Epic Games President Explains Wii's Success

Originally Posted by DrZaius1

It wasn't the biggest seller of the year. though. It was the biggest gaming software event, but not the biggest seller.

My point still stands. And my other points have yet to be answered.

I think most people who enjoy Nintendo in general (and this includes Wii) do so for the enjoyable first and second-party games, which are usually adventure games or party games; Microsoft and Sony fans tend to lean towards first-person shooters and RPGs, respectively, as well as driving games.

There are exceptions to this mold, such as Shadow of the Colossus, Okami and presumably Banjo-Threeie, but that tends to be how the cookie crumbles.

Originally Posted by Blizzaga

My point still stands. And my other points have yet to be answered.

You didn't ask me anything, though.

Since this has turned into a Wii discussion, here's some guy who was formerly with Ziff Davis' opinion on the future, or lack thereof, of the Wii. One point of interest is that he mentions the so-called amazing sales of Smash Bros. Brawl, and the almost complete disapearance of such sales.

When the Nintendo Wii was first announced, I felt as if the system was too gimmicky and would never last in the current market. To my surprise, the Wii took off like a bat out of hell and some might even say that the Wii owned 2007 in gaming. I’m not saying that I hate the system or anything, but it’s certainly what I would call a “dust collector” among my friends and I.

It was very interesting to me how Super Smash Brothers Brawl sold 1.4 million copies the first week it was out and has pretty much dropped off the map since. I think this is a prime example of how Nintendo has no problems selling consoles and peripherals, but they are not selling games as projected. At this point, they would have to sell 20 million games instantly to catch up with the average games purchased per console on the Xbox 360 and Sony PS3. Despite achieving an installed base way beyond anyone’s expectations, the company simply has not taken the steps to keep the success going.

If Nintendo doesn’t fix some of their major problems fast, the Nintendo Wii will fade into obscurity by 2009. From my observations, their primary problems are:

Poor game marketing.
They rely too heavily on sequels.
Low quantities of consoles on the shelves.
Poor relationships with 3rd party developers.
Limited access to quality information for the media.

Can Nintendo rebound from these problems? I highly doubt they will. The Nintendo Wii is getting ready to go the way of the N64 and Game Cube in the near future. While there certainly are cool aspects to the Wii, I’m pretty sure this was simply a phase many people went through. The Wii really became part of pop culture for a little while and it took a long time for the buzz to die down. Nintendo has taken a beating by the mass media this week and I have a feeling the media’s love affair with their console is just about at the end of the road.

Oh yeah, and since everyone is such a ***** for sources, here's mine: The Nintendo Wii Is Nearing The End Of The Road:.

i think all of you are being stuck up, self absorbed, conceited, whiny *******s. especially you Radek. all this "respect" you claim to have? not here. nobody cares if gears of war was the top game of 2007. it is hardly relevant to this topic. this thread is about why the Wii is succeeding/failing. there was somebody who said something i thought was actually useful and somewhat insightful on this page but i lost it somewhere in your massive pile of arrogant bull****. can we please return to the topic at hand?

Originally posted by Radek
I actually cited both sources independently. The fact that Zaius also probably cited the same thing shows that he knows what he's talking about too, unlike you. Your argument has degraded into simple finger-pointing. Step up or get out.

Where are your sources then? I'm looked at every last one of your posts and so far you have never cited another site, press release, magazine etc. You just spat out baseless information while noting Zaius, who did the same. Thus far, I'm the only one who has backed any his sales facts with an undeniable source. You're pathetic.

Originally posted by DrZaius1
I'm going to have to disagree on that. Guitar Hero II was a pretty big game, but Oblivion was not. Twilight Princess was semi-big. The Wii Launch was a pretty big event, but Twilight Princess was nowhere near it.

Apparently you spend little time in the video game community. Oblivion and TP have both garnered incredible respect from the majority of gamers and critics. Not to mention, TP sold extremley well that year.

I'm hoping to god that someone doesn't try to tell me that Super Mario Galaxy was the biggest game of 2007, and not Halo 3. Super Smash Bros. Brawl did NOT surpass it. Apparently Grand Theft Auto 4 will, however.

