As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

What is an AAA game, and is the Wii getting any from 3rd parties?

UncleSporkyUncleSporky Registered User regular
edited January 2008 in Games and Technology
What constitutes a triple-A game?

The_Scarab wrote: »
The_Scarab wrote:
Wii has been out over a year and the only good games are Nintendo ones.
Just making sure this is typical space-saving exaggeration, yes?

Well yes and no. This requires more analysis on what is a 'triple A' title. At the moment on the Wii, the best games are definitely Nintendo ones, the most high profile too. That's not to say there aren't good games from other people, but hyperbole just cuts out a whole other discussion that leads nowhere.
Dukhat wrote: »
The Wii will outsell all other consoles this year, but it will plateau around summer, and third parties will not release any triple-A content for the system due to weak third-party sales.

Welcome to the exciting world of semantics!

Well, maybe a little bit more than that. Semantics with a point, hopefully.

Is a game an AAA title regardless of its popularity, hinging only on the parties involved in making it and its production values? Or are games only AAA if the public sees them as being so? Is it about the quality of graphics, meat to the game, and money spent on it, or is it simply when people decide it should be categorized as one?

I wanted to avoid list warz junk in this thread, but I think some specific examples are in order. GTA games are AAA, Halo is AAA, Mario Galaxy is AAA. This is just my opinion but I think it's reasonable and accepted - some games are pretty much indisputably top-tier. But what about more offbeat games like Katamari Damacy? Personally I would say it's AAA for being such an all-around quality experience, and yet it wasn't created by one of the big boys or on a huge budget. I don't think it even pushed the envelope in any respect. But based on popularity and fun/cohesiveness, I would call it triple-A. Is that fair, or incorrect?

Could it swing the other way? Suppose you have a game from a big studio with millions invested that looks and sounds spectacular, but it bombs hard. Is it possible to consider it AAA? I'm having a hard time coming up with examples of this, maybe Kane & Lynch, or even something like Beyond Good and Evil.

And is it possible for a game to be AAA more than once? I'm referring to ports. RE4 was AAA on the Cube, but is it still so on the Wii?

The reason I ask is that there seems to be a general sentiment about the Wii that it's not getting any AAA effort from third parties. I suppose this could be correct, I'm not going to get defensive about it or anything. I just wondered if, by our definition of AAA, this is really true.

The Wii is getting a lot more offbeat sort of games, interesting twists on "normal" genres. This was something else I mentioned to Scarab in our earlier discussion - that 360 and PS3 are seeing "classic genre" 3rd party AAAs such as FPSs, and the Wii is getting third party AAA games of a different kind. Two games which I personally would categorize this way are Trauma Center and Zak & Wiki.

One thing in particular that occurred to me: seeing that the Wii is getting quite a few games from non-standard genres, I wonder if we are getting triple-A games here, it's just that they're less recognizable because their category has been more or less untapped. Why wouldn't you call games like Trauma Center or Big Brain Academy triple-A? Is it because it doesn't belong to one of the specific genres that AAAs can come from, or because it doesn't have astounding 3D graphics, or what? Is it based on popularity among the forums?

That's the jist of my argument (if you want to call it that). I think there's more star effort for Wii than most people think, we just aren't used to calling it that, and it seems worse for comparison. If I'm totally off base here, please let me know!

But also please avoid list warz and stuff like "what do you mean, every game on the Wii is shit." I don't mind if you feel that way, I'd just like a more thought out post with less flamebaiting.

Switch Friend Code: SW - 5443 - 2358 - 9118 || 3DS Friend Code: 0989 - 1731 - 9504 || NNID: unclesporky
UncleSporky on
«1

Posts

  • Options
    PolagoPolago Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    At triple A title either has a TON of hype and is pretty good, or a little bit of hype and is unbelievably good.

    Halo 3 and Portal both fall into this description as to Assassin's Creed and Call of Duty 4 while great titles like Crackdown, skate, and Persona 3 don't and would probably be called double A or A grade titles.

    Generally the whole description of "AAA" is given to a game long before it's released anyways so it's generally based on how much critical hype a game gets along with it's marketing.

    Polago on
  • Options
    TheSonicRetardTheSonicRetard Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Assassins creed is described as a AAA game that let people down. Hence, the common definition for a AAA title seems to be a game which a company is devoting massive resources to. Their main game for the time being. Hence, no, a game like katamari damacy won't be a AAA game. Metal Gear Solid 4 will be.

    AAA games aren't necessarily GOOD games, they're just the big budget, highly featured, main product a company is pushing.

    TheSonicRetard on
  • Options
    The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I think there is a bunch of criteria which a game must meet to be triple A status.

    System seller.

    Hype levels.

    Sales.

    Heritage.

    Etc etc.

