-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Can't understand Nintendo and 3rd parties
- Thread starter onesvenus
- Start date
EA Active has sold through 600K copies in less than a month. Gold's Gym and Jill whatever whatever Fitness both charted last month.Future said:
Deca Sports did well enough to warrant a sequel, as did Carnival Games, Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games, and several other similar "sporty" games.
It'd be nice if more developers broke away from the "follow Nintendo" approach and go for the "attack the markets Nintendo doesn't have locked down," or the "beat Nintendo to the punch" type of games. Only with that type of initiative and daring can Wii have it's very own Resident Evil 4.
pakkit said:
Yeah those were just examples. Wii Sports and Wii Fit set a standard that 3rd parties are now following and cloning. 3rd parties gotta get the jump on things and get these standards out before Nintendo does. It's not like Nintendo game output is so high that devs can barely catch up
.Although given those sales numbers, cloning can work for devs as well, heh
WrathOfOtaibah
Banned
You guys need to see what sells on the Wii.
Outside of Nintendo efforts, it seems that shovelware like Carnival Games and Jillian Michaels Fitness sell the best. Third parties may notice but if these types of games sell well, why even apply themselves? Even more to the point, why would third parties waste their money on a new Metal Gear when they can make decent sales with some half assed effort.
This is the obviously unintended consequence of the Blue Ocean Strategy. Nintendo wanted to bring soccer moms and grandmas to the Wii and it did. Only problem is that soccer moms and grandmas don't give a shit about "hardcore franchises." They'll throw some occasional bones but again, when the bar is set as low as it is, the motivation to apply yourself to bigger, more complex projects goes away. Especially when a party game effort can bring in 500,000 sales.
At this point, it doesn't really matter. If third parties aren't arriving in droves at this point, chances are that they never will. You can swallow your fanboy pride and get another console (one system is only $199!) or you can enjoy the games you have on it. Whining about the situation at this point is useless, as it has always been.
Outside of Nintendo efforts, it seems that shovelware like Carnival Games and Jillian Michaels Fitness sell the best. Third parties may notice but if these types of games sell well, why even apply themselves? Even more to the point, why would third parties waste their money on a new Metal Gear when they can make decent sales with some half assed effort.
This is the obviously unintended consequence of the Blue Ocean Strategy. Nintendo wanted to bring soccer moms and grandmas to the Wii and it did. Only problem is that soccer moms and grandmas don't give a shit about "hardcore franchises." They'll throw some occasional bones but again, when the bar is set as low as it is, the motivation to apply yourself to bigger, more complex projects goes away. Especially when a party game effort can bring in 500,000 sales.
At this point, it doesn't really matter. If third parties aren't arriving in droves at this point, chances are that they never will. You can swallow your fanboy pride and get another console (one system is only $199!) or you can enjoy the games you have on it. Whining about the situation at this point is useless, as it has always been.
leroy hacker
Member
The Experiment said:
Think about the consequences of your reasoning more carefully. Why would third parties make a Metal Gear for any platform "when they can make decent sales with some half assed effort" on the Wii? Why doesn't your argument shut down core development on every platform if the Wii is such an easy way out?
The Experiment said:
Here, I agree. Wii owners can't play games that third parties aren't making, and complaining on a message board(which I admit I sometimes engage in) won't cause those games to exist. For me, there are more than enough games coming out that I don't need to worry about games that don't exist, no matter how much I might want some of those non-existent games.
The Experiment said:
It matters and it matters a lot, though not because of some stupid fanboy shit. The videogame industry is basically black listing Nintendo - the fucking market leader. That doesn't matter? Not only is it huge news that is getting ignored it is incredibly important when looking at the future of this industry.
