So if the author of this article doesn't like "waggle" what is he going to think of the upcoming xbox360/PS3 control inputs? I can sense the incoming hypocrisy already.....

I havent't read the whole thread (too many pages) but, we're talking about the IGN editor's conclusions, right?

Sure I was, and that's also how I interpreted your post.

I agree with everything written in the blog ( except megaman 3 being the best game ever ).

in the past years, i played about 4 hours of Guitar hero 3, 1 hour Wii Play and maybe 2 hours Zelda.
and i palyed thorugh rebel strike ( a GC game ).

I'm a hardcore gamer and nintendo fan, i bought the wii month 1, but I played it
After the Gamecube gen where I always sneaking a peek at the PS2 library, all the games I couldn't play, I thought that this gen, I bet on the right horse.
But Nintendo doesnt give a shit about those who saved their ass when they produced a pure failure console, the people who made them survive despite ridiculous business decisions in the 5th and 6th gen ( cartridges anyone ? ).

Ok, so the Wii has 8 year old hardware, Im fine with that by now. But I havent bough a game since mario kart, and that is for a reason.

A lot has to happen to convince me to ever buy a product of this company.



And it was just a matter of time since sth like this is being posted on a big website. its a logical consequence

@ Lord

'The Conduit would have to cost several million to lose money at the sales it has (so far, since it's only been out for three months). It's a Wii game, by a developer known for keeping games in budget. It's very unlikely it cost more than a few million.'.

If it cost a few million to make, how is that less than several million?

'Hence it most likely made money.'.

Most likely? You haven't the faintest idea how much it cost to make and market. That's not my opinion: it's a fact.

A few is 3-4. Several is 5-7. Few < several. Why is there any debate over its success? Both Sega and HVS have come out praising the sales of the game. HVS has not talked about canceling any of their 3,000 hardcore Wii games, and Sega is looking to publish more of them. Obviously money is being made by someone here.

What is 8 then? Is it not several?

No, he's not. He doesn't review games it seems.

I'd also like to add this link to an Ars Technica article dating back to June 2003, original -and apparently dead by now- source is MSNBC.

"Today, development costs for an Xbox or PlayStation 2 game run anywhere from $5 million to $7 million per title and sell for $49.99. And some game titles can cost upwards of $30 million"

I am too lazy now to go and look for it, but the numbers are in the same ballpark as those I read from other sources debating the economy of game development during the PS2 golden years.

Plus I'd add that some very small development teams have projected costs of about $3M to develop games on the PS3 using the free Pyro engine shared by Sony.

So when I hear that you can in 2008-2009 code and market a game on the Wii with quite a large staff working for a couple of years for "a few million", I get suspicious, as it simply doesn't sound realistic. Even if the Wii toolset and graphics didn't require any additional training or asset creation when compared to PS2-era development, when you factor in inflation we're clearly talking of averages quite over $6M per game.

Unless you externalize the costs of developing the engine completely, in which case it remains to be seen if those costs will be covered by future games.

I forget what the next highest up is. Several might cover 8 as well, but I am too lazy to verify.