Quality is relevant. If people are going to start making these pointless lists and try and brag about them so they feel like the have some kind of speriority for owning a plastic box then be honest about things.  And sure, i agree, if someone likes it then that is awesome, but then we look around and ask the people who are bragging how many you bought, my guess it is no where near as many as the list is portraying.  And again we both know this to be true.  So to end with my originol point in the first place Quantity is Quantity, not quality.  How many are you really interested in, because regardless if you get XBO/PS4/WiiU/etc youre not getting every game on a list, and you have a higher probability of getting the games with the "highest quality"

Thanks - I just cant stand when posters make false statements. Happened yesterday in that smartphone thread as well where LeoJ was making up stuff on the fly. Gotta call it out when you see it! You never know who is reading it and believing it

It is unfortunate how MS, being very committed to indies last gen, is slow to action this time around. Weird to say the least.

That said, I learned last gen that lists are contextually barren. Lists equalize everything when we gamers view them very differently.

Example: Geometry Wars 2 and Last of Us. Both 90+ meta scores. On a list they would be placed in the same 90+ category. However most would pick the AAA retail exclusive.

I learned from last gen that indies are not on the same level as the retail games, nor are they system sellers. They are nice to have once the system is all ready bought but are not in themselves worth the purchase. Its in the end its up to the AAA exclusives, just like they always were.

Lists should separate indies from AAA, into 2 separate lists. It paints a better picture.

Figures, after all we are both posting opinions but you know, only yours can have substance ;)

damn straight son!

I would pick Geometry Wars ANY DAY over TLOU

@Bold: And here is the Crux of the problem. The only thing the list proves is the quanity of the games. It does not "prove superiority", which is impossible considering people have different opinions and needs for their console(s) of choice.

Therefore, bringing in Quality is just as pointless as using the list to prove superiority, both are subjective. There is no absolute judge that decides the quality of games or superiority of consoles. Even Metacritic, which is arguably the most objective rating system we have is just an aggregate of subjective opinions hence, it is objective only in the sense that it conveys the mean reviewer opinion of a game.

This list has nothing to do with Quality. Quality is subjective, and so absolutely anything can be considered a Quality Game. 

You're preferences are not the absolute judge of a games quality, so you can't even make the claim that 5 quality games are better then 100 no-quality games. Quality is defined by preference, if a gamer prefers the color blue, that is how he/she would determine quality. This the arbitrary 5 quality games vs 100 no quality games would immedieatly become 1 game with blue vs 3 games with blue. See how pointless it is? The list only shows Quantity, Quality is irrelevant to the discussion.

There you go, i agree with this completely, but we also kow why these lists were made.  We can act like we dont though.

I remember the lists from a few years ago that wouldn't allow the Microsoft side to have indie games or Kinect games bundled together with their regular games. Now the tables turned because a different narrative fits the war.