    The_Scarab on
  • Options
    TheSonicRetardTheSonicRetard Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Another good word to susbstitute for AAA would be blockbuster. And thats easy to define:

    from webster's:
    blockbuster
    2 : one that is notably expensive, effective, successful, large, or extravagant <ex: a blockbuster movie>

    Trauma center isn't a blockbuster (or AAA game) because it's not the kind of game that the company poured all it's resources into. A game like trauma center is more accurately described as a sleeper hit. Movies like napoleon dynamite? They're not blockbusters, they're sleeper hits.

    TheSonicRetard on
  • Options
    PolagoPolago Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    I think there is a bunch of criteria which a game must meet to be triple A status.

    System seller.

    Hype levels.

    Sales.

    Heritage.

    Etc etc.

    The biggest thing to note though is that most AAA titles are decided as such long before they're ever released, and generally the actual success of a game (unless it COMPELTELY tanks) doesn't affect that standing.

    The opposite can be true for suprise hits but generally not until they get whored.

    Polago on
  • Options
    PolagoPolago Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Another good word to susbstitute for AAA would be blockbuster. And thats easy to define:

    from webster's:
    blockbuster
    2 : one that is notably expensive, effective, successful, large, or extravagant <ex: a blockbuster movie>

    Trauma center isn't a blockbuster (or AAA game) because it's not the kind of game that the company poured all it's resources into. A game like trauma center is more accurately described as a sleeper hit. Movies like napoleon dynamite? They're not blockbusters, they're sleeper hits.

    Yeah, this. One word to describe and parallel AAA perfectly. Well done TSR. :)

    Polago on
  • Options
    FyreWulffFyreWulff YouRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited January 2008
    I don't see why people complain. "Oh man, this console has great games, but they're from one company!"

    Probably because most third parties have seem fit to just regurgitate anything they can.

    Heck, the only good games on the Xboxes are MS first party.

    Halo 1, 2, 3
    Phantom Dust
    Forza
    Fable
    Crimson Skies
    etc

    FyreWulff on
  • Options
    TheSonicRetardTheSonicRetard Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    As for your second question - is the Wii getting any? Yes. Is it getting as many as the PS3 or 360? No.

    Sega actually is putting out it's blockbusters on the wii. NiGHTS would be considered a blockbuster from sega. Square is putting blockbusters on the DS, but not the wii. the next Dragon Quest? A blockbuster definitely. However it seems the trend is to put your blockbuster on another system and give something similar, but not quite a blockbuster on the wii. Case in point, Resident Evil. PS3 and 360 owners get the blockbuster version - RE5. Wii owners get RE:UC.

    Note that blockbuster doesn't necessarily imply quality, nor does non-blockbuster. Case in point, sleeper hits and blockbuster failures. Assassins creed (which I actually enjoyed, but I recognize it's flaws) was a blockbuster that failed. Trauma center was not a blockbuster but it rocks.

    An even better example - Sonic the Hedgehog. Sonic the Hedgehog (2006) was undoubtedly sega's blockbuster for the year. And damn did it suck. On the other hand, Sonic and the Secret Rings was not, an it ended up being a sleeper hit.

    But it's pretty obvious that the blockbuster stuff is tending to come out on other systems. will the trend stop? I dunno. But, and I say this without the intent of pissing off other wii owners (like myself), it's pretty clear that nintendo's console hasn't been the blockbuster machine.

    TheSonicRetard on
  • Options
    TheSonicRetardTheSonicRetard Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    I don't see why people complain. "Oh man, this console has great games, but they're from one company!"

    Probably because most third parties have seem fit to just regurgitate anything they can.

    Heck, the only good games on the Xboxes are MS first party.

    Halo 1, 2, 3
    Phantom Dust
    Forza
    Fable
    Crimson Skies
    etc

    well that's pretty ignorant. Remember that title from Bioware - Kotor? I hear it did pretty well. How about that one game about the dude in black... ninja something or other. Or that fighting game with the titties. Lets not forget my favorite companies outtings - JSRF, Panzer Dragoon Orta, and so forth.

    TheSonicRetard on
  • Options
    jogernautjogernaut BisonopolisRegistered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I would probably go with TSR's definition too. Of course, because of the lower dev costs on the Wii, that would mean there won't be a lot of AAA games from third parties on it.

    However, it doesn't mean excellent games from third parties won't coming to the Wii.

    jogernaut on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    Mr_GrinchMr_Grinch Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I reckon it's all down to opinion, I'd have classed Zack and Wiki as AAA, I got more fun and enjoyment from that then any other game in years!

    AAA is by and large a grade, but I agree with others that the general meaning for it is a blockbuster, popular, title. In that sense Z&W wouldn't make the grade.

