By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - *Where Would Gaming Be If Wii Failed?*

Kasz216 said:

I don't actually... but now you know.

Third party games do perform better on the Wii then the HD consoles.

Wii games were selling less and making profits, HD games were selling more and bankrupting their developers. 

This is less of a problem now due to enough time being put in graphically to in general make things cheaper (as happens in every generation) but if it hadn't been for the Wii to start out...

there would of been some SERIOUS problems... and serious crashes of companies.

yeah.....bullshit, your gonna have to show me alot more than a link from ubisoft (who is far from small) to support that claim. I bet every one you do find it's becasue of the developers own fault, poor resource management,shit game, etc.

but SERIOUS problems...yeah keep your own made up (until proven otherwise) FUD to yourself.



Around the Network
evolution_1ne said:
Kasz216 said:
 

I don't actually... but now you know.

Third party games do perform better on the Wii then the HD consoles.

Wii games were selling less and making profits, HD games were selling more and bankrupting their developers. 

This is less of a problem now due to enough time being put in graphically to in general make things cheaper (as happens in every generation) but if it hadn't been for the Wii to start out...

there would of been some SERIOUS problems... and serious crashes of companies.

yeah.....bullshit, your gonna have to show me alot more than a link from ubisoft (who is far from small) to support that claim. I bet every one you do find it's becasue of the developers own fault, poor resource management,shit game, etc.

but SERIOUS problems...yeah keep your own made up (until proven otherwise) FUD to yourself.

So in otherwords "Show me more proof that I will pretend doesn't matter anyway."

Cognitive Dissonance much?

 

Also, you know... that's exactly the problem.  ANYONE can make a shit game.   If ONE shit game can end you as a company... you are pretty much screwed.  Hence why the Wii basically saved... large swaths of the gaming Industry.  If it wasn't for the Wii, those who did surived would of went conservative.  Basically making SD games on the HD systems.

Free Radical went down because of Haze... they made some very popular games and some unpopular ones... and one HD game ended them.

Even great selling games don't gurantee profit though.  Afterall Rockstar didn't make money the year Grand Theft Auto released.

I mean, you can believe what you want and what will "help you sleep at night", but it won't change the obvious reality that existed. 



dtewi said:
theprof00 said:
dtewi said:

Graphics would become the main feature of the typical game, Sony and MS would be playing t3h graphix warz instead of t3h casual warz, then the gaming industry would collapse in 2020 when the PS5 and Xbox1080 release for around $1000 each.

despite the fact that most generation consoles have released for very similar price points, you make that leap to 1000$ like Sony didn't learn its lesson one year into this generation.

Game consoles would not have become 1000$, and it wouldn't become the graphics wars because at the level this generation is at, future generations aren't going to be ABLE to have a significant leap in graphics. Innovative gameplay and expansion will always take the primary foundation, just as Battlefield and COD have taken control of the HD market. You might argue that those games are teh awsum grapfx, but they are very innovative games; FPS with an RPG kind of slant with leveling and abilities.

Additionally, there would still be an iPhone, and market expansion would still occur, so,

tl;dr

I very much disagree with your comment.


Sarcasm is just one of the many services that I offer.

Sarcasm: some people don't catch it even when it's blatantly obvious.



Above: still the best game of the year.

I read through this entire thread. All the plausible hypotheticals have been brought up.

I agree, there would be more than a few 3rd party developers going under. Good. Great. Excellent.

The fat needs to be trimmed in my opinion. Certain 3rd party developers such as id Software who have not developed a game since Doom 3 in 2004, just need to die. I don't care what you and Romero did in the 1990s, I don't want to listen to your 50th interview on how you guys created the FPS genre, and frankly, I would giggle a little inside if you guys went the way of Westwood Studios.

Studios like id Software in the West are equivalent to Yoshio Sakamoto in Japan. 10 to 20 years ago they were the bleeding edge, created huge hits, created sequels, created another round of sequels, 6 year development hiatus, and 6 years later they are releasing a new IP. Romero, Carmack and all of id Software are the old lions who need to bow out now with dignity and make way for the new lions or stay their ground and finish their career like Brett Favre.

Honestly, I want the latter. I want 3rd party studios like id Software to embarass themselves and go out like an old man comes out during sex. A whole lot of waiting and disappointing packages.

I am in the camp that if you look at the indie games on Xbox Live and PSN, there is far more talent there right now than in celebrated studios like id Software. Give these guys a chance because they are hungry, are just as talented, and demand a whole lot less in monetary compensation.



Killiana1a said:

I read through this entire thread. All the plausible hypotheticals have been brought up.

I agree, there would be more than a few 3rd party developers going under. Good. Great. Excellent.

