Rumor Control - IGN's Nintendo Voice Chat

[jammy2211]

I think these developers who hate on the Wii are just not interested in what it offers. They have probably established themselves by using consoles to make the best possible technological acheivements and that is where they made their reputation, and why their games sell. Can you blame them for disliking a console which tries to disrupt what made them so successful?

 

At the same time, there are alot of developers who favour the Wii. Jet Black Games said they're exclusive to Wii and DS because their a format in which innovation sells games much more then just having a huge budget, which to alot of developers is very important.

 

Publishers will be seriously pushing for Wii games now anyway, sales speak for themselves in that respect.

 

As for Zack and WIki advertising, I think this is a game which is going to be heavily relying on word of mouth. Guitar Hero was the same if you think about it, it was stupidly awesome but had all these barriers Capcom are facing, but once people play it they're always sold to the idea. The sales trends show that sort of chain reaction effect of Guitar Hero simply from word of mouth, and Zack and Wiki needs to pull off the same effect. I think it's built an extremely dedicated fanabse already, and provided it delivers, will get the same sort of thing as Guitar Hero did.

[pedrocasilva]

I think these developers who hate on the Wii are just not interested in what it offers. They have probably established themselves by using consoles to make the best possible technological acheivements and that is where they made their reputation, and why their games sell. Can you blame them for disliking a console which tries to disrupt what made them so successful?

That's what they think, but in reality they're just shoveling it aside instead of being open minded about it. Truth is... few third That's stupid; when you're not the one in charge it makes you incompetent, and if you're in charge and pass the idea "it's ok, it's a Wii game we don't need effort on the graphics part and we can blame the system". Makes you incompetent as well, since you're not even trying to put out the best product possible... No "taste" in it, just a job, that's bad, of course that way you won't like to develop for it.

 

Point is... you should be proud and feel lucky that you have a job, there's a lot of people trying to climb up in this industry and the ones on top seem to forget this.

 

For instance... If you're that old in the industry does hardware mean that much? look at this from this perspective, ok, Wii isn't a HD powerhouse still... I've worked with stuff ten times worse. You don't see them saying Metroid Prime and Mario Galaxy look bad due to technical limitations either... and they run at 60 frames, there's lots of ceiling for them to reach those, they just don't want to.

At the same time, there are alot of developers who favour the Wii. Jet Black Games said they're exclusive to Wii and DS because their a format in which innovation sells games much more then just having a huge budget, which to alot of developers is very important.

 

Publishers will be seriously pushing for Wii games now anyway, sales speak for themselves in that respect.

I think we're fine with the support we have on Wii you know? when it comes to amount, now we just need one thing... ambition, and I don't know if those studios have it... that and money to invest.

As for Zack and WIki advertising, I think this is a game which is going to be heavily relying on word of mouth. Guitar Hero was the same if you think about it, it was stupidly awesome but had all these barriers Capcom are facing, but once people play it they're always sold to the idea. The sales trends show that sort of chain reaction effect of Guitar Hero simply from word of mouth, and Zack and Wiki needs to pull off the same effect. I think it's built an extremely dedicated fanabse already, and provided it delivers, will get the same sort of thing as Guitar Hero did.

Guitar Hero could be even more risky, acessory like that and a extra price, Zack and Wiki is supposed to be $40 at launch.

[jammy2211]

That's what they think, but in reality they're just shoveling it aside instead of being open minded about it. Truth is... few third That's stupid; when you're not the one in charge it makes you incompetent, and if you're in charge and pass the idea "it's ok, it's a Wii game we don't need effort on the graphics part and we can blame the system". Makes you incompetent as well, since you're not even trying to put out the best product possible... No "taste" in it, just a job, that's bad, of course that way you won't like to develop for it.

 

Well, if you company has a special interest in graphics and visually great game, you're going to choose the 360 and ps3 arn't you? The ones who don't care about graphics so much may choose Wii, but will opt to ignore the visual side of things. I think the WIi graphics problem is more just companies don't have Wii engines built yet, so they're just using their ps2 technology, but that'll be addressed in time. The second wave of games look much more appealing visually.

 

In all honesty, the publishers don't really have a reason yet to try push the Wii. The majority of games look severely under-par, and games still seem to sell even if they look horrible. I'm sure Nintendo will keep raising the bar and plenty of developers will try to push things further, but there currently is no real incentive for developers to try that extra mile.

