This was my first year going to E3, and it was a blast. Even though I was only able to go on Friday it was well worth it.

First a general impression, I was blown away by the scope of presentation at the show, I guess I just never realized how much money is spent on the booths and presentation. EA won for best booth IMO, they had a huge circular booth with a massive 360 degree screen showing off their previews. Too bad it was EA and I wasn't that interested in most of their games (except for Crysis which they are publishing)

Rankings for the big 3

1. Nintendo- Nintendo definitely had the most buzz and the testament to that was the line to get in and see the Wii (took me 2 hours). When you first walked in they had two guys giving a presentation of the Wii with an orchestra/drums controlled by the Wii remote. I just wanted to get to the games, but this really looked interesting for rhythm games like guitar hero.

Once inside I finally got to test out the Wii controller with both tennis and baseball. The first thing I noticed, as many people have already mentioned, is the Wii remote is tiny. Secondly the Wii remote is very sensitive to the slightest movement or adjustment. I guess I had gathered from the videos that it just kind of sensed sudden motions (unless you were pointing it at the screen like a pointer), so that it was just idle until you swung in tennis for example. But where I really noticed just how sensitive the controller was, was during the baseball demo, where the bat moved while I was waiting for the pitch, out in front, behind the shoulder, however I was holding the remote it followed precisely. The baseball swing did feel a little generic, as it seemed to follow the same path regardless of how I swung, but hopefully this is just part of the demo (I might not have messed with my swing enough to tell).

After playing a few of the demos, unfortunately I never got to play the games, as I was waiting too long to play Zelda and E3 closed before I got to play. I did get a chance to watch Zelda and Mario being played by a lot of people along with Red Steel. The reaction was generally very positive, the sword and bow controls seemed to translate well in zelda. The graphics in Red Steel looked pretty bad, and some of the sword fighting looked pretty clunky, but it still looked like a good showcase of what is possible in FPS games.

2. Microsoft - I watched a lot of the games being played. Dead Rising was the highlight for me, it looked like a lot of fun taking down hundreds of Zombies in a game like Dawn of the Dead. Too Human looked okay, but it seemed pretty standard from what I watched, I just remember all the old news, made it seem much different from what I saw being played at the show. The idea behind Huxley, bringing together both XBOX live players and PC gamers in a massive FPS seemed like a great idea, although I couldn't really tell if it was a Battlefield type of game. I couldn't find Gears of War. I breifly watched some other games, but not enough to really form a full impression.

3. Sony - I didn't really see anything that warranted the 600 price tag. Heavenly Sword looked like the game I would be most interested in, especially since it reminded me of GOW, and it looked great, but not enough to justify $600. I really wasn't that amazed by the new Gran Turismo. I guess I was already biased due to the price, but I was hoping to be blown away by some of the games there. I unfortunately didn't get to see the Eye of the Beholder card game they were showing in some of the offices, I heard it was pretty impressive.

I watched a lot of the PC games, but the highlight for me was Crysis, it was also the game I thought looked the best at the show. The forrest was immense, it was much more of a jungle with trees that really dwarfed you unlike Far Cry which had much sparser vegetation and tiny trees in comparison. Everything was truly destructable, leaves were knocked off by bullets then slowly drifted to the ground, trees would crack and fall if you set off a grenade and the buiding and fence would explode into peices after an explosion. The only thing that seemed funky was the trees did seem to have specific breaking points. Overall though the game looked like a lot of fun.

Best presenations.

1. Sony - Finally after a year of speculation we finally have official price, release date and fully playable demos of the Playstation 3. The price may seem high for a game console but considering the price of Blu-Ray players its a steal. Sony definutly proved that there Playstation 3 is more powerful then the Xbox 360. The unfinished demos already look superior to all of the Xbox 360s launch titles. Sony may dominate another year.

2. Microsoft - Microsoft didn't have anything near as big to reveal as a new console but they definutly showed the 360 isn't dying (as if anyone thought it was). Gears of War in particular looks absolutly amazing and I can't wait to play it. My biggest dissipointment was the lack of an official price on there HD-DVD drive.

3. Nintendo - I was skeptical that Nintendo would pull off anything good and I was more right then even I knew. Nintendos Wii is pathetic. After looking at Playstation 3 and Xbox 360s great visuals its amazing that Nintendo thinks they can compete with there console with graphics barely better then the previous generation and no high definition ability. Hey look I got a cool new controller. Big fuckin deal.

It's like a flashback to E3 2004:
"After looking at the PSPs great visuals its amazing that Nintendo thinks they can compete..."

Whoops!

PSP has passed or is about to pass the DS in sales around the world.

I think you mean shipments.

Are you sure you are talking about this years E3? That goes against everything I saw online and the opinion of just about every gaming publication that was at E3. They are calling the graphics battle between the two a draw.

Yep, Sony can ship as many PSPs as they want, but the actual sales numbers (i.e. people buying the system off the store shelf, as opposed to the amount ordered by retailers) favor the DS.

Not to mention the switch over from the current DS to the Lite caused stores in Japan to be without DS units for some time hurting yearly sales and the same thing is happening here. When the new Lite units hit the market next month there will be a huge spike in DS sales. Nintendo can't ship them fast enough and that is not a problem with the PSP.

And besides, it's game sales and number of highly reviewed/regarded games that determine a systems worth.

Sales numbers are just for the geeks online to spout off in flame wars. Real gamers could care less as they're spending they're time playing the fucking games.

