That reminds me. I should play these games...

The Chronicles games were awesome. No reason to not make any money.

Hmm...I'd normally be excited to hear that two games I really enjoyed on Wii are coming in HD to a platform I actually play games on more than twice a year.  However, I've been trying Move out on several titles of late (Child of Eden, House of the Dead Overkill), and the thing's been a total piece of crap. Stuttering cursors, disappearing cursors, calibration errors, etc. have made playing games with the thing almost impossible.  Plus, even when it does work, that trigger's really terrible due to how soft and mushy it is when you press it.

Maybe it's better with the Sharpshooter accessory.  I'll look into that when we're closer to the release of these games.

its a bit sad... i mean the wii is missing out on SOOO many games this year..


SF3 3rd strike online...mortal kombat arcade kollection....xmen arcade...voltron..and RE operation racoon city...the list goes on and on...
nintendo a really falling behind.

We'll get RE: Revelations!

...which will probably be later ported to Vita.

I agree with the "share the love" sentiment. These are great games that found an appreciative audience on Wii, but expanding that audience is all good in my mind.  HD graphics won't hurt a bit either.

Absolutely.  I mean, it's all about what's fair right?

The HD consoles got ports of one-time Wii exclusives like No More Heroes, HotD Overkill, GoldenEye 007, Dead Space Extraction, NBA Jam, de Blob 2 ... that's just off the top of my head so I'm sure I'm forgetting some.

Anyway, we can be mature about it because the Wii got ports of ... hmm... Chop 'til You Drop was more of a variant than a port.  What else.... umm... help me out here guys?

It's a hell of a lot easier to port from Wii to PS3/360 than the other way around, and while I personally like Chop Till You Drop the results aren't generally very good when you do do it. The Wii would have gotten tons of ports from the other systems if it were capable of running them; you can't really blame this on the developers.

Well, I'm glad I could check this thread out for a little while. I'm totally bailing before people lose their shit over companies not graphically downgrading their games for Wii.


Also, Modern Warfare Reflex


And this humorous potential PR bullet point for one of these downgrade games: "It's the same game you loved on 360/PS3, but without HD graphics! Or a strong online interface!"

It would be interesting to compare sales figures: will these RE spin-offs fare better on PS3 than they did initially?


Weren't there a few "Wii exclusive" games ported after slow sales on Nintendo's console that didn't see notable sales on HD consoles either? I seem to remember hearing that No More Heroes, House of the Dead: Overkill, and Dead Space Extraction all saw tepid sales on HD consoles - but can't find any source now. If true then maybe sales figures have less to do with the console than the game being offered.

For most companies, these are the things they plop out for the profit to make their new stuff. Capcom is especially guilty of this.

Not trying to be a jerk, but I really need to know WHY that is.  People say it and it makes no sense to me.  Instead of NPCs with 100 points of articulation running through the background, why not just give them 10 points of articulation?  Why not scale the 50 destructible environments down to 10?  Doesn't the lower resolution alone mean you don't need as much horsepower?

We need specific answers!

If they put in the effort, the sales would follow.  So yes, we can blame the developers.  They crammed SF4 to the iPhone but not to the Wii? I've played RE5 on the PC all the way through.  There is nothing at all that stands out in my mind that RE4 didn't prove was possible on the Wii.

So, what the heck... ?

Yes, I do believe that is true.

And this is why it further seems like it really doesn't matter how a game sells originally.  You can see cases for both sides of the philosophy.  "This sold poorly on Wii, let's spend money and surely it will do better in HD!" or "this sold great on Wii, imagine how well it will do once we enhance it for the HD consoles!"

So really, I don't think Wii sales really matter at all.  It's more a matter of how much "buzz" and "hype" the 'hardcore' community gives to a game. 

Yea, cuz all these HD ports definitely use the PR bullet: "It's the same game you loved on Wii, but without the pointer (or motion) controls that made it unique!"

Plus, not sure about yours but my Wii has online built right in.  Works great.  I have over a thousand hours between Brawl, Kart and MHTri.

.................. so why do other companies not know this?

