-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
IGN: "[Wii] runs a distant second to 360 in annual profits"
- Thread starter legend166
- Start date
VGChampion said:
You are not alone. I don't like driving my real car so I have no desire to actually drive a car while driving a videogame car [Insert appropriate meme]. The Wii wheel was irritating enough.
I think it is a technological marvel to be sure, but not something that will change gaming. I do think it would be great for fitness games.
Sho_Nuff82 said:
Seriously man I was replying to this.
SamBishop said:
As I read again I admit that I may have misunderstood the point. Anyway what is the point of saying that some the Wiis core titles sell less than their expanded titles?
Nintendo makes the expanded titles to appeal to a larger audience so they expect them to sell more. Wii Fit, Wii Play and Wii Sports are suppose to sell more than SSB, MP and SMG. Even though that happens we still get excite bots, punch-out and many other core titles that don't have a chance to sell as much from Nintendo.
We know how well Nintendo consoles sold for the last two gens when they focused mainly on their core titles, so I think it is pretty stupid to keep bringing up this point.
jibblypop said:
I'm under the impression he is talking about 3rd party software only.
I think he is incorrect on that too, but you can't disprove Gears of War, Street Fighter, Force Unleashed, GTA IV, & other money makers when a lot of the Nintendo 3rd parties are slow simmering, less marketed, & also less costly. They made Boom Blox 2 because sales must have decent.
If anything, Microsoft's platform makes more revenue.
Guys guys guys...
Look beyond his use of 'inflammatory' language and you'll see he's quite accurately suggesting that there is plenty of reason to be hopeful for more traditional gaming on Wii.
It's not the sort of Wii Hate article it's being made out to be. It's a guy who doesn't really like Wii very much appraising the things Nintendo is now doing to make him like it more.
Look beyond his use of 'inflammatory' language and you'll see he's quite accurately suggesting that there is plenty of reason to be hopeful for more traditional gaming on Wii.
It's not the sort of Wii Hate article it's being made out to be. It's a guy who doesn't really like Wii very much appraising the things Nintendo is now doing to make him like it more.
manueldelalas
Time Traveler
The article is a great representation of stupidity, really; great thing from the writer to use factual information and present it as true.
Some stupid points:
- "Natal" is the new hotness", "Nintendo scared of Natal", etc. I laughed a little at this point (but find really sad his opinion... I mean, he is a "professional" writer)
- "Casual gamers buy no games". We all know the Wii's attach ratio, so I don't know why he twisted the information, we know Wii software sells at the same rate as PS3 software and at a lesser rate than the 360 (Wii/PS3 attach ratio is about 5-ish, and 360 is about 8...). Saying Wii owners buy Wii Fit+Wii Play and little else is just biased.
- Why he dismisses New Super Mario Bros is puzzling to me. Sure it is not a game that fires up the charts, but it's legs on the DS are staggering... The sequel to a 20 million selling game; it's not like people who own a Wii don't know the DS version. I don't know how much it will sell, but I think it has potential to be really huge (I'll say it will sell at worst at Halo 3 levels...).
- "Nintendo going after hardcore crowd". Lol, just lol. I mean, yeah Nintendo started making a Zelda game in response to something; someone should inform this dude, Nintendo always make Zelda and Mario games. Making a New Super Mario Wii seems like a no brainer, making a Zelda Wii is expected. SMG2 was a surprise announcement, but we all expected to hear about a new project from Nintendo Tokyo; I'm glad it is the sequel to what's considered to be the best game this generation (sadly the first one bombed at only 8 million sold).
- "Third parties don't sell on Wii". Let's see:
Capcom: RE4: sold great, great game. RE UC: sold great, great game. DR Wii: Sold horribly, horrible game.
SEGA: Madworld: sold "badly", it's a really niche not that great game. Conduit: mediocre sales, mediocre game. HOTD Overkill: Bad sales (even though it met SEGA's expectations and broke even), great game.
HOTD is the only one I see could have sold better; and none of those games would have sold better on another console, none.
- "Nintendo was teh hardcore". No, Nintendo never was the "hardcore", they have never dedicated to hardlycore gamers. The only generation in which Nintendo has been the cool one is the NES, because there was no competition (GB also falls in this category), but in all the other generations, they weren't (Genesis was "the rad" thing to buy, then the PSX, then the PS2 and Xbox, and now the 360. Also the PSP is "cooler" than the DS). Stop dreaming on this one.