Depends. Saleswise, Halo 3 dominated. Critically, it got whupped by games like Bioshock, the Orange Box Galaxy. That, and even though sales were obviously in its favor, Halo 3 was hardly the talk of the town throughout all of Q4 2007. Call of Duty 4 (in particular), Bioshock, Galaxy, among other killer aps, got a lot of attention from the community.

Besides, it's so god damn easy to find the numbers that it doesn't even need to be sourced. One types in Wikipedia.org, and then one types in Twilight Princess/Gears of War. Scroll down to sales. What the **** is this website, college or something? I assume most of the information in this discussion is common knowledge.

Are you ****ing kidding me?

You cannot simply throw around facts forever without citing them, otherwise you're doing nothing but stating your opinion. Sales statistics are not common knowledge, especially when we're talking about the time span with them as well. This is not a topic that we can generalize and then go about our way with. Anything with detailed numbers can't just be casually said without some form of backing.

I don't give a crap if I'm wrong or not; maybe Gears of War did outsell TP in a ten weeks of their releases, I just want to you prove it. I'd rather you argue like a man.

Originally Posted by DrZuais

You didn't ask me anything, though.

I know I didn't. I was saying something generally, and not to a specific person or persons. Radek, in his anti-Nintendo fanboyism, chose to ignore it and flame me instead.

I'll say it once more...

"We go forward not back."

The question is...how do they view themselves going forward? Is it a certain type of game play? Graphics? If plain graphics, then shame on them. If they're going to be graphic whores, I don't want them developing for Wii anyway. There are other ways of "going forward," and it's possible that such a concept can be realized on the Wii.

Myself, I think it was a crappy excuse hastily thrown to finally get the "are you going to make games for Wii?" questions of their backs. They need to specify instead being so vague, otherwise, I can safely assume they're just being Anti-Nintendo fanboys. One word: cowardice. One more word: hypocrisy.

(Note: Whenever I use the term "Anti-Nintendo fanboy," I mean a fanboy that is anti-Nintendo)

Originally Posted by Jeff

You just spat out baseless information while noting Zaius, who did the same.

Apparently you spend little time in the video game community. Oblivion and TP have both garnered incredible respect from the majority of gamers and critics. Not to mention, TP sold extremley well that year.

Depends. Saleswise, Halo 3 dominated. Critically, it got whupped by games like Bioshock, the Orange Box Galaxy. That, and even though sales were obviously in its favor, Halo 3 was hardly the talk of the town throughout all of Q4 2007. Call of Duty 4 (in particular), Bioshock, Galaxy, among other killer aps, got a lot of attention from the community.

Are you ****ing kidding me?

You cannot simply throw around facts forever without citing them, otherwise you're doing nothing but stating your opinion. Sales statistics are not common knowledge, especially when we're talking about the time span with them as well. This is not a topic that we can generalize and then go about our way with. Anything with detailed numbers can't just be casually said without some form of backing.

I don't give a crap if I'm wrong or not; maybe Gears of War did outsell TP in a ten weeks of their releases, I just want to you prove it. I'd rather you argue like a man.

It's really not hard to look up stats. If I don't know what someone's talking about, I go research it. I don't speak for Radek, but I do speak for myself. It's isn't hard to look up figures. It's all on Wikipedia, and from there it's sourced even further.

In addition to CNN and Gallup, I read the gaming blogs every day and have for quite a while now. Oblivion was NOT a huge ****ing deal when it was released. Twilight Princess, as I said before, was a semi-big deal. It was eclipsed by the Wii. The Wii/PS3 launch WAS the biggest event in gaming during 2006, but the biggest game, if anybody has any sort of memory on this damn forum, was Gears of War. Halo 2 was the biggest game of 2004, Resident Evil 4 was the biggest game of 2005, Gears of War was the biggest game of 2006, Halo 3 was the biggest game of 2007, and Grand Theft Auto IV is going to be the biggest game of 2008. It's that simple. It's hard to deny.

It doesn't matter how well-received Halo 3 was. It was the single-biggest game of 2007. Other games may have received better scores, but the amount of hype and anticipation Halo 3 received was second to none last year. Call of Duty 4 may have been a better game for multiplayer, but it didn't break Halo 3. Halo 3 WAS the biggest game of last year.

