Support NeoGAF

[obaidr]

just a small question to all the people who say 3rd parties doing it wrong:

how many of the ~4 Wiis sold this month, were sold to actual gamers who care about games and buy many games per year, like lets say the PS360 owners?

All those Big 3rd party devs like Rockstar, EA, Ubisoft, Sega, Capcom etc. make gamer games like Ubisoft said. Now i don't think many gamers bought a Wii basically because they know there is not much announced to look forward for. So if you are a company like one of those and make core games and you know the core gamers are on the PS360 platforms, why should you care how much Nintendo is selling? My these is that almost every core gamer who was really interested in a Wii did already buy one before Dec. 09 because the Wii market just doesnt have such a high entrance barrier.

Even if the Wii would have sold 10 million systems this month but the core gamers were still on the other two platforms, the 3rd parties would not care because they dont (probably can't) make the right products, which is not core games like we already see in x cases, for the Wii audience.

 

[Shiggy]

Wow, didn't expect the Wii to outsell Xbox 360 + PS3 combined this year again.

And the third parties failed - this year again. They miss so many opportunities on the Wii.

 

[gamergirly]

I've been saying this for years, but it can be broken down even simpler.

Every third party needs to ask themselves, "Why does the consumer need this game?" If they can't answer it with anything beyond marketing spin, then their game is going to flop.

Let's look at Capcom in this instance. They came out with one of the first original rail shooters on the Wii, tied to a popular brand name that built up a good base on the Gamecube prior, was released on the promise of new and better things if it succeeded, and was a co-op experience that was not entirely bad.

Then, two years later, they release another one at a time when the market was flooded with rail shooters.

Someone that bought Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles will see Darkside Chronicles on the shelf and ask themselves the following questions:

- Do I really need another one of these games when I already have the last one?
- Is there anything really different about this one?
- Was anything cool added that would make this worth $50 in addition to the game I already own?

And if the answer is no, why would they buy it? They still have Umbrella Chronicles! They haven't memorized zombie locations, they don't give a shit about operation Javier, they wanted a fun shooter to play two years ago and that shooter is just as playable today. So now the game is just selling to people who are interested in Resident Evil lore, which I don't think there's very many of. Capcom's biggest mistake with making a sequel to Umbrella Chronicles was making a sequel to Umbrella Chronicles. Casual gamers don't like iterative sequels without much improvement. At least not these.

The thing is, the people who buy games like this seem weird to us. To a GAFer who wants to play Darkside Chronicles, a bigger headshot window is a huge deal, RE2 levels are a selling point, the last game came out two years ago and they consumed it in a week, so they're hungry for more. A casual who doesn't want a new one after enjoying the first one is just stupid to GAF.

I wonder when people are going to realize they're not stupid, they're normal.

That's very much it

 

[ShinNL]

just a small question to all the people who say 3rd parties doing it wrong:

how many of the ~4 Wiis sold this month, were sold to actual gamers who care about games and buy many games per year, like lets say the PS360 owners?

All those Big 3rd party devs like Rockstar, EA, Ubisoft, Sega, Capcom etc. make gamer games like Ubisoft said. Now i don't think many gamers bought a Wii basically because they know there is not much announced to look forward for. So if you are a company like one of those and make core games and you know the core gamers are on the PS360 platforms, why should you care how much Nintendo is selling? My these is that almost every core gamer who was really interested in a Wii did already buy one before Dec. 09 because the Wii market just doesnt have such a high entrance barrier.

Even if the Wii would have sold 10 million systems this month but the core gamers were still on the other two platforms, the 3rd parties would not care because they dont (probably can't) make the right products, which is not core games like we already see in x cases, for the Wii audience.

Right, your logic makes complete sense.

PS3/360 have 100% core gamers.
Wii has 100% non-core gamers.

Right?

How about they look at the Wii and think of a game. Then ask themselves: if someone tried to sell this game to me, would I:

1. Ignore it.
2. Buy it if I'm really bored.
3. Buy it when it's cheap.
4. Buy it on launch game.
5. Stand in the line to make sure I have it.

