WAS no E3 video. Just a vlog.
As for Square, it was a well put together sizzle reel of some good games. That was for the fans, not the attendees I think. I've no idea what their booth was like, but I imagine the booth was just fine. I don't think investors care a wink about the sizzle reel, and the journalists were no doubt having fun at the booth. But it does seem like "Japan hates E3" doesn't it?
Please don't,the majority of live events tend to be cringe worthy.
@NEStalgia Square's probably just waiting to shine on the TGS...
I'm getting a bit confused at the whole translator/presenter thing. I think we actually mean the same, but for some reason, we're largely talking past each other. With what you just said, I see even less of a problem.
It doesn't matter who Trinen is, or how insignificant he might be in the bigger picture, because all he would have to do is assist the speaker on stage, whether or not that's a Japanese big wig or a Japanese developer. And the same goes for Reggie: he's just a pass-through hatch for the message coming from Nintendo HQ.
But because they need to address a largely English speaking audience, which attends E3, they'll always choose for guys like him to convey the main part of it, regardless of him not being a decision maker or not. It's about ease of presentation and relatability, and in an American-hosted event, native English speakers are (naturally) more at home, and come across as more natural than people speaking any other language.
And not just Japanese, as shown by some parts of EA and Ubisoft's presentations, where non-native speakers were involved. It was often a chore to listen to the mangled English.
But yes, to assuage any misunderstandings on that part, I did like Iwata's Directs VERY much, and they were cool, but they were still not all that much more special than their other Directs, other than either the odd Robot Chicken or Muppet segments, to differentiate them from that. In that, it was more about the presenter himself, than about the video, and there simply isn't an adequate enough replacement for Iwata to duplicate that effect.
But live is and always will be where the real buzz/hype is at with these kinds of things, there is no way in hell that you can translate that to anything pre-recorded. That's not even a discussion...
Another thing where a bit of miscommunication seems to occur is what I mentioned about time and money and all people being there at the same time. First off, that was a side note, that I mentioned to the person I originally commented on, because he made note of it in his own comment, wondering whether or not E3 is still important/viable, and that is why I went into detail on that, explaining why events like E3 most certainly DO matter, and will still matter for many years to come.
So, that hasn't got all that much to do with the presentation, but more with the follow ups, such as the meetings and the behind closed doors sessions.
Holding these at E3 is simply and undeniably FAR more cost effective and easier to plan, because everybody's already there anyway. And like the audience at home and on the show floor, even those executives are hyped and pumped, so they'll be more eager than usual, improving success rates.
That's a thing about conventions in general, though. Not just E3. I've done my share of conventions, so I know about it from my own experience. There's just something to it, that is missing from normal meetings or appointments. Everybody, high and low, is feeling the excitement, and it shows and has its effects.
I like the pace of the Directs, it's a much better viewing experience than awkward transitions on stage or whatever the hell it was that Sony did this year.
I like the E3 direct personally. Straightforward and to the point, and then tons of deep dives with tree house. They spend more time talking about games and less about PR rambling.
I like the format. I just think they need to A) have more/better first-party games to include in the presentation, and B) balance the time spent on individual games so that you’re not spending two seconds per game on most games and then 45 minutes deep-diving into one single game just so you can explain every mundane aspect of every single character in a game with like 80 characters.
So, format: good. Execution this year: bad.
@Kyranosaurus They showed off Smash Bros, Mario Party, Pokemon, and Mario Tennis. That's a pretty good showing if I do say so myself.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...