Lurker > creativename

I think the GotY is fine as PotDs.

LeonhartFour posted...

I think 1997 would've broken 40% if it had actually beaten 2001.

I would be pretty surprised by that.

Thanks TRE and congrats yoblazer :)

LeonhartFour posted...

NowItsAngeTime posted...

CaptainOfCrush posted...

I'd take it over any other Square game and almost every Nintendo game, but I'm not taking OoT to lose against a non-rallied game.

I'd probably take LttP over CT before I consider taking CT over Ocarina.

This is my opinion as well

This Chrono Trigger is #1 thing kinda reminds me of the Mario/Samus thing. One may look better stat-wise and they could be close but I would still take Ocarina easily in a head to head match.

Except by the time they faced in 2005, Mario had become legitimately stronger. Maybe Mario wins if they face in 2004, but I don't think that's a lock.

Which is the unfortunate problem for CT. Even if it was stronger in 2015, that doesn't mean it'll still be stronger next time.

Was about to say this. Everyone seems to forget the Mario boost.

I'm not convinced Mario would've won in 2004. He looked real bad. He would've needed rSFF to win, which is quite possible, but we've never seen it. It was the old Mario people were picking against.

CT might have lost its only shot at glory already as its boost may not last.

UltimaterializerX posted...

CaptainOfCrush posted...

UltimaterializerX posted...

Why? Starcraft won in a very similar fashion and did not win that contest.

Undertale stormed back from 9000 votes down in R1. What's the biggest comeback in contest history after that? Is it even half as big?

http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/(6)Undertale_vs_(11)Mass_Effect_3_2015

2483, but this wasn't an L-Block spot where the perfect crescendo happened. Fallout, Mario World, and Pokemon all in a row was ridiculous, and Pokemon especially would have beaten any rally if those fans didn't hate themselves. I even clearly remember you saying that specific match was different since Undertale was finally against something that was actually fighting back, and that was really the match I was most afraid of. Undertale's power was coming from tumblr and Pokemon is tumblr's #1 game.

I still don't get why Pokemon fans hate RBY so much. Undertale caught Pokemon really late and only won by 3600 votes. If the fanbase was in unison and built a lead bigger than 7600, Pokemon easily wins since they basically have the exact same fanbase. Does anyone really think Undertale comes back from a 15000 vote lead in that match? 10000?

We even have evidence Draven wasn't inevitable. He got his ass kicked when the LoL subreddit disallowed rallying for half a day. These rallies are not invincible, and the fact we even get to have a debate about this 10 minutes before this contest's final shows how sorely missed they are.

I think you're right that rallies aren't inevitable. I still think Link could've won without the downtime, actually. And there's huge random elements, like Reddit mods closing topics. And the whole shady stuff with Allen's "wife".

Undertale may have been pretty inevitable, but based on the info we had after round one I wouldn't call it that.

However I hardly think that rallies is what this contest is missing. It's missing something interesting enough to rally for. People aren't going to get too excited for years. Plus, 1998 was predictably the most dominant favorite we've had, at least since Sephiroth in villains.

I think we should stick to bread and butter game and character contests.

And I'd really prefer not having another GOTD - though I think that's what we'll get in 4 years. Not a good idea for this site though. Outside rare exceptions, it will be full of third tier games and turbofodder. This site isn't interested in supporting many 2010-2020 games. A GOTD would be better than a years contest, though.

squexa posted...

charmander6000 posted...

In the bonus poll topic NGamer made a best month of 1998 list with three games each

Sept - Pokemon RB/Metal Gear Solid/Fallout 2
vs.
Nov - Ocarina of Time/Half-Life/Baldur's Gate


September looks a lot better, but November has Zelda.

This is basically 2 questions.
1. Does OoT beat RB?
2. In the event that it does, does OoT SFF RB so much that MGS vs HL is irrelevant.

I'd lean Sept for now, but OoT could surprise me.

I don't think Fallout 2 and BG are relevant. MGS beats Half-Life, but not by enough to make up for OoT's big edge on RB.

1998 - 60.50%

Caps

Team Rocket Elite posted...

Not all rallies are equal. It was really obvious that at the end of Round 1 that Undertale caught a L-Block/Draven style rally and was not going to be stopped. That's a complete different level than Missingno. or Starcraft. The people who claimed it was obvious backed it up with predictions on how the Undertale matches would go and they pretty much happened that way to the letter. Just because you didn't see it coming doesn't mean other people didn't.

