RE5 is Capcom's Lair.

In the last paragraph of the newspost are you implying that Capcom is lying, due to the game starting development prior the Wii's official reveal?

I think it's possible that Capcom started designing RE5 with hardware comparible to the Xbox 360 in mind and when the Wii turned out to not be comparible they decided to focus it on the PS360.

Nintendo's ultimate problem with the Wii design is that the whole thing is a tradeoff.  If they had Xbox 360 comparable hardware with the Wii remote they could say they have an advantage because their console can do more than the others.  But the Wii CAN'T do more than the others, it is merely different.  So developers are given the choice between pushing superior hardware or making use of the new controller.  It looks like most of them picked superior hardware which isn't suprising since it's a concept that has been proven for decades and the remote's actual usefulness as a standard controller is debatable.

I've come to the conclusion that the Wii's third party situation has no realistic hope of improving.  Nintendo has just made a console that game developers are not interested in developing for.  They are so uninterested that they will make shovelware for the Wii to finance the creation of the games they want to make on the other consoles.  The waggle wand isn't good enough.  The Wii is actually so unappealing to developers that they would rather risk financial ruin than focus on it.  That's pretty idiotic since the Wii's hardware is perfectly capable of producing good games.  It isn't like a cellphone here where the system itself is so limited that good games are near impossible to make on it.  But that's the reality and it isn't changing.  It CAN'T change because at the end of the day the Wii is still a Gamecube 1.5 with a goofy novelty controller.  Nintendo can sell all the Wiis they want but they can't change what the Wii is and what the Wii is is why developers aren't interested in it.  It would have to get to the point where making great AAA games on the Wii is a requirement to survive.  It has to be down to making the game on the Wii or not being able to make a game at all.

"It has to be down to making the game on the Wii or not being able to make a game at all."

I hope that point is almost here.

Another thing I just thought of - is it possible that developers don't want to support the Wii specifically because they don't like what it stands for and thus don't want it to succeed?  Developers are usually also gamers and I imagine there is a desire to make games one would like to play.  Dora the Explorer games may exist but I doubt anybody who dreamed of making videogames wanted to get stuck developing them.  Developers want to be ambitious in the games they design.

The Wii seems to be designed specifically to discourage ambitious design.  It's targetted at non-gamers with simplified non-games that are intentionally restrictive so as to not confuse or intimidate non-gamers.  If you want to make ambitious games this is not a business model you want to succeed.  Publishers are always going to push for the hot trend and don't usually care if those are the types of games you want to make or not.  So if you don't like non-gaming and waggle and intentionally scaled down hardware you may want to see the Wii fail, so you don't have to get assigned to working on games with last-gen graphics and waggle controls aimed at children and women.  You make all your best games for the competition because that's the style of console and style of games you want to win.

Developers are NEVER going to be non-gamers so on a personal level they're likely not that interested in making games that they aren't really interested in playing.

This is why companies (irrespective of market and current economic status) fail. The market is supposed to make these decisions, not people who want to "push the series as far as possible". If they wanted to do that, then its easy. Get better storywriters.

Well, you just described the leading conspiracy that's been around ever since the Wii began displaying signs of impossible, unstoppable success.

The part that is harmful to them and their *business* is that THEY are not the customers, WE ARE.  They're supposed to make products for us first and foremost, not for themselves.  They can be like Iron Chefs getting lost in their own cooking fancies.  Meet the needs of the customers, not the rest of the dev team, not game site awards editors, not AIAS awards club voting members.

Pro Daisy owns Ian Sane.