Jesus ****ing Christ, do you want the god damn figures? Are you that much fo a sack that you can't look it up yourself? Here's your ****ing Twilight Princess source: IGN: Zelda Tops One Million on Wii, and here's your ****ing Gears of War source:Xbox.com | Xbox News - Gears of War Juggernaut Continues. Jesus, I ****ing hate people on this god damn website. Everyone here is apparently a ****ing lazy sack who needs information spoon fed to them because they don't have the ability to ****ing find it themselves. That's a great way to go through life, kids.

Originally Posted by Radek

I actually cited both sources independently. The fact that Zaius also probably cited the same thing shows that he knows what he's talking about too, unlike you. Your argument has degraded into simple finger-pointing. Step up or get out.

*does not see citations or links*

Yes, I do know everybody who deserves recognition. I've been here since day one of the forums. I don't need your respect. I already have it where it counts. And I never said Brawl isn't amazing. Don't put words in my mouth.

1) I highly doubt that. Even if you have been around from the start, after a certain point it doesn't matter.
2) I never put words in your mouth. I just asked how the fact negated brawl's amazing sales. I'm just saying the point still stands.

Originally Posted by DrZaius1

That's your problem. You don't care about the significant details.

Let's see... I own a wii. I don't own a 360. What games do you think I'm gonna care about? And stop trying to sound smart. I don't have a problem ignoring big details, you have a problem TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT!

No, I don't.

Then what is the point?

Hmm, well, in the context you put it in it was pretty obvious that you were referring to GEARS OF WAR.

I was speaking in general. I said, "What if a crappy game shoots through the roof in sales? Does that make it game of the year? The title requires opinions to back it up. By discounting Blizzaga, you discount every individual, ergo there are no opnions." Does GoW have opinions behind it? Yes. Ergo I am not talking about GoW. Try something new, it's called thinking.

I'm going to have to disagree on that. Guitar Hero II was a pretty big game, but Oblivion was not. Twilight Princess was semi-big. The Wii Launch was a pretty big event, but Twilight Princess was nowhere near it.

Quatsch
That's all I have to say.

I'm hoping to god that someone doesn't try to tell me that Super Mario Galaxy was the biggest game of 2007, and not Halo 3. Super Smash Bros. Brawl did NOT surpass it. Apparently Grand Theft Auto 4 will, however.

IMO SMG>GoW
Other than that, sales statistics? How do you know how well GTA will do?

Besides, it's so god damn easy to find the numbers that it doesn't even need to be sourced.

So we should go through extra work to help your arguments? Arguing just doesn't work that way.

One types in Wikipedia.org, and then one types in Twilight Princess/Gears of War. Scroll down to sales. What the **** is this website, college or something? I assume most of the information in this discussion is common knowledge.

That's the problem: you assume.
Also, most of the people who actually argue are highschool or college students. So we like our sources.

Originally Posted by DrZaius1

You didn't ask me anything, though.

Now we are supposed to ask you questions?

Since this has turned into a Wii discussion, here's some guy who was formerly with Ziff Davis' opinion on the future, or lack thereof, of the Wii. One point of interest is that he mentions the so-called amazing sales of Smash Bros. Brawl, and the almost complete disapearance of such sales.

Yeah, take a biased person and get a biased article.

Oh yeah, and since everyone is such a ***** for sources, here's mine: The Nintendo Wii Is Nearing The End Of The Road:.

Now, was that so hard?

Originally Posted by Blizzaga

The question is...how do they view themselves going forward? Is it a certain type of game play? Graphics? If plain graphics, then shame on them. If they're going to be graphic whores, I don't want them developing for Wii anyway. There are other ways of "going forward," and it's possible that such a concept can be realized on the Wii.

there it is. thank you for re-stating that. there is no way they can say that their moving forward if they dont do something new. at least new to their company. making more graphicaly-intense gory shooters is not moving forward. Elebits? De Blob? those games are moving forward.

Originally Posted by Rhalen

Let's see... I own a wii. I don't own a 360. What games do you think I'm gonna care about? And stop trying to sound smart. I don't have a problem ignoring big details, you have a problem TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT!