I really don't think Undertale winning was obvious after round 1. There was a good shot based on what we knew then that it only took off on Tumblr via fluke.

Not_Wylvane posted...

Weak votals and contest gimmicks can enable some really weird shit, see Vivi > Mario.

I don't really think we can avoid rallies without getting contests like this. Rallies occur because there's something to root for, but that's also what makes these contests so fun in the first place. Take away that and we end up with this contest.

I'm not a big fan of rallies but at this point they're a necessary evil.

Yes, the more interesting contests will have rallies. I'd rather have a more interesting contest with rallies, than a dull contest without them, even if the ideal is interesting contest without them.

LeonhartFour posted...

There are a few people who argue that contests without rallies are boring and predictable, even though it was clear Undertale was going to win as soon as it beat ME3 and the contest was worse off for CT losing early.

Well said. Though I disagree Undertale winning was a lock - weren't we thinking it was mostly Tumblr at that point? (I think Allen wouldn't say it was mostly reddit until later?) And Tumblr is probably not entirely reliable.

But CT winning would've been more fun for most GameFAQs users as few had even heard of Undertale, and also, CT would've had skeptics until the end who wouldn't have thought it could beat OoT. Especially as OoT could rally better. So CT would've sparked a lot of debate and interest.

NowItsAngeTime posted...

creativename posted...

I didn't see anyone complain there were no rallies.

Do you have Ulti on ignore?

No. I must've missed that post(s). Was he the only one? I think more regs than not prefer no rallies.

Also, rallying is more interesting when there are counter-rallies. One-sided rallying is dull.

lightsout06 posted...

A contest with a terrible entrant like Draven gets rallied and everyone complains that some other site ruined the contest.

Now we have a contest where the best two entrants are in the final round and people complain that there wasnt any rallies.

I enjoy both types of contests. Is fun to see joke upsets but it is also great to see the best entrants go against each other.

I didn't see anyone complain there were no rallies.

Most stats regs (not all) hate rallies. Not having rallies is great.

What we're complaining about is unfair pics, in what is likely the most pic sensitive contest ever.

Edit: Also it's highly doubtful the best two entrants are in the final.

haloiscoolisbak posted...

Team Rocket Elite posted...

2000 just being Majora's Mask was due to the picture. It's not something you could have known before the contest started. It's similar to how 2006 was missing it's second ace in KH2. Like if 2001 randomly lost FF10 against 1995 and 1997 runs the same Round 4 picture, I would be in the running for a prize. I would also be the first person in line to say I was super lucky because how could anyone predict 2001 would go up to bat without FF10? I certainly didn't.

you would not be first in line to say that if everyone was already saying it for you. you'd feel the need to defend your picks to some extent as they are now deemed by most to be the wrong pick that got lucky.

TRE is very honest and I see no reason to doubt his words.

One should be able to openly admit when they got lucky. People who picked 1996 and 2001 got lucky, that's all there is to it.

haloiscoolisbak posted...

people can cry pic unfairness all they want but 94 > 91, 96 > 00 and 01 > 97 all had something in common, 2 super strong gamefaqs games over just 1 and i stuck to that idea when making my bracket


Super Metroid + FFVI > SMW
SM64 + SMRPG > Majora's Mask
FFX + SSBM > FFVII


like i'm not saying the people who got these matches wrong made bad picks, but I wish everyone would stop pretending the 'wrong year' won these tight matches and those who successfully picked these matches right got super lucky or something.

I don't think most think 1991/1994 was the pic, do they?

I'm quite confident 1996 and 2001 won because of the pics though.

I had both 1996 and 2001 in my bracket. I will readily admit there was nothing more to getting those right than dumb luck. No "pretending" here.

I was rooting for 1996 and feel dirty about its win, but I was rooting for 1997 and am extremely salty it lost :(

1998 - 66.06%

Caps

_SecretSquirrel posted...

I'll point this out here in the stats topic. There's a familiar face inside the audience of FF6's match pic.

Who?

CaptainOfCrush posted...

transience posted...

or 06 getting the wii/ps3, or 1989 getting its trifecta

the console argument has been the worst argument this contest.

Why are you lumping it under one umbrella "argument"? There aren't many entrants in this contest; it's easy to examine them individually.

