What does define the quality of the master thesis? I have been doing projects nearly 1 year with my future supervisor. I think he knows me enough. We were talking about many topics for thesis. Among all the topics, he is in favor of one topic which is pure science ie. development of new material. There will be lots of repetition and testing. On the other hand, I am a mechanical engineer and wanted to do some mixture work of science and design task, we ofcourse have an idea about it. 

After my masters I would like to do phd, and I have low/mediocre GPA Low GPA. So I think that my thesis should be very good to compansate it. My supervisor admitted that the topic he is in favor of would be hard, lots of pain and hardwork and has high rate of failure, on the other if I somehow find something or improve a little bit, it would has very huge impact. He added that failing with new devopled materials would be again success, since in future they will skip what is failed.

Other topics that I am in favor of are more on design and less science focused, ie. using new developed material(I will make it but there will be only one material) in newly designed systems, our aim is to make an end product with low weight and low cost, ie. increasing the fuel cell performance in the ragone plot.

My question for researchers and committee, can you define a good master thesis? What do you look for?
Any such definition is necessarily broad and somewhat vague. Here's my attempt at offering a categorisation:


An instance of an outstanding master's thesis is one that significantly advances state-of-the-art research, such results are rare.
An instance of an excellent master's thesis is one that contributes to state-of-the-art research, such results are infrequent.
An instance of a good master's thesis is one that satisfies the institution's criterion for the highest grade, such results are common amongst PhD students.


(This categorisation is highly subjective.)