YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Reserved for modern gaming discussions.
User avatar
Stalvern
Posts: 357
Joined: June 18th, 2016, 7:15 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Stalvern » April 6th, 2017, 2:18 am

Atarifever wrote:When Raretronic announced a high def Banjoo, they probably weren't sure a modern take on the completely dead 3D platforming collect-athon genre was going to sell well. I mean, obviously Microsoft has felt that way for years, doing very little with that particular franchise. So it's a little silly to claim that somehow Playtronic knew this would be some smash hit project before they put it up. Good for them they made $2 million. The day before they didn't know if they'd make two dollars.

Really? "The creators of a '90s nostalgia property are doing it again!" is peak crowdfunding bait - Mighty No. 9, Armikrog, Broken Age, Elite: Dangerous, Shenmue 3, Reading Rainbow, Mystery Science Theater 3000, friggin' Star Citizen. There was zero question that this would be huge. The idea that the least popular console of the seventh generation would be important to drumming up interest in one of the biggest franchises of the fifth is bizarre anyway; the people who grew up with Nintendo in the '90s had clearly moved on to other brands by 2015 (and Rare's biggest fans probably bought the 360 over the original Wii, for that matter).

Atarifever wrote:You can claim all day that this is conspiracy theory stuff. However, I'm not claiming an elaborate conspiracy at all. I'm claiming it was easy for ex-Rare guys to say they'd make a Wii U port too, back before they knew how much money they would make. I'm claiming they likely assumed a new Banjo game would appeal to Nintendo fans. I'm claiming they likely assumed Nintendo fansites, videogame press, and gamers would like the story of a new Banjo game coming to a Nintendo system. I'm claiming at the start of this, they intended to make a Wii U port. You somehow think all of that is too amazing to be believed. I cannot imagine why. None of it could be anything other than the obvious truth, unless you think the people at Playtronic are drooling imbeciles.

The shady part is fishing for donations and press on Kickstarter, then just dropping whatever you don't want to work on in the end, once you know who you do and don't need, and once you've taken every possible advantage in the meantime. I don't see how the story, as it played out, looks like anything else.

I apologize for misunderstanding and misconstruing your narrative; it is more internally consistent than I had thought. What's still missing is the actual financial incentive. They had nothing to lose by releasing a Wii U version, but in canceling it, they not only shed backer funds but wasted practically the entire development budget, making the decision as late in development as they did - and given that lateness, the Wii U and Switch versions had to have been simultaneous projects, so it's not like Playtonic needed to abandon one to complete the other; with the resources on hand, they could have had their cake and eaten it too with both ports. They lost money on this choice, plain and simple.

Besides, I don't like to presume malice (or negligence) over misfortune, especially when the stated misfortune specifically fits Unity's track record on the Wii U. A technical failure such as Playtonic claim is entirely probable. Together, that and the absence of any gain from electively abandoning the project give their story a lot of weight.

User avatar
Atarifever
Posts: 347
Joined: April 12th, 2015, 5:55 am

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Atarifever » April 6th, 2017, 5:23 am

Stalvern wrote:I apologize for misunderstanding and misconstruing your narrative; it is more internally consistent than I had thought. What's still missing is the actual financial incentive. First, regardless of what you say, the developers couldn't have failed to see the goldmine on their hands; only the most pathological kleptomaniacs would have reason to bolt a peripheral con of nostalgic manipulation onto a campaign that was itself a colossus of nostalgic manipulation. (And do you really believe that, almost 20 years on, it would have been through the Wii U that they would think it necessary to appeal to N64 owners when the people who grew up with that console had clearly moved on to other brands? Heck, how many Rare devotees do you think bought a 360 instead of a Wii?) Second, they had nothing to lose by releasing a Wii U version, but in canceling it, they not only shed backer funds but wasted practically the entire development budget, making the decision as late in development as they did - and given that lateness, the Wii U and Switch versions had to have been simultaneous projects, so it's not like Playtonic needed to abandon one to complete the other; with the resources on hand, they could have had their cake and eaten it too with both ports. They lost money on this choice, plain and simple.

Besides, I don't like to presume malice (let alone to the degree you're suggesting) over misfortune, especially when the stated misfortune specifically fits Unity's track record on the Wii U. A technical failure such as Playtonic claim is entirely probable. Together, that and the absence of any gain from electively abandoning the project give their story a lot of weight.


I did a small bit of digging around on google, because I thought "I remember being a Wii U owner who followed this closely, and I remember them talking about the Nintendo angle early and often." Here's some stuff I found:

Nintendo fansite clearly talking about ti as a Wii U game 3 onths before Kickstarter:
http://nintendoeverything.com/playtonic ... qus_thread


Eurogamer article interviewing the developers from a couple months before the Kickstarter:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015- ... ickstarter

"We don't want to force tiers and stretch goals on fans, we'd love to hear if people would like to voice characters, if people want to have early access to the game, perhaps - and this is just a pipe dream - if we can have a boxed N64 copy of the game to really play off the game's nostalgic feel. So it's about finding out what people want from us from the Kickstarter campaign and then creating it with that in mind.


