But honestly, all the factors you mentioned -- "innovation, originality, gameplay, storyline, replay value or controls" -- are much more subjective: the quality of those are subject to individual judgment on how "good" they are, e.g. how important is innovation, is this or that innovative and to what degree, etc. etc.

Sales is not so vague. This many copies were sold, bam.

But even that is not rock solid proof of "popularity", because of used game sales and rentals and even plain old local multiplayer. Some games tend to see more of this kind of circulation than others, so popularity isn't a simple function of sales IMO.

Yes, thanks.

You're absolutely right, popularity isn't such a simple function, but sales is probably the biggest factor, and the one that's the most reasonable to measure. Which is what my original point was, however ill-worded.

There we go.  And when you factor in all the other stuff that was brought up, you can see that even sales gets influenced by popularity and other outside sources so it can't be a solid measure of popularity.

If anything, popularity is just an abstract concept or an ideal.  A buzz-word people on the internet use to attach to games that sell well.  But if people then try to equate strong sales to 'popularity', then they start to run into problems.  And not all games that are deemed 'popular' are 'successful' in the sales category.  And vice versa.  A game that is deemed 'unpopular' can sell more than a game that is 'popular' (look at tons of examples on the Wii and DS compared to all the 'popular' games on the HD consoles for example).

no, but the validity of some of the arguments stated kind of does.  thats not really the point though.  If you step out of your bubble you can see how unreasonable you guys sound.  what you guys are saying is so wrong on so many levels that when shown to people outside the thread, its laughable.  you know, I can argue about stuff like FFVII or games I feel dont deserve their popularity. there are plenty of debating to be had among the gaming community, but this particular argument is idiotic, almost in a trolling sense. What it will eventually come down to will be arguments about our perceptions of reality, the construction of the gaming industry’s economy, the fundamentals of advertising and the effects of the "mob mentality." I mean, holy shit. this is out of hand. In this kind of argument no one wins. so, im just not going to concern myself with it. I need to make a few last points before I go.

judging by popularity (which is you say is measured by sales) is not objective or reasonable in any sense. you could look at a game's popularity and not even know what the game looks like, what the gameplay is like, what its about, what genre its in, or anything. all you know is its name and its sales.  But according to you, you could put your foot down and say, “this is enough information to safely vouch that this game is high quality.” so that is a more objective, reasonable, accurate summation than actually playing the game and judging by innovation, originality, gameplay, storyline, difficulty, replay value or controls? Yeah, if you use your technique and shoot in the dark you might pick some decent games that happen to be popular, but by your reasoning, it would be impossible for a game with lower sales to be good.  And it would also be assuming that all games that are popular and sell well, are great(not only that, but they are by far the best). How is that more logically valid than an individual using their natural human abilities to use reason and logic? 

Also must I remind you that popularity is based on the opinions of individuals?  Now, if these individuals were all well-researched and educated on a wide variety of games (assume, they have the expertise of any given professional reviewer), It might be understandable to trust the masses. But the problem is, the vast majority of consumers are not like that at all. People buy games, based off of popularity. The games are popular because people buy them. Thus the cycle builds and spirals. “OK, fine. Where does this circular reasoning begin,” you might ask? Well, you have insinuated that it begins with quality and that quality is, for the most part, the only driver. Any marketer will tell you otherwise.  Average people get their opinions from the media, whether it be ads or TV commercials.  Big developers hog the vast majority of that publicity. “Well, how did they get big?” you might ask. “isn’t it initially due to quality?” my answer would be yes, but that doesn’t mean the games they are releasing now are high quality. True, they have most likely done something in the past to deserve this wealth and acclaim but the origin is traced all the way back to the NES age. For the most part, that’s where most of the biggest companies originate. They may not have been around back then, but the stage was set for them. Companies like Nintendo produced innovative revolutionary games that spread like wildfire. Later on, smaller developers would be brought in by Nintendo and some would break off to form their own new franchises. By the time the PS2 age had hit, most of the biggest publishers and developers were established. Smaller companies would be hard pressed to compete. That is why we have giant behemoth companies that overshadow the rest. Does this mean that the reason they are at the top now, is strictly because of the quality of the games they now produce? Of course not. Its just simple economics.  Many of these companies are simply riding on the success of previous games. So these giants have a chokehold advertising and they influence the opinions of the ignorant masses indefinitely.  

So, in a nutshell, you are saying that the opinions of millions of consumer minions is the most viable and objective source of information? You would rather go by the blind opinions of masses, blindly, before you would look at a game from a reasoned, but opinionated standpoint? Why do the masses seem so credible to you? Less than millennium ago they knew for a fact the earth was the center of the universe. Now you may say “that’s a terrible analogy! You cant compare this to scientific fact.” Well, if you have asserted that quality is definable, measureable and quantifiable, than it could be easily misinterpreted by the ignorant masses just as in the case of an individual. When does a million possible (and most likely) invalid opinions become more credible than one persons logically solid opinion? How credible can a single person’s opinion be? What is the point of having opinions if in the end, the majority decides what’s good and what’s not?

this is where debating comes in and this is where you get people like me and many others on forums. In the end we can give our reasons and hope to convince other people of our views, though it is technically opinion in the end. We judge by many different standards and principles, and I believe we can sometimes reach a reasonable, solid conclusion that is nearly fact. But, if there’s one thing that can never be used as a method of objective judgment, its popularity. It is fickle complicated, built on ignorance, fueled by un-educated opinions and countless minute immeasurable factors.  If judging by sales is even remotely objective or accurate than explain this list. According to your logic, this list should be at least reasonably close to the perfect description of the top 20 games of the decade.  If you are right, the list should be pretty agreeable (or at least sort of agreeable). Lets take a look at the top 20 objectively chosen games of the decade

this is VGChartz top 20 highest grossing games

1. Wii Sports (Nintendo) 51.25m
2. Wii Play (Nintendo) 24.83m
3. Pokemon Gold/Silver (Nintendo) 23.10m
4. Nintendogs (Nintendo) 22.99m
5. Wii Fit (Nintendo) 22.73m
6. New Super Mario Bros (Nintendo) 19.81m
7. Mario Kart Wii (Nintendo) 18.60m
8. Dr Kawashima's Brain Training (Nintendo) 18.14m
9. Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (Rockstar) 18.08m
10. Pokemon Diamond/Pearl (Nintendo) 17.16m
11. Mario Kart DS (Nintendo) 16.26m
12. The Sims (EA) 16.08m
13. Pokemon Ruby/Sapphire (Nintendo) 15.38m
14. Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec (Sony) 14.89m
15. Pokemon Yellow: Special Pikachu Edition (Nintendo) 14.64m
16. More Brain Training with Dr Kawashima (Nintendo) 14.23m
17. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (Rockstar) 14.20m
18. World of Warcraft (Blizzard) 11.84m
19. Grand Theft Auto III (Rockstar) 11.60m
20. Animal Crossing: Wild World (Nintendo) 11.10m

I rest, my fucking case.

There. I have said everything that needs to be said. All this should be common sense for any gamer and I cant believe I just had to explain it all to you guys. Please relieve me and say that you were just trolling all along. Please. I will sleep better knowing that. anyway, if you read my entire longwinded comment, thanks. you deserve a cookie.