Of course, what constitutes a 'good' or 'great' game is subjective. How could it not be? But are game sales - essentailly a referendum on an individual title - a good way to measure game quality? Better or worse than reviews - (which are often biased in many ways, and slave to what could be a trend in thinking at that given time)?
I do introduce one qualifier - of course, a game that sells poorly would not neccesarily be 'bad' it could simply have liimited market, or a host of other variables that limited it sales. But that is not for THIS topic, - on the other end of the scale - just how well does the game buying public do in crowning its sales kings? Here are some lists, for disccussion, taken from our mutual friend wikipedia....we will do top 5's for the sake of space and neatness....
Wii Sports (45.71 million Wii Play (22.98 million Wii Fit (18.22 million Mario Kart Wii (15.4 million Super Smash Bros. Brawl (8.43 million
Nintendo DS
Nintendogs All versions (22.27 million New Super Mario Bros. (18.45 million] Brain Age: Train Your Brain in Minutes a Day! (17.41 million) [Pokémon Diamond and Pearl (16.81 million Mario Kart DS (14.61 million
NES
Super Mario Bros. (40.23 million) Super Mario Bros. 3 (18 million) Super Mario Bros. 2 (10 million) The Legend of Zelda (6.51 million) Zelda II: The Adventure of Link (4.38 million)
Atari2600
Pac-Man (7 million Pitfall! (4 million) Missile Command (2.5 million) Demon Attack (2 million) E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1.5 million)
All time franchises :
Mario (201 million) Pokémon (186 million) The Sims (100 million) Need for Speed (Almost 100 million) Final Fantasy (85 million)
All time - (non bundled)
1. Wii Play (Wii – 22.98 million 2. Nintendogs (DS – 22.27 million, 3. Pokémon Red, Blue, and Green (Game Boy – 20.08 4. New Super Mario Bros. (DS – 18.45 million 5. Wii Fit (Wii – 18.22 million)
Hardcore, casual = marketing. The real divide is between arcade and narrative games.
Quality is completely subjective. There is no scientific measure of quality, including sales. Grand Theft Auto games sell very well, for example, and I think the entire series is utter garbage. Am I right, or are the numbers? Well, both are. The game is poor quality to me, but apparently satisfies a lot of other gamers. You can't reach a universal standard of quality unless everyone has the same tastes. Sales are good for a general consensus, but that is obvious and doesn't need proving.
Also, of course reviews are biased. There is no such thing as an objective opinion when judging a game.
reviews - (which are often biased in many ways, and slave to what could be a trend in thinking at that given time)?
Considering the fact that reviews are nothing more than the opinions held by the reviewer in question, I would say that they are ALWAYS biased. That's just the nature of what they are.
If you ask anyone in the world what they think of a certain book / movie / song / TV show / video game / work of art, the response they give you will be biased. It'll be biased by their own opinion...which is what you're asking them for.
Sales are irrelevant. I mean, look at WiiPlay and in contrast, any awesome Atlus RPG. Quality may be subjective, but bad games DO exist, and it's not that hard to identify them. This is why I hate when fellow Nintendo gamers use the Wii sales as an indicator of quality - just like Playstation fans did the last two generations.
@Rm88 Sales aren't irrelevant. Simply put, you might have the greatest game in the world that you know everyone would love, but if it doesn't catch on and make sales, then it slips into oblivion never to see appreciation or sequels. Plus a game like it might not ever be made again simply because the developers would consider it too risky to try.
I do understand what you are saying though. I buy games based off of my own enjoyment. I do read reviews and hope that others like it as well as I do, but when it comes down to it, as long as I like it, I don't care. I do wish the games success in sales so that maybe they'll make more like it. So there's where I do care about sales vs general perception of games.
Of course they aren't irrelevant in terms of the likelihood of a sequel, but the point was that they don't determine quality. Quality games don't always sell.
I think they do reflect quality. Look at those list. You find what you may think are exceptions, and what may be exceptions -( such as Wii Play, I disagree, but that is fine...; ) - but look at the overall rule.
Look at NES in particular : 3 Mario games and 2 Zelda games. Those are 5 fingers in the tightest fist of game quality in any system, period, in my opinion.....
Hardcore, casual = marketing. The real divide is between arcade and narrative games.
Of course the question of quality is subjective, but unfortunately we don't live in an utopia where we can individually try out all the games and develop opinions in a vacuum. It would be nice though.
I wouldn't ever say that someones opinion on what constitutes a quality game is wrong (well, not seriously), but a general rule for me would be that great games stand the test of time. People are still downloading SMB3 and talking about Ocarina in glowing terms decades after their release and that I think is testament to those games. If we have to use a measure other than our own opinion (and lets face it life would be pretty maddening if you had to verify everything yourself) then I think that's a good one.
Well, I agree most of those games are good, but there are tons of epic games that sell poorly and bad games that get good sales. Therefore, I don't think sales can accurately reflect quality.
@eugene Just because a game doesn't sell good doesn't mean it's bad,it could be an awesome game. Also,just because a game sells great doesn't mean the game is good,it could be big-time shovelware or just awful.
Here are 2 quick examples: Example 1:Wario Land:Shake It! is an awesome platforming game,but apparently not too many people are buying it. It's sad really. That's an example of a good game that doesn't sell well. Example 2: Pong Toss,need I say more?
@eugene Just because a game doesn't sell good doesn't mean it's bad,it could be an awesome game. Also,just because a game sells great doesn't mean the game is good,it could be big-time shovelware or just awful.
Here are 2 quick examples: Example 1:Wario Land:Shake It! is an awesome platforming game,but apparently not too many people are buying it. It's sad really. That's an example of a good game that doesn't sell well. Example 2: Pong Toss,need I say more?
One of the first things Eugene said was that obviously not all good games sell well. His suggestion is that perhaps all games that sell well are good -- but they aren't necessarily the only good games. Also, Wario Land: Shake It was pretty awful. That's an example of how game quality is completely subjective.
@eugene Just because a game doesn't sell good doesn't mean it's bad,it could be an awesome game. Also,just because a game sells great doesn't mean the game is good,it could be big-time shovelware or just awful.
Here are 2 quick examples: Example 1:Wario Land:Shake It! is an awesome platforming game,but apparently not too many people are buying it. It's sad really. That's an example of a good game that doesn't sell well. Example 2: Pong Toss,need I say more?
One of the first things Eugene said was that obviously not all good games sell well. His suggestion is that perhaps all games that sell well are good -- but they aren't necessarily the only good games. Also, Wario Land: Shake It was pretty awful. That's an example of how game quality is completely subjective.
Dang it,I thought Wario Land:Shake It! was awesome. But I guess everyone has their own opinion. Fine then,why don't you and everybody else come up with good examples of games that are good but didn't sell well. Here is a better example:Toki Tori.
Forums
Topic: Fresh discussion.....Just how good an indicator are game SALES of overall game QUALITY?
Posts 1 to 19 of 19
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.