Topic: The House of the Dead: Overkill - Extended Cut Will Make Me Buy a Move

[broodwars]

The day I see Conduit HD for the PS3 or 360 is the day I dedicate my life to destroying Sega for good.

I'm honestly surprised that the first Conduit sold well enough to get a sequel (though knowing Sega, maybe it didn't and they were just insane).  I highly doubt a shooter that spectacularly generic would sell even a thousand copies on the HD platforms where the bar is significantly higher with the likes of Killzone, Gears of War, Resistance, etc. so I can't see Sega bringing that game to the HD consoles.  But then again, this is Sega so anything's possible and hey, Halo manages to sell despite how spectacularly generic I felt it was.  I'm a little surprised we haven't seen an announcement for an HD MadWorld considering Platinum Games is putting out Anarchy Reigns in the near future, which uses some MadWorld characters.

[Chocobo_Rider]

@broodwars

1. In regards to the Wii sales thing, pay closer attention.  Numbers like the ones in this thread show that it is not the console that prevents big sales.  These games were simply too limited in appeal to get big numbers on ANY console.

Effort (no gimps!) + Mainstream (no spin-offs, no side stories) + Wii = sales

The one thing I will grant you is that a dude-bro shooter needs to be on PS3/60 for optimal sales because dude-bro gamers are allergic to standard def and motion controls.

2. I'm willing to bet you're a bit surprised we haven't seen Mario Kart PS360! Building off of that, shhhh...

[broodwars]

Effort (no gimps!) + Mainstream (no spin-offs, no side stories) + Wii = sales

And I suppose that explains why MadWorld; Zack & Wiki; Silent Hill: Shattered Memories; and both Conduits didn't set the sales charts on fire, then?  Sure, only 2 of those games were ever any good, but I've seen mediocre games sell well on the HD platforms so that's no excuse.

The one thing I will grant you is that a dude-bro shooter needs to be on PS3/60 for optimal sales because dude-bro gamers are allergic to standard def and motion controls.

It has nothing to do with the style of the FPS and everything to do with the fact that the audience that likes FPS games isn't on the Wii and has played games with a traditional controller for years if not decades.  I prefer using a traditional controller for these games myself just because I don't want the slightest twitch of my wrist to screw up my aim, but if I were so inclined to use motion control I have my Wii and I have a Move.  From my experience, though, pointer control works much better for 3rd person shooters (see Resident Evil 4 Wii) and rail shooters than it does for FPS games, which is why I would be excited if Dead Space 2 got a Move patch yet I don't feel inclined to use my Move when playing Killzone 3.  It's also why I use my Classic Controller Pro if I feel like playing GoldenEye on Wii, but the Wii Remote + Nunchuk when playing Resident Evil 4 Wii.  I can just never get the camera how I like it in FPS games using pointer devices, and the way that the character's arm + gun moves so unnaturally in such games bugs me.

As for the "Standard Definition" comment, once you go HD you really can't go back to SD on an extremely technically-limited platform like the Wii unless the game's artistic design is really stylized, especially if you have a good HD TV like I have.

2. I'm willing to bet you're a bit surprised we haven't seen Mario Kart PS360! Building off of that, shhhh...

No, that would be stupid considering Mario Kart is a 1st party Nintendo franchise and like most of Nintendo's 1st party software sells pretty well (it's the best-selling non-Wii Sports game IIRC).

[NWR_insanolord]

Effort (no gimps!) + Mainstream (no spin-offs, no side stories) + Wii = sales

And I suppose that explains why MadWorld; Zack & Wiki; Silent Hill: Shattered Memories; and both Conduits didn't set the sales charts on fire, then?  Sure, only 2 of those games were ever any good, but I've seen mediocre games sell well on the HD platforms so that's no excuse.

None of those except maybe Conduit are mainstream. I don't necessarily disagree with what you're arguing, and I will certainly agree that the third-party situation is a lot more complicated than some people here want to believe, but you picked bad examples to refute his point.