Like always. =P

Is anyone else picking up that this sounds more like damage control in case the game doesn't sell anywhere near as well as they're expecting it too considering they're basically cutting off half of their possible market?

idk, i've been pretty pessimistic lately. I do think a new wii Resident evil is still possible. I wouldn't mind resident evil 4 with new levels..ie resident evil 5

From a perspective of someone who used to build half-life levels..how freaking hard can it be to make a game using re4's engine. Developing a game from scratch is hard, but altering an existing game to make a new one isn't. They went through the trouble of porting Dead Rising with the re4 engine..which is a task since their two completely different games..idk..i don't understand Japanese game companies. It always seems like they spend way longer than they need to in development because they never know what their aiming for to begin with.

Having played the demo they could have developed the whole game on GameCube using the re4 engine and then just  bumped up the graphics on the other system. Thats basically what Silicon Knights did with Ed from n64 to gamecube. Also what Capcom did with re0. I remember seeing an interview about re0 where they were like.."well we pretty much have the whole game developed, we just need to move it"

Its not quite half yet, wait until the summer time  ;)

They had an excuse for not releasing a Wii version back then, but what is the excuse now? They've made RE ports w/ waggle in Japan, They made a Dead Rising port (albeit with a few changes); these excuses just don't cut it.

This.

RE 5 Wii Edition confirmed!

Quote me on this, it will happen. Not because I believe it will but because Capcom is too greedy and can't resist whoring the same game for profit.

Ultimate problem?  Actually, this is really the only problem with the Wii.  However, if Nintendo hadn't chosen this route, the Wii would almost certainly be no more successful than the GameCube was (marginally more successful at best).  The only thing Nintendo could have done differently was made the console more powerful and eaten the cost themselves.  They could have only eaten so much, so at best we'd have SD games with better shaders or Wii games as they are now in HD.  I like to get things for free of course, and Nintendo might have eventually gotten a return on their investment, but then again they might not have.

Funny, I had just come to the opposite conclusion.  While the very best developers can guide the publishing decisions, most of the time it is the other way around.  Now that the Wii is the unquestionable market leader, publishers will start forcing their developers to make Wii games.  However, this newer batch of Wii games will actually have budget and so we'll start to see some surprise games of higher caliber.

Actually, the Wii is designed to require innovation and emphasize it over graphics.  It's perfectly possible to develop real games (Zelda, Metroid, Galaxy etc.) if the market demands it.

Maybe it's a differing gaming philosophy, but to "push the next part of the series as far as it could be pushed" does not mean better graphics, I believe. Judging from early impressions I've read RE 5 is merely a prettier RE 4. How is that pushing a series? The closest thing to a step forward for the series in RE 5 I have seen is the co-op mode.

I interpret their pushing as taking the direction RE4 set and going in excess of it. El gigante? Now we have SUPER GIGANTE! Lake monster? How about a sea monster! Vehicle sequence? Now its faster and there are more guns and explosions!

You're right, it is a different philosophy. Its the philosophy of excess, not innovation which is what you're thinking.

That's a good name for it; Excess versus Innovation.

Though is it wrong to view one as better and the other as poor?

TOTALLY misreading. &P

I think it goes to show that Capcom started planning for something on a grand scale, and by the time the Wii was revealed their project was on a course that couldn't be changed.

And yet they pull out a Dead Rising port. How is that any different?
I'm agreeing with those predicting an RE 5: Wii Edition. If anything Capcom will force the devs to make it due to the sales of the 4th on Wii.

I can't wait to see what Ian says when the Wii's "novelty controller" has a lot of its functions implemented in future consoles. Anyway enough with Ian's repeating anti-Wii rambles of doom.

There is no reason why RE5 could not be brought to Wii from what I've seen. At least when it comes to single player, they may need to scale down the visuals a tad, perhaps take out a couple of zombies but I see it being completely viable. Not sure about co-op though.

Well, Rize beat me to responding to Ian. There is absolutely no reason why developers can't develop full-featured games. Nintendo has done a handful that have been successful, but publishers seem too distracted by trying to reproduce the lower-budget success to consider pursuing a more traditional, larger budget title on Wii like Brawl or Metroid Prime 3.

