36 replies to this topic

[Socalmuscle]

While I admit there is a lack of effort on third parties providing lackluster efforts to the Wii U, there is evidence creeping in that despite its low install base Nintendo Wii U owners simply don't care for third party games at all or supporting the Wii U if they can afford to buy a Wii U or buy third party games.
 
I point the finger at all of us for failing the Wii U just as much as the corporations that either provide ports of games several years old at a full price or just don't provide enough effort separating the Wii U version out from the crowd.
 
My game collection mainly contains third party games such as Tekken Tag 2, Trine 2, ZombiU, Splinter Cell: Blacklist, Need for Speed: Most Wanted U, deus Ex: Human Revolution: Directors Cut, Assassin's Creed III, and Batman: Arkham City: Armoured Edition. With only a small fraction such as Wind Waker HD, Nintendoland, and Super Mario 3D World coming from Nintendo itself.
 
I feel sometimes that I'm part of a small breed of Nintendo fans that truly put their money where their mouth is, despite me only being able to afford £40 most months. Seeing the statistics of third part multiplats on other "next generation" (they're current gen now!) consoles such as COD: Ghosts sales on PS4 and XBO compared to Wii U sales especially when back then PS4 and XBO (XBO still does) had far less sales than the Wii U is horrid. Maybe it's the marketing, but I blame the majority of Wii U owners that say "we don't want a generic FPS on our console" these people are the snobs DESTROYING Nintendo's chances at gaining third party multiplat support. 
 
Again the publishers themselves aren't blameless, far from it. They are lazy, and wont even try risking a PS4/XBO game on the Wii U, but I do also accuse the (seeming) majority of Nintendo fans for doing as much damage, if not more.
 
Yes Nintendo themselves could moneyhat publishers into providing ports, but to what advantage if the money is better spent in heightening the quality of their own products if the console ends up a first party only machine? Moneyhatting only provides temporary solutions at best for the majority of cases, and really Nintendo have to concentrate their efforts on gaining non-nintendo fans and the fickle general public with better advertising geared at gaining new Nintendo console fans or making their first party games better rather than temporarily gaining a third party game through essentially bribing other companies.
 
I also accuse a lot of fans who can afford a Wii U but wont invest a measly £180 - £250 (compared to PS4 and XBO) on the console itself, despite plenty of games and a brilliant future lineup!
 
What do you guys think, are the majority of Nintendo fans (who can afford it) to blame equally if not more than third part publishers? Or am I just being a meany?

Nah. Most third parties have simply hobbled their games, released crappy last gen ports, or released games that were already available on other systems years ago.

It's pure common sense that they didn't sell.

Now. Even watch dogs is in jeapordy because who knows how long the gap is between ps4 and wii u releases.

It's a bunch of stupidity from the third parties.

There is a self fulfilling prophecy they have created. And it started wit Ubi betraying Nintendo who was counting on them. That, along with EAs withdrawal hurt consumer confidence in the platform. Combined with the subpar ports, and it's a recipe for disaster.

Wii u owners are the victims of this political crap. Not the perps. That blame is laid squarely on the shoulders of studios who treat wii u like a second class citizen and then blame the platform when consumers don't buy their uninspired steaming piles of crap.

[MorbidGod]

Nintendo is also to blame in many respects as well. They didn't go with the same x86 architecture that the others consoles went with. granted, this makes the Wii U the only console that can truly be called a console instead of a box with PC parts in it, but still, if they were able to get ports without rewriting a larger portion of the game I'm sure we would be seeing more support.

How could they have known Microsoft and Sony was going that way? Microsoft was considering ARM processors when the Wii U was almost done. So again, how could they have known? I don't even think rumors were saying Sony was going x86 came up until after the Wii U was released.

While I admit there is a lack of effort on third parties providing lackluster efforts to the Wii U, there is evidence creeping in that despite its low install base Nintendo Wii U owners simply don't care for third party games at all or supporting the Wii U if they can afford to buy a Wii U or buy third party games.

I point the finger at all of us for failing the Wii U just as much as the corporations that either provide ports of games several years old at a full price or just don't provide enough effort separating the Wii U version out from the crowd.

