SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic - Have major developers lost their chance with the Wii?

Posted: Aug 17 2008 07:26 pm

Have Konami, Namco, and Capcom ruined the Wii for themselves? It's quite possible they have. In their blatant rush to keep their front row seats on the Sony/Microsoft bandwagon of the last generation, they refused to make the Wii a priority. Now, with twice as many consoles sold as the PS3, 10 million more sold than the XBox 360, and another easy sales victory in July, Nintendo has shown that it's not going away and the big game makers have finally started to wake up to the Wii bandwagon. But it may be too little too late.

The big boys have allowed shovelware to dominate the system, to the point where Nintendo is the only brand name that anyone trusts on the system. Rather than fixing the problem, the big boys have exacerbated it. Capcom and Namco respectively released the unforgivably mediocre Umbrella Chronicles and Soulcalibur Legends, while Namco and Konami each released the marvelously awful We Ski and Target: Terror. And now they come crawling back. Capcom's begruding Wii port of Okami has sold reasonably well, but not as well as it would have it had come out in April 2007 instead of April 2008. And now Capcom has decided to bring Dead Rising to the Wii and announced they expect it to sell at least 500,000 copies. This, when the critically praised Okami has sold under 300,000 and when Dead Rising is now a $20 title on the current generation system it was released on two years ago. Had Dead Rising come out concurrently on the Wii and 360, the Wii version could have been a million seller. Instead, Capcom didn't have a launch title for the Wii and their first game, delivered 6 months after the launch, was Resident Evil 4. Which was a great gqme certainly, but everyone and their fucking mother had played it by the time it came to the Wii. Capcom is now talking about porting more titles to the Wii, with Resident Evil 5 and Street Fighter IV being the top rumors. Well, when the Wii versions come out a year later, it's fairly pointless. The buzz for the game is dead and the Wii version tends to be slightly stripped down, especially because of the lack of DLC. If these companies were smart, they'd release the Wii version FIRST for the people who just want to play a fun game, then release the 360/PS3 version six months later for the loser techies who need leet graphics to masturbate to. But the major game companies can't seem to figure this out and thus continue to lose out on big money. It's a shame.

Posted: Aug 17 2008 07:30 pm

I agree. This is why I ended up buying a Xbox 360. But who said Nintendo's 1st party Wii games kept them going? The Nintendo DS is doing most of the work here, and that is where the major third party companies are going.

Posted: Aug 17 2008 07:30 pm

Portcom just loves sending ports to the Wii, lazy asshats.

Posted: Aug 17 2008 07:38 pm

DarknessDeku wrote:

But who said Nintendo's 1st party Wii games kept them going? The Nintendo DS is doing most of the work here, and that is where third party companies are going.

Actually, the Wii is doing its fair share. Nintendo makes a decent profit on the console itself and with 29 million sold, they're hardly hurting in console department. And their games sell well on it too. Galaxy, Twilight Princess, Prime 3, Mario Kart and Brawl are required purchases for any Wii-er, especially Brawl. Brawl has stayed in the GameFAQs Top Ten Games since its release and is currently #2, second only to the 360 version of Soul Calibur IV. That says something.

Title: Titlating Joined: Dec 17 2007 Posts: 5042

I think we might just have to wait for nintendos next console for good third party support

Posted: Aug 17 2008 08:33 pm

I think so too. And I think Nintendo needs to learn from its mistakes in regards to storage space and online gaming, which they may not do. When you're winning, it's easy to ignore your mistakes. Look at Nintendo or Sega in the mid-90's. They went from being the top two games in town to nearly collasping.

I'd mention graphics too, but it goes without saying that each nextgen console will be HD by necessity.

Posted: Aug 17 2008 08:34 pm

While the big 3rd party players have shot themselves in the foot when it comes to the Wii, you can’t really blame them for backing the 360/PS3. A good deal of opinion inside the industry and out was that the Wii was going to be this gimmicky toy parents buy for their kids if they can’t afford a “real console”. The problem is while consumers were buying them up, developers were still thinking this way and, once sales numbers started going up, started to toss whatever they had or could make on the cheap onto store shelves to cash in on unsuspecting shoppers looking for something to play besides Wii Sports.

