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

Forums - Gaming - Which of the big three consoles manufactures put the most big name devs out of business this gen?

Sal.Paradise on 21 October 2012
lilbroex said:
Sal.Paradise said:

Man if that's all the PS360's fault, the Wii U is going to be a bloodbath! Even more powerful AND you're expected to use a second screen, however will the poor devs cope.

Failure to read alert. All devs who have commented ont he Wii U's cost said that its comparatively low as that is how Nintendo designed.

Strenght was not the problem with the PS3/360. It was that they jumped to high to quickly. Devs couldn't manage abrupt "HUGE" jump in costs.

You don't understand me Lilbro, I'm weeping for all the poor Wii teams that will experience the big cost jump and go out of business, because their dev costs on the Wii were so much lower than the PS360's. Now they'll have to sell even more units on the Wii U to make a profit, than devs have to on PS360 :( 



Around the Network
lilbroex on 21 October 2012
Sal.Paradise said:
lilbroex said:
Sal.Paradise said:

Man if that's all the PS360's fault, the Wii U is going to be a bloodbath! Even more powerful AND you're expected to use a second screen, however will the poor devs cope.

Failure to read alert. All devs who have commented ont he Wii U's cost said that its comparatively low as that is how Nintendo designed.

Strenght was not the problem with the PS3/360. It was that they jumped to high to quickly. Devs couldn't manage abrupt "HUGE" jump in costs.

You don't understand me Lilbro, I'm weeping for all the poor Wii teams that will experience the big cost jump and go out of business, because their dev costs on the Wii were so much lower than the PS360's. Now they'll have to sell even more units on the Wii U to make a profit, than devs had to on PS360 :( 


I just posted this.

http://www.theverge.com/gaming/2012/7/19/3170432/ubisoft-says-wii-u-development-cost-not-a-huge-investment-plans-more

http://www.vgchartz.com/article/250486/darksiders-ii-lead-desgner-wii-u-easier-to-develop-for/

There is also the thread I posted from the ME3 porter stating how easy the Wii U is to code for. The complexitiies are what make cost high, not system strength.

The Wii U is both stronger than the PS3/360 and way easier/cheaper to develop for. Nintendo stated last year that their goal was to make the Wii U as easy to program for as the Wii. Remarks from dev very this as being true.



Kresnik on 21 October 2012
lilbroex said:

You are truncating the facts. I call foul. I said 150-300k for the average game.

Top quality developments(with the few there were) gnerally needed around 500k.


You didn't actually.  In fact, you said exactly the opposite.  Go check your post again.

 

"For a A+ quality games on the PS3, the developement costs are so high that a million seller isn't even enough to break even.

On the other hand, dev costs on the Wii were so low that even you only needed to 150-300k sells to make a profit."

 

Pretty sure that's a comparison of A+ quality games on PS3 to A+ quality games on Wii, since you didn't mention anywhere that you were talking about 'average' games on Wii.  And if you were, then why on earth would you make that comparison?  Why not compare like-for-like?  (i.e. average game on Wii to average game on PS3)

But that's okay.  Don't just accept by apology and move on, feel free to just start yet another argument.



Find my website here

lilbroex on 21 October 2012

"http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Wii"

It costs around 1/4th as much to make a Wii game that it does to make a game on other consoles. This means that games that would normally be considered too risky or unprofitable to get made can be developed, and the makers of games like Monster Hunter Tri, Sonic Colors and Silent Hill: Shattered Memories have acknowledged that. In fact, there are game genres that are nearly extinct on other consoles (such as 3D platformers) that survive on the Wii for this reason.

Boom Shakalaka

Also

http://www.gamingunion.net/news/the-average-wii-game-costs-5-7-million-to-make--4122.html



killerzX on 21 October 2012
Jay520 said:
There hasn't been many big name developers that closed in the first place. Most developers that shut down were no name developers.


this.

there might be like 5 devs that shutdown, that actually produced quality games.



Around the Network
lilbroex on 21 October 2012
killerzX said:
Jay520 said:
There hasn't been many big name developers that closed in the first place. Most developers that shut down were no name developers.


this.

there might be like 5 devs that shutdown, that actually produced quality games.