[Cube]

Well, if you company has a special interest in graphics and visually great game, you're going to choose the 360 and ps3 arn't you?

 

It depends on what you want your graphics to look like. If you want "realistic" (or HDU, as I call it) then you would chose the 360/PS3. Mario Galaxy is the most visually appealing game I've ever seen.

[jammy2211]

It depends on what you want your graphics to look like. If you want "realistic" (or HDU, as I call it) then you would chose the 360/PS3. Mario Galaxy is the most visually appealing game I've ever seen.

 

Yeah, I'm speaking from a technical stand-point, in terms of creating the best technilogical acheivement.

 

Art Styles should be much more the focus on the Wii, as well, they look awesome, and hide the Wii's technological short-comings. That seems to be the way alot of developers are heading with the Wii, which suits me.

[harribo]

I like how people get angry at Matt for having an opinion.

[pedrocasilva]

Well, if you company has a special interest in graphics and visually great game, you're going to choose the 360 and ps3 arn't you? The ones who don't care about graphics so much may choose Wii, but will opt to ignore the visual side of things. I think the WIi graphics problem is more just companies don't have Wii engines built yet, so they're just using their ps2 technology, but that'll be addressed in time. The second wave of games look much more appealing visually.

No, If I was going by that I'd choose a PC, since according to John Carmack High-end PC is already surpassing them by a whole generation.

 

Seriously though, you have to develop for where the money is, picture that last gen, do you think PS2 would have gotten FF's, Metal Gears and such? It was the market leader simple as that, since Xbox and GC wouldn't give you as much sales and profits no way you'd have that kind of budget from them apart from first/second party titles.

 

And if they're making money on the Wii in order to invest it on X360, other than a bad decision (wasting more money where the revenue is lower) they're being hypocrite, simple as that.

 

Wii is not that limited too, so they're not saying "oh I can't do this" truth to be told it's "I don't want to do this" they're acting like spoiled kids.

In all honesty, the publishers don't really have a reason yet to try push the Wii. The majority of games look severely under-par, and games still seem to sell even if they look horrible. I'm sure Nintendo will keep raising the bar and plenty of developers will try to push things further, but there currently is no real incentive for developers to try that extra mile.

Well, they should... they just aren't. Most of those "Wii sucks" developers actually should have a reason to develop for it too (it sells and reaches the masses).

 

If all they release sucks ass graphically and "we" still buy it... they ought to invest and fix that, because if the games didn't sell (even because of that and being crappy) they'd abandon the platform just the same; probably that's all they wanted/needed... a reason, one or another, everything leads to the same.

 

See, it's two sides of the same coin, and what you're telling me is that a lot of teams and publishers wanted the wii to flop while they made profit and capitalized on it while it lasted (ubisoft is a prime example), that's the incompetence I was talking about before, they ought to make more effort; if the platform sells they should have all the reasons they need.

 

As a developer and providing you like what you're doing... you should always try the extra mile, that's what makes you a good developer rather than just a worker; now I also understand a lot of budgets and timeframes for release are tight and some games get prejudice from it... but there's also lots of guys who wouldn't do the extra mile if they had 5 years with the hardware; that's the same as saying they're third rate developers, in my book.

[jammy2211]

No, If I was going by that I'd choose a PC, since according to John Carmack High-end PC is already surpassing them by a whole generation.

 

And some companies do, I think there is more of an aurora around consoles, along with the fact developing the best graphics on the PC reaches a very nishe market as well, not many people have PC's that can cope. I'm sure alot of these companies would develope on PC instead of consoles, but know to pull of the graphics they want isn't financially viable.

 

Seriously though, you have to develop for where the money is, picture that last gen, do you think PS2 would have gotten FF's, Metal Gears and such? It was the market leader simple as that, since Xbox and GC wouldn't give you as much sales and profits no way you'd have that kind of budget from them apart from first/second party titles.

 

But is the money in the Wii? multiplatform games over all consoles still sell better on Xbox 360 then any other platform (even PS2 now) and Nintendo own about 50% of Wii software sales. Third parties are obviously still trying to learn if they can make as great sales off of the Wii as the userbase size suggests.

 

And if they're making money on the Wii in order to invest it on X360, other than a bad decision (wasting more money where the revenue is lower) they're being hypocrite, simple as that.

 

Indeed.

