Support NeoGAF

[Sipowicz]

i said it all along. dead space extraction is a cheaply made, outsourced arcade game spinoff that could and should have been released for a budget price. Despite a few of the chirpier motherfuckers on here doing their best to dismiss me. I was right

it was not some huge show of support. there was no reason to blackmail people into buying it and it did not deserve to sell at all on the wii as i've said numerous times

it has a host of problems, problems that they will hopefully try to fix when they release the superior PSN/XBLA version. a version that will be very cheap or a free pack in for people purchase dead space 2

EA is completely and utterly worthless on the wii. they are far shitter than the likes of Ubisoft will ever be on the system and there is no reason why anyone should ever buy any of this failing company's horrible, inferior wii crap.

those rare games they have made for the wii that aren't complete shit or licensed shovelware will get superior and often much cheaper versions on the PS3/360.

 

[v0yce]

It's common sense that Nintendo harbors more of a family friendly image than Sony or Microsoft, so of course there will be more M-rated games on those consoles, but it still doesn't excuse the garbage that developers put out on the Wii, especially early on during the Wii's most influential period on consumers.

You think Madden 06 or Tony Hawk Wasteland or King Kong or plenty of other early 360 games weren't bad? Most launch games suck, and it was doubly difficult for devs with Wii trying to wrap their heads around the Wiimote.

Bad games always get released for all systems. That's nothing new.

 

[Frencherman]

i said it all along. dead space extraction is a cheaply made, outsourced arcade game spinoff that could and should have been released for a budget price. Despite a few of the chirpier motherfuckers on here doing their best to dismiss me. I was right

it was not some huge show of support. there was no reason to blackmail people into buying it and it did not deserve to sell at all on the wii as i've said numerous times

it has a host of problems, problems that they will hopefully try to fix when they release the superior PSN/XBLA version. a version that will be very cheap or a free pack in for people purchase dead space 2

EA is completely and utterly worthless on the wii. they are far shitter than the likes of Ubisoft will ever be on the system and there is no reason why anyone should ever buy any of this failing company's horrible, inferior wii crap.

those rare games they have made for the wii that aren't complete shit or licensed shovelware will get superior and often much cheaper versions on the PS3/360.

Pretty true. To be honest, I won't miss EA much regarding the "inhouse" support of the wii this year. Very good, that the majority of gamers were more intelligent than me by letting Dead Rail in the shelves....

 

[scitek]

You think Madden 06 or Tony Hawk Wasteland or King Kong or plenty of other early 360 games weren't bad? Most launch games suck, and it was doubly difficult for devs with Wii trying to wrap their heads around the Wiimote.

Bad games always get released for all systems. That's nothing new.

Yesh, but nothing BUT bad games? And Madden '06 and King Kong were both rather well-received, by the way.

 

[FishSquared]

I really hope this is true, achievements + HD console + Dead Space = (for me personally that is) a buy day 1.

I loved dead space, but the poor reviews and how the game looked on the Wii kept me away from extraction, but I believe that if this is true the games quality will increase.

just my opinion but hey

Hope they don't have the same god awful box art

 

[Frencherman]

Hope they don't have the same god awful box art

Pretty sure this box art decreased the sales potential even further.

 

[scitek]

I really hope this is true, achievements + HD console + Dead Space = (for me personally that is) a buy day 1.

I loved dead space, but the poor reviews and how the game looked on the Wii kept me away from extraction, but I believe that if this is true the games quality will increase.

just my opinion but hey

Hope they don't have the same god awful box art

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/deadspaceextraction?q=dead space extraction

No.

 

[FishSquared]

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/deadspaceextraction?q=dead space extraction

No.

Metacritic kind of is a failure, but that's ok. Everything I've read leans towards mediocrity, a pale in comparison to Dead Space.


And didn't I say, partially, my goddamn opinion?

 

[Haunted]

I like the campy boxart. It has that trashy 60's Sci-Fi series feel.

Yesh, but nothing BUT bad games? And Madden '06 and King Kong were both rather well-received, by the way.

Hey, King Kong was pretty good (Ancel!), but the first 06 EA Sports titles were downright embarrassing. :lol

 

[ShinNL]

Haha, grandjedi6, I don't care about your personal agenda against Wii fans/AceBandage, but you sure take every chance you get to troll Wii fans. Yes, we're all dumb casuals who haven't moved on to real HD systems *cough*.

Oh, how about, I don't know, wait when this is released and see how it sells? I don't even care about using excuses like price difference. If I remember correctly, you were one of those people who kept claiming this game was one of those amazing core games for the Wii and kept using it as an example that Wii owners don't want "hardcore" games. Let's see how it performs on "hardcore systems" then. You hardcore gamer.

People who like core games are in the thousands for the Wii? Right. Brilliant.

 

[Neuromancer]

You think Madden 06 or Tony Hawk Wasteland or King Kong or plenty of other early 360 games weren't bad?

King Kong wasn't that bad. Average at worst.

Psst Hayes

 

[Agnates]

You think Madden 06 or Tony Hawk Wasteland or King Kong or plenty of other early 360 games weren't bad? Most launch games suck, and it was doubly difficult for devs with Wii trying to wrap their heads around the Wiimote.

Bad games always get released for all systems. That's nothing new.

Who said bad games don't appear on all systems? What are you even arguing? People are saying there are no big budget serious efforts for Wii from the third parties, aside from recent exceptions like Monster Hunter 3. How is that justified from third parties following Nintendo which was your original 100% unfounded argument? Does Nintendo put out shovelware or rail shooters or otherwise gimped products? Where is that 3rd party movement that follows Nintendo? Where are the expansive platformers and 30 hour action adventures? Nobody cares about age ratings, people just want good, involving games. That Nintendo doesn't put out mature games has nothing to do with third parties a) only putting out shallow casual titles and b) making their mature titles just as shallow. None of that aligns with Nintendo's direction. Even their casual titles have depth and come from the minds of their top tier developers, not some outsourced shovelware studio. Third parties have done anything but follow Nintendo's example. If all we cared about was age ratings Wii would have plenty including Dead Space Extraction, MadWorld, Chop Til You Drop, the 2 Chronicles games, to go alongside actually wanted efforts like No More Heroes, RE4, and the like. We wouldn't be talking about a lack of support. It's not an age rating that happens to be outside Nintendo's range that's the issue.

 

[ThatObviousUser]

Haha, grandjedi6, I don't care about your personal agenda against Wii fans/AceBandage, but you sure take every chance you get to troll Wii fans. Yes, we're all dumb casuals who haven't moved on to real HD systems *cough*.

Oh, how about, I don't know, wait when this is released and see how it sells? I don't even care about using excuses like price difference. If I remember correctly, you were one of those people who kept claiming this game was one of those amazing core games for the Wii and kept using it as an example that Wii owners don't want "hardcore" games. Let's see how it performs on "hardcore systems" then. You hardcore gamer.

People who like core games are in the thousands for the Wii? Right. Brilliant.

:lol You have no clue. gj is actually surprisingly good to the Wii, just not in flamewars (where he takes more joy in pointing out stupidity.)

 

[scitek]

And didn't I say, partially, my goddamn opinion?

Yeah, you did, but the reviews weren't poor, that's why I bolded just that part. I'm nitpicky.

Hey, King Kong was pretty good (Ancel!), but the first 06 EA Sports titles were downright embarrassing. :lol

Agreed on both counts, but the even the worst of the Madden games are at worst in the 7s score-wise.

The point I was trying to make earlier, though, was that even though every console has its share of bad games, particularly at launch, there's always one or two stand-outs from the crowd to sort of make up for it. Resistance and Call of Duty 2 were two that come to mind.

On the Wii, the first M-rated titles were Splinter Cell: Double Agent and Far Cry Vengeance, which were both just awful. In the months following, it didn't get any better with shit like Mortal Kombat: Armageddon coming 6 months after the Xbox and PS2 versions (and WITHOUT online play), and other crap that was just shoveled to the system without a thought.

THEN came Resident Evil 4's re-release, which took off, and publishers saw that and were all "THAT'S EASY!" and when they took their turns, they flew off the bridge because they didn't know the capital of Assyria.

I think that by that time, it was already too late to sell a hard M title without the aid of some hefty advertising because the early adopters had already gotten burned. So when these new customers, who don't want to take a chance and buy total shit again, decided to only buy games with brand-name recognition -- a la a Resident Evil or Call of Duty -- developers threw their hands in the air and just said "We can't compete with that, fuck it, shovelware time."