False. Hudson, Free Raidcal, Factor 5, THQ(A large amount of their susidiars), Tales Studio, Big Huge Games, Midway, Ignition, 3D Realms, Eidos(most of), Gamelab, Zipper Interactive and a bunch more.

Isn't taht comapny that exslusively made Starhawk for Sony going out of business now as well?



lilbroex on 21 October 2012
Kresnik said:
lilbroex said:

You are truncating the facts. I call foul. I said 150-300k for the average game.

Top quality developments(with the few there were) gnerally needed around 500k.


You didn't actually.  In fact, you said exactly the opposite.  Go check your post again.

 

"For a A+ quality games on the PS3, the developement costs are so high that a million seller isn't even enough to break even.

On the other hand, dev costs on the Wii were so low that even you only needed to 150-300k sells to make a profit."

 

Pretty sure that's a comparison of A+ quality games on PS3 to A+ quality games on Wii, since you didn't mention anywhere that you were talking about 'average' games on Wii.  And if you were, then why on earth would you make that comparison?  Why not compare like-for-like?  (i.e. average game on Wii to average game on PS3)

But that's okay.  Don't just accept by apology and move on, feel free to just start yet another argument.

You lost me. How did I say the oppostie?

A+ games on the PS3 cost upwards of 50 million(games like GT4, Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain)



Andrespetmonkey on 21 October 2012
lilbroex said:

Isn't taht comapny that exslusively made Starhawk for Sony going out of business now as well?

Not exactly. They're moving to mobile development, but loads of employees were laid off.



My Music

Barozi on 21 October 2012
lilbroex said:
M.U.G.E.N said:
Most of the companies went out of business because they were just not good enough. Harsh but the reality of things.


Bollocks. If they had developed on cheaper platforms, they still would have been in busuiness.

The reality is that the cost of the developing HD games was HIGH. The sales most of the games got on the HD consoles that failed would have been profits on the DS/PSP/Wii.


The reality is that the hardware in the HD consoles were too expensive for most devs to make a profit.


Why are you defending studios that make bad games ? Look at how many crap there is on the Wii and then imagine how these studios laugh at the people buying their bad games. No one wants to do low quality games aimed at 4 year olds, but they do it because they know parents won't know how bad a game is and buy it regardlessly.

On HD consoles (btw. 360 is just as easy to develop for as WiiU) developers had at least to try make a good game. That's natural quality control.
Then when Move and Kinect hit the stores, you could yet again see cheap lame ass games everywhere.


And btw. Crysis, Gears of War & Uncharted games can be made for $20m already. You need to ask yourself why other games have a much higher budget and still fail to live up to the quality of these 3 gaming franchises. Don't defend them only because they are bad with money.



lilbroex on 21 October 2012
Barozi said:
lilbroex said:
M.U.G.E.N said:
Most of the companies went out of business because they were just not good enough. Harsh but the reality of things.


Bollocks. If they had developed on cheaper platforms, they still would have been in busuiness.

The reality is that the cost of the developing HD games was HIGH. The sales most of the games got on the HD consoles that failed would have been profits on the DS/PSP/Wii.


The reality is that the hardware in the HD consoles were too expensive for most devs to make a profit.


Why are you defending studios that make bad games ? Look at how many crap there is on the Wii and then imagine how these studios laugh at the people buying their bad games. No one wants to do low quality games aimed at 4 year olds, but they do it because they know parents won't know how bad a game is and buy it regardlessly.

On HD consoles (btw. 360 is just as easy to develop for as WiiU) developers had at least to try make a good game. That's natural quality control.
Then when Move and Kinect hit the stores, you could yet again see cheap lame ass games everywhere.


And btw. Crysis, Gears of War & Uncharted games can be made for $20m already. You need to ask yourself why other games have a much higher budget and still fail to live up to the quality of these 3 gaming franchises. Don't defend them only because they are bad with money.


The games were not necessarily bad. Most of them were mediocre to fairly good as the cost of making a more detailed and complex game would have been even higher for the studio.

That is another area where the dev costs on the systems limited games. You couldn't afford to experiment. Devs went with marketing and making what others had success with rather than risking an new investement. It killed them in the end.

As the link I posted at the top of the page states, you could afford to take risks on the Wii because the dev cost around around 1/4 of what it was on the 360/PS3