[broodwars]

Effort (no gimps!) + Mainstream (no spin-offs, no side stories) + Wii = sales

And I suppose that explains why MadWorld; Zack & Wiki; Silent Hill: Shattered Memories; and both Conduits didn't set the sales charts on fire, then?  Sure, only 2 of those games were ever any good, but I've seen mediocre games sell well on the HD platforms so that's no excuse.

None of those except maybe Conduit are mainstream. I don't necessarily disagree with what you're arguing, and I will certainly agree that the third-party situation is a lot more complicated than some people here want to believe, but you picked bad examples to refute his point.

Perhaps.  I would argue that MadWorld, along with both No More Heroes games, would be "mainstream games" by his definition (they are, after all, 3rd person exploitation brawlers ala God of War, Devil May Cry, Dante's Inferno, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, and Bayonetta).  There's also Goldeneye on Wii, which is a FPS (the current most mainstream genre in the U.S.) and none of these games sold all that well in the short-term, though Goldeneye probably sold the best of the bunch.  And the sad thing about Goldeneye, Zack & Wiki, and Silent Hill: Shattered Memories is that those 3 are excellent games for their respective genres that really deserved to sell much better.  Maybe Capcom and Activision will release HD versions of Goldeneye and Z&W at some point down the line (Konami's already forging ahead with Silent Hill: Downpour so Shattered Memories was in the rear-view mirror a long time ago).

[NWR_insanolord]

Calling No More Heroes mainstream is ridiculous. If it's made by Suda 51, it's not mainstream, and I'm sure he'd be the first to argue that. Beyond that, I'm not sure I'd argue that any of the games you mentioned after God of War are mainstream. As for Goldeneye, like you said, it sold fairly well, and it probably would have sold even better if Activision hadn't released it in the same week as their own Call of Duty: Black Ops.

In the end, there's no reason we should be giving this as much discussion as we do. Companies as big as the publishers we're talking about don't make decisions out of spite; everything they do is designed to make the most amount of money. They don't believe making a Wii version is a worthwhile investment. A large part of that reasoning is their and others' experience on the platform, and part of that is due to mistakes, both on their part and Nintendo's.

All we can hope for at this point is that Nintendo learns from this, and makes future decisions with the intention of attracting more and better third party support, which, given what we've seen with the 3DS and the rumors of Cafe, it really looks like they have.

[NWR_Neal]

I don't want to get too embroiled with this, but let's lay out the facts:

- Overkill is a finished game that people seemed to enjoy.
- Move is a system similar to the Wii.
- The cost in porting Overkill to the Move is probably less than making a new game.

That's why Sega is doing this. Is it the greatest business decision ever made? No, but it's not a dumb one.

[BlackNMild2k1]

I don't want to get too embroiled with this, but let's lay out the facts:

- Overkill is a finished game that people seemed to enjoy.
- Move is a system similar to the Wii.
- The cost in porting Overkill to the Move is probably less than making a new game.

That's why Sega is doing this. Is it the greatest business decision ever made? No, but it's not a dumb one.

Well, it could be a dumb one, but hopefully it 's not a costly one.

[Chocobo_Rider]

I think perhaps a more specific explanation that might satisfy everyone (erm, almost everyone) is this:

It would have been better for third parties if the Wii was not such a radical departure from so many previous philosophies of game development.  Businesses try to minimize risk.

"This has better graphics than the last one" is a no-risk way to market a game.
"This has the same controls you've been comfy with for 10 years" is a no-risk way to sell a game.

Neither of those tried and true tactics could be applied to the Wii.  The Wii itself was a wild success on PS2-levels and developers had to change to take advantage of it.  But there was too much risk involved in that.  So, most of them just chose to play it safe.

The situation is compounded by the fact that with PS3/60 you could do minimal effort cross-platform releases once the initial investment was made.  Talk about minimizing risk! You've just doubled your sales potential!

