• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Might 3rd Party Wii U Hate Be an Effort to Push Gamers to DRM-Locked Platforms?

It's possible but third parties haven't fucked with Nintendo since PS1. Nintendo just doesn't care about third parties and vice versa.
Probably has more to do with the fact that software quality is better on Nintendo's platforms and it's harder to sell "AAA" games.
Fuck outta here with this nonsense. Third parties aren't touching halo, uncharted, forza/horizon, the last of us, infamous, and gears either.
 
What?

3rd parties didn't "prop up" Sony. They had a mounted investment in the platform due to the insane success of the PS2 and the fact that it established the Playstation platform as a place where third parties could make a ton of money.

3rd Parties continued supporting PS3 through the weak launch because they'd already placed their bets and resources on the platform (and even then, Sony lost a ton of exclusives during this period). This is a completely different situation than Nintendo - who never had that level of investment from 3rd parties to begin with.

Because we hear all the time the reasons for shafting Wii U are because of low sales and low installed base, not because of third-parties's bets and investments.

A small userbase perhaps isn't, but some of the incredibly low sales of games on Wii U certainly don't paint a very positive future for the platform for 3rd parties, especially knowing the past. PS4 & Xbone still at least have the POTENTIAL to be more viable platforms, especially for 3rd parties.

How do you expect your game to sell truckloads if you bring feature missing late ports at full price? Batman? Late port. Madden? Missing features late port. Fifa? Missing features late port. Mass Effect 3? Crappy late port at full price while there's ME Trilogy announced. Sniper V2? Late and awfully missing features. You're delusional if you believe this was going to sell.
 
It's possible, yeah.

I really don't think it's as "conspiracy theory"-level as some might. We all [hopefully] know some scummy shit goes down in the business world, and given all the questionable things we've been hearing about DRM and companies like EA and Microsoft lately (in addition to the same topics as they related to Wii U before launch) it's not too far-fetched of a conclusion to come to. It's just paying attention and connecting the dots.

However, I don't think it's 100% fact, and I don't think it should be treated as such until it's confirmed in some way. What I do think is that this idea shouldn't be disregarded as "conspiracy," especially in light of recent events.
 
I agree Nintendo can be blamed for this situation, but third-parties aren't helping either. Both sides have their issues.

There are no sides here.

Nintendo fans waste too much time treating Nintendo's relationship with 3rd parties as co-dependent, as though the issue can be framed as, "yeah, well maybe Nintendo's not perfect...but neither are you, 3rd parties! Compromise!"

That's not how this works.

It's ain't the 90s anymore. 3rd parties are the prized hens here. They hold all of the cards. They can choose to support Nintendo and, if they choose not to, there other platforms waiting to cater to their every need.

Nintendo's the one with the issues, and it's solely on NINTENDO to address them. Expecting 3rd parties to accept some of the responsibility will just result in what we're seeing now: 3rd parties going elsewhere.
 
There are no sides here.

Nintendo fans waste too much time treating Nintendo's relationship with 3rd parties as co-dependent, as though the issue can be framed as, "yeah, well maybe Nintendo's not perfect...but neither are you, 3rd parties! Compromise!"

That's not how this works.

It's ain't the 90s anymore. 3rd parties are the prized hens here. They hold all of the cards. They can choose to support Nintendo and, if they choose not to, there other platforms waiting to cater to their every need.

Nintendo's the one with the issues, and it's solely on NINTENDO to address them. Expecting 3rd parties to accept some of the responsibility will just result in what we're seeing now: 3rd parties going elsewhere.

It's not exactly Nintendo's fault if playing to their strengths scare off 3rd parties.
 
Probably has more to do with the fact that software quality is better on Nintendo's platforms and it's harder to sell "AAA" games.

yet MH3U the best game on the system by a country mile completely bombed. Just because something is quality software doesn't mean it will sell on Wii U. I assume this is why Namco has ignored Wii U for DARK SOULS 2.
 
yet MH3U the best game on the system by a country mile completely bombed. Just because something is quality software doesn't mean it will sell on Wii U. I assume this is why Namco has ignored Wii U for DARK SOULS 2.

bombed by who's standards? Monster Hunter is a niche in the west. What were you expecting it to sell? 500k?
 
Support was weak before the console even launched though.
Were all the people swallowing this conspiracy born last November?

