26 replies to this topic

[GAMER1984]

So I am going to post a video from youtube member Doctre81. He is one of the few that i watch videos from youtube but i think he  might have a point on this one. Nintendo home consoles are exclusive selling consoles. Multiplats dont have a chance for the most part. Maybe sports games which IMO should be east to make a respectable port. It does seem like exclusive titles do more respectable numbers... why dont 3rd parties see that. the fact that zombi U is over 550,000 for a new IP on a new console launch IMO warrants a sequel. i know they didnt put much budget into the game.  I am sure they made a profit. Like he says in the video many 3rd party games sold respectable on Wii enough to warrant sequels. what do you guys think? should 3rd parties focus their nintendo home console efforts more on exclusives?

 

 

[Chrop]

why dont 3rd parties see that. the fact that zombi U is over 550,000 for a new IP on a new console launch IMO warrants a sequel. i know they didnt put much budget into the game.  I am sure they made a profit. 

They came out and said ZombiU was a failure and made them no profit, so they're not making a second game.

[GAMER1984]

They came out and said ZombiU was a failure and made them no profit, so they're not making a second game.

 

no they didnt that was a misquote from a website trying to make hits for negative wii U news. Anyone that played that game can see its bare bone not much budget went into it. If it sold 570k they made a profit of some sort. But zombie U is not the only case. Like said in the video i myself was expecting those games that sold respectable on Wii and had a crowd to have sequels on Wii U.

[Mewbot]

They came out and said ZombiU was a failure and made them no profit, so they're not making a second game.

As GAMER said, there's no way ZombiU failed to make a profit 570k sales is incredibly impressive for a launch title on any system, especially one considered dead, and if Ubisoft didn't expect sales like this and gave the game a massive budget then that's their fault. If anything, they should have been expecting worse sales..

[Nollog]

no they didnt that was a misquote from a website trying to make hits for negative wii U news. Anyone that played that game can see its bare bone not much budget went into it. If it sold 570k they made a profit of some sort. But zombie U is not the only case. Like said in the video i myself was expecting those games that sold respectable on Wii and had a crowd to have sequels on Wii U.

The writing would have been costly, I believe they did research on some unknown prophet and such.

[Mahmoodinho98]

Well my opinion is that we can grab games that are getting developed for next gen and making them exclusive

for example project cars can be a Wii U exclusive specially since its a very nice game that uses the full capabilities of the Wii U and the gamepad I think it will be great

[Nollog]

Well my opinion is that we can grab games that are getting developed for next gen and making them exclusive
for example project cars can be a Wii U exclusive specially since its a very nice game that uses the full capabilities of the Wii U and the gamepad I think it will be great

It's an indie company, they can't afford to make a console exclusive using the assets and the amount of time they're putting in to that game.
You seem to be meaning give Wii U exclusive features, if so you left out a word. I doubt that'll happen either, it makes more sense from the publisher's standpoint to not cut features from versions if they're not Nintendo-versions, as they have nothing to lose with Nintendo buyers, 10 years of shafting them isn't going to go away unless you invest incredibly in the area you shafted for that long, which is not going to happen unless Nintendo buys them.
The others have smartglass as crossplay or whatever, the psv. There's no need to cut features from Nintendo's competitors at all, just make a game with all three in mind, and port between every platform. Of course this will either result in terribly bad horrible Wii U versions, or the better which would be fully acceptable to me and I imagine most people,t slightly inferior Wii U versions, graphically.

[Colinx]

I'd like to see more, even though I doubt ZombiU wasn't close to profitable I'd love a sequel. I think since Sonic and W101 pretty much were flops I hope this wont effect future decisions by 3rd parties.(i think they have legs, which I think Sonic will) I hope we get a Conduit 3 or something original, I'm waiting to see what 3rd party exclusive got for us now.

Edited by Colinx, 28 December 2013 - 08:40 AM.

[Hunter]

I'm still hoping for a ZombiU sequel- especially as sales start to increase. That game has so much potential.

 

Conduit 3 was supposedly in development for Wii U but didn't HVS lose their publisher or something like that? Anyway, I think Nintendo should work with third parties to create exclusives. Partner with smaller developers and bring us more original, exclusive titles.

[Hank Hill]

Conduit 3 was supposedly in development for Wii U but didn't HVS lose their publisher or something like that?