My game collection mainly contains third party games such as Tekken Tag 2, Trine 2, ZombiU, Splinter Cell: Blacklist, Need for Speed: Most Wanted U, deus Ex: Human Revolution: Directors Cut, Assassin's Creed III, and Batman: Arkham City: Armoured Edition. With only a small fraction such as Wind Waker HD, Nintendoland, and Super Mario 3D World coming from Nintendo itself.

I feel sometimes that I'm part of a small breed of Nintendo fans that truly put their money where their mouth is, despite me only being able to afford £40 most months. Seeing the statistics of third part multiplats on other "next generation" (they're current gen now!) consoles such as COD: Ghosts sales on PS4 and XBO compared to Wii U sales especially when back then PS4 and XBO (XBO still does) had far less sales than the Wii U is horrid. Maybe it's the marketing, but I blame the majority of Wii U owners that say "we don't want a generic FPS on our console" these people are the snobs DESTROYING Nintendo's chances at gaining third party multiplat support.

Again the publishers themselves aren't blameless, far from it. They are lazy, and wont even try risking a PS4/XBO game on the Wii U, but I do also accuse the (seeming) majority of Nintendo fans for doing as much damage, if not more.

Yes Nintendo themselves could moneyhat publishers into providing ports, but to what advantage if the money is better spent in heightening the quality of their own products if the console ends up a first party only machine? Moneyhatting only provides temporary solutions at best for the majority of cases, and really Nintendo have to concentrate their efforts on gaining non-nintendo fans and the fickle general public with better advertising geared at gaining new Nintendo console fans or making their first party games better rather than temporarily gaining a third party game through essentially bribing other companies.

I also accuse a lot of fans who can afford a Wii U but wont invest a measly £180 - £250 (compared to PS4 and XBO) on the console itself, despite plenty of games and a brilliant future lineup!

What do you guys think, are the majority of Nintendo fans (who can afford it) to blame equally if not more than third part publishers? Or am I just being a meany?

I think the best way to describe this, is which came first? The chicken or the egg?

On one end of the speculation, the chicken had to come first. They make the eggs. Or games in this case. So, the developers must be lazy and make bad games and expect them to sell well. But wait, maybe the egg came first, or in this case the consumer, and we stopped supporting third party games.

I don't know which one came first. People are quick to point to third party examples where they did a bad job or ported an old game and expect it to sell - but what third party game has done well on a Nintendo platform? And I'm talking over a million units sold?

Sonic has had multiple successes on Nintendo's platform. That's why we have three exclusive games: Sonic World, Sonic Olympics and Sonic Boom.

Resident Evil did well with the original port and RE4. I believe both have sold over a million copies. RE4 was my favorite Wii game, besides Zelda of course.

But those aren't the only attempts. Cap on had made several exclusive Resident Evil games for GCN and Wii, and not all of them did well. Ubisoft has made several exclusives for the Wii. Red Steel didn't do well, and neither did it's second game Red Steel 2. RS2 was better than the first. Ubisoft was willing to make a second game with that series, even though the first didn't do well.

ZombiU didn't sell over a million. That game wasn't great, but it was a good game. Batman Armoured Edition was a remake, but so was Resident Evil on the GCN, and it sold over a million units. Why didn't that game? Both systems had about the same market share at the time of the game being released. And both game saw improvements.

And again, publishers base improvements such as DLC that we complain not getting by how many ppl bought the game. So, if not a lot of sales, not a lot of updates.

[3Dude]

How could they have known Microsoft and Sony was going that way? Microsoft was considering ARM processors when the Wii U was almost done. So again, how could they have known? I don't even think rumors were saying Sony was going x86 came up until after the Wii U was released.


I think the best way to describe this, is which came first? The chicken or the egg?

On one end of the speculation, the chicken had to come first. They make the eggs. Or games in this case. So, the developers must be lazy and make bad games and expect them to sell well. But wait, maybe the egg came first, or in this case the consumer, and we stopped supporting third party games.

I don't know which one came first. People are quick to point to third party examples where they did a bad job or ported an old game and expect it to sell - but what third party game has done well on a Nintendo platform? And I'm talking over a million units sold?

Sonic has had multiple successes on Nintendo's platform. That's why we have three exclusive games: Sonic World, Sonic Olympics and Sonic Boom.

