Well SNES had an incredible 1995-1996 software lineup and N64 had an incredible 2000-2001 software lineup so hey you never know
| t3mporary_126 said:
But 3D world is suppose to sell systems and is a sequel to one of Nintendo's core franchises (3D Mario games). Forgot to add that earlier in my posts. I'm taking account of development staff, dev cycle, and sale expectation. |
No, it's not. It's a new 3rd branch of isometric platformers started with 3D Land. That's like calling NSMB AAA because it sells consoles. AAA is the end product. That's it.
| the_dengle said: Development time is only one factor. The other is the size of the development team. Most of Nintendo's dev teams are around or fewer than 100 people -- relatively small these days, it seems. Even if we use your definition of AAA as sales expectation, I don't see why Zelda would count. What are the sales expectations for this game? Surely not greater than Mario Kart 8 (that one would be AAA in this case). I would think 1-3 million is the AA range, with games like Fire Emblem and Pikmin falling there. Besides, sales expectations and budget are bound together -- the greater the publisher's expectations, the greater the budget is likely to be. Nintendo doesn't "expect" most of their games to sell more than a couple million, which is why they're able to keep their budgets in check. I have to say, the OP's question doesn't make a lot of sense in the context of the definition of AAA you've provided. At this rate nobody in their right mind would expect any Wii U game released in 2016 or later to sell "AAA" numbers, no matter what it is. And while I'm sure Nintendo is still greenlighting new games for Wii U, they're probably mostly short-term projects. A standard development time starting now would mean a release in 2018. Even the Wii barely had any new releases 6 years after its launch. |
So, basically, you're just making up numbers off the top of your head? And you're telling me that Zelda Wii U is going to have half the team that Skyward Sword had? Why?
Also, what you called my definition isn't mine, it's that of Ingram Entertainment and other industry-leading distributers who send out prebook listings.
If everyone is going to simply assign their own values to what "AAA" or "AA" mean, then this thread is a waste of time.
spemanig said:
|
Okay yeah, its a sequel to 3D Land series. But it's still AAA because it was made by EAD Tokyo, had the normal 3 years dev time for Mario 3D games, and marketed as a system seller.
New Super Mario Brothers series have all of those requirements except for the development size and cost. That makes it lower than a AAA title.
What does AAA even mean cos i dont know
| pokoko said: So, basically, you're just making up numbers off the top of your head? And you're telling me that Zelda Wii U is going to have half the team that Skyward Sword had? Why? Also, what you called my definition isn't mine, it's that of Ingram Entertainment and other industry-leading distributers who send out prebook listings. If everyone is going to simply assign their own values to what "AAA" or "AA" mean, then this thread is a waste of time. |
Skyward Sword had a hellish development process and they were sapping developers from several other studios to get the game released on time. Yes, I expect Zelda Wii U to have fewer hands on it than Skyward Sword.
I'm not "making numbers up." Under 200 people were involved in the development of Skyward Sword. EAD 3 was assisted by SPD (which has about 70 employees) and Monolith Soft Kyoto (a team of about 30). Even assuming not everyone from SPD helped on Skyward Sword, you can see how dropping those two would whittle the size of the dev team for the next Zelda down to "around" 100 people. Hell, Link Between Worlds also received development support from other studios (including Monolith Soft again), yet the size of its dev team was under 100 people. Of course EAD 3 will probably have expanded to accomodate HD development, but I doubt that alone would account for the ~100 man difference.
If Zelda Wii U has had as choppy a development cycle as Skyward Sword had, sure, it could have had a bunch more developers piled onto it. But Iwata made it clear that Skyward Sword cost Nintendo far too many resources (time, developers, money, you name it) and that such a thing couldn't be allowed to happen again.
I certainly agree with the bolded, and I wasn't trying to discredit those terms by calling them "your" definition, I was just contrasting it with the one the OP seemed to be using, and the one I'm more familiar with. And now spem has offered his own definition. If we cannot all agree on such a basic thing, we're not even having the same discussion. I don't care what definition people want to use, as long as we're all using the same one. Anything other than that is just semantics.
Not likely at all. Move on.
| KLAMarine said: What does it mean to be AAA? |
It's to protect our family, be it the publisher or the entire industry... we would make anyone our enemy!
I really hope a new Metroid will get announced at E3!
---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
