Why Do So Many E3 Trailers Show So Little Gameplay?

[Liana Kerzner]

Why Do So Many E3 Trailers Show So Little Gameplay?

Authenticity was nowhere to be found during many of the loud, visually dazzling game trailers for some of the biggest games of the coming year.

Read Full Article

 

[Dying_Jester]

"In the case of Dark Souls III, I suspect the game trailer was actually trying to avoid the ludicrously difficult combat of the Dark Souls franchise. These games are so hard they're essentially unplayable for many gamers, but that's why their fans love them - so why not make it a selling point? "

But they did, with Dark Souls Prepare to Die Edition. Y'know, that version whose name so many make fun of(alongside hating on the community, sometimes justifiably, for constantly using 'Get Gud' as an explanation)?

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

I think a lot of these trailers are just attempts to "outsource" hype: Get the "core audience" super-excited about the new entry in the franchise, and they'll go to every site and forum they know to spread the gospel of how this game will be the best thing since sliced bread.

 

[oldtaku]

I think the Call of Duty bit in Sony's E3 presser is a good answer to this. SO boring. When is this going to be OVER? Yes, yes, some guys with suits stolen from Crysis and some Titanfall moves are shooting each other. Okay. Great.

Showing extended gameplay sequences is only entertaining when the person playing them has entertaining commentary (not an E3 thing) or when the game is specifically designed to be a cinematic experience - Uncharted 4 being perfect for this.

Now I wouldn't mind some more actual gameplay snippets for more games, but those are often hard to get properly in context.

 

[Mikeybb]

Maybe they've come to terms with the fact E3 is just for hype and embraced it.
No more 'vertical slices' or 'gameplay representations' to confuse the gaming audience.
Just trailers, exciting plans and vague promises.
Why?
Well, the way I see it...

The last couple of years, with the tiny furors over 'bullshots' and disgruntled forum mumbling about downgrades, may have left the developers a little shy over showing mocked up gameplay as eagerly as they used to.
While I don't think sales are overly impacted by the disappointment expressed by those expecting what they've seen to be perfectly recreated on release, I still believe that the negativity it can create isn't something they're going to miss.
As minor as such outcries can be, it still hangs around the release of such hyped games in an unwelcome way.

It's probably for the best, to be honest.
Far too many gamers take what they see and hear about from e3 as gospel from the gaming gods.
Some seem to see it as truth etched in stone instead of a curious mix of wishful thinking and best laid plans.

 

[Sanunes]

Maybe they've come to terms with the fact E3 is just for hype and embraced it.
No more 'vertical slices' or 'gameplay representations' to confuse the gaming audience.
Just trailers, exciting plans and vague promises.
Why?
Well, the way I see it...

The last couple of years, with the tiny furors over 'bullshots' and disgruntled forum mumbling about downgrades, may have left the developers a little shy over showing mocked up gameplay as eagerly as they used to.
While I don't think sales are overly impacted by the disappointment expressed by those expecting what they've seen to be perfectly recreated on release, I still believe that the negativity it can create isn't something they're going to miss.
As minor as such outcries can be, it still hangs around the release of such hyped games in an unwelcome way.

It's probably for the best, to be honest.
Far too many gamers take what they see and hear about from e3 as gospel from the gaming gods.
Some seem to see it as truth etched in stone instead of a curious mix of wishful thinking and best laid plans.

I agree, even look at some of the more recent games that have had changes after previews of the game. Dragon Age: Inquisition there were several articles on the internet talking about "the great game that never was" because some of the features in a closed door demonstration at Gamescon were removed and according to BioWare it was because of the limitations of the 360 and PS4. Another example is how people were acting towards something like The Witcher 3 with its resolution issues not being exactly like what was shown in the past.

If we really want to see true gameplay from a game that is months if not years before release we as a community have to understand that content will change during development and its not some conspiracy, otherwise they will pick and choose what to show us because people don't seem to want to understand that in development.

 

[ManFromTheInternet]

great article, keep it up

 

[KungFuJazzHands]

Why do we ask ourselves the same question every year after E3? It's a masturbation conference.