 

[LCfiner]

1. Why do you think it's foolish? The examples I listed were released quite early, so I actually thought it was pretty logical to expect more of these type of games. Instead 3rd parties were releasing tests. Then sequels on their tests if it worked out.

2. 50% of those listed games actually don't use much of the motion/pointer controls (Mario Galaxy, No More Heroes).

In other words, you have no arguments and calling people "foolish" is nothing more than a troll.

:lol

I'm not trolling anyone! when the Wii was announced, when they showed Wii Sports and other E3 demos, it was clear that Nintendo was going for a new audience than the traditional "core" gamer. A market they had been losing to Sony and MS.

It was so different that a lot of Gaf had no faith that it would even work because it would be so nontraditional.

And, for what it's worth I think Mario Galaxy uses the pointer and motion controls extensively and really well.

 

[jay]

just a small question to all the people who say 3rd parties doing it wrong:

how many of the ~4 Wiis sold this month, were sold to actual gamers who care about games and buy many games per year, like lets say the PS360 owners?

All those Big 3rd party devs like Rockstar, EA, Ubisoft, Sega, Capcom etc. make gamer games like Ubisoft said. Now i don't think many gamers bought a Wii basically because they know there is not much announced to look forward for. So if you are a company like one of those and make core games and you know the core gamers are on the PS360 platforms, why should you care how much Nintendo is selling? My these is that almost every core gamer who was really interested in a Wii did already buy one before Dec. 09 because the Wii market just doesnt have such a high entrance barrier.

Even if the Wii would have sold 10 million systems this month but the core gamers were still on the other two platforms, the 3rd parties would not care because they dont (probably can't) make the right products, which is not core games like we already see in x cases, for the Wii audience.

Let's turn this around. You're an actual gamer who cares about games and buys many games per year. Which third party Wii games did you buy this holiday season?

 

[ShockingAlberto]

I will say that asking third parties to stop making iterative sequels is the cruelest thing you can do to this industry. That alone will send them running to the hills of HD development where this kind of thing isn't frowned upon.

It requires an entire lateral shift in thinking how you develop and market your games. For right now, the old ways are working, but I would stake my reputation on the prediction that those days won't last forever.

 

[Cosmonaut X]

Speak of the devil! After my "Wii requires slightly different skill set" shpiel, I see this. I think it's quite an excellent example. This is from an EEDAR article about the cumulative year end results:

SNIP

I think this is something that has become particularly obvious to anyone following the sales of titles like Deca Sports 2, Taiko 2 etc. in Japan. The yearly sequel approach just doesn't work very well on the platform, or at best it just doesn't seem to be quite as effective as it is on other platforms.

Wii owners seem to demand a significant and obvious improvement/addition from sequels, so where Wii Sports Resort succeeded by offering improved motion sensing and a slate of new sports that took advantage of this, and these features were advertised clearly, Deca Sports 2 just appeared to be more of the same with no clear differentiation. Wii Fit Plus succeeded in spite of simply being an upgrade/expansion pack by adding some extra desired features, retailing for a budget price and essentially replacing the original.

"Core" gamers do seem easier to satisfy in that they will seek out repeat experiences again and again, and this makes them far more predictable and easy to please. The Wii audience seems to expect novelty and fresh ideas, and once one or two titles have been released in a genre I'd suggest subsequent me-too titles or direct sequels will have a tough time carving out reasonable sales.

Of course, if third parties had been in at the start building an audience for their games this could have been avoided and Wii could have been DS Mk. 2, but it's too late now. We're at the stage where the gamers who snapped up the more "core" titles early on have left the building, and third parties who jumped in far too late are stuck trying to sell their more considered efforts to a shrinking audience.

 

[markatisu]

It's true and we keep getting examples of this.
I might add this is also one of the reasons why the lightgun genre, a genre not exactly known for its innovations and variety, oversaturated so quickly on the Wii: most of these customers feel no need to shell out more money for another game that plays largely the same as the one they already got, especially not if the game is sold at full price.

