GameFAQs Contests

KamikazePotato posted...

5 minute reaction: 1996 has this and it won't be super close.

But it will be close enough that I think the result flips if the 2000 pic is decent.

The night vote probably won't favor 1996 because Super Mario RPG is mostly non-existent in Europe and 1996 depends heavily on 2 Nintendo games.

Yesterday's X-Stats:

1995 – 50.00%
1987 – 47.61%
1985 – 24.38%
1986 – 11.00%

2001 – 50.00%
2008 – 31.60%
2009 – 17.80%
2014 – 16.83%
2009 – 14.77%
1979 – 6.72%


5 minute X-Stats:

1997 – 50.00%
2007 – 31.97%
1999 – 22.75%
2012 – 14.99%

2000 – 50.00%
1996 – 48.75%
1990 – 34.70%
1989 – 15.90%
1983 – 9.63%

all I've heard from this topic and all over B8 was 2000 and not 1996 so I don't know why anyone would think 1996 was the favorite

12 people fell off the Top 50. JackMan, OliviaTremor, Big_Bob, NLMagic, snesmaster40, meatnit, cdw01, SpikeDragon, Tirofog, WiggumFan267, JetJaguar and TheArkOfTurus did not have both 1995 and 2001 winning.

TIE GAME. Here we go, finally some excitement.

oh ya tie

ninkendo posted...

all I've heard from this topic and all over B8 was 2000 and not 1996 so I don't know why anyone would think 1996 was the favorite

It's the favorite in the Guru, but not by much at all.

aw yeah tied

2000 was the favorite once the contest started and it was clear that depth mattered

ninkendo posted...

all I've heard from this topic and all over B8 was 2000 and not 1996 so I don't know why anyone would think 1996 was the favorite

Because it is an incredibly obvious 'upset' pick over the guru favourite (1996)

Hold on to your butts

Damn, both games in the 2nd match are tied

I can't predict this contest worth a dang.

I should have put more faith in anchors, with the very depressing exception of Mario 3. Maybe Mario 3 can't even beat Majora's Mask anymore.

creativename's site picked up a half-update (12 minutes in) with 1996 up 6 votes. Looks like things are swinging in its favor.

http://imgur.com/khI6FBp

Great Scott!!

Yeah I'm not super optimistic about 2000 here

2000 fell of a cliff!

12 vote gain means gg, probably

Oh well. Leon, am I in the right to think that Pokemon and Diablo could have swung this result around?

CaptainOfCrush posted...

creativename's site picked up a half-update (12 minutes in) with 1996 up 6 votes. Looks like things are swinging in its favor.

That update only had 10 more votes than the previous one, which wasn't going to fully represent the most recent normal 5 minute update (which had a lot more than 10 votes).

http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/IT'S_FREAKING_MARIO!

Haste_2 posted...

I should have put more faith in anchors, with the very depressing exception of Mario 3. Maybe Mario 3 can't even beat Majora's Mask anymore.

I'm inclined to believe depth may not matter that much, so long as you can put up three or four decently strong games on the front page.

1990 is hurt because it can only produce Mario 3, while 96 can put up Mario 64, Mario RPG, Resident Evil, and rounds out with Crash Bandicoot.

I really want to see a CT vs. Mario 64 match, just to see Mario 64 lose. As in today, not in 2009. >_>

CaptainOfCrush posted...

12 vote gain means gg, probably

Oh well. Leon, am I in the right to think that Pokemon and Diablo could have swung this result around?

Statistically I can tell you that the answer is yes, and I don't think it would be close

CaptainOfCrush posted...

Oh well. Leon, am I in the right to think that Pokemon and Diablo could have swung this result around?

I have no idea! There's so much we don't know about the way this contest works, but you'd rather have them than not have them.

Would 1996 be doing better if Allen actually included the N64 in a pic?

If only Lugia was there instead of the dude from Deus Ex...

I have now predicted two matches wrong, with both predictions happening because of pic screwery. I didn't think it would be possible for this contest to annoy me like old contests did!

