Wii Q&A Thread

[Velorath]

Anyway yea, while Sony wants people making games for the PS3, they can remain king of the castle as long as they keep supporting the PS2 - which is happening.

That is kind of funny when you think about it..

Nintendo: We're going to win everyone's hearts with an intergen system. Power doesn't matter right now. We'll gain marketshare by gameplay, cheap development, and affordability alone.

Sony: Hmm, yeah... We have that covered too.

Less games to compete against on the Wii though.  Even with all the PS2's out there, it's easy for even good games like Shadow of the Colossus to get lost in the shuffle and not sell as well as they probably should.  You'll notice on top selling software charts a mix of 360, PS3, Wii, DS, and PS2 games in the US, and mostly Wii, DS, and some PS2 titles in Japan.  Having over a dozen times as much hardware out there doesn't equal a dozen times as many sales per software title. 

There are so few quality titles on the next-gen systems right now, that any game that's good (not even great) will get notice and likely will get sales.  On the PS2 not only do a lot of good games not get noticed, but they have a larger used game market to compete with.

[stray]

What would you call bad sales numbers exactly? I don't know the exact number of SotC or anything, but I know it sold decently when it first came out. Has to be at least 500k by now.


Just wondering what you'd call a success. Some people have been brainwashed into thinking anything less than Halo or FF numbers is a failure (not saying you're that extreme -- but that's why I'm asking). Even games like God of War, while still selling in the couple of millions, still aren't good enough for some people. When the truth is it would have already been a great success at 500k sold, at a quarter of what it's actually performed.

Sure, SotC could have done better, but it's still a greatest hits title (the minimum requirement is 400k, and 9 months on shelves). And as far as greatest hits titles go, there's quite a few of them. It's something like that that should indicative of the state of the platform. Fuck man, even 50 Cent Bulletproof and "Big Game Hunter" titles are greatest hits. And there are too many multimillion sellers to even bother naming.

[EDIT] Just to further add, most titles (A titles) are going to cost 5 to 10 million to make (marketing costs, otoh, will fluctuate, of course). Selling 400k is going to pull in at least 3 to 4 million dollar profit. Say one million of that pays back the marketing costs. When all is said and done, the game is still a success.

Once the price gets reduced to $20 from being a Greatest Hit, then that's a little more money in the bank as well.

[Velorath]

What would you call bad sales numbers exactly? I don't know the exact number of SotC or anything, but I know it sold decently when it first came out. Has to be at least 500k by now.


Just wondering what you'd call a success. Some people have been brainwashed into thinking anything less than Halo or FF numbers is a failure (not saying you're that extreme -- but that's why I'm asking). Even games like God of War, while still selling in the couple of millions, still aren't good enough for some people. When the truth is it would have already been a great success at 500k sold, at a quarter of what it's actually performed.

Sure, SotC could have done better, but it's still a greatest hits title (the minimum requirement is 400k, and 9 months on shelves). And as far as greatest hits titles go, there's quite a few of them. It's something like that that should indicative of the state of the platform. Fuck man, even 50 Cent Bulletproof and "Big Game Hunter" titles are greatest hits. And there are too many multimillion sellers to even bother naming.

If a mediocre game like Lost Planet can sell over 1 million copies on a system with an installed base of around 10 million (give or take), selling 500,000 copies of a game on a system which has shipped over 115 million units looks decidedly less impressive.  I'm not saying Shadow of Colossus' sales numbers are bad, but the truth is that when a PS2 owner goes to the store looking to buy a game there's a lot more competition for his money than there is with the next-gen systems.  That's good for the consumer, and good for Sony to an extent, but maybe not so good for developers who might want to keep releasing games for the PS2 just because a lot of people own one.

[stray]

I don't think it's a good idea to compare PS2 titles to something like Lost Planet at the moment. Next gen development costs are a headache. And Lost Planet, in particular, had an outrageous marketing budget. Nothing about it illustrates very much for the typical PS2 title.

...

Other than that, your point is just weird. Almost sounds like you're trying to say the PS2 having such a large installed base is bad or something.

[Velorath]

I don't think it's a good idea to compare PS2 titles to something like Lost Planet at the moment. Next gen development costs are a headache. And Lost Planet, in particular, had an outrageous marketing budget. Nothing about it illustrates very much for the typical PS2 title.

...

Other than that, your point is just weird. Almost sounds like you're trying to say the PS2 having such a large installed base is bad or something.

I'm saying having a large installed base doesn't automatically equal large software sales for individual titles, and thus makes schild's point that developers are better off just releasing games on the PS2 rather than the Wii, somewhat invalid.  A Wii version of Monster Hunter 2 might well sell as many copies as a PS2 version since Wii owners have such a small amount of games to choose from (hence the reason why a game like Wii Play has sold over a million copies in Japan alone and almost 2 million total worldwide).

