Data shows Wii games discounted fastest
by Randy Nelson 
{ Nov 25th 2008 at 8:15PM }
Not all that waggles on Wii is gold. It turns out there's a reason we've been seeing so many Wii games in bargain bins: they're twice as likely to under-perform at retail than PS3 or 360 titles.
Blend Games has obtained a new report from Electronic Entertainment Design and Research (EEDAR) which claims that 15.1 percent of Wii titles are reduced in wholesale price by their publishers (termed "price protection") after only a short time on sale, versus 7.5% on 360 and 9.09% on PS3.
EEDAR analyst, Jesse Divnich, suggests that the larger volume of mainstream and casual titles hitting simultaneously on Wii is part of the problem. "Most publishers typically avoid releasing their big triple-A core targeted titles against other triple-A titles, whereas it is common to see many mainstream/casual titles, targeting similar markets, released in the same week," Divnich explained.
So, release lots of crappy games and more crappy games will end up yellow-tagged. Got it. But do publishers? Hopefully they will, sooner rather than later.
[Via CasualGaming.biz]
Blend Games has obtained a new report from Electronic Entertainment Design and Research (EEDAR) which claims that 15.1 percent of Wii titles are reduced in wholesale price by their publishers (termed "price protection") after only a short time on sale, versus 7.5% on 360 and 9.09% on PS3.
EEDAR analyst, Jesse Divnich, suggests that the larger volume of mainstream and casual titles hitting simultaneously on Wii is part of the problem. "Most publishers typically avoid releasing their big triple-A core targeted titles against other triple-A titles, whereas it is common to see many mainstream/casual titles, targeting similar markets, released in the same week," Divnich explained.
So, release lots of crappy games and more crappy games will end up yellow-tagged. Got it. But do publishers? Hopefully they will, sooner rather than later.
[Via CasualGaming.biz]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
HighFiveJesus @ Nov 25th 2008 8:21PM
well
nintendo's lucky that the machine itself is so alluring.
Jerk Face @ Nov 25th 2008 8:23PM
Wow, I wonder if it's because the console has had literally 4.5 good games since it came out two years ago.
Sora @ Nov 25th 2008 8:59PM
4.5? What's the .5?
Gehodra @ Nov 25th 2008 9:00PM
Twilight Princess?
Nick the Hero of Canton @ Nov 25th 2008 9:14PM
Your hand? That doesn't count, Dale
Ignatius @ Nov 25th 2008 9:19PM
Probably the .5 is No More Heroes.
Jerk Face @ Nov 25th 2008 11:29PM
Yep. Twilight Princess. Awesome game. Awesome Gamecube game.
Gehodra @ Nov 26th 2008 1:56AM
Hah, point for Gehodra.
Cerpin Taxt @ Nov 25th 2008 8:23PM
But, Billy the Wizard, Balls of Fury, and Anubis II were so good!!!
Mr Khan @ Nov 25th 2008 8:23PM
Well yeah, if you're using cumulative averages. The mounds of shit are going to drag down the fact that not a single first-party title has been marked down since release, even given that some of these titles have been propelled into the realm of the top-selling games of the generation
The whole point of shovelware is to get the sales out as quick as possible before you move on to the next cheapo game, savage price-slashing will help that...
PhydeWice @ Nov 25th 2008 8:36PM
Most 3rd party games are shovelware. There are a few diamonds in the rough, like my personal favorites, Blazing Angels and Umbrella Chronicles. The ones that suck essentially focus on the gimmick of the motion controls, the infrared sensors, or both. The two games I've mentioned happen to use the gimmick quite well. Other games will use it, but the overall quality of the game ends up being sub-par.
Titanium_Orchid @ Nov 25th 2008 8:37PM
uggh, looking at the article picture makes me feel bad for people who own a Wii but don't know much about gaming.
They must get burned so often.
ChooChooCharlie @ Nov 25th 2008 8:43PM
My old roommate actually saved one such unfortunate victim in Best Buy a few months back.