The problem with down-porting from consoles like the PS3 or 360 to the vastly technologically inferior Wii is that for all the time; money; and manpower you'd have to spend to take all your HD assets and strip them down so they could run on the thing (which is harder than you'd think), you might as well just build a new game from the ground-up for the Wii.  And it just doesn't make sense to do that for the Wii, especially as the years went on and increasingly more core-oriented Wii 3rd party games failed to sell on the platform.

On the flipside, when you move a game from the Wii to the HD consoles, you theoretically only have to change code and increase the output resolution as the assets are perfectly compatible with the existing hardware.  At that point, you're just adding features or assets instead of having to practically rebuild your entire game from scratch.  It's far easier and cheaper than going the other way around, and the HD consoles have long since established themselves as places where core-oriented games can sell.  I have my doubts that the Chronicles games will just based on them needing the Move, but Capcom can certainly try and it won't cost them that much.

It all comes down to cost and what companies would expect as the return on their investment.  Games sell on the HD consoles and the iOS devices.  Just Dance and Nintendo titles sell on the Wii.  It's not that hard to see why the Wii missed out on the titles it did, and it would probably have missed out on far fewer if Nintendo hadn't been so stuck in the past technologically when designing the Wii.

Besides, I don't know why you'd expect these games to stay on the Wii when multi-platform releases are so common these days.  The only thing originally keeping these games from crossing platforms was that there weren't the appropriate interface devices on the HD consoles.  Now there are, so these companies are trying to save cash in a down economy by raiding their old Wii titles.  You asked what you got in return for Wii titles now traveling to the HD consoles?  Several years of exclusivity.  That's more than most 3rd party titles can say on the HD consoles.

It's simple. To get a Wii game to work on a more powerful system, you "just" need to translate the code. Then you can upgrade the models/textures if you want. To get a 360/PS3 game to work on Wii, you have to, at best, reduce the components of the models/textures, and at worst, redo the runtime of the game to fit within speed and memory constraints, which is essentially rewriting the whole game. With such a large difference in power, it's far easier to add than it is to subtract (the resolution difference is a minimal consideration compared to the amount of data/polys/effects/etc. that can be pushed, which is something Nintendo either didn't consider or severely underestimated). Usually, the multiplatform devs don't even try this and get separate developers to handle the Wii versions in order to get them out at the same time as the HD counterparts.

OK, so that makes sense.  I thank you.

But then, let's say companies want money (fair assumption?).

Wouldn't it still be a great cost/benefit analysis to put a separate team on game that is conceptually/artistically/philosophically finished and possibly DOUBLE (given the Wii's install base and accounting for the myth that Wii gamers don't buy "hardcore" games) the size of the net you cast on the audience?

The only problem of course would be to require that other team to put in the same amount of effort as the primary team.  Which is where the third parties tend to initiate the crap game > crap sales > no effort > crap game cycle.

A team with enough talent to pull that off would produce more revenue for the company by making a completely different game. And there's no way a Wii version would double the audience; even if Wii gamers would buy core-focused games, which they never proved to do consistently, it wouldn't be anywhere near the install base.

Why would it take less talent to produce an entirely new game than a 480p version of a finished concept?

Also, where are the numbers that suggest Wii owners do not buy quality core-focused games?  Cuz I can point to a few million-sellers that say otherwise.

And you can debate the exact percentage by which the Wii audience increases your potential, but by your proclamation, you think 100% of the PS3/60 audience is "core-focused"? I didn't either.

It wouldn't take less talent; what I said was it would produce more revenue, which it would do because an original game would sell better than an inferior Wii port of a PS3/360 game.

You can cherry pick titles that sold well to make it look like core-focused games sold well on Wii, but it wasn't at all consistent. It was a gamble to produce a core game on Wii (unless you were Nintendo, and even then it wasn't a sure thing), and it was a lot less so on the other consoles.

I don't think the PS3 and 360 are 100% core, but they certainly have a much higher proportion than the Wii.

I broke my one rule...

Anyway, go and find the sales data for Sega's Thor and Captain America games. They had proven Wii developers (Red Fly, HVS) working on separate versions of the game. If they sold better (without looking I can tell you this much: they didn't), then maybe your point holds weight.

And how many of those "core-focused million sellers" aren't Nintendo games? Just Dance isn't a core game...

Insano/Neal-

Please, cite us some sales figures.  Otherwise your beliefs are only based on internet ramblings from mostly """hardcore""" sources.  In other words, meaningless.  And there is no point in a meaningless discussion.  But I'll go one more round while we wait for those figures.....

