Post by: Crimm on June 05, 2008, 02:56:50 AM
After the fall-out from Ubidays and after the fall-out from Capcom unveiling Spyborgs, we've seen two distinct ways to react to detractors in your midst. Whenever a corporation opens a forum they need to be aware of the risks that entails. Ubisoft clearly was not, where as Capcom was.
Nintendo fans were understandably disappointed with Ubisoft's showing at their annual media event, Ubidays. While the Xbox 360 and the PS3 got new iterations of The Prince of Persia and Beyond Good and Evil, the Wii and DS got games like "Petz Dogz Wii" (which might only have "Wii" in the title because the screenshots look similar to Nintendo DS title Nintendogs) and "Imagine Teacher."
Some of their disappointment made its way to Ubisoft's public message board. The thread a moderator had created just for Ubidays 2008 became inundated with upset owners of Nintendo systems. Much of it was indignant, much of it questioned Ubisoft's decision to "forsake" the Nintendo systems, and much of it just seemed depressed. There were the usual animated gifs and clever catch-phrases, like calling Ubisoft "Ubicrap," that one would expect from an Internet message board.
Capcom's forum uprising came after they lifted the veil on their newest Wii title, Spyborgs. There had been substantial hype, much of it not directly the fault of Capcom, regarding the unveiling of the new title. The often overly passionate Nintendo crowd is prone to expecting the world. When the title was announced, and the first screenshots released, the response was mild disappointment. The images released did not feature the graphics one would expect from a "big" title. It is important to note that the game is not being released until 2009. However, that didn't stop people from saying, at Capcom's message board, that it looked "cheap."
When the uproar made its way to Ubisoft's message board there wasn't an immediate response. However, after a day or so of dealing with it, one of the Ubisoft "UK Community Managers" (essentially a moderator) posted the following:
"The true of the matter is this, the Wii is a very different console than what most games developers are used to. The Wii has managed to make a huge success from having games on it that just would not work on a conventional console. The Wii has also managed to increase the market share to a huge group of people that are not that interested in gaming. With Wii Sports, Wii Fit and all manner of games built for family play, Nintendo know who they are marketing for and it is not die hard gamers. If you look at the most successful Wii games, they are not amazing new AAA games, they are predominantly family orientated games/alternative games.
Looking at the current UK games sales for Wii Wii Sales Link, there are not that many traditional games in the top 30. Trends are changing and not everyone wants a new action game, FPS game or epic RPG, sales of the Wii proves that the majority want something different.
Parents who are buying a console for their children do not really care about Prince of Persia, Rainbow Six or Far Cry on the box, they want games that are going to be good for their children and not get them in the local newspaper. Why else would games like Brain Training/Wii Fit/Mario Party sell in the millions if people wanted hardcore games?
Check the Nintendo DS figures in the UK as well. DS Sales Link. Notice whose name is listed there a few times but also notice which games are listed? We make games that will 'hopefully' sell to a selected audience. We are a business after all, but Nintendo know which people are their market, just as Sony and Microsoft know who their markets are. Ubisoft have always been aimed at the more mature market (Look at our back catalogue) and in the last few years have started venturing into the casual gaming market. This is because that market now exists, thanks to the rise in popularity of the Wii and DS. The Wii is still a new console and it still has plenty of time to grow, Nintendo know this and Ubisoft know this.
As for Shaun Whites on the Wii, can you at least wait to get some more information and gameplay on it before binning it? Most people have seen a few screenshots and they already hate it because it does not look as good as the 360 etc but to damn a game just because of looks, and without actually playing it is just silly. All I have seen is various forums doing childish Photoshop screens, at least wait to see the game face to face before turning it into a humorous gif."
There are a few problems with his response.
First off, it can easily be read as sounding like "all the people who own a Wii are kids, whose parents have to buy their games." Clearly this is not true, and is insulting. Even if that was not his intent, you would have to be blind to not see it being read that way.
Secondly, it has been pointed out that the top selling games on the Wii are, by and large, not casual titles. Ubisoft's top selling Wii titles are, in fact, Red Steel and Rayman Raving Rabbids. I hold neither game in especially high regard, but they're both million sellers. However, the sales of Red Steel, The Legend of Zelda TP, Mario Galaxy, and Super Smash Bros Brawl all reject the argument that there is no market for "hardcore" games.
Third, he misstated the arguments that the graphics of Dogz and Shawn White Snowboarding (also shown at Ubidays) spawned. The general theme was not the graphics were below the level of the 360, but rather that they were below the capabilities of the GameCube. The Wii is significantly more powerful than the GameCube, and the theme was that there is no excuse for lazy graphics.
Lastly, he positioned himself as an Ubisoft employee. He used "we" repeatedly, and came off as if he was being "official." His position as "official" was amplified by the simple fact he is Ubisoft UK Community Manager. The fact of the matter is that he is paid by Ubisoft, by his own admission. However, he does not work there. His posts are not official.
His posting, which can be viewed as inflammatory, spread across the Internet via forums and blogs. It was as if the dam burst, and upset users flooded into Ubisoft's forums to respond to his post, which was often represented as "official" on the site these new posters came from. After 22 additional pages of people dissecting his post the thread was locked by a different "UK Community Manager" for being off topic and no longer "constructive."
As it stands, users are still posting in various threads, wondering when Ubisoft will issue a response to the criticism. To date, no official statement has been made, about any of the issues raised.
Capcom faced substantial less of an uproar, but responded much more proactively. In a thread that asked if Capcom was content to make "kiddie games" too, in a not too tacit reference to Ubidays (which had only occurred a few days earlier), there was an almost immediate response. Christian Svensson, Capcom's Corporate Officer/Vice-President of Strategic Planning & Business Development, responded by stating:
"Dark Void and Spyborgs are the two biggest titles our office is working on. To say that either of them isn't an incredibly high priority for the company, with major resources against them would be a pretty big misunderstanding of the reality.
The team working on Spyborgs is an all-star team of some of the best character action game developers in the world, backed by us. Have faith.
This is a game that is incredibly thoughtful in its design, incredibly varied in its mechanics and will be incredibly fun to play (both alone or with a buddy/son or daugther/father or mother) when its done.
The initial reaction here I swear is the EXACT reaction so many of you posters had when we first revealed Zack & Wiki. Somehow, Z&W is now a posterchild title for the Wii in your eyes. Mark my words... you will feel exactly the same way about the level of quality in Spyborgs when it is done."
This was an official response from someone at Capcom. It's hugely important that he had the faith to come in and assure the posters that this game will not only be good, but that it is high in their list of priorities. His other posts, from the same thread, compared the game to Ratchet and Clank (noting that there are members of the R. and C. team on Spyborgs), and offered additional insight into the game's origins. He even empathised with Wii gamers, referencing his previously stated distaste for Wii shovelware.
The difference in approach is staggering. Ubisoft was content to do nothing, until one of their Community Managers stuck a stick in the hornets nest. Even then, Ubisoft refused to do anything. Capcom, however, issued a quick and official reply. They promised a good product, and that the people who play it would view it as the next Zack & Wiki.
Ubisoft very well may have alienated some of their market more so than simply releasing these games would have already. Not only that, it brought extra scrutiny on games like Petz Dogz, which are clearly lacking in quality.
Capcom may have managed to sell people on the game before the consumers even know much about it. While the game may ultimately disappoint, it's safe to say that many people (myself included) are more optimistic about Spyborgs than they were prior to reading these posts. If it's true that Capcom is staking this much in the game then it could very well be great. The somewhat lacking screenshots aren't forgotten, but they're somewhat forgiven.
That's the double edged sword of operating a message board. If you hope to use it to promote your product you can't leave it unattended. Using it to communicate with your consumers can endear them to you, but saying the wrong thing can alienate them.
Post by: Crimm on June 05, 2008, 04:02:12 AM
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 05, 2008, 04:15:36 AM
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on June 05, 2008, 10:42:38 AM
YES! Longest blog post.
A third of it is made up of quotes. I don't think you get full credit. Sorry.
Nice analysis, though. This is the first time I've heard that the Ubisoft post was just by a glorified mod, which makes me feel slightly better, but the lack of any official response is still disappointing. I wonder if that guy managed to hold on to his position.
Post by: ShyGuy on June 05, 2008, 11:57:30 AM
I think Babyz Party got even more rancour
Post by: Crimm on June 05, 2008, 01:41:43 PM
One only has to see the shots from Petz Dogz Wii to know that it wont be good. Also, most of the animated gifs are of Dogz.