 

[Nazulu]

Because there are too many fucking pathetic soulless business turds running the show who don't have enough courage in their product. So instead of being realistic with it, they choose to build it all up as much as they can then hide it all. E3 isn't worth a fucking thing!

 

[So_So_Man]

You've got a broken link in the article (darksouls trailer leads to escapist 404)

Edit: Looks like most of the trailer links are/should be broken.

 

[Kohen Keesing]

Showing extended gameplay sequences is only entertaining when the person playing them has entertaining commentary (not an E3 thing)

Some of us don't even like THAT. I HATE having people commentating over a game I'm trying to watch. HAAAAAAAATE it. I just want to see a game being played. I want to sit down and watch a 15 minute session of people behaving the way people do when they play any game in question. That's the only measuring stick I really have of whether I like something before I get my own hands on it.

*snip*

*snip*

The thing is though, that E3 is basically an advertising floor. What really gets me about E3 is that devs/pubs show off games with the thin disclaimer that "content is subject to change". For the more cynical of us, that basically means all of E3 is worthless, because we've been shown something but are in an extended limbo of not being able to know that the game will even resemble what we saw (*cough* Overstrike/Fuse *cough*) and it removes all confidence or excitement in the game's development.

And if this misleading is due to them advertising games months or years in advance, maybe they shouldn't. We're all tired of this comparison between different mediums, but Films don't get advertised while they're still in filming (Well, actually, the new Starwars trilogy might be, I don't follow the movies), you see posters and TV ads when the movie is about to go to theaters and then later when it's going for boxed release. They wait until they have a finished, provable product before stepping into advertising.

About the only 2 games I got excited at were SW:Battlefront 3 and No Man's Sky. New IP and long-awaited IP, both had (somewhat) choreographed trailers, but they were gameplay trailers at least, and nice long ones that showed off a lot of mechanics. That being said, I'm still stuck in the cynic's hole, worried that the end products are going to differ drastically.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Because it's a masturbatory tech orgy where devs and publishers jerk off over technological crap that most gamers don't care about. To me, it's almost like they hold gamers in contempt the whole time, wondering why they're getting in the way of shallow bullshit and want to go on about meaningless techno babble that bores audiences. It's why the PC presser at E3 this past year was an utter disaster, nothing but boring people going on about boring specs no one talks about for a reason. They want to get away with their tech fetishism instead of showing gameplay despite that being the whole point of a trade show. It's why unless a game is in playable form you're better off not talking about it yet.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

Trailers used to be so much better. I remember my years of subscription to OPM and PSW back in the PS1 and 2 days. Trailers would come on a disk, and I used to watch the lot. Sometimes repeatedly to catch all the details. I also used to watch Movies, Games and Videos, and GamesMaster for added footage. They would usually follow a similar format too:

• 
  Start with a CGI opening. Usually something slow starting, or a small cartoon showing the characters. Make it funny or ominous. Set context to the story, or just something to catch attention to the game's world.
  
  Show game gootage. This would be lots of small clips of things actually happening in the game. Clips of fighting moves, dramatic overtaking and action shots. Some buzzwords to tell you what the clips were representing. 'Stealth', 'Insane Action', 'Multiplayer Mayhem', 'Sheep'... whatever. Whatever the main selling points of the game were they would show, but there was always evidence. It was like the basic format for an essay. Point, Evidence, Discuss. The basic trailer would have the point and evidence. The discussion was down to you. Enhanced trailers/spots/previews would extend with voiceovers/interview exerpts also adding discussion.
  
  Then end with a logo and a bit more CGI. Just for good measure.

The difference between the CGI and the gameplay was huge... that's why there was both. Gameplay alone was usually not as gucci looking as nowadays, so you needed some glam to hook the audience. The thing it that now the CGI graphics are as good as the gameplay, so why not let it speak for itself? Seeing someone running along in a 1st/3rd person action shot is more exciting gameplay wise than something that looks nothing like the final product. Especially if you know that the scene isn't even in the actual game! At least a lot of the old CGI clips used to actually be from the cutscenes!