vizunary said: naznatips said: No, that argument is flawed in pretty much every way. I don't even know where to begin on breaking that down. I guess we will start with the devs "vision." Developers present ideas to the companies they work for, companies say yes or no, then give developers a budget. Studios will not go "oh, you have a $50 million PS3 game you want to make, go ahead!" Believe me if "graphical vision" had much to do with sales at all every game last generation would have been on the Xbox. Not only is it ridiculously arrogant of you to assume that every developer just wants to have pretty graphics on their game and that's the limit of their creativity, but it is also unbelievably petty of you to say that Wii gamers will buy bad games. If all you care about is graphics, that's fine, but don't pretend the rest of the world agrees with you and CERTAINLY don't pretend that designers do. I'm a computer graphics technology major (specializing in animation) and you know what: I would much rather make a Wii game right now. I feel I would have a lot more creative options on the Wii. Your PS2 citation was a horrible example... how many good games were made on the Xbox? According to gamerankings 2 Halos, followed by a lot of racing games and ports from PS2 games. Guess what you're gonna get this generation... I'm sorry, either you misread or I mistyped my post. Take a look at a dev like Kojima, do you think he would be happy making MGS4 for the Wii while there is more powerful hardware to deliver his "vision" on? Also, IT'S NOT JUST THE FUCKING GFX PEOPLE, physics, A.I., game engines, etc need powerful hardware. I tried to even put in there that I am not talking shit about Wii owners. On the PS2 there were some of the absolute WORST games ever made, yet they sold due to a large number of console owners. The same thing will happen to the wii, just think about it. Yeah, we'll get Wii ports, like we would buy that crap....you chose this road.

It's not just the graphics? AI, Physics, game engines? Apparently you didn't bother to read that Red Steel is run on the Unreal engine. It's just the graphics I'm affraid :)

Edit:  This topic is becomming extremely derailed.  We shouldn't be discussing this here.  If you want to make a topic on why you think all the good games will be on the 360 and PS3 I would be happy to continue the discussion with you, but we aren't contributing to Mrstickball's topic with this.

naznatips said: It's not just the graphics? AI, Physics, game engines? Apparently you didn't bother to read that Red Steel is run on the Unreal engine. It's just the graphics I'm affraid :) Edit:  This topic is becomming extremely derailed.  We shouldn't be discussing this here.  If you want to make a topic on why you think all the good games will be on the 360 and PS3 I would be happy to continue the discussion with you, but we aren't contributing to Mrstickball's topic with this.

I'm not trying to say that ALL the good games would be on PS3/360. But certain games could never be made on the Wii..... sorry I don't remember the orig topic any more LOL....j/k mrstickball

 

vizunary said: naznatips said: It's not just the graphics? AI, Physics, game engines? Apparently you didn't bother to read that Red Steel is run on the Unreal engine. It's just the graphics I'm affraid :) Edit: This topic is becomming extremely derailed. We shouldn't be discussing this here. If you want to make a topic on why you think all the good games will be on the 360 and PS3 I would be happy to continue the discussion with you, but we aren't contributing to Mrstickball's topic with this. I'm not trying to say that ALL the good games would be on PS3/360. But certain games could never be made on the Wii..... sorry I don't remember the orig topic any more LOL....j/k mrstickball

Lol.  Well I agree that certain games will never be made on the Wii.  Your Gears of War and Metal Gear Solid 4 aren't really Wii style games.  Not that the Wii can't and won't sell mature games, but it's not going to be hosting those particular franchises.  My guess is due to the surprise success of the Wii developers will be make a lot of new franchises on the Wii, some of which may turn out to be surprise hits.

rocketpig said: Well I mostly agree. Your point that the Wii is overpriced for what you get is sorta misleading. I know what you mean, but others will take it the wrong way. Nintendo sells the Wii for a $25 profit (slightly less in America because of Wii sports bundle). Economically speaking, anytime demand is outstripping supply a machine is underpriced, because it means that they are not maximizing their profits. Ideally, you would sell 90% of a stock at a price that's well balanced. The PS3, by pure economic terms, is overpriced, because supply far ouststrips demand, despite the fact that it's sold for a large profit loss. Really the terms under and overpriced are often misused because people think of them as the "bargin" the company is giving you, but in fact they should really only be used to describe the consumer's demand for the product. Not to derail this subject but I have a hard time believing that Nintendo is only making $25 on each Wii. It's basically a GC with slightly boosted output (not enough to even cost Nintendo an additional $40 on processor and vid card), wireless (very cheap), Bluetooth (also pretty cheap), and nice controllers (what, maybe an additional $20 cost to them at most). They were selling the GC for $99 at the end of its life. I don't see how the Wii comes anywhere near $150 in additional cost of manufacturing.