TYP Monster Hunter 3 and DQX seem to be changing that trend. I do expect it to start shifting now unless Madworld/DC/Conduit end up bombing. Those titles will be key to weather or not developers are willing to take the risk developing full featured titles more often, or hide behind more simple games (though I want to clarify I don't think simple games are bad if done well).

Oh man, an RE5:Wii edition would be sorta amazing to hear about. Then afterwards, they could make a sequel to Umbrella Chronicles! ... or not. Please don't kill me.

Don't forget FFCC: Crystal Bearers. That's been given a long development cycle.
Plus No More Heroes 2 seems to be getting a lot of special treatment considering it will have a two year dev cycle.

I won't kill you. I'll just make you wish I'd kill you... WUAHAHA  ;)

At least UC was a fresher edition to the series then RE5! BURN ;)

I'd love to see RE5 Wii Edition, but honestly I think I'd rather they go back to their roots a bit and make a RE game specifically for Wii that cuts out the co-op, uses the RE4 engine but uses the atmosphere of games pre-RE4. Even a game that is more like a sequel to RE4 would be fine too.

Kairon is bumming me out...

T_T I'm sorry, is it my fault I still salivate at the thought of Area 51?

But co-op is what interests me the most...maybe it's my Left 4 Dead obsession speaking. I got to play it again with my friend in the internet cafe. I love how cooperative the co-op is. Maybe that's why I loved the big three GBA->GC link cable required games back in the day.

Since when do companies listen to the wishes of the developers?

I seem to recall that developer ambition was the reason RE4 was supposed to stay a GameCube exclusive.  If Mikami's suicide threats weren't enough to stop Capcom from announcing the PS2 port before that game's original release, why do the hacks working on RE5 deserve any better treatment?

Funny, how Mikami pushed the GameCube RE4 to make a new NEW NEW RE game and produce a more refined experience than what would've been delivered on PS2.

These RE5 devs ambition so far has been to make a prettier, shorter game with co-op and copy-pasted AI.

I disagree.  The PS3 was a complete disaster at first.  Nintendo could likely have beaten Sony by merely being competent.  I think Wii Sports has enough of a mainstream hook with the real-time racket swinging and such that Nintendo could still have sold buttloads of hardware with it at a higher price point.  iPods are really expensive for example and yet sell like hotcakes because they're got that "it" factor that people just love and thus cost no longer becomes a concern.  The Wii could have cost as much as the Xbox 360 and I think it still could have had near identical success due to the widespread appeal of Wii Sports.  The Wii has "it" and it isn't because it's cheap.  People had to wait up to a year to find one in stores.  The demand was such that it could have cost a good $100 more and I think it would have been fine.

I assumed this too but the Wii has been the market leader for quite a while now.  We got Dragon Quest X and that Monster Hunter game that gets lousy review scores and no one in America ever gave a shit about before it was announced to the Wii but we still get bullshit like that Dead Space spin-off rail shooter crap.  I think if we were going to see a real improvement, like PS2 level support which we SHOULD have, it would have happened already.  The "well no one assumed the Wii would be so huge" argument no longer makes sense.  Now third parties like Capcom here are looking for excuse to not support the Wii.  Well there has to be some reason for that.  That's why I assume it will never change because it's taken WAY too long.

idk Ian, the cheaper price point improves the It factor, had the wii been 300 dollars it would have been "i want this game, how much is wii? 300 - 400 oh well..nevermind" instead of actuall quote ""i want this game, how much is wii? 250..thats not so bad!"

I agree with Ian that price wouldn't have made that much of a difference in my opinion. One of the reasons that the Wii was cheaper was because Nintendo knew they were taking an awful risk. If they had assurance that the Wii would be where it is today, they would have given it better traditional tech to supplement the new tech. Never underestimate the force of popular culture. If something is 'in' like the Wii has been then nothing short of a $1000 price point would have deterred many people, especially if the system offered more that it does at the moment. iPods and iPhones are great examples of high cost product that sells extremely well. 'Course, hind sight is 20/20.

