Topic: Dead Space Extraction

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

We're lagging behind!

[GoldenPhoenix]

Jonny said everything that I wanted to say.

And I was over at Gaf reading their reactions. 20 pages already! What a hoot!

Yeah gaf in general is pretty funny.

[Flames_of_chaos]

I think people need to take a chill pill and take the wait and see approach the unveiling trailer looks interesting and graphically for the Wii it looks amazing in my opinion. The only things we know about the game is that it will have coop, it's on rails, it's a prequel and it will retain a bunch of gameplay mechanics from Dead Space.

[Adrock]

Even though I started this thread, it looks like I'm late to the party. First of all....

NOT SURPRISING AT ALL

Still, I'm glad this is a brand new game. I actually prefer this to a downgraded port because there's no point in that even existing. At the same time, while I have nothing against on-rails shooters, this kind of completely misses the point of bringing the series to the Wii, Just because the Wii is ideal for the genre, doesn't mean that's the best/only solution.

I've been pretty vocal about my distaste for spinoffs on the Wii. It makes no sense, especially when they suck because better use could have been made out of that time, money, and energy. That said, Dead Space Extraction may be a good game, but when Sega has already made a true installment to a series that was an on-rails shooter to begin with, I'm having a hard time caring about this game, especially since I wasn't even a huge fan of the original. I swear, we're living in a mirror world where Sega is praised for making good decisions....

[Deguello]

Yeah it's pretty rare where you get most of NWR in agreement, including some people who vehemently disagree most of the time, like myself and Ian.  That post of his about spinoffs, I found myself 100% in agreement.  I'm sick of being mined for cash and being treated like I'm some kind of second-class gamer because I own a Wii. 

And people wonder why Nintendo pulls down the most sales on their platforms.  Most of the time, they don't treat their customers like they are morons, like EA did with this fiasco.

[Ian Sane]

I swear, we're living in a mirror world where Sega is praised for making good decisions....

Sega rules?  EA sucks?  Maybe we're just returning to the status quo?

Talking of spin-offs, while obviously they have been proven to sell, are spin-offs ever truly demanded by the public or merely tolerated?  When there is a demand for a series I think the demand is typically for the main series.  Mario is likely an exception and some of his spin-off like Mario Kart are so huge that there is demand specifically for it.  But when people say they want Final Fantasy I figure most of them want an RPG.  When they say they want Soul Calibur I figure most of them want a fighting game.

Now sometimes spin-offs surprise you.  Super Mario RPG?  What an awesome idea!  When I said "I want another Mario game" I didn't really think of that but what a great idea!  I want it!  But I think most spin-offs are quite clearly designed as a stop-gap.  Realistically it can be hard to crank out a sequel every year and even if you can that can also burn a fanbase out (everyone asks for more until you give them too much and then they lose interest; it takes so good know-how to figure out the ideal balance).  But this gets something on the shelf with the familiar name and may get the sale.  But even if the fanbase buys it did they truly ask for it or are just buying it because it's there and what they really want isn't quite available at the time?

Do spin-offs have any actual role in meeting the wants of gamers or do they merely create corporate manipulated want?  Would anyone actually care if the practice suddenly ceased to exist?

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

If it ceased, we'd probably see more direct sequels and original IPs.  Hoo-yah.

[EasyCure]

Though i agree with some of Ians points on this one, i can't help but skipping over his giant angsty posts and just viewing this instead

[NovaQ]

Bear with me on this post; it's long but not angry (and hopefully is worthwhile...).

I agree that spin-offs generally are the result of laziness, semi-interest, and/or hesitancy on the part of developers and publishers. Wii has received "so many" spin-offs (or at least a handful of very disappointing ones like Soul Calibur, Castlevania, Resident Evil, etc.) because of this laziness, semi-interest, and hesitancy.

There seem to be a lot of developers and publishers that still prefer PS360 and would like to ignore the Wii's marketplace dominance, but I'd guess that their heads and share holders have become increasingly nervous and vocal as the economy has worsened and Nintendo's profits have risen (again). So, those at the top of these companies see the money over on the Wii side of things, but the actual developers and publishers' laziness, semi-interest, and/or hesitancy leads to such disappointing support.

But why do these people feel this way toward the Wii? My guess (possibly just taken form these boards and filtered / regurgitated) is that many game developers are stuck in a 20-year tradition. It's a tradition based in making games more complex and better looking through advanced and expensive new technology, and it has led to the creation and support of the 360 and PS3. Even their business structures may very well be set up around this tradition. Wii doesn't really follow this model, and while it has been number one for a little over two years, that's not much time compared to two decades of working (and growing up) under the now-traditional mindset in gaming.

