Qwark said:
Well you don't have a diploma in journalism now have you. If the majority of buyers really likes a game than that's a solid quality meter. A game is made to entertain and if the critics and users prefer one game over another that game is better. If you belong to the 10% that doesn't like that game or think the other is better well that is because that game simply isn't your taste/thing well that's bad luck. That doesn't change the fact that the game is objectively good for the masses. I don't like nor can I enjoy FF games (including 7) but that doesn't make it a bad game, it's objectively of the greatest ever made.
Another example are soul games which are highly praised by most users and critically and are objectively a great series. But those games are not for everyone, same counts for nearly every game that is available. But you can't say a game can't be objectively measured in therms of quality, because in the same genre some games are better than others.
If just 51% of hour buyers like the game you didn't deliver a good game. But games like those are either really niche or just mediocre like the order 1886. A convincing number starts if st least 80% of your community enjoyed the game. Which I am sure nearly if not all 85+ games on proffesional meta achieved. See it like this if 90% of the buyers enjoy a game it contains very little experience breaking flaws if a mere 51% enjoys the game it will have some experience breaking flaws, whether you bother with them or not is up to your taste. But the game with the high critical rate and presumably high percentage of gamers that enjoy the game delivers a better experience to the masses and is a better game. Whether each individual thinks the same about that is non relevant as long as a high percentage (at least 80% for daring, different and innovative games and 85% for familiar games) the masses and the critics do.
Critics are mostly more reliable considering not at least halve of them are fanboys. And they need to represent a company while a user reviews (especially on metacritic.com) doesn't need to represent anything and many simply trash a game because it isn't on their platform or BS reasons like that. You have some good user reviews but the majority is not really representative and is either I like this game so 10/10 or I hate this game so a 0/0. If a reviewer of IGN does that he will lose his job rather fast. |
So if 80% - give or take - of people like something it's great? And those 80% need to have some knowledge of the industry or a degree in journalism?
Doesn't that sound weird to you?
If you really believe that, I guess there's no convincing you otherwise.
Although, based on your criteria, I could erase all your posts by pointing out you don't have a degree in metaphysics and you don't have the support of 80% of the community. If you want to insist on argumentum ad populum, prepare to have many of your opinions invalidated in the name of a logical fallacy.
