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

Forums - Nintendo - TheGUNNShop says "Nintendo Wii 2 is a joke!"

 

TheGUNNShop says "Nintendo Wii 2 is a joke!"

Yes, he is right 64 25.91%
 
No, this guy's a joke 115 46.56%
 
I'm not sure 35 14.17%
 
See poll 33 13.36%
 
Total:247
LordTheNightKnight said:

You missed my point. You assumed I claimed the money wasn't for any reason, when my point clearly was about sales not increasing in general to match the money spent (I even bolded the part here).


I didn't think you thought the money wasn't for a reason I just assumed you thought that graphics was what was driving game budgets so high. A perfectly logical assumption I think considering the comments you were replying to. My point was that there were other factors some of which have bigger impacts than increasing the level of graphical fidality in games, there are many other factors driving up costs including voice acting, music, motion capture, reinventing the wheel with new game engines (most of the most expensive games around use a new or highly modified engine) adding content just so you have a tick on the back of the box like multiplayer etc, there is also the fact that there are now "rockstar" developers that demand high salaries and a tone more factors and there is also the fact that multiplatform development is more common that raises costs. According to many developer blogs I have read on sites like Gamasutra and altdevblogaday there are also a lot of badly designed tools and inefficiant procedures in most developers.



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

Around the Network
zarx said:
LordTheNightKnight said:

You missed my point. You assumed I claimed the money wasn't for any reason, when my point clearly was about sales not increasing in general to match the money spent (I even bolded the part here).


I didn't think you thought the money wasn't for a reason I just assumed you thought that graphics was what was driving game budgets so high. A perfectly logical assumption I think considering the comments you were replying to. My point was that there were other factors some of which have bigger impacts than increasing the level of graphical fidality in games, there are many other factors driving up costs including voice acting, music, motion capture, reinventing the wheel with new game engines (most of the most expensive games around use a new or highly modified engine) adding content just so you have a tick on the back of the box like multiplayer etc, there is also the fact that there are now "rockstar" developers that demand high salaries and a tone more factors and there is also the fact that multiplatform development is more common that raises costs. According to many developer blogs I have read on sites like Gamasutra and altdevblogaday there are also a lot of badly designed tools and inefficiant procedures in most developers.


I'll give that, but it still raises the costs just the same (and that inefficiency makes it more shameful), and just means it's a race to top themselves in general instead of just graphics. Still a problem when sales don't increase accordingly.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

LordTheNightKnight said:
zarx said:
LordTheNightKnight said:

You missed my point. You assumed I claimed the money wasn't for any reason, when my point clearly was about sales not increasing in general to match the money spent (I even bolded the part here).


I didn't think you thought the money wasn't for a reason I just assumed you thought that graphics was what was driving game budgets so high. A perfectly logical assumption I think considering the comments you were replying to. My point was that there were other factors some of which have bigger impacts than increasing the level of graphical fidality in games, there are many other factors driving up costs including voice acting, music, motion capture, reinventing the wheel with new game engines (most of the most expensive games around use a new or highly modified engine) adding content just so you have a tick on the back of the box like multiplayer etc, there is also the fact that there are now "rockstar" developers that demand high salaries and a tone more factors and there is also the fact that multiplatform development is more common that raises costs. According to many developer blogs I have read on sites like Gamasutra and altdevblogaday there are also a lot of badly designed tools and inefficiant procedures in most developers.


I'll give that, but it still raises the costs just the same (and that inefficiency makes it more shameful), and just means it's a race to top themselves in general instead of just graphics. Still a problem when sales don't increase accordingly.


Sad but true



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!



I====== http://www.tntn.us / ==========

====== http://www.tntn.us / ========== 

====== http://www.tntn.us / ==========



ssj12 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:

"THQ stated that a big budget next gen game would cost around 100$ at retail they said it would cost almost double to develop over the current generation."

This is why the graphics race has to stop. They aren't making the games better (the good games are due to talent, not waving their specs around), and the sales have NOT risen this generation to match the increased cost over last generation.


