So I'm guessing the nextbox and PS4 are going to avoid gimmicky/innovative controller types.
This pleases me.
But they will clearly continue try with the casual motion controls though. Specially MS.. Kinect has been great for them.
So I'm guessing the nextbox and PS4 are going to avoid gimmicky/innovative controller types.
This pleases me.
Um... they didn't scoff at it. They ported games to it. A lot. Perhaps inadequately on occasion, but it still shared the vast majority of 3rd party titles with the 360 even though the 360 versions beat the hell out of it sales-wise for a very long time.
So pulling this excuse out now? Sort of strange.
360?3rd party titles have never matched up sales-wise. On any platform. Ever. And if that bothers them, they are even more ridiculously inept at business than I already thought.
PC gaming would be far easier to do and the return would probably be just as well.The problem with this is that I seriously doubt that the userbase of the PS4/720 is going to be enough to sustain the sort of development budgets we'll be looking at next generation. PS3 benefited from this this generation, in that publishers couldn't afford not to make ports for the system despite all its technical problems.
Of course the other option is that they continue to ignore the Wii U (which seems unlikely, at least for the next few years) and continue to squeeze more money out of a console space that is showing increasingly stagnant userbase growth.
Publishers will be all over it if there aren't any real technological incompatibilities like there were this gen. Developers can talk about how they're not looking forward to it all they want, but at the end of the day, most of them don't get to make that kind of decision.You'd think developers would jump at the chance to add another console to port their games over these days. You can't think of shit to do with the screen? Then don't do anything you black hole of creativity. Put a static image on there.
Publishers will be all over it if there aren't any real technological incompatibilities like there were this gen. Developers can talk about how they're not looking forward to it all they want, but at the end of the day, most of them don't get to make that kind of decision.
Not sure why some people are complaining about the possibility of just throwing a map on the controller anyway. Going from the GBA to the DS, having bits of the HUD and content that used to be relegated to subscreens constantly displayed somewhere besides the main screen was a revelation. If that's all most third-parties use it for, great.
From a hardware perspective, nearly 80% of respondents said Microsofts next console is the easiest to work with, and the overwhelming majority suspect it will be the sales leader over the next five years.
Mediocre, Much better than Wii's.Third party support was very mediocre in the early years.
I ain't complaining PikachuMobile. That's the most I expect from them.
Mitch Dyer is an Associate Editor for IGN's Xbox 360 team. Hes also quite Canadian.
Nintendo Wii - 8.5 games per system (818.46 milion games divided by 95.85 million systems sold)
X360 - Revealed tie ratio to be 8.9 in US, which is the strongest market no numbers for the rest of the world which suggest the tie ratio would drop, unknown for how much though.
PS3 - Last oficial data is from may 2011 from what I gather, sits at 8.5
What does that have to do with anything? Its a developer survey featuring 35 developers. He's Canadian and an 360 editor. That shouldn't change the numbers. Its not like they count different from the rest of us.Why are we even discussing this "article" still?
really now
What if they're talking about post 360/PS3? What if that's not so easy to port? I think its unfair to assume that they're saying its difficult just because they can't figure out what to do with the touchscreen.Because devs that we know are making titles say porting is very easy. It might require some tuning because of very basic differences in their CPU's, but the system itself runs PS3/360 games easily.
This is why a good deal of posters are looking at this as more of a controller thing, and those of us looking at it like that are thinking "Why?" Just make your game and add some superfluous touchscreen gimmick. Even if it's just "HUD on DRC screen." that's still better than nothing.
I think the ship sailed with the Wii in me expecting developers to really try with new control schemes. The market isn't built like that anymore. At best Nintendo should mandate the ability to play the games on the controller. Devs shouldn't be expected to do more than that, because otherwise the games will probably never be considered for the platform
really now
What does that have to do with anything? Its a developer survey featuring 35 developers. He's Canadian and an 360 editor. That shouldn't change the numbers. Its not like they count different from the rest of us.
This information is based on survey responses from 35 video game developers IGN trusts. Look for more information on next generation consoles at IGN soon.
What if they're talking about post 360/PS3? What if that's not so easy to port? I think its unfair to assume that they're saying its difficult just because they can't figure out what to do with the touchscreen.
PC gaming would be far easier to do and the return would probably be just as well.
Presuming that they played with the results to make the WiiU look bad?Yeah, and we should all trust IGN when it comes to anything Nintendo related after Matt left..I'm sure we will have a few more "articles" about how terrible the Wii U is before we actually see it.
Presuming that they played with the results to make the WiiU look bad?
I'm assuming it just went like this...
"Hey. lets interview some devs on their thoughts on the next gen systems. OK, we got 35 responses to our survey. Let's publish the results."
It is what it is. Its the opinion of 35 devs IGN got a hold. Take it as exactly that.
Yeah, and we should all trust IGN when it comes to anything Nintendo related after Matt left..I'm sure we will have a few more "articles" about how terrible the Wii U is before we actually see it.
