Well, I must be a visionary, because E3 is cancalled. Next-Gen.biz had an
exclusive report today, which featured "well placed sources" who claimed that
the ESA (Entertainment Software Association) decided to pull the plus on E3
after several major exhibitors had decided to pull out of the world's largest
video game show for 2007.

There was just one problem. Not long after Next-Gen "broke" the news, several
other competing video game news outlets, such as Ars Technica, issued their own
reports Sunday that E3 was, in fact, not cancelled and would go on, albeit on a
smaller sclae. Then more reports trickled out that featured their own un-named
industry sources, which claimed that E3 would undergo drastic changes -- like
being moved from the Los Angeles Convention Center to a smaller venue -- and be
significantly downsized because the show was becoming a Comdex-like behemoth
that was out of control. All of these conflicting reports have led to insults
and bickering between the trade news organizations, blogs and enthusiasts that
follow the video game industry.

Apparently, one thing is true -- the ESA is having serious discussions with
industry folks and major exhibitors about paring down E3 to a smaller, less
costly and more manageable event. According to the official E3 Web site,
planning is already underway for E3 2007 at the L.A. Convention Center, May 16-
18. The ESA is supposed to release the official word on the future of the show
this week, perhaps as earlier as tomorrow, which will hopefully do two things.

First, it will put an end to some of the immature behavior and silly
gamesmanship (no pun intended) that some "news" sites are engaging in with this
particular hot item. And second, it will give the video game industry a chance
to examine it premier trade show and figure out how to fix it before it breaks
for good and become another Comdex. Sure, tech trade shows aren't what they used
to be, but there's a still a place for smaller, more targeted events that
actually deliver value like CMP's Game Developer Conference.
href="http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7876/3296/1600/NintendoLine.jpg"> style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; CURSOR: hand" alt=""
src="http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7876/3296/320/NintendoLine.jpg"
border="0" />

But E3 was becoming too crowded and too hard hard for people to digest. There
were too few informative seminars, panels or keynotes. Major players like
Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony getting their big news out of the way prior to the
event at adjacent locations (seriously, that's how it starts -- just as Comdex).
People waited six hours to play Nintendo's Wii, which is half the time they had
to wait in line to get lunch. All in all, E3 had turned into a mangled mess.
When you ask people if they are going to E3, and 99 percent of them let out an
exhaustive sigh followed by "Yeah, I'll be there, but I don' really want to go,"
well, that's when you know something is wrong.

Hundreds of comments later, Joystiq decided to wipe the egg of its face and
terminate Summa's employment as one its most prolific bloggers. Joystiq editor
Christopher Grant quickly wrote a thoughtful href="http://www.joystiq.com/2006/09/08/an-apology-and-a-note-on-
hype/">apology to readers, which essentially put the blame on Joystiq for
succumbing to the rules of Internet hype instead of real news.

Grant states: "The worst part is, we understand that it was our hard-earned
credibility that contributed to this excitement cocktail. There are gaming
websites that trade in hype, and we've always prided ourselves on avoiding it.
If we tell you that something is "major" and "worth waiting for," naturally you
would expect it to be."

Well, it didn't take long for Summa to land somewhere else -- a new gaming blog
called Destructoid -- and fire back at
Joystiq. In a post on Destructoid, Summa declared that he was
"very happy to be free from Joystiq's shackles" and that "Joystiq takes
themselves WAY too seriously." Summa doesn't apologize and instead paints
himself at Joystiq's scapegoat. Here's more from Summa's post:

"I in no way meant to hype anything. There was no ulterior motive to bring
increased traffic. The entire affair was blown way out of proportion. Joystiq
fired me because of fan reaction and their fear of losing whatever credibility
they think they have. Also, we were both headed in different directions. They
wanted content that was long, boring, and obscure. I want to write about fun
stuff like rumors, culture, and everything that is humorous out there."

And rumors it will be, apparently. One of Summa's recent posts on Destructoid is
a self-described rumor about Wii online beta testing, which Summa got off a
forum from a guy who he writes is "just talking out of his ass." Ironically,
Summa started off the post with "I don't normally like to take rumors from
message boards, but considering how plausible it sounds, what the hell." (the
post also featured the above image of "Rumor Has It...", and I can't tell if
that was meant as a disclaimer to readers or a tounge-in-cheek gag)

I think I have an idea of what's going on here. Clearly, Summa wasn't adhering
to the same journalistic standards as his employer. Joystiq is trying to ensure
quality the same way a newspaper or magazine would, whereas Summa feels the site
is just shoot-from-the-hip blogging where the rules of journalism don't apply.
Summa isn't a reporter -- he's a blogger. But even a blogger, who's delivering
information to the masses, has a duty to be truthful and accurate. So is Joystiq
to blame for hiring someone they knew was a blogger but who they wanted to act
like a journalist? Are they to blame for allowing Summa to hype a press release
as a "scoop" and then firing him when readers reacted badly to the news? Or is
the unapologetic Summa to blame for callously discarding his responsibility to
readers and laughing off Joystiq's credibility? Should Summa be blamed for
acting unprofessionally, even if he's not a "professional"?