 

Wii is not that limited too, so they're not saying "oh I can't do this" truth to be told it's "I don't want to do this" they're acting like spoiled kids.Well, they should... they just aren't. Most of those "Wii sucks" developers actually should have a reason to develop for it too (it sells and reaches the masses).

 

If they're still raking in the money off of the 360 and PS3, then they don't need to go to the Wii. Especially if it challenges their company to do things they've not got any experience in, why take a risk with the Wii userbase when they can be guarenteed success on the other formats?

 

If all they release sucks ass graphically and "we" still buy it... they ought to invest and fix that, because if the games didn't sell (even because of that and being crappy) they'd abandon the platform just the same; probably that's all they wanted/needed... a reason, one or another, everything leads to the same.

 

It makes them more money though, so until the other competitiors start raising the bar no one is going to bother. There's alot of thing sthey should do, but that doesn't mean it's best for them as a company.

See, it's two sides of the same coin, and what you're telling me is that a lot of teams and publishers wanted the wii to flop while they made profit and capitalized on it while it lasted (ubisoft is a prime example), that's the incompetence I was talking about before, they ought to make more effort; if the platform sells they should have all the reasons they need.

 

I think it's more they expected the Wii to flop, they probably didn't even look into it enough to decide whether it benefited them or not to have it successful. Now it is they 'should' raise the quality and budget of games, but why should a company like Ubisoft do this when they can just port all their old games and still make tons of money off of them?

 

As a developer and providing you like what you're doing... you should always try the extra mile, that's what makes you a good developer rather than just a worker; now I also understand a lot of budgets and timeframes for release are tight and some games get prejudice from it... but there's also lots of guys who wouldn't do the extra mile if they had 5 years with the hardware; that's the same as saying they're third rate developers, in my book.

 

I think your perception of the video games industry is a bit flawed. Developers really don't get a choice how much budget they have, how long they can work on a game etc. That's up to the guys EA, or Ubisoft, or Capcom or whoever. They don't want to make the best possible product, they want to make the biggest amount of profit, and if PS2 graphics don't look out of place on the system there's no financially enticing reason to try go above them.

[pedrocasilva]

And some companies do, I think there is more of an aurora around consoles, along with the fact developing the best graphics on the PC reaches a very nishe market as well, not many people have PC's that can cope. I'm sure alot of these companies would develope on PC instead of consoles, but know to pull of the graphics they want isn't financially viable.

That would make sense if PS3 and X360 weren't niche markets now. I really understand it though, and I understand cross platform... But I simply can't understand you know... Ignoring and a big platform if they're supporting the others

 

But is the money in the Wii? multiplatform games over all consoles still sell better on Xbox 360 then any other platform (even PS2 now) and Nintendo own about 50% of Wii software sales. Third parties are obviously still trying to learn if they can make as great sales off of the Wii as the userbase size suggests.

I dunno about that (if they're really trying)... that said look at what X360's offers, it's very aimed at americans... american developers develop for it and even japanese ones, capcom games for example are clearly aimed at them, other games like RPG's, and experimental inovative games sell bad by comparison (viva pinata for example), so it's not really a universal example.

 

Besides it still has a bigger userbase in US and Europe... not saying their tie-ratio is not good, it is... but it's quite obvious why we don't surpass that yet, even if we're all hardcores; that said... Wii can surpass it eventually, even if it's down to userbase.

If they're still raking in the money off of the 360 and PS3, then they don't need to go to the Wii. Especially if it challenges their company to do things they've not got any experience in, why take a risk with the Wii userbase when they can be guarenteed success on the other formats?

Because there's money there, if you don't support the market leader you're getting a secondary market in name of security.

 

That's fine with me, I know it happened to gamecube and all... But I don't expect most third party developers to stand still in there "oh we have success it's enough".

It makes them more money though, so until the other competitiors start raising the bar no one is going to bother. There's alot of thing sthey should do, but that doesn't mean it's best for them as a company.

don't you agree if the games didn't sold at all they've had dropped us though? it just goes full circle, and IMO it's their vision that's wrong... So... what do you think the solution is?

I think it's more they expected the Wii to flop, they probably didn't even look into it enough to decide whether it benefited them or not to have it successful. Now it is they 'should' raise the quality and budget of games, but why should a company like Ubisoft do this when they can just port all their old games and still make tons of money off of them?

