How important are first-party games to Wii?
Yahoo! News has an interesting, albeit slightly obvious, piece analyzing the importantance of first-party franchises to Wii's success. From the article: "Nintendo doesn't want a repeat of the GameCube performance, a scenario in which it couldn't really get a 'cool factor' going against the PlayStation and Xbox... and the Wii will go only so far with Mario. Nevertheless, Mario -- along with Link and the Zelda franchise -- are important assets for Nintendo, and they both will serve the company well."What do you attribute to Nintendo's DS success? Is it because of great first-party games, intuitive interfacing, strong support from third-parties, growth of the non-gamer market, or all of the above? Answer that with the right mix, and you just might help Nintendo better prepare its "home console elixir" this go around, execution aside of course.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Draco @ Jul 20th 2006 2:09PM
the most important part of the DS was the Brain Training game in my oppinion, and games of the sort, casual games, or learning a la learn english game in Japan.
if the Wii can get some Java games from the net (simple games that take like a day to make alone), it will do awesome! if they can capture the freecell and solitaire players from PC's they are guaranteed victory.
DBX00 @ Jul 20th 2006 2:10PM
I'm really getting tired of people comparing the home console market and the handheld market. Nintendo has dominated the handheld market for years and it didn't translate into success for their home consoles. The way I see it...
Home console - complicated games with an immersive environment and high replay value
Handheld - simple, quick fun games
Nintendo is good at making simple fun games that play well for 30 minutes at a time (zelda is the exception). I can't think of one new game or third party game that is going to change that this time around for the console. If gaming is truly about the games, a controller won't push Nintendo to dominance 5 years from now. Let's be honest, after awhile the controller will no longer be innovative. The games carry a system to the end of its cycle and that's Nintendo's weakest point in the living room.
CakeOrDeath @ Jul 20th 2006 2:10PM
DS is sucessful because of all the free advertising it got from non gaming sources. My Mum bought me a DS because she wanted to see how it worked after reading about it in the financial times. Bear in mind I'm 22 years old.
If nintendo can get my mum interested in gaming, all be it for 10 minutes, they are doing something right.
Jonathan @ Jul 20th 2006 2:10PM
I don't care about what companies make the games, if the system has good games and is affordable, it should be successful. Not saying that first-party games aren't important, but first-party support alone won't be able to satisfy gamers.
Omega697 @ Jul 20th 2006 2:11PM
DS gives me experiences I can't get anywhere else. Wii will do the same thing. That's the key.
HallwayGiant @ Jul 20th 2006 2:12PM
The Wiis success definitely has much to do with first party since those will be big sellers and I doubt the third parties will produce anything of quality. The same can be said about the DS since (in my opinion) the DSs third-party support is rather fleeting at best, at least in the U.S...
J B Cougar @ Jul 20th 2006 2:13PM
What do I attribute the success of the DS to?
That's easy. Frank Stallone.
Ritz @ Jul 20th 2006 2:14PM
Hmm, the mass majority of my Nintendo DS games (New Super Mario Bros, Advance Wars DS, MP Hunters, Kirby CC, Mario and Luigi Partners in Time, Mario 64 DS and Mario Kart DS) are all prettymuch 1st party games, amirite? The other three games, Phoenix Wright, Trauma Centre and Sonic Rush are by Capcom, Atlus and Sega respectivly.
So just considering my current library, selected with no preference to publisher or developer, I think the DS's success continues to be caused by great 1st party titles. I am unsure of other 3rd party games worthy owning, actually, come to think of it.
So, lets say great 1st party support that makes excellent use of the system's features is what is helping the DS along right now.
ManekiNeko @ Jul 20th 2006 2:15PM
The importance of third party support cannot be overstated. It's the lifeblood of any console, and already Nintendo is having difficulty getting third parties aboard the Wii train. If Nintendo can't fix this problem by 2008, the Wii will head down the same rocky path as its predecessors.
JR
32_Footsteps @ Jul 20th 2006 2:16PM
Actually, I'm going to pipe in and say that Nintendo's success lies in figuring out how to maximize their profit. I mean, it's commonly cited that they were actually profiting off the DS hardware from day 1 - in the video game industry, that's unheard of. For all those that want to call the Gamecube a failure, that also pulled a profit for Nintendo.
