Writer's Fallout Shelter

I'm new to this forum, but already I've observed many questions and answers, though I've only decided to chime in on a couple. It seems too often, however, that the questions asked seem, to me at least to be unanswerable. To me writing has always been very subjective, both to the reader and the writer. I've read many books in many different genre and styles, and they have been as varied and different as the authors writing them.

For example, a recent question has been asked regarding the appropriate levels of character development. I've read great novels where the characters are immediately, richely, developed, and great books where the characters are never developed, and virtually everything in between. The appropriate level of characterization seemed to be more dependant on the writer and the story than anything else.

I guess what I'm trying to get to here is, how well can one really answer questions such as this? I mean, if there was some sort of formula to write a good novel, wouldn't everyone do it? I once heard a friend say that it is a vulgar thing to correct an English major's grammar, and it is true, to an extent, that writers break as many rules as they keep to.

How well can questions about characters, plotlines, pacing, and other features of a novel really be answered when it seems like all answers could potentially be right? Is there any sort of standard? Like a point system? (ex: If you take three points out of characterization, then you need to make up for it by putting three in landscape descriptions or character history. You need 20 points to make a successful novel.) If there isn't a standard then how can one accurately answer such questions?