Kawa's theory is that quality is what determines a title's overall financial success. "It's all about games and quality. I'm not surprised that another shooter on rails doesn't sell well. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that people expect something more than that."
He expects titles like No More Heroes 2, Monster Hunter 3 and Metroid: Other M to be successful because of their quality. Kawa concludes this statement by saying that "Instead of bitching we'd rather create something that has value and doesn't feel like a third-rate port put together to make a quick buck."
Bloober Team's first WiiWare title is Last Flight, a horror action game that takes place inside of a plane. When asked about the game's success with the Wii's audience, Kawa simply comments that "Our logic is far simpler: if the game doesn't sell, we did something wrong."
Kawa believes that there is indeed an audience for mature rated titles on Wii.
His game had better be good, or he's going to look a little foolish.
Speaking of Nibris.....
How is Sadness coming along? Does anyone know? Has is been delayed till WiiHD?
what about Raid over the River?
"Only bad Wii games sell badly"
Terrible logic. This guy needs to shut his mouth and buy Zack and Wikki. The market just isn't that black and white.
That's another thing... In this competitive business of INTERACTIVE TV PICTURES, why create products that you're unable to market effectively? Do you not understand your own product's appeal (and what appeals to buyers)? Do you even care about your product's appeal and communicating it (and not just ship/sales numbers on spreadsheets)?
Crapcom
EA
Ubi
Activision
THQ
If Nintendo raises the bar, 3rd parties go under it more easily (and some just crash into the bar). IS THIS HOW IT'S SUPPOSED TO WORK?
Er, how can you declare SH:SM a failure already?
The weekly sales VGChartz lists
Broodwars: Sounds like you are saying that Nintendo is doing a bang up jump of bringing in the casuals(stocking the lake) and proving bridge games(baiting the hook), but then no one is transitioning them in to traditional gamers. So it sounds like your beef isn't with Nintendo, but your beef is more that 3rd parties aren't doing their part on the Wii if you can't find what your looking for.
I don't smoke anymore, but 3rd parties remining me of those people that would come up to you and ask to bum a smoke, so you give them a cigarette, then they ask to borrow a light, you look at them funny but you light the cigarette for them but have to ask "Would you like me smoke that for you too?".
Is Nintendo really expected to do everything? 3rd parties aren't even trying to fill the gaps in the Wii release schedule even when Nintendo purposely leaves them wiiiiiiiiide open. All 3rd parties have done is copy some of the early things that Nintendo has done successfully on the Wii, do it extremely cheaply and repeatedly until it doesn't sell anymore. But just like the 3rd parties you blame Nintendo for this?
You say that there are no "traditional" gamers left on the Wii (outside of Nintendo fans), and it may or may not be true, but it's no one fault but the 3rd parties.
Nintendo releases WiiSports
3rd Parties see sports mini games. Deca Sports and countless other sports minis are born
Nintendo releases WiiPlay
3rd parties see mini game collection. Carnival games, Raving Rabbids and countless other minigame collection are born. Not to mention that that for some reason Light Gun games and On Rails shooters become a focus.
Nintendo releases Mario Galaxy
3rd parties ignore it because it's Mario. Where are all the damn platformers?
Nintendo releases Metroid Prime 3
3rd parties ignore that too. Wii owners don't like 1st person shooters.
Nintendo releases WiiFit
3rd parties see fitness games. Some good software actually came from this, but there are still some very obvious gaps being left wide open.
Now you have to look at 3rd party success that hasn't even been followed up and much less even copied.
Capcom re-re-releases Resident Evil 4.
Does Capcom follow that up with a similar style game?
Nope. RE5, Lost Planet, Dead Rising and anything else in the genre never shows up.
Does EA capitalize and release Dead Space on Wii to fill the obvious gap being ignored here?
of course not.
Does any 3rd party put any sort of effort into filling the 3rd person shooter gap on the Wii?
CoD whatever is released.
Does Activision push for more.... yeah, but late ports on low budgets.
Conduit is released. Solid effort from a C grade studio that actually brought something to the table.
Does anyone try to step up and be the FPS of the Wii?
Nah... but here is another 2yr late port.
So you can't blame Nintendo for the shortcoming in the Wii line up when it is the job of the 3rd parties to get in there and make the games that fill out the line up. I don't see anyone pointing any fingers at Sony or MS for having the 3rd parties do 90% of their heavy lifting while Nintendo carries all their own weight.
Nintendo is selling more hardware to more people faster than any console or handheld before this gen and 3rfd parties are abandoning the platform because they forgot how to make games that aren't HD? And when they do manage to make something worthwhile, they send it out to die with absolutely no advertising whatsoever.That is ridiculous and for every 3rd party that fails to stay profitable this generation has no one but themselves to blame.
I think third-parties are stuck between a rock and a hard place this generation. If they make a top-tier, AAA, "expensive" Wii game, it would be unique on the platform but might not sell regardless of their effort, since the buying habits of the Wii audience is a little hard to predict.
