Yodariquo said:gamingeek said:Edgecrusher, the point about sales is that who cares? Publishers care, because they can sell product on a system and its the sales of the hardware and even now collectively the software that shows there is a viable market for games. It's almost like a safety net that dampens the risk vs reward mechanic.And it's not even whether we personally desire or care for better support on Wii, it's that the lack of support is simply bizarre given the sales.
I wouldn't really consider it that bizarre myself. Developers want to see their ideas and visions of what they would like to see a game go and having more powerful hardware is pretty much their number one desire to achieve this for the majority of them. It doesn't necessarily have to be 'the' most powerful hardware on the bleeding edge of technology just the most effective at delivering what they wish for.
While I am surprised at just how well the Wii is selling I'm not surprised that it's doing exactly what I had purchased it for. A secondary console I picked up so I could play Nintendo games on, for the Virtual Console, and perhaps the odd third-party title here and there of which have pretty much been from Capcom which again the company I was expecting it to be.
Archangel3371 said:
I wouldn't really consider it that bizarre myself. Developers want to see their ideas and visions of what they would like to see a game go and having more powerful hardware is pretty much their number one desire to achieve this for the majority of them. It doesn't necessarily have to be 'the' most powerful hardware on the bleeding edge of technology just the most effective at delivering what they wish for.
While I am surprised at just how well the Wii is selling I'm not surprised that it's doing exactly what I had purchased it for. A secondary console I picked up so I could play Nintendo games on, for the Virtual Console, and perhaps the odd third-party title here and there of which have pretty much been from Capcom which again the company I was expecting it to be.
That's a very good point about developers and their visions, there are some games that definetly need the extra power for larger enviroments and AI etc. And a good number of developers out there that wouldn't want to touch a Wii with a pole. I can understand that for some titles.
However, why does every vision neccessarily have to equate to HD graphics? On the whole that is the western way, whereas the Japanese can see outside of big games on bigger hardware. They can have visions for unique games, from MadWorld to Little Kings Story, but the western obsession is graphics, graphics, graphics. When a western dev thinks differently it usually equates to a puzzle game. There are ways to make great games, unique visions that don't always equate to bigger and better. This is all part of one big discussion we are having about games at the moment. Of course its a generalisation and you will find exceptions on either side. Western developers almost pretend that they have forgetton how to make great games on Xbox level hardware.
As for yourself this is what I was talking about with a laser sighted view on blockbusters and multiconsole ownership. There are people out there who only own a Wii, a lot of them and why should they have to go without games? You may have bought it as a nintendo playing machine and for all intents and purposes a gamer who does that is fine with that, nothing wrong with it. But that is a view from a gamer who buys 10 titles and month and constantly demands the best graphics and the biggest games and who has more than one console.
It's the kind of view you would get echoed across message boards which people have to sign up to, because they are so passionate about games. But there were people last gen who bought a PS2 and a couple of Fifa games and now people with Wii and god knows what. And these people make up this majority that leaves everyone perplexed at sales every NPD. And off the top of my head I could name a few forumers that only owned a Wii as well, Angry Beaver, Bugsonglasses, Mantorok, Yarcoffin, Iga. These are only guys I know but obviously there are a lot more out there as the system is eclipsing sales of the other systems like the PS2 dominated the cube and Xbox.
When it comes down to it I understand what you and Edgecrusher are saying, if there is a wii game, that is on other systems, you would rather have it on other systems with better graphics and tech, that you can see on your HDTV and have everything etc. I'm not advocating that versions of multiplatform games are the way forward (although still essential for Wii only owners) don't forget about them.
What I'm trying to say is that if a third party made a Wii game (that wasn't on other systems) that was as good as Metroid Prime 3 or Super Mario Galaxy or Twilight Princess, or Smash Bros, wouldn't you want to buy it? Games with amazing design can still be made on Wii hardware - mario galaxy doesn't have high definition visuals, or online modes or digital sound, massive neverending landscapes, or armies of enemies across the screen, it has none of the technology that marks out next gen gaming and yet its design still makes it an engrossing and joyful game to play.
