ESA Wants To Replace E3 With a Bunch of Buzzwords (engadget.com) 30
The Entertainment Software Association is launching a new gaming event to replace E3, which was permanently canceled in 2023. According to Engadget, the new event is called iicon (short for "interactive innovation conference") and will feature many of the same major gaming companies that once participated in E3. "Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, Disney, EA, Epic Games, Ubisoft, Square Enix, Take Two Interactive, Amazon Games and Warner Bros. Games are all named as participants." From the report: [T]he announcements on social media promote iicon as being for "visionaries," "changemakers" and "innovators," so our best guess is that this event will swing more toward the corporate side of gaming where people might use that language unironically. If that's the case, this won't really be a replacement for the heyday of E3, when studios big and small would showcase their upcoming projects and drop internet-breaking surprises. Instead, the inaugural event in April 2026 sounds like it will focus more on moving the needle, brand alignments and synergy.
PAX (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:PAX (Score:5, Insightful)
It's also full of shitty DEI as indicated in their mission statement.
This is the statement that's got you all triggered? "We do not tolerate discrimination or harassment based on race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, age, ability, or any other characteristic that makes individuals who they are. We strive to create an event where everyone feels safe, respected, and valued."
And you crybabies call us snowflakes.
Re: (Score:1)
why isn't sex on the list?
Re:PAX (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Why would that belong in a mission statement?
I'm going to take a shot in the dark and assume it's because their mission is to create a gaming event where everyone feels safe, respected, and valued.
I don't see any overlap
Well, then it's a good thing they went out of their way to specify that their event is intended to be inclusive. Because, apparently, it needed to be expressly pointed out that people shouldn't be assholes while attending. I assume that's a result of the organizers assessments of other similar events?
Re: (Score:2)
"Safe" is the only word with any value in all that rot. Attendees should not be robbed, stabbed, beaten, etc. Respect is earned and value is demonstrated. Assholes exist everywhere and I'm sure there are more than a few involved in running the event.
That people should be polite and decent in public needs no elucidation in a mission statement. That is the default behavioral assumption, so all this other crap is just empty virtue signa
Re: (Score:2)
No, you're just spouting the same politicized buzzwords they are.
No shit? It's almost like I cntrl-c cntrl-v'd their mission statement.
That people should be polite and decent in public needs no elucidation in a mission statement.
You sure would think that "don't be an asshole while you're here" wouldn't have to be expressly stated, but some people's behavior in public would indicate otherwise.
That is the default behavioral assumption
Unfortunately, that's a shitty assumption. Especially when it comes to how people treat other people who are "different" in some way.
so all this other crap is just empty virtue signaling.
You're entitled to your opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Be specific, which part do you disagree with? The statement says:
"PAX started as a celebration of games and our community — everyone in our community. We want to make it definitively clear that you’re all welcome to find a home here at PAX. We do not tolerate discrimination or harassment based on race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, age, ability, or any other characteristic that makes individuals who they are. We strive to create an event where everyone feels safe, res
Re: (Score:1)
It makes them sound weak, cowardly, and focused on the wrong things. It's a gaming expo, not a mass therapy session. "We want everyone to come celebrate games with us", would have said everything they wanted to, but in a manner appropriate for the context rathe
Re: (Score:2)
I had to lookup PAX because I never heard of it, and I can see why.
PAX was huge about a decade ago. They used to announce attendance figures and it was nearing 100,000 over a weekend.
Then they went all DEI, released some "anti-booth-babe" thing, and suddenly stopped announcing attendance figures. That was about the same time the major publishers and console makers stopped attending.
These days it's just a sad little thing where a few indie publishers show up and you get a bunch of people waving rainbow flags and talking about pronouns.
Re: (Score:3)
What are you talking about?
in 1998 the gaming industry generated worldwide sales of $30 billion in 1998 (equivalent to $56.1 billion in 2023).
Now the gaming industry generates $500 billion in revenue. You make it sound as if it has actually declined since the 90s because some game companies offend you, Mr. Snowflake. Are you shocked that some studios lose money on some of their projects? gamedev is a risky business. Pretty sure it was in the 90s too.
Re: I recall when E3 was good. (Score:1)
Re: Will it be open (Score:2)
ESA = European Space Agency, you cunts (Score:4, Insightful)
Who the fuck edits this site?
Re: (Score:2)
and E3 is the plane that is often referred to as AWACS
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody
Not getting the point here... (Score:3)
When I see stuff like "moving the needle" and "synergy", that means that this event's cool factor is only relevant for Wall Street, and likely it will be the same old stuff, perhaps demanding people sign up for more accounts, demanding more monthly battle passes be used, or maybe going back to loot boxes and gachas.
This is why the game industry isn't doing so well. If they actually wanted to make something that people would give a shit about, take 2-3 years, create some original IP, original gameplay, maybe even focus on long tail games that are like Ultima Online which keep on going and keep a solid playerbase.
For example, EA could dig up some of the old Origin IP, make a Cybermage game, Wing Commander, or other games that were awesome at the time.
Maybe there is another timeline where EA didn't lose an eighth, and the old school Ultima games is still a running series, cranking out a game every two years, similar to Final Fantasy. It likely would be single player with the PC being the Avatar, but that can be always retconned to multiple Avatars for online play. If we forgot U7 and forward ever happened, with a different BBEG, life would be good, and that series could go almost anywhere, be it popping felines in space, nation building (you have only a certain amount of time to get some nations built and civilized before a predicted fimbulwinter wipes everything out), visiting other worlds that were shown in Ultima Underworld, and so on. Done right, it would have been a series that people would pick up and play because the world would be constant, the user felt like the hero and actually doing things, and content could come out either as new games, modules, expansions, or just stuff dropped in with a subscription fee. Each new game can start over with something different, giving that new gameplay that Final Fantasy has, but still keeping the familar element of things.
In any case, the game companies need to start getting their end users interested, rather than just pundits and "influencers". Otherwise, they will be seeing another 1983, and some company like Nintendo or Tencent will swipe the market right from them.
Innovation? (Score:1)
Wait a minute.... (Score:2)
Are they honestly trying to maintain E3 wasn't a bunch of buzzwords in the first place?