Price is a big issue, we have been told already numerous times that SEGA found HoTD Overkill sold much better at $19-29 then $49. I would imagine that Dead Space would see a similar increase now that in most places its dropped.

Wii Fit + was $19.99 and essentially replaced the previous SKU

I can certainly understand why publishers would rather whore a game out at $59-69

For 3rd parties on Wii I think its just as much about proper advertising (look at EA Active, that was Nintendo like in its advertising campaign) and price as it is about the talent of the developer or the weight of the publishers name

People can mock Wii owners all they want but they really are voting with their pocketbooks, sequels without substantial changes or additions do not get bought for full price

 

[EmCeeGramr]

fuck all y'all who didnt buy silent hill


right up the urethra

 

[ShockingAlberto]

just a small question to all the people who say 3rd parties doing it wrong:

how many of the ~4 Wiis sold this month, were sold to actual gamers who care about games and buy many games per year, like lets say the PS360 owners?

Why does the PS3 always get lumped in here?

The tie-in ratio isn't really appreciably better than the Wii's. What makes it so full of gamers?

 

[markatisu]

Why does the PS3 always get lumped in here?

The tie-in ratio isn't really appreciably better than the Wii's. What makes it so full of gamers?

Seriously, PS3 owners (myself included) dont buy many PS3 only games. If the 360 were not portable to the PS3 I wonder who super sexy awesome software sales would look. We would no doubt have an entirely 360/Wii controlled Top 10

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

That's very much it

If this is the case, why would a Resident Evil 4-2 (or something like RE5, which many here would argue is worse than RE4) work any better?

Just trying to understand this aversion to iterative sequels to non-Nintendo franchises.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

If this is the case, why would a Resident Evil 4-2 (or something like RE5, which many here would argue is worse than RE4) work any better?

Just trying to understand this aversion to iterative sequels to non-Nintendo franchises.

At this point, it wouldn't!

But it wouldn't be selling to the same segment of the Wii audience that Umbrella Chronicles did.

It'd be selling to the same people who bought three Prince of Persias in a single generation, or three Splinter Cells, or buy CoD every year, except these people are probably Wii-only owners.

 

[JudgeN]

Seriously, PS3 owners (myself included) dont buy many PS3 only games. If the 360 were not portable to the PS3 I wonder who super sexy awesome software sales would look. We would no doubt have an entirely 360/Wii controlled Top 10

You son of a ......... :lol

 

[Cosmonaut X]

If this is the case, why would a Resident Evil 4-2 (or something like RE5, which many here would argue is worse than RE4) work any better?

Just trying to understand this aversion to iterative sequels to non-Nintendo franchises.

I don't think it would now, but it might have done back in late 2007/early 2008. As I said, I think the audience that would have bought these kind of iterative sequels started leaving sometime around then when it became obvious that the system just wasn't getting any significant support and rival platforms were getting more and more interesting "core" titles.

I'm very interested in how Super Mario Galaxy 2 will perform, as I think there's still a strong Nintendo-centric audience on the system, but I'd argue that at least some of the success of the original was down to the expanded audience. Nintendo will have to be smart about marketing it to that segment, explaining why they should buy it when on the surface it just looks like more of the same.

 

[gamergirly]

At this point, it wouldn't!

But it wouldn't be selling to the same segment of the Wii audience that Umbrella Chronicles did.

It'd be selling to the same people who bought three Prince of Persias in a single generation, or three Splinter Cells, or buy CoD every year, except these people are probably Wii-only owners.

Yup. It'd have to be an original Resident Evil, marketed well, that's not on rails. Who knows, maybe all of the hundreds of millions of Yen Nintendo have relocated for new development buildings and R&D might pay off at E3

 

[obaidr]

Right, your logic makes complete sense.

PS3/360 have 100% core gamers.
Wii has 100% non-core gamers.

Right?

How about they look at the Wii and think of a game. Then ask themselves: if someone tried to sell this game to me, would I:

1. Ignore it.
2. Buy it if I'm really bored.
3. Buy it when it's cheap.
4. Buy it on launch game.
5. Stand in the line to make sure I have it.

