Are wii development costs really cheaper?

[Pristine20]

puffy said:
I read it all, and I still think that making PoP on Wii would cost less than the exact same game on a HD system because Wii simply can't handle the same amount of things on screen. It's also got a coding environment that would be quicker and easier to get a grasp on and develop for. It'd take less people thus less money for the exact same title.

It's up to the developers then if they want to put that extra cash towards marketing or if you're a dev with not a lot of cash then Wii may be your only option.

I understand what you're trying to say and the thread has done a very good job of convincing people. Yes as a whole the developer would either be able to downsize or make more games. The fact that you say you put qualifiers on your OP such as without layoffs means that you're pretty much not ready to debate this.

Wii game: less people or less hours = cheaper
HD game: more people or more hours = more expensive

So to answer the thread topic. Yes.

Then if the developer decides to go for Wii exclusive development then they can make more titles. I think it'd be stupid to go Wii only development as one post already explained, you need to diversify but the topic asks if dev costs on Wii are cheaper and I said yes they are.


I think EA have the best system right now. 50% goes to Wii, 50% goes to PS3/360. We know that to make a multiplat game for the HD consoles is only 10% more than to make it for only one of the systems. We also know that Wii titles sell better when they are high quality or exclusive. EA are launching Grand Slam Tennis exclusively for Wii this June and haven't been stingy with their money. This title has all the big names in Tennis and also has Wimbledon. They were able to spend that amount of money on an exclusive title because they didn't have to create a huge amount of High Definition character models and textures and because they didn't have to code for audience movements and sweat and all these little 'HD console extras'. If they were making Grand Slam Tennis a 360 exclusive with perfect character models and all the licencing, how much would you expect it to cost them?

Tiger Woods PGA Tour 10.. Wii is the lead console. It STILL probably costs less for them to make that title compared with the HD game.


So is it cheaper to develop for only the DS? Is it cheaper to develop only for the PS3? Only for 360? Only for PSP?

 

If you understood the points we were making before, you'll know that HD provides FLEXIBILITY. No one is forced to release max graphics...it's a CHOICE devs make knowing the lengthy dev times and thus cost that follows. So exactly why can't the game be made with max wii graphics (i.e less particles) and released on PS360 anyway? It's the ideology thats the problem here. Making multiple Petz games for wii is not the solution, I'd reiterate

The point here is that no console is intrinsically more expensive to develop for. It's all about how devs choose to ration their resources. If GTAIV had been a wii game, it'll probably still cost over 70 million dollars because I don't see anything too special about the graphics and it's most costly component was marketing by far (which would be constant for any game on any system). It's just like how wii fit is cheap on paper but with the amount of advertising it still gets, I won't be surprised if it actually costs as much as killzone 2 by now.