By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - I just realized that Nintendo will stay in first place for a long time

UncleScrooge said:

 1) I'll basically get to this in point 3 (without mentioned this specific example, though)

 2) Do you think you have a "shit taste" as well? Honest question, no offense. I don't want to sound offensive or anything, I actually like arguing with you

3) Because business tries to identify what quality is. Business doesn't change the definition of quality, it tries to explain it. So business tries to define what quality is. That includes the artistic meaning of quality And we can trust this because business needs to find the real answer. Making answers up doesn't help a business man because he wants to sell his products. So he has to stay objective.

Quality is defined as "the degree to which a set of characteristics fullfills requirements". Or to put it this way: If a product does its job it is a quality product. If a work of art does its job (like inspiring you, tell you what the "producer" wanted to tell you, makes your thoughts go wild, teaches you something... whatever you want art to do) it is a quality work.

Of course people have different definitions of what quality is to them. Because of this some people like Metal Gear Solid and hate Wii Sports and vice versa. Some people also like both games because they know they need to approach them with different kinds of qualities in mind because these games fulfill different jobs.

It gets a lot easier to understand when you use the word "job". If you want Wii Sports to do the same job that Metal Gear does... well, of course you'll be dissappointed. It's like buying an electric car and then saying "this is utter crap, where is the fuel?" or watching a soap instead of an action movie and then going "where are the explosions?" But at the same time other people would look at a Ferrari and go "this is damaging the environment, this is utter crap!" Quality is always subjective and increased knowledge doesn't make your definition of quality more important than others.

In the case of Wii Sports you say the game is shallow because you try to apply the values that make Metal Gear, Zelda, Final Fantasy, etc. quality games to it. You can't do that. You don't judge a horror movie by comparing it to a soap, either!

 

And the reason why Wii Sports will be of longtime quality is pretty simple: A lot of people have played videogames for the first time when they used Wii Sports (Resort). And apparently they liked it, otherwise the games wouldn't sell so extremely well. And a lot of these new gamers are children today. In 20 years these children will be grown up and they'll be in the majority and say "quality games are like Wii Sports". 20 years ago kids were laughed at because they liked Super Mario Bros and today a lot of people hail it as the best game of all time and buy a Wii for their children because of Super Mario Bros being on the system.

And I bet that in 10 years the whole internet will be full of people who love Wii Sports and Mario Bros. Wii. And at some point someone will invent a new type of game with different qualities and these people will spend dozens of hours on the web wondering why these new "non-games" sell and tell everyone that they are crap and not worth playing haha :D :D :D

2. No, I'm pretty sure I have good taste, at least in terms of the mediums I care about.

3.

"And we can trust this because business needs to find the real answer. Making answers up doesn't help a business man because he wants to sell his products. So he has to stay objective."

This isn't true at all. Performance in the marketplace is no more true or real than performance among the critics. The problem with using a business definition for quality is that the end goal of all business endeavors is making a profit, and the end goal of art is something else entirely. Again, I bring up the example of the music industry: who would seriously argue that the best-selling artists are the best ones?

"In the case of Wii Sports you say the game is shallow because you try to apply the values that make Metal Gear, Zelda, Final Fantasy, etc. quality games to it. You can't do that. You don't judge a horror movie by comparing it to a soap, either!"

Of course I apply the values that make quality games quality games to Wii Sports. That's like telling me I need to learn to appreciate Twilight for what it is, and that it's a quality book even though it doesn't share any of the hallmarks of quality literature. Nonsense! Twilight is bad! Wii Sports is bad! No amount of relativistic mumbo jumbo will change that. Artistic merit is only subjective to an extent: there are some works that all reasonable people should be able to admit simply do not have it within them to cross the threshold into the realm of deserving expression.

Still, there's nothing wrong with indulging yourself with "popcorn" literature or music or games or what have you - I like genre fantasy just as much as the next guy. for example. But liking something doesn't make it good.

"And the reason why Wii Sports will be of longtime quality is pretty simple: A lot of people have played videogames for the first time when they used Wii Sports (Resort). And apparently they liked it, otherwise the games wouldn't sell so extremely well. And a lot of these new gamers are children today. In 20 years these children will be grown up and they'll be in the majority and say "quality games are like Wii Sports". 20 years ago kids were laughed at because they liked Super Mario Bros and today a lot of people hail it as the best game of all time and buy a Wii for their children because of Super Mario Bros being on the system."

But will these kids really remember Wii Sports fondly? Will the people whose first introduction to gaming was Wii Sports really see their interest in gaming grow over time, or will this be a passing novelty or a dead end for them? I do not think we can be sure that either will be the case.

Super Mario Bros was a game that had enough depth and required enough skill that people could replay it again and again, each time with increased pleasure. Wii Sports does not share those characteristics. I think the kids whose parents bought them Wiis as their first consoles are much more likely to remember their first Mario or Zelda game fondly, or a game like Super Smash fondly, than they are likely to remember Wii Sports fondly. When I was younger I played a lot of shitty games on the Genesis, but the one I remember most fondly is Sonic and Knuckles.



Around the Network

"Have you ever talked to a 40 year old person who grew up on computer games about the quality of the games you like? They'll laugh at you and tell you that your game isn't quality at all.

And I bet you'll call them "elitists" and they'll say you've got a bad taste, haha"

Not at all - I'll try to engage them in discussion, and try to explain why I think the game I like is worth their while. The same applies to debating any sort of art, be it literature or music or cinema or whatever. Reasonable people can come to an accord on these subjects without resorting to squealing about how everyone needs to respect each others' opinions.



Qays said:

Reasonable people can come to an accord on these subjects without resorting to squealing about how everyone needs to respect each others' opinions.