No. The PS360 has a very high rate of core gamers. I would suggest something like 90% for the 360 and something like 80% for PS3 because of the Blueray player and its attractiveness for Movie only fans. The Wii on the other hand has, considering the very high number of systems out there, a very low number of core gamers, maybe 10-20% going by the sales numbers of the core games on the system.

Let's turn this around. You're an actual gamer who cares about games and buys many games per year. Which third party Wii games did you buy this holiday season?

I dont have a Wii but if i had i would have bought the new mario game. Thats it.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

I think Galaxy 2's going to live or die based on how Nintendo markets it.

Just putting it out there will probably get you the sales of the die-hards who consider it the best game on the system, but making people aware of it as the other Mario game will probably go a long way to helping it.

 

[Aaron Strife]

If this is the case, why would a Resident Evil 4-2 (or something like RE5, which many here would argue is worse than RE4) work any better?

Just trying to understand this aversion to iterative sequels to non-Nintendo franchises.

That's a good point but RE4Wii was also a port that sold to a smaller base than RE4 on PS2 or GC. It was also a very highly rated game as opposed to Umbrella Chronicles where people were like "Well that was kind of alright" but there was no pressing desire for a sequel.

 

[stuminus3]

No. The PS360 has a very high rate of core gamers. I would suggest something like 90% for the 360 and something like 80% for PS3 because of the Blueray player and its attractiveness for Movie only fans.

:lol

 

[plagiarize]

personally, while i think that keeping the Wii SD was a really good idea in that it kept dev costs low reducing the risk for 3rd party devs to develop on what was when it first came out a vastly different system i do think that now, it's hurting the console.

core gamers care about the best graphics. that isn't a judgemental statement, it's a true statement whether you think that is good or bad.

the cost of making a wii version of a multiplatform core title is actually higher than it would be if the wii was similarly powered. so when you get a big tent pole release like Modern Warfare 2 or Resident Evil 5 or whatever, the Wii is getting what? some wacky other take on things.

i'm not saying Reflex and Darkside Chronicles aren't great games, they are... i'm just explaining why core gamers don't buy games on the system.

there are core gamers that have a Wii for games like Zelda and Mario Galaxy... but we're going to get the latest RE or COD on our main console and we're likely to see the Wii version as not worth our time when we have things to directly compare it to that look a lot better.

Shattered Memories wasn't advertised at all. it only sold to hardcore Silent Hill fans, and i think SH4 and SH5 show that there aren't enough of those to give you great sales.

the focus on adventuring... the lack of combat... this really was a game you could have sold to the millions of people that went to see Paranormal Activity if you'd marketed it right. people will pay to be scared.

but no advertising at all? how was that supposed to work?

anyways i'm hoping that the Wii HD (or whatever) is similarly powered. the controls are a proven thing now. what does and doesn't work has been pretty much worked out. there's no longer a reason to make developing on the system seem less risky. let it get some multiplatform love and more people will think about buying core games on the system when they see how well 3rd person shooters and other genres work with the Wiimote.

with the PS3 and 360 bringing in their own motion control things there's really no reason to make the next Wii underpowered.

it made sense at first. it let devs use existing tech they'd built for the gamecube. it lowered costs of developing titles for the system. but now, the only thing keeping developers off the wii is poor sales.

as you can see with the PC though if it's easy to port over, even if sales aren't massive, why not? the same thing would happen with a Wii HD that was easy to port to... and i honestly think things could start turning around.

if you could play Zelda Next Gen and Mario Galaxy 3 AND Modern Warfare 3 and Bioshock 3 all on the same system, that'd be a very different situation to we have now.

 

[Jocchan]

I really don't see any non-Nintendo developer doing well on the Wii.. it just seems to be THE Nintendo machine. There seem to be a bunch of decent non-Nintendo games out this year and none of them really sold well in relation to the audience they have at their disposal.

You know, part of the problem with reaching the Wii audience is the concept of "quality" we use in our industry having a clear disconnect with the concept of "quality" customers have.

