Kazuma Kiryu
Member
man, what a trainwreck the wiiU has been.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Avalanche (Just Cause) - Wii U dev kits collecting dust, Nintendo is hard to reach
- Thread starter Flightmare
- Start date
dragonfart28
Banned
Even still, the Gamecube was a pretty rad looking console.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
Who buys Nintendo consoles for third party games anyway
Didn't the last decade teach you anything
It's a secondary console you use in-between the Sony/MS offerings for select Nintendo exclusives.
Didn't the last decade teach you anything
It's a secondary console you use in-between the Sony/MS offerings for select Nintendo exclusives.
GiantBreadbug
Member
This thread sure has gone places.
You really never paid attention to 90 percent of the "Core" studios coming out and saying they paid for your core games on the backs of Carnival Games like games? And you can keep pushing the "wii never sold 3rd party games" but go look at any sales thread and you'll see you're dead wrong. It exists because folks like you decide to just ignore data and keep chirping the same meme over and over for ever. just like the 3ds never sells 3rd party games, or DS can't sell 3rd party games.
And guess what NO GAME sold well in comparison to Wii Nintendo games on any platform. So again, you believe, the same PS3/360 audience (who btw for 360 didn't explode until.. *gasp* Kinect showed up*) are going to take the industry on their backs, and support it now when they couldn't do it before, and now costs will be even higher? I just want to make sure that's your reasoning.
dragonfart28
Banned
While I agree that it is a complimentary console, right now most of my games for Wii U are actually third party.
Hell, the best games (MH3U, ZombiU, Lego City Stories) are all third party games.
Has it? Pretty much every thread about negative Wii U news follows the same route.
They have been unless you think Nintendo was lying about reaching out third parties to get games from the bigger publishers. They went to take two and a top down gta and a tennis game ( nothing for Wii U/ 3DS I think), they went to EA and are getting nothing, they went to Activision and are getting cod..... maybe, they went to Warner Bros. and are getting mostly late ports and some good stuff, and ect... I think they should try the middle guys more and keep/ increase the effort with indies.
This response was so generic and expected when a 3rd party dev/publisher doesnt like to work on the WiiU.
Same goes to "Wait for x".
SMT
this show is not Breaking Bad why is it not Breaking Bad? it should be Breaking Bad dammit Breaking Bad
I didn't call you out. I just didn't feel like quoting you. So I put your name instead, and told you that you that you were wrong. I do not do this in rage, and I am Geek.
I will call you out right now, however.
The Phantom Renegade would never deny the truth, and would always fight for a Just Cause. The fact that you support mediocrity, and chose to turn a blind eye to evidence is proof enough that you're a poseur.
Go toil in the ranks of the robos, hobo.
I'm not sure there are any but is that the third parties fault or Nintendo's?
Nintendo seems to develop consoles the same each gen going back to the NES days. They isolate and insulate themselves in their development of their next console, often ignoring the latest trends over the years(disc based development, online gaming, demographic switches, more unified pc centric architecture etc) in favor of their own gimmicks and what they think matters in their bubbled world. They struck gold once with the wii but that is the outlier, not the norm.
But even with the wii their process has ignored third parties. The only difference between arrogant Nintendo of old, that basically gave a middle finger to third parties, and arrogant Nintendo of today is that AFTER they develop these consoles in their bubble, that are often ignoring current trends in the market, ignoring what third parties desire and have built their business models around and are difficult to develop for, now they make a marginally better effort toward talking to third parties then they once did. But it's more like "hey we built this console that ignores current gaming trends, has architecture that won't fit neatly into your game engine development or what you'd like to do, a gimmick controller, and low specs - and i know we've ignored most of your requests in the past and we mostly did so again - but why don't you come make games for us!"
The legacy of Nintendo has been poor third party support and a customer base that isn't looking to Nintendo for third party games because that's the audience Nintendo has built over the years thanks to its practices - fans that buy their consoles for Nintendo games and little else. Why should third parties suddenly flock to a Nintendo console and dump tons of resources into them given these facts?
When Sony felt the pressure of third parties leaving them for Microsoft they brought in third parties from day one and aimed to make the console the most third party friendly platform they ever made. A model Microsoft used this gen to gain monumnetal third party support. The problem with Nintendo is that once again they are behind on a trend, if they wanted third party support so bad they should have went back to the drawing board like Sony and Microsoft did and followed the strategy of bringing third parties in early and often and not only listening to them but actually implementing the laundry list of wants these companies had. It's the model that seems to work when you want third parties but Nintendo rather just live in their bubble and ignore another obvious trend.
In every color except purple. The problem with the purple wasn't even that it was purple, it was that the shade of purple was awful. Looked like some dull purple pill or something.
There's only a handful of consoles that have ever carried the entire industry, and those are the Ataris, NES, PS1, and PS2.
GiantBreadbug
Member
Sorry, forgot my /sarcasm tag.