Post by: Rize on June 05, 2008, 03:25:18 PM
Understandably? This disappointment stems from the fact that Nintendo actively decided to try their very hardest to become "pop" and they succeeded. Why should anyone waste time making a "hardcore" game when they can make tripe that will likely make just as much or more money?
As an NWR editor I hate to say it, but Nintendo is all but dead to me as a console. I love my DS and I own a Wii... but if Wii2 was being released tomorrow I don't think I'd buy one (especially if the next Zelda was being simultaneously released for Wii and Wii2 with essentially the same graphics as a Wii game and Metroid Prime 6 and Super Mario Universe were pushed back a year). Sure, I'd probably get one eventually (probably; but truth be told I hate the Wii controller). Actually I take that back; I'd buy 10 of them and sell them on eBay.
Post by: ShyGuy on June 05, 2008, 03:28:21 PM
Post by: Crimm on June 05, 2008, 03:56:32 PM
A good game takes effort, regardless of market. I think there would have been less disapointment if the games they HAD shown were not in the sorry state they were in. Besides, "hardcore" titles do and have sold on the Wii.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 05, 2008, 04:50:59 PM
Post by: Djunknown on June 06, 2008, 12:04:50 AM
Quote
This disappointment stems from the fact that Nintendo actively decided to try their very hardest to become "pop" and they succeeded.
While its true that Nintendo has been hyping WiiFit to no end, they still release titles to satiate hardcore players. I may not care much for Wii Fit, but Nintendo still made Mario Kart, which I'm playing the hell out of. Whatever the next big title for the expanded market, there will be a title hardcore players will eat up.
In Ubisoft's case, they've announced Dogz and Babiez, but no port of Beyond of Good and Evil 2/Splinter Cell/ Tom Clancy's XXX to go with it. I'm not all up in Ubisoft's grill yet, since E3 isn't too far off, where I'm positive we'll hear something about Red Steel 2. But yeah, bad damage control on Ubisoft's part.
Post by: Jonnyboy117 on June 06, 2008, 01:39:48 AM
Post by: Crimm on June 06, 2008, 02:11:04 AM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 06, 2008, 03:23:14 AM
Post by: Shift Key on June 06, 2008, 04:20:36 AM
This disappointment stems from the fact that Nintendo actively decided to try their very hardest to become "pop" and they succeeded.
Holy hell, Batman. Did the PS2 get the same treatment last gen because it was "the popular one"? It sure didn't. In fact, it got a massive library of quality third party games.
Let's do a quick and dirty comparison between the two and see if anything stands out:
The PS2 wasn't the superior hardware platform last gen.
The Wii isn't the superior hardware platform this gen.
Verdict: Nothing different here. Except for the fact that the PS2 always got at least some attention when it came to new games, perhaps it was due to reputation. Most of the time, it was the focal point. And now the Wii, despite dominating sales for the last year at a pace greater than the PS2 could muster, has to fight with the two other consoles for any attention at all. You may argue that what is coming out at the moment is suitable, but when a PR goon spends a whole lot of time telling me why I should be grateful to see Shaun White's on Wii, let alone any support from a major third party like Ubisoft, it sounds like they're deliberately avoiding the Wii.
The PS2 wasn't a huge change from its predecessor - the controls were the same, the functionality set was roughly the same.
The Wii changed a lot of things in terms of how you can play a game. It also included support for its predecessor's peripherals and games (remember the last time Nintendo did something like that?)
Verdict: Is this such a big issue? I guess it depends on your perception of the situation. Mario Kart has shown that you can play a Wii game however feels comfortable, its just more work for the developers. Sure, there are games like Wii Fit which require brand new peripherals (sup Rock Band), but I see this as breaking out from the conventional mould of games - I haven't got it yet (hell, I still haven't played Mario Kart in almost a fortnight) but I'd consider it if I had some time available.
The PS2 lived and died by its third party games - that's how it won the PS1 gen, and it continued on as normal.
The Wii could probably survive on Nintendo's own games - look at the Gamecube.
Verdict: I think this is the crux of the issue. Last generation, third parties didn't need to worry about the Gamecube because they had a bigger pool of users attached to Sony's consoles. This generation, the largest pool of users is attached to Nintendo's white box. They know (or are becoming familiar) with Nintendo's brand and games. If I was a third party, I'd see two choices in front of me.
1. Throw significant resources (remember how big Nintendo's development teams are) and attempt to build a game that stands side by side with Nintendo's own titles. High risk, because if it doesn't stack up to their quality, its likely the hardcore Nintendo fans are going to be pissed and will steer clear of it.
2. Take the easy way out. Make a simple, basic game with a big hook, and target a specific group of gamers. The budget won't be big, so the risk that the money is wasted is negligible. If it makes some money, great. Set that aside for a real project.
That's just how I see things, but I do believe that it contributes to this problem regarding third parties and Nintendo coexisting in any sort of environment.
Post by: Plugabugz on June 06, 2008, 07:48:06 AM
Post by: Shift Key on June 06, 2008, 08:09:52 AM
I agree with Shifty completely here, but even the "low budget" games (Zack/Wiki) come out great simply because of a well executed idea.
I'm speaking in generalities regarding budget games. From what I've seen, Zack and Wiki seemed like a polished but short affair - not that there's anything wrong with it.
Post by: Deguello on June 06, 2008, 09:20:58 AM
For example, please look at the muchly-hyped MGS4. I think the series got along fine on the PS2, don't you? Nobody called and clamored for it to be on Xbox (despite actually having been ported once) and definitely nobody said the PS2 was a "low budget" console, especially after launching with Fantavision.
I remember the PS2's large userbase meant it got the most third party support. Now apparently the Wii's large userbase is the reason it ISN'T getting the most third party support. This generation has been confusing.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 06, 2008, 11:45:10 AM
Each E3 or each big Nintendo release that goes by is like a new WWII battle milestone in Band of Brothers: landing on Normandy, seizing Carentan, pushing through Bastogne, seizing Foy, then cleaning up shop at the Eagle's Nest.
How many strongholds will fall before the HD movement is crushed?
Post by: animecyberrat on June 06, 2008, 01:38:46 PM
It would seam that going in to the PS2 era, developers had first off Dreamcast titles to port over right away, second off they had the reassurances that Ps1 fans would pick up a Ps2 and when the sales ook off right away they knew that was the console to back up.
Now With the Wii it is not so easy, coming in the GameCube was dead last the previous gen and that followed the N64 which was also a disappointment for 3rd parties as well. So going into Wii, developers were faced with a few hard choices, they knew that Nintendo was going to have their usual fans buy the system and that meant that Nintendo's games would still be successful and would be a threat to 3rd party sales. They did not know that Wii would take off right away and by the time developers started to realize that, they were already over their heads in developing Ps3 and 360 titles because they were expected to perform better than they are.
So it does make sense that as of RIGHT NOW the Wii is the best selling console and it is a sure fire system to get your games on, but it takes a year or more to make the types of games everyone is begging for so 3rd parties either have to start swtiching resources over and focus on the Wii or they have to just keep going the route they are and hope for the best. I think that it is more or less they invested heavily in the Ps3 because PS1/2 were so sucessful it was assumed Ps3 would be too, and now they feel the need to get a return on that investment by betting that if they continue to throw their best games at the console, eventually the userbase will go up and Wii will become a fad.
I will state for the record I do not think that is the smartest business decision but it is one that would make some sense, it is like they are hoping the Wii will go away so they can focus on Ps3 and make their money back and in the mean time will release low budget games to whatever sales they can to fund their Ps3 projects in hopes that things will "straighten out" eventually.
It is maybe flawed logic but it is the only reason I can think of for the way things are and it is just going to take more time for the big name stuff to start showing up on Wii, it sucks to be sure no doubt about it, but it is the reality and well there isn't much anyone can do. I still maintain hope that by the end of next year things will be how the should be, or hell even by the start of next year, because that would fit into the time frame of having had time to realize Wii is the next Ps2 and developers will start having to shift their games to it to maximize profits.
Post by: Kairon on June 06, 2008, 05:53:13 PM
"Nintendo fans were understandably disappointed with Ubisoft's showing at their annual media event, Ubidays. While the Xbox 360 and the PS3 got new iterations of The Prince of Persia and Beyond Good and Evil, the Wii and DS got games like "Petz Dogz Wii" (which might only have "Wii" in the title because the screenshots look similar to Nintendo DS title Nintendogs) and "Imagine Teacher.""
