What holds more weight when determining the quality of a game?

Critical acclaim or sales?

I often see people hold sales to a very high regard, often times using sales as a support argument for why a game is of a certain high quality. I see many arguments claiming that sales is a more indicative figure than critical acclaim when determining the quality of a game. For example, some might say that Gears of War 2 is a better game than Uncharted 2 because it sold more, while other people might say that Uncharted 2 is a better game because it got higher reviews.

What is your stance on it? I personally think critical acclaim holds more weight when determining the quality of a game.

Your own personal opinion?soulitane

Um both?
but if we must choose one the simple matter is is that Sales the majority of the time do mean something something far more then ciritcal acclaim...People are buying the game because if preceived value and short of hearing of gamers returning a game in droves they are receiving that preceived value and enjoying themselves with said game.

Sales cannot be discounted they mean something. specially so to a developer whom could care less if a game gets critical acclaim they want their money back and profit.

Personal opinion > Acclaim > Sales.OreoMilkshake

Obviously this

Quality is a subjective matter and subjective means opinion... sales have nothing to do here.

sales =/= quality.MonsieurX

[QUOTE="MonsieurX"]sales =/= quality.The_Gaming_Baby

Hmmm... interesting.

@Blops+bros: sales =/= quality.

Your own personal opinion?soulitane

I seriously can't stand it when people tell me that games like mass effect 2 or UC2 are great games JUST because of the ammount of awards they got.