Board 8 > The 128 Greatest GameFAQS Contest Matches of All Time

(+) Yeah! (+)

97. Castlevania vs. Halo (2006) R1

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/7aed9c55.jpg

Castlevania 55.02% 61076
Halo 44.98% 49930
TOTAL VOTES 111006
https://board8.fandom.com/wiki/(3)Castlevania_vs_(6)Halo_2006
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/poll/2431-snake-division-round-1-castlevania-vs-halo

Are you prepared for the biggest vote shift/comeback youve ever seen? That was the main aspect being hyped going into this match. Halo was the king of the Day Vote at this point, and Castlevania, despite not having as much evidence, was considered an obvious choice for having one of the best Night Votes. The biggest comeback wed seen up to this point in contest history was in the neighborhood of 3,000 votes, but people were saying not to worry if Halo got behind early, because this match could see a 4,000 or even 5,000 vote one. Some of this was just people having fun, but on some level it was taken for granted that if Halo got very far behind it would be able to catch up.

Aside from the vote trends, this match was also considered a testing ground for how the average voter would view the Series Contest. On one side, you had Castlevania, a series whose roots stretched back to the NES era, and which consisted of a large number of games in a variety of styles and genres, but which was not considered a major presence in the contemporary gaming scene. On the other side you had Halo, a series which was very much at the peak of its popularity, even on anti-Xbox GameFAQS, but which only consisted of two games at this point, the bare minimum to be considered a series. In regards to the individual games popularity, SOTN might be able to compete with the more popular of the two Halo games, but overall the average popularity of the two Halo games was almost surely far ahead of the mean average of every Castlevania game. It was a genuinely open question going into 2006 how voters would weigh those various factors. Quantity vs. Quality. Legacy vs. Relevance. These were open questions, which this match would answer. Halo was a pretty strong favorite to win, even on the board, but there were doubters, and they would be proven right almost immediately.

The match started with, for perhaps the only time in contest history, an overperformance for Halo. Never underestimate the power of the Bracket Vote, especially in a match like this with no personal favorite of the board. There was a problem with said overperformance though. Halo was still narrowly losing. Castlevania was pulling off a huge upset and it was only going to get worse, as the early vote started wearing off, and the night vote kicked in. Castlevanias lead hit 4,000 just after 6 AM, and its overall percentage was pushing towards 56%, and most people still rooting for Halo threw in the towel. Still, wasnt this supposed to be the match with the biggest Day Vote wed ever seen? Wasnt there still an opportunity for a comeback, for Halo to do something crazy, even if it ultimately ended up just short? The answer it turned out, was absolutely not. There was no comeback, not even a brief one, and the Day Vote only managed to bring Castlevanias percentage down from 56% to 55%. Castlevania would walk away from this match not only having defeated a fearsome Day Vote, but having proved a certain theory of the case when it came to a series performance. History mattered, and GameFAQS voters werent going to just roll over for a two or three game series that was popular at the moment. If only Castlevania could find another neophyte series like that to go up against in the next round.

The two matches from GOTD 2 both took place in the same round iirc, since they were both divisional finals.

No, RE2 vs. Bloodborne was r3, Mass Effect 2 won that division.

Oh I forgot lol

I remember Lopen claiming Halo could have come back from 10,000 votes if need be

I think Black Turtle said that about Sonic/Crono 2006 too

Yesmar_ posted...

Unlike Bloodborne, this rallys support was much less extensive, and Xenoblade retained its lead through all of the match, completing its underdog run to win its division. But once again, when the dust cleared it was revealed that without the anti-rally measures, Persona 4 Golden would have emerged victorious, and once again a rally had been stopped in its tracks.

I should be really grateful, then. This was basically the final deciding point between my bracket and jona's. The only other difference after this point was Dark Souls vs TLOU, and we had already seen the writing on the wall where that was concerned. People point to the decision to take Witcher 3 > Skyrim as the decider for winning the contest, but lots of people took that upset. It was the fact that I parlayed it with Xenoblade winning its division that made the difference...and thanks to how good Jona was in the first two rounds, it almost didn't matter. He had me by 7 going into this 8-point match.

azuarc posted...