Nintendo has had poor third party support since the N64.

Most third parties have taken a reserved and wait and see approach with every Nintendo console since the SNES.

May the lack of any DRM been one more reason for third parties to take that approach again? Possibly. There is zero evidence to suggest it but its not out of the question. Would it have changed much if Nintendo had the exact same DRM setup as Microsoft? I seriously doubt it.
 
It's always going to be a never-ending cycle of "we don't feel like it's a smart investment" -> [few or no resources given to Nintendo platform] -> [sales suck] -> "we don't feel like it's a smart investment" unless Nintendo blows the third parties away with their hardware/policies. And it's never going to happen as long as MS/Sony/etc. decide to push technical specs while Nintendo doesn't. Especially if they stay a couple steps ahead of Nintendo in "wooing" the third party pubs.

It's ain't the 90s anymore. 3rd parties are the prized hens here. They hold all of the cards. They can choose to support Nintendo and, if they choose not to, there other platforms waiting to cater to their every need.

Nintendo's the one with the issues, and it's solely on NINTENDO to address them. Expecting 3rd parties to accept some of the responsibility will just result in what we're seeing now: 3rd parties going elsewhere.
Only if you look at third parties as some monolithic entity. The big boys did alright last gen but there were a ton of studio closures. Not saying that everybody should've jumped on the Wii train and rode it to prosperity but there was undoubtedly money left on the table by everybody in the aftermath of the Wii success.
 
There are no sides here.

Nintendo fans waste too much time treating Nintendo's relationship with 3rd parties as co-dependent, as though the issue can be framed as, "yeah, well maybe Nintendo's not perfect...but neither are you, 3rd parties! Compromise!"

That's not how this works.

It's ain't the 90s anymore. 3rd parties are the prized hens here. They hold all of the cards. They can choose to support Nintendo and, if they choose not to, there other platforms waiting to cater to their every need.

Nintendo's the one with the issues, and it's solely on NINTENDO to address them. Expecting 3rd parties to accept some of the responsibility will just result in what we're seeing now: 3rd parties going elsewhere.

It's completely third-parties's fault if they bring lame, late and feature missing ports for Nintendo consoles and later blame Nintendo for their failures. If they actually tried and yet failed, then their reason for shafting it would be unquestionable. Now trying to get away from their mistakes using Nintendo as scapegoat is ridiculous.
 
There are no sides here.

Nintendo fans waste too much time treating Nintendo's relationship with 3rd parties as co-dependent, as though the issue can be framed as, "yeah, well maybe Nintendo's not perfect...but neither are you, 3rd parties! Compromise!"

That's not how this works.

It's ain't the 90s anymore. 3rd parties are the prized hens here. They hold all of the cards. They can choose to support Nintendo and, if they choose not to, there other platforms waiting to cater to their every need.

Nintendo's the one with the issues, and it's solely on NINTENDO to address them. Expecting 3rd parties to accept some of the responsibility will just result in what we're seeing now: 3rd parties going elsewhere.


And we see where that attitude takes us with the XBone. Unfortunately some of us think its the customers who are the prized hens.
 
Probably has more to do with the fact that software quality is better on Nintendo's platforms and it's harder to sell "AAA" games.

Absolutely not. Sony's first party has been as good or better than nintendo's for a long while now.

The problem isn't one of quality, but instead the tendency of Nintendo to make niche games propped up by mascot characters. Nintendo itself doesn't make any games similar to third party efforts, meaning nintendo fans are encouraged to play games only made by nintendo.

Sony's first party (polyphony digital, sony santa monica, naughty dog, media molecule, etc) make very, VERY high quality games, but are a lot broader in their choice of genre, so it's not that big of a stretch for Sony gamers who like uncharted to pick up Tomb Raider, or God of War fans to pick up Castlevania: LOS. Sony also sends it's top tier developers (ICE Team) out to third parties to ensure quality of third party efforts is as high or higher than it's own. Nintendo doesn't do this and has notoriously bad third party relations.
 
It's not exactly Nintendo's fault if playing to their strengths scare off 3rd parties.

Uh...no. It is their fault. It's entirely their fault.

