Nintendo Claims Bubble Hasn't Burst for Wii
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
Super Mario Galaxy: 8.84 millionHopeless Bastard said:
Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess: 4.52 million*
Super Paper Mario: 2.28 million*
New Super Mario Bros. Wii: 14.7 million
Mario Kart Wii: 22.5 million
Mario Party 8: 7.6 million
Mario Galaxy 2: 1.29 million ALREADY
We seem to have different views of what is mass-developer-suicide worthy "utter failures"... Sure, the casual titles are outselling some of these (especially the ones that are, y'know, packaged with the console). But clearly these are good enoug for Nintendo to continue making them, since Mario Galaxy got the first direct console sequel Mario has seen since the golden age and there's already a new Zelda in development.
*Numbers are from March 2008...a little dated.
Edit: Also, I need to correct something from my earlier post. There are two wii ____ titles that I forgot: Wii Fit Plus and Wii Play.
I sold my 'hardcore' systems because I had had enough of the genital sword fighting that predominated any discussion in those communities. It really pissed me off, something chronic, and it was like every second person I came across was some whiney teenager with anger issues and an ego the size of a small country.
When I finally bought a Wii, it was 'just to pull out on a rainy day' (poor choice of verb there), but then, I bought Metroid Prime Trilogy .. then SMG, then Zelda, then Project Zero, and Muramasa and so on. There is something magical that Nintendo can attract, and it fosters it in every 2nd and 1st party title. Any regret from my sale earlier dissapated the moment I first stepped foot into Samus's boots with the Wiimote.
You can't get those experiences on the other systems. The graphics and sound fidelity are there, and so are the online features. The angry gruff 'maturity' is certainly there, but so often the HEART AND SOUL is deficit. I really liked Gears of War and those zany steroid pumped closet ... er heros. I really enojoyed Halo. I had a great time with Drake and his daring feats. BUT, I feel madly in love (again) with so many games and characters on Wii.
That is priceless. If success in this industry is measured in sports games, Middle East based shooters (what I call 'propaganda peices'), and so on, that's fine. That's great! I loved those games and I miss the RPGS, such as ME and ME2, but they weren't enough because the online focus really alienated me, and I have been gaming for over 25 years. Robust single player (outside of an RPG genre) should not be a happy bonus.
So, despite Wii having far too much shovelware (and anyway, didn't the Playstation and Ps2 have TONNES AND TONNES of lackluster crap! And before that so did the SNES and NES and the Megadrive and MAster System, etc), it has so much gold as well, and it's priceless. I hope Nintendo can hold on to this good thing!
When I finally bought a Wii, it was 'just to pull out on a rainy day' (poor choice of verb there), but then, I bought Metroid Prime Trilogy .. then SMG, then Zelda, then Project Zero, and Muramasa and so on. There is something magical that Nintendo can attract, and it fosters it in every 2nd and 1st party title. Any regret from my sale earlier dissapated the moment I first stepped foot into Samus's boots with the Wiimote.
You can't get those experiences on the other systems. The graphics and sound fidelity are there, and so are the online features. The angry gruff 'maturity' is certainly there, but so often the HEART AND SOUL is deficit. I really liked Gears of War and those zany steroid pumped closet ... er heros. I really enojoyed Halo. I had a great time with Drake and his daring feats. BUT, I feel madly in love (again) with so many games and characters on Wii.
That is priceless. If success in this industry is measured in sports games, Middle East based shooters (what I call 'propaganda peices'), and so on, that's fine. That's great! I loved those games and I miss the RPGS, such as ME and ME2, but they weren't enough because the online focus really alienated me, and I have been gaming for over 25 years. Robust single player (outside of an RPG genre) should not be a happy bonus.
So, despite Wii having far too much shovelware (and anyway, didn't the Playstation and Ps2 have TONNES AND TONNES of lackluster crap! And before that so did the SNES and NES and the Megadrive and MAster System, etc), it has so much gold as well, and it's priceless. I hope Nintendo can hold on to this good thing!
And how many successful years is it going to take before cynics will stop using the words 'gimmick', 'trend' and 'bubble' for the Wii? All of those things denote fleeting success and thatis not what is proven with the Wii. It's here to stay - until the next system.Canid117 said:
I think you might not understand what it is to be a 'nongamer'. They won't 'graduate' to the Ps3 and Xbox 360 in any kind of drove. They weren't interested before, and they most likely aren't now. The ones who WILL graduate are the people (kids) that got Wiis as 'first systems'. However the families that bought Wiis as family systems and/or the equivelent of board games for the livingroom, are NOT going to see Ps3 and Xbox 360 as 'better'.danpascooch said:
The 'hardcore' are just going to have to accept that the market for gaming has expanded and it will stay that way. Consumers like that don't buy things because they 'Playstation' or 'Xbox', or even 'Ninetendo'. They buy something because it has something that they need. Move and Natal will do a lot to attract them, but it doesn't change the fact that the two respective systems are miles ahead of Wii in terms of complexity. That is not what these 'non gamers' want.
Just look at it like the sections in your Blockbuster or Tower Records. The pop section doesn't cancel out the rock section, and Britney doesn't stop System of a Down or even Cannibal Corpse from making albums.
Reading through this first wall got me airing out yet another opinion on the matter.
I have to say I'm siding more with the predictions of wii's end of days than placing my infinite trust with the console. You may throw in sales numbers on both consoles and the "core games" and you can even add the casual multigames that are selling great, but Wii isn't exactly something I would consider as a way to reach gamers.
I don't mean to say that games on Wii are bad; instead the core games are actually very good. But those core games are made by how many developers, exactly? Leaning to the list that had the numbers of copies sold, these are all nintendo franchises. If you exclude nintendo titles such as mario, metroid, zelda and wii whatever (sports, fit, etc), how far has wii actually gone? How exactly is this helping the gaming industry to develop any further? How much would YOU bet on wii if you were making an exclusive game (considering you weren't only after an easy buck and scraping up a motion dependant multisports game)? I wouldn't put my money on a dead horse, I know that much.
Nintendo is, granted, making hell of a money out of Wii and certain titles, but it's only a great forum of sales for nintendo and retailers. Every publisher and developer is escaping the sinking ship because there just isn't money there. No matter how many consoles you sell to casual gamers, IF they become core gamers they will look for other options than Wii in the long run.
Personally I lost my interest in Wii (still own it, saving it til my daughter is old enough to get something out of it) after a few rounds of casual wii sports games, a quick try of horrible Metroid 3, disappointment in Zelda TP and 20 hours something on Mario Galaxy. That one I still like.
The point I'm trying to make here is, the games that sell on Wii, would sell pretty much same numbers on any other console as well. Now that Wii has hooked the casual gamers, there might be a bigger audience for those titles than on others, but every nintendo fanboy would have still bought whatever console Nintendo said they were making their games from now on. And Twilight Princess was ten times better on GameCube and I'd choose classic controller over wiimote on EVERY title on wii if it only were possible.
It's a toy. And it's a shame good titles are wasted on a toy when they could be so much more.
I have to say I'm siding more with the predictions of wii's end of days than placing my infinite trust with the console. You may throw in sales numbers on both consoles and the "core games" and you can even add the casual multigames that are selling great, but Wii isn't exactly something I would consider as a way to reach gamers.
I don't mean to say that games on Wii are bad; instead the core games are actually very good. But those core games are made by how many developers, exactly? Leaning to the list that had the numbers of copies sold, these are all nintendo franchises. If you exclude nintendo titles such as mario, metroid, zelda and wii whatever (sports, fit, etc), how far has wii actually gone? How exactly is this helping the gaming industry to develop any further? How much would YOU bet on wii if you were making an exclusive game (considering you weren't only after an easy buck and scraping up a motion dependant multisports game)? I wouldn't put my money on a dead horse, I know that much.
Nintendo is, granted, making hell of a money out of Wii and certain titles, but it's only a great forum of sales for nintendo and retailers. Every publisher and developer is escaping the sinking ship because there just isn't money there. No matter how many consoles you sell to casual gamers, IF they become core gamers they will look for other options than Wii in the long run.
Personally I lost my interest in Wii (still own it, saving it til my daughter is old enough to get something out of it) after a few rounds of casual wii sports games, a quick try of horrible Metroid 3, disappointment in Zelda TP and 20 hours something on Mario Galaxy. That one I still like.
The point I'm trying to make here is, the games that sell on Wii, would sell pretty much same numbers on any other console as well. Now that Wii has hooked the casual gamers, there might be a bigger audience for those titles than on others, but every nintendo fanboy would have still bought whatever console Nintendo said they were making their games from now on. And Twilight Princess was ten times better on GameCube and I'd choose classic controller over wiimote on EVERY title on wii if it only were possible.
It's a toy. And it's a shame good titles are wasted on a toy when they could be so much more.
I'm not sure why people think Nintendo has somehow given up on its old group of gamers. I'm playing Super Mario Galaxy 2 right now and its just as good as any of my old Super Nintendo Mario games. The Wii may have a lot of junk on it, but the core Nintendo games are still of excellent quality.
Playing the Wii is like smoking a cigarette a week, you're much more likely to eventually go full out and smoke more than that (Going to PS3/360) or you're going to decide that you need to stop smoking cigarettes, possibly because of cost, health issues, or time (stopping the Wii)UberNoodle said:
But at that state of one foot in one foot out, it's unlikely a large number of people will settle there.
Games have to start changing in ways that isn't just "moar polygons, higher definitions." Even if (and this is a big, big IF) motion control is a dead end, I point to the success of the DS and the iPhone as examples of how alternate control schemes are succeeding.Hopeless Bastard said:
And attach rate means absolutely nothing to publishers. If a game sells 3 million copies, a publisher will be happy whether that's a 30% attach rate or a 3% attach rate. If it sells 50,000 copies, it will be a failure whether it's an 80% attach rate or a .08% attach rate. The failure of much third party Wii software is purely numerical - they didn't move enough copies. It has absolutely nothing to do with attach rate.
But I guarantee you that a failure on the Wii is less of a setback compared to a failure on the infinitely more expensive PS3 or 360.
I've been a Wii owner for 4 years and I have yet to say the Xbox or PS3 is the better system. Hell, I hate those systems. The Wii has all the great games that I like while the Xbox 360 has crapdanpascooch said:
I don't even know where the cords and controllers to my Wii (that I bought at launch) are anymore, It had a few good launch titles, but after that, it was all crap like "Carnival Games"Aura Guardian said:
Those core games you listed were great, too bad almost all of them came out near launch. (Guitar hero III is not one I would have on that list however)John Funk said:Tell that to Sony and Microsoft.Hopeless Bastard said:You're misunderstanding whats happened with the wii.starwarsgeek said:Pointing out that they sold 20m units is equally as credible as "it didn't sell, but we learned our lesson. Success!!!!"?
I'm pretty sure selling roughly the amount of your competition's combined consoles while expanding gaming to a larger audience counts as a "bubble", not a fad.
Also, we've got two Mario games only a few months apart, a Metroid that should come out soon, and a Zelda and possibly Kirby in the works. And they had already made Super Paper Mario, Twilight Princess, Mario Galaxy, Mario Kart, Smash Bros, and a Mario Party, compared to what: 4 wii _____ titles? (Sports, Sports Resort, Fit, and Music?). They've been making games for both their long-running fanbase and the newcomers.
The small handful of 'core' titles you listed were utter failures if you go by copies sold to consoles sold. They actually sold fewer copies than most wii shovelware titles. If a game experienced a similar percentage on the ps3 or 360, developers would be jumping through windows.
Wiisports and wiifit are still, to this day, the most successful "games" on the platform, and there is simply nothing left down that road. Once you start talking about "attachments" and such (wii motion plus) the average person's eyes glaze over.
The wii was always a dead end, it was just a dead end paved with platinum bricks. The fad is ending, and nintendo has to either go back to making video games or figure out a way to transition into a toy company.
And I'm sorry, once you get beyond the Wii Sports/Play/Fit, you have... Mario Kart Wii, NSMB Wii, Super Mario Galaxy, Super Smash Bros, Animal Crossing, Twilight Princess, Guitar Hero III, RE4, Metroid Prime 3... the list goes on. Are these not core games? Seem pretty goddamn core to me.
News flash: If a copy sells 2 million units, a developer is happy no matter what the attach rate is. Especially since development costs on the Wii are lower. Red Steel sold a million - more than enough to break even.
If Nintendo could keep making games like that consistently and effectively, It'd be great, but I feel like I rented my Wii, because all the good games dried up in less than 6 months and it became a paperweight.
Sure, some decent ones are still being made, but too few, too far apart for me to use my Wii anymore.
Nintendo made had a great thing for the Wii, for about 3 months, then they apparently decided it wasn't too important anymore.
This bothers me, the idea of these low budget low risk ventures.John Funk said:
What it sounds like to me is that they are putting a bunch of low budget crappy games out there thinking: "well, we only need to sell a little bit to break even, so when people buy them out of curiosity, we'll probably see a good return on our tiny investment" instead of taking a risk, and occasionally making amazing innovative games that help advance the industry and are truly entertaining.
Where would the game industry be if all the systems operated like that? Surviving off of third party "quantity over quality" shovel-ware.
However, high budget-high risk titles can hold back innovation in the other extreme: developers scared to try anything different because it might not sell well and they would lose money. (ie. Resident Evil 5's big focus...looking like a Hollywood movie)
Wait what, really?danpascooch said:
You have it backwards: Game developers - and more importantly, the publishers who fund projects - are more likely to take risks if they don't have to win big to succeed. When publishers are shelling out $20m+ for a title, they need a return on investment. Which means that they're more likely to green-light a sequel, or something known and established, than they are to give the thumbs up to something experimental and risky.
The games industry needs to ENCOURAGE lower/middle-budget games that have the freedom to take risks. That's why WiiWare/XBLA/PSN are seeing a lot of cool new titles, because they're relatively inexpensive to make and that means publishers are more comfortable giving the thumbs-up to an idea that might not be a guaranteed hit.
True, but when a publisher shells out 20+M on a game, it often shows the kind of 20+M game quality that you pretty much don't find at all on the Wii (outside of launch and near launch titles (I don't count multi-console games as Wii titles, I don't credit them to any of the consoles, or use them to say "this console has good games").John Funk said:
There's a reason companies spend 20+M on a game, that's because that 20+M allows them to make a better game, you need a healthy mix, and the Wii is way too far tipped toward the low budget side.