Though, we should actually take this article as a subtle hint that RE 5 is coming to Wii. They said RE 4 was Gamecube exclusive and the that went multiplatform; they said there would be the Capcom five and that didn't happen; Guess saying that RE 5 is not for Wii means that it will be coming shortly.

Why are we complaining about the Wii being cheap when it's Nintendo's most expensive console to date?

The problem is that Nintendo couldn't predict that it would be popular enough to sell at a higher price.  And you can't predict that it would definitely have been just as well off at a higher price because it turned out to be in such high demand.  Part of the high demand was no doubt due to the lower price

You may be right about the third parties to an extent.  The problem is that a large part of Wii's customer base are non-savvy consumers who will buy anything.  They're not checking the magazines and websites nearly as religiously as the PS3 and 360 fan base.  However, a percentage is, and that percentage has the power to lead the non-savvy consumers into better purchasing decisions.  This just means that the Wii needs a higher customers base than a normal platform before third parties feel comfortable.  I think that time has come and you will start to see the games flow.  However, they need to finish being developed first.

That is why I think a game like Monster Hunter 3 is so significant, there is a game that has high production values along with being more traditional. When companies, like Capcom, are starting to bring their biggest franchises to Wii in their purest form that is a good sign. Also games like Madworld are no slouches either!

Looking at the economic situation, I wouldn't be willing to risk the Wii being more expensive.

Hmm?  Capcom is trying to justify a development decision made many years ago, when they assumed the ps3 would inherit the ps2's dominant position and nintendo's next console would be an also-ran -- obviously the "no one assumed the wii would be so huge" reasoning applies to decisions made before it became clear the wii was a hit and the ps3 was a flop.

I don't know what their attitude to future games is; capcom's management has always been kinda brain-dead.

It sounds like with RE5 that the development started long enough ago that Capcom didn't think it feasible to shift consoles so late in the game's development. But for the overall feeling like many prominent 3rd parties aren't supporting the Wii nearly as well as they should, I think it's because the Wii is such a clear change for gaming "philosophy." Nintendo's little white box, more clearly than many of their previous systems, epitomizes innovation over excess (to borrow the phrase from Enner). This conflicts with the conception of video games and game development that developers and publishers (and gamers) have been operating under for decades, so it makes sense that many of these game makers would be so reluctant to shift to the Wii.

I think it'll be interesting to see the results of some of these companies forcing their developers more toward the Wii. I wonder if at least some of the resulting games will be lacking in "soul" and/or quality because the developers still wanted to focus on excess over innovation.

I dunno, surely there are devs who are so desperate to create the next crysis that they'd have a breakdown even considering the wii ... but I don't think everybody's like that.

It's perfectly possible to make huge, technically excellent, and "conventional" games on the wii -- just look at RE4!  Sure the models have to be a bit lower poly, and the sweat might not glisten quite as brightly, but those are the sort of restrictions that game developers have always worked under.

Look at the PS2 -- it was notably inferior to the other systems (PS2 versions of games pretty much universally looked worse), but because of its popularity, the game companies bit the bullet and did what they could, and the result was that the PS2 had lots of excellent games, despite its hardware inferiority.

Another example is many PC games, where it's very common to support a wide range of hardware by gracefully degrading the graphics at runtime.  Doing it at runtime is hard work, but merely supporting different platform ports should be far easier, given sufficient planning.

Examples like those are why I don't really buy the "whining devs" excuse.  I think the problem falls squarely on the shoulders of the people doing the planning, and that's management.

I'll add to that by pointing out games like Conduit, Winter (even as a tech demo), Overlord and Cursed Mountain, among others, are very advanced for the Wii.

Capcom could've fixed this whole situation by simply saying, "Yes, we are going to be porting the game to Wii." I'm sure it will happen, and it would've sounded better than simply dancing around their bullshit like they did here.

