Reggie Says Developers Shifting To Wii

[soco]

GamesIndustry (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/) has an article (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=20946) about Reggie Fils-Aime's comments at the Montréal Games Summit. He talked about Nintendo changing the industry, and hilighted their success with the DS. He believes that the shift to the Wii style controls is as large as the step to 3D.

Perhaps the biggest point was that he claims developers are shifting their focus to the Wii.


"We've had a tremendous amount of third party support as we've prepared for the launch. The shift that's been reported in developer focus from those other consoles to Wii truly is happening," Fils-Aime told the audience.

[Kem0sabe]

I can truly see the Wii having the same impact in the home console market as the DS had on the portable market.

It would be very amusing to see Nintendo clean out the PS3 and the 360.

[OrangePulp]

Really, the former PR guy (what is he now, pres of nintendo america?) is saying good things about their system. How surprising. Not that I'm saying bad things about the console itself; I hope it does well, since I'm basically forced to buy one on account of SSB Brawl. But why do we really care what Fils-Aime says?

[Skytram]

I hope it's true, the Wii is the only next-gen system I'm purchasing until Halo 3 releases.

[Feltoar]

Really, the former PR guy (what is he now, pres of nintendo america?) is saying good things about their system. How surprising. Not that I'm saying bad things about the console itself; I hope it does well, since I'm basically forced to buy one on account of SSB Brawl. But why do we really care what Fils-Aime says?
Pfft, stupid question. Why do we care about what any figure head says? This is an industry site and we like to hear what people of importance have to say.

[Zeal]

This is the same shit they said with N64 and Gamecube. Exactly.

Actions speak louder than words.

[jonat3]

I'm expecting a major 3rd party dev reshuffle this time around. The last time, every 3rd party dev jumped ship from N64 towards the Playstation. The PS2 was a success, because it had the installbase lefover from that era.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that there will be once more a migration of 3rd party devs. The only question, is who willl benefit more, Nintendo or MS (needless to say Sony will be the loser)?

[Jenga]

Really, the former PR guy (what is he now, pres of nintendo america?) is saying good things about their system. How surprising. Not that I'm saying bad things about the console itself; I hope it does well, since I'm basically forced to buy one on account of SSB Brawl. But why do we really care what Fils-Aime says?
Of course. He's basically the main voice for Nintendo in America.

[GunnyMo]

Yeah, developers are going to shift development from a proven console (360) and an industry leader (Sony) to take huge risks on a new console with a radical new and untested (consumer-wise) control system. They're going to shift to a company that in the last generation came in a resounding third place in the console war (I'm not including the hand held market here). Uh huh.

Btw, that's not Nintendo bashing it's simple reality. I hope the Wii succeeds and I'll be buying one myself but Reggie is making statements he can't back up. Oh, wait, he's an exec. Nevermind. :rolleyes:

[The Great Gatsby]

Really, the former PR guy (what is he now, pres of nintendo america?) is saying good things about their system. How surprising. Not that I'm saying bad things about the console itself; I hope it does well, since I'm basically forced to buy one on account of SSB Brawl. But why do we really care what Fils-Aime says?

Because we don't care what you have to say. Because you're a nobody, whilst this guy is in the industry and has something remotely interesting to say on the matter of the Wii, regardless of who he works for.

[KingGorilla]

In other news, Wii to have 4 million by year's end, and Microsoft to prove that they can break the "everyone who wants one has one" barrier. The idea that you can be successful on a Nintendo console is one of the worst kept secrets out there. Sega does spectacularly in sales on Nintendo consoles, Capcom long has as well.

[RMan]

Yea, Nintendo is golden these days, making some great moves combined with some great timing. I’m not sure how much of this is just good fortune, but without a doubt Nintendo wouldn’t be doing so well if their approach wasn’t such a departure from the direction of Sony/MS. It’s always nice to see innovation so highly rewarded, regardless.

[jonat3]

Yeah, developers are going to shift development from a proven console (360) and an industry leader (Sony) to take huge risks on a new console with a radical new and untested (consumer-wise) control system. They're going to shift to a company that in the last generation came in a resounding third place in the console war (I'm not including the hand held market here). Uh huh.

Btw, that's not Nintendo bashing it's simple reality. I hope the Wii succeeds and I'll be buying one myself but Reggie is making statements he can't back up. Oh, wait, he's an exec. Nevermind. :rolleyes:

Come on, you seriously don't expect Sony to stay on top this gen? Never mind Nintendo's odds this time around, i can atleast say with confidence that Sony is in for a rough time.

[Jenga]

Yeah, developers are going to shift development from a proven console (360) and an industry leader (Sony) to take huge risks on a new console with a radical new and untested (consumer-wise) control system. They're going to shift to a company that in the last generation came in a resounding third place in the console war (I'm not including the hand held market here). Uh huh.

Btw, that's not Nintendo bashing it's simple reality. I hope the Wii succeeds and I'll be buying one myself but Reggie is making statements he can't back up. Oh, wait, he's an exec. Nevermind. :rolleyes:
And developers AREN'T taking risks developing games for two systems that are still considered too expensive for alot of casual gamers? Gears of War, Madden, MGS, Final Fantasy have no problems selling, but what about those new obscure titles? Devs are still supporting PS2 for a reason.

[GunnyMo]

I didn't say I expected Sony to come out on top this time. I said they are an "industry leader" which includes (no matter if you hate them or not) PS2 and PSX. I don't expect them to come out on top this time. I think Sony's success this time really depends on whether or not Nintendo can keep the "wow" factor going for their control scheme which, to be honest, is the only thing going for the Wii. Yes, the Virtual Console is great but that won't carry a system just like XB Live Marketplace games won't carry the 360. If Nintendo can keep that "wow" factor rolling for at least a couple years to pull ahead of Sony then they have a shot at regaining some past glory. Whatever we think of Sony's arrogance and price points we have to realize that they have a huge name brand recognition advantage over the other two systems.

I agree completely that Sony is in for a rough time but that doesn't mean third party developers are putting their money on the Nintendo as much as Reggie claims they are.

[GunnyMo]

And developers AREN'T taking risks developing games for two systems that are still considered too expensive for alot of casual gamers? Gears of War, Madden, MGS, Final Fantasy have no problems selling, but what about those new obscure titles? Devs are still supporting PS2 for a reason.

Actually, I'd say developers would see MS and Sony as proven industry leaders with the numbers to back it up. Nintendo's last gen showing, outside a few big titles, was lackluster and saw third parties abandoning it like rats leaving a burning building.

"alot" is "a lot" /end grammar nazi :p

[PopoWRX]

Heh, well at least one third party publisher has provided significant initial support(Ubisoft). Nintendo will stay in the discussion as one of the big game system makers with their stranglehold on the handheld market and the fact their consoles (Gamecube), while not getting a hold of " significant market share", still made money for them, unlike say, Microsoft. (Though I did spend plenty of money on the xbox, like around $1800 total I think)

[jonat3]

Have to agree on GC's lackluster performance. The wii is so different however, i'm not sure you can even compare them.

As for Nintendo, perhaps Reggie was exaggerating. But i think that they did start off far better than the GC. Judging from the launch line up and the media buzz, i do think that they have more 3rd party devs this time around, exaggeration or not.

[Phanto]

Well if that is true maybe we can see one day not so far away a Gran Theft Auto game for the Wii..?