Well, we here on nintendo forums never expected this kind of success so I understand they were caught by surprise... thing is... they still aren't changing and a lot of them doesn't want to... a lot of them still wants the Wii to go away... it's a hindrance... and you can clearly feel it.

I think your perception of the video games industry is a bit flawed. Developers really don't get a choice how much budget they have, how long they can work on a game etc. That's up to the guys EA, or Ubisoft, or Capcom or whoever. They don't want to make the best possible product, they want to make the biggest amount of profit, and if PS2 graphics don't look out of place on the system there's no financially enticing reason to try go above them.

I know that, hence why I said:

 

I also understand a lot of budgets and timeframes for release are tight and some games get prejudice from it... but there's also lots of guys who wouldn't do the extra mile if they had 5 years with the hardware

 

perhaps I forgot to tell that a lot of them don't decide that, but it was self implied.

 

That said, I don't think I have a flawed view, but I'll admit I'm a idealist at core, so I always want to expect the best game possible, the best effort possible, etc; that's how I like to think... that's how I think of my future work too, I can't think of it as a chore or something I don't wanna do.

 

So I think developers should always attempt to do the best game possible... But I feel they sometimes don't.

 

As for not having a reason to go above it... well, a game with good graphics will, in most cases sell better; so I believe they have a reason, if they want to figure how to sell games... They sure figured that quickly on X360.

 

I understand launch games not having budget... I don't understand current games not having budget.

[jammy2211]

I'll reply later, got stuff to do atm.

 

Actually it'll be tommorow, arg.

[pedrocasilva]

I'll reply later, got stuff to do atm.

 

Actually it'll be tommorow, arg.

No problem

[Hellfire]

I agree with matts comment completely about MP3 sales. This was THE game to appeal to hardcore gamers and yet they bloody advertise it to casuals

 

Lots of people have their Wii online and they're getting an entire channel with trailers and also tv and magazine ads. Seems pretty advertised to me. Not to mention it has been selling.

[Gizmo]

Zack and Wiki should drop the "Quest for Barbados Treasure" part of the name, for me. It's gonna be one of those games like Super Monkey Ball - when I tell my friends "oh, I got Super Monkey Ball yesterday!" they'll instantly think wow, your a prat. But then when they play it, they'll think, wow, this is awesome.

[Goron_3]

Lots of people have their Wii online and they're getting an entire channel with trailers and also tv and magazine ads. Seems pretty advertised to me. Not to mention it has been selling.

 

I never said it wasn't selling. I just said it could sell more. Trust me, there are lots of gamers who aren't even aware of this game who if they got to play it, they would buy it 100%. In fact, hardly anyone in my year group if 190 students has even heard of metroid. I'm just making a point; stop feeling the need to defend Nintendo on everything.

[pedrocasilva]

^ Do you live in US?

 

I heard there was a raging launch campaign there, and I think if you live in UK (or europe for that matter) that's only normal; still MP1 and MP2 had their campaigns I believe, and they (still) don't know the franchise? Prior advertisements or not could make a difference?

 

And just for comparison, are they as mass consumers aware of say... Bioshock? (and if they have a X360 this question doesn't count because people obviously look for titles their platform has, just the way I'd say at least most gamers with a Wii should be aware of Metroid)

[Hellfire]

I never said it wasn't selling. I just said it could sell more. Trust me, there are lots of gamers who aren't even aware of this game who if they got to play it, they would buy it 100%. In fact, hardly anyone in my year group if 190 students has even heard of metroid. I'm just making a point; stop feeling the need to defend Nintendo on everything.

 

Stop feeling the need to think that people don't have an opinion, they just automatically defend Nintendo. What I'm saying is a fact, it's not personal opinion.

[Goron_3]

Stop feeling the need to think that people don't have an opinion, they just automatically defend Nintendo. What I'm saying is a fact, it's not personal opinion.

 

So it's a fact that the game has reached its entire possible audience? BEcause i don't believe that for a second.

[jammy2211]

Metroid Prime 3 has almost doubled the first week sales of MP2, and that is on a userbase over half the size, in a month where games traditionally sell less.

 

So, I think the sales are doing well thus far. Perhaps Nintendo haven't invested as much into advertising it as we'd hope, but I would argue it's one of those games where everyone who wants it, already knows about it, and those who don't will have seen the TV adds.

 

I hope it'll continue strongly into it's second week.

