Legend11 said: I think a lot of third parties are seeing the success of Wii Sports and Wii Play and think the most lucrative and safe games to be developing for the Wii are casual ones while those developing for the 360/PS3 see the success of games such as Gears of War and Resistance: Fall of Man and so make games targeted at a similar audience.

 I would agree with this for developers who are looking for safe games, and there are definately developers looking for safe games.  But most 3rd party publishers are usually working on new IPs almost constantly and I am pretty sure they are not going to be scared away from the "core" games markets until games in those genres actually begin to fail. Like I mentioned in another thread recently, these developers do in depth market analysis before game production so I think while they are recognizing the safeness of casual games they are not going to just assume its more lucrative and let a competitor find out and strike it big when they could. Then there is MP3, SMG, and others which I think will show them that these types of games are very profitable and I expect increasing "core" games over the next year as the Wii begins to fully find its legs and we get a clear picture of what life with a wii is going to be like.

 

 

Sqrl said: @Final-Fan, I don't have any major problems with your post except that I feel you only fully evolved one half of the conclusion to the situation. If we are to assume that this is the case then it is logical also to assume that the wii will be getting exclusive games that cater to its "specialness" and they will be games that as you yourself say are "awkward, difficult, and perhaps in some cases outright impossible" to port. There is currently no reason to assume these games will not be as much of a draw for the console as the "disexclusives" (as you have dubbed them) will generate for the PS3/360. This is especially true by the time you factor in the part where two consoles will be gaining the benefit of the 1 game so its impact is divided and significantly lessened for a given console. I think to fully apreciate that exclusives are designed to sell consoles because you can only get it on the one console, we need to then account for this with disexclusives by realising the impact will be split. Now I am not trying to marganlize the "disexclusives" to the point of saying they would be inherently less impactful on a given console than the Wii exclusives. I just think it would be premature to assume that Wii exclusives are going to be inherently less(or more) impactful. I am not sure where you stand on this issue but I am stating it so you know where I stand. With all of that in mind I think this falls in line perfectly with my beliefs that the PS3 and 360 are not directly competing with the Wii. And in general it works well with the idea that the Wii makes a good second console since it has differentiated itself from the other two significantly. I think Nintendo has a great market strategy, and it will serve them well in the current market environment of two similar choices and one very different choice. I think all of this makes for a phenomonal situation for "we the gamers" as it ensures that all of us will have the games we love and the games we like. Right now I believe developers are being tasked with creating the widest variety of games the industry has ever produced and that to me means that games won't be stale as quickly and it means there should always be something new and interesting for us to play. PS - @Everyone, Please don't bother responding to me unless you have thoroughly read what I said, I don't want to get into another debate where people haven't bothered to get a grasp on what I have said. I chose my wording with intent, so please read carefully.

I think I clearly did say that the Wii is going to get a lot of exclusives. I said that throughout the post, and expecially in the two paragraphs about Sonic. How could there possibly be a "Wii" side of the game market and a "not-the-Wii" side of the game market without a huge number of titles appearing only on the Wii, A.K.A. Wii exclusives? For that matter, the Sonic example itself is the perfect example of what you are saying...

[edit: Whoops, I think I jumped the gun here, but I'll leave the original response so no one can accuse me of revisionist history. Sorry for getting too defensive there, Sqrl. This is some of the thought I was intending to provoke in people. I would think that the sentence you quoted did imply that many of these games are going to be very, very different from games made with traditional control schemes, but obviously I couldn't cover all areas of speculation about Wii's future without making a gargantuan post that nobody would want to read to the finish. So I am letting the debate shape itself, including these things you mention.]

