Ok, this once again seems to be going nowhere. But, please explain to me if you can, what happens when someone buys Diablo 3 to play co-op with friends only because there are no other local co op games that they all like and they think the game is fun, but not good. In other words, not well made.

What was the point of this example ? Last time I heard Diablo 3 wasn't a bad game at all! Tell me how it's not well made ?! Blizzard has given high effort to try and make this game good and the sales also don't lie either.

Think of the movie Sharknado. My friends and I decided to pay money to rent it from itunes over other movies, NOT because it's a good movie, but because it's a bad movie and it's fun to watch it and play drinking games. It has some value in that it provides entertainment, but it's clearly not a quality product to any of us (or the critics). Also, you haven't explained what happens when you buy a game and you end up hating it. Is that a quality game just cause you bought it? I played Wii play for an hour and regret it. How is my purchase any indication of its quality?

What about sharknado ? Do you even know the box office for it to prove your point ? You need to remember that quality is defined by the sales because as far as the market is concerned all votes from whether critics or masses are made equal. It's rare to end up with a game you don't like because consumers are relatively cautious on how they spend things but to have people in masses buying the game clearly means that it's not just a concidence or some chance otherwise it wouldn't have gone very far. 

Following the logic of sales = quality, and quality = sales, why spend money on marketing? If a game is bad, it's not gonna sell and if it's good it will sell well on its own. The reality is massively different from that. The best example is probably Dead Island which had one of the best trailers ever made, people bought the game and then regretted their decision. Are fps games better than jrps just cause they sell better, or do they sell better because it's a more popular genre? How can jrps sell well in Japan and not in the US/Europe when it's the same games we're talking about? Does quality change from country to country? Recently Western games and especially COD have been doing well in Japan. Was COD 4 terrible and Ghosts a masterpiece and that's why it sold so well or are there more factors that need to be taken into account to explain its success?

Marketing only works when the game is good or decent. The best marketing won't save trash because the masses will still reject the game. Do you remember what happened to the whole guitar hero franchise ? Your example doesn't make any sense because those who you encountered likely were likely from game review sites and or game forums where a stigma exists upon that whole community. In other words your anecdotal observation likely has a bias but the market responds differently from what they say. I'll say this, FPS's are BETTER than JRPG's and this is coming from someone who ADORED JRPG's at the 6th generation. JRPG's have done nothing but keep falling down in quality but did you know what else happened ? There sales also spiked down very rapidly too and I ended up having more fun playing COD than every other JRPG including xenoblade (IMO ni no kuni was terrible.). This is one of the views that the masses and the forum communities agree with. As to why JRPG's do so well in japan compared to everywhere else is because of a regional bias but that alone does not make them propel because the sustained audience is clearly not enough to keep all the franchises alive. Both COD 4 and Ghosts sold well so what exactly are you trying to pull here ? 

Diablo 3 is extremely repetitive. An insane number of people bought it day 1 from the official website and then sales dropped considerably. Sales alone show that the game was loved by gamers but Diablo fans have been compaining since its release for not being a good game compared to Diablo 1+2. My point it: Just because I paid for the game, it doens't mean I think it's good. I bought it because of its brand (I've been hearing how awesome Diablo 2 was for ages) and because it has co op and only a few games have 4 player local co op on ps3. Again I do not think it's a good game. How does my purchase translate into the game being a quality game? Many people regret their purchases (or have few choices). 10 sales =/= 10 satisfied customers. That is my point. 

What about the diablo fans ? How do you know that there not hardcore diablo fans who demand obscure crap much like the hardcore smash fans that demand more elements from melee ? It's true that a game can be brought for it's brand but what it comes down to is your enjoyment to get it. Just because YOU don't buy the game because it's good doesn't mean that others as well as the masses don't. That is your opinion that you don't like diablo 3 and I can not take that away but however that doesn't mean that the game isn't good because you can't discount their wallets. Your purchase alone doesn't constitute it to be a good game, rather that is handled by what the masses will purchase. There is a clear difference between you and the masses so you can't represent them properly. How do you know that the masses regretted their choices ? Do you have any surveying data that are not hampered by gamers from forums and such to make that claim ? 

