… can you see in a E3 2007 Award Showcase (PC) and other platforms.

The titles are selected in terms of presentation and things what you haven’t seen or heardbefore (my opinion). BioShock is an OK title - the upcoming reviews will show what this title can hold what it promised. Fallout 3 is more than pre-Alpha and the developers showed only tech things which look ‘great’. The same with Crysis - can the technology make up for the gameplay experience (re-gameplay experience and so forth) and the depth of a storyline? CoD4 - graphics and technology = gameplay experience? Et cetera. Bla di bla and so on.

Its my opinion - and it can’t be always graphics and technology which drives the gaming industry to new horizons … and when you look at titles which were innovative in non technological ways and were not produced by a well known studio but got their 80 - 90% rating by the gamemags … they were a financial disaster in terms of sold copy’s.

To work in this industry can be so much fun and so much pain at the same time.

PS: All editors which attended the E3 this year in its new ‘FORM’ - said it’s better to report and get a solid preview on the paper because you can spend more time with a title, talk more etc. The same way which the GC Germany (Leipzig) has its concept with the ‘Developers area’ running next by at the same time.

And did you noticed? There is no real MMORPG title in the list. I doubt that Flagship Studios will have its Hellgate: London named a MMORPG title.

… MJ.