[stray]

OK, that makes sense.

[EDIT]

God, I hate seeing those Wii Play numbers though.  Free controller -- That's cheating! 

[Azazel]

Yeah. I bought it too. On the basis of "effectively that second controller plus an extra $10 for some minigames).

[Kageru]

The PS2 is still a monster with a massive installed base and lots of people in little hurry to upgrade. However I suspect this is little joy to sony. They wanted to move both the users and the developers to the PS3 so they could compete with the 360 (they're not really competing with the wii) and it's just not happening fast enough.

[Margalis]

Last week the PS2 sold as much as the PS3 did!

[schild]

The PS2 sold more worldwide than pretty much every system last week. It's a monster, and it's not stopping. And the floodgates have been opened as well. Hell, SCEA even let SNK publish the Art of Fighting Anthology here. That never would've flown two years ago. I think we're about to see a flood of easily translated games hit the market.

I have no problem with that. King of Fighters XI please. I don't want to buy an Atomiswave for one game.

[Velorath]

Sure. Nothing I'm saying has to do with cutscenes necessarily. I'd rather get that vibe through playable/scriptable sequences, emergence, or whatever. It's still storytelling though -- and if you like that as I do, then we're in agreement.

Also, MGS has plenty of the same moments -- Otacon popping through the communications system, guiding you through something; the dialogue that's being said as you fight a boss; the general sneaking around shit (and all the eavesdropping and atmosphere that goes with it).

Getting back to this part of the conversation for a minute, part 3 of Jaffe's interview on gametrailers is up right now and he says a lot of the same things I've been thinking in regards to using games to tell stories.  In essence he says that he thinks using cutscenes to tell stories is the wrong way to go about it and developers need to start coming up with more interactive/gameplay ways to tell a story and to evoke certain emotions.

[Azazel]

The PS2 sold more worldwide than pretty much every system last week. It's a monster, and it's not stopping. And the floodgates have been opened as well. Hell, SCEA even let SNK publish the Art of Fighting Anthology here. That never would've flown two years ago. I think we're about to see a flood of easily translated games hit the market.

I have no problem with that. King of Fighters XI please. I don't want to buy an Atomiswave for one game.

This is a good thing. The PS2 is still my main console when I play console games. And yes, I do believe it's overtaken the SNES as "best console EVAR" for me.

[HaemishM]

On the Rails Shooter?  Fuck that shit.  Goddamn that's disappointing. 

FUCKCOCKCUNTCRAB

That is hugely disappointing, and a pretty token effort on Capcom's part. I'm not expecting another RE4 so quick, but it should be more interesting than Dead Aim for fuck's sake. Shit, at least let me use the Nunchuk to move.

Douchebags.

[Yegolev]

No doubt the PS2 has overtaken the SNES, Super Metroid and SMW can only hold so much ground.

[schild]

So, a lot of hubbub going around with the Shinji Mikami and Hideo Kojima teamup. A lot of folks are saying "hopefully for the Wii."

If two graphical monsters like Mikami and Kojima make a fucking Wii game, I will go fucking apeshit.

I just realized something. It's entirely possible that the Wii is going to ruin as many opportunities as it creates. Like NiGHTS, it's simply not powerful enough to make a proper sequel.

Goddamn fucking wiitards.

[Margalis]

Tell us how you really feel.

When I hear that Mikima and Kojima are teaming up my first though isn't "I can't wait for the graphics!"

[schild]

I've already thought about everything else over the last 2 days and am now onto the graphics.

It doesn't take long to think of a strict conservative highly-trained military type alone during a zombie infestation... and how awesome it would be.

[stray]

Graphics are definitely a part of their pedigree though.


I don't mind seeing something good on the Wii (especially something not made by Nintendo), but I do get Schild's point. I think Nintendo are shitty for what they did. If they get too successful, then they'll cockblock the entire way the production values of games progress over time -- until they themselves are good and ready. I don't really like that. I'm ready for an upgrade now (graphics-wise, as well as everything else). I'm able to have fun without any of that stuff, but I've already been playing consoles games like those that will be on the Wii for a good 7 or 8 years now. I don't care to wait much longer.

[edit]

We're not even close to where computer power can really take games, but I'd like to see a hint of it before I die. And I'm getting old as it is. Fuck you, Nintendo! Don't hold back my dreams.

Or should that be green?

[schild]

Hey, Stray, Raiden III comes out this week for the PS2. Also, Red Star, FINALLY.

/derail

I think we need a Useless Games discussion thread, like "What are you playing... NOW." type thing.

[Azazel]

No doubt the PS2 has overtaken the SNES, Super Metroid and SMW can only hold so much ground.

Especially for those of us who never gave a shit about either of those titles...

