E3 is surely the biggest event on the video gaming calendar, and while some of you may think it's all fun and games, know that for most of us journalists it's three days of hell: running around a convention hall with a backpack full of gear, smiling politely as developers tell you they're really going to re-invent the free-to-play MMO, then getting drunk on Microsoft's dollar before breaking a Kinect and getting thown into the street by a huge Samoan bouncer named Craig.
Ok, it's pretty fun.
Anyhow, being that E3 is where almost everything cool gets announced and demoed, every respectable game publication in existence will be there to cover it. All except for those who are willing to commit digital suicide by boycotting E3, much like those monks who burned themselves alive to protest Vietnam (it's pretty hard to find that kind of dedication these days).
Why would these outlets choose to boycott E3? Namely due to the ongoing SOPA crisis, with the notorious internet-killing bill still being debated despite the overwhelming lack of support from the American public. Though many game developers and publishers have tried to distance themselves from the bill, the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) remains one of its biggest sponsors, and the dozens of companies aligned with the ESA count themselves guilty by association.
Many sites today participated in an internet-wide blackout to show the possible effects of the bill, though sites like ScrewAttack want to take the fight one step further, trying to convince industry journalists to deny gaming companies the coverage they so desire. It's a radical step, and one which will be a hard sell to the many for-profit publications out there.
That being said, if the community demanded it, I'm sure many a gaming site would choose to appease their fans as oppossed to the industry. So the question really comes down to readers like yourself. Are you more interested in a free internet? Or knowing what new video games are going to be coming out?
