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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Third Party Devs have made up their minds about the Wii.

Oh, and my point about break out hits being the vast bulk of Wii sales is true. Of the 1500 or so Wii games, and the total 436.84 million Wii software sales, 302.72 million belong to the roughly 50 million sellers.



A game I'm developing with some friends:

www.xnagg.com/zombieasteroids/publish.htm

It is largely a technical exercise but feedback is appreciated.

Around the Network
MaxwellGT2000 said:
psrock said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
psrock said:
vonboysp said:


if they'd rather get attention then make a profit, fine by me.

Activision made 1 billion dollars in 2 months from one game, if they don't make a profit, we need to investigate.

The game generated 1 billion revenue, not all of that is money they "made", you gotta take out that 200 million ad campaign they touted first, then shipping, production, retail cut, development costs, taxes, etc etc...

so, it's still 800 million left and they still selling. Please, if you  are going to use the revenue excuse, at least know the budget one.

... Whats with the attitude?  Don't act like that expecting people to respond nicely...

They said 1 billion in revenue... it's been no different since the news hit... but revenue is not profit which is what a company "makes" on a game, if they had 1 billion revenue but somehow spent 2 billion on the game they didn't "make" jack.

Am I saying this game didn't make a shit ton of money? no I'm not.  Am I saying that revenue isn't profit? Why yes I am because its a common misconception and it spreads worse than the plague.

Just like the average HD game (from EA's mouth) takes about 1.1 million copies to break even thats roughly 66 million revenue, but look at Rockstar saying Red Dead Redemtion needs 5 million copies at full price to break even, thats 300 million in revenue, and they wont make money until they break that plane.

No matter how much revenue they make, if it cost them more than that revenue to make then they don't "make" that money, the only time you can claim revenue = profit is if something cost them nothing and that doesn't happen in business.

But in trying to respond to me saying they made 1 billion dollars, which the game generated, you made the same mistake I made. Budget is not actual amounts used, it's the amount you put aside which you can use.  It's not actual money spent. I doubt they used 200 million dollars for marketing, when big movies don't even use that much.

My point still stands, the game still made 1 billion dollars, and if Activision doent make a profit, we need to investigate.



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
Demotruk said:
Johann said:

Is it really that bad? Is the support really just one game that outsold everything?

I don't think it is because I don't hear about many 3rd party efforts on the Wii which have sold ridiculous ammounts (comparable to Playstation 3's and X360's 1st or 3rd party games I mean, as nothing ever compares to Nintendo's games). So I think it's pretty spread out.

I could be completely wrong, but I don't think the top 5 best selling 3rd party games on the Wii count for that much of the total 3rd party sales. In fact I think they count for much less than the HD consoles.

No, of course it isn't that bad. However, I'm using reduce to absurdity by following your logic to an absurd conclusion. It's your determinant of "support" that I am using in that hypothetical scenario, and it is invalid.

And my point is that the Wii gets 3rd party support. You might consider it mostly shovelware, but it does get it. And it sells too!

What kind of 3rd party support it gets is of no relevance, because the kind that it does get sells.

Your point would be valid if it was not getting any kind of 3rd party support or if the sales of 3rd party Wii games sucked. That would mean that  most of the developers/publishers that were putting games on the Wii were losing money. But that's not true. They're making money. As the sales of 3rd party software show!

 

If this is about the Wii not getting the kind of 3rd party software YOU want to play, well... you know what I'm gonna say.

PS.: Maybe this is about those stupid 3rd parties who have been claiming that the Wii doesn't sell their games. You know those guys are the minority, don't you?



Quem disse que a boca é tua?

Qual é, Dadinho...?

Dadinho é o caralho! Meu nome agora é Zé Pequeno!