When even your so-called failures are a net gain for you, that's what I call a recipe for success.
delerious @ Jul 20th 2006 2:19PM
First party titles have always contributed to Nintendo's success. Mario is always the first to tout the system's performance, and last out as one of the best games on the consoles. Without first-party titles, Nintendo would have near to no marketshare. Mario, Donkey Kong & gang, Link, and Pokemon have put them in their place as one of the top publishers/developers.
They would never have gotten along well as Sonic and SEGA did if they never had Mario and Starfox during the SNES vs. Genesis era.
Ask yourself. What would life be without Mario, Luigi, Yoshi, Bowser & the rest? What would it be without the crew of Starfox? What would it be without Link, Zelda and Ganon/Ganondorf? What would it be without Tom Nook and Cyrano? Nothing. I would be outside. I wouldn't be playing games, and neither would you. Think about what I said while I hit up some MKDS.
Revolution @ Jul 20th 2006 2:20PM
@ #6...
hahahaha! That's awesome.
I also contribute the DS' success to Harvey Firestein
Nintendo Cant do it alone! @ Jul 20th 2006 2:23PM
The NES was successful because not only did you have Nintendo's awesome first party games but you had all the third parties on board. Same with the Super NES. When the N64 came out Nintendo burned many bridges and lost third party support because of the use of cartridges. They did the same thing with the Cube with the dumb mini disc.
If Nintendo doesnt get lots of quality third party support then the console is doomed. Nintendo cannot do it alone and has proved that with the N64 and the Gamecube.
Success in the handheld world has nothing to do with home consoles. Anyone that says otherwise is a moron. If portables transferred over to the console realm then Nintendo would of never lost first place in the home arena.
Nintendo needs the Rainbow Six's, the Ghost Recon's, the Final Fantasies and ther rest. Nintendo does not do enough to ensure their success. If I were Nintendo I would lower the licensing fees to have what they are of any competitor. Make the system retail at no more than $150.00 and have 10 million consoles produced between now and December 24. That way they have a mass market price and units to fill the immediate demand. The launch window is by far the most important window to meet demand as it will sustain you. The more units that Nintendo can get in the hands of gamers the more likely third parties will stand by that console. They do that and they will take the console wars.
martin @ Jul 20th 2006 2:27PM
Honestly, you people who think that simple, quick, and fun are only good for the handheld market have really got to look at the top console games.
Most of the top console games are ones that are simple, quick, and fun (but usually packed into a very long game experience.)
GTAIII and its reiterations. All this game really is is a bunch of small missions put together. What makes that different from something like Wario Ware or Brain Training??? The only difference is is the amount of different missions and that it is interconnected. Another PS2 best seller- GT4. What is that, a racing game, which is just a bunch of 'short(kinda)' missions... ie races all tied up into one tournament.
HALO- just a bunch of missions...
all games are are really just quick pick up and play missions... most of the console ones just seem to tie together.
Who is to say that brain training... Nintendogs... and other pick up and play, simple, quick, and fun games won't end up boosting a console's sales????
KrazyIan @ Jul 20th 2006 2:29PM
I think that Nintendo is in a unique position to change gameplay with the DS and Wii because it has a strong first-party library to fall back on.
Because of the staples of gaming Nintendo has (Mario, Zelda etc...), they know that people will be getting the system even if they are unsure of the new interface methods.
Conversely, I dont think that Microsoft could have attempted the Wii-mote style gaming this generation because they don't have the stable of franchises to support them initially.
Dracula Jones @ Jul 20th 2006 2:29PM
I think for the first time since the Super Nintendo, first and third party games are of equal importance and are being treated that way by Nintendo. N64 had a lot of poor quality 3rd party games, and not enough first party games. The Cube had fantastic first party games, but they had to carry the console, with hardly any third party support. It seems like Nintendo finally sees the importance of balance on the Wii. Just look at the launch lineup, and the games that have been announced for after launch. They've got tons of great first party games covering all genres, and most 3rd party publishers have promised some really interesting (and sometimes exclusive) games.
nyc @ Jul 20th 2006 2:36PM
I don't think anyone at nintendo R&D is going to read these comments. Sorry.
