Topic: EA CEO Frustrated by Low Wii Sales

[smallsharkbigbite]

It's not that RE5 would not work on the Wii, it's that it doesn't make business sense to put it there.  RE is now a premium brand.  Think about a company like Ferrari.  Ferrari isn't going to try and compete with the Ford Taurus even though the Ford Taurus is going to sell a bunch more.  By putting RE5 on the Wii, they may make $.  But it has the possibility of 2 negative consequences.

1.  Water down the series.  Most good series can only see a sequel ever 2-3 years without the gaming public getting tired of them. 

2.  Lead the public to believe RE is not a premium brand.  I.E., poor graphics, poor game from a technical perspective, etc.  They are trying to sell you a $60-$80 game with DLC.  On top of that several premium games try to sell a collector's edition for over $100.  They don't want you to think RE is only worth $50 and they don't want you thinking it isn't from a performance perspective among the best in this generation.

Bottom line is they made enough $ on the PS3/360 versions not to risk a Wii version and they aren't going to.

[broodwars]

Why would RE5 not work on Wii? This shooting for a different aesthetic is a silly argument too, the PC can run circles around any of the consoles if you have a high end computer with a well programmed game (Crysis wastes Uncharted 2 visually). Yes there are some things that cannot be done on Wii, but it is mostly for things other then visuals (AI, number of characters on screen etc etc). There is no reason why RE5 can't be on Wii, even if they have to take out the online co-op. My point is that visual fidelity can be relative.

It's not a matter of the game not being able to work on Wii.  I'm sure if the game was properly rebuilt for the Wii with the right people and right attitude it could be phenomenal and a worthy successor to RE4.  The question is "is it worth it?"  Even when 3rd parties release good games on the Wii (Okami, Zack & Wiki, etc.), Wii owners don't buy them.  I just don't see the kind of effort that would be required to turn RE5 into a stellar Wii game generating the sales to justify it.

[vudu]

It's not that RE5 would not work on the Wii, it's that it doesn't make business sense to put it there.  RE is now a premium brand.  Think about a company like Ferrari.  Ferrari isn't going to try and compete with the Ford Taurus even though the Ford Taurus is going to sell a bunch more.  By putting RE5 on the Wii, they may make $.  But it has the possibility of 2 negative consequences.

1.  Water down the series.  Most good series can only see a sequel ever 2-3 years without the gaming public getting tired of them. 

Bologna.  You're talking about the company that ported Resident Evil to the DS.  You're talking about the company that ported RE4 to the iPhone.  You're talking about the company that put Leon and Claire into a snowboarding game on PlayStation.  Capcom will put the series on anything as long as they think they can make money on it.

I appreciate the graphical fidelity offered by the HD systems for RE5 and, for that matter, Call of Duty 4. The graphics are a major factor in both of those games, and for good reason. I think Capcom understands that they'd be seriously dumbing down their product for the Wii, and I think it would require a pretty massive graphical overhaul. Why bother? The game has already sold gangbusters. They've moved on.

Last I checked RE5 sold 5.0 million copies and RE4 sold 5.2 million copies.  Chances are RE5 will pass RE4 eventually, but it's not like it's the best selling game in the series by a ton.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

RE5 is only the worst game in the series, the shortest game in the series, the ugliest game in the series, the most expensive game in the series.

Gamers disappoint.

[broodwars]

RE5 is only the worst game in the series, the shortest game in the series, the ugliest game in the series, the most expensive game in the series.

Gamers disappoint.

It can't be the worst game in the series while Resident Evil 0 still exists, along with the many Gun Survivor games.  I didn't think it was too short for the story it was trying to tell, but I do think the "all brown, everywhere" color palette does make the game look uglier than it really is.  I will say it's up there in the series on the list of most laughably bad stories, though, and considering the general quality of story in this franchise that's saying something.

[BlackNMild2k1]

It's not that RE5 would not work on the Wii, it's that it doesn't make business sense to put it there.

