Insomniac "Not Working" on the Wii U

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

yet another developer not making games for the wii-u. I'm just going to leave this here, because I've got nothing else left to say.

image

A developer who thinks console generations are based on power...... why is someone like him having any saying in anything? Generations where never about hardware power because the original Xbox is a lost more powerful than the PS2.

Also, isn't Insomniac like Sony's 2nd party developer with few exceptions? Kinda obvious that they aren't working on the WiiU.

Raggedstar:

Lvl 64 Klutz:
Has Insomniac made anything for the XBox either? I thought they were almost exclusively Sony anyway. I expect I'm wrong, since that would kind of negate the point of the article, but I honestly can't think of anything Insomniac has made for a console that is not of the PlayStation brand.

Fuse is being made with an EA partnership, and I think is going to be on the 360 too. Though I think they also have a division within the company that works on mobile games too? But ya, mostly Sony and I agree with your thoughts ("We won't work with WiiU" says developer who's 90% of games are with Sony platforms).

That's because Sony published the games. Now they have a third party publisher which would allow them to release multiplatform and they still choose to avoid the Wii U.

This is a sad sign of the times. These day AAA developers spend more time on high end graphics than on the mechanics and fail to meet the quality of the PS2 era. Consider this, video games are like a Sundae, the game play mechanics is the ice cream the story is the chocolate sauce and the graphics are the sprinkles. If the ice cream is bad, the sundae will suck no matter how many sprinkles are added. In other words, If the game play mechanics are bad, the game will suck no matter how good the graphics are. Yes, the Wii U doesn't have the graphical potential that PS4 & Xbox Infinite have, but AAA developers act like graphics are the most important part of the game. If that were true then games like Minecraft and Angry Birds wouldn't be as successful as they are. Imagine what games would be like today if they only used half the current budget for graphics and put the rest on the mechanics? Look at Nintendo (I know that not everyone likes their games), for the most part Graphics are the last thing that they consider when making a game. They always focus on the game play mechanics first and they will start from scratch even if the game is almost finished if they feel that mechanics just aren't up to their standards. Why do you think Pikmin 3 has been delayed for so long.

My lord, I'm just gobsmacked at how fucking stupid Nintendo's leadership is. The U is turning out to be a complete disaster. Not to mention that they keep releasing games on the Wii U VC that no one wants to play (Solomon's Key, Xevious?! WTH?) and devs keep bailing week-after-week.

Not good nintendo, and every bit of it is because of your poor choices on how to make this console. Pretty bummed I bought the U at this point. At least a few decent games are coming out for it before it goes down in flames, I hope.

Nintendo needs to watch Jimquisitions video about innovation for the sake of innovation, they could learn a thing or twenty.

The WiiU is shaping up to be a fair bit of a flop.

It's always going to have some supporters, but, the fact is, the console is too far behind the curve than what people want.

A lot of people, want a typical console, with more power.

They don't want a giant gamepad with a screen on it.

They don't want waggle sticks and tennis attachments for their controllers.

They just want to sit down and play a video game with a control they're familiar with.

That's really all there is to it. Blame it on "Graphics being more important" or whatever you want.

The fact is, if the product is not enticing to the consumer, they're not going to be interested.

The Wii worked because it had its own unique games. It didn't matter that they didn't look as good, because they were stylised, a Mario game isn't going to require the PS3's level of hardware.

Now with the WiiU, these stylised games, really aren't looking much better than the Wii, and the more mainstream games the WiiU can run, look pretty identical to their console companions.

So, what this results to it the following.

Do I like Mario games? - Stick to a Wii.

Do I like mainstream titles? - Stick to your current console.

The only main selling points the WiiU has is the Controller, and honestly, most people don't like it.

deadish:

Tanakh:

Well if we look at the word "generation" it's something that refers to time and not how effective something is.
And since (is it gen8??) the WiiU is 1 year earler than the next PS and Xbox, while the wii, 360 and ps3 are from around 2006, I guess the English language really decides it is in the current generation.

Fine it's a next-gen console ... with last gen's hardware.

A next gen console case with last gen's internals.

Happy?

