More quality writing from the man who had an orgasm playing Black and White:

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/05/22/e3_2001/index.html

T&A is lame, but you know what? IMO, the Nintendo kiddie stuff is almost as bad. I don't know which is worse, gamers as pudgy, sweaty horndogs, or gamers as children in adult bodies.

I'm an adult, and I'm neither a horndog nor am I a fan of Hello Kitty crap. Here's an idea for you marketing geniuses: how about developing games for me?

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

We're in a minority. Why market to the normal people when you can appeal to the geeks and kids? They make up a larger part of the gaming market.

I gotta say, though, that Salon really does have some kick-ass writers.

"I gotta say, though, that Salon really does have some kick-ass writers."

And yet, they're still minutes away from going out of business at any given time.

Sobering.

I don't think that's a minority around here. I'd say that most of the people around here feel that way. Although, Tom Ohle, I'm not sure that you can claim not to be a sweaty horndog, knowing your site as I do!! ;-)

Phht. I just do it for marketing.

What amused me about the Salon piece is that Salon is a purveyor of porn, now.

The GOD lot was the worst for T&A. The rest of the show was pretty mild, though some booth babes were hanging around. The GOD lot drew people because of the free beer. The T&A didn't have much to do with it.

"Phht. I just do it for marketing. "

So does GOD. Although they STILL haven't sent me any of my memebership goodies from earlier this year, the dishonest SOBs.

Ah, every year I hear the same carpola out of you guys. Too much T&A, you say. Hate all the bored booth-babes, you say. Yet here you are, making a whole topic about them. They were also in the front page of Q23 yesterday, where Tom mentioned the reduced quantity of them at the E3. And what about us non-writer types out here in the cheap seats? What do we get? Every single one of you folks will mention booth babes in one way or another as you type your articles, but all we get is a few fuzzed-out screenshots of games that probably won't even look the same by the time they come out. Phft. You guys, frankly, whine too much.

You ask me, babes are best used as additions to displays, not as the displays themselves. Think of a nice NASCAR display, with a babe sprawled out on the hood, or of game characters in costume. That seems better to me. Circus performers, like acrobats, would be cool, too.

Though, uh, the elevated pole dancers DO sound pretty interesting, in a purely, ah, skill-appreciation kind of way...

"Though, uh, the elevated pole dancers DO sound pretty interesting, in a purely, ah, skill-appreciation kind of way..."

Didn't see them, though I did enjoy Satan's Cheerleaders dancing onstage at the GOD lot.

Booth babes don't bother me. I like to look. I'm just more interested in the games. I can always go to Hooters if I want to get an eyeful. E3's just once a year.

"I did enjoy Satan's Cheerleaders dancing onstage at the GOD lot. "

I hate you, Asher.

"Hate all the bored booth-babes, you say. Yet here you are, making a whole topic about them. They were also in the front page of Q23 yesterday, where Tom mentioned the reduced quantity of them at the E3."

Are you actually reading anything that's written here? Did you read the Salon article (er, now there are TWO threads on it)?

I don't want gaming to be marginalized into the "kiddie" and "porn" pigeonholes. Neither should you.

The future of the industry absolutely DEPENDS on gaming becoming more and more mainstream, and thus generating larger and larger audiences. Anything that slows or damages that process.. is something any serious gamer should be concerned about.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

>GOD lot drew people because of the free beer. The T&A didn't have much to do with it.

Which makes me wonder--why bother with the T&A then? Oh, and they didn't serve alcohol at the lot until 3pm (it's the law) and there were plenty of people there long before that. Free burgers, maybe.

In all honesty, the tattooed-slut lechery of GOD just makes me ashamed to be a part of this industry sometimes. It's fitting for Duke Nukem (only showing in video form) but not for any of GOD's other games, so I'm not sure I get it. I agree with the Salon piece that shameless T&A is maybe one of the reasons why games aren't as mainstream as we all hope they'd be.

Some would say that sex sells. Well, when I look at the top10 games list every month, it seems pretty obvious that sex not only doesn't sell, sex can't GIVE it away.

Wumpus: you can argue all you want about the kiddie crap being as bad as the shameless T&A, but until Pokemon, Paper Mario, and Donkey Kong stop dominating sales charts, you've got an uphill battle. The people have spoken (with their wallets) and kiddie crap is just as good as stuff like Onimusha, Tony Hawk, and Gran Tursimo.

