• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Third Party Wii Games

ksamedi

Member
Sep 7, 2006
5,854
0
1,290
Rotterdam
schuelma said:
To seriously answer the question, I think the only somewhat feasible strategy for 3rd parties oddly enough is to put its biggest IP's on the Wii and treat those games as equal to its HD counterparts as possible.

By and large the best selling 3rd party games are from recognized brands. Activision should have CoD Wii same day with PS360 every single year. Capcom should have RE6 Wii at the same time as PS360. EA should treat Madden Wii more how it treats Tiger instead of changing the formula every single year. SEGA will be committing gaming malpractice if Project Needlemouse isn't on the Wii. And so on.

As for original IP's and spinoffs..don't even bother- that's a graveyard.

But people don't buy the Wii for these big third party titles. They know HD machines are much better machines for these experiences. Wii owners buy the Wii because they want something unique. Third parties should push and spend money on their Wii titles I agree, but these titles should be system seller caliber and that can only be done on Wii by bringing something unique to the table.
 

Taurus

Member
Dec 3, 2006
3,195
0
0
The land of hope and glory
Bisnic said:
You have to put Mario and/or Link in every Wii exclusives if you want good sales imo.

Make a VS. Capcom game called "Nintendo VS. Capcom" with Nintendo characters of course, and the sales will be 1000x higher than Tatsunoko VS Capcom.
notsureifserious.gif

We know that Nintendo titles have less than 50 percent share of the whole Wii market, which means that 3rd parties have over 50 percent share. I'll bet my left nut that none of those 3rd party games have neither Mario nor Link in them.
 

Zachack

Member
Jun 9, 2004
2,170
0
0
Chris1964 said:
There are average titles that have sold way more than they should and average titles that have sold less than they should.
Examples? Is there a trend? Does the pattern from early 2007 still hold in early 2010?
And what's the budget for these average titles comparing to HD average titles?
Do you know? Most of the numbers/fractions that get bandied around come from the beginning of the generation, and the marketing percentage is often unclear.
 

fabprems

Member
Mar 1, 2006
752
0
0
schuelma said:
Activision should have CoD Wii same day with PS360 every single year. Capcom should have RE6 Wii at the same time as PS360. EA should treat Madden Wii more how it treats Tiger instead of changing the formula every single year. SEGA will be committing gaming malpractice if Project Needlemouse isn't on the Wii. And so on.

I don't understand (apart the bullshit between treyarch and infinity ward) how Activision didn't get their shit right the way they did with the Guitar Hero franchise ...
 

ymmv

Banned
Mar 17, 2007
6,485
0
0
Amsterdam, NL
JohnnyPanda said:
How about learning that spinoff =/= core game in a series? On Bonus Round you cited poor sales of DS:E and RE: DC as signs that the hardcore market just isn't there on Wii, but seriously, how well would lightgun spinoffs sell on the HD consoles? Would Castlevania: Judgement have sold any better? What about that Soulcalibur game that nobody cared about?

There's a reason RE4 sold gangbusters on Wii and that's because it was a quality game that fit the platform well. It boggles the mind how few developers and publishers understand this and instead thinking that there is no place for M-rated content on the console.

RE4 sold gangbusters because for almost a year it was one of the few games worth having on the platform. When I got a Wii in early 2007 the only titles that had received high scores from the gaming press were RE4 and Zelda. Nintendo hadn't yet released MP3, SMG, SMK or SSB so Capcom was able to sell a lot of copies of a repackaged GC game because there wasn't that much competition from Nintendo at that point.
 

schuelma

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.
Feb 11, 2007
21,699
1
0
nipponsalesage.blogspot.com
ksamedi said:
But people don't buy the Wii for these big third party titles. They know HD machines are much better machines for these experiences. Wii owners buy the Wii because they want something unique. Third parties should push and spend money on their Wii titles I agree, but these titles should be system seller caliber and that can only be done on Wii by bringing something unique to the table.


But most of the 3rd party successes are from well known IP's. CoD:WaW has outsold the Conduit like six times over. Reflex will probably end up doing something similar. Guitar Hero/Rock Band have succeeded. Madden does surprisingly well considering its limitations.

Yes, in a perfect world for Nintendo 3rd parties would be creating unique, high budget, AAA games specifically designed for the Wii. That ain't happening.
 