Understandably? This disappointment stems from the fact that Nintendo actively decided to try their very hardest to become "pop" and they succeeded. Why should anyone waste time making a "hardcore" game when they can make tripe that will likely make just as much or more money?
As an NWR editor I hate to say it, but Nintendo is all but dead to me as a console. I love my DS and I own a Wii... but if Wii2 was being released tomorrow I don't think I'd buy one (especially if the next Zelda was being simultaneously released for Wii and Wii2 with essentially the same graphics as a Wii game and Metroid Prime 6 and Super Mario Universe were pushed back a year). Sure, I'd probably get one eventually (probably; but truth be told I hate the Wii controller). Actually I take that back; I'd buy 10 of them and sell them on eBay.
RAWR. *angry eyes*
Post by: Shift Key on June 06, 2008, 08:50:34 PM
Quote
So it does make sense that as of RIGHT NOW the Wii is the best selling console and it is a sure fire system to get your games on, but it takes a year or more to make the types of games everyone is begging for so 3rd parties either have to start swtiching resources over and focus on the Wii or they have to just keep going the route they are and hope for the best. I think that it is more or less they invested heavily in the Ps3 because PS1/2 were so sucessful it was assumed Ps3 would be too, and now they feel the need to get a return on that investment by betting that if they continue to throw their best games at the console, eventually the userbase will go up and Wii will become a fad.
I have two problems with this:
The first is that they've been saying the "it takes time to move resources over" excuse since the Wii came out. It is coming up on two years since it was released in Japan. How much longer should we give them? Another twelve months?
The second one is the "throw money at the problem until it goes away" plan. No company survives doing that, and the indicators are there - Sony and Microsoft racking up massive debts this gen on their systems, third parties struggling and merging/fading into the night. It may work for a while but it is only staving off the inevitable - the company made a stupid decision and needs to review it.
Post by: animecyberrat on June 07, 2008, 12:11:51 AM
Post by: Crimm on June 07, 2008, 02:44:17 AM
dur hur hur
Post by: NWR_Lindy on June 08, 2008, 02:35:12 PM
Wii is now officially the budget, family console. This is what Dad plays with the wife and kids after dinner, before the kids go to bed. In general, the games made for Wii will reflect this reality.
Xbox 360/Playstation 3 is the console that Dad plays with by himself (maybe with the wife), after the kids have gone to bed. In general, the games made for Xbox 360/Playstation 3 will reflect this reality.
As a gamer, the Wii doesn't really cater to my interests any more. It's a niche console - you get your Zeldas, Mario Galaxys, Smash Bros. Brawls, but that's about it. To everybody else, it's exactly what they're looking for; it features fun games that are easy to get into, and they don't require you to be a video game master who's prepared to put 50 hours into every title you pick up.
If you consider yourself a serious gamer, don't buy a Wii. It's a simple as that.
Post by: ShyGuy on June 08, 2008, 03:11:33 PM
How will we respond?
(http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k302/shyguy70/dead_bluejay.jpg)
Post by: Arbok on June 08, 2008, 04:23:21 PM
If you consider yourself a serious gamer, don't buy a Wii. It's a simple as that.
Yes sir. *proceeds to throw his Wii into a wood chipper*
Post by: King of Twitch on June 08, 2008, 06:22:04 PM
Post by: Caliban on June 08, 2008, 06:42:40 PM
... and they don't require you to be a video game master who's prepared to put 50 hours into every title you pick up.
You can't say the same thing for 360 or PS3 either.
I can agree with what you said about the Wii, and I will add that we do get the odd game that is developed for the Wii "hardcore" audience, but I think that the number of hours is not a valid characteristic to expose your point. I think it all comes down to simplicity and functionality of controls.
Post by: Bill Aurion on June 09, 2008, 12:37:35 AM
If you consider yourself a serious gamer, don't buy a Wii. It's a simple as that.
Wow, I guess I'm not a serious gamer after-all...Thanks for telling me what I am and what I am not...
Post by: Infernal Monkey on June 09, 2008, 12:51:24 AM
Post by: Deguello on June 09, 2008, 01:16:32 AM
Quote
What we're seeing here is video games becoming so mainstream, and the video game audience becoming so massive, that companies can actually make a boatload of money by catering to a single type of gamer.
Wii is now officially the budget, family console. This is what Dad plays with the wife and kids after dinner, before the kids go to bed. In general, the games made for Wii will reflect this reality.
Xbox 360/Playstation 3 is the console that Dad plays with by himself (maybe with the wife), after the kids have gone to bed. In general, the games made for Xbox 360/Playstation 3 will reflect this reality.
As a gamer, the Wii doesn't really cater to my interests any more. It's a niche console - you get your Zeldas, Mario Galaxys, Smash Bros. Brawls, but that's about it. To everybody else, it's exactly what they're looking for; it features fun games that are easy to get into, and they don't require you to be a video game master who's prepared to put 50 hours into every title you pick up.
If you consider yourself a serious gamer, don't buy a Wii. It's a simple as that.
I disagree wholeheartedly, Silks. Mainly because the "gaming audience" isn't as massive as you make it seem.
Both the 360 and PS3 combined haven't outsold the PS2 at this time in the last cycle. If it were not for the Wii and its apparent influx of new gamers out of whole cloth the games industry, at least the console side, would be in a pretty deep recession, especially since Sony is still losing money on it and MS, despite a profitable quarter or two, is still $6 billion in the hole just "getting their foot in the door." Nintendo saved the industry, again. Hooray.
...
Unless of course you were to argue that these new, from-thin-air customers would have chosen the 360 or the PS3, otherwise. Which I guess would make them savvy gamers who make choices based off of choice-making abilities. If that's the case, then there are a whole lot of gamers willingly choosing the Wii. A LOT of gamers.
The truth is that there is a combination of the two, but the percentages are uncertain. If you were to take the official Nintendo number that 79% of them are still 18-40 Serious gamers with Serious Seriousness, that number comes to about 21 million worldwide, which is still higher than either of their competitors. Even if the percentage got as low as 52%, it would still be a higher number than the 360's entire market, assuming it is 18-40 young male serious gamers.
Anyway you look at it, the Wii has a significantly sizable number of gamers that enjoy video games seriously (whatever that means) and it is certainly the biggest demographic on the console.
To use total generalizations to prove a point is ridiculous, silks. To use them in a business strategy is beyond foolishness.
I remember a time when the DS was a portable that wasn't for "serious" portable owners. That didn't stick. This won't either, not matter how much the internet forums jawbone about it.
Post by: Urkel on June 09, 2008, 03:09:29 AM
Quote
I remember a time when the DS was a portable that wasn't for "serious" portable owners. That didn't stick.
Quote
"Are you freaking serious? How is the Wii designed for a 'different' group?"
Because Nintendo SAID SO. The Wii is aimed at the casual gamer. Period. Like it, don't like it, you can't argue the fact that Nintendo has designed and marketed the Wii thusly. The SOFTWARE, on the other hand, may or may not be designed and marketed that way. There will be some games designed to cater to Nintendo's fans, but I get the distinct impression that many of those games will be intentionally spaced out compared to the casual gamer shovelware that we're seeing now like Dogz and other such titles.
Deg ... I didn't mean that you are a casual gamer because you like Wario Ware. I'm not saying Wario Ware is a bad game. I'm just saying that the game is not fundamentally different than any of the other Wii games at this point. The Wii has pretty much created a new genre: Waggle Mini-Game. Simplistic, accessible games, but the problem I'm seeing is that while the graphics change, the gameplay is identical. Those are perfect to attract new gamers (non-gamers), but that's not to say that others can't enjoy them either. I just don't see how those games are supposed to entertain ME ... but I think that might be the point: They aren't supposed to entertain ME.
In case you don't get the joke... That's an old RickPowers post, except I switched DS with Wii.
Quote
We can count on getting some good games from Nintendo, I'm sure. We can also count on crap like Pokemon Dash. I'm just worried that the DS could become a haven for shovelware for developers to release garbage that looks innovative when it's really the same game with different graphics. Having developer support is simply NOT GOOD ENOUGH. The N64 had developer support too, and we got some really god-awful games out of that. We don't want developers thinking, "Hey, I can make a quick buck by making a mini-game with stylus support" just to fund their other development efforts. We want developers to stretch, to come up with new ideas, and I just don't see that happening. I'd rather have fewer quality games than a bunch of crap cluttering up the library like the PS1 had, and it used to be that Nintendo thought the same thing. Apparently that's changed, judging by the games we're seeing.