- "casual gamers, serious gamers". I hate this difference, because in the revisionists story you can see that casual franchises are Halo, GTA, Mario, Madden, WE, Zelda, Gears of War, Gran Turismo, Pokemon, Mario Kart, Wii series, Final Fantasy, Warcraft, Starcraft etc.
It's like people fail to understand what really hardcore and serious gaming is. Buying a japanese 360 to play the cave shooters; that's hardcore. Buying an original Pac-Man cabinet to beat whatever record; that's hardcore.
Buying the latest console because it has teh best grafix and all the cool games in the genre that's popular right now, is not hardcore (or serious), it's casual.
Also, as most of the popular games on 360 are on the PC, any serious gamer sill play them there where you have a good and free online infrastructure, real HD (as in more than 600p), better frame rate (60+ as opposed to shaky 25), etc.
- "MS makes more profits" :lol :lol :lol (yeah, three laughing smiles, take that).
All in all, biased article, uninformed, etc.
Some stupid points:
- "Natal" is the new hotness", "Nintendo scared of Natal", etc. I laughed a little at this point (but find really sad his opinion... I mean, he is a "professional" writer)
- "Casual gamers buy no games". We all know the Wii's attach ratio, so I don't know why he twisted the information, we know Wii software sells at the same rate as PS3 software and at a lesser rate than the 360 (Wii/PS3 attach ratio is about 5-ish, and 360 is about 8...). Saying Wii owners buy Wii Fit+Wii Play and little else is just biased.
- Why he dismisses New Super Mario Bros is puzzling to me. Sure it is not a game that fires up the charts, but it's legs on the DS are staggering... The sequel to a 20 million selling game; it's not like people who own a Wii don't know the DS version. I don't know how much it will sell, but I think it has potential to be really huge (I'll say it will sell at worst at Halo 3 levels...).
- "Nintendo going after hardcore crowd". Lol, just lol. I mean, yeah Nintendo started making a Zelda game in response to something; someone should inform this dude, Nintendo always make Zelda and Mario games. Making a New Super Mario Wii seems like a no brainer, making a Zelda Wii is expected. SMG2 was a surprise announcement, but we all expected to hear about a new project from Nintendo Tokyo; I'm glad it is the sequel to what's considered to be the best game this generation (sadly the first one bombed at only 8 million sold).
- "Third parties don't sell on Wii". Let's see:
Capcom: RE4: sold great, great game. RE UC: sold great, great game. DR Wii: Sold horribly, horrible game.
SEGA: Madworld: sold "badly", it's a really niche not that great game. Conduit: mediocre sales, mediocre game. HOTD Overkill: Bad sales (even though it met SEGA's expectations and broke even), great game.
HOTD is the only one I see could have sold better; and none of those games would have sold better on another console, none.
- "Nintendo was teh hardcore". No, Nintendo never was the "hardcore", they have never dedicated to hardlycore gamers. The only generation in which Nintendo has been the cool one is the NES, because there was no competition (GB also falls in this category), but in all the other generations, they weren't (Genesis was "the rad" thing to buy, then the PSX, then the PS2 and Xbox, and now the 360. Also the PSP is "cooler" than the DS). Stop dreaming on this one.
- "casual gamers, serious gamers". I hate this difference, because in the revisionists story you can see that casual franchises are Halo, GTA, Mario, Madden, WE, Zelda, Gears of War, Gran Turismo, Pokemon, Mario Kart, Wii series, Final Fantasy, Warcraft, Starcraft etc.
It's like people fail to understand what really hardcore and serious gaming is. Buying a japanese 360 to play the cave shooters; that's hardcore. Buying an original Pac-Man cabinet to beat whatever record; that's hardcore.
Buying the latest console because it has teh best grafix and all the cool games in the genre that's popular right now, is not hardcore (or serious), it's casual.
Also, as most of the popular games on 360 are on the PC, any serious gamer sill play them there where you have a good and free online infrastructure, real HD (as in more than 600p), better frame rate (60+ as opposed to shaky 25), etc.
- "MS makes more profits" :lol :lol :lol (yeah, three laughing smiles, take that).
All in all, biased article, uninformed, etc.
