Khuutra said:
...What a peculiar thing to say. Would you expand on that, please? |
He's saying because they sold so well, they are quality games. When in fact that's completely wrong.
Seece said:
He's saying because they sold so well, they are quality games. When in fact that's completely wrong. |
Is it?
And if so, what does that have to do with how a review is written?
I love it, Wii fans are the only group to act like Metacritic is useless or doesn't exist. (and for good reason, because most of their top games are poorly reviewed).
Except for maybe when someone brings up SMG.
And lol@20m sales equaling quality.
Khuutra said:
Is it? And if so, what does that have to do with how a review is written? |
Yes it is.
He is saying those games deserve high scores because many people buy them
a game isn't reviewed on that basis at all. Plenty of games that have sold a lot have had shoddy graphics, or poor gameplay, not long enough, ect.
Just because carnival games sold well doesn't make it a GREAT game, whatever people say.
Some people may think it is, but on paper. No.
Pyro as Bill said:
Nah, they are temporary. Elvis, The Beatles and Michael Jackson are probably the best musicians (I'm not a fan of any of them but I accept they're the best musical entertainers). Books? No idea. Bible maybe. Greatest story ever told apparently. NSMB, Wii Sports, WSR, Mario Kart, Wii Fit are the best games available for the majority of gamers. If a game sells 20M it's a quality game and clearly deserves a high score. |
Especially when those 20m sales are the result of a year's worth of legs.
Legs = quality
High day 1 sales = hype
| Seece said: Yes it is. He is saying those games deserve high scores because many people buy them a game isn't reviewed on that basis at all. Plenty of games that have sold a lot have had shoddy graphics, or poor gameplay, not long enough, ect.
Just because carnival games sold well doesn't make it a GREAT game, whatever people say. Some people may think it is, but on paper. No. |
Nnot just that they buy them - that they praise them, and others buy them as consequence, on and on.
But I wouldn't say it has anythingn to do with scores, either, because reviews have never been a very good metric of quality.
"On paper" is meaningless, here, because there is no objective standard of quality for video games.
| Seece said: Just because carnival games sold well doesn't make it a GREAT game, whatever people say. Some people may think it is, but on paper. No. |
What does that mean? "Just because you think it's good doesn't mean it's good?" I'm surprised to hear you take such an elitist stance.
Khuutra said:
Nnot just that they buy them - that they praise them, and others buy them as consequence, on and on. But I wouldn't say it has anythingn to do with scores, either, because reviews have never been a very good metric of quality. "On paper" is meaningless, here, because there is no objective standard of quality for video games. |
""On paper" is meaningless, here, because there is no objective standard of quality for video games."
Yes there is.
| Seece said: ""On paper" is meaningless, here, because there is no objective standard of quality for video games."
Yes there is. |
Can you elaborate on what it is, then?
noname2200 said:
What does that mean? "Just because you think it's good doesn't mean it's good?" I'm surprised to hear you take such an elitist stance. |
It's not elitist.
I think Lips (X360) is a fun game, a great game in fact (for me personally) do i think it should have scored any higher than 7.5? no.
There is a measure on the worth of a game, graphics, sound ect.
A game sells 20 mill, does that automatically mean it has all those qualities to make it a high rated game?
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