    Mr_Grinch on
    Steam: Sir_Grinch
    PSN: SirGrinchX
    Oculus Rift: Sir_Grinch
  • Options
    UncleSporkyUncleSporky Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    As for your second question - is the Wii getting any? Yes. Is it getting as many as the PS3 or 360? No.

    Sega actually is putting out it's blockbusters on the wii. NiGHTS would be considered a blockbuster from sega. Square is putting blockbusters on the DS, but not the wii. the next Dragon Quest? A blockbuster definitely. However it seems the trend is to put your blockbuster on another system and give something similar, but not quite a blockbuster on the wii. Case in point, Resident Evil. PS3 and 360 owners get the blockbuster version - RE5. Wii owners get RE:UC.

    Note that blockbuster doesn't necessarily imply quality, nor does non-blockbuster. Case in point, sleeper hits and blockbuster failures. Assassins creed (which I actually enjoyed, but I recognize it's flaws) was a blockbuster that failed. Trauma center was not a blockbuster but it rocks.

    An even better example - Sonic the Hedgehog. Sonic the Hedgehog (2006) was undoubtedly sega's blockbuster for the year. And damn did it suck. On the other hand, Sonic and the Secret Rings was not, an it ended up being a sleeper hit.

    But it's pretty obvious that the blockbuster stuff is tending to come out on other systems. will the trend stop? I dunno. But, and I say this without the intent of pissing off other wii owners (like myself), it's pretty clear that nintendo's console hasn't been the blockbuster machine.
    Probably a good way to think about it. So would you say that the Wii is full of sleeper hits, as opposed to AAAs? It sounds odd to say there're a lot of "sleepers" since that kind of implies nobody knows about them...but most everybody knows about the Wii's almost-blockbuster games. Maybe they all cater to different sleeping audiences.

    If AAA just comes down to "pleases the hardcore," then citing a lack of them is really just another way of saying the Wii is too kiddy, isn't it? Or is that not what you guys mean? It just seems like it's impossible to have an AAA game of certain genres, like puzzle, and the majority of them are shooters and RPGs. And thus if the Wii isn't getting those genres due to lack of graphical power then it would be impossible for it to have triple-As.

    UncleSporky on
    Switch Friend Code: SW - 5443 - 2358 - 9118 || 3DS Friend Code: 0989 - 1731 - 9504 || NNID: unclesporky
  • Options
    PatboyXPatboyX Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    I don't see why people complain. "Oh man, this console has great games, but they're from one company!"

    Probably because most third parties have seem fit to just regurgitate anything they can.

    Heck, the only good games on the Xboxes are MS first party.

    Halo 1, 2, 3
    Phantom Dust
    Forza
    Fable
    Crimson Skies
    etc

    I think Halo is the only must-own Microsoft title you've mentioned. I actually don't own it but I realize that is weird of me as an xbox owner.

    PatboyX on
    "lenny bruce is not afraid..."
    brush1rt1.jpg
  • Options
    mausmalonemausmalone Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    As for your second question - is the Wii getting any? Yes. Is it getting as many as the PS3 or 360? No.

    Sega actually is putting out it's blockbusters on the wii. NiGHTS would be considered a blockbuster from sega. Square is putting blockbusters on the DS, but not the wii. the next Dragon Quest? A blockbuster definitely. However it seems the trend is to put your blockbuster on another system and give something similar, but not quite a blockbuster on the wii. Case in point, Resident Evil. PS3 and 360 owners get the blockbuster version - RE5. Wii owners get RE:UC.

    Note that blockbuster doesn't necessarily imply quality, nor does non-blockbuster. Case in point, sleeper hits and blockbuster failures. Assassins creed (which I actually enjoyed, but I recognize it's flaws) was a blockbuster that failed. Trauma center was not a blockbuster but it rocks.

    An even better example - Sonic the Hedgehog. Sonic the Hedgehog (2006) was undoubtedly sega's blockbuster for the year. And damn did it suck. On the other hand, Sonic and the Secret Rings was not, an it ended up being a sleeper hit.

    But it's pretty obvious that the blockbuster stuff is tending to come out on other systems. will the trend stop? I dunno. But, and I say this without the intent of pissing off other wii owners (like myself), it's pretty clear that nintendo's console hasn't been the blockbuster machine.
    Probably a good way to think about it. So would you say that the Wii is full of sleeper hits, as opposed to AAAs? It sounds odd to say there're a lot of "sleepers" since that kind of implies nobody knows about them...but most everybody knows about the Wii's almost-blockbuster games. Maybe they all cater to different sleeping audiences.