This is just getting scary now.
And now a bonus quote just for fun...
Quote
"I don't see much in the PSP's future of being much more than ports."
Wow. Depending on your definition of the word port, I could say the same thing for the DS. If port were to mean a game essentially copied directly from the same version on another console, I count one on the DS (Rayman), and two on the PSP (Tiger Woods, Ape Escape). If your definition is games that are very similar to games on another system, then one could argue that the DS has Mario, Rayman, Wario Ware, Need for Speed, Ridge Racer, etc. On the PSP, you've got Tiger Woods, Ridge Racer, Tony Hawk, Twisted Metal ... again, there's really little difference. But I would argue that both systems are seeing games created specifically to take advantage of the hardware rather than being straight ports, and there is no evidence to support saying otherwise. There will always be ports, but to say that the DS will get more original software than the PSP is naive.
AHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! HAHAHAHHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
HA! HA HA! HA HA HA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
HAHAHAHAHAHA! HAHAHA!
HUHUHUHUHUHUHUHUHUHUHUHU! HOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHO!
HEE HEE HEE!! A HAW HAW HAW!
HYUCK HYUCK HYUCK HYUCK HYUCK!
HA!
And LOL at the "serious gamer" comment. I'm sure that comment will bring just as much joy in a few years as Rick's statements have.
Post by: Mario on June 09, 2008, 05:38:16 AM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 09, 2008, 02:55:29 PM
How to Manage Your Forums - don't let former nintendo fans run it
ahahahahah
Post by: NWR_Lindy on June 09, 2008, 06:09:44 PM
Wow, I guess I'm not a serious gamer after-all...Thanks for telling me what I am and what I am not...
That wasn't a personal knock against anybody on this thread, Bill. I'm just stating what I see around me. When somebody asks me what game console they should buy, the first thing I ask them is what kinds of games they like. They tell me, and this is how I respond:
1) If they don't care about playing the most technologically advanced games out there, don't care about playing online, and want something to play with the kids and wife, I tell them to get a Wii.
2) If they're into first-person shooters and RPGs with cutting-edge graphics, and want to play against other people online, I tell them to get a 360.
I think these are two entirely different audiences. "Serious" isn't the right word for #2 of course ("serious" can be defined any number of ways), but however you want to phrase it, #2 is not #1. I know a couple of guys that bought a Wii when it first came out, and wound up buying a 360 because Wii simply didn't have the games they were looking to play. I'm sure this wasn't an isolated case of "Wii Defection" either. Wii software is definitely skewing in a certain direction, and it isn't in the direction of 360/PS3 titles.
Bottom line is that if you want to play stuff like Gears of War, CoD4, Mass Effect, and other titles that skew towards a twenty-something-plus age group, having a Wii will only leave you disappointed. There are games like that on Wii, but they are the exception rather than the rule. On other consoles, it's the other way around.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 09, 2008, 07:25:51 PM
Post by: Shift Key on June 09, 2008, 07:32:15 PM
Wii software is definitely skewing in a certain direction, and it isn't in the direction of 360/PS3 titles.
I still haven't found a game (either out or in the pipeline) that has made me rush out and get a 360 or PS3. Then again, I haven't had time to even answer glowing Wii message over the last fortnight, if that's indicative of my gaming habits.
Post by: vudu on June 09, 2008, 08:46:06 PM
When somebody asks me what game console they should buy, the first thing I ask them is what kinds of games they like. They tell me, and this is how I respond:
I don't know anyone who would answer the question like either of your hypothetical responses.
I like fun games. What system is right for me?
Post by: Crimm on June 09, 2008, 09:03:39 PM
When somebody asks me what game console they should buy, the first thing I ask them is what kinds of games they like. They tell me, and this is how I respond:
I don't know anyone who would answer the question like either of your hypothetical responses.
I like fun games. What system is right for me?
V.smile
Post by: vudu on June 09, 2008, 09:07:12 PM
Post by: NWR_Lindy on June 10, 2008, 12:25:19 AM
I don't know anyone who would answer the question like either of your hypothetical responses.
I like fun games. What system is right for me?
It depends on your definition of fun. That's my point. Not everybody's idea of fun is PWNING N00BZ in Halo 3 online multiplayer. Then again, some people don't like Wii Fit and Wii Sports either.
Whether or not you have kids is huge as well. I only know one couple that lets their 8-year-old son play the 360, and that's with Rock Band and Halo 3 while they play along. Almost everyone else I know that has kids has a Wii, because they don't have to worry about mature content. If they have a 360 or PS3, that's "Daddy's console" and the kids don't touch it.
The problem as I see it is that the middle ground is becoming smaller and smaller, hence the creation of terms like "Wii60". The fact that that term even exists shows you that, in the minds of many, the two consoles cater to very different ends of the gamer taste spectrum.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 10, 2008, 12:43:33 AM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 10, 2008, 12:46:21 AM
No More Heroes, Scarface, Godfather, RE4, Manhunt 2, Conduit, Medal of Honor, Mad World, all confirmed for KIDZ!
Yeah because Mario Galaxies is hard core now also. The world just flip flopped on us.
Post by: KDR_11k on June 10, 2008, 01:19:11 AM
Strong Bad[..] all confirmed for KIDZ!Television?!! Kids?!! Wait, do you people think I'm intended for children? Like, the littlest, tiniest babies? You know, they watch those shows on public television. I don't think I'm cut out for that sort of sugarjob.
Anyway, you know how often people listed all the M rated gameson the Gamecube? The list for the 360 is at least ten times as long as the Wii's.
Post by: Arbok on June 10, 2008, 01:59:57 AM
The problem as I see it is that the middle ground is becoming smaller and smaller, hence the creation of terms like "Wii60". The fact that that term even exists shows you that, in the minds of many, the two consoles cater to very different ends of the gamer taste spectrum.
But that term was coined way before these systems were even released by fans eager to see the Playstation brand fall after years of dominating the other two...
Anyway, you know how often people listed all the M rated gameson the Gamecube? The list for the 360 is at least ten times as long as the Wii's.
True, but in the context of the kids being "safe from mature content"... does it really matter if the Wii has 50 M rated games or 100 in this case?
Post by: MegaByte on June 10, 2008, 02:03:40 AM
The problem as I see it is that the middle ground is becoming smaller and smallerThe problem as I see it is that the problem as other people see it is that the middle ground is becoming smaller and smaller... which then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Post by: Deguello on June 10, 2008, 03:00:30 AM
Quote
The problem as I see it is that the middle ground is becoming smaller and smaller, hence the creation of terms like "Wii60".
Yeah I'm with Arbok here Lindy. I haven't heard that term LATELY. I heard it a whole lot after Sony stumbled through their E3 2006 presentation but lately all I've heard is just "Wii Wii Wii." The actual amount of people who owned more than one console last generation was so infinitesimally small that it was insignificant. To believe that any sizable chunk of the Wii owners also own 360's is pretty naive.
The 360 will end up with like the N64. Fist-pumping hard-rawking UNF GO AMERICA console (as the N64 was the darling of the western publishers), but the loser in the end, except this time with less ground-breaking games.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 10, 2008, 04:01:09 AM
Strong Bad[..] all confirmed for KIDZ!Television?!! Kids?!! Wait, do you people think I'm intended for children? Like, the littlest, tiniest babies? You know, they watch those shows on public television. I don't think I'm cut out for that sort of sugarjob.
Anyway, you know how often people listed all the M rated gameson the Gamecube? The list for the 360 is at least ten times as long as the Wii's.
Now let's name good mature 360 games. There aren't a hole lot to speak of. No More Heroes and from what we've seen of Mad World look to beat the crap out of many 360 mature games when it comes to style and uniqueness. There are plenty of games on the Wii that are not casual games that are quality. I know for myself I play the Wii much more than my 360 or PS3, there is plenty on the console that interest me ranging from "casual" to the more "hardcore" titles. We also have to realize that DS had a similar problem within its first year (In fact it was WORSE in many respects), and now the system is one of the most diversified around. All we need is one "mature" new IP that is a hit and you will start to see a balance. In fact the future looks MORE bright for more "mature" playing games, not less with new developers stepping up to the plate like High Voltage and Platinum Games.
