Support NeoGAF

[TheGreatDave]

665 people were crazy enough to buy the DS version with you.

Mistakes were made. I still believe in the 360 game though.

 

[shykyoichi]

But is one title enough to create a strong a reliable market for hardcore games that would convince publishers to devote a significant part of their businesses to AAA Wii games? Especially since the game's relevant in one region only. Of course, Wii will have more than MH3, but it all feels too slow, too little.

Every thing starts from nothing to something.

 

[onipex]

Because the original context of the discussion concerned how the casual accessibility of Wii Sports has influenced other games, and since (as you probably know) Guitar Hero predates Wii Sports, I was wondering how it's relevant. So I asked you.

Oh, I guess I misunderstood your question then since you didn't say name a game inspired by WiiSPorts that was half as successful, accessible for the whole family and not made by Nintendo.

 

[Jokeropia]

Games half as successful as Wii Sports period are a pretty rare breed, especially if they're not made by Nintendo.

It's pretty clear that consumers who choose the Wii are making their decision based upon an entirely different criteria and thus a sale for the Wii does not equal -1 for 360. It simply adds to the market a wholly new group

Again, this is just not true. 71% of Wii owners also have a PS2.

 

[TJ Spyke]

Again, this is just not true. 71% of Wii owners also have a PS2.

Uh-huh, and your proof for this is?

 

[Cromat]

It is as much 3rd parties' fault as it is Nintendo's. Had Nintendo been as obsessive about 3rd party support as Microsoft, Wii would have the most AAA games in development by now. Helping developers of most promising titles, financing marketing campaigns or simply moneyhatting are all strategies that competition have been successfully using for years. It's incredible that 360 with its very slow start managed to gain support of basically all 3rd party developers. But as of now Nintendo hasn't even bothered to change the situation.

They have, of course, the most popular console ever even despite that, so 3rd parties will eventually try something, but Nintendo should really encourage these baby steps with their own money to accelerate the process.

As I said before, I think it has more to do with the fact that most developers think that putting their game on Wii would make it an inferior product, and they are willing to make potentially less money to make it better. The alternate controls don't make enough of a positive difference on most games to make it worth losing all the HD benefits - graphics, sound, AI, physics and online. And it could be argued that many of the best selling Wii games would have been better off on an HD console.
Money isn't everything. If developers believe they will make a better product on the next-gen consoles then they will develop for them even though they are losing a lot of potential success on the Wii. That's why there aren't many big 3rd party efforts on Wii - not because 3rd party games don't sell, but because developers prefer making (what they consider) a better game even at the cost of making less money.

A good example would be RE4 Wii. Resident Evil 4 controls better on Wii than it did on the PS2/GC, and it sold well. Capcom has every financial reason in the world to bring RE5 to Wii, but it is still coming to 360 and PS3. Why is that? Because the developers thought that great graphics and online co-op matter more.

IMO the games that should be made on Wii are the games that could only work on Wii (such as Trauma Center, Excitetruck and Boom Blox), not the games that are gimped to work on it.

And about the Mario fetishism - i'm really glad someone brought this up here. Doesn't it bother people that Nintendo insists on putting Mario and co. in every single game, even in stuff like Tetris DS? The amount of Mario games is ridiculous. Wouldn't some of those sport games and RPGs be better off having original characters and settings? Keep the nostalgia-fest to Smash Bros.

 

[schuelma]

A good example would be RE4 Wii. Resident Evil 4 controls better on Wii than it did on the PS2/GC, and it sold well. Capcom has every financial reason in the world to bring RE5 to Wii, but it is still coming to 360 and PS3. Why is that? Because the developers thought that great graphics and online co-op matter more.
.

RE5 was started before Capcom knew the Wii was going to be a huge success. It was started waayyy before RE4 Wii came out.

You might be right that the developers would have still put it out on 360/PS3, but that decision was made well before Capcom or anyone else knew Wii would be a hit.

 

[ElFly]

Uh-huh, and your proof for this is?

NPD released a study a couple of months ago about this. Around 70% of the 360 and the Wii owners also own a PS2. The percentage is higher on the PS3, but given its smaller userbase, it means that most people who own a PS2 are moving onto 360/Wii.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Do you not see LBP, the whole idea behind what it's doing, as something that we'll see again and again in the future of gaming?

If LBP bombs and Media Molecule closes, do you not STLL believe shareable, user-created, online co-op/competitive gameplay will drive the future of our consoles?

Platformers are niche. The online content hub is not. It's where everything is heading to, LBP got there first.