That's a lot of BS you're chewing on there, I hope you don't choke on it.

Why would Capcom spend so much time bringing the RE fanbase over to the Nintendo consoles only to not bring out the next sequel on a Nintendo console?
That's what doesn't make business sense. 1.3+ million people double dipped on RE4 Wii in anticipation of what a RE5 must be like and then they leave the entire RE fanbase on a Nintendo console holding their Wii in their hands staring at Umbrella Chronicles.

How much business sense would it make for SquareEnix to bring every single DQ ever made and put it out on the DS, sell millions upon millions of copies bringing over their entire DQ fanbase to the DS and then release DQ9 on the PSP?

This is essentially the same thing.

As for visual fidelity and "author intent"
I really don't see how 2-3 less zombies on screen or not being able to see individual strands of hair, sweat dripping and wounds pulsating really changes the game or the "authors intent" on delivering a solid game that's fun to play. I don't see how a really nicely done texture inplace of a 50k polygonal wall with bump mapping and reflective surface HDR antiscotropic filtering and 10xAA really changes the game. Sure it may look a whole lot nicer and be really easy on the eyes, but unless the gameplay is based off one of those elements, I really don't see how that is just nothing more than my cake being served on a silver platter instead of a paper plate. WHO CARES!? I just wanna eat the cake.

[smallsharkbigbite]

The PS3 and 360 are affordable now.  If you wanted to try RE5 you'd buy one of those and play the game.  Also, the gamecube was last gen and also the last time that Nintendo focused on the core market.  The gamecube was almost all core market.  The Wii has some core market holdovers, mainly for the Nintendo branded games, but even most of them have a PS3 or 360.  Notwithstanding exclusives change hands all the time.  RE alone started with Sega, moved to Sony, moved to Nintendo, moved to Microsoft and Sony.  It happens alot.  And generally the series continue to sell well no matter who their on. 

The bottom line is Capcom is doing great financially, so they know more than you right?  That's what I was always told when I thought Nintendo could be doing a better job with the Wii.  I'm just joking about that, but the truth of the matter comes down to numbers none of us have a clue about.  A.  Cost of porting to Wii, B.  Sales revenue brought in by the game.  We can speculate but they don't think it is worth their time. 

[Halbred]

Hahahaha...as to Jurassic: The Hunted, here's my complicated paleo-nerd answer.

As long as the dinosaurs in this game are closer to those of the Jurassic Park series than Walking With Dinosaurs, I'll be happy. Or, to go the other direction, I will be just as happy if the dinosaurs are closer to those in Harryhousen movies than Walking With Dinosaurs.

I do NOT like Walking With Dinosaurs. EVERYBODY IS FAT AND CONSTANTLY SHAKING THEIR NECK. Yes, it's a cool effect, but it completely ignores phylogenetic bracketing.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Halbred, can you provide a hypothesis as to why Activision thought Jurassic:  Cabella's BIGGER Game was worth bringing to Wii?

[Halbred]

Good question. My guess is that it's Activision wanting to make money, as usual. They've been very good about supporting the Wii with quality ports in the past. Plus, I can certainly see a more immersive experience with the pointer instead of dual-sticks.

I am worried about how my precious prehistoric beasties will turn out. Actually, I'm just nervous about the game generally. Aside from the initial announcement and screenshots, I don't really know **** about this game.

[Stratos]

I saw a trailer for it and it was pretty terrible. By that I mean the trailer, not the game. It was a very low budget trailer.

[Ian Sane]

One thing a new console generation provides is an easy way for new games to differentiate themselves from old ones.  If I'm making a sequel I have to come up with new ideas or the series will become stale.  The noticable "step up" that a new console provides makes it easy to differentiate the sequel from the original, even if there's in reality not that much newness to it.

The PS3 and X360 provide very clear improvements.  The graphics are noticably better.  The better hardware allows for larger areas, more characters on screen at once, and more advanced AI.  Making a new game stand out from last gen is easy.  Even if the true gameplay difference is minor the game will differentiate itself from it's last gen predecessor.

