I got a call from an Electronic Arts representative yesterday asking me about my coverage plans for Battlefield: Bad Company. I'm busy, and, right now I don't have any.
Honestly, it's possible that seeing so much of the game at so many press events played a part in that.
I try to be curious about everything, but seeing a game — even a good one — so many times can kill the buzz for me.
I've heard other reporters say the same thing about the long-hyped Brothers In Arms: Hell's Highway. To be fair, I'd grown weary of the many Spore demos, but I've re-warmed to the game after recent showings (two private demos in the last month — I'm not bragging, just making a point about how it gets around to the press.)
On the other hand, I was asked by a Microsoft representative yesterday what I was most interested in seeing at E3. I said, from a reporter's standpoint: Nintendo's line-up. Because I don't know anything about it.
Nintendo's been shortening its hype cycle. Some developers have called for a shortened cycle too. We gaming reporters certainly need to ask ourselves if long hype cycles are affecting our coverage. My question is if it's affecting gamers as well.
Would you rather know about a game for a shorter period of time?