[RMan]

Yeah, developers are going to shift development from a proven console (360) and an industry leader (Sony) to take huge risks on a new console with a radical new and untested (consumer-wise) control system.
Both have happened, pretty frequently, and I’m sure will happen again after the Wii.
They're going to shift to a company that in the last generation came in a resounding third place in the console war (I'm not including the hand held market here). Uh huh.
That’s because companies are smart enough to evaluate products on their merits rather than dismiss them because the company that made them has had recent blemishes on an otherwise spectacular track record. If you understood the economics and motivations behind what a game publisher/developer does then you could plainly see why many would gravitate towards the Wii.

Also, the man’s not saying they will migrate, he’s saying they have and are, and we’ve seen enough game announcements to support this. This ‘gamecube failed, so will this’ response may have had some legs a year ago when the control scheme wasn’t even announced, but given what we know now, I really don’t see how even the most fervent 360/PS3 superfan can doubt the system has great potential and question that developers would be attracted to it.

Arguably Nintendo’s assertion that consumers want innovative/intuitive controls is more proven than consumer’s willingness to throw down big money on high priced/high resolution systems and games. When the 360 is consistently outselling the DS you can come back and argue the point, but for now I don’t think term ‘proven’ should be applied to a pro 360/PS3 anti Wii argument.

[Chris_D]

It sees like the Wii will do very well, but there will still be a strong market for traditional console games which will be better suited to 360 or ps3. With nintendo aiming to grow the market (like they did with the ds) they don't necessarily have to rely on stealing marketshare from Sony. On the other hand, I assume most xbox1/360 gamers have come over from sony or pc platforms (or play both of course).

[OriginalJax]

I can believe that Nintendo will have no shortage of developers for the Wii. In terms of 'next-gen', it's the cheapest and easiest of platforms to develop on. While the big players will certainly have a good presence on all consoles, the same will not be true for smaller developers. It wouldn't surprise me to see a lot of these smaller developers working exclusively on the Wii, as the sheer costs involved (financial and in terms of resources) in developing for 360 and PS3 will be a nigh impenetrable barrier (well, excepting cases where publishers throw money and devkits at the little guys!).

OJax

[mister_slim]

Actually, I'd say developers would see MS and Sony as proven industry leaders with the numbers to back it up. Nintendo's last gen showing, outside a few big titles, was lackluster and saw third parties abandoning it like rats leaving a burning building.
Eh? There's less than a million units difference between the Xbox and the Gamecube. The GC's actually catching up a bit, believe it or not.

[Zeal]

Actually, I'd say developers would see MS and Sony as proven industry leaders with the numbers to back it up. Nintendo's last gen showing, outside a few big titles, was lackluster and saw third parties abandoning it like rats leaving a burning building.

It's amazing how things change.

[Megalith]

Wii is a failed gimmick. Unlike the DS, which could fall back on its success of essentially being a Game Boy, the Wii will just become Toycube 2, and everyone will bury it.

[Royal Fool]

It can be argued that the development process for a Wii title is shorter than for a 360/PS3 one. The costs are also lower, at least the initial entry fees. Nintendo is really trying to swoon developers and get them to try doing at least one experimental game for the Wii. They've been mildly successful so far.

[GunnyMo]

Both have happened, pretty frequently, and I’m sure will happen again after the Wii.

That’s because companies are smart enough to evaluate products on their merits rather than dismiss them because the company that made them has had recent blemishes on an otherwise spectacular track record. If you understood the economics and motivations behind what a game publisher/developer does then you could plainly see why many would gravitate towards the Wii.

Also, the man’s not saying they will migrate, he’s saying they have and are, and we’ve seen enough game announcements to support this. This ‘gamecube failed, so will this’ response may have had some legs a year ago when the control scheme wasn’t even announced, but given what we know now, I really don’t see how even the most fervent 360/PS3 superfan can doubt the system has great potential and question that developers would be attracted to it.

Arguably Nintendo’s assertion that consumers want innovative/intuitive controls is more proven than consumer’s willingness to throw down big money on high priced/high resolution systems and games. When the 360 is consistently outselling the DS you can come back and argue the point, but for now I don’t think term ‘proven’ should be applied to a pro 360/PS3 anti Wii argument.

I don't question that developers have an interest in the Wii. They should and do have great interest in it. I do, as well. I was merely questioning Reggie when he hints that developer focus is moving away from the other consoles. He suggests that developers see the Wii as a better platform and I disagree.

I guess I should have also mentioned that Nintendo has been trailing since the days of the 64 but figured that would be implied.

You had a good argument until you compared DS to 360 sales. That argument doesn't really work. Two different, non-competing markets.

Look, I know this is going to degenerate into fanboy ranting soon (not necessarily from you, RMan. I refer to the thread itself) so let me say this: I am looking forward to the Wii, I will buy one and I hope it is successful. I do, however, state that Nintendo is standing over a precipice: they are banking a lot that a mere control system will carry the Wii for the next five to seven years. That, to me, seems to be their only possible advantage over their competitors. You could argue the price as well but, as with the Cube, that didn't do much in the long run. I hope the fun factor carries them as I, like many, am a secret and quiet Nintendo fanboy. I don't want them to fail.

[GunnyMo]

Eh? There's less than a million units difference between the Xbox and the Gamecube. The GC's actually catching up a bit, believe it or not.

You realize how much a million actually is, right? :p Seriously though their recent gains could be attributed to the fact that MS has all but stopped support of the Xbox. I, myself, am looking at getting another Cube as many places are running sales (every now and then) with new systems at $79-$99. There are some great titles to pick up at that price.

[Zeal]

I predict that 360 and PS3 will have most major titles ported between them and stay in a dead heat. I also think the extra development time to port and downgrade these titles to run on Wii will force developers to stick with PS3/360.

I expect Nintendo to once again have a few successful, gimmicky titles and then for Wii to fade out, exactly like the Gamecube.

[jonat3]

I predict that 360 and PS3 will have most major titles ported between them and stay in a dead heat. I also think the extra development time to port and downgrade these titles to run on Wii will force developers to stick with PS3/360.

I expect Nintendo to once again have a few successful, gimmicky titles and then for Wii to fade out, exactly like the Gamecube.

Why, oh why am i not surprised? :rolleyes:

[Draft]

Eh? There's less than a million units difference between the Xbox and the Gamecube. The GC's actually catching up a bit, believe it or not.Yeah, and all Nintendo needed was MS to stop making Xbox's for a year.

This is just PR bullshit. We'll know how things really stand in one year.

[Harlan Hoyt]

Wii is a failed gimmick. Unlike the DS, which could fall back on its success of essentially being a Game Boy, the Wii will just become Toycube 2, and everyone will bury it.
I think you forgot the invisible sarcasm tag.

How can something that hasn't been released yet qualify as failed? Further, I can't think of a single great DS game that would have been possible on the GameBoy. Do you mean that it's essentially a GameBoy in the sense that it's portible? That it's fun? That there are a ton of great games for it at a reasonable price? You're right, that is quite a bit to fall back on.

As for this GameCube failed nonsense, I don't see how a console that sold a couple million less than the Xbox (both of which were so far behind the PS2 as to be in a dead heat -- 21 and 24 million respectively, compared to 111 million), had a ton of great games and was technologically a little gem (how many GameCubes did you have to buy?) can in anyway be called a failure.

The big complaint, and the only complaint that has any legitimacy as far as I can see, is that the GameCube didn't have much in the way of third party support, despite having some great third party games (Killer 7, Viewtiful Joe, RE4 -- and that's just Capcom). So is it the lack of multisystem ports? Well, I for one can live without three copies of Madden. At any rate, as Reggie pointed out, and as we can see just from the rush of announcements, that is a "problem" that Nintendo is on the road to correcting.

