13 replies to this topic

[Terrabyte20xx]

I was reading about game devs. about the Wii, and I wondered why most of their games wern't very good. They said it was too hard to program for.

So that begs the question, Were the game devs. just lazy, and didn't want to learn how to make a good game, or was the hardware just that "weak."

What do you guys think?

Edit: Added a poll for my convenience.

Edited by Terrabyte20xx, 02 February 2012 - 03:20 PM.

[Nollog]

I haven't seen anyone claim the Wii was "hard" to program for.
The problem was they didn't think the audience was there, so why bother making massive changes to 360 or PS3 code for a small audience.

Yes they're lazy.

[10k]

You should post a link of this article. Many developers for the Wii used these as excuses:

1) Lack of HD - many ports had to be built from the ground up for the Wii
2) Lack of shaders - no shader model was supported by the Wii
3) Motion controls were hard to implement without being gimmicky
4) Only first and second party games sell well on Nintendo consoles
5) Shovelware sold the most on the Wii so why bother putting in so much effort?

[Auzzie Wingman]

I think the idea of having to have the Wii Remote as a default setup turned a lot of devs off from making Wii Games.

[Terrabyte20xx]

You should post a link of this article. Many developers for the Wii used these as excuses:

1) Lack of HD - many ports had to be built from the ground up for the Wii
2) Lack of shaders - no shader model was supported by the Wii
3) Motion controls were hard to implement without being gimmicky
4) Only first and second party games sell well on Nintendo consoles
5) Shovelware sold the most on the Wii so why bother putting in so much effort?

I know I should've, but it wasn't a simple "this guy said this" it was more of spur of the moment kind of thing. I just wanted to know other's opinions on whether or not Devs. Were simply lazy, or if they really tried but failed.

[Deadly Virus]

Not lazy, it's just that with PS3 and 360 being the lead platforms, you couldn't really focus on making the Wii version particularly great unless it was an exclusive. And devs didn't want to make exclusives too often because the console doesn't exactly have the same audience as PS3/360. Honestly, if the Wii was closer to the HD consoles in terms of power, I think it could have got plenty of multiplats. The worst we might have had would be a bunch of games with awkward controls, but then Nintendo fans were already used to that with multiplats on the Gamecube. I know Nintendo had good intentions with underpowering the Wii, but really it did screw them up in the long run...

[Auzzie Wingman]

Yes...

BECAUSE ALL THAT MONEY COUNTS AS A SCREW UP

[Xilefian]

I do believe many game developers were lazy, however there is some good reasoning behind it.

It's well-known that the Wii sold the most consoles, however when you take the individual person on the console, those with Xbox 360s and PS3s bought more games for their system than Wii owners, more software quantities ship on the other two consoles than the Wii so in some respects dedicating more resources to 360 and PS3 games is more profitable.

The Wii exclusives tend to push the graphical power of the Wii greatly, so we know it's possible, it's a shame when you see the PS2 graphic style shovel-ware the console has compared to mario galaxy.

The Wii's low console power also meant that realistic graphics that people were used to on other consoles could not be translated to the Wii, some of the most impressive looking titles have distinctly cartoony effects, Mario Galaxy, Brawl and Skyward Sword, when you take something like Goldeneye Wii which strived for realism, it sadly missed the mark with the low quality character faces and textures, making up for it mostly in the animation department, so in part if you're trying to make a realistic Wii game, it's somewhat not possible considering the competition it stands against with the other consoles, you could say that developers chose to create something that simply works than to attempt to match these other consoles.

One distinct feature that the 360 and PS3 have above the Wii is their software's expandability, games can be patched, updates, new levels, unlocks can be added in, so there's money to be made from those too, dedicating more resources to those consoles could prove profitable over a long period, whereas the Wii takes the old approach of releasing software into the wild to fend for itself, so one bug in the software and it's all over, meaning more resources would have to be dedicated to bug testing for Wii software, which is more time and effort, so perhaps relaxing time spent on the graphics and gameplay lets the bug testing be more thorough to produce software that is solid, even though it's not using the console's full potential.

The Conduit showed that when effort is put into it, a Wii game can look great and achieve the complex effects that the 360 can do, but so much effort was put into that game and when compared to the sales it made, was it really worth it?

[Terrabyte20xx]

I do believe many game developers were lazy, however there is some good reasoning behind it.

It's well-known that the Wii sold the most consoles, however when you take the individual person on the console, those with Xbox 360s and PS3s bought more games for their system than Wii owners, more software quantities ship on the other two consoles than the Wii so in some respects dedicating more resources to 360 and PS3 games is more profitable.

The Wii exclusives tend to push the graphical power of the Wii greatly, so we know it's possible, it's a shame when you see the PS2 graphic style shovel-ware the console has compared to mario galaxy.

The Wii's low console power also meant that realistic graphics that people were used to on other consoles could not be translated to the Wii, some of the most impressive looking titles have distinctly cartoony effects, Mario Galaxy, Brawl and Skyward Sword, when you take something like Goldeneye Wii which strived for realism, it sadly missed the mark with the low quality character faces and textures, making up for it mostly in the animation department, so in part if you're trying to make a realistic Wii game, it's somewhat not possible considering the competition it stands against with the other consoles, you could say that developers chose to create something that simply works than to attempt to match these other consoles.

One distinct feature that the 360 and PS3 have above the Wii is their software's expandability, games can be patched, updates, new levels, unlocks can be added in, so there's money to be made from those too, dedicating more resources to those consoles could prove profitable over a long period, whereas the Wii takes the old approach of releasing software into the wild to fend for itself, so one bug in the software and it's all over, meaning more resources would have to be dedicated to bug testing for Wii software, which is more time and effort, so perhaps relaxing time spent on the graphics and gameplay lets the bug testing be more thorough to produce software that is solid, even though it's not using the console's full potential.

The Conduit showed that when effort is put into it, a Wii game can look great and achieve the complex effects that the 360 can do, but so much effort was put into that game and when compared to the sales it made, was it really worth it?

.....

All that can be said, has been said, you sir, are awesome!

[HaoSenVastForest]

I think that they were just lazy! Because some games look really nice and can compete with 360 graphics! (Conduit 2 specifically) The Wii has allot of potential and I think that the developers need to start to work a little harder.

[Xilefian]

I think that they were just lazy! Because some games look really nice and can compete with 360 graphics! (Conduit 2 specifically) The Wii has allot of potential and I think that the developers need to start to work a little harder.

The conduit 2 runs at 30 frames per second at 480p, so it runs half the speed of most 360 games at less than half the resolution, I'm willing to say that the Wii has hit it's maximum potential and the only thing that can be done now is mix up the graphical style produced by games; mario galaxy, skyward sword, xenoblade chronicles, conduit 2, all look very impressive, but they all have different graphical styles (They're also all Wii exclusives).

[Soul]

MW3 on wii has very good graphics compared to other shooters

Edited by Sportsgamer, 02 February 2012 - 05:29 PM.

[PipoPito]

Sonic Colors looked nice

[Joshua]

My top three reasons as to why devs don't develop much games (good games) for the Wii is:

1. Very limited hardware.
2. Preferred standard controllers to Wii Remotes and Nunchuck. (Or devs have not heard about the Wii Classic Controller )
3. The main audience the Wii attracts (casual gamers).