DBX00 @ Jul 20th 2006 2:40PM
martin
I think the developers that spent months creating the environments for those games would disagree. My point is that Nintendo can't put out enough first party games on a quick and consistent time table to dominate the home console market like it does for the handheld. Sure, Zelda and Mario are awesome games but what happens when those two games are released by early 2007 and I have to wait a year for the next good first party game and there's nothing coming out from third party distributors. At any rate, we'll see what happens. I just can't see a controller changing the landscape of the market unless they come out with some great games (and brain age on the Wii isn't going to cut it).
riffgod @ Jul 20th 2006 2:42PM
First, there are those who go out and buy it just because it's the newest offering from Nintendo. I think this number especially on the portable front is on the incline.
Secondly, price comparison to competition. Nintendo really doesn't get that much competition in the portable market. Their biggest probably being the Sega game gear (which I still play mine). The simple facts that their was something to compare it to. The PSP coming out around the same time with a higher price tag and not much of an offering gamewise made the DS look like a good buy. Also, to a lesser extent, the N gage (on it's last legs), was an example of what not to do.
Third, was "WOW" factor. Wow, this isn't like the normal gaming devices we're used to. Wow, this may actually change the way we play games from here on out. Wow, how do they put all of that into something that fits into my pocket.
Most importantly however is the games. Nintendo started throwing out games that has new ways to play and new twists on old standards and games people actually were getting excited about trying. While Nintendo did this the only thing we saw from the compeition was ports and sub par ports at that. Same control configuration that we've been playing playstation games on for what, 10 years now. That and Sony wanted us to buy and re-buy movies in a format that we could only use to watch them on a screen smaller than my hand, while we hold it still, for the entire length of the movie.
josh @ Jul 20th 2006 3:05PM
The most important thing about it is how the new interface works... if that is a failure (for example, if it's not responsive enough), the Wii will fail.
Next up is 1st party games. People buy Nintendo primarily for Zelda, Mario, Metroid, etc...
Then, 3rd party support - the main reason the Gamecube was not a hit.
Finally, I would say online support. Online support is important, but good interface which allows what a game system is for - GOOD GAMES - is the most important.
Brian @ Jul 20th 2006 3:08PM
I attribute the DS's success to first-party titles & the big three -- Capcom, Konami, and SQEX.
Charlie @ Jul 20th 2006 3:10PM
What attributes to Nintendo's DS success is not because of great first-party games or growth of the non-gamer market? My answer to that is NO COMPETITION. But now Nintendo should worry about Microsoft and some other formidable challengers that have shown interest in portable gaming market. Look what Apple is trying to do with their future iPod.
josh @ Jul 20th 2006 3:10PM
"Make the system retail at no more than $150.00 and have 10 million consoles produced between now and December 24."
This is ridiculous.
To profit, you want to find the delta between demand and production. You DON'T want pay extra to rush production of 10 million units when you can only sell 8 million. Then you pay more to shut down all the factories for 6 months while you sell out of your backstock, then pay again to refit those factories when you need to start production up again!
Sounds like a great way to lose money.
HOUSE @ Jul 20th 2006 3:11PM
Hey guys,
I thought I'd report this to you guys regarding the US Wii release date. I've been following Nintendo's release patterns for a LONG time and can say this I've narrowed down the release date of the Wii. Here's how.
-Since the early release of Nintendo 64 (which came out Thursday, Sept. 27, 1996 unofficially and on Sunday, Sept. 30, 1996), Nintendo has traditionally released hardware on a Sunday. Now I was too young to go back any further than that (can anyone help on SNES, NES?)
-Gamestop recently posted a new release date of Marvel Alliance for the Wii for Tuesday, Oct. 24. Companies tend to release new hardware launch games the week before a new system comes out (not to say some companies have released games sooner than that, but the norm is the week before). Also, Oct. 24 is pretty specific. (Update: Upon further investigation, all the other versions of the same game are coming out that day, except for the XBox 360 version, so it's possible that Gamestop just generalized that date when Activision announced the release date.)
-Nintendo has been good to Europe lately with releases.
-EA Europe has a Need For Speed Carbon release date set for Nov. 3. This coming from Gaming Age Forums.
