fun is subjective. quality is not.

i feel this message needs to be spread to all system wariors.

for example, halo 3. it is a high quality game. it has good graphics (for the time) great soundtrack, and great level design and weapons.

did you have playing it? maybe.

another example: super mario galaxy. a high quality game. absolutely level design, wonderful soundtrack, great gameplay.

did you have fun? you should¨ve, but maybe its not you're kind of game.

so when people say "*insert bad game here* is the best" they're wrong: its a bad game, but he had fun playing it.

or if they say:"*insert AAA game here* sucks." they're wrong, its a high quality game, but they didn't have fun with it

discuss.

...Quality is subjective.:| Your example of "well,this game has great level design, music, etc." assumes that these statements are fact, which they are not.

Quality can be subjective, as it's just based on other reviews. Your examples are just opinions in any event.

I do agree, critically those games and many more are of a fine quality, but opinions are opinions.

i think it'd be better if you pointed out what quality means in a video game

...Quality is subjective.:| Your example of "well,this game has great level design, music, etc." assumes that these statements are fact, which they are not.

VGobbsesser

listen too the doom sega 32x version soundtrack and then listen to the SNESs.

tell me which game has the better quality soundtrack.

compare crysis graphics and sims 3 graphics. which one has higher quality graphics?

i think it'd be better if you pointed out what quality means in a video game

88mphSlayer

everything exept fun really.

Both are subjective, I don't care what anyone says.

With that said, I do not think Halo is a quality game.

Both are subjective, I don't care what anyone says.

With that said, I do not think Halo is a quality game.

Theguy56

you mean: "i do not think Halo is a FUN game"

Someone who thinks like me, nice!

Super Mario Galaxy is by definition a high quality game. You can not say it's a crap game, but you can discuss why this game is not for you.

Both are subjective, I don't care what anyone says.

With that said, I do not think Halo is a quality game.

Theguy56

There are people who would prefer a NES to a PS3, simply because they feel that games were more fun back in those days. Whether a game is good, depends on fun but not quality. People prefer to buy on fun rather than quality, this is why GameSpot's GOTY Demon's Souls hasn't really recieved a huge amount of sales. Probably because people aren't into very difficult games.

[QUOTE="88mphSlayer"]

i think it'd be better if you pointed out what quality means in a video game

gamedude234

everything exept fun really.

well i would agree to an extent, but things like level design are built in the first place to be fun

ie: Crytek didn't make Crysis a semi-sandbox shooter just to show off the technical brilliance of the game, but also because they knew that style of gameplay would appeal to players

same goes for art design in games like Bioshock or Mass Effect, they're there to invoke something out of the player

polish is really important to gameplay tho, i think Nintendo has the best record of polishing their games above anybody else out there, it means less to everything else but is still important

imo things like music, art design, level design, and graphics can't be considered a "true quality" part of a game, as all of those things will be considered in a subjective manner by the player

imo the only thing you can call quality across-all-platforms is Polish, not just in terms of getting rid of glitches but also in terms of how a game functions and how well it's put together as a whole

[QUOTE="VGobbsesser"]

...Quality is subjective.:| Your example of "well,this game has great level design, music, etc." assumes that these statements are fact, which they are not.

gamedude234

listen too the doom sega 32x version soundtrack and then listen to the SNESs.

tell me which game has the better quality soundtrack.

compare crysis graphics and sims 3 graphics. which one has higher quality graphics?

This has nothing to do with what you stated before. Your original post only was concerned about the quality of an individual game, based on its own merits, not based on comparisions between two games. But for the sake of it:

For one thing, your first example is based on a comparison between what is, for all intents and purposes, the same game, while the second one is based on two different games.

For the first example, I have not heard either of the soundtracks, but perhaps you are discussing porting issues or a difference in technology?Besides, this still goes against what you said earlier, based on the sum of the parts of the game and not just on one individual part or game. Perhaps the version with the worse-sounding music is better overall to a certain person based on other differences?

Your second example does the same thing; uses only one individual part and assumes one is better playing than the other because of that part, not mentioning how the other parts may stack up in a certain person's eye.

Ok, lets say you are right for a second... now what if that "quality" game is boring as hell to me... why should I give a **** about it being a "quality" game when it isn't fun?

[QUOTE="VGobbsesser"]

...Quality is subjective.:| Your example of "well,this game has great level design, music, etc." assumes that these statements are fact, which they are not.

gamedude234

listen too the doom sega 32x version soundtrack and then listen to the SNESs.

tell me which game has the better quality soundtrack.

compare crysis graphics and sims 3 graphics. which one has higher quality graphics?

[QUOTE="Theguy56"]

Both are subjective, I don't care what anyone says.

With that said, I do not think Halo is a quality game.

Anjunaddict

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"][QUOTE="Theguy56"]

Both are subjective, I don't care what anyone says.

With that said, I do not think Halo is a quality game.

Theguy56

[QUOTE="Theguy56"][QUOTE="Anjunaddict"] Hmm..... don't know how to put this, but you are wrong? I have no problem if you say you don't like Halo for whatever reasons (a game can't please everyone) but to say its not a quality game? Do you really think its a crap game that just happens to get AAA reviews everywhere, GOTY awards and millions upon millions of sales? Not to mention has hundreds of thousands of players still playing it every day? Oh dear...Anjunaddict

[QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="Anjunaddict"] Sales can be a result of quality though, and ongoing popularity is certainly an indicator of quality. Why would hundreds of thousands of people continue to play the game every day if it was crap? Anyway, sounds to me like you getting into conspiracy theory territory, which i don't really have time for. Halo gets reviewed very well because its a high quality game. You should really just accept that it doesn't suit you, but that by no means makes it any less of a quality game. locopatho

[QUOTE="locopatho"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"] Same reason millions of people eat at McDonalds every day when they could be enjoying the dozens times more delicious and just as inexpensive Five Guys; horde mentality. smokeydabear076

...Quality is subjective.:| Your example of "well,this game has great level design, music, etc." assumes that these statements are fact, which they are not.

