-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Is the Wii a modern Teddy Ruxpin?
- Thread starter Eteric Rice
- Start date
Azelover
Titanic was called the Ship of Dreams, and it was. It really was.
Link said:
Read my edit, that's part of what I was saying. These people all have families so I think in some cases it may not be as bad, and in some the negative opinions may go in different directions. That doesn't really matter, that's my point.
Business wise it's definitely not genuine.
Eteric Rice
Member
Jokeropia said:
Also, Zack & Wiki had an indentity crisis. :lol
stuminus3 said:
I agree there's no way to prove a big time 3rd party title would flop on the Wii, there's not really any proof for it at all because nobody has decided to take the risk. If the next fully realized GTA game was Wii exclusive, it could very well be a huge smash. Based on numbers alone, it should be a huge smash. So what are the other factors on why these guys are so reluctant to pull the trigger? It's more than "oh they hate Nintendo and the Wii" this isn't high school. Its also not just a tech issue either, if there's money on the table someone will step up to take it. My theory is basically 3rd parties have no faith in the Wii audience as a whole. They see the big selling, headline grabbing games like Wii fit and Wii Sports and they think..."well Bloodstorm 19 will never sell on the Wii, look at all those grannies on the news bowling, they won't buy our game." Sometimes perception is reality, especially in business, even though the actual reality is there are tons of Wii owners starved for more conventional games.
Kilrogg said::lol
@Vinci : for a start, you could stop using the words "hardcore" and "casual" yourself if you don't like them and don't believe they're apt words. That's what I do. Like Opiate, I think they're vague... So vague in fact that they're completely meaningless.
Crap, I used the words.
SEE? You can't escape the damn things!! They just come out and you're like, "AAA damn it!"
But yeah, I"ll see if I can do it in the future.
reggieandTFE
Member
Despite the rhetoric thrown around the entire argument comes down to graphics and horsepower. It's not a surprise that the developers whining the most come out of the PC sphere and are used to pushing tech the most. It's unfortunate that instead of seeing opportunities to make creative entertainment endeavors on lesser hardware, they belittle the sales leaders. Even sadder is that this head in the sand 'core' mentality is leading these developers into the red.
Also, a most hilarious thing about the mature/'core' argument to me is that games like Gears of War aren't acknowledged being designed for the 15 year old boy in all of us. Come on, ridiculous macho posturing and absurd amounts of gore, violence, and swearing cannot hide the fact that the underlying premise is silly as shit and holds back the medium as much as Animal Crossing Redux 12.
Also, a most hilarious thing about the mature/'core' argument to me is that games like Gears of War aren't acknowledged being designed for the 15 year old boy in all of us. Come on, ridiculous macho posturing and absurd amounts of gore, violence, and swearing cannot hide the fact that the underlying premise is silly as shit and holds back the medium as much as Animal Crossing Redux 12.
Azelover
Titanic was called the Ship of Dreams, and it was. It really was.
poppabk said:
Perhaps but it's not in their interest to create a company line around them.
The paradigm perpetuated by the 360 and PS3 is the ideal one for them, even though they may dislike some aspects of those consoles, they will not extrapolate them, or even really express them, because it is not part of the interest. They may have some if not most of the opinions they expressed, but it has nothing to do with opinion really.
From the things I read, it sounds like this is exactly it. I mean, what else could that Teddy Ruxpin quote? The analogy doesn't make any sense, so it has to just be a developer bitching about how its not powerful enough for him. Seriously, has someone explained the Teddy Ruxpin quote, cause I don't follow it at all.truly101 said:
In the end, publishers decide what does and doesn't get made though. Nintendo doesn't seem up to publishing big western FPS titles, or no one has asked. I think (like you said) other publishers have just bet that the things won't sell there. Rising development costs on the HD consoles, good Wii sales of Christmas, etc. etc., For better or worse, it sounds like a few of them are going the other way now.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
What I mean is that fundamentally the game was a very complicated puzzle game, with interesting mechanics and well thought out challenges. However it was packaged as a cartoony kids game all the way down to the title and grating voice sound effects.truly101 said:
Even after IGN started pimping the game they didn't seem to be in a rush to get a publisher. They must have had a good bit of money behind them to have that luxury, but even so from all the information we have they did not "have a hard time" finding a publisher. I don't see how Sega's country of origin is relevant to that specific question.Link said:
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
truly101 said:
Won't this question be answered with Dragon Quest X? At least in Japan?
