Support NeoGAF

[Psycho_Mantis]

I never absolved Nintendo of anything, and your post flies in the face of everything you've been saying. So third parties ARE actually anti-Nintendo now?

I'm sure you haven't

Not really. Back in the days Nintendo had some bad policies in place. Competition came along and offered third parties a choice. Third parties abandoned ship and had success elsewhere.

After the initial loss of third parties, Nintendo has been making misstep after misstep. There is no anti-Nintendo. Its Nintendo hurting itself by not talking with these parties and inquiring on what they want. They don't have to follow them word for word but take it into consideration. However this is all too late. Playstation and Xbox have had this for years. Nintendo's incompetence with third parties has led them to an inevitable future.

So which of these 2 irreconcilable narratives are you running with?

"back in the days"

Right now its just business. Why waste resources porting your game to WiiU?

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

Earlier you were talking about attach-rates with SMB and the 360's 80 million units sold. Now you seem to think 80 million versus 0 units isn't a meaningful element to game sales? Interesting.

Well im confused what you're arguing for too;
- you don't believe there is any inherent bias of a platform demographic for or against certain genres, but are apparently arguing its nintendo fans fault for not buying third party titles and that things like being poor quality or late ports should make no difference to sales?

- you don't believe low selling mediocre quality titles in a genre can be extrapolated into overall demand for better quality titles in a genre?

- you think its fine for a brand new console to have low selling late ports and thats to be expected because the userbase isnt there, except for nintendo consoles where its proof nintendo buyers dont want third party titles?

 

[StuBurns]

are apparently arguing its nintendo fans fault for not buying third party titles and that things like being poor quality or late ports should make no difference to sales?

What? No.

- you don't believe low selling mediocre quality titles in a genre can be extrapolated into overall demand for better quality titles in a genre?

What? No.

- you think its fine for a brand new console to have low selling late ports and thats to be expected because the userbase isnt there, except for nintendo consoles where its proof nintendo buyers dont want third party titles?

What? No.

 

[Mithos]

If that's the case, it is a fault with documentation for the system. Developers don't actually look at components, they only know what you tell them about the architecture, if they were under the impression the system had two cores instead of three, Nintendo colossally fucked up somewhere.

I even knew it had 3 cores for a very long time before it released, and when developers only figured it out months before the release date... if anything the developers must have lived in a damn bubble.

No one is wondering why games aren't selling on Wii U. The system is the most embarrassing bomb since the Dreamcast. And that is all Nintendo's fault, not Ubisoft, or any other publisher.

No but we're disagreeing to what the cause is, and I say 10-15 years of receiving sub-par versions of games, and that results in, why the heck should I buy their game on this platform again?

 

[danmaku]

I did get NFS: MW WHEN it didn't cost €60 in stores anymore, while the PS360 versions were €25 at the same time, but then again 5 month to late minimum.

Dark Souls PC was a late port at full price and sold extremely well, even if it was a technical mess. Seems like we found a master race that's even more master than PC gamers!

Or maybe... just maybe... the PC crowd was a good match for the DS franchise while the WiiU crowd couldn't care less about AC or Batman? The audience for those big AAA games was on PS360 and wasn't going to jump ship so easily. Especially when the other next gen consoles were right around the corner.

 

[Father_Brain]

I'm kinda weary of repeating myself all the time, but you're not correct in your perspective. Recognize what Nintendo is first. They do not have the mission statement or in house talent to make what you're calling "core targeted games," so they do things like publish Ninja Gaiden RE, pay for and announce Bayo 2, pay marketing for games like zombiu, add clicky sticks to controller because third parties ask for it, incentize development for things likr WD and the titles I mention in the last post. Did it work? Ultimately no. Was it extremely stupid? Maybe in hindsight since it failed but its not like they were winging it. They made some bad bets and the Wii u failed to take off, and Nintendo will re evaluate and try again

The titles you name are a token effort compared to what Sony/MS are capable of. Even if the Game Pad had resonated with the casual market as Nintendo had hoped, it wouldn't have drastically changed that picture, as Wii's failure as a core platform suggests.

