Home » News » Game On or Game Over: E3 2015 Edition
News

Game On or Game Over: E3 2015 Edition

Microsoft versus Sony, Battlefield versus Call of Duty and Forza versus Gran Turismo. These are some of the rivalries that can get people talking about console wars. “Game On or Game Over” is your place to get inside the minds of Nicholas and Andy as they seek to find the true meaning of gaming and tackle some of gaming’s most controversial subjects. Both are award winning authors – although the awards haven’t been mailed or created yet — but trust them. Would they lie to you?

Andy: Man, what a week last week. I don’t think the name E3 adequately defines what went down there. I think we should coin the term “GamerGasm” for all the stuff we saw. With that said I know I am a huge hypocrite, and I am assuming you are just a bit as well. We have both stated in the past about ignoring the hype train, employing a wait and see approach and just not letting ourselves get wrapped up in the blitz and pizazz of the marketing machines, but, I’d be lying if I said that there wasn’t a handful of games I saw last week that I’m not chomping at the bit to get my hands on.

I watched more E3 press conferences this year than I ever have before and I have to say I liked most of what I saw. Sure some of the presenters were dry, some were humourless and some were flat out weird… I’m looking at you Square Enix guy with the giant mask on his head. That said, all that stuff comes second to the games, that’s what the show is about and man did this year deliver on games.

Admittedly we will still be digesting everything that we saw from awhile yet. Sifting through what’s “real”, what is scripted and what is really an accurate representation of the games will take a while. We’re gamers, we’ve been burned before with things like Watch_Dogs and Aliens: Colonial Marines. But, I don’t want to focus on the negative yet – I’m sure we’ll touch on that later. For me the big hitters were of course Fallout 4 coming in November, Need for Speed looked really good, Star Wars Battlefront and Deus Ex: Mankind Divided were probably the highlights for me. So, before I go into anything really specific what are your general thoughts on what we saw?

Fallout4_Trailer_End_1433355589

Nicholas: Overall I was pleased with the announcements and information that we saw, but for me, E3 this year just seemed to lack that “OMG WOW” factor that I’ve experienced from events in the past. Again, that’s not to say there wasn’t some good news that came out, but I only really seemed to be properly interested in just a few titles, as opposed to my draw dropping after every single conference.

Starting with the highlights, like you’ve mentioned, it has to be Need For Speed for sure. I know we’re still a few months out and we’ve only had a snippet of gameplay to go off, but already it’s looking to be heading in the right direction. I’m loving the focus on tuner vehicles and not just high-end hypercars. I’m loving the focus on customisation too (Rocketbunny bodykits, what up?) and the urban environment just feels and looks authentic. There’s a return to live-action cutscenes and some variety in the race modes as well, so it looks pretty good to me. Of course there’s the backwards compatibility announcement from Microsoft and that to me is perhaps second in the list of highlights. I know we’ve discussed how negligible the functionality is once a new console generation is launched, but I’m excited to play some Banjo-Kazooie, Perfect Dark and even the South Park TSOT again. Of course off that, I’m interested to see the Rare Collection too.

There’s no denying that Battlefront looks absolutely and utterly amazing, and even as a non-fan I can’t help but be in impressed. Aside from that though, despite the announcements and additional information about Fallout 4 or Assassin’s Creed Syndicate, I’m not frothing at the mouth to play them. Same with Forza Motorsport 6. I definitely want to play it, but I isn’t pulling me like NFS is.

But not to dwell on negativity yet, how about you – you’ve mentioned some big hitters, what about them specifically are you liking and looking forward to? Is there anything else that you really liked from the conference?

Andy: I’m pretty sure even a casual reader of our weekly segment knows my love for the Fallout franchise. Bethesda announced Fallout 4 a couple weeks back, and to say I was excited would be an understatement. For me, the presentation was everything I was hoping it would be, and more. They could have taken the safe road and pretty much remade Fallout 3 with a new story, location and weapons and I would have been stoked. Yet, they went so far above my expectations it’s not even funny. From weapon/armour crafting, to making your own settlement, those are just things I wasn’t expecting at all. Then, Todd Howard went and dropped the biggest news that it’s coming this November and once he said that no other game could match that this E3. That’s one thing I really appreciate from Todd Howard – he doesn’t announce his games until they are almost ready. No three-year hype cycle, it’s here’s and the game coming soon.