So, let's review. Fun new way to play, cheap hardware, established Nintendo track record for quality hardware, established Nintendo track record for quality games, established Nintendo track record for game innovation, and much broader third party support than the GameCube -- two weeks before it comes out. How, exactly, has the "ToyCube 2" already failed?

[thecrazyd]

Wii is a failed gimmick. Unlike the DS, which could fall back on its success of essentially being a Game Boy, the Wii will just become Toycube 2, and everyone will bury it.
I agree. It should be more like the Toystation 3, or the Toybox 360.

[Metal Jesus]

I agree that the Wii is going to play a big part in this console war. But after spending a full day with the stunning Gear of Wars, you just know that the Wii can't compete with that kind of presentation. The Wii has got a neat controller, but it doesn't have the X360 power for things like amazing next-gen graphics or AI.

[Zeal]

Insufficient third-party support is why Nintendo's last two systems can be regarded as failures. Sony absolutely killed Nintendo's ass with third-party games for PSX/PS2 and Microsoft did the same with Xbox.

I can guarantee Wii's fate will be the same unless it can secure ports.

This is just reality.

[jonat3]

Yes, xbox360 and the wii both have bright futures. It's the PS3 that's in trouble.

[jonat3]

Insufficient third-party support is why Nintendo's last two systems can be regarded as failures. Sony absolutely killed Nintendo's ass with third-party games for PSX/PS2 and Microsoft did the same with Xbox.

I can guarantee Wii's fate will be the same unless it can secure ports.

This is just reality.

Mostly agreed. Without software, the wii will be nothing. It must also be added that there will be more room for new IP on the wii than just ports. Even if 3rd party ports sell less on the wii than other consoles, if new IP performs well, the wii will still do good.

Needless to say, if ports sell as well on the wii as on the competition, their success for the rest of the 5 years is already assured.

[Heretic Machine]

If game development is as expensive as publishers (fear mongers) want us to think, then we're headed towards an industry focused on multiplatform titles that aren't just restricted to the usual licensed garbage and budget titles. We're going to see more stuff like GTA showing up on more than one console (GTA, for example, has already been announced as coming out in roughly the same time frame on both the PS3 and 360).

But, if Nintendo really wants to win, they're going to need to attract more mature titles. That is just a fact, a large portion of the gaming population won't play anything else. Don't give me that crap about them being a family-focused company either, they used to run a fucking love hotel, they shouldn't have a problem with a GTA-style shooter.

[Harlan Hoyt]

Insufficient third-party support is why Nintendo's last two systems can be regarded as failures. Sony absolutely killed Nintendo's ass with third-party games for PSX/PS2 and Microsoft did the same with Xbox.

I can guarantee Wii's fate will be the same unless it can secure ports.

This is just reality.
I really don't think a 3 million unit difference in a 154 million unit market constitutes Microsoft doing anything to Nintendo's ass. Both the GameCube and the Xbox did well in their own ways. Both were fine systems and both had great games. I really don't see how there's any way to say that the GameCube "failed" that doesn't include the Xbox. Because it didn't have ports?

Face it, with three viable systems on the market, it's no longer a 1 system per gamer dynamic. Ports aren't an issue.

I don't have a crystal ball and I can't tell the future, but I can tell you this: Nintendo has been releasing games that I love since 1985. I'm sure they will continue to do so well into the future. As long as Nintendo wants to put out little plastic boxes that let me play their incomperable line up of games, I'll be there. The GameCube was in no way a failure, the DS is doing great and I'm sure the Wii will do just fine. But the most important part is -- I'm going to get to play some great games.

[Skyelan]

Insufficient third-party support is why Nintendo's last two systems can be regarded as failures. Sony absolutely killed Nintendo's ass with third-party games for PSX/PS2 and Microsoft did the same with Xbox.

I can guarantee Wii's fate will be the same unless it can secure ports.

This is just reality.

Cute. Except you don't need third party PORTS, you need third party EXCLUSIVES. Do you think the PS2 succeeds because it's got ports? GC had an assload of ports, almost all it's third party games were ports. PS2 has hundreds of EXCLUSIVES. And look at that, there's proof, not ESTIMATION, that Wii is getting tons of it. But it's all okay, because if there's one thing that plays no role in declaring system 'winners' and 'losers', it's logic. So you're good. :D

[Royal Fool]

Wii is a failed gimmick. Unlike the DS, which could fall back on its success of essentially being a Game Boy, the Wii will just become Toycube 2, and everyone will bury it.
I guess everyone here has you on ignore. This would be a great reason for me to join that club.

[Camel]

I don't even view Nintendo as competing with Microsoft and Sony anymore. They just go do their own thing, come out with 4 or so amazing games a year that seem to take forever to release, make money hand over fist, rinse and repeat. The fact that they keep making money means they won't ever go away, at least that's the way I see it.

And Harlan...don't bother with Megalith. He's got some good taste in music, but the next time he comes back to defend one of his trolls will be the first. It's best to just ignore it. :D

[Zeal]

And Gamecube had a bunch of first-party exclusives and still failed, so what's your point. You need exclusives and major third-party support, especially now that most developers admit their next-generation games will end up on both 360/PS3.

My second point is that games ported from PS3/360 to Wii are going to be downgraded and look like ass. This is not good for Nintendo and the Wii's image.

Have you seen the latest Splinter Cell running on Wii. Embarassing.

[Sparky]

By the way,

Gamestop's and EB's in 30 select Westfield Malls will be getting over 10 times the number of units that a standard store will be getting at launch due to a marketing agreement between Nintendo/GS/Westfield. I'm talking 150 units extra per store. This is because Westfield will be hosting Wii demo areas in these malls until the end of January. The only two malls I know of off the top of my head are Chesterfield and West County Malls in St. Louis.

If you didn't get a reservation, this might be your only way to get one at launch due to the freakishly large numbers that these malls will stock at launch.

[Harlan Hoyt]

And Gamecube had a bunch of first-party exclusives and still failed, so what's your point.
My point is that the GameCube didn't fail. I don't see any real way you can say it did.

Also, question marks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_mark) -- get to know them. It makes your writing look really strange and affectless. It's a jarring reading experience.

And Harlan...don't bother with Megalith. He's got some good taste in music, but the next time he comes back to defend one of his trolls will be the first. It's best to just ignore it. Good to know. Thanks for the head's up.

[RMan]

I was merely questioning Reggie when he hints that developer focus is moving away from the other consoles. He suggests that developers see the Wii as a better platform and I disagree.
Well, I think it’s true, and will be for many developers/publishers. Clearly from a technical point of view, if you were just developing code and art assets, working with the 360 would likely be the best platform, and from a power perspective the 360/PS3 seem great, but those are a small part of the overall picture.

Note how many big publishers are complaining about the problems with high end graphics, and who is defending high end graphics. Those championing it are those who’s business plan depends on it, first party console developers or super huge developers that have the artistic resources in place and have that as their strength. Big developers, and generally few of them, are the only ones that can make a high production value game and make them successful (and most of them are working for the console makers). They are the ones that are big enough to attract the microphones, so have been the voice of the industry, but not necessarily the voice of what most developers or publishers really wanted. Now that the Wii is apparently a viable option, publishers and developers have a choice, they have another option rather than buying into the war of attrition that is being played out between MS and Sony.

Now companies like EA can bitch about what they surely haven’t been thrilled about for some time. Previously complaints about how hard game development is from the biggest game developer in the world would fall on deaf or insulted ears, but now that an option exists they can say “this route sucks, which is why we’re focusing on this…”. I really think a great deal of other developers and publishers are thinking the same thing.