There is no plausible scenario in which Nintendo could have snagged a significant piece of the Sony/MS core pie without radically changing their approach as a first party to produce/moneyhat major (and more marketable than ZombiU or Bayonetta 2) exclusive content aimed at that audience, which is why they'll probably simply give up on AAA multiplats with their next console. It's just too late.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

What? No.

- You were arguing that you think SMB3D would sell really well on other platforms, despite poor sales of other platform games on the PS360, which suggests you don't think nintendo buyers are more likely to buy platform games than PS360 owners, no?

- You used the "timeshift selling badly doesn't mean PS360 owners don't want FPses" to show that mediocre titles in a genre selling doesn't mean there is no demand for that genre on a platform, no?

- You brought up userbases to show why COD / BF / AC sold less on the new platforms than on the last gen platforms, no?

 

[StuBurns]

No but we're disagreeing to what the cause is, and I say 10-15 years of receiving sub-par versions of games, and that results in, why the heck should I buy their game on this platform again?

But the Wii won last time. Obviously third parties are not to blame for the Wii U bombing at all.

I also disagree with the sentiment, lots of GC games are better than their PS2 counterparts. The Wii was a generation behind, so is the Wii U, of course the versions are worse, what do you expect from a developer? They can make PS4 quality games on massively inferior hardware? Again, this was Nintendo's fault, and their decision.

 

[crinale]

I even knew it had 3 cores for a very long time before it released, and when developers only figured it out months before the release date... if anything the developers must have lived in a damn bubble.



No but we're disagreeing to what the cause is, and I say 10-15 years of receiving sub-par versions of games, and that results in, why the heck should I buy their game on this platform again?

IMO it's the Nintendo's responsibility to make third party's port not sub-par, but who knows.

 

[Ansatz]

I think the biggest problem is I very much doubt Nintendo execs actually question why third parties in the West and Japan have not supported the Wii U?

Until Nintendo ask themselves ‘why do third party games struggle to sell on our platforms’? and ‘Why are third parties so reluctant to support our platform’? Nothing will change.

The truth of the matter is if the Wii U was a success and Nintendo’s 1st party software was selling then they wouldn’t give a damn if the third party games bombed and that’s a problem.

Nintendo have to acknowledge that third parties are a key stakeholder and to treat them as an afterthought like the past is not an option anymore.

They are probably aware of what needs to be done to get 3rd parties to support them but do not accept the compromises that are required, both on the hardware and software front.

If Nintendo is successful again it will be through a new blue ocean, 3rd parties will not simply port GTA to that console but rather create equivalent games (think Wii)

 

[Geniuzz]

The Wii U is turning into Next Gen's red-headed stepchild. This doesn't look too good, to be honest.

 

[StuBurns]

- You were arguing that you think SMB3D would sell really well on other platforms, despite poor sales of other platform games on the PS360, which suggests you don't think nintendo buyers are more likely to buy platform games than PS360 owners, no?

No, I didn't agree those games sold poorly at all. You said they did.

- You used the "timeshift selling badly doesn't mean PS360 owners don't want FPses" to show that mediocre titles in a genre selling doesn't mean there is no demand for that genre on a platform, no?

Yes, but that doesn't mean I believe an attraction to the genre can't be extrapolated from their performance. The middling platformers sold about as well as the middling shooters, there was just no good platformers, where as there are the good shooters.

- You brought up userbases to show why COD / BF / AC sold less on the new platforms than on the last gen platforms, no?

They didn't sell poorly at all though. So I don't see your point.

You said they sold worse because they were late ports, I said no, they sold worse because they were selling into a five million plus install base, not a hundred and fifty million install base.