Insano-

So in your hypothetical, the Wii game is bad and the brand new IP becomes a success?  Since when are new IPs a safer bet than quality, multi-platform releases? Remember, my argument was that QUALITY(read:effort) makes the difference.

Anyway, I've said it a million times, it's not about cherry-picking.  It's about a simple formula, quality + mainstream appeal = success.  And yes, as much as "hardcore" gamers may want to deny it, their beloved AAA, blockbuster games are quite mainstream.

Tatsunoko v Capcom may have been quality, but it was obscure.  Sales I'm sure were moderate.
NBA Jam had a lot of hype, but they completely neutered the Wii version.  Why? Can the Wii not handle a shinier version of a 16-bit game? =P

I'm sure the PS3/60 has a higher percentage of core-trending gamers.  My point was, what is the sheer volume? I would argue it's rather favorable for the Wii, but few games have given the audience a chance to prove that.

Neal-

I'm not sure movie-liscenced games are a fair benchmark for core-appeal, are you?

It's sad that first party games always have to be taken out of this discussion.  Mario platforming, Link adventuring and Samus exploring were the very origin of core, American, console gaming.  But they don't have enough blood and sex to be """hardcore""", right?

You mean like your continual insistence that incredibly neutered ports of popular multiplatform HD games would sell incredibly well on the Wii?  Just from watching this discussion, you've produced about as much evidence to back up your claims as anyone else has, so it's just a tad bit hypocritical for you to demand numbers from other people to refute your own beliefs.

No, my friend.  Because, as you'll remember from a previous conversation.  I always looked up sales data on vgchartz.  However, vgchartz is not allowed here and my list of million sellers was dubbed "cherry picking" so I didn't bring them up. I want to see where you all get your numbers from.

All clear now?  ;D

PS - incredibly neutered =/= quality.  Did I not mention quality in my previous posts? Oh no, I did.... you must have missed it ;-)

To be fair, I told you to find the sales figures for the game. I could do it, but you also said my point was invalid, and I have much better things to do.

Nintendo games get taken out of the discussion because we're talking about third party games going from Wii to 360/PS3 and vice versa. Nintendo games ain't getting ported to 360/PS3 anytime soon.

But seriously, what Nontendo """"core""""" titles have sold a million on Wii?

Once again, I could look this up, but I'm not going to.




EDIT: And get your fucking facts right. NBA Jam wasn't "neutered" on the Wii. It was made for the Wii. For shit's sake, dude. All that dev team did was love the Wii and then everyone got burned that Corporate EA told them to port it to 360/PS3 because their main NBA title was terrible. It's not their fault the game sold better on 360/PS3.


And I don't need to cite shit, because if it sold better on Wii, the new game would be on Wii.

I sort of doubt that considering you keep saying that.

Here's some Million Seller. With Numbers from the company itself.
http://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/business/million.html

Number 21.  Resident Evil 4 Wii Edition
Number 20 is Monster Hunter Tri
Number 38 is Resident Evil: The Umbrella Chronicles

I said it in one post...

Also, conclusion: Capcom should make more games in successful franchises for Nintendo systems. Which they are doing.

*Shrug*
It was the easiest undisputed numbers I could find.  I don't know if that is the real take away.
The PS2 Version of Resident Evil 4 is number 14.

So do you agree or disagree that licensed movie games are an accurate representation of a traditional gaming audience?

According to vgchartz, Thor sold better on Wii that PS3 or 360.  Cap.America sold better on PS3 and 360 than Wii.

All good? If you have better numbers, as always, I'm all ears.

Close.  We're actually talking about whether or not there is the audience on the Wii to justify equal effort on multi-platform releases.  Thus, to me, it has never made sense to take Nintendo games out of that equation.  Especially when they seem to put in the most effort.

Monster Hunter Tri, Sonic and the Secret Rings, Epic Mickey, Call of Duty 3, Resident Evil 4, Sonic Unleashed, Call of Duty WAW, Star Wars TFU, Shaun White Snowboarding, RE Umbrealla Chronicles, GoldenEye 007, TigerWoods '09, Call of Duty MWReflex, HotD 2+3 Return, Red Steel, Need for Speed Carbon, Pro Evo Soccer '08, Boom Blox, Call of Duty Black Ops, FIFA Soccer '08, and TigerWoods '10.

