Topic: This just in: Developers and publishers still have no business sense.

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: Galford
1.)The industry is in the middle of a transition.
In Japan next-gen HD equals PS3.  With the PS3 flopping few companines can afford a next gen title unless it's a million seller.
Even still with the PS3's obtuse design few companies will pay money to push it.
Licensing middleware is something the Japanese are not big on.

So that means more developers should be supporting the Wii with this fact out in the open, right?

Quote
Originally posted by: Galford
2.)Limited hardware.
The Wii will not age gracefully.  
Minus the controller the Wii hardware was outdated from day one and will continue to look worse against the competition.
...
I could say alot things but to boil it down the 360 and PS3 can grow as is, the Wii can not without a major hardware revision.

Same could be said of the DS compared to the PSP.

Quote
Originally posted by: Galford
4.)Wii's misc/multimedia functions suck.
From homebrew programming to video/DVD playback there are many things to do on the 360/PS3 without buying a game.
With the Wii you can create a Mii, play a puzzle, and play back a movie in an obscure video format.
That's it.

See above.

[that Baby guy]

Quote
Originally posted by: Galford
I really don't think developers are giving the Wii the finger.
There are a number of factors involved, but much of it has to do with the course Nintendo has taken the Wii.

1.)The industry is in the middle of a transition.
In Japan next-gen HD equals PS3.  With the PS3 flopping few companines can afford a next gen title unless it's a million seller.
Even still with the PS3's obtuse design few companies will pay money to push it.
Licensing middleware is something the Japanese are not big on.

2.)Limited hardware.
The Wii will not age gracefully.  
Minus the controller the Wii hardware was outdated from day one and will continue to look worse against the competition.
With little internal memory the Wii is going to hit a wall fast.
I could say alot things but to boil it down the 360 and PS3 can grow as is, the Wii can not without a major hardware revision.

3.)Nintendo still ignores online.
The PS2 had better online support.
Nintendo only does online because competition shamed them into it.
Once again Xbox Live and PSN are raping the Wii in terms of online integration.

4.)Wii's misc/multimedia functions suck.
From homebrew programming to video/DVD playback there are many things to do on the 360/PS3 without buying a game.
With the Wii you can create a Mii, play a puzzle, and play back a movie in an obscure video format.
That's it.

I know I will take a lot of heat for this but think about it...

Personally, I think your observations are incorrect.  The first is true.  The only HD option in Japan is the PS3, but games don't sell well when there isn't much hardware penetration, and the PS3 doesn't have that penetration, either.  It just isn't a viable option for developers to genuinely make a profit, especially without breaking the bank well before revenue streams in

The second has yet to be determined.  However, I have not yet seen a next-generation game whose core mechanics and, in essence, entire self, could not be duplicated on the Wii.  Sure, things will have less polygons and look less realistic, but to several gamers, these features are nearer to the back of the list of what's important.  In this sense, the Wii won't age like you say, IMO.  After all, what else can be done with more polygons and shaders, anyways?  Game-play-wise, I mean.  Look at the movie Sin City.  It told it's story mostly in black and white.  Does it seem dated?  The timeless classic, It's a Wonderful Life, is that dated, too?  What's the difference?  Colors?  Resolutions?  I mean, dude, a great movie is a great movie is a great movie.  It doesn't need ultra-realistic graphics to be great.  How did the original Star Wars Trilogy age?  Are the movies still not great to younger generations?  I know I'm using movies and not games, but parallels can be drawn.  The difference isn't as big as a silent film and a talkie.  This generation, the pay-off in graphics really isn't there.  Seriously.  Look at Pikmin.  Look at Super Mario Galaxy.  Look at Metroid Prime 3.  These games are nearly par with the big next-gen games, when you account for each game's style.  I don't see how a developer wouldn't want a cheaper, friendlier, more familiar programming environment.  Really, for most, this should be a non-issue.

