Bad thing is, there are no mid-budget games almost anymore. In 6th and 5th (and sometime in the 7th) eras, about anyone could make a successful game sell easily and without big budgets. There were franchises that looked gorgeous but there were also budget-tight games that run well and weren't expensive to make. Nowadays that middle is disappearing, leaving us AAA games and indies mostly. Sad but true

I ... have no idea what you are saying.  I've read your post like six times and I do not understand at all.

For one I said likely. Which is a pretty big admission that it's absolute. Though publishers are simply more willing to endorse developers whom have released multiple high scoring games that sold well.  

Even if it is the only difference that's a HUGE difference.  To pretend it doesn't make any difference in customer's mind I think would be incorrect of all of us. Otherwise advertising wouldn't be a big business at all. 

Once again I said that isn't true of MOST non AAA games.  Meaning that obviously there will be exceptions.  

I don't think the point "What he's saying is that he doesn't understand the mentality of someone who uses game budgetover game quality as a means of deciding what they play." is a bad one.

If that is his point  why do they have such a high budget for advertising?  Does that not only lead to a place where customers are more likely to do the opposite of his point.  That contrast in point and action causes dissonance for me. 

Is that clear?

I think he's erronesly confusing Sony's Tv Advertising budget with Yoshida's opinion on choosing a game based on its budget rather than its quality.

Its a nonsequitor.

Yh, maybe you should have voiced your opinion better and not just start off calling someone an idiot. That aside, even what you are saying now is not the same thing.

Lets look at tekken revolution. Digital only multiplayer only release of tekken. Yet it has everything that the standalone tekken release has with exception to a single player mode and story and a limited chracter roaster. Its also free to play. By indie standards, its safe to assume that tekken revolution is an indie game. 

then lets look at no mans sky, the witness, journey and rime. All indie games, and you will be hard pressed to find any games like them even in the AAA field. Now also look at games like stryder... its basically what AAA games were say 15-20yrs ago. 

Point is, these are all great games. And in most cases the major difference betwen AAA games and indie games is how long they are. So it makes very little sense when someone writes off a game even simply cause they aren't as long as the AAA games they are accustomed to and conveniently forget that they usually also cost less.

So while you may say its simple to understand if you want to look at it from an extremely limited perspective, I stand by him in saying I don't get why a great game suddenly becomes crap simply cause it doesn't cost $60 and have a ridiculous marketing push to boot.

More like steak and potato field...

cos they market AAA as superior games. people want play superior games instead of inferior.

sooo muuuch fuuun.

Well, yeah, but it still doesn't make any sense.  There seems to be a disconnect between what you think he's saying and what I think he's saying.

Sony wants you to buy a PS4.  They want you to buy AAA games.  They want you to buy some downloadable titles off PSN, too.  No where is he saying not to buy AAA games.  AT ALL.  He is simply saying that he does not understand those who complain that there aren't enough games to play while passing over games that aren't AAA.  He's talking about people who ONLY WANT AAA TITLES.