-Nintendo's will of course release the Nintendo Wii in the US ahead of Europe.
-This all seems to point to an October 29 release date in the US.
We shall see soon enough.
Scott @ Jul 20th 2006 3:15PM
@ #2
"I can't think of one new game or third party game that is going to change that this time around for the console."
There are a lot actually. Besides Zelda there is metroid prime 3, dragon quest, final fantasy CC, super smash bros brawl, call of duty 3, sadness, super mario galaxy, sonic wildfire, project HAMMER, Excite Truck, Red Steel, Elebits, Tony Hawk,Super Monkey Ball, Madden, Rayman, Disaster Day of Crisis, resident evil.
Thats just some that fit your definition of home console games. On top of that I really think that definition is very limited. Console games should have every type of games including fun and simple and complex and immersive games. In fact, its harder to think of the simple quick games. All I can think of are the Wii sports, music, air games and wario ware smooth moves.
"The games carry a system to the end of its cycle and that's Nintendo's weakest point in the living room."
Are you serious? Nintendo is known for making the best games.
Meekrob @ Jul 20th 2006 3:18PM
Third party support is huge. Look at the Nintendo 64, in many ways considered a failure. The first and second party titles were incredible, better than anything else on the market at the time. How many 'Best Game Ever' titles appeared on that system? Mario 64, Goldeneye, Ocarina of Time...
Sony was propelled to the front on the backs of a dizzying number of quality third party titles. Nintendo needs to win those back, and solid first party titles alone won't be enough.
Spectral @ Jul 20th 2006 3:25PM
First party games should be priority. I mean you can't have a Nintendo console without Nintendo games, right?
Mario, Zelda, and Metroid will all be there. It's just the case on how often they'll appear and if Nintendo is willing to take the risk on putting these franchises into new territory.
However when it comes to 3rd party support, when Nintendo finally decides to make the game medium mainstream with the DVD, we're now facing a brand new control interface. While Nintendo opened one door them, they closed another one and ahead lies the challenges to develop for it. It's up to the 3rd parties if they want to make games for it or not, or better yet, be up to the challenge to do so. The wild card is there, but it's up for them to play the hand.
J.Goodwin @ Jul 20th 2006 3:25PM
There certainly is a difference between "success" and "profitability."
Nintendo has long had a strategy where it is a key factor that around 50% of the titles are first party games, or at the very least, 50% of game sales are of first party games.
Nintendo retains the entire margin on games that they develop in house, whereas for their 3rd parties, they get only their licensing fee (in the console industry, typically 7 dollars, and in the case of major Japanese 3rd parties, FREQUENTLY less than 7 dollars if they are going to be convinced to support your hardware. Microsoft refused to cut that kind of deal on the Xbox, and paid the price, even though they were offering ad comp dollars to these guys that were probably more than they would have received through license discounts. Microsoft ultimately ended up entering into a license fee rebate program where if you sold over certain milestones, you got some of that money back).
The more first party games that Nintendo sells, the EASIER it is for them to make money on fewer units (losing money on the hardware and making money on the software, they can sell fewer software units if they are keeping the entire margin instead of only getting seven dollars or less per unit of software sold). The problem is selling any units if all you have is first party support, because the public perception is that developers aren't in support of the platform, and that the games that you want to play may not be available on it.
Drew @ Jul 20th 2006 3:37PM
I think Nintendo is trying to get away from the whole mindset (and sometimes reality) that you are making a huge investment by buying its console. If someone buys a PS3, they had better be sure they want it badly because it will set them back $600 before they have even bought one of the $60-$70 games. You have to decide (unless you're rich) between PS3 and 360. You can have either of those systems and still be able to afford the Wii and its lower cost games. For that reason, it doesn't need the Rainbow 6's and GTA's. It could very well survive simply on it's own high-quality 1st party games because it's a fun, cheap system that people will be interested in because of the novelty, just as the case has been for the DS.
Loque @ Jul 20th 2006 3:39PM
well, if Wii connect 24 works the way it is supposed to, I can see 3rd party working well for nintendo, expecially the Indie crowd with the hella-cheap dev kits.