Resident Evil did well with the original port and RE4. I believe both have sold over a million copies. RE4 was my favorite Wii game, besides Zelda of course.

But those aren't the only attempts. Cap on had made several exclusive Resident Evil games for GCN and Wii, and not all of them did well. Ubisoft has made several exclusives for the Wii. Red Steel didn't do well, and neither did it's second game Red Steel 2. RS2 was better than the first. Ubisoft was willing to make a second game with that series, even though the first didn't do well.

ZombiU didn't sell over a million. That game wasn't great, but it was a good game. Batman Armoured Edition was a remake, but so was Resident Evil on the GCN, and it sold over a million units. Why didn't that game? Both systems had about the same market share at the time of the game being released. And both game saw improvements.

And again, publishers base improvements such as DLC that we complain not getting by how many ppl bought the game. So, if not a lot of sales, not a lot of updates.

Thats a lot of false equivilance.

REmake was a HUGE remake, graphical overhaul, and improvement of one of the greatest games ever made, its still the definitive version of re1.

Batman ae was a dubious port of a game that just came out.

Red steel was a lie that permanantly damaged the franchise name when those million plus people who bought it found out it was just waggle crap, and not remotely close to the 'bull play' 'gameplay trailer' that made them want to get it in the first place.

When the second one came out promising what appeared to be the same thing, nobody believed it was real, they thought it was another bait and switch like the original.

A game like zombi u wouldnt sell on ANY platform in the millions. A game as hard and unforgiving as dark souls, but only a fraction of the content depth, and variety?

Third parties REFUSE to do what they do on other platforms, and when their clearly NON AAA products sell like NON AAA products; they use it as an excuse.

[MorbidGod]

Thats a lot of false equivilance.

REmake was a HUGE remake, graphical overhaul, and improvement of one of the greatest games ever made, its still the definitive version of re1.

Batman ae was a dubious port of a game that just came out.

Red steel was a lie that permanantly damaged the franchise name when those million plus people who bought it found out it was just waggle crap, and not remotely close to the 'bull play' 'gameplay trailer' that made them want to get it in the first place.

When the second one came out promising what appeared to be the same thing, nobody believed it was real, they thought it was another bait and switch like the original.

A game like zombi u wouldnt sell on ANY platform in the millions. A game as hard and unforgiving as dark souls, but only a fraction of the content depth, and variety?

Third parties REFUSE to do what they do on other platforms, and when their clearly NON AAA products sell like NON AAA products; they use it as an excuse.

I wouldn't call Resident Evil one of the greatest games on the planet. I've hated Resident Evil until RE4, and that's when the platform became playable for me.

But, I'm an odd person. I don't have good taste in games, I guess. However, Batman armored edition had all of the updates for the original game that came out a year before it, had an exclusive mode that was cool to use. Sure, it wasn't worth re buying, but are you telling me every Wii U owner played the first one? I didn't. I've only played Origins and the Armored Edition.

But, even if you hate that game, and want to call the work Montreal did "dubious", that doesn't discount the other games third parties have tried and didn't work. What about Resident Evil Zero? What about MadWorld? What about No More Heroes?

Example, after example, these games don't sell over a million copies. I guess they all suck right?

[Raiden]

REmake is one of the best games ever made. RE4 is ok I like it at times but it's quality has quickly aged to the point there are so many games similar. REmake still stands on it's own and also gave us the story of Lisa Trevor. Holy carp that is heartbreaking.  Game still looks great. One of my buddies runs Biohaze and he got REmake in 1080P and the game still looked amazing. RE4 muddy textures don't benefit in HD. Game still plays perfect and yes the tank controls on are purpose to make it scarier trying to get away. So I like those. I'm not a big fan of the series by any means. In fact I lost all interest after 4. REmake however is as good today as the day I bought  it in 2002.

 

Also Madworld sold over 600k(it made profit even if SEGA Daisyed) and NMH was good as well. Suda was very happy with it's sales. In fact NMH was Suda's most successful game up to that point. RE0 was great but yeah that did not do well and led to RE4 being more Action focused.

Edited by Ryudo, 09 March 2014 - 12:44 PM.

[xile6]

its hand and hand.

 

I was getting watch dogs on the wii u but switch my perorder because they delay the game. So now im getting it on ps4.