The NES was a huge deal in 1985 (though not big enough to reverse a tripling).
The SNES was a huge deal in 91.
The N64 was a huge deal in 96.

Apart from the Wii (which hasn't aged well), I'm not sure if there are any consoles that were that hyped in their launch year. I think the voters would have recognized that, which is why I feel the SNES is a much bigger deal for 91 than the PS1 would have been for 95.

I question whether the voters would have recognized which console had good launch titles. I don't think they would have.

Having the launch games in the pic would be the same effect. But I don't think "this console had killer apps at launch" would be a factor otherwise.

Lightning Strikes posted...

Getting Halo 3 vs. Super Mario Sunshine flashbacks here.

Underestimating Halo is almost as destructive a force as overestimating Halo!

But yes, Halo > Mario Kart 64 any day. Halo is evidently slightly weaker than Goldeneye, but I might actually take it to win in a match.

I'd take both those games to kill Halo.

Edit: well, easily win anyway.

CaptainOfCrush posted...

I now think there are four matches where, even within the constraints of SBAllen's chosen format, the loser may at least plausibly bring up the point of pictures costing them the match:

2006 vs 2011
1996 vs 2000
1991 vs 1994
2001 vs 1997

I'm sure somewhere, there exists a person whose only four misses are the ones above. You have my sword, sir.

(I'm 2-2 myself so I'll hereby stop complaining about that 2000 match)

Well it's not about 2-2, it's about points.

Though I think many are like me, and care more about our favorites winning than our bracket. I have 2001 in my bracket but really wanted 1997 to win, and I'm fairly sure it would've won with a fair pic. Not 100% sure but pretty confident.

Safer_777 posted...

So pic factor is real you assume.

Of course it's real. And likely bigger this contest than ever.

Lightning Strikes posted...

2001 doesn't have Halo, to be fair, which may be a bigger omission than Goldeneye and definitely Mario Kart 64.

Hahahahaha what!???

Safer_777 posted...

So I just woke up and I checked the results. To tell the truth I don't understand why everyone thought 1997 would win. Sure it has FF7 and SOTN, but 2001 has Halo, GTA 3 and OOT. You tell me which is more important.
And I voted for 1997 of course.

With a fair pic, I still think 1997 wins.

If 1997 finishes with over 47%, I'd somewhat confident that the pic cost it the match.

_SecretSquirrel posted...

It's almost bizarre that 97's picture from last round is really the outlier, when it really should be the standard.

It might very well be the only time in this contest any year gets the ideal games in the ideal order. That's almost sad.

I don't think Allen is rigging things, as some suggest.

I think he's bad at pic selection and has the wrong idea about diversity over strength.

Yuri_LowelI posted...

Why are people talking about pic sabotage?

Sure goldeneye should be in but still. It has ffvii in it. That's all yo need.

Even if both years had the best possible pics. It's a bad performance from 97. People were overhyping 97 becuase it beat what was an awful 96 year with literally one game of any note.

If people think goldeneye is making a big deal then they better hope 97 doesn't make the final becuase it will get absolutely walloped. 98 will literally make most all of 97's n64 support useless and crush 97.

2001 with its incredible depth will at least make it respectable. Might even hit 40. But I doubt it.

I think this post is silly. Goldeneye and MK64 as strong, and without them 1997's depth is crippled.

I doubt 2001 and 1997 would perform much differently on 1998. Both would get whipped.

squexa posted...

LeonhartFour posted...

15 minute X-Stats:

2001 – 50.00%
1995 – 47.89%
1997 – 46.10%
1987 – 45.60%
2008 – 31.60%
1996 – 28.44%
2000 – 27.66%
2007 – 26.76%
1985 – 23.35%
1999 – 20.98%
1990 – 19.20%
2009 – 17.80%
2014 – 16.83%
2012 – 12.54%
1986 – 10.54%
1989 – 9.28%
1979 – 6.72%
1983 – 5.62%

LOL i love how close 1987 and 1997 are.

Pic influence IMO.

whatisurnameplz posted...

2001 was a solid all around year for gaming. Each console had its own killer app (FFX, MGS2, and GTA for PS2, Melee for GCN, Halo for Xbox), which can't be said about many other years. 97's very Sony heavy which hurts it a lot.

What? It's a great N64 year.

Oh wow. If I had known Goldeneye and MK64 would be snubbed, I'd have predicted a couple points lower for 1997 in the Oracle.