SBAllen strikes again!

KamikazePotato posted...

Statistically I can tell you that the answer is yes, and I don't think it would be close

...I still don't think adding all the X-Stat values together is the way to look at this. Theoretically, sure, 2000 would be better off and I guess people who picked 2000 can solace themselves in thinking it'd have won with the right setup, but anyone who picked 2000 knew it NEEDED the right setup to win and that wasn't guaranteed.

LusterSoldier posted...

KamikazePotato posted...

5 minute reaction: 1996 has this and it won't be super close.

But it will be close enough that I think the result flips if the 2000 pic is decent.

The night vote probably won't favor 1996 because Super Mario RPG is mostly non-existent in Europe and 1996 depends heavily on 2 Nintendo games.

Isn't Crash decent with the Europe vote though? I know it's not exactly on the same level as everything else, but 2000 is also relying quite a bit on Nintendo as well.

LeonhartFour posted...

KamikazePotato posted...

Statistically I can tell you that the answer is yes, and I don't think it would be close

...I still don't think adding all the X-Stat values together is the way to look at this. Theoretically, sure, 2000 would be better off and I guess people who picked 2000 can solace themselves in thinking it'd have won with the right setup, but anyone who picked 2000 knew it NEEDED the right setup to win and that wasn't guaranteed.

Well said.

(also I still think 1997 beats the winner whichever one it is anyway)

LeonhartFour posted...

KamikazePotato posted...

Statistically I can tell you that the answer is yes, and I don't think it would be close

...I still don't think adding all the X-Stat values together is the way to look at this. Theoretically, sure, 2000 would be better off and I guess people who picked 2000 can solace themselves in thinking it'd have won with the right setup, but anyone who picked 2000 knew it NEEDED the right setup to win and that wasn't guaranteed.

Nah. Unless 1996 wins by 55%+ I'm like 100% positive that switching out Deus Ex with Pokemon GSC flips the match. I don't even think this is very disputable! Let alone not including Diablo 2, which would have also helped a lot.

And I don't think expecting Pokemon GSC instead of Deus Ex on the front page was an unreasonable expectation to have.

_SecretSquirrel posted...

I'm inclined to believe depth may not matter that much, so long as you can put up three or four decently strong games on the front page.

If true, 1995 might do surprisingly well against 2001.

LeonhartFour posted...

Theoretically, sure, 2000 would be better off and I guess people who picked 2000 can solace themselves in thinking it'd have won with the right setup, but anyone who picked 2000 knew it NEEDED the right setup to win and that wasn't guaranteed.

1996 needed the right setup as well. The difference being - it got it. Mario RPG could have easily been excluded for Duke Nukem or Kirby.

Yesterday's charts:

Time | 1995 | 1987 | Votes | Demographic
EBV | 58.56% | 41.44% | 263 | (0:00-0:05)
PHV | 53.83% | 46.17% | 1618 | (0:00-1:00)
FNV | 53.61% | 46.39% | 3447 | (1:00-6:00)
BSV | 51.51% | 48.49% | 2353 | (6:00-9:00)
DSV | 51.24% | 48.76% | 4311 | (9:00-14:30)
ASV | 52.79% | 47.21% | 3980 | (14:30-22:00)
SNV | 51.02% | 48.98% | 837 | (22:00-24:00)

Time | 2001 | 2008 | Votes | Demographic
EBV | 73.78% | 26.22% | 267 | (0:00-0:05)
PHV | 70.45% | 29.55% | 1631 | (0:00-1:00)
FNV | 68.49% | 31.51% | 3472 | (1:00-6:00)
BSV | 69.83% | 30.17% | 2370 | (6:00-9:00)
DSV | 68.59% | 31.41% | 4304 | (9:00-14:30)
ASV | 66.68% | 33.32% | 3985 | (14:30-22:00)
SNV | 67.33% | 32.67% | 857 | (22:00-24:00)

1996 has a secret weapon to beat 1997 - The freaking N64

Hail to the King, baby

Yeah 1996 actually had the 4 strongest possible games it could have gotten on the front page. Where's Quake? Duke Nukem? *checks the question mark* The hell is Dragon Force?