They were too deep in development to convert to Wii development, fine. However, they should've allocated a small team to start porting the models and the environments to the RE4 engine, and catch up to the PS3/360 versions in order to release at the same time, or near the same time.

But anyway, I'd rather have the 360/PS3 keep this POS. It looks terrible, and from the demo, it plays terrible too. When the creator of the series refuses to play the game, you know it has got to be a real pile.

Do you suppose, then, that the "bigger is better" development mindsets from the past decades are also now ingrained into the mindsets of these companies' higher-ups?

That's what happens when last decades' devs become this year's higher-ups.

The biggest problem I see with all of this is that games seem to be following a trend of trading off hours of gameplay for prettier graphics and overall less content.

If what I hear is correct, a basic walkthrough with RE5 is 7 hours. That's half of RE4's 14 hours.

I know that older gamers have less time, but a game that can be beaten in a day with little replay value? Really? And given the $60 pricetag, that's $8.50 an hour you're paying for entertainment. The game is begging to be rented instead of purchased.

And WHY is the game only 7 hours long? Because it costs so damn much to have HD textures on every model in the game and it's so time consuming, that's why.

Are we really willing to trade-off hours of gameplay for prettier graphics? I know I'm not, but it's a trend a lot of so-called AAA titles have been following, like Heavenly Sword, Lair and now RE5.

It's not worth it. Spending 7 hours in a pretty game with mediocre gameplay is not an ideal situation when we could've spent 14-20 hours in a game with average graphics and decent gameplay.

Don't worry, with the magic of DCL, RE5 will end up getting more hours of gameplay added to it.  The only problem is, be prepared to probably spend another $30 to get it.

After Megaman 9 and Street Fighter 4, Capcom has shown us that they have no shame when it comes to outright scamming the consumer.

Love it. 

First Capcom leaves Sony to develop for the Gamecube and Nintendo fans rejoice but when it does the opposite they pound-their-fists and cry like little babies.  :)

I wouldn't be surprised to see this title ported to WII 2. 

The reason we're complaining is that Capcom eventually caved in and ported RE4 to the PS2 despite its hardware limitations because of its massive install base.

In Canada it actually launched at a lower price than the Cube did?  ;D

Regarding RE5 being ported, can it be?  The difference between the PS2 and the Cube was not nearly as significant as the difference between the Wii and the other consoles.  It's very likely that Capcom had every intention of porting Dead Rising to the Wii but then realized the hardware difference was so great that they couldn't do it!  So they came up with this Chop 'Til You Drop thing to work around the limitations.  The market may be such that it would make a lot of sense for Capcom to port RE5 but they may have to severly alter it to make it work.

It would be less of a port than a recreation of RE5 using RE4's development, planning, and resource management processes.  Recreate the assets for the RE4 engine, start in a relatively bare-bones setting, then include more objects as available resources allows.

Dead Rising took the opposite approach and went to hell:  it tried to shoehorn the mall architecture/floorplan/loading structure onto Wii hardware, overshooting the available resources.  RE4's structure worked as it did because the architecture (and thus the size of memory-loaded rooms) was limited accordingly with the GameCube hardware in mind.  So in Dead Rising's case, a lot of resources are being sucked into rendering the different shops and shelves and nooks and crannies, leaving little for the actual zombie models and character counts.  A complete custerfluck.

Its the cycle of life, my friend.

Suddenly The Lion King started playing in my head.

I'd rather they not port it, but make a new game instead.

I heard the later games in the series sucked so I would either want a new team to make a new Wii version or have them remake the first ones.

I want a sequel to Umbrella Chronicles that details the events of RE2, RE:CV, and RE4. I don't need RE5 on the Wii.

I just realized that I posted this in the wrong thread. I meant to post this in the Silent Hill on Wii thread. Silly me and having multiple tabs open on the RFN forum.  :-[