Chatin

Member
Dec 6, 2008
935
0
0
Gamers don't buy the Wii for niche experiences. They buy the Wii because they know that they are guaranteed excellent games from Nintendo.

Nintendo's name is synonymous with quality. Developers like Ubisoft can't say the same thing because they throw out so much trash. They are the ones that really need the marketing so that gamers know which games aren't complete trash.

Sega has done pretty well on the Wii considering how far their quality has dropped since their Dreamcast days.
 

Taurus

Member
Dec 3, 2006
3,195
0
0
The land of hope and glory
captmcblack said:
You need to make good games that can fit cleanly into the types of genres that are/have historically been popular in the US/the world. Platformers, FPSes, fighting games, racing games, action/adventure games...things like that.

Rail-shooters, point-and-click adventure games, shoot-em-ups, quirky Japanese games, puzzle games, et al...while those can be (and have been) very good games, those aren't going to be the games that set the US marketplace on fire, and they never will.

You need to design them with real effort. Maybe you don't have to code to the metal anymore, but the game should be able to look and sound better than PS2 games. There is no excuse for games to look like games from 2001 in 2010.

You need to put your better teams behind those games. Why can't EA's top teams make games like their HD counterparts on the Wii? Why couldn't Ubi's? Why can't Activision's?

You need to show real faith in them, and provide legit advertising/marketing support. They put real muscle behind advertising even unknown things like Borderlands and Darksiders, and those were untested new IPs. When something like Red Steel 2 or No More Heroes 2 comes out, are they going to blanket the airwaves and magazines/stores with ads for them?

You need to avoid making "test games" or late ports of things. No, you are not going to sell boatloads of Call of Duty: MW1 Reflex on Wii when it is a port of a 3-year old game that isn't even being advertised. No one cares anymore. No, you aren't going to sell boatloads of Dead Space: Extraction when it is a late spinoff railshooter version of a not-so-popular, relatively new/unknown game franchise that didn't even do good numbers when it was a new game on HD consoles. It will especially not do well when it isn't advertised either.

Third parties want to sell Crystal Chronicles on Wii, and both the casuals and hardcore only really care about real Final Fantasy. I bet you if Versus XIII came out on Wii, it'd sell a fuckload. In fact, I bet you if even FF XII International was ported to Wii, it'd sell better than Crystal Chronicles. Just show some effort and goodwill towards the Wii consumer base, and it will probably respond.
I think someone in the game industry should hire you now, you are making way too much sense.
 

dolemite

Member
Oct 21, 2007
3,201
0
0
Deutschland
Chris1964 said:
And what's the budget for these average titles comparing to HD average titles?
Why make a big budget Wii title and risk a studio closure when it's a far greater risk of drowning in cash from making a Just Dance game.
 

Lonely1

Unconfirmed Member
Jul 20, 2009
16,360
1
30
Mexcio City
ksamedi said:
But people don't buy the Wii for these big third party titles. They know HD machines are much better machines for these experiences. Wii owners buy the Wii because they want something unique. Third parties should push and spend money on their Wii titles I agree, but these titles should be system seller caliber and that can only be done on Wii by bringing something unique to the table.
For what is worth, there's over 300k entries on the MWR board, now take into account the numbers of wiis that never go online. Not bad for a non-advertised with zero pre-release hype 2-years-late-full-price port.
 
Mar 10, 2005
50,827
5
0
www.theimrankhan.com
Taurus said:
notsureifserious.gif

We know that Nintendo titles have less than 50 percent share of the whole Wii market, which means that 3rd parties have over 50 percent share. I'll bet my left nut that none of those 3rd party games have neither Mario nor Link in them.
Mario vs. Sonic does!

One left nut please.
 

Indyana

Member
Sep 18, 2009
711
0
0
Stumpokapow said:
that's sort of a silly way to look at it.

the problem isn't with B-tier titles getting B-tier sales, it's with B-tier titles getting D-tier sales. people spend too much time blaming Wii developers and publishers for not making AAA games and not enough time looking at the fact that the vast majority of games on any system aren't AAA; B-tier games apparently did just fine on PS2 and apparently do just fine on PS3/360, so what's different about the Wii?
I think there are three problems:

- Opiate's umbrella games theory.

- Third parties treating Wii owner like a second tier or just dumb.

- A large chunk of the Wii market doesn't know most of those games exist.
 

Mariah Carey

Member
Mar 14, 2007
1,796
0
0
Customers can tell when they're being jerked around.

