Topic: EA CEO Frustrated by Low Wii Sales

[Stratos]

I'm sure I can lower the setting on my computer to be visually crap and still play Bioshock just fine. That means that Bioshock could be done on a Wii, it just won't look as good as the PS360 version which in turn wouldn't look as good as the PC version. Why bother making games for consoles.... It's such a stupid argument to make.

They tried to put Dead Rising on Wii. I'm wonder BioShock would have turned out better. Also, Modern Warfare is on the Wii now and runs quite well from videos leaked. All it takes is a little bit of effort.

[smallsharkbigbite]

It's not a stupid argument to make.  While graphics aren't everything they are part of the game's ability to draw you in.  Graphics are a part of the equation.  If graphics didn't matter, we'd still have 13" black and white TVs instead of high def 50" tvs.  And while an awesome game, who would have paid $50 for Mega Man 9?

[JLowther]

You have a hard time believing that 1.5 million gamers would buy a light gun spin off when Capcom themselves called it a test to see what could be done on the Wii with the assumption that the next game coming was RE5?

The internet alone wouldn't be enough to garner that many sales, even with a "test marketing" promise from Capcom. It would help, I'm sure, but that's a LOT of sales that would have to come from the internet which I just don't see happening.

I'm guessing people bought it because it was a RE game, really.

[broodwars]

I'm sure I can lower the setting on my computer to be visually crap and still play Bioshock just fine. That means that Bioshock could be done on a Wii, it just won't look as good as the PS360 version which in turn wouldn't look as good as the PC version. Why bother making games for consoles.... It's such a stupid argument to make.

Having had to play Bioshock my first time on this laptop with the lowest possible graphical settings (which had lots of framerate problems during the more hectic firefights), I can say that the game could be released on the Wii if 2K really wanted to do it.  Even on the PS3, the game isn't the most technically outstanding game.  It's the game's art deco style that makes the game look great, which could be replicated on the Wii no problem.  Actually, I'm kind of surprised that we haven't seen some sort of prequel or sidestory Bioshock Wii project after Metroid Prime Corruption came out and showed it was a superior platform for FPS gaming.

[GoldenPhoenix]

I'm sure I can lower the setting on my computer to be visually crap and still play Bioshock just fine. That means that Bioshock could be done on a Wii, it just won't look as good as the PS360 version which in turn wouldn't look as good as the PC version. Why bother making games for consoles.... It's such a stupid argument to make.

Having had to play Bioshock my first time on this laptop with the lowest possible graphical settings (which had lots of framerate problems during the more hectic firefights), I can say that the game could be released on the Wii if 2K really wanted to do it.  Even on the PS3, the game isn't the most technically outstanding game.  It's the game's art deco style that makes the game look great, which could be replicated on the Wii no problem.  Actually, I'm kind of surprised that we haven't seen some sort of prequel or sidestory Bioshock Wii project after Metroid Prime Corruption came out and showed it was a superior platform for FPS gaming.

Yeah Bioshock was impressive because of the art direction more then the under the hood visual engine (which was good but not outstanding)>

[Mop it up]

The extra processing power and RAM of those other systems accounts for more than just graphics. It also means more expansive environments, more moving objects on screen, more complicated A.I. scripts, etc. I don't think any amount of graphical reduction would allow this game to run on Wii:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnsdkdVPmYE

And I can't imagine this game being any good after cutbacks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eyDBgy0fCA

[smallsharkbigbite]

It could have still been a good game.  But it would have been a different experience.  Simply put you cannot get the same experience on the Wii as you can on the PS3.  However, vice versa, with the Wii's controls you can't get the same experience on the PS3 as the Wii. 

[BlackNMild2k1]

It's not a stupid argument to make.  While graphics aren't everything they are part of the game's ability to draw you in.  Graphics are a part of the equation.  If graphics didn't matter, we'd still have 13" black and white TVs instead of high def 50" tvs.  And while an awesome game, who would have paid $50 for Mega Man 9?

You're right, I can't watch Transformers 2 on my 13" B&W TV, its just not possible....

[Ian Sane]

Except for the fact that RE:UC has sold over a million copies and RE:DC will probably do the same, sure.

Why is Extraction "dumbed down" and unworthy of purchase, yet the Wii fanbase bought RE:UC despite not getting RE5?

RE:UC did come out at a different time period.  It was the first example of getting an on-rails game instead of a "real" entry into the series.  By the time DSE came out on-rails shooters of popular franchises had become an annoying trend.  RE:UC was the start of that trend.  Wii owners weren't pissed off or upset about getting tons of on-rails shooters yet.  It should also be noted that Resident Evil 5 sold better despite being released on consoles with a smaller userbase.  I think that indicates what core gamers were really interested in.