    If AAA just comes down to "pleases the hardcore," then citing a lack of them is really just another way of saying the Wii is too kiddy, isn't it? Or is that not what you guys mean? It just seems like it's impossible to have an AAA game of certain genres, like puzzle, and the majority of them are shooters and RPGs. And thus if the Wii isn't getting those genres due to lack of graphical power then it would be impossible for it to have triple-As.

    Again, just like in movies, there's more to it than just blockbusters, sleeper hits, and failures. In fact the vast majority of movies (like games) are merely moderately successful and fall into neither of the three categories we've mentioned.

    For every Lethal Weapon that's a AAA blockbuster, there's a dozen lesser-known buddy cop movies with lower production values that manage to be financially successful.

    mausmalone on
    266.jpg
  • Options
    JihadJesusJihadJesus Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    AAA is the result of incredible hype and over-the-top production values. Essentially it's the gaming version of the summer blockbuster - it may be nothing but explosions and tits, but they're expensive explosions and big tits. Quality has little to nothing to do with it. It's all perception, and most of that perception comes from big budget and polish, along with top-notch graphics.

    As far as I know, not one third party has tried to make this kind of game for Wii.

    JihadJesus on
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    JihadJesus wrote: »
    AAA is the result of incredible hype and over-the-top production values. Essentially it's the gaming version of the summer blockbuster - it may be nothing but explosions and tits, but they're expensive explosions and big tits. Quality has little to nothing to do with it. It's all perception, and most of that perception comes from big budget and polish, along with top-notch graphics.

    As far as I know, not one third party has tried to make this kind of game for Wii.

    I don't know, I think Red Steel was an attempt at a big blockbuster for launch. If we're going for the "blockbuster" definition, I'd say it qualifies even if it flopped.

    mcdermott on
  • Options
    UncleSporkyUncleSporky Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    JihadJesus wrote: »
    AAA is the result of incredible hype and over-the-top production values. Essentially it's the gaming version of the summer blockbuster - it may be nothing but explosions and tits, but they're expensive explosions and big tits. Quality has little to nothing to do with it. It's all perception, and most of that perception comes from big budget and polish, along with top-notch graphics.

    As far as I know, not one third party has tried to make this kind of game for Wii.

    So then it's more about the effort than the result. I wonder if No More Heroes would count in this regard, though I don't know if anyone besides Suda ever hoped it would be massive. I would also say RE:UC shows a ton of effort, but again, their own predictions were only for moderate success.
    mcdermott wrote: »
    I don't know, I think Red Steel was an attempt at a big blockbuster for launch. If we're going for the "blockbuster" definition, I'd say it qualifies even if it flopped.
    It may have sucked in many people's eyes, but it sure didn't flop. Sales were quite high.

    UncleSporky on
    Switch Friend Code: SW - 5443 - 2358 - 9118 || 3DS Friend Code: 0989 - 1731 - 9504 || NNID: unclesporky
  • Options
    mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    I don't know, I think Red Steel was an attempt at a big blockbuster for launch. If we're going for the "blockbuster" definition, I'd say it qualifies even if it flopped.
    It may have sucked in many people's eyes, but it sure didn't flop. Sales were quite high.
    True. I was thinking in terms of reviews and popular opinion. IIRC, it sold well over a million copies. One of the benefits of being a launch title, I suppose.

    And it really wasn't that bad, it just wasn't that good either.

    mcdermott on
  • Options
    AlejandroDaJAlejandroDaJ Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I'd like to wax philosophical not on whether the Wii is getting third-party AAA titles, but if it'll get more third-party AAA titles.

    From the Sales Figures Thread, this popped up:
    ghstwrld wrote: »
    *taken from NeoGaf

    Codemasters CEO Doubts Wii Sustainability, Envisions 'Wii 2'

    In a lengthy interview to be published with the GameDaily BIZ newsletter Wednesday morning, Codemasters CEO Rod Cousens provided some interesting commentary on the current console war and Nintendo's incredible success with the Wii and DS to date.

    Cousens, like other third-party publishers, lamented the fact that Nintendo always dominates software sales on its own platforms. "The global event that's been marked as a surprise for most people is the huge success that Nintendo's achieved in every territory... The challenge that third-party software publishers face in supporting that market is that it's clearly a market dominated by the first party and always has been," he said. "If you look back at the Nintendo track record over the last 20-25 years, it's a typical situation where Nintendo will take 60-70 percent of the market and third parties will compete for the remaining 40 percent. One of the challenges is: will that result in a sudden flood of software by third parties onto a platform that's currently seen as the Holy Grail, and as a consequence there's a lot of wastage?"

    Later in the interview he added, "If you go back to the Nintendo model when it first started you had a five-product license and so one of the ways in which software publishers dealt with that was to go and buy a competitor so you could increase your output to 10. It was a way of managing product outflow both from a first- and third-party perspective, but it was always done on the basis that even if you bought up another five-product license you still knew the available share to you was something on the order of 40 percent and that the product flow, which was cartridge-based at the time, seemed to be managed in a way so that's how it folded out. Well, I'm not so sure that the current wave is any different, because I hear there's manufacturing shortages, and too much software... and these are all consistent characteristics."

