Support NeoGAF

[Epiphyte]

I agree, except that in this case it's title specific, rather than every barely shown Nintendo game, no matter how poor, is given endless faith/fervor.

I just hold up Killzone as a case of extraordinary cognitive dissonance. Why the hell is a sequel to a mediocre shooter, of which we've only seen a bullshit CGI video, hyped to hell and back?

I think Nintendo does get too much hype for their 1st party releases, but given their history, they've earned a bit more benefit of the doubt than most developers. Same with studios like Level 5, Bungie, Valve and Blizzard. People just assume that their games will be quality unless proven otherwise.

 

[Pureauthor]

No, it's because they had the largest userbase and it would be idiotic from a business standpoint to not position your games to where they can touch the most people.

Pst. Their first party reflected this. They had everything. Hardcore and casual, 'mature' and 'kiddy'.

Nintendo has hardcore, casual, and 'kiddy' tied up about now. If you want them to move to mature... well, write them a stern letter or something.

 

[LOCK]

Wow this was a little....unexpected.

 

[No6]

It's not completely untested and unproven. Perhaps we could start with the theory that they MIGHT be some of the same people who are buying the DS. Surely we could find some data to work with there?

If the DS is any indicator the Wii owners will buy Mario, Mario, and Pokemon.

Nintendo's best strategy is to grow their market to be larger than the hardcore "we want mature games" market. Once they gain ground (as they have been with the Wii) then 3rd parties will have no choice to support them. do you think the PS2 got all of those mature titles because they shouted from the rooftops "WE ARE THE MOST HARDCORE RAWR!!!" No, it's because they had the largest userbase and it would be idiotic from a business standpoint to not position your games to where they can touch the most people.

Sony got the support because mature games sold on the PS2. Overall userbase helped that, but the PS2 owners still had to actually buy the games.

Further, making games last gen didn't require an explicit compromise in design vision when choosing a platform to develop for. That's clearly not true this time, and the "business standpoint" argument means that developers are encouraged to copy Nintendo games as much as possible and avoid risks at all costs.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

Pst. Their first party reflected this. They had everything. Hardcore and casual, 'mature' and 'kiddy'.

Nintendo has hardcore, casual, and 'kiddy' tied up about now. If you want them to move to mature... well, write them a stern letter or something.

Pureauthor, your economics teacher must be weeping.

Let's say hypothetically that the Wii wins all three territories on the back of the games library that we've heard so much about. Do you honestly believe there will be little to no mature games on the system because Nintendo made their "kiddy" bed?

 

[Pureauthor]

If the DS is any indicator the Wii owners will buy Mario, Mario, and Pokemon.

Working under the concept of 'multimillion' sellers alone as being 'bought' is stupid. If one has been paying attention in Japan, you'll see many franchises and genres seeing greater success on the DS.

That's the offshoot of a massive userbase. Wii should have that sooner or later, so...

Pureauthor, your economics teacher must be weeping.

Most probably he is. My class just completed a test today, and he's marking it. :lol

Let's say hypothetically that the Wii wins all three territories on the back of the games library that we've heard so much about. Do you honestly believe there will be little to no mature games on the system because Nintendo made their "kiddy" bed?

Whoa whoa whoa. Hold up. If you've checked my post history you'll know I champion the simple fact that userbase -> software -> userbase -> software -> userbase. You'll also see I use the DS as an example (although funnily enough, there's a shortage of 'M' games for that system.)

At this point in time, though, the Wii doesn't have the userbase to back up support for 3rd parties to throw everything on it. It has the momentum, and that's encouraging for 3rd party support in general. But we're not going to see the results just yet.

I am perfectly willing to discuss hardcore games appearing on the Wii. I'm arguing against the claim that devs should just up and dump everything, including 'mature' titles on it.

 

[fresquito]

This whole discussion is too dependent on the past.

If Nintendo pursues gaming in the same way they did with the Cube, i.e: Pander to the 360/PS3 gamers by trying to attain "teh mature" titles on the console, they will fail again. What incentive is there for those gamers to leave the 360 and PS3 (well, not so much the PS3) if that's where the hardcore mature games are?