A Ferrari with a Ford Model-T engine is still a Ferrari right?

Bro, missquote. I didn't wrote that, in fact I think it's quite dumb and oblivious towards the use of language.

Edit: Also, NO, a Ferrari with a ford model-t engine is certainly no Ferrari!

Given that Insomniac has spent the vast majority producing sony exclusives, this is not news.

It's unfortunate that we're seeing the same launch the 3DS had - very few games worth buying. Nintendo needs to start pumping these games in the pipeline out, fast. This is going to be a critical e3 for nintendo - oh wait. They cancelled. Idiots.

My question: Does anyone really want PORTS on the WiiU? Exclusives built for the system sure, but I have no interest in games that are available on other systems. I have a very powerful PC so anything that is multiplatform I will simply get for that and a year or so down the road I will probably buy a PS4 as well.

The strength of the WiiU is that it can offer experiences that you can't get on the other consoles and a port of games made for other consoles are never going to make use of that strength beyond throwing in something gimmicky and pointless.

novem:
My question: Does anyone really want PORTS on the WiiU? Exclusives built for the system sure, but I have no interest in games that are available on other systems. I have a very powerful PC so anything that is multiplatform I will simply get for that and a year or so down the road I will probably buy a PS4 as well.

The strength of the WiiU is that it can offer experiences that you can't get on the other consoles and a port of games made for other consoles are never going to make use of that strength beyond throwing in something gimmicky and pointless.

Yep. Zero interest in a PS4 or Next-box. Too expensive compared to my PC, more hassle then my PC, and one, from current rumors, wants to charge me to use the damn thing. I hope the Wii U wins just because of my growing disdain for microsoft and sony.

Snowblindblitz:

novem:
My question: Does anyone really want PORTS on the WiiU? Exclusives built for the system sure, but I have no interest in games that are available on other systems. I have a very powerful PC so anything that is multiplatform I will simply get for that and a year or so down the road I will probably buy a PS4 as well.

The strength of the WiiU is that it can offer experiences that you can't get on the other consoles and a port of games made for other consoles are never going to make use of that strength beyond throwing in something gimmicky and pointless.

Yep. Zero interest in a PS4 or Next-box. Too expensive compared to my PC, more hassle then my PC, and one, from current rumors, wants to charge me to use the damn thing. I hope the Wii U wins just because of my growing disdain for microsoft and sony.

More power to the both of you on your endeavours.

Meanwhile while finishing my new desktop I'll be saving for the U in time for the summer and down the line the same for one of the other two consoles because from my point of view I don't see any hassle apart from the time and money it took to build this new desktop of mine that will no doubt present annoying problems in the future like every other PC will always do.

CriticKitten:
-snip-

Why would it be? Because it's design has more to do with the Xbox360 than with any other console before or after (excluding the control).

And I am not pretending anything. You talk as if being or not part of a generation had to do with some objective characteristic in the product, and say it was based on age, then how come the neo-geo is not of the fifth? Chronologically and technologically makes more sense as it's closer in both ways to the Jaguar and the 3DO than the TurboGrafx. The answer back in those times was because the first and the second generations were defined by historic events (market crashes), and the third to fifth clearly defined by CPU architectures.

Now, here comes the tricky part, microsoft introduced in the Xbox a method of console development than then refined for the Xbox 360. That method being making your console a cheapass computer optimized for gaming, and it works amazingly well because it's easy to produce, to develop and to develop for. From the Xbox360 Nintendo and Sony learnt that they should do the same.

So now generations are kind of meaningless, merly marketspeech to sell the new console, because unlike before there is no historic or technological reason to keep advancing the number; it's just a way for a PR guy to sell.

BTW, the obvious implication is that I also don't think a PS4 is "new gen", because it seems like a direct descendant of the Xbox360 with a Sony twist, same as a WiiU would be a Nintendonized Xbox360.

PS: You never gave me a descriptive definition bro.

BrotherRool:

EHKOS:
So...? Insomniac is a Sony studio. Not to mention they've given up on making good games.

Insomniac is no longer a Sony studio. They went multiplatform

Was that their choice? Because between that and their recent Ratchet titles, it seems they got hit on the head.