I should be really grateful, then. This was basically the final deciding point between my bracket and jona's. The only other difference after this point was Dark Souls vs TLOU, and we had already seen the writing on the wall where that was concerned. People point to the decision to take Witcher 3 > Skyrim as the decider for winning the contest, but lots of people took that upset. It was the fact that I parlayed it with Xenoblade winning its division that made the difference...and thanks to how good Jona was in the first two rounds, it almost didn't matter. He had me by 7 going into this 8-point match.

Oh, Xenoblade absolutely won you the Guru. It was the biggest upset in the entire 2020 contest by prediction percentage, and #25 overall in contest history. Somewhere around 15 or so Gurus had it (myself included but I had Skyrim in the finals) since the board consensus was FE: Three Houses.

Not just the guru, but the site. Jona and I were 1 and 2.

I picked Xenoblade and Dark Souls to win their respective divisions that contest which got me high on the leaderboard until picking Dark Souls to make the FINALS bit me good.

Dark Souls over Skyrim was a hot upset.

Think Dark Souls winning its division was the cookie pick though.

I had just heard so much anti-Bethesda sentiment!

LinkMarioSamus posted...

I had just heard so much anti-Bethesda sentiment!

You weren't wrong. You just picked the wrong game to beat it.

True

Tag

96. Zelda: Twilight Princess vs. Resident Evil 4 vs. Super Smash Bros. Brawl vs. Metal Gear Solid 4 (2009) R4

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/dbde20ba.jpg

Zelda: Twilight Princess 23.5% 29209
Resident Evil 4 22.18% 27563
Super Smash Bros. Brawl 27.12% 33707
Metal Gear Solid 4 27.2% 33812
TOTAL VOTES 124291
https://board8.fandom.com/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Twilight_Princess_vs_Resident_Evil_4_vs_Super_Smash_Bros._Brawl_vs_Metal_Gear_Solid_4_2009
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/poll/3505-contest-quarterfinal-zelda-tp-re4-ssbb-mgs4

Most rivalries between contest entrants are due to the contests themselves. MGS4 and Brawl though. . .These two had history. History stretching back to the 2008 GOTY polls that were still just under six months old at the time this match took place. Brawl and MGS4 were the two most hyped games of the year on the site, probably two of the most hyped games that we had ever seen on GameFAQS since the beginning of these contests, each one considered the potential crown jewel for their respective systems. And in a way, we would never see something like this again. This was a transition point for the site. Right on the cusp of open world multiplatform games taking over the industry, and a year before daily visitors to the site began a precipitous plunge, these two games would in their way mark an end of an era for GameFAQS. Both in terms of the attention that was paid to new games, as well as the number of people around on the site to pay attention to them.

But we didnt know that at the time of the GOTY polls. What we did know was that we were seeing one of the tightest GOTY races ever. Brawl had been the favorite to take the GOTY title, but MGS4 surprised everyone by holding on and winning the initial GOTY poll that year. But, as is usually done, the stragglers from the initial poll were removed and a Final GOTY poll was held with the Top 3, which featured Brawl coming back with the Day Vote to win. And then, just to make sure that the final results really were final, a third, Final, Final GOTY poll was held between just MGS4 and Brawl, which Brawl, once again, narrowly won. So when it was announced that the second Games Contest would once again be four-ways, and would once again be divided by era, we knew that these two were going to get tangled up yet again.