 

[Mithos]

The Wii was a generation behind, so is the Wii U, of course the versions are worse, what do you expect from a developer? They can make PS4 quality games on massively inferior hardware? Again, this was Nintendo's fault, and their decision.

To be able to match the PS360 at least (fps, textures, features, DLC etc), I'm not expect a match with PS4/One.

IMO it's the Nintendo's responsibility to make third party's port not sub-par, but who knows.

I disagree, it is up to the developer to take advantage of the hardware given, if the hardware can do 100, but you only do 50 it's no ones fault but your own.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Nintendo needs to use the collaborations as a means to secure support for next gen, and use the system as a whole as a means to get very comfortable with HD development. The system is likely destined for a 15 - 25 million max user base because of bad decisions from both Nintendo and third parties, so it's best to learn as much as possible from it and ensure next gen goes better overall.

Collaborations in which 3rd parties are simply farmed out Nintendo's own franchises don't grow Nintendo's base audience, and it prevents their core fans from really experimenting. PS3 owners in Japan aren't going to jump on a Wii U to play Dynasty Warriors Zelda. And it breaks my brain to sees people say they would have bought Wonderful 101 if it had Nintendo characters.

 

[LegendofLex]

Collaborations in which 3rd parties are simply farmed out Nintendo's own franchises don't grow Nintendo's base audience, and it prevents their core fans from really experimenting. PS3 owners in Japan aren't going to jump on a Wii U to play Dynasty Warriors Zelda.

I think the idea is to get Zelda fans to play Dynasty Warriors.

 

[crinale]

To be able to match the PS360 at least (fps, textures, features, DLC etc), I'm not expect a match with PS4/One.



I disagree, it is up to the developer to take advantage of the hardware given, if the hardware can do 100, but you only do 50 it's no ones fault but your own.

I was thinking exactly the same as the GC fanatic. However watching how things turned out at PS3 I don't think so anymore.
The system's "performance" is now regarded with combination of libraries and support.
No matter how strong the hardware is if the first party does not give adequate support then there's very little third party devs can do.
IMO PS360 with well-suited libraries easily outperforms WiiU without it.

Now, if Nintendo has made WiiU a beast then un-optimized library may not mean much, since the hardware could just brute-force the performance. However that wasn't the case, so...

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

No, I didn't agree those games sold poorly at all. You said they did.

I don't want to misrepresent your position; disregarding the "poorly selling" aspect, you agree with the following statement:
"SMB3D would sell well on other platforms. WiiU owners are no more likely to buy platform games than PS360 owners"?

They didn't sell poorly at all though. So I don't see your point.

You said they sold worse because they were late ports, I said no, they sold worse because they were selling into a five million plus install base, not a hundred and fifty million install base.

Again, not wishing to misrepresent your position, ignore the subjective aspect (poor sales), you agree with the following statement;
"Cross platform ports sell better on the existing consoles because the userbase is not there for the next gen yet"?

Collaborations in which 3rd parties are simply farmed out Nintendo's own franchises don't grow Nintendo's base audience, and it prevents their core fans from really experimenting. PS3 owners in Japan aren't going to jump on a Wii U to play Dynasty Warriors Zelda. And it breaks my brain to sees people say they would have bought Wonderful 101 if it had Nintendo characters.

At this moment its a good question what exactly would make PS3 owners in Japan buy on any home console.

 

[StuBurns]

To be able to match the PS360 at least (fps, textures, features, DLC etc), I'm not expect a match with PS4/One.

Let's say for example the Wii U is technically more or less on par with the PS3 and 360, maybe the CPU is worse, the GPU is better, etc, but more or less on par.

Firstly you have the normal launch issues, the tools and libraries are bad, support is bad, platforms are changing notably with every FW, etc.

Then consider the fact you're basically coming in at the very end of the generation, when devs have had an entire generation to get to know the PS3 and 360.

We went from this:

To this:

And you expect developers to be able to hit par on day one, despite having had a fraction of the time with the system? I think your expectations were hugely too high.