A look at the E3 showfloor will prove that the Wii is getting plenty of attention from developers. Western devs EA are giving huge support to Wii, as are Ubisoft. Square Enix is really pushing their Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles line on Wii. Big Tales of and Dragon Quest games are coming to Wii. Monster Hunter 3 is going to be huge overseas, and Capcom is bringing Spyborgs, Tatsunoko vs. Capcom, and RE: DC to U.S. shores (all from shoddy efforts). The next Silent Hill is on Wii. Little King's Story was created by what is essential a Japanese dev dream team, and a lot of Japanese games that were thought to stay in the Japan are getting enthusiastic ports thanks to sales and publishers becoming more willing to take risks.Scrubking said:
Those are just a few, and the list is far from complete, but to say that Wii is being "blacklisted" is way overdone. The doom and gloom that you and the The Experiment prescribe is an old thought. The Wii may never be the software pusher that the PS2 was, but it is slowly but surely gaining a real 3rd party presence, and this E3 is as good evidence of that as ever.
A Twisty Fluken
Member
Danthrax said:
Ironically I'm probably going to end up spending more time with Darkside Chronicles than RE5 when all is said and done.
But point taken, the reasoning behind it IS bullshit.
Eteric Rice
Member
Scrubking said:
I agree with you. It really sort of paints a bad picture of the gaming industry as a whole.
Also, I like the third party games that the Wii is getting. But I think there should be even better efforts than there are now. The Wii is much better than the GC and N64 was at this point, but there's a lot of room for improvement.
PhoenixDark
Banned
DrGAKMAN said:
It has nothing to do with snubbing. Why should a developer make an inferior port of a top franchise game, just to appeal to a small demographic of "hardcore" Wii owners?
DrGAKMAN said:
Yeah, sure.
norinrad21
Banned
The new Metroid looks incredibly good for a game running on an inferior console.PhoenixDark said:
3rd parties can pretend all they want that Nintendo the market leader doesn't even exist and in the end it won't be Nintendo that's bleeding money
PhoenixDark
Banned
norinrad21 said:
It looks bad imo; bad art definitely. But that's my opinion
They aren't pretending, they simply don't care - which should be very obvious by now, in 2009. They're doing pretty well without Nintendo;t he idea that dev costs were going to cause massive destruction of developers hasn't really panned out.
MrPing1000
Member
I scratch my head at companies making spin off games on the Wii.
I honestly believe they'd have more success just creating new IPs instead of banking on a franchise being taken out of the environment that made it successful. Square Enix are the only ones that I can think of that have managed to create a fanbase for their spin off on Gamecube and then Wii.
I honestly believe they'd have more success just creating new IPs instead of banking on a franchise being taken out of the environment that made it successful. Square Enix are the only ones that I can think of that have managed to create a fanbase for their spin off on Gamecube and then Wii.
Zoramon089
Banned
PhoenixDark said:
Except for with Midway and Factor 5...
norinrad21
Banned
Zoramon089 said:
Free Radical Design is gone too
A Twisty Fluken
Member
PhoenixDark said:
:lol :lol :lol
MrPing1000 said:
The problem is not that the games are spinoffs, it's that they are dumbed down spinoffs.
If DSE and DSC were 3rd person spinoffs Wii gamers would be cheering, but instead they are shoehorned light gun games because they are cheaper and quicker to make and play into the "wii gamers like easiness" stereotype.
New IPs really isn't the way to go. They are always risky and hard to get off the ground. Just look at Dead Space and ME on 360.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Zoramon089 said:
Awesome, you've listed a company that died thanks to horrible business decisions (that have nothing to do with the Wii) and another company that bet everything on a high profile bust of a game. Doesn't quite back your argument. I doubt you'll find their CEOs muttering "if only we had developed games for the Wii"
Seems pretty obvious they know they can make games that break even for decent profit, but would rather make huge games on the 360/PS3. And if the Netal/Sony motion stuff pans out (still up in the air of course) they certainly won't need Nintendo.