The fat needs to be trimmed in my opinion. Certain 3rd party developers such as id Software who have not developed a game since Doom 3 in 2004, just need to die. I don't care what you and Romero did in the 1990s, I don't want to listen to your 50th interview on how you guys created the FPS genre, and frankly, I would giggle a little inside if you guys went the way of Westwood Studios.

Studios like id Software in the West are equivalent to Yoshio Sakamoto in Japan. 10 to 20 years ago they were the bleeding edge, created huge hits, created sequels, created another round of sequels, 6 year development hiatus, and 6 years later they are releasing a new IP. Romero, Carmack and all of id Software are the old lions who need to bow out now with dignity and make way for the new lions or stay their ground and finish their career like Brett Favre.

Honestly, I want the latter. I want 3rd party studios like id Software to embarass themselves and go out like an old man comes out during sex. A whole lot of waiting and disappointing packages.

I am in the camp that if you look at the indie games on Xbox Live and PSN, there is far more talent there right now than in celebrated studios like id Software. Give these guys a chance because they are hungry, are just as talented, and demand a whole lot less in monetary compensation.

Your ID software tangent seems... way off base.

I mean, why would ID Software have gone out of buisness when, they haven't even released a game yet?

Though yeah.   I would also perfer to see a focus be put back on indie games like those found on Xbox live, PSN, and more importantly PC... and smaller niche targeted games like DS and stuff.... though, i'd perfer it being done without people losing their jobs.  Hence why it's good the Wii is around.

but it's worth noting for those that LIKE their big AAA games... ironically without the system that dosen't get many... NOBODY would get many.

That's what's so funny about all the console hate.  People fail to see the connections and don't realize that they are connected and wouldn't of did as well without each other. 

Me, i'd rather just collect $5 buck games off steam.


Edit: also, you forgot quake live.



Around the Network
Kasz216 said:
evolution_1ne said:
Kasz216 said:
 

I don't actually... but now you know.

Third party games do perform better on the Wii then the HD consoles.

Wii games were selling less and making profits, HD games were selling more and bankrupting their developers. 

This is less of a problem now due to enough time being put in graphically to in general make things cheaper (as happens in every generation) but if it hadn't been for the Wii to start out...

there would of been some SERIOUS problems... and serious crashes of companies.

yeah.....bullshit, your gonna have to show me alot more than a link from ubisoft (who is far from small) to support that claim. I bet every one you do find it's becasue of the developers own fault, poor resource management,shit game, etc.

but SERIOUS problems...yeah keep your own made up (until proven otherwise) FUD to yourself.

So in otherwords "Show me more proof that I will pretend doesn't matter anyway."

Cognitive Dissonance much?

 

Also, you know... that's exactly the problem.  ANYONE can make a shit game.   If ONE shit game can end you as a company... you are pretty much screwed.  Hence why the Wii basically saved... large swaths of the gaming Industry.  If it wasn't for the Wii, those who did surived would of went conservative.  Basically making SD games on the HD systems.

Free Radical went down because of Haze... they made some very popular games and some unpopular ones... and one HD game ended them.

Even great selling games don't gurantee profit though.  Afterall Rockstar didn't make money the year Grand Theft Auto released.

I mean, you can believe what you want and what will "help you sleep at night", but it won't change the obvious reality that existed. 

and if they would have made a wii game they'd still be here....yeah umm bullshit.

and name some of the savoir games the wii has.... that had it not been for this game x developer wouldn't be here, I mean you say SWATHS, and SERIOUS so finding some should be hard at all.....



Mr.Metralha said:
zgamer5 said:

gaming would acually be better because 3rd pary devs would be making profit.

Many 3rd party developers went bankrupt because of HD flops. 


yes, their was also the economic crisis.

im not trieng to downplay the wii, i applaud nintendo for expanding the market. but the console doesnt support well and bring profit to most third parties. who have to release hd games who sell well, but the company still goes in the dark.

point is wii introduced motion controls and expanded the market, but if theirs no gaming devs to give us games(other then nintendo) then gaming would be ruined, so companies making profit>innovation and expanding the market.



Being in 3rd place never felt so good

evolution_1ne said:
MrT-Tar said:
evolution_1ne said:
MrT-Tar said:
evolution_1ne said:

it would be in a better place than where it is now


can I ask how?

IMO greater competition and diversity in the video game industry is a good thing

wii hasn't been competing with the ps3 or 360 until mid 2010.

and diversity is good, always good, but that depends on what type of diversity, and the "diversity" (which in my opinion isn't diversity at all but I won't go into that because I'll probably get banned again) the wii brings is definitely the wrong type of diversity.

In my opinion the industry would be A LOT better off with Nintendo being a 3rd party publisher, instead of a hardware manufacturer.

