| Sheershaw said:
"I think most game creators got into the industry in the hopes of writing the next Doom or Halo or Command & Conquer," writes Victor Godinez, "and not the next Hannah Montana video game adaptation." |
I wonder: don't lots of them also want to make the next Zelda or Mario?
"So the best game makers gravitate to the consoles that seem to specialize in the kinds of games they like."
True, Gabe Newell and Will Wright do like the Wii best, amongst many others, so I suppose this is true. Bit of a non-sequitir, though.
The Wii is the least powerful of the three current consoles, and you simply cannot easily duplicate a high-end Xbox 360 or PS3 game on the Wii.
Things won't look as purdy, true. Have we sunk to the point where shiny graphics are all Western developers can do, though?
Dead Rising on the Xbox 360, for example, was fun and amazing in part because there were often hundreds of zombies on the screen at one time, each shambling toward your brain. The Wii version under development, though, is limited to a dozen or so monsters on the screen simultaneously, and the downgrade makes the game seem kind of pointless.
Can't argue with this. Dead Rising on the 360 is probably going to butcher the Wii version. Still, I'm having trouble of thinking of any other game that requires the processing power to run 1,000 enemies simultaneously, without using run-arounds.
But Nintendo chose to go down this path of less-powerful, lost-cost hardware, and one side effect of that decision is that some games simply cannot be ported over.
As opposed to last generation, when most games could be but often weren't ported over to the Gamecube. Man, I can't imagine why Nintendo didn't think about making it easier for third-parties to port stuff to their console.
The Wiire (saw this one when I was reading up on Jennifer Aniston) points out that Capcom's Seth Killian said the Dead Rising build Godinez references was really "just a tech demo," and not close to the final game. But the larger point made here is a valid one.
"Sure, the stuff I said above to prove my point isn't really true, but still listen to me because..."?
I'd love for opposing counsels to learn their brief-writing from this guy.
To demand that your underpowered console get the best of a developer's effort, otherwise they don't "get it," when they're selling tons of their best stuff on the PS3 and 360 already, that's just arrogant.
I remember when people said the same thing about the DS/PSP split.
How's that working out again?
It also ignores the tremendous incentive for others to develop lightweight titles, an incentive very much furthered by Nintendo's continuous touting of the casual market's growth."
A thousand VGChartz bucks to the man who can find a single quote about Nintendo saying this. Mind you, it fits with the pattern of the article: use half-ass logic, ignore stuff that doesn't agree with you, and arrive at your conclusion hoping that no one noticed your thesis' lack of connection with reality.
There are valid ways to make the argument that third-parties shouldn't devote their best teams to the Wii. This guy doesn't even approach making any of them.