I don't want to misrepresent your position; disregarding the "poorly selling" aspect, you agree with the following statement:
"SMB3D would sell well on other platforms. WiiU owners are no more likely to buy platform games than PS360 owners"?

No.

Again, not wishing to misrepresent your position, ignore the subjective aspect (poor sales), you agree with the following statement;
"Cross platform ports sell better on the existing consoles because the userbase is not there for the next gen yet"?

No.

 

[fred]

If Ubi is done with the Wii U then, for all intents and purposes, Western development on the Wii U has ceased.

Not necessarily. We may find that Ubisoft and other third party announcements for E3 will be announced during Nintendo's digital event. Would make more sense because they're not going to be constrained by time.

It wouldn't surprise me if Sony and Microsoft do a similar thing to Nintendo next year, having everything squeezed into 1 hour is pretty impractical when you think about it.

 

[Metallix87]

I think the idea is to get Zelda fans to play Dynasty Warriors.

Bingo, and also to show devs and publishers that Nintendo is ready and willing to work with them.

 

[pvpness]

Shrug. I'm PC/Wii U this gen so I'm not really feeling the burn on this one. My interest in Ubi on Wii U died when they said no sequel to Zombi U was in the works. I bought the Wii U for Zombi U! Lol. Didn't day one another Ubisoft title on Wii U after that because they were all phoned in efforts. I did pick up SC/Legends/aciv on the cheap to check out GamePad usage tho.

Either way, it's been clear for a long time that Nintendo's goals don't match up with third parties and vice versa. This should shock no one.

 

[Metallix87]

Shrug. Either way, it's been clear for a long time that Nintendo's goals don't match up with third parties and vice versa. This should shock no one.

What shocks me most is that new third party publishers haven't emerged that focus specifically on making games for kids.

I guess kids these days buying up CoD and GTA ruins that...

 

[DontBlink]

What shocks me most is that new third party publishers haven't emerged that focus specifically on making games for kids.

I guess kids these days buying up CoD and GTA ruins that...

Bingo for you. I think the problem is that today's kids grew up on CoDs and GTAs and they want to play whatever is "cool" amongst their friends. They're not interested in Mario's and Kirby's because they are known to be childish. They don't ask for a Wii U to play 3D World; they want to shoot each other on Xbox Live instead.

Part of the problem are the parents for letting 8-year olds play those games but that's another topic altogether.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

No.

So your position is platform games as a genre sell best on Nintendo consoles?

Again, not wishing to misrepresent your position, ignore the subjective aspect (poor sales), you agree with the following statement;
"Cross platform ports sell better on the existing consoles because the userbase is not there for the next gen yet"?

No.

I said no, they sold worse because they were selling into a five million plus install base, not a hundred and fifty million install base.

???

 

[Metallix87]

Bingo for you. I think the problem is that today's kids grew up on CoDs and GTAs and they want to play whatever is "cool" amongst their friends. They're not interested in Mario's and Kirby's because they are known to be childish. They don't ask for a Wii U to play 3D World; they want to shoot each other on Xbox Live instead.

Part of the problem are the parents for letting 8-year olds play those games but that's another topic altogether.

A topic that's worth discussing.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I'm not entirely sure what it is you're both arguing about.

Cross-platform games (if we're referring to the likes of ACIV) have sold well on the 7th gen HD platforms because there's a conducive audience for those titles within the installed base.
Cross-platform games have also sold well on the 8th gen MS and Sony platforms because there's a conducive audience for those titles within the installed base.
These games have sold better on the last gen platforms, due to the relative sizes of the installed bases.
But around a third of US ACIV sales in 2013 were on the new combined installed base of 3.8M, rather than the old combined installed base of 67M.

Cross-platform games have not sold well on the 8th gen Nintendo platform because there isn't a conducive audience.
This is despite at the time having a larger installed base than the other two 8th gen platforms.

