By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - RE4 Wii ships 1 million!

So I actually post links, you post none, but you still pretend you have don't have to prove as much.

Sorry, but you have to prove that those factors are hard to get around, since you made the claim first. And being less powerful is not enough to make the game expensive to port. I posted those costs as possible maximums. You are claiming those are the absolute minimums. You have to prove that.

You also have to prove the port will take two years.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Around the Network
twesterm said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
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.


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).


What studio? You didn't mention working at a game studio on this thread (and you shouldn't think mentioning them on other threads is good enough, since we can't look at every thread).

Plus what kind of games did this studio do? 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

LordTheNightKnight said:
So I actually post links, you post none, but you still pretend you have don't have to prove as much.

Sorry, but you have to prove that those factors are hard to get around, since you made the claim first. And being less powerful is not enough to make the game expensive to port. I posted those costs as possible maximums. You are claiming those are the absolute minimums. You have to prove that.

You also have to prove the port will take two years.

 You've posted links to an article saying that Wii games cost less (and I had already mentioned that number ealier) to make and definitions to what a game engine is (which didn't prove anything), that's really not a lot of proof.

Also, Capcom hasn't made any claims that they have any plans to port the game to the Wii so I have no reason to defend anything, you are the one trying to say that a port to the Wii is possible and should be done because it wouldn't be hard.



twesterm said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
So I actually post links, you post none, but you still pretend you have don't have to prove as much.

Sorry, but you have to prove that those factors are hard to get around, since you made the claim first. And being less powerful is not enough to make the game expensive to port. I posted those costs as possible maximums. You are claiming those are the absolute minimums. You have to prove that.

You also have to prove the port will take two years.

You've posted links to an article saying that Wii games cost less (and I had already mentioned that number ealier) to make and definitions to what a game engine is (which didn't prove anything), that's really not a lot of proof.

Also, Capcom hasn't made any claims that they have any plans to port the game to the Wii so I have no reason to defend anything, you are the one trying to say that a port to the Wii is possible and should be done because it wouldn't be hard.

 

I did not claim it should be done. You're just putting words in my mouth. If you can't even refute my actual points, and futhermore ignore the rules of burden of proof, I'm not going to argue further, as you are clearly cheating, to "prove" your points.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Wait, you ARE cheating. Capcom not posting any plans to port the game is NOT the same as them supporting your claims it would cost as much as an original Wii game, and take to years two develop.

EDIT: I meant to write "two years", not "to years". 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Around the Network
LordTheNightKnight said:
twesterm said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
So I actually post links, you post none, but you still pretend you have don't have to prove as much.

Sorry, but you have to prove that those factors are hard to get around, since you made the claim first. And being less powerful is not enough to make the game expensive to port. I posted those costs as possible maximums. You are claiming those are the absolute minimums. You have to prove that.

You also have to prove the port will take two years.

You've posted links to an article saying that Wii games cost less (and I had already mentioned that number ealier) to make and definitions to what a game engine is (which didn't prove anything), that's really not a lot of proof.

Also, Capcom hasn't made any claims that they have any plans to port the game to the Wii so I have no reason to defend anything, you are the one trying to say that a port to the Wii is possible and should be done because it wouldn't be hard.

 

I did not claim it should be done. You're just putting words in my mouth. If you can't even refute my actual points, and futhermore ignore the rules of burden of proof, I'm not going to argue further, as you are clearly cheating, to "prove" your points.


 That's the talk of someone who knows he's lost to me. 

And I really don't remember who (nor do I care), but this started because someone said that RE5 should be ported to the Wii.  I'm simply saying it's not going to happen and nobody can come up with a concrete good reason why it should other than RE4 sold well and it had a good control scheme.  That isn't factoring in the most major factor: cost.  You can't prove it's going to be cheap and common sense says that it would be an intense project.  Intense = expensive.  I really don't have anything else to prove.



twesterm said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
twesterm said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
So I actually post links, you post none, but you still pretend you have don't have to prove as much.

Sorry, but you have to prove that those factors are hard to get around, since you made the claim first. And being less powerful is not enough to make the game expensive to port. I posted those costs as possible maximums. You are claiming those are the absolute minimums. You have to prove that.

You also have to prove the port will take two years.

You've posted links to an article saying that Wii games cost less (and I had already mentioned that number ealier) to make and definitions to what a game engine is (which didn't prove anything), that's really not a lot of proof.

Also, Capcom hasn't made any claims that they have any plans to port the game to the Wii so I have no reason to defend anything, you are the one trying to say that a port to the Wii is possible and should be done because it wouldn't be hard.

