|
Supercar Gautier posted:I'm remembering how Rayman was delayed months due to Ubisoft's policy of simultaneous releases. Probably a policy on simultaneous releases on console where the game has actually sold. Also, Kotaku is reporting that it's still that generic "Spring 2014" release date, so somewhere between April and June.
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 07:03 |
|
|
Obsidius posted:Wii U version delayed? http://www.videogamer.com/wiiu/watch_dogs/news/watch_dogs_delayed_on_wii_u.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Just the Wii U version has been delayed. Ahh that's great thanks, I hadn't realised that the second quater was a certain release window at all and thought it was just sometime this year.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
Obsidius posted:Wii U version delayed? All versions are delayed or has there been some sort of release news that I've missed? Ubisoft announced that the WiiU version in particular would be "further delayed". Basic idea is that, whenever Watch Dogs is released, the WiiU version won't be present concurrent with the other versions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
Obsidius posted:Ahh that's great thanks, I hadn't realised that the second quater was a certain release window at all and thought it was just sometime this year. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
What are "Others"? Phone games? Ouya?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
eric posted:They should sell it for $80. Wii U owners are so desperate for anything they'll buy it. I dunno, they'll probably just get the PC version like most non-idiots will be doing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
greatn posted:My guess is Ubisoft will release the WiiU version at the same time as the GOTY editions on other consoles, but without any of the dlc or extras, and for $10 more than the new edition. At that point why would they even bother? If they acknowledge they're not going to sell even close to as many copies on the WiiU as on any other console, why not just put the project on ice and shift resources to DLC creation? whaley posted:I dunno, they'll probably just get the PC version like most non-idiots will be doing. Enjoy dealing with DRM, ya bastard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:At that point why would they even bother? If they acknowledge they're not going to sell even close to as many copies on the WiiU as on any other console, why not just put the project on ice and shift resources to DLC creation? Well it's an issue of they already spent some X amount of money on the port. They can scrap it and lose all of it, or they can spend the smaller Y amount to finish, and get SOME amount of money Z out of it. If Z is greater than Y, they should finish the game. As for them going full EA with it like I was suggesting, I was just being facetious. What's most likely is this game is too ambitious for it's own good and the only way they are going to finish it on time is to take resources from other teams, including the port teams for WiiU. They're probably taking all their QA people, probably taking a bunch of gamepad people to make smartglass or Vita connectivity or something so they can finish SOMETHING and get it out of the door. It probably will be buggy and incomplete anyway, and take a couple months of patches after release to be running well. THEN they can take that team and finish the WiiU version.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
greatn posted:Well it's an issue of they already spent some X amount of money on the port. They can scrap it and lose all of it, or they can spend the smaller Y amount to finish, and get SOME amount of money Z out of it. If Z is greater than Y, they should finish the game. As for them going full EA with it like I was suggesting, I was just being facetious. You do also have to factor in value V that is the money the DLC could make them. Since V decreases the larger the gap is between release of the game and release of the DLC, taking resources from Y to keep V as the largest potential value, especially when this will make more than X-Y, is still a good move.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:You do also have to factor in value V that is the money the DLC could make them. Since V decreases the larger the gap is between release of the game and release of the DLC, taking resources from Y to keep V as the largest potential value, especially when this will make more than X-Y, is still a good move. Well people are gonna buy the DLC anyway, cancelling an entire port might speed up the process but by how much really? Obsiouldy there's an opportunity cost to everything, they could be put on AC5 or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
You could be cynical and say that the latest Direct is MIA because they have nothing new to share, but Directs also include 3DS announcements and I though they'd be really eager to make a brief Direct announcing Bravely Default's launch since they've been pumping that game up for months now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:You do also have to factor in value V that is the money the DLC could make them. Since V decreases the larger the gap is between release of the game and release of the DLC, taking resources from Y to keep V as the largest potential value, especially when this will make more than X-Y, is still a good move. Then you have to factor in U as the amount of money made from people who will only buy the DLC only within the first few months of release before they put the game down for good. DLC can always be created later, but you have to imagine they'll be making T, which is a fewer amount of DLC sales. So if X-Y + T is greater than U, then DLC as A-OK to do at a later date of TBD.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
So if the projected profits weigh as much as a duck...