There was an interview article where they admitted that some publishers wanted to dumb down the game or scrap the main FPS gameplay altogether and just use the engine they've built to develop some mini-games or party games compilation.Fredescu said:
I think they had to pick and choose the publishers that gave them the most bang for the buck as well as making sure the gameplay they've built is still kept intact.
Gully State
Member
I forget who it was but there was somebody on gaf months ago saying that the wii would get more japanese exclusives. At the time I thought it wasn't very convincing but looking at the landscape right now, it seems like Japanese 3rd party developers are embracing the wii whereas the Western 3rd party devs still continue to ignore it. Perhaps EA will do something but I get the impression that they're just going port their 360/PS3 stuff down instead of really making something from the ground up for the wii..
Amir0x said:
I appreciate that you remember me from the Wii music thread, but I hope you'll also remember, despite your choice of the word "pimpism", that I gave up fairly quickly in trying to change anyone's mind around here.
You say that it's easier to make a game that you want to play yourself, but I would submit that that is, at most, only part of the story. Working on a minigame collection for the Wii that you have no interest could be quite rewarding and fun if: you get along with the other members of your team; your role in the game represents a meaningful part of the whole; the project manager has clear and concise goals and realistic means of attaining them; the publisher is strongly behind the project in terms of budget and general support; etc. Conversely, working on a hugely hyped, epic PS360 game in a genre you adore but where none of the above is true might be enough to make you question your career choice.
There are simply too many variables. Despite how amazing the game turned out, who knows how upset/infuriated people on the RE4 team were to hear that, for the third time in two years, most to all of their work was being scrapped in favor of another version. And I'll bet that at least someone on the Ravid Rabbits team had a good time, despite being hardcore in his gaming habits. And how many artists are stuck working on "hardcore" gray and brown shooters that would kill to be working on hardcore 2D sprite-based platformers? Who the hell knows, everything we say here is pure speculation, or sweeping generalization.
I will say it's a little insulting to imply that developers can't put their all into a game that they're not into. I'm sure I pimped in the Wii Music thread that I'm a professional musician, and part of the reason I and others get work around town is that we make sure to operate on the highest level no matter what the project. Putting preference before professionalism is a good way to never get hired again. I would think it the same for the game industry.
I would also argue against your statement that the hardcore games are the best, but then we're back into taste territory again.
But my original comment about not wanting to serve the "hardcore" demographic was based on the incredibly transparent posts going on in the KZ2 thread, where you know almost instantly whether or not each poster has a PS3 or 360. Who would want to deal with making a product for a group when so much of that group has seemingly no interest in ever giving the game a fair shake?
Bluemercury
Member
I really hope games like House of the Dead, mad world, the conduit, deadly creatures...etc...do really sell very well and make these developers shut up for good.....if you dont want to develop for it just say it....dont hide behind excuses.....
I don't think the developers are making excuses - my take of it would be more of how the perception has become the reality for these developers.Bluemercury said:
If publishers only want to build mini-games and shovelware for the Wii, developers can't do anything. If this is the perception developers have from the Wii landscape, I can see why they're so repulsed by the Wii.
Bluemercury
Member
Arde5643 said:
Well if those games sell well, Sega must be applaused for at least trying.....
Vilix said:
I don't think its a question in Japan, but the console market there has other difficulties from what I understand, general gaming boredom or burnout and the super popularity of mobile gaming seem to be the main contributors, those aren't quite present here yet, but they probably will be someday
Version 3.0
Member
I was struck by the bit about "the Wii audience is not the PS2 audience" bit. That's...delusional. The Wii audience is certainly the closest equivalent to the PS2 audience among the 3 current consoles.
I also like the "Nintendo needs to take the lead" BS. I agree that Nintendo is leaving money on the table with some decisions they've made, but copying Nintendo is absolutely not the best recipe for success on the Wii. The exact opposite is a better strategy: filling the void left by what Nintendo doesn't make.
I also like the "Nintendo needs to take the lead" BS. I agree that Nintendo is leaving money on the table with some decisions they've made, but copying Nintendo is absolutely not the best recipe for success on the Wii. The exact opposite is a better strategy: filling the void left by what Nintendo doesn't make.
Version 3.0
Member
Bluemercury said:
Here's my prediction: these games will appear to do poorly their first month (ie. they won't be part of the publicly available Top 10 NPD data). They'll be declared failures by the internet community and by any publishers paying attention--perhaps even by their own publishers. Then they'll continue to sell under the radar and turn a healthy profit.
I'd love to be wrong about this...any part other than the healthy profit they make.