...Just be sure to grab an external harddrive to hold those suckers on :)
mnugghuhx @ Jul 20th 2006 3:47PM
#20 _ The DS has the biggest competition any nintendo system has ever faced. The number one game company in the world put out a system that crushes the DS in every technical category (the PSP, of course). It doesnt have the games to compete with nintendo. Nintendo wins because of its unique experience that everyone (including parents and New York Times reviewers) can understand and enjoy.
Tinn @ Jul 20th 2006 3:50PM
Lots of 3rd party games doesn't boom any console's initial sales. It's only the end product because developers find out who got the most consoles sold. It's a business afterall. 3rd party games can only carry the console to victory from about the mid-life span, say 2008 for this gen.
The bottom line is: if the console sells better than the others, 3rd party games come along. And what makes the console sells better? Francise games, public/media hype (which is kind of unpredictable). Wii seems to be on the right track so far, and DS already did.
Low price doesn't seems to be a big factor; look at the poor Cube. But high price tag like PS3 definitely is a barrier.
And why do ppl keep saying Wii doesn't have enough 3rd party support? It'll have more than 20 games + virtual console games by Christmas, that's not much less than PS3 (30 launch games?). And I'll bet Wii's launch games' quality will be much better than PS3's.
Let's see how many 3rd party games will Wii has by 2008 :)
SiliconHero @ Jul 20th 2006 3:55PM
I'm going to say third-party support is the main factor for the success of the DS, of which the Gamecube wasn't able to get a whole lot. Granted, Nintendo's always found a way to get A, AA, and AAA franchises for their systems (Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, etc.), but with companies like Namco Bandai and Sega on board, it certainly helps them avoid being a one-company pony.
@werk @ Jul 20th 2006 3:57PM
J B Cougar more like J B Winner!
billychaos @ Jul 20th 2006 4:06PM
I think the DS's success was all the advertisement. I also say this was a key factor to the success of sony's ps1. Remember when the ps1 was out, commercials, ads, game ads, were everywhere. Everything was sony sony sony. The same can be said now about iPod. iPod is everywhere. It all comes down to marketing.
Nintendo marketed the DS very well. I even think they may have marketed it a lot better than they have with the 8-bit system (which originally the general public turned away and it almost flopped!). It didnt take long at all for the DS to go nutz. I think if they spend the same amount of money and time promoting the Wii's new functionality as they did with the DS, you'll see the same results.
molecule @ Jul 20th 2006 4:17PM
A steady stream of quality software, cheaper than the other guy's system (and games), and of course, innovation that is appealing to everyone--THAT'S why the DS has sold and will sell well in the forseeable future. Oh, and the fact that the DS reenergized a Japanese market that was gradually becoming uninterested and indifferent towards videogames.
Xenikos @ Jul 20th 2006 4:19PM
#14
"GTAIII and its reiterations. All this game really is is a bunch of small missions put together. What makes that different from something like Wario Ware or Brain Training???"
What? Does this make sense to anyone?!? GTAs games feature huge, immersive and dynamic worlds. Those games feature short little discrete mini games. I can't think of a game LESS like GTAIII than Wario Ware.
Short little mini games = the model Nintendo apparently has in mind. The Wii's technological limitations are going to preclude it having precisely those GTA-esque immersive games....it isn't just graphics and sound quality you're sacrificing! You're going to need discs with 10-20 gigabytes of capacity to stream the huge environments coming from some games since you sure as hell can't swap cds/cartridges in the middle of those kinds of games...you're gonna need a storage medium capable of handling that size (aka BR) sooner than many people think.
I'd buy the Wii if they come out with some surprising, exclusive 3rd party games. Think outside the damn Triforce. #23: ExciteTruck?!?!? Oh boy, I laughed for awhile about that one. A few people in my office gave me weird looks. Excitetruck....hahaha.
Woody @ Jul 20th 2006 4:24PM
If you look at gamerankings.com best games for DS based on reviews, Nintendo takes top honours by far like 60+% of top 30. Capcom and Atlus have a couple.
I'm actually surprised Sega isn't pumping out more games for this system using genesis type gameplay. genesis had lots of good games (although mostly 3rd party).