    Cousens then touched on the ideas that the 60-year-old "Brain Training" market may dry up and Nintendo may need to launch a "Wii 2" sooner than we think.

    "I think this cycle has got a long way to go and it's certainly not over. Anyone writing off Sony and Microsoft do so at their peril. I could give you an argument that says there's going to be a 'Wii 2' pretty quickly because [Nintendo would need one] in order to sustain momentum over a 10-year period. And what type of software would it have then? Because right now it isn't driven by technological supremacy or power. I wonder if the idea of opening up a whole new audience to 60-year-olds looking to make sure their brain cells don't die off is a sustainable form of entertainment. Maybe they got it right because we are all an aging population in Western markets, but I somehow think as a form of entertainment that won't be the case," he concluded.

    The complete interview talks about Codemasters' best year in its 22-year history and how the U.K.-based publisher is continuing to evolve as it targets the U.S. market with a greater focus.


    In response to that, I wrote:
    Also, why shouldn't we take what the Codemasters guy says at face value?

    We've heard this meme several times from publishers. They worry about the Wii being underpowered... they worry about software selling poorly... they worry about moms and grandparents being the market... they worry about competing with first-party titles. To us, this sounds silly, and since the forums are some semblance of a deliberative body, we pick holes in these claims.

    But isn't this a self-fulfilling prophecy? We can mock the publishers all we like, but in the end, they do what they want. What if they continue to put their AAA titles on the 360 and PS3 and their watered-down offerings on the Wii and PS2? New IPs like Assassin's Creed and sequelitis victims like Call of Duty are doing damned well. Of all the stuff we've been raving about in the year-end Top 10s, how many were on the Wii? Galaxy, is that it?

    We've got most publishers and (I'd wager) the majority of dev houses still geared towards pushing graphics, refining traditional controls, established franchises, etc. Does the Wii fit into their formula? In most cases, no, and they don't seem to be willing to rewrite it. They certainly aren't rewriting it now, and they probably won't rewrite it any time soon after the smashing success of Holiday 2007.

    The caveat, of course, is that these publishers are always thinking in terms of large-scale AAA "establishment" type games in the same way that Hillary Clinton is the "establishment" candidate on the Dem side in this election cycle. The Wii is the perfect breeding ground for new IPs and smaller runaway successes like Phoenix Wright. It prints money, etc. etc. But I'm starting to think that "it prints money" is not what they're banking on. These are huge corporations, right? We mock Codemasters, but I bet they and everyone else are swimming in pools of hundred dollar bills, after having carefully removed their hats of hundred dollar bills. They've already got money, so I'm willing to bet their remaining goals are market share and brand recognition. I think they've calculated that the most surefire way to increase both is to push blockbusters on the 360 and, to a lesser extent, the PS3.

    Is that putting the cart before the horse? Or are we the ones guilty of that?

    AlejandroDaJ on
  • Options
    emnmnmeemnmnme Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Daikatana is a blockbuster AAA title? I can understand Deus Ex or Tomb Raider Legend but Eidos calling Daikatana AAA because of the money they sunk in it seems so very wrong.

    emnmnme on
  • Options
    mausmalonemausmalone Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    emnmnme wrote: »
    Daikatana is a blockbuster AAA title? I can understand Deus Ex or Tomb Raider Legend but Eidos calling Daikatana AAA because of the money they sunk in it seems so very wrong.

    Daikatana was most certainly an AAA title, even though it was pure shit. It was the flagship title from Ion Storm for quite a while. It's not about whether the game is good or not, it's about the time, resources, and effort the developer is willing to sink into the production of a game -- and right now it's clear that developers (in the general sense) are unwilling to put their big budget, big name, best staff, most effort games onto the Wii.

    Alejandro has it pretty well nailed where he talks about the self-fulfilling prophecy though. As long as you put half-assed games on the Wii, they'll continue to sell poorly. But as long as games are selling poorly on the Wii publishers will be unwilling to put their biggest projects on the system.

    It seems that the only people who haven't figured this out are the developers and publishers themselves.

    mausmalone on
    266.jpg
  • Options
    RookRook Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Sales is definitely part of the Triple A package. Games that don't sell shouldn't get that title, in the same way that The Golden Compass isn't a blockbuster film, no one went to see it, despite it having the cast, the hype, the marketing etc.