Nintendo's best strategy is to grow their market to be larger than the hardcore "we want mature games" market. Once they gain ground (as they have been with the Wii) then 3rd parties will have no choice but to support them. do you think the PS2 got all of those mature titles because they shouted from the rooftops "WE ARE THE MOST HARDCORE RAWR!!!" No, it's because they had the largest userbase and it would be idiotic from a business standpoint to not position your games to where they can touch the most people.

Then explain to me why so many western devs are giving a finger to the DS and they're supporting the PSP?

I really hope third parties support the Wii with good titles, but at this point, I think they're going to be late to the party. And we all know what happens when you're late to the party. On the other hand, they will have the perfect excuse to blame it all on Nintendo and their fans. I only see things changing in the late times of the Wii and in the next-gen cycle.

 

[Epiphyte]

Further, making games last gen didn't require an explicit compromise in design vision when choosing a platform to develop for. That's clearly not true this time, and the "business standpoint" argument means that developers are encouraged to copy Nintendo games as much as possible and avoid risks at all costs.

Wait, developers on the Wii are the ones who need to avoid risk at all costs???

 

[John Harker]

Working under the concept of 'multimillion' sellers alone as being 'bought' is stupid. If one has been paying attention in Japan, you'll see many franchises and genres seeing greater success on the DS.

That's the offshoot of a massive userbase. Wii should have that sooner or later, so...

Greater success on the DS vs what?
Surely Castlevania DS sold very well - but it was still less than its PSX and GBA counterparts.
Same could be said for Mega Man, Resident Evil, Viewtiful Joe, Maddens, Tales etc.

Third party sales on the DS are good, don't get me wrong, but surely you see that the true "more-succesful" franchies are the Marios/Pokemons/Brain Trainings, etc. So if yo want to make an argument that the DS and Wii userbases overlap (though, I'll stand by my its still "unproven" what the Wii Sports-generation will buy next) then by your own logic, the best sellers on Wii are going to continue to be the Mario, Mario, Pokemon (See: No6)

That isn't to see other genres will be succesfull on Wii, but it wont be because of the 'non gamer DS crowd'

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

Then explain to me why so many western devs are giving a finger to the DS and they're supporting the PSP?

No problem:

The PS2.

American devs are just shifting resources from the PS2 to the PSP. It's cost-sensible, and can double their dollars with little to no efforts. I'll ask you a question now: Why are we seeing so many PS2/PSP/Wii ports? The answer is the same as above.

 

[Pureauthor]

Greater success on the DS vs what?
Surely Castlevania DS sold very well - but it was still less than its PSX and GBA counterparts.
Same could be said for Mega Man, Resident Evil, Viewtiful Joe, Maddens, Tales etc.

I'm going by Japanese sales, and Castlevania on the DS has beaten the GBA iterations. And of course it wouldn't beat SotN. That game is near legendary.

MMZX reversed the decline in sales that the MMZ series was seeing, Ryusei no Rockman managed to triple launch week sales to reach 400K (although the sudden drop in sales in bizzarre. Probably the 3 SKU crap). RE? We got a port. And it's sold decently.

Viewtiful Joe for handhelds is trash either way. Madden? What? TotT is an outsourced piece of donkey feces that didn't deserve the 100k sales it crawled it's way up past.

On the flip side, games like CoM tripled launch week sales, DQM:J and FFIII have both achieved nongame status. Games like Layton see legs. To claim that DS games have not met success, as far as Japan is concerned, is an utter crock.

Third party sales on the DS are good, don't get me wrong, but surely you see that the true "more-succesful" franchies are the Marios/Pokemons/Brain Trainings, etc. So if yo want to make an argument that the DS and Wii userbases overlap (though, I'll stand by my its still "unproven" what the Wii Sports-generation will buy next) then by your own logic, the best sellers on Wii are going to continue to be the Mario, Mario, Pokemon (See: No6)

That isn't to see other genres will be succesfull on Wii, but it wont be because of the 'non gamer DS crowd'

'Bestsellers' sure, but game devs shouldn't care about how well their games sell in relations to others. They care about how well their own games sell. Period.

 

[Dolphin]

 

[OnWarmerMusic]

Wow this was a little....unexpected.

*scrambles to talk about something Capcom-related*

So I've seen a number of people hoping for Megaman Legends sequel as part of all of this; I'm ashamed to say I missed out on those 2 (?) titles. Are they worth tracking down?

 

[Particle Physicist]

Did you just describe Zelda, or am I missing something?

