Who is this Blue3 and why is he making good points?

all the 3 cases are possibles and it underligns the interest of developpers for multiplateform release.

but, the Wii is quite less powerfull than Xbox360 or Ps3
and, as is saying Blue3, not the same gamers are playing to these 2 types of console
Then this is not the same game that will come on Ps3/Xbox360 AND Wii

Their will be special developpement for PS3/Xbox360
and special developpement for Wii

==> who will have the "better" game ?
maybe be both if the games are well targetted

Blue3 said: your mother said: Blue3 said: 2 - Competing with Nintendo/Miyamoto, its damn near impossible to beat them. Except for maybe Square with an Rpg can you see anyone making a wii game better then Nintendo themselfs ? 2: One word: Rare. They had some top-notch titles that went toe-to-toe against Nintendo and fared arguably better in some cases (GoldenEye 007, Donkey Kong Country, Blast Corps come to mind). But based on that logic, wouldn't everyone simply buy Nintendo and eschew any other console - after all, it's "damn near impossible to beat them"? What's the point of other developers coming out with new games for non-Nintendo platforms if it's "damn near impossible to beat them"?   my #3 comes to play, The demographic is way differant. Nintendo games wont work well on 360. You think halo would have done 6 million on the GC ?

Actually, yea, I do. Goldeneye was a very similar game, and it sold over 8 million copies.

But I think your point still stands all the same. There definitely are different demographics, and those differences are even greater this generation than last. I just think your example was a poor one :p 

Blue3 said: Bodhesatva said: Blue3 said: Is this a artist thing only conversation. Or can other reasons be included in the reason they wont make wii games.   Absolutely, please do comment Blue3. You could argue -- reasonably I think -- that people won't develop for the Wii for a number of reasons, only one of which are the hardware's limitations. 1 - Well devs banked on the succes of the PS3 making game technology that needed PS3 power. Millions were invested in next gen gaming while wii was looked on as a joke. Its hard shifting recources to the wii now, expecially when you can always take your product and throw it on PS3/360/PC. 2 - Competing with Nintendo/Miyamoto, its damn near impossible to beat them. Except for maybe Square with an Rpg can you see anyone making a wii game better then Nintendo themselfs ? 2.1 - Sales, using the DS/PSP as example of the future yes the Ds outnumbers the PSP 2-1 yet the highest selling 3rd party game is on the PSP, there is really in no great reason for 3rd partys to flok to the wii while adandnoning PS3/360 becasue its outselling them. 2.5 - sales, on quite a few occasions a wii game has failed to out sell the PS3 game. Now think 360/PS3 version vs Wii. Madden 1.6 milllion for 360, 386k for PS3 359k for Wii, Is it worth it to make a wii version if at the end of the day the wii sales are only 15% of total sale. (used Madden just as example) 3 - More dependable demographic, a tried and true shooter and you got great sales. Making a game for the wii demographic is harder. This might not make much sense.

 Your number 2 through 2.5 are kind of weak, game makers are still going to aim at systems that have the most sales, even if they are not sure exactly how many of those people will buy their product. Hitting for 15% of 40 million, and 15% of 20 million, you always come out better with the larger number. Now, if your game is aimed directly at a certain demographic, then perhaps if you know that X gamers are going to have X system over Y system, sure. 

Number one I can see. If you overextended your company aiming at the PS3 and now find yourself trying to rework everything, spending more money to get the game out to broader markets, it would be hard to set up another shop or division just to work on Wii games. 

Number three... eh, I really think that if you DO make a good shooter, and aim it for the Wii, using it's control set up, you'd have yourself a system seller... not that you need one, but think about it. If you made a game, appealing to the core gamer, in a shooter/RPG genre with the quality of a game like FFXII or Halo 3 (with graphics optimized for the Wii) and it was addictive fun, I'd see core gamers putting down for a Wii, cause it's buy in price is cheaper than the other two systems. With the 360, sure it's possible, but less so as the price tag goes up. Meaning even less so with the PS3. (Perhaps with two or three of these games, these systems too become more impulse buys.)

But, as far as aiming at the casual crowd that's coming in with the Wii, then yes, I can see it being a bit harder for gaming companies to know exactly what their aiming at. Honestly, I think it'd be pretty easy to know what will and will not work with the Wii and casual crowds. I bet making a New York Times crossword game with some online scoreboards and challenges would sell like wildfire on it at a cheaper price point. (29-39 dollar game perhaps) 

Bodhesatva said: Blue3 said: your mother said: Blue3 said: 2 - Competing with Nintendo/Miyamoto, its damn near impossible to beat them. Except for maybe Square with an Rpg can you see anyone making a wii game better then Nintendo themselfs ? 2: One word: Rare. They had some top-notch titles that went toe-to-toe against Nintendo and fared arguably better in some cases (GoldenEye 007, Donkey Kong Country, Blast Corps come to mind). But based on that logic, wouldn't everyone simply buy Nintendo and eschew any other console - after all, it's "damn near impossible to beat them"? What's the point of other developers coming out with new games for non-Nintendo platforms if it's "damn near impossible to beat them"?   my #3 comes to play, The demographic is way differant. Nintendo games wont work well on 360. You think halo would have done 6 million on the GC ? Actually, yea, I do. Goldeneye was a very similar game, and it sold over 8 million copies. But I think your point still stands all the same. There definitely are different demographics, and those differences are even greater this generation than last. I just think your example was a poor one :p

then vida pit or whats its name.  Golden eye did have the benefit of James bond brand name.

