Smashchu2 said:
Shadowblind said:
Smashchu2 said:
mrstickball said:
I think part of the issue is that the Wii has fragmented the gamer base into 2 categories: The HD base, and the Wii base.
Never before has there been such a fragmentation. Last generation, there was a pretty clear choice - You had the PS2 for any project, and it was near-assured to garner huge sales. And then there was the GC and Xbox as 2nd-tier products, multi-plat games, or moneyhatting situations that could give increased profitability.
Not so with the Wii/HD comparison. It's a catch 22: Spend tons of cash on a blockbuster HD game and it either does great, and makes tons of cash...Or does OK and hurts (ala Haze or Lair).
The other option is the Wii, which has seen horrible returns for some games..Works for casual games, but that also fragments your work force - Few games seem broad success between all 3 platforms. Madden would be a great example of this...Despite the huge install base of the Wii, Madden sales have been nothing short of abysmal given the install base.
Part of it is the developers fault, part of it is the HW manufacturers fault - and all of them. No one is without blame. Nintendo put out trashy hardware that fragmented the abilities of developers, while the HD manufacturers put out systems that exponentially increased costs past what may be viable for the average game. |
Sorry to only reply to late post, but there are some serious misconceptions made here.
First, none of this is Nintendo's fault. If you think this, then don't talk about video games. Why so harsh? Look at the PS2 compared to the Gamecube and XBox. The PS2 was the weakest system of the three. Some may say the games still looked better, but that is a result that everyone wanted to work on it. Thus, the system had the best looking games. Becuase of this, no one came blame Nintendo for weaker hardware.
I don't think you understand the situation quite well here-- the PS2 did have the weakest hardware last gen, but it was so close to the Xbox and Gamecube it practically didn't matter to anyone. The Wii is much weaker then the 360 or PS3.
You can't blame Nintendo for third parties not wanting to make a non-HD game. Their system is the best selling, and as far as we know, there is no problem coding for it. It is the best selling system. I guess people are going to blame Nintendo making a system people want.
If it was best selling at games then there wouldn't be this issue. Consoles sold =/= games sold. And, despite popular belief(on this board), its not just because "teh dum developerz just wantz teh HDs"
The fragmentation of the industry was it's own doing, not Nintendo. The PS2 was the weakest system and publishers still released game for it. Now, instead of supporting the Wii like they should*, they make overpriced HD games. We are seeing this ideology fail, yet Nintendo makes money hand over fist. Their software is making record numbers, yet the industry dries because they can't compete. Anyone with any sence knows this is false. Look at many of the other franchises that have done well over time. Look at Blizzard for instance. They have made many titles, Blue Ocean ones in fact, and they sell extremely well. Nintendo alone is nothing special; it is how they work. If a western company can do it, why can't the others. It is a matter of third party incompetence.
So why do third party's fail at every turn. Here is why
Mmmm, I hardly call the million sellers on the HD systems "failing" in any way. Look at Konami; MGS4 had a MASSIVE cost, and made all of it up and more. They posted a surplus. The real culprit here is the economy. Western studios are effected even more then Eastern, from the look of things. Obviously low selling games would be creating losses, but not the "uber death losses" that HD gaming is so terribly blamed for(on this board anyway).
The other option is the Wii, which has seen horrible returns for some games..Works for casual games, but that also fragments your work force - Few games seem broad success between all 3 platforms. Madden would be a great example of this...Despite the huge install base of the Wii, Madden sales have been nothing short of abysmal given the install base.
They follow this flawed logic. Why is there terrible return. It certainly isn't making the wrong games or making shallow soulless games for a quick but, or even underfunding Wii project to support the HD one. Nope. It's Nintendo. They fragmentated the market. If they were gone, none of this would have happened.
Technically, yes. But the entire paragraph is absolutely inconsistent with the rest of your explanation. Zack and Wiki certainly wasn't a souless port, and its not even sold 500k. De blob, CoD WaW, both great games. Both below 500k.
In fact, lets talk about Madden. First, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think a games needs to be on all three platforms. NOW, don't say "There can't be console exclusives anymore." The PS2 had many exclusives. No one has given a reason why that can't work here. Of course, the first thing they'll look at it PS3/360 games, but I'll touch on that in a minutes.
Madden was great on the Wii.
Madden doesn't sell on the Wii. Hmmm, that's weird. Guitar Hero sells on the Wii. Both Resident Evil games sold well on the Wii despite being M rated games. In fact, to praise Guitar Hero once more, it is only .02 behind the 360 version. Odd huh? So the problem must not be the Wii, so the blame is not on Nintendo. Perhaps it is the fault of EA. Perhaps they should take note that the last Madden game sold 1.55 copies on the 360. Maybe it's not the Wii, but the fact consumers don't want Madden. Or, perhaps the Wii version isn't up to snuff.
The Wii version was fine on the Wii. Resis have had success on the Wii, and it deserves credit for that.