VGobbsesser

This is exactly right.

I couldn't have put it better myself.

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"][QUOTE="Theguy56"] Crap game no, but not quality. I also think MW2 is not a quality game even if it got AAA reviews almost everywhere. Sales are definitely not an indicator of quality. I don't usually put trust in reviewers who only try to see quality in FPS.smokeydabear076

Perfect example. Neglect the fact that sales = quality here, this is not what I'm discussing.

Ok so, Britney Spears is a 'quality' singer. Her voice is good, for the music genre she is into. You can not say she is a crap singer. But you can say that her music is not for you.

Much the same way, a game can be good, but not necesarilly for you.

To a certain extent, that is true. However, the components on which we base quality are in many ways subjective. Now, no-one can ignore that some games are just good, no matter what. Taking, as you say, SMG and saying the game is bad is plain stupid. But what is still debatable is upon what we base our decisions. Everyone has a different take on a certain aspect of a game: I liked the long cutscenes in MGS4, some hated them, I disliked the open nature of Fallout 3, others loved it. That's why I feel it is crucial that a game be judged for those that lie in the core demographic. Sports games aren't reviewed for the casual crowd, it's directed towards fans of the genre. Same could be said about many other things. I'm not nearly as big a fan of MW as others, but it's hard to deny it offers everything an war FPS fan needs.

So though I generally agree with you (OP), it's still a rather iffy subject matter in itself. I feel it is possible to say a game is good, period. However, I don't feel it is possible to say one game is better than the other unless the gameplay is so much alike that it isn't even funny (Dante's Inferno comes to mind). Ignoring objective quality is stupid, but what one person sees as quality can be something else entirely in the eyes of another.

Well when we acknowledge (and we all do) that there is an obvious set of quality standards which gamers, developers and reviewers in general follow, ofc you are correct.

When X game doesn't meet these standards and you like it, that simply means you like a product of inferior quality then. No biggie. :33

Well when we acknowledge (and we all do) that there is an obvious set of quality standards which gamers, developers and reviewers in general follow, ofc you are correct.

When X game doesn't meet these standards and you like it, that simply means you like a product of inferior quality then. No biggie. :33

Dystopian-X

[QUOTE="locopatho"] Don't have that here though :PVandalvideo

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"][QUOTE="Theguy56"]

Both are subjective, I don't care what anyone says.

With that said, I do not think Halo is a quality game.

Theguy56

[QUOTE="Dystopian-X"]

Well when we acknowledge (and we all do) that there is an obvious set of quality standards which gamers, developers and reviewers in general follow, ofc you are correct.

When X game doesn't meet these standards and you like it, that simply means you like a product of inferior quality then. No biggie. :33

Vandalvideo

We don't have to be governed by them. You are free to be a deviant of the quality norm all you want however don't expect the majority which sets the standard to agree with yours.Dystopian-X

IF by quality you mean production values then no, that is not subjective. But It woulf be my opinion if I hated said High quality game, that doesn't make it any worse a game though. Just not a game for me.

[QUOTE="smokeydabear076"]

[QUOTE="Anjunaddict"] Sales can be a result of quality though, and ongoing popularity is certainly an indicator of quality. Why would hundreds of thousands of people continue to play the game every day if it was crap? Anyway, sounds to me like you getting into conspiracy theory territory, which i don't really have time for. Halo gets reviewed very well because its a high quality game. You should really just accept that it doesn't suit you, but that by no means makes it any less of a quality game. kontejner44

Perfect example. Neglect the fact that sales = quality here, this is not what I'm discussing.

Ok so, Britney Spears is a 'quality' singer. Her voice is good, for the music genre she is into. You can not say she is a crap singer. But you can say that her music is not for you.

Much the same way, a game can be good, but not necesarilly for you.

Games are complex and hard to break down and analyze. Take this example:

We have 2 toothbrushes in front of us.

Nr 1 is of higher quality than the 2nd, lets assume we have defined exactly what quality is in a toothbrush. (objective)

However, the quality toothbrush does not come in the color red which happends to be my fav. (subjective)

I choose the red one because in my mind, its more important to have the red colored one as the higher quality one wont do much difference. But I will still agree that the first toothbrush is of higher quality.

(Game is good, but not for me)

That is fine by me. Why should I care if people on the internet agree with my opinion or not? It is nothing more than opinion, just as yours is nothing more than opinion. Yours does not gain strength by numbers.Vandalvideo

There certainly is a difference between a well made game and a badly made game, but what the **** does it matter if a game is well made if you just don't have fun playing it? You play games for fun, not to analyze quality...

Games are complex and hard to break down and analyze. Take this example:

We have 2 toothbrushes in front of us.

Nr 1 is of higher quality than the 2nd, lets assume we have defined exactly what quality is in a toothbrush. (objective)

However, the quality toothbrush does not come in the color red which happends to be my fav. (subjective)

I choose the red one because in my mind, its more important to have the red colored one as the higher quality one wont do much difference. But I will still agree that the first toothbrush is of higher quality.

(Game is good, but not for me)

kontejner44