We, the gaming press and execs assume quality to be the actual, structural quality of the game (graphics, good gameplay, features, etc.), which translates to good Metacritic rankings and - once the hype machine gets rolling with enough marketing money - should translate into good sales.
And this usually works, especially for traditional genres that appeal to traditional gamers.

But in reality the concept of quality customers have is the quality of the experience you get while buying a product. People don't buy games, they buy an entertainment experience, and the measure unit of quality is the satisfaction they get in exchange.
The latest installment in one of the biggest FPS IPs with a 100 average on Metacritic to your average bro offers the same value as some crappy Ben10 licensed title with a 65 average on Metacritic to your average kid. While the first one is looking for a certain type of experience (multiplayer slaughtering action), the second one is looking for a completely different one (having his favourite characters from the TV show on screen), but the driving factor is exactly the same, and it's the simplest truth you can find in every market: people buy what they're interested in. Occam's razor at its finest.

If the customer is satisfied with the experience (considers it a quality one), he will be back for more. If he's not, or doesn't see in your offerings anything he doesn't already have, he won't buy your sequel and he will ignore your other products.

The problem with so many third party titles on the Wii is the fact they don't offer what Wii customers want. So the customers see no reason to buy them, and they bomb horribly (as I said earlier, bad word of mouth by enthusiasts and media worsen the situation).

Reducing everything to a stupid, artificial dualism of hardcore versus casual creates a situation where you have only two types of gamers that should magically be interested in either all hardcore games or all casual games that get released.
It's oversimplification (entia non sunt dividenda praeter necessitatem, my own personal razor LOL), and it's completely wrong. Once you reduce anything to a dualism, your model has already lost touch with reality so the conclusions you're going to get will most certainly be wrong.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

No. The PS360 has a very high rate of core gamers. I would suggest something like 90% for the 360 and something like 80% for PS3 because of the Blueray player and its attractiveness for Movie only fans. The Wii on the other hand has, considering the very high number of systems out there, a very low number of core gamers, maybe 10-20% going by the sales numbers of the core games on the system.

I am super curious to see the data backing this up

Because it seems like you're talking about tie-in ratios but then arbitrarily saying some games count and some games don't because some are casual

In which case I'd suggest we remove all Halo, Gears, and GTA numbers from the 360 because those games are hella casual to me.

 

[gamergirly]

That's a good point but RE4Wii was also a port that sold to a smaller base than RE4 on PS2 or GC. It was also a very highly rated game as opposed to Umbrella Chronicles where people were like "Well that was kind of alright" but there was no pressing desire for a sequel.

And at the time, the majority of people that first purchased a Wii were probably Nintendo fans

 

[mclem]

Case in point: most sequels targeted to the mainstream and casual markets actually underperform in comparison to the original, which is the opposite to what has traditionally been the case for core targeted games.

Wait, what?

I was under the impression that it was actually quite normal for earlier games to outsell their sequels, that this was nothing new, and had gone on for ages?

 

[jay]

I dont have a Wii but if i had i would have bought the new mario game. Thats it.

Please think about this for a while.

Many "serious gamers" claim core games on Wii should sell and are not and then dismiss any sort of excuses made for the games. But many of these gamers aren't buying Wii games because big single player games, AAA or not, aren't that common on the system. So when a Wii fan says companies should try harder just think of how you yourself don't want many Wii games and how that means you implicitly agree. If companies made more appealing core games you would probably be interested.

I am using you as an example here. I understand you personally may think the Wii is an atrocity or refuse to play SD games or something similarly silly.

 

[Dragmire]

People who think that the average Wii owner doesn't buy games are misguided. The problem is that Nintendo is the only developer releasing decent games which aren't niche. When they do release a good game, everyone buys it. Including those casuals that supposedly "don't buy games." Since when were rail shooters like Darkside Chronicles a big genre, for example? Instead of thinking that Wii popularized rail shooters, maybe the problem was only a few rail shooters sold well because consumers were desperate for shooting games and/or confused by licensing (thinking Umbrella Chronicles was a traditional game), or the masses of shovelware on the Wii. The same with the awful casual games like Carnival Games. A majority of people definitely are not buying crap like that. It's because casual games are niche. Or at least they're not as mainstream as people think, it's more like a sector of the Wii audience. Most of it doesn't sell at all. People keep mistaking genres for being popular on Wii because of a few runaway hits. On a userbase that big that grows that quickly, you're going to have hits like that. It doesn't mean that genre represents the userbase now. So developers keep making casual/hardcore hybrids that no one wants, that also aren't very good, and then they're 'surprised' when they don't sell.