Nintendo also hasn't done anything to really cultivate audiences in the more "hardcore" genres either. Why not have the Wii equivalent of Goldeneye 007? Why is the new installment of Golden Sun going to DS instead of Wii? It doesn't seem like Nintendo themselves even have any faith in those genres on their own console, or even care about growing those genres on Wii. It's not the job of third-parties to test out the waters for a genre on a console; that should be done by the console-maker, since they have the money to incur the most risk. Nintendo would help out a lot by at least having some flagship franchises that don't involve Link, Mario, Samus, or Miis.
Why Nintendo doesn't have a Dragon Quest-type RPG franchise, I'll never know. They could do it as well or better than anybody else. Somebody will say, "Oh, but JRPGs are a dying genre, Nintendo doesn't want to make a money sink, red ocean blah blah blah" but come on. The 3D platformer could be considered a dying genre, yet Nintendo still creates amazing Mario games that set the industry on fire. The reason why the 360 is huge for first-person shooters is because Microsoft made it a priority to cultivate the Halo franchise. They created an audience for first-person shooters on their console out of thin air, and third-parties have been feeding off of it ever since. Until Nintendo steps outside the boundaries of their general-interest fare, then the third-party output for the console will cater mostly to the audience that those general-interest games create. Granted, that's a big audience, but not the total audience.
It's not that Nintendo doesn't have faith in those genres; they simply have no desire to make games in those genres, and historically never have. Nintendo always has and probably always will do what they want to do. As for your question why Nintendo doesn't have their own equivalent to Dragon Quest, what do you think Pokemon is?
It's not that Nintendo doesn't have faith in those genres; they simply have no desire to make games in those genres, and historically never have. Nintendo always has and probably always will do what they want to do. As for your question why Nintendo doesn't have their own equivalent to Dragon Quest, what do you think Pokemon is?
Yet Pokemon is also the big franchise Nintendo just steadfastly refuses to bring to any of their consoles in its traditional format. Nintendo treats their consoles as shovelware platforms when it comes to Pokemon, to the extent that it's hard to care about the franchise anymore.
3rd parties need to know their place.*
Nintendo has left them plenty of seats at the table and it's them(3rd Parties) that have chosen not to sit in them.
I've never played it, but I understand it to be a pick up and play on-the-go type of game that is best suited for the handheld sector.The great thing about Pokémon is that it can suit both the "casual" and "hardcore" moods. The design is simple and the goals are clear, but there is more complexity to the game than its cutesy surface might have you believe. The team-building element of the game is quite intricate, with hundreds of Pokémon separated into over a dozen different types, all with different potentials for stats and various ways to build up stats. The limitation of four moves also instills even more strategy, and even things like the sex of a creature affects how its stats are built.
...realizes the thread is thoroughly delrailed...oops... :-[My work here is done.
Wii game's aren't going to sell to core gamers because we can get better games with better graphics on the 360 and PS3. For a Wii game intended for core gamers to sell really well to multi-console owning "core" gamers, it can't be merely "great for a Wii game". It has to compete with the 360 and PS3 and that includes graphics so you developers and publishers better start looking for some Metroid Prime caliber artists.
It has to compete with the 360 and PS3 and that includes graphics so you developers and publishers better start looking for some Metroid Prime caliber artists.
I just love the assumption that for a game to have good gameplay it has to look like ****, and if a game has good graphics the gameplay must suck...don't you?
Of course, in any game the developers need to bring the gameplay as well, though I wonder how much of that lacking on Wii comes from incompetent programming/design and how much stems from the Wiimote being a motion controller so obviously flawed that Nintendo had to release Motion+ as a bandaid.
I'm replaying FF X from the PS2 on my PS3 right now, and I have said in the past that if most Wii games looked as good as that game I'd be perfectly content with the system. That game was released in 2001, and from sheer art direction it still looks better than most Wii games...which is pathetic. We've been getting some great-looking games this year (Punch Out, Muramasa, A Boy & His Blob), but they still seem the exception rather than the rule.
Of course, in any game the developers need to bring the gameplay as well, though I wonder how much of that lacking on Wii comes from incompetent programming/design and how much stems from the Wiimote being a motion controller so obviously flawed that Nintendo had to release Motion+ as a bandaid.
Wii game's aren't going to sell to core gamers because we can get better games with better graphics on the 360 and PS3. For a Wii game intended for core gamers to sell really well to multi-console owning "core" gamers, it can't be merely "great for a Wii game". It has to compete with the 360 and PS3 and that includes graphics so you developers and publishers better start looking for some Metroid Prime caliber artists.
We were informed of this game through one of our relatives in Guam. Wethought it was a family joke untill we saw the front cover forourselves. MY SON is on the front shaking those rumba shakers(maracas). All of my family here in California was shocked and wonderedhow he was on there since. Then my wife remembered, when she wasworking for a Pulbication Company in Novato... when "Kobe" was 10months old they took photos of him for greeting cards. The company isclosed now due to economic times. So we wondered how they obtained thisphoto. Kobe is now almost 6 years old and when he saw his photo, he didnot seem to care. I have a plan though, when he gets older then I canuse this in his wedding slideshow. We have other photos that weresupposed to be used in greeting cards...like one where he is bowlingand one where he is giving flowers to another baby (like forvalentine's day). We bought the game at ToysRUs and it is good foryoung kids above 5. Quite a few mini games like green light red light.Oh well...not like the violent games on the other systems but...well itis just a "GAME". Not really meant for those hard core gaming type ofpeople but maybe like the ones who like the bowling one for Wii. ThankYou Steph for letting us know he was on the cover. =)
QuoteI just love the assumption that for a game to have good gameplay it has to look like ****, and if a game has good graphics the gameplay must suck...don't you?