[Gizmo]

I'm with Goron on this, I don't know anyone at my school who has heard of Metroid. While the advertising is yet to begin for MP3, it doesn't really bode well. Alot of people have heard of say Brawl, and thats even further off.

[Hellfire]

So it's a fact that the game has reached its entire possible audience? BEcause i don't believe that for a second.

 

No game has reached its entire possible audience, don't exagerate no one said that. Just that the web has been abuzz with MP3, Wii owners with online got thei hands on trailers, there was advertising and they've done a much better job than before. Metroid will never be a Halo. Now that I think about it, I haven't seen a single Halo 3 ad in mags or TV and the game is nearly out. Not that it needs advertising.

[Goron_3]

No game has reached its entire possible audience, don't exagerate no one said that. Just that the web has been abuzz with MP3, Wii owners with online got thei hands on trailers, there was advertising and they've done a much better job than before. Metroid will never be a Halo. Now that I think about it, I haven't seen a single Halo 3 ad in mags or TV and the game is nearly out. Not that it needs advertising.

 

Lmao. Erm, have you SEEN the prime trailer! God there was so much buzz with that game; everyone saw it was like 'wow'. The tv ad for this game is basically a bunch of women going 'omg i can twist a handle in game'.

 

Also, FHM just did a feature on Halo 3. That said, I'm trying to compare the two, but come on, this game (from what i've heard) is the first game that truly reaches for the hardcore crowd but Nintendo don't really seem to want steal hardcore gamers from PS3/360, and they seem to be saying 'this is for our old metroid fans who have downloaded the trailer and have been following the game online (as limited as playtime was before reviews came out), and hopefully we'll get some casuals in on the act too'.

[pedrocasilva]

They did that Halo drink in US, but then again that came with the popularity of it.

Lmao. Erm, have you SEEN the prime trailer! God there was so much buzz with that game; everyone saw it was like 'wow'. The tv ad for this game is basically a bunch of women going 'omg i can twist a handle in game'.

Welcome to 2007. Back in 2002 there was so much buzz about Prime 1, yet... Like Jammy2211 said... This one doubled the sales of Prime 2 first week sales, the rule with sequels be it with movies or games is that the further the number goes the less it sells (apart from FF because they're totally separate)

Also, FHM just did a feature on Halo 3. That said, I'm trying to compare the two, but come on, this game (from what i've heard) is the first game that truly reaches for the hardcore crowd but Nintendo don't really seem to want steal hardcore gamers from PS3/360, and they seem to be saying 'this is for our old metroid fans who have downloaded the trailer and have been following the game online (as limited as playtime was before reviews came out), and hopefully we'll get some casuals in on the act too'.

did FHM get paid to do that?

 

And if it was solely for the old fans why would they advertise it like mad on TV when the game launched? and why that advert you yourself are complaining about?

 

The tv ad for this game is basically a bunch of women going 'omg i can twist a handle in game'.

 

are you complaining because it aimed at the regular metroid fan? I don't think so.

 

You need to sort yourself, I get what you're saying and I don't agree but still, it's like you're struggling to make a point inside; the masses... are casual, simple as that. And for the record... I didn't love that advert either, but I see it as 80's adverts you know? it's supposed to be kinda ridiculous.

[Hellfire]

Wait wait, you complain that the commercial is aimed at a larger crowd with the women and whatnot, and then you complain that they're not targeting casuals?

Zelda was also a game that could achieve the crowd of MP3 and Halo and I understand what you're saying but, right now, Halo has an untouchable status and I doubt any amount of advertising and marketing would change that.

[Goron_3]

No no no.

 

I'm complaining at the advert because it's targeting casual gamers, not hardcore gamers. I mean, I've got mates who LOVE PC gaming and hate dual analogue. Now, this is the kinda game that will make em buy a console; the controls are that effective, but my mate saw that advert and dismissed the game straight away. I then linked him to a video review on IGN which made him consider getting a Wii. THing is, that TV ad isn't interesting AT ALL; you see and are like 'well they said Red Steel had great control' (lol!), when what they should be showing is how epic the game is.

 

They should have made the ad more epic is what I'm saying, like this ad:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQd0w_mG0ok

 

I mean come on that ad practically sold the game to me.

[pedrocasilva]

I understand what you're saying and understand why they saw what you did, but still... are you complaining about lack of advertisement or bad advertisement now?

 

By any means I agree, I didn't really like that advert, but I think it sold quite a few units considering by the end of the week sales