Gunfinger - General - In a perfect world...

In a perfect world would people actually enjoy something without saying there is something wrong with it? If the PSP had the best games, best graphics and all the games had the best gameplay money could buy would critics even exist? Let's look at the games coming out for the PS3 or Xbox 360 or PC or Nintendo Wii (aside from its name). People say, " We expect this game to be the best game in ages," and somehow turned out disappointing what then? Should a game satisfy everyone's hopes of what the game was meant to be? What exactly is the game meant to be? Better graphics than they anticipated? Better gameplay, controls, etc.? that list could go on and on. But I find it funny and ironic that the sole purpose of a game in existence was meant to entertain the masses not diminish the hopes of what we want in games. Yet some people and critics find it in our best interests to serve a "greater good" by critiquing and poking or analyzing what we think a good game should be.

I'm not ranting about anything in particular but I hope the rhetorical questions give you something to think about. I understand this though knowing people have their preferences. There are just those who go out there to say bad things about one thing and generalize everything else, right?