So you are saying that whoever ported Enclave to the Wii intentionally tried to make it as bad as possible? Can I ask you why? What purposse would that serve?Now obviously the Wii can do much better, but I'd expect that most Xbox ports would have turned out similarly, mainly due to the fact that the developers of those games clearly weren't interested in learning how to take advantage of the Wii's hardware.
Thanks, couldn't find newer data than May 2011 from the search I did.PS3 is 9.3 (595 million games, 63.9 million systems)
Not what he said.So you are saying that whoever ported Enclave to the Wii intentionally tried to make it as bad as possible? Can I ask you why? What purposse would that serve?
Why are you so defensive? What could a site as big as IGN possibly gain from slandering Nintendo?
I guess we could ask G4 the same question, seems to be the "cool" thing to do...Why would an Xbox editor put out an article about another system, and would he have done the same if this "survey" came out with a positive outlook?!
Everyone seems content on getting their jabs in before E3, it's chill...enjoy.
Why are you so defensive? What could a site as big as IGN possibly gain from slandering Nintendo?
This article is not about the Wii-U. Its about all the next gen consoles.
Page views and site hits, which in turn mean they can charge higher advertising rates.
Why are we even discussing this "article" still?
Means that a IGN Xbox 360 team member wrote and did a survey that *gasp* hails the Xbox sucessor as the shit and the Wii-U as doomed.what the hell is that supposed to mean?
As I've said earlier, PC ports would likely supplement any potential loses from skipping the Wii U. Well, that or more/more expensive DLC. Bottom line is if developer have the choice of supporting up to three platforms Orbis/Durango/PC and making a decent profit, then what's the point in recreating all of your game assets from scratch just to put it on another platform and risk losing money? None.Cost wise they have no choice not to support all 3. If this gen showed anything then they cant afford to ignore Wii/U. Unless they want more closures.
Why wouldn't they be interested in learning how to take advantage of the Wii? Making a better product usually leads to better sales and bigger recognition and learning how to take advantage of a very popular platform is a good thing when you want to have a job as a game developer.Not what he said.
He said they clearly weren't interested in learning how to take advantage of the Wii's hardware.
Means that a IGN Xbox 360 team member wrote and did a survey that *gasp* hails the Xbox sucessor as the shit and the Wii-U as doomed.
And O.J. Simpson says he's innocent, news at eleven.
As I've said earlier, PC ports would likely supplement any potential loses from skipping the Wii U. Well, that or more/more expensive DLC. Bottom line is if developer have the choice of supporting up to three platforms Orbis/Durango/PC and making a decent profit, then what's the point in recreating all of your game assets from scratch just to put it on another platform and risk losing money? None.
Ah. I'm european, I don't get that regional shenanigans.I was talking about the part where he bolded Canadian.
That would be the professional approach to it, but lots of developers couldn't be arsed to read documentation or give the TEV pipeline a try; not saying it's the case here (I wouldn't be surprised if it was ported by a guy with time constraints), but it happens.Why wouldn't they be interested in learning how to take advantage of the Wii? Making a better product usually leads to better sales and bigger recognition and learning how to take advantage of a very popular platform is a good thing when you want to have a job as a game developer.
I was talking about the part where he bolded Canadian.
That part I was just being silly.
You think higher rates are worth it when you could get black-listed by Nintendo for lying? Cause I betcha IGN doesnt.
They probably didn't have the time or budget.Why wouldn't they be interested in learning how to take advantage of the Wii? Making a better product usually leads to better sales and bigger recognition and learning how to take advantage of a very popular platform is a good thing when you want to have a job as a game developer.
You think higher rates are worth it when you could get black-listed by Nintendo for lying?
Yes?
Websites love trolling Nintendo because it riles up fanboys and haters alike. Look at all the GAF threads on devs speaking anonymously and poorly about the Wii U versus the ones with praise. The negative news threads explode while the positive ones fade away in a handful of pages.
IGN isn't above baiting for ad-clicks, nor would they be blacklisted for it in the first place. It isn't like Nintendo enjoys close relationships with the media in terms of giving them juicy sort of press junkets and insider secrets anyway.
And for what it's worth this doesn't surprise me at all; it sounds like the typical euphemistic "it's hard to think of ways to use this controller so we won't make anything at all" kind of logic that western developers treated the DS and Wii with. Which is in itself a variation of the "if we're going to make a DS/Wii/U game, it'll have to use the unique functions of the controller" excuse that they also peddled, even though the controls provide extra options, not a singular focus. Aggravating logic.
As I've said earlier, PC ports would likely supplement any potential loses from skipping the Wii U. Well, that or more/more expensive DLC. Bottom line is if developer have the choice of supporting up to three platforms Orbis/Durango/PC and making a decent profit, then what's the point in recreating all of your game assets from scratch just to put it on another platform and risk losing money? None.
Large publishers/developers don't make games for any other reason that maximizing profits while reducing costs. That's the way every successful business works. And if that means skipping out on a Wii U port, then so be it.