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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Dispelling the myth that Wii did not move software

Tagged games:

 

Did Wii succesfully move software?

Yes, Wii moved software just fine. 66 70.21%
 
No, Wii didn't move software well at all. 22 23.40%
 
It was all bundles. Plea... 6 6.38%
 
Total:94
jmorris724 said:
30 million units of mario kart and 20 million of wii fit is not a "dust collector" like some assholes portray.

Everything not hermetically sealed is a dust collector.



Around the Network

I mean, comparing CoD3 Wii version to PS3 version is kind of unfair, considering the PS3's abysmal launch. PS3 more than made up for it later on, with CoD titles selling 10 + million on PS3, while Wii versions eventually stopped due to lack of people purchasing them.



0331 Happiness is a belt-fed weapon

RolStoppable said:
 

You don't understand it, because you haven't played the games that third parties have passed off as good. You wouldn't have been fond of those games either. Not because you don't like that type of game, but because the lack of quality is so appalling.

I don't think your way of determining who is casual works, because then you would have to make the same claim for the PSP. And this is before we get into the issue that the word "casual" has no clear definition and means different things to different people; although most commonly it's used in the context of something that is not welcome.

The DS has the highest tie ratio of any handheld ever, but that's besides the point. You don't judge developer interest that way, but rather by the overall number of titles that were released for a system and the quality of said titles; and both the DS and PSP had a healthy amount of legitimately good third party games, most notably in the JRPG genre. Equally nonsensical is a breakdown of the top 20 bestselling games; you should realize that that doesn't make sense, because the DS got better third party support despite being more skewed than the Wii in said top 20 breakdown.

Regardless of my or your definition of casual; the fact of the matter is that, like I said, about 80% of the Wii's installed base will have vanished from the console market, which in turn denotes that these are customers that were never very invested in gaming to begin with, it is perfectly reasonable then to assume that these same customers would in fact not have purchased much 3rd party AAA software. The console market has been steadily growing for almost three decades; suddenly a huge chunk of it disappears, effectively setting the total hardware numbers for home consoles back to around the same level as the 6th generation, it doesn't take a genius like the two of us to figure out that something rather unusual has taken place here and this largely invalidates the dated, baseless claim that 3rd party games ever had the potential to do very well on the Wii.
As for the term casual covering something that is "not welcome" or not; this is irrelevant since you still have to somehow explain what happened to those 80 million + gamers who up and disappeared, this is not a matter of semantics, it is a matter of observable facts and the notion that these gamers would somehow have been a proper source of income for 3rd parties is mere speculation at best and utter hogwash at worst.

The DS has had about 1300-1500 titles released, depending on sources, in comparison, the PS2 had over 3500 on the same installed base and had about twice the total software sales. The PSP had about 800 titles released and sold around 300 million units of software, a fair bit less than half of the DS, in comparison, the 360 has about 1100-1200 games released and has sold about 950 units of software (on an installed base only slightly bigger than the PSP).  These handhelds clearly have less titles than their home console counterparts/peers and sell way less software.
One could argue that the Wii was the DS' peer as well, of course, but that doesn't change much since the Wii had more titles released and twice as many scoring in the 90's or higher than the DS (for the sake of your own argument, that is, going by your metric of; number of releases + quality = level of support).

There are about 450 games that scored 90 or more on Metacritic, out of these, there are only two on the PSP out of about 800 releases. The DS has only 7 titles rated 90 or above, and 5 of these are Nintendo games and there are around 1300 releases (on a 155 million installed base) so there goes the whole theory on broad 3rd party support and subsequent high quality to measure support you mentioned. Also; in comparison, the 360 has 54 titles rater 90 or higher, the PS3 has 52 titles rated 90 or higher, the PS2 had 58 games rated 90 or higher and the Wii had 14 titles rated 90 or over and out of those, 8 were Nintendo games, similar to the PSP and DS situation, it has around 1350 titles released in total.
One should also note, as I mentioned earlier, that the Wii's total software sales are over 1/3 1st party titles.

The Xbox One currently already has 3 titles scoring 90 or more, out of less than 300 released titles, the PS4 has 8 titles scoring 90 or more, already beyond the DS then after only about 1.5 years on the market and about 400 releases thus far, 3 of those titles are 1st party developer or published.

You see; you just had you own argument defeated by your own metric of support. By number of titles and the quality of them; it can be claimed using your logic that the Wii had better support than the DS then; it has more releases than the 360 (about 150-200 more) and twice as many games scoring higher than 90 than the DS does so it must have better 3rd party support. This doesn't work no matter how you twist it. It is simply not that cut & dry, and 1st party percentage of total software sales is highly relevant when one is discussing 3rd party support; if the majority of your top selling and top rated titles are 1st party, 3rd parties have obviously not had a huge commercial and critical impact on your overall software situation and this shows that the DS, PSP and Wii all had pretty poor support all in all.

