Support NeoGAF

[Lonely1]

Well, I believe bishoptl post reflect the position of most developers which got interviewed. Which is sad since he's pretty much saying that the Wii U doens't have a place in the market from conception, even though what decides that is how much it sells, not how you perceive it.

I believe what Nintendo, and many of us want form the system, is that is a target for multipat games along with other unique concepts that developers might come with. I don't know why you will need to treat it as a "tablet" system. And I also believe there should be plenty of tablet concepts that are above the scope of an iPad. Just like bishoptl is suggesting there are "tech pushing" concepts that above the Wii U.

 

[evolution]

Pointless survey. If anything I'm curious to see how Nintendo market this thing. They should really work with 3rd parties more with marketing if they want the core audience to buy the system. They have a lot of checks to write.

 

[Satchel]

Wait. So they won't work with a console that will have a very decent userbase due to 'complexities' but they were happy to work with the PS3?

Mind blown.

 

[Dan Yo]

Well, I believe bishoptl post reflect the position of most developers which got interviewed. Which is sad since he's pretty much saying that the Wii U doens't have a place in the market from conception, even though what decides that is how much it sells, not how you perceive it.

I believe what Nintendo, and many of us want form the system, is that is a target for multipat games along with other unique concepts that developers might come with. I don't know why you will need to treat it as a "tablet" system. And I also believe there should be plenty of tablet concepts that are above the scope of an iPad.

Nintendo nailed their own coffin in that regard when they decided to go with current gen specs. You can't blame anyone other than Nintendo and their own greed for why it won't be the best choice for multiplat developers.

 

[Lonely1]

Nintendo nailed their own coffin in that regard when they decided to go with current gen specs. You can't blame anyone other than Nintendo and their own greed for why it won't be the best choice for multiplat developers.

You are assuming a lot with this post, but start with the basics. Can you tell me what are the Wii U specs, since you seem to know?

 

[NBtoaster]

Wait. So they won't work with a console that will have a very decent userbase due to 'complexities' but they were happy to work with the PS3?

Mind blown.

At the start of this gen many were not happy to work on the PS3 and we know nothing about what the Wii U userbase will be like.

 

[AgentP]

What self respecting dev would take an IGN survey?

 

[Satchel]

At the start of this gen many were not happy to work on the PS3 and we know nothing about what the Wii U userbase will be like.

Well I'm working under the assumption at least half will carry over. That's still a very big userbase.

 

[_Alkaline_]

Well I'm working under the assumption at least half will carry over. That's still a very big userbase.

The PS3 is a great example of a console's successor never being gifted its predecessor's audience.

 

[Lonely1]

The PS3 is a great example of a console's successor never being gifted its predecessor's audience.

Well, the Ps3 still is a big market.

 

[_Alkaline_]

Well, the Ps3 still is a big market.

True, but it had to work pretty hard for it. Its initial few years were pretty tough. It was pretty clear that most of the PS2's audience didn't want to hop on the PS3 train anytime soon (and one could argue that a decent amount of the PS2's audience went to the Wii instead).

The PS3 has done well for itself, but it's still a good example of how brand loyalty doesn't really exist in this industry on any signifcant scale.

 

[boyshine]

The average consumer (GAF opposite) do not know about a console until they see a commercial or hear about it from friends. Release date does not matter, it's all about when you have the right value for money. As it stands right now it seems like Nintendo might once again have this at launch, while the other two are going to be more expensive = slower initial hardware sales (unless there's a AAA++ exclusive or a mind blowing feature we don't know about). My question is how and when is PS4/X8 going to make their systems appealing when we're past the point of "good enough" graphics. If power is their only selling point, they are in trouble.

 

[jman2050]

The average consumer (GAF opposite) do not know about a console until they see a commercial or hear about it from friends. Release date does not matter, it's all about when you have the right value for money. As it stands right now it seems like Nintendo might once again have this at launch, while the other two are going to be more expensive = slower initial hardware sales (unless there's a AAA++ exclusive or a mind blowing feature we don't know about). My question is how and when is PS4/X8 going to make their systems appealing when we're past the point of "good enough" graphics. If power is their only selling point, they are in trouble.