[Velorath]

I don't mind seeing something good on the Wii (especially something not made by Nintendo), but I do get Schild's point. I think Nintendo are shitty for what they did. If they get too successful, then they'll cockblock the entire way the production values of games progress over time -- until they themselves are good and ready.

The Wii isn't going to cockblock anything.  If anything, the cost of developing 360 and PS3 games is the only likely thing to cockblock the industry in the way you're saying.  It's already at the point where just about every game that isn't being developed or published by MS or Sony is going multiplatform in order to make back development costs, so we're at the point where only first party games and a handful of third party ones are actually going to take advantage of either systems' strengths.  The Wii didn't create the problem, Nintendo just capitalized on it by giving developers an alternative to developing games that need to sell a half million copies to make their money back.

[schild]

If the Wii ends up second in the marketplace, it will cockblock loads of shit. And once again, when you say "half million" you mean AAA titles. I hate how that number is thrown around so lightly. Most games are not AAA titles and really DON'T cost that much to make. If they did, Cavia couldn't have afforded to even put out Bullet Witch and there wouldn't already be a train simulator for the PS3 (Railfan, which actually looks kinda fun, go go region free).

[Velorath]

If the Wii ends up second in the marketplace, it will cockblock loads of shit. And once again, when you say "half million" you mean AAA titles. I hate how that number is thrown around so lightly. Most games are not AAA titles and really DON'T cost that much to make. If they did, Cavia couldn't have afforded to even put out Bullet Witch and there wouldn't already be a train simulator for the PS3 (Railfan, which actually looks kinda fun, go go region free).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the AAA titles the ones you and Stray mostly seem to be worried about getting cockblocked?  I mean it's not like you guys are afraid the Wii will keep games like Bullet Witch and train simulators from getting made and thus hold the industry back.

[schild]

Actually, anything could get cockblocked by the Wii. There's never really been this situation where - technologically - a vvastly inferior system had the ability to put a fucking wrench in the works. We're talking worst case scenario here, of course. But as long as people keep lying about the Wii being the best thing ever, the buzz will stay and bad shit will happen.

And it's not an opinion thing. I'm simply going by what's been announced. Honestly, if something amazing was announced for the Wii, I'd be right there. Money in hand. As it stands, I haven't even spent the time to hook it back up to OPEN and play Cooking Mama, there's just no reason.

[Velorath]

Actually, anything could get cockblocked by the Wii. There's never really been this situation where - technologically - a vvastly inferior system had the ability to put a fucking wrench in the works.

There's never been a situation where 2/3 of the console makers priced themselves right out of the casual market (or at least on the borderline in the case of the 360) either.  Nintendo is only able to do this because Sony decided to charge $600 for their new system despite the fact that most of their customers bought the PS2 for $179 or less.

[schild]

Can't sleep.

The PS3 price point, now that I've seen what's happening, is utter brilliance and I feel like an asshole for buying into it. Essentially, I paid for the development of the console rather than paying to be an early adopters.

Here's what's going to happen:
1. The PS2 will EVENTUALLY, MAYBE, ONE DAY, stop pushing 150,000-400,000 units a month worldwide.
2. The price of the PS3 will drop.

In that order. Basically, Sony is brilliant.

[stray]

Actually, anything could get cockblocked by the Wii. There's never really been this situation where - technologically - a vvastly inferior system had the ability to put a fucking wrench in the works.

There's never been a situation where 2/3 of the console makers priced themselves right out of the casual market (or at least on the borderline in the case of the 360) either.  Nintendo is only able to do this because Sony decided to charge $600 for their new system despite the fact that most of their customers bought the PS2 for $179 or less.

Most of them bought at $179? I was under the impression that people were gobbling up PS2's even when it wasn't far from it's launch price ($299).

As for expensive consoles, 3DO launched at $699. The Saturn was $399. Both shared the same generation. Others released around the same period (just for comparison): Playstation 1 ($299), Jaguar ($249), and the N64 ($199).


The first Atari was $249 in 1977 money (later dropped to $199 by the 80's). It's competitors, the Intellivision, the Magnavox Odyssey 2, and the Bally Arcade, were $299, $199, and $350, respectively. You could say that they were out of the reach of most people too, but yet, they somehow made their mark anyways (to put it lightly).

[HaemishM]

As for expensive consoles, 3DO launched at $699. The Saturn was $399. Both shared the same generation. Others released around the same period (just for comparison): Playstation 1 ($299), Jaguar ($249), and the N64 ($199).

Both Saturn and 3DO flopped HORRIFICALLY. You might as well mention the Neo-Geo and Turbo-Grafx for their generation, because they were both technoogically superior to what was going on at the time, but were more expensive and flopped. They were huge fucking miscalculations about what price people would pay for "better" tech.