Next would be Need for Speed, with some caution of course. There’s no denying the game looks amazing, and I really like the customization options as they seem to be pretty deep and extensive. However, there were a few unanswered questions from them. Most notably the always-online requirement that we talked about before. I like the 5 ways to play that they talked about, but there wasn’t a lot of depth to their presentation on it – at least from what I saw. Granted, I’m still looking forward to it, I just wish they had shown/discussed more substance than just having eye candy. The same thing can be said about Star Wars Battlefront, I want to play it but give me a little more information on it than just “Holy crap look at this!” type moments.

I’d like to shift a little to less of what we knew was coming, to the stuff that surprised us. You touched on it above, but I never thought I’d see the day that the Xbox One was backwards compatible. I have two schools of thought on this, first is; it’s pretty cool. Yes, Microsoft did say that it wasn’t possible, so either they were lying or they made some serious advancements and made it happen. On the other hand, as much as everyone jumps up and down about backwards compatibility… most people I know don’t want to play old games on a new system. When I got the Xbox One it was to play new stuff. With that said, it is nice to only need one box hooked up to my TV if I ever feel the need to play something older. Aside from that, and the Fallout 4 release date (and Fallout Shelter) there wasn’t a lot that made me sit up and have my jaw hit the floor. For me most of it was just more information about stuff we already knew was in the pipeline.

You touched on it briefly, but was there anything that made you squeal like a little kid and surprise you?

needforspeedheader

Nicholas: It really was that backwards compatibility announcement if I’m honest. It’s interesting how you said that Microsoft were either lying when they announced it couldn’t be done or that they’ve managed to craft some magic to make it happen, so that leaves a lot to think about. It wasn’t something I was expecting at all and now that I think about it, I’m really glad they did. By no means am I suddenly going to go back and play through all my Xbox 360 games again, but I am keen to play those games I listed earlier.

Keeping on backwards compatibility if I may, the thing I want to talk about is its implementation. While I can understand the need to re-download XBLA titles again, I’m on the fence about having to re-download AAA titles back to my console to play them. I recognise that they cited hardware specs as the reason why these games couldn’t be played off the disc, but how can the Xbox One recognise the game, initiate a download and then play the download, but it can’t just install the disc and then run off the installed files? I also noticed that they’re doing the same thing they did with original Xbox games on the Xbox 360, whereby the backwards compatibility list is limited. It means there’s a chance a lot of games can be left out, and I don’t understand implementing the feature just to do it half-arsed.

What are your thoughts on the above, and I guess now it as appropriate time as ever, was there anything that you were somewhat disappointed, if not completely disappointed about from this year’s conference?

Andy: I’m no tech expert by any means, but since we have to do the same thing for Xbox One games I’d assume that it’s a limitation of the actual hardware. I would assume it has to do with how the hardware plays/access the data for the game. There was a video last week comparing Mass Effect running on a 360 and a Xbox One, and the Xbox One emulation had faster load times and just ran smoother. I think the reason to require the disc to play is just to authenticate it and confirm you “have” it. If they didn’t I’d just have to go to Gamestop and buy used games, download them, then return them and have a massive library of games. So thinking of it that way, it makes sense.

As I said before this is the first year I watched all the press conferences and by and large there was a lot to like. Yet, as always with these types of big events there’s things that don’t quite measure up as well. The first thing that disappointed me was the overall Square Enix conference. Not so much in terms of content but the ‘how’ they did it. It was to use one word – bland. There was no life or passion behind it. It was a bunch of people paraded up to a podium that read off a teleprompter. I mean, with the stuff they had to show off – Tomb Raider, Hitman, Deus Ex, Just Cause and the  Final Fantasy VII remake to name a few and I was bored. I stayed with it for the Deus Ex news, if that would have been sooner I would have bailed. And that’s even before I mention how incredibly creepy the “Moon mask” guy was. I mean really, what the hell was that about?

The overall Ubisoft conference was close to the same for me, but more so because of the host. She just annoyed me and was saying stuff to be funny, but really wasn’t funny. It seemed like Ubisoft tried to be hip and cool and came out like that annoying friend you can’t shut up that laughs at their own jokes when no one else does. I was also sad for Nintendo fans. Nintendo has some of the most passionate fans out there, but left every one of them just sitting on their hands. I remember this time last year saying how awesome Nintendo’s conference was. Yet this year was the exact opposite. It’s almost like Nintendo took E3 off, but had to show something just because, so they rolled out what they did.