Edit: Beaten by ethelred.



Look, I'm not disagreeing here. What I am saying is:

HOW ARE THIRD PARTIES SUPPOSED TO KNOW THIS WHEN THE VAST MAJORITY OF TITLES SOLD ON NINTENDO CONSOLES ARE 'KIDDY'?

because good 'mature' games sell well..

 

[Burnst]

:lol :lol

 

[Pureauthor]

*scrambles to talk about something Capcom-related*

So I've seen a number of people hoping for Megaman Legends sequel as part of all of this; I'm ashamed to say I missed out on those 2 (?) titles. Are they worth tracking down?

Well, I loved 'em.

It's kinda like a Megaman ARPG. Lots of buster shooting action fighting Air Pirates and Ruin Guardians, that sort of stuff. And a storyline, to boot!

Plus, it gave rise to the Servbot/Kobun! Definite plus.

(If you can find the spinoff 'The Misadventures of Tron Bonne', grab it as well.)

 

[Berserker]

Glad to see Capcom finally jumping on board.

 

[Evlar]

If we're arguing what's going to be best selling that's likely to be the biggest franchises of course, unless some new IP takes everyone by surprise. And it's no secret that right now the only BIG franchises on the Wii are Nintendo's own Zelda, Mario, Metroid, etc. Other publishers don't have potential best-sellers on the list yet because they haven't committed their biggest franchises (unless you count spin-offs like DQS and the Resident Evil game). That's all obvious.

A Mario title is likely to be the biggest game on the Wii, but Mario is no stranger to being the biggest name on ALL consoles. But if other major franchises are committed to the Wii I have no doubt they could push into the top ten games on the system, or top five, or even #1 in some territories.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

Whoa whoa whoa. Hold up. If you've checked my post history you'll know I champion the simple fact that userbase -> software -> userbase -> software -> userbase. You'll also see I use the DS as an example (although funnily enough, there's a shortage of 'M' games for that system.)

Post History, Pfffh... I was THERE when you made those comments. I know your philosophy man.

At this point in time, though, the Wii doesn't have the userbase to back up support for 3rd parties to throw everything on it. It has the momentum, and that's encouraging for 3rd party support in general. But we're not going to see the results just yet.

I completely agree.

I am perfectly willing to discuss hardcore games appearing on the Wii. I'm arguing against the claim that devs should just up and dump everything, including 'mature' titles on it.

I agree with this, but only to an extent. Somebody's going to have to jump, and I think that 3rd parties have left a lot of potential money on the table by not supporting Wii to this point. It made sense for the wait and see attitude before the Wii launched, but now that we're in full swing it's time for 3rd parties to sack up and start releasing or get left in the dust.

 

[ziran]

http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/2025/mateurva5.jpg

:lol

This thread has quickly descended into bollocks! :lol

The fact of the matter is even on the purple lunchbox, kiddie friendly, supposedly craptacular for all 3rd parties GayCube, RE4 still sold ~1.5 million copies ww on an installed base of ~20 million. If 3rd parties develop good games with the potential to appeal to a large audience for Wii, or any console, they'll have a better chance of selling great numbers than if they port any old shovelware.

Also, I don't agree with the, Nintendo needs to desperately concentrate internal resources on new mature ips or they'll be damned for all eternity, mentality. Nintendo already develops Zelda, Metroid Prime and Fire Emblem, which are mature/hardcore franchises and have the potential to sell well for their genres, and I'm sure there'll be a few more new ones over the lifespan of the console, like Project Hammer is showing.

I'm really happy with the balance Nintendo's 1st parties create and I wouldn't want them to stop making brilliant games like Wii Sports and Animal Crossing in favour of more mature titles, it would be huge step backwards imo.


EDIT -

This whole discussion is too dependent on the past.

If Nintendo pursues gaming in the same way they did with the Cube, i.e: Pander to the 360/PS3 gamers by trying to attain "teh mature" titles on the console, they will fail again. What incentive is there for those gamers to leave the 360 and PS3 (well, not so much the PS3) if that's where the hardcore mature games are?

Nintendo's best strategy is to grow their market to be larger than the hardcore "we want mature games" market. Once they gain ground (as they have been with the Wii) then 3rd parties will have no choice but to support them. do you think the PS2 got all of those mature titles because they shouted from the rooftops "WE ARE THE MOST HARDCORE RAWR!!!" No, it's because they had the largest userbase and it would be idiotic from a business standpoint to not position your games to where they can touch the most people.