A lot of these developers still see the Wii as nothing more than a Gamecube with a remote control which is why the Wii version of multi-console games is almost always the same as the PS2 version but with tacked on motion. It’s beyond sad to see a game like Mario Galaxy show off what the system can do and the best anyone else can come up with is Cruisin’. I also don’t think they have any idea on how to use the Wiimote or just completely forget that the system can use 2 other controllers. Almost like the loss of a few buttons throws these guy off and sends them crying into a corner because they actually have to think about the control setup for once instead of just adding everything to a button. Hell, Galaxy could’ve been played with a Gamecube controller if it weren’t for the need to collect star bits, that game only used motion sensing for the spin attack.

So, yeah, now they have to play catch up by realizing that shovelware is better left on a system that’s almost on its way out (PS2). Capcom did try something new with Zack and Wiki but I guess they said it didn’t sell too well which is surprising because I know I can’t find the damn thing anywhere. I don’t mind them porting over games I never got around to playing but, like Syd said, it’s pointless now since the originals are dirt-cheap.

The higher ups at Namco are too busy jerkin’ it to renders of Ivy to give the ok to anything other than Tales games and, probably, something with Pac-Man so I don’t expect much of a change from them. As for Konami, I wish they’d realize that the Wii is the perfect place for Goemon, Contra and just about any game from their old catalog. I agree with Meat Gear being on the other consoles because there’s just way too much dialog and shit cluttering it up and the amount of discs would be ridiculous.

As bad as those three are, however, I have to say that Ubisoft is the king of Wii shovelware so much as to admit to releasing crap on the system and using those profits to fund their higher priority titles for the other consoles.

Posted: Aug 17 2008 09:06 pm

Ubisoft did give us No More Heroes though.

Posted: Aug 17 2008 09:42 pm

Yeah but they just handled the publishing and (terribly done) marketing. I’m sure if the game was shopped around a bit more it could’ve been picked up by anybody. Publishing 1 good game doesn’t earn them a pass for all the Turdz they keep plopping on the Wii/DS.

Posted: Aug 18 2008 01:22 am

McScurvy wrote:

I wish they’d realize that the Wii is the perfect place for Goemon, Contra and just about any game from their old catalog.

I agree with you about Goemon, I think a Goemon game for the Wii would be amazing. Seems they've given up on that series here in America though. I wish Mystical Ninja on N64 would at least find it's way on the Virtual Console.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

yeah, because I prefer playing online in rock band, being able to pick and download what songs I want to buy instead of buying booster discs full of songs I don't like, and enjoy customizing a unique character instead of playing with "generic black guy with sideburns" or "bald skinny LOD wannabe" surely I must be a techhie nerd who masturbates over elite graphics.

seriously man, sometimes it's a little deeper than you make it out to be.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

furthermore, releasing a game six months early for a system that quite a few consumers cant even manage to find and buy is a great idea.

Posted: Aug 18 2008 05:06 am

I think they should start making games for a console that doesn't even exist. Everyone will be really confused because they never heard of the console the games are for but then people will start pretending they know everything about games and buy them anyway. They'll do this because they want everyone to think that they know what this console is and that they own it. Everyone will follow suit and buy the games as well. After awhile, everyone will own the games but will be too afraid to admit that there is no console out of fear of being the only one who doesn't know about it. There wouldn't even have to be a game on the disc since nobody can play it, it'll just be a blank disc with artwork on it. It'll be the greatest scam ever.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

sony coul dhave done that wiht ps2 games, considering they always ahd DRE anyway.

Posted: Aug 18 2008 07:47 am

JEW wrote:

furthermore, releasing a game six months early for a system that quite a few consumers cant even manage to find and buy is a great idea.

Actually, it is, because the system has significantly higher market penetration despite availability issues. Availability is symptomatic of sales, not of underproduction. By your logic, the fact that I can walk into any given store on any given day and walk out with a PS3 means that every game should come out on PS3.