Eteric Rice
Member
Scrubking said:
No, I still don't like spin-offs. I want numbered games.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
Because of money, silly. Why make PSP games? Why make cell phone games? These companies have the resources and they are choosing to ignore the wii. Konami is the worst with it's new RE on the PSP.PhoenixDark said:
gamergirly
Member
PhoenixDark said:
I feel some of the companies that have went under or have had massive layoffs would have done better making Wii custom titles than losing millions by being ignored on PS3/360
Eteric Rice
Member
skinnyrattler said:
I don't see why companies don't build games on the Wii, and downport them to the PSP. That's like 80 million people combined if you want a big userbase.
PhoenixDark
Banned
skinnyrattler said:
Huh? Wii is getting another RE spin off. Third parties are more than willing to throw spin off rail games on the Wii. I'm curious, why do you guys think they aren't releasing the actual franchises (RE5, FF, etc) on the Wii?
PhoenixDark, are you reading the same financial reports I am? These are the major western publishers:
Electronic Arts
Ubisoft
ActivisionBlizzard
Take 2
THQ
Midway
SCi/Eidos
LucasArts
Microsoft
SCEA EU/US
CodeMasters
Codemasters we know little about, and is the smallest of the bunch anyway. Of the rest, the following are making money:
ActivisionBlizzard
Ubisoft
These companies have lost money this generation:
Electronic Arts
Sony
LucasArts*
THQ
Take 2
Midway
Microsoft
SCi/Eidos
THQ
Most of these companies have indeed cut jobs (THQ has, Electronic Arts cut over 1,100 jobs already, LucasArts cut 50% of its staff, Midway is effectively out of business, THQ has cut 100 jobs, SCi/Eidos is about to be subsumed and will likely be streamlined).
Now, whether this is caused by the Wii or not is a totally different question that I don't really want to get in to here. The central point of this post is: the major publishers have indeed cut jobs, and more improtantly, have continued to lose money. If these trends continue, then these companies will all gradually reduce in size. That's the consequene of losing money. you had more money before -- which physically represents itself as cash on hand, capital investments, or intellectual property -- and now you have less -- less cash on hand, less capital investments, less IPs.
All of this is listed very clearly in all of these companies financial reports which are public data and can be viewed online at the respective companies' Investor Relations sites. *LucasArts is the sole private company on the list, so we do not have their financial data. However, as they recently cut their staff by nearly 50%, it is reasonable to assume they are struggling. We cannot confirm, but we can strongly assume.
Electronic Arts
Ubisoft
ActivisionBlizzard
Take 2
THQ
Midway
SCi/Eidos
LucasArts
Microsoft
SCEA EU/US
CodeMasters
Codemasters we know little about, and is the smallest of the bunch anyway. Of the rest, the following are making money:
ActivisionBlizzard
Ubisoft
These companies have lost money this generation:
Electronic Arts
Sony
LucasArts*
THQ
Take 2
Midway
Microsoft
SCi/Eidos
THQ
Most of these companies have indeed cut jobs (THQ has, Electronic Arts cut over 1,100 jobs already, LucasArts cut 50% of its staff, Midway is effectively out of business, THQ has cut 100 jobs, SCi/Eidos is about to be subsumed and will likely be streamlined).
Now, whether this is caused by the Wii or not is a totally different question that I don't really want to get in to here. The central point of this post is: the major publishers have indeed cut jobs, and more improtantly, have continued to lose money. If these trends continue, then these companies will all gradually reduce in size. That's the consequene of losing money. you had more money before -- which physically represents itself as cash on hand, capital investments, or intellectual property -- and now you have less -- less cash on hand, less capital investments, less IPs.