Notice how with the exceptions of RE Umbrella Chronicles and CoD MW Reflex this list supports my quality+mainstream formula exactly.

resident evil FOUR, monster hunter THREE, hotd TWO + THREE. actual numbered flagship entries.
Epic Mickey, GoldenEye, Boom Blox. actual flagship IPs.

Not "Epic Mickey: The Side-Story Party Game Collection."

Give us Dead Space, not Extraction.  Give us RE5 not Darkside Chronicles (still a great game).  HotD4 not Overkill. And the sales will follow.

So, you're here for discussion, but not fact-based discussion?

Sorry, my eff-bombing friend.  You're the one who doesn't know their facts.

"EA revealed today that NBA Jam will hit the PS3 and Xbox 360 on November 17th. Unlike the Wii version, the PS3/360 editions will feature online multiplayer.

Upon launch, gamers will be able to play Classic 2-on-2 matches online with results being tracked by leaderboards. In December, a title update will add arcade modes like Backboard Smash, Domination Free-for-All, Elimination, and 21. An Online Progression feature will allow players to level up via challenges and in doing so unlock rewards."
~cinemablend.com

I know why the game was moved to PS3/60.  But why does the delay of their terrible game mean the Wii version can't have online multiplayer or the additional game modes?

Well, according to VGChartz NBA Jam sold better on the Wii .  Just imagine if it had those extra features! I know that's why I didn't buy it.

So I guess you should cite something or stop blowin' hot air.

NBA Jam didn't have online because it couldn't run at 60 fps or something like that on the Wii. The 360/PS3 release was an afterthought (like I detailed), and because of the solid online infrastructures, was easy to implement online.
I'm sorry you just read press releases and make assumptions. Read actual interviews (maybe even some of the ones we did...) with the developers. They tried to put online in, but they couldn't get it working well enough. If you want to hate on them for failing, then hate on Nintendo for Brawl's online.
EDIT: (from an interview in August 2010 at Nintendo Okie) Director Trey Smith: "We’re not there yet unfortunately, but we haven’t given up hope yet. We’ve said since day 1 that if we were going to do Online on the Wii that we had to do it right. We haven’t been able to maintain a rock solid 60fps online yet and we’re not going to put it out there unless we do."
I can't find a quote from him confirming its absence, but it's not like they didn't try. They just made the design decision to go for 60fps or bust. You might disagree with it, but I don't.


Unfortunately, vgchartz's dodgy sales number are all we have to go on. I don't think they're totally wrong, but they're not 100% accurate. The movie game comparison is one of the only ones we have to go on of your different-team-working-on-original-Wii-version theory. If there are other ones, throw them out there. It looks like it was a split, which makes a little bit of sense since the Thor Wii and the CA 360/PS3 were supposedly the best of the bunch.

I seriously question a lot of those million sellers as well. But even still, why do Umbrella Chronicles and MW Reflex not count? At first I thought it was because MW Reflex was a port, but are you saying the games are bad? I can't vouch for UC, but MW Reflex was in the same league as other Wii CoD games.

And why would you ever want an old arcade port (HotD 4) over a brand new awesome game (Overkill)?

I'll offer a mea culpa on the NBA Jam sales bit. I guess it boiled down to XBLA/PSN being easier to do than a retail release, and I doubt it could fit in the WiiWare size limit without substantial work.

Neal-

1. My friend, I remember reading the frames per second rationale.  That's garbage.  I'm sorry if your keen eye would prefer playing against the CPU indefinitely instead of reeling in horror at *gasp* 30fps!! But, for a SPORTS game what do you think more people will see value in ... 60fps or online multiplayer? Gimme a break.

Saying it's ok because "they tried" is like .... let's pretend I'm selling you a car.  Oh, I couldn't figure out how to build a shiny body around that engine so I removed the engine and gave you the shiny body! You can still sit in the car though! It's so shiny!  ... Still interested? Still don't think I'm at fault?

