My Battlefield 4 campaign review...

[bazmeistergen]

fatslob-:O said:

curl-6 said:

fatslob-:O said:

Your right LOL. It's capitalism that dominates and what better way to show that is consumers supporting the product. 

Quality is subjective opinion, commercial success doesn't make a game any better to those for whom it does not represent quality.

I say that quality CAN be be defined quantitatively. Just because some else may not think it's good doesn't exactly mean that it has less quality. If there are more gamers buying a piece of software then it is that piece of software that has the greatest value for alot of people. Quality in this case means the better value as mass consumers see it. Just because I don't like bethesda games doesn't mean that I will discount everyone elses value of the experience. Even though JRPGs have been dissapointing, (Which is one of my favourite genres.) I realize that bethesda games have more qualities due to consumer support. If people value a product more it's honestly that simple that more people see quality in the title. Just because hardcore gamers keep shouting that wii sports sucks doesn't devalue my thoughts on it because in the real world their opinions are mostly irrelevant. (Just like how some people say that the ps vita is a better system. In the real world it doesn't match with the fact that the 3DS has better games, period.) 

Belief in quality of a product doesn't mean it has objective quality. Quality is a subjective experience. You cannot quantify actual quality - though reviewers believe otherwise, I guess - you can quantify belief in quality, however. I wouldn't use sales numbers to do this as marketing manipulates many purchases. There's also the issue of following trends - FIFA, for example, promotes mass migration each year. Is the game of better quality than the previous or is there much more complexity in purchasing than quality?