And can I just say that I'm loving that we are having some decent discussion in this place as the past week and a half were a bit empty. Forums are cool and I'm so glad that you stuck around Archie as well as others. 
I cannot see the best developers from companies like Capcom, Konami, Square, Ubisoft, Activision, Valve, Epic, etc. want to take their major titles and make a game on old tech they all want to move forward and be on the cutting edge. Lets take Kojima,do you think he would have ever made MGS4 on the wii, not a chance, have the new tech is a huge reason why MGS4 is the way it is. Now Kojima would like to make a Wii game, he has said so but a different side project. And thats what is going to happen to the Wii with most of the third party games, they will be side projects or lesser known franchises. A part of this also has to do with the fact that the 360+PS3 is close to the Wii so its not like the userbases are drastically different, also third party games just seem to sell better on the 360/PS3 than wii, mature titles seem to sell better on the 360/PS3. So when you are a major company looking for the best investment its not best to go the cheaper, older tech route, its better to make a cutting edge, big budget title on consoles that have better sales for those types of games (which odds are is a shooter).
I dont think the lack of major third party support is that surprising, I think we could have saw this coming. Yes the crazy sales of the Wii does add a new dynamic and yeah I do see more Japanese focused franchises heading to the Wii as well as franchises looking for a home or new start (HoTD, Tenchu, Fatal Frame, Nights).
GG you hit on another big aspect of this. The answer is yes by the way, if a third party developer made a game as great as those Nintendo first party titles of course I would buy it. But when you have a system with old tech like this you have to do some spectacular things with the gameplay to stand out cause we have seen it all already. That is probably too hard to do for many of the third party developers who rely on making something new tech wise. In terms of gameplay design, I dont think there is a company better than Nintendo, they can take something with old tech and make it matter, very few others would be able to do the same on the same level as Nintendo.
Iga_Bobovic said:edgecrusher said:Iga_Bobovic said:edgecrusher said:Iga_Bobovic said:So Edge I take it you are a PC gamer?
And that has what to do with anything? No, I hate sitting in front of a monitor playing games.You said you rather wanted to have better technology, PC > 360/PS3 technology wise. So following your own logic, I came to the conclusion you would be a PC gamer. Pretty straightforward, if you aks me!
Yeah, because the PC is as far ahead of the PS360 as they are to the Wii....
Whatever, your just being foolish now. You realise that you come out with this every time a tech discussion is brought up?
Yeah, I'm dumb for wanting to use my better tech. Let me bust out my Dreamcast and get people making games on that again. Technically, it is possible to make great games on it. And it doesn't have the burden of being as powerful as a Wii.
Yes the PC is way ahead of the PS3 and 360. Have you seen Crysis? And why are you being so defensive, I just asked a simple question?
Because you only said it to be a tool.
edgecrusher said:Iga_Bobovic said:edgecrusher said:Iga_Bobovic said:edgecrusher said:Iga_Bobovic said:So Edge I take it you are a PC gamer?
And that has what to do with anything? No, I hate sitting in front of a monitor playing games.You said you rather wanted to have better technology, PC > 360/PS3 technology wise. So following your own logic, I came to the conclusion you would be a PC gamer. Pretty straightforward, if you aks me!
Yeah, because the PC is as far ahead of the PS360 as they are to the Wii....
Whatever, your just being foolish now. You realise that you come out with this every time a tech discussion is brought up?
Yeah, I'm dumb for wanting to use my better tech. Let me bust out my Dreamcast and get people making games on that again. Technically, it is possible to make great games on it. And it doesn't have the burden of being as powerful as a Wii.Yes the PC is way ahead of the PS3 and 360. Have you seen Crysis? And why are you being so defensive, I just asked a simple question?
Because you only said it to be a tool.
I love you too, Edge!
Mario, Zelda, and Metroid could also have been even better on better consoles. That's my point. Obviously thats not happening since they're Nintendo properties, which is why I'm really only interested in Nintendo's Wii games mostly. For anyone else, I'd rather they work elsewhere.