I agree.

The key factor for 3rd party success is going to end up being size of installed base, as the PS3/Wii sw sales are already showing.

 

[Pureauthor]

I agree with this, but only to an extent. Somebody's going to have to jump, and I think that 3rd parties have left a lot of potential money on the table by not supporting Wii to this point. It made sense for the wait and see attitude before the Wii launched, but now that we're in full swing it's time for 3rd parties to sack up and start releasing or get left in the dust.

I'm willing to be patient, myself. Not to mention I don't really give a fig either way whether a game is 'mature' or not. If it's fun, it's fun.

That aside, I think support from Capcom (REUC, Island Adventure) are perfectly viable and enjoyable games. REUC is the bigger game of the two and it would make sense for them to send it to the Wii in the first place as a testing grounds. In the end, it'll just take time. Wii still does have to fight the perception of Nintendo hogging all the sales, after all. (The DS should have helped this situation some, as far as SE and several others are concerned.)

 

[OnWarmerMusic]

Well, I loved 'em.

It's kinda like a Megaman ARPG. Lots of buster shooting action fighting Air Pirates and Ruin Guardians, that sort of stuff. And a storyline, to boot!

Plus, it gave rise to the Servbot/Kobun! Definite plus.

(If you can find the spinoff 'The Misadventures of Tron Bonne', grab it as well.)

Thanks, I'll keep my eyes open. They always looked like a bit of fun, but at the time I remember being a little "meh" on the 3D Megaman idea and foolishly never went back to play them. Now seems like as good a time as any.

I love all the Capcom talk that's come out over the last 24 hours; still one of the best (and based on the last day, one of the most savvy) 3rd parties going.

 

[No6]

I'm going by Japanese sales, and Castlevania on the DS has beaten the GBA iterations. And of course it wouldn't beat SotN. That game is near legendary.

Japan isn't a useful metric, though (unless you live in Japan). If anything, Japan's Wii software sales are going to push hard against the development of anything like Zelda and more towards the "Blue Ocean" crowd.

'Bestsellers' sure, but game devs shouldn't care about how well their games sell in relations to others. They care about how well their own games sell. Period.

How games sell in relation to others is an indicator of how future games will sell, and whether or not to invest more heavily in development. Especially on a Nintendo console.

I agree with this, but only to an extent. Somebody's going to have to jump, and I think that 3rd parties have left a lot of potential money on the table by not supporting Wii to this point. It made sense for the wait and see attitude before the Wii launched, but now that we're in full swing it's time for 3rd parties to sack up and start releasing or get left in the dust.

3rd parties may have left money on the table but they also have to be able to convince the development talent (as compared to ordering the shovelware teams) to make a game that doesn't necessarily (and probably won't) let them achieve their "vision".

 

[Pureauthor]

Japan isn't a useful metric, though (unless you live in Japan). If anything, Japan's Wii software sales are going to push hard against the development of anything like Zelda and more towards the "Blue Ocean" crowd.

How games sell in relation to others is an indicator of how future games will sell, and whether or not to invest more heavily in development. Especially on a Nintendo console.

Then where's the massive avalanche of nongames coming out? Devs have had 2 years to see the advent of 'Blue Ocean'. Wait, it's because the Blue Ocean is causing sales of traditional, hardcore games to rise on the DS.

And I use Japan sales for the sole reason that it's the most reliable and weekly sales barometer we get. NPD is a complete wash now, and Europe's weekly software charts aren't helpful for exact figures.

3rd parties may have left money on the table but they also have to be able to convince the development talent (as compared to ordering the shovelware teams) to make a game that doesn't necessarily (and probably won't) let them achieve their "vision".

Yes, they're going have to 'convince' the devs to develop for the Wii. I think one needs to recall the chain of command in a game development company here.

Edit: After 11 minutes with no reply, I'm going to sleep. Providing no bannings occur and the debate continues, I'll respond in a few hours.

 

[Jokeropia]

How games sell in relation to others is an indicator of how future games will sell, and whether or not to invest more heavily in development. Especially on a Nintendo console.

If their games sell better on a Nintendo console than on a competing console (which is happening with Wii vs. PS3), they don't care if Nintendo's own games sell even more.