Wii online is finding its identity.  With the 360, out of the box, you get less than you do with the Wii.  You have to buy to have anything, really.  With the Wii, you have access to a couple channels, at least.  The Wii can surf the 'net, a feature the 360 is missing.  Games are free online, though, right now, there are only two, I think.  The VC matches Live! Arcade, I believe, especially with the new systems about to emerge.  Third party games are beginning to implement online, too.  There's three, I was wrong before.  Madden '08 is online, too (there might even be more, but heaven forbid I actually research something).  Other 3rd party games will feature online, too.  For instance, Rock Band and Guitar Hero 3, off the top of my head.  It's pretty clear that Nintendo is footing a lot of the online bill for other companies if they want, (with the Nintendo WFC), and they're allowing third parties to jump on board, too.

The Playstation Network is a pretty shoddy thing, at least in North America, if I've heard correctly.  Sure, there is a new game every once in a while, but the Playstation games aren't being revived, and it there aren't as many online games as it seems available on the platform, either.

As far as multimedia capabilities:  First, the internet.  Internet allows streaming media and basically endless information.  The 360's online pales in comparison, w/o any true internet surfing applications.  Second, price.  For the price of a functional media 360, you'll need $350, I think (is that what the price dropped to for the Premium?)  With the extra $100, you could buy a $20-30 DVD player, a $50 hard drive or SD card, and a couple VC games.  For the price difference between the Wii and the PS3, there's several more options for the consumer.  This is irrelevant, though, since we're talking publishers and developers.  If you want to talk homebrew, take a look at Wii Ware coming up.  It seems like there's actually a method arriving on the Wii that's not available anywhere else for smaller developers to actually make a decent profit.  Beyond that, developers don't care if the Wii can play movies, consumers do, and judging by sales, they actually don't.  The entire fourth reason is just a non-issue.

So there you go, I think I offer some great reasons why I disagree with you.  I will say that Live!  has developed into something powerful at the moment, but for once, we can finally see that Nintendo is going somewhere online to match this, with the Metroid Prime 3 Preview Channel, the channel additions, the import games, and Wii Ware.  I've mentioned the online gaming situation, and I admit that a hearty online system is a big draw for an American developer, and I concede that it is a better environment right now, but I hate to say it, Japanese games are a little less online-friendly as of now, anyways, so Nintendo's lackluster structure may be a better fit for some.

You make good points, but they either aren't focuses of developers, or there are few extra details neglected in your reasoning that I have countered with.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

ZELDA WARS BATTLEFRONT

WITH ZAPPER SUPPORT

[UERD]

I'll just briefly address #2 and #4.

2. The Wii won't age gracefully. But then again, it's not supposed to last for ten years like the PS3. By the time that proverbial 'brick wall' is approaching, they'll be readying a next-generation machine, and with the way that IC technology is going, it will be a lot cheaper to pack the hardware necessary for a marked increase in performance into the device.

4. The vast majority of consumers don't give a flying poo about things like homebrew and DVD support. In fact, PSP is really good for homebrew and stuff. It's so suited for that application that very few people I know who own a PSP don't have at least a few pirated games for the device. Do you honestly think (third-party) developers are happy about that sort of thing? They want you to buy their game, not freaking download the ISO or watch a movie instead.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

"lasting" 10 years by its technological strength is not a significant issue.  It's whether it still brings business for 10 years (or whatever length) that matters.

see: Game Boy Spinnach, PS2

as opposed to: Dreamcast, 3DO, PhailCube

[Kairon]

I personally think, though, that a lot of that market-segmentation talk could become true if developers keep trying to make that reality manifest. The XBox 360 is here to stay and provide a viable market and alternative to the Wii. It's market stats are quite nice for third parties, and it may very well prove to be a sort of Genesis-like Rival to Nintendo's Wii. Certain developers are sure to stay predominantly on the "tech-y" systems just because of dinosaur stubbornness, but that doesn't mean that they'll go extinct. The rest will, or should, come over to the Wii and benefit not only from simple market majority and market expansion, but also from the new artistic possibilities of the wiimote, cheaper development, and the lack of major pressure to keep up with Gears of War and MGS 4 level bleeding edge technologies.

[SixthAngel]

Why won't Wii age gracefully?  The difference between 360 games and Wii games that we see now isn't going to get bigger.  The 360 has been out for two years and there isn't much more to squeeze out of the box.  Halo 3, an in house game, had to drop the resolution below HD to get everything to look good.  The Wii aging will probably go better then we think because third parties have so far put out mostly rushed launch games and easy ports.

