I felt the same way about the D5100 and flamed it in a review on the Best Buy site. However, eventually I got the hang of it. I had been comparing it to the pix I got with my Canon 610 Powershot point and shoot. But thanks to the suggestions from some very patient people here on Nikonians, I am gradually getting the hang of it. I still believe that it should be mounted on a 5 ton granite slab for the best pictures, but if you don't have one in you hip pocket, a tripod that is built like one will do. And the 3200 has an even higher pixel density than the 5100 so keeping it steady is even more critical. And, as anyone who has shot bullesye pistol knows, you CAN'T hold anything absolutely steady.
I found the the kit lens, which I also thought was a waste, considering that there was an 18 to 200 available, was really what I needed for shots of flowers, rather than the 18-200. And for pix of birds, the 200 wasn't enough. It seems that I was trying to use the wrong lens for what I was doing.
Also, one of the things that was pointed out to me when discussed a comparison of pix of my dog taken with the 5100 and the canon, if something isn't done to limit how far the Nikon can move the ISO on its own, when a flash is used, it will go straight to 3200 ISO. The Canon was shooting at 50 ISO. The noise introduced by that produced pix of the dog that looked "soft" compared to the Canon. Once I limited that, the dog pix were fine.
So, don't give up on the 3200. With practice, it will come. If you look at my galary, you will be able to see the improvement over time as I got the feel of the camera.
Some of the things mentioned in the the posts here (focus priority in particular) would be a deal breaker for me. But as far as picture quality, it takes practice and attention to detail. (And a 5 ton granite slab )