 So all the tens of $millions spent on research, developement and design of the new look, smaller system and it's unique controller should be ignored?

mrstickball said: In every enterainment medium, except for Video Game production, there have been drastic ways to reduce costs of producing forms of entertainment: Home Recording Studios have hampered album costs for both many indie bands and major touring artists, computer workstations and cheap high-def cameras have allowed movie creators to drasticly reduce costs of a high budget movie (Robert Rodriguez's action movie Once Upon a Time in Mexico was made for a fraction of typical hollywood blockbusters, by using $3,000 cameras, a home studio for the soundtrack, and a film editing workstation at home).

Gotta call you out on this one. Once Upon A Time In Mexico was a modest budget for a big film, but the cameras they used cost somewhere around the $100k mark, maybe up to $150k (not sure for dollars or exact price back then), and each lens costs about the same. The editing studio would have cost an awful lot as well, Rodriguez just happens to own one.

Shooting on HD costs pretty much the same as 35mm, and home editing for a feature is far from the norm.

Game budgets will become like movie budgets, there will be a wide variation between them, and in time, with the advent of new and better technology, the difference will not be as apparent as it is now. There will always be big budget blockbuster games but, like films, they will be an established series or development teams and there will only be a limited number per year.  

Sony fans still riding MGS4 like its their life raft I see, wasn't it only putting out one or two good games a year that made everyone criticize Nintendo? But now its perfectly acceptable now that the PS3 is doing it. Of course in pushing such heavy development, cost prevent developers from making lots of games for the more powerful systems. Pity that, MS and Sony's game libraries shrink while Nintendo's grows.

OriGin said: ckmlb said: OriGin said: ckmlb said: I don't think suddenly the big companies are gonna go ahead and make their biggest titles on Wii and forget about the other two because the Wii is going to be the console of casual and Nintendo games for the most part (not exclusively). They will still make good money off of their Wii games, but they will continue pushing technology on the other two. Very good post!!! And im hoping that this is what a lot of developers will do! Are you being sarcastic? And damn it I left out casual at the end, it was supposed to casual and Nintendo games not Nintendo games exclusively before ppl start listing me the 3rd party games of the Wii. No sarcasm here, I liked your post and I can see that's where the market may look to be going... I don't want the 'epic' games on Wii cause I want more graphics and stuff that the Wii can't do in them :)   But if the Wii has a sheit load of fun pick up and play games then that will suit me as well, because I like both :) (i'm still playing Tetris DS)

 Yeah, add to that Nintendo 1st party games and a few 3rd party stuff that's worth it (Manhunt and No More Heroes) and you already got a great Wii selection.

n00b said: It's silly to think that the epic games of this generation will be going to the Wii, the system is just too weak. Doesn't matter if Nintendo sells an infinite number of Wiis, plenty of game makers aren't going to massively water down their games. It's a matter of integrity. If all artists looked at the potential audience for their art, we'd never have any R-rated films with big budgets, we'd be stuck with nothing but G-rated kiddie trash for casuals. No, they purposely limit their audience because it allows them to present their vision to the audience the way it's supposed to be seen. The PS2 argument doesn't hold water either -- its hardware capabilities might have been weaker than the Xbox or GameCube, but it was still in the ballpark. Continuing the metaphor, the Wii's basically in the minor leagues compared to the 360 or PS3.

 I agree with this to some extent, it doesn't mean epic games can't be made on the Wii it just means they won't have  the graphical prowess of the other two and thus most of the big affairs will still be 360/PS3 games.

Gballzack said: Sony fans still riding MGS4 like its their life raft I see, wasn't it only putting out one or two good games a year that made everyone criticize Nintendo? But now its perfectly acceptable now that the PS3 is doing it. Of course in pushing such heavy development, cost prevent developers from making lots of games for the more powerful systems. Pity that, MS and Sony's game libraries shrink while Nintendo's grows.

Sony releasing two games a year what are you talking about? Even MS fist party has more games a year then 2...

All console libraires will grow, as a matter of logic :P

MGS is not made by Sony... 

 

ckmlb said: Gballzack said: Sony fans still riding MGS4 like its their life raft I see, wasn't it only putting out one or two good games a year that made everyone criticize Nintendo? But now its perfectly acceptable now that the PS3 is doing it. Of course in pushing such heavy development, cost prevent developers from making lots of games for the more powerful systems. Pity that, MS and Sony's game libraries shrink while Nintendo's grows. 1. Sony releasing two games a year what are you talking about? Even MS fist party has more games a year then 2... 2. All console libraires will grow, as a matter of logic :P 3. MGS is not made by Sony...

1. The only two games that matter to people who aren't Sony fans is MGS4 and FFXIII, don't try and kid yourself anyone else has even taken notice of that rag-tag list of no-name titles comming out for it. The Gamecube had alot of games released each year too but only one or two ever warranted the attention of people who weren't Nintendo fans.

2. But the number of worthwhile games released per year doesn't, necessaraly, and with MGS4 four years in the making how much further in future need we look for the next decent PS3 game that isn't Final Fantasy? And please don't give me some no-name game no one has ever heard of yet, as if anyone not actively looking for upcomming Sony games would know anything about it a week before its release.

3. Never said it was.