Topic: Theory about third party support

[Smash_Brother]

Square, as much as I dislike their "time-release" storylines, is generally known for pushing the graphical limits of whatever hardware they're on, regardless of whether or not there's "better" hardware out there. If they're bringing piles of games to the DS instead of the PSP, there's no argument for not bringing games to the Wii.

Something I need to ask: am I the only one who isn't impressed by "next-gen" graphics any more? The same washed-out look of these games with admittedly nice smoothing has just become commonplace for me and as a result nothing to get excited about.

It's the same reason "special" effects aren't special any more when George Lucas puts them in every single scene.

[NWR_pap64]

Something I need to ask: am I the only one who isn't impressed by "next-gen" graphics any more? The same washed-out look of these games with admittedly nice smoothing has just become commonplace for me and as a result nothing to get excited about.

My issue with next gen graphics is the lack of creativity. Here we have these powerful graphic engines, yet they opt to create games that look the same. Same character models, same textures and same color.

For example, when I first saw the TV spot for Unreal III I thought the game was a Gears of Wars spin off because the main character looked A LOT like Marcus Fenix.

And before someone mentions it, yes I am talking about many FPS games out in the market right now.

Whatever happened to color, surreality and imaginative environments?

[NWR_Lindy]

Yes, when S-E announced FF XIII (May 2006), they had no idea that the Wii would be big and the PS3 would struggle.  But they did know that Sony's console was going to be a hardware powerhouse, and that Nintendo's Wii would be underpowered by comparison.  Since 1) they already had close ties with Sony, 2) the PS3 hardware would allow them to produce the visuals they were looking for, and 3) Nintendo hadn't had a track record of console success since the SNES, Sony was the obvious choice at the time.

Yes, S-E is making FF XII for 360 to recoup expenses, period.  That's why they aren't releasing it in Japan; they wouldn't get their money back.

Square Enix can make epic games on the Wii.  I never said they couldn't (and from a business standpoint, like I stated above, I don't know why they're not).  But if they're looking to set an industry benchmark for graphics (which they seem to try to do with every successive FF release), they aren't going to be able to do that on Wii.  The Wii isn't the ideal platform for the pseudo-movies that S-E seems to be intent on producing.

[Ian Sane]

Um Ian N64 was a much more visually impressive system than the PS One and was more advanced.

Not much.  The N64 was blocky and the Playstation was blocky and grainy.  The comparison between the Wii and the other two console is like the PS1 going against the Dreamcast but being released after.  I have yet to see a Wii game that doesn't look it could have been done on the Xbox.  The Wii's CPU clocks in the MHz while the other consoles are in the GHz.  Not the whole picture but it shows the huge difference in specs.  The Wii is glorified last-gen hardware.  Its specs are closer to the Xbox than they are to the other current systems.

Say this and that about Square but they were working on the N64 but moved when they realized the hardware was not suitable for what they wanted to do.  Them switching over is what made the Playstation the market leader.  They led the way.  They didn't just hop over once it appeared everyone was.  Initially they were doing what they're doing now - supporting the old market leader under the assumption the status quo would remain.  But they couldn't do what they wanted to do so they jumped ship.  Final Fantasy VII at the very least is an example of Square switching hardware because they wanted a high level presentation.  Had they "toughed it out" and compromised Final Fantasy VII so it could be on the N64 that would have changed everything.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

"Them switching over is what made the Playstation the market leader."

That's a nice myth.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Square, as much as I dislike their "time-release" storylines, is generally known for pushing the graphical limits of whatever hardware they're on, regardless of whether or not there's "better" hardware out there. If they're bringing piles of games to the DS instead of the PSP, there's no argument for not bringing games to the Wii.

Something I need to ask: am I the only one who isn't impressed by "next-gen" graphics any more? The same washed-out look of these games with admittedly nice smoothing has just become commonplace for me and as a result nothing to get excited about.

It's the same reason "special" effects aren't special any more when George Lucas puts them in every single scene.

I agree with the graphics, I am VERY hard to impress now, the only way a company can do it is if they try something abstract like a Mario Galaxy or something that is not trying to be realistic. I HOPE Banjo Kazooie 3 turns out this way but I'm not holding my breath. There is one game coming out for 360 (Maybe the PS3 as well) that is called Tales of (Can't remember the full title!) that is using cell shading that looks just like a cartoon, now this game's visuals interest me. Realistic visuals pretty much fail to compare to a game like Crysis which is pretty amazing and even then they aren't "OMG mind blowing". I can go outside and see pretty trees, if possible I'd like my game to actually have a world that I truly cannot see in every day life. I guess that is why I found SMG far more stunning visually than most games out there, it did something very unique visually. Even Ratchet and Clank did this to a lesser extent.