Also I think how you define "mature" is up in the air as well, it doesn't necessarily have to have a mature rating. Heck Zack and Wiki is far from a casual game, and it is one of the finest puzzle/adventures that has came out EVER. A kid would end up throwing their controller through the TV after playing it for awhile. Does the Wii tilt more casual? Definately but it also has one of the most diverse lineups of the 3 consoles. Also I'm not so sure I'd count Xbox 360 or PS3 as "RPG systems" because I can only think of one RPG that was any good and that is Eternal Sonata, the rest are comparable in quality to Opoona. I think the only really good RPG for 360 was Mass Effect and even that isn't a true RPG.
Post by: blackfootsteps on June 10, 2008, 04:36:24 AM
As a gamer, the Wii doesn't really cater to my interests any more. It's a niche console - you get your Zeldas, Mario Galaxys, Smash Bros. Brawls, but that's about it.
The N64 and GC were dominated by 1st party software too. So maybe it's just that 'your Zeldas, Mario Galaxys' etc just don't do it for you anymore.
Post by: Urkel on June 10, 2008, 05:19:22 AM
I often see on Nintendo fansites bitter former fans that are angry about the Wii being "mainstream", or "casual", or "not for serious gamers". Yet, it confounds me that many of them have praise for the DS and squeal with glee each time some JRPG or whatever is considered to be hardcore is announced for the system.
These same people are pissed at Nintendo for going with weak hardware on the Wii and can't even stomach the idea of playing an epic game on something with twice the power of the Gamecube, but apparantly they're willing to put up with N64 era quality graphics playing some SquareEnix game. And they'll often praise the graphics of said SE games that would only look cutting edge a decade ago.
I. Don't. Get. It.
Quote
1) If they don't care about playing the most technologically advanced games out there, don't care about playing online, and want something to play with the kids and wife, I tell them to get a Wii.
2) If they're into first-person shooters and RPGs with cutting-edge graphics, and want to play against other people online, I tell them to get a 360.
See, the DS most closely resembles the first category, yet you'd be hard pressed to find a "serious" (can we start using the term "upstream" now?) gamer that doesn't consider it a worthwhile system for themselves.
I can understand someone not being satisfied with the current 3rd party lineup of games, but the idea that the Wii cannot function as a "serious" game console at any point is what I just don't get.
Post by: Deguello on June 10, 2008, 06:51:21 AM
That and there is the myth that, since Nintendo always won the handheld sector, the status quo would be kept. the market would never turn away from the 360 crowd and there will never be hardcore games on the Wii simply because Wii Sports exists.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 10, 2008, 12:36:06 PM
Things are doing fine on the Wii right now. Heck, just last night I played this horrible fighting game online with kiddie Nintendo characters. GeneralTraag, Kenology, wassup.
Post by: Crimm on June 10, 2008, 09:57:49 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 10, 2008, 10:02:01 PM
To the topic at hand. Ubisoft's forums came back up yesterday. The "events" folder, which had been ground zero for the uproar, is now gone.
Perhaps they lost the mold for it?
Post by: NWR_Lindy on June 11, 2008, 06:27:31 PM
Quote
To believe that any sizable chunk of the Wii owners also own 360's is pretty naive."
I never said anything about the size of that group. All I said was that it exists. I think that the notion that everybody that owns a Wii is 100% pleased with the Wii game library is naive. So there! :-)
Quote
The 360 will end up with like the N64. Fist-pumping hard-rawking UNF GO AMERICA console (as the N64 was the darling of the western publishers), but the loser in the end, except this time with less ground-breaking games.
I don't know what the 360 being primarily popular in America has to do with anything, but I can assure you the 360 will not end up like the N64. For example, third-parties won't abandon it, people will continue to buy it well into the future, and it will continue to get high-quality exclusive games. You can't say any of those things about the N64. When it died, it died quickly.
Quote
No More Heroes, Scarface, Godfather, RE4, Manhunt 2, RE: UC, Strong Bad, Alone in the Dark, House of the Dead, Conduit, Medal of Honor, Mad World, all confirmed for KIDZ!
Yeah, all of those games are M-Rated, but I'd also assign them another letter....the letter B. As in, B-grade titles. The only top-shelf title on that list (sorry, No More Heroes) is Resident Evil 4, and that's a port of an already-existing game. You don't see anything approaching the quality of, say, Metroid Prime 3 on that list. Mad World, maybe.
Quote
Now let's name good mature 360 games. There aren't a hole lot to speak of.
What top-quality 360 games aren't M-rated? I can't think of any besides Burnout Paradise, Virtua Fighter 5, Guitar Hero, and Rock Band. Hell, practically everything in my 360 library is M-Rated. Halo 3, Mass Effect, Ninja Gaiden II, GTA IV, BioShock, Orange Box, Gears of War, Call of Duty 4, Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, Rainbow Six Vegas 1 and 2, Assassin's Creed, Devil May Cry 4...how's that for a list?
Quote
All we need is one "mature" new IP that is a hit and you will start to see a balance.
I'll believe that when I see it. It hasn't happened yet, and unless Nintendo surprises us with something killer (and entirely out of character, I might add), I don't think it will. I don't believe Nintendo feels it's their job to provide mature games. I think they look at that as the job of third parties, because they see themselves as the Disney-style company that provides games that everybody can enjoy. Unfortunately, it looks like many third-parties have abandoned making mature games for Wii because they feel it's too risky, meaning we're right back where we were with the GameCube. However, it'll be even worse this time around because the Wii's huge userbase guarantees that casual games are profitable. So now we'll see a flood of casual games because they're low-risk, easy to develop, and profitable. Yay.
Quote
Also I'm not so sure I'd count Xbox 360 or PS3 as "RPG systems" because I can only think of one RPG that was any good and that is Eternal Sonata, the rest are comparable in quality to Opoona. I think the only really good RPG for 360 was Mass Effect and even that isn't a true RPG.
I'm with you on this one. Why are RPGs so weak this generation? I don't understand it. I think it's a strange combination of the 360 not being popular in Japan, the Wii not being perceived as an appropriate platform for RPGs, and RPGs taking ages to develop on PS3. Final Fantasy XIII seems like it's been in development for five years already, and it still won't be out until 2009. Ironically, the Nintendo DS is hands-down the best system for RPGs this generation.
Quote
I can understand someone not being satisfied with the current 3rd party lineup of games, but the idea that the Wii cannot function as a "serious" game console at any point is what I just don't get.
It doesn't have a large list of M-Rated games like the ones I listed above. Therefore it's not that it cannot function as a console for those game types, it's that it does not because those games don't exist for it. A console is only as "serious"/"hardcore"/"M-Rated" as the games that are made for it.
Quote
See, the DS most closely resembles the first category, yet you'd be hard pressed to find a "serious" (can we start using the term "upstream" now?) gamer that doesn't consider it a worthwhile system for themselves.
This is all due to game library (see my above point). The DS has a large, varied library of HIGH QUALITY unique games (Elite Beat Agents, Meteos, Kirby Canvas Curse, Bangai-O Spirits, Planet Puzzle League, Nintendogs, Ninja Gaiden: Dragon Sword, Professor Layton, Contra 4, etc.) so hardcore gamers love it. The Wii is seriously lacking in this department.
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 11, 2008, 06:42:00 PM
Post by: NWR_Neal on June 11, 2008, 06:50:32 PM
I actually think his argument is very strong. While I know I'm not the majority (at least I don't think I am), I have a Wii and a 360 and the 360 is generally for those "mature" games like Bioshock and Assassin's Creed while the Wii is where I get all my fun multiplayer games like Brawl, Mario Kart, Wii Sports, Warioware and such. I can speak from my own experience that most gamers that I know crave the combination of Wii/360 or Wii/PS3.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 11, 2008, 06:56:39 PM
Cuz they're not worth making for those "serious"/"hardcore"/"M-Rated"/"HD" machines.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 11, 2008, 08:36:56 PM
Quote
Halo 3, Mass Effect, Ninja Gaiden II, GTA IV, BioShock, Orange Box, Gears of War, Call of Duty 4, Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, Rainbow Six Vegas 1 and 2, Assassin's Creed, Devil May Cry 4...how's that for a list?
OK let's see.