With the Wii, however, it's like Mr. Miyagi once said:

Walk on road, hm? Walk left side (ignore Wii completely), safe. Walk right side (mainstream, full effort, Wii), safe. Walk middle (gimped, side-story), sooner or later? get squish just like grape.

Saying Madworld, No More Heroes and Zak&Wiki were mainstream? Sorry, but no.
Silent Hill: Shattered Memories? Great game? Maybe.  But see how it has a colon and a subtitle instead of a numeric digit? The defense rests.

As for GoldenEye, if 1.17 million units sold in the US and EU alone isn't a "success" in your mind? Then, you are simply beyond convincing!

[broodwars]

Silent Hill: Shattered Memories? Great game? Maybe.  But see how it has a colon and a subtitle instead of a numeric digit? The defense rests.

Companies don't like to use numerical designations for long-running franchises anymore unless there's a legacy or prestige factor to it (Square-Enix).  Just staying within the Silent Hill franchise, after SH4 we had Origins, Homecoming, Shattered Memories, and soon we'll have Downpour as well (which formerly went by the title of "Silent Hill 8").  None of them use the numerical designation, and yet all are valid extensions of the Silent Hill franchise.  Should we call New Super Mario Bros. Wii a "sidestory" or "partial effort" (well, I might call it that but that's another story) because it's not called "Super Mario Bros. 5"?  How about any of the Legend of Zelda games past the 2nd NES title, which have all used subtitles and alternate names instead of numerical designations?  I could do this all day with Nintendo franchises.

As for GoldenEye, if 1.17 million units sold in the US and EU alone isn't a "success" in your mind? Then, you are simply beyond convincing!

The last time I heard sales data on GoldenEye, it was when Invisible Walls reported the official NPD numbers for November 2010.  I believe GoldenEye was in the low 40s on the Top Selling software for that month, if not the low 60s.  I haven't seen any official sales numbers after that, which is why I noted "in the short term".  In the long-term, even Valkyria Chronicles was a successful game, but it wasn't a successful game quickly enough on PS3, so Sega moved the franchise to PSP.  Short-term profits matter when determining future software development.

I will agree with you, though, that the Wii was an extremely risky venture based on an extremely unreliable customer base (casual gamers).  Some companies took risks with the Wii and succeeded (Carnival Games, Resident Evil 4 Wii, Just Dance) and some companies took risks with the Wii and got burned (Zack & Wiki, Madworld, Silent Hill: Shattered Memories), which caused other companies to reconsider supporting the platform.  Eventually, the audience for those games just moved on, and we ended up where we are now with the platform.

[NWR_insanolord]

Third parties played a significant role in their failure on the Wii, but if that's going to change next time around, Nintendo has to make the effort for it. Nintendo needs to make a system that third parties don't need to make compromises for, with hardware and features in line with what they're looking for. Expecting publishers to put in the extra effort got the Wii the support it's had. Everything we've seen recently indicates that Nintendo understands this, so I'm cautiously optimistic.

[Chocobo_Rider]

@ broodwars

Yea, only Squeenix numbers their mainstream games.  *cough*SF4, RE5, MW3, ME2, Portal2, Bioshock2, Conduit2, Fallout3, Killzone3, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc...

As for comparing Nintendo's apples to these oranges, if I need to spell things out even more, you can call it whatever you like, but let's just boil the concept down to "flagship" titles.  NSMBWii was a flagship title, SMG2 was a flagship title.  Zelda's flagship titles are fairly obvious.  If you can't figure things out beyond that, I can't help you.

RE: GoldenEye, "Then, you are simply beyond convincing!" Moving on...

RE: Your proclomation that the Wii's audience is just a bunch of casual gamers who have "moved on" - yea, I'm sure that's why Epic Yarn topped 1 million, why DKCR topped 4 million.

I'm sure that has nothing to do with game quality and mainstream appeal ...