Legend11 said: I think a lot of third parties are seeing the success of Wii Sports and Wii Play and think the most lucrative and safe games to be developing for the Wii are casual ones and those aimed at a younger audience while those developing for the 360/PS3 see the success of games such as Gears of War and Resistance: Fall of Man and so make games targeted at a similar audience. And since third parties have finite resources they choose to put them towards the most lucrative audiences for the games (eg. Ubisoft making Haze for the 360/PS3 and Rayman: Raving Rabbids 2 for the Wii). Would it make sense to port some of those casual games or those for a younger audience to the 360/PS3 when similar games in the past have done horrible, or to spend the money and resources to adapt Haze so it worked well with the Wii without the guarantee if similar sales to those on the 360/PS3? Will games like Metroid Prime 3 change that? Possibly to some extent but games like Halo 3, GTAIV, and Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare will still likely convince third parties to continue making games targeted at that audience on the 360/PS3.

There's definitely trepidation about how well traditional games aimed at the 16-25 year old male demographic will do on the Wii, but I don't think it's nearly as cut and dry as you may think. As someone else has already mentioned, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Super Paper Mario and Red Steel are all million sellers, and Resident Evil 4 is almost certain to surpass Capcom's expectations by a rather handy margin (20% or more). 

So I think the companies are dabbling their toes in the water to see if those few games are just blips on the radar, or if there really is both a casual and hardcore audience available on the Wii. Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles is an explicit example of this (Capcom has said directly that they are testing the waters) and I'd wager that games such as Madden 08 and Soul Calibur Legends are tests for more sports and action titles, respectively. 

 

Now that I think about it, there's only one traditional, young-male genre on the Wii that hasn't seen much success yet, and that's sandbox games. Godfather and Scarface both tanked. Otherwise, we've already seen significant hits in the adventure, FPS, RPG, and (to a lesser extent) survival horror genres. Other than action games, what other major genres are yet to be tested at all? Singular successes aren't absolute proof of long term growth (especially when they're made by Nintendo itself), but it's a very good start.

Final-Fan said: Sqrl said: @Final-Fan, I don't have any major problems with your post except that I feel you only fully evolved one half of the conclusion to the situation. If we are to assume that this is the case then it is logical also to assume that the wii will be getting exclusive games that cater to its "specialness" and they will be games that as you yourself say are "awkward, difficult, and perhaps in some cases outright impossible" to port. There is currently no reason to assume these games will not be as much of a draw for the console as the "disexclusives" (as you have dubbed them) will generate for the PS3/360. This is especially true by the time you factor in the part where two consoles will be gaining the benefit of the 1 game so its impact is divided and significantly lessened for a given console. I think to fully apreciate that exclusives are designed to sell consoles because you can only get it on the one console, we need to then account for this with disexclusives by realising the impact will be split. Now I am not trying to marganlize the "disexclusives" to the point of saying they would be inherently less impactful on a given console than the Wii exclusives. I just think it would be premature to assume that Wii exclusives are going to be inherently less(or more) impactful. I am not sure where you stand on this issue but I am stating it so you know where I stand. With all of that in mind I think this falls in line perfectly with my beliefs that the PS3 and 360 are not directly competing with the Wii. And in general it works well with the idea that the Wii makes a good second console since it has differentiated itself from the other two significantly. I think Nintendo has a great market strategy, and it will serve them well in the current market environment of two similar choices and one very different choice. I think all of this makes for a phenomonal situation for "we the gamers" as it ensures that all of us will have the games we love and the games we like. Right now I believe developers are being tasked with creating the widest variety of games the industry has ever produced and that to me means that games won't be stale as quickly and it means there should always be something new and interesting for us to play. PS - @Everyone, Please don't bother responding to me unless you have thoroughly read what I said, I don't want to get into another debate where people haven't bothered to get a grasp on what I have said. I chose my wording with intent, so please read carefully. I think I clearly did say that the Wii is going to get a lot of exclusives. I said that throughout the post, and expecially in the two paragraphs about Sonic. How could there possibly be a "Wii" side of the game market and a "not-the-Wii" side of the game market without a huge number of titles appearing only on the Wii, A.K.A. Wii exclusives? For that matter, the Sonic example itself is the perfect example of what you are saying...

I wasn't saying you didn't say the wii wouldn't get plenty of exclusives, I was just restating the point to build towards the point I was making. Like I said I do largely agree with your OP. My only real complaint was that I felt it was worth stating in detail that it would be some time before we could know how impactful Wii exclusives and Wii disexclusives will be.

Edit: it really wasn't even a comlpaint, more of an "I agree, but I would add..."

Edit2: rereading "I wasn't saying you didn't say the wii wouldn't get plenty of exclusives" let me simplify that. I recognize that you were saying the Wii was going to get exclusives, and I was not challenging the point.

Just in case you don't notice it, Sqrl, I updated my post to address my overreaction and the rest of your post.

I also would like to add that it will indeed be interesting to see how the Wii's effect on the market, combined with Microsoft's apparent policy of spending LIMITLESS amounts of money to abolish the very IDEA of a PS3 exclusive, ultimately turn out. Will we really see the death of exclusives? Will the PS3 just get hosed? Will (most unlikely of all) Microsoft finally get tired of throwing money around like it's radioactive hot potatoes?

This is part of what Nintendo designed the Wii for.

If they went down the same route as last gen they would just get the same games as the other systems with albeit the 'inferior' version is most cases, and puts them in a state of insignificance.

Wii is differentiated from that, it's part of the blue ocean, you make it inherently different so it can't be done on the opposing console thus broadening the 'only on Wii' feeling or meaning, the DS pioneered this whole thing.

The PSP is commonly criticised because most of the games are just PS2 like and aren't really any different which gives less draw to buy games for that system.

It's ingenious and it is the only thing and the ONLY reason that the Wii is kicking arse this generation.

This will continue to happen, PS3 / 360 will share games and battle it out head to head fighting with the big guns, while Nintendo gets a different version altogether and doesn't care about the other two banging each other in the butt and sales off on its own.

Final-Fan said: Just in case you don't notice it, Sqrl, I updated my post to address my overreaction and the rest of your post. I also would like to add that it will indeed be interesting to see how the Wii's effect on the market, combined with Microsoft's apparent policy of spending LIMITLESS amounts of money to abolish the very IDEA of a PS3 exclusive, ultimately turn out. Will we really see the death of exclusives? Will the PS3 just get hosed? Will (most unlikely of all) Microsoft finally get tired of throwing money around like it's radioactive hot potatoes?

 lol, i appreciate it. I hope my last post clarified a bit more what I meant also.  I think we actually see eye to eye pretty closely.  But for the record I would of read the post no matter how big (but I am very very abnormal in that regard).

OriGin said: This is part of what Nintendo designed the Wii for. If they went down the same route as last gen they would just get the same games as the other systems with albeit the 'inferior' version is most cases, and puts them in a state of insignificance. Wii is differentiated from that, it's part of the blue ocean, you make it inherently different so it can't be done on the opposing console thus broadening the 'only on Wii' feeling or meaning, the DS pioneered this whole thing. The PSP is commonly criticised because most of the games are just PS2 like and aren't really any different which gives less draw to buy games for that system. It's ingenious and it is the only thing and the ONLY reason that the Wii is kicking arse this generation. This will continue to happen, PS3 / 360 will share games and battle it out head to head fighting with the big guns, while Nintendo gets a different version altogether and doesn't care about the other two banging each other in the butt and sales off on its own.

 Ya, I think a lot of people have mentioned this but it bares repeating.  Nintendo had excellent vision in realizing they would get their ass handed to them if they tried to compete in the "HD wars" with huge companies like Sony and MS.  So they went and forged their own path.  Obviously something new like this has to find its niche in the marketplace (ie the thread topic).

Nonquihote said: Well if you really want to whore out your game to as big a user base as possible (EA) make PS3/360/PC version and Wii/PS2/PSP version.

no sh!t, EA and all those licensed game... though I think EA makes most of those too. @Bods, wasn't Zelda sandboxy? though obviously more RPG, so maybe not. also, you're probably right about exclusives declining, apart from long running series, like MGS and Ratchet, and of course 1st parties. there will certainly be more differences in games this gen, with PS3/360/PC on one side and Wii on the other. but i don't see this as a problem.