I didn't care for any of those initial announcements, what am I going to do with that? Announce a game when you know that I'll be able to play it in at max 1.5 years, if that's not the case then just shut up, sorry that's just not something I'm remotely getting excited about, something that far away, might as well announce every game that's greenlighted.

Its a regualr thing in the industry as most games are announced years ahead of time.  If you dont want to get excited for it though, that is fine by me.

Didnt they say this last year and then start with 15 mins of COD

God. I hope they deliver an excellent E3, otherwise all this talk about too much things to show with so little time will come back and bite them in the ass.

Well, pretty much what i wanted to say.

False hope again, it's annoying. Just wait and show what you got, but don't say bullshit like this.

Better than 2 hours of painful nothingness.

You're definitely right that it's a regular thing in the industry (unfortunately imo) and if people are excited by it then I really can't expect that stuff to end, but I'd extremely appreciate it if the industry moved to shorter announcement-release cycles, I mean we just have to look at examples like the Division, Phantom Dust or the R&C reimagining, all of which imo should have been announced at least a year later.

Bloodborne has been the absolutely perfect example of how it should be done I think.

What I wish is E3 had a rule that multyplats dont have to be shown on every conference. Seeing COD 3 times last year was anoying. Inmagine now with PC having a conference. There will be 4 diferent showings of call of duty and all other multy platforms. I wish they just stayed once and thats it.

we'll see. The last two MS E3 shows were great though.

No one actually needs more then an hour and they've already said they're not wasting time on third parties. Sony show last year had way to little original content to be 2hours.