there is a classic controller if people want to play those games, sure they have to go out and buy it, but if they really like those games than they should.
But that games don't get made in the first place because the classic controller is an optional accessory. I have a classic controller but it hardly gets used because it isn't very well supported. And it isn't well supported because it doesn't come with the system.
If I could play NSMB Wii and Wario Land with the classic controller, I would, but the option isn't even available. Having the CC as optional also means that no one designs games with it in mind. Lets say you wanted these four functions that normally you would map to the CC face buttons. But you can't get this to work well with the remote-nunchuk combo. Well then you scrap one of those functions. You can't make a CC-only game so if an idea doesn't work with the remote-nunchuk combo you don't bother.
That's the problem with the Wii from a developer standpoint. If you can't get it to work with the controller or you can't get it to work on the weaker hardware, you just scrap the idea and not bother. And then there are these two other consoles that don't have those restrictions so you can just make your game for them, which happens 99% of the time. The only restriction those consoles have is they don't have motion control... which they now do have. Even if you discount Kinect, the PS3 offers a developer exactly the same thing the Wii has... plus MORE. So why make your game on the Wii? It has the bigger market share but that has had zero effect thus far. From a business perspective you would assume that the most dev friendly design wouldn't hold so much weight but the thing is, it isn't as if you HAVE to support the market leader to make money. If you can still make a profit on another console then other factors are going to affect your decision.
It may be that, even with the Wii being the market leader, you do not feel that you can make a hit game within the restrictions of the hardware. But you do feel you can make a hit game on the other consoles and as long as you make a profit, then you've succeeded. Although I think there's some laziness there, the HD consoles offer what you already know so you can plan things the way you are used to.
I think the Wii puts a developer in the mindframe of "okay what game can I make to work with this?" That's a challenging way to approach things. I think a more conventional approach is that a dev thinks of a game he wants to make and then decides what hardware to make it for. The DS initially had some piss-poor games and they were piss-poor because the touchscreen usage was forced. It was clear that devs were approaching the DS with the intention of making good use of the touchscreen. The PSP had the better games at first because it was conventional. But then the DS library vastly improved once devs just started making great games, instead of specifically trying to use the unique features. Maybe this game uses the touchscreen, maybe it doesn't. Who cares? The DS had that flexibility. You just made the game and using the touchscreen was as optional as using the X button.
Topic: Nintendo's got 700 Problems, but....... (Read 33078 times)