A Best Buy employee was "helping" a woman pick out a game for her kid and suggested Alvin and the Chipmunks as an option. My roommate happened to overhear the conversation and, once the employee was out of earshot, confronted the woman and explained to her the terrible mistake she was about to make. I bet that kid doesn't even know how close he was to getting that POS as a gift.
sjs2626 @ Nov 25th 2008 8:48PM
http://www.wiisworld.com/images/boxpics/wii/big/Redneck-Jamboree-US.jpg
tmacairjordan87 @ Nov 25th 2008 9:10PM
Well as I've said before, I blame the consumer as much as Nintendo. If you're buying something without knowing what you're getting into, that's your fault.
Tiptup300 @ Nov 25th 2008 8:38PM
Wow, did you guys know there is this thing called the "Wii", but you say it like happy "WEEEE!" It's crazy, it has like a tv remote that you like move around and it's 100% accurate at everything. Like in this one game to jump, you litterally jump! They even have these games that are 100% FREE with the system. It has bowling and tennis and boxing and it's amazing (and). So you even get tons of exercise while playing the console. It's just a blast to play and it never gets old. It's the most gosh darn gee golly darn system ever!
j.howlett @ Nov 25th 2008 8:42PM
but the games i want don't drop in price on wii. the ps2 remakes are interesting but not at $50 when i already have the game. we got bully again because we liked it so much and the extra classes were intriguing but some sections became difficult when compared to the ps2 version. i wanted to get okami again but if the controls have issues like i've read it's not worth $50 when i have better controls.
Mr Khan @ Nov 25th 2008 8:46PM
Okami's control issues come mostly at the beginning of the game, due to the gesture that sets off the Reflector weapon. The whip weapon is easy (and fun) as hell to use, and the swords are easy enough.
The Reflector will cause you grief, though
Moptimus Slime @ Nov 25th 2008 8:57PM
1. Okami was never $50, it started at $40, and you can probably find it for either $20 or $30 now
2. It was the reflector. The complains about the nunchuck never surfaced for me, and if you dont purchase the dodge move, you never need to worry about it
3. The rosary weapons were easily the best. The reflectors were to slow and the swords sucked. Maybe its because Im completely fucking retarded, but I never found out how to use them. I would get stuck "charging", then waggling like hell to attack. Rosary is quick, allows a lot of HUGE combos, and does moderate damage.
j.howlett @ Nov 25th 2008 8:59PM
the reason i won't get unless i catch it on sale. i already played and can still play the ps2 version with no frustration. i got the game when it first launched
samfish @ Nov 26th 2008 12:35AM
Okami is $20 dollars at Circuit City on Friday.
You can easily get it for that other places if you hunt around, too.
Also, yeah. The control issues are a bit overblown. The reflector is broken, but you hardly use it in the beginning of the game, anyway. And Fleet Foot is broken, too, but it's not like you need the move.
Over all, the PS2 version is better, just because it has less technical issues...but it's easy to understand why someone would like the Wii version more.
sam @ Nov 26th 2008 8:13AM
You should probably get Okami.
I didn't have any major control issues in battles - the game's not that hard, so who cares if you can't pull off a long combo. If you upgrade weapons etc you'll get through it despite the battle system making basically no sense - I did.
The control issue I have is with the magical spell drawing thingy. It's really, really bad - some symbols take me like ten attempts to draw successfully, which is embarrassing, given that they are all trivial to recognise compared to something like handwriting. This is generally tedious rather than seriously problematic ie you won't lose because you missed drawing a shape, you usually just have to try again.
Overall it's a good game and well worth playing; the 'better than Zelda' hype is an outright lie imo ('not nearly as good as Zelda but it's nice to have a change of style and gameplay seeing as every single zelda game is basically identical' would be more accurate), but it's still good for sure.
