Hey, no offense meant, I was just seeking clarification. Obviously you were talking about games, but what about a game being popular would make a game worse? Your judgment that FFVI would have the life wrung from it (and that FFVII already has had this happen) implies that you are, in fact, of the opinion that popularity exists in opposition to quality. I'm asking why you hold that opinion.

Your assumptions are wrong about me and you're getting the wrong message from what I'm saying. I'm of the opinion that popularity exists in opposition to how people view the game as a whole in their opinion of the game's quality, not the actual quality itself.

i just want to add in, due to this "popularity makes a game great" thing, you have to compare the amount of people that played FFVII to those of that played other FF games.

just for instance, if 5 mil ppl played VII, and only 3mil of those people were big FF fans that play all the FF games, then only 3mil of those people should count.
(i know those numbers are wrong, but, just for instance.)

"For now, yeah, FFVI is the best. Once people have poured too much love into it like VII, though, they'll migrate to another FF to worship and wring the life out of that one."

The opening clause, "for now", means that this is something which is going to change; the following explanation, concerning people "wring[ing] the life out of that one" implies that an excess of love would be what causes a game to not be the best anymore, meaning that popularity affects actual quality.

How else is that supposed to be read?

"I'm of the opinion that popularity exists in opposition to how people view the game as a whole in their opinion of the game's quality"

...And how can something be less liked if it's more popular?

FFVI made 3.4 million sales while FFVII made 9.75million.

and I think you have it reversed. A games popularity does not make it great. It's greatness makes it popular. We can then see what is great by it's popularity.

Because obviously, analyzing every bit of a fairly sarcastic sentence literally is really going to get you an answer. I'm saying that most people, in their opinions, liked FFVII to death when it came out, as I've seen with my own eyes, and then started to hate it afterward and flocked over to FFVI. Yes, FFVI was loved and regarded to be the "greatest," but that only escalated after people suddenly and apparently started to hate FFVII for the hell of it.

And if you need to know, my sentence was practically a joke in the first place

Incandescence: I see now that in that sentence you equated "best" with "best-loved". The statement makes much more sense now; thank you for your clarification.

forevercloud3000: No. Popularity does not equate to best.

Unless you'd care to argue that every single Mario Kart is better than every single Final Fantasy, that is.

Regardless of what I personally think it is not up to me on what is better. Obviously people think Mario Kart 64 (the only one to pass FFVII) was simply that good of a game. Yet this one is debatable seeing as they are completly different genres. And Popularity does not make a game the best, but the best games are popular.

Mario Kart DS has smashed FFVII's numbers to paste.

Yes, ideally, it is you who says what is best. Going with a crowd mentality means giving up the responsibility of having your own opinions, which is something that absolutely has to be preserved.

No, the best games are not necessarily the most popular. To pretend that is to ignore sleeper hit underground games that were arguably the best of their respective generations: EarthBound and Steel Battalion, for instance, are both better than Final Fantasy VII, and neither of them sold even a tenth as much. Probably not a twentieth.

this^

I thought I was the only one that noticed that. It's one of those social things. You always hate what you cannot have. Or, If it is popular, I should not like it, because that makes me a conformist, but I don't realize doing this makes me a conformist to unconformatism.