If you're looking at sales of software on an early life platform, you look at absolute numbers and attach rates in unison to get a good picture. Because yes, smaller installed bases are going to be a limiting factor.
The Wii U has never been promising with regard to either, in terms of these titles.

 

[evilromero]

What's the argument here? That it might not be Nintendo's fault that their system is selling so poorly? I don't think you can argue such a thing. All we've been saying on this board since 2010 was that Nintendo has been making one bad move after the next. They let the Wii run dry its last two years, bungled the 3DS launch with poor messaging and product differentiation, then they further confused the hell out of people with the Wii U reveal to finally top it off with the worst two years of game releases in their history. It's been a mess. And for the first time since they became a video game maker they've had several consecutive quarters of operating income loss. If you're still hiding behind some idea that the industry is "out to get" Nintendo then I don't know what to tell you. I suppose it's no use arguing when the other side just refuses to look at all angles.

 

[Metallix87]

What's the argument here? That it might not be Nintendo's fault that their system is selling so poorly?

As I said on the previous page, Several topics at once:

1.) Are third parties partly to blame for Nintendo owners not buying their content? Did they make poor business decisions that hurt the Wii U, or is Nintendo fully to blame for the system's woes?

2.) Do indie games provide a viable substitute for high quality platformers from top tier devs?

3.) Is there a viable audience for big budget, $60 platformers on Sony and Microsoft consoles?

 

[John Harker]

The titles you name are a token effort compared to what Sony/MS are capable of. Even if the Game Pad had resonated with the casual market as Nintendo had hoped, it wouldn't have drastically changed that picture, as Wii's failure as a core platform suggests.

There is no plausible scenario in which Nintendo could have snagged a significant piece of the Sony/MS core pie without radically changing their approach as a first party to produce/moneyhat major (and more marketable than ZombiU or Bayonetta 2) exclusive content aimed at that audience, which is why they'll probably simply give up on AAA multiplats with their next console. It's just too late.

Nintendo doesn't compete with Sony and MS, so comparing their first party output will always be skewed. I was saying they were pitching the Wii u that way prior to launch as an opportunity for 3rd parties to cheaply monetize the portion of the market that only purchased Nintendo hardware with their successful x360ps3 franchises (at the time these decisions were made, the Wii was a monster) to fill in the gaps between Nintendo launches. This way Nintendo could finally say they had all the major franchises... With the enhanced unique gameplay they are known for

... Not that Nintendo was trying to "steal" anything from MS or Sony. Just offer monetization on genres third parties were no longer supporting them with.

Tho as I said, it didn't work anyway. Nintendo just doesn't really know how to market to that audience effectively and their messaging and products fell short. That market has responded with graphics over gameplay. So, back to doubling down on kids and families. As Iwata has told us publically.

 

[Yagami_Sama]

That's not quite a surprise. Besides Rayman, other Ubi's franchises were quite rare on Nintendo consoles, even more on handheld.
Looking into my Nintendo consoles, I Have Rayman 2 for N64, Rayman 3, Prince of Persia (all 3) and XIII for Game Cube, Rabbids , Rayman Origins and two Princess of Persia for Wii and Rayman Legends, Assassin's Creed III and IV Splinter Cell Blacklist
and Child of Light for Wii U, for handheld, just Rayman 1 for GBA. And there is a Prince of Persia for DS but looked so awful that, never played. So, I think that they already did everything they can.

After the announcing that new game using the Ubi art engine, Valiant Hearts, will skip Wii U. I was expecting nothing more.

 

[MilesTeg]

After the announcing that new game using the Ubi art engine, Valiant Hearts, will skip Wii U. I was expecting nothing more.

Yep, as soon as that wasn't on Wii U when the game was announced, it was obvious Ubi was done with the console. The UbiArt engine obviously works fine on Wii U, so it doesn't make sense to skip the U unless they are done.