PS: You also failed to adress the hardware issue; what would be the developer incentive to work at making better Wii ports when the hardware chasm was so vast? Different generation shaders, different processor threading (and single core at that, with a lot less buffer and 64 bit vs 32 bit), much less memory, no proper harddrive for installs, no way of running high tier post-processing effects or modern light and shadow rendering etc. That's a lot of obstacles, and with no discernable rewards to doing said work; it takes a special kind of person to still be pondering why they didn't bother with this, especially when the other two were so adept as selling traditional 3rd party software. Many Nintendo fans then pull the "look at all the developers that went bust in the 7th gen, this could have been avoided if they supported Nintendo", conveniently forgetting that: A: there was never guarantee of decent sales, that is merely speculation at best, and B: there was a huge financial crisis and it's a small miracle that it went as well as it did, last point C: this has happened before, namely the transition to VGA/SVGA and the rise of the CD-ROM that carried things like FMV and vastly more complex code and textures, which upped development budgets and caused many to go out of business.
I still think, after all these years, that you are being unreasonable regarding the 7th gen and your whole stance on 3rd parties, in spite of all your insights and obvious intelligence; this is something you just cannot seem to let go.



The site farted, duplicate post.



Oh boy, I love this debate.

Bottom line, if you buy a Wii or Wii U you probably don't give a shit about 3rd party core games.

People who buy a Xbox or Playstation primarily care about 3rd party core games.



Recently Completed
River City: Rival Showdown
for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Around the Network
Mr Puggsly said:
Oh boy, I love this debate.

Bottom line, if you buy a Wii or Wii U you probably don't give a shit about 3rd party core games.

People who buy a Xbox or Playstation primarily care about 3rd party core games.


More or less; yes. I mostly don't give a shit about 3rd party core games on consoles either, which is the main reason why I still don't own an 8th gen console (that and the prices, for now). If I buy a Nintendo; I know what I'm getting and I'm fine with that, same goes for PS and Xbox.



jmorris724 said:
30 million units of mario kart and 20 million of wii fit is not a "dust collector" like some assholes portray.

So, in your opinion, what happened to all those people who bought Mario Kart and wii fit? Wii fit U flopped bad and the wiiu version of Mario Kart has been nowhere near as successful as the wii version was. Did people not like what they played or something? How do you explain their wiiu sales?

And, seriously, there's no need for name calling.



DialgaMarine said:
I mean, comparing CoD3 Wii version to PS3 version is kind of unfair, considering the PS3's abysmal launch. PS3 more than made up for it later on, with CoD titles selling 10 + million on PS3, while Wii versions eventually stopped due to lack of people purchasing them.

It also worth noting that was the Wii's peak. While future CoD games declined on Wii, the PS3 saw a massive increase.

Wii fans focus on a few games that sold well. Yet neglect how modest those numbers are when compared to 360 and PS3 in the long run.



Recently Completed
River City: Rival Showdown
for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

RolStoppable said:
Mummelmann said:

Regardless of my or your definition of casual; the fact of the matter is that, like I said, about 80% of the Wii's installed base will have vanished from the console market, which in turn denotes that these are customers that were never very invested in gaming to begin with, it is perfectly reasonable then to assume that these same customers would in fact not have purchased much 3rd party AAA software. The console market has been steadily growing for almost three decades; suddenly a huge chunk of it disappears, effectively setting the total hardware numbers for home consoles back to around the same level as the 6th generation, it doesn't take a genius like the two of us to figure out that something rather unusual has taken place here and this largely invalidates the dated, baseless claim that 3rd party games ever had the potential to do very well on the Wii.
As for the term casual covering something that is "not welcome" or not; this is irrelevant since you still have to somehow explain what happened to those 80 million + gamers who up and disappeared, this is not a matter of semantics, it is a matter of observable facts and the notion that these gamers would somehow have been a proper source of income for 3rd parties is mere speculation at best and utter hogwash at worst.

The DS has had about 1300-1500 titles released, depending on sources, in comparison, the PS2 had over 3500 on the same installed base and had about twice the total software sales. The PSP had about 800 titles released and sold around 300 million units of software, a fair bit less than half of the DS, in comparison, the 360 has about 1100-1200 games released and has sold about 950 units of software (on an installed base only slightly bigger than the PSP).  These handhelds clearly have less titles than their home console counterparts/peers and sell way less software.
One could argue that the Wii was the DS' peer as well, of course, but that doesn't change much since the Wii had more titles released and twice as many scoring in the 90's or higher than the DS (for the sake of your own argument, that is, going by your metric of; number of releases + quality = level of support).