    Rook on
  • Options
    UncleSporkyUncleSporky Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    A bit of a tangent:
    Of all the stuff we've been raving about in the year-end Top 10s, how many were on the Wii? Galaxy, is that it?
    Luckily our GotY poll just finished up...and indeed, Galaxy is the only exclusive the Wii has in the top 10, the other Wii game being GH3 which was multiplatform (though it sold the most on Wii, didn't it?). However if you expand that to our top 20, we also have MP3, Super Paper Mario and Zak & Wiki. Of the top 20 there are 10 other games which are not portable.

    I think 4 Wii vs. 10 PS3/360/PC is pretty decent, although of course that's just a poll and not representative of sales and dev thoughts. Which is exactly what you were talking about!

    UncleSporky on
    Switch Friend Code: SW - 5443 - 2358 - 9118 || 3DS Friend Code: 0989 - 1731 - 9504 || NNID: unclesporky
  • Options
    SmudgeSmudge Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I think Red Steel was a pretty good example, and the only one I can think of.

    Most of what we are seeing are little side experiments like RE:UC and the DQ:Swords stuff. Not to say these games are not (or will not be) great games, but they are hardly huge profile. Other than the experiments, it is mostly ports or partygames.

    No More Heroes is a big title for that developer (forget their name), but only because the developer is pretty small. So it probably only makes it a AA title, even though it is a big risk for their size.

    What is that game coming out that is supposed to use light and shadows heavily? The anime one with the flashlight? That might be at least AA, who is making that one again?

    Smudge on
  • Options
    SmudgeSmudge Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    A bit of a tangent:
    Of all the stuff we've been raving about in the year-end Top 10s, how many were on the Wii? Galaxy, is that it?
    Luckily our GotY poll just finished up...and indeed, Galaxy is the only exclusive the Wii has in the top 10, the other Wii game being GH3 which was multiplatform (though it sold the most on Wii, didn't it?). However if you expand that to our top 20, we also have MP3, Super Paper Mario and Zak & Wiki. Of the top 20 there are 10 other games which are not portable.

    I think 4 Wii vs. 10 PS3/360/PC is pretty decent, although of course that's just a poll and not representative of sales and dev thoughts. Which is exactly what you were talking about!

    But this thread is about third party, so only ONE of those top 20 would even count, Zak and Wiki and it sold pretty poorly, didn't it?

    I know I would never buy it. We finished it in about 6 hours or so on a rental. Brought it back the same day. It was fun though.

    Smudge on
  • Options
    JihadJesusJihadJesus Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    mausmalone wrote: »
    Alejandro has it pretty well nailed where he talks about the self-fulfilling prophecy though. As long as you put half-assed games on the Wii, they'll continue to sell poorly. But as long as games are selling poorly on the Wii publishers will be unwilling to put their biggest projects on the system.

    It seems that the only people who haven't figured this out are the developers and publishers themselves.
    Exactly. You know what I'd like to play, even at $50? RE5 with REWii controls, even if I have to give up some on screen not-zombies and a lot of plastic normal mapping. You know what I DON'T want to play, even for $20? A crappy not-quite-lightgun knockoff.

    I don't think I'm alone in this. It's kind of hard to say that your 'main' games won't sell on the Wii when you don't even fucking try it. As far as I know GHIII is the only big-time release to compete acrss all three platforms, and just look at how that experience went: "Eh, we'll toss out a couple of glitchy Wii copies to appease the handful of fanboys who'll buy it over the 360/PS3 version and...holy mother fuck it sold out overnight! Jesus, make more, MAKE MORE!"

    JihadJesus on
  • Options
    ArcSynArcSyn Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    JihadJesus wrote: »
    mausmalone wrote: »
    Alejandro has it pretty well nailed where he talks about the self-fulfilling prophecy though. As long as you put half-assed games on the Wii, they'll continue to sell poorly. But as long as games are selling poorly on the Wii publishers will be unwilling to put their biggest projects on the system.

    It seems that the only people who haven't figured this out are the developers and publishers themselves.
    Exactly. You know what I'd like to play, even at $50? RE5 with REWii controls, even if I have to give up some on screen not-zombies and a lot of plastic normal mapping. You know what I DON'T want to play, even for $20? A crappy not-quite-lightgun knockoff.

    I don't think I'm alone in this. It's kind of hard to say that your 'main' games won't sell on the Wii when you don't even fucking try it. As far as I know GHIII is the only big-time release to compete acrss all three platforms look at how that experience went: "Eh, we'll toss out a couple of glitchy Wii copies to appease the handful of fanboys who'll buy it over the 360/PS3 version and...holy mother fuck it sold out overnight! Jesus, make more, MAKE MORE!"

    Same here.

    I think it's going to be one of those situations where until a large developer decides to do it and shows that they can succeed in doing so, we won't see any of them do it. Ubisoft showed that launch titles can do it, but I haven't heard much about Red Steel 2 yet. If that looks good and plays well and is worth buying, perhaps we'll see some other developers follow suit and make some effort.