 

I did not claim it should be done. You're just putting words in my mouth. If you can't even refute my actual points, and futhermore ignore the rules of burden of proof, I'm not going to argue further, as you are clearly cheating, to "prove" your points.


That's the talk of someone who knows he's lost to me.

And I really don't remember who (nor do I care), but this started because someone said that RE5 should be ported to the Wii. I'm simply saying it's not going to happen and nobody can come up with a concrete good reason why it should other than RE4 sold well and it had a good control scheme. That isn't factoring in the most major factor: cost. You can't prove it's going to be cheap and common sense says that it would be an intense project. Intense = expensive. I really don't have anything else to prove.


 One of Capcom's producers said that the game could (not will, but could) come to the Wii, just that they were waiting until other projects were finished to even consider it. Naznatips posted links to that, which I guess you didn't bother to look at.

Plus even if intense=expensive, you still have to prove it will be intense in the first place.

Finally, that first comment shows your problem. You are more interesting in winning an argument than being right. Sorry, but I didn't say I was going to concede. I said I won't bother arguing when you cheat, and twisting words is cheating. 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

LordTheNightKnight said:
twesterm said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
twesterm said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
So I actually post links, you post none, but you still pretend you have don't have to prove as much.

Sorry, but you have to prove that those factors are hard to get around, since you made the claim first. And being less powerful is not enough to make the game expensive to port. I posted those costs as possible maximums. You are claiming those are the absolute minimums. You have to prove that.

You also have to prove the port will take two years.

You've posted links to an article saying that Wii games cost less (and I had already mentioned that number ealier) to make and definitions to what a game engine is (which didn't prove anything), that's really not a lot of proof.

Also, Capcom hasn't made any claims that they have any plans to port the game to the Wii so I have no reason to defend anything, you are the one trying to say that a port to the Wii is possible and should be done because it wouldn't be hard.

 

I did not claim it should be done. You're just putting words in my mouth. If you can't even refute my actual points, and futhermore ignore the rules of burden of proof, I'm not going to argue further, as you are clearly cheating, to "prove" your points.


That's the talk of someone who knows he's lost to me.

And I really don't remember who (nor do I care), but this started because someone said that RE5 should be ported to the Wii. I'm simply saying it's not going to happen and nobody can come up with a concrete good reason why it should other than RE4 sold well and it had a good control scheme. That isn't factoring in the most major factor: cost. You can't prove it's going to be cheap and common sense says that it would be an intense project. Intense = expensive. I really don't have anything else to prove.


One of Capcom's producers said that the game could (not will, but could) come to the Wii, just that they were waiting until other projects were finished to even consider it. Naznatips posted links to that, which I guess you didn't bother to look at.

Plus even if intense=expensive, you still have to prove it will be intense in the first place.

Finally, that first comment shows your problem. You are more interesting in winning an argument than being right. Sorry, but I didn't say I was going to concede. I said I won't bother arguing when you cheat, and twisting words is cheating.


 1) Could does not mean will.  All that interview said is that they aren't going to close the door on it because there's no reason to (as I stated earlier).  There's no reason to back yourself in a corner if there's no reason to at all.  There's no hurting in keeping the door open to RE5:Wii because it really won't affect sales.  They've said nowhere that they plan to to port it to the Wii, only that they haven't closed the door.   If for some reason it does turn out to be worthwhile because of whatever reason, then they don't have to go back on their word, otherwise they are just playing the "lets not upset the Wii fanbody game".

2) I've given plenty of examples why it will be work intensive in which you just keep saying the engine does half the work (which it doesn't) so it's easy.

3) Learn to take a joke.  When there's pointless bickering back and forth it's fun to throw random joke or jab in there every now and then. 



dude if it comes to the wii it comes to the if it doesnt it doesnt..
i cant believe u people still argueing ?



johnlucas said:

Here's a thought.

Capcom released Resident Evil 4 (a 3 year old game) on the Wii as a test.

The sales of the Wii Edition of RE4 were the proving grounds that determined Capcom's relation with Nintendo on the Wii project.

The sales are a success and Nintendo passed the test.


Half the test.

http://revoeyes.blogspot.com/2007/07/speculation-resident-evil-5-and-more-re.html

"When questioned why Resident Evil 5 was not currently in development for Wii, Kawata revealed that RE:UC and RE4: Wii Edition will be tests to gauge how well the series can perform on Wii.

In addition, Kawata and his team working on Umbrella Chronicles are still looking into how they can exploit the Wii remote functionalities and/or Nunchuck for the title."

So Umbrella Chronicles would be the other half. Considering RE5 is set for "sometime" 2009, seems like plenty of time to make up thier mind.