Microsoft has Xbox Live. They have their shit together, at least as far as the US is concerned.

The PS4 is the major wild card right now.

 

[Yagharek]

The average consumer (GAF opposite) do not know about a console until they see a commercial or hear about it from friends. Release date does not matter, it's all about when you have the right value for money. As it stands right now it seems like Nintendo might once again have this at launch, while the other two are going to be more expensive = slower initial hardware sales (unless there's a AAA++ exclusive or a mind blowing feature we don't know about). My question is how and when is PS4/X8 going to make their systems appealing when we're past the point of "good enough" graphics. If power is their only selling point, they are in trouble.

I know what youre trying to get at, but at this stage the ps4/xbox3 are not just going to be about power. In their case it will be as much about network services as it is about graphics. At the very least.

But I do agree with you that price is going to be a big factor very early on next gen. Whichever of the 3 consoles can deliver on a big game and the right price early on is going to be at a huge advantage.

 

[Gamer @ Heart]

Nintendo nailed their own coffin in that regard when they decided to go with current gen specs. You can't blame anyone other than Nintendo and their own greed for why it won't be the best choice for multiplat developers.

You are jumping to conclusions you know absolutely nothing about.

 

[Saint Gregory]

Nintendo nailed their own coffin in that regard when they decided to go with current gen specs. You can't blame anyone other than Nintendo and their own greed for why it won't be the best choice for multiplat developers.

Nintendo is a games only company. They don't have other divisions to subsidize selling bleeding edge technology for mass market prices and Nintendo's games for everyone philosophy wouldn't work with a $600 dollar console.

Is amazing to me that people equate greed with not a company not bankrolling their high end gaming experience. I love this industry but this spoiled gamer attitude needs to go.

Do you think publishers give a shit about any of that, the only thing they care about is making money, and making games for the wii with a few exceptions clearly was not the way to do that.

Except for Nintendo. How did that work?

 

[chriskun]

Different scenarios in that sense though.Perhaps, but I still feel what we saw this gen is disgraceful if we expect this industry to be run by sane, inteligent, mature people.

Do you think publishers give a shit about any of that, the only thing they care about is making money, and making games for the wii with a few exceptions clearly was not the way to do that.

 

[Nirolak]

Or even how many...

80% sounds like a lot but 80% of what? 10 developers?

The link reveals all:

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.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Holy inaccurate generalisations batman!

I'd say childish men, but I don't have any right to judge.

I play Nintendo games.

 

[Hiltz]

Some third-party developers complained about the complexity of making games on the PS3. However, Sony's machine still received substanial multiplatform support from both Japanese and western third-parties. Ultimately, the "complexity" issue didn't have a significant impact on the quantity of third-party support. If anything, it only hurt the quality. Were the the reasons for this basically come down to the PS3 meeting the lowest common denominator and the games selling well enough to justify enduring developing for the PS3 ? The rising cost of game development and the opportunity that online services provided as an additional source of revenue, were intriguing for third-parties to embrace multiplatform support. Quite frankly, the PS3 was the only capable candidate since Wii was not ideal to support for a variety of different reasons we're all well aware of. Of course, PS3 was also shown some love by third-party exclusives as well.

What I'm trying to get at is third-parties can complain all they want about Wii U apparently being "too complex" to make games for. However, if third-parties can be commercially successful on Wii U (regardless of exclusivity or multiplatform support), then wouldn't they just learn to deal with the "complexity" issues Wii U may have ?

 

[Robot Pants]

Sooo.... MS basically lied to all of us and Nextbox and PS4 will be at E3?

 

[Nirolak]

Sooo.... MS basically lied to all of us and Nextbox and PS4 will be at E3?

They have been widely revealed to developers, especially the next Xbox, but they are very unlikely to be officially announced at E3.

 

[Mudkips]

Nintendo shouldn't even bother releasing the system if it isn't incredibly easy to develop for. Making third parties very happy during Year #1 should be their top priority, and it'd be scary if it isn't. Very strange quote...I find it hard to believe, but would be a huge mistake on Nintendo's part if this ends up being a challenge to develop for. They should be working more closely with third parties right now than they ever have...