 

They did lose their publisher (Sega) because the Conduit 2 sold like crap. Namely because while the first one sold decently (and is loved by me) they screwed with things they shouldn't have in Conduit 2 (voice actors, the way certain characters acted, turned the lead character from secret-agent to a second-rate Duke Nukem, made the campaign really short, etc...although I did love the wave mode in multiplayer) hence leading to horribad sales.

 

Also, ZombiU wasn't profitable, as that's one of the reasons Rayman Legends was mass-ported to every game system under the sun, and Red Steel 2 wasn't exactly a driving sales force either, but they may have made a profit off of that.

 

As for No More Heroes...the most we've got to go on is this, and that was over two years ago, before the Wii U started selling poorly. Suda51 has been happy with the series' sales in the past on the Wii, so there's a good chance of a sequel.

 

 

[Mahmoodinho98]

It's an indie company, they can't afford to make a console exclusive using the assets and the amount of time they're putting in to that game.
You seem to be meaning give Wii U exclusive features, if so you left out a word. I doubt that'll happen either, it makes more sense from the publisher's standpoint to not cut features from versions if they're not Nintendo-versions, as they have nothing to lose with Nintendo buyers, 10 years of shafting them isn't going to go away unless you invest incredibly in the area you shafted for that long, which is not going to happen unless Nintendo buys them.
The others have smartglass as crossplay or whatever, the psv. There's no need to cut features from Nintendo's competitors at all, just make a game with all three in mind, and port between every platform. Of course this will either result in terribly bad horrible Wii U versions, or the better which would be fully acceptable to me and I imagine most people,t slightly inferior Wii U versions, graphically.

What I mean is the game being only available on Wii U and about the funding it will be provided by nintendo and since it will be released  6-9 month from now they have enough time to work on the game  for Wii U

[3Dude]

They did lose their publisher (Sega) because the Conduit 2 sold like crap. Namely because while the first one sold decently (and is loved by me) they screwed with things they shouldn't have in Conduit 2 (voice actors, the way certain characters acted, turned the lead character from secret-agent to a second-rate Duke Nukem, made the campaign really short, etc...although I did love the wave mode in multiplayer) hence leading to horribad sales.

Conduit 2's campaign was way longer and way better designed than the first games.

The theme change was also for the best, as the first was WAAAAYYYY to self serious for what it actually did, to the point of becoming a joke... Turning it into a tounge in cheek joke was a great way to roll with the punches.

C2 was an infinitely better game than c1, it sold like crap because people were burned by the first game. Same thing happened to rs2.

[Hank Hill]

Conduit 2's campaign was way longer and way better designed than the first games.

The theme change was also for the best, as the first was WAAAAYYYY to self serious for what it actually did, to the point of becoming a joke... Turning it into a tounge in cheek joke was a great way to roll with the punches.

C2 was an infinitely better game than c1, it sold like crap because people were burned by the first game. Same thing happened to rs2.

 

Oh, I didn't say the campaign was bad, nor do I really mind that they made it a little more joke-y. It's just that I hate the voice acting/the fact that the campaign is really short. I did like the game, just like the original more. xP

[3Dude]

The King of All Cosmos, on 28 Dec 2013 - 2:35 PM, said:
Oh, I didn't say the campaign was bad, nor do I really mind that they made it a little more joke-y. It's just that I hate the voice acting/the fact that the campaign is really short. I did like the game, just like the original more. xP

What are you comparing the campaign length too? It cant be the original, as its literally half the length of the second game, and completely repetitive in comparison. or maybe you only found half the mission co-ordinates in c2 or something idk.

I dont typically factor voice acting into whether i like a game or not because it has nothing to do with being a game. When its good its nice, and all other implementations are uniformly bad to me.

C2 having more content, being of an adventure game design with discoverable unlockables ranging from weapon unlocks, powerups, side missions, and new areas, taking place in a great variety of locations, simply beats the snot out of the linear, same area only (the entirety of c1 takes place in dc) whose only other activity besides engaging in poorly designed gunplay with admittedly wonderful weapons (though c2 improves on this as well) is a really, really, bad mini game puzzle using the ase.

c2 beats the pants off c1 in level design, gunplay, enemy variety, terrain variety, boss fights, replayability... Everything, its a game design 1 sided smack down.