Bioshock=Multiplatform
Orange Box=Multi Platform
Gears of War=Multiplatform
Call of Duty 4=Multiplatform
Mass Effect=Multiplatform
Elder Scrolls=Multiplatform
Ninja Gaiden II= Not A grade
Rainbow Six=Multiplatform (Also far from A grade)
Assassins Creed=Multiplatform (Also not A grade)
Devil May Cry 4=Not A grade
So you managed to bring out all multiplatform M rated games except for two all of which have better versions on the PC. In fact these multi platform titles are the only real true AAA. You know what I can do? Show how pathetic the Xbox 360 lineup of Mature rated games are compared to my collection of PC games since we appear to be using that as a measurement. By that measurement then everyone should buy a PC if they want real game experiences. Also I'm not sure what standard you are using for calling something B-Grade, many of those Wii games I listed (Like No More Heroes) have similar overall ratings to games like Ninja Gaiden II (I think one is better to be honest) or Devil May Cry.
Also Lindy, I respect you but to equate M-Rated with a serious game is childish at best. Take Metroid Prime 1 for example, it isn't a M-Rated game but has pushed the genre in ways that we still haven't seen and it is far from "kid friendly". In fact I would argue the industry is starting to rely too heavily on shock value in regards to gore or other controversial themes, that it could benefit from focusing more on innovating gameplay. It seems like most mature games now days are basically ripping from a previous game and trying to spruce up the visuals along with gore. Take Gears of War which is far from unique, especially since it borrows quite heavily from RE4. Even Call of Duty 4 is basically the same at its core with a shallow single player campaign and a good but pretty standard multiplayer game in its design. Halo 3 is basically the same way. These shooters start to really mesh together into a blob of "Which one is prettier".
Probably the only really stellar mature rated game that I played last year was Bioshock and I wouldn't call it groundbreaking at all. When I look at my 360 library it saddens me how basically everything is so similar except for a few games like Eternal Sonata, Mass Effect (which I rebought on PC), GTA4, and Beautiful Katamari. My Wii Library is very diverse, probably the most diverse (and yes satisfying) library I've EVER had for a console. I have a great FPA (MP3), a great trivia game (Smarty Pants), great arcade racers (Mario Kart and Excite Truck), two great adventure games (Zelda: TP and Okami), two solid lightgun shooters (RE: UC and House of the Dead collection), amazing puzzle game (Boom Blox), one amazing platformer (Mario Galaxy), an amazing survival horror game (RE4), the best beat em in years (No More Heroes), two solid free roam games (Godfather and Scarface), stellar fighting game (SSB:B the highest rated fighter out of them all) tremendous sports games (PES 2008 perhaps the biggest jump in sports game innovation in some time). This does not even include upcoming games which look to be really pushing the envelope in things like sports (Madden 2009 actually looks like it could be a really unique experience along with tiger woods), and the potentially great Fatal Frame 4 all coming in the near future. Also we have a strong platform for space shooters and one game within that genre is also one of the most flexible user creation tools ever, and that is Blast Works.
Does the Wii have a long ways to go? Sure it does, but already it is showing signs of having one of the most diverse and yes UNIQUE lineup of games out of all the systems. Also as others have stated, there will be a critical mass point where these mini game collections will start to be poor investments, it happens EVERY generation where one genre is flooded and it finally slows WAY down. Remember the DS, it took about 2 years to get the gimmick, mini game collections to become less and less common. I would think any "serious" gamer would appreciate that if they are truly a serious gamer instead of a fan of one or two particular genres only and only if they have mature rated games in them.
Post by: NWR_Neal on June 11, 2008, 09:10:58 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 11, 2008, 09:19:01 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 11, 2008, 09:28:07 PM
Regardless of whether or not they're on PC, 360 or PS3 (Honestly, I prefer consoles), the fact of the matter is that, out of that list of games, none of those games are on Wii. Yes, Mature rated games do not equal serious games as games like Metroid Prime, Brawl and, to bring this conversation back home, hopefully Spyborgs have shown, but games like Bioshock, the Orange Box and even your far from A-grade games are not really rivaled on Wii.
And guess what? Many of the games I listed are not on Xbox 360 or PS3 as well. EVERY generation has different exclusives. Yeah the Wii may not have Ninja Gaiden II or Assassin's Creed but it instead has games like Super Mario Galaxy, No More Heroes and Metroid Prime II (Also it is quite debatable that NMH isn't better than NGII which is basically NG1 rehashed and more limited in scope). I will give you the Wii doesn't have a great selection of FPS, but that could easily change down the line. We've seen steps in the right direction and it is quite commonly held that the Wii would be BETTER when it comes to controls for a FPS. So we'll see. You also have to realize both Orange Box and Bioshock took over two years into the 360's life cycle to come out as well.
It is quite odd that people are now harping against diversity between systems instead of embracing them. Every generation up to PS2 has had genres they were strongest at, one wasn't "more serious" than the other, just different. That line started to get blurred (In my opinion TOO MUCH) but with the Wii we are startng to see that diversity again. PS3/360 will get great games and experiences Wii won't and Wii will get great games and experiences that neither of those two will get. It is making gaming exciting again by shaking up the old and opening up potential for the new. Any "serious" gamer should be thrilled about that.
I do agree with Lindy in that the Wii needs improvement in more traditional games, but that appears to be coming as time goes on. We have to realize with new technology and new ways of interacting with games you need a year or two to get the hang of it and what you can do with it along with understanding your market. PS3/Xbox 360 had an advantage in that they are both extensions of previous generations with the same basic ways of interaction but with better "guts". To abandon the Wii as a mini game, family system so early in this new technologies life cycle seems silly to me especially when we are already seeing signs of this possibly leveling out with each game announcement (Barring Ubisoft of course). EA especially has been taking hold of this and by all accounts the new Madden game is quite innovative and will provide a serious, yet unique experience you cannot find on the other two consoles.
Post by: NWR_Neal on June 12, 2008, 12:38:44 AM
But, by your logic with Bioshock and the Orange Box, we should be getting comparable games this fall but then again, the 360 sure as hell isn't the Wii. That can be taken as a good thing or a bad thing.
Post by: Deguello on June 12, 2008, 01:37:25 AM
Quote
I never said anything about the size of that group. All I said was that it exists. I think that the notion that everybody that owns a Wii is 100% pleased with the Wii game library is naive. So there!
I never said that at all, but you did imply that somehow Wii and 360 are complementary in some sort and that somehow means they serve different masters or something. I however, never even made an inkling of the notion that 100% of Wii owners were 100% satisfied with Wii.
Quote
I don't know what the 360 being primarily popular in America has to do with anything, but I can assure you the 360 will not end up like the N64. For example, third-parties won't abandon it, people will continue to buy it well into the future, and it will continue to get high-quality exclusive games. You can't say any of those things about the N64. When it died, it died quickly.
We'll see, but one of the reasons the N64 got "abandoned" was because it simply became more profitable to make games on the PS1. Games of ANY type. Do you even know what the PS1 launched with? It was a disgraceful lineup of the worst games CD developers could offer, seriously, and the game that launched it into the stratosphere didn't even come until 3 years after it launched, in the first year of combat against the "Serious" console, N64, which had just launched GoldenEye. Things could just as easily fall apart for MS, no matter how much support they are willing to outright purchase.
Quote
I'm with you on this one. Why are RPGs so weak this generation? I don't understand it. I think it's a strange combination of the 360 not being popular in Japan, the Wii not being perceived as an appropriate platform for RPGs, and RPGs taking ages to develop on PS3. Final Fantasy XIII seems like it's been in development for five years already, and it still won't be out until 2009. Ironically, the Nintendo DS is hands-down the best system for RPGs this generation.
RPGs are weak this gen because of the sudden misconception that they require powerful hardware to run. The only time in history where RPGs sprouted up on a debatably superior console was the SNES. Any other time, NES (versus Amiga and gaming computers, which had the popular Ultima series) PS1 (vs. N64 and Saturn) PS2 (v.s Xbox and GC), Gameboy (vs. Game Gear) GBA (vs. ... ... NGage?), DS (vs. PSP). Also they also come to the market leader, regardless of the market perceptions. One of the things that humorous to watch is Square Enix run around like a chicken with their head cut off trying to fund that albatross-around-their-neck of a game FFXIII. One game is taking up half their resources and you know it's not going to end very well. IF it were on the Wii, they could make a very high budget, yet reasonably so, FFXIII along with SEVERAL other games on the same platform. Another idea that has bored into the skulls of third parties this gen is the apparent reasoning that they should release less games. Third parties that flooded the PS1 and PS2 with copious amounts fo software have scaled back and put all their eggs into one title's basket. If you take away ports on the Wii, Capcom's output has been laughable this gen. Moreso Square Enix (Whose Current generation release count is something like 3) and Konami.