Making $ is their priority.
And they will make tons of it with or without 3rd parties.

 

[EatinOlives]

Well, we are assuming that the game doesn't make much use of the second screen in the first place. You asked what reason we would have to buy a third party Wii U game over the other options. That's a reason of why I would.

I suppose, though personally that wouldn't be all that great a reason for me. I'd much rather have no "game handheld" feature if it means actually having a meaningful control scheme.

 

[jrDev]

lol. HD twins outsold the Wii and the hardware differential made it an either or proposition so publishers and devs continued to target the larger market, sorry if that upsets you.

Hmm...this argument is a little silly since you are quantifying a 'larger' market based on total combined sales when more than likely lots of people bought multiple consoles.

Anyways, as I have said before, I wouldn't take any developer seriously that says stuff like this AND be anonymous. BTW, the anonymity makes stories like this hard to believe. I mean, I am developing for multiple platforms in which I have to work with completely different interfaces, and I have to tell you...it's not hard...at all...

 

[Biff]

They have been widely revealed to developers, especially the next Xbox, but they are very unlikely to be officially announced at E3.

Are you counting teaser reveals in "officially announced"? Because if so then I'd have to disagree.

I feel strongly that we will see at least a mockup/tech demo of both of these consoles. Not the actual name or actual specs, but I'd bet we will 'officially' see something concrete in both Sony and MS' presentations, in the sense that officially means the company sets aside a few minutes of their presentations to show something off.

 

[Saint Gregory]

Are you counting teaser reveals in "officially announced"? Because if so then I'd have to disagree.

I feel strongly that we will see at least a mockup/tech demo of both of these consoles. Not the actual name or actual specs, but I'd bet we will 'officially' see something concrete in both Sony and MS' presentations, in the sense that officially means the company sets aside a few minutes of their presentations to show something off.

Sony really wouldn't have anything to lose by doing that aside from creating a distraction from what will hopefully be a Vita-centric presentation but MS would be better served by keeping their 360 successor under wraps as long as they can.

There's no need to throw cold water on the 360's market resurgence.

 

[onQ123]

True, but it had to work pretty hard for it. Its initial few years were pretty tough. It was pretty clear that most of the PS2's audience didn't want to hop on the PS3 train anytime soon (and one could argue that a decent amount of the PS2's audience went to the Wii instead).

The PS3 has done well for itself, but it's still a good example of how brand loyalty doesn't really exist in this industry on any signifcant scale.

well the PS2 market was people who paid $299 & less for their Console, PS3 just started selling to that market in the last few years.

 

[boyshine]

I know what youre trying to get at, but at this stage the ps4/xbox3 are not just going to be about power. In their case it will be as much about network services as it is about graphics. At the very least.

But I do agree with you that price is going to be a big factor very early on next gen. Whichever of the 3 consoles can deliver on a big game and the right price early on is going to be at a huge advantage.

Yes, but do the average consumer care about network features, clouds, DD, subscription based deals or bonuses, etc. ... I really doubt it. Those are all incentives for the hardcore minority. It must be transparent and easy/fun to use, and that's a hurdle I don't see that Microsoft or Sony are ready to jump yet.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Wait. So they won't work with a console that will have a very decent userbase due to 'complexities' but they were happy to work with the PS3?

Mind blown.

No. They think the developement is hard because the Wii U is not as powerful as the PS4 and Xbox 3. That means the ports for Wii U will not be looking good and will lack features, therefore they will sell bad, regardless how big the user base is. Bad sales and high effort = Devs won't support Wii U.

 

[OldJadedGamer]

The PS3 is a great example of a console's successor never being gifted its predecessor's audience.

Not its entire audience but its a huge help to get over big hurdles. The PS3 would not be where it is today without the goodwill earned by the PS1 and PS2. Next gen the PS4 will be on its own from day one, kind of like how the Vita is now.

WiiU will carry over a lot of goodwill from Wii from consumers as well.

