• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Reggie Talks About Third Parties, Wii 2 Theories Missing Point

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
Kotaku posted up an interesting interview with Reggie in which he talked about his position on the actions of third parties and how he feels that most of the current Wii 2 theories are missing the point.

Kotaku said:
As it seems to do these days, discussion with Nintendo of America's president turned to that of a new Wii capable of rendering high-definition graphics. It's a common question, but one that Kotaku was told, misses something.

During my recent interview with Reggie Fils-Aime, Nintendo of America's president, we got to talking about a so-called Wii HD by way of talking about his appearance last week at an event featuring presentations by top executives of gaming companies. Top men from Activision and Ubisoft showed trailers for the complexly-rendered Modern Warfare 2 and Assassin's Creed. Neither game is slated to be released on the Wii, coming out only on more powerful platforms, such as the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC.

I asked Fils-Aime what he, as someone who wants his console to do the best, thought of that.

"I'm extremely disappointed," he said. "I've had this conversation with every publisher who makes content that is not available on my platform. The conversation goes like this: 'We have a 22-million unit installed base. We have a very diverse audience… We have active gamers that hunger for this type of content. And why isn't it available?'"

I told him that I assumed that technology was still a formidable obstacle. While Nintendo boasts that Resident Evil 4 and Call of Duty World at War each sold well over a million copies on the Wii, it seemed to me that more recent games, such as a Grand Theft Auto IV or an Assassin's Creed 2 just wouldn't be able to function on the console, given its level of horsepower.

"I think for those games, typically decisions are being made two years prior," Fils-Aime said. "And so the decisions two years ago were that those types of games would not be effective on the platform. But we've shown that that's just not the case. High-quality, effectively marketed against our installed base will sell, period end of story."


It seemed, I suggested, that a more powerful Wii would help.

I observed that even Nintendo's engineers and execs were discussing the prospects of the company getting into the business of making an HD-compatible console at a recent investors' event in Japan. And I mentioned that people like games financial analyst Michael Pachter and Game Trailers TV host Geoff Keighley had openly speculated that building a more powerful Wii that could do HD and the games that are made to that standard would seemingly check off the last box where Nintendo didn't have parity with the other console makers.

Fils-Aime and I weren't seeing things the same way.

He said: "The fundamental issue in the logic flow is that — and this is what I'm hearing, whether it's from you or Geoff or Michael himself — is that, gosh it's such an opportunity to take HD capability and link it with the Wii. And what we have said, repeatedly, is that that's not the way we at Nintendo do things. The way we at Nintendo do things is, you know, when we will move to a new generation, it's because there are some fundamental things the [current] console cannot do. What that says is that simply the addition of HD capability will not be the next step for us. There will be more to it. There will be additional capability. There will be additional elements, and, given that, it is far into the future."

In jest, I replied: "So, no new Wii in 2010?"

Fils-Aime: "Not to announce with you here today."
Source: http://kotaku.com/5405667/reggie-wii-2-theories-miss-key-point

So, as for the third parties, any thoughts on his points?
 
It's nice of him to ignore the hardware limitations that nintendo chose themselves being a limiting factor in third party success.
 
It's the 'diverse' audience that's the problem. Third parties would rather have a somewhat smaller audience composed entirely of 18-30 year old males because that's the audience they're used to creating content for.
 

gerg

Member
Nirolak said:
So, as for the third parties, any thoughts on his points?

I think Opiate summed up the disconnect between Nintendo and third parties well in a recent post, so I'll try and paraphrase his thoughts: essentially, where Nintendo sees opportunity, third parties see risk. Nintendo see its 22-million strong install base as a chance for third parties to shine and create the games that Nintendo will never create; third parties see this as an unknown landscape, and will shy away from it until a proven market exists.
 
Well we at least know that Reggie is in talks with 3rd parties, trying to secure support at least. Amazing that he still can't manage to do so (And I do think there's more to it than just horse power and demographics...)

As for Wii HD, I can see where he's coming from. HD support and enhanced graphics are just additional features that will come as an "extra" They won't be the focus of the next machine (big surprise!)
 
elrechazao said:
It's nice of him to ignore the hardware limitations that nintendo chose themselves being a limiting factor in third party success.


Except that it's not. Not at all.
It's that third parties load the system with complete crap.
The Wii should be super easy to develop for, since it's essentially a GameCube, but they struggle to make games even look like the GameCube's mid tier games
 

TunaLover

Member
Reggie said:
"I'm extremely disappointed," he said. "I've had this conversation with every publisher who makes content that is not available on my platform. The conversation goes like this: 'We have a 22-million unit installed base. We have a very diverse audience… We have active gamers that hunger for this type of content. And why isn't it available?'"