1997 - 55%

Caps

The consensus for 1994 would've been the #2 pick.

LeonhartFour posted...

every contest I try to talk myself into believing Zelda will lose

2003 and 2004 spoiled me

How did 2004 spoil you? Link won.

Axl_Rose_85 posted...

What the ****? Just 19% predicted 1994 to get to the semis? What is this?

Also a bit nervous about 97 vs 01. 2001 is clearly the better year just not in gamefaqs contest strength. 97's my bracket pic and it winning would guarantee a leaderboard finish but at the same time 2001 is just the better year and hard to root against.

1991 sucked up a lot of pickers. Many probably picked 20XX years too out of underestimating the 90's.

1997 - 56%
1998 - 64%

Caps

haloiscoolisbak posted...

does anyone think its still possible 2001 beats 1997?

Is it possible 95 > 96 and 2000 by a huge margin?

If CT is our strongest game, and 1987 overperformed due to 1995's weak pic, it's possible 2001 is still an absolute beast and can win.

But clearly at this point one has to favor 1997. I think 8 games in the pic helps it. With 4 games, 2001's 1/2 punch may be emphasized more and make it do better.

squexa posted...

Also wtf no KOTOR for 2003?

That is odd. As if 2003 wasn't outclassed badly enough.

1998 - 77.75%

No KOTOR in the match pic...

1998 - 77%

Caps

LeonhartFour posted...

creativename posted...

Not sure if I understand what you're saying? The pic says FF IV, it was called FF II back then. Meanwhile FF VI has a pic saying III. That's inconsistent pic labeling. Plus, for contests, haven't they always been called IV and VI?

Well, Allen didn't make the pics this round, so he doesn't really have control over the labeling. Allen has generally gone with FFII/IV and III/VI when labeling them in Games Contests in the past, but when he made the pics for this contest, he went by their original SNES names because that's what they were known as when they came out.

But IV wasn't known as IV when it came out. It was known as II.

1994 - 53%

Caps

Lightning Strikes posted...

creativename posted...

pjbasis posted...

Maybe 2007 is really a beast

The 2000's years in general are stronger relative to the 90's than I would've expected pre-contest. Especially the 2010's.

GameFAQs users may have stopped gaming much (or at, *homepage visiting* GameFAQsers), but they seem to be aware of which modern games have a good rep.

Is this true?

62% still play 11+ hours a week:

https://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/6296-how-many-hours-of-video-games-do-you-play-a-week

Roughly half buy majority digital, a recent trend:

https://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/6583-of-the-last-10-games-youve-bought-how-many-were-digital

69% play two or more different games per week:
https://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/6647-how-many-different-games-have-you-played-in-the-last-week

85% own or will soon get a current console:
https://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/6629-by-the-end-of-this-year-which-of-the-three-current-consoles

I don't think they're out of touch at all!

Good info! Looks like the notion voters don't play games anymore might be a myth.

Though nostalgia would stilll cause them to favor childhood games.

LeonhartFour posted...

Well, in the case of FFIV and FFVI, those were the names they were given when they were released in the U.S. so it makes sense in this case.

Not sure if I understand what you're saying? The pic says FF IV, it was called FF II back then. Meanwhile FF VI has a pic saying III. That's inconsistent pic labeling. Plus, for contests, haven't they always been called IV and VI?

I doubt it matters, but IV everyone should get, while a rare few might confuse III for the NES title. I mean I doubt it matters, but labelling should be consistent.

2001 needs to hope the picture format changes, I think. With 8 pics 1997's quality is clear.

What would people predict for a 1992 vs. 1996 match?

_SJimW_ posted...

HaRRicH posted...

Super Mario 64 has long been my favorite game, but 1997's got some top-tier PS1 games and several great N64 games for support too...couldn't vote against it.

I voted 96 but I honestly think both of these years represent kind of a lull in gaming for me. There's a grand total of 0 all-time favorites between the two and barely like 20 at most games each year I have any interest in playing. I think it's tragic but not surprising they respectively beat my two favorite years in gaming (2000 and 2007).

Anyways results here are unsurprising. 97's pics destroy 96.

"Barely like 20"?! That sounds like a lot to me!

And this result isn't because of pics.

pjbasis posted...

Maybe 2007 is really a beast

The 2000's years in general are stronger relative to the 90's than I would've expected pre-contest. Especially the 2010's.

