MY ARGUMENT: The real battle is between PS3 and 360, Wii is not included

[Readykilowatt]

There's no need to get worked up over the possibility of the Wii being the dominant console this gen. Sony and Microsoft will not suddenly drop the PS3 and Xbox 360 respectively if the Wii outsells them both 4 to 1. Some key third party franchises (like FF) may jump ship, but you will still be able to play Gran Turismo 8 and Gears of War 4 in "glorious high definition."

 

[Nesh]

I have to say that I fail to see how this impacts the success of the current generation of products, both having a good install base.

-Dave

Thats because install base alone doesnt say the complete truth about the well being of each product. Its just a part of it. Sometimes small, sometimes big according to the conditions that specific product is facing. Remember each console and their respective producer faces different challenges

 

[Magnum PI]

But the real strength of the Wii is not FPSes, but quirky, innovative games - or so the core proponents claim. I'm not arguing that a Wii-level FPS has a chance on the 360, but that something like Guitar Hero, Katamari Damacy, Nintendogs can be produces equally cheap for the 360 and look similar to the Wii look, but it won't necessarily be compared to Gears etc.

Unless you claim that the only way to have quirky, innovative games is to wave your hands in the air -

OK now in understand.

So for the less technically demanding titles, the guitar hero-dacamacy-mah-jong etc..
There is no advantage on Wii about development costs. The advantage could well be one the Xbox360 because of XNA. Not on the PS3 IMO.

For more techically demanding games, the budget of the Wii version would be less. Plateform games, sport games, racing, arcade, FPS. The kind of games where you have competition on the PS3/X360 and customers expect PS3/X360-level graphics.

I suspect the second category is by far the more prevalent.

I'm not even sure if a nintendogs-like game with Wii-level graphics would be well received by X360 owner, but who knows..

where we get to point B of my argument, that the Wii's advantage is the controller, not develoment costs.

I still doesn't understand why you want absoultely that the different factor of success excludes each other. Of course the controller is an advantage, without it there would be no point releasing an overclocked GC. This doesn't prevent the development costs can be an advantage, despite not being systematically true depending of game.

 

[ninzel]

I wonder if there is an inherent danger for devs,by creating a system like the 360 that creates such specific expectations. That expression "if you build it they will come" among other things speaks to the idea that the type of thing you build dictates who you attract. A 360 attracts a certain type of gamer that has high and specific demands,and if devs constantly feed into that they can almost paint themselves into a corner.
Imagine if Epic came to the 360 fans and said instead of making the next GOW,they wanted to make this amazing game they had been building called Fruity Glow Bubble Pop. I wonder how a game like that would be received by 360 fans.
By creating a system like the Wii that probably affords devs who are used to making certain games to experiment,witness Elebits instead of MGS4. So it affords devs more lateral movement than perhaps on other systems, while still having a fanbase that would warmly recieve the traditional MGS or RE type games.
I'm not saying 360 fans aren't open minded but I coud see devs being able to break out of their current mould and use the Wii to put out those guilty pleasure type games that they might not bring to their traditional fanbase.
Also traitional games like an RE:Umbrella Chronicles will be embraced enthusiastically,whereas an RE5 for 360 will also be but will be more heavily scrutinized seeing as it's going up against the likes of Halo3 and such.

 

[assen]

Also traitional games like an RE:Umbrella Chronicles will be embraced enthusiastically,whereas an RE5 for 360 will also be but will be more heavily scrutinized seeing as it's going up against the likes of Halo3 and such.

All the versions of RE5 will be compared against each other, and I think the tone will be more like "The Wii version of RE5 looks like %@#$%@# compared to the 360 version, which in turn looks worse than Halo3", rather than "The 360 version of RE5 looks worse than Halo3, but the Wii version is OK because there is no Halo3 on that platform".

I'm not even sure if a nintendogs-like game with Wii-level graphics would be well received by X360 owner, but who knows...

This depends on the general fate of the 360. If it fails, i.e. it remains contained to its current userbase of 5-7 million, there will be no place for nintendogs with Wii-level graphics on it. If it succeeds and gains 30-40 millions of users, there will be market for all kinds of games on it.

And the price of good graphics on it will crawl down over time, with the improvements in middleware and the skills of artists, while the hard limit on the current Wii's graphics capabilities will remain.

(Now, I'm firmly subscribed to the theory that we'll see a backwards-compatible "Wii HD" in about 2-3 years, but that's a semi-separate topic...)

 

[ninzel]

All the versions of RE5 will be compared against each other, and I think the tone will be more like "The Wii version of RE5 looks like %@#$%@# compared to the 360 version, which in turn looks worse than Halo3", rather than "The 360 version of RE5 looks worse than Halo3, but the Wii version is OK because there is no Halo3 on that platform".

Thanks for the well thought out response,whenever I see those %@#$%@# swearing symbols I alway's know I'm in for a great read.
You do realize don't you that there are all different types of gamers with different tastes buyng brand new system everyday? There are gamers that require nothing short of 360/PS3 level of graphics, and others that are still happily playing the PS1. Everything in the gaming world does not revolve around the latest hight tech machines.
Relative to the other types of games on the Wii,Wii owners will enthusiastically embrace the RE game for Wii as long as it's good. On the other hand I expect RE to be liked but much more heavily scrutinized by 360/PS3 owners even thoough it will technicaly be ahead of the RE Wii game. My point being each system brings with it a different set of gamers and differnet set of expectations for developers to live up to.
The game reviewers(becasue they are hardcore) will likely follow your narrow line of thinking but they don't dicate the tone for all gamers.

 

[assen]

The game reviewers(becasue they are hardcore) will likely follow your narrow line of thinking but they don't dicate the tone for all gamers.

