I understand perspective and subjective nature of "good" as the notion that newly-inducted gamers may have different criteria as to what constitutes an enjoyable game. Imagine someone who's just about exhausted Wii Sports, is entirely new to the world of gaming and owns no other titles but would like to keep the Wii experience going. In such a scenario, one of two things will usually occur. Either that consumer, who is only familiar with Nintendo products and specifically Wii Sports, will look to other Nintendo-produced products for that experience, or they will look to games that look as though they will offer that same experience based on appearances, such as Big Beach Sports.
Now Consumer B may have a good time with Big Beach Sports, but are they likely to have a better time with it than Wii Sports? It is possible, but thoroughly unlikely. It is much more likely that the undeniable second-rate nature of the title will stymie their initial enthusiasm in the Wii experience. The "casual gamers" that everyone points to may be more likely to purchase these second-rate offerings, but that is because these titles are inherently designed to ensnare these gaming initiates and make a quick buck and unlike us enthusiast gamers they lack awareness of where the true quality lies. I absolutely agree that enjoyment derived from individual titles is subjective and that where one finds trash another finds treasure, but I see game quality as belong to the realm of objectivity. Poor game quality does not preclude enjoyment, but it severely hampers it.
