Highest sales = highest quality; reviews are useless

TC is trolling.

There is no way he actually believes that.

I can honestly say that I have never used the dishonest, cowardly tactic of hiding behind sales and reviewers before.

the same cannot be said for most people on SW. specifically lemmings. how many times have we heard this?

"halo is better than _______. it has better reviews and sales!!! what now???"

I see this, literally, every time I get on SW.

. And what other factors affect sales?Mrmccormo

Impulse buys?

Though what you say can have some legs to it, but it has flaws. You could apply this to every consumer product out there. You can do it from music to movies to towels to TVs. The bottom line is sales aren't everything. Just because it sells doesn't neccessaryly mean that it is quality. I mean just look at Wal-Mart, I bet Wal-Mart sells more of its mainstays brand candles then Yankee Candle does. Does that mean that Mainstays is a better candle than Yankeee Candle? Heck no. Sales aren't everything and sometimes are a deterrent to what a product actually is.

I can honestly say that I have never used the dishonest, cowardly tactic of hiding behind sales and reviewers before.

the same cannot be said for most people on SW. specifically lemmings. how many times have we heard this?

"halo is better than _______. it has better reviews and sales!!! what now???"

I see this, literally, every time I get on SW.

There is no direct correlation between sales and quality. If a developer misled the customer into believing a game was better than it really was when it wasn't, would the sales indicate whether it was a good game or not?

Sales are a factor of game quality, advertising, and hype.

Highest sales = highest marketing budget. Nothing more, nothing less.

liking or disliking a game can be subjective.

quality however, is not.

I can honestly say that I have never used the dishonest, cowardly tactic of hiding behind sales and reviewers before.

the same cannot be said for most people on SW. specifically lemmings. how many times have we heard this?

"halo is better than _______. it has better reviews and sales!!! what now???"

I see this, literally, every time I get on SW.

arbitor365

I don't beleive I've done that.

Anyways, what can I say that hasn't been said before? Sales do not equal quality. If that were true, CoD would be the best game(s) to come out every year. But guess what? They aren't. I trust reviews moreso. I usually read a mixture of both good and bad (actually, I try to find bad reviews moreso than good ones) and judge based on that, and information that has already been released. Just because a game is selling well doesn't mean it has quality.

highest sales = most mainstream. Nothing else

I don't know why but in the music industry awards are so pointless to the majority of people, but in the videogame industry scores and GOTYs are so important

[QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]i'm not assuming anything. i'm pointing out exceptions where for you a sale = absolute measure of quality. i am not saying that there's a large portion of people who don't like the game. what are you saying though? there's a large portion of people who like the game? care to prove that? you're also ignoring all the other factors that influence game sales. why?Mrmccormo

that's not how it works, dude. people aren't buying a picture. they're buying a game in hopes that they will like it. the majority won't know for certain ahead of time that they will like what they buy. you keep ignoring this. if what you are saying is true then the word "disappointment" would not exist because there would be no need for it. all you are saying is "no dude i'm right" even though dozens of people have punched holes in your argument. i'm not sure at this point if you even believe what you say.

another thing you ignore is the degree of satisfaction. what does quality even mean? like it? love it? best game ever? how do sales correlate to those degrees? is there a cutoff?

ico, horrible game, am I right?

FeedOnATreeFrog

[QUOTE="Mrmccormo"][QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]i'm not assuming anything. i'm pointing out exceptions where for you a sale = absolute measure of quality. i am not saying that there's a large portion of people who don't like the game. what are you saying though? there's a large portion of people who like the game? care to prove that? you're also ignoring all the other factors that influence game sales. why?CaseyWegner

that's not how it works, dude. people aren't buying a picture. they're buying a game in hopes that they will like it. the majority won't know for certain ahead of time that they will like what they buy. you keep ignoring this. if what you are saying is true then the word "disappointment" would not exist because there would be no need for it. all you are saying is "no dude i'm right" even though dozens of people have punched holes in your argument. i'm not sure at this point if you even believe what you say.

another thing you ignore is the degree of satisfaction. what does quality even mean? like it? love it? best game ever? how do sales correlate to those degrees? is there a cutoff?

I don't know why but in the music industry awards are so pointless to the majority of people, but in the videogame industry scores and GOTYs are so important

JuarN18

[QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

[QUOTE="Mrmccormo"] Can I prove that a large portion of people liked the game? I can prove that they liked it enough to buy it as opposed to spending their money on dozens of other things. And what other factors affect sales? Remember, the whole point of this thread is that people buy something when they view it as quality. Higher game sales means that more people viewed that game to have quality. In business, the consumer decides what is quality. However, gamers like to deny this because they'd rather argue about review scores and feel-good concepts like "art style" and whatnot to say a game has quality. But this is a business discussion. Anyone care to actually use business arguments to refute what I said? Because so far, everyone is simply saying "no dude you wrong!" and nothing more.Mrmccormo

that's not how it works, dude. people aren't buying a picture. they're buying a game in hopes that they will like it. the majority won't know for certain ahead of time that they will like what they buy. you keep ignoring this. if what you are saying is true then the word "disappointment" would not exist because there would be no need for it. all you are saying is "no dude i'm right" even though dozens of people have punched holes in your argument. i'm not sure at this point if you even believe what you say.

another thing you ignore is the degree of satisfaction. what does quality even mean? like it? love it? best game ever? how do sales correlate to those degrees? is there a cutoff?

quality comes down to the individual, if you think it sucks the game sucks.APiranhaAteMyVa

liking or disliking a game can be subjective.

quality however, is not.

