Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo
Your turn mate.  |
alrighty then
i'm too lazy to do the multiquote thing so whatever. mostly from the top hehe
#70 third party games, low quality etc. etc. fact is, it's a publisher driven industry, developers are not the ones calling the shots. it's unfortunate but it's what it is. while it's still possible for a few people to make a game out of their basement / garage they're still going to need to shop it around - and get lucky - to find a publisher to get it onto shelves. for the most part the publisher is the one fronting the money for the developers to make a product. you're going to have a hard time finding a venture capitalist who's willing to invest in a product that doesn't have any form of established distribution.
innovation does not equal success. sales = success. again it's unfortunate but it's what it is. publishers don't care about innovation, they want a return on their investment. safest way to do that is a small budget, small team, making a low risk title. party games are popular and simple to make. they don't need to have a massive hit in order to break even. on the flip side there's always the chance that it will become a big hit. FAR less risky than investing a large budget into an innovative title that's only bought by a small portion of the market.
as far as coding for the wii. it's not that it's inferior technology but it's different technology. it's a lot easier to recycle code between similar platforms. it's likely more of a logistics thing than logic. unreal 3 is the simplest example, the core graphics engine has support for the ps3 / 360 / pc. so the bulk of the work for 3 products only has to be done once. even if epic games really wanted to have unreal games on the wii they would have to make a whole new graphics engine specifically for that one platform. which is a better investment? a 1 for 1 deal or a 3 for 1?
while it's obviously possible to have 3d FPS games on the wii the developers either need to make their own engine ($$$), or license an old one and either find people who still remember how to use old technology or spend a fair amount of time and money getting a team up to snuff with the specific tech again ($$$). with little guarantee on a return.
as for your examples of big sellers only 'big brain academy' isn't part of a very well established franchise. nintendo doesn't need to spend a dime advertising mario anymore, slap his face on something and you've got a million+ sales.
my example about smash bros wasn't that it wasn't successful but that the bulk of the people who were going to get that game did so as soon as it came out. nintendo's big hits sell big during their initial release and then that's that, it's part of being an established franchise, the people know the name and either get it right away or never bother.
it's not that the people i know are poor, it's that they're satisfied with wii sports. my friend who has more than 2 games has at least a dozen (not counting the virtual console downloads).
wii play is likely the best selling game for the wii because it comes with an extra controller. the wii is the best selling system because of itself, not because of its games. it's cheap, simple, accessible, and fun, right out of the box. what's the point in having high rated games if you can't find them on the shelf? put yourself in the shoes of a single parent looking for a game for their child. you get to the wii section and then
WTF? oh hey look another 'wii-sports' game with an extra controller. the kid likes that bowling game, now they'll be able to play with their friends.
mad world looks awesome. the conduit and tales of symphonia have potential. i've read very bad things about the dead rising port. the castlevania fighting game looks lame.