Can't be said enough.
Isn't that the majority of console generations
Ubi is certainly very happy with Nintendo for this.
Seriously AssCreed is not cheap to make.
Btw when 3rd party put stuffs that is interesting maybe I'll buy it instead of looking at it dubiously wondering WTH it even exists.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
I'm just saying, this can't come as a surprise to anybody who's been paying even the slightest bit of attention the last 15 years.
These weird ass systems are by Nintendo, for Nintendo. Any fun third-party games or ports is a bonus. They ignore current trends, they always seem a step behind the curve, always doing their own little thing in their own little world. And people whine and people argue and say LOL Nintendo, and then we all play Melee or SMG2 and go, "Oh yeah, video games"
The design was terrible from a marketing point of view.
The PS2 was black, looked like a high end multimedia accessoire and was the "cool" thing to have for people of all ages.
The Gamecube looked like a childrens toy.
Well it notably excludes this one and the SNES when there was healthy competition.
More to the point though, it's hard to imagine another console that would carry 85% of the market like the PS2 did.
The purple, sure.
OG_Original Gamer
Member
That's assuming they don't want anything back on they're investment, but there is no point in complaining when support dwindles to 0.
Bargain Bin games it is then.
But why settle?
Other consoles are doing well. Why should someone buy a new console only to play games that are several years old?
It shouldn't have to be a choice between ports and bargain bin games.
Nintendo are obviously doing something wrong if those are the two options available.
DragonSworne
Banned
Nintendo almost ruined their handheld business 3 years ago follow these same exact business practices...
It's only a matter of time their handheld market will collapse if they don't change. The only thing keeping 3DS afloat is Japan, it's lagging behind all other regions.
Nintendo is doing little to actually make their business sustainable.
The purple one was certainly the worst offender but it´s not like the others had even the slightest chance to compete with Sony in the coolness division.
DeuceGamer
Member
In a lot of cases I agree, but it seems at least in this case they were willing/wanting to work with Nintendo and Nintendo wasn't the easiest to work with. If you are already having problems getting Publishers/Dev to work with you, then I would think you would seize the few opportunities that present themselves and make sure you are available, easy to reach, and show enthusiasm for any project that has an opportunity of making it onto the Wii U.
I NEED SCISSORS
Banned
It's funny how this is repeated ad nauseum in every Wii U gloom thread, as if it's suddenly going to fix all its problems in a single swoop.
I mean it's not like EA, or Avalanche, or Deep Silver, or any other third party dev who has abandoned them already has a stake in Mario doing well - in fact, they view it as competition. It's not like the game is single handedly going to fix their shit CPU architecture and overlock the box. And it's not like the low sales are suddenly going to skyrocket overnight - not without a pricecut, better branding and a bunch of other titles to go with it.
And even if it was to start selling - which there are no guarantees, look at GameCube - it's happening right on the doorstep of PS4 and Durango. The thunder, if it happens, is just waiting to be stolen away.
I think when 3rd parties realized they couldn't easily port 360/ps3 games to wii u (it's probably somewhat more powerful, but has a different architecture, and so requires effort) or easily co-develop wii u games with 720/PS4 (due to massive power difference) they lost interest. The key word is easily.
3rd parties in today's reality need to be able to easily (read cheaply as possible) port their console games to different platforms. That means they need to target a somewhat equivalent feature set (graphics, network capabilities, controller etc) between the different consoles and PC. I think it's pretty certain that the WiiU does not provide them with this.
Hell most developers struggle with doing their PC ports justice, let alone something like the WiiU.
3rd parties in today's reality need to be able to easily (read cheaply as possible) port their console games to different platforms. That means they need to target a somewhat equivalent feature set (graphics, network capabilities, controller etc) between the different consoles and PC. I think it's pretty certain that the WiiU does not provide them with this.
Hell most developers struggle with doing their PC ports justice, let alone something like the WiiU.
darkstar0155
Member
well of course they want a return on an investment, but its not like the port of ME3 or NFS cost 50mil to make, thus needing 3 mil copies to profit. These games could probably sell 250K @ $60 and make back the investment that went into the port.
The point i was making though, was 3rd party publishers shouldnt expect old ports to put up big numbers, and when they dont, they shouldnt use that as the reason for not sending new games to the Wii U.
No, I have never heard any core studio (studio? Publisher? I believe you mean publisher, because I can't think of any studios that made both AAA games and also shovelware, and funded their own AAA games with shovelware) coming out and saying that Carnival Games and/or Just Dance funded their AAA games. Literally cannot think of a single example. Those two game series are two of the only 3rd party series that sold well on Wii. And they belong to Take Two and Ubisoft. You think Take Two and Ubisoft need those games? The former has the likes of NBA2K and Grand Theft Auto under its belt, the latter has Assassin's Creed and tons of other titles.