With the Wii the ONLY difference is the controls.  That's it.  It may be more powerful than a Gamecube but it's close enough that it's more or less the same thing aside from motion control.  Now ignoring market share if I'm making a game and I don't plan on it having motion control, then there is no reason to make it for the Wii.  Nintendo made it an either/or situation.  You can have the better hardware or you can have the new controller.  Well if I can't come up with a decent idea for the controller then anything I make for the Wii will come across as last gen.  At least with the other consoles I can make my game seem relevent by just having better graphics.

Let's use Soul Calibur IV as an example.  Namco HAD to design it for the PS360 for one simple reason: the formula is too restrictive to make any really significant change without pissing off the fanbase so upping the graphics was logically the only way to get a new Soul Calibur game out there without it looking like a superflous upgrade.  If they weren't going to use motion control and the made that game with the Wii as the base platform it would come across as no different at all from Soul Calibur II & III.  It would be pointless.  The improved graphics give the game some purpose, even if it's superficial.  Meanwhile when making a Soul Calibur for the Wii Namco did try to use the unique feature of the Wii, only the results sucked.

Part of that problem lies in what I see as the restrictive nature of the remote.  Nintendo passes it off as the "new standard" but I think it's far too limiting for that.  It works well in sports games where you recreate the real-life movement.  The pointer functionality works well in games that would normally use a mouse or a lightgun.  But aside from that?  Even Nintendo has had to settle for lame waggle in their games that extend outside these two scenarios.

The problem is no one wants stuff that feels last gen.  New consoles cost money and no one wants to spend money on something that provides the same stuff that last gen did.  There has to be some justification even if it is just graphics.  And we also want something that has responsive controls and plays well.  The Wii has the unfortunate problem that the only way for a Wii game to feel current is if it uses motion control.  But it has to use it well.  So for most genres it's lose-lose.  The game is either a crappy wagglefest or it uses traditional controls and comes across as a last gen game that realistically no one should have had to pay for a new console to play.

Though ironically Resident Evil 5 is one of those games that could easily come across as next gen with only new controls to differentiate it.  Go figure.  I guess the creators wanted the co-op aspect of it, which needed the better hardware.

Let's face it when any one of us desires a game on another console do we really want it visually scalled down so that it looks like a slighty enhanced Gamecube game?  We want the real deal but it cannot exist.

[Stratos]

But Ian, what about making special 'for Wii' versions? We have a working Soul Calibur engine (Soul Calibur 2) so where is a genuine SC for Wii?, a working RE engine (RE4) so where is a new RE for Wii? Among a few other titles. Square is making a FF game for Wii that genuinely appears to be ground up.

Is there something wrong with giving us a similar game? they do it when they make a DS version of popular games. Modern Warfare 2 got a DS version and a lot of others did too. Why not a Wii one? Modern Warfare Reflex on Wii proves it is doable.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

But supporting all platforms with proper funding and attention would make too much sense.  That's just not in the cards here.

[Halbred]

Stratos, you're basically asking companies to make two different games. It costs enough money to make ONE. RE4: Wii Edition was very cheap turnaround for Capcom--they basically ported the PS2 game but turned on the GC textures and added pointer functionality. Not a big gamble. They probably make dollars on the penny.

But making a brand-new Wii version of RE5? You'd be producing an entirely new game. Yeah, they've got the RE4 engine, and it would probably work, but you'd still have to build new assets, maps, and friendly AI. And with Nintendo's restrictive online shenanigans, I'd bet money that online co-op would be out the window. You could get rid of Sheva, but then the story wouldn't make a lot of sense, and the cutscenes would have to be re-done. It really WOULD be a totally different game.

Look, Capcom had a goal in mind (an intention) for the sequel to RE4. They simply couldn't do what they wanted on the Wii. I think it really is as simple as that.

But they could totally make a new RE4-style game for the Wii. I'd be all for that. I'd buy it on launch day. But I just don't think it's gonna be RE5.