    ArcSyn on
    4dm3dwuxq302.png
  • Options
    urahonkyurahonky Resident FF7R hater Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I have a feeling this year will be a good year for AAA titles on the Wii. Why? Because Nintendo tried something new with their controller. It's been over a year, and we're finally seeing quality (albeit not AAA) 3rd party titles. Give it a few more months, and many of the developers will finally get the hang of things. Capcom sure has the hang of it already.
    JihadJesus wrote:
    As far as I know, not one third party has tried to make this kind of game for Wii.

    Indeed.

    urahonky on
  • Options
    Xenogears of BoreXenogears of Bore Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    monsterhunter3-banner.jpgbaroque-banner.jpg
    dragonquestswords-banner.jpgmlb2k8-banner.jpg
    civ-revolution-banner.jpgsambadeamwiigo-banner.jpg
    okami-wii-banner.jpgPES2008-banner.jpg
    opoona-banner.jpgtales-ratatosk-banner.jpg
    houseofthedead2n3.jpgchocobosdungeon-banner1.jpg
    spacestationtycoon-banner.jpgworms-wii-banner.jpg
    fatalframeiV.jpgoboromuramusaready.jpg

    Borrowed with much love from PantherLotus over at NeoGAF.

    Xenogears of Bore on
    3DS CODE: 3093-7068-3576
  • Options
    Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Oh man.
    As cool as some of those games may be, it looks like maybe one or two new IPs, rest are all sequels.
    Which is depressing.

    Local H Jay on
  • Options
    UncleSporkyUncleSporky Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Oh man.
    As cool as some of those games may be, it looks like maybe one or two new IPs, rest are all sequels.
    Which is depressing.
    Well, it's how the industry operates, I really don't think it's any worse than the other consoles, except for Wii having more ports such as Okami.

    That is a sweet summary image, though, even though it's got some crap that could be replaced by games like King Story.

    UncleSporky on
    Switch Friend Code: SW - 5443 - 2358 - 9118 || 3DS Friend Code: 0989 - 1731 - 9504 || NNID: unclesporky
  • Options
    ArdeArde Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    There are several games coming out in 2008 that we know for sure are AAA:
    * WiiFit
    * Super Smash Brothers Brawl
    * Monster Hunter 3


    Potential AAA release:
    * Red Steel 2 (If and only if this time they can fix the issues from last time. With good reviews and good advertising of how this is the best FPS in Wii, Wii owners starving for any FPS - even those turned off by the first one - will surely latch on)


    Potential sleeper hits IMO:
    * Fatal Frame 4 (Wii owners are very hungry for mature horror games, so this is simple enough)

    * Tales of Symphonia (again, Wii owners are very hungry for JRPG games - and one that doesn't have bad character designs like Opoona might help in sales)

    * PES 2008 (probably not, but depending on the ads and reviews - it might be able to pull owners of PES for other systems if they can be convinced that the game is very different from regular PES game)

    * Okami (hopefully this game will get the same revitalization that RE4 got from the Wii)

    * King's Story (I'd like to say this will be AAA, but I don't think the publishers will allow even a decent budget for advertising that's necessary for any AAA game)

    Wii owners are probably some of the most forgiving gamers in this current gen so any company that's able to satisfy the lack of traditional games in the Wii will be heavily rewarded.

    Arde on
    Wii code:3004 5525 7274 3361
    XBL Gametag: mailarde

    Screen Digest LOL3RZZ
  • Options
    Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Oh man.
    As cool as some of those games may be, it looks like maybe one or two new IPs, rest are all sequels.
    Which is depressing.
    Well, it's how the industry operates, I really don't think it's any worse than the other consoles, except for Wii having more ports such as Okami.

    That is a sweet summary image, though, even though it's got some crap that could be replaced by games like King Story.

    Oh, I know, wasn't blaming the Wii. Just disappointing that even on such an innovative system like the Wii, we still get more and more sequels.
    SIGH.
    Oh well. Still won't stop me from getting House of the Dead.

    Local H Jay on
  • Options
    themocawthemocaw Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    Wii is currently still at the "WTF?" stage with a lot of developers: remember how long it takes games to develop.

    What I see happening was that the launch titles were basically the few stalwarts brave enough to commit to the system while everyone else waited to see if Ninty's new flagship would live or crash and burn. Now that it's selling out within ten nanoseconds of shipping, everyone's getting on the bandwagon, yelling, "ME TOO ME TOO!" and shoving out whatever they can for the Wii so that they have at least one foot in the door.

