Saying "I could not care less about FF7 or Shenmue 3" to discredit Sony's conference, to say MS "won" or "had more" is just plain silly. "I don't care about Halo, Tomb Raider, Gears, Hololens, etc", therefore MS had "nothing", so they lost. Sounds ridiculous, right?

You gotta be objective here. Just because one conference didn't "have anything" for you doesn't mean they didn't have anything at all. So what if, for you, they only had Uncharted and Horizon? They still had a lot of other stuff that affects more people than just you. Their announcements had much more real world impact. FF7 has over 10M views on YouTube. Shenmue 3 broke records for video games via Kickstarter. Several gaming websites locked up because they couldn't handle the traffic that came in from Sony's announcements. You may not care about real world impact, but that's what determines who "won". And Sony achieved that, in spades.

I really don't care about Nintendo, but if at one of their conferences, they announced a new Super Mario, the next Bioshock was exclusive, and a new IP from Square Enix with, say, Nomura at the helm, and it's Nintendo exclusive; and then Sony/MS turned around and only showed games we already expected to come out and montages of Madden and COD, would you say MS or Sony still won because "I could not care less about Bioshock and Mario" and an annual title like Madden appeals to you more?

I'm not saying the disparity between MS and Sony's conferences this year were that extreme, but it's the same logic to say MS won because Sony showed stuff you, personally, didn't care for, even though an overwhelming majority care more for them than they did for MSs announcements.

Saying "I could not care less about FF7 or Shenmue 3" to discredit Sony's conference, to say MS "won" or "had more" is just plain silly. "I don't care about Halo, Tomb Raider, Gears, Hololens, etc", therefore MS had "nothing", so they lost. Sounds ridiculous, right?

You gotta be objective here. Just because one conference didn't "have anything" for you doesn't mean they didn't have anything at all. So what if, for you, they only had Uncharted and Horizon? They still had a lot of other stuff that affects more people than just you. Their announcements had much more real world impact. FF7 has over 10M views on YouTube. Shenmue 3 broke records for video games via Kickstarter. Several gaming websites locked up because they couldn't handle the traffic that came in from Sony's announcements. You may not care about real world impact, but that's what determines who "won". And Sony achieved that, in spades.

I really don't care about Nintendo, but if at one of their conferences, they announced a new Super Mario, the next Bioshock was exclusive, and a new IP from Square Enix with, say, Nomura at the helm, and it's Nintendo exclusive; and then Sony/MS turned around and only showed games we already expected to come out and montages of Madden and COD, would you say MS or Sony still won because "I could not care less about Bioshock and Mario" and an annual title like Madden appeals to you more?

I'm not saying the disparity between MS and Sony's conferences this year were that extreme, but it's the same logic to say MS won because Sony showed stuff you, personally, didn't care for, even though an overwhelming majority care more for them than they did for MSs announcements.

Saying "I could not care less about FF7 or Shenmue 3" to discredit Sony's conference, to say MS "won" or "had more" is just plain silly. "I don't care about Halo, Tomb Raider, Gears, Hololens, etc", therefore MS had "nothing", so they lost. Sounds ridiculous, right?

You gotta be objective here. Just because one conference didn't "have anything" for you doesn't mean they didn't have anything at all. So what if, for you, they only had Uncharted and Horizon? They still had a lot of other stuff that affects more people than just you. Their announcements had much more real world impact. FF7 has over 10M views on YouTube. Shenmue 3 broke records for video games via Kickstarter. Several gaming websites locked up because they couldn't handle the traffic that came in from Sony's announcements. You may not care about real world impact, but that's what determines who "won". And Sony achieved that, in spades.

I really don't care about Nintendo, but if at one of their conferences, they announced a new Super Mario, the next Bioshock was exclusive, and a new IP from Square Enix with, say, Nomura at the helm, and it's Nintendo exclusive; and then Sony/MS turned around and only showed games we already expected to come out and montages of Madden and COD, would you say MS or Sony still won because "I could not care less about Bioshock and Mario" and an annual title like Madden appeals to you more?

I'm not saying the disparity between MS and Sony's conferences this year were that extreme, but it's the same logic to say MS won because Sony showed stuff you, personally, didn't care for, even though an overwhelming majority care more for them than they did for MSs announcements.

To say Shenmue and FF7 are the reason Sony won is silly.  One is a multiplat a year+ away and the other is years away.  Shenmue has such a mediocre story; Its pure nostlgia just like FF7.  Sony gave fans hype, just like they always do.   A $30 digital game and an hd remake of the lamest, most dragged out franchise in video gaming.  Advertising a kickstarter at an E3 conference, just sad.  Couldn't believe they were actually doing that no matter the game.  

Uncharted and Horizon Zero looked fantastic.  Only noteworthy parts from Sony's conference imo.  TLG looked boring with very few improvements since the last time we saw it, nor was it a suprise.  

Just glad Sony's show wasn't dreadfully boring like their show last year.  They are learning presentation skills!  Both conferences were good, neither great.  I liked MS's E3 last year a lot more. 

If you dont care about those things then no, its not silly at all. Especially when youre talking on a personal level. Hope that helps. Id read and reply to the rest but its obviously flawed based on the opening sentence.

The thing is this is Xbox vs Playstation that excludes abbreviations.

Most people type PS4 not Playstation 4. PS4 isn't included if your are searching for trends for Playstation. Xbox doesn't have a standard abbreviation everyone says Xbox. That's what makes this so stupid. During E3 people were typing ____ on PS4, PS4 exclusive, and more. This is why Playstation didn't get a bump, because everyone was using PS4 as the headline.

It's a shame that people are taking this seriously.

The term "PS4" had a huge boost, which is how we know it wasn't included.

The author (source) is a well known fanboy, that is known to writing biased/inaccurate articles. *shrug*

I brought this to light yesterday and everybody seemed to brush it under the rug.

Here are the results from topsy (a site designed to keep track of tweets).  Isn't this...interesting:

http://topsy.com/analytics?q1=xb1%20OR%20xbox%20OR%20xbone&q2=ps4%20OR%20playstation%20OR%20playstation4&q3=Wii%20OR%20WiiU&via=Topsy

The above link provides the last 30 days AND includes any abbreviation that someone might use for these three consoles.