It's completely third-parties's fault if they bring lame, late and feature missing ports for Nintendo consoles and later blame Nintendo for their failures. If they actually tried and yet failed, then their reason for shafting it would be unquestionable. Now trying to get away from their mistakes using Nintendo as scapegoat is ridiculous.

You're right about this, but your conclusion is wrong.

3rd parties bring half-assed efforts to Nintendo platforms BECAUSE Nintendo doesn't do much to make their platforms appealing to 3rd parties bring their best work to it.

What you and so many other people are doing right now is expecting 3rd parties to bring AAA teams, budgets and games to Nintendo hardware without Nintendo doing any of the work to prove that their platforms are a viable place for it.
 
It's completely third-parties's fault if they bring lame, late and feature missing ports for Nintendo consoles and later blame Nintendo for their failures. If they actually tried and yet failed, then their reason for shafting it would be unquestionable. Now trying to get away from their mistakes using Nintendo as scapegoat is ridiculous.

Nintendo's system isn't selling and thus third parties don't have a wide audience to hock their wares to, quality or not so quality. This is directly Nintendo's fault. No-one elses.

Its very convenient to try and spin the recent DRM stuff as some sinister anti-Nintendo agenda conspiracy. But the reality is its selling like shit and was before all of this hullabaloo anyway.
 
No I'd say being one of the worst selling consoles of all time probably has more to do with everything. And no, the state Wii U is in is not the result of some self-fulfilling prophecy either; it just straight up didn't catch on with the public. There is no third party or publishers that should feel guilty not supporting a system that catastrophically dead, and that includes Vita.
 
Nintendo's system isn't selling and thus third parties don't have a wide audience to hock their wares to, quality or not so quality. This is directly Nintendo's fault. No-one elses.

This is no excuse for feature missing/late ports bombing being blamed at Nintendo.

What you and so many other people are doing right now is expecting 3rd parties to bring AAA teams, budgets and games to Nintendo hardware without Nintendo doing any of the work to prove that their platforms are a viable place for it.

And how do you expect WiiU's sales to suddenly increase if no quality games are being made for it? Your argument is contradictory.
 
Nintendo's system isn't selling and thus third parties don't have a wide audience to hock their wares to, quality or not so quality. This is directly Nintendo's fault. No-one elses.

How is that an excuse for some 3rd party developers, like the recent sniper elite v2, to bring a year old port for $60 that is missing nearly every feature the other games have..
 
This is no excuse for feature missing/late ports bombing being blamed at Nintendo.

Ah yes, the ol' one two of "its late" or "missing features" because the WiiU audience is collectively a group of ultra-clued in NeoGAF forum members only. Need For Speed Most Wanted WiiU is the definitive version yet sells worse than the lesser able Vita version. Spin that.
 
Nintendo's system isn't selling and thus third parties don't have a wide audience to hock their wares to, quality or not so quality. This is directly Nintendo's fault. No-one elses.

Its very convenient to try and spin the recent DRM stuff as some sinister anti-Nintendo agenda conspiracy. But the reality is its selling like shit and was before all of this hullabaloo anyway.
That's a nice "chicken or egg" argument if I've ever seen one. Nintendo's strategy for the Wii U is a mess right now but it seemed like most 3rd parties made up their minds not to invest heavily before the system was ever unveiled.

I don't believe that I've ever seen a system launch with so few real new, exclusive 3rd party games. Even the Wii had more.
 
Well 3rd parties haven't been sweet on Nintendo console's since Super NES. I will say the way they turned their back on the Wii U probably does have something to do with Nintendo's no DRM. Further game companies are moving to a different paradigm the one of bigger, prettier, more expensive to produce games and the Wii U is more about good games done incrementally better. Even if they decided to change the Wii U can't even physically do it. I think Nintendo believes the bigger and bigger games is ultimately unsustainable that's they've kept things comparatively small and simple. The publishers have made it very clear they don't believe that at all.
 
That's a nice "chicken or egg" argument if I've ever seen one. Nintendo's strategy for the Wii U is a mess right now but it seemed like most 3rd parties made up their minds not to invest heavily before the system was ever unveiled.

I don't believe that I've ever seen a system launch with so few real new, exclusive 3rd party games. Even the Wii had more.

If you want third party exclusives, you have to pay these days. Nintendo didn't pay. Also the WiiU launch had a pretty impressive third party line-up for a Nintendo console to be honest. Ubisoft support pretty heavy, EA trialling with some of its biggest franchises, and Acti giving it the full Codblops treatment.