EHKOS:

BrotherRool:

EHKOS:
So...? Insomniac is a Sony studio. Not to mention they've given up on making good games.

Insomniac is no longer a Sony studio. They went multiplatform

Was that their choice? Because between that and their recent Ratchet titles, it seems they got hit on the head.

That's interesting I never even thought of that, I always assumed it must be because the Resistance titles did pretty okay and Ratchett was a good system mascot. I assumed they wanted to branch some wings or just make more money or something

Well hello, every third party video game developer ever, how do you do?

There seriously isn't anything noteworthy about this. In fact I'm seriously worried that the Wii U is dead. Deader than dead, in fact. It seems it has an uphill climb. And I do love my Wii U so I'm not trying to support its death.

Though, as others have stated, doesn't Insomniac just work with Nintendo anyway?

The Wii U does seem pointless to support in a multi platform release as it does seem substantially weaker than infinity/ps4. 3o I kinda understand dropping interest from devs. Exclusives could still do well on it though. Just doesn't seem practical to port a game from 8gb ram 8 core processor and likely better gpu to something with 2gb ram(1 gb video probaly)

Tanakh:

deadish:

Tanakh:

Well if we look at the word "generation" it's something that refers to time and not how effective something is.
And since (is it gen8??) the WiiU is 1 year earler than the next PS and Xbox, while the wii, 360 and ps3 are from around 2006, I guess the English language really decides it is in the current generation.

Fine it's a next-gen console ... with last gen's hardware.

A next gen console case with last gen's internals.

Happy?

A Ferrari with a Ford Model-T engine is still a Ferrari right?

Bro, missquote. I didn't wrote that, in fact I think it's quite dumb and oblivious towards the use of language.

Edit: Also, NO, a Ferrari with a ford model-t engine is certainly no Ferrari!

I might have quoted someone else and somehow it got mangled. Apologies.

sneakypenguin:
The Wii U does seem pointless to support in a multi platform release as it does seem substantially weaker than infinity/ps4. 3o I kinda understand dropping interest from devs. Exclusives could still do well on it though. Just doesn't seem practical to port a game from 8gb ram 8 core processor and likely better gpu to something with 2gb ram(1 gb video probaly)

Here's the thing about the PlayStation 4, though. It is pointless for most companies to even utilize even a decent portion of that hardware.

Most would go bankrupt even trying.

I've come to this conclusion a while back(with words of others being fans/suits) is that this next-gen is going to have a complete uphill battle. Nintendo biggest problem has absolutely nothing do to with hardware which I find hilarious that people want to argue about it all the time. As of now, unless techniques change sometime within this up-coming gen, the Wii-U is able to render the techniques used in modern development which makes porting more than possible.

No, Nintendo biggest problem comes down to relevancy which I think they haven't had much of for quite some time. Yes, they still have huge control of how the industry shapes up but this doesn't effect most developers. It has absolutely nothing to do with hardware but rather proving to them that you can profitable on the system and this so far was Nintendo biggest mistake. This is something that Nintendo probably won't be able to fix until the other two companies release their consoles so they have something to compare against. People think that Nintendo will get left in the dust when they release but what I think will happen is companies will do their math after making some games on the competitors console and realize their profit margin will be massively bigger since the cost cover will be smaller.

For all those saying that the Wii-U is not next-gen clearly don't know how the market works. Wii-U is replacing Wii shelf space and is going to be competing for shelf space against PS4 and Infinity, that makes it next-gen. XD

And escapist, really? instead of reporting about "Insomniac Q@A", you went for the cheap hits and bashed Nintendo? And you want to be considered credible? How about reporting in why there is no PC version while your at it but I guess covering news is hard work. XD

a thought:

Saying that the Wii U isn't of the same generation as the PS4 and Nextbox is like saying that the 3DS isn't in the same generation as the Vita. Check. Freaking. Mate.