I'm not sure I would get it again if I'd already played it on PS2 though, because the Wii changes don't appear to add that much imo...
sam @ Nov 26th 2008 8:15AM
guh, damnit - to clarify the first sentence in my post just above - 'You should probably get Okami' should have said 'if you didn't play it on PS2'. The poster up above had already played the PS2 version, so personally I'd recommend that they skip the Wii one unless they really really want to play it again (even then, I doubt it adds much).
jackbauer @ Nov 25th 2008 8:46PM
wouldn't this be good thing since those lame games like those pictured above are not selling well?
once publishers realize that not all cheap gimmicky games will bring a major amount of profit they will also focus on more less-casual games.
well, my logic is questionable; I thought chicken shoot was a good game for more than an hour.
nick @ Nov 25th 2008 8:53PM
This is my biggest complaint in regards to the Wii. Nintendo, somewhere along the line, decided that quality control was out the window. There are too many third party games being released too freqently on the Wii, and I think in the long term it's going to have a negative impact on the perception of the Wii.
Perhaps they were concerned that they wouldn't have enough games and are over compensating. But I think it's time to start emphasizing quality over quantity.
In a sense this happened to Microsoft too on the XBLA, and they've stated they were going to do something about it. There were too many games being released there, a number of which should have never been released. And I'm not talking about ports. I'm talking about games that are simply not fun to play or simply don't work well.
At any rate, there needs to be some control. If you harken back to the Atari 2600, it's the thing that pretty much killed them. Too many games, many of which weren't that great.
Mr Khan @ Nov 25th 2008 8:59PM
The key difference with the 2600 analogy that people keep drawing is thus: 2600 had no licensing whatsoever, therefore, 2600 games were not guaranteed to actually work. You could pay $30 or whatever for a cartridge and find out you just bought an expensive hunk of inert plastic
That, at least, has not been true for Wii titles.
However, the ramifications could be the same. The idea behind the crash of 83 was that consumers had been burned too many times on broken products and simply stopped buying, especially when that problem leeched up to the highest caliber of 2600 release (ET)
WhatIsThatThing @ Nov 25th 2008 9:44PM
Speaking of ET for the Atari 2600, I recently found a copy at a garage sale for $1. So I bought it. I don't even have a console to play it on.
Does...does this make me a bad person?
Markez @ Nov 25th 2008 9:58PM
It makes you a renaissance man.
nick @ Nov 25th 2008 11:35PM
I don't recall ever coming across a game that didn't work on the 2600. I do remember the flood of poor quality games. There were so many released so quickly that the prices dropped significantly. A lot of latter day games simply weren't that fun. And people lost interest.
My point is, too many games too quickly is not a good thing. Nintendo came around after the 2600 and started the whole seal of quality thing, where they controlled the release of games. Then some years later, they seemed to have forgotten that part of their history. It almost seems as if they'll release anything. I'd like to see a little more quality control from Nintendo when it comes to third parties.
FSK405K @ Nov 26th 2008 12:43AM
Think of how much fun it would be to dig a hole in the desert for all the Wii ports, toss them in, then douse them with gasoline and a lit match?
sam @ Nov 26th 2008 8:25AM
The seal of quality thing was just that, though: it meant the game worked. Of course, Nintendo's real reason for controlling licensing, and the 'Seal of Quality' branding, was that they earned money from game sales! It was just a good excuse to make a point of that at the time.
I don't believe they ever imposed any control on actual game quality (as in how good the game is), rather than technical game quality (as in does it work).
Or did they? Are there any documented instances of Nintendo refusing to reduce a game because it worked fine but was just mediocre?
Personally, I don't think it's appropriate for Nintendo to apply restrictions to their system and I'm pretty sure they have been criticised before for that. I.e. if you make a game and it isn't too buggy and it gets the official censorship rating that your policy requires (M) and you're paying the cash then you can release it.
It would be nice if maybe they would actually introduce a new version of the Seal of Quality. Maybe a star, they like stars. Sort of 'Nintendo Approved Quality', which is granted to third parties as well, basically anything that's decent and not shovelware... Unfortunately I don't see any way to do this sensibly (i.e. rather than just in a payola manner) before a game's release. You could do it after based on Metacritic score... but would they support a sticker their own games occasionally don't get... I doubt it... so it's probably a doomed idea, and best left to customers unfortunately.
nick @ Nov 26th 2008 1:56PM
I thought the seal of quality basically meant they kept publishers from releasing too many titles too quickly. Basically you couldn't dump games into the market without going through Nintendo, which is the reverse of what happened with Atari. Anyone could release a game for the 2600 whenever they wanted.