The two games first met up in Round 3 where Brawl would finish with a strong first place finish, partly on the back of being the only spot of color in a series of match pics with three other drab, brown looking games. MGS4 would advance in second place though, setting up this rematch in Round 4, where this time Brawl would have a disadvantage, forced to share a poll with fellow Wii hit Twilight Princess. Even so, Brawls dominant performance the round before had set it as a favorite to advance, and MGS4 was supposed to have its hands full with Twilight Princess in a battle for second. The match started, and initially, it looked to be a reverse of the previous round. This time MGS4 was the game in the lead, with Brawl in second falling further behind and getting closer to the third and fourth place games than it was to the game in first. By noon, Brawl had recovered somewhat, but was still behind MGS4 by 1600 votes. The match seemed over. That is, until Brawl unleashed an ASV we werent sure it was capable of, and started tearing down MGS4s lead at a breakneck speed. By 4:30, the lead was down to 1,000. By 6:30 it was down to 500. It looked at this point like Brawl could pull this off. Unlike the GOTY polls, however, it couldnt and Brawl ended up just short, still advancing to the next round, but doing so just 100 votes behind MGS4s first place finish.

And that would be it for these two games. They would both get eliminated next round in the semi-finals, and even though Brawl would make the finals of the Game of the Decade contest in 2010, they both probably peaked here in 2009. Neither is held in close to the high regard that they were back then, and certainly not as the pinnacle of modern gaming that you would have gathered from their performance(s). But for a moment, they were, and that is captured in this match.

I do believe Brawl gets past FFX if not for the Ocarina of Time hammer. It's kind of ridiculous that we got two Zeldas and Final Fantasy's in the final because the SFF somehow worked perfectly like that.

Admittedly LTTP winning because of that is less certain, but FFX definitely benefit from it.

Yesmar_ posted...

Brawl and MGS4 were the two most hyped games of the year on the site, probably two of the most hyped games that we had ever seen on GameFAQS since the beginning of these contests, each one considered the potential crown jewel for their respective systems.

Oh, how things change....

Brawl vs. MGS4 was such a wild time

Wonder how that match goes today

Brawl wins rather easily I would guess. But both have probably been weakened to a point where it might be somewhat similar.

RE4 taking fourth to Brawl, MGS4 and TP is so incredibly funny and so 2009-coded

TP probably easily wins that pack now

I could see the order being the complete opposite today, RE4 probably has the greatest legacy and significance.

Unfortunately I don't see RE4 beating TP. The ZeldaFAQs is too strong

Yeah, TP is an easy first place now. RE4 would be a good choice for second given that MGS4 and Brawl have definitely aged worse, but there's arguments for all three games that would be valid.

95. Pokemon Gold/Silver/Crystal vs. Xenogears (Sp2004) R1

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/7b76d760.jpg

Pokemon Gold/Silver/Crystal 42.05% 29381
Xenogears 57.95% 40495
TOTAL VOTES 69876
https://board8.fandom.com/wiki/(8)Pok%C3%A9mon_Gold/Silver/Crystal_vs_(9)Xenogears_2004
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/poll/1618-division-32-64-round-1-pokemon-gold-silver-crystal-vs

Spring 2004 was not a good time to have a contest. As previously mentioned, GameFAQS was going through its not a merger with Gamespot, and there were frequent interruptions and delays as the some of the coding and technical kinks were worked out. Most of these issues just consisted of delays, or the SOTN/Perfect Dark match where poll updates were frozen for half the match, but this effect on this match was a little worse. And it was one of the most debated matches of Round One, too. On one hand, you had Xenogears, which was the textbook example of the kind of game that 2004-era GameFAQS loved: a classic Square JRPG for PS1. And on the other side you had Pokemon, with all the strong feelings it produces, both good and bad. Pokemon was clearly the bigger game by a sizable amount, but what was the breakdown of its fans and haters, and would Xenogears be able to slip in through the difference?

The board came down on the side of Pokemon, especially in the days leading up to the match, as predictions began to coalesce around G/S/C. The match started and Xenogears immediately proved the vibe shift wrong however, by getting off to an early lead. A lead which starting dropping with the Day Vote, but was still large enough to prevent any speculation that a comeback was brewing. There was one, little problem though. Where were all the votes? The vote totals for this match were not only lower than anything else in the contest, they were on track to make this the least popular match we had ever seen. 9 hours in and the votals were just starting to crack 10,000. Not only would this break the record of the least popular match, it would do so by several tens of thousands of votes. What was going on?