Dead-Memories

[QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

[QUOTE="Mrmccormo"] Can I prove that a large portion of people liked the game? I can prove that they liked it enough to buy it as opposed to spending their money on dozens of other things. And what other factors affect sales? Remember, the whole point of this thread is that people buy something when they view it as quality. Higher game sales means that more people viewed that game to have quality. In business, the consumer decides what is quality. However, gamers like to deny this because they'd rather argue about review scores and feel-good concepts like "art style" and whatnot to say a game has quality. But this is a business discussion. Anyone care to actually use business arguments to refute what I said? Because so far, everyone is simply saying "no dude you wrong!" and nothing more.Mrmccormo

that's not how it works, dude. people aren't buying a picture. they're buying a game in hopes that they will like it. the majority won't know for certain ahead of time that they will like what they buy. you keep ignoring this. if what you are saying is true then the word "disappointment" would not exist because there would be no need for it. all you are saying is "no dude i'm right" even though dozens of people have punched holes in your argument. i'm not sure at this point if you even believe what you say.

another thing you ignore is the degree of satisfaction. what does quality even mean? like it? love it? best game ever? how do sales correlate to those degrees? is there a cutoff?

that goes out the window when you make a statement like "we're being completely illogicalabout it". you brought the gamer into this.

[QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

[QUOTE="Mrmccormo"] Can I prove that a large portion of people liked the game? I can prove that they liked it enough to buy it as opposed to spending their money on dozens of other things. And what other factors affect sales? Remember, the whole point of this thread is that people buy something when they view it as quality. Higher game sales means that more people viewed that game to have quality. In business, the consumer decides what is quality. However, gamers like to deny this because they'd rather argue about review scores and feel-good concepts like "art style" and whatnot to say a game has quality. But this is a business discussion. Anyone care to actually use business arguments to refute what I said? Because so far, everyone is simply saying "no dude you wrong!" and nothing more.Mrmccormo

that's not how it works, dude. people aren't buying a picture. they're buying a game in hopes that they will like it. the majority won't know for certain ahead of time that they will like what they buy. you keep ignoring this. if what you are saying is true then the word "disappointment" would not exist because there would be no need for it. all you are saying is "no dude i'm right" even though dozens of people have punched holes in your argument. i'm not sure at this point if you even believe what you say.

another thing you ignore is the degree of satisfaction. what does quality even mean? like it? love it? best game ever? how do sales correlate to those degrees? is there a cutoff?

No, when a business releases a product that sells well it is considered successful. The things that lead up to success are not easily identifiable. If they were, every product released would be a success.

Quality is at odds with what businesses are trying to do, make the most money while incurring the lowest costs possible.

Welp, we heard it here folks...*sells all games, and buys Just Dance 2*

[QUOTE="Mrmccormo"][QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

that's not how it works, dude. people aren't buying a picture. they're buying a game in hopes that they will like it. the majority won't know for certain ahead of time that they will like what they buy. you keep ignoring this. if what you are saying is true then the word "disappointment" would not exist because there would be no need for it. all you are saying is "no dude i'm right" even though dozens of people have punched holes in your argument. i'm not sure at this point if you even believe what you say.

another thing you ignore is the degree of satisfaction. what does quality even mean? like it? love it? best game ever? how do sales correlate to those degrees? is there a cutoff?

Pug-Nasty

No, when a business releases a product that sells well it is considered successful. The things that lead up to success are not easily identifiable. If they were, every product released would be a success.

Quality is at odds with what businesses are trying to do, make the most money while incurring the lowest costs possible.

and how about a company that sells two grades of an item...a high quality version and a lower quality version. the high quality version is more expensive than the lower quality version so it sells less. does that mean that the low quality version is of higher quality than the high quality version?

And i though this guy was a PS3 guy

I'm sorry, but saying sales equals is quality is idiocy. All you have to do is look at Hollywood for the proof. I agree with some of your other points, but this is SW.Deathtransit

Agreed.

these ideas dont work because of marketing. if you make the greatest shooter in the world and sell it on the ds for 50 dollars and market it primarily to soccer moms it wont sell. does this mean the greatest shooter is a pile of crap?

then if you put it on the 360 and market it to teens and adults then it sells 6 million units is it suddenly a better game than before even though nothings changed?