So, to sum it up, "remote+nunchuk good, two sticks bad"?

Just remember that the other expression for "carving out their own niche" is "painting themselves into a corner". Nintendo marketing wants us to believe the former; I think that by banning entry of "normal" games to their platform, they are doing he latter.

 

[ninzel]

So, to sum it up, "remote+nunchuk good, two sticks bad"?

I think that by banning entry of "normal" games to their platform, they are doing he latter.

Really? That's what you got from my posts even though I said nothing at all about controllers or sticks? And "normal" games,did you really just say that? What the hell are you talking about. Forget it I don't even want to know.

 

[Magnum PI]

All the versions of RE5 will be compared against each other, and I think the tone will be more like "The Wii version of RE5 looks like %@#$%@# compared to the 360 version, which in turn looks worse than Halo3", rather than "The 360 version of RE5 looks worse than Halo3, but the Wii version is OK because there is no Halo3 on that platform".

As a plateform owner i mainly care about the offer that is available on my plateform.
I want to play games, i have a budget for it and i have to choose my games amongs the games that are available to me.
Why would i base my choice on what is available on another plateform ? Why would i care for what is not available to me ?

So in the end what counts is how the game compare with the other games i can buy, and, except for a few specific low-tech titles, a last-gen game on a current gen console won't be the choice of many unless there is no contender.

Maybe my analysis is wrong then we should see much PS2 ports on xbox360. It may be the case i don't know.

IMHO we tend to forget we are not representative of the masses of videogame players, they are not as passsionate/hardcore gamers as most of the forumers here.

I'm not either representative of the people here as i only own a gamecube (and a DS) and i'm satisfied with the offer of present and past titles. Not in an hurry to change the console.
Didn't make my mind yet, i wait to see things settle, price cuts, killer apps. What is currently offered by the Wii isn't appealing enough for me, the same for PS3. I wouldn't mind to skip a nintendo generation (i did skip nintendo 64) and go for xbox360 or PS3..

 

[Anvil]

I think that by banning entry of "normal" games to their platform, they are doing he latter.

Care to explain how Nintendo is "banning" normal games from their console? Looking at the 2007 game release from Nintendo it certainly looks to be made up of the same games Nintendo has relied on for years. It is going to be interesting though to see how Nintendo uses to Wii remote with these games though.

Oh, and I own both the 360 and the Wii and I have to say that the Wii is a whole lotta fun. So far I have been having too much fun to have the time to sit back on the couch and over analyze the graphics. Too me everything looks just fine.

 

[Pozer]

I think the Wii will attract alot of non-gamers or trendy-gamers (ddr guitar hero crowd) but these people will not buy enough 3rd party software in the long run once the novelty wears off. The Wii will end up alot like the GC. Not being a bomb but not attracting the demographic that buys alot of games making 3rd party pubs run. Thats just my opinion/prediction. Alot of the people I know getting a Wii seem to be the type that play solitaire in windows, Sims, or get into 1 game every 3 years.

 

[Magnum PI]

The Wii attach rate seems to be 3.0. Maybe it includes wii sports ?

Because of its stylus and some non-gamer games (sic) the DS is said to attract lots of non-gamers. Like the Wii, the DS lacks some multimedia features its competition has and is technically inferior to its competition.

Could be interesting to compare attach rates of PSP and DS, at the same point of their lifecycle.

At least the DS shows that widening your audience and making a cheaper low-tech product can.

The more i think of that the more i see the Wii as the non-portable alter-ego of DS.

And I still don't understand how things are so different in the non-portable videogame market that the factors that made the success of the DS would only mean the failure of the Wii.

Somebody cares to explain it to me ? Or do I have to have more faith to accept it as a truth ?

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Probably because in general people tend to think you buy a handheld to play in short sessions and you buy a console to play for longer times making gfx and stuff more important.

Wich I dont think is true because I spend over 35hours on contact and ff3 on the DS in about 3 weeks.

 

[Magnum PI]

same here..

game sessions have similar length than GC ones.
i can play for short and long session on each consoles indifferently.
never played with it while telecommuting.

 

[Nesh]

And thats why the Wii probably has a big chance of atleast selling alot more than GC. 90% of the people who buy a console probably dont give a shit how the gfx look.

Will nintendo win? dont know. They probably have a decent change if they manage to make some wii titels with the impact that BrainTraining and Nintendogs had for the DS. If they manage to get to the non gamers they have alot bigger market to explore than the x360 and ps3 that basically aim at people who are already gaming.

Atleast its a good thing that alot more 3rd party devs are spending time on Wii than with GC.

Acrually they care about graphics. The difference is that Wii will not be baught as a PS3/360 replacement.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Most people will only buy 1 console so I dont think you can say wii will be a second console for most people. I think wii will be treated as the main console by many people simply because they will only buy 1 console.

I still dont think most people care alot about the gfx. But I already said why I think that for about 4 times now.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

When do you think that these 'most people' who only buy one console and will buy the Wii as their one console are going to start buying them?

 

[Magnum PI]

When do you think that these 'most people' who only buy one console and will buy the Wii as their one console are going to start buying them?

The 11/19 ?

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

And anecdotal evidence would seem to prove that false, as most people who have purchases Wiis to this point have done so as their second console.

"Most of the people" who are "most of the people who have only one console", haven't purchased any console yet.

 

[Magnum PI]

And anecdotal evidence would seem to prove that false, as most people who have purchases Wiis to this point have done so as their second console.

"Most of the people" who are "most of the people who have only one console", haven't purchased any console yet.

Not only one console for their entire life.. Only one console in each generation. It's implicit.

So where is your evidence ? Please provide a source.