When they see that colon at the end of "Resident Evil:" they know it's "Not a Resident Evil." They see that colon at the end of "Final Fantasy:" and they know it's "Not a Final Fantasy." Also while I don't think there's anything wrong wtih big heads or cartoony looks in themselves, when the Wii version of the game is the only one that looks like that it's just another indicator that we're not getting The Real Thing.

It's like a record label feeding the market nothing but live albums, remix collections, and EPs and wondering why they're not selling like studio albums. People want The Real Thing. If companies stop treating people like second-class customers they'll stop giving companies second-class sales.
 

Zachack

Member
Jun 9, 2004
2,170
0
0
ksamedi said:
But people don't buy the Wii for these big third party titles. They know HD machines are much better machines for these experiences. Wii owners buy the Wii because they want something unique. Third parties should push and spend money on their Wii titles I agree, but these titles should be system seller caliber and that can only be done on Wii by bringing something unique to the table.
So basically 3rd parties have to out-Nintendo Nintendo? Because that's what you're arguing, since not even Nintendo can reliably do what you're proposing.
I don't understand (apart the bullshit between treyarch and infinity ward) how Activision didn't get their shit right the way they did with the Guitar Hero franchise ...
Because it's much, much easier to port GH than CoD.
 

Meatwad

Member
Jun 6, 2004
165
0
0
Sorry to say TVC is going to bomb. It's a 2D fighter with half it's cast comprised of obscure anime characters and ?What's a Tatsunoko?? It's also launching alongside Mass Effect 2 and as a "hardcore" Wii owner who also owns a 360 and only has cash for one game I'm going with ME. Sorry Capcom.
 

donny2112

Member
Apr 18, 2005
18,797
1
1,590
Et tu, Michael?

michaelpachter said:
Given that NeoGAF is a hard core site, I'm curious to hear your spin. What should publishers do?

Plan to support Wii 2/HD/+ fully from launch. They've pretty much ruined their chances of reaching the Wii-specific audience in a crossover fashion, because they almost totally passed up any attempt to build a more core-centric audience on Wii in the first place. PS2 had the core titles that spilled over into drawing in some non-core players because they already owned the system. This gen, most pubishers totally eschewed the Wii for core game, and there is very little of a non-core audience on PS360 to crossover to. The Wii non-core users only really have Nintendo titles to crossover to, and it's too late in this generation for all publishers to sink significant dollars into trying to build an audience on Wii. Some publishers hedged their bets all along (e.g. Activision), so they're not as far out (despite yoy declines on COD Wii) as others. However, as a whole, it's a lesson for the industry to fully support the next Nintendo system (and all the others) from launch.

Thanks for the stats! :)
 

ksamedi

Member
Sep 7, 2006
5,854
0
1,290
Rotterdam
schuelma said:
But most of the 3rd party successes are from well known IP's. CoD:WaW has outsold the Conduit like six times over. Reflex will probably end up doing something similar. Guitar Hero/Rock Band have succeeded. Madden does surprisingly well considering its limitations.

Yes, in a perfect world for Nintendo 3rd parties would be creating unique, high budget, AAA games specifically designed for the Wii. That ain't happening.

Yes I agree those titles did well but relative to other consoles those games sold bad. Your last sentence kind of nails what is needed for Wii from third parties and also how the reality of the situation is. It won't happen but in the meanwhile a lot of money is lost because of it.
 

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
May 21, 2006
17,232
4
0
Chris1964 said:
There are average titles that have sold way more than they should and average titles that have sold less than they should. And what's the budget for these average titles comparing to HD average titles?

wouldn't the answers to these questions probably be reflected in the kind of ongoing support and comments publishers make about supporting the wii / ps3 / 360?
 

teeny

Member
Nov 29, 2009
1,568
0
0
UK
dolemite said:
Why make a big budget Wii title and risk a studio closure when it's a far greater risk of drowning in cash from making a Just Dance game.

No studio is going to close down based on a Wii game, big budget or not. The fact is flops on the HD twins have been causing studios to close and publishers to tighten their belts for a good long while now. The lesser risk would be to release the same games on the Wii platform, considerring there was an audience there for them.

Now, I think most people have been scared off, considerring all they have had to buy for ages are Nintendo games, niche stuff and shit.
 

schuelma

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.
Feb 11, 2007
21,699
1
0
nipponsalesage.blogspot.com
ksamedi said:
Yes I agree those titles did well but relative to other consoles those games sold bad. Your last sentence kind of nails what is needed for Wii from third parties and also how the reality of the situation is. It won't happen but in the meanwhile a lot of money is lost because of it.

