Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Why do we still look forward to Nintendo's E3 directs?

Nautilus said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Again, that the event could have been better does not change nor excuse the fact that the event is what it is, but eh fine keep repeating yourself. I won't be saying this again though. Also refer to the quote below as to why the E3 direct was not solid up until Smash.

 

I didn't say anything about being the best, I said it would hardly make a difference. Yes technically it would be better, by like 0.2%. Certainly wouldn't make anyone unhappy with the direct suddenly like it. The loss of surprise factor didn't negatively affect Mario Rabbids any. But eh, I realize this is also a moot point.

Yal are free to believe the 3rd party stuff being unknown beforehand and Smash Ultimate being 5 mins instead woulda made all the difference, doing so won't change anything afterall.

Again, I didnt say it would make all the difference, I said it would make a difference.Stop putting words in my mouth.And honestly, people should start looking beyond themselves.Fortnite, like it or not, is a huge grab for the system, even if all other systems already have it.I mean, the numbers speak for themselves.The other ones are also relevant.

I mean, just because you diont like those games, or arent interest in them, dosent mean you represent everyone.Not all of us are a Einsam Dolphins.

Irrelevant semantics, plus that part of the post was not directed at only you specifically. No one ever said anything about Fortnite not being a good get, speaking of putting words in people's mouths. However it is undeniable that Nintendo systems are bought primarily for Nintendo games, so naturally the 3rd party stuff doesn't hold as much weight as 1st party to most people. That's not me saying everyone is me lol, that's just going by sales data and from actually listening to those who were disappointed in the direct.

Around the Network
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Nautilus said:

Again, I didnt say it would make all the difference, I said it would make a difference.Stop putting words in my mouth.And honestly, people should start looking beyond themselves.Fortnite, like it or not, is a huge grab for the system, even if all other systems already have it.I mean, the numbers speak for themselves.The other ones are also relevant.

I mean, just because you diont like those games, or arent interest in them, dosent mean you represent everyone.Not all of us are a Einsam Dolphins.

Irrelevant semantics, plus that part of the post was not directed at only you specifically. No one ever said anything about Fortnite not being a good get, speaking of putting words in people's mouths. However it is undeniable that Nintendo systems are bought primarily for Nintendo games, so naturally the 3rd party stuff doesn't hold as much weight as 1st party to most people. That's not me saying everyone is me lol, that's just going by sales data and from actually listening to those who were disappointed in the direct.

But numbers dont support that, at least not entirely.Yes, Nintendo games do the biggest weightlifting for the system, but third parties and indies are selling the best on the Switch, and even if you dont consider the competitors, its been ages that a good number of companies other than Nintendo are finding success on the Switch.This in turn points that the current userbase of the system have a taste that expands beyond Nintendo related IPs, or franchises that are usually tied to Nintendo consoles, like Overcooked, Steamworld, Sonic Mania, Fifa, Rocket League, Super Bomberman R, Puyo Puyo Tetris, Golf Story just to name a few.I got to this conclusion by also looking at sales data and by looking on everyones reaction and expectation before, during and after the presentation, in various forums.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

Lonely_Dolphin said:
Miyamotoo said:

I disagree, E3 Direct was solid until Smash Bros segment, and very long Smash Bros segment effect very negatively on hole E3 Direct, just 5 min long Smash Bros segment definitely would make Direct mush less negative, also point that some things like Fortnite were already leaked didn't help at all.

Again, that the event could have been better does not change nor excuse the fact that the event is what it is, but eh fine keep repeating yourself. I won't be saying this again though. Also refer to the quote below as to why the E3 direct was not solid up until Smash.

Yeah, Direct is what it its but thats not point, point is that E3 Direct was OK until Smash Bros. segment and defiantly would have less negativity around without so much long Smash Bros. segment, thats my point but from some reason you have hard time understanding that.



Hell if I know OP. I quit years ago.



 

wombat123 said:
shikamaru317 said:

I am baffled that some people in this thread think that E3 is dying or becoming irrelevant. Where are you getting that from? E3 2018 had the largest attendance for an E3 since 2005. Every E3 press conference except EA broke their peak concurrent viewer record from last year on Twitch. E3 is bigger than ever. Sure there are more events throughout the year to showcase games at, Gamescom, Paris Games Week, multiple different PAX's, The Game Awards, etc., and of course for Nintendo, the other Direct's throughout the year, but E3 is still the best place to announce games in terms of maximizing the number of people who will see your announcement. 

In my view it's less about E3's relevancy and more about Nintendo not wanting to share the spotlight or be overshadowed when they reveal games.

Except they blew the competition out of the water last year? 



Around the Network
Mcube said:
wombat123 said:

In my view it's less about E3's relevancy and more about Nintendo not wanting to share the spotlight or be overshadowed when they reveal games.

Except they blew the competition out of the water last year? 

Wasn't really hard to considering that, for the most part, Sony repeated their presentation from a year ago and Microsoft expected people to be impressed by a bunch of multiplats and 'console exclusive' games.



Nautilus said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Irrelevant semantics, plus that part of the post was not directed at only you specifically. No one ever said anything about Fortnite not being a good get, speaking of putting words in people's mouths. However it is undeniable that Nintendo systems are bought primarily for Nintendo games, so naturally the 3rd party stuff doesn't hold as much weight as 1st party to most people. That's not me saying everyone is me lol, that's just going by sales data and from actually listening to those who were disappointed in the direct.

