GameFAQs Contests

Halfway through this thing already.

~*creativename's contest site (all things contest!)*~
http://www.gamefaqscontests.com/drupal/

~*The Board 8 Wiki (lots of useful contest and board information, including all past Post-Contest Analysis from Ulti, transience, Ed Bellis, and others)*~
http://board8.wikia.com/

~*List of All Polls (a search bar is at the bottom)*~
http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html

~*NGamer64's Archive Sites (good stuff!) and (LOL) X-Stats Sim*~
http://www.thengamer.com/
http://thengamer.com/xstats

~*GameFAQs Contests Hall of Fame*~
http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/GameFAQs_Contests_Hall_of_Fame
http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/GameFAQs_Contests_Match_Hall_of_Fame

~*Character Contest Histories*~
http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Contest_Histories

~*Simple Explanation of Extrapolated Standings*~
A = Strongest Character
B = Character Weaker than A
C = Character Weaker than B
To figure out a character's Xsts Percentage ---> [(CvB)(BvA)]/50 = CvA
To compare how C would do against B ---> [(CvA)/(BvA)]*50 = CvB
To figure out how B would do against A ---> [(CvA)/(CvB)]*50 = BvA

~*All the Match Pics*~
http://www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery/index.php

~*Leonhart4's Trend Charts*~
https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?hl=en&key=tOGmynfNIiNy5VukpEF-PdA&hl=en#gid=0

~*Daily Vote Trends - An Explanation for Dummies*~
http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/Daily_Vote_Trends

~*Acronyms and Percentages for Dummies*~
http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/Acronyms_and_Percentages

1995 is dead meat

This is anyone's game as far as I'm concerned. Ignore the %s. Votals are too low for them to matter. Like 95% of 1995's lead is from the board vote.

Haste_2 posted...

I am puzzled how polarized predictions were for 1995/1987. Everyone who picked '95 thought it would be a blowout. And then like five people had '87 winning.

Think that's a result of 2 different schools of thought pre-contest. Most people figured the years would be as strong as their strongest game, but others figured depth would matter. This is probably the most egregious example of single game strength vs raw depth of field, but 2000/1996 will have similar results.

God, can you imagine how badly 1995 would be getting wrecked if Bacon hadn't included the little Crono sprite below it's year in the pic to let people know right away that it was the year of CT? It would be getting (Full) throttled.

Oh 1987 is going to win, which is so good. This is the ultimate picture dickery if I've ever seen it.

Really angry at myself for not thinking enough about this match today.

Yesterday's trend charts:

Time | 2013 | 2003 | Votes | Demographic
EBV | 36.65% | 63.35% | 281 | (0:00-0:05)
PHV | 38.45% | 61.55% | 1714 | (0:00-1:00)
FNV | 42.36% | 57.64% | 3402 | (1:00-6:00)
BSV | 42.94% | 57.06% | 2329 | (6:00-9:00)
DSV | 42.29% | 57.71% | 4427 | (9:00-14:30)
ASV | 42.61% | 57.39% | 4088 | (14:30-22:00)
SNV | 40.00% | 60.00% | 775 | (22:00-24:00)

Time | 2015 | 2005 | Votes | Demographic
EBV | 40.86% | 59.14% | 279 | (0:00-0:05)
PHV | 39.35% | 60.65% | 1695 | (0:00-1:00)
FNV | 39.64% | 60.36% | 3380 | (1:00-6:00)
BSV | 41.31% | 58.69% | 2324 | (6:00-9:00)
DSV | 41.42% | 58.58% | 4416 | (9:00-14:30)
ASV | 41.73% | 58.27% | 4031 | (14:30-22:00)
SNV | 42.99% | 57.01% | 756 | (22:00-24:00)

BlAcK TuRtLe posted...

Haste_2 posted...
I am puzzled how polarized predictions were for 1995/1987. Everyone who picked '95 thought it would be a blowout. And then like five people had '87 winning.

I predicted a 55% win for 1995 and it looks like I was being too generous. But you're right, I would like to hear the rationale for picking 95 with a huge percentage when three of its four "marquee" games are absolutely terrible fodder. It's like people didn't want to believe how badly the pic was screwing it over.

KamikazePotato posted...

God, can you imagine how badly 1995 would be getting wrecked if Bacon hadn't included the little Crono sprite below it's year in the pic to let people know right away that it was the year of CT? It would be getting (Full) throttled.