I'd say that the console sales of UT3, Little Big Planet, and Far Cry 2 will actually have the opposite effect, as they've shown (unless LBP really takes off) that console gamers by and large don't give a crap about user created content or level editors.

They simply aren't a big enough selling point and will never be revenue generators to the same extent as selling pre-made map packs and expansions to the console audience as HL2, COD4, and Halo 3 have shown.

The fact that GHWT is bombing out of the gate despite its music creation tool, which is a fairly big step forward for the franchise, also points towards the trend of console gamers preferring static game environments and DLC.

I'd go so far as to say that nearly everyone who is genuinely enthusiastic about sharing level-editors with other gamers is already doing so on the PC.

 

[ElFly]

LBP did pretty well, considering its niche-ness, PS3-ness and being-charted-only-five-days-ness. It will probably end up passing a million of copies worldwide.

That said, it's not the system seller/PS3 savior that some crazy people expected. Of course, against such extravagant expectations it bombed.

Still, most people on consoles don't really care about user created content. And I'd say that in PC they are doing it less and less each day.

 

[gregor7777]

Were there any MotorStorm 2 sales?

Somewhere in the ballpark of 75k was posted earlier.

 

[Opus Angelorum]

Somewhere in the ballpark of 75k was posted earlier.

Yeah is was not an official figure but an aggregate from a few reports and referenced alongside the chart position (which was #28 according to gamesindustry). European numbers closer to 150K.

Again, not official.

 

[TJ Spyke]

NPD released a study a couple of months ago about this. Around 70% of the 360 and the Wii owners also own a PS2. The percentage is higher on the PS3, but given its smaller userbase, it means that most people who own a PS2 are moving onto 360/Wii.

Considering how many people bought a PS2 (or multiple ones given the reports i've read about the reliability), it wouldn't be surprising if the real number was close to that.

 

[onipex]

A good example would be RE4 Wii. Resident Evil 4 controls better on Wii than it did on the PS2/GC, and it sold well. Capcom has every financial reason in the world to bring RE5 to Wii, but it is still coming to 360 and PS3. Why is that? Because the developers thought that great graphics and online co-op matter more.

Yes, but COD 4 sold very well without the Wii and COD5 is still being ported to the Wii anyway. Besides making video games is a business. A business can not stay in business to long if they keep leaving money on the table.

It also does not matter if a developer does/doesn't want a game to go to a certain system in a lot of cases. The publisher has a say as to what systems the game will be made on.

 

[Cromat]

Yes, but COD 4 sold very well without the Wii and COD5 is still being ported to the Wii anyway. Besides making video games is a business. A business can not stay in business to long if they keep leaving money on the table.

It also does not matter if a developer does/doesn't want a game to go to a certain system in a lot of cases. The publisher has a say as to what systems the game will be made on.

Well obviously there are exceptions. Monster Hunter 3 also comes to mind.
But what's surprising is that stuff like COD5 isn't happening more, despite the Wii's huge ever-growing lead. Most developers don't want to put their big games on Wii, and especially not exclusively on Wii.

 

[Speevy]

I'd say that the console sales of UT3, Little Big Planet, and Far Cry 2 will actually have the opposite effect, as they've shown (unless LBP really takes off) that console gamers by and large don't give a crap about user created content or level editors.
.

It doesn't matter. Games are moving slowly but surely away from standalone single player campaigns and towards online content.

There's nowhere else to go but created content. It doesn't have to be a selling point. It's just something people will expect.

 

[HK-47]

As I said before, I think it has more to do with the fact that most developers think that putting their game on Wii would make it an inferior product, and they are willing to make potentially less money to make it better. The alternate controls don't make enough of a positive difference on most games to make it worth losing all the HD benefits - graphics, sound, AI, physics and online. And it could be argued that many of the best selling Wii games would have been better off on an HD console.
Money isn't everything. If developers believe they will make a better product on the next-gen consoles then they will develop for them even though they are losing a lot of potential success on the Wii. That's why there aren't many big 3rd party efforts on Wii - not because 3rd party games don't sell, but because developers prefer making (what they consider) a better game even at the cost of making less money.

A good example would be RE4 Wii. Resident Evil 4 controls better on Wii than it did on the PS2/GC, and it sold well. Capcom has every financial reason in the world to bring RE5 to Wii, but it is still coming to 360 and PS3. Why is that? Because the developers thought that great graphics and online co-op matter more.

IMO the games that should be made on Wii are the games that could only work on Wii (such as Trauma Center, Excitetruck and Boom Blox), not the games that are gimped to work on it.

