By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - E3 Scoring - Who will win?

 

Who will win?

Sony 134 33.58%
 
Nintendo 177 44.36%
 
Microsoft 32 8.02%
 
VGC Polls are useless 54 13.53%
 
Total:397
starcraft said:
Most of the measurements in the OP are irrelevant to the purpose of E3. Cannot be bothered retyping so I'll paste what I put in the other thread:

It depends what you mean by 'Win E3'. If you mean who will have the best games regardless of sales potential then it will be entirely subjective and in the vast majority of cases confirmation bias will ensure that everyone who expected/wanted their preferred company to win, will believe they won. This is especially true where niche titles such as the Last Guardian could be shown, leading fans of such games feeling as though a certain company 'won' E3.

If you mean who will best leverage 'E3' as an opportunity to promote future console sales, this is almost certainly going to be Microsoft of Nintendo. Quite simple, this is because Sony is currently outselling those two companies, often combined, despite an almost complete lack of high-budget, high visibility AAA content. In other words, the only place Sony has to go at this E3 is down. Whereas even a viable attempt at levelling the playing field would represent an E3 'won' for Microsoft or Nintendo.

If you mean on these forums? It will go by userbase - in line with the aforementioned confirmation bias. Sony > Nintendo > Microsoft - irrespective of what is actually shown.

That's not true. They could have a great E3 and start outselling the competition even more!



Sigs are dumb. And so are you!

Around the Network
Fusioncode said:
Conegamer said:
Angelv577 said:
Microsoft > Sony>>>>Nintendo.

Interesting. I'm curious why; according to this relatively unbiased scoring system, you feel Nintendo will be behind massively. Looking at other comments and the results in the poll, you seem to be in the minority. 

You should know by now that anonymous polls are a poor way of judging results, especially since there are so many Nintendo fans on this site. 

Very true. But the comments in the thread also wouldn't make you think there would be a big difference between the three companies.

Just want to hear his explanation is all.



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Fusioncode said:
starcraft said:
Most of the measurements in the OP are irrelevant to the purpose of E3. Cannot be bothered retyping so I'll paste what I put in the other thread:

It depends what you mean by 'Win E3'. If you mean who will have the best games regardless of sales potential then it will be entirely subjective and in the vast majority of cases confirmation bias will ensure that everyone who expected/wanted their preferred company to win, will believe they won. This is especially true where niche titles such as the Last Guardian could be shown, leading fans of such games feeling as though a certain company 'won' E3.

If you mean who will best leverage 'E3' as an opportunity to promote future console sales, this is almost certainly going to be Microsoft of Nintendo. Quite simple, this is because Sony is currently outselling those two companies, often combined, despite an almost complete lack of high-budget, high visibility AAA content. In other words, the only place Sony has to go at this E3 is down. Whereas even a viable attempt at levelling the playing field would represent an E3 'won' for Microsoft or Nintendo.

If you mean on these forums? It will go by userbase - in line with the aforementioned confirmation bias. Sony > Nintendo > Microsoft - irrespective of what is actually shown.

That's not true. They could have a great E3 and start outselling the competition even more!

Thats why I said 'almost certainly.'



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

KylieDog said:

I'll explain.

A brand new IP is made by Capcom.  This IP has no fanbase, so nobody is missing on on a series they like.   That is good.
Resident Evil is not a new IP, if that is suddenly exclusive, the fans on the other consoles are missing out.  That is bad.

Exclusive DLC means that one or more userbases are going to be missing out on content for a game they can buy.  That is bad for same reasons as Resident Evil going exclusive.  It isn't a reward for the userbase that gets it since if it wasn't exclusive they would get it anyway.

Timed exclusive games or timed exclusive DLC means one or more userbases need wait, this like exclusive DLC is bad as it isn't a reward for anyone, only a punishment of sorts for another.

Moneyatting is a shitty practice that benefits no gamer. 

The bolded is the best indication you've entirely missed the point of what E3 is about.

I own both the PS4 and the Xbox One.  Sony and Microsoft aren't interested in selling me their console anymore.  In terms of 'winning E3' they are gunning for people who have not yet bought their console.

Lets say that right now purchasing intent for the rest of the generation looks like this (the numbers are designed to show a shift only, are pulled entirely out of my ass, and are not to be read as a prediction):

PS4: 45%
Xbone: 35%
Wii U: 20%

If those numbers change after E3 to the below...

PS4: 40%
Xbone: 35%
Wii U: 25%

Then Sony has lost E3, Nintendo has won E3, and Microsoft has held its own at E3.

Coming back to the beginning, those who own multiple consoles, or those who one one and never intend to purchase another are broadly irrelevant to any of the big three's assessment.  The premise of this thread is relevant only to the individual sense of victory (which will be largely determined by the confirmation bias mentioned in my earlier post) and is entirely detached from the actual reason E3 exists.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

I don't agree with the scoring,i think who win will always be something subjective



PS4 - over 100 millions let's say 120m
Xbox One - 70m
Wii U - 25m

Vita - 15m if it will not get Final Fantasy Kingdoms Heart and Monster Hunter 20m otherwise
3DS - 80m

Around the Network
Conegamer said:
-10 for not having a conference is silly. We know what's happening so you're already putting Nintendo at a disadvantage; which is surely beyond the point.

Regardless I'll have to say Nintendo.


I´m not so sure about that.



@StarCraft:

I agree with you, but there is also the purpose for E3 of showing off software to existing customers.

So if, for the sake of argument, an existing Sony customer currently plans to buy 2 games in the next 12 months, and comes out of e3 planning on buying 5 games, then that is also a win for Sony.

New customers are obviously better than increased penetration into existing customers (giggity), as long as the former don't come at the expense of the latter.

Which, after all, is why WE all watch E3, to find out what games we're going to be drooling over the next couple of years.

I still like the point idea though, to try and get some 'objective' measure of whose E3 is most exciting.



KylieDog said:

I'm scoring based on what is better for the gamer.  I'll never buy into or care about marketing spiel.  Nobody should.

The existence of, and competition behind the existence of E3 IS good for the gamer



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Wow. That lack of faith for MS is simply disturbing!



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

Conegamer said:
Angelv577 said:
Microsoft > Sony>>>>Nintendo.

Interesting. I'm curious why; according to this relatively unbiased scoring system, you feel Nintendo will be behind massively. Looking at other comments and the results in the poll, you seem to be in the minority. 



Nothing personal, it's just that I was dissapointed with last year Nintendo E3 that I'm not sure what they can show to get me excited aside for a Zelda game.  As you can see I'm a sony fan and still give microsoft my number one prediction.