Wii online is perfectly fine.  The only thing that it needs is more games and they will come.  Once Brawl and a few more online games come out it will be better then xbox live.  The number of games is the only meaningful advantage I see in the live system and its $50 cost.  The vc absolutely destroys live arcade with games and now has import games as well.  Lets not forget that offline is more important then online.  The system seller for the Wii?  Wii Sports a totally offline game.  Original xbox?  Halo 1, totally offline.  Online is important but considering that a majority of gamers won't even have it available (much less pay $50) lets not talk about it like it is the most important thing, especially when the difference between the services of the consoles is pretty negligible.

[Ceric]

On the graphics thing I would point everyone to look at Sonic Next Gen and Sonic and the Secret Rings.  I've just rented the PS3 one out of curiosity and the Sonic portion so far are just like SSR but with worse controls and the Sonic you have when you only have the first agility skill.  In fact  I think SSR looks better as well in the actual gameplay.

As for in general.  I think the Wii has room to grow but, I don't think it can overtake.  If that makes since.  I hope that this time around we'll see games for the Wii looking vastly better in the last year then the first, unlike the Gamecube.  I feel that the 360 will probably soon reach its upper level and the PS3 will take much longer to hit its ceiling.

[Mashiro]

Agreed with SixthAngel, ("The Wii aging will probably go better then we think because third parties have so far put out mostly rushed launch games and easy ports.")

the Wii actually has great potential age gracefully and we can certainly thank our current batch of games for that.

IF, if being the keyword here, IF developers as a whole really get serious about developing for Wii and take notice of games like Super Mario Galaxy maybe, just maybe, we will see far nicer looking games down the road.

I think graphics as a whole for the Wii can be nice enough to remain "good looking" for some time into the future.. Will Mario Galaxy look any less great 4 years down the road? Probably not. In fact graphics (while the Xbox 360 and PS3 can do things Wii can't . . .) on the Wii are at a point where if you put enough effort into it they will still look dazzlingly good. While graphics may not be the Wiis strong point, it certainly is no slouch, and the sooner developers start taking advantage of it's hidden power, the sooner we will have games that look better than the PS2.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Wait, I didn't hear about Halo 3 being dropped below HD in its visuals? Just curious, where did you find that Sixth?

[bustin98]

Joystiq and Kotaku ran stories about how people counted the pixels to 1152x640. Bungie replied saying its true, but in exchange they are using two fame buffers for increased dynamic range lighting.

Whoopee todo da. You'd never know if it was never mentioned. Though I guess some people would say its the principle of the idea.

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/10/01/bungie-halo-3-resolution-cut-for-hdr-lighting/

[darknight06]

Yeah, it's the principle of the idea because the way I see it I just threw down about $1,000 plus just to get the system, games, surround system and the HDTV to support it.  I don't want to hear about any "cuts" made to any games' graphics or anything on a next-gen console.  At this point  it's a BS excuse with all the technology they have under the hood, and you better believe I'm not the only one that's looking at it all this way.

As far as Wii looking dated in a few years, why does this issue keep cropping up with people.  It's a $150 console barring the controller and Wii Sports.  Anybody disappointed with the Wii's graphics and tech in comparison to consoles that costs $500 plus to build at launch is a damned moron that DESERVES to be disappointed.  For most people the GC appeared dated compared to the X-Box and even the PS2 at times because outside of one or two companies nobody ever bothered to actually get anything real out of the system, and even then the GC could probably go farther than it's best titles.  Hell if anything,  a lot of the Wii's first year problems with third parties probably has a lot to do with the fact that they:

1. Either don't care enough.
2. Never really learned the GC hardware to begin with,  (remember talks of some developers "discovering" later in it's lifespan that the GC had an additional 16MB of RAM on top of the main 24MB) or
3. Both 1. and 2. which is probably the situation for some  of the devs on Wii now.

My concern isn't with the Wii's so-called lack of tech, I understand what it can and can't do and can completely accept that given the price tag.  It's with the average developers lack of giving a crap that gets my blood boiling.  When Rogue Leader and RE4 look heaps better than a good 80% of the third party lineup on a stronger console with practically the same architecture you know something ain't right.  I mean damn, even Wii Sports of all things did a few bump maps.  WII SPORTS!!!