 

[boiled goose]

What is your reason why 3rd parties would put those type of games on a Sony platform and not a Nintendo one?

Unless Sony is better at convincing third parties or helps fund game development, I have no fucking clue why PSP got versions of Dante's Inferno and Assassin's Creed and Wii did not.

They clearly needed to make a new engine for those games that could be used on wii.

Regardless of the userbase of the PSP, it is pretty much guaranteed those games would do better on the wii. Not because of the Wii, but because the PSP is pretty much dead in the west.

Truly mind boggling...

 

[v0yce]

Who said bad games don't appear on all systems? What are you even arguing? People are saying there are no big budget serious efforts for Wii from the third parties, aside from recent exceptions like Monster Hunter 3. How is that justified from third parties following Nintendo which was your original 100% unfounded argument? Does Nintendo put out shovelware or rail shooters or otherwise gimped products? Where is that 3rd party movement that follows Nintendo? Where are the expansive platformers and 30 hour action adventures? Nobody cares about age ratings, people just want good, involving games. That Nintendo doesn't put out mature games has nothing to do with third parties a) only putting out shallow casual titles and b) making their mature titles just as shallow. None of that aligns with Nintendo's direction. Even their casual titles have depth and come from the minds of their top tier developers, not some outsourced shovelware studio. Third parties have done anything but follow Nintendo's example. If all we cared about was age ratings Wii would have plenty including Dead Space Extraction, MadWorld, Chop Til You Drop, the 2 Chronicles games, to go alongside actually wanted efforts like No More Heroes, RE4, and the like. We wouldn't be talking about a lack of support. It's not an age rating that happens to be outside Nintendo's range that's the issue.

Uh, what?

No the argument is why don't the good 3rd party mature games (DS Extraction) sell on Wii. I made the case that its because Nintendo hasn't courted that audience themselves. Someone else made the claim that is was because of crappy 3rd party efforts in the early stages of Wii.

I honestly have no idea what your nonsense is supposed to mean. How is MadWorld not a "wanted effort" yet No More Heroes is? The only difference I see is that one had a small amount of success and the other didn't and you're trying to spin that to your benefit.

 

[Agnates]

No the argument is why don't the good 3rd party mature games (DS Extraction) sell on Wii.

Huh? If that was the argument, how the heck did your original argument of how "third parties follow first parties" lead into it? You weren't trying to explain why they don't make such titles on Wii by saying it's because Nintendo doesn't make those either? You were instead trying to justify their sales? Third parties follow Nintendo so their mature games don't sell on Wii? That makes no sense as a statement. But okay, I'll entertain this new found argument of yours. You're basing it on a false premise:

The good 3rd party mature games do sell on Wii, analogus to their marketing. DSE wasn't a good effort like DS was. And even if it was a good effort, you can't just claim its sales have anything to do with Nintendo's stance or its age rating ignoring how that particular game was handled by its own publisher, when other games of the same genre and type have sold way better in the past. Including House of the Dead 2 & 3, House of the Dead: Overkill, RE: Umbrella Chronicles, and if we generalised further like you're doing, as just "mature" rather than "niche rail shooter" then there are plenty more examples, including COD: WaW, RE4, and No More Heroes among others.

The bottomline is, the Wii mostly gets third party games that don't sell on any platform. It doesn't get games like those that sell on the other platforms. It doesn't get Dead Space, it gets DS Extraction, it doesn't get Resident Evil, it gets RE: Chronicles, it doesn't get action adventures, it gets rail shooters, it doesn't get big budget productions like Bayonetta, it gets borderline shovelware like MadWorld (lol @ implying it's of similar quality to NMH, hell no). There's your reason why those games don't sell on Wii, and it has absolutely nothing to do with their age rating, it has everything to do with what exactly those games are and how they're handled. In the few instances it does get games like those that sell elsewhere, they sell on it as well. Including titles I've already mentioned in this post, as well as Monster Hunter, and others.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

... how the game looked on the Wii kept me away from extraction...

As a $15 download game, this is going to look exactly the same as it did on the Wii, only rendered at 720p.