And about the Mario fetishism - i'm really glad someone brought this up here. Doesn't it bother people that Nintendo insists on putting Mario and co. in every single game, even in stuff like Tetris DS? The amount of Mario games is ridiculous. Wouldn't some of those sport games and RPGs be better off having original characters and settings? Keep the nostalgia-fest to Smash Bros.

No for me since I really dont care about the characters in a sports game or a party game. Nintendo however definitely nets more sales and spread the Mario brand out to people who like many different types of games.
And the themes in Tetris where awesone. Playing Catch Mode while listening the Metroid music was just about the best thing Tetris has ever done

 

[Gaborn]

I don't see it posted yet so:

 

[AndresON777]

Wow FIFA in the top 20 good to see, and only on sale for 17 days

 

[Jammy]

Wow. There's more PS3 games in the top 20 than Wii games. Take a picture. That's not going to happen often.

 

[comedy bomb]

I thought the Wii version of Guitar Hero sold the most, but I guess not!

 

[Stoney Mason]

As silly as it is, the high sales for Fable 2 make we want to go pick it up now.


I feel like I'm missing out on some big collective Xbox experience that is taking place.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

It doesn't matter. Games are moving slowly but surely away from standalone single player campaigns and towards online content.

There's nowhere else to go but created content. It doesn't have to be a selling point. It's just something people will expect.

Again, I think you're being overly optimistic if you think there's going to be a point in the next 5 years where level editors become the standard over $5 map packs and $2 unlockable character skins.

The only reason devs would move in that direction would be if customers demanded it.

There is a very vocal community that loves the idea, but until you see games that offer these features consistently outperforming similar games that do not, most devs aren't going to bother.

Lastly, there is the question of balance, and where user created content fits in online communities that are largely centered around head to head multiplayer moreso than co-operative experiences.

 

[GarthVaderUK]

As silly as it is, the high sales for Fable 2 make we want to go pick it up now.


I feel like I'm missing out on some big collective Xbox experience that is taking place.

Resistance is futile.

 

[TheGreatDave]

I thought the Wii version of Guitar Hero sold the most, but I guess not!

3 and Aerosmith sold best on Wii, I think.

 

[dammitmattt]

One third party Wii game in the Top 20. Are there any other third party Wii games other than Guitar Hero: World Tour coming out this year that will crack the top 20?

On the other hand, there are 7 third party 360 titles and 5 third party PS3 titles in the top 20. Part of the problem is a lack of big-name third party titles on the Wii, of course, but it's still an interesting data point.

 

[ThatObviousUser]

I thought the Wii version of Guitar Hero sold the most, but I guess not!

Give it time.

 

[schuelma]

Part of the problem is a lack of big-name third party titles on the Wii, of course, but it's still an interesting data point.

I'd say that's the only problem, really.

What 3rd party game this year would reasonably be expected to crack the top 20? Maybe CoD?

 

[JJConrad]

Well obviously there are exceptions. Monster Hunter 3 also comes to mind.
But what's surprising is that stuff like COD5 isn't happening more, despite the Wii's huge ever-growing lead. Most developers don't want to put their big games on Wii, and especially not exclusively on Wii.

The # of COD5-like games has been increasing on Wii. Last Christmas, there were hardly big multiplatform games for the Wii. No COD4, no Rockband, no Assassin's Creed, no Skate, no etc... big or small, there weren't many full multiplaform games. This year, the cross-over is wider. There are only about 5 or 6 major 3rd party games not being released on the Wii this Christmas. There are still some gaps, but the Wii also has more of its own games to fill those in.

 

[Prine]

Every thing starts from nothing to something.

Zero to One? One becomes Zero?

As I said before, I think it has more to do with the fact that most developers think that putting their game on Wii would make it an inferior product, and they are willing to make potentially less money to make it better. The alternate controls don't make enough of a positive difference on most games to make it worth losing all the HD benefits - graphics, sound, AI, physics and online. And it could be argued that many of the best selling Wii games would have been better off on an HD console.

Totally agree. Faced with creating a next gen game i feel devs themselves would choose power over controls.

 

[titiklabingapat]

It doesn't matter. Games are moving slowly but surely away from standalone single player campaigns and towards online content.

There's nowhere else to go but created content. It doesn't have to be a selling point. It's just something people will expect.

I firmly believe that created content will never truly take off for the casual traditional console player unless there is an easier way to make said content. Using a game pad to make stuff is infinitely harder than making them using a mouse.

Probably the reason why LBP will not truly blossom, and why most user created stuff on consoles are merely passing footnotes and cool bonuses right now.

 

[dammitmattt]

I'd say that's the only problem, really.

What 3rd party game this year would reasonably be expected to crack the top 20? Maybe CoD?

That's a pretty big problem, don't you think?

