Jump to content
Awoo.
SSMB Doesn't Chuckle! 'KNUCKLEHEAD' Theme Returns!

Fun vs Quality


Faseeh
 Share

Recommended Posts

What do YOU value more when playing a Sonic game?

I value my fun with it more than the quality of the game. Let me elaborate.

When playing Sonic 06, I have more fun with it compared to SA2. Yes. I said it.

At least, I'm getting what I paid for. Not getting 1/3 or much less than that of what I paid for.

At least, I prefer the music.

At least, I'm going to the goal ring at the end of the day and it's the same basic gameplay style, and can squint my eyes and think it's Sonic.

I could go on and on.

Oh but wait, if one asks me which I think is the better game between the two? I'll say SA2. It's undeniable. 06 is terrible game. SA2 is... eh, I don't want to touch on that but you know what I mean. I'll not defend 06 unless it is something worth defending on, like the music.

SA2 is a better game but I have more fun with 06.

I really found Generations to be a quality product that amazing fun, I wish we could keep getting that kinda stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A balance between both, not only for Sonic games, but every game in general. Ok, it's impossible, or at least it should be, to deny flaws, and depending of how big or how many they are, they can actually break the fun. Some flaws are acceptable and fun (paradox?), others can literally make you want to give up the game, but then again, it's even a matter of opinions. Again, a balance is needed between both.

Edited by Jingle
  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A balance between both, not only for Sonic games, but every game in general. Ok, it's impossible, or at least it should be, to deny flaws, and depending of how big or how many they are, they can actually break the fun. Some flaws are acceptable and fun (paradox?), others can literally make you want to give up the game, but then again, it's even a matter of opinions. Again, a balance is needed between both.

This, but I think higher quality can often mean more fun, depending on the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two don't always directly correlate. A quality game doesn't ensure you will have fun with it; the ability to derive enjoyment from anything depends as much on your own personal interests and expectations, if not more so, as it does the quality of the thing in question. If you prefer bitter stuff over sweet stuff, then it's not going to matter that God himself made a soda; you're probably not going to like that soda as much as a beer. Fun and quality can overlap and often do- e.g., if something is just complete shit, it can be expected that it will be hard to enjoy- but this isn't a consistent rule. Ultimately though, I value fun the most from a video game. Why in the world would I force or fake enjoyment from a game I'm instinctively not enjoying just because it was made well? It has still failed in its primary job to entertain me, so frankly the quality ultimately ceases to matter. Nothing wrong with saying a well-made game's an absolute fucking bore. =P

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say fun is more important. After all, that's what you buy a video game for. Having fun with it. At least, that's why I buy video games.

Who defines quality anyway? Is quality made of beautiful graphics and no glitches? What does that help me fun-wise if the gameplay concept is stupid (or simply not my thing)? I've had a lot of fun with games of average quality at best. I've seen high quality games (or those that were considered that) that didn't bring me any fun playing.

In case of Sonic games, I don't remember one of them I didn't have fun playing. They're just the kind of game that appeals to me, and usually I have so much fun playing them that I don't mind if they have a few flaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fun and quality aren't the same axis, but they're hardly perpendicular, either. "Being fun" is generally one of the goals of the game, and "being high quality" generally involves achieving the goals it set out to do, so if a game is high quality, they probably did a good job of making it fun. And if nothing else, a well-made product is going to remove a lot of obstacles towards having fun; no collision glitches making you fall through walls, no unfair difficulty spikes, etc etc.

If I have to choose I'd say fun, but I think setting it up as a choice between two things is misguided in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this topic suggesting that quality = less glitches and fun = anything inspiring?

I don't think that's an either-or question, despite a good designer came up with a funny idea but given too little time to finish it, or finished it terribly. But it is a matter of development cycle and resources, not sacrifice. You can always develop a high-quality fun game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose a game of bad quality can interrupt the fun I am having, such as a glitch meaning I get stuck in the wall... (I'm looking at YOU Classic Sonic with a SPIKES! Wisp.... :D) but I wouldn't say a stereotypically "bad" game can't be fun. I mean, I did have fun with Sonic 4 Episode II for a short while. It was definitely nostalgia that was driving said fun and in all honesty I haven't gone back to the game recently... especially since getting Generations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.