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
Astro7x posted:Probably a policy on simultaneous releases on console where the game has actually sold. Pretty sure Rayman Legends sold best on the Wii U.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
Spacebump posted:Pretty sure Rayman Legends sold best on the Wii U. Best out of loving horrible is still loving horrible. Just look at the total sales between all their titles on the consoles. The wii u makes up around 2% of their total sales.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
Spacebump posted:Pretty sure Rayman Legends sold best on the Wii U. Pretty sure Rayman Legends as a whole sold worse than SC or Assassin's Creed 4 did. Get your laments for the current state of the industry out of the way now, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
Spacebump posted:Pretty sure Rayman Legends sold best on the Wii U. The last time this came up, nobody could find any numbers for this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
Suspicious Dish posted:The last time this came up, nobody could find any numbers for this. It came from a Ubisoft conference call after the Q3 earnings http://gimmegimmegames.com/2013/10/ubisoft-rayman-legends-splinter-cell-low-sales/
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 04:22
|
|
|
Bruceski posted:So if the projected profits weigh as much as a duck... ...and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped. If Ubisoft cancelled Watch Dogs, can't say I would blame them after looking at those sales numbers. I'd be disappointed for sure (and I'd just end up getting it on PC anyways), but short of Nintendo offering to float some money to get it released, it makes no financial sense for Ubi to piss that money away unless it's past the point of no return for the Wii U port.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
With just how badly third parties are suffering on the Wii U I wonder if Nintendo is going have their work cut out for them trying to get any support for their next console. Edit: More so than in the past I mean. Amcoti fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Feb 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
Atomicated posted:With just how badly third parties are suffering on the Wii U I wonder if Nintendo is going have their work cut out for them trying to get any support for their next console. "If"? They've had their work cut out for them on almost every single console since the SNES and the only reason the WiiU had the initial support it did was because of the smash hit success of the Wii. Assuming they have the funds/plans to launch a next console they're going to either need another Wii caliber hit or they need to meet the basic standards of 3rd party support Sony established decades ago.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
Barudak posted:"If"? They've had their work cut out for them on almost every single console since the SNES and the only reason the WiiU had the initial support it did was because of the smash hit success of the Wii. Assuming they have the funds/plans to launch a next console they're going to either need another Wii caliber hit or they need to meet the basic standards of 3rd party support Sony established decades ago. That and if that EA rumor was accurate, EA was aligning itself to get Nintendo to rely upon Origin exclusively for their Online infrastructure for the Wii U.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:That and if that EA rumor was accurate, EA was aligning itself to get Nintendo to rely upon Origin exclusively for their Online infrastructure for the Wii U. EA thinks it's like the Walmart of video games or something, I swear. "Of course you'll accept our lovely terms, we're EA bitch! You're nothing without us! NOTHING!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
Monkey Fracas posted:EA thinks it's like the Walmart of video games or something, I swear. They kind of helped murder the Dreamcast in an era when they didn't have multiple sports exclusivity deals so they're not crazy that they have a lot of weight to throw around.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 18:36
|
|
|
quote:"Out of seven games we are planning to launch five games are ports, so those are games for which there is a quite small reinvestment to do," said Guillemot. Ubisoft indicated that Wii U ports cost about 1 million euros (a little over $1.2 million). http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-07-23-ubisoft-says-wii-u-ports-costing-under-USD1-3-million It's wouldn't be too difficult to ship enough copies to make a profit off a Wii U port. However, their sales on the Wii U are very poor to begin with and the console's shelf space in retail is collapsing, especially in Europe. The console hasn't shown to be as friendly with Ubisoft's casual audience (Just Dance, Raving Rabbits) as the original Wii. We also have price protection agreements with retailers which would eat into their profits. Another thing you should know about Ubisoft is that they are in a state of belt-tightening. The cost of game development for next-gen AAA games has gone up and they're struggling to deliver quality games in a timely manner. The delayed Watch Dogs from its initial release date because they need it to be an Assassin's Creed 1 type hit that would create a new mega-franchise for them. In their financials, the sales target was 6.2 million. They also delayed The Crew to 2014 alongside Watch Dogs. Outside of their annualized series, Ubisoft is a company known for delaying their games for quality or release window reasons but it's becoming more costly to push back their games. The company tried to save on development costs by developing Rainbow 6: Patriots on Assassin's Creed's AnvilNext Engine rather than license the Unreal Engine as middleware. However, an openworld engine seems to have been a poor fit for a shooter since the game has been delayed for years and assigned to entirely new teams. Splinter Cell Blacklist was another Tom Clancy game that was delayed. It also missed its sales target of 5 million units. I get the same feeling from Ubisoft that I got back from EA in 2005. EA heavily invested R&D and expanding their company size but many of their games didn't meet sales expectations. It's likely we'll see major changes to their next-gen strategy beyond just the Wii U, especially if their tentpole AAA games underperform.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
It's going to be really interesting to see where AAA development ends up in this generation. For all that we're going to have a shitload more powerful available, I don't know how profitable it is going to be to take advantage of that power. It's certainly not good for Nintendo when companies are going to be struggling to make their big-budget games sell on the PS4/One and can't justify additional investments without assured returns.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