Your answer to everything seems to be that sales = quality without showing the correlation between the two. Are you saying that Final Fantasy XIII  was received well by critics and fans alike and Xenoblade wasn't? Final Fantasy alone sold, what 7m? Is it that much better than Xenoblade? All I'm saying is that games sell well or bad for a number of reasons and quality is only one of them. 

There is a correlation between the two. Sales DEFINE quality. Again why would the masses purchase a bad product ? I'm not saying that xenoblade wasn't well received by critics per se but rather critics mean nothing to what people enjoy. Games may sell on more than one reason and such but those are secondary reasons. Quality is the MAIN reason as to why we buy games. 

I'll repeat my point about COD. Cod Ghosts sold better than Cod 4  in Japan. Is that because it's that much of an improvement over cod4 or is it possible that Western games became more popular in Japan? How can God of War sell well in the west and bad in Japan if the only reason a game can sell well is quality? It's the same game, has the same release, so it should sell equally everywhere, but it doesn't. Therefore, there must be another reason that can explain the difference in sales. 

COD 4 and COD ghosts sold ABOUT THE SAME in japan. If we take a look at the PS3 versions you will notice ghosts sold slightly less. Ghosts wasn't really that much of an improvement and western games still aren't very popular in japan mainly because of the stigma they hold in the japanese gaming community. The tastes between them differ is the reason why god of war as well as other western games do poorly because japanese gamers refuse to drop their crappy stigma and therefore western games can still flop. Your problem in thinking that games should sell equally everywhere is that each country has a varying audience size. The US has about 100 million gamers compared to japans meager 25 million. Again the japanese gaming community is suffering from a stigma.

Just because you buy a game, it doesn't mean that you consider it a quality game. People buy games because they are fun, because their friends bought them, because they look cool (graphics, trailer) etc. I bought Pokemon Y and I think it's a good game, but not as good as Gravity Rush. I also bought wii sports and I don't think it's a good game. It was fun at first, but then it got old.  

Again, just because you bought a game, it doesn't mean you think that game is good. Quality has nothing to do with it. No one cared about Picasso and suddendly his works are the most expensive works ever. Did they magically become better after his death? NO. Lack of interest in them or in a game, has no correlation with its quality. There's a reason Shadow of the Colossus is considered one of the best games ever made and wii play simply terrible. Tons of people bought it, but most don't think it's any good. 

who said that? Also you can simple use gamepad as mirror screen. There is no problem for devs here

You could not be more wrong.

Also, trying to draw parellels between video games and picasso.. lol.

How do you measure quality.. I mean think about it. In video games, how can you REALLY measure game quality? Biased game reviews? Your word? Mine? The only TURE and measurable way to judge game quality is sales. If a game sells great, there's probably a good reason it sold great. If a game sold like shit, it's probably shit. End of story.

Sure there may be some easilly manipulated saps that run out and buy games becuase of graphics, or because it "looked cool" but at the end of the day, if it's bad enough, they'll probably sell it back, or spread word to their friends that the game sucks, and thus the game's sales will suffer in the long run.

You measure quality by reviews

Game sales are measured by appeal

Sales DO NOT = Quality

You could not be more wrong.

Also, trying to draw parellels between video games and picasso.. lol.

How do you measure quality.. I mean think about it. In video games, how can you REALLY measure game quality? Biased game reviews? Your word? Mine? The only TURE and measurable way to judge game quality is sales. If a game sells great, there's probably a good reason it sold great. If a game sold like shit, it's probably shit. End of story.

Sure there may be some easilly manipulated saps that run out and buy games becuase of graphics, or because it "looked cool" but at the end of the day, if it's bad enough, they'll probably sell it back, or spread word to their friends that the game sucks, and thus the game's sales will suffer in the long run.

@Bold ROFLMAO I think your done here.