[Svevan]

If I had come into this discussion earlier I would have mentioned that not only did Nintendo do damage to their third-party support in the N64/GC era, even now, with Iwata supposedly trying to put it all back together (Reggie's doing a better job than that, see Take Two and Rockstar), Nintendo is an extremely arrogant, protective, and conservative company (innovations in hardware notwithstanding; see Wii price point, low hardware specs, similarity to GC, cost of manufacture, etc). I don't think they're sitting around with arms wide open, saying "if you want to make money, come make games for us." There are hoops you must jump through to be on Nintendo's side, especially now that they have the cash cow and Sony's faltering. Also, committing "100%" to the "new guy" (aheh, funny how that works) is dangerous because of the ever-changing game market. Two generations ago, PSX beat out the N64; last generation, MS arose and beat out the GC's niche market, with Sony still in the lead; this generation, MS was on top for awhile and may go back on top very soon, with Nintendo in the lead currently; next generation, who knows?

I think the Wii can last ten years: the trick is to make games with a solid graphical style that needs no apologizing (see all the great PS2 games of late). Most of the things I've seen so far on Wii DO need apologizing for, and only Nintendo and maybe SEGA have figured this out. Non-traditional games like Guitar Hero can do extremely well on Wii, since the userbase won't expect high-res or nurbs or what have you. Also, 2-D games need to come back ASAP - Grim Grimoire ftw? Top down RPGs? ADVENTURE GAMES? Tim Schaffer, get your ass over here.

I haven't been okay with MS being in the console race since day one; I would have much preferred Sony leading with a well-priced and reasonable PS3 instead of this Colossus that can be knocked over by a small man (like Nintendo). But as it stands, if I get a 360, I can have those high-powered high-res FPS experiences, or those cinema-laden RPGs (wait, no I can't); with the Wii, I can get something smaller but DIFFERENT and that's what matters.

So no developer should commit to one system; but if I had to choose, god, I'd steer clear of both Sony and MS. Of course, abandoning the 360 right now would be about as unwise as neglecting the Wii.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Lesson of this gen: People aren't getting what they paid for.

[Galford]

Where to begin..

Thatguy I appreciate your well thought out response.
I still disgree with you on a few points.

Let me put this way.

If I wanted to make a game for the Wii I have two options, make a game from the ground up and take a big risk or do a quick and dirty mini-game collection.  The Wii is so behind in graphics I would have to build my art assests from the ground up and I couldn't really reuse them on another system.  My Wii game would have to sell a lot to turn a buck without the comfort of being able to port it to another system.

If make a game for the PS3 I can port it to the 360 and/or PC.  
While the Wii's numbers are huge are they bigger then the install base for the above systems.

This is the dilemma facing a lot of developers right now.
The way Nintendo is marketing the Wii most publishers have little reason to push the Wii.

[that Baby guy]

The Wii has outsold and is continuing to outsell both competitors, with the only week in recent history that they haven't outsold competitors being the week of Halo 3's release, I believe.

As far as the Wii game being built from the ground up, it'll take far less time to create a Wii game from the ground up than it would for a game on the newer platforms.  Mini game collections have graphics, too, and in several cases, they can take just as long to design.  The mini-game idea is used because level design, concept, and programming are cheap, yet sell well, and has no correlation to the hardware's abilities.  Take a look for yourself:  I believe Viva Pinata Party or Something is coming out on the 360.  This isn't to avoid heavy graphical work, and it isn't because the art is already done.  Why?  The game features new characters, animations and locales.  It's an easy cash-in that was developed quickly, though, and like the mini-games collections on the Wii, it isn't restrained by hardware capabilities, at least, not in the graphic departments.

Ok, so we've established that mini-game collections are made because they're cheap and quick to design and program, right?  So now, there's the other issue about building the graphics from the grounds up.  In that case, I offer you Viva Pinata DS.  This game won't be able to use the same models as the 360 version, will it?  Yet, it's likely to be churned out pretty quickly.

Essentially, the idea is that you don't have to spend so much time and money on the Wii in the graphics, yet the return will still be nearly as good as what the other two next generation systems offer.  It won't take long to build these character models from the ground up.  It won't take long to build decent environments.  No where near as long as it takes for the 360 or PS3, and there's a lot less to show for a great deal of extra time.