Maybe it's all of the above. I'll need a few more days to think about this
one.

Well, there's just one problem, apparently. JP's Domain alleges that in fact a
significant number of front page stories are submitted and Dugg by the same,
small group of prolific Digg members. The blogger even identifies severa Digg
members that are apparently flooding the site with content. But is this true
manipulation? Are these Digg members simply casual acquaitances and avid Digg
fans or are they agents of an insidious plot to turn Digg into their own
exlcusive club? I'm not sure, but JP's Domain believes the issue loophole needs
to be close. The blogger writes:

"What it comes down to is there very literally is a group that controls Digg. If
you are within this group and you submit a story, you are more or less
guaranteed 10-15 (or more) automatic diggs from this group. What happens to the
people who don't have such a luxury and only get the default single vote like
everyone else? This only encourages a cycle where those who are getting votes
will continue to get more and more, as they feed each off each other and pat
each other on the back."

JP's Domain blames Digg's "Friends" feature, which allows Digg members to link
up with other Digg readers. This of course creates a system where a limited
group of people can get together on the site and combine their efforts to exert
greater control on the Digg electoral process.

In essence, they're a lobby group or a PAC (political action committee).

Interestingly enough, JP's Domain submitted the post to Digg, and it quickly
became a popular entry with 865 diggs at last count (including my own digg).
JP's Domain also posted a follow-up blog entry found href="http://jesusphreak.infogami.com/blog/what_happened_to_digg">here.

As a result of the posts, Digg co-founder Kevin Rose href="http://diggtheblog.blogspot.com/2006/09/digg-friends.html">pledged to
reform the site with a key algorithim update that is designed to select a more
diverse range of Digg submissions.

But one member of the Digg "in-crowd" was none too please with JP's Domain and
Rose's promises to reform the system, according to my old CMP pals at href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=192600648"
>InformationWeek. According to the article, Digg member " href="http://www.digg.com/users/p9s50W5k4GUD2c6">p9s50W5k4GUD2c6 ," who had
sumbitted the most stories of any Digg user, denied that he or she was rigging
the voting process and decided to leave Digg altogether.

"As a direct result of your blog this evening, I will no longer no supporting
(sic) Digg going forward. I bequeath my measly number one position to whoever
wants to reign," p9 was quoted in the InformationWeek article. "Now YOU can
spend all the time, all the effort and get stabbed in the back by fellow Diggers
-- aptly named -- and then tossed to the side by a Digg team that values toilet
paper with more worth than the core users that feed this site it's content every
day."

I swear, Web geeks are SO sensitive.

Now if you'll excuse, I'm going to get on Digg and check to see if any of the
"in-crowd" ever dugg any of my TwitchGuru stories.

For months now geeks have been closely following the v(ideo)log of a YouTube'r named "LonelyGirl15", a teenage girl named Bree who had strictly religious parents (yadda yadda) and was interested in "geek stuff", for wont of a better phrase.

Well, it turns out that the LonelyGirl saga was a fake, and that it was created by some enterprising film makers using nothing more than their intelligence, acting ability and a web cam. They led many scores of obsessed geeks on for four months, until finally a massive web witch hunt tracked down the producers and unveiled the mask of LonelyGirl.

Many geeks are decrying this great "scam" against them. I don't see why everyone has to get so touchy - well, I do actually. On the internet we all seem to be trying to form meaningful connections with others, even if it's just a passive thing where you watch that other persons vlog on YouTube, or comment in their blog, become one of their friends on MySpace or get chatting on MSN. LonelyGirl was one such passive relationship, where geeks listened to her woes and associated with her interests, probably amazed that a good looking girl could also be classed as a geek.

So some people feel personally betrayed that this was all a show. Well, tough luck I say. If you come onto the internet looking for meaningful lifelong relationships then you're entering into dangerous waters; even more so if the "relationship" you have is with a person looking into a webcam to record a vlog entry. Go out and meet some real people, for crying out loud. Internet relationships can work, but you have to have that distance between yourself and the chat box representing the person on the other side, or else you are quite likely as not to get burned.

I see the LonelyGirl show instead as a brilliant example of what can be done by film makers in the age of New Media Convergence; a scriptwriter and an actor, maybe even with a prop or two, can run an entire show - be it a fictional one like LonelyGirl purporting as real life, or a current affairs show, or whatever else you want - off of a site like YouTube, other blogs will talk about it and link to it, then big publications will weigh in. Even the "hunt" for who the real LonelyGirl was is a bit of fun - a distraction, something to do in your spare time, as most of this stuff is.

There's a lot of crap on the internet, but increasingly too there's a lot of quality stuff out there, the entry bar to creating of which has come down very low in recent months, and I don't see the LonelyGirl incident as a personal betrayal - it's a successful experiment.