"Wumpus: you can argue all you want about the kiddie crap being as bad as the shameless T&A, but until Pokemon, Paper Mario, and Donkey Kong stop dominating sales charts, you've got an uphill battle. The people have spoken (with their wallets) and kiddie crap is just as good as stuff like Onimusha, Tony Hawk, and Gran Tursimo."

Huh? The only kiddie title I see in the April 2001 top 20 PC sales list is Lego Island. That's a whopping 5%.

As for consoles, I can't think of much on the PSX, PS2, or DC platform that I consider 'kiddie', at least not in the pandering, obnoxious way that Pokemon, Mario Party, Kirby et al are. I just visited the http://www.ebworld.com pages for each console, and this observation is borne out in the "best sellers" and used titles for each console.

Given that these kinds of kid-targeted titles are largely limited to the N64, and the N64 is widely considered a failure... I don't see this "dominating the sales charts" that you refer to.

Clearly, Sony won this round of the console wars. And they did it without having much at all in the way of "kids" titles, at least not the way Nintendo does it. Consider Samba De Amigo, Virtua Tennis, or Dance Dance Revolution. I think these titles illustrate the right way to go. Proof that you _can_ develop games that have a broad appeal to all ages-- without needing to dumb it down to the goofy marshmallows n' stars world of Nintendo.

And heck, like you said-- if it wasn't for GB and the whole Pokemon phenomenon, Nintendo probably would be in a world of hurt right now.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"but until Pokemon, Paper Mario, and Donkey Kong stop dominating sales charts, you've got an uphill battle"

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/news/0,10870,2659715,00.html

Here's a random console sales list I found for November 12-18, 2000. You tell ME how many kiddie titles you see there. Outside of the obvious (pokemon phenomenon) there's virtually nothing there.

"The people have spoken (with their wallets) and kiddie crap is just as good as stuff like Onimusha, Tony Hawk, and Gran Tursimo."

I simply can't find any data that corroborates your position on this. If anything it's exactly the opposite; the vast majority of console gamers aren't children, but teenagers, and they want something edgier.

Kids' games are just as much of a niche as the T&A stuff, though more socially acceptable. Both groups are outside the mainstream gaming audience on PC or console.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

*sigh* I guess it all comes down to the old adage, "Give the people what they want." In the case of Nintendo, kiddie games sell else they wouldn't put them out. In the case of GoD, sex sells and at the very least, people talk. In W.J. Au's case, Salon wants a titillating tell all about the "vices of E3." Finally, how else do you explain the (n) different games with "Tycoon" in the title?

I still find it satisfying that there's atleast some portion of the gaming press (myself included) that view E3 as an unneccesary drain on resources that could otherwise be spent actually making games.

- Alan "not related to W.J." Au

With the success of games like The Sims and Rollercoaster Tycoon I think "casual" gamers dont really care for the TnA... theres more a novelty factor at work with gaming in general than just a sell to the ghetto geek crowd. Generally i think developers dont know there audiences as much as TV and the movie business does... though the tv and movie industry still is as clueless sometimes as well...

Anyway, games are games. I dont like the idea of games being considered ART at least in the present state of the gaming industry... its not a past-time its a time-passer. Though its a GREAT way to pass time!

Anyway, I'll admit I'm easily tittilatted! Long live Wood Elves!

etc

Is it that they don't know their audience, or that they don't know how to reach them? Let's face it -- 99.9% of advertising for games is done either through 1.) Gaming magazines, 2.) Gaming websites, or 3.) Press events like E3. You don't find many commercials on TV for games, hardly any at the movie theaters (not a bad idea, though), and virtually none in other advertising media, like radio, and non-gaming magazines. Put a Deerhunter ad in Field&Stream, put Tropico in Maxim, advertise the LOTR games before the movie starts on the big stream -- this is how to get games more mainstream.

>Here's a random console sales list I found for November 12-18, 2000. You tell ME how many kiddie titles you see there.

Okay, ignore a single random week for a moment. Let's look at a bigger picture:

March 2001
http://www.npd.com/corp/content/ie/videogames/c_vg0103.htm
Got Pokemon Stadium on there, Paper Mario, Super Smash Brothers, and Donkey 64. They're spread out pretty evenly with sports games and the Onimusha/Conker's/Tony Hawk.

Feb 2001
http://www.npd.com/corp/content/ie/videogames/c_vg0102.htm
Again, Paper Mario, Majora's Mask, Smash Brothers, Donkey Kong.