I was however at least expecting the usual Just Dance game though.

 

[Terra]

On mobile, so I'll keep it short. But I keep on saying what I have been repeating.

The bad moves started when they used resources to release Skyward Sword for Wii, and not for Wii U.

They also should have contracted Skyrim - legendary edition and Borderlands 2 to coincide with the console release.

As I have stated, some things seem to have been sabotaged from inside the company. Almost staged.

 

[Ludicrous Speed]

Yep, as soon as that wasn't on Wii U when the game was announced, it was obvious Ubi was done with the console. The UbiArt engine obviously works fine on Wii U, so it doesn't make sense to skip the U unless they are done.

I was however at least expecting the usual Just Dance game though.

Just Dance is dead most likely. There won't be a Just Dance 6. The Just Dance money has dried up. The fad is done. Same thing happened with those Guitar Hero games. You can't just keep making the same game every year with new songs

 

[Sonik]

Nothing surprises me anymore with Nintendo. Things are certainly not going well.

 

[John Harker]

Just Dance is dead most likely. There won't be a Just Dance 6. The Just Dance money has dried up. The fad is done. Same thing happened with those Guitar Hero games. You can't just keep making the same game every year with new songs

You do realize it was the #2 best selling game during the holidays and is like 6mm units sold ww?

So dry

 

[StuBurns]

So your position is platform games as a genre sell best on Nintendo consoles?

No, it is not.

???

No, I don't believe cross gen games sell better on the previous generation because of install base. Yes, I believe AssCreed, and the others I mentioned did. I do not believe all games would under all circumstances. I think they could sell better because of respective install bases, I don't believe they do as a blanket fact.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

No, it is not.

No, I don't believe cross gen games sell better on the previous generation because of install base. Yes, I believe AssCreed, and the others I mentioned did. I do not believe all games would under all circumstances. I think they could sell better because of respective install bases, I don't believe they do as a blanket fact.

Really resisting a tag quote, because you keep saying no without clarifying what it is that you are saying.

You don't believe WiiU owners are equally likely to buy platform games as any other platform owner AND you don't believe platform games sell best on the WiiU?
So you believe platform games sell worst on the WiiU?

You don't believe cross platform games sell worse on newer platforms because of install bases, except you also believe that for all of the games that have been released that have it is because of install base?

 

[ultrazilla]

If Nintendo plans on bringing out a new home console within the next few years, it simply can't be "on par" with the PS4 or Xbox One in terms of performance/power. They need to make a balls to the wall powerful home console 2-3 times as powerful as PS4 or Xbox One.
This will at least take the main excuse away from third party developers that the system "isn't powerful enough".

I'm tired of Nintendo playing conservative with the specs in their home systems. I want a powerful Nintendo home console. No more excuses.

 

[Ludicrous Speed]

You do realize it was the #2 best selling game during the holidays and is like 6mm units sold ww?

So dry

I didn't see that on the Just Dance 2014 wikipedia site. If that is the case then the answer is obviously that they won't be showing a Just Dance game at all at e3. Not for the Wii U, not for the PS4, not for the Xbox One, etc.

If there is a Just Dance game coming out this year of course it's coming to the Wii U. It'll even be on the Wii.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

If Nintendo plans on bringing out a new home console within the next few years, it simply can't be "on par" with the PS4 or Xbox One in terms of performance/power. They need to make a balls to the wall powerful home console 2-3 times as powerful as PS4 or Xbox One.
This will at least take the main excuse away from third party developers that the system "isn't powerful enough".

Have you ever heard the phrase "Only nintendo games sell on Nintendo consoles"?

 

[StuBurns]

You don't believe WiiU owners are equally likely to buy platform games as any other platform owner AND you don't believe platform games sell best on the WiiU?
So you believe platform games sell worst on the WiiU?

I'll try and make it very simple.

This was basically the first statement:
"Are Wii U users more likely to buy a platformer?"