I really try to avoid being rude in my discussions.  But it seems you're just set in the idea that the Wii was purchased by nothing but soccer moms who haven't touched it since Wii Fit Plus, because, well, that was the last game released on the platform, right? =P

 Again, "simply beyond convincing"

@ Insanolord

Yup.

It's just a shame that thinking outside the box qualified as a "compromise" for most third parties =P
 

[NWR_insanolord]

When looking at sales for Wii games, you really can't lump Nintendo's own software in with third party titles. Nintendo games have never had a problem selling (in general; there are of course exceptions to that). Hell, with DKCR, 4 million could be seen as disappointing. The audience is still there for Nintendo titles, just not for anything other than that (again, a few exceptions, but not many, and certainly nothing you can count on from a publisher's point of view).

And Nintendo could have done everything they did with the Wii, except with hardware specs that would allow porting from the 360/PS3 without too much effort, and gotten as good third party support as anyone this generation. Same controller, same interface quirks, same lousy online system, and still had at least as good third party support as Sony.

[broodwars]

@ broodwars

Yea, only Squeenix numbers their mainstream games.  *cough*SF4, RE5, MW3, ME2, Portal2, Bioshock2, Conduit2, Fallout3, Killzone3, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc...

 I clearly said "long-running franchises", and most of the series you named (Portal, Mass Effect, Conduit, Killzone, Modern Warfare) are at most 3 console games in and started this generation (Modern Warfare doesn't even use the correct numbering scheme, because Modern Warfare is the new branding).  Most companies don't use numerical designations outside of Square-Enix and Capcom (let's not forget the huge number of Megaman games there).

As for comparing Nintendo's apples to these oranges, if I need to spell things out even more, you can call it whatever you like, but let's just boil the concept down to "flagship" titles.  NSMBWii was a flagship title, SMG2 was a flagship title.  Zelda's flagship titles are fairly obvious.  If you can't figure things out beyond that, I can't help you.

I was using the same rules you were: if it's a long-running franchise, apparently the game is only considered a "full mainstream effort" if the title has a number after it instead of "a subtitle or colon".  Don't blame me that it's so easy to turn your own logic against you.  If you can't call something like Shattered Memories a "real game" in the Silent Hill franchise because the title uses a subtitle instead of calling it "Silent Hill 6", then I can call most Nintendo games "sidestories" or "not full efforts".  Yeah, doesn't make much sense, does it?  So let's just agree that a game's what it is due to actual design elements in the game itself, and that the title is incidental.

RE: Your proclomation that the Wii's audience is just a bunch of casual gamers who have "moved on" - yea, I'm sure that's why Epic Yarn topped 1 million, why DKCR topped 4 million.

It is undeniable fact that the Wii audience is largely casual.  If it wasn't, the Wii's userbase wouldn't be that much larger than the PS3's or 360's and the system wouldn't have sold what it has far beyond its competitors.  Also, Nintendo wouldn't have put such a large marketing and development push this generation into capturing that demographic.  Now, the more core users like us have stuck around (though I have all the consoles now), but you only have to look at the console and software sales for the other two platforms to see that the core users likely moved on and purchased 1 or more of the competing consoles to fill in the gaping holes in the Wii's library.

Now, as others have previously stated, this argument has gone on more than long enough.  The points have been made, and I have more interesting things to do with my time than argue around in circles with you.  You believe what you believe, and I'll believe what I'll believe.  Let's just agree to disagree and be done with it.

[Chocobo_Rider]

@ Insanolord

Right, so, Nintendo games don't sell because they make good products, but because these casual gamers who apparently don't pay any attention wake up on the morning a new 1st party title is released and say "I should go to the local GameStore and give them money!"

Yea, Nintendo could have beefed up the horsepower.  But then it wouldn't have been as affordable.  It would have experienced the same price barriers the PS3/60 have experienced.

In other words, please don't be one of the people who criticizes Nintendo for making games and hardware that resonated with the audience this generation.

Plus, do we really need a world with three consoles from the same mold?

