You need to strip a ton of textures and particle effects... and lower the polygons on everything, replace advanced lighting techniques, possibly even dumb down the AI a little. It's not easy porting to Wii. Plus it's got no hard drive for caching, that's gonna 'cause a ton of problems on open world games or anything with heavy streaming.
no one is asking for a port the wii was made so we get different games. what they need to do is make a ground up from the wii. and really hard drive is another excuse these have been very old excuses. the wii has it small hardrive itself not to metion you can use your sd card to store games from vc wiiware etc...
Yes, but the lack of hard drive means games can't cache data, which is almost essential for bigger games these days. It just makes it harder for the devs. And you're right, the Wii is different so it can get exclusives, but developers generally don't take up that offer because the target audience isn't as big. They've got a choice: make a game for Wii fans, or make a game for 360/PS3/PC fans. The latter is more likely to make a profit.
Nintendo, as you said has more money, but you're saying they can't take a loss. Someone is very hypocritical. Developers want to make their games multiplatform, they don't wanna strip the Wii version down wasting time, and they don't want to make an exclusive either because they won't make enough money. And to strip it down they have to change to simpler textures, worse graphics, completely different controls, etc. Casual games you sadly listed: Mario Kart, sports games, and SSB (is a casual fighter) What? +100
In the order of how they're arranged on my iPod silly. On another note, who thinks the original Mario Kart should be revived on the Wii or DS? Man, I loved that game when it first came out.
that cause developers don't give the chance there was no hardrive or hd last time so why is it a big deal? oh wait... memory card did that just fine just the like the sd card is doing just fine for the wii. the harddrive is a crap excuse to this date. the audience is large enough but when you making rail shooters compare to fps shooter ... what going to bomb more? rail shooters might be great game but people don't want rails. people want a true fps
fix there yea go... enjoy troll. i can't believe you people still bitching over the fing graphics to date. if you want to play a game for it looks... that fine might as well take my wii remote and play outside... where is so reasltic. i look like a fool doing it.
I think that whether it is true or not is irrelevant, even though it certainly is true. The important part is that the developers do not support the Wii in the first place, proving our point well enough that developers do not want to take the time to construct a game for the Wii. Here I was thinking it was common sense. Microsoft, as you well should know, is based primarily in the market for operating systems, computer programs, and services such as Bing, Microsoft Office, and Windows 7, outlined well by this report by TechCrunch: Link here. Based on this data, it is established that a huge percent of their market and revenue is generated by the sales of Windows 7 as well as their other products, seeing as their profit spike resulted from the release of Windows 7 itself. Naturally, a company would want to focus on the markets that generate the greatest amount of profit for them. And although the remainder of the article states that XBox is finally no longer losing money (essentially saying that they did have to use revenue from their other markets before, but no longer), Microsoft is to the point where they are able to maintain operating costs and development funding within their gaming department. Sony's in the same boat. Their market share is, by a large percentage, primarily located in hardware (such as TVs, Blu-Ray players, laptops, etc.) and digital media (such as films, music, etc.). They lost money in their Playstation market before, but revenue generated from previous installments of gaming consoles and very little funding borrowed from other departments have allowed them to maintain self-sustaining development departments in gaming, no longer losing money for their console. Summarily, Sony and Microsoft focus most of their revenue on the development of their largest markets. It would be plain idiocy to focus more on the 360 than the next incarnation of Windows, and for Sony to focus more on the Playstation than on the development of their laptop systems or their film productions. The gaming departments have to sustain themselves in the long run; otherwise, it is no longer useful to them, and the departments would be scrapped in favor of using the funds to develop their more profitable industries. Thus, the 360, PS3, and Nintendo divisions are one and the same in the sense that their systems all must sustain themselves, and their success depends on how their individual funds are used for their development. Using the argument that Nintendo is not as big as Microsoft or Sony is pure garbage; you said it yourself that Nintendo generates huge amounts of revenue and has for the past several iterations of its gaming consoles. Nintendo can take plenty of hits. Using the excuse that Nintendo isn't as big just shows to me that you're floundering for an argument that works and proves to me even more that Nintendo didn't focus on development strategies that would have placed them up to par with their competitors. I don't know how much clearer I could paint the picture, so hopefully this satisfies you. I would say that a hardcore game is one that develops a sort of connection with the player. Games like Mass Effect, where your involvement affects the game's outcome and those choices carry over to the next iterations of the series, are great examples of this. I'd say Halo Reach is hardcore to an extent, but that's more opinion; I personally felt a kind of remorse that my teammates died defending the planet. Uncharted was hardcore in my eyes as well; any game that gives you the feeling it's really a grade-A movie deserves that title. I'll even venture to say that Super Mario Galaxy was hardcore, as it took a familiar series and changed it to the extent where it was new, fresh, and exciting. Now, go ahead and say these are simple, but give your own examples as to what you think deserves the title of "hardcore". I'd like to know my criticism is coming from a worthy source. You can go ahead and be sick of it, but the fact is that it's true. You said it yourself, Call of Duty 3 for the Wii didn't have the features it should have had. The reason for that is the Wii cannot handle that level of content. Developers will not waste their time attempting to place features for their games on the Wii when they can easily do so on the 360 or the PS3 and then receive much more profit for their ventures. It's simple economics; placing your goods with the best features will only be beneficial to you in the markets where they sell the best.
I'm not talking about saving, I'm talking about caching. It's just harder (or impossible) without a hard drive so it's technically very difficult to get the same performance... so devs don't bother trying.
God, can I get this through your head, I don't care about the graphics, but I was saying that devs have to waste time stripping down the Wii version of graphics and gameplay. Casual Game - A simple game for people who aren't really gamers (ie: any sports game, Wii Sports, party games, racing games, etc.) Hardcore Game - A game that developed an attachement to the player and enriches them in the game (ie: Mass Effect, Mario Galaxy, Ratchet and Clank, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Uncharted 2, inFamous, etc.) Great graphics allow for realistic looking games, such as Uncharted 2, Racing simulators, Mass Effect 2, etc. notice how we don't have as many cartoon games like Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, Jak and Daxter, Sly Cooper, etc. on PS3. Because they can make more realistic games, and it works well for some cartoon games to like Ratchet and Clank on PS3. And how can you accuse me of being a troll and a fanboy, I believe you are the one that started this flame war. And I don't care what console I have as long as I have great games to play, nuff said.
I bet the only reason you like the Wii so much is because you can pleasure yourself with the stick. Seriously though, can you stop this argument. Every time I visit this thread it's still ongoing and it's getting boring and pointless.
Guys, just ignore him. The last many pages have all been pointless arguing. If you wanna do that, do to his new facepalm thread, it's pretty funny. http://forums.toucharcade.com/showthread.php?t=68706
GET PUMPED Wasteland wanderers can start polishing their combat armor--Fallout: New Vegas is gold. Today, publisher Bethesda Softworks announced that the post-nuclear role-playing game is finished, with the master disc now en route to the factory. The game ships on October 19 in the US and October 22 in the UK, and is rated M for mature by the ESRB and 18 by PEGI. -GAMESPOT