 

[v0yce]

Huh? If that was the argument, how the heck did your original argument of how "third parties follow first parties" lead into it? Third parties follow Nintendo so their mature games don't sell on Wii? That makes no sense as a statement. But okay, I'll entertain this new found argument of yours. You're basing it on a false premise:

The good 3rd party mature games do sell on Wii. DSE wasn't a good effort. And even if it was a good effort, you can't say it has anything to do with Nintendo's stance and not how that particular game was handled from its own developer and publisher, when other games of the same genre and type have sold way better in the past. Including House of the Dead 2 & 3, House of the Dead Overkill, and if we take it even more generalised as just "mature" rather than "niche rail shooter" then there are plenty more examples, including COD: WaW, RE4, and No More Heroes among others.

I'm not sure if its worth bothering with you anymore, but I'll try this one more time and I'll try to talk real slow.

I first started this exchange when someone said 3rd parties have no one to blame but themselves for their games performing poorly. I think that's silly. This isn't some new phenomenon to the Wii. Nintendo has been struggling with 3rd parties and particularly mature titles for their past 3 consoles. There has to be a reason for that. And the one that jumps out to me is that Nintendo doesn't make games that attract that audience.

Some 3rd parties have tried. Some have found some success. But most haven't. The Wii is a tuff nut to crack and its not as simple as the good games sell and the bad ones don't. That's just not true. Again, what is the difference between MadWorld and No More Heroes to you?

 

[Agnates]

Again, what is the difference between MadWorld and No More Heroes to you?

One is a decent, fun game, the other isn't. You can't see the difference between a Wii effort like MadWorld and a HD effort like Bayonetta? Or RE: Chronicles against RE5? Or DS: Extraction against Dead Space 1 & 2? All that really matters to you is that all of them are mature, and so should in theory sell the same, if only it wasn't for Nintendo's refusal to nurture a mature audience on Wii? Do you really think they would have become huge successes if only they had removed the blood to give them a Teen rating instead of Mature? Do you even own those games? Do you own any of the Wii games you're discussing here? Your arguments make no sense for the most part, you relate things that have nothing to do with each other, ignore arguments, dodge points, generalise some things, specify others where it suits your arguments, twist and turn at every chance, always avoiding the core issues. Let's see if Extraction XBLA/PSN sells 3-4x what Dead Space did (to match its revenue, $15 vs $50-60), since such games deserve the same success of AAA efforts like Dead Space, just by being mature. As for the "third parties follow first party examples" argument, that's already been shot down multiple times with no sensible rebutal from you. Anyway, you ask if it's worth bothering with me, but after this bullshit fest, I know it's not worth bothering with you, so thanks.

 

[scitek]

Some 3rd parties have tried. Some have found some success. But most haven't. The Wii is a tuff nut to crack and its not as simple as the good games sell and the bad ones don't. That's just not true. Again, what is the difference between MadWorld and No More Heroes to you?

If there ever was a window for PS360's current audience to have migrated to the Wii, it would have been very early on, but publishers were caught with their pants down when it came to the Wii's success. If they had shown support for it before the system launched, there's no doubt in my mind there would be both better selling, and a larger number of M-rated titles on the system.

Note that I'm not saying I blame the publishers for overlooking the Wii early on, no one could have predicted the success the Wii has had, but still, the lack of support in the "mature" arena from all parties from the start is why it's a wasteland now, and pointless to even bother with.

 

[evangd007]

I'm not sure if its worth bothering with you anymore, but I'll try this one more time and I'll try to talk real slow.

I first started this exchange when someone said 3rd parties have no one to blame but themselves for their games performing poorly. I think that's silly. This isn't some new phenomenon to the Wii. Nintendo has been struggling with 3rd parties and particularly mature titles for their past 3 consoles. There has to be a reason for that. And the one that jumps out to me is that Nintendo doesn't make games that attract that audience.

Some 3rd parties have tried. Some have found some success. But most haven't. The Wii is a tuff nut to crack and its not as simple as the good games sell and the bad ones don't. That's just not true. Again, what is the difference between MadWorld and No More Heroes to you?

Your arguement is flawed by the fact that the drivers of the HD consoles have been third party efforts with the exception of Halo and Gears.

What drove non-sci-fi FPS games? Call of Duty
What drove sandbox games? Grand Theft Auto
What drove the WRPG boom? Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (LOL if you think it was Fable 2)

This is not exclusive to this generation either; the PS2 got the amount of jRPGs it did thanks to FF10. Note how there have been no driving jRPGs on any console this gen, leading that genre into decline. The same could be said about racing games.