But numbers dont support that, at least not entirely.Yes, Nintendo games do the biggest weightlifting for the system, but-

But nothing, that's all there is to it. The rest of your post would only have relevance if I said third partys held no weight, which I didn't, but even that still wouldn't change anything.

Lonely_Dolphin said:
Nautilus said:

But numbers dont support that, at least not entirely.Yes, Nintendo games do the biggest weightlifting for the system, but-

But nothing, that's all there is to it. The rest of your post would only have relevance if I said third partys held no weight, which I didn't, but even that still wouldn't change anything.

The rest of the post would hold relevance if you thought it would be relevant to your argument, is what you mean.I mean, you say the rest of my post is irrelevant, but then you say this: "...which I didn't, but even that still wouldn't change anything.".In another words, you dont care about them, the third party games that was revealed, because in your opinion they are irrelevant to you and by extention, to the userbase of the Switch, no matter how good they are or more importantly, how well they sell.Because that surely shows zero interest for these games on the Switch and there would be no excitment over them.Gotcha.

Well, glad that we got that cleared out.With this we can easily conclude that yes, without the leaks the presentation would have been better.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

Nautilus said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:
But nothing, that's all there is to it. The rest of your post would only have relevance if I said third partys held no weight, which I didn't, but even that still wouldn't change anything.

The rest of the post would hold relevance if you thought it would be relevant to your argument, is what you mean.I mean, you say the rest of my post is irrelevant, but then you say this: "...which I didn't, but even that still wouldn't change anything.".In another words, you dont care about them, the third party games that was revealed, because in your opinion they are irrelevant to you and by extention, to the userbase of the Switch, no matter how good they are or more importantly, how well they sell.Because that surely shows zero interest for these games on the Switch and there would be no excitment over them.Gotcha.

Well, glad that we got that cleared out.With this we can easily conclude that yes, without the leaks the presentation would have been better.

By anything I mean the fact that 1st party holds more weight than 3rd party, thus directs are rated mostly by the 1st party showings. How you extrapolated that into me not caring about 3rd partys again I'll never know, but I'm not even gonna word my response any differently, just gonna straight up copy-paste.

"No one ever said anything about Fortnite not being a good get, speaking of putting words in people's mouths. However it is undeniable that Nintendo systems are bought primarily for Nintendo games, so naturally the 3rd party stuff doesn't hold as much weight as 1st party to most people. That's not me saying everyone is me lol, that's just going by sales data and from actually listening to those who were disappointed in the direct."

Also I never disagreed with the direct being better without leaks, only that it would make a difference to how it's perceived, but again this a moot point.

Lonely_Dolphin said:
Nautilus said:

The rest of the post would hold relevance if you thought it would be relevant to your argument, is what you mean.I mean, you say the rest of my post is irrelevant, but then you say this: "...which I didn't, but even that still wouldn't change anything.".In another words, you dont care about them, the third party games that was revealed, because in your opinion they are irrelevant to you and by extention, to the userbase of the Switch, no matter how good they are or more importantly, how well they sell.Because that surely shows zero interest for these games on the Switch and there would be no excitment over them.Gotcha.

Well, glad that we got that cleared out.With this we can easily conclude that yes, without the leaks the presentation would have been better.

By anything I mean the fact that 1st party holds more weight than 3rd party, thus directs are rated mostly by the 1st party showings. How you extrapolated that into me not caring about 3rd partys again I'll never know, but I'm not even gonna word my response any differently, just gonna straight up copy-paste.

"No one ever said anything about Fortnite not being a good get, speaking of putting words in people's mouths. However it is undeniable that Nintendo systems are bought primarily for Nintendo games, so naturally the 3rd party stuff doesn't hold as much weight as 1st party to most people. That's not me saying everyone is me lol, that's just going by sales data and from actually listening to those who were disappointed in the direct."

Also I never disagreed with the direct being better without leaks, only that it would make a difference to how it's perceived, but again this a moot point.

I didnt extrapolate anything, Im just pointing out that you are dismissing the third party games shown there as mostly inconsequential, shown by your lack of interest in them with frases as "Even if the games hadnt leaked, it would make the direct 0.2% better" or the non acknoledgement of its success found with the consoles through its sales numbers and such.So it seems you are misunderstanding me once again, so let me rephrase:

Nintendo games usually do the heavily lifting of the consoles sales, and its not much different with the Switch.However, in a matter that is usually uncharacteristic to Nintendo hardware, 3rd party games are generally selling extremelly well on the Switch, and all of them are not shovelware.So it stands to reason that a considerable number of Switch owners and thus, people watching the Nintendo presentation, wouldd have been more thrilled with the presentation itself if such games as DB Fighters Z, Fortnite and Overcooked 2 werent leaked ahead of the presentation.For an example of such an "adoption" of one of these games is Fortnite, which was downloaded over 2 million times in a single day.Yes, its a free to play game, but people wont download anything unless they are interested.

In conclusion, what I mean to say is that all your talk about third parties being mostly irrelevant compared to Nintendo games being shown and that the show would be 0.2% better if those same games hadnt been leaked is complete BS, especially because you are looking at this in a personal way, and Im using data to back up my claims.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1