Topic: GameFAQs users fail at poll

[Mop it up]

I can't believe the early results of the current GameFAQs poll:

http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html?poll=3510

Which company do you think had the best E3 this year?

Vote Accepted
Microsoft    30.42%    1086
Nintendo    20.62%    736
Sony    27.65%    987
It's too hard to pick one - all three were great    11.15%    398
None of them, all three were disappointing    10.17%    363
TOTAL VOTES          3570

Okay, so I can see the Microsoft fanbois voting in droves, but c'mon, no way Sony had the best showing at E3.

[TJ Spyke]

Sony fanboys. They are the same idiots complaining to any review of Killzone 2 that was less than 9/10 even though they hadn't played the game yet while the reviewer had.

[broodwars]

If this were just about the Press Conferences I could understand these numbers, but taking in E3 as a whole I don't really see how Nintendo couldn't place at least 2nd.  But then again, this is the GameFAQs crowd, the ones who somehow thought that Final Fantasy VII was the second best game of all time in another recent poll (thankfully, it got beaten out by our own Ocarina of Time).

[Stratos]

This is also the same crowd that voted the L-Block the best game character and then had a fit about how it wasn't really a character.

[Dirk Temporo]

Okay, so I can see the Microsoft fanbois voting in droves, but c'mon, no way Sony had the best showing at E3.

Yeah, but it also wasn't the worst, which leaves this poll fairly accurate. Microsoft had the best, then Sony, and Nintendo's was a massive pile of fail with the exception of Golden Sun and Metroid.

[Mop it up]

This is also the same crowd that voted the L-Block the best game character and then had a fit about how it wasn't really a character.

Ha ha, true. And they also think SSBBrawl is better than SSBMelee.

Yeah, but it also wasn't the worst, which leaves this poll fairly accurate. Microsoft had the best, then Sony, and Nintendo's was a massive pile of fail with the exception of Golden Sun and Metroid.

I had to do a double take to make sure I hadn't stumbled onto GameFAQs by mistake.

[Luigi Dude]

Ha ha, true. And they also think SSBBrawl is better than SSBMelee.

Brawl is a better game then Melee.

[TJ Spyke]

Ha ha, true. And they also think SSBBrawl is better than SSBMelee.

Brawl is a better game then Melee.

Totally agree.

[DAaaMan64]

Me as well.

[Nick DiMola]

Melee > Brawl.

[KDR_11k]

I wouldn't know, I only got Brawl a week ago and barely played it yet...

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Smash Bros. is meh

[Stratos]

I like to play the coin shooter game after having a huge Brawl party. I sat there for hours yesterday and shot trophies and alien spaceships. I still have a couple thousand coins to go through as well.

Brawl is about equal to Melee I think. If they had not axed some of the characters from Melee and included a few more new ones then I would have liked it more than Melee I think.

[Mop it up]

I both love and hate how one little innocent comment about SSBBrawl can derail any thread. That is a dangerous power to realize.

[D_Average]

Clayfighter 2 TE > MK 2 Arcade > Brawl > Melee > Killer Instinct 2 > Street Fighter 4

[Mop it up]

That's great and all but this thread is supposed to be about GameFAQs and the E3 poll. Which I see should go like this:

Nintendo > Microsoft > Sony

or this:

Microsoft > Nintendo > Sony

and I can even understand the mediator votes which say they were all good or all bad. But I don't see how Sony had the best showing.

[D_Average]

Here's how'd I'd list them.

In terms of Presentation, I'd say:
Sony > Nintendo > MS

Why, Sony had the least amount of BS.  Just straight to the games and hardware.  Dry, just the way I like it.  MS on the other hand, was full of BS with their wanna Tom Cruise backup lookalike.  Nintendo was somewhere in the middle.

In terms of Announcements, I'd say the same thing:
Sony > Nintendo > MS

At first I was more excited for Nintendo, but after watching video of Mario Bros Wii, it just doesn't look too great for one player.  Uncharted 2 owned all this year.

[broodwars]

That's great and all but this thread is supposed to be about GameFAQs and the E3 poll. Which I see should go like this:

Nintendo > Microsoft > Sony

or this:

Microsoft > Nintendo > Sony

and I can even understand the mediator votes which say they were all good or all bad. But I don't see how Sony had the best showing.

Actually, it's pretty easy to see how people could think that Sony had the best showing: The Last Guardian, God of War III, Uncharted 2, Final Fantasy XIV, MAG (when it comes to showing off online horsepower), Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker, Heavy Rain, and a pretty good Motion Controller demo.  Only a few of those appeal to me, but I can see how those could be a big deal to a lot of people.

[Mop it up]

I guess so. The Everybody Votes Channel says I'm something like 800 miles from popular opinion so I'm probably not a good judge of this sort of thing...

[D_Average]

It was a big win for all 3, which at the end of the day, benefits me the most, i.e variety.  The games industry is growing so large we may soon need conference for specific genres, just like in the movie industry.