Eteric Rice
Member
Leondexter said:
This is what I think is going to happen as well. Wii games just aren't front loaded like the other systems, and sell over a period of time. It happened with just about every decent third party Wii release (Boom Blox, RE4, REUC, etc).
Inflammable Slinky
Member
You know, the whole "companies hate nintendo" might be true.
You could make an argument that companies fear a dominant nintendo far far far more than any other nintendo company. Its like, they've got a history of autocracy, and they have the raw ability to follow through from a position of power.
OTher companies might just be worried that Nintendo will become a black hole consuming marketshare.
You could make an argument that companies fear a dominant nintendo far far far more than any other nintendo company. Its like, they've got a history of autocracy, and they have the raw ability to follow through from a position of power.
OTher companies might just be worried that Nintendo will become a black hole consuming marketshare.
dyls said:I appreciate that you remember me from the Wii music thread, but I hope you'll also remember, despite your choice of the word "pimpism", that I gave up fairly quickly in trying to change anyone's mind around here.
You say that it's easier to make a game that you want to play yourself, but I would submit that that is, at most, only part of the story. Working on a minigame collection for the Wii that you have no interest could be quite rewarding and fun if: you get along with the other members of your team; your role in the game represents a meaningful part of the whole; the project manager has clear and concise goals and realistic means of attaining them; the publisher is strongly behind the project in terms of budget and general support; etc. Conversely, working on a hugely hyped, epic PS360 game in a genre you adore but where none of the above is true might be enough to make you question your career choice.
There are simply too many variables. Despite how amazing the game turned out, who knows how upset/infuriated people on the RE4 team were to hear that, for the third time in two years, most to all of their work was being scrapped in favor of another version. And I'll bet that at least someone on the Ravid Rabbits team had a good time, despite being hardcore in his gaming habits. And how many artists are stuck working on "hardcore" gray and brown shooters that would kill to be working on hardcore 2D sprite-based platformers? Who the hell knows, everything we say here is pure speculation, or sweeping generalization.
I will say it's a little insulting to imply that developers can't put their all into a game that they're not into. I'm sure I pimped in the Wii Music thread that I'm a professional musician, and part of the reason I and others get work around town is that we make sure to operate on the highest level no matter what the project. Putting preference before professionalism is a good way to never get hired again. I would think it the same for the game industry.
I would also argue against your statement that the hardcore games are the best, but then we're back into taste territory again.
I would say that while you are right and I find nothing to disagree with, I do not agree that one isn't a much larger part of the picture than the other. I would rather work on something I will feel prideful about at the end of the day, even if the conditions are somewhat more difficult, because I can appreciate the product I am making. If I was working on Minigame compilation 2.0 I'd end up quitting after ten days, maybe eleven days.
But that's just my opinion... I know there are people just glad to have any job in the industry.
That doesn't mean they wouldn't greatly prefer to work on something they would actually enjoy, though they may find pride in putting out any game. I remember the people who worked on some crappy piece of shovelware writing some prideful essay about why they still are happy they were even on the game. After all...it was there first game they ever released to retail. There's some reason to be happy for that I suppose.
dyls said:
If developers were deciding to make games or not based on the fanboys, there would be no games for any system. Right now Sony fans are in the Nintendo fan position of last gen, or the Microsoft Xbox fan position of last gen. They're just sort of existing and trying to justify a purchase, and the fight goes back. But the hardcore Wii fans are the same, desperately trying to validate their choice and whining whenever a developer announces yet another big game for the HD consoles.
It's the nature of fanboys. They're all transparent. I'm pretty transparent too, at least I hope so. I'm extremely up front with my preferences. No use trying to hide that sort of thing, I always say. I have more respect for the fanboys that admit their preference and try to stay to their own corner than than for them to try to pretend to aspire to some form of objectivity. The way you view the Killzone thread I probably viewed the Wii Music thread, or an Animal Crossing topic.
Eteric Rice
Member
If I were a developer that was put on the Wii, I'd treat it like an old car. You know, see what I can get out of it? I think the guys that made Ninja Gaiden DS had the same idea.
It's kind of easy to impress people on the 360 and PS3 graphically (or at least make it acceptable looking), but not so much on the Wii. I think making something amazing looking on something older shows your talent. For instance, we used to shun the Super Mario Sunshine team. Then they made Galaxy, and now we're frothing at the mouth waiting for their next project.
It's like the guys now adays that make homebrew Atari 2600 games. Even those guys try to push as much as they can.