 

[schuelma]

That's a pretty big problem, don't you think?

It's a huge problem. I don't know how much deeper the analysis needs to get when there aren't even any possibilities.

 

[Gaborn]

That's a pretty big problem, don't you think?

Yes, but for whom? Nintendo, or third parties that are missing out on a massive (and apparently untapped by many third parties) userbase?

 

[Stoney Mason]

I firmly believe that created content will never truly take off for the casual traditional console player unless there is an easier way to make said content. Using a game pad to make stuff is infinitely harder than making them using a mouse.

Probably the reason why LBP will not truly blossom, and why most user created stuff on consoles are merely passing footnotes and cool bonuses right now.

There definitely should be some sort of PC interface to create great content and then somehow push it back onto the console side. I guess some sort of software side solution like Unreal Tournament 3 or something.

Until then we'll have to live with what we have.

 

[Sadist]

Yes, but for whom? Nintendo, or third parties that are missing out on a massive (and apparently untapped by many third parties) userbase?

Both, to a certain extent.

Allthough Nintendo has it's first party hitters, they need third party games of equal quality to broaden their selection of games. To keep the system healthy and a lot of choice to keep the Wii owners interested.

For third parties, there is money to be made. But apparently the HD consoles are profitible enough, even without the Wii.

 

[Gaborn]

Both, to a certain extent.

Allthough Nintendo has it's first party hitters, they need third party games of equal quality to broaden their selection of games. To keep the system healthy and a lot of choice to keep the Wii owners interested.

Agreed here, though at least for right now it doesn't seem to be hurting the Wii down the road it's a concern.

For third parties, there is money to be made. But apparently the HD consoles are profitible enough, even without the Wii.

Do you have any data to back that up? This is about eight months old but I don't believe I've seen a similar and more recent compilation of data:

 

[Psychotext]

Those Nintendo, MS and Sony numbers are worthless... given they include all of their hardware too.

(Rest should be fine for your example though obviously)

 

[Gaborn]

Those Nintendo, MS and Sony numbers are worthless... given they include all of their hardware too.

Agreed for the most part, since we're discussing third parties. Though I will say it does show some substantial third parties losing money and I don't think they're doing so in Wii development.

 

[NintendosBooger]

Well, with Wii and DS's first place status all but confirmed and with both experiencing a level of success never before seen in the gaming industry, I feel it's about time for the Big N to tighten up the screws on certain third parties. Nintendo did it during their previous reign, Sony did it, and now it's time for the revitalized overlords of gaming to finally re-succumb to the black-balling practice they've invented, for the sake of quality. I think, in this flailing and volatile economy, ole Mother Brain will find the small or struggling third-party companies more susceptible to such external pressures.

 

[Sadist]

Yeah, we all know that graph. But, it doesn't tell us anything about software sales for all the systems. How it's divided and everything.

I have no doubt that several publishers/developers have problems with bringing 360 and PS3 titles onto the market, but there are enough of them that have a lot of succes. You can't automaticly expect that when some developers pick up Wii development, that there will be succes. And a lot of developers/publishers invested their money in development tools for 360 and PS3 and structured their business model around it. You can't expect companies to alter their business models because the unexpected happened. If you would change it, there would be more costs and evertyhing. They just want their initial investments back and for some the 360/PS3 approach works. Complimented with some Wii development of course.

 

[Gaborn]

Yeah, we all know that graph. But, it doesn't tell us anything about software sales for all the systems. How it's divided and everything.

I have no doubt that several publishers/developers have problems with bringing 360 and PS3 titles onto the market, but there are enough of them that have a lot of succes. You can't automaticly expect that when some developers pick up Wii development, that there will be succes. And a lot of developers/publishers invested their money in development tools for 360 and PS3 and structured their business model around it. You can't expect companies to alter their business models because the unexpected happened. If you would change it, there would be more costs and evertyhing. They just want their initial investments back and for some the 360/PS3 approach works. Complimented with some Wii development of course.

Right, but you made the claim that the PS3 and 360 have been profitable for developers. Show me evidence that it has been that way.

 

[titiklabingapat]

Yeah, we all know that graph. But, it doesn't tell us anything about software sales for all the systems. How it's divided and everything.

I have no doubt that several publishers/developers have problems with bringing 360 and PS3 titles onto the market, but there are enough of them that have a lot of succes. You can't automaticly expect that when some developers pick up Wii development, that there will be succes. And a lot of developers/publishers invested their money in development tools for 360 and PS3 and structured their business model around it. You can't expect companies to alter their business models because the unexpected happened. If you would change it, there would be more costs and evertyhing. They just want their initial investments back and for some the 360/PS3 approach works. Complimented with some Wii development of course.

