Basically from the US video i got
Nintendo guy = Nintendo
Microsoft guy = Nintendo showed more surprises but the 3rd party games appealed to me more
Sony guy = Sony
And people are bashing the MS guy?!
Personally i think he is right. Nintendo came out with new games to their franchises, but none of them were like "holy shit that is the best thing i have ever seen!". In fact a few of them dissapointed as they mention i.e Zelda.
The same goes for MS. They showed some good demos of their games i.e the FIRST showing of MG Rising. If that game was a Sony exclusive and was shown at the Sony conference people would be declaring Sony the winner.
What the guy is saying is that if you look at the conferences as a whole they all had great parts and all had bad parts. How do you determine what was good and what was bad? That is simply a matter of opinion. Like the Kinect animals thing. We as hardcore gamers will look at that and think "er what the hell", few of us will buy it. But there are millions of people watching who are not hardcore gamers, they might be kids, and chances are they will like that. Why should we only judge the show based on 18 things? You don't instantly turn off a film i.e Shrek because it's main audience is for kids? The point is if we want to bash any of the conferences you will find something to dislike.
But in terms of games shown Nintendo showed the most brand new ones. They revealed more things and that is what he was saying. Neither Sony nor MS showed enough new un-announced things.