2. HotD4 came out in 2005 and is a great game.  You call it an "old arcade port" but it's not exactly Galaga.  Fans of the franchise (like myself) love the games, the setting, and the gameplay.  HotD:O was also a great game, but it was not a great HotD game.  It took the franchise in a whole new direction and that direction wasn't much more than vulgarity and b-movie effects (literally, not referentially like the flagship titles).

This is why 2+3 Return sold better than Overkill.

Also, Overkill came out 4 years later.  Not even a full generation advancement in console tech.

3. I liked Umbrella Chronicles.  But that's just what it was... a cliff's notes on the franchise.  Not a flagship installment.  So, that's going to severely limit your audience.  Plus it was a rail-shooter a time when Wii owners were started to get enough of them.

I never played MW Reflex but I heard it was a far cry from the original.  Feel free to correct me on that.  If it was true enough to the original then it would explain the sales and leave only one exception to my rule on that list =)

4. I appreciate the MC on the NBA Jam sales.  Takes a big man to admit that sort of thing on the interwebs.  And that's really what broke my heart about that whole situation.  They got Wii owners whipped into a frenzy, psyched about that game, and then, before it even comes out ... our princess was being moved to another castle?  The Wii was the right audience for that game, but they did not stick the landing.

~~~

So anyway, as I've said before...  Still waiting for anyone to show me there are actual numbers behind the pessimistic beliefs they believe so wholeheartedly!

Modern Warfare Reflex is excellent. Outside the graphics and lack of voice chat, it's essentially the same game as the HD version. Black Ops is apparently even better.

Well then that's great! That is EXACTLY what I'm talkin' 'bout.

And that's Activision dumping money into one of the (if not the) best-selling video game franchises of all time.  They can afford to put that much money and manpower into porting those titles to Wii, and yet those games still sold better on the HD consoles by a considerable margin.

I think you give teams that work on Wii titles (particularly ports) too little credit.  No one sets out to make a bad game, and I can speak from personal experience that the teams I've seen working on Wii versions of HD games did the best they could to deliver the best Wii experience possible.  Blame Nintendo for the lackluster hardware and pitifully lacking online infrastructure that gets in the way, and publishers for not giving the developers the necessary resources early in the Wii's lifespan when it still could have been saved for 3rd party games.

I believe the NBA Jam fps issue comes from the creator of the series demanding it run in 60fps because the game doesn't feel right in 30fps. You can hate them for it. I won't. Agree to disagree.

Overkill is legitimately one of my favorite games in the past five years. Once again, agree to disagree.

I've yet to see the numbers behind your views as well. Showing million sellers is one thing, but that doesn't change the fact that companies are running away scared from the Wii. If it really was that easy, it'd be happening.

@broodwars

No one said the Wii had to outsell the other consoles to be worthwhile.  They put in effort and they got great results.  That's the bottom line.

I have played over a thousand hours on the Wii's "pitifully lacking infrastructure."  I'm pretty sure it could handle 2-on-2 basketball.  ;)

@Neal

I am very cool with agreeing to disagree.  But why not answer the question of what you think buyers will want more: online multiplayer in a sports game or 60fps?

Also, don't forget that my least favorite HotD game is still one of my top games too.  :D
I just wish they felt they could have given us a game that got attention for its quality instead of its (now broken) record for eff-bombs.  Just sayin'.  But really, I do respect and enjoy how much you like the game!  I'm never gonna tell you what that G stands for.

Also, my numbers come from VGChartz and GoNintendo's reposts of articles about million sellers.

~~~

No one has been able to give me any other numbers, without that, their opinions are just based on myths that keep bouncing around a media that would rather focus on their "cool" twin consoles instead of going outside their comfort zone to embrace a console an expanded audience also embraced.

Simple as that.

GameTrailers had a whole Bonus Round on the future of the industry but did not dedicate a segment to the Wii U.  Why is that? Does it not have HD graphics? Does Nintendo not sell enough hardware/software?

Or are they just insecure about their cred? Would they rather just live in their "elite" world?

And these are the people we let tell us Nintendo platforms don't have a hardcore audience? hmm.

Everything I've seen has proven one simple rule: quality + mainstream = success.  That rule applies to all consoles.  Wii owners should not have had to buy crappy spin-offs and side-stories to "earn" fair treatment.

....

So, anyone got numbers for me or are we done here?