I want to say I'm surprised but I'm really not. A lot of game dev's play it safe on the gimmicks various console dev's bring to the table. Move, Kinect, the original Wii, 3ds, Vita, Virtual Boy (reaching way back, PowerGlove (seriously wtf was that thing for?), Rob the Robot. Sure Nintendo is the biggest offender... But are game dev's being shortsighted? 3rd party dev's have a chance to make games outside the box with some of the periph's for consoles. I don't claim to know everything that goes on behind the scenes but in today's industry the norm seems to be "go with the status quo". Thats fine for a bit, conservatism in moderation helps progress by not becoming too big too fast. (double meaning? maybe).
But in the end some console dev's shoot themselves in the foot. However Nintendo is the leader in "innovation" or as some may call it "useless gimmicks gamers will wear later in cosplay".
I'm not arguing that WiiU is great, nor is it bad. Its there and if the right dev's come along it may be awesome. But sometimes people have to take great risks for the greatest rewards, both console and 3rd party dev's alike.

KelDG:
Wikipedia is not a credible source, it has links to citation which CAN be credible, but I bet you can't provide a credible source from the article you linked before.

Oh while you were riding your high horse, you probably didn't notice but I did not take sides in the argument so I don't need to prove anything, especially to you, I frankly thing your argument with the other guy is stupid. I just pointed out Wiki is not a credible source and anyone who thinks it is, is a complete MUPPET.

[quote]You mention academia, there is a reason Wikipedia is not accepted as a source for references, it is because Wikipedia does not hold the credible information, but only links to it, and it is these sources that should (and would) be used. Even heavily moderated pages with correct information are not accepted for this reason. Have fun passing anything but high school with your logic.

It's funny, because I've graduated from college multiple times now and still cite bits from Wikipedia, because it's perfectly valid to do so. So I'm just going to say that you've got not so much as a clue what you're talking about, and the fact that you openly dismiss a valid source of information is ignorance at its finest.

Go away now. I don't care what you have to say.

Terramax:
But the Dreamcast was released closer to the release date of the PS2, Gamecube and Xbox, yet people often associate with DC with the generation of the PS1, N64 and Saturn, right? Can you explain what I'm missing here (I'm asking this as a serious question, not to be a smart alec, as I've always run by your logic also, but people have always decried me as wrong)?

Who does that? O_o

I certainly never have. DC, at least for me, was always appropriately compared to the PS2 and other such consoles, since those were its actual competition.

I suppose people might have compared it to those consoles because DC came out first in the generation by a decent margin. So it's sort of like how people are comparing the Wii U to the 360 and PS3 right now, would be my best guess.

Tanakh:
Why would it be? Because it's design has more to do with the Xbox360 than with any other console before or after (excluding the control).

And as we previously established, the eighth generation is defined primarily by its time period (in that it's a full five years after the prior gen), NOT the hardware specs. Otherwise there wouldn't be a new generation at all since they're all woefully outdated by comparison to PCs and other hardware out there (and while that may be your point, it's quite honestly a stupid point).

So this comparison is meaningless, and it's not going to go anywhere no matter how much you harp on it.

And I am not pretending anything. You talk as if being or not part of a generation had to do with some objective characteristic in the product, and say it was based on age, then how come the neo-geo is not of the fifth? Chronologically and technologically makes more sense as it's closer in both ways to the Jaguar and the 3DO than the TurboGrafx. The answer back in those times was because the first and the second generations were defined by historic events (market crashes), and the third to fifth clearly defined by CPU architectures.

The Neo-Geo came out three years before the Dreamcast, and there were three other consoles after that.

By comparison, the Neo-Geo was released only two years after the first console in Gen 4.

I'll let you do the math there, as I'm pretty sure you can handle it.

It's certainly true that the hardware was a factor in the decision to plant Neo-Geo firmly in the previous generation (16-bit vs 32-bit), but it was a natural entry for that generation anyways by virtue of the fact that it was released closer to the release dates of other 16-bit consoles rather than 32-bit ones.

Now, here comes the tricky part, microsoft introduced in the Xbox a method of console development than then refined for the Xbox 360. That method being making your console a cheapass computer optimized for gaming, and it works amazingly well because it's easy to produce, to develop and to develop for. From the Xbox360 Nintendo and Sony learnt that they should do the same.

