Why is FF7's shocking moment considered the most shocking *spoilers*

[Kenryoku_Maxis]

getsallad said:

Kenryoku_Maxis said:

getsallad said:

The only way to objectively determine the quality of a game is to judge by its popularity, i.e. it's sales.

That's completely wrong.  You are not accounting for such things as region differences, media influences, genre differences, etc.  Just because a game such as Drago nQuest isn't popular or well marketed in America and only sells 10,000 units, doesn't mean its comparatively 100 times worse than a Final Fantasy game just because it sold 100 times worse.  Especially since it sold BETTER in another region (Japan).

Likewise, a game such as Mass Effect or Fallout 3 would be deemed better at face value by your example, but only in America.  In other regions, such as Europe or Japan, it would have mixed results, as it didn't sell as well as other RPGs or do as well as it did in America.

In other words, your statement is completely watered down and doesn't work.  Sales are only a part of how you measure a games popularity.

Region differences. Differences in what? Sales? That sounds like sales to me.

Media influences? What does the media influence? Sales?

Genre differences aren't something you can put into numbers, I don't even see why it's relevant.

You measure popularity by measuring how many people like the game. In this quoted text, which I assume is the one you referred to, you have suggested no alternative to measuring sales.

If you look at region differences, you're no longer measuring popularity, you're comparing a game's popularity in different parts of the world.

If you look at media influences (what do you even mean by that?) - I'm assuming you're talking about games getting a lot of publicity in the media, you're measuring the quality of a publisher's marketing tactics.

And by looking at genre differences, you will have nothing to do with popularity.

Summa sumarum: My point still stands, and you have said nothing to disprove it. (my point being that the only reasonable way of measuring popularity is by looking at sales)

 

Arg here we go, another pointless 10 post debate back and forth that just comes down to someones ego being bruised.

Region differences, as in the two points I brought up.  Sales are the EFFECTS of a region difference.  Not the cause.  In the same way, because sales is one of the EFFECT of popularity, it is not the overall CAUSE.

Media infulences, do I really have to explain this?  Commercials, marketing, in-store ads, promotional plugs, word of mouth....  One game can have massive advertising for a game and sell TONS, while another game in another region can have no advertising and sell lackluster or horribly.  People can't buy a game if they don't know its out there.  But both regions can have an active market for the game (aka, another term for popularity).  [Insert cause and effect here].

Genre Differences.  What one game sells well from one genre (say FPS) in one market (say America) sells horribly in another (say Japan).  And I beg to differ.  Looking at the genre difference between Metroid and Zelda can show you very little, but the sales difference in Japan is MASSIVE.  You didn't take into account all the factors with your absolutism statement of 'sales = popularity 1:1'.