Playtonic expects to launch its Kickstarter campaign in May. Before then, it will be canvassing opinion for what potential backers would want to see as rewards and extra features for the developer to work on. The developer is even interested in developing its own Amiibo figurines to work with Nintendo's NFC toy range.


"And out of about 500 emails we receive every week, probably about 499 of them are shouting Wii U! Wii U! As a games fan, I've been a Nintendo fanboy since the NES days. Most of our fans are Nintendo fans as well. So while we can't confirm what platforms we will be on - some of that is beyond our control - but we are developing on Unity and we don't want to leave anyone out. And we'd try to ship simultaneously to make the biggest splash possible when the game comes out."


The worldwide reveal article from IGN, the biggest game site in the world, who no doubt drove many of the people to the Kickstarter who had not previously heard of it until the day before it launched:

http://ca.ign.com/articles/2015/04/30/s ... characters
If funded, Yooka-Laylee will be released on Windows, Mac, Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and Wii U.


An article explaining why Platytonic was personally developing the Wii U version:
When asked why the firm was internally handling Wii U over the other platforms, writer Andy Robinson said: “We naturally have so many backers who opted for Wii U. Because of the size of the team, we couldn’t take on all the consoles. You can imagine from a developer stand-point, that porting from PC to PS4 and Xbox One is slightly more straightforward than porting to Wii U.

“I also think it feels right playing it on a Nintendo system to some people.

“But the other versions will be fantastic as well.”



I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, as it's going to come down to what you feel the motivation/ expectations etc. were.

I think a simple bit of math was done in the end. In an earlier article, they claimed $500,000 would have been enough to make some version of the game. They made, like, $2 million. Let us say that some absurd and unrealistic amount came from Wii U owners. Like $800,000. That $800,000 would likely, given the player base, be every dollar they could ever hope to get on that platform. Without that $800,000 they still have over twice what they ever dreamed of, and ports on systems with massive install bases and long futures ahead of them, on which you could sell for years and years. If they ran into problems porting (even modest ones), I think their simple solution was to drop the Wii U money and put their resources elsewhere. By then it was clear this was a huge property. It was clear they had enough interest to make back development money. By then, even big Wii U money probably started to look like small potatoes.

User avatar
Stalvern
Posts: 357
Joined: June 18th, 2016, 7:15 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Stalvern » April 6th, 2017, 5:34 am

Atarifever wrote:I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, as it's going to come down to what you feel the motivation/ expectations etc. were.

Fair enough!

Gleebergloben123
Posts: 138
Joined: April 8th, 2015, 12:06 am

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Gleebergloben123 » April 6th, 2017, 3:29 pm

Atarifever wrote:
Stalvern wrote:
atarifever wrote:
Yooka-laylee did this with Wii U. Nintendo fans pitched the product everywhere. Nintendo fan sites posted every update. Places like Gamespot and IGN gave it extra coverage by putting it on Wii U specific pages. A bunch of money towards the goal was gathered by people aiming for that exact stretch goal. Yooka-Laylee's developer got a ton of benefit by "offering" a Wii U port. Then they cancel it and don't bat an eye. To me, that is as shady as anything done by any big publisher, and just "being indie" should not excuse it. It's shady business, and Kickstarter's business model ensures it will happen frequently.

What is this nonsense? They didn't do anything remotely like that. All platforms were determined and planned from the beginning; the closest thing to what you're raving about was a stretch goal for faster porting, which was completely reasonable (and which they delivered on). There wasn't even a Switch when they started, only vague rumors about something called the "NX". When they couldn't get the game to run properly on the Wii U, they moved it to the Switch to keep it on a Nintendo system - tell me how much money they saved by ditching the Wii U when they had to start again on a completely new platform.


HAHAHAHA! I originally read this as if you were serious. Yeah. They "couldn't get Yoo-freaking-kaLaylee to run on the Wii U." I heard they also couldn't get PacMan 2600 to run on Xbox Scorpio.

As for the stretch goal being for a port for Wii U vs. a day one port for Wii U, you have just split a hair so fine you needed a scanning electron microscope and a laser to do it.

Okay, let me tidy it up so it meets your rather outlandish requirements:

The developer promised a port to Wii U owners in their Kickstarter, so Wii U owners backed it, spread the word, etc about it. The Wii U version that was promised got it additional coverage on IGN, Gamespot, etc. pages and Nintendo fansites. The stretch goal promised console ports (including Wii U specifically in the goal) on day one. Then, because ancient 5-year old HD hardware cannot handle uprezed Banjoo-Kazooie (despite handling games like it for 5 years), it is cancelled and moved to a flashy new console with few launch year titles, out of the goodness of the developers dear, sweet little angel hearts. The Wii U owners who backed it are refunded their money, just like I said, the coverage and support and money helped release the Kickstarter funds, just like I said, and the developer gets to make a splash on shiny new hardware to boot.

