WereKitten said:
Most developers? Is that why they are flocking to develop for the Wii like there's no tomorrow? Oh, no, wait. They are not "because they're pigheaded". What EA, Activision, Take Two have admitted is that diversification is healthy. That's what any financial promoter will tell you when building a stock portfolio. Look at EA. Are they porting Dead Space to the Wii? No, they are making an on-rail game. As I said, playing it safe because other on-rail shooters sold well enough on the Wii. Their other project? A tennis game. Look at Capcom. Did they make the necessary investment when porting Dead Rising? No, they went with low-budget and a recycled engine because it was risky. Did they include the Wii when developing RE5? No, they used a common engine on 360 and PS3 and they announced a new on-rail shooter on the Wii. Face the facts: these developers are not sure that they can get their investment back if they develop mature, AAA games on the Wii. You can tell each other that the costs are lower and that they are stupid, but I doubt any of you has access to more statistics, cost projections and risk assessments than those "pigheaded" developers.
That said, what has "powerful enough" in the context of toolchain convergence and cost saving to do with your statement: "I'd say it's not developing for the top selling, and less expensive to develop for, system is being justified here. It's just being pig-headed that's making developers still see HD development as default." I read it. It said the same things I read many times in the past. |
Actually, developers like Activision have stated that the Wii is their biggest bread winner. The flocking to the Wii has already begun, and will continue to move in that direction.
Again, Activision for one has stated that the Wii is now their priority.
http://shanepeters.deviantart.com/
Achievement is its own reward, pride only obscures.
HATING OPHELIA- Coming soon from Markosia Comics!