 

[poppabk]

fuck all y'all who didnt buy silent hill


right up the urethra

Well thats not very nice. I am not interested in Silent Hill - I've never played the previous games - why would I start now. People need to realize that just because there are people who would really like a 'core' game on Wii, doesn't mean they are just gonna rush out and buy any good core game that releases if the style, genre and franchise is not something that appeals to them. Beggars can't be choosers doesn't work with luxury entertainment options.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

Shattered Memories wasn't advertised at all. it only sold to hardcore Silent Hill fans, and i think SH4 and SH5 show that there aren't enough of those to give you great sales.

the focus on adventuring... the lack of combat... this really was a game you could have sold to the millions of people that went to see Paranormal Activity if you'd marketed it right. people will pay to be scared.

but no advertising at all? how was that supposed to work?

I have a theory, backed up a little bit with things I've heard, that internal politics at Konami killed Shattered Memories' ad campaign.

Some people were completely convinced that the odd take on Silent Hill, especially on the Wii, was going to completely fail, so any marketing money was going to be wasted on it. This went back and forth, with banner ads being purchased then rescinded, commercials being planned and then canned, even a viral marketing messaging service that sounded really cool where you give a friend's phone number and they get a voice mail from Cheryl, all of it was killed off.

Some people at Konami really believed in the game and others saw it as a waste of time and money. Eventually the latter won out when the game saw release. I think Dead Space Extraction did more to kill the Silent Hill ad campaign than anything else.

 

[fabprems]

No. The PS360 has a very high rate of core gamers. I would suggest something like 90% for the 360 and something like 80% for PS3

If you're right, natal & the wand are going to bomb really really hard :lol

The Wii on the other hand has, considering the very high number of systems out there, a very low number of core gamers, maybe 10-20% going by the sales numbers of the core games on the system.

And I imagine that by core games you mean Mario Bros Wii ??

 

[ShinNL]

:lol

I'm not trolling anyone! when the Wii was announced, when they showed Wii Sports and other E3 demos, it was clear that Nintendo was going for a new audience than the traditional "core" gamer. A market they had been losing to Sony and MS.

It was so different that a lot of Gaf had no faith that it would even work because it would be so nontraditional.

And, for what it's worth I think Mario Galaxy uses the pointer and motion controls extensively and really well.

What nooooo.

First controller-only reveal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMk7dXUJNkU

Look at that. I'd say we got most of the stuff except for the actual stuff that made us GAF gamers say wow. Where are all the top quality shooters, sword games and horror games. It's incredible that the first games actually using that flash light idea has only been just released now.

I even picked up Grand Slam Tennis and Tiger Woods because they looked as fun as in that trailer (well, probably because of Motion+ but that's no excuse now since it's everywhere).

Great games/software gets good rewards and that should be the only logic. Just because I like gamer's games doesn't mean I can't pick up stuff like Wii Fit and EA Sports Active (which I did) and vice versa.

If lots of moms (lol) bought Wii's, then it means they have children (hence: moms). Those children could be of any age. The Wii is everywhere. And there's a lot of types of software missing. From what I've seen, it's the gamer's games. I'm sick of seeing the best efforts are rail shooters. Amazing high budget games... but they're freakin' rail shooters.

No. The PS360 has a very high rate of core gamers. I would suggest something like 90% for the 360 and something like 80% for PS3 because of the Blueray player and its attractiveness for Movie only fans. The Wii on the other hand has, considering the very high number of systems out there, a very low number of core gamers, maybe 10-20% going by the sales numbers of the core games on the system.

The hell, are you just picking random numbers out of thin air to drive a discussion? Zomg.