Also, the logic against exclusive is the third parties feel they can't make enough money this way. Of course, the real problem is (drumroll)
- The games are too expensive. If they didn't make these multimillion dollar monsters, they might not have to make two versions. Of course, it's easy to make a PS3/360/PC port (although not always for the latter). The third party publishers try to use this logic when making a Wii title. The title often fail becuase it is a half asked port with useless waggle (again, a thing third party companies think Wii owners love). This futher cements their logic and leads to their demisde.
- So your saying if it isn't a half assed port it will sell well? CoD WaW and Madden certainly weren't bad games on the Wii.
- It is becuase they support the losing team. I know some PS3/360 fan will get angry, but it's true at this point. In the last generation, you didn't see many XBox or Gamecube exclusives (save for 1st party games). The PS2 did, however. This is becuase the third party publishers supported the winning side. This time, they are putting more focus into second and third place. In the begining, it wasn't stupid becuase they 360 beat the others to the gate. However, here in late 2008, it's glaring stupidity. Additionally, the systems have the higher development cost. the logical solution would be to put the most resources into the Wii games. It is not only the best selling system, but is also cheaper to develop for. Yet, despite this simple logic, third parties do the exact opposite. And, once again, the Peter Principle hits them in the back of the head.
- They are supporting the team that sells more games, which is all they care about. If there were exactly 6million PS8s out there and 40 million Wii2's, if every single person on the PS8s bought the game then you can bet people would be developing every game for PS8. My point, they could care less about install base if it doesn't sell more then the competition.
The logic in this post is part of the problem. How can you blame Nintendo when third parties outside of Nintendo can't sell their games. They sold on the PS2. They sold on the PS1. They sold on the SNES. So what happened? The blame can not be on Nintendo for their bad decisions (which are bad do to the bellying up of western developers). Logically, if the company's product doesn't sell you look at the product, NOT (I repeat NOT) the consumer or console manufacturer. The problem is the developers. They have an external locus of control. They make bad games and "Oh look, you can't compete with Nintendo. Well, I guess they'll be a fad. Now onto the next HD game." The bubble is starting to burst on these developers. Change their ways or be destroyed in a Blue Tidal Wave. Decisions, Decisions.
Nintendo didn't do anything bad. If anything they got the formula right to bring non-gamers into 'gaming'. They are doing fantastic for themselves. And for the last time, its like no on this board has been effected by the ****ed economy and just forgets about it all the time. If the economy was rolling on fine I doubt the losses, if the companies even posted losses, would be near as severe.
*I say this becuase the companies should, logically, put their resources into the leading console. The third parties should only look into what is in their best interest. If it is the Wii, then they should make Wii game. However, they don't. This is a big reason why they are doing so poorly.
lol.
|
|
I wont take very long becuase I'll probably address the entire topic with it's own topic.
I don't think you understand the situation quite well here-- the PS2 did have the weakest hardware last gen, but it was so close to the Xbox and Gamecube it practically didn't matter to anyone. The Wii is much weaker then the 360 or PS3.
Ah, true, but that does not mean it was not the strongest. The system was not the strongest and the developers made games for it. It was not the strongest, yet it made fools of it's competitors. It was not the strongest, yet it had the most software. Does this not sound just like the Wii? Yes, the system are so far apart. However, the PS2 had many exclusives. It would have been easy to make a port to the other consoles, a good one at that. So why is it that the third parties act differently to Nintendo then they did to Sony? The Wii and PS2 are very similar in terms of their situation, so why is the Wii ignored so? This is the incompetence of the third parties.
Again, it was so close in strength to the other consoles it did not matter. Resident Evil 4 was ported to PS2 from GC and had no downgrades; only upgrades. They wer THAT close. Compare that to trying to port Resident Evil 5 to the Wii. The PS2 was also developed before more because it sold a number of times more software then its competitors. The Wii doesn't.
If it was best selling at games then there wouldn't be this issue. Consoles sold =/= games sold. And, despite popular belief(on this board), its not just because "teh dum developerz just wantz teh HDs"
Oh, but it IS the best at selling games. Just look at those software sold.
http://vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?name=&console=Wii&publisher=&sort=Total
Wii Fit, Smash Brothers, Mario Kart, they all sold well. A lot of those games were redical ideas many third parties wouldn't touch with a 10 ft poll (and for good reason), yet Nintendo did it. Why can't the third parties do it? Blizzard can also pull of these feats as well. Perhaps it is not Nintendo's fault.
It is the best at selling NINTENDO games and games with the word Wii in the title. If it was 3rd party friendly, again, they would have made the jump long ago.
Mmmm, I hardly call the million sellers on the HD systems "failing" in any way. Look at Konami; MGS4 had a MASSIVE cost, and made all of it up and more. They posted a surplus. The real culprit here is the economy. Western studios are effected even more then Eastern, from the look of things. Obviously low selling games would be creating losses, but not the "uber death losses" that HD gaming is so terribly blamed for(on this board anyway).
Not I didn't say anything about million sellers. But, let's back up for a second.
Compare the sales of Metal Gear Sold to many Wii games. You'll see that a lot of them are higher yes?