Actually we do. Especially with the big publishers. Financial reports have been posted here of the biggest western publishers.

Activision, Ubisoft and alot of the Japanese publishers are in blue. Coincidentally, alot of them have substantial DS(Ubi, Japanese companies) and Wii(Activision, Capcom) presence and revenue.

Those in the red either have substantially lower Wii/DS revenue(EA) or simply have no presence on Nintendo system until recently(T2).

Sega is just being Sega just so I can cover my butt with that one lol

 

[solid2snake]

RE5 was started before Capcom knew the Wii was going to be a huge success. It was started waayyy before RE4 Wii came out.

You might be right that the developers would have still put it out on 360/PS3, but that decision was made well before Capcom or anyone else knew Wii would be a hit.

so, RE5wii with the RE4 engine by the RE4wii dev-team?

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Right, but you made the claim that the PS3 and 360 have been profitable for developers. Show me evidence that it has been that way.

Looking at the list of companies in the red, are there really any surprises?

There's Sony and MS, who've released loss-leading hardware with the hopes of making it back with software.

EA, who spent an absurd 2 billion on two developers who've never had a massive breakout hit. They also have a pretty significant amount of Wii releases (and Wii bombs), I might add.

Midway, who banked heavily on Stranglehold and a PS3-exclusive UT3 to carry them through last holiday season.

Atari, who's tentpole release was the abysmal Alone in the Dark.

Sega lol.

And Take 2, a company so horribly mismanaged that they can't even make money off of GTA4 and have been investigated for bad book-keeping.

Do any of these companies, aside from perhaps EA, really deserve to be overwhelmingly profitable this generation?

Maybe it's in part due to the US' current economic woes, but where did we get the notion that everyone in the industry has to do well in order for the industry to grow, or that everyone deserves to do well? If you continuously put out over-budget shit games that no one wants to play, you don't deserve to make money or have a job. It's not nice but it's the way it is.

 

[Sadist]

Right, but you made the claim that the PS3 and 360 have been profitable for developers. Show me evidence that it has been that way.

Well you have reports on GAF of certain third parties posted. I've seen it in there, but I can't give you any links at the moment. I have to start searching for specific posts aswell and I'm to lazy right now . But I can't give you the data at the moment. Maybe a question for the people who have the financial links bookmarked.

Actually we do. Especially with the big publishers. Financial reports have been posted here of the biggest western publishers.

Yes, but not in the graph posted by Gaborn.

so, RE5wii with the RE4 engine by the RE4wii dev-team?

After finishing Dead Rising Wii, I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[thestopsign]

Rayman and possibly Shaun White's Snowboarding will break the top 20, or at least pull in decent numbers. I think the real testament to Wii game sales will come later, possibly the beginning of 2009, which has lots of big releases, third party and otherwise.

 

[mentalfloss]

Looking at the list of companies in the red, are there really any surprises?

There's Sony and MS, who've released loss-leading hardware with the hopes of making it back with software.

EA, who spent an absurd 2 billion on two developers who've never had a massive breakout hit. They also have a pretty significant amount of Wii releases (and Wii bombs), I might add.

Midway, who banked heavily on Stranglehold and a PS3-exclusive UT3 to carry them through last holiday season.

Atari, who's tentpole release was the abysmal Alone in the Dark.

Sega lol.

And Take 2, a company so horribly mismanaged that they can't even make money off of GTA4 and have been investigated for bad book-keeping.

Do any of these companies, aside from perhaps EA, really deserve to be overwhelmingly profitable this generation?

Maybe it's in part due to the US' current economic woes, but where did we get the notion that everyone in the industry has to do well in order for the industry to grow, or that everyone deserves to do well? If you continuously put out over-budget shit games that no one wants to play, you don't deserve to make money or have a job. It's not nice but it's the way it is.

So what you're saying is.. if these developers make good games, they'll be rewarded. Otherwise, they will continue to make half-assed games and get nowhere near Nintendo's profit level and success.


Holy shit.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

Why are people actually surprised at the PS3 numbers vs the X360 numbers? The console is like twice as cheap with alot of the same games. IT SHOULD SELL MUCH BETTER!!!! The PS3 actually fared better than I thought it would. I will never understand the Wii's numbers and momentum. Different demographic I suppose.

 

[onipex]

I'd say that's the only problem, really.

What 3rd party game this year would reasonably be expected to crack the top 20? Maybe CoD?

There is another Starwars game coming out that is targeted towards kids. The Starwars name alone could get it in the top 20.

Rockband could also crack it and Sonic games sell well on Wii.