Another thing that plagues the industry is the "wait and see" approach. Mainly because it is an approach that is only applied to Nintendo. There is a famous quote by somebody about Socialism and CEO's, how they get all the benefits of Socialism (when their companies fail, they make golden parachutes and somehow land at other companies) while the workers at the bottom have to deal with the free market (they are ejected into the free market workplace to fend for themselves.) This is a similar case with Nintendo. most of the big support for PS3 and Xbox 360 was announced before those two systems even launched, yet Nintendo gets "wait and see." And as a result of this "waiting and seeing" Nintendo dominates their own platform by making relevant, high quality games that sell well, downmarket or upmarket, Third parties react by thinking it's all casual games which they think are shoe-string budget, Z-grade games. This is not Nintendo's fault, seriously. They didn't "encourage" these games, mainly because Wii Sports isn't an afterthought project, nor is Wii Fit. Notice how the DS was for minigames and casuals and girls in 2005 and then suddenly the RPG machine a year later, due to a company (ironically Square Enix) who, INSTEAD OF SIMPLY SEEING THE MARKET FOR WHAT IT APPEARED TO BE, actually decided to release a plethora of RPGs and such on the platform. Ironic because they were scrambling even then to fund the very game that's taking a million years to develop on a third place platform.
I mean seriously Silks, when you responded to the idea of the DS being "serious" you listed a lot of games that don't even fit the genres you typed for the 360, and none of them are M-rated anythings, and most came out after the DS's initial two years, during which the DS was judged just as you are judging the Wii now.
It is implausible to think that the current and continuing market leader will lose ground in third party support. Trust me, stockholders and investors will be yelling at their companies soon, wondering why they haven't made an earnest and serious effort to extract funds, revenue, and profit from the largest userbase, currently, and one that's been outpacing THE PS2, for God's sake. And they won't be placated with demographics and generalizations, because if they don't respond, Nintendo will end up getting all the money this generation.
Post by: ShyGuy on June 12, 2008, 01:59:35 AM
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 12, 2008, 02:13:45 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 12, 2008, 02:57:42 AM
Well said...errr...written.
But, by your logic with Bioshock and the Orange Box, we should be getting comparable games this fall but then again, the 360 sure as hell isn't the Wii. That can be taken as a good thing or a bad thing.
Well I will say we probably won't be getting comparable genres in quality. But with Mad World looking promising, that is at least one game that shows alot of promise. Like with the DS the Wii has been "handicapped" in that it presented a new way to control games. It appears that finally developers are getting the hang of it and are willing to take more risks but still there has been significant delay, once again, like the DS. So let me modify my statement by saying there will be a bit more lag behind these AAA titles than there was with Xbox 360. It is one thing to throw the traditional wheel on a video game and see where it takes you then to have to figure out how to put a redesigned wheel on and after that you still have to take it for a test spin to make sure it won't fall off.
Also well thought out post Deg. You are spot on about the DS gamer population and how it supposedly skewed for AT LEAST the first year. It is interesting though that even at this early stage I think Wii shows much more progress in regards to diversity of genres (Not to mention quality). Will the Wii ever be overly populated with Mature rated titles? No I don't think so, but that does not mean there won't be a good to great amount of quality games for those looking for more traditional "serious" experiences. A "serious" gamer in my opinion is someone who wants to experience a wide array of different genres and games, and to truly achieve that you should own two of the three systems. Though if you can only own one, well you will find some great experiences on Wii if you truly appreciate diversity in gaming, even if it may be lacking in a couple of genres. What we need to do is not abandon Wii but continually try to slap 3rd parties in the head to get their act together, that One Million+ who bought Red Steel (poor people) didn't die off but has more than likely gotten larger.
Post by: KDR_11k on June 12, 2008, 06:05:24 AM
BTW, seems like the general oppinion of Red Steel has gone way down since the release? I recall people loving it when it was new.
Post by: Deguello on June 12, 2008, 06:21:47 AM
Makes you wonder about the state of the industry's business side, eh?
Post by: Nick DiMola on June 12, 2008, 08:15:43 AM
Makes you wonder about the state of the industry's business side, eh?
This is precisely what I was thinking. How is it possible for any sound business person to dismiss bringing games to the Wii? Who cares what the perceived demographic is? Time and time again games come out targeting the "serious" demographic and succeed. It isn't magic, it is just proof that the demographic for that game is there.
This whole serious/hardcore/XTREME gamer talk just annoys the crap out of me. The words are thrown around and mean LITERALLY NOTHING. Every single person has their own perception of what the words mean and what demographic the words represent. What the hell am I if I play all games on every system? A "casual gamer" who plays every single minigame collection that releases on the Wii may as well be the same type of "serious gamer" who catches every single first person shooter that lands on the 360. They don't care about quality, they are just genres whores, they are the exact same type of gamer with different game type interests.
I honestly think the industry has gotten to a point where the people running the companies are the annoying fanboys in forums and they feel like they are defending the integrity of gaming by continuing to develop for the 360 and PS3 exclusively. What they don't realize is that they are stifling gaming and not advancing anything in a significant way anymore.
Post by: KDR_11k on June 12, 2008, 09:02:22 AM
Also I think when people talk about mature games they really mean mainstream games and they define that by looking at hollywood movies, especially the live-action kind. Do NMH or Mad World look like average Hollywood movies? Now compare the popular offerings of the XBox 360.
Post by: NWR_Lindy on June 12, 2008, 10:27:39 AM
As for RPGs, the problem is that companies like SquareEnix suddenly decided that RPGs=CGI Movies. This lead to making their big RPGs exclusively for consoles that can emulate CGI movies. I love the fact that Dragon Quest 9 is coming out on DS, that's just awesome.
I realize that the DS' library improved greatly later on, but the Wii seems to be going in the opposite direction. With the DS there weren't too many games in 2004/2005, period, and then you had the Great Flood of Christmas 2005. We'll see what happens at E3, but I'm not expecting much to be honest with you. I figure they'll announce a new Zelda game and probably Animal Crossing, but I doubt I'll be really surprised at anything.
And think about this: regardless of the size of a console's userbase, a publisher isn't going to bring a game to it if it doesn't think it will sell to the console's audience. Note the key word there is "think"; I'm talking perception, not reality, but in this case I think perception is shaping reality.
Post by: Mario on June 12, 2008, 11:11:09 AM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 12, 2008, 12:21:35 PM
Quote
Like with the DS the Wii has been "handicapped" in that it presented a new way to control games.
the problem is that with DS youhad the traditional controlls built in, with Wii you don't, yes you can use GC controllers, something not a lot of people have lieing around and are getting harder to find and only work for certain games. Or you could use the classic controller, which is an extra $20.00 to play using a "traditional" controller, which also only works for a handful of games (Not counting the VC)
With Wii you either adapt or you don't fit in. With DS if using the touch screen just didn't work for your game, you had a D-Pad and basically the GBA controller to fall back on.
Quote
They loved what it represented. Yes it was mediocre at best.
I bought it on Day 1, and right off the bat I started finding things I did not like about it. When I invited my friends over to play (all massive PS fanboys and major graphics whores) they all enjoyed the sword play, but that was it, the FPS controls made everyone dizzy because they couldn't get the hang of it right away. The learning curve was not very fair for someone used to Halo controls.
Although I did enjoy the game, it got boring right away and I ended up trading it in for MP3.
Quote
Time and time again
And that is exactly it, time. Right now the Wii is in it's second year, and things are starting to turn around. A lot of the big budget PS3 and 360 games that came out last year and this year were STARTED before the Wii came out, and some games were started even before then that haven't even come out yet. It takes longer to make those big budget PS3/360 games so smart companies will want to release them on schedule if they can so they make back what they invested. By the time Wii came out and disrupted the market, for many games it was toolate to bring them over without doing a sloppy job. So instead they rush a bunch of PS2 ports over, but guess what, that is common for EVERY system ever made. Not something new.
The wait and see approach made sense in 2006 cuz GC was not a very successful console, therefore most companies assumed Wii would follow it's sales patterns. I honestly maintain that once 2009 rolls around things will be different, if it took DS that long why shouldn't it take Wii, after all GBA *was* the market leader and DS *did* have a leg to stand on. Wii was a big gamble that is paying off for those who saw into the future and placed the right bets, everyone else is playing catch up, just like they should.