As I wrote my response above I kept trying to think of a game that I was disappointed in, and honestly I can’t think of any. Sure, there were games I wasn’t interested in, Doom for instance, but it looked good. Game-wise there was a lot of variety, and some damn good looking titles. I just wish the presentations matched the content. What about you though? You sound like you weren’t as amazed as I was during the presentations. Anything specific that really disappointed you?

thedivisionheader

Nicholas: Nintendo really springs to mind when you asked me that question. Like you said, I was quite happy with their presentation last year, but everything about E3 2015 for them seemed… lacklustre. It’s the 30th anniversary of Super Mario but all they announced was some 8-bit Mario amiibos and a Super Mario Maker – wow. I would have been hoping for a new 3D platformer similar to Super Mario Galaxy but all it was, was a build-your-own-game game. In that regard I was disappointed, but I guess that’s just because I had other expectations, rather than their presentation being bad.

Aside from that, I think the only other ‘letdown’ was not seeing more content. I think it was fantastic to see a title to the upcoming Mass Effect game, but what about a release date? Some information? Some gameplay? I guess we don’t know how far it is in development, but I just would have liked to see more. Same with Need For Speed too – although they at least provided us with some gameplay, I just would have liked more talking around it.

I wonder, is perhaps the reason why I’m not jumping up and down in excitement simply because I knew most of these games were in development prior to the conference? Would I have been happier if I didn’t know NFS was in the making two weeks before? Would you have preferred to not have heard about Fallout 4 before E3, or did it work out fine nonetheless? Why do you think they did decide to let gamers know about so many of these titles prior to the actual presentations taking place?

Andy: Some of it relates to what we talked about a few weeks back, that being leaks. Some of those leaks are unintentional (website listings, media leaks or what have you); other leaks are more dubious and probably manufactured by the developer but we’ll never have proof of that. For those, I think they “leak” just enough information to get fans excited and chomping at the bit for more information, which in turns guarantees those fans will tune into their press conference. You and I both know that there is no better advertising for a game than word of mouth from a rabid fan. So if they can get a little pre-show buzz going, especially for games most gamers knew were coming it makes sense.

Here’s the rub with that though, they want us to talk about the games (even after E3), but more often than not give us very controlled, sterile pre-rendered footage to go by.  Some of the games aren’t even talked about much because they wat to save them for GamesCon over in Germany. I understand the desire of developers and publishers to protect their babies but sooner or later they have to fly from the nest. When a game is over protected you don’t get vital feedback, and worse yet, you get fans hopes up only to be disappointed later. Or, in the case of E3 the buzz and hype you generate quickly dissipates as people realize you said a whole lot of nothing. For games not coming out in the next six months, fine take your time to reveal stuff. However, for games coming out after six months, we are past the point of being over protective of information.

As we wrap up another stellar article, no bias of course, I wanted to touch on something that irks me every year at this time. It seems like almost every gaming website publishes a list, or article that says something to the effect of “Winners and losers of E3”. In terms of gamers, unless something goes horribly wrong, there are a ton of micro-transactions, a bunch of exclusive content or games get cancelled I walk away from E3 every year saying “gamers win.” Regardless of your platform of choice, the type of games you like, there it literally something for everyone to look forward to. The weeks after E3 shouldn’t be about tearing other games/developers/publishers/platforms down, instead it should be about celebrating all the awesomeness that is coming.

Maybe I’m just getting old, maybe I’ve just been through it so many times but, do you think it’s time we (in the gaming industry) start talking more about the good than perceived winners and losers after big conferences like this?

braceyourselves

 

Nicholas: I can certainly see where you’re coming from. Classifying companies as winners and losers only adds unnecessary cynicism to a community that’s negative enough, but I can understand why they do it. Like we’ve discussed this week, there’s elements to E3 that we like and there’s some that we don’t. We mightn’t call them ‘losers’, but those type of articles are doing the same thing of pointing out which companies absolutely nailed their presentations and announcements and which might have missed the mark. I think it goes without saying that all gamers are winners out of E3, well, perhaps not Nintendo fans, but I guess saying that doesn’t exactly attract readers or entice people to share the article.

There’s no doubt that there was something for everyone at E3 this year, and whether you were after The Last Guardian, Mass Effect or even Fallout, there were some big announcements and grins on a lot of people’s faces. I still would have liked a little more information or a little more gameplay, so maybe while we’re all winners, we’re maybe losers too? Bring on GamesCon!

Tune in next time for the next instalment of Game On or Game Over. If you have any ideas for our next article, feel free to contact Andy or Nicholas on Twitter.


This article may contain affiliate links, meaning we could earn a small commission if you click-through and make a purchase. Stevivor is an independent outlet and our journalism is in no way influenced by any advertiser or commercial initiative.

About the author

Nicholas Simonovski

Events and Racing Editor at Stevivor.com. Proud RX8 owner, Strange Music fan and Joe Rogan follower. Living life one cheat meal at a time.