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
Someone post the financials from all three companies. I don't believe Microsoft has made a profit from the Xbox program.
Where in my post did I say it was a good article? It's an opinion piece and reads like a stream-of-consciousness rant, complete with the digs at Nintendo fans you mention. But it at least has a point, one which the majority of people in this thread have misconstrued.darkwings said:
All I'm saying is that if you're going to criticise the article at least be true to what the author is actually trying to get across. Taking this article 'seriously' may not get us very far, but I hardly thinking building strawmen is better alternative.
Does: "Good thing Nintendo's already reinventing the Wii as a hardcore gaming platform. It's the smartest move it could possibly make" sound like faint praise to you?Zenith said:
If the criticism is: 'Nintendo have failed at catering to the harcore in the past' but the praise is 'Nintedo have completely turned things around' then isn't the praise more significant than the criticism?
Sho_Nuff82
Member
Bizzyb said:
Again, in context, he said that The Grinder blatantly ripping off Left 4 Dead is largely a waste of time, because it will probably never be as good as Left 4 Dead on the HD boxes. As good as Activions ever makes CoD for Wii, it will never be as good as the PS360PC counterparts.
Meanwhile, a game designed from the ground up for Wii Motion plus with a unique graphic style that doesn't attempt hyper-realism (Red Steel 2) seems like a much better way to attract shooting fans on the Wii.
read the article
Shin Johnpv
Member
This is why gaming "journalism" is a joke. If this was an article for a respected newspaper or magazine, there would be fact checking done. Instead of some guy just writing off in fantasy land. There's a shit ton of fact errors in here and IGN doesn't give shit enough to actually check them before publishing an article.
Nintendo's always made some games that we're currently describing as 'hardcore'. They're always developing a main-series Zelda, they're often working on Mario platformers, Fire Emblem is still alive, Metroid is alive... All this was as true three years ago as it is today. The only discernible difference in strategy between this year and last year is Wii Music won't be the tentpole game for the holiday season in 2009; that's hardly remarkable when you consider Wii Music wasn't the tentpole game for 19 out of the past 20 years.
A Twisty Fluken
Member
GAF: "[IGN] runs a distant second to reality in annual facts"
Vilix said:
Psychotexts post from "The Earnings Report Thread (Fiscal Year 2010)"
Code:
Sony Nintendo Microsoft Total
Y/E 1998 $902,811,090 $1,023,333,867 $1,926,144,957
Y/E 1999 $1,102,563,557 $1,301,350,000 $2,403,913,557
Y/E 2000 $722,738,949 $1,368,207,547 $2,090,946,497
Y/E 2001 -$449,776,290 $677,576,000 $227,799,710
Y/E 2002 $629,101,056 $895,872,180 -$1,135,000,000 $389,973,237
Y/E 2003 $935,569,253 $834,333,333 -$1,191,000,000 $578,902,586
Y/E 2004 $627,195,212 $993,161,303 -$1,337,000,000 $283,356,515
Y/E 2005 $419,888,799 $1,056,056,202 -$539,000,000 $936,945,001
Y/E 2006 $69,129,058 $774,478,055 -$1,339,000,000 -$495,392,887
Y/E 2007 -$1,970,923,859 $1,914,666,388 -$1,969,000,000 -$2,025,257,471
Y/E 2008 -$1,079,994,103 $4,322,637,887 $426,000,000 $3,668,643,783
Y/E 2009 -$577,207,240 $5,691,428,301 $169,000,000 $5,283,221,061
Y/E 10Q1 -$413,541,667 $420,843,750 N/A N/A
Total
$917,553,815 $21,273,944,815 -$6,844,000,000 $15,347,498,630
Full Year Average
$110,924,623 $1,737,758,422 -$1,001,857,143 $914,270,499
Profitable Years
8 12 2 10
Non Profitable Years
4 0 6 2
Average in Loss Year
-$1,019,475,373 N/A -$1,251,666,667 -$1,260,325,179
Average in Profit Year
$676,124,622 $1,737,758,422 $333,000,000 $1,389,625,094gamergirly
Member
Look at the # of profitable years. MS has only made a profit 2 out of 8 years in the video game business.
