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

Forums - Nintendo - Why do most third party publishers ignore the Wii completely ?

cAPSLOCK said:
Pristine20 said:

Geez....people are still arguing about this? 3rd party devs have always had the freedom to do whatever they wanted. Back when the ps2 had 70% marketshare, some 3rd parties chose to go xbox exclusive with their games (think Panzer Dragoon, Ninja Gaiden, DOA, etc). There were no tears, everyone moved on because it was their loss. This should be the ideal attitude of wi fans but we get non-stop complaining instead.

Now, fast forward to the wii's gen. The wii hasn't obtained 50% marketshare yet yet it already has raging fanboys who think every game should be on their system since its 1st place. The industry ain't that simple. We were mostly given the idea that the wii ushered in a new type of gaming so why would a wii fan be clamoring for games like MW2 or Street fighter? These games still follow the "old school formula. It doesn't make sense to me.

You should buy a system for the games that are already on it or that you're sure would be on it in the future not because of mere assumptions based on marketshare. It'll save you headache. Instead of whining to capcom that sf4 or RE5 isn't on wii, perhaps you should get a 360? It's just as cheap as the wii. Some people list of games they think should be on wii that are exclusive to HD platforms are quite long. If you wanted those games, wouldn't it have made sense to have gotten a HD console instead of the wii? On the contrary, if you think Mario and Zelda are ultimately more worthwhile than all the 3rd party HD exclusives, then don't complain.

The point is you said "some" third parties and acting like there's any kind of parallel between between 3rd party support for the consoles, it's not "some" there are literally 0 AAA 3rd party titles on the Wii, in 3 years at 50% marketshare? Doesn't ZERO seem like kind of an odd number to you?  No one said "every game" and again you're creating some kind of extreme fantasy request to make it sound like your argument isn't a complete pile of shit while at the same time downplaying the fact that there has not been, to date in 3 years, one single solitary AAA 3rd party title.

Could care less about SF4 and MW2, but that level of EFFORT would be nice by 3rd parties for the Wii.

Again, your argument relies so heavily on these magical extremes I can't even figure out why you bothered to type it.

No....it uses pretty much all the logic people have been using when buying consoles since the Atari. You buy the console based on the games that are available and wil be available, not buy a console and pray to God that certain game come to it, and when they don't, complain about it.

And sure, no one specifically used the term "every game" but it sure as hell is implied. Every time the next blockbuster 3rd party title comes out, there's alwas a "Why wasn't the Wii considered?" thread or comment from tons of people, and since it happens every time, I would assume that it pertains to "every game".

So please pick your poison and stick with it. First it was complaining about why 3rd parties aren't putting their established franchises on the Wii, and now it's about certain amounts of effort. They obviously don't feel like putting their games on the Wii, so it seems like YOU made the wrong console choice. You don't see people buying 360s and complaining about why Ubisoft isn't putting the "Petz" games on that platform.

And in terms of effort, they obviously don't want to put effort into making a AAA Wii game, and instead invest in HD. Once again, YOU made the wrong console choice. If they want to "ignore buckets of money", let them, because at the end of the day, it doesn't matter if the company goes bankrupt, just as long as they produce a quality game that the consumer can play. It's just like what people have been saying about the PS3 since launch. Sony has been in the red since PS3 launched, yet they continually put out great games. Does it matter to you that they "bleed money"? It shouldn't, as long as you get enjoyable games.

You want established 3rd party franchises that aren't spin-offs or remakes, you're not gonna find the majority of them on the Wii. If you want games where 3rd parties worked extremely hard, marketed it properly, and makes people say "I must have this game", again, you aren't gonna find that on the Wii, based on what we've seen in the past 3 years. So instead of complaining about it, why don't you just suck it up and buy the appropriate console in which 3rd parties put "that level of EFFORT" into their games? As easily as you bought your Wii, you could've bought a 360 in which 3rd parties are putting that level of effort into their games

/smh

 

EDIT



Currently playing:

Unreal Tournament 3, Warhawk, Rock Band, Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy XII, DMC2, then 3, and Radiata Stories

"Stop the presses// It's been a while but I'm back in session// And in the past time my flow's matured more than adolescence// It's time to learn a lesson// So get you pen and your pad out, listen close, and take heed to this blessing"

 

Around the Network

Because they haven't mastered the Art of Printing Money.......duh!!!



Gaming make me feel GOOD!

psrock said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
"the ones that appear on the console are pretty bad like Dead Rising."

That was one, and it was bashed before it even came out. And then Modern Warfare showed Wii doesn't make HD games bad, so that's not a reason not to port to the Wii.

"which is sad, because we havent seen a true blockbuster third party game on the Wii."

Monster Hunter 3. The top selling third party game in Japanese home systems this generation.

FFXIII

I forgot about that. Oops. It was the bestselling before that. But it does show that making a hit on the Wii can be done just by making a hit game, not by making a niche game and acting as though it's supposed to be a hit (still looking at you, Extraction).*

*BTW, not niche because it's a rail shooter (Darkside Chronicles is already selling well), but because it's a slow-paced rail shooter.



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

"Oh please, it was a terrible example and you know it. Using Monster Hunter Japan only sales as an example that third party games sell on Wii worldwide is about as fair an example as saying platform games are highly popular just because NSMB Wii has sold well."