And uh, what core games? >_>

PS. I think 100% for 360 would be more logical :lol

 

[Dragmire]

Again, what good core games are on the Wii that aren't super niche?

 

[Sadist]

Wow, grandjedi6 gets all the hate. Poor guy.

I've been saying this for years, but it can be broken down even simpler.

Every third party needs to ask themselves, "Why does the consumer need this game?" If they can't answer it with anything beyond marketing spin, then their game is going to flop.

Let's look at Capcom in this instance. They came out with one of the first original rail shooters on the Wii, tied to a popular brand name that built up a good base on the Gamecube prior, was released on the promise of new and better things if it succeeded, and was a co-op experience that was not entirely bad.

Then, two years later, they release another one at a time when the market was flooded with rail shooters.

Someone that bought Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles will see Darkside Chronicles on the shelf and ask themselves the following questions:

- Do I really need another one of these games when I already have the last one?
- Is there anything really different about this one?
- Was anything cool added that would make this worth $50 in addition to the game I already own?

And if the answer is no, why would they buy it? They still have Umbrella Chronicles! They haven't memorized zombie locations, they don't give a shit about operation Javier, they wanted a fun shooter to play two years ago and that shooter is just as playable today. So now the game is just selling to people who are interested in Resident Evil lore, which I don't think there's very many of. Capcom's biggest mistake with making a sequel to Umbrella Chronicles was making a sequel to Umbrella Chronicles. Casual gamers don't like iterative sequels without much improvement. At least not these.

The thing is, the people who buy games like this seem weird to us. To a GAFer who wants to play Darkside Chronicles, a bigger headshot window is a huge deal, RE2 levels are a selling point, the last game came out two years ago and they consumed it in a week, so they're hungry for more. A casual who doesn't want a new one after enjoying the first one is just stupid to GAF.

I wonder when people are going to realize they're not stupid, they're normal.

Excellent post.

 

[Zhengi]

No. The PS360 has a very high rate of core gamers. I would suggest something like 90% for the 360 and something like 80% for PS3 because of the Blueray player and its attractiveness for Movie only fans. The Wii on the other hand has, considering the very high number of systems out there, a very low number of core gamers, maybe 10-20% going by the sales numbers of the core games on the system.

Wow. :lol

I'm glad I came back into this thread after I missed all the excitement from page 1.

 

[Lord Error]

Or maybe their games dont really offer what gamers want...the "meta-game" as Jaffe put it recently seems more important and I feel some of Sony's titles are missing that.

Part of that meta game is what surrounds the game. Take a look at Halo 2, and the way they built it up before the release. The wait for the game was probably as exciting as the game itself.

 

[gamergirly]

Again, what good core games are on the Wii that aren't super niche?

When did platformers become a niche game? The only thing niche about Wii core games are their sell amounts

 

[Chris1964]

No. The PS360 has a very high rate of core gamers. I would suggest something like 90% for the 360 and something like 80% for PS3 because of the Blueray player and its attractiveness for Movie only fans. The Wii on the other hand has, considering the very high number of systems out there, a very low number of core gamers, maybe 10-20% going by the sales numbers of the core games on the system.

This analysis lives up to your posting history regarding Wii.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

Well thats not very nice. I am not interested in Silent Hill - I've never played the previous games - why would I start now. People need to realize that just because there are people who would really like a 'core' game on Wii, doesn't mean they are just gonna rush out and buy any good core game that releases if the style, genre and franchise is not something that appeals to them. Beggars can't be choosers doesn't work with luxury entertainment options.

shattered memories has nothing to do with the previous silent hill games and plays very differently


reiterate: all y'all

 

[Somnid]

Again, what good core games are on the Wii that aren't super niche?

Judging by software sales all "core" games are niche.

 

[The Faceless Master]

Wait, what?

I was under the impression that it was actually quite normal for earlier games to outsell their sequels, that this was nothing new, and had gone on for ages?

typically, with core games, the sequel sells more. this may be due to many factors like the original game being traded in and then bought used and played used by other people who then become more interested in the sequel. also, there are people who borrow the first from a friend or family member and then are interested in the series. there's also increased word of mouth to consider.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

At some point we should sit down and figure out what the hell core is.