Considering us posters are merely individual game consumers, we're not tied as closely to whatever business or development structures and mindsets have been in place for so long now. In other words, it's easier for us to acknowledge, adjust to, and embrace the Wii than many game companies. My guess is that it'll take more time than we think for the "majority" of developers and publishers to shift their mindsets to those of the Wii. (Except, that shift in mindsets might come about from older devs/pubs closing and new, "Wii friendly" ones taking their places.)

(P.S. This post is more general in focus. I have no idea how Extraction will turn out and I'm perfectly open to it being rad-tastic.)

[GoldenPhoenix]

Yeah it's pretty rare where you get most of NWR in agreement, including some people who vehemently disagree most of the time, like myself and Ian.  That post of his about spinoffs, I found myself 100% in agreement.  I'm sick of being mined for cash and being treated like I'm some kind of second-class gamer because I own a Wii. 

And people wonder why Nintendo pulls down the most sales on their platforms.  Most of the time, they don't treat their customers like they are morons, like EA did with this fiasco.

I'm glad people have gotten the chance to play the game that they can call it a fiasco. Talk about being extremely silly, considering we don't even know how they will handle the design of game beyond it being on rails. We have no idea what they are doing within that framework, what kind of budget it will have, or how long they are willing to polish it.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Yeah it's pretty rare where you get most of NWR in agreement, including some people who vehemently disagree most of the time, like myself and Ian.  That post of his about spinoffs, I found myself 100% in agreement.  I'm sick of being mined for cash and being treated like I'm some kind of second-class gamer because I own a Wii. 

And people wonder why Nintendo pulls down the most sales on their platforms.  Most of the time, they don't treat their customers like they are morons, like EA did with this fiasco.

I'm glad people have gotten the chance to play the game that they can call it a fiasco. Talk about being extremely silly, considering we don't even know how they will handle the design of game beyond it being on rails. We have no idea what they are doing within that framework, what kind of budget it will have, or how long they are willing to polish it.

[Kairon]

Wait a second, everyone's angry?

When I first heard about this I was ECSTATIC! WOOHOOO!!!!

I LOVE RAIL SHOOTERS!!!! And so does my brother!!! He actually has Resident Evil: UC on extended loan from me.... AND THIS HAS CO-OP!!! WOOHOO!!!

... I mean, I can see how the rest of y'all may be miffed, but I'm basking in this. I'd take an on-rails shooter over a Survival Horror game any day. This is such a great generation!

[IceCold]

Bear with me on this post; it's long but not angry (and hopefully is worthwhile...).

I agree that spin-offs generally are the result of laziness, semi-interest, and/or hesitancy on the part of developers and publishers. Wii has received "so many" spin-offs (or at least a handful of very disappointing ones like Soul Calibur, Castlevania, Resident Evil, etc.) because of this laziness, semi-interest, and hesitancy.

There seem to be a lot of developers and publishers that still prefer PS360 and would like to ignore the Wii's marketplace dominance, but I'd guess that their heads and share holders have become increasingly nervous and vocal as the economy has worsened and Nintendo's profits have risen (again). So, those at the top of these companies see the money over on the Wii side of things, but the actual developers and publishers' laziness, semi-interest, and/or hesitancy leads to such disappointing support.

But why do these people feel this way toward the Wii? My guess (possibly just taken form these boards and filtered / regurgitated) is that many game developers are stuck in a 20-year tradition. It's a tradition based in making games more complex and better looking through advanced and expensive new technology, and it has led to the creation and support of the 360 and PS3. Even their business structures may very well be set up around this tradition. Wii doesn't really follow this model, and while it has been number one for a little over two years, that's not much time compared to two decades of working (and growing up) under the now-traditional mindset in gaming.

Considering us posters are merely individual game consumers, we're not tied as closely to whatever business or development structures and mindsets have been in place for so long now. In other words, it's easier for us to acknowledge, adjust to, and embrace the Wii than many game companies. My guess is that it'll take more time than we think for the "majority" of developers and publishers to shift their mindsets to those of the Wii. (Except, that shift in mindsets might come about from older devs/pubs closing and new, "Wii friendly" ones taking their places.)

(P.S. This post is more general in focus. I have no idea how Extraction will turn out and I'm perfectly open to it being rad-tastic.)

