Support NeoGAF

[Sub_Level]

This is like assuming whores won't fuck you because they want you to die a virgin.

That's not the case - they don't wanna fuck you because you don't got no money.

Mo money, mo videogames

 

[Delusibeta]

I pretty much agree with this post, the movie industry had been thriving for a century because each and every year it releases fresh and new stories that have us hooked.

False. Objectively and totally false.

 

[Danny Dudekisser]

I pretty much agree with this post, the movie industry had been thriving for a century because each and every year it releases fresh and new stories that have us hooked.

Exactly. I got really depressed when the Twilight saga ended, and then *BAM* The Host.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

With the current sizes of teams and costs of development, along with the third party attach rate on the WiiU, I imagine that only smaller games are profitible. The reason many of these larger developers stopped making games is because they lose money each time they release a game on the console. I think for some publishers, when/if they begin to wade back to the WiiU once it has a larger install base, you might see some digital only releases to test the waters prior to releasing large scale physical releases.

Right now, with the current AAA/A model, it is simply not profitible to develop games (not always, but especially exclusively) on the WiiU.

It doesn't help that many of these games that were likely money losers were late ports, but facts is da facts. The entire situation is depressing for WiiU adopters, I'm sure.

This excuse to not support Wii U because it's "good business" or it's "risky" is totally nonsense. How could Nintendo change this situation if third-parties aren't helping them under the argument that not supporting WiiU is "good business"? This "good business" decision will only negative affect Nintendo but also third-parties who'll fail to build ground for a potential userbase and consequently sales. Everyone's talking like WiiU's already dead and can't stand a chance to recover itself. Remember, they can still drop the price (which will give an upper hand against PS4/X1) and their fall line-up is coming.

I really don't get why some believe WiiU can make a comeback without third-party supporting it, unless they're fanboys or anti-Nintendo biased people posing themselves are pseudo-analysts and bringing arguments which will obvious negative for Nintendo. Nintendo games alone won't change the situation and won't make WiiU to become a groundbreaking success all of a sudden and they need third-party support to fill the gap on their schedule. Remember the PS3? What if third-parties decided that PS3 was "risky" and not supporting them was "good business", could Sony manage to recover it after the $599 flop? Third-parties left the building even after the fiasco? Nope. They kept their support and this was a key reason for Sony to "phoenix down" the PS3. Wii was kicking and Xbox 360 was outselling PS3 by far and no one came with the "risky", "it's good business to shaft PS3" talking. The only way for WiiU to make a comeback it's to get as many third-party games as they can. I do agree some of them are in the "lol Nintendo" team and the piss-poor sales of third-party games and hardware was the cover up story they needed to justify an already planned shafting of WiiU.

But really, this "good business" and "risky" excuses needs to stop, unless these people who defends this ideas wants WiiU to fail, and will, if everyone support this.

 

[B.O.O.M]

Is this once a week type of thread topic now? Answer is obvious people...sales suck. More so on the software side than the hardware side hence the lack of support

Is NPD today? That should help add more evidence

 

[capslock]

Yes, this is all part of a vast third-party conspiracy against Nintendo.

 

[Bulzeeb]

Nintendo is phasing third parties out is more likely. I'm sure if third party games were selling well they'd have no issues putting their PS360 games on Wii U. There is no publishers hate Nintendo conspiracy.

because there are so many good third party games for the wii U rigth now that aren't ports of games that where out for other systems years ago, the only ones that comes to mind are Zombie U and lego City but beign honnest I wouldn't have bougth those because I don't like sand box games and I don't like to aim with an analog stick (wii mote or mouse ftw) anyways I will be buying a wii U later this year with Rayman and Wonderful 101

 

[Raist]

Is this once a week type of thread topic now? Answer is obvious people...sales suck. More so on the software side than the hardware side hence the lack of support

Is NPD today? That should help add more evidence

Next week.

 

[Into]

Lets pretend they are, just for the sake of argument

Then why did so many of them release their biggest games on the Wii U? Call of Duty, Assassins Creed, FIFA, Mass Effect, Need for Speed, Batman Arkham City etc?

Would it not be a much more effective and cheaper way to jeopardize/phase out Nintendo by not releasing anything? Would that not be a more effective tactic if this was their goal?

Because there is no contractual agreement that says they have to release these games.

They tried, and some of them will keep trying (Warner, Ubisoft), and we can discuss whether they tried hard enough, but they did try, if they really gave no shits and wanted Nintendo gone then the best thing would have been to ignore the console.