Yes, relative to the HD twins they didn't do so hot..but relative to like 90% of Wii 3rd party games they did excellent, and I think a downgraded CoD port is a much much better bet than a CoD onrails spinoff.
 

Boney

Banned
Jan 6, 2010
33,742
1
0
M°°nblade said:
They should concentrate on developing less but higher budget unisex casual games for the Wii.

This! Nintendo has boasted many times of it's nearly 50/50 split between genders. Use both markets, don¡t segregate them.
 

JADS

Member
Jan 20, 2007
1,234
0
0
The conclusion I draw from this is that the Wii audience is far more casual and harder to reach than the PS3 or 360 audiences (pretty obvious), and they buy brand name software (with "Wii" or "Mario" in the title, or with a TV/product tie-in). The only titles that don't fit this are Deca Sports and Game Party. The average selling price of third party titles says a lot, coming in almost $7 below the average for all Wii titles, and almost $18 below first party titles. There were a lot of units sold with the word "party" in the title at $20 or less.

First of all, would you mind giving us your definition of a casual game? The term is being thrown around quite a lot, yet no one seems to be able to give a clear definition of the term.

In certain genres, yes the hd-twins are easier to predict. My question is would a game like New Super Mario Brothers have sold as well on the XBOX360 and PS3 as it did on the Wii? Most publishers think that the so called HD-twins are easy to target, yet why is it that we only see certain genres (like FPS's and action adventure games) in the NPD platform top 10? In my opinion the Wii isn't hard to target, it's just that publishers don't know how to target a wider market yet. The market for HD-twins isn't wide and that's why it is so easy to predict. The Wii market however is wide with several new demographics (Females and People over 40 for example) and that skews the picture quite a bit.

There is one company that doesn't seem to have any problem targeting the Wii. Nintendo is profiting greatly from the situation they are in. Yes, there have been a few flops like Excite Bikes but the rest are doing well. As you said yourself advertisement plays a large role into getting a game to sell on the Wii, but I think it's not only advertisement that makes game sell on the Wii. It's the way how Nintendo sells there game on the Wii that earns them success. Have a look at how Nintendo advertises her games, we see people playing a game, young and old, male and female, your ordinary family all having a great time. It's actually quite interesting to see that the player (You) plays the biggest role in most commercials aired by Nintendo, accessibility of games is the biggest point.. Let's compare this to a game like Assassins Creed Two; we don't see any player interaction, focus on graphics and overall a gritty theme going on.
 

Celine

Member
Oct 4, 2009
12,720
296
1,155
donny2112 said:
Plan to support Wii 2/HD/+ fully from launch. They've pretty much ruined their chances of reaching the Wii-specific audience in a crossover fashion, because they almost totally passed up any attempt to build a more core-centric audience on Wii in the first place. PS2 had the core titles that spilled over into drawing in some non-core players because they already owned the system. This gen, most pubishers totally eschewed the Wii for core game, and there is very little of a non-core audience on PS360 to crossover to. The Wii non-core users only really have Nintendo titles to crossover to, and it's too late in this generation for all publishers to sink significant dollars into trying to build an audience on Wii. Some publishers hedged their bets all along (e.g. Activision), so they're not as far out (despite yoy declines on COD Wii) as others. However, as a whole, it's a lesson for the industry to fully support the next Nintendo system (and all the others) from launch.

Thanks for the stats! :)

That's my suggestion too.
 
Mar 10, 2005
50,827
5
0
www.theimrankhan.com
Do people expect Wii 2 to have third party support from the beginning?

The public whinging about the Wii right now is to give them a soft padding against investors when their Wii 2 launch games are Rabbids Party 6, Walk With Me 3, and Resident Evil Quiz.
 

teeny

Member
Nov 29, 2009
1,568
0
0
UK
Stumpokapow said:
is this true

Firstly, name me a company that has closed down / shrunk due to investing into Wii software.

Then compare that list to the likes of GRIN, Factor 5, Free Radical, EA ect ect ect.