[NWR_pap64]

While this idea of mine generated when thinking of an ideal animated film I think this can also be applied to videogames.

In my opinion, reality should be presented in a way that looks familiar but is completely fictional, like a dream. Make your surroundings glow with color, life and charm. Even something as dark as a war torn world can dazzle if they handled the presentation well enough. In a way, it creates a believable reality.

I admit that as much as I thought Bioshock was a tad overrated it did to a great job of presenting a world that looked like our own, but was completely set in fiction.

To sum it up; creating realism often ends in unreality. Creating surreality makes things real.

[GoldenPhoenix]

While this idea of mine generated when thinking of an ideal animated film I think this can also be applied to videogames.

In my opinion, reality should be presented in a way that looks familiar but is completely fictional, like a dream. Make your surroundings glow with color, life and charm. Even something as dark as a war torn world can dazzle if they handled the presentation well enough. In a way, it creates a believable reality.

I admit that as much as I thought Bioshock was a tad overrated it did to a great job of presenting a world that looked like our own, but was completely set in fiction.

To sum it up; creating realism often ends in unreality. Creating surreality makes things real.

That is a good pick for creating realism without being too realistic. Bioshock had a strange world we will never encounter yet it was familiar at the same time.

[Adrock]

Something I need to ask: am I the only one who isn't impressed by "next-gen" graphics any more?

No, you're not. I stopped caring about graphics after playing The Wind Waker. Gorgeous game, even by today's standards, but it plays like a refined Ocarina of Time with sailing.

Bad graphics is one thing, standard definition is another. If anyone other than Nintendo gave a damn, they could make some great looking games on the Wii. HD doesn't equal good graphics. There's plenty of ass looking 360 games. I've said this so many times, it's called art design. Developers need to figure out what that is and make some games that push people's imaginations.

[Sarail]

"Them switching over is what made the Playstation the market leader."

That's a nice myth.

But that's not a myth, Pro.  That's the truth of the matter.  Square got upset with Nintendo's decision to go with carts instead of CD as a medium, and because of it, Square jumped ship.  Enix followed, and because of this, Sony claimed the throne of market leader in Japan.  Its waves soon landed on American shores and took hold here, too.

If Nintendo would have gone with CDs for the N64... geez... I dunno.. we'd probably still be seeing Nintendo vs. Sega.  o_O

[KDR_11k]

I think there's sales data showing it didn't happen like that, might be what Pro's talking about.

I'd say the only reason FF13 is on the PS3 is assumed market inertia (AKA "playstation will keep the top"), nothing else. I recall Sony fanboys claiming it needs bluray but that's apparently not the case.

[S-U-P-E-R]

I really wish I could get inside some 3rd party software planners' heads. I feel like I'm getting a great mental workout just sitting down and thinking about why more 3rd party games aren't getting released/succeeding on the Wii. It's pretty easy to throw out lots of completely plausible theories, but I have a hunch it won't be clear for quite a while longer.

One issue I've noticed 3rd party guys raise since DKC came out is that it's really hard to compete with Nintendo's 1st (or 2nd, lol) party games on their own console. Nintendo is now making bank on excercise and fake dog games and if I were a 3rd party trying to sell to that demographic, I wouldn't even know where the **** to start. I'm sure the stockholders would rather see the company stick to business-as-usual so we get good quarterly numbers...

I have a hunch, though, if I could get my own company in good with Nintendo, like even get in a position to be 2nd party or partner and develop for them with some of their licenses attached (if they're still willing to do that stuff nowadays) and/or basically just become their bitch or whatever it takes to be a cog in their business plan, there'd be some good money to be had there.

The internet troll in me just wants to point at the shitbarn hardware and retarded casual games and jump up and down, but you can't argue with success.

[Flames_of_chaos]

For as long as the Wii has been on the market, industry pundits and journalists have pointed to low software tie ratios and sluggish sales of third-party games on the platform. Nintendo is getting increasingly annoyed by this perception, however. With 19 third-party titles that have sold over 400K units in the U.S. and a few that have gone on to be blockbusters, such as Guitar Hero III and Mario & Sonic, Nintendo feels it's about time that people start thinking differently about how games sell on the Wii.

