Hardcore Gamers' Reaction to Microsoft's E3 Conference: An Empirical Study Continues

Written by Andrew Hiscock

Editor's note: Andrew's Nintendo conference post (linked below) caused a bit of a ruckus on the Internet, and we asked him to do a couple more. Click on that graph to see a larger version. -Demian

Click here for the full-sized graph (or here for a mirrored version)

Abstract: Upon completing the initial look at neogaf.com's reaction to the Nintendo E3 press conference, I was requested to do the same for the other two conferences. I now present the results from the Microsoft E3 conference, with results from Sony forthcoming....

Methodology, Etc: Please see my previous installment.

Conclusions: This particular thread offered a different perspective on videogamer tastes. The conference started off with The Beatles: Rock Band, which garnered mixed reaction. It should be noted that more members of NeoGAF hate Yoko Ono than there are members that like the Beatles.

The study also revealed that members wanted more focus on games and less on sales figures. Games with established franchises were shunned (Tony Hawk and Rock Band), as well as games that were previously revealed either by leaks or marketing materials (Modern Warfare 2, Halo 3: ODST). There was a remarkable amount of cynicism when Halo: Reach was announced, probably due to its position in the presentation following ODST (many contributors to the thread criticized Microsoft for "milking the franchise").

Surprisingly, Crackdown 2 got the most positive reaction, followed by Alan Wake.

Outside of games, there was a positive response to Last.fm, Netflix, and Live Party, with a negative response to Facebook and Twitter.

As can be predicted, the motion control based Project Natal did not get many positive comments, at least at first. Commenters seemed to warm up to the initiative over time, but more negative comments were made with each new demo featuring the technology.

Interestingly, attitudes quickly changed once Kudo Tsunoda "dissed Nintendo" with a comment on "preset waggle controls." This got a positive response and further commenting on Project Natal was more positive than prior to the perceived "slam."

Peter Molyneux, a noted game developer, did not incite excitement, as many of his colleagues do in such threads. Many noted his history for "over hyping, under delivering."

NeoGAF is also very, very creeped out by Milo, and even positive comments mentioned that it was creepy, despite how much the technology impressed.

Trackback(0)

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (6)

It's interesting that the spikes seem to be far smaller than the biggest spikes that Nintendo had.

I'm also surprised at how negative Natal was received.

Stupid name.
Stupid Kudo.
Molyneux and Milo = fail.

BUT...the potential there is crazy. Oh GAF...it's such a bewildering place there at times.

Steven Hicks , June 08, 2009

I love how Cliff Blezinski incites such positive marks, yet the actual title he is promoting takes a hard dive. Perhaps the botched microphone and unfounded expectations of a Gears of War 3 announcement played into that.

To be fair, Shadow Complex still ended up in positive territory, and the gameplay demo likely pushed the marks back up after the initial announcement.

Adalberto Herrera Jr , June 09, 2009

Shadow Complex was one of the best parts of the whole conference for me.

Demian Linn , June 09, 2009

I'd be careful in how scientifically I would lay out this study and interpret anything from it. This is a sampling of a very specific population and so the results need to be presented for what they are. Who are they representative of and what does any of it mean? We're already seeing this (http://www.phdcomics.com/comic...micid=1174) cycle start to happen with Kotaku (http://kotaku.com/5283845/trac...conference) passively saying that Neo GAF was representative of everyone that saw MS' presentation online. Its still funny to see the trolls at Neo GAF have a predictably knee jerk reaction at Milo and Yoko Ono.

Patrick Williams , June 09, 2009

Oh it's not scientific at all. It's mostly a gag, hense the pseudo-academic literature layout. If you read the rest of my bitmob stuff, I write all in appropriated voices and tones, satire if you will. Mostly, it's a chart for laughs. That said, it is representative of the neogaf community, and a bit of work went into going through the thread.

Glad everyone liked it though.

Andrew Hiscock , June 09, 2009