Yves Guillemot: ZombiU Wasn't Profitable, not even close, no sequel planned

metalslimer

Member
Jun 9, 2012
26,506
0
0
Some of GAF won't like this but Nintendo should start cultivating audiences that buy third party games. Just having a audience that buys platformers and kart racers won't cut it for third parties
The hardest problem is that it's a catch 22. For Nintendo to cultivate that audience on their platforms they need to have a good amount of 3rd party support to get people interested, but 3rd parties aren't going to invest in such an unstable ecosystem. So does Nintendo have to pay for every single port then? It's become a cycle at this point that seems very hard to break
 

ymmv

Banned
Mar 17, 2007
6,485
0
0
Amsterdam, NL
I think part of the problem is that there were a lot of games out at Wii U launch, like 20+ core oriented titles (almost entirely late ports, of course), so instead of one third party title selling a million copies, twenty third party games sold 50,000 a piece. Compare to the Wii launch where you only had basically two games, Zelda and Red Steel, and you can see where sales would congeal around those two unlike how they fractured around the many at Wii U.
It's funny how often Wii owners repeat that "late ports" excuse to explain why the Wii U had such a rough start. If only those the Wii U got new games, then it would have sold so much better.

Chasing Aurora
Little Inferno
Nano Assault
New Super Mario Bros. U
Nintendo Land
Sing Party
Tank! Tank! Tank!
+ Darksiders II
+ Mass Effect 3
+ Namco Bandai Tekken Tag Tournament 2: Wii U Edition
++ Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge
++ Batman: Arkham City Armored Edition
++ Trine 2: Director's Cut
++ Warriors Orochi 3 Hyper
+++ Assassin’s Creed III
+++ Call of Duty: Black Ops II
+++ Disney Epic Mickey 2: The Power of Two
+++ EA Sports FIFA Soccer 13
+++ ESPN Sports Connection
+++ Game Party Champions
+++ Just Dance 4
+++ Madden NFL 13
+++ NBA 2K13
+++ Rabbids Land
+++ Scribblenauts Unlimited
+++ Skylanders Giants
+++ Sonic and All-Stars Racing Transformed
+++ Transformers Prime
+++ Your Shape: Fitness Evolved 2013
+++ ZombiU

+ No frills ports of older games
++ Upgraded versions of older games
+++ Recent games

There are seven titles that could be called "old", but at least four of those titles were enhanced ports. The majority of those 30 third party titles were brand new. The Wii U almost got each major publisher's top games plus a number of family games ideally suited to the Wii audience.
 

captmcblack

Member
Oct 4, 2004
18,193
0
1,150
Ubisoft made a first person zombie-shooting FPS/survival horror game in a gen where we've probably had the most zombie games ever made, and did it as a new IP (and not with the sales benefit of one of the many more popular, preexisting/relevant zombie IPs like RE/L4D/Dead Rising/Walking Dead/etc) whose gameplay is evocative of some of the most difficult games recently released (Demon's Souls/Dark Souls). On top of that they barely marketed/pushed the thing, and game it some weirdo name...and then they are "surprised" and "disappointed" about the sales, as if they legitimately were engaged in making sure the thing moved units. Definitely Nintendo messed up with not having the hardware sales to facilitate more software sales, or making third party relations easier/cheaper/whatever they need...but enough is enough.

I want a third party to make a full-bodied effort on the Wii U in a genre that has a chance of hosting a bold and relevant flagship title. I will definitely agree with these third parties if they do so and then still strike out...but at least I want a real try at it. For once, I want them to make an honest effort, not one with compromises on genre or content or input or playstyle or franchise/IP or anything. But no third party will ever do that, because they are "risk-averse". They're going to make Soul Calibur Legends, and extrapolate that to mean Soul Calibur can't be sold on Wii. They're going to make Dead Space Extraction, and have that mean Dead Space shouldn't be there. They're going to make late ports of games, omit entire features and DLC, and be amazed that gamers aren't willing to take that $60 that they'd have spent on the "real" version on PS3/360 and buy a lesser version on the Wii U - and then extrapolate that to mean that third party games can't sell. That's what has happened since GameCube.

These third parties want to make Transformers Prime, but not Fall of Cybertron. They don't even want to try Metal Gear Rising, a spinoff that people might actually want. And they want to release them late/nerfed, and expect that they sell like they were 360 games. Crazy.
 

69wpm

Member
May 21, 2013
2,320
0
0
I don't think it's Ubisoft's job to explain the hardware's functions to customers...

Nevertheless, they did just that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_v10dej2Is

It's actually better done than Nintendo's IMO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T93W4YmkAH0
Fair enough, didn't know about the UK commercials. But did they air a lot? Have you actually seen them? And even with the commercials, we don't know if they were effective at all. How about posting ads in survival horror forums, sites or anything like that. You know, marketing where the interested gamers might be. Just my 2c.

Ubisoft's job isn't to sell hardware. Yet they still did a better job showing off the hardware than Nintendo did.
It's in their interest that the hardware sells good so this is just a lame excuse in my opinion. The weird thing is, this excuse is only valid for Nintendo platforms.
 

Jinfash

needs 2 extra inches
Oct 16, 2007
13,883
2
1,065
Jinfash
The larger issue is that Nintendo put out a console that has sold roughly 1.1MM units NA in 9 months and has one Mario game with a 70% attach rate... and the next highest game, regardless of publisher, is 150k.
I'm going to assume that number was reached by Sonic Racing, and if so that's a sobering discovery for everyone who keeps bringing the game up whenever the variability of the platform for 3rd parties are discussed, at least in NA.

And if it's not a reference to Sonic then... Yikes.
 

metalslimer

Member
Jun 9, 2012
26,506
0
0
Ubisoft made a first person zombie-shooting FPS/survival horror game in a gen where we've probably had the most zombie games ever made, and did it as a new IP (and not with the sales benefit of one of the many more popular, preexisting/relevant zombie IPs like RE/L4D/Dead Rising/Walking Dead/etc) whose gameplay is evocative of some of the most difficult games recently released (Demon's Souls/Dark Souls). On top of that they barely marketed/pushed the thing, and game it some weirdo name...and then they are "surprised" and "disappointed" about the sales, as if they legitimately were engaged in making sure the thing moved units. Definitely Nintendo messed up with not having the hardware sales to facilitate more software sales, or making third party relations easier/cheaper/whatever they need...but enough is enough.

I want a third party to make a full-bodied effort on the Wii U in a genre that has a chance of hosting a bold and relevant flagship title. I will definitely agree with these third parties if they do so and then still strike out...but at least I want a real try at it. For once, I want them to make an honest effort, not one with compromises on genre or content or input or playstyle or franchise/IP or anything. But no third party will ever do that, because they are "risk-averse". They're going to make Soul Calibur Legends, and extrapolate that to mean Soul Calibur can't be sold on Wii. They're going to make Dead Space Extraction, and have that mean Dead Space shouldn't be there. They're going to make late ports of games, omit entire features and DLC, and be amazed that gamers aren't willing to take that $60 that they'd have spent on the "real" version on PS3/360 and buy a lesser version on the Wii U - and then extrapolate that to mean that third party games can't sell. That's what has happened since GameCube.

These third parties want to make Transformers Prime, but not Fall of Cybertron. They don't even want to try Metal Gear Rising, a spinoff that people might actually want. And they want to release them late/nerfed, and expect that they sell like they were 360 games. Crazy.
Well that's Nintendo's problem. 3rd parties and gamers (who don't only own Nintendo consoles) have moved on. They don't expect nor care about 3rd parties on Nintendo platforms. It's that platform you buy to get the new Mario and Smash. And this is Nintendo's problem to fix, not 3rd parties because they have no reason to focus on Nintendo because how big exactly is the Nintendo only audience? You think MS waltzed into this industry and took 3rd parties away from Sony? No they were extremely aggressive and listened to what developers wanted and built a huge 3rd party ecosystem from the ground up in less than a decade. Nintendo has been sitting on their laurels with their console outreach for that same period and now that they realize they aren't going to get another Wii and need 3rd party support it's once again too late.

true. The best thing out of this is platinum lives another day and increases their pedigree with 2 more amazing games. That said, i feel time is running out for that studio. They need their demon souls type breakout success.
I was hoping Revengeance would do much better, but I guess not.
 
Sep 2, 2011
15,640
0
0
That's not a 3rd party game, Nintendo's funding, publishing and marketing the whole thing. Same with Bayonetta 2.

true. The best thing out of this is platinum lives another day and increases their pedigree with 2 more amazing games. That said, i feel time is running out for that studio. They need their demon souls type breakout success.
 

Father_Brain

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
22,706
0
0
33
New York, NY
The hardest problem is that it's a catch 22. For Nintendo to cultivate that audience on their platforms they need to have a good amount of 3rd party support to get people interested, but 3rd parties aren't going to invest in such an unstable ecosystem. So does Nintendo have to pay for every single port then? It's become a cycle at this point that seems very hard to break
It can't realistically be broken unless Nintendo is willing to publish and fund first-party titles aimed at that audience (among other things), and even then, it would almost certainly take more than one generation to overcome the "core games can't sell on Nintendo consoles" stigma.
 

Raist

Banned
Jan 27, 2007
24,544
0
0
Fair enough, didn't know about the UK commercials. But did they air a lot? Have you actually seen them? And even with the commercials, we don't know if they were effective at all. How about posting ads in survival horror forums, sites or anything like that. You know, marketing where the interested gamers might be. Just my 2c.
If they have to tap into this kind of methods, again there's a problem.
To reiterate, ZombiU was the most successful 3rd party game on the platform. If it bombed overall, it tells you a lot about the platform, not Ubisoft's potential mistakes.
 

captmcblack

Member
Oct 4, 2004
18,193
0
1,150
Well that's Nintendo's problem. 3rd parties and gamers (who don't only own Nintendo consoles) have moved on. They don't expect nor care about 3rd parties on Nintendo platforms. It's that platform you buy to get the new Mario and Smash. And this is Nintendo's problem to fix, not 3rd parties because they have no reason to focus on Nintendo because how big exactly is the Nintendo only audience?
Well, I am a gamer who doesn't only own Nintendo consoles, but I do expect 3rd parties on Nintendo platforms, and I expect that the titles they release are actual quality titles released with nothing less than feature and release-date parity at minimum on Nintendo platforms. I want that because I would like a choice other than PC or HD twins. I want that because in theory, the Wii U version of such titles would be the best version of the title if third parties actually were honest about their efforts (if for no other reason than off-TV play). I want that so I could have a library of Wii U games that consisted of more than just Nintendo's releases.

It's as much Nintendo's problem as it is the third parties. I accept that it's Nintendo's fault for not doing x86, or not having hardware that is the equal or better than their competitors, or having an identical input device, or not subsidizing development/production, or money hats, or whatever else you could blame Nintendo for...but only if it is also acknowledged and accepted that third parties have made crap effort on Nintendo platforms since Gamecube at minimum, irrespective of the console horsepower/release date/cost/ease of development/input device or whatever.
 

Pie and Beans

Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
Apr 23, 2010
13,053
0
730
true. The best thing out of this is platinum lives another day and increases their pedigree with 2 more amazing games. That said, i feel time is running out for that studio. They need their demon souls type breakout success.
I think they already did with regard to Bayonetta 1 and Metal Gear Rising. Million sellers and a nudge beyond seems to be what a studio like Platinum would be targeting anyway unless a big pub wants to put in the work and big marketing budget to go for breaking 2 million. Also Platinum really needs to get their stuff onto the PC platform and quickly, and Rising should be the start of that.

W101 and Bayonetta 2 sales however are going to be some real stone boots to be wearing regardless if they were paid for development wise by Nintendo because as a studio you still don't want bad numbers for future investors to point at regardless of "Nintendo decided not to market our game at all" bullet points.

As for what Nintendo should have done 6 months ago was create 2-3 "porting" studios (much like what MS created for their Minecraft version) that would work with some big names to get certain games onto the WiiU so it could avoid this total third party ghost town effect and really get to work on improving relations with BIG co-marketing deals. Except here we are, they haven't, and their home console business will be ultimately forfeit as a result.
 
Sep 13, 2007
11,024
0
0
Sucks for Ubisoft, who was the only publisher to back the Wii U with genuine support right out of the gate. Still, Zombi U was a pretty idiosyncratic game. People probably expected a shooter (first person+zombies) and got a stealth survival game with an emphasis on holy-fuck-they're-right-on-top-of-me melee and bare bones weapons and ammo. Probably not the most accessible launch game, and certainly not a system seller. I have a Wii U and I like zombies, yet Zombi U did nothing to entice me to purchase at full price, even in the middle of a barren release schedule. That part at least is somewhat on Ubi. I guess they hoped to clean up by virtue of being the only game in town ala Red Steel? At any rate, I give them props for taking a risk, but it wasn't the most calculated one.

Rayman probably would have been a better fit for testing the waters, but they pretty much boned themselves on that one. They could have just as easily released it on schedule for the Wii (you know, seeing as how development was finished) to capitalize on its status as one of the only great 3rd party exclusives during a software drought then dropped the porting bomb at E3. Instead they shit all over the hype that had built around the game and put it up against every other publishers big guns in the second half of the year. If it has middling sales now they've really got no one to blame but themselves imo.
 

captmcblack

Member
Oct 4, 2004
18,193
0
1,150
As for what Nintendo should have done 6 months ago was create 2-3 "porting" studios (much like what MS created for their Minecraft version) that would work with some big names to get certain games onto the WiiU so it could avoid this total third party ghost town effect and really get to work on improving relations with BIG co-marketing deals. Except here we are, they haven't, and their home console business will be ultimately forfeit as a result.
This would probably be the only way they could get decent versions of relevant third party titles on their machine. This is what Sega, NEC and other companies used to do back in the day...
 

Mupod

Member
Jun 12, 2011
16,403
0
530
Toronto
It doesn't take "minutes" to load anything in the game. I think that's a bit of an exaggeration.
It was upwards of two minutes. Easily. I thought there was something wrong with my Wii U and was about to reset the system when the door opened.

It was likely an issue related to some scripted events and having a previous survivor zombie in there, but it happened to me more than once since I made multiple scavenging trips to that area in order to get everything. Yet I just tried to reproduce it and the door opened almost instantly, the preceding loadscreen was shorter as well.

The game definitely has technical issues, is what I'm saying. I mean, I didn't even start it until the patch because I read about game-breaking problems.

It's just a sad situation because the game has a brilliant concept and is almost exactly what I think survival horror should be. A sequel could have been an amazing thing.
 

metalslimer

Member
Jun 9, 2012
26,506
0
0
Releasing Rayman Legends onto an essentially dead platform would have been a bad idea and a waste of everyone's times because it wouldn't have done anything more than Lego City did. Ubisoft tried. They support all new platforms and was willing to give Nintendo that time exclusive, but no one could have predicted how horrrible Wii U software and hardware sales would be so they made the decision to wait for Wii U to get better. Also what exactly are all these huge games coming out on Wii U that Wii U owners will choose over Rayman Legends in September? The only other 1st party game that is even in the same month is Wonderful 101 and if Wii U can't support more than a few games doing well at a single time it was screwed to begin with.
 

Jinfash

needs 2 extra inches
Oct 16, 2007
13,883
2
1,065
Jinfash
It can't realistically be broken unless Nintendo is willing to publish and fund first-party titles aimed at that audience (among other things), and even then, it would almost certainly take more than one generation to overcome the "core games can't sell on Nintendo consoles" stigma.
I was just thinking that. Demographics have always been a big issue and, depending on how much they honestly care about their presence, if Nintendo wants to create a friendlier environment for 3rd parties then they need to (begrudgingly) create a new IP or two that targets the same demographic those publishers cater for. People would sometime cite the "3rd parties are afraid to compete with Nintendo" but when it came to a system such as the Wii, those who targeted the casual market Nintendo attracted were able to turn a solid return on their investments. The Wii U is unfortunately *not* the Wii, and Nintendo might be forced to work harder on creating that market, be it for casuals or core.

However, it's incredibly risky to even plan for this until the system starts selling better than 8 y/o systems and failing handhelds. The bar is too low to even consider it a catch-22.
 

prwxv3

Member
Sep 7, 2011
7,479
0
0
Releasing Rayman Legends onto an essentially dead platform would have been a bad idea and a waste of everyone's times because it wouldn't have done anything more than Lego City did. Ubisoft tried. They support all new platforms and was willing to give Nintendo that time exclusive, but no one could have predicted how horrrible Wii U software and hardware sales would be so they made the decision to wait for Wii U to get better. Also what exactly are all these huge games coming out on Wii U that Wii U owners will choose over Rayman Legends in September?
I think most people only expected it to not sell as much as the Wii did not crater like it has (myself included). And most people thought NSMBU would drive console sales too.
 
Feb 23, 2010
2,208
4
550
I thought I remembered Ubisoft saying that they might port ZombiU to PS3/360 at some point. I guess that's not happening?
 

Bumhead

Banned
Nov 14, 2010
8,202
0
0
true. The best thing out of this is platinum lives another day and increases their pedigree with 2 more amazing games. That said, i feel time is running out for that studio. They need their demon souls type breakout success.
I think Platinum will be fine. That partnership with Nintendo might be the be all and end all with regards to Bayonetta but it isn't necessarily for Platinum.
 

metalslimer

Member
Jun 9, 2012
26,506
0
0
I was just thinking that. Demographics have always been a big issue and, depending on how much they honestly care about their presence, if Nintendo wants to create a friendlier environment for 3rd parties then they need to (begrudgingly) create a new IP or two that targets the same demographic those publishers cater for. People would sometime cite the "3rd parties are afraid to compete with Nintendo" but when it came to a system such as the Wii, those who targeted the casual market Nintendo attracted were able to turn a solid return on their investments. The Wii U is unfortunately *not* the Wii, and Nintendo might be forced to work harder on creating that market, be it for casuals or core.

However, it's incredibly risky to even plan for this until the system starts selling better than 8 y/o systems and failing handhelds. The bar is too low to even consider it a catch-22.
Even if the Wii U continues to fail they have to begin the investment now if they want any results by next gen. The problem with Wii U is that Nintendo seemingly went to 3rd parties a year or 2 before the system launched and expected to reverse the situation. These things take years. Even Sony who has a much healthier ecosystem was talking to 3rd parties in 2008 about what they wanted. And you can even see it in the style of E3 presentations. Sony and MS treat 3rd parties like partners while Nintendo seemingly treats them like they are a necessary evil. So to be honest in response to that topic are 3rd parties actively fighting Nintendo I would say it's more the other way around. Nintendo creates their boxes to sell their own games and 3rd parties are along for the ride.

And then Nintendo does stupid shit like say they are leaving the 3ds launch open for 3rd parties (even though we all knew they just didn't have games ready) after only telling some 3rd parties about 3d at E3 that year and getting the dev kits out late, and then with Wii U having terrible dev kits that weren't fixed until a few months before launch leading to bad ports and delays

Nintendo needs to set up a branch specifically for dealing with 3rd parties needs in concerns and deal with both west and east. I mean just look at the indie outreach in the past 6 months. Just 2 years ago, indie devs hated Nintendo's guts. Nintendo isn't completely incompetent, but just seem to have a gross understanding of the market in relations to 3rd party games and creating that ecosystem
 

evilromero

Member
Jun 15, 2004
18,259
0
0
Damn. I've been dreaming of a sequel ever since. Very disappointed. And I definitely place the blame on Nintendo for poorly marketing the system and their lack of a killer first party title.
 

FLEABttn

Banned
Mar 30, 2005
8,219
0
0
33
NOVA
RIP WiiU?


If ZombieU can't turn a profit . . .
Then it's time for Nintendo to drop some money on accelerated R&D and have a plan C in their back pocket where they Virtual Boy the thing by the end of 2014.

Because I literally have no idea how you fix the Wii-U at this point.
 

fart town usa

Member
May 31, 2009
2,123
31
680
Then it's time for Nintendo to drop some money on accelerated R&D and have a plan C in their back pocket where they Virtual Boy the thing by the end of 2014.

Because I literally have no idea how you fix the Wii-U at this point.
Please be patient...
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Jul 31, 2007
39,660
0
0
Dam that's shocking. I really think this console could have a 3 year lifespan at most.
Yeah right. There's no way Nintendo is competent enough to get another system out in November of next year.

At the very least, they'll still continue having first-party output for at least the next 3 years.

2016, though? I easily see them putting out another system.
 

lwilliams3

Member
Apr 10, 2007
2,528
0
875
Indiana
Yea. It amazes me how people are presented with actual facts, and instead of discussing around it, they just fall back on the same tired arguments over and over.

People still focusing on the names of the games, their budgets, their reviews, their boxarts. These are not the larger issue. ZombiU didn't fail to hit expectations due to any of this. As other people pointed out, many people who purchased the game, really like the game. The larger issue is that Nintendo put out a console that has sold roughly 1.1MM units NA in 9 months and has one Mario game with a 70% attach rate... and the next highest game, regardless of publisher, is 150k.

Nearly all of those users only want Mario. People bought the Wii because they wanted the Wii. They bought a ton of games with it because they were sold on the concept of what it did for them. The features excited them. They wanted to experience a lot of what it had to offer, at least for awhile. Publishers saw launch attach rates of 30%. You want that. You target that. You'll take 10% and 10% is good too... when the system itself has a ton of hardware momentum. Wii U doesn't. So you want 30%. Whose even getting 10% now? These are just rough targets and obviously not everyone builds their financing to these models, but attach rate is the best number to really look at here.

Nintendo needs to sell people on the Wii U tablet aggressively and get people to understand why the console itself is something they need. Right now, people bought the Wii U for Mario. You're fighting for scraps with around 300k users who are willing to buy more than just Mario. I really want them to succeed... I want everyone to, given I want the industry to grow, and someone has to target females and bring younger demo into the industry at higher price points than Apple and Android do, but the reason I probably spend more post-energy on Nintendo related things is because they really are in a bad spot, and they have to start repositinoing and spending and I'd love to see that happen asap.
Seeing this post made it worth checking out this thread. Thanks.
 

Perkel

Banned
Oct 2, 2010
9,673
0
0
Poland
Then it's time for Nintendo to drop some money on accelerated R&D and have a plan C in their back pocket where they Virtual Boy the thing by the end of 2014.

Because I literally have no idea how you fix the Wii-U at this point.

Drop the plug from this and make new console same as Gamecube and Wii. Call it something other than Wii U and make spec good.

I would love to see powerfull gaming console from Nintendo.

If Ubisoft will drop support like EA then Wii U is good as dead.
 

metalslimer

Member
Jun 9, 2012
26,506
0
0
Dam that's shocking. I really think this console could have a 3 year lifespan at most.
Depends on how well Nintendo's 1st party software does. 3 years would still put them launching in the very middle of the generation which would be worse because gamers will have already made their decilsions and their friends will have picked a new platforms. Unless they do something completely wild and crazy they have to stretch the system's life to at least 4-5 years

Yeah right. There's no way Nintendo is competent enough to get another system out in November of next year.

At the very least, they'll still continue having first-party output for at least the next 3 years.

2016, though? I easily see them putting out another system.
Er you do realize this is 2013 and 3 years would be 2015 not 2014? If they wait til 2016 they will probably end up launching a new handheld and console in the same 12 month period which will kill them development wise. The best thing for Nintendo if they plan on having handheld/console be separate is to have at least a 2 year spread to get things ready and not have huge launch droughts
 
Oct 20, 2004
3,309
0
0
33
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
It's no surprise after Nintendo chose a mini-game collection and a Wii-enhanced game (which looks like a DS game) as their flagship titles at a price tag of 350$.

Too bad about ZombiU sales, it was by far, the best WiiU offering at launch.
 

prwxv3

Member
Sep 7, 2011
7,479
0
0
Even if the Wii U continues to fail they have to begin the investment now if they want any results by next gen. The problem with Wii U is that Nintendo seemingly went to 3rd parties a year or 2 before the system launched and expected to reverse the situation. These things take years. Even Sony who has a much healthier ecosystem was talking to 3rd parties in 2008 about what they wanted. And you can even see it in the style of E3 presentations. Sony and MS treat 3rd parties like partners while Nintendo seemingly treats them like they are a necessary evil. So to be honest in response to that topic are 3rd parties actively fighting Nintendo I would say it's more the other way around. Nintendo creates their boxes to sell their own games and 3rd parties are along for the ride.

And then Nintendo does stupid shit like say they are leaving the 3ds launch open for 3rd parties (even though we all knew they just didn't have games ready) after only telling some 3rd parties about 3d at E3 that year and getting the dev kits out late, and then with Wii U having terrible dev kits that weren't fixed until a few months before launch leading to bad ports and delays
The thing is that Sony once had a reputation that they did not listen to anyone but themselves from third parties and ps3 is proof. So for ps4 they had to really change their act and they did. There was a quote somewhere from a third party dev requesting 8GB of RAM wile saying Sony never listens and then bam Sony delivered. While Nintendo is in a far worse shape third party wise then Sony ever had with PS3 they need to actively change their image with third parties unless they want another WiiU situation with their next console.
 

MercuryLS

Banned
Apr 21, 2007
13,382
0
0
Nintendo is to blame for all of Wii U's hardships, they should take their lumps. Hopefully they come back with a console that people actually give a damn about next time.
 

Nash20

Banned
Mar 3, 2013
100
0
0
ZombiU is a really well done game. Probably the only game ive played so far that makes decent use of the tablet.
 

Majmun

Member
Dec 15, 2005
21,323
0
0
NeoGaf
The Wii U has been forgotten. Don't want to sound dramatic, but the console seems dead.

There are just no positives regarding the console. Even Nintendo seems to struggle with it and 3rd parties have totally abandoned it.

And now this news. One of the only Wii U games worth owning is still a flop? I've had enough of the wait game, it's over.
 

ymmv

Banned
Mar 17, 2007
6,485
0
0
Amsterdam, NL
Ubisoft made a first person zombie-shooting FPS/survival horror game in a gen where we've probably had the most zombie games ever made, and did it as a new IP (and not with the sales benefit of one of the many more popular, preexisting/relevant zombie IPs like RE/L4D/Dead Rising/Walking Dead/etc) whose gameplay is evocative of some of the most difficult games recently released (Demon's Souls/Dark Souls). On top of that they barely marketed/pushed the thing, and game it some weirdo name...and then they are "surprised" and "disappointed" about the sales, as if they legitimately were engaged in making sure the thing moved units. Definitely Nintendo messed up with not having the hardware sales to facilitate more software sales, or making third party relations easier/cheaper/whatever they need...but enough is enough.

I want a third party to make a full-bodied effort on the Wii U in a genre that has a chance of hosting a bold and relevant flagship title. I will definitely agree with these third parties if they do so and then still strike out...but at least I want a real try at it. For once, I want them to make an honest effort, not one with compromises on genre or content or input or playstyle or franchise/IP or anything. But no third party will ever do that, because they are "risk-averse". They're going to make Soul Calibur Legends, and extrapolate that to mean Soul Calibur can't be sold on Wii. They're going to make Dead Space Extraction, and have that mean Dead Space shouldn't be there. They're going to make late ports of games, omit entire features and DLC, and be amazed that gamers aren't willing to take that $60 that they'd have spent on the "real" version on PS3/360 and buy a lesser version on the Wii U - and then extrapolate that to mean that third party games can't sell. That's what has happened since GameCube.
Nintendo fans who want hardcore games never seem to understand they're not the core demographics Nintendo is targeting. Games like Nintendo Land, Super Mario Bros U, Smash Bros, Mario Kart, Pikmin, etc are not accidentally cute, family friendly games with familiar, well-liked cartoon characters. Nintendo has been branding themselves as the console maker with games for the whole family (but specifically children, let's not kid ourselves) for two decades. With the Wii they've really tried to broaden their audience, not by focusing more on 16-35 year old males like Sony and MS, but by trying to reach women and older people, a potential audience that has always been neglected.

Is it any wonder that when third parties making traditional hard core games for male gamers don't think a Nintendo console is the right place for their games? No major publisher will ever try creating a hugely ambitious AAA+ exclusive Wii U game for a traditional hardcore gamer audience. It's financial suicide when it's crystal clear that the vast majority of that potential audience owns a PS3/360/PC. It's a nice dream, but that's what it will remain since Nintendo only talks the talk, but never walks the walk. If they really wanted to get third parties on their side, they should have made the Wii U a fast PC like console with a modern online infrastructure. The current Wii U is another typical underpowered Nintendo console from a manufacturer that's completely out of touch with all modern trends. It's a perfectly fine Nintendo console, but it will never be more than that.
 
Mar 8, 2012
3,036
0
0
It's funny how often Wii owners repeat that "late ports" excuse to explain why the Wii U had such a rough start. If only those the Wii U got new games, then it would have sold so much better.

Chasing Aurora
Little Inferno
Nano Assault
New Super Mario Bros. U
Nintendo Land
Sing Party
Tank! Tank! Tank!
+ Darksiders II
+ Mass Effect 3
+ Namco Bandai Tekken Tag Tournament 2: Wii U Edition
++ Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge
++ Batman: Arkham City Armored Edition
++ Trine 2: Director's Cut
++ Warriors Orochi 3 Hyper
+++ Assassin’s Creed III
+++ Call of Duty: Black Ops II
+++ Disney Epic Mickey 2: The Power of Two
+++ EA Sports FIFA Soccer 13
+++ ESPN Sports Connection
+++ Game Party Champions
+++ Just Dance 4
+++ Madden NFL 13
+++ NBA 2K13
+++ Rabbids Land
+++ Scribblenauts Unlimited
+++ Skylanders Giants
+++ Sonic and All-Stars Racing Transformed
+++ Transformers Prime
+++ Your Shape: Fitness Evolved 2013
+++ ZombiU

+ No frills ports of older games
++ Upgraded versions of older games
+++ Recent games

There are seven titles that could be called "old", but at least four of those titles were enhanced ports. The majority of those 30 third party titles were brand new. The Wii U almost got each major publisher's top games plus a number of family games ideally suited to the Wii audience.
That wasn't my point. My point was that there were actually a ton of games available at launch, all aimed dead on at the same demographic (traditional players), which was in stark contrast to the Wii.

So instead of two or three titles taking all the sales (and doing relatively well for it), you split roughly the same number of sales among 20 titles (and doing pretty poorly).

That's not the only factor in Wii U's rough launch, but certainly one of them.
 

ymmv

Banned
Mar 17, 2007
6,485
0
0
Amsterdam, NL
That wasn't my point. My point was that there were actually a ton of games available at launch, all aimed dead on at the same demographic (traditional players), which was in stark contrast to the Wii.

So instead of two or three titles taking all the sales (and doing relatively well for it), you split roughly the same number of sales among 20 titles (and doing pretty poorly).

That's not the only factor in Wii U's rough launch, but certainly one of them.
Which is nonsense since most of those games also launched on other platforms. It's called competition. Most of those game probably didn't sell that much, but you'd expect the four best selling games of 2012 (AC3, CoD, Fifa, Madden) to become bestsellers on the Wii U too. Never happened.
 

GC|Simon

Member
Feb 4, 2006
1,518
0
0
Europe
I really enjoyed ZombiU. It's a great game and it's a shame that just very few people actually played it. However, Ubisoft cannot just blame WiiU's lack of success for the bad sales. There are a few factors in my opinion:

- The game received some really bad early reviews.
- ZombiU is a new franchise - there wasn't a fanbase.
- The game is pretty hardcore unlike most modern games.
 

lamaroo

Unconfirmed Member
Sep 21, 2012
21,080
0
0
It's insane to think of how poorly this machine is doing, yet all the potentially fantastic Nintendo games we could get out of it.

For anyone saying they should cancel the Wii U and create something new(and stronger), how do you suppose they do that?

At the very earliest, the new console would launch in Q4 2015 probably. Do they push all of the Wii U games they have in development back to launch with the new machine, or do they continue releasing them on their dead console in the meantime?
 

metalslimer

Member
Jun 9, 2012
26,506
0
0
They really did try. So if they just stop supporting the system, you really can't blame 'em.
Especially with this lineup for the fall

Rayman
Watch Dogs
Splinter Cell
Assassin's Creed

I hate to say it, but Ubisoft for some people has a better lineup for Wii U than Nintendo.

At the very earliest, the new console would launch in Q4 2015 probably. Do they push all of the Wii U games they have in development back to launch with the new machine, or do they continue releasing them on their dead console in the meantime?
If Nintendo's games flop this holiday (doubtful) than they have no choice but to pretty much VB Wii U. However if they bring in a nice profit like Gamecube Nintendo software and the hardware continues to fail they just focus more 3DS to make profits while waiting out this gen and building their teams and a strong arsenal of 3rd party partners for next gen launches. I hoped that with the death of the mid level game Nintendo could have a big chance to do something in that space, but I guess not this gen. There will definitely be some developers like Media Molecule floating around this gen and Nintendo has to be more aggressive in seeking out talent and fostering it and not just on their own IP.