3D Interviews!

Tom Ohle: Founder, Evolve PR

First, can you comment on the argument that rising costs in exhibiting and planning for E3 has cause this retrenchment of the show?

E3 has always been a major expense for exhibiting companies. For many smaller developers and publishers, it’s among the most significant marketing and PR expenses; it’s often their only chance to get their products seen by a ton of media outlets. Factoring in staff travel and expenses, they’re spending tens of thousands (or hundreds of thousands) of dollars for a small booth in Kentia or a meeting room. It’s a lot of money to be spending on a single event, but you just can’t demo your products to as many editors at any other event.

E3 was the single biggest worldwide media even for the video and PC game industry, bringing in attention from a ton of both game enthusiast and mainstream media to cover the show. Without such a large event in the US for 2007, do you think that could impact the attention that the video and PC game industry gets from consumers and gamers?

I don’t think it will impact the attention the games industry gets. Gaming is deeply engrained in mainstream society and is continuing an upward trend in that regard. As far as I understand, the “new E3” will essentially be less over-the-top and more focused on effective business, including effective demos to media. As long as editors in mainstream/consumer media are still able to attend the event, their coverage shouldn’t suffer; if they’re sensationalizing and glamorizing the whole event, though—and if that’s why readers follow it—then I suppose they may cut back on coverage. I hope it doesn’t come to that, though; gamers will still want to learn about upcoming games.

Do you think the people who exhibit at E3 will save their money and spend less on marketing and advertising as a whole or will the money that was previously earmarked for E3 be used in other ways?

I think the budget usually earmarked for E3 will be distributed to other marketing or PR efforts. Companies always seemed to have the money to spend on a massive booth presence; I don’t see any reason for them to not have that cash in the future (other than rising dev costs, I suppose). I’d watch for an increase in spending on press junkets and other editors’ day-type events.

Do you believe that this retrenchment is just temporary or will other events in the US, including CES, the Game Developers Conference and Digital/Life, become bigger and more important without having E3 be such a big presence in the industry?

I pray that GDC doesn’t turn into what E3 had become; that event needs to remain focused on development. Other than that, I think the aforementioned events may draw additional attention, but they won’t replace E3. The best part of E3 was the fact that you had all of these lower-tier websites and fan-oriented outlets that saved up all they could to send a small staff to E3. It was their one chance to meet their PR reps face-to-face, learn about upcoming games and really get a feeling for how exciting the industry can be. If the new E3 still allows those outlets to attend—while cutting out the droves of unqualified attendees (the dreaded Exhibits Only badges)—it’ll be a great venue for those outlets to remain involved in the industry, and conversely, for publishers and developers to reach the same audience.

Finally, is there anything else that you wish to say about the retrenchment of E3?

I’m all for the evolution of E3. In the last few years, it’s become increasingly difficult to cut through the noise—quite literally—to conduct effective business at E3. That said, I’ve generally been fortunate enough to work with companies that saw the value in holding behind-closed-doors demos. If that’s what the new E3 is—quiet meeting rooms where it’s easy to trade information between developer/publisher and media/buyer without having to scream—I’ll applaud the ESA for doing something we’ve all been waiting for.

Joseph Lieberman: PR Manager, Tri Synergy

First, can you comment on the argument that rising costs in exhibiting and planning for E3 has cause this retrenchment of the show?

E3 has been a ridiculous media circus for years. Smaller publishers pretty much got pushed out of the picture while larger publishers wasted millions of dollars trying to prop up products bound for failure. The system was broken and it is about time someone fixed it.

E3 was the single biggest worldwide media even for the video and PC game industry, bringing in attention from a ton of both game enthusiast and mainstream media to cover the show. Without such a large event in the US for 2007, do you think that could impact the attention that the video and PC game industry gets from consumers and gamers?

It may have an impact, but if that impact is equal to the cost that E3 has produced across the entire market I would be surprised. I am sure sites like Firing Squad will come up with their own way to build some hype around products that deserve it rather than products that just spent a few million dollars hiring and building a live stage act for three days of strobe-lighted fun.

Do you think the people who exhibit at E3 will save their money and spend less on marketing and advertising as a whole or will the money that was previously earmarked for E3 be used in other ways?

We exhibited at E3 in a closed booth. I am not sure what will become of that money, it will probably be used to do exactly what we did at E3 only in a more one on one setting with our partners.

Do you believe that this retrenchment is just temporary or will other events in the US, including CES, the Game Developers Conference and Digital/Life, become bigger and more important without having E3 be such a big presence in the industry?

In any market where there is an opening someone will seize it. I’d personally prefer to see the GDC grow a little bit in terms of a place for more business to business activity as opposed to training and development with a random show room.

Finally, is there anything else that you wish to say about the retrenchment of E3?

While I don’t know that I speak for Tri Synergy as a whole, personally I say it’s about damn time someone stopped the excessive waste and over-hyped garbage that came from LA in May. LA has enough over-hyped and wasted garbage without our industry’s help.

Randy Pitchford: President, Gearbox Software

First, can you comment on the argument that rising costs in exhibiting and planning for E3 has cause this retrenchment of the show?

Every year, the ESA confronts a gravity of influence from the people who spend money into the show about the kinds of things that need to be improved. I don’t think there is a single person that is writing checks for their appearance at E3 that wouldn’t welcome ideas that allow objectives to be achieved for less money. Today we have a statement from the ESA that states in clear terms that part of the motivation of adapting the expo is to provide a “more efficient way” for ESA members to use E3 to achieve the objectives of the show. Efficiency is about cost and benefit.

E3 was the single biggest worldwide media even for the video and PC game industry, bringing in attention from a ton of both game enthusiast and mainstream media to cover the show. Without such a large event in the US for 2007, do you think that could impact the attention that the video and PC game industry gets from consumers and gamers?

E3 is an important event. Adaptations that help ESA members better achieve the objectives of E3 for less cost is a good thing for our industry. I think our industry will have showcase events of all types, including events like E3, for many years. These events will be designed to bring attention to the entertainment our industry creates. I’m confident that the events will continue to accomplish their objectives, but will always strive to evolve towards the smartest ways of achieving those objectives.

Do you think the people who exhibit at E3 will save their money and spend less on marketing and advertising as a whole or will the money that was previously earmarked for E3 be used in other ways?

Money tends to get spent. If less money is spent on E3, it will be spent on something. There are a lot of things to spend money on.

Do you believe that this retrenchment is just temporary or will other events in the US, including CES, the Game Developers Conference and Digital/Life, become bigger and more important without having E3 be such a big presence in the industry?

There are a lot of events for publishers and developers to share their games and their plans. E3 has been the biggest, of course! For a long time to come, there are plenty of objectives for the big shows to exist. But, there are other approaches, too. Many folks are starting to get quite successful at creating their own events where journalists can focus on a few specific titles. As I type this, there is a group of European journalists at Gearbox getting an exclusive look at the next-generation game Brothers in Arms: Hell’s Highway for PS3, 360 and PC. That kind of thing happens all the time in our industry. There are other “big” shows. There are other intimate venues. There are choices…

Finally, is there anything else that you wish to say about the retrenchment of E3?

I’m looking forward to learning more about E3 2007 and am excited to be a part of it!