The Playstation 3 demos aren't too much better then Gears of War or any of the second generation 360 titles but yeah they look superior to any of the Xbox 360s launch titles. Heavenly Sword looked better then anything on the 360.

This is pretty much the exact opposite of what everyone else thinks.

How am I wrong?I can't believe how many people say how much they think the Wii looks cool. Are we looking at the same thing. There is no inovation in the Wii. Its just a recyclying of what we own. Next generation is suppose to mean big graphical improvements over previous generation games. At least Sony finally gave us honest details and real reason to buy there console. Why does Nintendo still hide there specs. I know why. Its because they are scared of a direct comparison because it will show how unbelievably inferior Wii is. Yet people complain about the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360s price. Its about value people. If the Wii is over $100 it will be too expensive.

Anyone that cares about graphics will be dissapointed by the Wii.

Those of us that are excited are excited due to the possibility for innovation in terms of the controller allowing for new types of games and for having the Virtual Console for instant access to all the games we loved (and hundreds we missed out on) in past generations.

I don't give two shits about graphical quality. I like cartoony looking games with good art design, so for me 3D games on the current consoles look as good as they need to to please me.

You want the latest graphics etc. and that's fine, and you're right that you're not wrong in not being excited for the Wii. It's not going to be for everyone, and certainly not for graphics whores like yourself.

I agree with Josh.

To you, a Wii over $100 is too expensive... to me a $600 PS3 is $400 too expensive.

You can't be wrong. It's your opinion.

I think a lot of people are excited to have a second option for this generation instead of getting caught up in a graphics war, they feel that a new way to play games in the future is a refreshing alternative.

New controller. Is controller trype now what makes a console inivative. Man all this time I thought it was things like online program, quality of visuals, Enemy A.I, expansivness, resolution, and all those things. That sends a good message. Hey industry make the controller different and nothing else and then you have a game console.

Are kidding me? You have to at least admit that the controller changes the way you PLAY the games, and that it might mean that there are some different types of games that come out of the interface between the player and the game. It may not be your cup of tea, which is fine, but there is no way you can say its just a "new controller type".

I see nothing else different about the Wii then a new controller. Yeah the new controller is pretty cool but why not just release an adapter that allows the gamecube to work with this tool. A console needs more then a new controller it needs to improve on the current generation in technology which the Wii fails at miserably.

I bet you would have said the same thing about the DS before it was released. Just a new control gimmick right? If Nintendo can put out quality software to back up the new interface it will be an excellent console and because it is so affordable it will make a nice second console for people that also want what the Xbox360 and PS3 offer. Its not an all or nothing thing. Many of us buy multiple consoles for exclusives and the Xbox360 and PS3 will not offer the experience of the Wii.

Ok, I'm done. Clearly, you can't see the new control cabilities offered by the new controller. Its pretty obvious that you wouldn't have liked anything other than souped up graphics and more power. You have two consoles to choose from. Enjoy one or both of them.

Your right it won't. It will offer an experiance thats inferior in every possible way. The DS came out before the Playstation Portable and was when it launch the highest quality graphics on handheld. Also Nintendo backed it up with more games then the Playstation Portable which was shamefully given a poor initial slate by Sony. Thats not the case this time. Wii is launching a year behind the Xbox 360 a graphically superior console and while some of the games look interesting the Xbox 360 will already have a much stronger slate of titles.

Online program - PC circa 1982

Quality of visuals (720p, I assume) - PC VESA circa 1989

Enemy A.I. - This is completely subjective per-GAME, not per-system. It is up to programmers to implement.

Expansiveness - Does this just mean "big areas"? Again, per-game, not per-system. And it doesn't even apply to all games. There's plently of reasons why "compactiveness" would be preferrable in any given game. Eternal Darkness? Resident Evil? Silent Hill? Those are all survival-horror games and wide open spaces really would detract from their atmosphere...

Resolution - See "Quality of visuals".

Hmm... yes, the 360 and PS3 are truly innovative. They're catching up to the mid-90s PC.

Upgrading existing things != introducing something new. That's not innovation.

Time will tell if the Wii fails or excels. Let's talk numbers in Jan 2008 after all the systems have got through their initial sell-throughs and a Holiday season can pass when supply > demand.

Eh, I have yet to see any "big graphical improvements" so far from any of contenders. In fact I would say that this generation looks like it may have the smallest leap in graphical capabilities ever. That hasn't kept console prices from ballooning to (in the PS3's case) double what they were last gen. Perfect time for Nintendo to jump in with a console that costs a fraction of price, but emphasizes gameplay over a slight graphical upgrade.

Me thinks you havent played xbox 360 games on a HDTV such as Graw or Lost Planet. Beleive me, they are truely next gen graphics that are simply mind blowing.

Sure. When it can give you a whole new way to play.

I don't care about online gaming. Why would I want to game with people like you?

I don't care about graphics. I spend most of my gaming time playing SNES games on emulators or playing my DS.

I'm sick to death of the types of 3D games on the PS2 and 360. I need a major shakeup, or I"m not buying any consoles and getting out of gaming.

The Wii looks to at least have potential in that area, and if not I have the Virtual Console which will probably work much better than PC emulation.

So yes, I'd say the controller is innovative.

Again, it doesn't appeal to you, and that's fine. The 360 and PS3 with their slightly enhanced graphics don't appeal to me as they look to have the same types of games that didn't appeal to me this go round.

Different strokes for different folks.