No. You're confusing 'opinion' with 'taste'.
Taste is an entirely different concept to quality. Something can appear appallingly bad to someone of an acquired taste (elitism) but, in reality, still be a solid production which delivers exactly what the purchaser expects in a well-made manner.
Take Transformers, for instance. An extremely easy target for people like myself to bash. But for fans of the franchise and Transformers fans and Bay fans, they do exactly what they say on the tin, each one succeeding in showing the elitists that 'taste' is 'subjective' - in that it depends entirely on the subject matter.
However, now compare The Mask 2 to The Mask. This is no longer a matter of 'taste', because vast swathes of people who loved The Mask, couldn't bare The Mask 2. If someone didn't like The Mask then they are unlikely to want to watch The Mask 2. So to whom do we recommend The Mask 2 to?
The Mask 2 fails to such a large degree from it's source material and audience reception that one has to call foul. The whole project was a 'failure'. It failed both technically and subjectively to deliver what it was otherwise 'easy' to deliver. It was a 'cynical' cash-grab, verging on the immoral.
No-one, in their right mind, would recommend The Mask 2 in any list of anything they were recommending and do so with the intent of maintaining either respect or credibility. If someone did recommend The Mask 2 in a list of 'best of' movies it can be considered a 'scam' list.
You see, liking or disliking Titanic or Avatar is 'taste'. Liking or disliking The Mask 2 is irrelevant to taste, the whole project was a gargantuan failure that no-one would or should recommend it to anyone other than for ulterior motives or curiosity value.
The Mask 2 - Ratings: 2.1/10 from 32,164 users
The Mask - Ratings: 6.8/10 from 197,775 users
The Mask itself is evidently a movie 'of a certain taste'. The sequel is 'unquestionably bad'.
Dragon Age II - User Score 4.3 based on 4036 Ratings
Dragon Age: Origins - User Score 8.5 based on 2652 Ratings
And when you consider:
"A BioWare employee was caught posing as a consumer on the review site Metacritic [for DA2]. The employee, Chris Hoban, who posted under the name of Avanost gave a score of 10/10 saying "Anything negative you will see about this game is an overreaction of personal preference.""
We can conclude 'beyond doubt' that Dragon Age: Origins is a 'good' game which doesn't necessarily require so much individual 'taste' whereas Dragon Age II is, essentially, unquestionably bad.
To completely ignore this concept of 'reality' is philosophical pedantry to point where philosophical pedantry itself stops being relevant.
