100°

Who Really Won E3 2012?

Wesley Copeland of VGI writes...

"Each year, publishers and developers alike take to the stage of E3 in a bid to showcase their latest and greatest titles, in an attempt to get us, the gaming public, informed and excited about what the year holds for us. E3 should be the gaming Mecca, an event that encompasses everything that is great about the world of video games and serves as a platform to whet our appetites. Only it didn't. This year, the spirit, and the basic foundations that E3 tries to encapsulate, simply died."

Read Full Story >>
videogamesinteractive.com
Patriots_Pride5069d ago

The wonder book, Usher nut grabbing and Nintendos gimmick tablet won E3.

paddystan5069d ago (Edited 5069d ago )

My list:

1) Ubisoft
2) Sony
3) EA
4) Nintendo
5) Microsoft

corrus5069d ago

My granny stop asking the same question again and again

5069d ago
VGI5069d ago

Could I be really cheeky and ask a favour of everyone who wants to commetn?

I have a theory that the winner of E3 is all down directly to the demographic.

Obviously it's not all demographic based for every single person, that would be insane, but I've noticed a trend.

Gamers with kids are really excited by the Wii U. There's no doubt this will be a great way to spend Christmas day.

Gamers in general (16-25ish) declare the winner as Sony. They, afterall, were focused on hot, new games.

And lastly, Microsoft employees think Microsoft won...Because they're paid to say that.

So, if everyone who comments could let me know their age (rougly is fine), and if you do, or don't have kids or bothers/sisters, that would be really awesome.

As I said, I'm thinking this year's E3 is set apart directly by the target demographic. This is still just a theory, so I'd love some feedback so that I can determine whether or not the demo theory is accurate or me just talking out my ass.

Cheers all!

TheWretched5069d ago

I am 30...

and in my opinion, it's a draw between Sony and Ubisoft. Sony, because they have "the balls" to show us 3 new IPs at one conference, two of which I really care for (Beyond and TLOU). And Ubisoft, because in general, their games have more of my interest (as I am not really an fps player at all).

Nintendo... I missed the first half of the show, as I was playing Yakuza 4 (nice game btw, and a bargain to obtain now). What can I say. I don't care for their games at all... and the stuff they did show for the tablet was gimmicky at best. Nothing "game changing" as you put it, in my opinion. This is supposed to be their killer app, yet I can't see how. I don't care for Mario or Pikmin or Lego... I mean Nintendoland. Sure, other people like those, but... stay away from me, please. I've grown very much away from Nintendo (well, I only ever owned a Gameboy, so I am less "biased" from my childhood... and I don't mean this as an offense).

EA was too shooterheavy in my opinion. Yet NFS looked good.

MS... well, they didn't show any real games, so... meh.

Show all comments (10)
40°

15 Years Ago, Mortal Kombat (2011) Saved Gaming’s Biggest Fighting Franchise

A brutal reset, a smarter story, and a return to what made it great—Mortal Kombat (2011) revived the series.

Read Full Story >>
fortressofsolitude.co.za
italiangamer6d ago

"Gaming’s Biggest Fighting Franchise"

Press X to (seriously) doubt.

DarXyde4d ago

Underrated comment. I used to hate that game so much that any time my siblings asked me to play it, I just picked Hom and shut myself down mid-match.

Soy5d ago

And then MK1 killed it again.

DivineHand1254d ago (Edited 4d ago )

15 years went by so fast. I remember playing through the story mode at launch.

90°

PlayStation legend Shuhei Yoshida says Jim Ryan fired him because he didn't listen to him

Why did Sony push Shuhei Yoshida out of his role leading PlayStation's first-party games? He'd overseen some huge successes. Well, apparently, he didn't listen.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
Relientk776d ago

Yeah I can see that for sure. Shuhei Yoshida should have been in charge not Jim Ryan.