The initial speculation had to do with a change that was made to the poll placement with this match. A sponsored poll asking people how well they were doing in the contest was occupying the normal poll spot in the top right corner of the page, and the actual match poll was pushed down below the fold. I believe that the first couple matches this contest had seen something similar with much less dramatic results, but the speculation was that this poll having to do with the contest had somehow misled voters into thinking that there was no match that day. In any case, within a couple of hours it became clear what the real issue is. Due to an update that had been made to the sites code that day, only registered users were allowed to vote in the poll. Speculation swirled as to how this would be resolved (I dont think anyone thought it was intentional), but 10 and a half hours in, Ceej took the match down, explained the situation, and announced that the poll would be reheld the following day, this time with the aberrant code corrected, and with every visitor allowed to vote in the match as intended.

This sent panic through anyone that had picked Xenogears. Sure Xenogears had been winning earlier in the day, but it was only at 55% when the poll got taken down. Surely the casual fanbase whose votes were missing would massively favor Pokemon. There were some dissenters who questioned whether or not Pokemon had been close enough to make up the difference, but the general premise that Pokemon would improve the next day was not seriously challenged. Pokemon was going to get a second wind, it was only matter of how much, as people waited for the rematch to start. And once it did. . . .Xenogears ended up winning by even more. Were Pokemon fans too stupid to realize the poll was being rerun? Were the hardcore users of the site actually more likely to be Pokemon fans? Who knows, but you couldnt have written a more ironic ending to this match.

That's hilarious. Before my time, so I never heard about some of the nonsense that went on in the first couple years, but it's also amazing to me that Xenogears was ever really that strong. (Or I guess Pokemon was just that disliked.)

azuarc posted...

That's hilarious. Before my time, so I never heard about some of the nonsense that went on in the first couple years, but it's also amazing to me that Xenogears was ever really that strong. (Or I guess Pokemon was just that disliked.)

In fairness Xenogears bowed out respectably last time we saw it, turning out to be worth ~33% on Wind Waker.

The glory days

Fun fact: Pokemon Gold and Silver is the only entry to technically be a part of all four games contests we have had.

ctesjbuvf posted...

Fun fact: Pokemon Gold and Silver is the only entry to technically be a part of all four games contests we have had.

It's sort of in both Game of the Decades too if you count HG/SS

Yeha that was the technicality, although I mistakenly wrote four instead of five.

94. Ganondorf vs. Vincent Valentine (Fall 2006) R1

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/e/e9b58327.jpg

Ganondorf 47.41% 60685
Vincent Valentine 52.59% 67321
TOTAL VOTES 128006
https://board8.fandom.com/wiki/(4)Ganondorf_vs_(5)Vincent_Valentine_2006
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/poll/2524-blast-division-round-1-ganondorf-vs-vincent-valentine

The biggest downside to the Male/Female Bracket in 2006 was that we got matches like this in Round 1. This should have been a match to decide who made the Sweet Sixteen if not the Elite Eight, not a battle to see who was simply making it out of Round 1. But it is what it is, and we were left with what has to be the strongest Round 1 showdown weve ever seen. I mentioned in my writeup for Vincent vs. Squall that that was a battle to see who the strongest non-Noble Nine member was, but this match could be considered a followup. Being the strongest non-Noble Square character was one thing, but could Vincent take on Nintendo? Ganondorf was generally considered the strongest of the Nintendo near elites, and was the only character trapped behind Maguss overperformance in 2003 that had gone on to justify himself. The stage was set for a first round match for the ages.

And the board was divided as to how it would play out. It had become less common by this point to have a true 50/50 prediction split as to how a match would play out, especially for established characters at this level of popularity. We had so much data and information to draw on that it usually pointed in one direction, and that was the side most people took. Not so in this case. The information we had looked good for both parties, and if Vincent had looked better on paper in 2005, that was easily countered by the Wii hype that would be reaching a fever pitch by the day of this match, not to mention rumors that the Wii would have a surprise launch sometime in October. This was a showdown in every sense: Nintendo/Square, Zelda/Final Fantasy, Near Elite/Near Elite.