I tend to get the game on the system that has the most support for it.

I remember getting wii games and not ps3 copies, only to find out that the wii copy was pure crap.

 

So if the 3rd parties give us crap we arent going to buy it.

Then they see that its not selling so they stop making more games.

Also nintendo doesnt really market the 3rd party games that they have.

 

if i was given the same game 100% on the ps4 and the wii u.

I would probably pick the wii u because of the game play control.

Now if it was an online game id go for ps4 because its online is better.

 

So there is no blame on just one person.

 

 

 

* wow my spelling and grammar was off. i believe i fix most of it.

Edited by xile6, 09 March 2014 - 05:38 PM.

[MorbidGod]

REmake is one of the best games ever made. RE4 is ok I like it at times but it's quality has quickly aged to the point there are so many games similar. REmake still stands on it's own and also gave us the story of Lisa Trevor. Holy carp that is heartbreaking. Game still looks great. One of my buddies runs Biohaze and he got REmake in 1080P and the game still looked amazing. RE4 muddy textures don't benefit in HD. Game still plays perfect and yes the tank controls on are purpose to make it scarier trying to get away. So I like those. I'm not a big fan of the series by any means. In fact I lost all interest after 4. REmake however is as good today as the day I bought it in 2002.

Also Madworld sold over 600k(it made profit even if SEGA Daisyed) and NMH was good as well. Suda was very happy with it's sales. In fact NMH was Suda's most successful game up to that point. RE0 was great but yeah that did not do well and led to RE4 being more Action focused.

I'm talking over a million sales, like REmake did. That's the type of sales publishers expect from their big games. And if they can't get those type of sales on their exclusives they make for Nintendo, then why should they spend more money on projects when ultimately the profit margins are a lot smaller? Why should they spend more resources on the game post release when there's not even a million players? These are the questions publishers ask.

And, I'm not knocking these games in quality. I'm merely showing that in this world, quality doesn't always mean sales.

Look at Wonderful 101. Great game from what I am told. Has it sold over a million copies yet? (Answer: Not even close)

So, for the people who say third parties just don't try ... They do and have. But their efforts are forgotten or written off.

[Raiden]

A common misconception is something needs to sell over a million to be a success and profitable.. Games like Madworld and NMH did not need to. NMH esp since we got a sequel. They were niche games. You can't expect a niche game to sell in the millions like AAA games. They set a smaller goal. Why Xseed is still around and doing well. It's why we are getting X on Wii U because Xenoblade did so well.

 

 

Something like Batman yes it needs to sell over a million. Watchdogs over a million. Assassins Creed Over a Million. AA games have bigger budgets and need more sales to be a success. Niche games do not.

Edited by Ryudo, 09 March 2014 - 03:36 PM.

[3Dude]

I wouldn't call Resident Evil one of the greatest games on the planet. I've hated Resident Evil until RE4, and that's when the platform became playable for me.
But, I'm an odd person. I don't have good taste in games, I guess. However, Batman armored edition had all of the updates for the original game that came out a year before it, had an exclusive mode that was cool to use. Sure, it wasn't worth re buying, but are you telling me every Wii U owner played the first one? I didn't. I've only played Origins and the Armored Edition.
But, even if you hate that game, and want to call the work Montreal did "dubious", that doesn't discount the other games third parties have tried and didn't work. What about Resident Evil Zero? What about MadWorld? What about No More Heroes?
Example, after example, these games don't sell over a million copies. I guess they all suck right?

More false equivilants, mixed with flat out lies.

Re0 is a million+ seller, Clover/platinum games have never sold in large numbers, especially esoteric games on single platforms like god hand or madworld. God hand sold 0.07 million on ps2, when it had an install base of 100+ million. In comparison, madworld sold .7 million, 10x more.

No more heroes was the biggest success grasshopper had ever had at the time, and Suda publically gave his thanks to the wii platform.

Okami sold around half a million on both ps2 and wii, but sold nothing to the tasteless morons on ps3.

Your arguments dont hold up to reality.

[MorbidGod]

its hand and hand.

I was getting watch dogs on the wii u but switch my perorder because they delay the game. So know im getting it on ps4.
I tend to get the game on the system that has the most support for it.
I remember getting wii games and not ps3 copies, only to find out that the wii cope was pure crap.