ampillion said: Some developers have already invested money in things more suited to making games for the stronger technology. They've probably picked up new software and computer hardware just for the next gen, and weren't expecting a system that relies more on the control system than the graphical output for gaming. So, expecting a PC-like console, a lot of companies readied for that. The 'low tech' solution in the Wii was at first, dismissed merely because of Nintendo's past performance and the unorthodox use of motion control on a less powerful system. However, it's price point and new, hands-on style of control has drawn in plenty of interest. And a lot of companies can't ignore a new market of people to sell things to. (New enthusiasts to the hobby of gaming are a lot more relaxed about things, they do not over analyze or respond to gaming history as core gamers do. Not to mention, those new gamers can slowly be weaned towards meatier products, to attract more dollars and turn casuals more into core gamers. Not all will, but some, certainly.) So gaming studios will do one of three things. 1) Grow to add support for the Wii and it's hardware and control setup, to harness the growing market to both create more Wii games and fund other projects for the more powerful systems. 2) Support only the casual system, drawing in cash from small, niche titles to make their bread. 3)Support only the powerful systems, saving the investment into new divisions to put back into their larger bankrolled titles. Honestly, I see most big 3rd party producers going the route of number 1. The casual market, if it's proven to be a new avenue for revenue for the entertainment dollar to be drawn into the gaming sector, cannot be ignored. Its more or less an untapped market at this point. Number 2 will most likely only happen for small, startup groups. With the price to develop a Wii title fairly cheap compared to the other two systems, a small company with good ideas could make cash feeding on the new market. Number 3 will most likely not happen. I don't think there are any 3rd party producers that can afford to stick to only the big guns, unless they are already making a lot of cash off previous projects. A company like Square Enix or even Capcom could probably afford to, but in all honesty, why would you want to take big gambles with every new project, instead of smaller, less risky ventures? Sure, the net profits might be smaller (Unless your product is just awesome.), but it would cost less to fund from the beginning, making it profitable in less units sold.

I think this is all very reasonable, and I agree with your conclusion. In fact, I think we can already see a few companies already fitting your first mold (Konami, EA) and second (Majesco, who made Cooking Mama and Bust-A-Move, among others).

To be honest, when considering all of the reasons we've named to develop for the Wii, and all the reasons Blue3 articulately laid out NOT to develop for the Wii, there is one reason that dominates all the others: how much market share will the Wii have? Right now, I think a lot of us believe that 33 percent market share is realistically the lowest it could go this generation. If that's the case, there's a lot of money to be made and a good deal of smaller games will be made for the system. But what if it breaches 50 percent market share? 60? 70? I don't think any of those numbers are out of the question, and if the Wii DOES hit 70 percent market share, basically all these other points we've taken the time to so carefully outline are suddenly near-irrelevant. Artists don't want to compromise, don't want to compete with Miyamato, developers have already invested in 360/PS3, yadda yadda; if the Wii really ends up being as big as it appears it can be, all that reasoning will be crushed under the boot of simple, hard economics.

Blue3 said: your mother said: Blue3 said: 2 - Competing with Nintendo/Miyamoto, its damn near impossible to beat them. Except for maybe Square with an Rpg can you see anyone making a wii game better then Nintendo themselfs ? 2: One word: Rare. They had some top-notch titles that went toe-to-toe against Nintendo and fared arguably better in some cases (GoldenEye 007, Donkey Kong Country, Blast Corps come to mind). But based on that logic, wouldn't everyone simply buy Nintendo and eschew any other console - after all, it's "damn near impossible to beat them"? What's the point of other developers coming out with new games for non-Nintendo platforms if it's "damn near impossible to beat them"?   my #3 comes to play, The demographic is way differant. Nintendo games wont work well on 360. You think halo would have done 6 million on the GC ?

You're right about #3, but I think only to the extent that the demographic is a result of the brand positioning. Nintendo chose to cater to a certain demographic, just like Microsoft does with the Xbox brand. It could have just as well been the other way around, and if so, Halo wouldn't have sold close to a million on the Xbox but would have on the Gamecube.

 

I am too tired to read some of the reasoning, but there is a legitimate debate to be made for developers not making Wii games, because of the motion controls. All right, I knot people will say well they can make the games without motion stuff, but then they will be reviewed harshly possibly but also lose a lot of the Wii audience.

I mean even Nintendo seems to be using mostly traditional controls for their traditional series: Mario, Zelda and Super Smash Bros.

Also, the idea that the sole motivation of people making games is money, there's gotta be more to it on some level with most game makers. So simply taking something to the Wii cause it has the largest install base isn't going to be true in all cases.

One of the reason why a developer would stay in PS3 over Wii is..... WiiKey.... Wii may have a huge User base.... but how many of them actually buy their games instead of downloading em?

Silver_Z said: One of the reason why a developer would stay in PS3 over Wii is..... WiiKey.... Wii may have a huge User base.... but how many of them actually buy their games instead of downloading em?

   

 Way too early to think that 'zomg, everyone who owns wii is pirating!'. First, Nintendo's already working to foil any modders. Secondly, pirating has been an issue for awhile, and modders are going to do whatever possible to mod their systems. But a majority of owners aren't going to crack their system open and solder stuff to their board. Third, I believe I recall them already working on BR writers for PCs? So it'd only be a matter of time before they did the same for the PS3. Pirates are going to pirate regardless. It's up to the makers to duke it out as long as possible, and showing the market you're going to fight to keep as much pirating off your system as possible, is usually enough to instill some confidence in developers.

 

Also, I think the idea that money is the only motivation is there, but dependant on the amount of money the company is making. If a company has come into hard times, struggling to make profits, or projects fell short of expectations, they might be a lot less motivated to do something artsy or risky and outside the general market. You can make a quirky or more abstract game if you're looking at a decent income flow.