Of course when all sold like absolute shit, the brakes on everything and anything else were promptly slammed. The Rayman Legends fiasco is pretty much a symbol of precisely what happened and third party's reaction to sales.

Nintendo also didn't help matters by making a system thats problematic to easily port to, supply finalised dev tools for, and more. Nintendo has plenty of blame to heap onto its shoulders here, unlike the virgin innocent some would have them appear.
 
That's a nice "chicken or egg" argument if I've ever seen one. Nintendo's strategy for the Wii U is a mess right now but it seemed like most 3rd parties made up their minds not to invest heavily before the system was ever unveiled.

I don't believe that I've ever seen a system launch with so few real new, exclusive 3rd party games. Even the Wii had more.

Developers aren't stupid though.

The WiiU only has a future as long as the 360 and PS3 are supported. Sony has a track record of supporting its consoles long term, but Microsoft does not.

The second it makes sense to shift the majority of dev resources to next gen, the WiiU is finished. Why would devs put significant resources into a platform that does not appear to have a viable future more than 2 years out? Nintendo has only itself to blame if all it's getting is half assed ports.
 
If you want third party exclusives, you have to pay these days. Nintendo didn't pay. Also the WiiU launch had a pretty impressive third party line-up for a Nintendo console to be honest. Ubisoft support pretty heavy, EA trialling with some of its biggest franchises, and Acti giving it the full Codblops treatment.

Of course when all sold like absolute shit, the brakes on everything and anything else were promptly slammed. The Rayman Legends fiasco is pretty much a symbol of precisely what happened and third party's reaction to sales.

Truth.

Also, nobody likes to discuss it, but it really doesn't help that Nintendo is so insular when the nexus of the gaming industry is moving further West and away from Japan. It's the reason why all the "people don't understand that Nintendo is a JAPANESE company!" excuses don't hold water when you point out Sony. Nintendo just doesn't seem to participate in the industry as much as the competition.

Nintendo needs to do some industry PR. Get some shady palm greasers on the payroll.
 
Ah yes, the ol' one two of "its late" or "missing features" because the WiiU audience is collectively a group of ultra-clued in NeoGAF forum members only. Need For Speed Most Wanted WiiU is the definitive version yet sells worse than the lesser able Vita version. Spin that.

Fun fact, its also hella late and available on two other platforms wii u owners likely have for much cheaper.

I appreciate Criterion's effort, but EA couldn't have expected good numbers by any stretch.
 
Shoddy/late ports have very little to do with the current state of the Wii U.
The only thing I would consider to be a bigger factor than the lack of compelling software would be Nintendo's piss poor marketing. The ilk of consumers who would buy a console near launch are certainly going to notice the shoddy/late ports, especially if they can get the superior SKU without throwing down a couple hundred bucks on a new system. Strip away the late/shoddy ports and how many games does the Wii U have?
even with them, it has no games, mirite?
 
Ah yes, the ol' one two of "its late" or "missing features" because the WiiU audience is collectively a group of ultra-clued in NeoGAF forum members only. Need For Speed Most Wanted WiiU is the definitive version yet sells worse than the lesser able Vita version. Spin that.

I agree with your example with this game. Very awesome game and I enjoyed it. (though you could make a case of it being $60 6-month late game, but even then it's still the best version). Honestly, I'm not surprised it did badly, sad to say. Only reason I have it is due to that $30 EA sale.

But you can't just dismiss that claim of some devs being lazy. Yes, saying that is a cliche these days, but some really do seem lazy. Some games like Sniper Elite V2 are a year old and barely have any feature of the original game. The only thing that game has in common with the original is the single player. Saying it's Nintendo fault for that game selling horribly is just wrong.
 
If you want third party exclusives, you have to pay these days. Nintendo didn't pay. Also the WiiU launch had a pretty impressive third party line-up for a Nintendo console to be honest. Ubisoft support pretty heavy, EA trialling with some of its biggest franchises, and Acti giving it the full Codblops treatment.

Of course when all sold like absolute shit, the brakes on everything and anything else were promptly slammed. The Rayman Legends fiasco is pretty much a symbol of precisely what happened and third party's reaction to sales.