Or something like Deadly Creatures; outside of having different controls that may or may not matter, in what way could this not be better on the other machines?
This is why I just don't care that Wii is getting leftovers. Now, back in the Gamecube days, I'd stick up for Nintendo for sure, as they had a great machine at the time That deserved more support. Certainly more popularity. Still trying to figure out why the Wii is more popular....lack of purple? Same with N64 or any of them. Wii on the other hand is not on the current tech level, its way fucking overpriced (my word the 360 is cheaper) and it was basically a cheap, lazy machine that Nintendo's laughing all the way to the bank with.
Its biggest thing is the controller, which is cool sometimes, bad others....and never really feels like the revolution it was said to be. Usually, it just stays out of the way. Not better or worse, just different.
As for 2009, what I'm hoping for out of the Wii is that Nintendo's releases 2 major games on it. I mean Metroid-level major. 2 games. All I want. I'm not interested in Punch Out. Nor really anything else they showed recently because it all looks like stuff that have better counterparts on other machines. Maybe Sin & Punishment 2, though its not a style I'm a huge fan of personally. But that's like the biggest announced Wii game for 2009; a sequel to a very niche N64 game that didn't leave Japan. Give me Pikmin 3 and something on the level of Metroid and I'll be happy as all the Oprah games bombard the system.
edgecrusher said:And yes, Mario Galaxy is a great game (though I fail to understand why its rated the best ever....it wasn't THAT good) as were Zelda (which is arguably better on Gamecube) and Metroid. So yes, no shit you can make a great game on the Wii. That's not the point. As I said before, you can make a great new game on Dreamcast, or the friggin PS1, if you want. But why would you?
Mario, Zelda, and Metroid could also have been even better on better consoles. That's my point. Obviously thats not happening since they're Nintendo properties, which is why I'm really only interested in Nintendo's Wii games mostly. For anyone else, I'd rather they work elsewhere.
Or something like Deadly Creatures; outside of having different controls that may or may not matter, in what way could this not be better on the other machines?
This is why I just don't care that Wii is getting leftovers. Now, back in the Gamecube days, I'd stick up for Nintendo for sure, as they had a great machine at the time That deserved more support. Certainly more popularity. Still trying to figure out why the Wii is more popular....lack of purple? Same with N64 or any of them. Wii on the other hand is not on the current tech level, its way fucking overpriced (my word the 360 is cheaper) and it was basically a cheap, lazy machine that Nintendo's laughing all the way to the bank with.
Its biggest thing is the controller, which is cool sometimes, bad others....and never really feels like the revolution it was said to be. Usually, it just stays out of the way. Not better or worse, just different.
As for 2009, what I'm hoping for out of the Wii is that Nintendo's releases 2 major games on it. I mean Metroid-level major. 2 games. All I want. I'm not interested in Punch Out. Nor really anything else they showed recently because it all looks like stuff that have better counterparts on other machines. Maybe Sin & Punishment 2, though its not a style I'm a huge fan of personally. But that's like the biggest announced Wii game for 2009; a sequel to a very niche N64 game that didn't leave Japan. Give me Pikmin 3 and something on the level of Metroid and I'll be happy as all the Oprah games bombard the system.
Mario Galaxy is that good.
Besides that yeah I agree with you. I dont want my favorite franchises to be on the Wii cause why would I want them to be going backwards, I want to see what they can become with the current tech. Even though RE5 would control better on the Wii I still rather have it on 360/PS3, its a no brainer. And yes I would love to see what Zelda, Mario and Metroid would be like if they were on a powerful system, Zelda especially cause that game has the most to gain from the size of the worlds they can make.
Wii should be the primarly console for all video game development. Period. Everything should be made for the Wii first, and then ported over to those other far less popular consoles. That is my opinion, and it cannot be refuted.
Ravenprose said:Wii should be the primarly console for all video game development. Period. Everything should be made for the Wii first, and then ported over to those other far less popular consoles. That is my opinion, and it cannot be refuted.
Hahaha, word.