You're new, aren't you? I've noticed some of your posts recently and you seem to be an intelligent poster. Keep it up!

EDIT: Regarding the topic, I somewhat agree that developers are sticking with the mindset of making more complex and graphically intensive games. But at the same time, even though the PS2 was less powerful than the Cube or the Wii, it got the majority of "important" third party attention. The graphical differences between the Wii and PS360 may be more pronounced, but I can't help feeling that console power is only part of the issue.

[NWR_pap64]

Anyone noticed that what happened with "Umbrella Chronicles" a few years back is happening right now with Dead Space Wii?

Let's look at the timeline:
- Capcom announces a new RE game for the Wii, people are excited

- Capcom confirms that it will be an on rails spin off that takes place through the RE storyline and people whine, bitch and complain because Capcom wasn't successful with RE Spin offs at the time

- At the same time, the announcement of RE5 for the 360 and PS3 makes the hatred towards the game even bigger

- Capcom releases demos of the unfinished game, some reviewers say its alright and fans whine and bitch some more

- The final game is released, and it gets much better reviews than expected. People play it, love it and thank Capcom for it (I KNOW some will say no, but reality says otherwise)

UC might have been an on-rails shooter, but it felt and played differently from any game before it. It was a game that focused on gun customization, performance, two player gameplay (though a bit unbalanced) and item collecting. Dead Space could provide this kind of experience.

Mark my words, by the time this game is released people will have warmed up to it.

[ShyGuy]

I'm making it a point to never to buy this game. Maybe if somebody didn't buy me Umbrella Chronicles we wouldn't be getting this version of a Dead Space game.

[Kairon]

But why do these people feel this way toward the Wii? My guess (possibly just taken form these boards and filtered / regurgitated) is that many game developers are stuck in a 20-year tradition. It's a tradition based in making games more complex and better looking through advanced and expensive new technology, and it has led to the creation and support of the 360 and PS3. Even their business structures may very well be set up around this tradition. Wii doesn't really follow this model, and while it has been number one for a little over two years, that's not much time compared to two decades of working (and growing up) under the now-traditional mindset in gaming.

Hmm... interesting thoughts. I've been wondering whether the Wii and DS have invoked a resurgence in oldschool genres like point-and-click and on-rails because the Wii and DS have tried to simplify the gaming world. Whereas the rest of the industry is pushing for more simulation and more realism and more complexity, like you say, Nintendo's systems are taking a step back and reconsidering the simple joys that were found in the 80's and 90's.

Perhaps RE:UC and DS:E are examples of other players in the industry trying to slow down a little and shift gears to a more broad-minded approach to gaming?

[NovaQ]

You're new, aren't you? I've noticed some of your posts recently and you seem to be an intelligent poster. Keep it up!

EDIT: Regarding the topic, I somewhat agree that developers are sticking with the mindset of making more complex and graphically intensive games. But at the same time, even though the PS2 was less powerful than the Cube or the Wii, it got the majority of "important" third party attention. The graphical differences between the Wii and PS360 may be more pronounced, but I can't help feeling that console power is only part of the issue.

Do you think there's any chance that many prominent developers from the past decade or two care, at least partly, about the "image" of their games and the systems the games play on? It might be a stretch, but maybe that's one of the reasons developers and publishers put so much of their work on the less advanced PS2. Perhaps they saw that Sony and its PlayStation brand best epitomized what they thought gaming had been working to become, i.e., more complex and graphically impressive. Plus, you know, it was way in the lead, which made everybody involved more money than the other systems would have.

This could be one of the reasons why Wii's market dominance haven't led to the wondrous gaming landscape we've been expecting as consumers. While many pubs/devs are now putting games on the Wii, a lot of the games seem like lesser efforts because those more closely involved in their creation wish they were still making games for the system (or brand?) that they more closely identity with.

And htanks for the assershion that Im intellijent!. I'll try to keep at that...

[Deguello]

Yeah it's pretty rare where you get most of NWR in agreement, including some people who vehemently disagree most of the time, like myself and Ian.  That post of his about spinoffs, I found myself 100% in agreement.  I'm sick of being mined for cash and being treated like I'm some kind of second-class gamer because I own a Wii. 

And people wonder why Nintendo pulls down the most sales on their platforms.  Most of the time, they don't treat their customers like they are morons, like EA did with this fiasco.

I'm glad people have gotten the chance to play the game that they can call it a fiasco. Talk about being extremely silly, considering we don't even know how they will handle the design of game beyond it being on rails. We have no idea what they are doing within that framework, what kind of budget it will have, or how long they are willing to polish it.