 

[No6]

Then where's the massive avalanche of nongames coming out? Devs have had 2 years to see the advent of 'Blue Ocean'. Wait, it's because the Blue Ocean is causing sales of traditional, hardcore games to rise on the DS.

Outside of Japan? The only traditional, "hardcore" (NSMB really isn't hardcore) games I see selling on the DS outside of Japan are Nintendo games.

And I use Japan sales for the sole reason that it's the most reliable and weekly sales barometer we get. NPD is a complete wash now, and Europe's weekly software charts aren't helpful for exact figures.

Except that Japan is a complete non-indicator of how things will sell in the West.

Yes, they're going have to 'convince' the devs to develop for the Wii. I think one needs to recall the chain of command in a game development company here.

I wasn't aware that the best developers (you know, the ones who can produce things like Halo and RE4, etc) were chained to their respective publishers.

 

[No6]

If their games sell better on a Nintendo console than on a competing console (which is happening with Wii vs. PS3), they don't care if Nintendo's own games sell even more.

I like how you totally ignore the 360 and the fact that 360 and PS3 games can be ported much more easily to each other. I also like how you just lump all games into one generic catagory.

 

[Berserker]

If their games sell better on a Nintendo console than on a competing console (which is happening with Wii vs. PS3), they don't care if Nintendo's own games sell even more.

Exactly why having the larger userbase is so important. The percentage of the console's owners who purchase the game doesnt have be as high for the sales to be higher.

 

[felipeko]

I like how you totally ignore the 360 and the fact that 360 and PS3 games can be ported much more easily to each other. I also like how you just lump all games into one generic catagory.

I like how you ignore the fact that Wii games are cheaper to produce.
I mean, less risks, and good profit...

 

[John Harker]

Best Selling? Best selling is considered, what, 250k for a sticker?

250k isn't even a lot for a $10mil+ budget these days.

 

[fresquito]

No problem:

The PS2.

American devs are just shifting resources from the PS2 to the PSP. It's cost-sensible, and can double their dollars with little to no efforts. I'll ask you a question now: Why are we seeing so many PS2/PSP/Wii ports? The answer is the same as above.

Well, that's actually a good answer, however doesn't answer my question in relation to your post. Companies don't seem to care that DS is the market leader by a wide margin, and it seems to me they aren't caring the Wii is gonna be the market leader soon enough if things go as they're going now. Ultimately, they will support the Wii with original and high quality content, but I don't think we will see it swing in full force until the next generation. So, third parties will continue to treat the Wii like the underdog, just like they do with the DS, they'll have their excuses, but I can see third parties supporting the Wii getting better benefits than third partied throwing shovelware and port-a-thon. So, blaming it all on Nintendo fans (not saying you're doing) seems stupid to me, after all, legendary classics like Castlevania, FF or Ghost n' Ghoblins were born on Nintendo systems.

 

[No6]

I like how you ignore the fact that Wii games are cheaper to produce.
I mean, less risks, and good profit...

Games like Zelda and RE4 are going to be expensive on any console; art, music, and development talent don't go way down in price simply because a console is easier to program for, and trying to make something high quality within the fairly severe constraints of the Wii will require significant effort. Games that will actually benefit from the cheaper production costs are going to be, well, what you're seeing from Capcom on the Wii. Or the majority of development for the DS.

 

[fresquito]

Games like Zelda and RE4 are going to be expensive on any console; art, music, and development talent don't go way down in price simply because a console is easier to program for, and trying to make something high quality within the fairly severe constraints of the Wii will require significant effort. Games that will actually benefit from the cheaper production costs are going to be, well, what you're seeing from Capcom on the Wii. Or the majority of development for the DS.

:lol

So gaming has been low quality up until now?

 

[OnWarmerMusic]

Games like Zelda and RE4 are going to be expensive on any console; art, music, and development talent don't go way down in price simply because a console is easier to program for...

They most certainly do if you already have a development team who has worked on the Gamecube and have assets or an engine already available, as Capcom does. Are you saying, for example, that you need the same number of programmers to tweak the RE4 engine for the Wii as you do to write something from scratch for the Cell?

...and trying to make something high quality within the fairly severe constraints of the Wii will require significant effort.

I assume you are referring to the relative graphical capability of the Wii as compared to the PS3 or 360. In any other context that statement is kind of silly.