Dvader said:edgecrusher said:And yes, Mario Galaxy is a great game (though I fail to understand why its rated the best ever....it wasn't THAT good) as were Zelda (which is arguably better on Gamecube) and Metroid. So yes, no shit you can make a great game on the Wii. That's not the point. As I said before, you can make a great new game on Dreamcast, or the friggin PS1, if you want. But why would you?
Mario, Zelda, and Metroid could also have been even better on better consoles. That's my point. Obviously thats not happening since they're Nintendo properties, which is why I'm really only interested in Nintendo's Wii games mostly. For anyone else, I'd rather they work elsewhere.
Or something like Deadly Creatures; outside of having different controls that may or may not matter, in what way could this not be better on the other machines?
This is why I just don't care that Wii is getting leftovers. Now, back in the Gamecube days, I'd stick up for Nintendo for sure, as they had a great machine at the time That deserved more support. Certainly more popularity. Still trying to figure out why the Wii is more popular....lack of purple? Same with N64 or any of them. Wii on the other hand is not on the current tech level, its way fucking overpriced (my word the 360 is cheaper) and it was basically a cheap, lazy machine that Nintendo's laughing all the way to the bank with.
Its biggest thing is the controller, which is cool sometimes, bad others....and never really feels like the revolution it was said to be. Usually, it just stays out of the way. Not better or worse, just different.
As for 2009, what I'm hoping for out of the Wii is that Nintendo's releases 2 major games on it. I mean Metroid-level major. 2 games. All I want. I'm not interested in Punch Out. Nor really anything else they showed recently because it all looks like stuff that have better counterparts on other machines. Maybe Sin & Punishment 2, though its not a style I'm a huge fan of personally. But that's like the biggest announced Wii game for 2009; a sequel to a very niche N64 game that didn't leave Japan. Give me Pikmin 3 and something on the level of Metroid and I'll be happy as all the Oprah games bombard the system.
Mario Galaxy is that good.
Besides that yeah I agree with you. I dont want my favorite franchises to be on the Wii cause why would I want them to be going backwards, I want to see what they can become with the current tech. Even though RE5 would control better on the Wii I still rather have it on 360/PS3, its a no brainer. And yes I would love to see what Zelda, Mario and Metroid would be like if they were on a powerful system, Zelda especially cause that game has the most to gain from the size of the worlds they can make.
Really Zelda and Metroid. I'd say Metroid even moreso, as its almost similar to a horror game in that it relies on impressive tech to set a convincing mood and atmosphere. I mean, imagine Corruption with that great Metroid music in Digital, with Bioshock level visuals, better A.I., bigger planets?
That reminds me, I wonder if Retro Studios will release one of my 2 wanted Wii games this year, lol. I seriously hope they're doing more than just porting MP 1 @ 2 to the Wii.
Only 4% of games make a profit
The phrase "hits driven business" gets thrown around a lot these days, but in the case of video games it really is true. Creating video games and knowing what will actually lead to commercial success is not exactly a perfect science. There's no magic formula, and unfortunately that means game development nowadays is very, very risky. Millions upon millions of dollars can be invested in a game project, and sometimes the company is lucky to break even, let alone make a profit.
In fact, according to Electronic Entertainment Design and Research (EEDAR) – as reported by Forbes – roughly four percent of video games that make it to market are actually profitable. To think that 96 percent of video games only break even or lose money for publishers is somewhat alarming. Geoffrey Zatkin, who designed games for 11 years before co-founding EEDAR, noted, "Every game I have ever worked on, we've gone in blind as to which features would sell the game better."
Reworking or redesigning parts of a game can comprise 60 percent of a game's budget, according to EEDAR. Sometimes including an extra feature or mode can really make a difference but other times it might not. Zatkin, for example, said that not knowing for sure if the inclusion of multiplayer would be worth an extra $500,000 "would scare the crap out of me."
"No one or two things can determine the success or failure of a game," Zatkin noted. But a number of factors can point to a greater chance of success, such as release timing, the developer's pedigree, the genre, the platform(s) and the promise of downloadable content.
Wii games more likely to be discounted within 3 months, comparitively.