Full Throttle vs. Metroid to start. That would be infuriating.

I kinda disagree about '96 not having depth. Resident Evil is a pretty good game to have next to Mario 64. And Crash Bandicoot, while not popular, is pretty iconic. That said, I'm expecting 2000 to win with 55-60%.

CaptainOfCrush posted...

BlAcK TuRtLe posted...

Haste_2 posted...
I am puzzled how polarized predictions were for 1995/1987. Everyone who picked '95 thought it would be a blowout. And then like five people had '87 winning.

I predicted a 55% win for 1995 and it looks like I was being too generous. But you're right, I would like to hear the rationale for picking 95 with a huge percentage when three of its four "marquee" games are absolutely terrible fodder. It's like people didn't want to believe how badly the pic was screwing it over.

Are you talking pre-contest or like, recent Oracle picks? Pre-contest it wasn't bad logic. As of yesterday, after we knew the pics and after seeing depth matter throughout R1, I can't describe it as anything except wishful thinking.

I blame my poor history of Oracle predictions for this.

BlAcK TuRtLe posted...

This is probably the most egregious example of single game strength vs raw depth of field

Luckily for 1995, I think enough people realize that it actually does have other games of quality (DKC2, Earthbound, SMW2), and that's giving it the lead at the moment. If those games didn't exist and this truly was a year with only one game worth a damn, it would be getting killed by 1987 right now.

KamikazePotato posted...

Are you talking pre-contest or like, recent Oracle picks?

Oracle picks as of like a couple hours ago. I saw at least a few people picking 1995 with a doubling or more.

CaptainOfCrush posted...

BlAcK TuRtLe posted...

This is probably the most egregious example of single game strength vs raw depth of field

Luckily for 1995, I think enough people realize that it actually does have other games of quality (DKC2, Earthbound, SMW2), and that's giving it the lead at the moment. If those games didn't exist and this truly was a year with only one game worth a damn, it would be getting killed by 1987 right now.

Well like I said last topic, I'm a living example of forgetting what other games 1995 had. And I'm a freaking stats topic regular. I don't think the average voters has any clue.

Someone tell KP to check his PMS lol

Haste_2 posted...

I kinda disagree about '96 not having depth. Resident Evil is a pretty good game to have next to Mario 64. And Crash Bandicoot, while not popular, is pretty iconic. That said, I'm expecting 2000 to win with 55-60%.

Well, compare that depth to 2000 which has a Zelda, a Final Fantasy a Pokemon game and 2 outstanding PC releases. 1995 has 'depth' until you realize that the only good games that came out that year were SNES platformers, and Chrono Trigger.

CaptainOfCrush posted...

BlAcK TuRtLe posted...

This is probably the most egregious example of single game strength vs raw depth of field

Luckily for 1995, I think enough people realize that it actually does have other games of quality (DKC2, Earthbound, SMW2), and that's giving it the lead at the moment. If those games didn't exist and this truly was a year with only one game worth a damn, it would be getting killed by 1987 right now.

Never mind the games, this is the year of the Playstation's release. The big thing that might be costing 95 here is the de-emphasis of consoles in these early rounds. The question mark at the top might very well be saving 95 just by existing.

all these posts talking about 95's depth and no mention of best Mega Man game =(

Playstation release doesn't mean a thing for '95 when nobody bothered to own a Playstation until '97.

My contest chances are dropping like an 800-pound weight.

Unless some BS magic can get 87 past 01...

I need 1987 to win so I can keep my perfect bracket. I just kinda figured 'that's a s*** load of recognizable franchises' when I chose it disregarding the strength of the individual games. Kinda been my strategy for the whole contest.

87 winning wouldn't kill my bracket much, as I backed 2001 to the finals.

But, the picsmith in me would much rather work with 95's games than 87's.

_SecretSquirrel posted...

87 winning wouldn't kill my bracket much, as I backed 2001 to the finals.

But, the picsmith in me would much rather work with 95's games than 87's.

You wouldn't want to make pics for Punch-Out, Contra, or the 4 games on the marquee? =/

Okay, I'll admit NES graphics are not nearly as colorful as SNES graphics, but still...

First okay update for 1995 in awhile.

Percentage increases are definitely good to see.

Think this match will see typical CT trends, complete collapse overnight and into the morning, then charging back with the ASV and SNV

azuarc posted...

_SecretSquirrel posted...