 

[felipeko]

Well, that's actually a good answer, however doesn't answer my question in relation to your post. Companies don't seem to care that DS is the market leader by a wide margin, and it seems to me they aren't caring the Wii is gonna be the market leader soon enough if things go as they're going now. Ultimately, they will support the Wii with original and high quality content, but I don't think we will see it swing in full force until the next generation. So, third parties will continue to treat the Wii like the underdog, just like they do with the DS, they'll have their excuses, but I can see third parties supporting the Wii getting better benefits than third partied throwing shovelware and port-a-thon. So, blaming it all on Nintendo fans (not saying you're doing) seems stupid to me, after all, legendary classics like Castlevania, FF or Ghost n' Ghoblins were born on Nintendo systems.

Handheld was always dominated by Nintendo hardware and software, they are the best at doing it.. Thirdies never cared that much..
If nintendo shows the same dominance in consoles as they show in haldhelds, where in the hell would thirdies get money?
They can't miss it again... And as EA, Ubisoft, Sega and a lot others are showing, they won't.

Games like Zelda and RE4 are going to be expensive on any console; art, music, and development talent don't go way down in price simply because a console is easier to program for, and trying to make something high quality within the fairly severe constraints of the Wii will require significant effort. Games that will actually benefit from the cheaper production costs are going to be, well, what you're seeing from Capcom on the Wii. Or the majority of development for the DS.

So, why costs goes so high on ps3 games?
FFXIII must be bleeding money from SE, and i don't think DQIX is doing the same.. (or DQSwords for wii)

 

[OnWarmerMusic]

:lol

So gaming has been low quality up until now?

"You mean you have to use your hands? That's like a baby's toy!"

Spoiler

obscure?

 

[wsippel]

Games like Zelda and RE4 are going to be expensive on any console; art, music, and development talent don't go way down in price simply because a console is easier to program for, and trying to make something high quality within the fairly severe constraints of the Wii will require significant effort. Games that will actually benefit from the cheaper production costs are going to be, well, what you're seeing from Capcom on the Wii. Or the majority of development for the DS.

High-def assets are the most expensive factor, so even though AAA-games on Wii are expensive, they are much more expensive on PS3 and Xbox360. Clever coding to work around Wiis performance constraints isn't really expensive in itself.

 

[underfooter]

What has this thread come to?



Am the only one who can't keep my pants clean over the thought of RE4-like gameplay in the older RE settings + wii aiming controls + improved graphics?


Am I really? That's TOTALLY AWESOME! RE4 was one of my favorite Gamecube games, so naturally this title is probably like, one of my most wanted 2007 titles (after Mario and Metroid).

 

[KINGMOKU]

:lol :lol

Okay, that got me.

 

[ziran]

I like how you totally ignore the 360 and the fact that 360 and PS3 games can be ported much more easily to each other. I also like how you just lump all games into one generic catagory.

The ability for easy ports didn't help GC. Size of installed base is king.

 

[No6]

:lol

So gaming has been low quality up until now?

No, but large budgets were required to get what are now considered average-at-best games. The bar has been raised.

They most certainly do if you already have a development team who has worked on the Gamecube and have assets or an engine already available, as Capcom does. Are you saying, for example, that you need the same number of programmers to tweak the RE4 engine for the Wii as you do to write something from scratch for the Cell?

Well, if you're going to just rehash the RE4 engine, sure it'll be cheaper. It'll also be ready for a PS2 port and you might as well just have a mid-range team do the whole thing, rather than sacrificing one of your AAA teams.

High-def assets are the most expensive factor, so even though AAA-games on Wii are expensive, they are much more expensive on PS3 and Xbox360. Clever coding to work around Wiis performance constraints isn't really expensive in itself.

True, but as libraries are developed these costs will come down. If 3rd party Wii games (or even 1st party) were selling like 360 AAA 3rd party games, then that would matter, and if all 3 consoles had been released at the same time I think a different picture would be emerging, but a lot of the work has already been done.

 

[fresquito]

No, but large budgets were required to get what are now considered average-at-best games. The bar has been raised.

Sorry, but I don't judge games solely on their technical achievements.

 

[No6]

The ability for easy ports didn't help GC. Size of installed base is king.