When the match started, to no ones surprise, Ganondorf got off to an early lead. As the slight favorite as well as a Nintendo character that was to be expected. However, Ganondorf couldnt hold onto it for long, and within 40 minutes he had lost the lead for good. The match would remain in the 50/50 range for another hour or so, but once the Night Vote rolled in, Vincent shot up, and would steadily increase his lead for the rest of the match, Ganondorf managing to at best stall during the Day Vote. A close match in the end, but not a barnburner. What the match did do however was confirm Vincents spot on top of the Near Elites. There was no longer any question as to who the strongest Non-Noble Niner was. It was, almost definitively, Vincent. And in a contest where Nintendo had once again established themselves as the company to beat in close and debated matches, Vincent had shown himself as one of the only characters who could actually face off against Nintendo in a marquee match and win.

I would be remiss to not mention what we lost due to this match. Legendary user Heroic Mario had made an account bet that Ganondorf would not only win this match, but win the entire Male Bracket. When Ganondorfs contest journey ended abruptly here in Round 1, he would be obligated to close one of the most iconic accounts in Board 8 history. He was given an out that if Vincent went on to beat every other character by more than he beat Ganondorf he could leave the account open, but Heroic Mario didnt wait for that. He stuck to his word, and closed the account. RIP

Another reason why Ganondorf is the worst, he cost HM his account

Also Vincent/Ganondorf has to be the highest combined strength between two entrants in a round 1 match we ever saw

93. Grand Theft Auto vs. Warcraft (2006) R1

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/6/6451bedb.jpg

Grand Theft Auto 49.56% 63051
Warcraft 50.44% 64167
TOTAL VOTES 127218
https://board8.fandom.com/wiki/(4)Grand_Theft_Auto_vs_(5)Warcraft_2006
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/poll/2434-mushroom-division-round-1-grand-theft-auto-vs-warcraft

Grand Theft Auto doesnt have the greatest record in our contests. For many years now, each new contest brings disappointment after disappointment. If GTA can find an opportunity to bomb or underwhelm it will. And this always gets written off as just the way GameFAQS is. But the latter parts not true! GTA used to have strength here. Vice City looked strong in 04 and almost won game of the year in 02. San Andreas did win GOTY in 04. Vercetti was no paragon of strength, but he was a decent midcarder, and CJ probably wasnt too bad either, even if he did lose to Ness. Ness is a midcarder! Losing to him doesnt make you fodder. Was GTA certainly worse than youd expect on other gaming sites back in the day? Sure, but it was still respectable, it still had strength. And that all came to an end abruptly with this match.

Blizzard entrants had pulled off crazy upset runs in the previous two Spring Contests, so there was some speculation that that could happen again when the bracket for the Series Contest first came out. At the very least, you couldnt dismiss Warcrafts chances entirely here, and while people didnt entirely dismiss them, the general consensus was that GTA would have a safe win and might even be able to put up decent numbers against Super Mario Bros. in Round 2. After all, which game series was more relevant at the moment? This was the era of big votals and tons of casuals at GameFAQS. Surely that would favor GTA.

As it turned out, our opinion of GTA was a bit outdated. It started off the match in the lead, and while its percentage started dropping immediately, it looked like it might be on the verge of stabilizing 45 minutes in. Too close to comfort, but still in the lead. And then the rally started. Much like Starcraft before, the online Blizzard community rallied in support and Warcraft quickly started coming back, taking the lead in short order and building it up over the next several hours. This was old-school rallying though, not the social media fueled kind that we would come to fear over the next decade. And so while Warcraft was able to stay in the lead, the lead it was creating wasnt insurmountable, and as the Day Vote began, GTA started making a move and slowly pulling off a comeback of its own. For a couple of hours in mid-morning it looked like it was on track to pull it off, but of course, as has been the case for virtually every Blizzard match weve ever had, the match fell on a Tuesday, the day that WoWs servers were partly down for maintenance, a downtime which gave Warcraft fans little much else to do but rally, and they struck back hard. The Warcraft rallies would get a second wind during the day and while they were never overwhelming they managed to keep the lead just of reach for just long enough to clinch things. GTA made a run again at the end, but it was too little, too late.