Under this model, gamers made out great, Nintendo made out great, and third parties with guts made out great too.  I just don't see why so many gamers and journalists are all gloom and doom 24/7.

Plus, please keep in mind, in no way am I trying to say that Nintendo is "better" than the competition.  Or that anyone should feel that way.  I happen to enjoy them more at the moment, but my primary motivation is simply to get everyone using the same standards.  And for a while now, Nintendo is definitely held to a different, somewhat impossible, standard.

But that's the price paid for being "different," right? That's a shame.

@ broodwars

Yea, I think I already said I couldn't help you and moved on ^_^

[NWR_insanolord]

I believe you're misreading what I said. Nintendo's software lineup on the Wii is phenomenal, and is in and of itself completely worth buying the console for. My point was that you can't point to Nintendo's first-party lineup as proof that good third-party games will sell well.

And given the tech of the time, I'm pretty sure Nintendo could have built a machine like I described and sold it for a modest profit for $299. If Nintendo could go back and do it over knowing what they know today, I'm sure they'd do that..

[ShyGuy]

NinSage is my favorite new poster.

[Chocobo_Rider]

I believe you're misreading what I said. Nintendo's software lineup on the Wii is phenomenal, and is in and of itself completely worth buying the console for. My point was that you can't point to Nintendo's first-party lineup as proof that good third-party games will sell well.

You're right! I did misunderstand you! I thought you were trying to say... that other thing.

OK, so 1st party sells because it is good.  We've discussed the success of several third party titles that gave us flagship quality games.  So, I ask, what leads you to believe the deciding factor between success and failure on the Wii is anything but quality mainstream experiences?

Keep in mind, to those who enjoy simulating dance with a remote control, a game like Just Dance is the pinnacle of quality.  Just as, for so many years, the Guitar Band franchises held a value for people who enjoyed simulating music with plastic toys.

And given the tech of the time, I'm pretty sure Nintendo could have built a machine like I described and sold it for a modest profit for $299. If Nintendo could go back and do it over knowing what they know today, I'm sure they'd do that..

Well, if you're going to use your powers of space/time mind-reading then I guess I just can't provide an adequate counter =P

But, my personal belief is still that Nintendo did what was right at the time.  Both for themselves, and for gamers.  You don't have to agree with that!

NinSage is my favorite new poster.

Hey, thanks buddy! I just call 'em as I see 'em.

~

On a somewhat related note: my first down vote! NOOOO!!!

[NWR_Neal]

NinSage is my favorite new poster.

I kind of echo this. I might not agree with you, but I enjoy arguing with you/seeing other people arguing with you.

[Mop it up]

And given the tech of the time, I'm pretty sure Nintendo could have built a machine like I described and sold it for a modest profit for $299. If Nintendo could go back and do it over knowing what they know today, I'm sure they'd do that..

I don't think they even had to go that far, though. From what I can tell, even when the Wii launched there was quite a markup on it. So Nintendo could have added in things like more RAM and more internal storage without raising the manufacturing costs very much, and still make a nice profit at the $250 price point. At the very least, WiiWare wouldn't face the issues it currently has, though from what I can tell the system has a puny amount of RAM for what its other components are capable of. I agree with their philosophy of affordable gaming but they cheaped out more than they had to with the Wii hardware, and I will always be critical of it when the topic comes up. But at the end of the day, it still has the games I want to play.

[Chocobo_Rider]

NinSage is my favorite new poster.

I kind of echo this. I might not agree with you, but I enjoy arguing with you/seeing other people arguing with you.

I coined a little phrase for myself several years ago when I started getting involved in video game message boards ... *ahem* ... "It's not about agreeing all the time.  It's about understanding that opinions can differ."  ^_^

But at the end of the day, it still has the games I want to play.

Huzzah!

[NWR_insanolord]

But at the end of the day, it still has the games I want to play.

Huzzah!

I'll agree with this. I own all three consoles, and each one has great things I wouldn't want to be without, but the Wii definitely has the most of those.