I wasn't claiming that proves they sell worldwide. It just proves that core hit third-party games do exist on the Wii. Try actually paying attention to context.

That game still has to prove itself elsewhere, so I'm waiting on that.



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

boilermaker11 said:

No....it uses pretty much all the logic people have been using when buying consoles since the Atari. You buy the console based on the games that are available and wil be available, not buy a console and pray to God that certain game come to it, and when they don't, complain about it.

And sure, no one specifically used the term "every game" but it sure as hell is implied. Every time the next blockbuster 3rd party title comes out, there's alwas a "Why wasn't the Wii considered?" thread or comment from tons of people, and since it happens every time, I would assume that it pertains to "every game".

So please pick your poison and stick with it. First it was complaining about why 3rd parties aren't putting their established franchises on the Wii, and now it's about certain amounts of effort. They obviously don't feel like putting their games on the Wii, so it seems like YOU made the wrong console choice. You don't see people buying 360s and complaining about why Ubisoft isn't putting the "Petz" games on that platform.

And in terms of effort, they obviously don't want to put effort into making a AAA Wii game, and instead invest in HD. Once again, YOU made the wrong console choice. If they want to "ignore buckets of money", let them, because at the end of the day, it doesn't matter if the company goes bankrupt, just as long as they produce a quality game that the consumer can play. It's just like what people have been saying about the PS3 since launch. Sony has been in the red since PS3 launched, yet they continually put out great games. Does it matter to you that they "bleed money"? It shouldn't, as long as you get enjoyable games.

You want established 3rd party franchises that aren't spin-offs or remakes, you're not gonna find the majority of them on the Wii. If you want games where 3rd parties worked extremely hard, marketed it properly, and makes people say "I must have this game", again, you aren't gonna find that on the Wii, based on what we've seen in the past 3 years. So instead of complaining about it, why don't you just suck it up and buy the appropriate console in which 3rd parties put "that level of EFFORT" into their games? As easily as you bought your Wii, you could've bought a 360 in which 3rd parties are putting that level of effort into their games

/smh

 

EDIT

This is one of those chicken or the egg things. Games sell the console and guess what? Nintendo makes the best games in the world right along side Blizzard and Valve.  No matter how much people like to sit in the corner masturbating with tears in their eyes over GTA4, it didn't move hardware like expected--all you have to do is look across the aisle at WiiSports which definitely moved hardware better than any game in history. There's a reason 19 of the top 20 best selling games are Nintendo (at least they will be in a few months).

Games traditionally move to the best selling console.

So here we are, the fastest selling console in history, the cheapest to develop for and a company that's getting people interested enough to pick up games like Mario Kart. Generally, this is when companies jump on board like they did with the PS1 and PS2. What's odd is that they're not, hence this topic.  My personal thoughts on it are that most developers just aren't talened or creative enough, not even worthy to wash Nintendo's sweaty ballsack.  Apparently people buy games for the Wii, because the attach rate is higher than the PS3.

We didn't make the wrong console choice. Apparently Midway, Sierra, Take-Two, Eidos, ACES, EA, and Activision all did--because all of those companies are either dead or had to make massive cutbacks. That's just the ones I can think of off the top of my head this year. Does that sound to you like healthy, strong industry? Especially amidst record profits for Nintendo? Sounds to me like they all backed the wrong horse and are getting fucked for their stupid decisions.

Good riddance, I hope a lot more companies crumble in 2010. Adapt or perish, and apparently most companies are choosing "perish"



Around the Network
cAPSLOCK said:

We didn't make the wrong console choice. Apparently Midway, Sierra, Take-Two, Eidos, ACES, EA, and Activision all did--because all of those companies are either dead or had to make massive cutbacks. That's just the ones I can think of off the top of my head this year. Does that sound to you like healthy, strong industry? Especially amidst record profits for Nintendo? Sounds to me like they all backed the wrong horse and are getting fucked for their stupid decisions.

Good riddance, I hope a lot more companies crumble in 2010. Adapt or perish, and apparently most companies are choosing "perish"

You sure do sound bitter for a gamer who did not make a wrong console choice. But hey, you can always have fun with wii sports, wii fit, mario kart and all other great games(*).

 

(* following part is directly from your previous post)

Obviously a game can not be good unless it sells more than 20 million copies.  20 million is a much bigger circle to jerk with than 5 million. The more the merrier.



"You sure do sound bitter for a gamer who did not make a wrong console choice."

It's the lack of respect and recognition to the winning console that makes us bitter.



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:
"You sure do sound bitter for a gamer who did not make a wrong console choice."

It's the lack of respect and recognition to the winning console that makes us bitter.

What is that respect&recognition you are looking for?



MRFENIX said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
"You sure do sound bitter for a gamer who did not make a wrong console choice."

It's the lack of respect and recognition to the winning console that makes us bitter.

What is that respect&recognition you are looking for?

You seriously don't know what we mean? Do you even know how the last generation leaders were treated?



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:
MRFENIX said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
"You sure do sound bitter for a gamer who did not make a wrong console choice."

It's the lack of respect and recognition to the winning console that makes us bitter.

What is that respect&recognition you are looking for?

You seriously don't know what we mean? Do you even know how the last generation leaders were treated?

I want you to tell me what is that "respect and recognition" you are talking about.