Yeah!!  No more Bull sh*t from third non selling parties!!  (GREAT!!!)  Even the HD system third party games dont sell on those HD system.  Can't even manage to sell 10million copies of anything they put out between the two systems.. and they have  over 55 million systems out between the two of them. EPIC FAILURE!!!  So its nice that third party will turn down the "Lets try and make a quick buck switch" off, on Wii.  You can List as many 3rd party titles from all those companies for HD systems and it'll take several of any of those titles to even come close to what Nintendo sells.  If they would of treated the system equally at the gate then maybe they would be reaping in the dough but Nooooo!!  You had to put out Bull Sh*t!!  Those companies only annouced thier lesser support after Stores such as the one I manage and the Bigger companies announced that we arent carrying any more of thier Casual Sh*t.  I hope and wish the HD systems can manage or match or equal Nintendo's sales by themselves not combined so gamers and game sellers and game makers can keep making money and people playing games happy. Till then I'm stuck playing on the HD systems something with a different number behind it or something totally different on the Wii.  "DS RULEZZ!!!"



Well, on one side, it's a stupid move abandoning the best selling console of the generation.

On the other side, it's logical for 3rd parties to push consoles with weaker (as in less dominant) first party, so they can have larger piece of cake on their market. Plus, the market is less risky, the recipe for success has been set long ago, and all you have to do is to follow it and invest sufficent amounts of cash and talent. Opposed to researching what the weird wii demographic actually want from them.

Will Nintendo suffer because of that? Absolutely not. However you spin this, the Wii market will have atleast 80-100 million potential buyers, and mostly Nintendo releases to buy.

What I think Nintendo should do is, establish another publishing brand (N obviously doesn't want to be associated with lots of mature content) and buy a couple of talented studios (they're cheap now), and start some hardcore/mature projects. Establish some kind of guidance from key Nintendo people on their projects, and release the games under the newly established publisher. But Nintendo should do it asap.

The added benefit would be great potential for entering into the next generation successfuly, retaining the casuals which will have some brand loyality, and gaining core from the PS3/X360 markets with the announcements of mature games.

Then they would even have the strenght and ability to introduce more rigorous quality control of 3rd party games on their next-gen offering.



.

Around the Network

You know! A xbox360 or PS3 aren't that expensive if you really want to play those games then buy one of those! You still have a Wii for the awesome Nintendo games~~



Khuutra said:
psrock said:

And they also get some support ($) from MS and Sony which Nintendo won't ever do. Nintendo is not the nicest company to deal with either.

This isn't really fair. Nintendo not moneyhatting shouldn't be taken as a negative, because it shouldn't be expected

And if it's based on Nintendo's past policies, see the word "past". Nintendo hasn't done that since the middle of the 16-bit era, when developers were still supporting them.



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

psrock said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
psrock said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
psrock said:
vonboysp said:


if they'd rather get attention then make a profit, fine by me.

Activision made 1 billion dollars in 2 months from one game, if they don't make a profit, we need to investigate.

The game generated 1 billion revenue, not all of that is money they "made", you gotta take out that 200 million ad campaign they touted first, then shipping, production, retail cut, development costs, taxes, etc etc...

so, it's still 800 million left and they still selling. Please, if you  are going to use the revenue excuse, at least know the budget one.

... Whats with the attitude?  Don't act like that expecting people to respond nicely...

They said 1 billion in revenue... it's been no different since the news hit... but revenue is not profit which is what a company "makes" on a game, if they had 1 billion revenue but somehow spent 2 billion on the game they didn't "make" jack.

Am I saying this game didn't make a shit ton of money? no I'm not.  Am I saying that revenue isn't profit? Why yes I am because its a common misconception and it spreads worse than the plague.

Just like the average HD game (from EA's mouth) takes about 1.1 million copies to break even thats roughly 66 million revenue, but look at Rockstar saying Red Dead Redemtion needs 5 million copies at full price to break even, thats 300 million in revenue, and they wont make money until they break that plane.

No matter how much revenue they make, if it cost them more than that revenue to make then they don't "make" that money, the only time you can claim revenue = profit is if something cost them nothing and that doesn't happen in business.

But in trying to respond to me saying they made 1 billion dollars, which the game generated, you made the same mistake I made. Budget is not actual amounts used, it's the amount you put aside which you can use.  It's not actual money spent. I doubt they used 200 million dollars for marketing, when big movies don't even use that much.

My point still stands, the game still made 1 billion dollars, and if Activision doent make a profit, we need to investigate.