I'm not suprised with some of the shit that clogs store shelves. I don't see discounting as that unhealthy though. Last gen cube games over here were never, ever, ever discounted. Titles like Baiten Kaitos or Path of Radiance were still full price years later because of the rarity of cube games, whilst PS2 and Xbox games could often be found 6 months later at cheaper prices, where I could snap them up.
Unfortunately most nintendo published games bar a couple of exceptions don't seem to be discounted, it's the trashy games that go down in price. Although I have spotted Pro Evo in the wild for a bargain price. If only I were a football fan.
Dvader said:edgecrusher said:And yes, Mario Galaxy is a great game (though I fail to understand why its rated the best ever....it wasn't THAT good) as were Zelda (which is arguably better on Gamecube) and Metroid. So yes, no shit you can make a great game on the Wii. That's not the point. As I said before, you can make a great new game on Dreamcast, or the friggin PS1, if you want. But why would you?
Mario, Zelda, and Metroid could also have been even better on better consoles. That's my point. Obviously thats not happening since they're Nintendo properties, which is why I'm really only interested in Nintendo's Wii games mostly. For anyone else, I'd rather they work elsewhere.
Or something like Deadly Creatures; outside of having different controls that may or may not matter, in what way could this not be better on the other machines?
This is why I just don't care that Wii is getting leftovers. Now, back in the Gamecube days, I'd stick up for Nintendo for sure, as they had a great machine at the time That deserved more support. Certainly more popularity. Still trying to figure out why the Wii is more popular....lack of purple? Same with N64 or any of them. Wii on the other hand is not on the current tech level, its way fucking overpriced (my word the 360 is cheaper) and it was basically a cheap, lazy machine that Nintendo's laughing all the way to the bank with.
Its biggest thing is the controller, which is cool sometimes, bad others....and never really feels like the revolution it was said to be. Usually, it just stays out of the way. Not better or worse, just different.
As for 2009, what I'm hoping for out of the Wii is that Nintendo's releases 2 major games on it. I mean Metroid-level major. 2 games. All I want. I'm not interested in Punch Out. Nor really anything else they showed recently because it all looks like stuff that have better counterparts on other machines. Maybe Sin & Punishment 2, though its not a style I'm a huge fan of personally. But that's like the biggest announced Wii game for 2009; a sequel to a very niche N64 game that didn't leave Japan. Give me Pikmin 3 and something on the level of Metroid and I'll be happy as all the Oprah games bombard the system.
Mario Galaxy is that good.
Besides that yeah I agree with you. I dont want my favorite franchises to be on the Wii cause why would I want them to be going backwards, I want to see what they can become with the current tech. Even though RE5 would control better on the Wii I still rather have it on 360/PS3, its a no brainer. And yes I would love to see what Zelda, Mario and Metroid would be like if they were on a powerful system, Zelda especially cause that game has the most to gain from the size of the worlds they can make.
Here is a question for you guys. How would 360/ps3 improve Zelda/Metroid and Mario?
One answer named by Vader is increasing the size of the world! But would this make a better Zelda? Windwakers overworld was much bigger than the one in Twilight Princess, but also more tedious. Making an Zelda just bigger for the sake of making it bigger is not the thing. Vader mentioned in his podcast, that Far Cry 2 was just too big. I rather have smaller more focussed Zelda, than a huge boring one. Sure you could increase the graphics, but that would not change the game fundamentally.
Another one mentioned by Edge is Metroid and its atmosphere. But one of the most atmosheric games ever is Super Metroid and that was made on the SNES. One of the scariest moments I had in Metroid, was running from the SA-X in Fusion, a GBA game. Atmosphere has more to do with Art and sound design than with pure HD graphics. Heck people can get scared by reading a freaking book, so you do not even need to have graphics at all.
I see more things that can be done with Wiimotion-plus that can change Zelda more profound than by simply increasing the power of the console.
So to repeat the question!
How can 360/PS3 improve Zelda/Metroid and Mario? (give examples)
Why could these improvements not be made on the Wii?
Iga_Bobovic said:Here is a question for you guys. How would 360/ps3 improve Zelda/Metroid and Mario?
