outlawauron said:
forevercloud3000 said:
outlawauron said:
You're wrong. SMG is not using the same engine as Super Mario 64. SMG was a beautiful game and one of the most technicially impressive Wii titles. I really think you're trolling with these comments.
At bolded,  . Wondeful 101 was a gigantic flop and financial failure. It had 1.5x the budget of Bayonetta which sold far more than W101 did.
The reason why Nintendo is so successful is because their IPs sell so well. That's it. They have over 7,000 employees and yet people still think they're a meager company making games with small teams.
I also never said they produce 6 50 million titles a year (they could if they wanted to). It's just naive to think their big efforts cost less than $10 million.
|
I'm just chiming in to say this...
Nintendo has remained profitable year after year because everything they put out is at minimum breaking even out of the game and the pedigree of their franchises has their games selling millions each time.
Pokemon: this game has been chump change for NIN to make since the second game. The biggest tech evolution came with X/Y but even that couldn't have cost them that much. Regardless they series sells 8million every release. Gold mine.
Mario *insert sur-title here* are never "big budget". No matter how crafty or fun these games are, they don't cost NIN anywhere near as much as Halo does MS or Uncharted does Sony. Honestly, less than 10million is just being marginal, I imagine they are pretty cheap to make. Once again, they will sell millions regardless.
Realistically, Smash Bros probably cost them the most because with each game they actually have to retweak game mechanics and fine tune new and old characters. Zelda might also cost a lil something but not like any other game's budget in the Adventure genre.
None of this is bad mind you, quite the opposite. The fact NIN continues to pump out heavy hitters for chump change is remarkable. Other devs could learn from them. Why does it cost devs 10s of Millions to pump out a game that is barely going to break even? Concentrate less on Graphics and Evironmental Effects, more on consistantly inventive and intuitive gameplay.
|
Do you really know why games are more expensive? They need larger teams over longer periods of time. I don't see how Nintendo (with more employees than either SCE and MS Game Studios) is immune to this because the hardware they have is weaker. That really doesn't matter, you just don't have to spend as much time on the graphical aspects of development.
Is how much you change the game was directly proportional to development costs, then Assasin's Creed and Call of Duty would be some of the cheapest games ever.
|
This what You say is true... specially in this Gen..nintendo had to reform their internal studios to adapt to the HD development... something that ALL japanese developers and publishers suffered at the beginning of the gen.. they lag behind..
But that's hapenning because what Forevercloud300 said is true too... Nintendo have been with Wii and Ds producing low budget games with recycled engines from last generations are at least withuot major improvements... what Activision have been doing with COD4's Engine since 7 years ago...
But Nintendoknow that they need third party support to mantain WiiU meanwhile they develop their strong first parties... that or shorten the development time between games.. they hinted this when Skyward sword released... and with two Mario games in less than a year (+luigi's expansion) since that they are going for this after the cold reception of third aprties and customers...
BTW.. I don't think Nintendo's major titles like Zelda or Mario main serie are low budget, because long development period mean more money invested.. but I'm sure they save a lot not using voices...