The PS3 has done well for itself, but it's still a good example of how brand loyalty doesn't really exist in this industry on any signifcant scale.

How many posts on GAF have you read describing Europe as "Sonyland"?

 

[brianmcdoogle]

The tie-ratio of the platform wasn't bad though.

Is there a more up-to-date article of tie-ratios? I'm curious to see how they've changed in 4 years.

 

[Nizz]

They have been widely revealed to developers, especially the next Xbox, but they are very unlikely to be officially announced at E3.

Nice tag, Nirolak.

I can't wait to hear more dirt on PS4/X-Box next. I'd love to know just how much easier the 720 seems to be development-wise against the PS4.

 

[bomma_man]

Not its entire audience but its a huge help to get over big hurdles. The PS3 would not be where it is today without the goodwill earned by the PS1 and PS2. Next gen the PS4 will be on its own from day one, kind of like how the Vita is now.

WiiU will carry over a lot of goodwill from Wii from consumers as well.



How many posts on GAF have you read describing Europe as "Sonyland"?

Think the relatively good performance of the PS3 on the continent is more to do with Microsoft's neglect than any decade long brand loyalty.

 

[FieryBalrog]

When nintendo beats the shit out of both MS and Sony again

They won't.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

So I guess Nintendo ninja delayed Wii U to 2013?

He said next gen not current gen.

Spoiler

Relax, I am kidding

 

[HigherLevel]

Why is the PS3 always discussed as if it's a total failure? It's only like 2 or 3 million consoles sold behind the 360. I've never understood this. I know in comparison to the PS2 it's way down, but no system's ever gonna touch the PS2 in sales.

 

[FieryBalrog]

Why is the PS3 always discussed as if it's a total failure? It's only like 2 or 3 million consoles sold behind the 360. I've never understood this. I know in comparison to the PS2 it's way down, but no system's ever gonna touch the PS2 in sales.

It's because of the expectations people had of Sony from the PS2, and the particularly bad first few years of the PS3. So it has that unfair reputation.

Also Sony in general is doing terribly and the PS3 gets lumped in with that whole story.

 

[Gamer @ Heart]

They won't.

They could. We have no idea.

 

[cosmicblizzard]

They won't.

So what are the lottery numbers for next week?

 

[gaheris]

"We're not creative enough to plan our main series and adapt them to the new controller" would've sounded more honest.

This right here western devs, let's be real.

 

[Hiltz]

I expect Wii U's head start will be short-lived. Nintendo will be busy spending the next 6 months fleshing out the Nintendo Network and not having to deal with some potentially glaring issues that Nintendo will have to fix months to a year later. We'll likely have to wait longer than that to start seeing some of the more impressive third-party Wii U titles beyond current-gen ports. With this gen, the killer-app titles didn't come out until a year after launch. Hopefully, Wii U's will be at launch or won't take as long to come out.

I am foaming at the mouth in excitement for Wii U but I'm trying to keep my expectations within the realm of reality.

 

[Gamer @ Heart]

Why is the PS3 always discussed as if it's a total failure? It's only like 2 or 3 million consoles sold behind the 360. I've never understood this. I know in comparison to the PS2 it's way down, but no system's ever gonna touch the PS2 in sales.

These are businesses. As fans we can measure success based on games and experiences we enjoyed, but sales age gaf looks at it like a business, and businesses set out to make money. It isnt about total sales or perception at this point, its about profit. Sony created and launched a system that lost them billions and wiped out all the profit they made from the playstation brand the previous 10 years and fumbled the transition from one of the most popular consumer electronic devices to its successor. That is a failure.

 

[Vinci]

This was so predictable. Hell, I'm pretty sure I - along with many others - predicted this shortly after the controller's reveal.

Nintendo nailed their own coffin in that regard when they decided to go with current gen specs. You can't blame anyone other than Nintendo and their own greed for why it won't be the best choice for multiplat developers.

You're very fortunate I'll never be a moderator here.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

This right here western devs, let's be real.

Being real?

It's more likely that they can't fit another SKU into their budgets and they are choosing based on userbase.