The first Atari was $249 in 1977 money (later dropped to $199 by the 80's). It's competitors, the Intellivision, the Magnavox Odyssey 2, and the Bally Arcade, were $299, $199, and $350, respectively. You could say that they were out of the reach of most people too, but yet, they somehow made their mark anyways (to put it lightly).

Made their mark? Atari went on to release another console and a bunch of computers. Intellivision? DEAD but still remembered. The others? Didn't even make it out of that generation.

The console market from the beginning has had serious resistance to being gouged. The most expensive consoles, especially those which pass the $300 mark, haven't succeeded.

[Velorath]

There's never been a situation where 2/3 of the console makers priced themselves right out of the casual market (or at least on the borderline in the case of the 360) either.  Nintendo is only able to do this because Sony decided to charge $600 for their new system despite the fact that most of their customers bought the PS2 for $179 or less.

Most of them bought at $179? I was under the impression that people were gobbling up PS2's even when it wasn't far from it's launch price ($299).

The PS2 dropped $100 a little over a year and a half after it's U.S. launch and then another $20 a year later.  Out of the 115 million or so units that have been sold, only around 25-30 million of them were sold at launch price (which is really good when you look at current-gen sales, but then even launch price for the PS2 is half the price of a PS3).

[Margalis]

The market is speaking. Try listening.

This isn't a difficult concept. Consumers don't want to pay $600 for the same thing with higher res graphics and developers don't want to double their dev costs for the same thing with higher res graphics. Especially when 2/3rds of the people can't even take advantage of the higher res graphics.

Damn that Nintendo! And damn Neo-Geo before them! If only everyone had smartened up and paid $600 for the NG and $150 a game, then we'd all have been living the good life. Instead of crap like Super Metroid and Link the the Past we could have been playing Magician Lord 2 and Nam '76!

[schild]

The Neo-Geo was essentially consolized arcade system with built in supergun. $600 is a sweet deal for that if you want a straight arcade experience at home without buying a console.

Comparing the SNES and the NG is just crazy.

The Neo-Geo didn't flop btw. Considering they were still releasing AES titles until just a few years ago. It's one of the longest supported systems of all time (by the 1st party that is, the Dreamcast will probably beat it). Odds are SNK would still be supporting it if not for 3 things: 1. Install base of PS2, 2. The need to move higher-res and thus switching to Atomiswave a little while ago, and 3. Age. It was simply old.The cabs that went out with the system were old, the mainboards were old. Everything about it was old. Also, arcades in America - which had tons of Neo-Geo units, simply ceased to exist.

[Bokonon]

schild, you blow your point out of propotion, and I can't for the life of me understand why. Every console company toots it's horn and downplays possible deficiencies.

Are you really pissed that Nintendo didn't say, "You know what? We want to keep consoles relatively cheap, and that's going to preclude us keeping up in the graphics race, so we aren't going to invest a bunch of money in a whole new graphics system, but we've been doing R&D on different control systems for a while, and we have this pretty cool new scheme we're going to make standard." That's just SOP for any corporation. It's why some of the crazier statements were made by Sony folks when the perceived sticker shock of the PS3 caused folks to complain.

What graphics capabilities would the 360 or PS3 have if they had been priced at $250, assuming the relative margin profit/loss was kept (so if the $600 PS3 is a $50 loss, then about $20 buck loss at $250)?

BTW, I can't wait for GHIII on the Wii, since I won't have to keep around my PS2 version (I'll probably skip the rumored GH: 80s Edition that is supposed to come out this summer for the PS2 at this point).

What can I say about F13?  It's really my favorite website in the entire universe!  I love the irreverent banter and sly wit these keyboard jockeys produce.  And I especially love the staff, they're AWESOME.

[schild]

I'm not playing in What Ifs. I own all 3 system and knows all the pros and cons of each. Nintendo ripped me off The Most at this point. Just like the last 2 generations.

[Bokonon]

I'm not playing in What Ifs. I own all 3 system and knows all the pros and cons of each. Nintendo ripped me off The Most at this point. Just like the last 2 generations.

To each their own, I guess. The Wii has been fun so far. I've enjoyed the games, and the graphics are serviceable.

What can I say about F13?  It's really my favorite website in the entire universe!  I love the irreverent banter and sly wit these keyboard jockeys produce.  And I especially love the staff, they're AWESOME.

[schild]

If they only had killer graphics, but still charged $250, it would have been enough.
If they had a killer online service, but still charged $250, it would have been enough.
If they had a slew of third party games announced before release, and charged $250, it might have been enough.
If it had come with 4 controllers (just wiimotes, not even chucks), and they charged $250 (or $300 with 4 chucks also), it would have been enough.

Instead we have shitty graphics, with no online service, one controller and b-string third party games and they're still charging $250.

It's not fucking enough.