Who said that and where?
QuoteWii game's aren't going to sell to core gamers because we can get better games with better graphics on the 360 and PS3. For a Wii game intended for core gamers to sell really well to multi-console owning "core" gamers, it can't be merely "great for a Wii game". It has to compete with the 360 and PS3 and that includes graphics so you developers and publishers better start looking for some Metroid Prime caliber artists.
For me the graphic aren't as important. But the "better games" part of it is what turns me off of Wii third party games. Nothing seems like a really serious effort. It all seems like someone told the B-team to "make something for the Wii audience". On the other consoles you get games where you can tell the developer has their top guys working on it and the whole thing is a labour of love. You can tell that the goal is to make one of the greatest games ever. Serious effort is made on the gameplay, controls, level design, graphics, art style, music, story and just overall presentation. The Wii it's just like "pound out whatever". Core gamers aren't interested in half-assed attempts. We want those GOTY types of games and when a third party only makes those games on the other consoles you just develop this "eh, **** 'em" indifference to them.
Super Mario Galaxy, SSB Brawl and Metroid Prime 3 seem like FULL efforts. They have that "go for broke and make the best game EVER" ambitious design, regardless of whether you think they actually acheived that. Not every game has to be like that. I think Nintendo very noticably cuts corners these days and even an amazing game like NSMB Wii doesn't come across as very ambitious. But at least Nintendo has made that sort of game on the Wii. When a third party have never even made an attempt to do such a thing how can their support be taken seriously? It comes across like the Wii is not a priority for them so core gamers might as well stick to the other consoles and just use their Wii as their Nintendo machine.
The effort I think is the key thing and you can put in that kind of effort on the Wii even without HD graphics. The best games always made exceptional use of the hardware they were "stuck" with. There was always something better be it arcades, PCs or some high-powered but obscure console. Square could have made Final Fantasy VI on the 3DO and thus have FMV and CD-quality music and a lot of the bells of whistles they later had in FFVII. But instead they used the "inferior" SNES with it's chip sound, cartridge format, and slow CPU but still busted out an amazing game that pushes the console to its limits. Despite the limitations they went for broke and knocked the ball out of the park. Nobody does that on the Wii, except Nintendo (sometimes), and then they wonder why after 20 years of being conditioned to favour these types of games we don't buy Wii games and instead focus on the 2nd and 3rd place consoles that contain those types of games.
I think third-parties are stuck between a rock and a hard place this generation. If they make a top-tier, AAA, "expensive" Wii game, it would be unique on the platform but might not sell regardless of their effort, since the buying habits of the Wii audience is a little hard to predict. If they make a top-tier, AAA, "expensive" 360/PS3 game, it will not be unique on those platforms, but it will *probably* sell because the buying habits of those audiences are more predictable.
I think third-parties are reticent to dive into Wii development whole-hog because very few companies besides Nintendo have really put up huge numbers. You have your Just Dance titles that do well, but those "casual" genres get saturated too. And people looking for the more "hardcore" titles probably already have a 360 or PS3 anyways, and abandoned the Wii long ago.
In a landscape of gambles, the Wii ironically seems to be MORE of a gamble, since the platform has been pigeonholed as a family-oriented console by gamers and press alike. I think perception has become reality on Wii, and its hard to reverse that sentiment once it's become entrenched.
<Side rant incoming...>
Nintendo also hasn't done anything to really cultivate audiences in the more "hardcore" genres either. Why not have the Wii equivalent of Goldeneye 007? Why is the new installment of Golden Sun going to DS instead of Wii? It doesn't seem like Nintendo themselves even have any faith in those genres on their own console, or even care about growing those genres on Wii. It's not the job of third-parties to test out the waters for a genre on a console; that should be done by the console-maker, since they have the money to incur the most risk. Nintendo would help out a lot by at least having some flagship franchises that don't involve Link, Mario, Samus, or Miis.
Why Nintendo doesn't have a Dragon Quest-type RPG franchise, I'll never know. They could do it as well or better than anybody else. Somebody will say, "Oh, but JRPGs are a dying genre, Nintendo doesn't want to make a money sink, red ocean blah blah blah" but come on. The 3D platformer could be considered a dying genre, yet Nintendo still creates amazing Mario games that set the industry on fire. The reason why the 360 is huge for first-person shooters is because Microsoft made it a priority to cultivate the Halo franchise. They created an audience for first-person shooters on their console out of thin air, and third-parties have been feeding off of it ever since. Until Nintendo steps outside the boundaries of their general-interest fare, then the third-party output for the console will cater mostly to the audience that those general-interest games create. Granted, that's a big audience, but not the total audience.
<Side rant finished>