Honestly, I think for the majority of publishers, the Wii is a superior platform.
You had a good argument until you compared DS to 360 sales. That argument doesn't really work. Two different, non-competing markets.
I just don’t buy that “it’s two different markets, so motivations and precedent are irrelevant”. I understand they’re different, but the things that interest the players are largely the same. I don’t think players happily enjoy their DS then suddenly changes into someone who squints and gasps when he can make out a pixel just because the game’s displayed on a TV. TV and Movies are much more different, IMO, than consoles and handhelds, but TV producers don’t dismiss every fundamental thing they’ve learned about what entices viewers just because some elements of the delivery are different. While nothing the DS has achieved is ‘proof’ of how the Wii will perform, it’s at least as good an indicator as anything else, and far from irrelevant.

[Zeal]

Uh, what. DS is a handheld toy and 360 is a console. How are they are not two seperate markets, considering even Nintendo regards them that way.

[Camel]

All Nintendo needs to do is maintain the good happy nostalgia vibes by putting the Nintendo name on products and releasing high quality first party games like Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc. If they do that, they will make money, just like always. People who like the Nintendo brand will find tons of stuff to love, and so will plenty of other gamers. It won't attract most of the "hardcore" crowd, at least not the ones who only plan on getting one system. And really...who cares? Nintendo probably won't get the exclusive third party support this generation to make them #1 (and if they aren't #1, then I guess you could say they "fail"), and while they might be concerned about that, I doubt anyone who buys their system will, myself included.

I don't see them ever being the console king again. If I'm wrong it won't be the first time.

[Royal Fool]

And Gamecube had a bunch of first-party exclusives and still failed, so what's your point. You need exclusives and major third-party support, especially now that most developers admit their next-generation games will end up on both 360/PS3.

My second point is that games ported from PS3/360 to Wii are going to be downgraded and look like ass. This is not good for Nintendo and the Wii's image.

Have you seen the latest Splinter Cell running on Wii. Embarassing.
Meh, Double Agent on the Wii isn't a good example, it's ported from the PS2/GC versions. If it was built from the ground up for the Wii (Or downgraded from PS3/360 assets) it'd look tons better. The Wii is perfectly capable of displaying quite decent graphics. After all, the hardware is like an Xbox 1.5.

[martinj88]

Whats good about the Wii is that Devs can't just "port" games over.......they have set up teams to work just for a Wii version of a game like they did for madden.

So you could get the same game for the Wii and 360/PS3 but it would be a completely different game.

[Draft]

Uh, what. DS is a handheld toy and 360 is a console. How are they are not two seperate markets, considering even Nintendo regards them that way.The funny thing about Nintendo is that in the console space, they aren't "competing" with Sony and MS. They are doing their own thing. But handhelds? You can't read a news story on the DS without seeing it's utter domination of the PSP brought up.

Nintendo: Not Competing Unless We're Winning.

[RMan]

It won't attract most of the "hardcore" crowd, at least not the ones who only plan on getting one system.
Yea, this is one area where I think Nintendo’s plan has worked out really well. I just don’t think very many hardcore gamers will fall into that category. I don’t know of many hardcore gamers from this generation that own only a PS2/Xbox/GC, and they offered largely the same experience. I just don’t see most of the people I know that I’d call hardcore gamers passing up the Wii (partly because I’d smack them around :)), unless something dreadful is being hidden from us, it’s just too cool for most real gamers to pass up. They may bitch about it on message boards, may say that they would kill their dog for it to have the graphics of a 360/PS3, but they’ll still buy it, and many of the exclusives that hit the system.

[Camel]

So you could get the same game for the Wii and 360/PS3 but it would be a completely different game.
More than likely though, developers just won't bother.

But...I think that the Wii will be a lot like the DS in some respects. Not ALL of the games take advantage of the touch screen, and plenty just add some half-assed touch screen support that probably should have been left out anyways. I think ports for the Wii will work the same way...does anyone who plays Madden really want to use Wiimote controls to do so? Probably not, but they'll be in the game anyways. I don't even see the point of ports on the Wii (unless they really do something neat with the controls), but maybe I'm just being pessimistic here. If the games don't take advantage of the new control scheme, or do so in a stupidly superficial way, and were costing more than last gen games I would say that's a problem, but since they cost the same the whole issue of ports gets a big "whatever" from me.

[Lutheran]

I predict that 360 and PS3 will have most major titles ported between them and stay in a dead heat. I also think the extra development time to port and downgrade these titles to run on Wii will force developers to stick with PS3/360.

I expect Nintendo to once again have a few successful, gimmicky titles and then for Wii to fade out, exactly like the Gamecube.


But will Halo 3 suck about the same or worse then Halo 2?

[Johan]

Marketing spin...the proof of this will be holiday '07 and into '08.

And I'm still not sold on the idea of the controller. Naturally, it will depend a bunch on implementation in the games, but I'm not a believer...yet.

[Camel]

But will Halo 3 suck about the same or worse the Halo 2?
Halo 3 has nowhere to go but up!!!

[Lutheran]

I was at my local Gamestop before picking up Gears of War , and there was about 15 people surrounding the Nintendo Wii stand watching some 11 year old girl playing Excite truck..she was kicking all sorts of azzz on that game within 10 minutes of fooling with the controller for the first time..I played the game too , found it mildly amusing as thats not my type of game but the controls were a lot of fun and the graphics were just fine...the Wii doesn't just have the controller going for it , its going to have good games and the VC is big too. Don't underestimate it , the live marketplace is one of the only reasons I still own my 360. Now I have GoW and will also get Call of Duty 3 but after that not much interests me from what I can see that they have coming down the pike in the next few months.

[CapnBob]

Uh, what. DS is a handheld toy and 360 is a console. How are they are not two seperate markets, considering even Nintendo regards them that way.

Weren't you moving to Mars? How's that coming along?

[VenomUSMC]

What do "most gamers" want these days? Awesome graphics. Most people don't research anything. They see a game that has awesome graphics, here the name a lot and then buy it.

If you understood the economics and motivations behind what a game publisher/developer does then you could plainly see why many would gravitate towards the Wii.

They understand that their last system was lackluster compared to the PS 2 and 360 as far as sales.
People that are into economics usually don't invest too much into things that didn't do well last time around.

This ‘gamecube failed, so will this’ response may have had some legs a year ago when the control scheme wasn’t even announced, but given what we know now, I really don’t see how even the most fervent 360/PS3 superfan can doubt the system has great potential and question that developers would be attracted to it.
Probably because it's pure "potential". You know potentially I Wii could have the greatest games known to man, so could the 360, or the PS 3 or anything.
A lot of people like something called a "track record". You know... proven stuff.

Arguably Nintendo’s assertion that consumers want innovative/intuitive controls is more proven than consumer’s willingness to throw down big money on high priced/high resolution systems and games.
That proves they want better graphics... if they were so interested in a new controller why did anyone buy a 360 when the Wii was announced or even the PS 3's controller?

When the 360 is consistently outselling the DS you can come back and argue the point
Different market....
From someone giving an economics lecture, you should realize this.



for now I don’t think term ‘proven’ should be applied to a pro 360/PS3 anti Wii argument.

The Sony brand has proven sales, the 360 has a proven installed base. The Wii is potential. Many will just see it's lackluster graphics compared to the new systems out there and also view it's controls as a gimmick.

[Zeal]

Finally, someone who drops some simple fucking logic and common sense.

[Chris_D]

But will Halo 3 suck about the same or worse then Halo 2?

Dunno what crack you're smoking, but halo 2 sold more copies than 1 and a lot of people seem to love it. I know the multi is a big factor, but despite the naff single player ending, the actual length of the game was not that different from 1.

[Zeal]

I'm going to shoot the next person who mentions Halo 2 in the fucking head.

[MasterEvilAce]

I really, REALLY don't see how the DS was as spectacular as everyone from Nintendo continues to say....

[see colon]

I really, REALLY don't see how the DS was as spectacular as everyone from Nintendo continues to say....
that's because you aren't collecting the dividends.

HALO 2

[tiremfej]

I won't buy a Wii, and I'm pround of it! Maybe, maybe for my eleven year old niece, but certainly not for me!

[Johan]

I'm going to shoot the next person who mentions Halo 2 in the fucking head.

You just mentioned it...does that count?

I don't hear any gunshots yet....;) ;)

[FreezaSama]

I'm going to shoot the next person who mentions Halo 2 in the fucking head.

Halo.........3? ;)

Dunno what crack you're smoking, but halo 2 sold more copies than 1 and a lot of people seem to love it. I know the multi is a big factor, but despite the naff single player ending, the actual length of the game was not that different from 1.

I thought the Arbiter bits in Halo 2 kind of ruined parts of the experience. I understand what Bungie tried, but it subtracts from Master Chiefs part of the story and ruins the feeling of being immersed in the story. On that front, I thought the original game was much better.

[Johan]

...the Arbiter bits in Halo 2 kind of ruined parts of the experience.

Hmmmm...'Arbiter bits.' Hmmmm...;)

[Xenkylm]

They understand that their last system was lackluster compared to the PS 2 and 360 as far as sales.
People that are into economics usually don't invest too much into things that didn't do well last time around.


People who are into economics care about the one thing you completely fail to mention anywhere in your post: profit margins. You think any investor out there gives a crap whether the system runs at 4ghz or runs 1080i? They look at how much it costs to produce a game, and how many copies they can sell. As of last year, PSP games cost $800k to develop, and DS games cost $300k to develop. Did graphics win? Or did profit margins win?

Investors couldn't care less about you, or how pretty your game is. They want to make money, and given that Wii-development uses a similar process to GameCube development (which was the cheapest of last cycle), the Wii won't have to sell as many units to make those investors happy.

The big three are here to stay, this generation. Expect a lot of people we don't know to make a lot of money off of the Wii (and the Ps3 and the 360), and expect a lot of that money to come from your wallet, or my wallet.

***edit***

The Xbox sold more units than the Gamecube, sure, but development costs for the Gamecube were less than 50% in comparison. Even at half the units sold, the Gamecube would be raking in comparable profits. If one was a failure, both were a failure. The PS2 was nuts in comparison, and the dev costs were about the same as the Gamecube, so go figure.

[bean19]

It seems like 75% of the games coming out for the Wii are ports of current-gen titles, so I don't know that reality is actually backing up Reggie's remarks here. . . maybe the shift is too recent for us to see the results though.

Don't get me wrong. I am hoping the Wii is awesome and I want to play sick games on it. It's just that RIGHT NOW, I don't see enough upcoming games for the system to know if Reggie is talking out of his ass or not.

It seems like the smart thing to do from a developer standpoint. The Wii is by far the most affordable console and price is a big part of what sells systems. There are tons of parents who simply see even the $300-$400 cost of the 360 as insanely expensive, and the PS3 won't be tolerably priced for these buyers for about 3 years. I'm betting that the Wii install base will be right up there with the 360 near Xmas 2007, so it might make a lot of sense to developers to make something with low development costs for 2007 until the 360 and the PS3 have a larger install base. . . especially if they can release it on the PS2 and the Wii.

The only problem with this is that I don't really care if the Wii gets a bunch of movie-based titles or budget-software. I'm more interested in exclusive AAA titles or games that take advantage of the new control scheme like Trauma Center and Cooking Mama.

[Hellstorm]

Are developers and publisher moving away from the PSP to the DS? You bet.
Are developers and publishers moving away from the 360 and PS3 to the Wii? You bet

In the end it's the company that sells the most units. Right now 360 is limping along. The PS3 can barely make a presence in the market. But there will be 4 million Wii's SOLD come the end of December.

Nintendo is back! And they're printing money!

[Siraris]

Yeah, developers are going to shift development from a proven console (360) and an industry leader (Sony) to take huge risks on a new console with a radical new and untested (consumer-wise) control system. They're going to shift to a company that in the last generation came in a resounding third place in the console war (I'm not including the hand held market here). Uh huh.

Btw, that's not Nintendo bashing it's simple reality. I hope the Wii succeeds and I'll be buying one myself but Reggie is making statements he can't back up. Oh, wait, he's an exec. Nevermind. :rolleyes:

I want to agree with you here, and I had a whole post written out, but I changed my mind. I think if Nintendo can get itself a killer party game, it could sell HUGE. I think it all depends on market visibility. If people see other people playing the Wii, it's likely that they will say "Ooo that's new, let me take a look". That could lead them to buying the Wii for a game or two. That's fine by Nintendo as they make money off every console they sell. I don't think they're going to push the numbers software-wise that Sony and MS will, but it's possible they could move a lot of hardware if it gets the proper exposure.

I just wonder how many people will be interested in buying a Wii who are in the older crowd, or the non-gamer crowd. Throngs? I don't know. People could see it, say "Oh that's cool" and not buy it. They could just go over to play at friends houses. I personally don't know anyone who is not already a big gamer who owns a DS or a GBA, so I don't know what the casual people are buying it for.

Nintendo has always ruled the handheld market, and no one has really come up to pose a strong threat. PSP easily could have dethroned Nintendo based on the Sony brand name alone and the hype, but there have been no games whatsoever to make the system stand out. If we look at what is selling the DS, it's all Nintendo games, and it's all the same franchises (note: Time and time again I've said that most people who buy a DS are buying it solely for either Brain Age, Nintendogs or New Mario):

# Brain Age: Train Your Brain in Minutes a Day (8.51 million) [108]
# Nintendogs (8.42 million) [109]
# New Super Mario Bros. (6.76 million) [110]
# Animal Crossing: Wild World (5.23 million) [111]
# Mario Kart DS (5.18 million) [112]
# Super Mario 64 DS (3.88 million) [113]
# Dr. Kawashima’s Brain Training 2 (3.50 million) [114]
# Pokémon Diamond and Pearl (3 million) [115]
# Big Brain Academy (2.01 million) [116]

If we look at the GBA, which has sold like nobody's business:

# Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire (14.74 million) [57]
# Pokémon FireRed and LeafGreen (9.12 million) [58]
# Pokémon Emerald (5.60 million) [59]
# Mario Kart: Super Circuit (5.11 million) [60]
# Super Mario Advance 2: Super Mario World (4.89 million) [61]
# Super Mario Advance (4.68 million) [62]
# Super Mario Advance 4 (4.50 million) [63]
# Namco Museum (2.80 million) [64]
# Disney's Finding Nemo (2.55 million) [65]
# The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past/Four Swords (2.50 million) [66]

It's the same stuff selling, so it goes to say that the same people are buying. Pokemon, Pokemon, Pokemon, Mario, Mario, and throw in some Brain Age and Animal Crossing.

I show this because Nintendo is doing what Nintendo does, and that's sell to it's devoted fans, with a couple new games with the DS. The thing is that Nintendo is totally unproven in the console market since the SNES. People could very easily associate Nintendo with on the go, Sony and Microsoft at home, and Nintendo could not be able to break that barrier. It all comes down to timing, advertising, and getting killers apps that bring people in.

Regardless, it all comes down to what sells along with those Wii's. I think that at launch it's going to be however many Wii units sold all attached with Zelda, and then a few other titles spattered in there. If that's the case, third parties are going to go "Um, no?". As time goes on, if the Wii is only really selling first party titles, it doesn't matter how many third party developers support it, especially if they go the route of Ubisoft and shower it with shitty ports.

[RMan]

So much nonsense in a post, I just have to respond to the fun ones.
People that are into economics usually don't invest too much into things that didn't do well last time around.
Know too many people that used Windows 1.0, what about 2.0? Guess that makes Windows 3.0 just a dumb investment, right? Yea, just assuming a company is only as capable as it’s last failure, ignoring all successes may seem like a smart move to you. Let’s all hope you don’t somehow stumble into a publishing job.
A lot of people like something called a "track record". You know... proven stuff.
Which track record is this? The completely dominant NES, SNES, GB, GBA, DS, with the N64 and Gamecube as merely profitable. Or are you only interested in the track record of a company that funneled 4 billion dollars at a machine so it could do slightly better than Nintendo’s biggest failure? This, somehow, should inspire significant faith in MS that would have them ignore the Wii’s potential? And that’s if we wanted to entertain the idea that track record was somehow “proof” of a future product’s success as you suggest.
That proves they want better graphics... if they were so interested in a new controller why did anyone buy a 360 when the Wii was announced or even the PS 3's controller?
People buy tacos, that must mean they don’t like pizza, right? What kind of idiocy are you talking about, people buy stuff. I just bought BF2142 even though I’d rather have bought QW:ET, but guess what, I don’t get that option.
Different market....
From someone giving an economics lecture, you should realize this.
Same color…
Figured I’d throw out something relatively inconsequential that by itself proves my point only to a super fan grasping for any validation of what they blindly believe. I know it’s a different market, never said it wasn’t, the PS3 is a different system than the PS2, doesn’t mean we ignore the relevant similarities because one aspect is different.
The Sony brand has proven sales, the 360 has a proven installed base.
Whatever, dude. Sony brand does indeed have a proven record, but the 360 has a ‘proven’ installed base? That’s absurd, I’m not saying it’s tanking or doing bad, but proven? It’s getting the same boost the Dreamcast got in it’s day, and for pretty similar reasons. Although I’m quite sure MS will do a much better job than Sega all around, the ONLY thing the 360 has proven about itself right now is that it launched a year earlier than it’s competition. It hasn’t shattered expectations or blown publishers skirts up, there’s no way many of them are going to look at the potential of the Wii, the success of the DS, and get excited about the 360’s install base enough to spend several times more money developing for it instead.
The Wii is potential. Many will just see it's lackluster graphics compared to the new systems out there and also view it's controls as a gimmick.
Good luck with that. You should take a look at game sales charts some time, the all-time greatest sellers cover a broad range, and it’s quite clear that top notch graphics are not required for success. Of course, that’s if you are interested in a track record that doesn’t guarantee the Wii’s failure, which I’m not sure you are (especially since all-time game sales charts will be flooded with Nintendo titles).

[Skyelan]

For the last goddamn time. Graphics. Aren't. The. Selling. Point.

I want goddamn PROOF from everyone who makes this idiotic claim. Madden doesn't have the best graphics. Many games with AMAZING graphics go ignored. PS2 was the worst powered, PS1 was the worst powered, NES was the worst powered, DS was the worst powered. SNES/Genesis admittably neither smeared the competition, but if graphics dominated, it wouldn't be nearly tied, SNES would've beaten the shit out of the Genesis.

It's not true. It's never been true. It never WILL be true. Graphics don't sell systems, and they don't sell games. Anyone who still spouts such shit with such OVERWHELMING evidence otherwise is an idiot.

[Nimos]

So many negative predictions, it seems that most people here in EvilAvatar already consider Wii... dead, and it's not even out yet !!! I am gonna file this thread and 10 months after Wii's launch i will create a new thread with all your "Wii future predictions" posted in here. That should be interesting.

[Achilles]

"We've had a tremendous amount of third party support as we've prepared for the launch. The shift that's been reported in developer focus from those other consoles to Wii truly is happening," Fils-Aime told the audience.If "those other consoles" is referring to PSP and DS, than he may be correct. A lot of the developers that were having a hard time competing in the console business, or couldn’t compete at all, are turning to the Wii as their choice for this upcoming generation. At least until they can score a hit and afford to develop for the 360 or PS3.

[Exodus]

You guys should be all fucking ashamed yourselves.

It's about the fucking games, not about the consoles. It's not about graphics, it's not about some new fucking controller. It's about what games come out, and what fun you can have in them, what "compelling" gameplay they can offer.

Like someone said before. If the wii gets the killer apps it needs, it will succeed. The same can be said for any other console. Gears of war, if MS does it right, it will be the cash cow brother to their halo fan base, you know that every halo kid bought that bloody game just to keep themselves happy till halo 3.

It's about games, exclusives, killer apps. Say it with me now.

[Zeal]

I always enjoy reading these pseudo-philosophical debates on the essence of gaming.

"Is it the graphics?"
"Is it the gameplay?"
"Is it the console?"

They never end with a definitive answer, and are subsequently repeated until the end of the internet itself.

[jhunter46]

At the end of the day, when the CFOs and CPAs look at the bottom of their Earning Statements there is going to be a very large number printed in black ink. Failure indeed.

[bean19]

Are developers and publisher moving away from the PSP to the DS? You bet.
Are developers and publishers moving away from the 360 and PS3 to the Wii? You bet

In the end it's the company that sells the most units. Right now 360 is limping along. The PS3 can barely make a presence in the market. But there will be 4 million Wii's SOLD come the end of December.

Nintendo is back! And they're printing money!

Coming out a year early has it's advantages dude, and you an see that in the game lineup for the 360. There are 6 million 360's sold and they expect to ship and possibly sell 10 million units throughout the Xmas season. . . so it isn't "limping along".

The Wii probably will sell really well and will have an EQUAL install base to the 360 by Xmas 2007, so there may in fact be some shifting to the Wii and the 360 for games expected to come out next year and through early 2008. It really remains to be seen where third-party developers will go in 2008. I expect Sony will sell a ton of units next Xmas when they have hopefully done a price-drop and MGS comes out.

[HardScores]

Actually, many developers have stated they are more excited about working on Wii games than any other system because they love innovation as much as we do. They were in a small box when it came to consoles of the last generation - there were only so many buttons and plausible combinations of button presses to execute an action. With the Wii, you can do almost anything you want. They don't like being blamed for the lack of innovation - can you imagine if Gears of War was tuned to the Wii, all of the extras they could have possibly added in to do away with all of these complaints that it's "just another shooter?" You could swing a controller to use the chainsaw bayonet or throw grenades, etc. I think that's why so many developers want to work with the Wii.

[see colon]

It's the same stuff selling, so it goes to say that the same people are buying. Pokemon, Pokemon, Pokemon, Mario, Mario, and throw in some Brain Age and Animal Crossing.
umm... have you looked at top selling games on other platforms? rockstar hasn't been churning out GTAs or anything. EA hasn't been churning out sport titles. activision hasn't been churning out tony hawk's. sure nintendo keeps it's franchises around. they make money, and give nintendo the freedom to do new things. nintendo has at least 2 new solid franchises a generation. you're already complaining about brain age like it's the same old stuff, and that nintendo is just making games for it's "devoted fans". brain age didn't sell 8 million copies just to people who were "devoted nintendo fans" before they owned the game.

[Karmakin]

It's kinda funny, we all lose sight about what we're talking about when we mention the console war, or why there's even a war in the first place.

We want all the best exclusives and the best ports to come to our system of choice. That is what it is all about.

In reality, it's going to be a relative tie when it comes to installed base for the next generation of games. So all three systems are going to get a good number of games, including exclusivies for their system. The question will be, will the PS3 or the 360 get a game that shows off the massive power of the system beyond what we have now? Will the Wii get some games that basically master the new control scheme?

It'll be decided during the next holiday season, not this one. The PS3 will have MGS4 and DMC4 I think (No Final Fantasy game is done this soon. Expect XIII in 2008 at the earliest. I don't think it'll come out until 2009). 360 has Halo 3, Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey. Truth be told, I'm not sure of any Wii projects that are that long term, but the Wii has a great spring line-up, which is rather unconventional. Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, SSBB, and the new Sonic game.

I think all three systems will be good. But I DO think that if one defines victory in the console war by the PS2 library, my money IS on the Wii. (Literally. I'll be buying one launch day), because of the aggressive launch line-up and production numbers. (I also happen to think that the Wii is the next iPod, the next tech gadget to hit the mainstream "gotta-have it" status, but that's a different story)

[Lutheran]

Dunno what crack you're smoking, but halo 2 sold more copies than 1 and a lot of people seem to love it. I know the multi is a big factor, but despite the naff single player ending, the actual length of the game was not that different from 1.


Please , Halo 2 sucked to high heaven..JMHO and A LOT of other peoples too..Doom 3 sold tons of copies , does that make it a great game?

[Lutheran]

Good luck with that. You should take a look at game sales charts some time, the all-time greatest sellers cover a broad range, and it’s quite clear that top notch graphics are not required for success. Of course, that’s if you are interested in a track record that doesn’t guarantee the Wii’s failure, which I’m not sure you are (especially since all-time game sales charts will be flooded with Nintendo titles).

QFT , besides RE4 was probably better looking then any game ever made for the PS2 and most of the XBOX games and we all know that the Wii is more powerful then any of the previous generation of consoles. I am not worried about graphics at all , I just want fun games. The Wii is perfectly capable of displaying nice graphics..not XBOX 360 nice or PS3 nice but that didn't seem to hurt the PS2 much..its the games that matter , nothing else.

[Voodoo]

I'm always perplexed by these arguements. See, I'm a PC gamer and I look and the three consoles and say to myself that if I really wanted to I could own all three for the relative price of a medium to high end gaming PC. Isn't the point about the fun to be had while gaming? The Wii will cost, what, $275 or something? That like a video card, big deal. If there is a few games out for the Wii that seem bad assed with their "gimmic" controller, I think it is worth the sticker price. What I'm saying is if you take the cost of the X360 + PS3 + Wii it will be less or equal to the amount of money I see many of you putting into a gaming PC. Why do you feel compelled to have them compete?

[fargo]

in the end it is all about the games... Everyone is Wii loving these days, but they are just as profit driven and evil as Sony and Microsoft...

[TheBrainKills]

... Why do you feel compelled to have them compete?
I just find it funny that Zeal and other Nintendo haters predict the death of the Wii and Nintendo, yet there is no rational explaination for this. I wonder what ever happened to Player1.

I predict that the Wii will sell twice as many units as the 360 and the PS3, and yet still be considered a failure to Zeal.

[Chameleo]

I always enjoy reading these pseudo-philosophical debates on the essence of gaming.

"Is it the graphics?"
"Is it the gameplay?"
"Is it the console?"

They never end with a definitive answer, and are subsequently repeated until the end of the internet itself.

you said once to another halo fanboy that he realised what halo was *really* about. it was about *fun*.


well wrap your mind around this one:

thats what the Wii is about too.

[Hellstorm]

See, I'm a PC gamer

Last of a dying breed. The concept of a PC gamer is becoming more and more obsolite as PC game software sales continue to crash.

Outside of a few FPS companies and well, Blizzard. You're choices and product are getting thinner and thinner.

[Voodoo]

Last of a dying breed. The concept of a PC gamer is becoming more and more obsolite as PC game software sales continue to crash.

Outside of a few FPS companies and well, Blizzard. You're choices and product are getting thinner and thinner.
Your opinion did little else than make me yawn. This has been said since consoles come to the market in the Atari 2600 days. You missed entirely the point of my post as such don't seem to open to discussion. I will most likely remain a PC gamer until I see that there are games on the console I would like to play more or they stop creating games for the PC that I continue to enjoy. So far neither has happened... I will NOT stop playing PC games because some doppelgänger on the net decides to tell me I am the last of a dying breed.

[williambraski]

Yeah, developers are going to shift development from a proven console (360) and an industry leader (Sony) to take huge risks on a new console with a radical new and untested (consumer-wise) control system. They're going to shift to a company that in the last generation came in a resounding third place in the console war (I'm not including the hand held market here). Uh huh.

Btw, that's not Nintendo bashing it's simple reality. I hope the Wii succeeds and I'll be buying one myself but Reggie is making statements he can't back up. Oh, wait, he's an exec. Nevermind. :rolleyes:

corporations don't always make a decision based upon past numbers but also future projections. looking at what the DS has done for casual gaming and sales, you could make a case that third parties would want to be at least putting some eggs in that basket to hedge their bets.

better to have something in the pipe than having no ammo at all when the guns start blazing.

[TheFlyingOrc]

Good, Voodoo, that would be a foolish thign to do.

However, there is a severe problem with genre variety on the PC. Sim, MMO, FPS, Strategy. They are shoehorning their userbase into a smaller and smaller box.

[bean19]

Outside of a few FPS companies and well, Blizzard. You're choices and product are getting thinner and thinner.

1. Microsoft is spending a lot of time and money trying to foster the PC game market with Vista and by creating tools that allow easy transition to the 360.

2. MMORPGs are still incredibly lucrative business models and while these are cost prohibitive to create and maintain, the market is continuing to grow. While I believe consoles will eventually take over a portion of this market, we have yet to see any excellent console MMOs - yet. A MMORPG that gets subscription fees can be lucrative even with just an install base of about 100K. Those that do better than this are making mad cash. :)

3. Some game genres remain on the PC or are played more on the PC because the mouse/keyboard environment is much better at playing them. The PC will always enjoy RTS games and the best FPS titles. While I enjoy Gears of War, and I know that my PC could never run it as beautifully as my 360, I know that it pales in comparison to playing Counter-Strike or UT2K4.

4. You are wrong about PC sales sinking. Overall, the PC games market continues to grow and sales increase. WoW and other MMORPGs have cut into overall sales quantity but have increased actual sales dollars immensely.

[Voodoo]

Good, Voodoo, that would be a foolish thign to do.

However, there is a severe problem with genre variety on the PC. Sim, MMO, FPS, Strategy. They are shoehorning their userbase into a smaller and smaller box.
This is exactly correct. This is one of the two problems I have with PC Gaming in particular. The other is the strange need for developers to always push the hardware envelope. It is a very nieve way to develop and as a result you loose a vast amount of customers. NWN 2 is an excellent example of an engine that has a great deal of overhead that just isn't necessary on the platform. Many people that loved NWN 1 are now faced with the choice of upgraded/replacing their PC to play or not play at all. Not a good marketing decision. If only more developers worked like Valve and Blizzard to create a product that has a huge installation base instead of one that acts to alienate. If PC Gaming ever does fall completely off the map where EB Games employees will laugh at you trying to find the non existant PC Games rack, the blame will be solely on the developers that fit the description described herein.

BTW, another notion about there not being enough genres. If you remember, there was a time from about 1995 to 2002 where quite a few mixed and unique genre games came out for the PC. Unfortunately the market didn't react to well and their sales were very low. What is a company which creates a product supposed to do in this case? They can't continue to make product for an select audience who's dollars aren't enough to support their endeavors. Its an interaction that is seen in many markets, not just the PC Gaming market. I feel that this is exactly the reason why PC Gaming has an exact selection of genres now.

[KingGorilla]

Originally Posted by Hellstorm
Last of a dying breed. The concept of a PC gamer is becoming more and more obsolite as PC game software sales continue to crash.

Outside of a few FPS companies and well, Blizzard. You're choices and product are getting thinner and thinner.

You had better tell NvIdia and AMD-ATI this, they are recording record profits.

[bean19]

BTW, another notion about there not being enough genres. If you remember, there was a time from about 1995 to 2002 where quite a few mixed and unique genre games came out for the PC. Unfortunately the market didn't react to well and their sales were very low. What is a company which creates a product supposed to do in this case? They can't continue to make product for an select audience who's dollars aren't enough to support their endeavors. Its an interaction that is seen in many markets, not just the PC Gaming market. I feel that this is exactly the reason why PC Gaming has an exact selection of genres now.

Nostalgia's great, but it's also deceptive. There are two PC genres that have dimmed a bit while others have grown: adventure/puzzle games and space-sims. You can still find both genres well represented - though Nancy Drew mysteries are not Myst and I personally find the new space sims to be almost impossibly hard to get into. However, there never were that many titles coming out for the PC. The number of titles has grown TREMENDOUSLY and the variety of games has really not fallen off much if you really look back at the titles.

What's happening is that the other videogame markets are getting huge, and while the PC game market is growing (especially with MMO profits), the results feel overshadowed by console success. Look at the list of PC games out over the last 5 years and you will see as much variety in the games as you saw from 1995-2000 if you count them by quantity of games (i.e. there are as many adventure and space-sim titles in the last five years TOTAL as there were between 1995-2000). However, you'll see a MUCH larger total number of titles in the last 5 years and a many more standout hits (just that most of them will be MMOs, RTS, simulations, or FPS).

The PC market has grown. Just not as fast as the console market. However, the potential for profit (as well as the costs and potential for loss) is highest for MMORPGs right now. So in this area, PCs are actually excelling past console competitors.

[mister_slim]

You realize how much a million actually is, right? :p Seriously though their recent gains could be attributed to the fact that MS has all but stopped support of the Xbox. I, myself, am looking at getting another Cube as many places are running sales (every now and then) with new systems at $79-$99. There are some great titles to pick up at that price.
About a 4% difference in install bases? If that was a definitive difference, the 400% (closing on 500%) advantage the PS2 had would have meant no third-party games for GC or Xbox period. The Xbox/GC install base differences pale in comparison to the market demographics, as Sega and Ubisoft can tell you.

[TheBrainKills]

You had better tell NvIdia and AMD-ATI this, they are recording record profits.Doh! you do realize that these company's supply the chips for the consoles .... yup... Doh!

[Oskin]

at the Montréal Games Summit

And by that you man the Arcadia festival? (because the Arcadia festival started today... Never heard of the Montréal Games Summit before) I'm not sure if i'll go yet since I will have a Wii next friday... (oups I mean Sunday ;) haha the joy of working in a computer store) Anybody from Montreal who are planning on going?

[Exodus]

Games have suffered because they were made to go hand in hand in to match the in terms of architecture it had to work with.

Deus ex 2 being a prime example.

[Hellstorm]

You had better tell NvIdia and AMD-ATI this, they are recording record profits.

Yes, of which a large part comes from royalties made from Nintendo, MS, and Sony. But let's ignore that for a moment. Instead let me throw out that Nvidia and ATI have very little to do with the downward spiral of PC gaming.

They are hardware, and much like consoles, software pushes the sales of hardware and not the other way around. WoW is a good example of artistic style over hardware demands. Blizzard is a smart company. They aren't chasing after having the best engine that needs the most cutting edge tech to run their games. No, they make engines that run on the bulk of computers already out there. They are trying to make sure that just about anyone with a PC doesn't have to do anymore out side of buying WoW, installing, downloading, upgrading, and playing. They are aiming at more than just the dwindling hardcore PC gamer.

You see, while Nintendo and other consoles are now beginning to court casual gamers, the casual gamers have always been on the PC. Just the PC game market is ruled by a handful of genre that aren't exactly casual friendly. But therein lies the problem, the PC isn't expanding outside those genres, while consoles, and even handhelds are. Is there any reason why there isn't a PC equivalent to Nintendogs, or Brain Training? Because no PC developer has the balls to do games like those. They rather make another FPS that you have to upgrade your PC for, because for the most part, that is what PC gamers buy. Why is that?

PC game developers have to stop with the let's make a game that you have to upgrade your PC to play and start thinking, let's make a game that 90% of current PCs can run and that isn't an FPS.

That is why PC game sales are falling. As far as MS goes, we will see what is a higher priority to them, gaming for windows or gaming for the 360. I get the feeling windows will lose out in that battle.

It also isn't developers, but publishers as well. Steam is a great alternative to having to go through a publisher that wants everything you make to be on a console. I am glad steam exists and Valve is willing to stock games from small companies there. I dare say there is more variety on Steam then the PC section of EB... do they still have those?

[see colon]

Yes, of which a large part comes from royalties made from Nintendo, MS, and Sony. But let's ignore that for a moment. Instead let me throw out that Nvidia and ATI have very little to do with the downward spiral of PC gaming.

They are hardware, and much like consoles, software pushes the sales of hardware and not the other way around. WoW is a good example of artistic style over hardware demands. Blizzard is a smart company. They aren't chasing after having the best engine that needs the most cutting edge tech to run their games. No, they make engines that run on the bulk of computers already out there. They are trying to make sure that just about anyone with a PC doesn't have to do anymore out side of buying WoW, installing, downloading, upgrading, and playing. They are aiming at more than just the dwindling hardcore PC gamer.

You see, while Nintendo and other consoles are now beginning to court casual gamers, the casual gamers have always been on the PC. Just the PC game market is ruled by a handful of genre that aren't exactly casual friendly. But therein lies the problem, the PC isn't expanding outside those genres, while consoles, and even handhelds are. Is there any reason why there isn't a PC equivalent to Nintendogs, or Brain Training? Because no PC developer has the balls to do games like those. They rather make another FPS that you have to upgrade your PC for, because for the most part, that is what PC gamers buy. Why is that?

PC game developers have to stop with the let's make a game that you have to upgrade your PC to play and start thinking, let's make a game that 90% of current PCs can run and that isn't an FPS.

That is why PC game sales are falling. As far as MS goes, we will see what is a higher priority to them, gaming for windows or gaming for the 360. I get the feeling windows will lose out in that battle.

It also isn't developers, but publishers as well. Steam is a great alternative to having to go through a publisher that wants everything you make to be on a console. I am glad steam exists and Valve is willing to stock games from small companies there. I dare say there is more variety on Steam then the PC section of EB... do they still have those?
just a couple of points. the best selling PC games are generaly named The Sims. they generaly have lower system requirements, appeal to casual gamers, and aren't a FPS. and the declining PC market is somewhat of a myth. it's true retail sales have fallen in recent years, there is no concrete sales data for online sales and digital distribution. even you mentioned the success valve has had with steam.

[Exodus]

And soon Spore, and that game is going to be a fucking BEAST.

[bitwise]

Halo 3 has nowhere to go but up!!!

Don't. Jinx it.