Jan 2001
http://www.npd.com/corp/content/ie/videogames/c_vg0101.htm
Donkey Kong, Majora's Mask, Smash Bros, Spyro, and Pokemon Stadium

Dec 2000
http://www.npd.com/corp/content/ie/videogames/c_vg0012.htm
Majora's Mask, Banjo-tooie, Crash Bash, Spyro, and Pikachu.

So for the last third of a year at least, there have been 4-6 Family Friendly games on the list, and that doesn't include the Gameboy where Pokemon would put two more on the list. That's pretty evenly split with sports games and more "adult" titles.

I'm not sure I'd consider Donkey Kong and Zelda as particularly "kiddie" games, as I own them both, and enjoy them. But, your point is well taken.

Yeah, I agree with Murph.

Obviously there's some interpretation here, but I put Banjo-Tooie, DK, Crash, and Zelda in the "appeals to all ages" group. They have enough mature content to avoid the kid-only stigma.

I'll give you Spyro, Smash Brothers (could there BE a more wussy fighting game?), Paper Mario, and obviously anything Pokemon related. Those I see as kid stuff across the board.

Did you check out the developer's comments on Evil Avatar? Interesting, because the recurring theme WRT GameCube is the star wars game, which was the only GC game that appealed to me, too. The really depressing thing is that this type of title would fit really well on the PC. I'm sure most of us would kill for an ultra-modern remake of Tie Fighter / X-Wing with state of the art GeForce3 style graphics.

Developers certainly weren't getting all excited about the prospect of Super Smash Brothers Alpha Turbo XVII Deluxe.. and there's no indication that Luigi's Mansion will be even a fraction of the innovative, groundbreaking title that Mario 64 was.

Anyway. Kid stuff is a small fraction of the market, and I'd like to keep it that way. Titles that appeal to all ages are fine by me (Virtua Tennis anyone?), just don't drag the rest of us into that kiddie hellhole in the process.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

Wumpus, I think you missed my point. I wasn't lauding the use of booth babes, I was pointing out that they distracted from the real purpose of the show.

Some of you mention that the publishers showing at E3 don't know who their audiences are, or how to reach them. Kidding aside, it sounds like, at least for this show, they do know who the audience is, and at least partially how to reach them. Quite few of you commented about the "pasty geeks" (or some variation on this wording) hanging out watching. E3 isn't for us, the gaming public. All we see are some screenshots, and maybe a couple of Here-is-the-giant-hall-crammed-with-people stills. E3 means nothing to us. It's for the journalists. It is YOU folks that E3 is attempting to impress, not me.

The trouble is, the excessive use of sex objects doesn't sound effective to me. While this approach might drag the reporters to the booths, it doesn't seem like it's the GAMES that those people are then looking at. Actually, it sounds like the whole idea is flawed, with people not really getting to play the games, just looking at short previews, if I understand it correctly.It sounds like this would be much more efficient if everyone had set appointments, and 50 minutes to play each game. That'd be what? 24 games for 3 days, if you were at it for 8 hours, with ten minutes between?

Also, please don't take this wrong, but with all the game site carnage this year, shouldn't there be a lot less gaming journalists fighting for play time? Wassup with that?

wumpus: You're actually complaining about the lack of innovation in a game (luigi) that's not due to be released for 7 months.

Kazz,
Most of the "journalists" covering E3 worked for free before the purge and they continue to do so. Sadly, the ISDA has extremely lenient standards regarding who gets a press pass and I saw plenty of people wearing badges from dead sites walking around.

This makes it harder for people like me who had assignments and very little time to gawk and others who simply wandered around, perpetually in my way (;->).

Also, and this is probably most important, E3 isn't really a press event, as I understand it. I finally realized this year that what E3 might be for, is to impress retailers. Convince them to stock product and back the systems. Maybe it was the new console flavor of this show but, often, I felt like I was in the way of the CompUSA, Best Buy, etc., buyers and boy were they clueless!

Personally, I think the booth babes are really there for those people.

-Andrew
PS: I think Tom was right and there really were far fewer booth babes this year, or, I just didn't notice them... which is kind of alarming. Then again, I avoided the GodLot altogether.

Bub--

Dead on. This isn't much of a secret amongst us walking dead, err, E3 working types. E3 exists solely for retail buyers from the various territories.