And that was that for GTA going forward. Curiously this drop off occurred at the same time that other casual bait series like Halo and Call of Duty were peaking in popularity on the site, so it wasnt part of some overall trend. Despite all the people after this match who said This just isnt a site that likes GTA like it was some obvious truism, that wasnt always the case. But sometimes the vibe just shifts, and in 2006 on GameFAQS the vibe had definitely shifted away from GTA.

Yeah, that match was definitely the turning point for GTA here. It hasn't been the same since.

One notable thing about Ganondorf/Vincent was the release of Dirge of Cerberus. The reason many (and I) picked Vincent was because of that new game. I probably would have chosen Ganondorf otherwise... and, if you assume Crono 2005 = Crono 2006, Ganondorf 2006 beats Vincent 2005 with about 52%.

Ganondorf 2005 is inflated though, as is 2005 Bowser. They've never been as strong as they were that year.

I don't know what point you're trying to make? Oh, that Ganondorf was a legit good pick against Vincent because he looked very strong in 2005? There was an additional issue for me: I thought Vincent (and the Devil Division) was overrated in 2005. (it's why I agonized over who to pick in Vincent/Ganondorf) Of course, that turned out to be wrong.

Bowser's performance on Kirby suggests Bowser 2005 = 2006, essentially. Of course, he looked great against Chun-Li and Ryu, so it's debatable whether Bowser was really at 36.x% on base Link for just that year. As for Ganondorf... You'd have to extrapolate Ganondorf through Auron/Scorpion 2004 in order to give Ganondorf an inflated x-stat in 2005. I don't think Ganon was any stronger in 2005 (Sephiroth/Ganondorf aside) than he was in 2006.

I remember really not caring at all about Series 2006, so its interesting to see it come up a few times so far.

I got a perfect Oracle prediction on that Vince/Ganon match

Also was it CantFakeTheFunk who called that warcraft/gta match

Eh, Bowser and Ganondorf were both inflated by their Villains Contest runs. Prime example of recency bias. Look at their prediction percentages that year, absurdly high for non-Noble Niners. And we know bracket voting is a real thing, so it certainly helped. Ganondorf was probably less inflated compared to Bowser in 2006 because of the imminent release of Twilight Princess, which counterbalanced some of that (same thing happened between 2003 and 2004 for Ganondorf, fittingly enough).

I didn't really get the "Devil Division was overrated" stuff that people threw around back then. It didn't make much sense because it gave you a consistent reading of Squall. Turns out the overrated one was Knuckles (typical beneficiary of bandwagon effect after a big upset) and Magus by proxy!

But if you're looking strictly at the 2005 X-Stats, Ganondorf doesn't have a high value because I don't think he was ever properly adjusted for his match against Samus. I'm looking more at his performances against Yuna and Auron, too strong for what he'd normally do against them in any other year.

Bowser/Kirby was a weird match in 2005 and it was a weird match in 2018. I wouldn't base anything off of that, but Bowser has never been worth 36% on Link any year other than 2005 (and arguably not even then because he also benefited from getting to face sprite Snake). Bowser didn't match that performance in 2006, and he lost to Ryu outright just two years later.

It was Knuckles/Squall that threw me off. (and also Dante's large gain, etc.) I didn't believe Knuckles gained a bandwagon at the time... and to this day, it doesn't make sense to me (except for... see the next paragraph). The bandwagon effect should have only been a few hundred votes limited mainly to those who were on B8, since to the casual brackets the upset probably wasn't that big of a deal But it ended up being far more than that....

It's a far different situation from what Frog gained in 2004 where the large bandwagon legitimately made sense, because he had just conquered two 50/50 matches in a row.