All of this is listed very clearly in all of these companies financial reports which are public data and can be viewed online at the respective companies' Investor Relations sites. *LucasArts is the sole private company on the list, so we do not have their financial data. However, as they recently cut their staff by nearly 50%, it is reasonable to assume they are struggling. We cannot confirm, but we can strongly assume.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
Most 3rd parties are posting losses. Given that you admit that one company died due to betting on one game, how does that become effected by HD budgets?PhoenixDark said:
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
Mainline games. We came to that conclusion a long time ago. Yeah, I played Umbrella Chronicles. Never beat the first boss, I'm so apathetic to that game. I'm a sucker w 50 less dollars.PhoenixDark said:
I should count up the number of Wii games I bought because I don't want to push my soft-ass 360 into another death convulsion and can't stomach another $400 console with 2 in my house and a handheld. And a computer. If I only would have ignored Gears of War 2 years ago, and just stuck with the PS3 I bought (then returned) at launch. It would have been backwards compatible. I'm sad.
List:
RE:UC
Tenchu
SMG
Punchout
Good to great games that I just don't have the stomach for. BTW, I couldn't put RE5 down and am loving Bioshock. I want more of these games. BTW, Bioshock could be done on Wii. I don't see anything stopping that in terms of gameplay. Yeah, it won't look as good but besides graphics, it ain't doing anything special. But each and every publisher is scared to take a chance on 50 million customers or the biggest userbase in America. And the UK. Ahh, I'm so frustrated with Wii.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Opiate said:
I agree with your premise, but as you said we cannot tell how much - if any - of this is due to them not supporting the Wii. Ubisoft is making a killing by producing massive tons of shovelware. This is the same thing that happened with the PS2, but the difference is that most companies aren't releasing shovelware AND serious titles. Games like Red Steel are an exception to a clear pattern.
Eteric Rice
Member
Opiate said:
It makes me wonder whats going to happen to EA as this continues. I know an analyst was criticizing EA a while back for their losses, and blamed the Wii for it.
I don't like the idea of there being two or three major companies buying up the smaller ones. Less competition = we lose quality anyway.
I think developers need to rethink how they make games. Not just on the Wii, but on all systems.
Flachmatuch
Member
PhoenixDark said:
The problem is that you said that they were doing "pretty well without Nintendo" which is completely stupid, as they're doing badly. And in addition to companies closing (like Ensemble and the MSFS team for example), you have pretty big consolidations which is never a sign of a healthy industry.
Opiate said:
Errrr...a healthy market has loads of independent small players, not 3 huge ones
I wonder if this exact topic will still end up being discussed at the very end of this generation. It's pretty straight forward; Many 3rd party devs/publishers are making bad business decisions. Many 3rd party devs/publishers are losing massive amounts of money. Thems the facts.
You can't tell me that had they released RE5 on 360/PS3/Wii that they some how would have gotten less sales. I'm pretty sure there would be enough of the types of people to buy those games on the Wii to net the devs/pubs additional dollars.
But again, what's it matter? There are plenty of games on the Wii to build a good library (though a quality GTA style would make my day, and more third person shooters/action would be nice). If devs/pubs leave money on the table this gen (and even have to close because of it in some cases) what do you personally care?
You can't tell me that had they released RE5 on 360/PS3/Wii that they some how would have gotten less sales. I'm pretty sure there would be enough of the types of people to buy those games on the Wii to net the devs/pubs additional dollars.
But again, what's it matter? There are plenty of games on the Wii to build a good library (though a quality GTA style would make my day, and more third person shooters/action would be nice). If devs/pubs leave money on the table this gen (and even have to close because of it in some cases) what do you personally care?
Flachmatuch
Member
Vinci said:
I disagree. It's a) because it's an interesting topic with new information constantly coming in and very fun to discuss, and b) also because some people have some emotional investment in the companies themselves. I doubt that even the most diehard fanboys lose any sleep over NPD numbers or whatever though...the main reason is just that looking at the "real world" and thinking about why stuff happens and discussing it with people with similar interests is interesting for everyone. The "I care about the devs/games" etc argument is (while sometimes true) is imo very much secondary. Most people are only interested because discussing stuff you care about is fun.
