By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales - Sales vs. quality

 

Sales vs. quality

1M 37 40.22%
 
2M 14 15.22%
 
3M 13 14.13%
 
5M 14 15.22%
 
10M 4 4.35%
 
20M 10 10.87%
 
Total:92
Chroniczaaa on 03 January 2011

Cmon man you really think just cause mw2 and bo sold like a bazillion copies by now means there any good?



"Defeating a sandwich, only makes it tastier." - Virginia

Around the Network
pastro243 on 03 January 2011
Galaki said:

So, you're saying, if a game sell 20M, it could very well be 20M idiots buying a shitty game?


Yes



- Our album on spotify https://open.spotify.com/album/56mEbEgyBYGzcDyZ1eMQ1v?si=hYKgir5YRSCrzywgGmV4oQ

- Our videoclip 

- My manga: https://www.webtoons.com/en/challenge/blanca-the-world/list?title_no=313068

SmokedHostage on 03 January 2011

Quality is too subjective to have sales equate or collerate directly to it.

Personally; I think Pokémon is a brillantly, expertly-crafted JRPG series.  I also think series like Tales of and Final Fantasy (in recent outtings)do poor jobs at entertaining me.

Likewise; a AAA title with a expansive budget can sell in the millions and a relatively smaller title with a budget of less than 500,000 USD can sell in the hundreds of thousands and yet I can hold both in similar regard.

If anything; resonance with the market should never be a indicator of a game's quality but rather an indication that at a baser level, the game has done its job well either it be to pander to teenage angst or portray a beautiful world and so on.



Pixel Art can be fun.

Galaki on 04 January 2011

I don't give a crap about FPS since it's not my type of game but I will admit that CoD:BO is a good game as it's universally loved by people (and reviewers).

Some of you claiming it's not a good game. How so?



Pre-order limited edition Blue Slime Condoms

r505Matt on 04 January 2011
Squilliam said:
HappySqurriel said:

To a certain extent, I think your argument also demonstrates that the similarities and differences between review scores and games may be based heavily on the limited demographic diversity of game reviewers ...

While there are many core gamers who own the Wii, a large portion of Wii owners (and people who are Wii users) are not traditional core gamers; and what they see as a quality videogame might be significantly different from what an 18 to 35 year old single male who loves Call of Duty sees as a quality videogame. Being that the XBox 360 has a more uniform userbase which more closely resembles game reviewers games that review well tend to be the same games that sell well; while the Wii's more diverse userbase means that more games that are not seen as quality titles by reviewers sell quite well.

Don't you mean divergent rather than diverse userbase for the Wii? I.E. the userbase diverges from the reviewers in that they often have different opinions on the same games whereas the Xbox 360 and PS3 userbase alligns with the reviewers. Arguably the pool of reviewers could effectively be said to be drawn mostly from the Xbox 360 and PS3 console users.

Quality in general is a messy concept because it doesn't mean the same thing to everyone. It even differs significantly if you're taking a meta view on quality in general or specifically pin pointing a single game to a single user in other cases. In most cases where I have seen quality arguments the whole argument fails on the grounds that the two or more people arguing are arguing upon different definitions of quality and thus can never agree or convince the other person which makes the whole thing pointless.

I think one of the important questions isn't sales vs quality, it is the relationship appeal and quality. That is really the question of this thread since by refining the concept of sales to appeal you can cut through a lot of qualifications required when using sales on their own. If art doesn't appeal can it still be called high quality and if art does appeal to a wide audience can it said to be of low quality? This is a question which has grappled the arts for a significantly long period of time. Both sides have strong arguments but I haven't really heard of anyone creating a theory or concept which unifies both positions satisfactorily.


I was going to type something up along these lines, but you already did it for me =) thanks.





Around the Network
Squilliam on 04 January 2011
r505Matt said:


I was going to type something up along these lines, but you already did it for me =) thanks.

The concept of quality isn't subjective, but what people find to be 'high quality games' is completely subjective.

No problem! Im glad at least one person read it.



Tease.

leatherhat on 04 January 2011
Galaki said:

I don't give a crap about FPS since it's not my type of game but I will admit that CoD:BO is a good game as it's universally loved by people (and reviewers).

Some of you claiming it's not a good game. How so?


All you have to do is compare it to other games in the genre to realize how short it comes up



ǝןdɯıs ʇı dǝǝʞ oʇ ǝʞıן ı ʍouʞ noʎ 

Ask me about being an elitist jerk

Time for hype

DeadNotSleeping on 04 January 2011

None.  It is entirely for 20 million people to purchase a terrible game while the best goes unnoticed.  This is not only true for video games, but any product.



Metallicube on 04 January 2011

There are several games I find of top quality that did not recieve sales, and quality is certainly a relative thing.

However, usually if a game gets great sales, I'm talking 3 plus million, it's usually great in SOME way, which is irrifutable. I may not find it great necessarilly, but I recognise that many people do, and who's to say their opinion is wrong? Also, what other quantifiable way is their to measure quality than through sales? Nobody can ever seem to answer that..

So do sales equal quality? Yes and no.