So yes, third parties dug their own graves on the Wii by not putting effort into the games that were driving the genres they wished to be successful in, whether it was by making terrible games or by not making them at all.

In fact this may have also been the case on the DS if it wasn't for Square Enix's dumb luck with what they thought at the time was a throw-away remake in Final Fantasy III exploding in sales. That led to the DS becoming THE platform for jRPGs and led to numerous, numerous successes for themselves (FFIV remake, the DQ remakes, DQIX) and others. What did Nintendo do on the DS to drive jRPG support?

 

[scitek]

In v0yce's defense, he's right about Nintendo being partly responsible for their lack of third-party support because their family-friendly image does go against the M-rated grain, but that's been obvious since even before the censored version of Mortal Kombat on the SNES.

If Nintendo had "toughened" their image over the past three generations, would they have more M-rated titles today? Probably, but you can't expect a company to just up and change their entire philosophy over something like game ratings.

It's much more reasonable to ask third-parties to just take risks with a couple of titles than it is to ask a hardware manufacturer to overhaul its entire approach to existence, particularly when that company has consistently been in the black with its current practices.

 

[v0yce]

If there ever was a window for PS360's current audience to have migrated to the Wii, it would have been very early on, but publishers were caught with their pants down when it came to the Wii's success. If they had shown support for it before the system launched, there's no doubt in my mind there would be both better selling, and a larger number of M-rated titles on the system.

Note that I'm not saying I blame the publishers for overlooking the Wii early on, no one could have predicted the success the Wii has had, but still, the lack of support in the "mature" arena from all parties from the start is why it's a wasteland now, and pointless to even bother with.

Sure. But Nintendo themselves could take up the slack and lead with a strong mature title themselves. Instead the gave the world Wii Sports and set the tone for their audience. If Nintendo themselves doesn't care to make mature content for their audience, why should 3rd parties?

babble

Oh good grief. "Non sci-fi FPS?" You don't think the same gamer that plays Halo also plays Call of Duty. Do you only play one genre of game? I explained it earlier. Tastes have a lot more to do with theme and content than they do with genre. That guy with Call of Duty on his shelf. Do think its more likely he has Gears of War or Mario Galaxy? Why is that? Actually don't bother. I've derailed this thread long enough.

 

[donny2112]

1) Separating out third-party efforts by ESRB rating is ridiculous.
2) The FPS genre was kick-started on consoles by Goldeneye, a T-rated game that sold multi-millions in the U.S. on the N64 (i.e. within Nintendo's last three consoles).
3) Third-parties absolutely have themselves to blame for their current core game performances on Wii. They thought the Wii was a fad, and when it was shown that it wasn't, they buried their head in the sand hoping it would just go away. The articles last year happily proclaiming the end of the Wii were quite telling. Then Wii sold 3.8m in December. Nintendo could've done more to keep third-parties from shooting themselves in the foot, so it's not all third-parties fault. The lionshare is, though.
4) Third-parties could still turn it around now, but the amount of effort (and funds) by them or Nintendo is so overwhelming that it's simply not going to happen this generation. Some third-parties hedged their bets by putting out Wii versions of their big games, but most never bothered. Oh, well. Maybe next-gen.

 

[Dascu]

:lol You have no clue. gj is actually surprisingly good to the Wii, just not in flamewars (where he takes more joy in pointing out stupidity.)

andrex defending grandjedi

Now I've seen everything.

 

[ThatObviousUser]

andrex defending grandjedi

Now I've seen everything.

We're bffs.

 

[velvet_nitemare]

Joke character confirmed?

Fanboy AND a joke character.

 

[Freeza Under The Shower]

i said it all along. dead space extraction is a cheaply made, outsourced arcade game spinoff that could and should have been released for a budget price. Despite a few of the chirpier motherfuckers on here doing their best to dismiss me. I was right

it was not some huge show of support. there was no reason to blackmail people into buying it and it did not deserve to sell at all on the wii as i've said numerous times

it has a host of problems, problems that they will hopefully try to fix when they release the superior PSN/XBLA version. a version that will be very cheap or a free pack in for people purchase dead space 2

EA is completely and utterly worthless on the wii. they are far shitter than the likes of Ubisoft will ever be on the system and there is no reason why anyone should ever buy any of this failing company's horrible, inferior wii crap.

those rare games they have made for the wii that aren't complete shit or licensed shovelware will get superior and often much cheaper versions on the PS3/360.

by your logic, everything that comes out on the PSP is equally cheap, shit or shovelware.