And I'm with you, KP. We missed the same matches, and both sting a little bit.

KamikazePotato posted...

And I don't think expecting Pokemon GSC instead of Deus Ex on the front page was an unreasonable expectation to have.

It was also not unreasonable to expect it wouldn't get it when you looked at what games SBAllen put under 2000's profile. Like, what games 2000 got besides FFIX and MM was a crapshoot, and they didn't get what they needed.

CaptainOfCrush posted...

1996 needed the right setup as well. The difference being - it got it. Mario RPG could have easily been excluded for Duke Nukem or Kirby.

Eh, 2000's potential ceiling relied more on it than 1996 did.

All 2000 needed to do was get to round three where it could have It's full potential shown with good pics...but it looks like it will fall short.

LeonhartFour posted...

It was also not unreasonable to expect it wouldn't get it when you looked at what games SBAllen put under 2000's profile. Like, what games 2000 got besides FFIX and MM was a crapshoot, and they didn't get what they needed.

I don't agree with this line of thinking. Yeah, it didn't get what it needed, but the fact of the matter is that 1996 did and there was no guarantee for that either. Super Mario RPG was not guaranteed at all - Bacon has removed other random games in the name of diversity. It's actually very weird that there's two Mario games in the same poll. And 2000 not getting Pokemon GSC OR Diablo 2 is probably the biggest pic screwery of the contest so far. I can sort of see Deus Ex included for the diversity and it being a fairly landmark game, but did we really need Perfect Dark?

Well, at least 2000 isn't represented solely by Perfect Dark and Diablo 2. Because that was a legitimate concern until one hour before lockdown, and a sign of things to come by the looks of it.

Ultimately, this is largely on Allen for not giving us the information we needed to make proper judgments before brackets locked down. Everyone knew pics would matter, and it's pretty darn tough to make picks when you don't know what you're getting.

KamikazePotato posted...

I don't agree with this line of thinking.

It's not a matter of "agreeing with this line of thinking." This is a matter of "there was always a chance SBAllen wouldn't include them." It's stupid you have to pick matches like that, but we did.

I think FF7 is demonstrating the power of anchors in this match. Take out FF7 out... and we practically have a 50/50 match. Mario Galaxy and (Bioshock, not Portal) are right around SotN and Goldeneye, strength-wise. (even though I personally think SotN and Goldeneye are much more significant)

_SecretSquirrel posted...

Well, at least 2000 isn't represented solely by Perfect Dark and Diablo 2. Because that was a legitimate concern until one hour before lockdown, and a sign of things to come by the looks of it.

Yeah, I had 1996 > 2000 until an hour before lockdown. When I saw that we'd be getting four pictures per year to start Round 1, I switched to 2000 because I assumed it would at least get three of its top four. Woops.

That's like... the most annoying way I've ever missed a prediction.

KamikazePotato posted...

LeonhartFour posted...

It was also not unreasonable to expect it wouldn't get it when you looked at what games SBAllen put under 2000's profile. Like, what games 2000 got besides FFIX and MM was a crapshoot, and they didn't get what they needed.

I don't agree with this line of thinking. Yeah, it didn't get what it needed, but the fact of the matter is that 1996 did and there was no guarantee for that either. Super Mario RPG was not guaranteed at all - Bacon has removed other random games in the name of diversity. It's actually very weird that there's two Mario games in the same poll. And 2000 not getting Pokemon GSC OR Diablo 2 is probably the biggest pic screwery of the contest so far. I can sort of see Deus Ex included for the diversity and it being a fairly landmark game, but did we really need Perfect Dark?

It seems like he was going for diversity of platform rather than franchise. The late 90s, and 2000 itself didn't have a lot of variety. All games worth playing were N64, PS1 or PC. 1996 on the other hand still had SNES, Genesis, PS1, N64 and Saturn games coming out.