This is adding insult to injury. Not only did 3rd parties treat the Wii as nothing more than a toilet this whole generation and did nothing but **** on it, but now what little 3rd party support the Wii did have is being taken away and given to the PS3. This is outrageous.

No surprise though, because look at what Crapcom did with RE4 which was supposed to be a GC exclusive. The last year of the Wii's life is looking more and more like a repeat of the GC's last year of life. Hopefully 5-6 years from now history won't have repeated itself a third time.

Judging from Brawl, I'd say 60fps. Once again, you're not going to agree with me. That's a statistical impossibility (there's a stat!). NBA Jam was disappointing for me for other reasons that had nothing to do with online multiplayer.

This whole "Nintendo's system has terrible last year!" thing can't be a coincidence. It's happen with each of their past three home consoles. We might not be able to pinpoint the reason, but there's an issue we're not quite seeing that has nothing to do with the industry men keeping Nintendo down.

I hope it goes both ways. If alot of formerly Wii exclusive stuff gets ported to the PS360, then I hope a lot of exclusively PS360 stuff gets moved over to the Wii U. That would be fair, right?

And Broodwars, I don't see you complaining about Umbrella Chronicles coming to PS3. You seemed to have a problem with Mass Effect and other games getting ported to the Wii U, so why aren't you complaining about this? I call that hypocrisy. By your own argument people should have already played this game on the Wii years ago when it came out, and if they didn't then tough luck, right? Or could it be you have a bias and don't have a problem with Nintendo system games coming to PS360 just so long as the reverse doesn't happen.

I'd rather see new games on Wii U, but I'm in favor of more people playing Arkham City and other excellent games.

The Wii U should also get Arkham Asylum. Maybe it could be included with Arkham City as part of a bundle. Yes, I know Arkham City is a old game, but so is Umbrella Chronicles, so...

And I call that "Apples and Oranges" and a pathetic last-ditch effort to find something to insult me with, Chozo.  Seriously, you can do better than that.

I was against Mass Effect 3 coming to the Wii U because Mass Effects 1 and 2 weren't on the platform, and it's the conclusion to the epic story told over those two titles.  You jump into the 3rd game now and you're missing the entire point of the franchise, that being (as I've said) making choices over the course of a massive 3-game story arc and seeing how your choices play out over multiple games.  If Mass Effect could be ported to the Wii U (it can't, but if it could) along with Mass Effects 2 and 3, I'd be all for that.  But it can't, and certain Wii owners need to move on from the endless whining about not getting those games.

Umbrella and Darkside Chronicles, on the other hand, are self-contained stories.  Being compilation games covering stories that are, by the way, already playable in their original forms on at least the PS3, players new to the franchise can jump in with no problem.  If you like what you see in the Chronicles games and are interested in learning more about their original stories, you can always check out the original Resident Evil games via the Playstation 1 Classics and PSN/XBLA.

My other concern was that the Wii U shouldn't be hung up on making sure it has every single game Wii-only owners are whining about having missed over the past 6 years.  It was alright for a few catalog titles to cross over, but that should be kept to a minimum to allow for new Wii U games instead of companies just focusing on ports.  It's a new console, and the focus should be on new software, new ideas.  For the PS3 and 360, on the other hand, these games are afterthoughts, titles that will co-exist alongside the frequent wave of new titles every month.  It's not the same.

C'mon, Chozo, is that the best you've got?  That was pathetically easy to shoot down.

And by the way, all this whining about the HD consoles getting Wii titles now and how "WAAAH!  UNFAIR!" it is?  Grow.  Up.  The HD consoles have been sharing games for years, and Wii-only owners have had years of exclusivity on these titles that is incredibly rare for 3rd party games on the HD consoles.  I don't recall seeing this much whining from HD console-only owners when these games were originally announced as exclusive to Wii.

No, it's not. I'm not insulting you. I'm just calling you on what I perceive as an inconsistency in that you are unsympathetic to Nintendo fans not getting these games and you don't want them ever to get them, but on the other hand you are silent when Nintendo exclusive games come to other systems. If I wanted to insult you, I would call you names and use actual insults, but I didn't do that and I have no intention of doing that. I just don't see any consistency in your position except that its hypocritical. I only insult people I dislike, and I don't dislike you.