[smallsharkbigbite]

But supporting all platforms with proper funding and attention would make too much sense.  That's just not in the cards here.

Why would that make sense?  You support the platforms the most that you expect the most profit from.  I'm sorry if Capcom decided that porting RE5 to the Wii wouldn't make them more money than making DLC for RE5, or bringing Tatsunoko VS Capcom: Ultimate All-Stars to the Wii or whatever other projects they were working on.  Making money alone isn't justification enough for a project.  Making the most money is.  And they decided they should use their resources elsewhere.  A pc version of RE5 is looking likely though if you don't want to pick up a PS3/360.  And that may not have Wii type controls but it should have better than console controls.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Yes. we all know that the Wii can't handle online therefore it can't handle online co-op.

Somebody should probably tell that to HVS and Treyarch because that online deathmatch FPS just aint gonna happen, then someone should tell Nintendo too because releasing Dynamic Slash with 4 player co-op gameplay is gonna be a complete waste of time and resources since it's obviously not possible since no one has bothered to attempt it yet.


edit:  & why is everyone acting as if the only way you can play RE5 is online co-op?
Are you trying to say that the computer doesn't control Sheva when you don't have another person to play with? Are you saying that you have to wait for a second player of you want to play the game? the amount of palms that need to hit faces are not available to me right now.

[Halbred]

It's not like it couldn't happen. It's just I don't think Capcom is going to bother trying.

[broodwars]

Yes. we all know that the Wii can't handle online therefore it can't handle online co-op.

Somebody should probably tell that to HVS and Treyarch because that online deathmatch FPS just aint gonna happen, then someone should tell Nintendo too because releasing Dynamic Slash with 4 player co-op gameplay is gonna be a complete waste of time and resources since it's obviously not possible since no one has bothered to attempt it yet.

edit:  & why is everyone acting as if the only way you can play RE5 is online co-op?
Are you trying to say that the computer doesn't control Sheva when you don't have another person to play with? Are you saying that you have to wait for a second player of you want to play the game? the amount of palms that need to hit faces are not available to me right now.

Wow, where to start.  Alright, first off the online multiplayer in HVS's Conduit is a laggy, buggy POS so I don't know why you'd even bring that up to support an argument.  Second, I didn't say it wasn't possible to have online Co-op in a Wii RE5, just that making it work on Nintendo's antiquated online system probably isn't worth the cost.

You can play RE5 offline (as I did), but the computer does such a poor job with Sheva it completely ruined the game for me.  She constantly gets herself into trouble, never uses any weapon other than her damn pistol, and worst of all she goes out of her way to run up and grab ammo from barrels and whatnot before you can.  The AI Sheva is an abomination (the only thing she's good at is accuracy), which is why I have a whole AI classification system in games I like to refer to as the Elika/Sheva system.

[Halbred]

Elika is high, Sheva is low, right?

That reminds me, where's the sequel to PoP, Ubisoft?

[UncleBob]

Why not by-pass Nintendo's online system and use your own servers?

[broodwars]

Elika is high, Sheva is low, right?

That reminds me, where's the sequel to PoP, Ubisoft?

Exactly.  Elikas don't need to be protected, and they don't need to be babysat.  They take care of themselves and only interfere in your experience when you actually need them or when you ask for it.  Shevas are the opposite.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

I don't necessarily mean take 1 game and make sure it's developed for all systems semi-equally, per se (otherwise we'd end up with Jurassic:  The Humped), but rather putting your good foot forward to provide those products that do similar jobs despite targetting different platforms.  Street Fighter went HD, while TatsuCap went Wii -- different projects with different targets yet doing similar jobs without the Wii version being some ugly duckling that remains ugly -- all well and good.

"Why would that make sense?"

Because it provides a clean frame of reference for a company to speak from before they blame Nintendo/Wii/casuals on disappointing sales.  "Did you apply your best efforts, like you're so happy to do on other platforms?"  Yes?--OK you can blame the casuals.  No?--OK 3rd party, you're full of ****.

