Peter Moore: Soulless, Fragmented E3 Can Be Fixed
Peter Moore: Soulless, Fragmented E3 Can Be Fixed
July 25, 2008
Calling this year's E3 "soulless" and "fragmented," EA exec Peter Moore (left), who has livened up a few E3 press conferences with wild game launch tatoos, maintains that show operator the ESA and its member game publishers can put things right.
gamesindustry.biz reports on Moore's remarks:
There was a palpable sense of frustration at the structure and logistics from all participants, from publishers like ourselves to the working press and financial analysts.
Soulless and lacking an epicentre, the fragmented layout gave no indication whatsoever that we are the fastest growing entertainment medium in the world. While I am not sure I want to revert back to the old days of excess and one-upmanship, I do know that this format isn’t working.
We're confident that we can work with the ESA to make this right. There are important meetings ahead that we think will be substantive and be productive in finding the right path forward.
As others, including ECA head Hal Halpin have suggested, Moore raises the possibility of inviting gamers to future expos:
FULL DISCLOSURE DEPT: The ECA is the parent company of GamePolitics....Let's invite the community. With the right planning, involving our biggest fans in E3 would bring back some of the raw passion the event has lost.
Whether it's E3, or whether it's in our forums, my belief is bringing in the fans helps us to create better games and bring new ideas to the market.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:16pm
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:10pm
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:00pm
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:48pm
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:42pm
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:40pm
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:39pm
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:34pm
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:32pm
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:26pm
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:25pm
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
Since never having been to E3, it's hard to tell what the problem is. I think that we can fix it, but I wouldn't put idiots like Moore in charge. It seems to me that the presentations went pretty well (except for our console trinity), it's just no one showed up.
Many journalists weren't happy with the way the first E3 was so crowded and disorganized, nothing could get done. It was a total fiasco.
Now, everything's so organized, it's a bore. There must be some common ground between the two we can find.
I remember that when I first heard about that game launch tattoo, it was one of the dumbest things I had ever heard.
And here we are, however many years later... and it's still one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
Does he still have that tattoo?
The easiest and possibly most appropriate fix for E3 is not a turn towards PAX-land, but instead towards Las Vegas. It has been mentioned before by others as a good spot for the event, allowing the glitz and glam of the Strip to take over for the lack of it in the event itself.
From there... open bar. Because alcohol lubricates information from pursed lips.
The problem with going to Vegas is that anti game opportunists will latch onto it and noe how gaming has moved to the "sinner's capital of the world." The open bar may increase the virtriol.
THen again it likely won't matter since those nitpickers never let the industry have anything, no matter how well they do things already.
I always thought that most of the "one upsmanship" might be dissapated if you separated XBOX, PS, and Nintendo into different rooms. With the big three in one hall, they are directly competing with each other for flash, noise, and spectacle.
I think E3 needs a new venue with 3 separate halls for the big guys, a mezzanine of rooms for press announcements, and an upstairs for game publishers (each publisher getting their own room). This would be mostly doable at the San Diego Convention Center (which hosts the Comicon), except that that they only have the one hall and miserable parking (but what convention center doesn't?).
Its really quite sad that the only sites that report about the ECA are the ones Hal Halpin has a hand in. Its almost as if noone cares.
Possibly because the ECA isn't pumping millions into popularity-placement. ;)
Na, its because nobody cares :)
Actually, the ECA is covered quite a bit. You can catch all the ECA coverage on the forums, http://forums.theeca.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34
Brett Schenker
Online Advocacy Manager
the ECA
www.theeca.com
Like I said, if EA sees an industry problem, then you KNOW it's bad.
Do like Moore's optimism though.
Seriously, dude's a mind reader or something. The last couple E3's while I'm watching footage on the TV, I eventually decided to just turn it off. It's just not fun to see the video game representatives pitch some new toy to a bunch of reporters, who are too busy taking notes to whoop about it. Vague polite applause doesn't make good TV.
If they want to make E3 an event again, they need to bring in some folks who are excited about the medium for a change. "Regular folks" used to sneak into E3s, and they made it pretty easy back then, and that made it a lot more fun to watch.
I'm all for freedom of ttnet vitamin speech and allowing rent a car game makers to put whatever they want in games, but there's one thing about this app that has me scratching my head. Correct me if I'm wrong, but from araç kiralama the previous article araba kiralama on this I gathered that players can use Google maps in-game to find the other (real-life?) dealers in their area. If this is the case, has travesti anyone considered what's stopping someone from using this app to actually move drugs between hands for reals?
But majority araba kiralama of their outrage araç kiralama stems from what it could DO TO children, not the content itself. Talk to one of these people and you'll find they don't think any books kiralık araba should be banned from children. Mention American Psycho and they talk about kiralık araç the redeeming value of using imagination to construct a story. Reading, no matter what the content, is largely viewed as a consequenceless activity for people of any age. The reason why I mention American Psycho is because of the content itself. Gaming never has and likely never will have any scenes where someone has sex with a severed head. Not gonna happen. Yet despite this, they'll fight tooth and nail to protect their children from two boys kissing in Bully but whatever they read is harmless... yeah.
The entire arguement is kiralık oto based upon a social normality inflicted by luddites who can't figure out the controls for Halo so it's frightening and terrifying and obviously the cause of youth violence on the rise even though, in reality, it's in decline (which is actually a HUGE suprise given minibüs kiralama the economies status). In a perfect world, we would have parents that actually parent. The idea of sales restrictions on media on oto kiralama any form to accomidate parental unwillingness to get involved with their child's life is the real problem to me. Here I am, 32 years old, and being held up at a self-scan rent a car needing to show ID before I can buy a $10 M rated game all because Soccer Momthra can't be bothered to look at the crap Billy Genericallystupidson does in his free time. It's too hard for her, so I have to suffer?
Thanks good job;
Btw, I think Atari and Midway will drop out too, but mostly travesti because these guys have done nothing travesti or little and need to start saving costs. and dizi izle
YES.
Now I don't have to get off my ass for the important shit anymore!
Whats next, ordering pizza from Xbox live?
Wait... I think that sounds like a good idea.
But I think voting should MAKE you get off your ass, and see outside or a second while you go vote. I mean, your picking the president of the United States of America for God's Sake... least you can do is drive down there and punch out a card.