By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
noname2200 on 24 November 2009
Edit Thread
silicon said:

You made a few good points. Especially with regards to the bolded section.

I did not want to make an argument of hardcore vs casual becuase I don't really understand the definitions that people use on the forums for those terms.

The root of the problem is the association of quality with the number of sales. I do no agree that sales necessary or sufficient to imply that a game is a quality title.

It seems that what you're saying that quality is judged by the consumer. Someone with different standards can consider a title quality and their beliefs as to what is quality is different than somone elses, specifically my own. I agree that everyone can have their own personal opinion on how much they like, value or appreciate something.


There is another problem, and that is if a game sells well it implies that the consumer judges the quality of the title before playing the title. This could mean that the actual product is not what the consumers actually consider when making the purchase.

 

This is fundamentally different the view I proposed where quality is something inherent in the title themselves. The main difference is that I believe that something can be quality even with low sales. Something with high sales can also be quality. The inherent qualities can of course be made up of personal standards, which is why reviews are all over the place.

I can agree with what you wrote. A game that people ultimately end up disappointed in (i.e. what is generally a "bad game") can still sell gangbusters due to opening hype, and a game that more people would ultimately have liked if they'd tried it can sell poorly due to a variety of factors. So I think you're correct that sales figures aren't the alpha and omega of the quality analysis.

I'm not comfortable going much further with this though, because I know I'll start to put my subjective tastes into objective categories. For example, I "know" that if more people tried Little King's Story, it would have sold far, far better. But if I'm to be honest, I have zero idea how much of my knowledge springs from the truth and how much is just wishful thinking.

It's quite possible that poor-selling games I love (LKS, Okami, Beyond Good and Evil, Ogre Battle, etc.) would be largely rejected by the masses even if they got a chance to try them. In such situations, I'm prepared to say that I personally think they're good games, but most gamers apparently feel otherwise (just like I say that most gamers love Grand Theft Auto, even if I personally don't care for it at all).