The voice acting/story direction is a non factor to me... Aside from the Lincoln/Washington turned bulky space marine is a hilarious yet laser precise jab at the state of the industry today.

[Mahmoodinho98]

guys i mean no offense to any one but aren't we a little  bit of topic

[Radar2032]

3rd Parties will only make a Wii U exclusive if it expects to reach IP sales figures. 

[LinkKennedy]

Man not factoring voice work nowadays sounds crazy lol but to each his own. I certainly factor it in as well as the music and really everything that surrounds the game. Obviously though it's the gameplay that will make or break a game but it's always better when the voices,music,visuals,art styles, etc. can make a full circle.

guys i mean no offense to any one but aren't we a little  bit of topic

Haha yeah

[Nintyfan86]

Companies will want to remain as risk averse as possible. Putting your product in as many markets as possible helps to control risk in a similar manner to investing in stocks with different betas across different industries (over simplistic representation of modern portfolio diversification theory alert). 

 

This is why the Wii U, with the limited audience for these third party titles, receives the low budget port (if it is that lucky). Actually, publishers want to profitable on the platform, but they also want to present if the system turns around. 

 

So, if you want exclusives, this is the best way for it to happen under this environment:

 

• Nintendo creates risk aversion for third parties by funding development
• Nintendo assists with development to prevent disasters that lead to a low ROI (remember, Nintendo still needs to earn above the firm's WACC)
• When the game goes to market, Nintendo makes its' money back first, and then the usual cut from software sales, plus an agree upon premium for the resources utilized

If the game bombs, Ubisoft or EA is left with wasted resources, yet these resources would not necessarily be their top tier clone factory people. No one loses money, except Nintendo, which saves on the staffing costs by taking advantage of the third parties' comparative advantage. 

[3Dude]

LinkKennedy, on 28 Dec 2013 - 4:19 PM, said:
Man not factoring voice work nowadays sounds crazy lol but to each his own. I certainly factor it in as well as the music and really everything that surrounds the game. Obviously though it's the gameplay that will make or break a game but it's always better when the voices,music,visuals,art styles, etc. can make a full circle.


Haha yeah

I obviously enjoy good va over bad va, so if given a choice between the exact same game with either good or bad va, the choice id make is obvious.... But thats not even remotely close to being a scenario.

Good va wont make a bad, broken game better. It will just make cut scenes, that arent even part of the game, that you dont even control better... At which point you ultimately walk down this road:

http://m.neogaf.com/...ad.php?t=736867

Where one has been so brainwashed by publisher marketing you demand to skip gameplay to watch videos, instead of demanding better gameplay you dont want to skip. At which point I not so kindly ask all who actually agree with this to gtfo out of my hobby before they completely destroy it.

Conversely, REMOVING va, actually CAN make a game better, being that the cost of va actually ECLIPSES the cost of making the actual video game, often now even several times over, money that could be spent on making a better game, by say, hiring a level designer, or entire team of designers for the money youll have spare.... to design a world that doesnt suck, or gameplay mechanics that arent crap.

The only part of a games production that is more vulgarly priced and less related to the game today is the ADVERTISING BUDGET, which actually completely eclipses THE ENTIRE COST of making an actual game (Game programming, asset creation, voice acting, music recording etc). Its disgusting,

So, no, I do NOT factor va into the worth of a game, as what was once a nice bonus that enhanced the immersion of great games, has been twisted into a link in a chain thats part of a disgusting shackle imprisoning the industry, caging originality, pioneering, exploration, and any attempts at anything new or fresh, and as a result progress of the industry as a whole has screeched to a halt, as we are stuck playing the same handful of games from the same handful of suspects over and over and over, with only the thinnest coat of paint applied to change them.

[Nollog]

What I mean is the game being only available on Wii U and about the funding it will be provided by nintendo and since it will be released  6-9 month from now they have enough time to work on the game  for Wii U

It won't be only on Wii U, and Nintendo aren't funding it though.

guys i mean no offense to any one but aren't we a little  bit of topic

Isn't the thread topic about third party games?

Exclusives do best on Nintendo, everyone knows that, NMH, Dead Killer Be GameCube Seven, Sonic, ZombiU, an endless list of exclusives that sold like rainbow when tried on "big-boy" consoles.