One answer named by Vader is increasing the size of the world! But would this make a better Zelda? Windwakers overworld was much bigger than the one in Twilight Princess, but also more tedious. Making an Zelda just bigger for the sake of making it bigger is not the thing. Vader mentioned in his podcast, that Far Cry 2 was just too big. I rather have smaller more focussed Zelda, than a huge boring one. Sure you could increase the graphics, but that would not change the game fundamentally.
Another one mentioned by Edge is Metroid and its atmosphere. But one of the most atmosheric games ever is Super Metroid and that was made on the SNES. One of the scariest moments I had in Metroid, was running from the SA-X in Fusion, a GBA game. Atmosphere has more to do with Art and sound design than with pure HD graphics. Heck people can get scared by reading a freaking book, so you do not even need to have graphics at all.
I see more things that can be done with Wiimotion-plus that can change Zelda more profound than by simply increasing the power of the console.
So to repeat the question!
How can 360/PS3 improve Zelda/Metroid and Mario? (give examples)
Why could these improvements not be made on the Wii?
Well, for one thing, they wouldn't have any of those silly waggle controls. 
And the graphics would look like this:
Now wouldn't this be AWESOME on an 50" HDTV?
Iga_Bobovic said:Dvader said:edgecrusher said:Another one mentioned by Edge is Metroid and its atmosphere. But one of the most atmosheric games ever is Super Metroid and that was made on the SNES. )Why could these improvements not be made on the Wii?
Yeah...it was atmospheric back in 1994, when the SNES was considered an advanced console. Now its not atmospheric at all.
Your basically just talking about things I think I've already covered, so I'm not going to repeat myself.
Bottom line is, your not going to convince me that the Wii is somehow able to be as impressive as the other machines. If that was the case, I'd be all kinds of pissed off that Konami made MGS4 on the PS3 instead of the PS2. As its basically the same argument.....last-gen tech, or current-gen tech. I just haven't drank that particular bottle of Nintendo kool-aid. If this was 2002, then yes.
Yeah...it was atmospheric back in 1994, when the SNES was considered an advanced console. Now its not atmospheric at all.
Your basically just talking about things I think I've already covered, so I'm not going to repeat myself.
Bottom line is, your not going to convince me that the Wii is somehow able to be as impressive as the other machines. If that was the case, I'd be all kinds of pissed off that Konami made MGS4 on the PS3 instead of the PS2. As its basically the same argument.....last-gen tech, or current-gen tech. I just haven't drank that particular bottle of Nintendo kool-aid. If this was 2002, then yes.
When it comes down to it though, I view the Wii like I do the PS2; its old dated tech. Why would I want my NEW games on DATED tech if they don't have to be? Just because Nintendo "PSTWO'd" the Gamecube and slapped it into a new shell, called it the Wii, and marketed it to soccer moms everywhere, doesn't make it more relevent in my eyes.
edgecrusher said:^^^WTF quoting is bad.
Yeah...it was atmospheric back in 1994, when the SNES was considered an advanced console. Now its not atmospheric at all.
Your basically just talking about things I think I've already covered, so I'm not going to repeat myself.
Bottom line is, your not going to convince me that the Wii is somehow able to be as impressive as the other machines. If that was the case, I'd be all kinds of pissed off that Konami made MGS4 on the PS3 instead of the PS2. As its basically the same argument.....last-gen tech, or current-gen tech. I just haven't drank that particular bottle of Nintendo kool-aid. If this was 2002, then yes.
Explained? You only said graphics would be better. That would not fundamentally change the games at all. And I also mentioned Fusion which was released in 2002 on the GBA, so your argument is incorrect.
So to repeat the question. again!
How can 360/PS3 improve Zelda/Metroid and Mario? (give examples)
Why could these improvements not be made on the Wii/ps2/GG/Xbox level of tech?
Only answer we have know is that the graphics would be better, obviously!
And it's not even whether we personally desire or care for better support on Wii, it's that the lack of support is simply bizarre given the sales.
---
Tell me to get back to rewriting this site so it's not horrible on mobile