Poll from 1999
6,509 total user votes.
75% of users under the age of 18.
Poll from 2010
128,745 total user votes.
78% of users over the age of 18.
Poll from 2019
14,173 total user votes.
97% of users over the age of 18.
Fandom has already begun implementing some of the simpler step, hoping to see them eventually start to take some huge risks with how they position the site to new (younger) users!
I go on and on like this for 7 pages, if anyone's interested you can click the link in the OP. But I've been preaching corporate overhaul for 4 years nowahahahaha
However unlike fandom, they know how to retain their longtime older fans.
What a weird obsession with this site.
I go on and on like this for 7 pagesAs you do
the reason we lost so much engagement on the forums was due to the vibe and culture of GameFaqs not aging into adulthood as it did with it's users.That's your opinion. I disagree. Engagement on the forums declined virtually everywhere, because traditional forums have simply become less popular. That's it. And nothing that Fandom does here will increase traffic to the forums. They are shutting down more and more of them, and limiting what can be talked about on the remaining ones. And no I'm not talking about the perverted talk shit, nor am I talking about CE, as CE was not indexed, so search engine traffic wasn't feeding anyone here.
Fandom has already begun implementing some of the simpler step, hoping to see them eventually start to take some huge risks with how they position the site to new (younger) users!
modernization or not, the reason we lost so much engagement on the forums was due to the vibe and culture of GameFaqs not aging into adulthood as it did with it's users.
It took so long for us to get swearing for crying out loud. Around 2011 the medium age was 24 years old -- we were all just basically getting out of college, shedding our awkward young adult skins, and becoming normal, mundane, average joes. So the folks who moved on with their lives, and started racking up their various adult milestones posted less and less, meanwhile the folks that didn't do these things, and more or less just retained their "awkward young adult skins" posted more and more.
The place didn't evolve with its own userbase, or with the world around it. It just remained frozen in time, and unfortunately the user that attracts is very niche, and not that conducive to growth or monetization.
Fandom recognizes this I'm sure, and I look forward to watching their progress. Will they succeed? Probably not, but I'm eager to watch them try!
tv hasn't highlighted a single way in which fandom has worked on improving gamefaqs.
So far they've implemented banning politics and restricting posting about sexual themes even further. How does that help with your earlier stated concerns? Earlier you even said they were trying to attract kids, which doesn't fit your enthusiasm for evolution that retains their userbase.
Young people have no need for text walkthroughs. Why would they? Youtube is easily accessable now.
Because they need to acquire new, younger, more casual users. The existing userbase thats currently here is not the userbase they are going to try and cultivate. They wont be going after 35-50 year old males.So they want to get rid of the exisiting userbase? And just hope it gets replaced?
Theyll be going after the 18-34 market, which great empthasis in the 24-34 year old market, since they have the disposable income to spend and are the bridge between the existing users (that they dont really want) and the upcoming generation (which they definitely want).
And as for taking on YouTube as a source for video guides, via a 'bounty' of crypto? I'm wondering if your intent is is sabotage Fandom, rather than help them.I don't think Fandom need help in that regard they seem perfect capable of destroying the site themselfs.
So they want to get rid of the exisiting userbase? And just hope it gets replaced?A new website would be considerably cheaper the overhauling this one.
Why not make a new website instead?
Because they need to acquire new, younger, more casual users. The existing userbase thats currently here is not the userbase they are going to try and cultivate. They wont be going after 35-50 year old males.
A new website would be considerably cheaper the overhauling this one.Right?!
You started with an interesting topic and ruined it with your dumb corporate rhetoric. You've been missing the point for 4 years that Gamefaqs is and will always be a one man show that won't ever have any bells or whistles because that's too much work for 1 person.
I think you have some funny ideas about the attractiveness of a 'vanilla, generic' messageboard to 18-35 year olds.
There are quite a few trans women on Gamefaqs as well. And they are now prohibited from discussing how politicians and laws affect them *or how said laws could affect future trans representation in videogames* outside of CE, which is just utterly and completely fucked up. Fandom claims it wants to be inclusive, yet its ToU prohibits trans people from promoting activism against politicians and policies that would harm them or worse.
Isnt the rule that if it fits into the discussion of whatever the topicality of said board is then you can discuss it?
Companies don't need this, they can already do it via Google Play. And the current GameFAQs userbase I don't think has a lot of interest in pre-registering to play microtransaction-filled service mobile games.
Do you ever buy games from the Amazon purchase links on GameFAQs?
Nope. It's okay to discuss trans issues as it applies to movie/videogame/etc. topics (characters, representation, etc.), and general social activism *not related to laws or government representation*, but politics is banned on all boards outside of CE, PERIOD . So, for example "Trump's AG pick wants to ban media representations of trans minors" would be prohibited on the movie/etc. boards, I'm fairly certain.
What a weird obsession with this site.
They are quarantining the boards where the core users reside, to try and curb the culture this place had cultivated, and make the rest of the boards a bit more vanilla
which is needed if they want to put money into any type of user aquisition campaign.
If the end of the funnel of a paid ad campaign is dropping off a newly acquired user onto a board where a bunch of 40 year olds are discussing the attractiveness of cartoon characters then that user isnt going to stick around, theyre going to dip out.
There is no logic in allocating funds to modernizing the site or acquiring new users if youre just going to drop that user off in the basement of a magic the gathering party, or in the midst of a political thrashing.
They need to make the boards more generic and vanilla so that these users can stick around without being chewed up and spit out by the board regulars.
Was tc the weird guy that tried to sue gamefaqs or something
Imagine thinking 13-28 year olds don't like discussing the attractiveness of fictional and cartoon characters let alone not realizing that's the peak age for a person to discuss them l
No, that was Jacob CurnowI thought that was tails or was he the one that called the FBI on gamefaqs?
He made a reddit all the racist chuds flocked to it than failed to run it.
So I don't think hes a good advisor on how to run a website.
What a weird obsession with this site.
Especially considering he worked with the shit tier bottom feeders in harassing gamefaqs employees in an effort to get the site shut down.
"Fandom doesn't want to attract you old ass losers! Now, aren't you excited about Fandom's plans to attract a new audience and change this website?"