You're clearly arguing this point just for the sake of arguing. There is no defensible reason why a game's release schedule, if not completely concurrent, shouldn't move from least powerful system to most powerful over a several month period.

Rock Band, which you mentioned in your other post, is a great example of why this strategy makes sense. Get it now on the Wii, or get it later with more features and DLC. When you do it the other way around, you're not doing yourself or anyone else any favors.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

so if averave joe gamer doesn't own a wii, he will still buy wii games. is that what you're telling me?

how does that make sense?

and rock band was released A YEAR AFTER the other three systems. you know why? because they couldn't do a simple port. the wii is a difficult system to develop for. this is nintendo's fault. it's easier for a company to make ONE game and port it to the ps3, 360, pc, and fuck, even the ps2 in most cases. THEN if there's really a big enough demand, spend half a year trying to figure out how to dumb it down to work on the wii.

by your logic, they should start out making a game for the wii, then port it over to the other systems, where it won't be taking full advantage of what the other systems are capable of. This is the same case on why PC games like fear, farcry, and doom 3 were always released like a year later on the X box.

while nintendo was designing the system, they were so busy trying to make something new and innovative, that they didn't even care about portability of games from other systems. They WANTED to be the guys that got the special games like umbrella chronicles and SC legends built from the ground up for them while the other systems shared ports.

If I was capcom, I'd pour all of my heart and soul into making the best damn resident evil 5 or street fighter 4 that I could, put it out on the wide variety of systems that could handle it, make tons of money, and then take some older game off the shelf that's already run it's course and have a few guys rework it on the side to work on that other system so that I could suck a few more dollars out of it. it makes perfect sense from a business standpoint.

Posted: Aug 18 2008 05:18 pm

Syd Lexia wrote:

JEW wrote:

furthermore, releasing a game six months early for a system that quite a few consumers cant even manage to find and buy is a great idea.

Actually, it is, because the system has significantly higher market penetration despite availability issues. Availability is symptomatic of sales, not of underproduction. By your logic, the fact that I can walk into any given store on any given day and walk out with a PS3 means that every game should come out on PS3.

You're clearly arguing this point just for the sake of arguing. There is no defensible reason why a game's release schedule, if not completely concurrent, shouldn't move from least powerful system to most powerful over a several month period.

Rock Band, which you mentioned in your other post, is a great example of why this strategy makes sense. Get it now on the Wii, or get it later with more features and DLC. When you do it the other way around, you're not doing yourself or anyone else any favors.

And release an expansion pack for the version of the game without the extra features.

Then again, why can't the same game be released for all the systems at the same time?

Joined: Apr 09 2008 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 3112

I had a bad feeling about the Wii from the start. Don't get me wrong, it was almost the first Nintendo console I would have bought since the SNES. It just felt that its main selling point would be its main downfall. The motion-sensing stuff seemed cool for shooting, swordfighting, and driving, but it would obviously lend to a lot of gimmicky gameplay things like turning cranks. Nintendo just seems to have this problem where they try something new but don't fully commit to it, which just leaves us printing clipart from our gameboys or screaming at Pikachu through an N64 controller. It seems like they try to make us experience a gimmick via a game, instead of enjoying a game through a gimmick.

Don't get me wrong, There are fun games for the Wii (Boomblox, you are fun for everyone), but all of the games just seemed to be designed for the sake of promoting waving your hands everywhere (like most of the shovelware, or unnecessary mini-games), instead of incorporating it as a main gameplay aspect (such as the fun No More Heroes and Wii Sports).

Also, Nintendo's third party support has been getting gradually worse since the first Playstation was released.

Posted: Aug 18 2008 08:12 pm

JEW wrote:

so if averave joe gamer doesn't own a wii, he will still buy wii games. is that what you're telling me?

how does that make sense?

What in the fuck are you talking about?

Wii: 29.62 million units sold
XBox 360: 19.01 million units sold
PS3: 14.41 million units sold

So please, explain to me again the part where "Average Joe Gamer" is more likely to own a PS3 than a Wii.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

Syd Lexia wrote:

JEW wrote:

so if averave joe gamer doesn't own a wii, he will still buy wii games. is that what you're telling me?

how does that make sense?