This is an endlessly repeating cycle. You can't build a userbase without the games, but the games don't come unless you've got the userbase. Well... unless the manufacturer can convince through some means (dropping licencing fees, subsidizing dev costs).

Not only does MS have access to the most well documented tech in the industry, they've also got the money and pull to do this at any time. This is why the entire M$ thing is so stupid. Yeah, they've got buttloads of cash. Very little of it from gaming, but they got the cash. The spoils tend to go to the one willing to lose. Nintendo with the Wii for instance. Huge risk, huge payoff. MS just risks cash literally.

 

[Zuhzuhzombie!!]

Well we already basically knew XB3/PS4 late 2013.

IMO this is yet another reason the Wii U is in trouble. It means the big unveil of Durango/Orbis will be e3 in June 2013.

So Wii U will come out in November of 2012, about Feb-March-April 2013 already you'll have small leaks and hype building for Durango-Orbis. Well before they even go on sale, their shadow will be looming over Wii U.

People would say "Oh Wii U will have XXX lead time, they'll crush the other guys". But they'll really have almost no time before the specter of Durango/Orbis is upon them.

Could be a Dreamcast>PS2 situation. The 360 will have Kinect. The PS4 may have Move. Casuals, who made up the majority of Wii buyers, may adopt the Wii U heavily at launch, but once the next two consoles (especially the new one from MS) start ramping up the ad blitz, Wii U sales may be completely cannibalized. Especially if there's not as good of a price discrepancy between the two consoles this time.

Isn't the Wii U expected to be around $300 or $350? After the PS3, I would be surprised to see if MS has a non bundle console for over $400.

 

[Vinci]

Being real?

It's more likely that they can't fit another SKU into their budgets and they are choosing based on userbase.

This is an endlessly repeating cycle. You can't build a userbase without the games, but the games don't come unless you've got the userbase. Well... unless the manufacturer can convince through some means (dropping licencing fees, subsidizing dev costs).

Not only does MS have access to the most well documented tech in the industry, they've also got the money and pull to do this at any time.

Yes. Limiting one's potential audience by neglecting a portable platform [as in one you can port games to] makes worlds of sense, especially in light of how the current generation shaped up. Short of the 360 selling games like crazy, the PS3 would have lost support. Period. In the end, supporting both benefited publishers. Failing to support a portable platform because of the likely reason that it has a touchscreen in the center of it is beyond moronic.

Seriously, man, I tend to agree with you - but are you honestly suggesting that 3rd parties have a good record when it comes to making viable business decisions? Really?

 

[Instro]

Since we are talking about 3rd party support it was mentioned by Ben Judd on 8-4 that Nintendo has basically been going to developers saying that they are willing to do whatever is needed for them to bring their games to the system. Paraphrasing here of course, I haven't listened to it myself yet, but this came up in the WiiU thread so I thought it was fairly applicable to this thread.

 

[lostinblue]

Is there a more up-to-date article of tie-ratios? I'm curious to see how they've changed in 4 years.

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 per system.



They're all in line (despite Wii being dead in the water now), the whole "Wii doesn't sell software it's aimed at casuals and they only play Wii Sports" was really overblown. Problem was crap third party titles and no marketing budget for them, there are no miracles, and yet throughout the platform life they sold more than they should have, clearly.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Yes. Limiting one's potential audience by neglecting a portable platform makes worlds of sense, especially in light of how the current generation shaped up. Short of the 360 selling games like crazy, the PS3 would have lost support. Period. In the end, supporting both benefited publishers. Failing to support a portable platform because of the likely reason that it has a touchscreen in the center of it is beyond moronic.

Seriously, man, I tend to agree with you - but are you honestly suggesting that 3rd parties have a good record when it comes to making viable business decisions? Really?

God no.

Just that they've done risk assessment on titles still in dev. And other manufacturers were more than willing to drop a licencing fee, or subsidize costs making that platforms release a lighter load.

I think a lot of companies do view Nintendo as more of a competitor on their platforms than they actually are, but I don't think there's an industry wide agenda against Nintendo. Lack of willingness on both sides to take chances with one another? Definitely.