So if the 3rd parties give us crap we arent going to buy it.
Then they see that its not selling for they stop making stuff more games.
Also nintendo doesnt really market the 3rd party games that they have.

if i was given the same game 100% on the ps4 and the wii u.
I would probably pick the wii u because of the game play control.
Now if it was an online game id go for ps4 because its online is better.

So there is no blame on just one person.

Exactly.

More false equivilants, mixed with flat out lies.

Re0 is a million+ seller, Clover/platinum games have never sold in large numbers, especially esoteric games on single platforms like god hand or madworld. God hand sold 0.07 million on ps2, when it had an install base of 100+ million. In comparison, madworld sold .7 million, 10x more.

No more heroes was the biggest success grasshopper had ever had at the time, and Suda publically gave his thanks to the wii platform.

Okami sold around half a million on both ps2 and wii, but sold nothing to the tasteless morons on ps3.

Your arguments dont hold up to reality.

I give you REZero, I forgot that that one did sell over a million. And so did RE4.

However, I never said that the games didn't sell well, or meet the expectations of said developer. What I did say is that they didn't sell over a million. Even though Madworld may have done well, we didn't get a sequel did well? In fact, we wouldn't be getting a sequel to Bayontta for the same reason if it wasn't for Nintendo. So, Sega did choose not to continue that series because of sales.

I love how you keep denying these third party companies don't try to make good games for Nintendo, yet defend these sales and these good games third party developers are making.

[iEatTacos]

I'm the customer who owns more than one console. I have a ps4 for Multiplatformers, and I bought a Wii U solely for Nintendo's godly first party games. I want to make the Wii U my go-to console for ALL my gaming needs but considering all the 3rd Party backlash the last year, I just don't see that happening. And that makes me sad.

[3Dude]

Exactly.


I give you REZero, I forgot that that one did sell over a million. And so did RE4.

However, I never said that the games didn't sell well, or meet the expectations of said developer. What I did say is that they didn't sell over a million. Even though Madworld may have done well, we didn't get a sequel did well? In fact, we wouldn't be getting a sequel to Bayontta for the same reason if it wasn't for Nintendo. So, Sega did choose not to continue that series because of sales.

I love how you keep denying these third party companies don't try to make good games for Nintendo, yet defend these sales and these good games third party developers are making.

I NEVER denied independent studios like Platinum dont give their all. I have been SPECIFICALLY referring to third party PUBLISHING HOUSES, and crapping their refried crap onto wii u, with hack job ports of say the last game in a series for sixty bucks, whilst a trilogy collection of all 3 games for a cheaper price releases on ps360 at the same time, and giving up after they dont sell.

We didnt get a sequel to 'god hand' either. The reason why we dont have a sequel to Madworld doesnt really have anything to do with sales, as the product was quite succsessful with the sane business model platinum uses, as Hideki Kamyia has stated himself when talking about the rarity that is Bayonetta 2, Platinum doesnt typically like making sequels. And bayonetta didnt 'sell well enough' on ps360 for sega to greenlight a sequel, directly defeating your argument that its Nintendo gamers that are the problem. Nintendo gamers buy high quality products. Platinum games make high quality products, however, they are extremely niche, they will never sell the numbers you are demanding on any single platform, although they tend to consistantly sell more on Nintendo platforms. The wonderful 101 would have nevr sold ANYTHING on ps360, as bad as that game is selling, its already doubled the lifetime sales of godhand on ps2 and psn combined.

What DOESNT sell well is the homogenous piles of identical crap Third party PUBLISHING HOUSES are flooding the ps360 with, when crapped onto the wii u. And neither should it. And if those companies 'abandon' the wii u. Good. Thats one less platform I have to sift through their crap on to get to the nugget of gold.

[MorbidGod]

I NEVER denied independent studios like Platinum dont give their all. I have been SPECIFICALLY referring to third party PUBLISHING HOUSES, and crapping their refried crap onto wii u, with hack job ports of say the last game in a series for sixty bucks, whilst a trilogy collection of all 3 games for a cheaper price releases on ps360 at the same time, and giving up after they dont sell.

We didnt get a sequel to 'god hand' either. The reason why we dont have a sequel to Madworld doesnt really have anything to do with sales, as the product was quite succsessful with the sane business model platinum uses, as Hideki Kamyia has stated himself when talking about the rarity that is Bayonetta 2, Platinum doesnt typically like making sequels. And bayonetta didnt 'sell well enough' on ps360 for sega to greenlight a sequel, directly defeating your argument that its Nintendo gamers that are the problem. Nintendo gamers buy high quality products. Platinum games make high quality products, however, they are extremely niche, they will never sell the numbers you are demanding on any single platform, although they tend to consistantly sell more on Nintendo platforms. The wonderful 101 would have nevr sold ANYTHING on ps360, as bad as that game is selling, its already doubled the lifetime sales of godhand on ps2 and psn combined.

What DOESNT sell well is the homogenous piles of identical crap Third party PUBLISHING HOUSES are flooding the ps360 with, when crapped onto the wii u. And neither should it. And if those companies 'abandon' the wii u. Good. Thats one less platform I have to sift through their crap on to get to the nugget of gold.

The thing is, I've never denied some third parties are in the wrong. EA is horrible, because of the example you gave. Activision is at least somewhat supporting their Wii U games, just not as well as they should.

So yes, there are bad developers and bad publishers out there. However, there are third party developers who do try. I've stated those few who have. I use to like Namco with Soul Caliber, but then they totally forgot about us after SCII. Funny thing, SCII did great on GCN. Having Link was a great edition to that game. Which is why I never understood why we didn't get a true sequel to that game.

You can try to make a difference between small developers like Platinum Games and bigger developers like Bungie all you'd like. You can of course come up with all their bad choices and say they all suck besides these smaller studios. Go ahead. Do that. I don't give a rats butt.

However, my point still stands. Third parties have put good effort into Nintendo's platform. There are good developers out there.

And Nintendo choosing to pick up Bayonneta 2 has nothing to do with what I said. All that proves is Sega didn't think there was money in the franchise, and Nintendo saw something in the game they liked. I hope it does sell well, but I'm not holding my breath. But that game isn't a third party game anymore. It's published by Nintendo. So if it does do well, it isn't an example of s third party doing well.

[3Dude]

The thing is, I've never denied some third parties are in the wrong. EA is horrible, because of the example you gave. Activision is at least somewhat supporting their Wii U games, just not as well as they should.
So yes, there are bad developers and bad publishers out there. However, there are third party developers who do try. I've stated those few who have. I use to like Namco with Soul Caliber, but then they totally forgot about us after SCII. Funny thing, SCII did great on GCN. Having Link was a great edition to that game. Which is why I never understood why we didn't get a true sequel to that game.
You can try to make a difference between small developers like Platinum Games and bigger developers like Bungie all you'd like. You can of course come up with all their bad choices and say they all suck besides these smaller studios. Go ahead. Do that. I don't give a rats butt.
However, my point still stands. Third parties have put good effort into Nintendo's platform. There are good developers out there.
And Nintendo choosing to pick up Bayonneta 2 has nothing to do with what I said. All that proves is Sega didn't think there was money in the franchise, and Nintendo saw something in the game they liked. I hope it does sell well, but I'm not holding my breath. But that game isn't a third party game anymore. It's published by Nintendo. So if it does do well, it isn't an example of s third party doing well.

I try to remember to differentiate publishers from developers. There are som great devs being destroyed by crappy pubs.

But my end state is clear. I dont support crap ports, or crap games. These publishers wont stop crapping on wii u if their garbage sells, theyll just take it as a sign that effortless garbage sells on wii u.

[Hank Hill]

but sold nothing to the tasteless morons on ps3.

 

buhbuhbuhbbuh

 

I bought it full price ;-;

[3Dude]

buhbuhbuhbbuh
 
I bought it full price ;-;

Thats because you are a King, a king of Cosmos, amidst a sea of tee climbing crap slingers.

But seriously, you are literally about one in seven thousand people who actually bought Okami hd outside Japan. You and I make 2.... of 7000.

Its absolutely depressing.

[Kokirii]

Thats because you are a King, a king of Cosmos, amidst a sea of tee climbing crap slingers.

But seriously, you are literally about one in seven thousand people who actually bought Okami hd outside Japan. You and I make 2.... of 7000.

Its absolutely depressing.

 

I'm #3!