Speaking to GameDaily BIZ during E3, Nintendo of America's Vice President of Coporate Affairs, Denise Kaigler, commented, "There is an assumption out there that just simply isn't true... We're setting the record straight. This is fact," she said while pointing to a chart supplied to Nintendo by The NPD Group. "We are selling third-party games and they are doing very well, and better than our competitors."



In fact, according to the data in the chart, the Wii has sold more software (first-party and third-party combined) than either the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation 3 when looking at the first 19 months of availability in the U.S. for each platform.

Of course, given how well Nintendo's own titles tend to sell, the above chart is no doubt affected by the inclusion of first-party games. At the very least, however, it does show that a boatload of Wii games in general have been sold. We've contacted NPD and Nintendo to see if a chart that focuses only on third-party sales is available. We'll be sure to bring that to you if/when we receive it.

[NWR_Lindy]

Is there a comparable chart for third-party games only?  I'd love to see that.

[Flames_of_chaos]

The only 3rd party charts are from 2006/2007 that compared 1st to 3rd party sales.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

"It's pretty easy to throw out lots of completely plausible theories, but I have a hunch it won't be clear for quite a while longer."

I'm waiting for those instances where a company rep will admit what they did "wrong."  Like how someone at Sega recently mentioned Sonic's ailing game quality, and how EA peeps talk about being surprised and then restructuring this and that.

[Ian Sane]

am I the only one who isn't impressed by "next-gen" graphics any more? The same washed-out look of these games with admittedly nice smoothing has just become commonplace for me and as a result nothing to get excited about.

I probably should have responded to this point earlier but missed it the first time.  A lot of games don't really wow me too much in terms of graphics anymore but they still can if they're creative.  Bioshock does wow me because it looks cool.  A spooky underwater city?  That's a cool setting and it makes the game stand out more.  Call of Duty meanwhile does nothing for me because it's dull.  It's just army stuff.  Big deal.

Japanese games still wow me but I think a big part of that is I like the style.  Namco, Capcom, Konami and Square Enix just have a style I like.  North American third parties just don't have that.

The Wii however often has games that specifically unimpress me with their graphics.  A lot of it looks like something that wouldn't even fly on the Cube.  There's a real laziness to a lot of it.

Graphics will only get so good.  If they looked like real life for example you could never top it.  Nothing can look better than real life.  I think what the PS3 and Xbox 360 can do is at a level where we really don't need to go much further.  But I think that also creates a certain expectation of graphic quality.  Frankly I think Resident Evil 4 or Twilight Princess should be the standard.  We really shouldn't have anything below that anymore.  But the Cube has tons of stuff like that.  Stuff that would have been laughed at at the GAMECUBE LAUNCH.  That's lazy and sloppy and we shouldn't put up with that.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Here is a breakdown for the first 18 months software units (US):

Wii - 50 million (not including Wii Sports)
X360 - 28 million
PS3 - 20 million
PS2 - 42 million

First 18 months hardware units (US):

Wii - 9.5 million
X360 - 5.2 million
PS3 - 4.2 million
PS2 - 8.5 million

http://kotaku.com/5010214/nintendo-w...irst-18-months

#'s taken from post 11...

Wii 3rd party software = 29.05 million
X360 total software = 28 million
PS3 total software = 20 million

[GoldenPhoenix]

Wow can't believe Wii is beating 360 and PS3 in 3rd party software sales. My guess is that they are spread out among many games instead of a few like 360 and PS3.

[DAaaMan64]

29.05 Million copies of Carnival Games

[Flames_of_chaos]

Wow can't believe Wii is beating 360 and PS3 in 3rd party software sales. My guess is that they are spread out among many games instead of a few like 360 and PS3.

Of course, Wii has the most diverse spread of software this generation as long as you don't count the DS.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

“The game has changed, … and the way the game is played has to be changed.” --Iwata

game = business

[NWR_Lindy]

For example, if BioWare put out Mass Effect on Wii, I don't think it would even matter because nobody would buy it.

Looks like BioWare was listening to me.

http://ds.ign.com/articles/897/897443p1.html

[Mario]

“The game has changed, … and the way the game is played has to be changed.” --Iwata

game = business

You just blew my mind.

[Bill Aurion]

For example, if BioWare put out Mass Effect on Wii, I don't think it would even matter because nobody would buy it.

Looks like BioWare was listening to me.

http://ds.ign.com/articles/897/897443p1.html

More like Miles Holmes is the head of the handheld team at BioWare, so of course if he has an idea for a game it'll be a handheld one...