Im trying to google the list for you now.
 

andycapps

Member
Dec 20, 2006
30,585
0
0
Columbus, OH
Just chiming in here, but I think the key is like the OP, Mr. Pachter said, is quality and marketing. You can't put a quality product out there and not push it, or it's being sent to die. Ideally, a well made game that is marketed well and maybe even with partnership from Nintendo would be the best case scenario.
 

schuelma

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.
Feb 11, 2007
21,699
1
0
nipponsalesage.blogspot.com
Stumpokapow said:
wouldn't the answers to these questions probably be reflected in the kind of ongoing support and comments publishers make about supporting the wii / ps3 / 360?


That seems kind of simplistic and assumes that 3rd party developers and publishers always do the right thing financially.
 

Taurus

Member
Dec 3, 2006
3,195
0
0
The land of hope and glory
dolemite said:
Why make a big budget Wii title and risk a studio closure when it's a far greater risk of drowning in cash from making a Just Dance game.
Who the hell does his business so that a single success/failure decide's the fate of the entire studio? Few points to you:

1) Developing for Wii is cheaper than HD consoles.
2) The Wii market is huge, there's a lot of money on the table and it's all up to you how to grab it.
3) Almost every 3rd party's business model on the HD consoles is flawed; they aren't making enough money, or making money at all.

Did you know that Just Dance has one of the biggest marketing campaigns from Ubisoft for their Wii games? Oh my god, lot of marketing = good sales. Who would have known?
 

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
May 21, 2006
17,232
4
0
teeny said:
Firstly, name me a company that has closed down / shrunk due to investing into Wii software.

no because that's not my point

Then compare that list to the likes of GRIN, Factor 5, Free Radical, EA ect ect ect.

in order:
rapid overexpansion followed by THREE simultaneous bombs

got dropped like a sack of shit by two publishers simultaneously, one of which went busto and owed them a bunch of money

had a bomb followed by having a project yanked away from them followed by spending six months working on a pitch that no publishers bit on; didn't close down or shrink, got bought out

and i'm not even sure why you mentioned ea... i guess you meant pandemic, who have had a 6+ year record of consistent underperformance and bombs and didn't close down, they were forcibly closed by ea who are closing studios across the board regardless of focus including their internal casual studio?
 

kame-sennin

Member
Jun 11, 2007
7,617
0
935
www.bluepeppercomics.com
michaelpachter said:
What should publishers do?

They should try and understand what the Wii audience buys beyond a simple correlative analysis which, with all due respect, is all you've presented above and the only thing I've heard from high level executives. What we've seen from third parties this gen is a thorough understanding of the 'what' and a complete dismissal of the 'why'. Games with "Wii", "Party", "Sports", and "Fit" sold well, so third parties preceded to ape those games and mostly failed. But they only understood 'what' was selling. They didn't look at why those games sold what they sold. Moreover, I don't think a causal analysis is likely to be forthcoming from publishers because they simply don't view Wii's most popular games as quality. If they think Wii Sports and Wii Fit are crap games, they're not going to be in a good position to understand what attracts customers to those games. And if they can't do that, it's also unlikely that they'll be able to understand the customer who buys those games.

Whenever a thread like this comes up, there is always a flood of Nintendo fans shouting, "make QUALITY games and advertise them!" Third parties respond by making Dead Space: Extraction and putting banners up on Gametrailers. This is a classic example of the customer/producer disconnect. The customer is often incapable of articulating what it is they want (it's not their job to do so). All they're really saying is, "make games I want and tell me about them." This however, does not help publishers because as I mentioned above, they do not understand what these customers want. Or, to put it more accurately, they do not understand the metrics by which the Wii audience defines "quality".
 

schuelma

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.
Feb 11, 2007
21,699
1
0
nipponsalesage.blogspot.com
ShockingAlberto said:
Do people expect Wii 2 to have third party support from the beginning?

The public whinging about the Wii right now is to give them a soft padding against investors when their Wii 2 launch games are Rabbids Party 6, Walk With Me 3, and Resident Evil Quiz.


I think Nintendo should have more leverage and influence than when they were launching off the GameCube, but I am skeptical that 3rd parties will be that on board- if the only lesson they are taking from their Wii software failures is that its all the audience's fault things probably won't change.

Of course, things would be a lot easier for Nintendo if their next system launches with comparable specs-that's the #1 factor IMO to the Wii not getting quality 3rd party support.
 

gerg

Member
Dec 6, 2008
7,278
0
0
ShockingAlberto said:
Do people expect Wii 2 to have third party support from the beginning?