GameFAQs users may have stopped gaming much (or at, *homepage visiting* GameFAQsers), but they seem to be aware of which modern games have a good rep.

LeonhartFour posted...

for the record that was a 70% update so it might get uglier still

and at the moment 1996 would need to beat 1992 with 62.08% for 1997 = 1998

I think 1996 and 1992 probably aren't too far apart, so 1998 should still 60/40 1997.

Wow, go 1997! It really does deserve to be in the finals IMO. Amazing year.

charmander6000 posted...

Match XXX – Round 3 – 1997 vs. 1996

Previous Results

1997
Round 1: Defeated 1999, 77.25% - 22.75%
Round 2: Defeated 2007, 70.98% - 29.02%

1996
Round 1: Defeated 1989, 83.69% - 16.31%
Round 2: Defeated 2000, 51.38% - 48.62%

Analysis

I still maintain that with a better picture 2000 would have defeated 1996 and I would have still been alive in the guru. My bracket had 2000 winning this match so it’ll be an auto loss for me. Anyway back to the actual match. 1997 will be going into the match as the favourite. Final Fantasy VII is arguably the strongest game between the two years though I’d imagine quite a few people would go with Super Mario 64. After that Super Mario RPG is likely the next strongest game, but due to its overlap with Super Mario 64 it may not bring as much support.

In terms of depth I would have to give 1997 the advantage. Mario Kart 64 and Star Fox 64 likely take out Crash Bandicoot and Kirby Super Star though SFF/LFF may be the only way 1996 could win. If Nintendo fans can concentrate around 1996 while Playstation fans are split an upset could occur. I think there is a good chance of this happening. Nintendo SFF has always been massive; I mean we saw it in 2009 though GoldenEye 007 held up relatively well which could spell disaster for the year. Meanwhile outside of characters/games from the same series Playstation tends to avoid a lot of SFF. Sure Final Fantasy VII and Castlevania: SotN would easily win over Crash Bandicoot and Tomb Raider, but they could end up costing more votes.

I don’t think 1996 will cause the upset. The lack of Resident Evil hurts an already shallow 1996. I still feel 2000 would have won this match and if this match turns out to be close I will at least feel in the back of my mind a bit shortchanged.

charmander6000’s Bracket: 2000 > 1997

charmander6000’s Prediction: 1997 wins, 56.15% - 43.85%

Wait, you were expecting 1997 with 56% and still think 2000 would've beat it? That'd be quite the pic effect. Possible, but I think it might be too much.

1997 - 58%

Caps

Something occurred to me. We all assume that the site is full of adults. But if Allen is telling the truth and unique visitors are higher than ever, maybe it's only old school people that use the homepage because they are old and used to it? Thus biasing the poll voting, making it totally different than the site overall?

Anyone think this could be possible?

I actually do think this site skews older than most gaming sites (though all gaming sites should be older than they used to be, as gamers are getting older), but the homepage visitors might skew even older than the boards.

EmDubyaSee posted...

LinkMarioSamus posted...

So 1987 is a powerhouse? Could be because all the big franchises that got their start that year.

It started 2 of the 4 most iconic gaming series ever, and 3 of the 10.
And on this site... 3 of the 4 most iconic ever. Including the top 2.

Yes, the only reason it is so powerful is because it began LoZ, FF and Metroid.

Are you saying Final Fantasy is from 1987? It's from 1990, The SMB3 year.

_SecretSquirrel posted...

creativename posted...

So the question mark for 1997 says game.com for consoles.

What the hell is game.com? I went there and it's done cashback stuff, so I guess it's defunct, whatever it was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game.com

Thanks. Odd that they let the domain expire. So you use can't even use it now?

SwiftyDC posted...

97 vs 98 final. How lame.

I think 2001 vs. 1997 is a very close call at this point.

So the question mark for 1997 says game.com for consoles.

What the hell is game.com? I went there and it's done cashback stuff, so I guess it's defunct, whatever it was.

azuarc posted...

Linkzcap posted...

Across the world, gamefaqs users frantically voted for 1995

But the future refused to change.

Is that the WDTL response?

What's WDTL?

Odd, there's a 12:06 update that has less votes than the 12:05 update. Wonder what happened there.

Looks like 1995 is stronger with better pics. 1987 will probably be overrated in the stats. Not that it matters as we'll never have this contest again.

Still, 1987 appears to be stronger than I would've thought.

2001 - 59.50%

Caps