Nintendo also didn't help matters by making a system thats problematic to easily port to, supply finalised dev tools for, and more. Nintendo has plenty of blame to heap onto its shoulders here, unlike the virgin innocent some would have them appear.

3rd party support could also have just this little bit to do with....you know....DRM practices?
 
Fun fact, its also hella late and available on two other platforms wii u owners likely have for much cheaper.

I appreciate Criterion's effort, but EA couldn't have expected good numbers by any stretch.

This is another issue. There are damn near 160 million PS3's and 360s already out in the marketplace, and prices on both are set to drop like a rock when the new generation launches.

The WiiU is competing with two systems that can put out equivalent visuals (and inexplicably better online experiences) that most people already own, and those that don't can pick up for a fraction of the cost.
 
Fun fact, its also hella late and available on two other platforms wii u owners likely have for much cheaper.

I appreciate Criterion's effort, but EA couldn't have expected good numbers by any stretch.

So once again, its Nintendo's fault for creating a console in the same power spectrum as boxes from 7 years ago not providing current gen owners any real desire to upgrade. The GamePad is seemingly a huge bust in providing a USP, and thats all on Nintendo.

I don't really get what people want from third parties in this thread? To have supported the WiiU with exclusive and totally new titles in the biggest financial risk this industry has ever seen and then have all potentially imploded when people didnt give as much a shit about the GamePad as they did waggle?

3rd party support could also have just this little bit to do with....you know....DRM practices?

Oh. I see people are actually believing this now. Well now I'm doubly hoping Sony announce no such thing so the Excuse Force has another layer of madness stripped away.
 
Shoddy/late ports have very little to do with the current state of the Wii U.

Certainly not. Nintendo's terrible marketing strategy and awful selection of release titles have resposability, too. But blaming Nintendo for these shoddy/late ports selling bad? This is stupid.

Ah yes, the ol' one two of "its late" or "missing features" because the WiiU audience is collectively a group of ultra-clued in NeoGAF forum members only. Need For Speed Most Wanted WiiU is the definitive version yet sells worse than the lesser able Vita version. Spin that.

Stiil, it's a late port. But true, this was actually a good effort that didn't managed to sell, unlike games like... ME3?
 
Also, I'm tired of the mentality that the Big 3 have to kiss 3rd party ass, as if they are the gods that control the market.

Microsoft seems to have taken this route, and we have ended up with an Xbox One.

Could Nintendo take steps to make their systems more approachable for 3rd parties? I actually don't know. But what I do know is that Nintendo playing to their strengths seems to scare them off, and Nintendo frankly doesn't care much because of the fact that they can sustain themselves.

Stop trying to get Nintendo to be more like the other two, it won't work, it can't work. They make batshit crazy decisions, but it seems to me that them trailblazing on their own has kept them alive for this long, third parties or no third parties.
 
Also, I'm tired of the mentality that the Big 3 have to kiss 3rd party ass, as if they are the gods that control the market.

Microsoft seems to have taken this route, and we have ended up with an Xbox One.

Could Nintendo take steps to make their systems more approachable for 3rd parties? I actually don't know. But what I do know is that Nintendo playing to their strengths seems to scare them off, and Nintendo frankly doesn't care much because of the fact that they can sustain themselves.

Stop trying to get Nintendo to be more like the other two, it won't work, it can't work. They make batshit crazy decisions, but it seems to me that them trailblazing on their own has kept them alive for this long, third parties or no third parties.

3rd parties do control the market. Undeniable fact.

Also, expecting Nintendo be a bit more proactive and modern in how they implement their ideas is NOT asking for Nintendo to be more like the other two...unless being clued into the modern gamer is considered being more like the other two.
 
Wii U is a case of "Not this shit again".

Times change and Nintendo should have changed with it. At least 1st party is great and I'm fine with that since I 3rd party on PC/PS this coming gen.
 
This is no excuse for feature missing/late ports bombing being blamed at Nintendo.
Something I've noticed a lot that unlike Sony or Microsoft fans, Nintendo fans seem to have a much more reactionary approach to their consoles criticism and a much poorer ability to self reflect on the failings of their favorite console maker.

