scooby_dooby
Legend
Any decent sized city will have a ton of bars that do Karaoke at least once a week.
NPD September 2007
- Thread starter Zaphod
- Start date
Any decent sized city will have a ton of bars that do Karaoke at least once a week.
Not at all. Take a game like Gears of War vs Metroid Prime 3 Corruption. Last figures I heard were that Gears cost around $10 million to make (not including the cost of development for UE3).
How much do you think MP3 cost? Maybe $1 million tops?
In other words, both are high quality games for their respective systems, but MP3 doesn't have to sell as many copies as GoW does in order to turn a profit. But it is still super quality.
See what I'm getting at now? Low cost development != "cheap"
Mintmaster
Veteran
What a load of crap.
If any game is cheap to develop on the Wii, it is entirely due to the fact that it is NOT the same game as something on 360/PS3. Something like Madden, for example, will need a lot more than half as much artist time as the 360 version, will still have the same licensing cost, will still need the same motion capture costs, and will undoubtedly have higher cost for UI development and testing.
Wii games can have low dev. cost, but for third parties it's really hard to sell such a game.
Unless someone can pull some real numbers that can be verified, I don't think there's any point in arguing about development costs. It's reasonable to assume the Wii would be cheaper, but AAA to AAA, whether it would be 3/4, 1/2 or 1/4 of the price difference, you couldn't really say with any authority.
What is defined as an AAA title on Wii?
I think that an AAA title on PS3 or 360 is totally different than what is considered an AAA title on Wii.
If a game succeeds at being very fun on Wii is usually considered as an AAA title. On PS3 and 360 on the other hand are games that are both fun but have high production values (depending on the genre) and attention to detail. Thats true even if we go beyond their visuals.
They are incomparable.
I think that an AAA title on PS3 or 360 is totally different than what is considered an AAA title on Wii.
If a game succeeds at being very fun on Wii is usually considered as an AAA title. On PS3 and 360 on the other hand are games that are both fun but have high production values (depending on the genre) and attention to detail. Thats true even if we go beyond their visuals.
They are incomparable.
Well, AAA is subjective I guess. But you could say the flagship titles. So, what does it cost to make Metal Gear 4, and what does it cost to make Super Mario Galaxy. I think that would be a fair comparison of flagship titles, if you wanted to analyze how many copies you have to sell to be profitable, and what defines success on either system for high profile titles.
This is the most concrete feedback. Sony camp is late. So the list becomes...
Shooter: Resistance (new patch coming), WarHawk (new patch coming), Haze, UT3 (might be delayed), (COD4)
Stealth: No show
RPG: No show, (Oblivion)
Platformer: Ratchet & Clank
Adventure/Action: Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Folklore, Eye of Judgment, (Ninja Gaiden Sigma), (Assassin's Creed)
Driving: MotorStorm, F1, GT
rologue demo, RR7, (Dirt), (Sega Rally)Party/Social: Singstar, LBP beta
Others: Playstation Home beta
Arcade: Everyday Shooter, Super Stardust HD, Calling all Cars, flOw, ...
(I dropped Lair because it's kinda incomplete despite impressive showing in some levels)
It's not ground breaking but it's not too bad either. For people who wants a Playstation 3, they still have plenty to toy with.
On top of that, add your favorite Blu-ray movies if you watch those. I recommend Planet Earth (!).
Well, you're including two demo's, and a niche card based title, that's why they don't count
In terms of titles that will actually stimulate sales, Singstar, Uncharted and R&C are basically it, at leats from that list. I don't remember any demo ever having a large impact on sales of a console.
Is Haze still coming?
(Yap, they just released 5 new screen shots over at GAF)
For social/community play like Playstation Home and LBP, the most important elements are:
* Likeminded users
* Premium and user generated content
* Marketing activities (e.g. run events and competitions in Home and LBP)
As long as these elements are there, it is possible to orchestrate a presence/following not found in traditional console games -- if the beta is far along enough.
Last edited by a moderator:
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
To take the point even further, and go a bit to what Mint was saying, unless you are developing a game just for the Wii, then the development costs are going to be the same.
You would still require the huge budget in order to make the game worthy of purchase on the 360 or the PS3, you'd then simply cut out a great deal of it to port it to the Wii.
They are incomparable because the paradigm is completely different. If you spend $20M developing a game for the 360, PS3 and PC and then 'dumb it down' for a Wii port, you've got four platforms you are selling on.
If you use the Wii as a lead platform, sure development costs are less, but so are the potential systems the game can be sold on.
I enjoy Natoma's passion for all things Wii, but it's not as simple as Developer spends X amount of dollars and needs to sell Y amount of units to recover, and because X is less on the Wii, Y is necessarily less as well.
In order to take advantage of the 'cost savings' from developing on the Wii, you have to give up the ability to sell that game across the 360, the PS3 and the PC.
This is why the Wii won't ever become the lead platform, and why the Wii will continue to get 'second rate ports' in comparison to the other systems.
Games like Wii Play, Wii Fit will be the social appeal to the Wii. Yes, yes, Mario will sell great but don't expect the Madden's of the world to set sales records.
A few reasons for that. The better versions are available on the other 2 platforms. You're getting into the "gamer" zone now and getting out of the social activity zone that makes the Wii appealing.