Let's stop talking about RE5.  That's not a game I want to see on Wii.  Legend of Barry or some other original RE4Wii-based adventure that would've gotten Mikami's blessing, yes.

RE5 "not on Wii", if anything, just highlights the gap left by a potential full-fledged Wii Resident Evil title.  Wii got Monster Hunter Tri, a huge huge game everyone has forgotten, so it shows Capcom had significant resouces go SOMEWHERE substantial, but it doesn't address the gap for a dedicated Wii RE title.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Wow, where to start.  Alright, first off the online multiplayer in HVS's Conduit is a laggy, buggy POS so I don't know why you'd even bring that up to support an argument.  Second, I didn't say it wasn't possible to have online Co-op in a Wii RE5, just that making it work on Nintendo's antiquated online system probably isn't worth the cost.

You can play RE5 offline (as I did), but the computer does such a poor job with Sheva it completely ruined the game for me.  She constantly gets herself into trouble, never uses any weapon other than her damn pistol, and worst of all she goes out of her way to run up and grab ammo from barrels and whatnot before you can.  The AI Sheva is an abomination (the only thing she's good at is accuracy), which is why I have a whole AI classification system in games I like to refer to as the Elika/Sheva system.

HVS is a second rate developer branching out on their first big game. It was ambitious and a solid first effort.

Second, I never mentioned you as saying anything and was actually responding to Halbred. I left it a general "everyone" because you two aren't the only people I've sen say "what about the online co-op". My response is "What about it?"

I think that the Wii has proven that it is capable of any gameplay experience and only requires that the developer actually try to make it work.

Capcom might not want to put in the time and effort to make such a thing work, but people are giving them the excuse to be lazy by saying that it's just not possible. Just because it's easier to port around between HD systems doesn't mean it wouldn't be worth the time and resources to create a system or an engine that works for Wii. It's very common to re-use these engines for many different games and they already built a RE fanbase on the Nintendo console, that's why it makes sense to attempt it in the first place.


edit: I don't mean to focus on any specific game, but RE5 is where we were obviously misdirected while Capcom stole our wallets.

[smallsharkbigbite]

I don't necessarily mean take 1 game and make sure it's developed for all systems semi-equally, per se (otherwise we'd end up with Jurassic:  The Humped), but rather putting your good foot forward to provide those products that do similar jobs despite targetting different platforms.  Street Fighter went HD, while TatsuCap went Wii -- different projects with different targets yet doing similar jobs without the Wii version being some ugly duckling that remains ugly -- all well and good.

"Why would that make sense?"

Because it provides a clean frame of reference for a company to speak from before they blame Nintendo/Wii/casuals on disappointing sales.  "Did you apply your best efforts, like you're so happy to do on other platforms?"  Yes?--OK you can blame the casuals.  No?--OK 3rd party, you're full of ****.

Who is the judge of equal?  That will always be subjective.  EA had it's big guns on the Wii.  They had their most releases on the Wii.  They tried to get the Wii market and they failed.  You say it's not good enough.  For the record Capcom has never blamed anything on the Wii.  They've done exactly what you said.  They gave the Wii Monster Hunter, they gave it Tan vs. Cap, they gave it that Spyborgs game.  They gave the PS3/360 Resi, Street Fighter, DMC.  And they aren't blaming anything on the Wii, just raking in the profits of good planning.

RE5 "not on Wii", if anything, just highlights the gap left by a potential full-fledged Wii Resident Evil title.  Wii got Monster Hunter Tri, a huge huge game everyone has forgotten, so it shows Capcom had significant resouces go SOMEWHERE substantial, but it doesn't address the gap for a dedicated Wii RE title.

Shows your biasedness.  Of all third parties Capcom has probably balanced the best between Wii/HD and are raking in profits.  But since your a Nintendo fan, best efforts mean puts everything on the Wii and makes sure the Wii version is better than HD systems if they choose to support those systems.