Also we're now at a time where I suspect much of the core gamer demographic on the Wii has given up on Wii third party support and has bought an Xbox 360 or PS3 to get access to the games they've been missing.  Hell people on this forum were talking about that being a requirement over a year before a bought a PS3.  Just a personal example but now that I have a PS3 I can't see myself ever buying something like DSE or RE:DC.  I can now buy the REAL Dead Space and the REAL Resident Evil so why would I even give a second look to a Wii spin-off?  When RE:UC was released it was earlier in the Wii life so there was more optimism.  Now we know that we're not getting the real Resident Evil and that Capcom considers the Wii as clearly their THIRD choice for support.  The other consoles are affordable now, no one has to put up with second rate support.

Actually, John Ricatello said that they weren't games people care about or marketed, since he said that Nintendo didn't release games that drove interest in the platform.  And that's where this whole discussion originated.

Yeah if we're talking about driving interest in the platform Excitebots doesn't really count as it's a minor release at best.  Wii Sports Resort is a major release but not for the core market EA was looking for.  So on that count Punch-Out and the upcoming NSMB Wii would be the only games that I feel would really be the sort of titles to drive core gamer interest in the Wii.

In comparison Sony released the following games this year for the PS3:
God of War Collection
InFamous
Killzone 2
MLB 09: The Show
Ratchet & Clank Future: A Crack in Time
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
Buzz Quiz World
Singstar Motown
EyePet

So we've got a last-gen collection of ports which is like their Metroid Prime Trilogy.  We've got three casual focused titles at the bottom.  A sports game and then four pretty major releases aimed at the core market.  And Sony is known for being a weak first party and the PS3 has decent third party support and thus doesn't even NEED this much first party support.  I think this is more what EA is expecting.  On just sheer non-port core games Sony beat Nintendo this year 5-3.  5 games isn't even one for every two months.  Surely Nintendo could match that.

Excitebots and Punch-Out were also released only a month apart.  So while we get 3 core games we get only two periods of major releases.  This would be thin even if spread out evenly over the year.  But in this case we're going six months between releases.  Six months where the Wii is out-of-sight and out-of-mind.

Clearly third parties are being pretty incompetent here.  But shouldn't Nintendo ackowledge this?  No one is picking up the ball here.  Sony has good third party support and they've still releasing a steady first party output.  Now they're in last place and they're hungry so I can why they would.  Nintendo still should realize "we have shitty third party support, we should do something about this. The Wii has major droughts between major releases and that risks hurting our momentum.  We need to carry this console on our back until our third party support is strong enough to fill in the gaps."

You can talk all you want about Nintendo giving third parties a chance but when third parties blow this chance Nintendo doesn't take over to make up for it.

[GoldenPhoenix]

::skips over Ian post:: I think the moral of the story is that EA had crappy marketing, and should have put more effort in pushing games on Wii.

[King of Twitch]

Wasted away again in Redinkaville,
Searchin' for a surefire hit in the IP vault
Some people claim that there's a gamer to blame
But I know
it's Nintendo's fault.

Don't know the reason
Checked out all season
With nothing to show but this brand new on-rails-prequel-to-a-game-that-was-originally-on-PS2
But it's a real beauty,
A non-HD cutie, how it got here
I haven't a clue.

[JLowther]

RE:UC did come out at a different time period.  It was the first example of getting an on-rails game instead of a "real" entry into the series.  By the time DSE came out on-rails shooters of popular franchises had become an annoying trend.  RE:UC was the start of that trend.  Wii owners weren't pissed off or upset about getting tons of on-rails shooters yet.  It should also be noted that Resident Evil 5 sold better despite being released on consoles with a smaller userbase.  I think that indicates what core gamers were really interested in.

Also we're now at a time where I suspect much of the core gamer demographic on the Wii has given up on Wii third party support and has bought an Xbox 360 or PS3 to get access to the games they've been missing.  Hell people on this forum were talking about that being a requirement over a year before a bought a PS3.  Just a personal example but now that I have a PS3 I can't see myself ever buying something like DSE or RE:DC.  I can now buy the REAL Dead Space and the REAL Resident Evil so why would I even give a second look to a Wii spin-off?  When RE:UC was released it was earlier in the Wii life so there was more optimism.  Now we know that we're not getting the real Resident Evil and that Capcom considers the Wii as clearly their THIRD choice for support.  The other consoles are affordable now, no one has to put up with second rate support.

That's true: EA was kinda late to the table there, but they probably started developing DSE around the time RE:UC was selling well.

It'll be interesting to see how REDSC sells, now that everyone knows there's no RE5 coming for Wii.

Also, "testing" a console for interest with a half-game is a pretty lousy thing to do to the fans of that console to start with...

[GoldenPhoenix]

Also, "testing" a console for interest with a half-game is a pretty lousy thing to do to the fans of that console to start with...

It is especially bad with Capcom considering how well RE4: Wii Edition did. That should have been all the testing they needed. Personally I think it was just an excuse.

[smallsharkbigbite]

They were never testing.  It was marketing BS.  It's the same thing we here every time a marginal core game is released for the Wii.  Well, if you don't buy this game there probably won't be any more core games for the Wii.  Like buying loads of crap will get us better games.