Can the WiiU handle F2P? That or games begin to get capped by budget more stringently in the manner of modern blockbuster films where despite there being tons of technology and power to enhance films studios aren't keen to give out more than $200 million for even seemingly surefire, smash hit successes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:It's going to be really interesting to see where AAA development ends up in this generation. For all that we're going to have a shitload more powerful available, I don't know how profitable it is going to be to take advantage of that power. It's certainly not good for Nintendo when companies are going to be struggling to make their big-budget games sell on the PS4/One and can't justify additional investments without assured returns. It's already happening. Nintendo's closest third party developers (Ubisoft, Activision, Warner Bros. Interactive) will publish a number of games in the future which are PC/PS4/XB1. Or the games are cross-generation with confirmation of no Wii U SKU, such as Techland's Dying Light.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Monkey Fracas posted:EA thinks it's like the Walmart of video games or something, I swear. Ironically, though, even as bad as Origin is it's still an undeniably better online infrastructure than what Nintendo went with instead, nothing. You can see why EA thought it would make sense as an offer, but they really failed to realize just how little Nintendo cares about online.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:It's going to be really interesting to see where AAA development ends up in this generation. For all that we're going to have a shitload more powerful available, I don't know how profitable it is going to be to take advantage of that power. It's certainly not good for Nintendo when companies are going to be struggling to make their big-budget games sell on the PS4/One and can't justify additional investments without assured returns. I wish it was easier for developers to start from scratch with a new IP, because one of the biggest problems with AAA development is experimentation. Naughty Dog have remarked about how difficult making The Last of Us was, even though they were one of the most experienced developers with the hardware they were working on and even using their own custom engine. Just working on top of what's been done before is almost always easier, and in this case Naughty Dog are going to continue using their engine for PS4 games because of the even greater difficulty they had with the first Uncharted. Unfortunately, a lot of the work that goes into AAA games is just asset creation. Films don't need to create all their props from scratch, so there's no reason to populate a virtual alleyway with custom-made garbage cans if most players aren't going to pay that much attention to them anyway. Middleware engines really took off in the last generation, with Unreal Engine 3 being used for games from Batman: Arkham Asylum to Bioshock: Infinite. Ideally, developers would handle everything unique to the game, and not worry about making sure the engine loads the next area correctly. Writing your own engine is like designing your own film camera from scratch. You might get better results with one you've finely tuned yourself, but you can start filming sooner if you just buy one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Can the WiiU handle F2P? Even F2P games are going to reach a plateau. There's a limit to how big an audience you can get vs how much you can profit off something. A lot of why F2P stuff is so profitable is because it is fairly low budget. AAA stuff runs into a lot more problems. Games have fewer revenue streams and a more fickle audience than movies do. Trying to keep AAA profitable feels like it's becoming increasingly hard any of the big publishing houses and it's certainly impacting the kind of niches that can be developed. Part of the reason we have such a massive glut of shooters is that shooters are the easiest AAA games to develop and market and it's increasingly hard to justify doing anything but the easy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
No Mods No Masters posted:Ironically, though, even as bad as Origin is it's still an undeniably better online infrastructure than what Nintendo went with instead, nothing. Basically this. I'd rather have lovely rear end Origin on the Wii U then absolutely nothing like we have now. And I found myself liking Blacklist quite a bit, but I can't help but feel it might have sold more if they have stuck with Ironside and not de-age Sam to such an extreme point, also I could do without "Panther 175 point". I don't need the game to keep tossing feel good text at me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
No Mods No Masters posted:Ironically, though, even as bad as Origin is it's still an undeniably better online infrastructure than what Nintendo went with instead, nothing. I guess the question you really have to ask yourself is, say Nintendo totally bowed to everything EA asked. Would that still have held EA's support? I mean, the technological specs of the Wii U were already known by EA when they originally pledged their support. So was accepting Origin really going to ensure every EA Sports title? Every AAA EA title? Full EA support? I have my doubts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:I guess the question you really have to ask yourself is, say Nintendo totally bowed to everything EA asked. Would that still have held EA's support? EA would have one hell of an incentive to stay onboard if that were the case instead of every reason to abandon ship like it is now. Alteisen posted:And I found myself liking Blacklist quite a bit, but I can't help but feel it might have sold more if they have stuck with Ironside and not de-age Sam to such an extreme point, also I could do without "Panther 175 point". I don't need the game to keep tossing feel good text at me. Ironside refused to keep doing the character because he's a pacifist and became unhappy with Sam's characters slide. Or at least so it was claimed in an interview.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Blacklist was great, but the story was absolute crap. Hell, the coop missions have a much more engaging story than the main campaign. But Sam's character went from questioning what the hell he was doing in certain situations to "The mission always comes first"
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Zack_Gochuck posted:It's because in the Atari 2600 era, lovely third party developers were releasing games that weren't even playable and they crashed the industry. The seal of quality doesn't mean it's a good game, the seal of quality means that yes, this is a game you can put in your Nintendo and actually play. Superman 64 is one of the worst games of all time, but the game actually works and you can play it. There were literally games on store shelves for Atari 2600 where you'd hit reset to play the game and the sprites would disappear and nothing would happen because there was zero quality control. Stop this. The gaming crash was caused by the endless releasing of new machines, only affected a small amount of publishers, and was entirely localized in America. I mean E.T might have been a poo poo game, but I think spending 125 million dollars on it was probably the reason it was a failure.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
WiiFitForWindows8 posted:Stop this. How the hell did they spend 125 million on a game that was only made in several weeks, did they like pay the programmers a kings ransom?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
Pixeltendo posted:How the hell did they spend 125 million on a game that was only made in several weeks, did they like pay the programmers a kings ransom? Licensing the property covered basically all of that money. The game was made on a shoestring budget pretty much.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 07:03 |
|
|
Wait, why was the licensing fee for ET that high? Previous movie liscenced games for the Atari, stuff like Raiders, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Star Wars, were presumably a lot cheaper to license, right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 05:52
|
|