Ghetsis-Dennis
追放されたバカ
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2011
- Messages
- 4,488
- Reaction score
- 8
This question puzzles me after reading and listening to so many reviews on the internet (not to mention, spending so much time reading on TV Tropes). First we've got the professional critic reviews; they know what makes a movie or game good or bad based on their long-term history with them, but the only things that makes their reviews questionable are bias steamroll and nostalgia filter. Then we have audience views. There are times when a movie is panned by critics but is loved by the audience (The Notebook, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Pokemon spin-off titles, etc.); however, unpleasable fanbases fall into this category thus making them polarized films/games. Finally we have the sales, or for the movies' case, the box office. If a game sells well, then a sequel will be made, but if it sells poorly, there's no hope left for it to be on the same ranks as the biggest cash cow franchises. There are times where it sells like hot cakes in one region but sold less in another thus no plans on shipping the sequels on that said region, which of course will anger its small fanbase. For movies, same thing except it has to gross more money than its actual budget at the box office. If a movie has planned sequels but for some reason the first movie flopped at the box office, then those sequels will be straight-to-video, thus ruining its quality like Disney's films. Which of the three seems to be more important for these two forms of media?
Last edited:
