So they couldn't make good games before 2006? The PS2 was underpowered compared to the Gamecube, for example.

It's developers like these that will lead to the death of the industry. They look at their games like they're art or like they're their own children. They forget that games are a business.

I would expect that in this type of economic climate, investors will start getting angry at publishers for not having anything for the wii (because its cheap to develop for and has the biggest userbase) and heads will start to roll.

Bad ones = ones ignoring your console of choice? Sounds like it..

What were those good developers last gen?

Yes, it does give them a hint about how to have success on wii. I think they have learned from it, too. That is why you are getting game party 2 and more games comparable to the best third party successes on wii.

Of course, in last gen the power difference was small enough to allow making the weakest platform the lead platform. Now you just cannot do that. There seems to be little reason to do that, since third parties are having success with really different games on wii or Ps3/360. Looks like there is no need to port mario&sonic type games to Ps3/360 as there seems to be no reason to port a game like CoD:WaW to wii.

I wonder: don't lots of them also want to make the next Zelda or Mario?

True, Gabe Newell and Will Wright do like the Wii best, amongst many others, so I suppose this is true. Bit of a non-sequitir, though.

Things won't look as purdy, true. Have we sunk to the point where shiny graphics are all Western developers can do, though?

Can't argue with this. Dead Rising on the 360 is probably going to butcher the Wii version. Still, I'm having trouble of thinking of any other game that requires the processing power to run 1,000 enemies simultaneously, without using run-arounds.

As opposed to last generation, when most games could be but often weren't ported over to the Gamecube. Man, I can't imagine why Nintendo didn't think about making it easier for third-parties to port stuff to their console.

"Sure, the stuff I said above to prove my point isn't really true, but still listen to me because..."?

I'd love for opposing counsels to learn their brief-writing from this guy.

I remember when people said the same thing about the DS/PSP split.

How's that working out again?

A thousand VGChartz bucks to the man who can find a single quote about Nintendo saying this. Mind you, it fits with the pattern of the article: use half-ass logic, ignore stuff that doesn't agree with you, and arrive at your conclusion hoping that no one noticed your thesis' lack of connection with reality.

There are valid ways to make the argument that third-parties shouldn't devote their best teams to the Wii. This guy doesn't even approach making any of them.

wii will follow in the footsteps of the DS

See, I can't entirely agree with the OP. If RE4 can be put on the Wii and look as it does, there is NO excuse for any other game should look any worse than that. The tech exists, and it works. Also, take Mushroom Men, another game very well polished on the Wii. The technology isn't THAT limiting. The Wii is STILL significantly stronger than the original XBox, so no game should look any worse than the best original XBox game, or any worse than even the BEST looking game of last generation.

The issue that exists is that there aren't any Wii-specific high quality engines open for licensing yet. This is to be expected, as they are in development, since devs have seen the light that the Wii is the clear winner this generation. Once a high quality Wi-specific engine is readily available for licensing, you will see more games with higher quality visuals, that take full advantage of the entire Wii hardware.

Overall, I think people are just jumping the gun on a system that's only been out for 2 years so far. A AAA title can take up to 3 years to develop from the R&D process onward. So that means that a Wii game that started development at the launch of the Wii might take up till 3 years into the console's life. Expect to see improvement in 2009 and 2010, since this will be a big push for quality titles for the Wii.

I think the answer to these developers is "too bad." I don't get to do exactly what I want at my job, either. This furthers my sense of developers as little man-children, who want to do what THEY want, and not what consumers want. As a database administrator for a hospital, I'd be fired almost instantly if I did everything "my way" despite requests to the contrary from my customers.

If the argument is that programmers or artists would rather work on a game that stretches their abilities to the max -- and allows them to create the greatest works possible (like Doom, or Command & Conquer, or... I assume... Mario 64, or LoZ:OOT), that's fair. In fact, that's something they can be proud of.

However, this argument (like so many others) really boils down to a belief that, somehow, graphics are exclusively what makes games good. A stupid, stupid argument.

Programming is a complicated business, and while making wonderful graphics is tough, there are plenty of other design challenges. Like making an interesting story. Or an easy-to-pick-up interface that eventually leads to deep controls. Or fun gameplay. The Wii affords a lot of things for the ambitious programmer/designer to sink his teeth into.

Not only that, but with its motion controls (however well they've been implemented thus far), programmers have the opportunity to push game design to places its never yet been. It would be like working on the 1st gen of 3d titles. It's a brave new world, and if you were really looking to stretch your craft and create something unique, Wii would be the place to do it.

Finally... is it really the implementers that get the decision about what system they design games for? I would imagine that it's actually the bosses and/or investors who make those kinds of calls, and that they're ultimately not about artistic fulfillment, but trying to profit so that they don't go out of business. The fact that so many third party developers are in financial jeopardy seems to indicate that, so far, they've been making some very bad choices...

Wow, Reggie is amazing, and the deduction by that Capcom guy was sheer brilliance.

Hmm, I wonder who is cracking down on Reggie to crack down on publishers... maybe Nintendo's got some rotten apples?

Maybe... from where I see this thing, it seems odd that Reggie would comment at all on the subject, these publishers are just afraid of Nintendo and that all, eventually consumer end versus production losing it's return will force someone to play their cards... but why is Reggie even talking V_V.

So confusing, maybe somethings going to happen... I wonder if it will a gaming change.. it's just rare to see him talking about something trivial... but I guess it happens.