Scrubking said:
If the Wii had more power under the hood of it, things would be quite a bit different. Also following market trends of what sells and what doesn't, and I'm sure they have survey teams prodding to see what the typical Wii consumer really wants, that is probably your answer.
People need to stop blaming 3rd parties, and focus on nintendo. They themselves are the major reason of this, as to how they built the system, their online, and who they market it too. They may have some hardcore first party titles that can establish a tone, like Zelda, but let's face it, while it appeals to people of any age because they're fun, it's not hardcore/mature enough like mainstays on the other two consoles. It's not bloody/gritty enough, it's not Halo, it's certainly not God of War.
Nintendo has carved out, targeted a new segment of gamer, and limited the power under the hood. 3rd parties have probably done their homework at the consumer end, and thus they're doing what they've been doing. They weren't caught off guard to not bring their AAA titles over to the system, they meant they were caught off guard not making enough games of the type the majority and target audience of that console wants.
There is nothing wrong with owning a Wii if you want your Zelda, Marios, and Metroid. But if you're a hardcore gamer that wants the traditionally more gritty AAA stuff, then you can't just have a Wii. If you are a multiconsole owner saying you want more Wii stuff, then I'm sorry, it's just not going to happen. It hasn't happened yet after these years, it's not happening this gen outside of a title here and there.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
Because many of the games they are producing will become niche? Or maybe not that far but it doesn't make sense to keep your best franchise with the best gameplay off the biggest market.pvpness said:
Another is that there is a very good argument that if devs are losing a ton of money, it's not because of the wii. Devs are making the same games with better graphics, more online. Compared to last gen, they are losing money. It'll be a healthier position for them to make money and it probably involves them cranking down the budgets.
Vinci said:
I can understand that Vinci, but ultimately we can't always get what we want. Which I know can be difficult to accept, but this exact conversation (with these exact answers 90% of the time) has gone on for at least 2 years at this point. Most 3rd party devs/pubs have abandoned the 'traditional gamers' on the Wii. Sad but true.
I could see that being the case, Flachmatuch, as I spend tons of time thinking about that exact thing (while pulling my hair out cause I don't know what to tell my clients anymore about this industry), by but and large it seems like it's the same arguements over and over again, which generally miss the point you're raising entirely.
EDIT @ Skinnyrattler:
I agree. There is a distinct possibility that many of the mainline entries that aren't appearing on the Wii could become niche titles next generation and your right, it doesn't make sense to keep your best franchises off the biggest market. But that's exactly what they are doing. You can't change that, I can't change that. That's the reality.
Again I'm not trying to argue why that fact sucks, or why they should be putting those games on Wii. I'm asking why, when the answers to this question is so obvious that we all know it, that we have to keep the circle discussion going forever. That's all. 3rd parties are making bad decisions. That's happened for many years it's just really, really obvious this gen.
FINAL EDIT: I'll stop derailing though. Apologies, carry on.
Flachmatuch said:
That's true as well, but I can only speak for myself: I'm both. I worry about developers and I'm curious about how the industry works. But the worry is built primarily on what happened to SEGA and how that affected the company's output as a set of developers. Too many great games are gone now; development teams that once shined have since been split up, shifted elsewhere to deliver nowhere near the same level of quality the accomplished together.
Imagine, if you will, Team ICO being broken apart - with Ueda going one way while his team goes another (perhaps individually). That's what it was like to see SEGA fall. I was as much a SEGA fan as a Nintendo fan, and I can't imagine Nintendo without EAD 1, 2, or 3.
So yes, there's a real vital concern for me when it comes to how these companies do. I'd prefer good teams sticking together and being capable of success - and I look at what 3rd parties are doing this gen and shake my head at the gambits they're taking.
EDIT, @ pvpness: I know we can't always get what we want. I accept the fact that the Wii's potential has been squandered this gen, but that doesn't mean I still can't hope for things to improve across the industry, right?
