Gaming News

gizmo

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Nintendo though was never a hit at E3. It was like the forgettable stand in the back of a trade show. E3 has always been about the big boys, Xbox, PlayStation, and PC. What I am saying is they never made much of an effort compared to the big boys at E3.

Last year Nintendo had 75% of the show floor space Sony had, they weren't really squirrelled away at the back somewhere.

Despite the increasingly large online presence of the event, folk still seem to forget that E3 is primarily an industry event, it's not necessarily aimed at consumers. While the keynotes feature elaborate (and arguably unnecessary) stage productions, the bulk of the work goes on behind the scenes in the meeting rooms that are sandwiched in between the main halls. That's where you get the press-only previews, the meetings between developers and publishers where new partnerships can be forged over the strength of a demo shown and where both software and hardware retailers market their wares and services to both types of companies.

I'm kind of surprised Sony went with the nuclear option with E3 though. Even if they move to a Nintendo Direct style manner of presentation and increase their investment into the annual PSX events, I would have thought it'd be better to have some representation in the halls rather than none.

Penn

I think as others have said, news and announcements at e3 have to compete with everything else at e3, including interviews, previews etc. And it becomes a needless competition to have the biggest announcements rather than let the reveals speak for themselves. And then things get revealed that are way too far off, or before they should be revealed. As much as I enjoy it and enjoy watching some of the conferences, if the event was toned down a bit and expectations lowered, I think the standard of what is shown would increase.

I think Sony pulling out and focusing on some of the other conferences, their own included, would help this. Whether they return to e3 again in the future would remain to be seen, but spreading out trailers and announcements on their own terms rather than having to hold everything for e3 to try win some imaginary battle that plays out in some fans minds (even when those fans have usually already picked their winner before e3 and announce that their side has won 5 minutes into the show), is just pointless at this stage when there are so many ways to communicate with the audience, most of whom don't watch the conferences but just check out trailers and news afterwards regardless.

I think people are reading too much into it. I've no doubts about it if Sony had something to announce they would be there. With nothing to announce they would be in for some negative press, imagine them showing the same games as last year. It's all about avoiding negative press. I think Sony are finished with this gen and not ready to announce anything for next gen. No reason whatsoever for them to be at the conference.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

I think people are reading too much into it. I've no doubts about it if Sony had something to announce they would be there. With nothing to announce they would be in for some negative press, imagine them showing the same games as last year. It's all about avoiding negative press. I think Sony are finished with this gen and not ready to announce anything for next gen. No reason whatsoever for them to be at the conference.

This would be my thoughts on it too. They have nothing to show.
And Sony are guaranteed massive hype if they sign on for E3 2019, people will know they're ready to talk next gen.

iLikeWaffles

Dr. Bre wrote: »

A Netflix for games would be a great idea !

I have to disagree. If all games go that way eventually the market will be pretty stale. Less competition for companies to make money as the playing field is levelled against the cost of the subscription which may be shared equally among the companies enlisting into the subscription. You might have one or two big games in the year that would have done well, in terms of sales, not being in the subscription model but because they are setting the bar and not getting paid their full potential they could be getting not being in subscription, will they make the same effort next time round? By which time the quality of their next game, from a fans prospective will not be as expected.

I can't justify paying each week for a subscription myself as the games on Game-Pass for example do not interest me; maybe one or two I would download and complete. That is two games I could have bought for cheaper than what it would cost for the subscription, if I complete the games within the subscription that is.

Netflix has the similar quality content you will never get through everything on Netflix. But eventually you get to a point where you do not want to watch something as its quality is just not up to your own standards, so in fact you do end up running out of content because your own quality standards goes against justifying watching it just for the sake of it.

Sieghardt

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Netflix for games is the future on consoles.

It's only ever going to be a complementary thing, companies whose games sell 10-20 million wont sign up because the numbers dont work for them, games that are extremely niche need their dedicated fans to support them too, getting thrown a few cents from a subscription service would kill them

The netflix model doesnt even work for netflix, let alone the games industry which is 100 times the size

Grumpypants

iLikeWaffles wrote: »

I have to disagree. If all games go that way eventually the market will be pretty stale. Less competition for companies to make money as the playing field is levelled against the cost of the subscription which may be shared equally among the companies enlisting into the subscription. You might have one or two big games in the year that would have done well, in terms of sales, not being in the subscription model but because they are setting the bar and not getting paid their full potential they could be getting not being in subscription, will they make the same effort next time round? By which time the quality of their next game, from a fans prospective will not be as expected.

I can't justify paying each week for a subscription myself as the games on Game-Pass for example do not interest me; maybe one or two I would download and complete. That is two games I could have bought for cheaper than what it would cost for the subscription, if I complete the games within the subscription that is.

Netflix has the similar quality content you will never get through everything on Netflix. But eventually you get to a point where you do not want to watch something as its quality is just not up to your own standards, so in fact you do end up running out of content because your own quality standards goes against justifying watching it just for the sake of it.

Subscription services have revolutionised TV, look at the quality of TV shows now coming out of Netflix, Amazon and HBO. Even the biggest of movie stars are now on TV shows as that's where the best work is being done.

If you reduce the risk for every studio to have smash hits or go bust, by balancing the income across a sub model, then they are free to take more risks with the games they make. Subs want variety. They want to say we have 200 games from indie to AAA.

The average gamer buys 1.5 games a year. So a sub of €100 a year brings in more money.

Grumpypants

Grumpypants wrote: »

The average gamer buys 1.5 games a year. So a sub of €100 a year brings in more money.

Really?? Jesus, I shudder to think where I fall on that scale:o

Grumpypants

Cake of Tremendous Power wrote: »

Really?? Jesus, I shudder to think where I fall on that scale:o

Yip Microsoft came out with it. I suppose for every gamer that buys a game a month there are 10 that just buy cod or fifa. Or have a console sitting gathering dust.

I wonder would. It make the industry more stable? Each studio is only one bad game away from going bust.

ERG89

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I wonder would. It make the industry more stable? Each studio is only one bad game away from going bust.

Yeah but what if your subscription ain't worth the price either?
If they become a success you can guarantee they'd have ones to exclusively play games for every major studio. EA, Ubisoft, Square Enix, Activision, 2K/Rockstar & First party's.
You also put a value on your games that is hard to go back from & need at least 1 game that people would feel they need to play. Netflix relies a lot on people forgetting to cancel or lapsing from unsubscribing until a series is on they want to play.

Cake of Tremendous Power wrote: »

This would be my thoughts on it too. They have nothing to show.
And Sony are guaranteed massive hype if they sign on for E3 2019, people will know they're ready to talk next gen.

Sony like Microsoft, Nintendo and others can do their big game & console reveals outside it.
Works for Rockstar. PS4 was announced in February, the Switch was revealed on a random midweek afternoon in October. The E3 stage weren't missed there.
No matter what is revealed that week you are always going to be sharing the spotlight. I genuinely didn't know Bethesda revealed Wolfenstein Youngblood back in June until only last week.
Does anyone remember the name of the Star Wars game that Respawn are making?
No, cause it was just thrown out there that week.
Even CD Projekt Red waited to show Cyberpunk 2077 properly in August as people would pay more attention to it then.

EoinHef

The problem is if all the big devs decide to create their own netflix for gaming. You could be looking at needing multiple subs.

Netflix making their own content shows that relying on other companies games/movies for their sub was not gonna be sustainable. Those companies that provided the media are going to eventually want their own version of netflix where they make all the profit.

Retr0gamer

E3 as an industry event isn't relevant anymore. It used to be about talking to retailers to get them to buy stock but the industry is so big now that only small publishers need to do that now.

As a way to give news to the media it's outdated as well.

E3 will get smaller and smaller in the coming years.

DS86DS

Did anybody get around to early gameplay of Battlefield V?

I really look forward to seeing what this game is about next week, particularly as I felt COD: WW2 was rubbish

Grumpypants

DS86DS wrote: »

Did anybody get around to early gameplay of Battlefield V?

I really look forward to seeing what this game is about next week, particularly as I felt COD: WW2 was rubbish

Yeah it's amazing, best shooter this year.

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057847093/52/#post108650494

CastorTroy

Anyone like Fallout 76?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0l6nOSoux4o

Footage of gamestop being wrecked can be seen here
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10210836196699653&id=1793478433

Answering the phone at the end is just funny

Jerichoholic

What a ****ing baby.

iLikeWaffles

Jerichoholic wrote: »

What a ****ing baby.

Psychotic more like!

chrislad

Ignoring the completely out of proportion reaction, there should be some recourse over bad games - I mean more from the "Game is buggy as f**k" side of things, rather than "I didn't like it" - Taking a recent enough example of WWE 2K17 on the Nintendo Switch - total mess of a game, completely unplayable in most game mode, and not like it's come from some small company with three staff.

From what I hear, Fallout 76 is quite buggy, but we've kinda gotten ourselves into this lifecycle, where the first release is a hot mess, followed by some game-saving patches down the road.

gimli2112

Some launches are beyond catastrophic. As someone who was there on day one of Battlefield 4 I know. They turned it around but it took them months to get it right.

yyt

Cake of Tremendous Power wrote: »

Really?? Jesus, I shudder to think where I fall on that scale:o

I thought i was the average at around 10ish

degrassinoel

Firaxis about to announce something -

https://www.twitch.tv/firaxisgames

iLikeWaffles

degrassinoel wrote: »

Firaxis about to announce something -

https://www.twitch.tv/firaxisgames

Cloud simulator? :eek:

Shiminay

Maybe if people STOPPED PREORDERING GAMES then Bethesda might finally get the finger out and stop releasing broken buggy messes?

I'm watching this cloudy sky on the Fireaxis stream and am waiting to see a UFO... :P

iLikeWaffles

2 hours uptime will be an announcement someone said in chat there. That's in 20mins or so.

Mr Crispy

It's hardly more Ace Patrol?

degrassinoel

Darch Nemesis wrote: »

It's hardly more Ace Patrol?

guessing at a civ tease or announcement given the cityscape and high altitude

Kiith

Too soon for a new Civ, so i'd assume the next DLC. They don't normally do twitch announcements though, so maybe a new IP?

degrassinoel

Kiith wrote: »

Too soon for a new Civ, so i'd assume the next DLC. They don't normally do twitch announcements though, so maybe a new IP?

Could be, skies darker at the two-hour mark, and the winds picked up in the stream, nothing else yet. Shamefully, this is more interesting that Fallout76 atm

Shiminay

I have more for doing than listening to the wind. I'll find out what it is later I'm sure.