Seriously, PLEASE give me a single real example of a AAA game publisher saying they funded their AAA game development with a Wii game. I am legitimately curious to learn about it.
Again, I would need some good examples, and no, I would never say the 3DS or DS didn't sell 3rd party games, because they do sell 3rd party games, and I myself own upwards of a hundred games for DS. The majority of them not published by Nintendo (but a good chunk).
The Call of Duty series says hello. And WHAT? You think the 360 wasn't doing well until Kinect??? That is outright false. Kinect didn't even do that well, especially not in comparison to their market with core gamers. You are disillusioned in this regard that casuals actually determine the PS360 market in any way. Move was an inarguable failure, and yet PS3 still sold just as many units as 360 worldwide, and overall was definitely not a failure for Sony, despite their failed attempts at reaching out to the casual market.
And what do you think was happening to the video gaming industry before Nintendo Wii? Wii was an exception. A runaway success. It CREATED a new, larger, broader market. Video games existed before the Wii. There was still a massive audience of core gamers, that mostly graduated from the PS2 days into the PS3 or 360. That market of core gamers still very much exists, is still very large, and is still very responsible for the success of the PS3 and the 360.
The silver Gamecube looks great.
If you don't have one already, 3DS is a nice choice.
It's got Nintendo games and big third party games. That's all I ever wanted, really.
Nightstick11
Banned
Are you seriously equating Nintendo's first-party with Sony's or Microsoft's? Halo and Gran Turismo can't hold a candle to Nintendo first-party sales; Nintendo's best-selling games of the previous generation sold more than iterations of a Call of Duty + Gran Turismo combined. Not to mention, Nintendo has multiple franchises that sell more than either GT or Halo.
It has been openly hinted at before that third-parties do not want to compete with Nintendo. One can't really blame them.
I remember when those comments started coming out. I remember it greatly altered how I approached buying games on the Wii and pushed me to buy more and more Nintendo made/published games on the Wii over other things. Even if a company didn't say it I started looking at what they were putting out to see if it seemed they were using their Wii success to fund games I wouldn't get to play. Started focusing PC games as well at that point. That was a time my frustration was at an all time high.
As I said in another thread recently, it took me a lot of years here at GAF to realize that there are actually a lot of people out there who only buy and play on Nintendo consoles. Lots of people who think video games start and stop with the big N. They can't, or won't buy another console and have been content to sit back and complain and act completely bewildered, for 10+ years, as to why big third party games don't come to Nintendo consoles.
There's a reason why Nintendo went sleek and Apple like after the GBA and Gamecube man. That was the end of Nintendo's experiment with Fischer-Price aesthetics.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
I still haven't forgiven him for trashing Platinum Games. This is worse than that time I found out Tain didn't like Treasure. It's like finding out Santa Claus exists, but he's racist as hell and doesn't want to stop by your black ass for Christmas.
Well, not everybody has the money to buy everything, but I can't be about that life. Man cannot live on Nintendo alone, I say.
The issue is that the ports that were made sold like shit. Exclusives sold like shit. The console continues to sell like shit.
You don't make games in that environment. You cancel projects and move on.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
Weird as indies seem to have no problems...
I think if Nintendo had sense, they would've emphasized its power and small size.
Instead we got bizarre shit marketing that lead some people to believe the GC was weaker because it was small and purple.
It's a really good design. It's a lot of power (for that gen) packed into a low-profile, durable cube. Even the motherboard is nicely arranged. It's a masterwork.
Likely the last great console design from Nintendo. The DSi was their peak in handheld, though.
DeuceGamer
Member
I wouldn't blame you for not buying Nintendo consoles again, but rather than boycott them I would urge you to see them for what the are. A perfect companion console, which is fine by me. I mean, there are, and will be, great gaming experiences to be had on Wii U in my opinion. Just don't limit yourself to only owning a Wii U if you enjoy a lot of the AAA third party games. If you are only able to purchase one console then you should seriously weigh how important Nintendo First party games are compared to Sony/MS first parties and all the third party offerings that will inevitably come to Sony/MS consoles.
I don't think they are lying at all but when we are hearing things from developers, such as in this case, then they are clearly not doing as much as they should. Especially given their current predicament and the stigma that is associated with the Wii U and Nintendo in general. I guess what I'm saying is that it seems like a no-brainer to me to atleast have someone available for 3rd party relationships 24/7 considering that is one of the major perceived weakness of your console.
I don't think you can blame Nintendo for every game that doesn't make it to the Wii U but when you have a publisher saying Nintendo is "hard to reach, never know when to contact them", it's clearly a red flag, IMO.
SlipperySlope
Banned
Ultimately the reason is the install base. I'm just trying to figure out why the PS3 wasn't ditched early on.
Sony will money hat.
Is this a joke post?
Publishers still had faith that the system would rebound and be a place where third party software could sell well. Nintendo has no such faith