Don't mind the trolls Kenny and welcome to the site.

I´d like to add one more possible reason:

You have to compete with the most succesful 1st party developer on their own console. So it might not be ”hostility” on purpose, but the fear, that people might ignore your game on a Nintendo system (which would explain the constant ”only N games sell on N systems” complaints/excuses used by some developers).

 I think you've definitely hit on an important reason here, okr. Nintendo's spent over twenty years cultivating its following by releasing a lot of incredibly high-quality games, and they look to be doing that yet again with the Wii and the DS. It's no wonder that a lot of third parties would shy away from competing with Nintendo head to head. One example is when IGN reported a few months back that Bully was released in early March specifically to avoid any big-name Nintendo games (and then Brawl got delayed...). So a lot of third parties are definitely a bit "gun shy" at the thought of going head to head with the "Big N."

And at the original poster, it's obvious that you've put a lot of thought into your post, and I agree with much of your reasoning. I especially think your remark about third parties investing a lot of money and training into the High Definition systems means they have to release more games for the 360 and PS3 just to recoup their losses. But I suspect that you are exaggerating a bit when it comes to just how much the major third parties dislike the Wii.

Your idea that their pride is hurt because they did not see the Wii's success coming wouldn't be unprecedented (look at EA during the NES days), but I think that you're overstating how strong of an influence this is. Games are incredibly expensive to produce nowadays, and if the consumers are stampeding in one direction I think most developers know they have no choice but to follow. You cited Rockstar as an example of a company that thinks little of the system, and it's true that they don't exactly have a long and fond relationship with Nintendo. On the other hand, they've already made three games for the Wii: Bully, Table Tennis, and Manhunt 2. They're coming around. They may not want to, but they know they have to. And I think the same is true for many others.

I also believe that the second reason you listed, that the Wii is lowering the entry point for new developers, is actually a positive in the eyes of most third parties, including the big ones. We've been seeing a lot of mergers and acquisitions in the past few years as games get more expensive to make, and companies are forced to share their resources just to survive. Even some of the big-name companies are flirting with disaster because of development costs. Look at Take-Two, a large developer who's in serious danger of being acquired by its main rival in a hostile takeover because it simply lacks the money it needs to truly compete. Heck, its flagship game may be the toast of the town right now, but I suspect that if Microsoft hadn't funneled $50 million at them, the $100 million cost of creating GTA IV would have led to only modest profits, no matter how sky-high their sales. I'm looking forward to what you have to say about my thoughts.

i said before and i will say it again, they don't know what they should do with it

Most of this is due to the sunk cost fallacy.

Go look it up if you're not familiar with it.

usually only ninty games sell on a ninty system, and mabey some developers dont want to run the risk of loosing there reputation for creating a wii game that didnt sell

Over 60% of all revenue on Wii is from 3rd parties. That's hardly only Nintendo games sell on Nintendo consoles.

The developers who are the most hostile towards the Wii are also the developers who have the most to lose from the Wii ...

Epic Games (for example) has tens of millions of dollars of potential profits banking on HD graphics becomming the standard, and developers choosing the Unreal 3 engine to minimize their costs whilst maximizing their graphics quality. The Wii's success undermines their immediate goals as well as their long term goals if developers begin to think that they can make just as good of a game without advanced graphics ...

I agree to some extent to your post.

However EVERYONE was thrown off guard. All nintendo said was trust us and start developing you won't regret it. Now I can understand why studios would not do so due to having like NO INFO about the system.


So my point being, i will reserve this judgement for AFTER E3. Developers have had at least a year now since the success of the Wii was seen so what better way then to show all this developement at E3?

I ain't saying they will or will not show us anything. But if anything BIG is gonna happen from 3rd party for Wii it will be at this years E3.

I think you're right HappySqurriel, but what surprises me so much about the situation is that there's definitely an unsatisfied demand for a great graphics engine on the Wii that remains mostly unfilled. I mean, you can't say that Wii owners are indifferent to pretty graphics: I think we can agree we're just as shallow as the other guys.

If Epic put the effort to develop a great Wii engine, they would rake in the dough. Someone else thinks so, anyway, which is why they're trying to port it over to the Wii, albeit without Epic's help. And when High Voltage showed off their engine, they started getting calls from developers by the end of the week, in spite of the fact that the engine was not as impressive as some Wii games are (Brawl and Galaxy, specifically).

So I'd like to hear your opinions, people. Why do you think that so many developers have been ignoring the pent-up demand? I have my own thoughts on the subject, but I'd like to hear from any of you who care to share first.