 

[javac]

I pretty much agree with this post, the movie industry had been thriving for a century because each and every year it releases fresh and new stories that have us hooked. Nintendo will not be able to thrive for long if they fall into stagnation.

I do like me some Nintendo games but they are starting to feel stale. I guess anything would if you've been playing them the last 20+ years.

Without Nintendo the industry would have been in huge decline during last gen. Maybe the PS3 and 360 were selling mediocre due to supply constraints or shit games or lack of games in general or being over priced but it doesn't matter. The end result is the Wii and DS kept money coming in. They expanded the video game audience. And that's been the case for previous gens too. Sony themselves have referenced the PS3 launch as a disappointment.

There's only 3 hardware manufacturers and let's be honest. Taking any one of them away will have negative effects on the industry.

Nintendo make games that sells to people of all ages and genders and although looking at statistics might show younger people playing Nintendo games...that's not a bad thing at all. Sony have LBP and whatnot sure but Nintendo are the ones catering to this audience the most. And it's a lucrative audience. They make a shit ton of money and sell huge amounts of software.

They all need each other. They fit together like a jigsaw puzzle. Nintendo makes games that are catered to an audience neither Sony or Microsoft cater to. Sony makes games that cater to an audience the other two don't and vice versa.

Kids shouldn't be neglected games just because you grew up especially when video games started off as a kids hobby. The same with movies. A shit movie or a bomb won't stop the movie industry from growing. Natural selection will do its work. Kids movies are just as viable as mature movies.

And I'd argue the vast majority or adults view Nintendo as more mature. There is a reason adults buy games like Angry Birds and Cut The Rope and Fruit Ninja on mobile devices instead of hardcore Modern Combat or whatever. Games are supposed to be fun. Sure games like Bioshock are amazing but not every game has to be Citizen Kane. Sometimes people just want to enjoy some silly fun.

And as a side note the video game industry has more issues that make it look immature like the lack of female leads, blood splattered screens, over the top machismo etc.

 

[Kater]

Rightfully, if it is so. Nintendo is the biggest of the few companies that keep video games from becoming truly mature. If we ever want video games to grow, we should let Nintendo and their franchises go. Their continuing influence on gaming makes being a video game fan a struggle and makes it impossible for the industry to become something more than it is right now, something it should be.

Worst Post of the Day.

Why does every thread about the Wii U turns into everyone just spouting "Nintendo should give up!" or "The Wii U is DOA!1!".

On topic: There is a small chance that developer as close-minded as some of the people posting in this thread and don't like Nintendo because they think they are too "kiddie" OR they are afraid that they can't compete with the games that the Hardcore Nintendo crowd loves. I tend to believe that the second option is closer to the truth.

 

[Mooreberg]

Most developers get their marching orders from publishers. Publishers want more of a user base and a larger attach rate on third party games before they invest more on developing for the platform.

 

[ChorusLindarr]

Development studios are businesses not charities. As long as the WiiU sells poorly, developers and publishers will look upon it as an increasingly risky platform to develop software on.

It's really as simple as that.

 

[Buggy Loop]

Imagine you're a developer. Which system would make the most sense financially to develop for?

3DS

But as shown by the western dev community, they ignored the DS and 3DS, the platform was just begging for a diablo or baldurs gate type game, but no, too much money to make out of that logic. So yea, they mostly ignore all things nintendo, regardless of install base. N64 must have killed their dog.

 

[Maxrunner]

Imagine you're a developer. Which system would make the most sense financially to develop for?

the one's that are out?

 

[Raist]

Without Nintendo the industry would have been in huge decline during last gen.

PS3 + 360 sales are ahead of PS2 + Xbox at the same point in their lifetime, so I'm not quite sure what this statement is based on.

 

[Prine]

Wii U is a disaster, i dont blame devs.

 

[Maxrunner]

It used to be okay when it was 1980s and no one cared that most games were for children.
But this year we saw Bioshock Infinite and The Last of Us released, two games that transformed the idea of what video games could be. We see more and more of those kinds of games, but their efforts are nullified by companies like Nintendo, who just go on and release another Mario game as if it is still 1980s, without innovating in anything that matters, like storytelling and graphics. Video games will be accepted by everyone only if they become more movie-like.

So Bioshock infinite innovate on what really?

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Where does "150k is the ceiling for all 3rd party sales in North America 9 months after launch?" fit into this theory?

