"I still don't see how Pixar is a good example. What animation studio makes ostensibly "grander" films than them?"

It's not them in comparison. It's their approach. Nothing else.

"And, again, how is it that the movie comparsion works one way and not the other?"

It's not the movie comparison. It's the attitude comparison. Attitudes can apply. The media don't.

"It's not them in comparison. It's their approach. Nothing else."

But what makes you say that?

"It's not the movie comparison. It's the attitude comparison. Attitudes can apply. The media don't."

That tells me nothing. Why can't that approach work for a video game?

Attitudes are not approaches. How you use a chisel is an approach, but you can't use it for painting, just sculpting. How you feel about the results can apply to both, since both have results.

You can feel the same way about making a movie or making a game. You just can make them the same way.

But in terms of James Cameron's attitude, that can apply, just not for expanded market games, which is what the Pixar comment was discussing. He's a perfectionist, which is not required, and even detrimental, to those games.

I agree with the general gist of your... essay... lol. I can also kinda understand the publishers POV though. Take 2 new Ubisoft IPs such as Assassins Creed (HD) and Red Steel (Wii). Both had good advertising (at least in the UK) and both were of similar quality (as far as the critics were concerned). Red Steel sells OK, but Assassins Creed becomes the most successful new IP ever. On the other hand they can put in less money and effort into other genres on Wii that appeal to a different demographic and make a tidy profit even if the sales aren't brilliant. Ubisoft in particular was one of the few publishers that put any effort into Wii development early on with traditional style games. If we look at the more recent Wii titles they've published they're more in line with the new market of fitness style games etc. What this suggests to me is that they're making more money this way than they did at the start of the generation.

Oh, and after reading some of the other posts in this thread, I think LordTheNightKnight might need to work on your metaphors a bit. They seem to have confused most people.

"Oh, and after reading some of the other posts in this thread, I think LordTheNightKnight might need to work on your metaphors a bit. They seem to have confused most people."

Although some need to look at the context as well. The paragraph mentioning Pixar was about making a specific kind of game, not games in general.

A good read. You're condensing what has succeeded and what has failed under a few categories, which i think is necessary. If only there could be such a consensus, instead of people just saying "making a hit wii game is a shot in the dark."

"Take 2 new Ubisoft IPs such as Assassins Creed (HD) and Red Steel (Wii). Both had good advertising (at least in the UK) and both were of similar quality (as far as the critics were concerned). Red Steel sells OK, but Assassins Creed becomes the most successful new IP ever."

Critics are not the deciders of quality. The audience is, regardless of the game. Red Steel disappointed many, while Assassins' Creed was a successful take on the sandbox genre.

^Assassins Creed divided many. It wasn't a big blockbuster game by any stretch in terms of quality or a successful take on the sandbox genre as it was unbelievably repetitive. Having played both my own personal opinion was that they weren't that far apart. Critics might not be the be all and end all in terms of quality, but neither is going purely by sales. Red Steel I felt was very similar to Resistance on PS3. An OK game that sold well because of lack of direct competition. Yet Resistance sold better than Red Steel even though it had a smaller userbase to sell to.

Either way, it still did well-enough to warrant a sequel. Comparatively though, the few 3rd party core Wii titles released haven't sold enough to convince publishers to put more effort into core Wii development. What the Wii really needs is for that 1 core title that helps revolutionise it's respective genre and sells 5+million (so broad appeal as well) before publishers take note. I mean, most of the stuff 3rd-parties release are just copies of new and successful Nintendo titles (Sports, Party, Fitness).