It's kind of easy to impress people on the 360 and PS3 graphically (or at least make it acceptable looking), but not so much on the Wii. I think making something amazing looking on something older shows your talent. For instance, we used to shun the Super Mario Sunshine team. Then they made Galaxy, and now we're frothing at the mouth waiting for their next project.
It's like the guys now adays that make homebrew Atari 2600 games. Even those guys try to push as much as they can.
You said that the developers of The Conduit had a hard time finding a publisher, which is by all accounts incorrect. Your premise is wrong, thus your conclusion is flawed. Sega obviously think there is an audience for core games on the Wii, not only because of the Conduit, but it, House of the Dead Overkill and Madworld all hitting within a few months or each other.Vdragoon said:
Responding to your edit:
I agree that many developers don't seem to want to work on the Wii, and publishers are risk averse so have trouble adapting to a quickly changing market. The Conduit, which comes from a developer who is (or at least claims to be) passionate about the Wii, and published by a company that has other core Wii games coming very soon, is not relevant to those points.Vdragoon said:
Vdragoon
Member
you obviously didn't read the interview... let me try to find it.
http://wii.ign.com/articles/949/949610p1.html
"One of the major challenges that we discovered when moving forward with the project was that most publishers we spoke to had no (zero, less than zero, terribly less than zero) interest in seeing what we could do with higher-end graphics, tight gameplay, and integrated mechanics. "The Wii is not a hardcore market," and variations on that theme were common refrains."
So, yes I am correct
http://wii.ign.com/articles/949/949610p1.html
"One of the major challenges that we discovered when moving forward with the project was that most publishers we spoke to had no (zero, less than zero, terribly less than zero) interest in seeing what we could do with higher-end graphics, tight gameplay, and integrated mechanics. "The Wii is not a hardcore market," and variations on that theme were common refrains."
So, yes I am correct
Cool, that was the article I was looking for.Vdragoon said:you obviously didn't read the interview... let me try to find it.
http://wii.ign.com/articles/949/949610p1.html
"One of the major challenges that we discovered when moving forward with the project was that most publishers we spoke to had no (zero, less than zero, terribly less than zero) interest in seeing what we could do with higher-end graphics, tight gameplay, and integrated mechanics. "The Wii is not a hardcore market," and variations on that theme were common refrains."
So, yes I am correct
Again, I think the problem isn't that publishers nor developers aren't interested in the Wii - it's more of how publishers have only shown interest to develop low budget affairs for the Wii and hence developers become averse in working for the Wii since it mostly entails working on low-end budget games.
Fair enough, they tried to pitch the idea to publishers before they had a product and got a poor response. I wasn't aware of that. Regardless of the software type it would be much easier to get a game published if you're funding the development yourself, so it's no suprise that they found it easier to find a publisher once they had a product.
Eteric Rice
Member
Link said:
Suddenly it all makes sense.
Eteric Rice said:
Actually, the problem is that it isn't easy to impress people - which is why these companies are spending such insane amounts of money developing these games in the hopes that the HD fans will jump onto their product and make it the next big thing.
My basic issue with Amirox's proposal, despite feeling it's absolutely right in how developers view the Wii and their jobs, is that it ignores innovation borne of imperfect circumstances. The whole 'make a game you'd like to play' is a good starting point for development, but what's foolish about this is that choosing the Wii as your target platform doesn't change this whatsoever. It simply becomes: "If you don't like Wii games, make a Wii game you would like to play."
I personally hate soap operas and teen dramas, but I personally would find it creatively challenging and intriguing to make myself create one or both simply to see if I could come up with something that I personally could enjoy. Basically take a market others like me have no interest in and make it compatible with our interests, creating something completely new by doing so.
This tells me that these developers - if Amirox says is true - don't have pride as creative individuals, but in merely perpetuating a market that has already reached its boundaries and doesn't show signs of growing. Of being a big fish in a small pond, rather than strike out, face some challenges, and become a big fish in a bigger pond. To me, that's what truly creative people like to do. Challenge their own indifference to something, be it a style or whatever, and create something worthwhile out of it. In essence, I'm suggesting that they lack imagination, vision, and ambition.
BUUUHUUUHUUU THE DEVELOPERS ARE NOT MAKING THE GAMES FOR THE CONSOLE I LIKE SO THEY MUST THEREFORE LACK IMAGINATION, VISION, AMBITION, MORALITY, INTELLIGENCE, JUDGMENT, TASTE, DECENCY, HYGIENE, TACT, RELIGION, LOYALTY, GRATITUDE, HONESTY, HUMOR, LEARNING, CHARITY, HUMANITY, AND SHAPELY HINDPARTS