You must have missed seece his sig:

MikeB reckons the PS3 isn't bought by retailors as much as the 360 and Wii because of its ..... wait for it. Its box size.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?id=1884863

xD

Holy shit, that can't be a serious post!

It can't! I mean, what would that imply for a human being to actualy think something like that... I prefer to believe it was sarcasm.

didn't know this until you posted. I just had to comment on it in the thread. :)

Well, let's think about it.

Quality is typically seen by one value, and it in of itself is irrelivent to everything else. Quality is seen as this high art type stuff. It's fancy painitngs, elegant food and, in this case, "good" videogames. We see quality as something seperate from sales and appeal. I belive quality exist so people can say "So what if more people liked it. It lacks quality." If you dwell on it, you'll see that is really stupid. So what does it matter that it's better to some of those "fancy" people if no one else agrees. It comes off as rationilization for being alone in liking that one item.

Let's think about the McDonalds example. They compair and contrast McDonalds to a gourmet chef making a hamburger. The chef can make the patty bette,r season it to prefection, and work his so called magic. McDonalds just puts a premade frozen patty on the skillet. But the chef would probably charge an arm and a leg to make that one hamburger. He'll also be slower then McDonalds. What if you want fries, or a drink. I would take quite a while. The Mcdonalds burger comes with the fries and a drink for a low price. plus, it takes only a little time. McDonalds has a drive though letting one get their food really quick. The restaraunt where the chef works may allow pick up (doubtful since we are saying this is an amazing chef), but it will still be slower then McDonalds.

So how does McDonalds stay in business. If it was about the quality of the food, they would have gone out of business. McDonalds is known for making the asmmebly line for food. This is what made then big, along with their variety of food and their prices. This is why we see so many fast foos chains. These chains are also the ones who do the most penatration into other countries. So, we can say the quality that made McDonalds a household name was/is their prices and their speed. In fact, despite the fact Supersize Me essentually discredited McDonalds on a national level, the company posted increased profits in Q3 of 2004.

So then answer me this: why would we care about "quality." McDonalds is considered low quality. Taco Bell is loved a lot more then other places despite having low grade meat, the epitamy of poor quality. Yet people will there rather then a 5 star restaruant. Then I ask, if companies are making low quality products, then why do we care about it. Who cares is the product is high quality. You may go to a dieing company who specializes in making "quality" and tell them it's all right. It's all right that their company is burning becuase they make quality products. This is what is happening to Sony's game division.

Money is what businesses care about. They care about making customers, so they must find what customers value. So I say, lets make a new "quality." Quality is no longer this higher culture products that the few enjoy. Opera was quality. Pinball was not. But we know that pinball thried during the depression while Opera became a thing of the past. Pinball made money, Operas didn't.

The hads of these comapnies, if their smart, look at what customers like. What they value. They know that finding what the mass consumers want will make then rich. So, they make products the consumer will want to buy. If the consumer does not care about the "quality" of the food, then why make that a focus (this is what Nintendo is doing with the Wii. Many core gamers want Nintendo to follow their path of "quality." Nintendo chose the path of consumer pleasing and is "printing money"). But, if custimers want faster preperation and lower prices, then the company must find out how to achive those goals.

These goals are what quality really is. To the business man, the quality is what consumers like. If he/she can give consumers what they really want, then he will make money. His view of quality is what consumers want. Consumers, on the other hand, want what will improve their life. While a high class restaraunt burger may taste better and be better for them, a McDonalds burger eliminates the wait and allows the consumer keep money in his/her pocket (in this economic scare, this quality is what is going to drive business. You can already see advertisments play on this despite only a month into the scare). So, to them, McDonalds is better quality becuase it fits into their life better. They may not say this, but since they spend more money on the cheap stuff, it has a higher value to them. If we look at this, quality can be judged by consumer's wants. Quality as everyone wants to talk about does not relate to making money or how much people will buy something. If this is true, then why should we care (don't foeget this is a sales forum. This stuff should matter to us,). No, the quality I talk about is the one that keeps the world going. Consumers wanted fast food, so McDonalds thrived. Consumers wanted cheap entertainment, so Operas failed.

Heck, even if we look at in it's basic form, we can see the same solution. If consumers spend so much money on this cheap stuff, then it must have quality. Wouldn't the customer turn away if they were buys products that lack quality. If quality is so importaint, then wouldn't people move towards it, not away. Then it must be these values everyone ignored.

Regarding the topic, yes, as has been said by many people here, it's Pokemon. I personally may not be a fan of either, but that doesn't negate the fact of how well known they are. Truthfully, I'd not be surprised (but am not claiming one way or the other) if Pokemon and Pikachu have surpassed Mario for global recognition.

Now, if you wanted to say a game as revolutionary to the JRPG, I'd probably give that to FF7. To get something out to the masses, you have to take the (perceived) complex item, and give it a simple wrapper. However, this doesn't decomplicate things, so something is added to fluff up the space from what was removed. FF7 used graphics as a wrapper, and when they added stuff (FMVs up the wazoo), some of what made up the classic JRPG spilled out. The "complicated" parts, such as where do I go now, were what was removed. The game took you by the hand through it, which is what made it more accessable, and led to the explosion. Knowing full well that many of the newer fans would complain if the walking hand was removed meant that they had to keep these changes to keep their market.

To "kill" FF7, if you will, would require making it even more accessable. The graphics wrapper is already in place, so that won't work again. However, what could they add, and what else would be removed in the process? I don't think it's going to happen, and truthfully, I don't want it to, either. I pine for the games of yore, knowing full well that I am a dying breed...

@Smashchu:
Interesting stuff. But I think you're looking at this too much as a business (yes I know how ridiculous that sounds), and you have to try to look at this a little but more as art.
Look at cinema. There are movies that are made to make a lot of money, and most of the time, they work. Does that mean there are no independent efforts anymore? Or that sometimes people (with and without money) won't make a movie just for the fun of it? Bruce Campbell does it all the time...
I think you might've been right in the past, but now this industry is too diverse for what you said to be entirely true. Game is now art (was it ever not?), and seeing it as just a business is a little bit narrow minded of you.

This thread should have been killed with this post.

 You are talking like if FF7 didnt sell almost 10 million copies. It sold well and had great critics, and more. Thats what people apreciatte, quality, and if they do that in a way it appeals to the general publi they may get sales like the FF main series.

Oh, and McDonalds sucks in any way, I dont get why people eat there, Im willing to pay more to get better food, and Im willing to wait to get better food, when you see people eating shit like McDonalds food and see what happens to them and how their life is you get its better not to eat there.

@Smashchu2

I love how you back away from your stance on popular equals quality to switch to a quality versus value argument.  Your entire argument just went from "It has more sales, so it must be of higher quality" to "It has more sales, it must be of higher value."  Charming.

Also, pitting quality versus value shows flawed logic in itself.  Quality is a part of perceived value (as is price) thus something of higher quality will be of higher value (than it would otherwise be) however something of higher value need not be of higher quality becuase quality is not the only component.