The second was this:
"Are platformers more likely to sell better on Wii U versus PS360?"

The answer to the first is yes, I believe a Wii U owner is more likely to buy a platformer, because they bought a Nintendo console, so they're a Nintendo fan, and Nintendo make platformers.

The answer to the second is no, because there are a pitiful number of Wii U owners compared to PS360 owners.

The individual Wii U owner is more likely, but the audience is so small by comparison that I don't believe that means it would sell more.

You don't believe cross platform games sell worse on newer platforms because of install bases, except you also believe that for all of the games that have been released that have it is because of install base?

I believe they can, I don't believe they must. I really don't know how to make that more simple. If BF4 had sold better on PS4 than PS3, it wouldn't surprise me, because the quality is so much higher, the install base is not the only determining factor in sales, especially with cross-gen when the versions are so different.

 

[AzaK]

If that's the case, it is a fault with documentation for the system. Developers don't actually look at components, they only know what you tell them about the architecture, if they were under the impression the system had two cores instead of three, Nintendo colossally fucked up somewhere.

All launch systems are treated as second class citizens. It's up to the developer to ship a box that's so powerful and easy to use that even with very little effort, the results trump the competition. Nintendo failed to do that.

No one is wondering why games aren't selling on Wii U. The system is the most embarrassing bomb since the Dreamcast. And that is all Nintendo's fault, not Ubisoft, or any other publisher.

The docs are vague and convoluted. I can see how a Dev might initially get confused about scheduling and core allocation. If they just assume the OS works like most other OSs, they'd fall into this trap.

 

[StuBurns]

The docs are vague and convoluted. I can see how a Dev might initially get confused about scheduling and core allocation. If they just assume the OS works like most other OSs, they'd fall into this trap.

First parties should host events for devs to meet and talk openly about the architectures without fear of NDA mishaps, I think that would side step plenty of issues like that. With any system being designed in Japan by Japanese people, you're going to have issues with communicating all it's elements right out the gate I think.

It's not an excuse, but it's certainly an additional issue Nintendo would have faced.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

I
I believe they can, I don't believe they must. I really don't know how to make that more simple. If BF4 had sold better on PS4 than PS3, it wouldn't surprise me, because the quality is so much higher, the install base is not the only determining factor in sales, especially with cross-gen when the versions are so different.

Okay, well that's where we differ on opinion then.

I don't believe any cross-gen title is going to sell more on a newer gen console until last gen platforms stop being sold, the port is so bad as to be unplayable on last gen systems, or is missing significant features, and the reason for that is entirely down to userbase.

You also agree that there is a fundamental genre taste difference between each consoles respective owners, and that PS/Xbox owners are closer to having similar tastes than PS/nintendo or Xbox/nintendo owners.

With that said, why is it nintendos fault that publishers (EA in particular) ignored the respective taste differences and userbase differences when initially assessing the WiiU as a viable platform?

 

[StuBurns]

You also agree that there is a fundamental genre taste difference between each consoles respective owners, and that PS/Xbox owners are closer to having similar tastes than PS/nintendo or Xbox/nintendo owners.

No, I do not.

I believe they're more likely to buy a platformer in general, as in if you took the average Wii U owners libraries and put them against the average PS360 owner's libraries, I think you'd get more platformers belonging to Wii U owners, but not because they generally favor them, just because they have access to much better ones.

The same way if you compare a 360 owner's library to a PS3 owners library, I think you'd find more co-op games, because the 360 has more high quality co-op games. Gears, Halo and L4D are the three best co-op series last generation to me, all of which were exclusive. Destiny and L4D3 (which presumably will be on PS4), will sell just as well on PS4 as they will on XBO, despite those users having suffered from a lack of the style previously.

With that said, why is it nintendos fault that publishers (EA in particular) ignored the respective taste differences and userbase differences when initially assessing the WiiU as a viable platform?