SamBishop said:
First of all, there have been very few, if any, titles with the same levels of visual/aural production on Wii that are on the 360 and PS3, that is mostly due to the fact that it either can't be done for technical reasons or that the dev/pub has decided to not make it worth the effort, however that most certainly does NOT mean that there couldn't or shouldn't be any of those kinds of games on Wii, i.e. guns, blood, story, maturity, etc. And for the record, multiplayer has shit to do with it. MGS2 and MGS3 had no multiplayer and are considered "PS/360" games by this asshats logic.
There are several games that are very much "good" looking, have gameplay depth and have story on the Wii such as; RE4, Madworld, The Conduit, RedSteel, RE:UC, Cursed Mountain, Silent Hill:Shattered Memories, No More Heroes, Twilight Princess, Bully, Okami, Splinter Cell: DA, Obscure, Tenchu, etc etc
The point is, THERE IS NO SUCH THING as a "PS/360" game. You can make any kind of game for any system and as long as you give it the right kind of production values, talent and effort, it will be a good game worth buying/playing. To say that a "Mature" (see; blood, guns, story, etc) game with production values, talent, and effort does not belong on the Wii is a asinine thing to say.
Sho_Nuff82 said:
No, I don't agree with that. not everyone has a 360, not everyone wants a 360. Who the hell are you or this guy to say that a game like Left for Dead can't or shouldn't be on Wii simply because it's also on 360?? Maybe someone WANTS a game like left for dead with pointer controls. Call of Duty 4 is now coming to Wii. I guess that was a mistake too, huh? For that matter they shouldn't even bother trying to make a REALLY good looking/playing MW2 for the Wii audience, right? Similarly, RE5 is now on 360/PS3 so I guess we should burn all of our copies of RE4 Wii edition and boycott the publisher from making anymore copies simply b/c that kind of game is a waste of time on Wii now that HD RE has arrived, right?
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
DNF said:
Exactly what I was looking for. Thanks, DNF. ^.^
honeymustardn
Member
He admits to being a troll in the first few lines. Move along.
legend166 said:
Better make sure they throw the other people that have actually read the article and have posted in this very thread about how they don't think it's an anti-Wii rant without even quoting me on the payroll too while they're at it. I've got enough gigs; I don't really need compensation for trying to contest a thread full of read-the-OP-and-race-to-post responses.
And I'm done, for what it's worth. That others were able to see beyond any flamebait and understand the article's actual points (which were quite astute, I think) means I won't completely lose my mind trying to figure out how so many people could get hooked on some barbed comments and miss the actual editorial.
[edit] Almost done:
Bizzyb said:
I only posited that right now there are no games that can compare -- and likely ever will compare -- in apples-to-apples comparisons to what the HD systems do in terms of immersion from an A/V standpoint (I'll lump scale in there too, I guess). When (not if, but when) a Wii game leverages the system's strengths to provide an FPS experience that's as deep as something on the other consoles in terms of story and multiplayer offerings, I'll welcome it with open arms. My response was specifically about FPS games which are, now, for better or worse, intrinsically linked to the online play -- something that right now the Wii simply can't do on the same level.
I didn't mean it as a slight against the system in terms of basic game concepts; you're 100% right that there's nothing right now the Wii couldn't do in purest terms that the others do. I will argue, like the article says, that the others do a number of them better, but to give up on the idea is stupid, as is any insinuation that a dev should (I'm ignoring that and a great many other little barbs thrown into the article for the sake of rancor).
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
Duke Togo said:
The problem is there's no sexy blond bombshell giving the bullshit news. It would make this so much more palettable.
SamBishop said:
Are you this goddamn stupid? You are admitting that the article has a mess of really stupid shit - I mean the guy starts off by saying that he trolls Wii gamers for a laugh for fucks sake! - and yet you come in here and complain that we're not getting it? Really?
Duke Togo said:
Well IGN is owned by News Corp (who owns Faux News). Go figure.
But then again, IGN was going downhill in journalism even before that.
ShockingAlberto
Member
If the article had good points, they're completely masked by really childish and unprofessional jabs.
It's kind of sad. This guy was either furiously typing an angry rant while trying to remain smug, or he was trying to make a point and couldn't make it because he couldn't remain consistent or professional. Either way, nothing about the article should be lauded - one fistful of mud is enough to ruin the soup, you can't put three fistfuls in and expect me to try it, anyway.
