"Do you think that they are abandoning the HD scene?"

Do you really think shanobi claimed they would do that? That's strawmanning his argument.

it might... all the game has to be shrink down and the game controls and gameplay has to be re done to fit the "special" way of playing in the wii... its not with magic powder that you transform the tradicional controls into wii controls...

GS: One of the bigger questions is the Wii, because that's dominating console sales now. Your company has been on the cutting edge of graphics since your foundation. But with the Wii's success, do you worry that a lot of bigger public developers are going to take resources away from triple-A development and then move them into mass market, Wii party games, for lack of a better term?

TH: I'm not really worried about that, because if you look at the data, the Wii is Nintendo--and then everybody else. And then among everybody else, it's licensed properties--and then stuff that people lose money on. So, for a really original, game-centric IP, if you're a third-party developer, I would say, "Show me what makes such a compelling case for the Wii." I'm not saying that it's not out there, but there hasn't been anything that's been demonstrated to be a really huge success.

So the game-centric game-based properties are successful on 360 and PS3, and PC, especially if you have a combined launch. They're not as successful on the Wii. In fact, if you're already doing those others, then maybe you add the Wii as your fourth platform. But if you look at the numbers, independent Wii-centric development is not really justified yet.

...

So somebody needs to demonstrate that there's going to be buyers out there that actually would show up and buy the games on the Wii. Even if we make an awesome game, there's still a question as to whether we're going to justify our investment. And also, I mean, if you look at the market, the type of games we traditionally make, those games are selling record numbers on non-Wii platforms. But despite the success of the Wii, and the fact that it's the largest-selling console out there, games like we make are still doing bigger numbers than they've ever done before."

The bolded are, in fact, " the same arguments of the last 2 years."

I can see where he is coming from as id has traditionally been PC developers, meaning that all they really know, pushing gfx.

however,

kotaku are full of epic fail.

They ruined the whole thing by adding at the bottom

"Would Madworld have done so on PS3 and/or 360?"

No strawman here. Maybe miscommunication, because that's what I intended with "flocking to the Wii". And do any of you really think that Activision saying that the Wii is their priority is anything but lip service?

But instead, let's go back to our topic. Please explain me the actions of EA and Capcom among others, if the Wii scene is so risk free. And please explain that remark about the "powerful enough".

And even with the same engine, they had to make the assets separately, instead of adjusting HD assets to work on three systems.

"Please explain me the actions of EA and Capcom among others, if the Wii scene is so risk free. And please explain that remark about the "powerful enough"."

Capcom and EA aren't abandoing HD systems, but they are not ignoring the Wii. They've had to turn around development, and that is not easy (ports save a lot of time, if not money, which is why they came before a lot of major games).

As for being powerful enough to match PCs, that is irrelevant to risk. 6th gen systems could still be put on PCs.

Agreed. I just wish he'd stuck to that point in this interview. Had he said "we make cutting-edge graphic engines, and the Wii can't really handle those" I, and most others, would have a hard time faulting him. It's when he started trying to justify his stance in the same old tired, disproven arguments that things went downhill.

Actually somebody should show Kotaku these:

http://www.vgchartz.com/games/game.php?id=26764

http://www.vgchartz.com/games/game.php?id=16625

http://www.vgchartz.com/games/game.php?id=26639

http://www.vgchartz.com/games/game.php?id=16109

There is no guarantee in this generation for good sales, unless big franchises (RE, Halo, Madden) or a ridiculous amount of hype (Killzone 2). Madworld didn't get any of those.

That's not the point. Ports could always be done. What is new is that you can develop multiplatform products using shared tools right from the get-go. It saves a great amount of time and money. Plus you can directly share many of the assets.

That's why developers such as id that were tipically PC-centric moved to multiplatform development.

Less money spent to develop for a bigger market implies less risk.

As for Capcom and EA... we're into the third year of the Wii. Why didn't Capcom do for the Wii what it did for the 360 with Lost Planet? Why did they limit themselves to ports and small projects on the Wii, but went all out with a new IP on the 360?

The answer is that MP3 and COD sales show that you're uncertain to cover a bill of 10M dollars, and considering that PS2 games did cost 5-12M, that's the approximate investment you have to do today for an A class shooter game on the Wii.

wow the dude didn't bash the wii at all like some are implying......id software hates consoles almost altogether, whenever they make a console game it almost always flops.....I think Doom 3 may be the only one that hasn't....they should stay on PC, thats where their audience is, most consoles fans don't care about them.