from some of these post, i'm a bit disapointed, and not so sure i want to watch it.

Read my lips... "Nintendo and Sony have nothing to worry about." I was highly disappointed. Voice commands and Kinect 2.0? Really? Oh and Snap? I really see no reason to buy a ONE. I don't want to be sitting on a couch and yelling at my TV as my mother calls the insane asylum. At least they have CoD and Halo.

5/10 for the sole reason they showed up with two female presenters (a concept unknown to some other companies, apparently).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbWgUO-Rqcw

there the Highlighs of te reavel....

I'll give it a 7.

I'm glad that Forza 5 will be a launch title, but I was hoping to see some actual gameplay footage. Even though CoD: Ghosts will be multiplatform, I still think that Microsoft revealing the game at their conference was a good move. I was really happy to hear that there will be 15 exclusives (8 of which are new ips) in the first year. Here's hoping that they're not all Kinect games.

On another note, I really didn't give a damn about the EA sports stuff. I also have no interest in a Halo tv series. Kinect 2.0 will probably be better than the current one, but that's basically saying nothing.

lol what?

Did you seriously just make up a chart... 

my old statistics and research teachers would be throwing a fit right now.

Why? I'll find it pretty sad if they expected me to have done some expensive professional marketing research, and couldn't see the conceptual point I'm making with the graph.

It's an inherently deceptive tactic that misuses statistics.

Graphs are a whole different thing from simple word demonstrations, and using a graph with made up variables is inherently dishonest.

The correct way to use a graph conceptually  would use data from something else in the same situation or something completely unrelated so as to not create undue bias.

Using a fake graph like that is basic unintended propaganda.  It does little extra to explain your point and only leads to bias people towards your way of thinking via the variables you've chosen for each thing.  In general people put a lot more faith in graphs even when explicitly told their fake.  

Which you never actually did in your post, you just kind of threw up a bar graph and let people decide whether it was real or not.  You never even really hinted at it being fake.  Relying on people assuming that research like that hadn't been done somewhere.

For example, a graph like that suggests gamers care far more about ram then the average consumer does.  (It's actualy probably quite the opposite, since it's ease of switching is likely one of the most impressive features to casuals, and all that multimedia needs a lot of ram to be fast.  Though it's beside the point.)

Can i give a negative score?

Then: -7/10 (Those 3 points are because the conference was short, and because now i'm loling so hard the whole time with parody videos or gifs)