It's hard to find even the most devout Sony fan that won't admit the ps3 launch was a failure and their arrogance cost them a lot. Or Microsoft fans that don't think live gold is kind of dickish and that the current DRM situation is a horrendous encroachment on consumer freedom and choice Sure there are fanatics in every corner but Nintendo fans seem unwilling to see their companies faults more then others.

It's almost alway the finger pointing outward and never back at themselves. Never mentioning Nintendo's poor relationship with third parties during the snes days. There hardware choices that alienated long held partners. Or there insistence on filtering content from developers. There lack of third party input during their hardware development provcess even today or their unwillingness in the past to embrace things like online, discs or modern hardware architecture. They always run behind the trends and behind the direction third parties are typically going. laucnching a new console without much marketing and with the scarcest amount of first and second party titles available this time after launch in their history. Not to mention record breaking poor sales. All that built up history and current history doesn't help much with getting third party support.

Nintendo is far from blameless in their current predicament. And trying to shuffle blame on the lack of DRM as a leading cause is the height of denial. If more favorable DRM was Nintendo's key to third party love they would have been the hands down lead development platform during the n64 days and GameCube days when they had the hardest platforms to pirate.
 
If you want third party exclusives, you have to pay these days. Nintendo didn't pay. Also the WiiU launch had a pretty impressive third party line-up for a Nintendo console to be honest. Ubisoft support pretty heavy, EA trialling with some of its biggest franchises, and Acti giving it the full Codblops treatment.

Of course when all sold like absolute shit, the brakes on everything and anything else were promptly slammed. The Rayman Legends fiasco is pretty much a symbol of precisely what happened and third party's reaction to sales.

Nintendo also didn't help matters by making a system thats problematic to easily port to, supply finalised dev tools for, and more. Nintendo has plenty of blame to heap onto its shoulders here, unlike the virgin innocent some would have them appear.
Don't misunderstand as I'm not suggesting that Nintendo is in any way blameless for the current state of things but my overarching point is that 3rd parties aren't abandoning the Wii U because of sales. Next week at E3 I can guarantee you that you won't be seeing an endless string of current gen up ports for the Ps4 and Xbox One. They'll definitely be some but most of the games that you'll see for those platforms will be new games for a new generation.

The fact that 90% of the Wii U's 3rd party launch titles were games that could be played better on cheaper platforms at lower game prices basically tells you all that you need to know about how much 3rd parties cared about the platform's launch. There were a lot of titles to choose from but the lack of investment was obvious to everyone, especially consumers.
 
I agree with your example with this game. Very awesome game and I enjoyed it. (though you could make a case of it being $60 6-month late game, but even then it's still the best version). Honestly, I'm not surprised it did badly, sad to say. Only reason I have it is due to that $30 EA sale.

But you can't just dismiss that claim of some devs being lazy. Yes, saying that is a cliche these days, but some really do seem lazy. Some games like Sniper Elite V2 are a year old and barely have any feature of the original game. The only thing that game has in common with the original is the single player. Saying it's Nintendo fault for that game selling horribly is just wrong.

We've been here in this exact position though with the 360. So many terrible PS2 up-ports selling due to the hype around being in HD for the first time and the added features. Clearly the WiiU just isnt offering that level of interest or "new" feeling that the HD gen or motion controls did, and thus people arent choosing to play the Off TV Play version by default or whatever.

Worse still, when titles like Fifa, Madden, NFS,and CodBlops just refuse to sell good numbers on the system, third parties would have to completely change their development leanings to succeed on WiiU, and the install base isn't even remotely in a place to ever convince them of putting such an effort it.

This is all on Nintendo. Third parties are not charities.

my overarching point is that 3rd parties aren't abandoning the Wii U because of sales. Next week at E3 I can guarantee you that you won't be seeing an endless string of current gen up ports for the Ps4 and Xbox One.

Well you're absolutely, totally wrong. Rayman Legends is pretty much definitive proof due to the emergency brake on that title. Money speaks, and if there was much to be made, they'd be bothering with the system. There isn't, so theyre not. The DRM thing isnt some ideological war, its a cherry on top to sway some preferential treatment.

As for up-ports, what do you think all these cross-gen titles are? The very definition of!
 
