Flawless is in my world the opposite of defect. A large volume of games seem to suffer from is how there are components which practically fails to deliver value to the user. If the failure of these components are classified as defects we’ll find that the definition of “flawless” changes over time as users develop a refined taste.

The trickiest part is that the measurement is fundamentally subjective. The measurement becomes objective when confronted with the market. When we look at generally large scale productions it seems as if the market is rather picky and rejects awesome products if they contain defective fragments.

This problem is more interesting when there is a specific case to study, going all theoretical requires too much text.

To narrow down the question I have to add a definition of quality as “meeting user value goals as expected by the user” and scope as the variable for “when the user expects it”.