"so basically, since you dont like wii fit, nobody can like it. since you dont like wii fit, anybody who does is a moron who doesnt know what quality is. is that what your trying to say?"

If someone were to walk up to you and insist that Twilight was the best modern literature has to offer, what would you say to him?

Qays Wii Sports Resort is probably the best videogame that's been released in a decade or so.

"Quality" can be defined in different ways because there are different kinds of quality.

If you want to buy a car you can either get a big and fast one or a small one that needs less fuel and is save. Both are quality cars.

If you are looking for a game you can play together with your friends (which, to me, is a very important sign of quality) Wii Sports Resort beats almost every other game on the market.

And I'll tell you something: When Wii Party is released I'll buy it instantly and play it with my friends for months and months, just like millions of other people. And you still won't understand why it'll be a quality game.

Oh and Twilight is a quality book (apparently. I haven't read it) because people usually read books to experience the adventures of the main characters. Apparently, Twilight is exactly what a lot of people, especially women, want to read. So yes, it is a quality book. It just doesn't offer the kind of quality that you want.

It's not that the games aren't fun.  It's that most of them taking the Sports/Music/Fitness component.  That's not Nintendo-like in any way.  They are very shallow games though.  I enjoy the basketball on Sports Resort, but I would enjoy it a hell of a lot more if it had any form of depth to it.   This is where many of these games aren't "quality".  They are skin deep. The game (while fun) is just significantly shallow and somewhat soul-less.  It doesn't have the feel of a traditional Nintendo game.

Sure there are different kinds of quality.  However, I think what Qays is referencing is that while 'Miley Cyrus' can quickly be considered quality by some, she will quickly fade as below average by all or most sooner or later.  Long-term quality versus Short-term quality.   

This is rather funny because I wanted to mention it in my post. In 20 years nobody will talk about the "AAA" games of today anymore but people will still play Wii Sports, Mario Bros. and probably Wii Party.

And I highly disagree about the "shallowness" of those games. To be honest I personally think a lot of today's blockbuster games are shallow and soulless. It is so easy to put more and more into a game but it is very hard to keep the things you don't need out of it, like Nintendo does with a lot of its games.

I just wrote in my post that there are different kinds of quality. You actually agreed but then you instantly said those games are "shallow". But they aren't, they are easy to pick up and play with people who haven't played them before. The reason why you think they are shallow is because you are still using your definition of quality to judge them.

It is shallow in terms of gameplay.  Shallow in terms of content.  For most of these games the learning curve is immediate.  There isn't a hidden layer of complexity.  What you see is what you get.  A few 'mini' games with characters without arms or legs and a low amount of difficulty. 

And why is it hard to keep things out of a game?  Since when does that become more difficult?  I consider it flat out lazy/easy. Everything put INTO a game takes time, effort, thought and energy on someone's part.  Why does Nintendo making a very shallow basketball shooter somehow make it better? It doesn't have to be complex to not be a shallow game. Wii Sports Resort Basketball is a prime example of this.

There is different types of quality IMHO.  Primarily, short term and long term.  Long term is the things you will remember.  The things that will resonate years from now.  Things you will play years from now.  I don't view Wii Sports in that category.  Super Mario Galaxy (While not that great IMO, would be a far better choice here). 

Just look at the NES generation of games to know why Wii Sports will still be popular in 20 years and Mario Galaxy won't.

It is not shallow in terms of gameplay and the content presented in Wii Sports Resort is quite huge. And it makes the game better because the definition of quality for the people who play Wii Sports is that a game should be easy to pick up and play with your friends. That means to a person who wants to play a game like Wii Sports the quality of a game decreases the more complicated it is to pick up and play with your friends. Basically put Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Mario Galaxy and Zelda Twilight Princes are... utter crap to a lot of people. And they are in the majority

Why do you think you know what quality is but a person who likes Wii Sports doesn't?

Do you know how quality is defined in business? No offense here, I'm just asking. Do you know what the definition of quality in business is?

"Basically put Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Mario Galaxy and Zelda Twilight Princes are... utter crap to a lot of people. And they are in the majority"

A lot of people think Shakespeare and Borges are utter crap, too. We know better.

"Why do you think you know what quality is but a person who likes Wii Sports doesn't?"

A lot, actually. The world isn't a magical happyland where everyone's opinion is equally valid. Most people have shit taste in everything.

"Do you know how quality is defined in business? No offense here, I'm just asking. Do you know what the definition of quality in business is?"

What relevance at all does this have to the definition of quality in an artistic context?

So let me get this strait.

Fun =/= quality?

Only Depth = quality?

Your priorities are fucked IMHO.

Wii Sports and Wii Sports resort are fantasitc games. Thats my opinion and many millions of other people agree. Get over it HD fanboys. Your systems have been beaten and it wasent a fluke. Nintendo owns MS/Sony asses and will contine to next gen. Deal with it.

FFS some of you people should try getting jobs with IGN or Game Informer. You would fit right in.

Because all i see is a bunch of but hurt HD fanboys spinning this gen like crazy.

PS: I own all 3 consoles and play all 3 all the time. I may be a Nintendo fan but i can see quality in the other systems because I'm not a blind fanboy.

Now after reading this thread i feel like i need a shower. See ya all later.

"Wii Sports and Wii Sports resort are fantasitc games. Thats my opinion and many millions of other people agree. Get over it HD fanboys. Your systems have been beaten and it wasent a fluke. Nintendo owns MS/Sony asses and will contine to next gen. Deal with it."

Who cares? Do you think I care that Twilight sells more than Blood Meridian? That Avatar grossed more than Pan's Labyrinth? Of course I don't. Sales have nothing whatsoever to do with quality.

^Wii Sports Resort is the best game of 2009. Swordplay, Golf, Table Tennis, Archery etc. are all accessible and at the same time have enough depth to learn new tricks, they have enough complexity to master, a lot of nuances and techniques to learn, as well as they have enough variety to experiment with new environment and opponents while progressing through the game - a long way to master the game, and there 12 in there.

It has fun, it has depth, it has variety, it has quality and it's the best bang for your buck. Dixi.

Compared to what's been said above what, say, yet another shooting gallery has to offer me? Bullets that fly in straight lines? Scripted skirmishes when I know exactly what is going to happen next? I bet people who are into this kind of games will claim there's enough depth and variety that I don't see, but a lot of people don't see depth and variety of WSR as well. Every man to his taste.