Well, what about talk with NCL itself first, he could have 4 games easily that aren't available in his platform :lol
in the US
 

gerg

Member
AceBandage said:
Except that it's not. Not at all.
It's that third parties load the system with complete crap.
The Wii should be super easy to develop for, since it's essentially a GameCube, but they struggle to make games even look like the GameCube's mid tier games

Why is it one or the other?
 
gerg said:
Why is it one or the other?


Because there hasn't been a single game released on the Wii on the same level as RE5 or MGS4 or GTA4.
It's all been D level games outside a few niche games from small studios.
 

Combichristoffersen

Combovers don't work when there is no hair
AceBandage said:
Because there hasn't been a single game released on the Wii on the same level as RE5 or MGS4 or GTA4.
It's all been D level games outside a few niche games from small studios.

But doesn't a surprisingly large part of GAF consider GTAIV, MGS4 and RE5 to be exactly that; D-level games?
 
AceBandage said:
Except that it's not. Not at all.
It's that third parties load the system with complete crap.
The Wii should be super easy to develop for, since it's essentially a GameCube, but they struggle to make games even look like the GameCube's mid tier games

This is true, the Wii is the easiest console to develop for but that's not what that guy was talking about. Most western devs simply want to push tech (mainly because they mostly came from a PC development background) and care more about pushing technical boundaries than new forms of gameplay.

This fits in with most publishers, most of which are risk averse and are unwilling to take a chance with consoles outside of their comfort zone (moneyhats help too!)

To both devs and publishers, Nintendo is seen as a threat to their livelihood and their very way of thinking (that plus long standing grudges from the NES/SNES/N64 days and the kiddie image as well)
 
Combichristoffersen said:
But doesn't a surprisingly large part of GAF consider GTAIV, MGS4 and RE5 to be exactly that; D-level games?


Only the part that hates games because of X, which has no bearing on the level of time, money and the team that makes a game.

Nuclear Muffin said:
This is true, the Wii is the easiest console to develop for but that's not what that guy was talking about. Most western devs simply want to push tech (mainly because they mostly came from a PC development background) and care more about pushing technical boundaries than new forms of gameplay.

This fits in with most publishers, most of which are risk averse and are unwilling to take a chance with consoles outside of their comfort zone (moneyhats help too!)


And it's just doing them wonders. They're going out of business faster than Blockbuster.
 

Taurus

Member
I remember how much 3rd party support the Gamecube got when it was even strength with competition... :lol :lol

There's always some reason for certain 3rd parties to avoid Nintendo consoles, mostly it's just too much competition from 1st parties. This gen it's been too late since everything went how it went. Maybe next gen 3rd parties take Nintendo seriously and are able to make money?
Propably not, just more excuses
 

tenritsu

Banned
Firestorm said:
WiiHD 2010 Confirmed!

Pachter's dream lives on!

But yea, he's so adamant bout his point, then when asked bout whether it will be made it's back to "oh, I can't say anything *whistles*"
 

gerg

Member
AceBandage said:
Because there hasn't been a single game released on the Wii on the same level as RE5 or MGS4 or GTA4.
It's all been D level games outside a few niche games from small studios.

And the reason why developers might be shy of releasing those game could be the fact that the Wii is graphically inferior with its competitors, thus limiting its potential to sell to the 18-35 male demographic in America, and thus lessening develop interest in the platform.

I think that there is an element in which no matter how many games third parties developed for the system - irrespective of legions of huge, amazing exclusive titles - the Wii would still not have accumulated a significantly large 18-35 male demographic within its audience.
 

gogojira

Member
Firestorm said:
WiiHD 2010 Confirmed!

Fact. We should all put 100 percent faith in this, and that Nintendo will have a gigantic unveiling at E3 2010.

If they don't deliver, we'll start a really mean petition that'll surely get Nintendo to make it happen!

but seriously that was some tricky wording
 
Nuclear Muffin said:
Well we at least know that Reggie is in talks with 3rd parties, trying to secure support at least. Amazing that he still can't manage to do so (And I do think there's more to it than just horse power and demographics...)

As for Wii HD, I can see where he's coming from. HD support and enhanced graphics are just additional features that will come as an "extra" They won't be the focus of the next machine (big surprise!)

That point is why the Wii HD add on theory doesnt appear to be the direction Nintendo will go. If they don't consider graphics to be the main driving point of ANY console, past/present/future, then what they're focusing on in development is technical and game-enhancing abilities. While important, it doesn't matter to them whether a Mario or Zelda game is in HD or not
 

GCX

Member
Jacobi said:
Nintendo's ignorance is back. OK, it was always there, but in a different form
So, should Reggie just say "yeah, our console is graphically abysmal and doesn't have any games. We'll probably go 3rd party by 2011"?
 