Hmmmmm... but I thought of an interesting comparison. Knuckles/Kefka 2004. Knuckles won in an upset that year, too.... and he happened to have his best performance against Snake in 2004. If Knuckles benefited from a bandwagon against Squall, maybe he did against Snake, too? (yes, I know it may have been a bad year for Snake) If that's the case, then I'll have an even harder time denying it was a bandwagon that inflated his % against Squall. Maybe all these years I've been overlooking lots of overperformances of contestants following upsets...? (there's Magus, L-Block, etc. obviously, but setting those ones aside)

But if you're looking strictly at the 2005 X-Stats, Ganondorf doesn't have a high value because I don't think he was ever properly adjusted for his match against Samus. I'm looking more at his performances against Yuna and Auron, too strong for what he'd normally do against them in any other year.

Fair points. Ganondorf was worth less than 51% on Auron in 2006, vs. his actual 54% on Auron in 2005. Granted, Auron in all likelihood benefitted from KH2. As for basing Ganondorf off Yuna... if Zelda 2005 = Zelda 2006, that puts Ganondorf at 37.34% against base Link, so that suggests Ganondorf 2005 gets probably 52-53% against Ganondorf 2006! But yeah, that female bracket was really wonky, so who knows whether Zelda 2006 and Yuna 2006 were anything like what they were in 2005?

Bowser/Kirby was a weird match in 2005 and it was a weird match in 2018. I wouldn't base anything off of that, but Bowser has never been worth 36% on Link any year other than 2005 (and arguably not even then because he also benefited from getting to face sprite Snake). Bowser didn't match that performance in 2006, and he lost to Ryu outright just two years later.

I don't find the Bowser/Kirby matches weird at all... I'd be surprised if the SFF (or rSFF) in those matches weren't minimal. They seem right in line with their normal strengths... but of course, in 2005 Bowser against Kirby didn't seem like the same Bowser against Ryu. I should have said this earlier: Bowser seemed to be inflated in his first two 2005 matches, but not the next two.

Amazing how we still have the memory to analyze things from 18-19 years ago....

I maintain to this day that the main reason 2004 Snake looked so bad (aside from the match with Tanner) is that CJayC used Naked Snake pics and voters knew that wasn't Solid Snake. Is it weird rationale? Maybe, but he was back to "normal" in 2005. 2004 is such a weird outlier for him.

It should be noted that Snake had his MGS2 art against Tanner and put up the biggest blowout ever in a Character Battle, so there's that.

Bowser/Kirby in 2005 is weird to me because it felt like Kirby overperformed, but it's hard to tell because getting a legit read on Tidus back then is so difficult. It's likely we overrated him quite a bit those early years because of wonky things like his Sonic match in 2002, getting extrapolated through Magus in 2003, getting hidden behind SFF in 2006, etc. 2004 is probably the most legit reading we got off of him in those early days, but then Mega Man seemingly underperformed against Link (perhaps because of one of the weird match pics he got for it).

2018 is the opposite where it seemed like Kirby was the stronger character going into it and Bowser won anyway.

I think it was speculated that Kirby might have overperformed due to being a 1 seed. That doesn't make a lot of sense, but I agree that something seems off with his performance that year.

Haste_2 posted...

One notable thing about Ganondorf/Vincent was the release of Dirge of Cerberus. The reason many (and I) picked Vincent was because of that new game. I probably would have chosen Ganondorf otherwise... and, if you assume Crono 2005 = Crono 2006, Ganondorf 2006 beats Vincent 2005 with about 52%.

Didn't Crono seem like he had lost a step in 2006?

I'm still gobsmacked people think Dirge of Cerberus mattered.

Like most people on this board haven't played it and we're the target audience.

Leonhart4 posted...

Also Vincent/Ganondorf has to be the highest combined strength between two entrants in a round 1 match we ever saw

I have been thinking about this a good bit. Closest thing I could think of is Crono/Missingno.

Just the awareness mightve been enough in fairness. Not to mention looking back that was when Square Enix was trying to push the Compilation of Final Fantasy VII hard.