A decision to port a game probably has nothing to do with the exact amount of money put into it (unless it was already way over 'normal' budget) or the quality of the game or any involved system. It's just about using what you have to make some money.


In this case in particular (if true), it's pretty obvious that DS:E is being used for some kind of internal powerstruggle in EA (think in the lines of old EA <> new EA) and has actually very, very little to do with the quality of the IP or its individual games.

 

[Vizion28]

Let the poor sales of DSE be a lesson to third party publishers: don't treat Wii owners like retards and expect great software sales!

There has been NOT ONE single third party game on the Wii with a serious budget that was made by a top tier development team where they put as much heart and effort as they do for a lot of HD games with the exception of Monster Hunter 3 (which sold relatively well). NOT ONE! It's ridiculous! The only games I can think of on the horizon are Red Steel 2 (maybe) and Epic Mickey. What they put on the Wii are cheap ports, niche games, mini-game collections, or on-rails games and they expect a million in sales. Ridiculous!

3rd parties are leaving so much money on the table with the Wii it is ridiculous. It's no wonder why many studios and publishers are losing money left and right.

Hey EA, New Super Mario Wii sold 11 million and will likely sell beyond 20 million. How about making a new light hearted fun IP platformer that I can enjoy with family? And put your top dev teams behind it. Are you guys creative and bold enough?

 

[Koren]

There has been NOT ONE single third party game on the Wii with a serious budget that was made by a top tier development team where they put as much heart and effort as they do for a lot of HD games with the exception of Monster Hunter 3 (which sold relatively well). NOT ONE!

I'd argue PES Wii enters this category. Unfortunately, PES has years of habits behind it, is tied to Dualshock, and it's really difficult to get past that, even if the game is really good (and that's include classic controller play, too). Tiger woods may also qualify, maybe a couple others... But I'd agree with you on the general lack of real effort.

 

[Freeza Under The Shower]

Let the poor sales of DSE be a lesson to third party publishers: don't treat Wii owners like retards and expect great software sales!

There has been NOT ONE single third party game on the Wii with a serious budget that was made by a top tier development team where they put as much heart and effort as they do for a lot of HD games with the exception of Monster Hunter 3 (which sold relatively well). NOT ONE! It's ridiculous! The only games I can think of on the horizon are Red Steel 2 (maybe) and Epic Mickey. What they put on the Wii are cheap ports, niche games, mini-game collections, or on-rails games and they expect a million in sales. Ridiculous!

3rd parties are leaving so much money on the table with the Wii it is ridiculous. It's no wonder why many studios and publishers are losing money left and right.

Hey EA, New Super Mario Wii sold 11 million and will likely sell beyond 20 million. How about making a new light hearted fun IP platformer that I can enjoy with family? And put your top dev teams behind it. Are you guys creative and bold enough?

Congratulations, you bought into the bullshit of others.

Seriously, how would you know what a "serious budget" is? Do you really think that CoD5 has cost more to make than an UE3 powered new IP? Say, Too Human?

You can't tell budget from a game. And DS:E has as much 'love' poored into it as you could ask for in a spinoff (yes, I know we don't agree on that and not being able to skip the story parts on replays is an oversight, but then, it is a rather sizeable game. It's a perfect rental, but likely not much more than that, even if it has the quality of good narrative in my book). I've played much worse and shorter games on Xbox360 and PS3, which DID have the budget, the marketing and some of the sales, but they are still shit.

 

[boiled goose]

I'd argue PES Wii enters this category. Unfortunately, PES has years of habits behind it, is tied to Dualshock, and it's really difficult to get past that, even if the game is really good (and that's include classic controller play, too). Tiger woods may also qualify, maybe a couple others... But I'd agree with you on the general lack of real effort.

I think the biggest problem with PES on wii is that it is always released much later than the other versions. By then people have already purchased the game on another system of simply moved on.