There is no conspiracy as to why developers are phasing out their PS360-level game support - both platforms are dying after an eternity on shelves, they've invested in new engines, and it will eventually be redundant to have separate "current gen" and "next gen" teams as the new consoles mature graphically.

The Wii U finds itself in the unenviable position where the hardware isn't good enough for AAA engines, the sales aren't good enough to justify an additional sku for a lot of cross-gen or late current-gen games, and the casual pull isn't great enough (and HD gaming is just expensive enough) to get the mountains of cheaper games the Wii got.

 

[-COOLIO-]

the one's that are out?

The ones that will make you the most money

 

[TreasureHunterG]

Development studios are businesses not charities. As long as the WiiU sells poorly, developers and publishers will look upon it as an increasingly risky platform to develop software on.

It's really as simple as that.

PS3 sold poorly when was $599, 360 and Wii were kicking it's ass and the cell stuff was really painful at beginning. Third-parties didn't left or considered risky to developer for it. WiiU is alone in the market, PS4/X1 aren't yet release and we don't know how well they'll perform. Why it's risky for Nintendo while wasn't for Sony?

 

[miksar]

3DS

But as shown by the western dev community, they ignored the DS and 3DS, the platform was just begging for a diablo or baldurs gate type game, but no, too much money to make out of that logic. So yea, they mostly ignore all things nintendo, regardless of install base. N64 must have killed their dog.

Exactly, the thing about 3rd party games on Nintendo systems is that even if Wii U sold much better many publishers would still be reluctant to make much effort, just like on DS, Wii and now 3DS. There's literally no excuse not to make games for 3DS now, but guess what, you had to realise back in 2011 that Nintendo would turn the situation around to be able to release a game for it this year when it has good momentum.

 

[airmangataosenai]

PS3 sold poorly when was $599, 360 and Wii were kicking it's ass and the cell stuff was really painful at beginning. Third-parties didn't left or considered risky to developer for it. WiiU is alone in the market, PS4/X1 aren't yet release and we don't know how well they'll perform. Why it's risky for Nintendo while wasn't for Sony?

Wii U is selling much, much worse than the $599 PS3 though. Again, it's tracking to be the worst-selling console since the Saturn.

 

[kinggroin]

It used to be okay when it was 1980s and no one cared that most games were for children.
But this year we saw Bioshock Infinite and The Last of Us released, two games that transformed the idea of what video games could be. We see more and more of those kinds of games, but their efforts are nullified by companies like Nintendo, who just go on and release another Mario game as if it is still 1980s, without innovating in anything that matters, like storytelling and graphics. Video games will be accepted by everyone only if they become more movie-like.

Someone didn't play New Super Luigi U

Tsk tsk

 

[javac]

PS3 + 360 sales are ahead of PS2 + Xbox at the same point in their lifetime, so I'm not quite sure what this statement is based on.

Point being that it took time to get to that point. The uptake was a lot lot slower this time around and while Sony and MS were losing money and PS3 sales at the time being seen as a disappointment for a while Nintendo were seeing huge growth and making the video game industry more attractive then it actually was.

In the same way the PS2 did the same previously. It made up for any of the duds.

It's not that big of a deal and the sentiment isn't Nintendo save everything but the fact that they all need each other to fill in the gaps, pick up the slack and cater to different audiences. Taking any one of them out of the equation will be negative in every shape and form.

 

[Boss Man]

I think they just don't want to waste a lot of their money and time trying to help Nintendo sell its console when they could be selling games instead.

This is not a "Companies are evil for trying to make money" post.

 

[-COOLIO-]

PS3 sold poorly when was $599, 360 and Wii were kicking it's ass and the cell stuff was really painful at beginning. Third-parties didn't left or considered risky to developer for it. WiiU is alone in the market, PS4/X1 aren't yet release and we don't know how well they'll perform. Why it's risky for Nintendo while wasn't for Sony?

Based on preorders alone we know there's a lot more interest in ps4 and x1. 3rd party games sold better on the ps3 than on the Wii, additionally, 360 ports were easier.

 

[borghe]

Wii U is selling much, much worse than the $599 PS3 though. Again, it's tracking to be the worst-selling console since the Saturn.

This is very disingenuous though. A LOT of early PS3s were sold solely because they were at least $100-400 cheaper than all available blu-ray players. If you look at early PS3 software attach rates, I am positive you will find a situation not too much outside of what Wii U is facing. PS3 sales (or more correctly PS3-sales-as-a-gaming-machine as shown in attach rates) didn't really pick up until the system's first price drop a year later.