87 winning wouldn't kill my bracket much, as I backed 2001 to the finals.

But, the picsmith in me would much rather work with 95's games than 87's.

You wouldn't want to make pics for Punch-Out, Contra, or the 4 games on the marquee? =/

Okay, I'll admit NES graphics are not nearly as colorful as SNES graphics, but still...

I suppose there's also the fact I've already done a CT pic, and am waiting for 95 to hopefully pull away to continue working on my DKC2 pic.

_SecretSquirrel posted...

I suppose there's also the fact I've already done a CT pic, and am waiting for 95 to hopefully pull away to continue working on my DKC2 pic.

you're doing god's work

Good update for 95.

keep this up 95

just survive this round and I promise we'll get you a proper match picture next round so you can challenge 2001

I wouldnt be surprised if 2001's B-Team can beat 1995.

MGS2
Paper Mario
Devil May Cry
Silent Hill 2

ninkendo posted...

keep this up 95

just survive this round and I promise we'll get you a proper match picture next round so you can challenge 2001

lol

Anyone that thinks 1995 is going to beat 2001 is kidding themselves.

Chrono Trigger has decided the Zelda Power Hour is over.

Thank you for reminding me that Paper Mario is 2001 so I can make a match pic for it

Why does everyone think Zelda 1 is so much weaker than CT, btw? 2k4 stats have CT getting 55.6% on LoZ.

This round is going to be full of nailbiters. Beginning with 95/87 which is actually a toss up as of now, then with 96/00, then 91/02, and finally 03/05. Every day a nailbiter.

1987's trends may be more or less the pure North America geolocation trend. As 1995 was 22 years ago and 1987 was 30 years ago, my guess (hope) is that there are no age-based trends left at this point, and this match will be fairly trendless with both years getting the NA geolocation trend. The Zelda thing complicates it.....younger voters may just see LoZ and vote.

I'm feeling pretty vindicated for not being impressed by 95's performance against Bubble Bobble and friends!

Chrono Trigger is a lot stronger than that now.

https://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/6147-best-game-ever-day-25-round-3-chrono-trigger-vs-final
https://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/4194-final-rounds-semifinal-final-fantasy-x-vs-zelda-majoras-mask

CT is projected to get over 65% against MM and I don't think many people would pick LoZ over MM.

Maybe, though I do think LoZ might be a bigger game than people think it is.

LordoftheMorons posted...

I'm feeling pretty vindicated for not being impressed by 95's performance against Bubble Bobble and friends!

Remember when people were predicting Snake would win the contest after the Tanner match?

I'll continue to hold out optimism. A better picture can work wonders, and 1987 is legit (it demolished 1985 too).

azuarc posted...

Playstation release doesn't mean a thing for '95 when nobody bothered to own a Playstation until '97.

hey now I had a PS1 in 1995

I've still got those ridiculously huge cases to prove it

1995 is performing about 2% worse in the US compared to the overall result. That's a bit surprising since Chrono Trigger is very strong in the US.


red sox 777 posted...

1987's trends may be more or less the pure North America geolocation trend. As 1995 was 22 years ago and 1987 was 30 years ago, my guess (hope) is that there are no age-based trends left at this point, and this match will be fairly trendless with both years getting the NA geolocation trend. The Zelda thing complicates it.....younger voters may just see LoZ and vote.

In this post, I talked about 3 different types of trends:

https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/75328678/878802709

Age based trends are mostly dead now, even in the age poll itself. 1995 struggling very hard after the freeze up might have been from the Power Hour voters being younger on average than voters from every other time period. In the most recent age poll, this was the average age by time period:

11/6/2016 Weekend Poll (25 hour poll due to DST change)
EBV - 27.03
PHV - 27.71
FNV - 28.28
BSV - 29.06
DSV - 28.39
ASV - 28.19
SNV - 28.23

Mac Arrowny posted...

Remember when people were predicting Snake would win the contest after the Tanner match?

Were they?

I remember everyone arguing whether Tifa and Vincent were Cloud/Sephiroth proxies and Ganondorf/Zelda were Link proxies in 2005 after their first round matches.

And there's a cut for 1987.

I don't guess it matters who's winning when I wake up since 2001 has this in the bag now.

Team Rocket Elite posted...

CT is projected to get over 65% against MM and I don't think many people would pick LoZ over MM.

Well, umm...

MM would absolutely fodderize LoZ, yeah.

In the top 50 for the first time ever. Feels good mang