So now generations are kind of meaningless, merly marketspeech to sell the new console, because unlike before there is no historic or technological reason to keep advancing the number; it's just a way for a PR guy to sell.

I'll agree that the lines are certainly more blurred, but the premise that a console released a full five years after the previous batch of consoles should be included as part of its generation PURELY on the basis of hardware is ludicrous.

BTW, the obvious implication is that I also don't think a PS4 is "new gen", because it seems like a direct descendant of the Xbox360 with a Sony twist, same as a WiiU would be a Nintendonized Xbox360.

And I'd disagree with you there too, since (again) the implication that the hardware is the only factor in deciding a generation when that's NOT what "generation" means....well, that's simply absurd.

If you want to bash hardware, go for it, but stop misusing a word to suit your argument and then insisting that you're using the definition correctly when you're obviously not.

PS: You never gave me a descriptive definition bro.

Because I'm still waiting for you to find a dictionary. I'm not going to spell out the definition of "generation" for you when it takes five seconds to look it up for yourself. Stop being lazy and then throwing accusations of logical fallacy out at me because I refuse to cave to your laziness. Do your own research, don't expect your opponent to do it for you. That is the most basic rule of debate. I'll give you one last chance to prove that you're capable of at least doing that much for yourself.

CriticKitten:
Who does that? O_o

I certainly never have. DC, at least for me, was always appropriately compared to the PS2 and other such consoles, since those were its actual competition.

Right.

Well, many, MANY people argue that the Dreamcast is the same generation as the N64, PSX and Saturn. I've seen forums escalate into flamewars due to the debate.

Just a few minor pointers to leave here for reference (I'm not up for debate at the moment):

Firstly, Nintendo's Wii not only kept up with the other two consoles despite having far weaker graphic capabilities, it
demolished them. Utterly, completely, and without any real 3rd part support.

Secondly, Nintendo still has an iron grip on the handheld market, even with the Vita and modern cell phone apps out there.

And thirdly, Insomniac hasn't been relevant or made anything most people even cared about since the days of the original PS1 and the PS2, so their unwillingness to develop for the Wii U is nothing to really stress over.

Nintendo will be perfectly fine in due time. The Escapist however, I'm a bit more concerned about. Honestly seems they're dredging up anything they can to report on, instead of something... I don't know, relevant?

Nouw:
The games on the WiiU may be behind in terms of specs compared to games on the other consoles but I believe the touch-screen controller more than makes up for it. The extra-screen provides opportunities for games that would be impossible to pull off on the other consoles and this is where the WiiU can really shine. I'd even say it has more opportunities because of this. Developers need to take advantage of it and do something -forgive my language- innovative. As j-e-f-f-e-r-s has pointed out many times before, a proper console strategy game could be produced! Asymmetrical gaming with the Pro Controller, hell even NDS-style aiming with the touch-screen.

That was the theory behind the Wii and motion controls. A generation later, and not even Nintendo could manage to come up with a game which made motion controls more than a gimmick. They put out some party games, then spent the generation milking their old franchises while unambitiously mapping various discrete actions to some form of controller waggling. Skyward Sword came the closest to really making the controls work, but they were still far too attached to the Zelda formula to be the definitive example (it was also a bit late at that point).

If Nintendo wants its latest "innovation" to take off then they need to take the bull by the horns and put out a game that doesn't just blow people away, but does something with the controls that makes people say "This game couldn't have been done on the 360".

Trilliandi:
Just a few minor pointers to leave here for reference (I'm not up for debate at the moment):

Firstly, Nintendo's Wii not only kept up with the other two consoles despite having far weaker graphic capabilities, it
demolished them. Utterly, completely, and without any real 3rd part support.

I hate to break this to you, but the Wii's sales fell off BIG time during the 2nd half of the generation. MS and Sony were both on track to outpace its totals in about two more years. The Wii also suffered a much lower attach rate than either of its competitors. The Wii U's sales are already in the dumpster.

The Wii was ultimately a strategic failure. It had some short-term success that Nintendo failed to capitalize on, leaving them in an awful position for this generation.