The public whinging about the Wii right now is to give them a soft padding against investors when their Wii 2 launch games are Rabbids Party 6, Walk With Me 3, and Resident Evil Quiz.

It depends, especially on how much Nintendo can change its third-party strategy.

The biggest step would be for Nintendo to design and release a graphically competitive console. It wouldn't then surprise me if any attempts that Nintendo would make towards attracting third parties would be significantly more effective than any they could have made this generation.
 

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
May 21, 2006
17,232
4
0
schuelma said:
That seems kind of simplistic and assumes that 3rd party developers and publishers always do the right thing financially.

well it's either we have no data and we assume that the gaf posters who want a given console to win are right or we have no data and we assume that the publishers who have data but don't always make optimal decisions are right

i think the suspension of disbelief stretches when after 3 years we're still operating on the assumption that publishers must be consistently running headlong in the wrong direction

edit: alternatively, assume that every publisher who claims "boy, we're having trouble with this whole wii thing so we're not really going to try anymore" (or not in so many words) is dead wrong. assume that there's a goldmine of sales if only they got it.

that's all fine and good for those of us who like following sales per se; but for the 99% of the audience of this discussion who care about sales in terms of future support, what does it matter? it's clear that the way publishers have pieces the puzzle together, they're not apt to give much future support for the wii.

so as far as games go; if you're not happy with the wii, it ain't gonna change. if you are happy with the wii, hopefully you will be in the future because it ain't likely to improve and i suspect there'll be a relative ebb in support.
 

ksamedi

Member
Sep 7, 2006
5,854
0
1,290
Rotterdam
Lonely1 said:
For what is worth, there's over 300k entries on the MWR board, now take into account the numbers of wiis that never go online. Not bad for a non-advertised with zero pre-release hype 2-years-late-full-price port.

I'm not saying that there's not a market for these (meaning traditional core) titles on the Wii. There is a market but that market is a lot smaller than on the HD platforms because those are the platforms these games are designer for (and vice versa, HD platforms are designed for these types of experiences).

I guess my point is that the Wii made it possible for video game entertainment to reach the next level. I remember the first E3 of Wii's unveiling. It was unbelievable how everyone ran towards the Wii booths and skipping PS3 altogether. It was a completely new experience that everyone wanted to try out. 4 years later, only Nintendo has partially lived up to this potential really. Third parties completely missed the boat and now they try to figure out how to make a good profit like in the PS1/PS2 days.
 

Road

Member
Jan 21, 2008
7,602
0
0
Brazil
sites.google.com
gerg said:
Because finding different definitions might help facilitate discussion?

In any case, by Pachter's own figures suggest that 45 million third-party games were sold in 2009. How does this compare to the PS3 and the 360, or are we going to be talking about a smaller percentage of a bigger pie again?
According to Matt from Gamasutra, 53 million games were sold for the 360 and 33 million for the PS3 last year.

There must have been some 3 million for games with "Halo" in the title alone last year (I don't know what else MS published without researching), so it's possible the 360 had the no. 1 third party sales in units in 2009.
 

teeny

Member
Nov 29, 2009
1,568
0
0
UK
Stumpokapow said:
no because that's not my point



in order:
rapid overexpansion followed by THREE simultaneous bombs

got dropped like a sack of shit by two publishers simultaneously, one of which went busto and owed them a bunch of money

had a bomb followed by having a project yanked away from them followed by spending six months working on a pitch that no publishers bit on; didn't close down or shrink, got bought out

and i'm not even sure why you mentioned ea... i guess you meant pandemic, who have had a 6+ year record of consistent underperformance and bombs and didn't close down, they were forcibly closed by ea who are closing studios across the board regardless of focus including their internal casual studio?

You ask me if it is true, then proceed to explain those systems closures in relation to bombs that they have had. I know there are many factors regarding the closures, and I also know we cannot predict what would have happened had they developed for the Wii instead.

However, had they not sunk so much of their time and money into the two other consoles, I am confident that some of the other problems would have not been so severe.
 

