Browse through the entries here and rate up the games you want to see made available via Steam
Originally posted by -Z-:Except for the part where everyone has differing ideas of the ways to measure quality, of course.
Originally posted by -Z-:Except for the part where everyone has differing ideas of the ways to measure quality, of course.And, even then, I would take a quirky title that amuses me over a "high-quality" title that bores me. Being entertaining is a very important quality ( an essential or distinctive characteristic, property, or attribute - the basic character or nature of something - a trait or feature of personality...anyone can cite a dictionary) for games to have.
Originally posted by Graeme- Coarse Gentleman:There is one literal definition of the word for this instance. I posted it above.
Your opinion that a RPG with choppy, pixelated visuals and a short generic story made in rpgmaker by a 9 year old in computer class is better than a unique RPG made by expierenced developers with a beautiful story and realistic crisp visuals is fine.
But comparing the quaity of each against eachother shows that your opinion on quality is wrong.
In the example I gave, we see, among othersBeautiful Unique against Generic short
Expierenced against inexpierenced
Pixelated choppy against Realistic crisp
While you may prefer one game to the other, the quality of the second game is clearly superior to that of the first.
That's fine, once more that's a matter of opinion, you can like what you like.
While being entertaining is an important quality, I am not sure how we can measure the level of entertainingness of a project, considering this would also be an opinion(for example I can really love playing a minecraft clone, but hate playing Minecraft)
Originally posted by -Z-:And there are many more meanings of the word that are applicable, and I posted them, as well.
Telling me what my opinion is, are you? This should be fun.
Except in the portion in which you laid out "my opinion," "quality" was not a deciding factor. Further...
"Beautiful" is opinion.
Unique v. Generic is only an issue depending on a person's level of exposure to what is deemed "generic," but that is a possible factor for measuring literal "quality, sure. However, the problem is that what is "unique" might not actually be objectively good.
Daikatana. Or, in other words, "experienced developers can put out what is deemed to be absolute rubbish."
This, again, calls upon "beautiful," and, as already said, "beauty" is opinion. This is a matter of aesthetic preference and not a factor of objective consideration.
Until you actually take time to consider what things you listed as being indicative of "quality." Then the distinction isn't actually clear.
That's fine, once more that's a matter of opinion, you can like what you like.Indeed, and what you listed as indicators of "quality" in your attempted example are purely things that you like.
For things of objective quality, you should have been looking at things such as how well the game actually runs. Is it full of bugs? Does it do what it should do well (which could also call up an individual's opinion of what it should do rather than remaining purely objective)?
Indeed. And, yet, this is still as much a matter of opinion as the distinctions you put forth in your attempted example.
Originally posted by Graeme- Coarse Gentleman:Really? You listed one last I checked. Something that had to do with the charactaristics of something, nothing to do with the level of excellence or being compared to something.
Example. You can substitute "Your" for "Bill" if you feel like it, example stands.
Try reading the next bit. Quality can have nothing to do with your opninion. You can love crap and hate greatness for all I care.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as you said earlier- Though please note it was implied that both perspectives were from the same person- listed as "You" - so the story would have been considered "beautiful" by them.
That would be why "beautiful" was included. This is what happens when you break everything apart :p
That's entirely true. Though at the same time, we see expierenced(read: Paid professionals) producing higher *quality* products than their inexpierenced(read: Low paid or amateurs) counterparts. While it is possible for a first time indie developer to crush something made by a professional studio- this is far less common than the other way around.This is why we see professional studios producing much higher quality content compared to inexpierenced developers.\This is why we see games like Starbound crush games like Edge of Space in terms of ratings and sales. While Edge of Space is not a low quality game, Starbound has been proven superior time and time again. Which would you rather play?
Typically choppy is not something people want to see, just as crisp is something people would prefer. This is one of the reasons the highest grossing and top rated titles are dang near always "crisp" while low rated titles tend to be "choppy"For an example, think DayZ visuals VS WarZ visuals. Got the picture?
Until you actually take time to consider what things you listed as being indicative of "quality." Then the distinction isn't actually clear.Read above.
Evidently things the market enjoys as well. How many people do you actually think would take generic/choppy/inexpierenced over a unique/crisp/expierenced game?Can you back this up with an example? Perhaps an instance in which a game that I would consider "low quality" has out performed a game I would consider"high quality" in the same market?No? Really.
We could consider the actual gameplay, and I considered mentioning it in the last post, the issue with Greenlight games being that you don't always have a product you can play. But even with games you can compare, give me one example where an Early Access game had more polished gameplay than a professional title in a similar category. Again- it's not impossible, just unlikely.
Explainations above! Because someone broke a paragraph into over five different points! WOO!
Originally posted by GorlomSwe:I lost track of what you people were argueing.1) Graeme- Coarse Gentlemen is trying his hand at statistics... what is the point of those numbers exactly? What is it supposed to show us? Valves bandwith? How many games they want to sell? That only 1 in 5 games are of decent enough quality to be sold?
2) He is upset that games he has little interest in is getting greenlit? or why is the system pointless exactly?
3) Posters in this thread are unable to agree on a solid measuring stick for quality.?(I thought the one provided by Z about ammount of bugs, how well it runs and how well it does what it set out to do seems to be a fairly decent and reasonably objective measuring stick)
Originally posted by -Z-:I listed three, and that should illustrate to you that the term "quality" is not purely about level of excellence. Further, it should show that "quality" is not actually an objective term.
Sure..until you tried to explain it. Then it fell apart.
Except, in the following, your list of "quality" was purely about your opinion.
So...your "example" was formed as pure nonsense and thus proves nothing?
I would rather play whichever piques my interest more. Fact is, the experience of the developer, alone, is not a deciding factor.
"The picture" being that you fail to grasp the concept of people having differing aesthetic preferences and that visuals alone are not indicative of objective quality? Got it.
Reading above changed nothing.
The original Super Mario Bros. New dev team puts out a rather generic, choppy, and pixellated game. Outsells everything they ever put out after gaining more experience with higher quality visuals.Yes.Really.
Are you aware that more games from Greenlight are released as full releases rather than as Early Access? Are you aware that more games in Early Access came from places other than Greenlight than those that did?
If you had any interest in objective comparisons, you should have asked for a Greenlight title that has been released rather than an Early Access title, as those are still in a Beta stage of development or earlier.
Explanations above failed and only further indicated the distinctions as being matters of opinion! The paragraph was broken up to deal with the individual points individually! WOO!
By the by, why couldn't an individual play both? Why do you present your case as though a person can only choose one of two?
Originally posted by Graeme- Coarse Gentleman:Just that we will pass 1/5 of whatever is uploaded here. I am arguing that some of it is low quality and what quality is.
Originally posted by Skoardy:
Originally posted by Graeme- Coarse Gentleman:Why the system is pointless. What purpose is there in our "filtration" if Valve just takes the top 20% and flies it through?