fatslob-:O said:
Games are judged by it's game, definitely I agree with that but a console is judged by it's games in TOTAL. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Wii_video_games http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_PlayStation_2_video_games The WII may have had the best games but the PS2 games in general presented a higher quality seeing as how it has more games that sold over 1+ million. |
Quoting your initial definition of quality: "If we define quality as sales then everything becomes simple. We can infer quality from sales and vice versa. I can say that that quality and sales are one in the same because people go out of there way to give something of value in exchange for a product. The market is always looking for quality in a product and quality is once again defined by the market."
Unfortunately, it's not as simple as that. By your definition, then, fluctuations in sales from one year to the next for a game would indicate fluctuations in quality, which is nonsensical.
Quoting you again: "Their software has become irrelevant for the most part and the quality dwindled as well with it." By your definition, the quality of software, and therefore sales have been dwindling. 27 million New Super Mario Bros. Wii, 34 million Mario Kart Wii, 8.6 million Pokemon X/Y (in 9 weeks) says no.
You say "Tell me, if their software is truly valuable as people speak of them to be then why is nobody buying their titles ? " - the above figures say people are buying Nintendo's titles.
Quality is one of the many factors that influence sales, but the level of quality cannot be determined by sales. This is because sales are influenced by a great number of factors. A few examples include advertising, hype, critial reviews, pricing, availability, competition, as well as economic factors such as how much money the consumer has to spend, versus production costs and retail prices.
One of the biggest sales drivers is the consumer's perception of value for money, which is why we see price-drops and pack-ins appearing in order to boost sales. By your definition, a boost in sales due to a price-drop would mean a boost in quality.
Take the 3DS for example. It took a while to get off the ground because of various factors - two of which were not enough games, and a fair bit of skepticism about paying all that extra money for the 3D element. Articles abounded on the internet in 2011 about how the Vita would anihilate the 3DS. Since its release the 3DS has received a price cut and a great library of games, more and more of which are showing what the 3D feature is capable of. The quality of the console hasn't changed, but the sales have soared, and it's now dominating the handheld market.
In the context of this thread then, which is discussing the claim that Nintendo's software is no longer able to carry its (to quote Captain Tom) "exceedingly sub par hardware" (unquote), for you to suggest that the relatively low level of sales of the Wii U's software is directly related to their quality is ridiculous.
With NSMBU, SM3DW, Nintendoland and W101 receiving metacritic ratings of 84, 94, 77 and 78 respectively, its clear that these are considered by the critics to be high quality, polished games. What has hurt their sales is nothing to do with their quality. It is a combination of confused marketing for the Wii U, a lack of games during the console's first year, the consumers holding out for more price cuts on the Wii U, and more recently, the competition from the XOne and PS4.