For further reading, check out:
Tom's
Hardware Guide is 10 Years Old Today
and
Tom's Hardware Guide -- the book

For answers -- or at least some opinions and suggections on possible answers --
I go to one particular source: Filmfodder.com, .
If you do watch the show, then do yourself another favor and check out
Filmfodder, a great pop culture and entertainment site (which I wrote for in the
past on a few occasions). Filmfodder's master and commander Mac Slocum does one
hell of a job staying on top of all the rumors, casting news, Web site stuff and
other junk that makes up the "Lost" universe. And his "Lost Blog," which
features an amazingly detailed summary of every episode the day after it airs,
is a true delight. A lot of other Web sites and magazines have caught "Lost"
fever and done their own blogs and episode guides, but I still think Mac's work
is head and shoulders above the rest -- well written, insightful, hilarious, and
irreverant. I read the "Key Points from..." episode summaries, even if I've
watched the entire episode already, because you never know what other people
might pick up on in a show as complex as "Lost." So if you're a fan, give it a
look. It's great stuff.

Check out Key
Points from "A Tale of Two Cities" on Filmfodder's "Lost Blog."

What an eventful day. TwitchGuru now has a filled out MySpace profile. Go look, and add us. We're your friends, remember. I say we now have a "filled out" profile because Rob created that back in late September, but it fell to the responsible one to actually put more than a fancy logo onto it.

Expect more pictures and suchlike, to be cross posted here of course, in the near future (as I beat Roberto into it, and get around to filling out the "Who I'd like to meet" section. Be really, really nice and I'll put you into it.)

The second, possibly more interesting, thing I picked up on today was a service called "Shelfari." The whole world seems to be about putting your life online these days, and Shelfari is an online bookshelf which is (I think) linked into Amazon. You basically find the books you have and put them on your "shelf." The social networking aspect obviously then comes from linking up with other people who read the same stuff.

Let me say here and now that there are an awful lot of Discworld readers in the world at large. In almost all of the links to profiles of "People who share some of your books" I've come across Discworld novels. Odd. Still, I can say that it's addictive stuff, adding dozens of books to your collection and racking your brains to stick in more titles. I've been coming back to it all day and adding books in spurts.

I shall be researching this Shelfari further in the hopes of doing another of my no-doubt enlightening and enthralling in-depth looks at such things which, it occurs to me now, I've not yet given a name to. It's an informal series of articles (you may recall Gamer sGate and ZYB?), but I really should give it an identifiable name. Suggestions on the back of a postcard to the usual address, or the comments box below, appreciated. With regards to Shelfari, I want to see what extra features this lot will be implementing post beta, and where they intend to make their money (IE, where's the catch.)

The other "Unnamed profile article" I'm working on concerns Games For Windows. Microsoft launched this initiative last year, lamenting about how they feel they'd almost killed PC gaming by focusing their attention on consoles (the PC gaming industry looked up, bemused, from behind its stack of gold at this proclamation.) Again, I want to know what the catch is beyond a simple logo on boxes. What's the benefit for having your game classed as a "Game For Windows"? What's the downside to not having it classed this way? A Microsoft takeover, Simpson's style?

Hrms, stuff to ponder. Well, I'm off to add more books to my Shelfari. Feel free to add me there, and feel compelled to add TwitchGuru on MySpace.

The Entertainment Software Association has set its legal dogs upon game blogs including Kotaku and bits bytes pixels & sprites, sending a Cease & Desist nasty letter over a parody ERSB rating t-shirt, "Your Mom Rated E for Everyone."

Naw, here let me find a dictionary for the ESA, I think sympathy is in there. The entertainment industry voice in North America, which protects us from Jack Thompson (or is just an easy target for a lampooning by him), is also do not forget A Big Evil Corporate Voice - their mission, remember, is "dedicated to serving the business and public affairs interests of companies that publish video and computer games". They're not happy that the ESRB rating is being parodied... but wait, parody is an acceptable art form and doesn't constitute copyright infringement! Hurray for those niggling legalities the ESA heads can ignore whilst making eejits out of themselves.

Big blogs like Kotaku can stand up to this sort of a legal challenge, but smaller one-man blogs are not in such a position (such as bits bytes pixels & sprites); strong-arming does, in fact, work when the person you are going after is too weak to defend themselves, no matter how weak your actual legal hand is.

I had an interesting conversation the other day about drugs and pro gaming with Liquilife and Vicious at UncleGamer.com. In case you're not familiar, UncleGamer Radio does a weekly podcast devoted to gaming. Well, Liquilife and Vicious caught the recent TwitchGuru story about the Cyberathlete Professional League making preparations for drug testing at its events next year.

If you missed it, the CPL will require all participating players in 2007 to consent to a potential drug test. CPL founder and president Angel Munoz told me he doesn't think the use of performance-enhancing drugs in CPL competitions is an issue yet, but he wants to be proactive before cheating via drugs becomes a problem. And with hundreds of thousands of dollars at stake - not to mention fame - Munoz and others in pro gaming have no doubt that people will use drugs to get an edge, if they haven't already.

Liquilife, Vicious and I chatted about everything from gamers taking Ritalin to NHL hockey players taking Sudafed and how the allure of money-making competitions in sports will always lead to cheating in some way or another. We also chatted about favorite games, the best consoles, and why I'm not a big fan of Halo or the Call of Duty sequels. Good stuff.

If you haven't tuned into to UncleGamer Radio already, here's a good interview with a guy who literally broke his knee while playing Guitar Hero.