Ozborne @ Nov 25th 2008 9:03PM
I really would love to have been in the room when that creative genius pitched "Billy the Wizard". Even surrounded by people conducive to putting out unashamed crap, and at the height of the Harry Potter craze, that still has to be a hard sell.
I just hope they get to follow up with their other cash-ins: Frank the WW2 Soldier, Peter the Orc and Joe the Plumber.
kaneda26 @ Nov 26th 2008 9:48AM
"An unrelated study, however, shows that most Wii games suck."
Damaga @ Nov 25th 2008 9:14PM
Atari.
2600.
mewoks @ Nov 25th 2008 9:44PM
Unless the games are actually made by Nintendo...then they stay the same price forever.
Alien Lord @ Nov 25th 2008 10:26PM
To sell shit you have to discount shit, release more decent games for Wii and you wont have to discount so many.
Zephiel @ Nov 25th 2008 11:22PM
and yet if they pay one programmer for a month of work and sell it for $10 a copy they still make more than they do paying 100+ programmers for 2 years of work at $50 a copy.
I don't see this logic having much of an impact.
mr nimblewick @ Nov 25th 2008 10:32PM
I would like to see a comparison between the Wii and the system that had all the crap shovelware last generation... the PS2. It's not fair to judge between a popular machine and two less popular machines.
mewoks @ Nov 26th 2008 12:19AM
Numbers/Ratings from Metacritic
PS2: (Approx. 8 Years)
535 Good Games (33.7%)
908 Mixed/Average (57.3%)
141 Bad Games (9.0%)
Wii: (Approx. 2 Years)
66 Good Games (21.0%)
184 Mixed/Average (58.4%)
65 Bad Games (20.6%)
Wii has a significantly higher percentage of bad games, and a significantly lower percentage of good games.
mr nimblewick @ Nov 26th 2008 8:01PM
Do you have the figures for after two years for the PS2? How about the timeframe for PS2 games to be reduced in price after 2 years? Do you have any relevant statistics?
Wiinterfang @ Nov 25th 2008 10:58PM
These crappy gift makes people appreciated games better, when I have my Dreamcast I say to him I wanted Resident Evil: Code Veronica was a gift but he end up Buying me Urban Chaos, the game has not good but I end up having fun and appreciated RS:CV a lot more when I get it.
caserb @ Nov 25th 2008 11:26PM
If you waggle the wii controller hard enough, these games will stop sucking and all of your dreams will come true.
Go 'head. Try it.
...Come one, don't be shy.
Premature ejaculation man @ Nov 26th 2008 1:24AM
If you do follow caserb's truthful and worderful advice, please upload it to youtube.
Lekko @ Nov 26th 2008 1:22AM
I just hate most that people associate wii games with like, you know, the real games we actually play.
So all these people that own wii games and play those discounted lame arcade remakes think that's what we're doing when we talk about our games, that they're the same thing. They are not the same, at all. I hate being lumped into the same category of gamers as wii folk.
t_m @ Nov 26th 2008 6:23AM
Last generation the PS2 games were always discounted, and the xbox ones weren't far behind.. but gamecube games NEVER got discounted.
I imagine it comes with the territory of having more games, more customers, and probably more trade ins that force game prices down.
Dante G @ Nov 26th 2008 10:33AM
I don't know about you, but I think this is a good thing for cheap gamers, cause we know which games to buy. It sucks though for developers whose games get drowned in the shovelware waves. Kinda like what happened with Zack and Wiki. It was bad for capcom to have to drop the price so soon, but it was a good thing for us cheap bastards who bought the game less than $30.
justinslot @ Nov 26th 2008 1:23PM
There was a Balls of Fury game??? That's the most ridiculous movie tie-in since Porky's for the 2600.
Of course now I have to buy it.