Cacabunga6d ago

It should be free highway for him now.. but Sony are too stupid to see this, especially that moron Hulst

S2Killinit5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

Wtf why all that anger. PlayStation is dominating on every level. Besides I think there is a little more to hiring a CEO than just who is available. Its not like its a athlete your team wants to buy.

neutralgamer19925d ago

S2Killinit

live service failures, chasing trends, closing studios. yes dominating

Cacabunga5d ago

Sony is Dominating because competition is not existing. Compared to previous gens this is the poorest in terms of software offerings.

Last gen we got Uncharted 4 Lost Legacy and TLOU2 from ND alone.

This is so far a remasters gen, with no competition to lift up the quality

1nsomniac5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

..."PlayStation is dominating on every level"....

...Really???

PlayStation are soon heading into a new generation in the not to distant future. They currently have the worst customer satisfaction they've ever sustained as a company. The company is heading for a huge crash while at the same time they'll need to be planning how they are going to try and win back that favour and the build up to their new releases.

Yes financially they're winning but they're going to have to ride out this complete public corporate disaster. No one has faith in the company or the product anymore. They've damaged their public image so much this generation. Greed can kill anyone.

medman5d ago

Hulst is a disaster......

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5d ago
blacktiger5d ago

He would've done the same thing and fire Jim Ryan and Shuhei would be the villain. Why?
Because Elite creates the narrative and distraction for gamers, users and citizens.

Outside_ofthe_Box6d ago

More confirmation that Jim Ryan is the culprit for what has happened to Sony. Hulst needs to go too. What sucks is that a lot of the good top heads at Sony are no longer there. I wish that guys that were forced out prematurely by Dumbo Jimbo like Shuhei and Layden came back.

robtion5d ago

Yep. Yoshida was responsible for bringing one of the best games of this generation to playstation (Stellar Blade). He is an actual gamer and is in touch with what gamers want (creative, fun games, not GaaS and agenda pushing). He also seems like a genuinely nice guy if you watch some interviews. Of course they got rid of him.

darthv726d ago

Makes you wonder if MS even thought about hiring him after Phil and Sarah were leaving. He certainly couldn't make their situation any worse.

Agent755d ago

Microflop. After Windows XP and Xbox 360, it all went floppy.

S2Killinit5d ago

Floppy 😆
No pun intended

badz1496d ago

Yoshida for President! Jim Ryan was and always be a hack! Sony should get Shu back

Lightning776d ago

All the gamer/consumer lead heads are gone across PS and Xbox. shuhei gone phil's gone (questionable) but gone. The future of gaming is somewhat uncertain across the board.

Show all comments (30)
50°

Ex-Naughty Dog Dev: Big Studios Are 'Forced' to Hire Like Factories

Former Naughty Dog artist Gabriel Betancourt explains why the "sweet spot" for game teams is under 200 people and how AAA "factories" kill creativity.

Read Full Story >>
powerupgaming.co.uk
6d ago
phongtro123_com5d ago

There’s definitely some truth to this. When teams get too large, coordination starts to outweigh creativity—layers of approval, risk aversion, and tight deadlines can turn bold ideas into “safe” ones. Keeping a team under ~200 people sounds ideal for maintaining clear communication and a shared vision. That said, massive AAA projects also come with huge technical demands and expectations, so scaling up isn’t always avoidable. The real challenge is figuring out how to keep that small-team creativity alive inside big studio structures.

DarXyde5d ago

More than that, it's logistically untenable. Inevitably, when teams get too large, how do you keep tabs on accountability? I suspect this massive team size is a consequence of the perfectionism streak Naughty Dog has.

I wish we could have so many people working on something and it turns out great because I'm all for collaboration in spirit - the problem is too many people as part of the larger team and smaller units. Suppose for example that you have too many people in the art department; you will very often come up against fiercely competing visions for how things should look. That competitive vision will cause friction between team members, team doesn't work as a unit, the back and forth can further delay parts that the other departments are waiting for, etc etc.

A 200-person team says, to me, that we need to scale back game development. Even if it means we go back to PS2 era costs and scale, why not? Those games are still great fun, the budgets were in check, and you could literally break the 200-man team into like 10 20-man teams working on different projects.