Quote
a casual gamer will buy stuff because he saw it in an ad, in a mainstream media report or because the box looks interesting
I think labeling one by that standard is pompous and arrogant. You amke it sound like anyone who doesn't read up about a game for months ahead of time isn't a real gamer that is bullshit my friend. Some games come out that you may have missed and all you have to go on is the box art or what the dopes at GS will tell you. I bought a **** load of fantastic games last gen that magazines/website either didn't cover at all, only gave a single paragraph to or gave low reviews. I based a lot of sales then on what I could get, since GC wasn't popular at all in my area it became even harder to find games for it so that complicate things.
Quote
Note the key word there is "think"; I'm talking perception, not reality, but in this case I think perception is shaping reality.
Exactly what happened with Xbox. Cube and Box has close to identical sales and Cube had superior 1st party offering, but public perception was that Xbox was superior and had better games, no buddy was talking "serious" or "hard core" then it was just better graphics, better online, etc. It wasn't true but people thought it was and therefore wrote the GC off as nothing. Even major retailers showed this, they knew that event hough Xbox had the better brand name at the time, the GC games were still selling so they kept them in stock and put them close to the GBA/DS games which they knew would get sales anyways.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 12, 2008, 12:38:30 PM
Who said casual gamers weren't real gamers? Quit distorting the reality of the statement. Or maybe you really bought into "serious gamer" definition.
Post by: NWR_Lindy on June 12, 2008, 12:41:04 PM
http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/06/11/wii-pole-dancing-game-update/
Yes, this game is garbage, and whether or not it comes to the Wii is irrelevant. However, I think it says a lot about how Nintendo and the Wii is perceived by developers making "edgier" content. Whether it's justified or not is another issue entirely, but the "Wii is only for family content" sentiment is definitely out there. To me, the key quotes here are:
----------
"The biggest issue with the whole thing is Nintendo’s approval,” Kay said. “We’re not going to get Nintendo to approve a Carmen Electra-based Wii game, not in near future at least.” However, he thinks that with the right developer and publisher, they could skew the game towards females and their families as a unique way to get fit using fun avatars like Miis.
----------
Where is this perception coming from? I mean, the developer isn't just pulling this opinion out of thin air. It seems that Wii is already developing a stigma of being the console "for females and families".
Also:
----------
“On the Xbox 360, the game could be edgier, and we could bring in Carmen Electra for it.”
“But are we over-worrying about Nintendo?” Kay wondered.
----------
I don't know, are they? If this is how other developers with "edgier" content are thinking, I fear for the future. I don't give a crap about this developer or their garbage Carmen Electra game, but if other companies are thinking pretty much the same thing then that's a BIG problem.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 12, 2008, 12:51:16 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on June 12, 2008, 12:53:06 PM
Post by: DAaaMan64 on June 12, 2008, 01:03:45 PM
Post by: Urkel on June 12, 2008, 03:29:38 PM
Quote
I realize that the DS' library improved greatly later on, but the Wii seems to be going in the opposite direction. With the DS there weren't too many games in 2004/2005, period, and then you had the Great Flood of Christmas 2005.
A quality DS game could be made in 6 months to a year. With the Wii your talking at least a year and a half to two, hence why it's taking longer for things to turn around.
Quote
"The biggest issue with the whole thing is Nintendo’s approval,” Kay said. “We’re not going to get Nintendo to approve a Carmen Electra-based Wii game, not in near future at least.” However, he thinks that with the right developer and publisher, they could skew the game towards females and their families as a unique way to get fit using fun avatars like Miis.
Clearly, these people are completely ignorant of Nintendo's approval process. As long as it's not AO rated, you're good to go. Hell, Nintendo's been criticized for their (almost) "anything goes" attitude.
Any company that perceives the industry in such a simplistic manner is lacking any real business sense and wont be around five years from now.
Post by: NWR_Lindy on June 12, 2008, 04:49:38 PM
To me, this is like the argument that NBA games are fixed. I wish I could say with 100% certainty that that wasn't true, but because of all of the crooked referee stuff I just can't. I don't believe it to be the case, but because of the facts I just can't.
This is the same kind of thing. I'd love to say with 100% certainty that developers don't dismiss the Wii as being for "females and their families", but reading statements like this means that I can't do that. The only thing I can say is that I don't think it's happening, but I can't say for 100% sure.
Post by: Nick DiMola on June 12, 2008, 05:07:14 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on June 12, 2008, 05:31:45 PM
Post by: vudu on June 12, 2008, 05:33:42 PM
the Wii has been passed up when considering what system to develop their games for due to the personal bias' of those running the show.
Who has a bias against making money?
Post by: Nick DiMola on June 12, 2008, 05:34:18 PM
the Wii has been passed up when considering what system to develop their games for due to the personal bias' of those running the show.
Who has a bias against making money?
Idiots.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 12, 2008, 05:52:14 PM
Post by: Arbok on June 12, 2008, 06:00:35 PM
How to Derail Your Thread
I smell a new Staff Blog topic...
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on June 12, 2008, 06:23:25 PM
Post by: Shift Key on June 12, 2008, 07:02:11 PM
I have a friend who works as an animator for a game company and he has told me on numerous occasions that the Wii has been passed up when considering what system to develop their games for due to the personal bias' of those running the show.
Thanks for confirming my suspicions. And although its just one case, I'll bet its not an isolated one.
Post by: Crimm on June 12, 2008, 09:50:49 PM
----------
"The biggest issue with the whole thing is Nintendo’s approval,” Kay said. “We’re not going to get Nintendo to approve a Carmen Electra-based Wii game, not in near future at least.” However, he thinks that with the right developer and publisher, they could skew the game towards females and their families as a unique way to get fit using fun avatars like Miis.
----------
I would have lobbied hard for this to be sent to Greg for review.
Post by: NWR_Lindy on June 12, 2008, 10:44:16 PM
I would have lobbied hard for this to be sent to Greg for review.
You're right, reviewing this in British would be hilarious.
Post by: ShyGuy on June 13, 2008, 03:13:37 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on June 13, 2008, 06:48:11 AM
I was using myself as and example, I am not a casual gamer, and am very serious gamer.You're on this forum, automatically makes you a regular gamer in my system. A casual gamer doesn't spend time worrying about gaming outside of the time he's playing the game.
Post by: NWR_Lindy on June 13, 2008, 05:10:06 PM
A casual gamer doesn't spend time worrying about gaming outside of the time he's playing the game.
Bingo.
Post by: animecyberrat on June 13, 2008, 06:32:27 PM
Post by: Crimm on June 13, 2008, 11:35:16 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on June 14, 2008, 01:43:07 AM
that is not what I was saying, even going to internet forums and reading about games, which I really don't do that much, I still have purchased many games on impulse based on what little information I could gather right there at the store. There are gamers hard core enough to read about previews and stuff months even years in advance, but not doing that does not disqualify one for being hard core.If you don't research at times that's your thing but you still spend a lot of non-gaming time on gaming. That's where I see the distinction.
Post by: animecyberrat on June 14, 2008, 02:29:08 AM
What I am saying is to be "hard core" one does nto have to spend time researching the internet. Sure a casual or "non-gamer" is not likely to spend any time online, but a hard core gamer can buy just as many games without ever going online and reading about them. You never heard of commercials? Or Word of mouth?
All I am saying is a person can be a hard core gamer and never look games up online. That is a false assumption. It isn't limited to me. You make it sound like anyone who doesn't look up games online is a casual gamer, I contest that theory because mainly I know too many die hard gamers who just never go online looking for games, they buy what they think is going to be good based on what other people say or if they see a commercial or maybe someone who did go online tells them about it. But a hard core gamer does not have to ever log into a single gaming site to still be a hard core gamer.
Post by: Plugabugz on June 14, 2008, 07:53:10 AM
For NWR it started with that statement at the Wii launch. It's easier, in theory, for developers to target games to the "differentiated gamers" who are less demanding because they aren't demanding about games in the first place. They just play, then stop. End. If they shift into the "existing gamer" market their demands would become more like ours - Make it good or we won't buy it. The same principle applies to nearly everything, think of "new" drivers and long-time ones. The newbies are happy to drive and the long-timers expect a better experience. There's more of the former than there is of the latter, hence Ubisoft are (in theory!!!!) doing the right thing because they would expect to make more money from people who are easier to spend it on stuff "existing gamers" wouldn't blink at it twice.
The problem is we shout louder. We want want want want because our needs are the ones that effectively created and drove the industry through the "unpopular years". Now it's a multi-billion dollar camel machine making more money than cinema and people are suddenly noticing.
Post by: KDR_11k on June 15, 2008, 05:24:40 AM