If the Wii only had the gamer appeal you'd see it selling a lot less. Fortunately for nintendo, they managed to grab turn the Wii into a social activity. Think of it like this. At social gatherings, people are putting away the deck of cards and playing the Wii. The games that fit that element will continue to dominate the Wii sales. If a 3rd party studio wants to jump in on the Wii sales, they need to focus on that.
A few reasons for that. The better versions are available on the other 2 platforms. You're getting into the "gamer" zone now and getting out of the social activity zone that makes the Wii appealing.
If the Wii only had the gamer appeal you'd see it selling a lot less. Fortunately for nintendo, they managed to grab turn the Wii into a social activity. Think of it like this. At social gatherings, people are putting away the deck of cards and playing the Wii. The games that fit that element will continue to dominate the Wii sales. If a 3rd party studio wants to jump in on the Wii sales, they need to focus on that.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
Why can't it be the other way around? A game designed for Wii ported up to other systems? ex: Harry Potter.
Worked well for the PS2.
Because the difference in power wasn't as visually obvious last generation?
Even then, the reason the Xbox sold as well as it did, was primarily due to the fact that the ports were visually superior on it.
And you say it worked for the PS2, but that's because they were the lead platform from the start. Developers didn't start with a high benchmark and then decide to dumb their games down to the PS2 level.
They started at the PS2 level, and remained there, adding additional assets as needed or able to take advantage of the Xbox's superior power.
What you are proposing now is that developers stop developing for the PS3, 360, and PC, and set the bar extremely lower while reaping the rewards of reduced development cost.
Those games simply won't sell on the 360, PC, or PS3 because they are going to be compared to the games produced by developers who decided NOT to set the bar so low.
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
Exactly.
Which only sets the 'standard of separation' that much further.
Because not only are these games going to have less assets and be less visually impressive, they need to function in a completely different way in order to really be successful on the platform.
So not only are developers separating themselves through budgets, but also through interface.
Which is one more reason the Wii won't be a lead development platform, because even if the consumer would tolerate the poor visual aspects (and AI aspects) of Wii-developed ports, they won't have a way to play the game in the same manner.
The bottom line is that unless Nintendo figures out a way to get Wii Sports to play on the 360 or the PS3, they aren't going to get much 3rd party support.
Of course, if they did get Wii Sports to play on the 360 or PS3, then their hardware sales would come to an end.
Nintendo made themselves a very niche player this generation, with all their eggs in their first party basket.
It has paid off in spades for them financially.
But the idea that they can now somehow expand that niche outward and grow (during this generation) is asking for a miracle.
They knowingly made that sacrifice when they went this direction.
They've already far exceeded their own expectations.
Believing that developers are somehow going to now flock to this very closed and very restricted system is like winning $10M in the lottery and then using all your winnings to buy more lottery tickets because you really want to win the $100M lottery.
iceberg187
Regular
Given that Nintendo doesn't lose money in the sale of the Wii, I don't think they care about 3rd party too much. Selling a Wii to a retailer is basically like selling the console at cost plus the royalties from 6-7 games. For them, the console really is enough
Why do you think MP3 only cost $1 million to make? You're basically suggesting it took 10 guys 1 year to make it and thats only salary + a bit of office expense? I rather doubt it. Just because the games for the wii are using lower assets doesn't mean it only takes a few artists, writers and coders to make a compelling game. I have no doubt that the wii games are substantially cheaper to make, but I rather doubt its as minimal as you're suggesting.
Development costs on AAA titles are returned very quickly. How many hours minutes into Halo's release was its development cost overcome?
random theorycraft below
Lets say MP3 winds up selling 2 million copies (~$100million), which right now seems doubtful, it will still have made substantially less revenue than GeoW which has sold ~4 million+ ($240million). If we assume MP3 cost your $1 million and margins at retail are 40% it would sit at $39 million. If we assume GeoW cost $20 million with 40% margins it would be sitting at $76 million. To make as much profit as GeoW, MP3 would have to sell 3.85million copies, which is only ~4% fewer.
So part of the extra development cost for the titles for 360/PS3 games is already built into the price which at the high end actually winds up being more profit for developers/publishers.
iceberg187
Regular
Wii games cost more than 5 million
In large part because MP3, though using a souped up engine and assets, is still basically MP1/MP2.
It's the same as Gears which while costing $10 million, is leveraging UE3 which cost at least $10 million to develop. I didn't factor in the UE3 development costs because those are considered already sunk.
I factored in risk. Not every title is AAA and a "guaranteed" sell. I brought up MP3 and Gears to illustrate that AAA can occur on the Wii while being substantially cheaper to develop, not to limit this discussion to only AAA games.
No evidence to support that broad claim you know. I wish there were however as I think this could be a very good discussion if we knew for sure on a title by title basis.
Yes, but you didn't factor in any of the assets which don't scale down near as much. Writing, level design and testing don't really scale down nearly as much as the graphic assets might. I'm not certain the actual development costs of a wii title vs a comparable 360 title would be, but I expect that they are a lot closer than your 1:10 ratio.
I think the old axiom 'you get what you pay for' can be applied for games development. If you want to make a truly stellar game on any platform you are going to have to lay out a bit of cash. More time tuning the engine to get the most out of the hardware, more times ripping up your work and starting from scratch because x just wasn't right. I'm certain the wii will take a few dollars off the front of development cost, but as you scale up to AAA quality efforts I doubt the cost difference is measured in orders of magnitude.
I'd be very surprised if something like mario galaxy's cost wasn't measured in $US with an 8 digit number.
<edit>Advertising is also a pretty much flat cost across platforms.