[that Baby guy]

I don't know what the results are now, but to be fair, the "early results" don't always match the outcome.  The selection of people being polled is essentially one demographic that's on at one hour, and the voters during the day have different values, opinions, and whatnot.

...And then I went and checked, and Nintendo's now at about 18.5%, so they actually went down.

The truth is, the only way Nintendo could win is by announcing a new Mario, Metroid, and Zelda game.  Too bad they've forgotten about their hardcore audiences?

No, really, the true truth is that coverage of the showroom floor of E3 this year has been abysmal by most major media outlets in the gaming industry.  Everyone watched those press conferences and made up their collective minds from that.  Nintendo had a stronger position on the floor, offering things like Sin and Punishment 2, which wasn't hardly (or even?) mentioned in the press conference.  Also, since people can't ignore things they don't like and focus on what they do enjoy, few feel like ignoring the biometric reader, rather than waiting until proper context is given.

Personally, I'd say Microsoft had the least interesting E3 showing, according to my own interests and tastes, but all three, from what I've seen and read, seemed to show a positive year ahead for video games.

[NWR_pap64]

I think both Sony and Nintendo had a great year at E3. At first I thought MS's show was cool. But the more I read and watch videos of it the more I believe it is nonsense.

Project Natal sounds awesome on paper but I will bet anything that most of it will become vaporware or be riddled with so much issues it will lose its charm fast. Remember how people tore Nintendo a new one when they realized that some of the stuff they promised the Wii would do didn't happen at launch? I see the same thing happening with Natal, except much, much worse.

It will be hard to make games for it. Third parties are having enough issues with the lack of buttons on the Wii remote, despite Nintendo offering alternatives to it. How does MS expect developers to make complex, button heavy games like Gears of War and Halo to control with your body?

And many of the games demoed will die off or play very differently from the demo.

At the very least Nintendo and Sony were grounded in reality, focusing on games and hardware that were realistic. MS just dreamt up a Jetsons like future where people got overly excited and can't wait for it, and it will bite them in the ass very, very, very badly.

As for Nintendo, I am set to believe that no matter what Nintendo does at E3 they will never be given credit. This year's show might not have been perfect but goddammit many didn't want a repeat of last year and we didn't get it. It was a well presented, serious show that SHOWED GAMES.

Here's a rundown of the things they did right...

- A serious, gimmick free presentation: Last year sucked because of all the fake, staged humor and enthusiasm that went on between the execs. This year they ditched that and instead of trying to put on a show they were serious, focused on talking about games and selling us ideas. E3 is a TRADESHOW, not a super duper mega videogame fanboy fest unlike what most sites lead you to believe. Nintendo did business in that show.

- Fair and balanced: Going back to last year again they focused a lot on their casual content and not enough on their core content. This year the show was split between both games and it was great. We didn't get a long, drawn out 30 minute Wii Fit Plus presentation nor we had a 4 player battle on stage in New Super Mario Bros. Wii. Games were covered, end of story.

- Third party games were shown!: Guys, remember how last year games like Chinatown Wars went unnoticed and nearly unmentioned by Nintendo? This year was the complete opposite of that and it was awesome! I don't care if you give two sh*ts about the games the fact that Nintendo acknowledges their support and sees them as great efforts worth buying on the Wii. And you know what? This is good.

The only flaws were the absence of Miyamoto on stage, the missing first party titles found on the press site and the bizarre announcement of the Vitality Sensor. But considering Nintendo had the ghost of E3 2008 behind them all this time they conquered the show and basically what we are dealing is with the same angry fanboy bullcrap who are blown away by ridiculous technology only to say the Wii is stupid, creating a set of double standards that this industry seems to love to live by.

[TJ Spyke]

I like Project Natal, and at least 2 publishers (Electronic Arts one of them) have confirmed support for it. The thing that I think will kill any chance of success though is the price analysts are predicting. I have seen at least one reliable analysts predict it will cost at least $200. I think the price alone will make it a niche product. I liked the demos they showed for it and I thought the Milo project was pretty damn cool (though the folks at I think Giant Bombcast at a point in that pedophiles will probably love it), but there isn't a snowball's chance it hell I would pay $200 for it. I would even be reluctant to pay $100 for it (although if they had both of those demos and the Milo project bundled with it I might consider paying $100 for it).

[Mop it up]

Alright, today's poll makes some sense to me:

http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html?poll=3511

Which E3-announced technology are you most looking forward to?

Vote Accepted
Microsoft's Project Natal    26.74%    3092
Nintendo's Vitality Sensor    7.78%    900
Sony's Motion Controller    14.01%    1620
They all look like gimmicks to me    51.46%    5950
TOTAL VOTES          11562

Out of the three, Microsoft's camera has the most potential based on what we saw. Sony's motion controller is an obvious ripoff but at least we know what to expect from it. Nintendo's vitality sensor is still up in the air though, since they didn't demonstrate any games along with it and we don't really have an idea of a good application for it.

Guess which option I chose. ^_^

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

"I like Project Natal, and at least 2 publishers (Electronic Arts one of them) have confirmed support for it."

EA supported Wii, and look at their track record.