I don't own an XBox 360 either. I probably never will. However, I acknowledge that GAMES EXIST OUTSIDE MY WII AND PS3. Doesn't anyone find it weird that someone who DOESN'T OWN AN XBOX 360 is arguing that it had the bigger games? THAT GOES AGAINST EVERYTHING THAT IS FANBOYISM.

Then what is the point?

I don't know. You tell me. You apparently have all the answers.

I was speaking in general. I said, "What if a crappy game shoots through the roof in sales? Does that make it game of the year? The title requires opinions to back it up. By discounting Blizzaga, you discount every individual, ergo there are no opnions." Does GoW have opinions behind it? Yes. Ergo I am not talking about GoW. Try something new, it's called thinking.

Wow, what a hypocrite we have here. Nobody said anything about games that suck shooting through the roof in sales. NO WHERE DID ANYONE SAY THAT.

Quatsch
That's all I have to say.

FANBOY!

IMO SMG>GoW
Other than that, sales statistics? How do you know how well GTA will do?

Nobody said anything about comparing Gears of War to Super Mario Galaxy. Maybe you should think for a change. It's a good thing to do.

So we should go through extra work to help your arguments? Arguing just doesn't work that way.

Let's see. I check your sources. You don't check my sources. Somebody here is being thorough. Somebody here isn't. I know! THE PERSON WHO CHECKS SOURCES FOR HIMSELF INSTEAD OF WAITING AROUND FOR AN ANSWER IS AT FAULT.

That's the problem: you assume.
Also, most of the people who actually argue are highschool or college students. So we like our sources.

Yeah, sorry that I put too much faith in people on this forum. I hope you can forgive me for thinking you aren't a total dumbass. As for people in college, yeah, guess who's one of them. You have no idea how fed up I am with people asking for sources that can easily be found.

Now we are supposed to ask you questions?

Do you have any idea what you're quoting?

Yeah, take a biased person and get a biased article.

Oh god, everyone's biased! Oh god!

Now, was that so hard?

Almost as hard as you looking stuff up yourself.

Originally Posted by DrZaius1

Oh yeah, and since everyone is such a ***** for sources, here's mine: The Nintendo Wii Is Nearing The End Of The Road:.

My favorite quote from that page:

Originally Posted by axl

Wow, what a load of BS.

Remember when everyone said the same thing about the DS. Yea…

This one also summed up the article quite nicely:

Originally Posted by Anon

Face palm at this fail of a article.

So far I've agreed with both of these articles. I own Wii and a PS3, my room mate owns a 360. So after playing all three I can honestly say my Wii gets the least amount of use, and by little I mean none. I'll put that into purchases I've made. I've owned the Wii since release day and have since bought 6 games. I've had my PS3 for one month hand have bought 3, and are several more that I want.

All my friends seem to share the same view as this article, except for the fanboys I know who would never buy another system. New controllers may be considered by some people on this board as a step forward, but I don't. The new graphics on the other hand are. Developers for the PS3 have to design for the new processor, and for the 360 and PS3 the online service is amazing, while the service on the Wii is that of the DS. I would not call that a step forward.

Originally Posted by Jeff

Where are your sources then? I'm looked at every last one of your posts and so far you have never cited another site, press release, magazine etc. You just spat out baseless information while noting Zaius, who did the same. Thus far, I'm the only one who has backed any his sales facts with an undeniable source. You're pathetic.

Well, I guess you're a dumb**** who can't remember things he's read and already replied to.

Does this ring a bell, you idiot?

Who's feeling pathetic now? Only a dumb**** would be. And guess what you are? A dumb****.

Originally Posted by Rhalen

*does not see citations or links*

Well I guess you're a retard, too. Read above and try to to sound like an idiot when making up an excuse.

1) I highly doubt that. Even if you have been around from the start, after a certain point it doesn't matter.

Uh, yeah, whatever. You don't make sense at all, but I'm not going to argue with some little unknown kid about my credibility.

The count for the word **** was ****ing used 26 ****ing times in this ****ing thread thread.

Uh. Yeah. Move along.