How can you blame 3rd parties for CoD and AC3 being late among other games. Nintendo decided to release the console after the two biggest games of the year. The truth is that even if the ports were fully featured the Wii U versions would have sold terribly. Why? No one was buying a Wii U for 3rd party games they could get on their PS3/360. They could have bought it for Nintendo games but Nintendo has left the Wii U barren while trying to "figure out HD". Nintendo also got the final dev kits to their own developers very late. How late do you think 3rd parties got them? I'm of the mindset that yes 3rd party games could sell on Nintendo platforms and there is nothign inherently wrong with Nintendo platforms that prevent this. However, this constant blaming and excuse making for every 3rd party game is becoming annoying. When Watch Dogs, AC4, and Splinter Cell all underperform on Wii U what will be the excuse then? THe higher install base of the PS3/360? Then what is even the point of putting these games on Wii U?
 
In regards to EA, absolutely.

However other games have all been games that were defined/built well before WiiU had kits and so forth and that lack of games existed on Wii before it.

Only game I can think of would be 2Ks NBA game this year. But, they specifically stated it would come next year... so there is some other resource issue.

However, if Sony offers this same DRM, I could certainly see future 3RD party support from the biggest publishers/supports of this DRM completely go away, including Ubi.

So either Nintendo would have to patch it in or we can all hope and pray Sony follows Nintendo and listens to the majority of consumers.
 
The only thing I would consider to be a bigger factor than the lack of compelling software would be Nintendo's piss poor marketing. The ilk of consumers who would buy a console near launch are certainly going to notice the shoddy/late ports, especially if they can get the superior SKU without throwing down a couple hundred bucks on a new system. Strip away the late/shoddy ports and how many games does the Wii U have?
even with them, it has no games, mirite?

I don't think marketing is as much to blame as the fact that Nintendo failed to give consumers any must-have Nintendo games at launch. Nintendo games sell Nintendo consoles, that's the way it is. When those consoles are sold there's a greater chance for third parties to see success. I can't imagine that Nintendo are unaware of this but they completely dropped the ball and there's no one else to blame for the Wii U's issues but Nintendo themselves.
 
This is no excuse for feature missing/late ports bombing being blamed at Nintendo.



And how do you expect WiiU's sales to suddenly increase if no quality games are being made for it? Your argument is contradictory.

This thread can ignore my posts here all you want but note that's willful blindness
 
Don't misunderstand as I'm not suggesting that Nintendo is in any way blameless for the current state of things but my overarching point is that 3rd parties aren't abandoning the Wii U because of sales. Next week at E3 I can guarantee you that you won't be seeing an endless string of current gen up ports for the Ps4 and Xbox One. They'll definitely be some but most of the games that you'll see for those platforms will be new games for a new generation.

The fact that 90% of the Wii U's 3rd party launch titles were games that could be played better on cheaper platforms at lower game prices basically tells you all that you need to know about how much 3rd parties cared about the platform's launch. There were a lot of titles to choose from but the lack of investment was obvious to everyone, especially consumers.

This has everything to do with sales. Despite the Wii's early head start, support and sales for that system fell off a cliff years ago. Casuals lost interest and the core went elsewhere. It's been on life support with only nintendo supporting it and third party titles not selling.

Developers have DEFINITELY noticed this.

In contrast, the PS3 and 360 are still enjoying strong, consistent sales for both hardware and third party titles- even if the total sales for both systems are below that of the Wii. There is strong and consistent interest in both consoles even though they're 7 years old and at relatively high price points, historically speaking. On top of that, there's little risk in developing a PS4/One title, as the same assets can be spread between both platforms and the PC. if the PS4 or One inexplicably tank, sales will likely be strong enough on the other two to make the investment worth it.

THAT is why Third parties are lined up to put their high budget titles on next gen platforms, and the WiiU is out in the cold.
 
I don't really get what people want from third parties in this thread? To have supported the WiiU with exclusive and totally new titles in the biggest financial risk this industry has ever seen and then have all potentially imploded when people didnt give as much a shit about the GamePad as they did waggle?
Something close to software parity to the PS360? Maybe the Wii U struggles just as badly even with equivalent third party support. Maybe not.

It's entirely possible that Nintendo's third party ecosystem is a poisoned well that only exclusive, new hits (as you say) would be able to cure. Nintendo platforms have been getting inferior versions of multiplats for how long now? In which case, it's a lose-lose situation unless Nintendo ponies up the $$$ for exclusives.
 
Top Bottom