James @ Jul 20th 2006 4:39PM
I think 3rd parties will be a lot more important for Wii but they don't seem to be as important for the DS. I mean most 3rd parties are kind of shite at making quality handheld games. Just look at the PSP(which is 90%of all its games unfortunatly), and then look at the DS's third party stuff, most is pants. Although I do agree it's needed it gives variety and there are the few 3rd party exceptions but Nintendo seem to be the only company to really put effort into making quality handheld software over and over again.
I guess it's cause most third parties are still fixated on there home console projects and don't really view handhelds worthy of there time *cough*gimmicky DS games *cough* PS2 ports on PSP *cough*
climbnotgame @ Jul 20th 2006 5:17PM
I waited to buy a DS specifically because I was waiting for 3rd party support since I was still stinging from buying a Gamecube and watching it collect dust. Crippled ports of multiplatform games would not suffice. I demand exclusives!
Castlevania, Phoenix Wright, Age of Empires, and news of games coming down the pipeline like Final Fantasy III all made that decision for me. Nintendo, brilliant as their games are, seemed to release at a pretty slow rate so there was rarely something that I was really looking forward to on the Gamecube cycle, besides rushed sports games starring Toad and whoever the hell Waluigi is.
I couldn't care less about any coolness factor or how many mature games are on a system as long as there's a steady stream of quality games coming out. The 1st party quality is guaranteed by this point, but man cannot survive on mario alone.
Dummy @ Jul 20th 2006 6:08PM
In Regards to Josh who says that you dont want to produce 10,000,000 units because you may overrun demand. That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.
If 10,000,000 people dont want to buy the Nintendo console at $150.00 worldwide then the console is going to fail.
Or in your mind it already has. Joshy boy you dumbass
vidGuy @ Jul 20th 2006 6:18PM
Nintendo's first party offerings will sell the consoles. I'm buying one for LoZ:TP, SMG, Wii Sports, and Mario Party. I'm also excited about Nintendo's new IPs, and I hope that a big hit comes out of them. A new franchise would really add some spice to Nintendo's lineup.
But the console can't thrive on 1st party titles alone. 3rd party support will win it the console war. If they have the largest game library (which is quite possible with support growing and the ease and low cost of developing for the Wii), they'll be the most attractive to the non-gamers looking to jump in - just as the PS2 was.
3rd party offerings will also keep the system fresh. The N64 and GC both had a moderate list of amazing games, but the 1st party offerings were too far between. With the right amount of 3rd party games (read: as many as possible), gamers will have a wide selection to choose from to buy up and play between Nintendo's releases. I'm looking forward to Red Steel and Sadness, and I expect many other quality games to come within the first year of the Wii release.
vidGuy @ Jul 20th 2006 6:30PM
Actually, Dummy, Josh is right.
The point is not that 10 million can or cannot be sold, it's the marginal cost of producing more units versus the marginal benefit.
If you limit supply, there is a pressure on demand while the equilibrium price stays constant. Basically, by creating a somewhat limited supply, Nintendo would up demand.
I believe that Nintendo will easily sell it's 6 million at $199 by it's deadline in early 07. Then they'll set a new goal, and they'll beat that. But they'd be stupid to release 6 million consoles on launch day, let alone 10 million.
What I expect them to do is what they've done with the DS and DS Lite: a controlled shortage. They'll deliver limited shipments, say no more than 50 a store, but very often, say once a week. So no consumer will have to go very long without buying one up.
A golden rule in economics: supply cannot create demand, but demand can create supply.
Geist @ Jul 20th 2006 7:49PM
To the "10 million at $150," you're a fool and god help a company if you try to run it.
Probably one of the best reasons (one of them, there's many,) that Nintendo is still with us today, despite failings like the Virtual Boy, and pseudo-failures like the Gamecube and N64, is that they don't need people to buy a bunch of games to satisfy the loss on each console purchased. Nintendo makes money on consoles. Lots of money. Remember the Game Boy Micro, and its point of ~$99? It cost Nintendo about 50 bucks per unit. That's %100 profit, I believe. Hell, even when the Gamecube was finally lowered to $99, the loss on each console was in the single digits. That's why Nintendo doesn't go for the bright and flashy, there's little profit to be made there. They've been around for over a hundred years, I'm sure they know a little more about business than we do.
(btw, Nintendo fanboy here)
Waccoon @ Jul 21st 2006 6:41AM
A silly question.