The economy, as you mentioned, is not the cause of the current state of third parties. It only accelerated what is happening. The system was flawed from the beginning. The games cost a lot to make in terms of resources. You had to have more employees working (labor is your highest cost in a business), the power to run facilities, money for supplies like art resources, and anything else you may need. These games also take more time to make which means all of these cost more. You can make more money with a twenty person team making a low budget title for a handheld. This is how many small developers have lived. The system could not work. The cost were high and the buyers were few (the 360 is selling less then the PS2, and isn't moving fast enough). The margin were low.
Third parties were initially attracted to the Wii for that reason. However, they used it as a quick cash grab. As the sales show, this plan failed. They saw it as some other force and not their shady work. They then go back to making HD games. They continue to lost money.
Alot of NINTENDO games are higher. You miss the fact continually that 3rd parties don't sell even a fraction of what Nintendo IPs sell on the wii. And yes, the economy is in **** form right now. Most people that I know have alost a 5th or more of their entire savings. Companies would have been hit even harder. It may have only accelerated it, but it did so by an extremely large amount. Say, 5 years as a guesstimate.
Technically, yes. But the entire paragraph is absolutely inconsistent with the rest of your explanation. Zack and Wiki certainly wasn't a souless port, and its not even sold 500k. De blob, CoD WaW, both great games. Both below 500k.
Zack and Wiki failed becuase it focused to heavilty on demographics. Look at the name even. Seems kind of childish. The advertising for the game was incorrect. Of course, there is more too it.
But it was a great game. Great games always sold good on PS2, although there are a number of examples otherwise. Zack and Wiki was tuned right to the Wii's demographic, so by all means it should have sold very well.
Madden was great on the Wii.
The consumer disagrees.
The critics don't.
So your saying if it isn't a half assed port it will sell well? CoD WaW and Madden certainly weren't bad games on the Wii.
They weren't, but they also were not a major focus in development. The 360 version was usually always the main focus. In fact, I beleive in 2007 (or was it 2008?) they talked about how Madden for the 360 was the best version becuase it ran at a higher frame rate (ohhhhhhhh). First, consumers don't care. Second, the Wii version was pushed to the side. They decided, "Ok, we'll release this too I guess," and we get the Wii game. They may still be good, but the focus is wrong. For instance, Madden could be liked by the entire family. Football is America's favorite sport. However, they advertise it and try to sell it to the 18-35 people, not the family. Thus, Madden on the Wii misses the mark for it's lack of "testatorne" consumers.
Main focus is true on the HD consoles. This is because Madden has always sold more on the 360 and PS3 then Wii. They make much money off of Madden even on an HD console, so they'd have no reason to switch.
They are supporting the team that sells more games, which is all they care about. If there were exactly 6million PS8s out there and 40 million Wii2's, if every single person on the PS8s bought the game then you can bet people would be developing every game for PS8. My point, they could care less about install base if it doesn't sell more then the competition.
Install base always mattered. Look at the PS2. It had the install base, but it got the games. Your idea works only in theory. As a business man, you can't think like this. The always made PS2 games becuase there were more fish. Even if the fish in the smaller pond are easier to catch, you may not get as many fish as the bigger one. This is how the third parties thought during the PS2 era. Now, they share your logic. Tell me, by looking at the current state of third party developers who do you think is right?
PS2 got the games because it could SELL the games. The Wii=/=PS2 in selling games.
Nintendo didn't do anything bad. If anything they got the formula right to bring non-gamers into 'gaming'. They are doing fantastic for themselves. And for the last time, its like no on this board has been effected by the ****ed economy and just forgets about it all the time. If the economy was rolling on fine I doubt the losses, if the companies even posted losses, would be near as severe.
The whole point is that Nintendo didn't do anything wrong. Thats the whole reason why I wrote this. But anyway.
Wow, so the economy is the reason these companies went under, not their bad decisions. I'm sure they'll think that was the cause of their demise as well.
The times were are in ARE NOT BAD. The 70s were bad. The 30s were REALLY bad. Now. Not so much. Not to say we are dandy, but the economy is the biggest scapegoat of our time. If these companies were smart, they would be doing well. The banks in the 30s did not fail because of the economy; their bad decisions made the bad economy.
Not that bad. I think you don't know how bad the economy really is. The Great depression is considered one of the few economic ****ups worse then the one we're in now.
Its bad. Its that bad.
lol.
It saddens me you even think this. I assume you think the idea is outlandish, but let me take you into a new world. One outside the industry dreams and the talks of developers. It's called reality.
I can say I'm justified when I say that I am smarter then every third party developers who does not have 50+% of their resources in Wii game. WHY? Much like the PS2, the Wii is going places. It has sold over 1million units worldwide in a week twice. It will probably do it though the rest of this year. What does this mean? More people have Wii verses 360s. What else? That the Wii will have a longer shelf life then the other two consoles. What am I geeting at? Would it not be smart to make Wii games? There is a lot more money in the system. You may say more people buy PS3/360 games, but the Wii still has higher selling titles. To anyone with any business skill, this would be like saying "There's gold in them thar hills." Third parties ignore this and make PS3/360 games. They are starting to be hit hard. It was inevitable; the economy only sped it up.
lol.
|