What in the fuck are you talking about?

Wii: 29.62 million units sold
XBox 360: 19.01 million units sold
PS3: 14.41 million units sold

So please, explain to me again the part where "Average Joe Gamer" is more likely to own a PS3 than a Wii.

I never said PS3, I don't know why you keep bringing that up.

and I didn't look numbers up, I'm talking about what I see.

what I see is people coming into my store EVERY SINGLE DAY asking if we have the wii, then me telling them no. I see my store being lucky to get a pallet of 24 of them in every few months, and the pallet being empty in two hours. I see one in ten people I know actually owning the system. I see people selling the systems for at least double what they payed. I see people constantly hounding gamestop to see if any were traded in.

so yeah, maybe the numbers look good on paper, but where the fuck are these systems going then? are you going to tell me that I should still be making sales for software when the people who should be buying the software can't even buy a system to play the titles on in my store?

also, where are you getting these numbers from? and are these sales altogether or sales for this year? Remember that the 360 has been out longer than the wii, so sales might be declining this year because most of the people that wanted the system already got it. maybe your idea of selling games for the wii first will work later on, when the demand for the system is satisfied, but to do that right now would be corporate suicide.

Posted: Aug 18 2008 11:05 pm

I got a Wii like 2 months ago, and I had almost no trouble finding one. Jew, if you work at Gamestop, part of the problem may be that Gamestop sucks total dick. Seriously. I don't think I've ever had a good experience at one. It's the only store that's actually designed to be harder to walk through than Hot Topic. I called up the nearest Target when I was looking for one, and the guy said "Yeah, we have like 50 of them. Come buy like 7." I thought it was a joke, so I had my girlfriend call as well, and she got the same answer from a different person. I drove by, and there they were, just a mountain of Wii's.

Oh, you mention how many people come in frantically looking for Wii's. How many people come in looking for the other systems? If the Wii has sold more than twice as much as the PS3 and over 30% more than the 360 (In significantly less time being available) and people still come in desperately trying to find Wii's, which system do you think it makes sense to develop for? I'd definitely sell the one that's sold the most systems despite being the youngest and is still selling out everywhere.

Posted: Aug 19 2008 12:21 am

He works at Sam's.

I see Wiis at every store I go into.

Posted: Aug 19 2008 02:26 am

Hell, I find Wiis just lying in the street. Damn things are all over the place, we can't get rid of them. I can't even walk out my front door without tripping over one. Just the other day I saw a bunch of beavers build a dam out of Wiis.

Posted: Aug 19 2008 02:28 am

I bought one a year and a half ago and I have only found 1 other Wii sitting on a shelf since then.

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

I got a Wii like 2 months ago, and I had almost no trouble finding one. Jew, if you work at Gamestop, part of the problem may be that Gamestop sucks total dick. Seriously. I don't think I've ever had a good experience at one. It's the only store that's actually designed to be harder to walk through than Hot Topic. I called up the nearest Target when I was looking for one, and the guy said "Yeah, we have like 50 of them. Come buy like 7." I thought it was a joke, so I had my girlfriend call as well, and she got the same answer from a different person. I drove by, and there they were, just a mountain of Wii's.

Oh, you mention how many people come in frantically looking for Wii's. How many people come in looking for the other systems? If the Wii has sold more than twice as much as the PS3 and over 30% more than the 360 (In significantly less time being available) and people still come in desperately trying to find Wii's, which system do you think it makes sense to develop for? I'd definitely sell the one that's sold the most systems despite being the youngest and is still selling out everywhere.

I work at sams. we sell quite a few 360 and DS systems without a problem.

and it doesn't matter what the reason for not being able to have the system is (I know lots of people looking for it and it selling out as soon as we get it is a good thing. a sure sign of high demand, I won't deny) the fact is that people still can't get the system. Maybe this isn't the problem everywhere, but from what I see, it's a problem in quite a few places.