Lonely1

Unconfirmed Member
Jul 20, 2009
16,360
1
30
Mexcio City
ksamedi said:
Yes I agree those titles did well but relative to other consoles those games sold bad. Your last sentence kind of nails what is needed for Wii from third parties and also how the reality of the situation is. It won't happen but in the meanwhile a lot of money is lost because of it.
They also got bad support and distribution. The stores around me were convinced that WaW for Wii didn't existed until about 3 weeks after launch. And MWR... the first media and previews we got from the game were from pirates a few days before the official release. Despite that, they sold.
 

schuelma

Wastes hours checking old Famitsu software data, but that's why we love him.
Feb 11, 2007
21,699
1
0
nipponsalesage.blogspot.com
Stumpokapow said:
well it's either we have no data and we assume that the gaf posters who want a given console to win are right or we have no data and we assume that the publishers who have data but don't always make optimal decisions are right

i think the suspension of disbelief stretches when after 3 years we're still operating on the assumption that publishers must be consistently running headlong in the wrong direction

Fair enough, but I don't think we should just assume that 3rd parties are 100% "right". They may feel that they have no choice given how heavily they invested in HD development, but that doesn't mean its objectively the "correct" decision to continue to ignore a userbase of 50 million +.

Now, that's not to say gaf posters are 100% either and its certainly not as easy as many of us make it out to be..but I just think there is a danger in just assuming that 3rd parties must be going about things completely the right way when they've shown a great ability to screw up a lot this gen.
 

Celine

Member
Oct 4, 2009
12,720
296
1,155
BTW Michael was the First Party/Third Party ratio on DS similar to the Wii one in 09 ?
 

gerg

Member
Dec 6, 2008
7,278
0
0
dolemite said:
here's one example:

source

Not to really debate your point, but I thought that a large portion of Ubisoft's drop in profits in "casual software" came from the "correction" of the DS' software market. (Their words, not mine.)

schuelma said:
Fair enough, but I don't think we should just assume that 3rd parties are 100% "right". They may feel that they have no choice given how heavily they invested in HD development, but that doesn't mean its objectively the "correct" decision to continue to ignore a userbase of 50 million +.

How do we define "correct"? I presume we're using the metric of profit, yes? In which case, I think it may very well be the "correct" decision for third-parties to ignore a 50 million+ user base.

Now, that's not to say gaf posters are 100% either and its certainly not as easy as many of us make it out to be..but I just think there is a danger in just assuming that 3rd parties must be going about things completely the right way when they've shown a great ability to screw up a lot this gen.

Sure. But let's not create a dichotomy between always doing everything wrong and always doing everything right.
 

thefro

Member
May 14, 2006
17,455
1
0
ShockingAlberto said:
Do people expect Wii 2 to have third party support from the beginning?

Certainly from the Japanese side of things.

I suspect Iwata will have some 3rd party franchises popular in Japan lined up. Kinda similar to how the last half of 2009 was for Wii in Japan.
 

teeny

Member
Nov 29, 2009
1,568
0
0
UK
dolemite said:
here's one example:

source

Quoting from the article:

French publisher Ubisoft has revised its financial outlook off the back of poor DS sales contributing to a 50 per cent drop in its casual business, and under-performing titles such as James Cameron's Avatar: The Game.

I said:

Firstly, name me a company that has closed down / shrunk due to investing into Wii software.
 

ksamedi

Member
Sep 7, 2006
5,854
0
1,290
Rotterdam
kame-sennin said:
They should try and understand what the Wii audience buys beyond a simple correlative analysis which, with all due respect, is all you've presented above and the only thing I've heard from high level executives. What we've seen from third parties this gen is a thorough understanding of the 'what' and a complete dismissal of the 'why'. Games with "Wii", "Party", "Sports", and "Fit" sold well, so third parties preceded to ape those games and mostly failed. But they only understood 'what' was selling. They didn't look at why those games sold what they sold. Moreover, I don't think a causal analysis is likely to be forthcoming from publishers because they simply don't view Wii's most popular games as quality. If they think Wii Sports and Wii Fit are crap games, they're not going to be in a good position to understand what attracts customers to those games. And if they can't do that, it's also unlikely that they'll be able to understand the customer who buys those games.

Whenever a thread like this comes up, there is always a flood of Nintendo fans shouting, "make QUALITY games and advertise them!" Third parties respond by making Dead Space: Extraction and putting banners up on Gametrailers. This is a classic example of the customer/producer disconnect. The customer is often incapable of articulating what it is they want (it's not their job to do so). All they're really saying is, "make games I want and tell me about them." This however, does not help publishers because as I mentioned above, they do not understand what these customers want. Or, to put it more accurately, they do not understand the metrics by which the Wii audience defines "quality".

Excellent post, as usual.