Nintendo Okie

Every time E3 is over I hear the same conversation pop up.  “Who won E3?”  I always get a little annoyed by this topic.  It always seems pointless to me.  I understand some companies make a better presentation than anothers, but why must we insist on handing out gold, silver and bronze medals each year?  We have talked a lot about E3 on the podcast lately and I debated on writing this article since everyone is tired of hearing about E3 by now.  But if I don’t say this now, then when else can I do it? 

The metric that seem to determine the “winner” of E3 is the quantity of big announcements.  Granted, when Nintendo announced Kid Icarus , Kirby , Donkey Kong, etc. on stage I was exuberant.  What we have to realize is Nintendo  (as well as other companies) has to hold off on bringing these game to the public in order to make a good show.  It is a very odd affect if you think about it.  Companies get all tight lipped about three months before E3.  So we are all starved for game news.  As the show gets closer, the information builds up like water behind a dam.  Then days before the show, when the water levels have reached their peak, rumors start to leak out.  Then the show hits and the flood gates of information open as we all get swept away by the awesome news.  Then once it is over, we argue about which company did the best job of withholding information from us, and praise them for it.  Someone explain to me how that makes any sense. 

I guess games are all about winning and being better than the rest.  So it is only natural that we game players take that same competitive edge and apply it to everything surrounding the games.  Be it review scores, press conferences or graphical capability, we take every chance to proclaim that something wins and something else loses.  I don’t know of any other industry that is like that.  Maybe I only notice it because I am so heavily vested in the games industry but I don’t ever hear this same kind of competition surrounding literature.  How many times have you walked into a GameStop and over heard some argument of my-game-is-better-than-your-game?   People in libraries don’t argue that William Shakespeare would beat J. R. R. Tolkien in a fight.  At least I don’t think they do. 

I suppose there is nothing wrong with a little healthy competition but I get tired of the flame wars.  Don’t get me wrong, I love making fun of giant enemies crabs as much as the next guy but that is about as far as it goes.  I realize we run a Nintendo focused site but we all play multiple systems.  I’ll admit that Nintendo is my favorite of the three but that doesn’t mean I agree with everything they do.  I hate the Wii’s online functionality.  I wish it could be more like Xbox Live so I could play Smash all day long.  Likewise I hate how my 360 had a chance of dying every time I turn it on. 

My point is that every company has their strengths and weaknesses.  We spend time pointing them out, which is a good thing.  If we don’t draw attention to them, nobody will ever fix them.  I don’t understand why we argue about them so intensely.  Did it all start from high scores on arcade machines?  Is it all angst leftover from Genesis does what Nintendon’t?  Or is it simply we need some way to keep our completive edge?  Maybe the internet is to blame.  It seems to being out the worst in people sometimes.  Whatever the reason, it isn’t going away anytime soon so I should probably just stop complaining.  I just feel like all of our bickering makes the game industry look so immature.  Perhaps this is why it has taken video games so long to catch on as mainstream entertainment. 

If you won’t listen to me, maybe Kevin Butler can convince you.  The whole point is the games.  We are all here to have fun.  Fun is a relative term after all.  For some, fun is a head shot.  For others, it is taking care of a virtual farm.  For me, I am partial to a flying blue shells.  To each his own.