TW10 was the beginning of real effort. Motion plus, online, features.
Still using the PS2 engine though.

Other real multiplatform efforts are GH on wii and Rock Band 2.

 

[TAJ]

Just XBLA games.

But yeah, I realized there's the whole Xbox originals and current 360 games you get too.

I'm mostly just a 'Splosion Man, Shadow Complex kinda dude. When I think XBL downloads, I immediately associate it with those type a games.

Isn't Shadow Complex at least 800MB, though?

 

[Agnates]

Congratulations, you bought into the bullshit of others.

Seriously, how would you know what a "serious budget" is? Do you really think that CoD5 has cost more to make than an UE3 powered new IP? Say, Too Human?

You can't tell budget from a game. And DS:E has as much 'love' poored into it as you could ask for in a spinoff (yes, I know we don't agree on that and not being able to skip the story parts on replays is an oversight, but then, it is a rather sizeable game. It's a perfect rental, but likely not much more than that, even if it has the quality of good narrative in my book). I've played much worse and shorter games on Xbox360 and PS3, which DID have the budget, the marketing and some of the sales, but they are still shit.

Telling that dude off so much, yet you aree it didn't deserve great sales, as it's merely a great rental :lol

So he exagerated a bit with the retard crap (but hey, they did try to sell a "great rental" for full price), but the result is still the same, it got no good sales, but it didn't deserve them either, not at that price point, not with that handling, not with trying to convince people it's not a rail shooter, not with its design flaws, etc.

And you don't know what budget it had either (or do you?). I don't either, but I'd feel pretty confident saying it certainly couldn't have had more than a fraction of the original Dead Space's budget though, making most of that guy's comment about "serious" efforts valid still. Dead Space was a serious effort. In comparison, DSE isn't.

 

[Vizion28]

Congratulations, you bought into the bullshit of others.

Seriously, how would you know what a "serious budget" is? Do you really think that CoD5 has cost more to make than an UE3 powered new IP? Say, Too Human?

You can't tell budget from a game. And DS:E has as much 'love' poored into it as you could ask for in a spinoff (yes, I know we don't agree on that and not being able to skip the story parts on replays is an oversight, but then, it is a rather sizeable game. It's a perfect rental, but likely not much more than that, even if it has the quality of good narrative in my book). I've played much worse and shorter games on Xbox360 and PS3, which DID have the budget, the marketing and some of the sales, but they are still shit.

You mean you really can't see that a lot more money was thrown at Resident Evil 5 than Umbrella Chronicles or Dead Space more than Extraction? Having a bigger budget doesn't automatically mean the game would be better but it does generally show they take the game and the gamers seriously by putting their top dev teams behind it and giving it a huge marketing push.

Perhaps developers did poured a lot of love into it but it's still an on-rails game and an IP that wasn't really popular on other platforms. As you stated it is a good rental but not worth forking out $50 to purchase. And that is why it sold poorly. It's a game that wouldn't have sold any better on the HD platforms at that price. I guess EA thought since most third party games are garbage on Wii that Wii owners would have ate it up.

Developers throw scraps to Wii owners by giving it a spinoff instead of the main dish and they expect it to sell really well. That's ridiculous.

 

[Freeza Under The Shower]

Telling that dude off so much, yet you aree it didn't deserve great sales, as it's merely a great rental :lol

So he exagerated a bit with the retard crap (but hey, they did try to sell a "great rental" for full price), but the result is still the same, it got no good sales, but it didn't deserve them either, not at that price point, not with that handling, not with trying to convince people it's not a rail shooter, not with its design flaws, etc.

And you don't know what budget it had either (or do you?). I don't either, but I'd feel pretty confident saying it certainly couldn't have had more than a fraction of the original Dead Space's budget though, making most of that guy's comment about "serious" efforts valid still. Dead Space was a serious effort. In comparison, DSE isn't.

I consider almost all story-heavy games rentals, to be honest. Few games can be replayed in any meaningful way, like a Deus Ex or Mass Effect (1, not so much 2).

Whether you choose to buy a game at some random price, has nothing to do with the qualitative judgment a person gives of a product.


That EA didn't play it smart (in terms of perceived price), is one thing. But that only tells us something about EA (or actually, a specific subset of EA and partners that handled this specific project) and nothing more.