BasilZero said:
curl-6 said:
Player1x3 said:
curl-6 said:
Player1x3 said:
curl-6 said:
There are no facts when it comes to game quality, everything is an opinion.
|
No, actually quality isn't subjective. I can not like a certain game but i can still admit it has quality and recognize it as such
|
But your admission that it's quality even if you don't like it is still made through the lens of your own perception. We can never be truly objective because we cannot escape our own heads.
|
No, quality can be distinguished regardless of your own taste and preference
|
There is no universally agreed upon set of criteria for a quality game though, so true objectivity is impossible.
Again, even when you try to step outside your own personal likes and dislikes, your assessment is still bound by the way you interpret the world. It's like this: say you're looking at something through different pairs of reading glasses; even if you wear none, you eyes are still a lens in themselves, from which you cannot escape.
|
Quality wise its debatable, but its a fact that the Wii's third party software lineup is piss poor compared to the PS3 and Xbox360's third party lineup when you compare genres, third party developer support and the number of titles available physically.
|
I'm not arguing that the Wii's third party library rivals the PS3/360's. I agree that the Wii is far behind, but I also believe the PS3 and 360 are similarly far behind the Wii in terms of first party games.
I also agree with you that quantity is, uh, quantifiable (XD) but quality is not.