As for the rest of your post, I didn't even read that before I hit the reply button because I had to address that.

Come on, don't be like that. I didn't insult you so don't take it that way.

That was actually a more general comment at some other comment-ers like NinSage than one directed specifically at you.  I actually already said that to NinSage earlier in this topic, but was just repeating it since the arguing about "fairness" is STILL going on.  Seriously, I like you guys, and you're a fun bunch of folks to chat with.  But enough is ENOUGH on all this complaining about these two games coming to PS3 that so many Wii owners complained they were getting in the first place when they were announced (because they weren't Resident Evil 5).

You're right, enough is enough. And it was a good thing those games remained Wii exclusive for as long as they did. Its not as bad as RE4, which was announced for PS2 BEFORE the GC version was even released. Not that it could have saved the GC by any measure, but it might have given the GC a shot of catching up to the original Xbox for 2nd place, because from what I understand it was a pretty close battle.

A) What does that have to do with Brawl?
B) Let the record show Neal believes more people would rather have no online multiplayer in a sports game than include it and have it run at less than 60fps.  I feel a forum poll coming on.

You have some sound concepts here but you are missing crucial points.

1. Wii owners aren't pissed because other people get to play former exclusives.  Thus, the idea that the "HD twins" live up to their nickname is irrelevant.  The problem is that, as has been discussed, it never goes both ways.

2. Among console owners who do not own a Wii, there is a tendency to not even be interested in a game that isn't in HD.  So, it's very easy for them to say "who cares? that looks like a PS1 game" until it gets an HD makeover (even if it's not a very demanding one!) and then suddenly the games become interesting.

Also, let's face it, Wii owners are open to a range of cutesy, colorful, family-friendly games that """hardcore""" gamers might not necessarily want to play.  Epic Mickey is an easy example, which is why I think there have been (possibly fatal) delays in bringing that game to an HD consoles.

But let's look at some of the games that have made the leap: No More Heroes (blood, sex, vulgarity), Dead Space Extraction (dismemberment, shootin'), HotDO (blood, sex, VULGARITY), RE Chronicles (blood, shootin'), and GoldenEye007 (shootin').

Exceptions: unplanned NBA Jam (sports game), deBlob 2 (cutesy, colorful).

Oddly enough, the two exceptions are the only ones that did not have a significant period of exclusively.  Though I don't think that means anything, do any of you?

I think you're drawing perhaps the wrong conclusion here.  With the exception of No More Heroes, the violent titles you named are ones that rely heavily on pointer control on Wii, which from my experience is just about the only thing that works somewhat like it should on Move.  Sony wants developers to put out Move titles, so they put out former Wii titles that work best on that thing.  It's probably the only reason the rail shooters were even ported, because it's not like Child of Eden has been setting the sales charts on fire on the HD consoles (despite being a very good game).

Incidentally, you also forgot Tales of Graces F under your "exceptions" section, which is definitely bright and colorful and coming to the PS3 in NA next year.

But let's not turn this into a "Bleh, gamers on the HD consoles only care about blood and guts, because it's not like these games were all originally released on the Wii to appeal to the same kind of gamers!" argument.  There are more technicolor games on the HD consoles (mostly JRPGs) than I can even list off in a space this small.  Hell, one of Sony's biggest games on the PSN is Flower, and that's about as far removed from a military FPS as you can get.  Two of the 360's biggest releases this fall are a Sesame Street game and a game where you recreate a Wild West Puppet Show in The Gunstringer.  There's a variety of different art styles and genres on all the consoles, and what sells in the marketplace doesn't change from console to console.

@broodwars

Looks like, yet again, we'll have to agree to disagree (mostly).

I could see Move support being a key factor.  And I did forget about Tales of Graces F which is indeed colorful.  (I have a very hard time keeping up with the many Tales of this and Tales of that that come out on every conceivable platform every few months!!).  Don't get me wrong, the series looks great and like something I would really enjoy, but (speaking to your point about ME3 and it's story) I always like to get the big picture from my games, and I just can't keep track of all those Tales games so... I pay no attention!

However, I disagree in that, looking over what is successful on PS3/60 versus Wii, though there are exceptions, the spectrum on Wii is quantitatively broader.  I can quote you numbers from VGChartz, but, we all know that's not allowed.  (Even though whatever "inaccuracies" should be relatively even across all platforms!) So, if you (plural) don't want my numbers, and you (plural) don't have any numbers, then I guess the discussion has reached its inevitable conclusion!

