It's time to stop using "but it sells well! " for dismissing legitimate criticism.

[Zelda]

A game can sell well and suck at the same time for sure. When that happens usually you hope that people learn their lesson and don't buy the next iteration. Lots of games can sell purely on hype alone with no substance. At the end of the day though everyone has their own opinion and devs / publishers are in the business of making money so whatever path can net them the most profit is the path they will choose to take. The problem isn't the games or game makers, the problem is that the mass market isn't as well informed as you think before making their purchase.

 

[dragonflys545]

Money talks more than criticism. That's just reality.

Just look at all the sports titles released yearly. Shit gets worse by the year.

 

[TheEchosOfTheCyborg]

I'm honestly kind of baffled by this thread and the sheer amount of people treating sells as the end all be all of artistic quality and criticism which as others have said, seems so odd to see in a discussion forum about video games, like what's even the point of ERA then if this is the mentality we're having.

Sells don't mean quality, as the above Sora87 said, it's like a lot of the users complaining and criticising bought the game themselves and have issues with it (which doesn't mean hate as some seem to think, you can love something and still criticise it in the hopes of making it better). Persona 5 sold well, doens't mean the criticise of homophobia and sexism isn't valid or important, Red Dead 2 Sold well, doesn't mean we ignore the poor working conditions at Rockstar or means people who have issues with some features are "Objectively" wrong.

Saying "It sold well" is a lazy argument and I hate to say it but I'm really getting the vibe I see in comment sections below reviews where I see people complain about the reviewers being "subjective" or "wrong" because their score doesn't match others or the "It's sold well" and like, yes it's subjective, all opinions are, that's not a revelation, art is subjective and people can and will debate, discuss and yes criticise art, dismissing that or shutting it up isn't going to change anything.

Like Transformers Revenge of the Fallen was a success at the box-office, does that mean it's immune to criticism? Lilith no. Hell, just because something is financially successful doesn't mean people don't listen to feedback and criticism

 

[CyberCaesar]

Can anyone point me to a game that sold over 5 million copies that was bad?

 

[Deleted member 29464]

I honestly think people prefer drive by comments to constructive wordy criticism because the former is easy to dismiss and the latter makes people feel the need to debate and question arguments and their love of a game. This is despite them probably claiming they prefer vice versa.

It's much easier to see X game you love sucks than a breakdown of why someone finds what you like to be poor.

 

[Deleted member 4869]

Marketing can do a lot when it comes to sales. FFXV sold a lot but was one of the worst in the series.

Click to shrink...

Always some bullshit excuse on why a game someone doesn't like sold well. Always.

 

[LuisGarcia]

I don'tknow how anyone can seriously say Rockstar games have bad writing. Especially in comparison with other video games ( which is all they should be compared to).

RDR2 had great writing and some of the best characters ever.

Their games sell well for good reason. And it's a legitimate argument.

 

[ArjanN]

Can anyone point me to a game that sold over 5 million copies that was bad?

Click to shrink...

Literally every game is a bad game to someone.

I don'tknow how anyone can seriously say Rockstar games have bad writing. Especially in comparison with other video games ( which is all they should be compared to).

RDR2 had great writing and some of the best characters ever.

Their games sell well for good reason. And it's a legitimate argument.

Click to shrink...

The example was about GTA which has had plenty of bad writing.

And no, something selling well CAN be a legitimate argument if that's what the conversation is about, but most of the time it's just used to try dismiss criticism of specific unrelated aspects.

 

[Servbot24]

Not at all. I learned a long time ago never to trust some random review, comment, or message board post about the quality of anything. Games sell well because they are quality. Bad games do not sell well. It is the most reliable way to gauge whether or not a purchase is worth it.

Click to shrink...

Bad games frequently sell well and good games frequently sell poorly.

 

[AlexFlame116]

This is a problem that's being seen a lot in Pokemon threads. Some people are really upset at the changes (both lack of and in some cases backwards for some people) that Game Freak is making at point it out but always get overshadowed because other say: "You just need to suck it up and become a fan of the new things or find another series to play" or "You can boycott it all you want, it's still going to sell millions".

That's a huge problem, despite any grievances that people might have with Game Freak and TPC, the games will still sell millions of copies.

 

[Mr. Genuine]

Bad games frequently sell well and good games frequently sell poorly.

Click to shrink...

This is just not true. Obviously, if lots of people like it, who are you to call it "bad"? It's one thing to say it's not for you, but to call it "bad" is another thing entirely. I don't like playing Minecraft, but it's obviously not a bad have if so many people like it.

 

[NuclearCake]

That and the Metacritic score.

 

[Weltall Zero]

While we're on that, can we stop using "overrated" (or as in the recent HK thread, "overhyped")? Congratulations on your hipster opinion (and your need to share it) but using these words does not imbue it with more (or, frankly, anywhere near as much) credibility or relevance than the literal consensus of everyone else.

I believe there is a difference between dismissing a criticism saying that and saying a company will not care about that criticism because the game sells.

Click to shrink...

Sure, but it's different in the sense of the first being inane and the second being inanely self-obvious, so neither is a particularly good use of anyone's keystrokes.

 

[UltimateHigh]

a child's argument no doubt. they're better off saying nothing

 

[Weltall Zero]

This is just not true. Obviously, if lots of people like it, who are you to call it "bad"? It's one thing to say it's not for you, but to call it "bad" is another thing entirely. I don't like playing Minecraft, but it's obviously not a bad have if so many people like it.

Click to shrink...

You realize you are countering the argument that "good is not always popular" by literally redefining "good" to mean "popular", right? If one of your starting axioms is that "good things" and "popular things" are equivalent sets, "some good things are not popular" (and viceversa) are going to be false statements by definition.

In any case, your definition is in the minority. Few people would argue that burguers are better than filet mignon because they sell much more. The more generally accepted definition of "good" is that of the consensus of a number of experts, in this case reviewers, and under that definition, "many bad / good games sell well / poorly" is absolutely correct.

 

[OptiveLink]

I mean, you can say Pokemon.

People will defend anything, no matter what type of criticism it deserves.
A personal experience that resonates with an individual can be stronger than any legit complaints that the series, game, or system might have.
The things that separate fans and "fanboys", or whatever the term is these days are:
- Understanding that something you love can have legitimate issues or complaints that can be addressed.
- That something can be a divisive experience where many others might not feel the same way as you do.
- Not feeling personally attacked when others might find faults and problems in parts that you see as fine as they are or perfect in every way.

When it comes to games, "it sells well" is one of those go-to responses to avoid having to create a proper point in a discussion, but still allowing you to say something against whatever the point made was. It's a way to kill discussion and complaints, same as "The devs know better than a non-dev ever will" or "Do you even actually like the franchise".

There are some that would rather shout something out to make themselves be heard instead of actually taking a second and reflecting upon someone else's opinion that differs from theirs.

 

[Isayas]

I mean you can criticize all you want but I don't think rockstar is going to give a shit at the end of the day, because well their games sell

Click to shrink...

Bingo and thank you.

 

[SofNascimento]

Sure, but it's different in the sense of the first being inane and the second being inanely self-obvious, so neither is a particularly good use of anyone's keystrokes.

Click to shrink...

Agreed. Although I think sometimes people forget the main purpose of games is to be sold, so not always that obvious.

 

[Servbot24]

This is just not true. Obviously, if lots of people like it, who are you to call it "bad"? It's one thing to say it's not for you, but to call it "bad" is another thing entirely. I don't like playing Minecraft, but it's obviously not a bad have if so many people like it.

Click to shrink...

I'm me, I'll call anything bad or good that I want to.