There's more to console development than you realize. One of the biggest obstacles to multiplatform development is the internal architecture of the CPU.

For example, the PS4 will run off a Semi-custom 8-core AMD x86-64 CPU (integrated into APU). The 360 uses a 3.2 GHz PowerPC Tri-Core Xenon. The WiiU uses a Multi-Core IBM PowerPC "Espresso".

Notice how radically different each of those are? Combine this with Nintendo licensing issues, and the unspoken obligation to work around that touch screen, on top of the unique internal structure and how out of control budgeting is these days, I can't say I'm surprised that developers are passing up having to develop for it.

BloodSquirrel:

That was the theory behind the Wii and motion controls. A generation later, and not even Nintendo could manage to come up with a game which made motion controls more than a gimmick. They put out some party games, then spent the generation milking their old franchises while unambitiously mapping various discrete actions to some form of controller waggling. Skyward Sword came the closest to really making the controls work, but they were still far too attached to the Zelda formula to be the definitive example (it was also a bit late at that point).

If Nintendo wants its latest "innovation" to take off then they need to take the bull by the horns and put out a game that doesn't just blow people away, but does something with the controls that makes people say "This game couldn't have been done on the 360".

Metroid Prime 3 would like to have a word with you.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Metroid Prime 3 would like to have a word with you.

It did have a word with me. I was unimpressed with what it had to say, and I politely requested for it to go back to being good, like the first Metroid Prime was. Then I went and played Gears of War again.

BloodSquirrel:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Metroid Prime 3 would like to have a word with you.

It did have a word with me. I was unimpressed with what it had to say, and I politely requested for it to go back to being good, like the first Metroid Prime was. Then I went and played Gears of War again.

Wow. Just wow. I hope you can see the blatant irony in your statement. Or that you're just ripping the piss.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Wow. Just wow. I hope you can see the blatant irony in your statement. Or that you're just ripping the piss.

You need to consult a dictionary. "Irony" does not mean "Somebody does not conform to my fanboy opinions about videogames".

BloodSquirrel:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Wow. Just wow. I hope you can see the blatant irony in your statement. Or that you're just ripping the piss.

You need to consult a dictionary. "Irony" does not mean "Somebody does not conform to my fanboy opinions about videogames".

Gears Of War: a shooter where the cover system was used to overcome the inherent problems of aiming with dual analogue sticks. Instead of having to track moving enemies with an inherently clumsy aiming device offset by hefty amounts of auto-aim, instead players just stick to cover and aim at largely stationary enemies who duck in and out of cover like a game of whack-a-mole. When enemies do move, they do so rather slowly in order to actually make aiming at them easier.

Metroid Prime 3: a game where being able to aim at the screen with the Wiimote actually gives you some level of accuracy comparable to an M&K setup.

I mean, can you show me an analogue stick game where the aiming is comparable to something like this? Or this? Or even this?

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Metroid Prime 3: a game where being able to aim at the screen with the Wiimote actually gives you some level of accuracy comparable to an M&K setup.

Oh God, that's rich. Where do you get this stuff? Have you ever actually used either of those things?

No, really though, it sure was great how the Wii became THE place for shooters after MP3 blew everyone away with its control scheme. Why, there was... um... The Conduit? I think? And Red Steel! No, wait, that came out before. But anyway, I remember how when Gears 2 game out everyone was talking about how much better it would have been with the Wiimote. It also sure does suck how nobody has figured out how to do a non-cover based shooter on a console. Halo and CoD keep trying, but neither of them even touch Metroid Prime 3's sales!

CriticKitten:
Because I'm still waiting for you to find a dictionary. I'm not going to spell out the definition of "generation" for you when it takes five seconds to look it up for yourself. Stop being lazy and then throwing accusations of logical fallacy out at me because I refuse to cave to your laziness. Do your own research, don't expect your opponent to do it for you. That is the most basic rule of debate. I'll give you one last chance to prove that you're capable of at least doing that much for yourself.

lol, I see that you think that "generation" and "console generation" mean the same; guess you also think "memory" and "computer memory" are one word. No wonder you are so confused, I'll peace out then.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here