The GC (eventually) got most midrange 3rd party games. Nor did (in most cases) the choice of lead platform result in an inability to port the game, it's just that some publishers decided not to bother. The difference is that this time, if you make a game for Wii (or 360/PS3), it basically can't go to the other platform. Even if the Wii totally demolishes the 360/PS3 in every territory (which is not remotely assured at this point), you'll still probably get something similar to the DS/PSP 3rd party scenario.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

No, but large budgets were required to get what are now considered average-at-best games. The bar has been raised.

For the love of God....you actually BELIEVE this?

 

[OnWarmerMusic]

Well, if you're going to just rehash the RE4 engine, sure it'll be cheaper. It'll also be ready for a PS2 port and you might as well just have a mid-range team do the whole thing, rather than sacrificing one of your AAA teams.

Sure, if all you're concerned about is graphics, but you couldn't possibly be basing the quality of a title just on gr...

No, but large budgets were required to get what are now considered average-at-best games. The bar has been raised.

Oh, you are. Well, alright then.

 

[fresquito]

The GC (eventually) got most midrange 3rd party games. Nor did (in most cases) the choice of lead platform result in an inability to port the game, it's just that some publishers decided not to bother. The difference is that this time, if you make a game for Wii (or 360/PS3), it basically can't go to the other platform. Even if the Wii totally demolishes the 360/PS3 in every territory (which is not remotely assured at this point), you'll still probably get something similar to the DS/PSP 3rd party scenario.

Which is why those companies will struggle to have positive numbers in their fiscal years by ignoring the leading platforms.

 

[No6]

Sorry, but I don't judge games solely on their technical achievements.

I wasn't aware that more power only resulted in improved textures. Do tell.

For the love of God....you actually BELIEVE this?

Are you trying to say that Zelda, Halo, or GT4 are above average (or even average) for what is expected from next-gen consoles? Content issues aside, I have a hard time thinking of many genres on next-gen consoles that haven't shown bar-raising improvements for what they try to achieve.

 

[EphemeralDream]

Am I the only one who doesn't really know what a "Nintendo fan" constitutes these days? Is it someone who grew up playing the NES/SNES (two incredible consoles in terms of 3rd party support) or perhaps the N64 (first party dominant)? I find it hard to believe that someone who grew up with the NES or SNES would only be interested in Nintendo games. In general I think the sort of Nintendo fan who rarely looks to 3rd parties a myth that you'd only find at a place like GameFAQs. I really hope this stereotypical view of the Nintendo fan is killed off this generation. Any gamer who discriminates against good games because of the home console, region, company, etc. is an idiot.

What is really silly IMO is I see a lot of people who don't own a Wii coming in to the occasional Wii topic and saying "I'll get a Wii for SMG, Brawl, and SPM" as if there won't be any other decent games on the system. I think these are the gamers who are adding evidence to the "people only buy Nintendo games on Nintendo consoles." It's not like games change fundamentally when they are put on a Nintendo console. The amount of games furthering the "lol Kiddy console" seems to be the minority IMO that has been blown out of proportion.

 

[No6]

Sure, if all you're concerned about is graphics, but you couldn't possibly be basing the quality of a title just on gr...


Oh, you are. Well, alright then.

RE4 is acutally an excellent example of a game that had to extremely constrain the player to achieve the visuals that it did. The alternative is something like Morrowind vs Oblivion.

Which is why those companies will struggle to have positive numbers in their fiscal years by ignoring the leading platforms.

Guess it's a good thing so much support is shifting to the 360 then.

 

[Jokeropia]

I like how you totally ignore the 360 and the fact that 360 and PS3 games can be ported much more easily to each other. I also like how you just lump all games into one generic catagory.

I only mentioned Wii and PS3 because they're the most comparable due to having been out equally long. 360 obviously has an advantage thanks to the 1 year headstart, but if Wii keeps selling like it is then it's installed base will become impossible to ignore.

Sure, 360 and PS3 games can be ported to each other, but the "spinoff exclusives" that the Wii is getting already will get more resources as the installed base grows. (PS3 also isn't guaranteed any 360 ports if it doesn't start selling better.)

Even if the Wii totally demolishes the 360/PS3 in every territory (which is not remotely assured at this point), you'll still probably get something similar to the DS/PSP 3rd party scenario.

Developers have finally started shifting resources from PSP to DS now.