LOL Budget isn't money you use?  Because you put that aside?  Really???

Money you spend is cost, budget is the planned cost, you can go over budget and it'll cost more.

Revenue isn't all going back to developers and owners of said game or in any business, this is how economics works, to get a gallon of milk you're not buying it from just the company that produced the milk, but the store that sold it, the worker that delivered it, the gas comapny that fuels the vehicles used, the AC company used to keep it cooled, etc...

In the end

Revenue - cost to make - retail cut - production cost - dilvery charges - misc. = profit and profit is simply their bottom line

The only time you'll really see Activision's profits or losses are at the end of their fiscal year, and yes if they don't make a profit here there is a serious issue.

This is all business 101



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000

MaxwellGT2000 said:
psrock said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
psrock said:
MaxwellGT2000 said:
psrock said:
vonboysp said:


if they'd rather get attention then make a profit, fine by me.

Activision made 1 billion dollars in 2 months from one game, if they don't make a profit, we need to investigate.

The game generated 1 billion revenue, not all of that is money they "made", you gotta take out that 200 million ad campaign they touted first, then shipping, production, retail cut, development costs, taxes, etc etc...

so, it's still 800 million left and they still selling. Please, if you  are going to use the revenue excuse, at least know the budget one.

... Whats with the attitude?  Don't act like that expecting people to respond nicely...

They said 1 billion in revenue... it's been no different since the news hit... but revenue is not profit which is what a company "makes" on a game, if they had 1 billion revenue but somehow spent 2 billion on the game they didn't "make" jack.

Am I saying this game didn't make a shit ton of money? no I'm not.  Am I saying that revenue isn't profit? Why yes I am because its a common misconception and it spreads worse than the plague.

Just like the average HD game (from EA's mouth) takes about 1.1 million copies to break even thats roughly 66 million revenue, but look at Rockstar saying Red Dead Redemtion needs 5 million copies at full price to break even, thats 300 million in revenue, and they wont make money until they break that plane.

No matter how much revenue they make, if it cost them more than that revenue to make then they don't "make" that money, the only time you can claim revenue = profit is if something cost them nothing and that doesn't happen in business.

But in trying to respond to me saying they made 1 billion dollars, which the game generated, you made the same mistake I made. Budget is not actual amounts used, it's the amount you put aside which you can use.  It's not actual money spent. I doubt they used 200 million dollars for marketing, when big movies don't even use that much.

My point still stands, the game still made 1 billion dollars, and if Activision doent make a profit, we need to investigate.

LOL Budget isn't money you use?  Because you put that aside?  Really???

Money you spend is cost, budget is the planned cost, you can go over budget and it'll cost more.

Revenue isn't all going back to developers and owners of said game or in any business, this is how economics works, to get a gallon of milk you're not buying it from just the company that produced the milk, but the store that sold it, the worker that delivered it, the gas comapny that fuels the vehicles used, the AC company used to keep it cooled, etc...

In the end

Revenue - cost to make - retail cut - production cost - dilvery charges - misc. = profit and profit is simply their bottom line

The only time you'll really see Activision's profits or losses are at the end of their fiscal year, and yes if they don't make a profit here there is a serious issue.

This is all business 101

It still comes out that MWF2 made 1 billion dollars. Yaeh, after you deduct the cost, the profit will lower.

And, it's always funny that only in gaming people use that revenue excuse, we have a big thread about Avatar making over 1 billion dollars, while most knew how expensive the game was to produce, no one actually brought that up.

When people ask me how much money I make, I never use the Net profit either, yet that's really what I make, but mostly everone uses the number before taxes and ect..

Again, The game generated 1 billion dollars in 2 months, if Activision doesnt make a proft, we need to investigate.



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)

None of the games on the HD twins excite me. And let's face it, the 3d parties hate the wii and what it represents. They don't have any excuse, they are just spoiled and arrogant.

For me they can go to hell and burn. 3 years of mediocre efforts and insulting games doesn't give thgem right to complaint.

Nintendo has showed that the real kings are consoles and their userbase. Not the 3d parties. Nintendo is much better without their garbage products.