Support NeoGAF

[phisheep]

Why would you WANT Modern Warfare and games like that to be on the Wii?
They are better suited on the HD consoles.
Even if a Wii version does come out eventually it would still be inferior to the HD version. If you want to play these games, get a 360 or PS3.

Simple. It is because I have a Wii.

I do find the contradictory arguments a bit strange around this area: if a Wii owner wants the sort of game that appears on the HD consoles they should get an HD console, but if an awesome game comes out on the Wii then it should have been released on HD.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[Dina]

I dislike the attitude that it's an incontrovertible fact that "better graphics" trumps "better controls". I have all three systems, and the shooter I have enjoyed most - by *far* - has been the rerelease of Resident Evil 4 on the Wii. Everything else is just a bit, well, tired, gunplay-by-numbers. Count me as another person disapponted that we didn't see anyone take the opportunity to build on that.

I'm looking forward to the rerelease of RE5 with PS3 wand support, I've a lot of hope that that'll be the first HD shooter I truly love playing.

(NB: I should add that I liked Bioshock a lot, too, although for ambience; the gameplay got pretty tiresome)

Twinstick is pretty much the best setup to have for quick shooters though. Well, apart from KB+M.

 

[farnham]

Why would you WANT Modern Warfare and games like that to be on the Wii?

I dont know... I certainly enjoyed CoD4 on the 360 more then CoD WaW on the Wii.. but that is because CoD4 is a vastly superior game in general.. I really didnt bothered about the graphics of the wii version... Controlwise i liked Cod WaW Wii a lot more.. I probably would have bought CoD MW2 on the Wii if i had the option.. (i liked CoD WaW Wii more then CoD MW2 on 360 btw.. )

Twinstick is pretty much the best setup to have for quick shooters though. Well, apart from KB+M.

i disagree.. i got used to twin stick shooting but i still hate that setup.. wiimote and nunchuck feels a lot more natural to me..

 

[Chuck Norris]

I think it'll sell less than other GT games because the racing genre(outside of Mario Kart Wii) has seen a sharp decline in sales for a while.

Has it been popular at all the past two gens outside GT, Mario Kart and Need For Speed? All of which still sell well, though NFS has seen a decline but I'd attribute that more to over-saturation and poor quality of that particular franchise.

Where's the data of this sharp decline?

 

[legend166]

Has it been popular at all the past two gens outside GT, Mario Kart and Need For Speed? All of which still sell well, though NFS has seen a decline but I'd attribute that more to over-saturation and poor quality of that particular franchise.

Where's the data of this sharp decline?

Stuff like Midnight Club, Burnout, and even arcade type things such as the ATV games were all million sellers last generation that have become increasingly irrelevant this generation and haven't really been replaced by anything else. You've also got the Project Gotham series which has essentially died now. Also Moto GP, the Rallisport Challenge games, Colin McCrae, F1 games, etc have either disappeared or have no real prescence in the marketplace. Along with the very sharp decline in NFS, and it's pretty clear the genre has declined.

The only racing franchises that are going to see growth this generation will be Mario Kart and Forza, and I'm pretty sure Forza has already seen its peak with the release of 2.

 

[Freezie KO]

Twinstick is pretty much the best setup to have for quick shooters though. Well, apart from KB+M.

I find it hard to believe you've played a game that does wiimote + nunchuk correct (RE4, Modern Warfare, or Conduit). If you like KB+M, you probably like the precision and quick "point to aim" control method. That's what is afforded with the wiimote + nunchuk.

The differences are that there are more buttons afforded for KB+M, you either have to or are able to recenter your reticle (depending on what you prefer), and you can sit on your couch for Wiimote + nunchuk. Other than that, they have a lot more in common than KB+M has with dual analog.

 

[Chuck Norris]

Stuff like Midnight Club, Burnout, and even arcade type things such as the ATV games were all million sellers last generation that have become increasingly irrelevant this generation and haven't really been replaced by anything else. You've also got the Project Gotham series which has essentially died now. Also Moto GP, the Rallisport Challenge games, Colin McCrae, F1 games, etc have either disappeared or have no real prescence in the marketplace. Along with the very sharp decline in NFS, and it's pretty clear the genre has declined.

The only racing franchises that are going to see growth this generation will be Mario Kart and Forza, and I'm pretty sure Forza has already seen its peak with the release of 2.

Midnight Club was never that big, any tangible data saying LA did worse than previous installments?

Burnout is still a million seller, not too long after it came out in fact.

The ATV games were replaced by Motorstorm, one of the best selling games this gen.

Colin McRae was replaced with DiRT, which has done better than they were on late PS2. Same for the Race Driver -> GRID rebranding. Some franchises just hit franchise fatigue after awhile. Happened to many on PS2, like Ridge Racer and Colin Mcrae and Wipeout last gen, but it wasn't because the genre was dying then either.

You also need to consider new blood like Forza coming in and taking root too.

PGR was always playing second fiddle in sales. It never took off, and with Forza becoming the go-to racer on Xbox it just lost it's appeal.

Also worth considering is that Need For Speed rode it's Underground *explosion* for a long time. It wasn't that big before NFSU. Otherwise, you really just named a bunch of franchises that were always second tier in sales compared to the likes of GT, Mario Kart and NFS... From what I see those franchises are in a similar spot to what they've always been, only Need For Speed has taken a considerable fall

 

[Lagspike_exe]

NFS has been declining in sales since the first Underground (which was a monster). It's not genre fatigue, more like franchise fatigue.

 

[szaromir]

Midnight Club was never that big, any tangible data saying LA did worse than previous installments?

The last gen games (3 iterations) sold 15 millions copies.

 

[danielijohnson]

Wow I just read this one page and read about 14 posts basically saying "What you said was totally wrong barring these 4 exceptions."

NPDs really bring out the winners. :lol

 

[C4Lukins]

I'm not banking against Halo's success. Reach will be successful as well.

What i'm saying is that Halo, Like GTA, is in nearing the decline stage of its product cycle. Namely, it's best selling days are long behind it. It's nothing against Halo and I'm not trying to downplay the monster success it's already had. However the reality is that Halo is no longer the definitive shooter on the 360 as it was with the XBOX, and is mired in strong competition, and by proxy those things, in addition to the semi regular releases (despite the amount of content) will hurt it.

It's like the 16-bit wars after Mario Bros. came out, and Sonic, Ristar, Kirby, et al shared company with Mario. At one time, the Mario series was the only game in town and as a result, the sales were in the stratosphere. Now, with increased competition, while Mario still did the best by a comfortable margin, it success was drastically reduced over previous efforts. With subsequent Mario releases, the franchise did less and less, in no small part to not being the only game in town.

You are acting like some odd video game pundit. I know you are a big fan of all things Nintendo, so lets look at Mario as an example. You have Super Mario Bros. then you have the US sequel which was successful but was a step backwards for some, then you had 3 which was huge, then Mario World which was just as huge, and then Mario World 2 which took a big step back as far as sales, then Mario 64......... Point being we recently had Mario Galaxy which was one of the better Mario games and while successful was just completely raped by the "New Super Mario Games" on both the DS and Wii. Mario 64, Sunshine, Galaxy..... Those titles trended downwards for the series as far as sales but Mario is bigger then ever now, and that downward trend did not equate to the death of the series. Mario went from the biggest franchise, to a moderately successful franchise, to once again the biggest franchise. Your metaphor sucks because the very example you are using does not even prove you point. It just makes you look more silly.

What is funny about your analysis, is that you are looking at Halo in the way that someone would attack Mario if they were being really stupid. "The last Mario Party game sold 1/4th of Mario World, the franchise is on the way down. Mario Tennis sold 1 million copies, Mario 3 sold 20 million plus.... " "Mario is dead, well not dead, just it has peaked."

And maybe you are right. GTA possibly peaked and is beyond its best years, the same with Halo... But Mario tells us that there is no simplistic cycle for a franchise. I have never seen someone try so hard to manipulate reality into the Utopian video game universe in which they would like to believe exists to this level.

 

[timetokill]

Twinstick is pretty much the best setup to have for quick shooters though. Well, apart from KB+M.

Pointer controls are so much better... I can only imagine you haven't played a FPS that uses them well on Wii (or any FPS at all on Wii?)

I guess it will take the next generation to show this, but at some point in the next console cycle I find it hard to imagine pointer controls not being the standard for console shooters.

 

[kitchenmotors]

I do find the contradictory arguments a bit strange around this area: if a Wii owner wants the sort of game that appears on the HD consoles they should get an HD console, but if an awesome game comes out on the Wii then it should have been released on HD.

You can't have it both ways.

This.

 

[Jokeropia]

No they did not.

Actually yes, but I guess you need some extra explanation to understand.

Suggesting that there is something wrong with PSP sales in general, not GTA.

PSP software sales were never very good in the west, but that didn't stop the previous PSP GTAs from selling several millions. (Both exceeded 1 million in the US alone.) There's a world of difference between that and not even selling 10k first month, like the PSP version of Chinatown wars.

 

[Arnie]

Wow I just read this one page and read about 14 posts basically saying "What you said was totally wrong barring these 4 exceptions."

NPDs really bring out the winners. :lol

Everyone's a winner.

 

[Stumpokapow]

This.

Actually, I disagree.

There's nothing wrong with pining for a game on a system you don't own, or by proxy wanting a game ported to the systems you do own. That's natural. Every single-platform owner is going to have that feeling at some point, even if they're a 5-games-a-year kind of person. Everyone did that last generation, even with the PS2's truly out of this world library, if they didn't own an Xbox or a Gamecube there'd be that game a year that "gee golly gosh, wish I could have it without buying this system". For what it's worth, though, this kind of bitching is banned on GAF, and that's why threads like Epic Mickey or more recently NBA Jam have had long casualty lists.

The problem becomes when you are clearly less satisfied with the console you have than you would be with the console you don't have. If someone posted "I wish Galaxy, No More Heroes, Fragile, The Conduit, Opoona, and Deadly Creatures got ported to 360... I haven't bought any 360 games in a year even though I'm a single console owner... fucking game companies", they'd be laughed at. Clearly this is a person that'd be happier with a Wii. They've identified 6 titles they want to play but can't because of their obstinacy... and they'd probably actually save money by buying a Wii and those six games versus what they'd have paid for full price new release ports on the 360.

I also think that if you buy, say, 20+ games a year, it really is worth owning every console. The investment will pay itself back in savings later, you'll have enough to play on all three, and you won't miss out on any games you want.

But in my experience, while plenty of Wii games have been grumbled about for ports--No More Heroes, Muramasa, and Little King's Story are the three that I've heard most loudly--Wii-only owners who grumble generally cast a much wider net. It's generally a complaint that "<Publisher X> should port their ENTIRE AAA slate, and I'd be interested in all of it."

I'm sure people will or can reply to this post with "Not me! I want a port of Dead Space but I have 0 interest in literally any other game on the PS360! What do you think of my awesome anecdotal example?" but my observation is based on the balance of the port grumbling that I see.

 

[Cromat]

Simple. It is because I have a Wii.

I do find the contradictory arguments a bit strange around this area: if a Wii owner wants the sort of game that appears on the HD consoles they should get an HD console, but if an awesome game comes out on the Wii then it should have been released on HD.

You can't have it both ways.

True, I never said that. I said I enjoy the Wii for what it has, not for what it should have. The same applies to the HD systems. If you want to play Super Mario Galaxy, get a Wii. If you want to play Modern Warfare 2, get a PS360. Simple.
There is no point bickering about this so much. It's probably one of the most if not the most debated topic in this forum.
At this point, it's a reality that is not likely to change in a significant way. It's perfectly legitimate to want the Wii to get good 3rd party games as a Wii owner, but wanting it won't make it happen. If you have a Wii and it doesn't provide you with the entertainment you are intrested in, you should get another system if you have the disposable income to do so. Same thing with the HD consoles.

 

[devilhawk]

But in my experience, while plenty of Wii games have been grumbled about for ports--No More Heroes, Muramasa, and Little King's Story are the three that I've heard most loudly--Wii-only owners who grumble generally cast a much wider net. It's generally a complaint that "<Publisher X> should port their ENTIRE AAA slate, and I'd be interested in all of it."

I'm sure people will or can reply to this post with "Not me! I want a port of Dead Space but I have 0 interest in literally any other game on the PS360! What do you think of my awesome anecdotal example?" but my observation is based on the balance of the port grumbling that I see.

Joke post?

In the same paragraph you reject anecdotal evidence of others you provide your "observations" on Wii owners. In fact, your long series of paragraphs is nothing but generalizations and anecdotes.

 

[EDarkness]

But in my experience, while plenty of Wii games have been grumbled about for ports--No More Heroes, Muramasa, and Little King's Story are the three that I've heard most loudly--Wii-only owners who grumble generally cast a much wider net. It's generally a complaint that "<Publisher X> should port their ENTIRE AAA slate, and I'd be interested in all of it."

I'm sure people will or can reply to this post with "Not me! I want a port of Dead Space but I have 0 interest in literally any other game on the PS360! What do you think of my awesome anecdotal example?" but my observation is based on the balance of the port grumbling that I see.

What gets me is why people simply discount the notion that people want to play those games with IR and motion controls instead of high end graphics.

 

[Jocchan]

What gets me is why people simply discount the notion that people want to play those games with IR and motion controls instead of high end graphics.

Then your only option will be waiting for Natal and Swaggle.
I'm not saying it's fair, I'm saying there will be no alternatives.

 

[Cromat]

What gets me is why people simply discount the notion that people want to play those games with IR and motion controls instead of high end graphics.

It's the same as people discounting the notion that people want to play Twilight Princess or SSBB with high end graphics. It doesn't matter. The debate here is not about high-end graphics vs. motion controls. Developers themselves have mostly decided that argument in favor of the high-end graphics (and larger game worlds, better sound, better online etc...).

Basically, people here are dissatisfied with the Wii library, but instead of doing the obvious thing and playing the games they want on the systems they are on, they get pissed at developers for not making the games they want on the Wii.
Developers might be 'dumb' for not taking advantage of the untapped Wii market, but the people who complain about it are also 'dumb' for not getting the kind of entertainment they want.

 

[freddy]

What gets me is why people simply discount the notion that people want to play those games with IR and motion controls instead of high end graphics.

The guy just discounted it again. Hilarious.

 

[BowieZ]

So I see everyone's talking about their personal preferences and whether they personally should buy a HD console or not, as opposed to the general public which is buying Wii in droves (although, yes, they're buying HD consoles, too).

So let's presume Sega/Capcom, etc, are the beginning of a trend of third party publishers increasingly turning their nose at the Wii at an inverse relationship to the Wii's increase in console leadership, and let's agree that there's no clear or easily justifiable reason for them doing so -- or at least, agree to disagree on what the reason actually is.

Question: third party developers may innately hate what the Wii stands for and publishers may be scared of a perceived risky market, but whatever the case, WILL they lose more money and more jobs if they do continue to defy the Wii?

Or was the 2009 shitfest only because of the economy at large?

Will supporting Wii actually increase profit (on average) and job prospects?

 

[Pureauthor]

So I see everyone's talking about their personal preferences and whether they personally should buy a HD console or not, as opposed to the general public which is buying Wii in droves (although, yes, they're buying HD consoles, too).

So let's presume Sega/Capcom, etc, are the beginning of a trend of third party publishers increasingly turning their nose at the Wii at an inverse relationship to the Wii's increase in console leadership, and let's agree that there's no clear or easily justifiable reason for them doing so -- or at least, agree to disagree on what the reason actually is.

Question: third party developers may innately hate what the Wii stands for and publishers may be scared of a perceived risky market, but whatever the case, WILL they lose more money and more jobs if they do continue to defy the Wii?

Or was the 2009 shitfest only because of the economy at large?

Will supporting Wii actually increase profit (on average) and job prospects?

That would depend on what kind of Wii support they give, wouldn't it?

Also, your avatar is too large.

 

[BowieZ]

That would depend on what kind of Wii support they give, wouldn't it?

Well, I guess that's the question. Does it matter what they do? If they continued to support HD at their current rate, but took on the risk and invested huge amounts of money into the Wii market... for quality games and for massive advertising campaigns and all that stuff... would they inevitably fail?

And if they didn't fail, would potential profits really be good enough to allay the risk?

Also, your avatar is too large.

EDIT: Thanks. Turns out supporting Conan had me walking on thin avatar ice. :/

 

[speculawyer]

Both World at War Wii and Modern Warfare Reflex run on the 360/PS3 COD4 engine. Unreal Engine 3 can and does run on the freaking iPhone, it can run on the Wii.

Look up your facts dude. :lol

:lol

Yeah . . . they are really the same engines. :lol

 

[Pureauthor]

Well, I guess that's the question. Does it matter what they do? If they continued to support HD at their current rate, but took on the risk and invested huge amounts of money into the Wii market... for quality games and for massive advertising campaigns and all that stuff... would they inevitably fail?

And if they didn't fail, would potential profits really be good enough to allay the risk?

I think that online-multiplayer focused genres like shooters would have a tough time regardless because MSoft would be backing Halo, and the X360 has an inherent advantage in that it has an online system that doesn't blow chunks.

But other games (too lazy to think 'em up now, sorry) wouldn't really be badly affected by the Wii's lack of features. RPGs, I guess.

(Part of the problem for Japan is that the DS (and PSP somewhat) are so much more appealing locations for development effort right now.)

Hmm? I really tried to make sure it was the right size. Isn't 80x120x20kb acceptable?

The forum has some auto-resize thing going on. Your avatar is now 90x135.

 

[markatisu]

:lol

Yeah . . . they are really the same engines. :lol

He is not wrong, I mean its a ported version of the CoD4 engine by Treyarch but its still the CoD4 engine used for the HD versions (I am guessing with graphics dialed massively down)

And Unreal 3 can run on Wii, EPIC just chooses not too use it because they do not want to develop on the Wii. I thought Band of Brothers (not sure if thats the exact name, it was a WWII FPS) was the first Wii game to use Unreal 3 and it looked horrible

But just because an engine can be used does not mean it should be. I would rather developers use engines that give us PS2 and Gamecube level graphics then the ones that seem like they are PS2 and PSP launch games.

 

[BowieZ]

(Part of the problem for Japan is that the DS (and PSP somewhat) are so much more appealing locations for development effort right now.)

Well that's a good point, although that's not really a problem when thinking in terms of the potential for gains or losses in third party development. That Japanese developers and some Westerners are thriving on the DS is a good thing. That's great.

But are there really gains to be had, particularly for Western developers/publishers, on Wii?

I just want to see more people working, and 2009 was an evil year. But some people argue not supporting Wii was the spanner in the works. Just curious if there's any clear way to know whether that was definitely or partially the case.

 

[speculawyer]

avatar299 and amtentori took care of the GTA issue.This has got nothing to do with the point.

FYI, I own a 360 and have no interest in MW2.

Yes, it is completely on point. These companies are not charities. Unless they can easily port these games to the Wii, they are not going to bother since they do not sell in sufficient quantities to warrant the investment.

Yeah, I find your complaints about "Nintendo fanboy Jihadism" to be silly.

There is a point . . . why are people whining endlessly about companies "not trying" with reference to M-games on the Wii. If you want to play those games, buy a 360 or PS3 and shut up already. If that is not good enough for you, then the only reason is you are being a fanboy for Nintendo and wanting companies to lose money making games that won't sell.

Pretty much all the publishers are losing money right now and you people seem to want them to create games that will have almost no chance of being profitable. Why? If there is some game on the PS3 or 360 that you want, then buy a PS3 or 360. Stop whining about the fact that game X is not on the Wii.

 

[Pureauthor]

Well that's a good point, although that's not really a problem when thinking in terms of the potential for gains or losses in third party development. That Japanese developers and some Westerners are thriving on the DS is a good thing. That's great.

But are there really gains to be had, particularly for Western developers/publishers, on Wii?

I just want to see more people working, and 2009 was an evil year. But some people argue not supporting Wii was the spanner in the works. Just curious if there's any clear way to know whether that was definitely or partially the case.

I think in general aiming for the lower development costs would help. But it wouldn't solve the underlying structural issues of the way the videogame industry is run. At best it's a stopgap.

 

[AceBandage]

Well that's a good point, although that's not really a problem when thinking in terms of the potential for gains or losses in third party development. That Japanese developers and some Westerners are thriving on the DS is a good thing. That's great.

But are there really gains to be had, particularly for Western developers/publishers, on Wii?

I just want to see more people working, and 2009 was an evil year. But some people argue not supporting Wii was the spanner in the works. Just curious if there's any clear way to know whether that was definitely or partially the case.

At this point, it's probably too late.
Consumers are far too weary of third parties on the Wii, after being shit on for 3 years.
However, had they jumped on board early and actually taken the platform seriously, the industry wouldn't be in nearly as much trouble as it is now.
It was a new console with a new audience that third parties could have molded to buy whatever they wanted.

 

[gunther]

Pointer controls are so much better... I can only imagine you haven't played a FPS that uses them well on Wii (or any FPS at all on Wii?)

I guess it will take the next generation to show this, but at some point in the next console cycle I find it hard to imagine pointer controls not being the standard for console shooters.

Yep, I want to see a FPS developed with the wii in mind. We have only seen ports of Dual+Analogs FPSs, there is alot of room for improvements for the genre on wii.

 

[speculawyer]

How did Reflex came to be then? Magic?

If it is the same then why is it called "Reflex" instead of MW2?

Piracy? Why did the other GTAs sell on the PSP then? Not to mention people do love 2D (look at the the top game in this NPD).

OK . . . then you tell me what the issue is. It got great reviews.

 

[BowieZ]

Consumers are far too weary of third parties on the Wii, after being shit on for 3 years.

How have they been shit on? Do you mean shit on in terms of quality, or shit on in terms of lack of games?

I guess I just struggle to comprehend this argument. If they've been burnt by lack of games, give them more games? If they've been burnt by lack of quality, make a quality release, advertise/position it as THE quality release of the moment amidst a sea of lacking quality games? (By advertise I mean, you know, ACTUALLY advertise it.)

Funnily, though, that's only *if* Wii audiences have perceived the games as lacking quality. It's often said in these threads that Wii audiences like crap, but that's surely not true?

And what about all these NEW Wii owners? There's 3.8 million of them right now, hungry for hot, new great games.

 

[Pureauthor]

OK . . . then you tell me what the issue is. It got great reviews.

Oh, come on. Reviews as a determinant of game sales is about as iffy as it gets.

 

[AceBandage]

How have they been shit on? Do you mean shit on in terms of quality, or shit on in terms of lack of games?

I guess I just struggle to comprehend this argument. If they've been burnt by lack of games, give them more games? If they've been burnt by lack of quality, make a quality release, advertise/position it as THE quality release of the moment amidst a sea of lacking quality games? (By advertise I mean, you know, ACTUALLY advertise it.)

Funnily, though, that's only *if* Wii audiences have perceived the games as lacking quality. It's often said in these threads that Wii audiences like crap, but that's surely not true?

And what about all these NEW Wii owners? There's 3.8 million of them right now, hungry for hot, new great games.

It's 100% quality.
When Ubisoft is complaining about the lack of sales for this Petz games on the Wii, you know it's because Wii owners are tired of shit games.

But like I said, it's too late now.
Consumers will see the publisher logo on the box and just pass on it for the most part.

 

[speculawyer]

Yeah . . . they are really the same engines.

He is not wrong, I mean its a ported version of the CoD4 engine by Treyarch but its still the CoD4 engine used for the HD versions (I am guessing with graphics dialed massively down)

You can't even agree with yourself. Is it the same or are the graphics dialed down. And it isn't just the graphics. You just can't have the same number of objects, the physics, net code, etc.

And Unreal 3 can run on Wii, EPIC just chooses not too use it because they do not want to develop on the Wii. I thought Band of Brothers (not sure if thats the exact name, it was a WWII FPS) was the first Wii game to use Unreal 3 and it looked horrible

Well, that engine sounds pretty different too.

 

[phisheep]

But in my experience, while plenty of Wii games have been grumbled about for ports--No More Heroes, Muramasa, and Little King's Story are the three that I've heard most loudly--Wii-only owners who grumble generally cast a much wider net. It's generally a complaint that "<Publisher X> should port their ENTIRE AAA slate, and I'd be interested in all of it."

I'm sure people will or can reply to this post with "Not me! I want a port of Dead Space but I have 0 interest in literally any other game on the PS360! What do you think of my awesome anecdotal example?" but my observation is based on the balance of the port grumbling that I see.

That's not what I see - in fact I don't see a great clamouring for ports at all. I was quite careful in what I posted up there:

I do find the contradictory arguments a bit strange around this area: if a Wii owner wants the sort of game that appears on the HD consoles they should get an HD console, but if an awesome game comes out on the Wii then it should have been released on HD.

"the sort of games" = namely, a good-quality shooter or two; a bit of survival horror that isn't a port; something like , in production values, care and content, Mirrors Edge or AC2 or Bioshock - but not actually those games.

When we have this conversation it always seems to come down to accusations of wanting everything ported, but despite pretty well everyone on the Wii side saying time and time again that what is needed is high class content built ground up for the machine, the voices seem to be crying in the wilderness.

At least that's what I think I've seen!

Of course, if what you say is true, then I sort of agree, because it is just the flip side of what the HD gamers are after on individual games - except that all too often the claim is that game X should have been brought out on HD and not on the Wii at all - which is just mean.

 

[speculawyer]

Oh, come on. Reviews as a determinant of game sales is about as iffy as it gets.

So I see that you also have no substantive input on the matter. Thanks for enlightening us.

 

[Jokeropia]

Yes, it is completely on point. These companies are not charities. Unless they can easily port these games to the Wii, they are not going to bother since they do not sell in sufficient quantities to warrant the investment.

But they pretty much haven't released any major games except for cheap ports. How can you claim that they don't sell?

There is a point . . . why are people whining endlessly about companies "not trying" with reference to M-games on the Wii. If you want to play those games, buy a 360 or PS3 and shut up already.

You really don't pay attention, do you? As was mentioned (and repeated) several times on this very page, many people want to play shooter games with pointer controls and buying a 360 or PS3 does not satisfy that.

 

[Kishgal]

You can't even agree with yourself. Is it the same or are the graphics dialed down. And it isn't just the graphics. You just can't have the same number of objects, the physics, net code, etc.


Well, that engine sounds pretty different too.

You seem to be equating 'engine' strictly with graphical fidelity, which is where the disconnect forms. An engine encompasses many things, including the tools used to create for it. By your logic, a PC game with the settings turned way down must be a different engine or something just because it looks worse?

 

[velvet_nitemare]

That's not what I see - in fact I don't see a great clamouring for ports at all.

In this thread or on the board in general. Because, if it's the latter, you haven't been paying attention.

 

[Jocchan]

It's the same as people discounting the notion that people want to play Twilight Princess or SSBB with high end graphics. It doesn't matter. The debate here is not about high-end graphics vs. motion controls. Developers themselves have mostly decided that argument in favor of the high-end graphics (and larger game worlds, better sound, better online etc...).

Basically, people here are dissatisfied with the Wii library, but instead of doing the obvious thing and playing the games they want on the systems they are on, they get pissed at developers for not making the games they want on the Wii.
Developers might be 'dumb' for not taking advantage of the untapped Wii market, but the people who complain about it are also 'dumb' for not getting the kind of entertainment they want.

The fallacy in this logic is the fact that the games they want on other consoles aren't the type of experience they want.
Anyone wanting to play a non-rail shooter Dead Space with Wii controls won't get exactly what he's looking for with the PS360 game, and in the same way anyone wanting to play Twilight Princess with HD graphics, shaders and sparks won't get what he's looking for with the Wii game.
Bitching is useless because both games are the way they are, and there's no way around that (well you can play Wii games in HD on Dolphin, lol), but just telling them to shut up and buy the other platform wouldn't be a solution because it wouldn't be what both groups are looking for.

 

[Pureauthor]

So I see that you also have no substantive input on the matter. Thanks for enlightening us.

Actually my input was to point out that your argument in favour of this probability of GTA:CW getting good sales was based on a flawed premise, but if you wish me to go into more detail, I can. Here:

Using reviews as a determinant for the expectations of a game's performance on the market simply does not work for what I believe can be summed up in two primary reasons:

1st: What the reviewer likes is not necessarily what the mass market consumer likes (and vice versa). The reviewers may have loved GTA:CW, but the average consumer might be turned off by the top-down style of gameplay, or the DS graphics, or the (insert perceived fault here).

This is because the reviewer is, most of the time, an enthusiast of the hobby, as opposed to people who play casually. In times where their interests accord (say, FPSes?), high reviews have a greater tendency to correlate with high sales. Where it doesn't, it tends to veer off more.

Examples? Sure - As we've seen, GTA:CW scored high and performed disappointingly. Wii Sports scored average and is a sales phenomenon.

Of course, it's still not a very good determinant even when tastes accord, due to reason 2:

Awareness of the game - people can't buy the game if they don't know about the game. And unless the game is so face-meltingly awesome (in the eyes of the mass-market consumer) that they run around telling their friends about it and buying it for their friends or whatever, all the 10/10s in the world mean jack if the game isn't marketed.

(Above arguments are made on the assumption that reviews serve primarily as a determinant of how much the reviewer liked the game and not how much coverage the site/magazine received about the game.)

 

[Cromat]

The fallacy in this logic is the fact that the games they want on other consoles aren't the type of experience they want.
Anyone wanting to play a non-rail shooter Dead Space with Wii controls won't get exactly what he's looking for with the PS360 game, and in the same way anyone wanting to play Twilight Princess with HD graphics, shaders and sparks won't get what he's looking for with the Wii game.

That's true, but a lot of this is not about wanting to play games a certain way, it's about wanting to play games on a certain system.

The best example for this is Monster Hunter 3. The game does not use the Wii controls in any significant way, but it was still getting applauses here. Why? because it's a high profile game that's on the Wii.

Anyone denying that an element of 'fanboyism' exists in this debate (by both sides) is either lying or naive.
Lets say the Dead Space game for the Wii was not an on-rails shooter, but a full 3rd person shooter with high production values. But lets also say that this Dead Space game had to be controlled by the Classic Controller and had no motion or pointer controls. Wouldn't it still be better loved around here, just on the merit of it being a high quality game on the Wii?

 

[AceBandage]

That's true, but a lot of this is not about wanting to play games a certain way, it's about wanting to play games on a certain system.

The best example for this is Monster Hunter 3. The game does not use the Wii controls in any significant way, but it was still getting applauses here. Why? because it's a high profile game that's on the Wii.

Anyone denying that an element of 'fanboyism' exists in this debate (by both sides) is either lying or naive.
Lets say the Dead Space game for the Wii was not an on-rails shooter, but a full 3rd person shooter with high production values. But lets also say that this Dead Space game had to be controlled by the Classic Controller and had no motion or pointer controls. Wouldn't it still be better loved around here, just on the merit of it being a high quality game on the Wii?

Well, certainly it would be more loved than what we got, but you'd still hear a LOT of bitching about how it didn't use the console to its full potential.

 

[word up]

If it is the same then why is it called "Reflex" instead of MW2?

because it's MW1?

It's a really good port too, you'd have to ask Activision why they sent it to die two years late, with no advertising and the Reflex moniker. Still it's on its way up to ~500k in the U.S apparently.

 

[Jocchan]

That's true, but a lot of this is not about wanting to play games a certain way, it's about wanting to play games on a certain system.

The best example for this is Monster Hunter 3. The game does not use the Wii controls in any significant way, but it was still getting applauses here. Why? because it's a high profile game that's on the Wii.

Anyone denying that an element of 'fanboyism' exists in this debate (by both sides) is either lying or naive.
Lets say the Dead Space game for the Wii was not an on-rails shooter, but a full 3rd person shooter with high production values. But lets also say that this Dead Space game had to be controlled by the Classic Controller and had no motion or pointer controls. Wouldn't it still be better loved around here, just on the merit of it being a high quality game on the Wii?

Oh, I agree, but I'm actually ignoring fanboyism and concentrating on opinions that are worth discussing

 

[ShockingAlberto]

That's true, but a lot of this is not about wanting to play games a certain way, it's about wanting to play games on a certain system.

The best example for this is Monster Hunter 3. The game does not use the Wii controls in any significant way, but it was still getting applauses here. Why? because it's a high profile game that's on the Wii.

Anyone denying that an element of 'fanboyism' exists in this debate (by both sides) is either lying or naive.
Lets say the Dead Space game for the Wii was not an on-rails shooter, but a full 3rd person shooter with high production values. But lets also say that this Dead Space game had to be controlled by the Classic Controller and had no motion or pointer controls. Wouldn't it still be better loved around here, just on the merit of it being a high quality game on the Wii?

I don't know if you intended it this way, but this certainly makes it sound like just liking a game because it's quality is very sinister.