That's worth repeating again-- E3 IS NOT FOR YOU. I say that comfortably, knowing that no retail buyers are reading this board (prove me wrong!). It also happens to be a good place to meet the press and let fans and other developers see the games as well.

BTW, the retailers usually don't want to see gameplay at all. . .

KP
Standard disclaimers as always

"Actually, it sounds like the whole idea is flawed, with people not really getting to play the games, just looking at short previews, if I understand it correctly. It sounds like this would be much more efficient if everyone had set appointments, and 50 minutes to play each game. That'd be what? 24 games for 3 days, if you were at it for 8 hours, with ten minutes between?"

The show's open for 22 hours, not 24. E3's designed for 5-15 minute showings of games. As others have said, it's a tradeshow aimed at the retail market more than the press, though it's also a significant press event. It's really impossible for the game companies to spend 45 minutes with one person to show one game. There are too many writers and too many buyers to take care of.

I played Dungeon Seige for 45 minutes because I had an exhibitor's badge. I went in early before the show opened to see what I could play, and Dungeon Seige was up and running, so there I was.

Now a bit of a funny story about that. I played Dungeon Seige on Thursday morning, the first day of the show. I got done with it and didn't know what time it was (I never wear a watch), but I was supposed to meet Tom. I thought, well, we're supposed to meet at the Ubi Soft booth, but I'll go out and see if I can spot him before they open the doors. Bad idea. I walked through the doors of the hall and looked down and saw hordes of people crammed on the escalator riding towards me. I looked to my left and saw a sea of people heading towards me. I looked to my right and saw another sea of people heading towards me, many of them sprinting. I had stepped out right at 10am when they opened the doors and the masses were all converging on me. I felt like a English soccer referee who had blown a call and caused the home town team to lose. It was terrifying! I had to turn tail and run back into the hall to avoid being trampled. They were animals, I'm telling you, animals! :)

I think it's unfair to take the anitceptic and cute games that we LIKE (Banjo-Tooie, DK, Crash, and Zelda) and say those are "fun for all ages games" while we take the anticeptic and cutesy games we DON'T like (spyro, pokemon, super smash bros, paper mario, whatever) and say those are "kiddie crap."

I've played practically every game on both of those lists, and the Pokemon gameboy games and Paper Mario are on equal grounds in terms of cuteness, voilence, and complexity/depth as games like Zelda, Banjo-tooie, or Crash.

Anyway, if you want to make that distinction, then you have to consider only that Pikmin and Smash Bros are the only games in the Gamecube lineup that are "kiddie crap." Luigi's Mansion, Kameo, Star Fox Adventures...all fit in the "DK/Banjo/Crash/Zelda" category. And stuff like the EA Sports, Wave Race, Eternal Darkness, and of course Rogue Leader are all more mature.

In ultimate fairness, we should pull out sports and then just call every game with an "E" rating a kid's game.

But you've gotta look at things like marketing and likely "intended audience" of these games. Playing Zelda, you wouldn't think that it's likely to be intended for kids, even though it's probably suitable. At the same time, Pokemon is definitely intended for young kids. (Heck, just look and see who's playing them in the commercials -- well, those that have commercials.)

Plus, you know that they're marketing Zelda largely towards those of us who played the original Zelda when we were younger. That's a major factor, in my mind.

Hard to say with a game like Banjo-tooie, but I'd say that for the most part, it's easy to tell who they intended the game to be for.

---Hard to say with a game like Banjo-tooie, but I'd say that for the most part, it's easy to tell who they intended the game to be for.---

People who liked Banjo-Kazooie?

Thanks, Bob. Big help. ;-)

Ya know, though, show me a trade show that doesn't use attractive women to host booths. I've been to shows displaying agricultural equipment, and seen scantily-clad women hawking tractors. Ever visit a boat show? An RV show? A car show? Tell me there are no women being used as ornaments there.

Whether this is good or bad, I leave to our philosophers to decide.

Good info, all. Thanks. I didn't realize that there was heavy retailer presence at E3, though in hindsight it seems rather foolish to have not thought of it.

From a different topic a while back, it sounds like retailers make up their minds on products in a minute or two, based on a sales blurb, box art, return policies and kickbacks, er, incentives. If that's the case, then the booth babses make a lot more sense. If you can get a certain look into a person's head (say the girl from Nox last year), then the box art has her on it when you later pitch the game to the retailer buyer, it could give you the little extra psychological edge to push them into buying. No, it's not logical. But I spent a lot of years in sales, and logic really has very little to do with it.