There are about 450 games that scored 90 or more on Metacritic, out of these, there are only two on the PSP out of about 800 releases. The DS has only 7 titles rated 90 or above, and 5 of these are Nintendo games and there are around 1300 releases (on a 155 million installed base) so there goes the whole theory on broad 3rd party support and subsequent high quality to measure support you mentioned. Also; in comparison, the 360 has 54 titles rater 90 or higher, the PS3 has 52 titles rated 90 or higher, the PS2 had 58 games rated 90 or higher and the Wii had 14 titles rated 90 or over and out of those, 8 were Nintendo games, similar to the PSP and DS situation, it has around 1350 titles released in total.
One should also note, as I mentioned earlier, that the Wii's total software sales are over 1/3 1st party titles.

The Xbox One currently already has 3 titles scoring 90 or more, out of less than 300 released titles, the PS4 has 8 titles scoring 90 or more, already beyond the DS then after only about 1.5 years on the market and about 400 releases thus far, 3 of those titles are 1st party developer or published.

You see; you just had you own argument defeated by your own metric of support. By number of titles and the quality of them; it can be claimed using your logic that the Wii had better support than the DS then; it has more releases than the 360 (about 150-200 more) and twice as many games scoring higher than 90 than the DS does so it must have better 3rd party support. This doesn't work no matter how you twist it. It is simply not that cut & dry, and 1st party percentage of total software sales is highly relevant when one is discussing 3rd party support; if the majority of your top selling and top rated titles are 1st party, 3rd parties have obviously not had a huge commercial and critical impact on your overall software situation and this shows that the DS, PSP and Wii all had pretty poor support all in all.

PS: You also failed to adress the hardware issue; what would be the developer incentive to work at making better Wii ports when the hardware chasm was so vast? Different generation shaders, different processor threading (and single core at that, with a lot less buffer and 64 bit vs 32 bit), much less memory, no proper harddrive for installs, no way of running high tier post-processing effects or modern light and shadow rendering etc. That's a lot of obstacles, and with no discernable rewards to doing said work; it takes a special kind of person to still be pondering why they didn't bother with this, especially when the other two were so adept as selling traditional 3rd party software. Many Nintendo fans then pull the "look at all the developers that went bust in the 7th gen, this could have been avoided if they supported Nintendo", conveniently forgetting that: A: there was never guarantee of decent sales, that is merely speculation at best, and B: there was a huge financial crisis and it's a small miracle that it went as well as it did, last point C: this has happened before, namely the transition to VGA/SVGA and the rise of the CD-ROM that carried things like FMV and vastly more complex code and textures, which upped development budgets and caused many to go out of business.
I still think, after all these years, that you are being unreasonable regarding the 7th gen and your whole stance on 3rd parties, in spite of all your insights and obvious intelligence; this is something you just cannot seem to let go.

That's a long list of strawman arguments that you dissected.

You failed to address the question if you've played third party games on the Wii. You used Metacritic to determine quality and then acted like I was the one who suggested to do this. I don't need to address any porting issues, because I've already said before that the Wii had high enough sales to justify development of exclusives.

You are defending the wall of shame as something that deserved to sell. Here's the link again:

http://pietriots.com/2010/12/17/the-3rd-party-wall-of-shame/

The unreasonable people are those who act like the wall of shame is the fault of Nintendo and/or the people who bought the Wii. The answer for why third parties didn't do better is right there.


So, basically; you're right and I'm wrong by default then? That settles it.

I should have known better after all these years.



RolStoppable said:
AnthonyW86 said:

Yes because that's any game develpment teams dream, working on outdataed hardware with limited capabilities..... And most if Wii buyers were casuals, not the kind of people that buy many expensive AAA games. Wii simply wasn't worth the effort compared to the PS360 and it's third party game market potential.

The vast majority of developers works on outdated hardware with limited capabilities. Heck, during the seventh gen a lot of developers worked on the DS and PSP which are behind the Wii in terms of capabilities. Your reasoning doesn't hold water.

What's your proof that Wii owners didn't buy expensive AAA games?


That's because besides DS and PSP there were no handhelds with 10x the computing power, nor would anyone expect PC versions of games to run on them. DS and PSP were the norm for handheld gaming, ps360 was the norm for consoles. And i didn't say no Wii owners would buy a lot of AAA titles, i said that most Wii owners bought it for the motion controls and were casual gamers. The market for more hardcore games under the Wii's install base wasn't big enough to warrent making enitrely new high quality version of these games. Let alone big third party hardcore exclusives for Wii.