As I said, I don't agree with the premise, so there's no point answering the question, I will however say this. Porting Mass Effect 3 probably cost a couple of million, maybe three, making a big high quality 3D platformer for the Wii U launch would have cost comfortably more than twenty million. There is no possible way it would have made money.

The reason publishers don't make games for every specific platform is that they're not charities, they don't make games to enrich peoples lives.

 

[Father_Brain]

Nintendo doesn't compete with Sony and MS, so comparing their first party output will always be skewed. I was saying they were pitching the Wii u that way prior to launch as an opportunity for 3rd parties to cheaply monetize the portion of the market that only purchased Nintendo hardware with their successful x360ps3 franchises (at the time these decisions were made, the Wii was a monster) to fill in the gaps between Nintendo launches. This way Nintendo could finally say they had all the major franchises... With the enhanced unique gameplay they are known for

... Not that Nintendo was trying to "steal" anything from MS or Sony. Just offer monetization on genres third parties were no longer supporting them with.

Tho as I said, it didn't work anyway. Nintendo just doesn't really know how to market to that audience effectively and their messaging and products fell short. That market has responded with graphics over gameplay. So, back to doubling down on kids and families. As Iwata has told us publically.

You make some valid points, but I think your analysis is ultimately too lenient on Nintendo here.

That strategy was fatally flawed from the outset, not simply because Wii U failed to catch on as a product, but because it was founded on two assumptions that basic market research should have easily been able to disprove:

-That there was a significant percentage of Wii owners who were interested in PS3/360 AAA core franchises yet never bothered to buy a platform that could play them
-That Game Pad features constituted an attractive enough differentiator for at least a respectably sized minority of the core market to choose Wii U versions over PS3/360 versions.

It really didn't take a genius to see long before launch that this wasn't going to work. I have little trouble believing that Nintendo convinced itself that it wasn't in genuine competition with Sony/MS and their existing core audiences, but I'd just call that sort of thing - seemingly unshakable faith that there's still a blue ocean out there where Nintendo can avoid competing with either Sony/MS or iOS/Android - the fundamental delusion of NCL's current management.

 

[Mpl90]

Unfortunately, Ubisoft not having much (if almost anything at all) for Nintendo had to happen. I'm sure Just Dance will be announced, at this point I'd say not at E3; that game still sells like crazy on Wii. And it's true that Rayman sold best on Wii U. But, for the rest...guys, unfortunately, this isn't a conspirancy against Nintendo. It's just that the console sells badly, third party software sells even less, and the difference between it and PS4 and One, while not being as severe as the one between Wii and PS360, makes it not worthy it. It's a shame, but this is the current situation, and it's highly implausible that, even if Wii U sales improve in a good way (...at least for Wii U), things will change. 3DS doesn't get anything as well because it sells Nintendo games, it sells children-aimed games, it sells Japanese-core games here in the West, but Western-core games? Not at all, the audience isn't there.

It's a shame, because Ubisoft was one of those who actually seemed to fully believe in the console, between exclusives and multi versions of games.
Still, I'm wondering how Child of Light is doing on Wii U compared to the other consoles: IMHO it could be doing relatively well.

 

[jmood88]

If only the industry spoke so freely about their unannounced projects as they do about shitting on Nintendo.

How is Ubisoft's statement "shitting on" Nintendo? Nintendo fans are so damn defensive it's ridiculous. Unless you own stock in the company or work for them, getting upset over the system not getting games doesn't make any sense.

 

[NinjamicWZ]

Duh. Ubisoft doesn't make Nintendo games. Nintendo does.

 

[John_RiticelloEA]

Why are 3rd parties abandoning the Wii U?

They abandoned the WiiU because it has sold like garbage for the past 2 YEARS.

Why invest in a system that has been lapped by the XB1 and PS4 twice?

It is less powerful and is still tied to DVDs as a storage media...

Lets face it, the WiiU is this generation's GameCube.