Oh yes, so much different from what I said. How could any of that appear shady.


Atarifever, with all due respect, you might want to tone down the condescension just a tad.

User avatar
Stalvern
Posts: 357
Joined: June 18th, 2016, 7:15 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Stalvern » April 6th, 2017, 5:15 pm

He already did. It's all water under the bridge.

User avatar
Atarifever
Posts: 347
Joined: April 12th, 2015, 5:55 am

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Atarifever » April 6th, 2017, 7:13 pm

Gleebergloben123 wrote:
Atarifever, with all due respect, you might want to tone down the condescension just a tad.

Guilty, as usual. Looking to see why my tone ended up there (besides me just being something of a tool), I think I way, way over-reacted to the "what's this nonsense" line. Hardly behaviour befitting a mod, or fitting that very benign comment. I will try better in future.

In any case, it's been a really fun debate.

ESauce
Posts: 266
Joined: April 8th, 2015, 12:20 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby ESauce » April 6th, 2017, 8:33 pm

It got a 7 in ign and an 8 on game informer. I read the reviews and it seems like anyone who enjoys banjo kazooie will enjoy it. So I'm looking forward to it.

I was however, one of the backers that wanted it on Wii U. I switched to the Xbox one version but I would have preferred play it on the game pad screen. My wife won't have any interest in it so I'll have to find time to play it now. I won't have a Switch for a while and I certainly didn't want a copy of a game for a system that I'll probably buy at some point in the future.

TheBlondeGamePunk3
Posts: 24
Joined: March 1st, 2017, 10:39 am

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby TheBlondeGamePunk3 » April 7th, 2017, 11:41 am

This is the problem I see, Here we are in 2017 and the games of today are not being released as complete "polished" games. I use the term "Polished" a lot because many are furious that games that Developers have spent time on were not completed before a deadline. Polished games are a rare breed in today's world, We didn't really care about that kind of thing in the 1980's or 1990's.. We just put up with it.

Having a Pre-Order of Yooka-Laylee Myself, The JonTron controversy was nothing more than someone taking a situation or comment and completely blowing things out of control, Sure I'm not amused with Jon but the way he was treated? Was far more serious than any resulting fallout from his comments. It's the SJW culture that is the enemy of us Gamers.. This would never have occured back in those golden days of gaming. :evil: :evil: :evil:

Since there is only a few days left before it's "officially" out, I'm willing to see how the game plays and if Playtonic games can really deliver on a game that brings us back to the days of the Nintendo 64. ;) ;) :D

LoganRuckman
Posts: 180
Joined: April 10th, 2015, 1:04 am

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby LoganRuckman » April 7th, 2017, 8:42 pm

I feel no sympathy for JonTron. This is coming from someone who's all time favorite YouTuber was JonTron. After saying stuff like foreigners dilute the gene pool and that blacks are genetically predisposed to crime, I don't feel bad for him at all. He certainly has every right to his opinions, and he has the right to spout his racist garbage if he feels so inclined. However, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from criticism or consequences.

Anyway, I wouldn't put too much stock in the Metacritic or Jim Sterling's review. It sounds like this game delivered exactly what it promised (besides a Wii U port lol), and I kind of expected it to have a mixed reaction, especially from critics who don't have the same fondness and nostalgia for 5th gen collectathon 3D platformers like some of us. Also, Jim Sterling is well known as a man who loves to stir the pot with controversial reviews.

User avatar
Stalvern
Posts: 357
Joined: June 18th, 2016, 7:15 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Stalvern » April 7th, 2017, 8:55 pm

TheBlondeGamePunk3 wrote:Having a Pre-Order of Yooka-Laylee Myself, The JonTron controversy was nothing more than someone taking a situation or comment and completely blowing things out of control, Sure I'm not amused with Jon but the way he was treated? Was far more serious than any resulting fallout from his comments. It's the SJW culture that is the enemy of us Gamers.. This would never have occured back in those golden days of gaming. :evil: :evil: :evil:

Maybe it wouldn't have, but I think they made the right call. A lot of people wouldn't be able to hear his voice without also hearing "HEY WHY DO PEOPLE HAVE SUCH A PROBLEM WITH DAVID DUKE JUST BECAUSE HE'S A WHITE SUPREMACIST?" and I really wouldn't be able to blame them. There's no reason to not avoid that association.

Edit:
LoganRuckman wrote:After saying stuff like foreigners dilute the gene pool and that blacks are genetically predisposed to crime, I don't feel bad for him at all.

Huh, I didn't know about that. Fun stuff!


Return to “Modern Gaming”