1st party titles will be critical for Nintendo this time around, since the controller is a very experimental design. Nintendo has to show developers how to apply the technology.
Lou D @ Jul 21st 2006 7:56AM
Geist,
I just beat that game last night, finally. Fun game. Very original. Great graphics (in widescreen progressive scan mode) but very short considering how long it was in development for... Great multiplayer games, but no LAN support or online obviously.
However, I feel n-Space gained alot of experience and will be a key 2nd party developer for Nintendo in the "M" rated scene.
With a 1.4GB disc, the GC left little room for perks like online play and LAN play. Also there was no common foundation for online play like XBL. These are problems that have been addressed with Wii.
The XBOX (original) could have held it's own weight for another year and MS could have polished up the 360 for another year and had all those Japanese-oriented titles ready for this holiday season and really went head-to-head with the PS3 with a better launch library. They could have came out with a bang in Japan and HD-DVD built-in instead they came out with DVD and a whimper.
This has left the door wide open for the Wii and since Wii is using DVD storage but SD visuals and the 360 has to hold HD visuals, a big cross-platform game may possibly require 2 DVDs on the 360 but 1 on the Wii and PS3. Also, since they saw Sony's motion sensing added in the controller, they could still have added the hardware to the controller and released a dev kit library for it in the future.
I think the Wii will be alright because it has differentiated itself, 360 sales are slowing down and enough people were fooled to hold out for the PS3 who may have switched interest to the Wii after E3.
The important thing is developers have taken note of E3. It's not hard to get a Wii game out the door that doesn't use the 3D pointing and motion sensing. So traditional games won't be a problem. Unique games that do take real advantage of it will take longer but is what will make the system truly shine.
Look for RTS games to finally take off on a console (Wii). The FPS interface will be polished.
Wii will be able to produce FPS games with RE4's Leon level of detail and do 540p in widescreen and that will be good enough. Like I said at the beginning. Geist looks great on my 50" widescreen. So did Metroid 1 & 2. With some more polygons and better textures, it will be fine.
Coincidentally, the Wii can detect pixel accuracy up to 1024x768, if it's got progressive scan output (confirmed), that's within the realms of 960x540 which upscales well to 1080i or p. Think about that.
JGE @ Jul 21st 2006 8:17AM
I would say 1st party titles are very important to Nintendo. They're the only reason I buy Nintendo consoles. If it weren't for Metroid, Mario, StarFox and Zelda I would have given up on them after Super Nintendo.
fumar @ Jul 21st 2006 1:31PM
Nintendo made huge amounts of money on the Gamecube becuase it didnt loose money for them to produce it. I doubt we will see any RTS' for Wii until it is successful as all of the RTS developers would have to create a new dev team becuase none of them make console games.
#45. The reason Microsoft released Xbox 360 a year earlier than Sony was so that they could establish a market base before Sony ala PS2 and becuase they were still loosing money on the Xbox console(Normally after 4 years console sales will not cause a company loose money despite price cuts becuase of die shrinks and cheaper manufacturing of parts such as disk players, memory and hard drives).
swebb @ Jul 21st 2006 3:40PM
Its the market there going for thats important, The main consoles offer little in the way of mainstream light entertainment, I can't sit with my wife and some friends and ask them to enjoy me playing Oblivion can I? But we can all have a laugh at some party games. Ps2's quiz games fit the bill but very little else involved everyone in a game. Wii will be different, offering plenty of short, fun and exciting games.
Dont get me wrong, I love the epics as much as any avid gamer, but my PC is as good for that as the next-gen consoles.
I'll have a Wii on release because its a fun family toy with some excellent Epics available (Zelda and Metroid will be great for heavy game sessions),its at an excellent price, and everyone in the house will play on it (wife included!) but buying a 360 or PS3 will be a decision considered long and hard!
Brent @ Jul 21st 2006 4:46PM
The Wii already has the "cool factor" going for it. The styling is much more modern than the cube, which wasn't even styled as good as the N64 before it!
Add to that the "dark" Zelda title, which the cube never saw, available at launch and the Mario title at launch, which took a year or so to come out for the cube (and a not-so-great Mario title at that), and I think the Wii has far more promise than the cube.