Remember, there might not be much point in you and I having this discussion as history has proved we are just two different peas in two very different pods, but it can be meaningful for others.  ... who quickly get scared off when it just becomes a 2-4 person debate  ;D :P:

I don't buy the excuse given for NBA Jam. Mario Strikers Charged has a lot of stuff happening on screen, probably more than NBA Jam, yet that game still runs at 60FPS in the online multiplayer mode. In the case of NBA Jam, I'm not going to speculate what the real reason is, but I can say that it wasn't because the Wii couldn't handle it.

To be fair, 2+3 Returns was $30 and Overkill was $50. I think the $50 tag is the main reason why Overkill didn't sell as well as the arcade port, because people saw it as a bad value.

Good call on MSCharged.

Regarding HotD, that's a valid point, I just think it's washed out considering the $20 difference could be justified by the upgrade in tech (visuals, etc.) and then you're left comparing the content for what it is.

But, it is very late and I am very tired so.... maybe I don't know what I'm talking about?  ;D

Anyway, I think I've said all I need to on this topic.  Again, anyone wants to post numbers and I'll come rushing back.  Otherwise, peace out Gwaihir Scout!!

I agree with Strikers Charged point. That online worked. Makes Brawl/NBA Jam all the more disappointing in that regard.

I bring up Brawl because, like NBA Jam, it relies on a quicker game that suffers if it lags. Also, it had terrible online.

I mean, the better question would be would it hurt the game/brand more if the online was terrible (like Brawl) or not present. I feel like for different people there would be a different answer. NinSage, you would obviously want online. I'd rather have no online than terrible online. I mean, that's based on the premise that the online in NBA Jam would be bad, which I think is a fair assumption. If it was good, it would have been included.

I've heard that now and then and I have to wonder if it is based on personal experience or just regurgitating what the media tells them. Online Brawl has been extremely popular.  Folks like me have played literally hundreds of hours of it.  That doesn't happen if it doesn't work.

Maybe my personal internet connection is blessed but I have only had a handful (less than 10) of unplayable matches and those were almost entirely during the game's first month of release.

Unless, they were being lazy because they (mistakenly) assumed the game would just do soooo much better on the HD platforms.  Which is exactly my theory.

Exactly.

Blessed internet connection.  It might be better now but when I was playing down the street with 1mb  upload speeds 10mb down was bad.

I'm actually excited about this.

I loved Umbrella Chronicles and I liked Darkside Chronicles, and I can really see myself loving an HD remake of both. Call me a graphics whore, but both of those games looked fine on the Wii but are gonna look a lot better on PS3. Besides, I have a Move wand that's just collecting dust after I beat Dead Space: Extraction.

I must be one of the other people who never had much of a problem with Brawl.  Never had an unplayable game, but the time wasted when the game server was trying to match you with a new player was ridiculous. 

I tried very hard to get online Brawl working. I think I had something like two or three playable matches out of 30-40. :(

Blah, The best part of Brawl was the Hype about Brawl.  The game just couldn't live up.

Felt the same way. I know Brawl is the defining Wii experience for many, and it's a fine game... but I didn't much care about Brawl when it failed to live up to the hype. Now I feel no need to own or play it, especially since there are dozens of other Wii games that blew away all of my expectations instead of coming up short.

What sad is whenever I do decide to play Brawl I start to wonder why I'm not just playing Melee instead.  I didn't really particularly like Melee till Brawl came out...

I was just talking about this last weekend. A friend of mine said he didn't think Brawl was any good compared to Melee.

For me, the Smash Dojo was the pinnacle of gaming hype. It was spectacular. I wish Nintendo or other companies did stuff like it more often.

The day Brawl came out, I got it at midnight, and the proceeded to play it until around noon with three other people. It was one of the crowning game experiences of my entire life.

Brawl might not have the same staying power as Melee (I played it regularly from the day it came out until the day Brawl came out), but it's still good. I just think it suffers from overhype and just being more of the same.

Just not a fan of Brawls pacing.

I'm fine with Brawl's pacing.  Just not its tripping.