BMaker11 said:
yo_john117 said:
BMaker11 said:
yo_john117 said:
BMaker11 said:
yo_john117 said:
WheelStriker said:
Sales, that's all people talk about. People actually think that more sales means better quality. But the fact is that's not always the case and it's sad that many people don't understand this. Or more likely chooses to ignore it.
If sales mean better quality, then I guess it's safe to say that "big bumpin" (a mediocre game) is the xbox 360's best exclusive and is one of the games that defines the xbox brand as it has high sales.
|
WTF is "big bumpin"?
And yes sales are the most importent thing at the end of the day, and yes they declare how much quality a product has. Sure there are always the exception but most of the time sales=quality because thats what most people want...
|
Carnival Games and Mario and Sonic
|
Here let me bold the part that you obviously did not read.
|
How many does it take for it to not be the rule, and always the exception? I can start listing games on both the low end and high ends of the charts. When I show you about 20-30, they're just exceptions?
If sales does equal quality, Halo is almost 10X better than KZ2, and Wii Sports is multiple times better than every sports game ever. Or is that just an exception too. After being on the market for 9 months, Valkyria Chronicles is only at 500k. Just an exception? Haze is sitting at almost 800k, despite being deemed a straight up turd. Another exception? Halo Wars has outsold every console RTS to date, although its' average review score isn't much higher, and even under some games. Another exception? There are way too many exceptions for "sales = quality" to be remotely close to a rule
|
I'm talking about if a game sells good it must be pretty good game. A game doesn't have to sell 10 million to be good. A game that sold one million is probably pretty good.
Games sell well because they are quality to someone, they may not be quality games to you or me, but they are to someone.
|
Then that would mean that quality is totally and completely subjective, but that's just not true. There's always a general concensus as to what is deemed "good"
Example: A lot of people may not be able to tell the difference Coke and Pepsi, so they may be considered equals. But you can definitely taste the difference between Coke and Village Pantry Brand Cola. People would say the latter drink sucks
|
Thats like saying your opinion is > then everyone elses. Its not true, who are we to say that we are right and the people ( most likely casuals in this case) who bought the game are wrong. If a game sells over 1 million with ease it must be pretty good for it to have sold that much.
My mom and sisters (who never really game) love Wii Sports, and think its a quality game. Am i supossed to tell them they are wrong because the general concensus says so? What about the millions of others that play Wii Sports and love it, are they all wrong just because some hardcore nerds don't like the game?
So yes in most cases sales=quality. Of course there are always exeptions (a bad game is bundled with a system) and variables (A crappy FPS will sell more than a good JRPG simply because FPS are vastly more popular. Or a really good game with little advertising gets overshadowed by another really good game that has tons of advertising that comes out around the same time period)