To respond to both you and Flames, it really has nothing to do with the game's quality in the end of it.  It's the attitude behind development, and the feelings of being pumped for cash to pay for a game the Wii isn't going to get, like a sequel to Dead Space.  Pap brought up Umbrella Chronicles.  This is actually kinda what I'm talking about.  What has Capcom done for the Wii lately?  If anything the success of Umbrella Chronicles didn't lead to more support from them, but possibly secured them funds to make other non-Wii games.  And you can see this as they ramped back Wii support with each successive game being made, by design, to sell less than the previous one culminating in a three year-old Dead Rising port nobody asked for.  Somebody prove to me they didn't do this on purpose.

In short, this isn't Cops.  These games are not good until proven crappy.  And I and everyone else have every right to complain about getting a spinoff side-story in place of the actual game, no matter what reviewers give it.

[Flames_of_chaos]

You are forgetting about Capcom giving Wii the biggest game franchise in Japan, Monster Hunter.

[Deguello]

You are forgetting about Capcom giving Wii the biggest game franchise in Japan, Monster Hunter.

THEIR biggest franchise, maybe.  Last time I checked Pokemon was still the #1 game franchise.  And so what?  They keep dragging their feet on that game so much I have no idea when it's coming out.  And does this one game, no matter how big, forgive the progressively awful games they've been releasing?  And now who's making comments about games they've never played on message boards?

Like I said before, I remain skeptical.  The third parties had their grace period.  They had the userbase's trust.  They've had years to be "surprised," "caught off guard," or "testing the Wii audience."  They've promised to make "Nintendo caliber games."  Enough.  I'm sick of being lied to.  Until they start putting full efforts onto the Wii, and act like they deserve the customer's money and attention, they will continue to struggle against a strong Nintendo first party and their own bad reputations on the market leader, which they created by themselves and through no fault of anybody else.  Nobody pointed a gun at them and forced them to make crappy, lackluster games.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Umm Deg I do play monster hunter on my PSP, it got a north american release and I think it's one of the best PSP games so please don't assume that, in Japan Monster Hunter 3 has a July release. Also Pokemon is one of the biggest franchises in Japan but Monster Hunter and Dragon Quest(which both are getting Wii releases) are very popular and both franchise have more legs than the majority of pokemon titles.  Monster Hunter is also one of Capcom's biggest Japanese franchises but they have a bunch of them Street Fighter 4 came out in Japan and sales wise it's doing a lot better than most fighters release in Japan, the only fighting game that it most likely won't beat is Super Smash Bros Brawl.

Also my main problem with DS:Extraction is that everyone is judging the game just because we saw some intro footage and what kind of gameplay style it has. I think we will know a lot more during the summer or in the fall which is the target release date.

[Nick DiMola]

Wow this conversation is completely out-of-hand and off-topic. Last time I checked this thread was about Dead Space Extraction, not Third Party Business Models.

Back on-topic, please.

[Deguello]

Wow this conversation is completely out-of-hand and off-topic. Last time I checked this thread was about Dead Space Extraction, not Third Party Business Models.

Back on-topic, please.

Sometimes it's hard to separate the two, like trying to talk about the old Soviet Union without talking about communism.  I'll stop for now, but please understand it's a major issue behind the game's very existence.

Also Pokemon is one of the biggest franchises in Japan but Monster Hunter and Dragon Quest(which both are getting Wii releases) are very popular and both franchise have more legs than the majority of pokemon titles.

But before I go I'll need to correct this falsehood and say both Dragon Quest and Monster Hunter don't even come close to Pokemon's sales in Japan.  And Dragon Quest doesn't have legs at all.  In fact, that is the very game that defined the huge launch in Japan in so much as, by law, they can't release the game during the work week.  That's not legs at all.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Dead Spinoff: ERROR is apparently pretty.  So the tragedy is that considerable talent and resources have already been wasted on this project.

*WILL THE REAL THIRD PARTY GAMES PLEASE STAND UP?*

[Flames_of_chaos]

Dead Spinoff: ERROR is apparently pretty.  So the tragedy is that considerable talent and resources have already been wasted on this project.

*WILL THE REAL THIRD PARTY GAMES PLEASE STAND UP?*

How has talent and resources been wasted? EA is giving Eurocom a big chance to shine and they are really a very underrated developer since their last unique game that wasn't based on any licensed property was Sphynx and the Cursed Mummy on Gamecube PS2 and Xbox.