    I have a feeling that the shovelware phase will soon pass. I don't think we'll see the kind of high-profile AAA titles like Halo 3, simply because the Wii doesn't work that way due to its lack of raw numbers. Instead, companies who want to try something interesting that doesn't require the massive processor power of the 360/PS3 will give it a shot on the Wii instead. Expect more titles like Trauma Center and Guitar Hero: things that take advantage not only of the wii-mote, but the Wii hardware's robustness and small size (it's SO much easier to pack up a Wii in a backpack and take it to a party than a 360 or a PS3, especially when you've already got to carry your Guitar.)

    themocaw on
  • Options
    ArcSynArcSyn Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    themocaw wrote: »
    Wii is currently still at the "WTF?" stage with a lot of developers: remember how long it takes games to develop.

    What I see happening was that the launch titles were basically the few stalwarts brave enough to commit to the system while everyone else waited to see if Ninty's new flagship would live or crash and burn. Now that it's selling out within ten nanoseconds of shipping, everyone's getting on the bandwagon, yelling, "ME TOO ME TOO!" and shoving out whatever they can for the Wii so that they have at least one foot in the door.

    I have a feeling that the shovelware phase will soon pass. I don't think we'll see the kind of high-profile AAA titles like Halo 3, simply because the Wii doesn't work that way due to its lack of raw numbers. Instead, companies who want to try something interesting that doesn't require the massive processor power of the 360/PS3 will give it a shot on the Wii instead. Expect more titles like Trauma Center and Guitar Hero: things that take advantage not only of the wii-mote, but the Wii hardware's robustness and small size (it's SO much easier to pack up a Wii in a backpack and take it to a party than a 360 or a PS3, especially when you've already got to carry your Guitar.)

    I think Galaxy/Brawl though can show what it can do for graphics and that you can at least get some good stuff out of it.

    I can attest to the packing up though. I bought a wireless sensor bar just for this purpose. I pack up the Wii, 4+ multiplayer games, 4 controllers, 4 nunchucks, guitar, power, and a/v all in a small backpack and I still have some room to spare.

    ArcSyn on
    4dm3dwuxq302.png
  • Options
    j0hnz3rj0hnz3r Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    The definition of a AAA game is simple. It's a game that the publisher went "All-In" on and succeeded to make a profit.

    j0hnz3r on
    jedi_watchtower.png
  • Options
    Local H JayLocal H Jay Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    As a side note, looking at SMG and Brawl, there is NO reason for games to look as bad as GH3 does on the Wii. It's worse than PS2, and I say that with all humility. It looks like someone took the characters and tried to recreate them using The Sims.

    Local H Jay on
  • Options
    KVWKVW Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    I'd say a AAA third party title is either a major franchise, like MGS, FF, GTA, etc, or a high selling 'mass market title', like Madden (it's rehash central, but it sells like hell anda console without EA Sports is a console thats doing something wrong), or something with a large budget and marketing with lots of hype, like Assassins Creed.

    Someone's example of Nights would not qualify as a AAA title. It's a port of a game that very few people have played, let alone heard of, and has had very little marketing and a relatively poor outing in reviews.

    However, Mass Effect, while a new property, comes from Bioware and has been heavily advertised, promoted through interviews or previews and has garnered massive amounts of attention while scoring quite well in reviews.

    Review scores don't matter too much though, as Assassins Creed did fairly bad for the amount of hype and attention devoted to it. It still sold well though.

    Going back to Wii, since that seems to be what sparked the OP, Zack & Wiki, Trauma Center, Red Steel and well, I can't think of anything else from the Wii that would qualify, but these are good to great games, but not AAA. My brother doesn't know what Nights or Z&W are. He wouldnt know what TC was if not for the fact I owned it before I sold my Wii. He's the definition of casual gamer and he knows about the sports games he likes and the GTAs and MGS's. All he knows for the Wii are teh VC titles and Nintendo titles because there are no AAA titles. There are good 3rd party games, but no AAA titles.

    KVW on
  • Options
    SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited January 2008
    AAA, by definition, is a product of high quality. The Wii, judging by review scores, has gotten it's fair share of high quality games from third parties, and there's plenty of speculation regarding how good plenty of the upcoming Wii games will be.

    Hype, brand recognition, etc has little to do with it in the long run.

    Sheep on
  • Options
    UncleSporkyUncleSporky Registered User regular
    edited January 2008
    KVW wrote: »
    Someone's example of Nights would not qualify as a AAA title. It's a port of a game that very few people have played, let alone heard of, and has had very little marketing and a relatively poor outing in reviews.
    It's not a port, it's totally new! Shows just how poor of marketing it's really had.

    UncleSporky on
    Switch Friend Code: SW - 5443 - 2358 - 9118 || 3DS Friend Code: 0989 - 1731 - 9504 || NNID: unclesporky
Sign In or Register to comment.