*note my feeling towards the wii are exclusive to the wii and NOT Nintendo*


how the hell has the Wii not been competing with the PS3 or 360 until that recently?

While many bought the Wii for games like Wii Fit, and as a result wouldn't likely buy another platform, I would still say the Wii and 360/PS3 have a postive cross elasticity of demand.  The fact that one of the biggest 3rd party exclusives, Monster Hunter 3, jumped from PS3 to the Wii clearly shows how they are competing.

If Nintendo were 3rd party, prices for platforms would be a lot higher.  While I can't prove anything, I suspect that the Wii's considerably lower price tag encourages MS and Sony to reduce the prices of their consoles.  Hell, Nintendo even raised the price of the Wii in 2009, shrinking the gap slightly.

3rd parties would have a lot less money if Nintendo were 3rd party.  Companies such as Ubisoft get a serious net benefit from releasing on the Wii, just think of all the money being received from Just Dance/2.  Even worse affecting would be your (judging by your avatar) beloved Square-Enix, who get massive sums of revenue from the DS.  If the likes of DQIX, Blood of Bahamut, FFIII and IV DS, DQ IV - VI DS were all split between the remaining platforms, the higher development costs would mean some games would have to be dropped, it is those games which finances the development of the next FF game.

I cannot conceive how anyone bar their console manufacturing competitors would argue that the industry would be 'A LOT better' with Nintendo being 3rd party 

yes

i. meh that's one game, which is very popular in japan which I heard, and I think it juked due to development cost.

ii. really, so a lower price is now a higher one??

iii. and that last part was just me being a fanboy of hardcore games lol, my hopes and dreams, not the industries.


i.  And what about games like Sengoku Basara, Samurai Warriors, Tales of Graces, Rune Factory Oceans, etc that are multiplatform on both Wii and PS3?  The different versions of the games would almost certainly have a positive cross elasticity of demand, as most people would only buy one version, which signals that  PS3 and Wii are competing.

I know this is anecdotal, but if the Wii never existed, I can categorically tell you that I would have bought a PS3 on it's March 2007 launch, instead of getting one in late 2008 to play LBP.  Equally, if the Wii never existed, I would have certainly bought a lot more PS3 games.

ii. The point I was trying to make was that the considerably difference in price between the Wii and 360/PS3 encouraged, through competition and the aim of profit maximisation, that gap to be closed (predominately by MS/Sony price cuts, but Nintendo did raise the price of the Wii in 2009, probably due to a combination of the above reason, the Wii being quite price inelastic and the weak £).

iii.  Surely 'hardcore' is a definition of the way one plays a game, rather than a definition of the game itself?  For example, my Mum between 2000 and 2009 (when I bought her Tetris DS) played between half and three quarters of an hour of Tetris (what many call a 'casual' game) on my GBC a day, pretty much without fail.  Meanwhile, in that time I've only played about 30 hours of it and I only played it irregularly.  My Mum is the 'hardcore' Tetris player, not myself.  Despite this, I am what one may call a 'hardcore' gamer, I can recite all 493 pokemon in numerical order, I can hum the battle theme from all mainline FF games, my  mother can do neither, however she is more 'hardcore' when it comes to Tetris.  Equally, in the event my Mum ever got into JRPGs or platformers, she will likely be more 'casual' than myself for those.

Again, this is anecdotal, but around my 6th form and social groups, a disproportionately high amount of gamers consider the Wii more 'hardcore' than the 360 and PS3.  They instead claim that the people who predominately play the likes of FIFA or FPS and know little of gaming history or culture are the 'casual' ones, many of them go even further and consider them the 'base' of video gaming culture.  While I realise that the views of generally upper-middle class students from the South East of England will not likely be representative of the entire U.K or even world gaming population, but that does say something.




Kinect wouldn't exist.  Move probably wouldn't although I guess the Eyetoy was bound to appear again.

Sony would probably have overtaken 360 worldwide sales although I still think 360 would have done as well in US thanks to Live so it would be  a close one/two position  - I say this as I believe the Wii blocked the PS3's growth a lot more than 360, particularly in EMEAA.

A number of developers would have fallen by the wayside - unable to deliver big enough selling HD titles and with no lower cost environment (apart from PSP/DS) available to them.

Most Mario titles, etc. sell well but obviously Wii Fit, Sports Resorts, etc. wouldn't have sold the same.

The above seem pretty likely to me.

Some maybes...

Sony focus more on PSN / Online and matching 360 differentiators instead of Move

MS focus more on non-English territories and emerging markets instead of Kinect / US homeground



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Gaming would have entered decline, and I would have been gaming exclusively on PC.



I LOVE ICELAND!