Wowzers, so much quote wars. Seriously, just wait for Capcom to say "we're porting RE5 to the Wii!" or "No way are we porting that to the Wii!"

Until Capcom says one or the other you're just stockpiling crow to eat later down the road.

I know you're calling me out on money and work and I keep telling you why it does in fact cost a lot of money and work and even give you reasons. You just keep insisting that engines automagically do everything and don't give any counter reasons.

-edit-
And you're still the only one talking about HD and SD which I haven't touched other than saying I'm not even factoring that in.  I'm simply talking general power of the machines and what they can do and can do in conjunction with everything else.  Something simply has to give.

 First off, I know you've looked up what a game engine is and what they do but have you ever actually used one?  Like a real one (not something like RPG Maker)?  Developers use things like the UE3 engine because it saves them money from having to create their own and it's a good engine.  It doesn't do half the work, I really don't know where you got that.  Pick up an engine like UT2k4, Radiant, Hammer, whatever 3D one you choose, and work in it for a while.  

I also never really said these obstacles were unique, they are in fact something you see in creating a *gasp* new game or even a sequel.   With something like RE4 they didn't have to nearly that work and only needed a small team of programmers and artists.  With moving something like RE5 to the Wii you need a full team and a full development cycle.

As for the HD/SD, I see, just different terminology. 

You DON'T KNOW it will take a full team. That's why your insistance of the cost is a lie.

And you really shouldn't talk about what engines can and cannot do, if you confuse them with games based on the engines (Unreal 2K 2004), and map editors (Radiant Hammer). 

And now we're getting back into terminology. I say things like Hammer and Radiant because that's generally what I work in but I still mean the Quake engine (assuming I'm talking about Q4 Radiant) and Source.

And if things like art, programming, and design are needed to bring the game to the Wii, you do need a full team. Or rather than bicker back and forth, how about this: you DON'T KNOW it won't take a full team. That's why your instistance of the cost is a lie.

Realistically speaking it is probably possible to port RE5 to the Wii although I'm not sure if you'd want Capcom to take that approach. Generally speaking, Resident Evil games have been fairly simple in terms of interaction (typically scripted) and AI and have thrown most of the systems' resources towards graphics; on top of this they also have some very smart developers who take advantage of the limitations in gameplay to pre-render a large portion of the graphics. This single focus on graphics is why Resident Evil games have been some of the best looking games of every generation. Now, what this means is that to port Resident Evil 5 to the Wii the main thing you need to address the differences between the graphical capabilities of the PS3/XBox 360 and the Wii. In terms of 3D geometry the Wii is not as powerful but this isn't that big of an issue anymore; the jump in the ammount of geometry between the Wii and XBox 360/PS3 isn't that large and most of the additional polygons are acutally used to smooth the mesh. A good developer should be able to scale back the models to an acceptable level. In a very similar way the base texture should be also very simple to convert to use on the Wii. The area I would expect difficulty porting is pixel effects; even though the Wii has an advantage of not supporting high definition, on a per pixel basis the Wii is still much less powerful than the PS3/XBox 360. I expect that every surface in RE5 will probably have a normal map, material effect, and probably other texture effects. On top of this most of the lighting will be handled with per-pixel lighting effects which will be difficult to replicate on the Wii. Ultimately, the game could be ported intact on the Wii but I'm not sure if it would maintain the 'tone' due to some of the changes that would have to be made. It would make far more sense to create a spin-off series, and many of these problems would not have been issues if they designed for the Wii and upgraded to the PS3/XBox 360.

Even if you have the full engines, your own personal experience cannot give you a real indication of the work done by several people, who have years of experience in making games.

Plus I'm not claiming it won't take a full team. I'm challenging your claim that it will. Therefore you have the burden of proof, not me. You have the burden of proof of why the effort will cost too much, and you haven't done that, only insisted.

However, I did claim the game could not cost that much, so I will prove it.

========================================
http://www.neoseeker.com/news/story/6299/
Wii Development Costs Remain Low
Leo Chan - Friday, November 17th, 2006 | 12:15PM (PST)

Investment in Wii development expected to be a "magnitude" lower than developing for next-gen consoles

Nintendo's Wii is hoping to make a name for itself partly through its lower pricing compared to the competition, and such price differences are expected to extend beyond the retail environment. For example, third party software developers and publishers are lauding the console's lower development costs, which are expected to almost half as much as those for the PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360. This in turn could lead to potential profits, even in light of the lower-priced Wii software.

THQ Inc. Chief Executive Brian Farrell said that investment in a next-generation video game can run roughly $12 million to $20 million, while a title for the Wii could be in the $5 million to $8 million range.

"When you talk about the PS3 and the Xbox 360, ramp-up costs are significant. You don't have the same ramp-up costs on the Wii because you have the tools already," said David Zucker, CEO of Midway Game Inc., whose Wii launch titles include "The Ant Bully" and "Rampage: Total Destruction."

Will developers be able to use the Wii development tools to produce gold from lead?
========================================

Now THQ may not make the best games, they aren't cheap developers. $5-$8 million for original, as in made from scratch, games. Even if the costs of porting RE5 got out of hand, you're looking at, what, $10-$12 million, which would still only have to sell a few hundred thousand copies to make even.

Then again, you still haven't proven that costs for RE5 will be even that high. You just post a list of features, assuming they will be hard to do, when I've seen too many developers talk about how to get around those obstacles you mentioned.

 So you've just proven that a Wii game costs about $5-8 million to make?  Congratulations, I said in one of my earlier posts in this thread that a typical moderate budget game last gen costs about $7million so you haven't really brought anything new to the table.  I think you fail to realize that $7 million is a lot of money to waste on a port and isn't something that can easily be tossed around even by Capcom.

If given the choice between spending $7 million on a game that is either going to be an inferior 2+ year later port or a completely new game in the series they are going to go with the completely new game.

So again I'll throw your argument right back at you:
You still haven't proven that costs for RE5 will be even that low.  You just post definitions and assume it will be eay to do.  It's not nearly as easy as you think it is and it does cost money.

You DON'T KNOW it won't take a full team. That's why your insistence of the cost is a lie.

@HappySquirrel

Exactly what I've been saying the whole time. 

 And just for the record, I may have worked at the studio I'm at for a short time, but I have a little over two years experience which is pretty good.  Sure, it's not 20 years but it's stll significant (especially for an industry like this).