Graphics should not affect development ability or cost. Its the hardware itself. The 360 uses simple tech compared to the PS3, which is why PS3 games still cost more to develop for and its cheaper to make the PS3 game the main platform and port over to the 360 versus the otherway around. Creation of higher quality textures and graphics might take a fraction longer, but the cost of making textures in Photoshop is the exact same no matter if your making an SNES game or a PlayStation 9 game.


LOL WUT. Do you know anything about programming and developing at all!?



Around the Network
Runa216 said:

While I do agree with his conclusion (the Wii-2 is a joke), I don't agree with how he got there...namely "it's a joke BECAUSE the graphics card is outdated" 

Uhm, no? last I checked the PS1 was the weakest of that gen, and PS2 was weakest of its gen, and Wii was weakest of that gen, and those were the best selling consoles of all time. 

Just sayin. 

ugh. Here we go again.

Saturn < PSone

DC < PS2



Dr.Grass said:
Runa216 said:

While I do agree with his conclusion (the Wii-2 is a joke), I don't agree with how he got there...namely "it's a joke BECAUSE the graphics card is outdated" 

Uhm, no? last I checked the PS1 was the weakest of that gen, and PS2 was weakest of its gen, and Wii was weakest of that gen, and those were the best selling consoles of all time. 

Just sayin. 

ugh. Here we go again.

Saturn < PSone

DC < PS2

I thought that Saturn > PS1, just that Saturn was impossible to properly program for, so no-one could quite get the best out of it except Sega.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Dr.Grass said:
ssj12 said:
LordTheNightKnight said:

"THQ stated that a big budget next gen game would cost around 100$ at retail they said it would cost almost double to develop over the current generation."

This is why the graphics race has to stop. They aren't making the games better (the good games are due to talent, not waving their specs around), and the sales have NOT risen this generation to match the increased cost over last generation.


Graphics should not affect development ability or cost. Its the hardware itself. The 360 uses simple tech compared to the PS3, which is why PS3 games still cost more to develop for and its cheaper to make the PS3 game the main platform and port over to the 360 versus the otherway around. Creation of higher quality textures and graphics might take a fraction longer, but the cost of making textures in Photoshop is the exact same no matter if your making an SNES game or a PlayStation 9 game.


LOL WUT. Do you know anything about programming and developing at all!?

do you? I've been a web developer since I was 7, and game development is very similar to web development in many ways. In both fields you; need to know what your making for the client; know how to program it; know how to create visuals; know how to put it all together; test functionality and compatibility with platforms; fix bugs and retest; release product; fix bugs that arise post-release.

Programming is done by code called C , OpenGL, and several others.

Graphics in general are skin textures, wall textures, 3D objects, and random other things that have been developed for years and created using Photoshop, Maya, and several others. Yes increase in power allows for better looking graphics because you can create larger objects with more depth to internal structure. A Xbox/PC game back in the day should have been harder to create than now due to less functional tools to create certain textures, but with Photoshop CS5, newer 3D modeliong tools, and such it should be a lot easier since there are more advanced tools that allow for better looking things in the same amount of time. 

Now things like fire, smoke, ragdoll animation, lighting, and other things come under programming, more specifically physics programming which takes animation or textures created by the graphics team and coded to work in a game. While code has advanced to be more complex, once learned at the beginning of a generation it becomes easier and less time consuming.

The one thing that majorly affects costs overall is understanding. If you have a programming team that are still learning a platform costs will rise as they discover how to actually make things function.



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 

He's a fool

 

Horse Power never decides a generation



Viper1 said:

I'm in the media and I've been told 2 things by those in the development community.

1. Nintendo is working on something.
Which we've known since before Wii even launched.

2. It will be moer powerful than Wii.
Which we've known since before Wii even laucnhed.

 

Everything else speculation, bullshit, unfounded rumors, pipe dreams, Nintendo hate, ignorance and few ounces of truth sprinkled in for good measure.


I nominate you for VGChartz voice of reason