And that's the only problem you got with my post? Ok, I don't respect your opinion, since you're ignoring mine. Glad now?



Qays, some points:

1) you didn't get my point about business at all. Of course business wants to sell but how do you sell a product? By knowing your customers. Knowing what your customers view as quality helps you sell your product and thus business has to objectively analyze what quality means. Otherwise there wouldn't be any sales

2) What best selling artists are you talking about? The Beatles? Elvis? In case you are talking about Boygroups or something like that: The job of a boygroup was never to make "quality" music but to make little boys and girls go crazy because they wanted to be like these artists or because they wanted to fall in love with these artists. And, wow, they did their job very well so boygroups became famous. The guy who formed the Backstreetboys for instance made it pretty clear that he wanted to put the actual "members" of the band into a new context of use. He was successful because he used different values ("qualities") to achieve this goal

3) No, you are judging Wii Sports by the values that make a good Cinematic game! Again, like Soaps vs  Horror movies...

4) Yes, they will have fond memories of Wii Sports. And people like the ones in this thread will have them, too, including myself and my friends. And we're actually grown-ups

Oh and I play Wii Sports Resort over and over again, each time with increased pleasure because I'm actually getting better each time I play it (especially table tennis)

And it's funny that you mention Super Smash Bros because Smash Bros. was always considered to be a shallow fighting game I guess you don't like quality fighting games. Oh and you liked Sonic? Wasn't Sonic the game that was tuned down so you could play with only one button?



"And that's the only problem you got with my post? Ok, I don't respect your opinion, since you're ignoring mine. Glad now?"

Ummm that statement wasn't even a response to your post.



Around the Network
Qays said:

My favorite thing about people with bad taste: they accuse you of being elitist for having good taste.


I didn't know there's a definition of good and bad taste.

Reading through this thread it seems that you have a problem accepting that your opinion isn't shared by everyone. What makes a game quality or fun is subjective. People have individual reasons for enjoying video games. Different values.

Some like video games built on pure gameplay; some like deep stories, games based on music or an artsy art style; and no one is wrong here. It's all a matter of having a good time, and no one, absolutely no one has the right to bash people for having a different experience than yours. This is gaming; not the Third Reich.



Qays said:

"Have you ever talked to a 40 year old person who grew up on computer games about the quality of the games you like? They'll laugh at you and tell you that your game isn't quality at all.

And I bet you'll call them "elitists" and they'll say you've got a bad taste, haha"

Not at all - I'll try to engage them in discussion, and try to explain why I think the game I like is worth their while. The same applies to debating any sort of art, be it literature or music or cinema or whatever. Reasonable people can come to an accord on these subjects without resorting to squealing about how everyone needs to respect each others' opinions.

This is exactly what people are doing in this thread

Oh and "reasonable people can come to an accord on these subjects"? Are you insane? Are you even remotely into discussions between artists, scientists, writers, etc. who keep bashing each other since ancient Greece?

This discussion is getting better with each post



UncleScrooge said:

Qays, some points:

1) you didn't get my point about business at all. Of course business wants to sell but how do you sell a product? By knowing your customers. Knowing what your customers view as quality helps you sell your product and thus business has to objectively analyze what quality means. Otherwise there wouldn't be any sales

2) What best selling artists are you talking about? The Beatles? Elvis? In case you are talking about Boygroups or something like that: The job of a boygroup was never to make "quality" music but to make little boys and girls go crazy because they wanted to be like these artists or because they wanted to fall in love with these artists. And, wow, they did their job very well so boygroups became famous. The guy who formed the Backstreetboys for instance made it pretty clear that he wanted to put the actual "members" of the band into a new context of use. He was successful because he used different values ("qualities") to achieve this goal

3) No, you are judging Wii Sports by the values that make a good Cinematic game! Again, like Soaps vs  Horror movies...

4) Yes, they will have fond memories of Wii Sports. And people like the ones in this thread will have them, too, including myself and my friends. And we're actually grown-ups

Oh and I play Wii Sports Resort over and over again, each time with increased pleasure because I'm actually getting better each time I play it (especially table tennis)

And it's funny that you mention Super Smash Bros because Smash Bros. was always considered to be a shallow fighting game I guess you don't like quality fighting games. Oh and you liked Sonic? Wasn't Sonic the game that was tuned down so you could play with only one button?

1. I don't think you got my point about your point about business. The definition of quality that a business will settle on is a meaningless definition. Knowing what most customers think quality is has nothing at all to do with what quality actually is.

2. A definition of quality that admits the Backstreet Boys is a definition of quality that makes no sense.

3. Not at all. Not all good games are cinematic. Is Flower a cinematic game? Is Crash Bandicoot?  All I am doing is holding Wii Sports to the same standards that good games are held - it comes up wanting not because of its genre or its presentation, but because it is a shallow game that aims for the lowest common denominator of gameplay.

4. I do not hold with those who consider Super Smash to be a shallow game, and I am a longtime player of "real" fighting games. And say what you will about Sonic, it required more skill to play than Wii Fit.



"This is gaming; not the Third Reich."

This is art, not Kindergarten.

"Oh and "reasonable people can come to an accord on these subjects"? Are you insane? Are you even remotely into discussions between artists, scientists, writers, etc. who keep bashing each other since ancient Greece?"

There's a fairly broad agreement in intellectual circles as to what literature is considered to have artistic merit and what literature does not. The same applies to music and cinema criticism. That there is some subjectivity inherent in deciding these things around the edges doesn't mean everyone's opinion is equally valid and we should admit Twilight into the canon.



Qays said:

"This is gaming; not the Third Reich."

This is art, not Kindergarten.


Any artistic playing card or board games you could highlight so I can check I'm not a Philistine?



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!