It's kind of sad. This guy was either furiously typing an angry rant while trying to remain smug, or he was trying to make a point and couldn't make it because he couldn't remain consistent or professional. Either way, nothing about the article should be lauded - one fistful of mud is enough to ruin the soup, you can't put three fistfuls in and expect me to try it, anyway.
It's not good, but it's not as bad as a lot of you are making it out to be.
Parts of it are very questionable, especially the comment about the Wii currently running a distant second to the 360 in annual profits (as if Nintendo were not spanking Microsoft in both hardware and software sales), but the primary thrust of the article is generally true. Nintendo has had trouble reconciling the casual and hardcore wings of its fanbase with the Wii, and at the moment, given what they announced at E3, they are taking significant positive steps to address that.
It is an editorial, so it doesn't have to sound completely unbiased or anything, but if it had started from a slightly more realistic point, people would have been less likely to get lost in the general dismissal of the Wii platform at the beginning of the article to see all the positive stuff at the end. But if trolling Wii fans is something the author enjoys as much as he says, that may have been his intent.
Parts of it are very questionable, especially the comment about the Wii currently running a distant second to the 360 in annual profits (as if Nintendo were not spanking Microsoft in both hardware and software sales), but the primary thrust of the article is generally true. Nintendo has had trouble reconciling the casual and hardcore wings of its fanbase with the Wii, and at the moment, given what they announced at E3, they are taking significant positive steps to address that.
It is an editorial, so it doesn't have to sound completely unbiased or anything, but if it had started from a slightly more realistic point, people would have been less likely to get lost in the general dismissal of the Wii platform at the beginning of the article to see all the positive stuff at the end. But if trolling Wii fans is something the author enjoys as much as he says, that may have been his intent.
nincompoop
Banned
:lol :lol :lol article
:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol people defending the article
:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol people defending the article
Souldriver
Member
When it's an editorial, you're allowed to voice your opinion. You should however not resort to fanboyism, trolling, name calling and misrepresenting facts in favor of your case. That's just shoddy journalism, even for an editorial.K' Dash said:
EmCeeGramr
Member
what the hell happened in here
I can understand people not liking the Wii, but I'm continually amazed by how journalists go out of their way to bash it. Honestly, what has the Wii done that is so wrong? Opened up a new way for consoles to innovate in the future? Curse the Wii for possibly saving what may have been a bad situation down the road!
It upsets me that so many game journalists seem to have such a strong bias, or probably just fanboyish attitude, but I suppose that line of thinking is almost primarily what has kept gaming alive for so many years. So what can you do?
It upsets me that so many game journalists seem to have such a strong bias, or probably just fanboyish attitude, but I suppose that line of thinking is almost primarily what has kept gaming alive for so many years. So what can you do?
divisionbyzorro
Member
SamBishop said:
For what it's worth, I'm with you.
The author of the article made some excellent points that were overshadowed by his annual profits claim - which, to be fair, I don't understand. If you only look at software and exclude Wii Play (I still don't understand why we count this in the NPD) perhaps the number could make more sense (Wii Fit is still a juggernaut though) - but AFAIK we don't have the info to put those sorts of numbers together, at least not in terms of $$$.
But the author's other points are excellent. He's right: I don't want to play the Grinder. Like he said, it doesn't do anything special, other than mimic a game which the other consoles do better. Perhaps if I only owned a Wii, I would be excited about it, but why should I care about the Grinder when L4D2 comes out this year? That being said, Red Steel 2 looks totally awesome to me. There's nothing like that on the 360.
I also like his comments about the "Nintendo Charm." He's right: I didn't buy the Wii for Halo ripoffs. I bought it for Zelda and Metroid and Mario and Pikmin and Mario Kart and...well, you get the point. Nintendo does know how to make quality games for us; they just haven't done it in a while. (The last Nintendo core title was PunchOut! a few months ago, and prior to that it would Mario Kart Wii...back in Spring '08? That's a year and a half ago!)
That said, I must admit that the games aren't why I don't play my Wii. The shitty online component is why it stays off. Sure, I may have to pay Microsoft for XBox Live, but at least I can see what my friends are up to, chat with them, hop into and out of games with them, meet new people, etc.
Hell, I can even cross-game chat if I want. 
ShockingAlberto
Member
Punch-Out like a few months ago.divisionbyzorro said:
Fimbulvetr
Member
Hey guys what's goin-