Vinci said:
No, you can. I do too. I hate how they've treated the Wii this gen. Motion controls are one of the things I've wanted since I was a kid... but in all these threads it's generally the same people saying the same thing and despite the fact that you personally are usually pretty logical and reasonable, you've gotta be getting tired of repeating yourself at this point.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
Sadist said:
I had no idea they had that many million sellers. My bad. I do think certain types of games on the Wii are accepted more than others though. If third party games are selling that many units. then I don't see why third parties seem to fear support and commitment to it unless it is only because of the visual performance of the machine.
pvpness said:
Just trying to show that there's a meeting point between Nintendo's disruption and traditional values; that one doesn't necessitate the death or mitigation of the other, unless these companies deem it so. [Which they largely have.]
The Wii could have been another PS2 - not only for them, but for us as well. But their actions have made this possibility largely non-existent at this point.
And yes, I'm getting tired of saying it. =(
norinrad21
Banned
J-Rzez said:
Not this bullshit again.
The Gamecube, Yes the tiny little cube could stand on its own against the Xbox and was more powerful than the PS2, yet Nintendo was the only company supporting it with the occasional token 3rd party game popping up here and there every now and then.
Things would be the same had the wii been as powerful as the HD twins or closer. Stop using that old tired excuse of things being different when its mainly 3rd parties ignoring the console just because they don't have a clue how to build a game from the ground up for the wii or just plain lazy.
norinrad21 said:
The reason the Gamecube got poor support was because it was very clearly in third place. Though it still got considerably better support than the Wii has, because it was on the same power level as the other two. Like, it got the Prince of Persias. I'm sure the Wii would have gotten Assassin's Creed and PoP if it was on the same level as the PS3 and 360. There are more examples than that, but basically what I'm getting at is the Gamecube support wasn't as bad as people remember. Other than the GTAs and MGS2, I can't think of many big games that went to both the PS2 and Xbox but not the Gamecube... though they sometimes arrived late and gimped in some way. I imagine it would have been similar with the Wii, perhaps a bit worse due to the difference in controllers and lacking online support.
Yet if the Wii was on the same power level as the PS3 and 360, it would have been some $100 more than it already was, and thus wouldn't have had the mainstream success that it's enjoyed.
I dunno, it seems like there wasn't an absolute way for Nintendo to win this gen. Hopefully all the money they're making this gen will help set up for a more balanced console next gen. Enough power so they're not getting left behind in multi-console games, but not so much that it launches beyond a mainstream price point. It's something I'm sure they could do, though given their current attitude, I'm not really sure they give much of a shit about the core gaming market anymore.
norinrad21 said:
Read everything else I said, when you throw it all together, it's not hard to grasp. Nintendo also hurt their 3rd party relations significantly by time the GC hit, and that took a major toll on them. Throw in a 1.5gb media disc, and there you have it. By then Nintendo also had the stigma that "only nintendo games sell on a nintendo console". And it seems the difference between the PS2, GC, and Xbox is not nearly as wild as the Wii, 360, and PS3.
Third parties are not ignoring the Wii. Once again, they're putting out titles to the crowds that nintendo themselves seems to focus on and said the Wii was to target. What people are crying about is the main AAA titles are not coming to the Wii, as they don't want to reinvent the formula and are happy with what they've been doing like their fans are, or they're ambitious/prideful that they don't want their games to look dated as soon as the first line of code is done. And, I'm sure these 3rd party devs had surveys done pertaining to what the Wii base wants, and it seems the hardcores are outnumbered.
Don't blame 3rd parties, blame nintendo and the route they took and the targets they chased.
Nope. Guitar Hero, Mario and Sonic (a minigame like Carnival Games, only better) and EA Sports Active (a fitness game like Jillian Michaels, only better) sell better.The Experiment said:
Please don't tell me you're equating "hardcore/mature" with "bloody/gritty". Seriously.J-Rzez said: