Support NeoGAF

[Deku]

The expectations need to be managed. S-E has come out and pretty much said Wii will be one of the platforms they will develop for. There is substantial 3rd party support on a global level.

If you like to game on Nintendo platform then accept Nintendo will have >50% of the software market and some third parties will not like it and go elsewhere. The discussion here is the same one we have every week, except some people keep raising the bar.

There's no lack of 3rd party software in Japan, they just aren't platform defining and are shovelware and it's not the 3rd party's fault they didn't see this coming.

 

[Pureauthor]

I'm not saying they're 'one-shot' in that they're working on MGS4 and nothing else. I'm saying that MGS is their biggest franchise by an order of magnitude, and they really don't have much failsafes if anything untoward happens with it.

For a comparison, look at RE5. It's also taking a tonne of time and manpower, to the extent where we can't even be certain of a 2008 release, yet Capcom can still stay on top of things with excellent games like Devil May Cry 4 coming very soon. Konami really can't boast the same thing.

 

[Deku]

Konami puts out a lot of games and they have put out quite a few on the Wii. The fact that none are catching fire has less to do with Nintendo and more to do with Konami putting the cart before the horse. There isn't a single platform defining title on their list, yet they flood the platform with gap fillers that would normally sell to the same audience.

Rushing products to the market may have something to do with this, but as already noted, having an exploding budget for MGS4 and most of your teams tied up on the DS and the HD platforms doesn't help. There's no lack of 3rd party software in Japan, they just aren't platform defining and are shovelware. Most people didn't see this market coming. Specifically they didn't expect the PS3 to bomb and struggle for do long.


The expectations need to be managed. S-E has come out and pretty much said Wii will be one of the platforms they will develop for. There is substantial 3rd party support on a global level.

If you like to game on Nintendo platform then accept Nintendo will have >50% of the software market and some third parties will not like it and go elsewhere. The discussion here is the same one we have every week, except some people keep raising the bar.

 

[donny2112]

I'm saying that MGS is their biggest franchise by an order of magnitude, and they really don't have much failsafes if anything untoward happens with it.

In Japan, their biggest franchise last generation was Winning Eleven. WE6-10 all sold better than MGS2 or MGS3.

 

[Pureauthor]

In Japan, their biggest franchise last generation was Winning Eleven. WE6-10 all sold better than MGS2 or MGS3.

I was, uh, kinda speaking in worldwide terms. I already stated that MGS is not a big seller in Japan.

 

[manueldelalas]

I was, uh, kinda speaking in worldwide terms. I already stated that MGS is not a big seller in Japan.

I believe W-E is a much bigger franchise than MGS everywhere except in the US because they don't like football.

 

[Pureauthor]

I believe W-E is a much bigger franchise than MGS everywhere except in the US because they don't like football.

Is that so? I wasn't aware of that.

So, could anyone tell me who beats who worldwide, and by how much exactly?

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

Seriously: I don't understand why there's an argument that Nintendo shouldn't have to do this when both of their competitors in the console space do so now and have done so in the past. Sony and Microsoft are both being aggressive in wooing third parties right now. I don't think there's some special onus on Nintendo to do this or anything; I think it's a normal part of videogame competition and they should be keeping up.

As I said before, the incentive for third parties to perform on the system is Sales. Sony didn't throw a huge moneyhat party to get console developers to the PS1; they released an economically viable platform for development with good RoI and cheap manufacturing and it paid off. Nintendo does the same thing, and now they have to throw money at people?

Third parties can have their cake one of two ways; with advertised, funded, properly developed and marketed Wii titles that reach the larger Wii install base, or advertised, funded, properly developed and marketed titles that appeal to the smaller 360 and PS3 bases. Nintendo has given third parties all the incentive necessary.

Moneyhats are a part of the industry, and using them sparingly can benefit everyone. But we can't point at Nintendo and say "these titles bombing on the Wii is YOUR fault." That's complete tripe.

 

[ksamedi]

W-E (PES) is HUGE in Europe. I don't know if it is more popular then MGS though but it probably is.

 

[donny2112]

I was, uh, kinda speaking in worldwide terms. I already stated that MGS is not a big seller in Japan.

Ah. I missed that you had shifted from Japan-focused to worldwide. As for your other question, I don't know which sells more on a game-by-game basis, but considering WE is an annual release and MGS is years between games, WE would most likely be the larger money-maker.

 

[Jokeropia]

At least in Japan I think the situation is quite clear. The software buying market has chosen Nintendo's platforms in a big way. (What was it, like 70-75% of all software sales 2007 were on Wii and DS? It should be even more in 2008 as the PS2 fades.) Now IMO it's up to publishers to appeal to this market, not up to Nintendo push the market towards the games other publishers release. It wasn't Nintendo who decided that 75% of all software sales should be on their platforms (or that 50% of all software sales should be of their own games), the market did. Wii is selling both hardware and software faster than the PS2 did so it's not like the market has disappeared, it has just altered it's preferences a bit.

I think once a userbase grows enough though it will able to support pretty much all kinds of games.

However, other companies have been shown to profit on the handheld and console front - most notably Capcom (which may not be a fair comparison, since I believe that they're the overall best Japanese developer by a decent margin). I don't think Capcom's pocketbook is going to be hurting anytime soon.

Capcom is also notable in the sense that they've been quite successful on Wii. (With core games even!)

 

[Pureauthor]

Ah. I missed that you had shifted from Japan-focused to worldwide. As for your other question, I don't know which sells more on a game-by-game basis, but considering WE is an annual release and MGS is years between games, WE would most likely be the larger money-maker.

Hm. Maybe I didn't make myself clear back when typing all that up, but I was always thinking of it from a 'worldwide' market view. If you'll read my Namco or SE section, it should be rather easy to spot.

 

[ksamedi]

At least in Japan I think the situation is quite clear. The software buying market has chosen Nintendo's platforms in a big way. (What was it, like 70-75% of all software sales 2007 were on Wii and DS? It should be even more in 2008 as the PS2 fades.) Now IMO it's up to publishers to appeal to this market, not up to Nintendo push the market towards the games other publishers release. It wasn't Nintendo who decided that 75% of all software sales should be on their platforms (or that 50% of all software sales should be of their own games), the market did. Wii is selling both hardware and software faster than the PS2 did so it's not like the market has disappeared, it has just altered it's preferences a bit.

I think once a userbase grows enough though it will able to support pretty much all kinds of games.
Capcom is also notable in the sense that they've been quite successful on Wii. (With core games even!)

exactly.

 

[Spiegel]

W-E (PES) is HUGE in Europe. I don't know if it is more popular then MGS though but it probably is.

PES 6 sold aprox. 6 million in Europe and 8.5 worldwide
PES 5 sold 7 worldwide

Source (spanish)

 

[RJT]

W-E (PES) is HUGE in Europe. I don't know if it is more popular then MGS though but it probably is.

I think PES is several times more popular than MGS in Europe. It has become Europe's Madden in the last years. I think most people bought a PS2 for PES only.

btw, PES Wii looks insanely great. If it delivers gameplay and sales-wise the Wii's success in Europe is guaranteed.

 

[donny2112]

Maybe I didn't make myself clear back when typing all that up, but I was always thinking of it from a 'worldwide' market view. If you'll read my Namco or SE section, it should be rather easy to spot.

I thought you were segueing when you brought up the U.S. points in Namco and Square-Enix. I totally missed that in the Konami section, though.

 

[ksamedi]

PES 6 sold aprox. 6 million in Europe and 8.5 worldwide
PES 5 sold 7 worldwide

Source (spanish)

Those are some amazing numbers. This confirms that PES is bigger than MGS or anything in Europe actually.

btw, PES Wii looks insanely great. If it delivers gameplay and sales-wise the Wii's success in Europe is guaranteed.

I wonder how this one will do in Japan. I think its kind of important for the franchise.

 

[birdchili]

apologies for off-rails post.

does anyone have year on year overall japanese software sales comparisons between 2006 and 2007? i have a memory of reading somewhere that they were *way* up (like 20-some percent?), but i can't find the numbers/reference now and am considering the possibility that sales-age-madness may be setting in.

 

[ksamedi]

apologies for off-rails post.

does anyone have year on year overall japanese software sales comparisons between 2006 and 2007? i have a memory of reading somewhere that they were *way* up (like 20-some percent?), but i can't find the numbers/reference now and am considering the possibility that sales-age-madness may be setting in.

I think its down from last year but higher than 2 years ago. Its been an upward trend with the popularity of the DS though.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Yawn...and you guys are objective?
Give me a break!

Er... Yes. Yes they are.

 

[Pureauthor]

Er... Yes. Yes they are.

Um, I don't think it's humanly possible to be objective.

But the numbers are!

 

[Stumpokapow]

But the numbers are!

Only if you believe in statistics. Did you hear that NO sales tracker actually tracks every store? I know this one guy, a real underground rebel-type, is running his own independent numbers service. He doesn't need statistics or your institutionalized math. He's the real truth!

 

[Kurosaki Ichigo]

PureAuthor, Namco will be okay thanks to Bandai. Yeah, I know it sounds bad. But Bandai must be one of the most consistent publishers imo, has a really wide portfolio of franchises, spreads its developments on multiple consoles, develops quite a good amount of software on a regular basis and without taking high budget approaches, and of course, has an amazing stronghold on the manga/anime audience.

I remember how upset I was when we heard about their merger (oh no they will bandalize my Namco games!!!11) but right now, you look at Namco output and say, phew they still have Bandai to save the day.

 

[Neo C.]

btw, PES Wii looks insanely great. If it delivers gameplay and sales-wise the Wii's success in Europe is guaranteed.

I'm still cautious. The new gameplay sounds great, but we don't know what the casuals will think about it. There's still the possibility they would prefer the old gameplay no matter what quality the new gameplay might offer.

 

[Neo C.]

If I had to give advice to third-parties about making core games on the Wii, it would be essentially to wait. Start a low-budget core game for the Wii and wait to see if things change for core games on the Wii following Super Smash Bros. Brawl. If there are obvious signs of core games doing better, up the budget and scale for the game. If they don't, keep it low-budget to minimize the financial risk. I don't think allocating big budgets to the Wii right now would make too much sense, though, for a traditional/core game unless you're trying to actively bring in more core users (i.e. Nintendo's position).

Or they could take a risk and make a mid- to high-budget core game right now. I don't think it's riskier than a high-budget core game for an other plattform.
Yeah, they could fail, they could fail miserably. On the other hand they could catch the big fish. Every generation has their own big hit, therefore it's always about taking bets. Of course every company needs a good mix of risks and safe bets, so having a mid- to high-budget game between several low-budget games might be a good strategy.

 

[Mushashi]

Konami, on the other hand... it's pretty obvious that they're putting all their bets on MGS4. In some ways I think that franchise was perhaps the worst thing that could happen to Konami short of outright bankruptcy. They barely have time to pay attention to anything not Solid Snake anymore. MGS4 was never a big seller in Japan - and I question whether the Western market will respond positively enough to MGS4. The investment has got to be far bigger than MGS3 or 2, after all.

Konami have a very successful annual franchise called Winning Eleven/Pro Evolution Soccer which sold 8 million copies WW last year, MGS is not their only golden egg.

 

[davepoobond]

Or they could take a risk...

businesses don't like to take risks. i think we've seen that over and over especially in this industry. the only ones that like to take risks are small companies.

 

[Mariah Carey]

Third party companies had always been seen as a means to an end-- garnering their support was a way to become successful. Lately I've been sensing the sentiment that third party support defines success. When exactly did this happen?

 

[liuelson]

businesses don't like to take risks. i think we've seen that over and over especially in this industry. the only ones that like to take risks are small companies.

Unfortunately, businesses have to take risks to survive, and sometimes thrive.

I don't think the argument is really about pointing fingers at Nintendo or blaming 3rd parties for their own failures. I think the argument is about whether a more aggressive 3rd party strategy by Nintendo would be more profitable for Nintendo.

My 2 questions remain: Does Nintendo have a strategic bias towards a 1st party strategy because of the whole "Blue Ocean" thing, and does the presumed return on investing in 3rd party whatever (be it better relationships to full-blown money-hatting) account for all of the opportunity costs for investment in other things?

 

[Man God]

Third party companies had always been seen as a means to an end-- garnering their support was a way to become successful. Lately I've been sensing the sentiment that third party support defines success. When exactly did this happen?

When a certain company happens to win the majority of market share without it and the people who root for the other company need something to prop themselves up with.

A moral victory of sorts.

 

[Vinci]

Seeing as this is my first post, I'll try to be coherent. People are saying that shit games on the Wii aren't selling as well as shit games on the PS1 or PS2, and that certainly seems true to some extent. But I'm curious whether people think it might be because, well, Wii owners are -- in actuality -- pickier?

I know that sounds like bullshit, but hear me out: Even the shittiest games on the PS2 can sell, but perhaps that's because they're similar enough to other games that people can still conceptually understand how they're played. Like, "This game is similar to GTA but it's not nearly as good - oh well, at least I can still play it." As opposed to a shitty Wii game which might have nothing to base your understanding of the game on: If it's shit, it's shit and it's indecipherable shit at that. You can't really play it to any extent.

Even some of the good Wii games have massive learning curves. But I think people look at some of these games that aren't marketed well and seem a bit strange or are noticeably shitty, and are like, "Hell, if the good games are hard to learn, what's that say for games that are completely incompetent?" So people don't bank on them. They avoid them. They don't hate them, they just go and find something that'll allow them to play without having to ruin their brains trying to figure it out.

I think what we're seeing isn't a transitional period from generation to generation or between hardcore to casual, but the transition from one style of control to another. It's awkward and it's difficult. Not so much for the casuals, who we all seem to write off as not the sort to buy games a lot, but for the hardcore gamers. I know I don't buy any Wii game - or even rent it - without hearing from trusted sources that it's good. Period. It can't be okay, it can't be decent; all that sounds like to me is headache. It has to be good or it has to be simple.

 

[ethelred]

When a certain company happens to win the majority of market share without it and the people who root for the other company need something to prop themselves up with.

A moral victory of sorts.

Who's rooting for whom?

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

Is that so? I wasn't aware of that.

So, could anyone tell me who beats who worldwide, and by how much exactly?

WE/PES by an absolute landslide. PES is probably Europe's best selling game series of all time (Aside from Pokemon)

 

[cvxfreak]

Third party companies had always been seen as a means to an end-- garnering their support was a way to become successful. Lately I've been sensing the sentiment that third party support defines success. When exactly did this happen?

This defines success.

 

[BishopLamont]

This defines success.

She's going to smash everyone when her new album comes out this year.

 

[RJT]

I'm still cautious. The new gameplay sounds great, but we don't know what the casuals will think about it. There's still the possibility they would prefer the old gameplay no matter what quality the new gameplay might offer.

But the Wii doesn't need more casuals, does it?
I want PES Wii to become the definitive version for the hardcore crowd, as long as the gameplay delivers what the videos already show. I'm not optimistic though...

 

[Diffense]

Er... Yes. Yes they are.

Maybe they are.
I actually don't care.
Accusations of 'bias' were not introduced by me.

No, they should have an active third-party development plan that involves marketing and development support (read: money) to encourage major third-parties to develop major (not random spinoff) titles for Wii. That means going to companies like Namco, Konami, and Capcom, giving them incentives to develop more big projects, and supporting the projects they do create with cross-marketing.

It only takes a certain threshold of initial success for other companies to commit to developing for the Wii, but that threshold might not be met if everyone is afraid to get in the pool (for reasons largely related to Nintendo's terrible third-party relations of ages past.) Since the Wii hardware itself and the platform of Nintendo-developed "non-game" software is unambiguously successful now, this is the area Nintendo needs to shift their energy towards.

I won't argue with the above.
It would be nice for third parties for Nintendo to throw money at them.

I don't know if they are throwing money, but can you really say Nintendo isn't doing any courting of third parties now? It seems likely that they did this to some extent with GCN by making the system more Dev friendly and actively courting some big Japanese Devs (Capcom 5, Final Fantasy CC). Those things seemed to have far less positive effect on Nintendo's userbase than their own efforts are having with the Wii. Sometimes you have to look at what's worked for you and what hasn't.

I don't disagree that Nintendo had to build the system on their own back, nor do I agree with the goofy position that Nintendo should "sell less software" or something to get third parties on board. But it's definitely not true that Japanese third parties have "picked their man" -- the problem for all those third parties is that all of the options they have are problematic compared to safe PS2 development, and as a result most of them are still in enough flux that their strategy can theoretically be shifted.

I said Japanese third parties HAD picked their man.
IMO, PS3 development plans started when the silicon for cell hadn't yet been mined.
Obviously with their initial pick struggling they have yet to pick someone else.

This is never actually going to be true unless you believe that the market of videogamers past will actually be entirely supplanted by blue-ocean non-gamers.

Nope.
I simply mean that owners of Nintendo platforms will probably represent the largest audience of gamers at least in Japan. If third parties don't develop for the platforms with the largest installed base then yes, they are restricting themselves to a smaller fraction of the market than they need to. They might be willing to gamble that more of THEIR audience is somewhere else but ... the numbers are the numbers.

 

[farnham]

At least in Japan I think the situation is quite clear. The software buying market has chosen Nintendo's platforms in a big way. (What was it, like 70-75% of all software sales 2007 were on Wii and DS? It should be even more in 2008 as the PS2 fades.) Now IMO it's up to publishers to appeal to this market, not up to Nintendo push the market towards the games other publishers release. It wasn't Nintendo who decided that 75% of all software sales should be on their platforms (or that 50% of all software sales should be of their own games), the market did. Wii is selling both hardware and software faster than the PS2 did so it's not like the market has disappeared, it has just altered it's preferences a bit.

I think once a userbase grows enough though it will able to support pretty much all kinds of games.
Capcom is also notable in the sense that they've been quite successful on Wii. (With core games even!)

Thirdparties are lazy -> GAF cries.. : Nintendo are killing the thirdparties....

 

[jarrod]

No, they should have an active third-party development plan that involves marketing and development support (read: money) to encourage major third-parties to develop major (not random spinoff) titles for Wii. That means going to companies like Namco, Konami, and Capcom, giving them incentives to develop more big projects, and supporting the projects they do create with cross-marketing.

But... isn't this what they *are* doing? Projects like DQ Swords, Monster Hunter 3 or Mario & Sonic rather obviously have Nintendo's fingerprints all over them in terms of investment or support. You might be able to argue Nintendo's not putting enough effort into these areas, but there's pretty obviously some notable attention being put towards 3rd party collaberation, incentives, development support and cross promotion.

Microsoft and Sony aren't doing something Nintendo isn't here, and frankly I'd say we're seeing a lot more fruit out of Nintendo's labors in the JP market than Sony (who's rather vocally given up paying out on windows for games that aren't MGS4 or FFXIII). If anything, Sony's the one lagging here imo, benefitting largely off 3rd party goodwill and HD multiplatform development.

Third party titles have been an integral (if far smaller than Nintendo's own offerings) part of the DS' success. Early third party successes like Tamagotchi and GBA carryover franchises like Megaman did their part to keep DS LTD sales from dipping below PSP before Nintendo launched their nongame strategy; bigger titles like FF3 came out just as the system was skyrocketing and helped lay the groundwork for today (when Nintendo can essentially let third parties handle all of the system's software support.)

Not entirely accurate here... Nintendogs and Brain Training both predated Tamagotchi by months and the DS port of Rockman.EXE5 tanked so hard they skipped EXE6 and didn't deliver a proper DS Rockman RPG until two years later. The only real notable early 3rd party DS success story was Naruto 3, which moved around 200k iirc... frankly, the first year of DS echoed Wii almost exactly (Nintendo domination, with a few scattered 3rd party notables). Hell, we even have longterm brands like Powapuro moving basically the same on Wii in 2007 that they did on DS in 2005.

Capcom seems to be doing alright with it with titles like Dead Rising and Lost Planet.

Relative to investment, they've likely recouped dramatically more off RE4 & UC. Granted it's not the best of comparisons, and Nintendo hasn't pumped investment into them like Microsoft's $30m USD Lost Planet ad campaign, but Wii's still likely given them a better roi to this point overall (even considering the bombs like Z+W, Golf & Basara).

Just curious here about Dead Rising, but wasn't it given the dreaded Z rating, which is almost the kiss of death, but still went on and sold pretty good for a game with a Z rating?

I was talking worldwide actually. RE4 Wii might've even outsold Lost Planet by this point too actually, and it looks like UC may outsell Dead Rising also.

 

[apujanata]

Capcom seems to be doing alright with it with titles like Dead Rising and Lost Planet.

Comparing it to PS2 levels isn't really helpful; no options exist for Japanese developers today which are as good as the PS2, so all of them will look bad in comparison.



To whatever degree ultra-casual purchasers of Wii are the cause of that system's poor third-party performance, that's also the degree to which Wii sales aren't "competing" for the same consumers' money as third party core titles.

Do you have the WW # of Dead Rising and Lost Planet ? I don't have the number, so I could not comment on your statement. If those two games can do the same (WW) or half (50%) of Capcom's successful new IP # on PS2 (like Devil May Cry), then all is good. If is is significantly less than 20% of DMC, then it (the plan) is not good.

If you don't like DMC, you can change it to some other new IP that was released during PS2 first two years, like Dead Rising and Lost Planet.

I agree that ultra-casual purchasers of Wii may not be interested about third party games, but I think the core purchasers of Wii care a lot (although currently it seems that those gamers are not a big part of Wii userbase yet, but it could change significantly in the near future, cause by SSBB).

 

[Stumpokapow]

When a certain company happens to win the majority of market share without it and the people who root for the other company need something to prop themselves up with.

A moral victory of sorts.

Start naming those people so they can be banned and we get back to actually discussing the business end of the industry in peace.

Do you have the WW # of Dead Rising and Lost Planet ? I don't have the number, so I could not comment on your statement. If those two games can do the same (WW) or half (50%) of Capcom's successful new IP # on PS2 (like Devil May Cry), then all is good. If is is significantly less than 20% of DMC, then it (the plan) is not good.

Both broke a million shipped for certain. Neither broke two million shipped IIRC.

 

[jman2050]

Start naming those people so they can be banned and we get back to actually discussing the business end of the industry in peace.

I wouldn't mind spwolf getting banned.

 

[Dash Kappei]

Those are some amazing numbers. This confirms that PES is bigger than MGS or anything in Europe actually.



I wonder how this one will do in Japan. I think its kind of important for the franchise.

It'll do shit.
Too little, too late.

It's not quite same as the Winning Eleven 6 situation on Gamecube (Japan only and for good reason) or We/PES07 on DS but you can be sure that everyone interested in the game as already bought it on their platform of choice (Wii only owners are definitely not as interested in the series obviously) and this is not the kind of game a lot of fans will double dip for, even if this version of the game's gonna be quite different (In fact, I think that Seabass decision to completely avoid an option for classic controls will do more to hurt his sales than the new gameplay will do to help 'em).

In the end, I think we can argue what the definition of "doing shit" for this game is.
Waiting to hear Konami sales expectations.

It can be a start for a next iteration timely release tho, we can only hope.

 

[gconsole]

Do you have the WW # of Dead Rising and Lost Planet ? I don't have the number, so I could not comment on your statement. If those two games can do the same (WW) or half (50%) of Capcom's successful new IP # on PS2 (like Devil May Cry), then all is good. If is is significantly less than 20% of DMC, then it (the plan) is not good.

If you don't like DMC, you can change it to some other new IP that was released during PS2 first two years, like Dead Rising and Lost Planet.

I agree that ultra-casual purchasers of Wii may not be interested about third party games, but I think the core purchasers of Wii care a lot (although currently it seems that those gamers are not a big part of Wii userbase yet, but it could change significantly in the near future, cause by SSBB).

Dead Rising and Lost Planet both sold around 1+M (1.2 or something but not more than 1.5).

First DMC sold around 2.8M.

 

[JJConrad]

1 Ridge Racer V - 611,507
2 Gekikuukan Pro Baseball 1999 - 482,061
3 Tekken Tag Tournament - 457,340
4 Kessen - 363,277
5 Dead or Alive 2 - 341,362
6 Jikkyou Powerful Pro Baseball 7 - 313,630
7 Shin Sangoku Musou - 302,101
8 FIFA Soccer World Championship - 252,358
9 The Bouncer - 219,858
10 Mobile Suit Gundam - 208,564

Above is the PS2's Top 10 for 2000. These aren't just the system's best third party games, these are the reasons the system was been bought. At the time, all of these games had a high-profile and many were considered to be AAA games.

1. Wii Sports - 1911520 / 246473
2. Wii Play - 1487484 / 1990669
3. Mario Party 8 - 1053934 / NEW
4. Wii Fit - 818166 / NEW
5. Super Mario Galaxy - 747684 / NEW
6. Super Paper Mario - 499639 / NEW
7. Dragon Quest Swords - 486222 / NEW
8. Mario & Sonic - 363101 / NEW
9. Wario Ware: Smooth Moves - 348485 / 545251
10. Gentle Brain Training Wii - 261161 / NEW
11. Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess - 260819 / 546093
12. Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles - 212417 / NEW
13. Pokemon Battle Revolution - 201919 / 332892
14. Fire Emblem: Goddess of Dawn - 171924 / NEW

Above the Wii's Top 14 for 2007. I'm not really certain where this talk of the lack of core gamers is coming from. Even if you decide that Wii Sports, Wii Play, Wii Fit, and Gentle Brain Training shouldn't count because 'a core gamer could never purchase or enjoy those game' or whatever nonsense, you're still left with a list of games that compares favorably to the PS2's first year.

I see 3 major faults with these comparisons between third partied between the Wii and PS2.

1) The PS2 was made successful because of its 3rd party games, the Wii because of it 1st party games. Ridge Racer V did not sell a lot units because the PS2 userbase was friendly to 3rd parties... It sold a lot of units because it was the system's flagship title and was hyped to hell and back. It just so happened to be 3rd party. When we make these comparisons, what we're really doing is pitting the PS2's top games to the Wii's #7 game and then wondering why the don't match up.

We can argue over why this is happening, but it doesn't really matter. There is no other platform that these companies can turn to and expect better returns than the Wii.

2) We're still arguing on the basis that third parties operate as a collective entity. They don't. They're only concerned about the sales of their own games and games like their own. Look at the two charts, Capcom did better on Wii than they did the PS2 in its first year... but we are suppose to believe they will turn their noise up at this because Namco hasn't had as much success?

3) The future of the Wii is not set in stone. In 2000, the PS2 had no 1st party games in the Top 10 ... I don't know why Sony even bothered support the system past that. How can they compete with the likes of Namco and Square? In 2001, they had two (one being a million seller). The difference was that Sony went from releasing mostly b-grade titles to releasing a GT3 and HSG. A little quality and some hype can go a long way. The PS2 and DS have both seen major changes in the landscape of their softwares sales over time, the Wii will do the same.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Top <x> versus Top <x> is not really a good comparison. The argument about Wii third-party sales is not "there are no good third-party sales on the Wii", it's that "many or most third-party Wii games are bombing".

 

[JJConrad]

Top <x> versus Top <x> is not really a good comparison. The argument about Wii third-party sales is not "there are no good third-party sales on the Wii", it's that "many or most third-party Wii games are bombing".

Its the same argument worded differently.

 

[liuelson]

But I'm curious whether people think it might be because, well, Wii owners are -- in actuality -- pickier?

...Even some of the good Wii games have massive learning curves.

...I think what we're seeing isn't a transitional period from generation to generation or between hardcore to casual, but the transition from one style of control to another.

It's a plausible hypothesis, but individual motivations are difficult to evaluate on an aggregate level in a market. For example, let's say your theory is correct, and that some gamers are making decisions based on their perception of how the controls are implemented. Should publishers focus on marketing their control schemes? Would that improve sales more than general marketing for the game itself, or using a familiar IP, or emphasizing graphics? It's really hard to have discussions about things for which we have no data.

The data we do have involves macro level sales figures, not micro level customer motivations.

 

[PantherLotus]

hly sht JJ, you just said what i've been trying to say for a couple months now. Well done.

For the record, we ARE in the midst of an avalanche of announcements and releases. Just watch.

 

[papelnabangka]

But the Wii doesn't need more casuals, does it?
I want PES Wii to become the definitive version for the hardcore crowd, as long as the gameplay delivers what the videos already show. I'm not optimistic though...

It won't be. The "hardcores" of today price techy visual stuff and presentation as much, if not more than the actual gameplay elements.