Firestorm

Member
AceBandage said:
Only the part that hates games because of X, which has no bearing on the level of time, money and the team that makes a game.
I thought the point of Wii was you don't need to spend the same amount of time or money to make a game. Isn't that Wii's primary draw? Costs aren't ridiculous? I think there's also the fact that many developers look at PS3 + 360 as one combined console. They make a game for one, they're also making it for the other unless they have ties to one of the hardware companies (in which case Wii never stood a chance).
 
AceBandage said:
And it's just doing them wonders. They're going out of business faster than Blockbuster.

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if most devs in a position of power would rather go down with the ship than develop for a Nintendo console :lol
 
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=18418938&postcount=57
SecretBonusPoint said:
The two modes of Nintendo PR:
- Hey third party developers about to experience amazing sales on our rival's consoles! Look at us, we're putting out another first party Mario title that will be the sole stellar selling Wii game this period! Suck on that!

- I just don't understand why other developers aren't bringing their A-games to Wii!

Like clockwork :lol
 

Elios83

Member
Such a strong apology ending with the classic : "Nothing to announce here today" :D He ruined his own climax :lol
I'm sure that Nintendo will be forced to add HD support next year if they don't want to have an other YOY decline for the platform. It won't be their next gen platform but a new Wii model.
 
Firestorm said:
I thought the point of Wii was you don't need to spend the same amount of time or money to make a game. Isn't that Wii's primary draw? Costs aren't ridiculous? I think there's also the fact that many developers look at PS3 + 360 as one combined console. They make a game for one, they're also making it for the other unless they have ties to one of the hardware companies (in which case Wii never stood a chance).


You don't have to spend the same amount of money to develop a Wii game, as you do for a PS3/360 game, no.
But spending less than 10% and having a team that you usually develops your license crap make a new "hardcore lightgun game" isn't cutting it (obviously).
 

TunaLover

Member
Anyway, it's very hypocrite on his part call dissapoinment on Wii library because third party, when he was one of the person who refuse Disaster in the first place, NoA actually hasn't moral right to blame third party, when the subsidarie has that awfull record to publish Nintendo owned games.
 

alr1ght

bish gets all the credit :)
"The way we at Nintendo do things is, you know, when we will move to a new generation, it's because there are some fundamental things the [current] console cannot do. What that says is that simply the addition of HD capability will not be the next step for us. There will be more to it. There will be additional capability. There will be additional elements, and, given that, it is far into the future."

There are fundamental things that the Wii cannot do, regardless of resolution. More power does not just mean a bump in resolution.

also,
dsi-released.jpg


in the end, it's all just PR bull and no one should care.
 

Teddman

Member
Given that Nintendo has outsold all third-party games combined this gen, maybe they ought to listen.

ALL THIRD PARTY GAMES COMBINED.

People don't care about graphics. If nothing else, Wii has proven that...
 
With the third party track record on the Wii some moderate hits followed by some horrible bombs I :lol at the posters in this thread that can assure third parties success if they just develop for the Wii.

"If they need success and sales come to the Wii, it's that easy." :lol Some have really tried. They need a market they can wrap their heads around, it's like because Gaffers own the Wii we should believe it is the heir to the PS2s excellent market that built so many fortunes. That market has been sliced and diced by all three consoles.
 

RevoDS

Junior Member
While I can see where he's coming from and I definitely agree, it's not like Nintendo always respected that "rule" of his...I didn't see many fundamental changes from NES to SNES, or GBC to GBA for example...

Fact. We should all put 100 percent faith in this, and that Nintendo will have a gigantic unveiling at E3 2010.
E3 2010 will be a major disappointment if all they have to show is a Wii with HD support.
 

Taurus

Member
farnham said:
new wii in 2010..? i highly doubt it
Wouldn't it possible for Nintendo to go the DS route with Wii? DS -> Lite -> i, Wii -> HD -> ? For example Sony offers several hardware versions during a gen, but Nintendo has always sticked with the same model they launched.
 

gerg

Member
TunaLover said:
Anyway, it's very hypocrite in his part call dissapoinment on Wii library because third party, when he was one of the person who refuse Disaster in the first place, NoA actually hasn't moral right to blame third party, when the subsidarie has that awfull record to publish Nintendo owned games.

I don't think the two complaints are the same.

Reggie isn't stating that third-parties should release games that don't or won't sell, as is the case with the titles it has refused to publish itself. He is stating that these third-party games would sell. Of course, this is a claim which may be debatable on its own terms, but I don't think he is being much of a hypocrite to make it.
 
Anerythristic said:
With the third party track record on the Wii some moderate hits followed by some horrible bombs I :lol at the posters in this thread that can assure third parties success if the develop for the Wii.