 

[Tashi]

I just don't get it.

 

[Jocchan]

typically, with core games, the sequel sells more. this may be due to many factors like the original game being traded in and then bought used and played used by other people who then become more interested in the sequel. also, there are people who borrow the first from a friend or family member and then are interested in the series. there's also increased word of mouth to consider.

And usually the sequels to games that sold well get advertised and hyped more.

 

[The Faceless Master]

At some point we should sit down and figure out what the hell core is.

i know it when i see it!

 

[Gwanatu T]

I don't buy it. The Wii is no different than a PS2 which they were fine making games for back then. They don't need to change their mentality. Instead they've spent all this time talking about how the Wii is "different" and that's a bunch of BS. Making a game like Bioshock on the Wii is the same as making it on the 360. Sure, they lose some graphic fidelity, but the core principles for making the game and what makes it fun are the same. Okay, so they can't make "Mario Kart", but maybe that's okay. How about just making the games that they know how to make...but on the Wii? That's what's bugging me the most about this.

They KNOW what makes games fun and cool for their demographic. There's nothing stopping them from making them on the Wii except themselves.

This is what bugs me the most. It's not like we didn't have amazing games in any of the previous generations, and I think the Wii has shown that, in it's best, it can look better than the original Xbox. Not only that but there have always been awesome/fun games in previous generations, and somehow it seems that developers have lost that when translating to the Wii. It's almost as if they took their skill set and threw it away.

 

[lowlylowlycook]

just a small question to all the people who say 3rd parties doing it wrong:

how many of the ~4 Wiis sold this month, were sold to actual gamers who care about games and buy many games per year, like lets say the PS360 owners?

All those Big 3rd party devs like Rockstar, EA, Ubisoft, Sega, Capcom etc. make gamer games like Ubisoft said. Now i don't think many gamers bought a Wii basically because they know there is not much announced to look forward for. So if you are a company like one of those and make core games and you know the core gamers are on the PS360 platforms, why should you care how much Nintendo is selling? My these is that almost every core gamer who was really interested in a Wii did already buy one before Dec. 09 because the Wii market just doesnt have such a high entrance barrier.

Even if the Wii would have sold 10 million systems this month but the core gamers were still on the other two platforms, the 3rd parties would not care because they dont (probably can't) make the right products, which is not core games like we already see in x cases, for the Wii audience.

Well just for starters what about The Sims?

 

[ShinNL]

i'm not saying Reflex and Darkside Chronicles aren't great games, they are... i'm just explaining why core gamers don't buy games on the system.

What do you define as "core gamers don't buy games"? Have you seen Reflex' sales yet?

 

[botticus]

Well thats not very nice. I am not interested in Silent Hill - I've never played the previous games - why would I start now. People need to realize that just because there are people who would really like a 'core' game on Wii, doesn't mean they are just gonna rush out and buy any good core game that releases if the style, genre and franchise is not something that appeals to them. Beggars can't be choosers doesn't work with luxury entertainment options.

Well, the Giant Bomb quick look did in fact get me interested in it just now. So try it out!

I don't really like to get into these heated arguments, because I don't know that I'm really on one side or the other. Do I want more "core" games on the Wii? Sure do! Do I want all the 360 and PS3 games to be on the Wii? Sure don't! If all I wanted to play was those games, I'd buy those systems. As it is, no, I'm not spending $300 to play Demon's Souls and Valkyria Chronicles. They aren't going anywhere.

The only time I'd ever say I want more CoD or whatever on the Wii is because if CoD, AC, and other million-selling series were all on the Wii as well, that would lead to an ecosystem that would likely better support the games I do want more of like LKS and and NMH. But as has been said ad nauseum at this point, it's very likely too late for that.

 

[Sadist]

At some point we should sit down and figure out what the hell core is.

If there is something that I hate this gen, it's all the terms that were made up by the industry.

And messageboards types like us just copy-paste it. Well, some of us.