Actually, Monster Hunter 2 sold in excess of 500K units in Japan, which is quite good for over there. The other two titles sold less well, but were fairly solid. Obviously they were able to build recognition of the series before the portable games were released.

So how do you suggest we rate the view of the "general public?" Your opinion is obviolsy a terrible measure, as is any other single persons opnion. I would tell you the Halo series is pretty bad over all, but I am clearly in a minority on that one. If a game sells extremely well, then the general public clearly thinks highly of it. Mario Party 8, for example, would not be selling so well months after release if the general public hated it. Review scores can tell you how "high quality" a game is, but sales tell you how well the general populace reacted to it.

Gnizmo said: I asked Soriku if he could give me some examples of other games that got mediocre reviews and were found to be good by the general public. Remeber, just 'cause it sells doesn't mean it's good. So how do you suggest we rate the view of the "general public?" Your opinion is obviolsy a terrible measure, as is any other single persons opnion. I would tell you the Halo series is pretty bad over all, but I am clearly in a minority on that one. If a game sells extremely well, then the general public clearly thinks highly of it. Mario Party 8, for example, would not be selling so well months after release if the general public hated it. Review scores can tell you how "high quality" a game is, but sales tell you how well the general populace reacted to it.

 My opinion seems to be on par with that of many reviewers, your opinion though seems to be the real terrible measure.

 

Soccer mom buy games for their kids all the time, do you think they have a clue how good the game is? They see and recognize Mario and know that will be good and violent free for Little Johny to play. 

Well, now that Monster Hunter is on a Nintendo system, Soriku actually gives a shit.

Hey, don't hate on Mario. The level of quality in Mario games is generally very high, and just because they are "non-violent" makes them no less excellent. Hate on terrible licensed software, like Chicken Little, Surf's Up, Ratatouille, etc. Hate on it HARD.

MontanaHatchet said: Well, now that Monster Hunter is on a Nintendo system, Soriku actually gives a shit.

Well that's a stupid thing to say.  Of course he only cares now that it's on a system he owns.  Everyone looks for information about games on their own systems first.

No, I mean the series. Only now does he care about the series, despite it being great, because it's on a Nintendo system. I mean, I've pretty much always owned all the consoles, so I don't have a basis for comparison.

Still, if say, the Mother series hit the Sony consoles, you'd likely see Sony fanboys rushing to find out what it is, despite it having been a great series the whole time.

I will say this: if Monster Hunter can fill the gap left by PSO (PSU notwithstanding), it will be a good thing. All the better if more people get the chance to play it. Still though, I can't see it moving very many units outside of Japan...

So the only measure of a games quality is based on reviewers? Then you have set an impossible task. With your definitions in place there is no game that can get mediocre reviews and be anything other than mediocre. You either need to redefine how a games quality is measured, or redefine the original challenge. Anything else is little more than justifying bashing a popular game because it went to a system you don't like.



You clearly know way different soccer moms than I do. They buy games cause their kids won't shut-up about them, and because their friends kids really seem to enjoy it. They don't just go into a store and pick a game randomly off the shelf all together and then decide it works. If Mario being on the front were enough to sell games, Mario's Time Machine would have very good sales numbers to back it.