"If they need success and sales come to the Wii, it's that easy." :lol Some have really tried. They need a market they can wrap their heads around, it's like because Gaffers own the Wii we should believe it is the heir to the PS2s excellent market that built so many fortunes. That market has been sliced and diced by all three consoles.


Examples?
Give me examples of third party Wii games that didn't sell well that should have.

Taurus said:
Wouldn't it possible for Nintendo to go the DS route with Wii? DS -> Lite -> i, Wii -> HD -> ? For example Sony offers several hardware versions during a gen, but Nintendo has always sticked with the same model they launched.


No, because developers would have to develop two versions of the game. An HD version and an SD version.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
AceBandage said:
Except that it's not. Not at all.
It's that third parties load the system with complete crap.
The Wii should be super easy to develop for, since it's essentially a GameCube, but they struggle to make games even look like the GameCube's mid tier games

No I think the point is that at the time, when GC was around, the top tier studios and devs were developing for it because it was relatively on par with the other consoles and was making money as they could use assets and dev power across all consoles.

Now, devs moved on and they develope with other goals in mind, other scopes for the games, multicore processing and so on. Developing for Wii means little of the work is to be reused across platforms and the sales are pretty low in comparison.

So its a bang for the buck type thing, back then you would develope across the board, now you would need a dedicated Wii team from day one to think of the scope of the game in terms of the power of the console.

No one is saying the Wii cant produce good graphics if worked with correctly, but I think devs are saying you cant do it profitably, and as such they are staying off.

I think it sucks he is still fishing for third party support because as he mentioned the two year cycle thing, by now I think devs are focusing on the end games for the HD consoles before a new generation fo hardware is out around 2012.
 

EDarkness

Member
Nuclear Muffin said:
This is true, the Wii is the easiest console to develop for but that's not what that guy was talking about. Most western devs simply want to push tech (mainly because they mostly came from a PC development background) and care more about pushing technical boundaries than new forms of gameplay.

This fits in with most publishers, most of which are risk averse and are unwilling to take a chance with consoles outside of their comfort zone (moneyhats help too!)

To both devs and publishers, Nintendo is seen as a threat to their livelihood and their very way of thinking (that plus long standing grudges from the NES/SNES/N64 days and the kiddie image as well)

Well, their job couldn't be easier. Just make the games they're good at on the Wii. Pretty simple stuff. "Core" gamers will go where the good games are. Make them and they'll come. Making kiddie looking games doesn't help either...(I'm looking at you Madden).
 

schuelma

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.
TunaLover said:
Anyway, it's very hypocrite on his part call dissapoinment on Wii library because third party, when he was one of the person who refuse Disaster in the first place, NoA actually hasn't moral right to blame third party, when the subsidarie has that awfull record to publish Nintendo owned games.


I'm not a fan of NoA's localization efforts, but not releasing Disaster, which would have solf about 10 thousand copies, has nothing to do with bad third party efforts.
 

farnham

Banned
Combichristoffersen said:
But doesn't a surprisingly large part of GAF consider GTAIV, MGS4 and RE5 to be exactly that; D-level games?
not in production values

only in terms of innovation, creativity etc.
 
Taurus said:
Wouldn't it possible for Nintendo to go the DS route with Wii? DS -> Lite -> i, Wii -> HD -> ? For example Sony offers several hardware versions during a gen, but Nintendo has always sticked with the same model they launched.

It would hold the masses over and temporarily satisfy third party developers(with the new HD versions they can create), but it wouldnt be a true Nintendo evolution. It would just be a Wii with added HD. Nothing like the jump from GC -> Wii created
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
SecretBonusPoint said:
This is pretty good :lol

schuelma said:
I'm not a fan of NoA's localization efforts, but not releasing Disaster, which would have solf about 10 thousand copies, has nothing to do with bad third party efforts.

I'm going to bet you elevendy internet dollars that a release of Disaster would have sold more copies than Sin and Punishment 2 eventually will.
 

farnham

Banned
Taurus said:
Wouldn't it possible for Nintendo to go the DS route with Wii? DS -> Lite -> i, Wii -> HD -> ? For example Sony offers several hardware versions during a gen, but Nintendo has always sticked with the same model they launched.
thats not exactly what wii HD means though
 

jiggle

Member
Taurus said:
Wouldn't it possible for Nintendo to go the DS route with Wii? DS -> Lite -> i, Wii -> HD -> ? For example Sony offers several hardware versions during a gen, but Nintendo has always sticked with the same model they launched.






how will the Wii HD games work on the millions of Wii already sold?
 

[Nintex]

Member
This goes against anything Miyamoto and Iwata said about the next Wii. Miyamoto said that they've 'shaken up' the market and wouldn't change the interface, only improve it and make it more cost effective.
 
Top Bottom