Granted, Halo 3 has already hit the limits, as someone else said earlier, the screen's resolution had to be lowered in order to handle the game.  Doesn't that mean something?  The 360's upper limit is being met with what's out there now.  I think you also miss that Developers have a difficult time porting a game from 360/PC to the PS3, too.  IIRC, it takes a long time and a dedicated team of it's own to do so, so that option is really pretty much thrown out it most cases, and a lot of PC gamers only buy games designed for the PC and "ported" to the 360, like Bioshock, and not the other way around.  Not to mention, most major Japanese developers don't develop for the PC in the first place.

How is Nintendo marketing the Wii, anyways?  And what does that have to do with developers?  Nintendo markets the Wii to the public, not to the developers or publishers.  Publishers have higher profit margins on the Wii, too.  Take a look and see where all of Capcom's recent profits have come from.  The Wii.  Publishers have every reason to push the Wii.

[Arbok]

Quote
Originally posted by: thatguy
The Wii has outsold and is continuing to outsell both competitors, with the only week in recent history that they haven't outsold competitors being the week of Halo 3's release, I believe.

If VGchartz is to be believed, the 360 has outsold the Wii these past two weeks in the US.

[KDR_11k]

I doubt Nintendo puts big hurdles in front of other devs, they know they need better third party support and they know third parties are giving them crap (game wise, the whole "fifth fiddle dev team" thing). Of course there are some hurdles but there are with all manufacturers, e.g. Nintendo requires you to have an office, MS demands HD graphics, Sony will refuse games in the US for arbitrary reasons.

Minigames are popular because you don't commit yourself to one control style or game design, if you find out that one style isn't very popular after release that doesn't leave you with a wholly unpopular game (cf. Lair). This is the experimentation phase, once it's complete most devs have an understanding of what can and cannot be done with the new hardware and can start making serious games with that knowledge. It was the same with the DS, many attempts at serious games early on failed because they picked control methods that didn't work or just included the touchscreen for the heck of it (cf. Castlevania DoS, the seals were unnecessary).

Quote
Granted, Halo 3 has already hit the limits, as someone else said earlier, the screen's resolution had to be lowered in order to handle the game. Doesn't that mean something? The 360's upper limit is being met with what's out there now.

I don't think hitting a bottleneck means the system has been fully utilized. It's easy to make a game drop in framerate because it takes too much power, that means nothing. I've seen PS1-looking games on the PS2 slow down. The advances come from expanding what you can do before you hit a limit. This is why first-gen titles always look like crap, they have little optimization for the platform and thus hit the limits with very little in terms of graphics.

[Galford]

I here what your saying thatguy, but making RS and RE level graphics on the Wii still cost a lot of money.
May not cost as much as the PS3 and 360 but it's still there.

RE4 was a port on a prebuilt engine.  
Very, very little risk for Capcom to bring it to the Wii.

Same sorta goes for MP3.  
Yes, I know the graphics engine was rebuilt for the Wii version but still MP3 had a built in audience.
Unless MP3 sucked(which it doesn't) the game was going make a buck.

Why as I game developer make a traditional new IP on the Wii when Nintendo is basically saying minigames, minigames, minigames?

Another thing, Nintendo is kinda stingy with money hats unlike Microsoft and Sony.
Someone else said it earlier but it' worth saying again.

[couchmonkey]

Nintendo is stingy with moneyhats because it has won.  I know we're not seeing it yet and nobody believes me, but third party support is coming.  We've already got way more support from Rockstar than ever before, and everybody's talking about how to make a buck on Wii...because if you can't, you're going to lose money this generation.

The thing is, people don't really seem to acknowledge all the support Nintendo's getting because the games aren't the main Resident Evil or Grand Theft Auto.  I guess that's fair enough: the support needs to increase in quality as well as quantity.  But if you look back at PS2, quantity is really where it kicks butt, not quality, and I believe that the huge quantity is what ultimately leads to a better overall third party lineup.  I disagree with anyone who says Xbox or GameCube had a better third party lineup than PS2, but there's also no doubt that the majority of the third party games on PS2 are crap.