I do think it's interesting.  Although I am in the Nintendo is partially responsible for this mess, is that the Wii has it's best support in the survival horror realm.  And in the Gamecube this is the only realm they tried to push by grabbing RE as an exclusive series and making the first party Eternal Darkness. 

[JLowther]

Also, "testing" a console for interest with a half-game is a pretty lousy thing to do to the fans of that console to start with...

It is especially bad with Capcom considering how well RE4: Wii Edition did. That should have been all the testing they needed. Personally I think it was just an excuse.

I never understood that, either. RE4Wii was so good with the controls that I played through it on professional mode and couldn't stand the analogue controls of the RE5 demo after that.

[GoldenPhoenix]

RE5 would have gotten me excited to play it if it was on Wii, as it stands I bought it but haven't touched it because I dread the analog controls.

[JLowther]

RE5 would have gotten me excited to play it if it was on Wii, as it stands I bought it but haven't touched it because I dread the analog controls.

Yeah, as much as I love the basic gameplay, I just can't go through another "control scheme-challenged horror".

The thought of an RE game built around the speed of Wii remote aiming, though...wow...

[BlackNMild2k1]

I still think Capcom is gonna make a sound business(and undo a wrong) decision and make a Wii version of RE5 with all the DLC content already on the disc.

[Arbok]

I still think Capcom is gonna make a sound business(and undo a wrong) decision and make a Wii version of RE5 with all the DLC content already on the disc.

Be nice, and very sound from a business perspective as you say, although I'm not holding my breath. I think it's more likely we get a "Code Veronica" type of spin off, a spin off in name only but lacks the normal number rather than 5 itself. Hopefully Capcom proves me wrong.

Anyway, just wanted to throw my hat into the arena, as it was mentioned earlier, and say that I got Umbrella Chronicles... for Umbrella Chronicles. Not as part of a test or anything. I don't understand all the spoken disinterest it seems to get either. It's not an amazing title, a little short, but it's solid and catered to exactly what I wanted:
1. An on-rail shooter when I had none at this point
2. Utilizing an established franchise that I cared about
3. Co-op

The last of which is more important than anything else, and why I will be getting the sequel as we had a blast with it.

I think a big problem with Dead Space Extraction, and there are many as mentioned in this thread, is that it's late to the party. UC was a hit on the Wii, although doesn't seem to be a beloved title. Those that didn't care for it likely passed up DSE, while those who loved the game, like me, are probably holding out for the next RE on-rail shooter instead, which is just around the corner now.

[Ian Sane]

I still think Capcom is gonna make a sound business(and undo a wrong) decision and make a Wii version of RE5 with all the DLC content already on the disc.

They'll announce it at next year's E3... at the same time they announce Resident Evil 6 for the PS3 and X360.

The correct decision is to make Resident Evil 6 specifically with the Wii in mind and then port to the other consoles if the controls allow it.  That is the sort of "grand gesture" that I'm talking about.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Code Veronica was a spin-off? I thought it was considered a sequel at the time.

[Arbok]

Code Veronica was a spin-off? I thought it was considered a sequel at the time.

Like I said, spin off in name only since it lost the numbering system that RE4 picked up again.

EDIT: Maybe I should have just said "non-numbered sequel"? Would have been less confusing I admit, but I love my verbose habit...

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

I'll gladly take the BARRY BURTON non-numbered sequel over RE5, but I won't count on any more decent RE adventures ever.  What they (those RE5 non-Mikami devs) did to Chris/Jill/Wesker is beyond wacky.

[EasyCure]

jesus christ, i hate missing out on good threads cuz i can't slack off at work anymorem..

look i'm not gonna bother reading thru all four pages because the conversation has been the same over and over every time a story like this pops up, so i'll just say two things:

1. someone get me a postal address for whichever office the EA CEO works out of so i can send him a letter stating:

"Dear ______,

Please make more high quality games developed from the ground up for Wii and that pushes its strong points to the limits, then be sure to advertise it so that gamers like myself who enjoy "core" games but don't spend all their time on the internet can actually find out when these games come out and go purchase them.

Thank you"

2. Every single time Deadspace Extraction gets brought up, i think the same fucking thing "holy **** this games out!?" and when i'm browsing the game selection at:

best buy, gamestop, target, walmart, fye, etc..

i never fucking see it on shelves, and even if its sitting there on a shelf, when i'm out at those stores I never remember to look for it because there was never any advertising around to put the product in my head.

wait, you know what? That second part might as well go in the letter to EA's CEO.

I suggest you all write similar letters (please, keep it civil) because hopefully we can all bring about change in EA...
sure, it won't make him/her turn around and change they way things operate but maybe he/she will be so irritated that they'll resign/shoot themselves in the fucking face and someone competent can take their place

[Peachylala]

It's not a stupid argument to make.  While graphics aren't everything they are part of the game's ability to draw you in.

When frankly games with very pretty grapiks nothing else to go by except shallow entertainment. mgs4 gta4 bionic commando re5

Only one of those games in the crossed out list flopped hard. The rest, disappointedly, sold well.