 

[BlackJace]

I thought we knew better than to take preorder numbers as gospel.

 

[Kimawolf]

It used to be okay when it was 1980s and no one cared that most games were for children.
But this year we saw Bioshock Infinite and The Last of Us released, two games that transformed the idea of what video games could be. We see more and more of those kinds of games, but their efforts are nullified by companies like Nintendo, who just go on and release another Mario game as if it is still 1980s, without innovating in anything that matters, like storytelling and graphics. Video games will be accepted by everyone only if they become more movie-like.

I wanted to stay out of this conversation but someone has to say it. for a VIDEOGAME those games have great stories, are amazingly engaging, but compared to most movies and books? they are middling story telling that wouldn't get a second look if not for them being video games. That's the reality. so your maturing games have a LONG way to go narrative wise if we're really going to compare them to movies and books. or even TV shows for that matter.

And developers have a multitude of reasons, some being financial, and others probably being silly reasons. But at the end of the day Nintendo has to absolutely address the issue themselves first, fuck depending on 3rd parties, they do't want to come to the party, hire more staff, make the games the "other" group of gamers want like the poster above me, for instance.

 

[dark_prinny]

 

[ASIS]

I should also point out that for the next few years I honestly see indies driving the most revenue into the industry.. simply through modest sales, low development costs, and sheer volume. And fortunately for Nintendo, they seem to be about tied with Sony as the second easiest place to self-publish (first easiest being PC, although the most popular platform on PS has become a pain thanks to Greenlight)

So will AAA third party development continue to be small on Wii U? Sure, probably. Will Wii U be lacking games? Hell no. The indie/download scene on the system will more than likely be equally as vibrant as PS4's, combined with Nintendo's first party output as well as the occasional third party AAA here and there.

That makes no sense, modest sales at a modest price cannot even possibly equate the numbers AAA projects pull, not even close.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

Wii U is selling much, much worse than the $599 PS3 though. Again, it's tracking to be the worst-selling console since the Saturn.

Nintendo will price drop the machine, no doubt about it. Also, the lower price can be an advantage if Nintendo isn't stupid and don't advertise the hell of out of it. If they make a 100$ price drop, they'll have a $150 gap over the PS4, that's something. This fall's line up has some good titles too.

Based on preorders alone we know there's a lot more interest in ps4 and x1. 3rd party games sold better on the ps3 than on the Wii, additionally, 360 ports were easier.

In it's first years? Not really. Madden 07 and COD 3 on Wii outsold the PS3 version, for example.

 

[Corronchilejano]

It used to be okay when it was 1980s and no one cared that most games were for children.
But this year we saw Bioshock Infinite and The Last of Us released, two games that transformed the idea of what video games could be. We see more and more of those kinds of games, but their efforts are nullified by companies like Nintendo, who just go on and release another Mario game as if it is still 1980s, without innovating in anything that matters, like storytelling and graphics. Video games will be accepted by everyone only if they become more movie-like.

I can get the Last of Us... ok I can't, but really, how did Bioshock Infinite change anything?

EDIT: wooooooooooooooooosh...

 

[aquavelva]

I can tell this thread is gonna be something special

 

[PhantomR]

Rightfully, if it is so. Nintendo is the biggest of the few companies that keep video games from becoming truly mature. If we ever want video games to grow, we should let Nintendo and their franchises go. Their continuing influence on gaming makes being a video game fan a struggle and makes it impossible for the industry to become something more than it is right now, something it should be.

 

[JoeM86]

Nintendo will price drop the machine, no doubt about it. Also, the lower price can be an advantage if Nintendo isn't stupid and don't advertise the hell of out of it. If they make a 100$ price drop, they'll have a $150 gap over the PS4, that's something. This fall's line up has some good titles too.

Well we know that this autumn will have a massive lineup. 9 first party titles between now and the end of the year. They have also started their huge marketing push made possible by shifting their budget from Q1/Q2 to Q3/Q4.

I can see a price cut happening if Pikmin 3 and Wonderful 101 don't make a massive dent, so I can see a price cut happening.

 

[LeleSocho]

It used to be okay when it was 1980s and no one cared that most games were for children.
But this year we saw Bioshock Infinite and The Last of Us released, two games that transformed the idea of what video games could be. We see more and more of those kinds of games, but their efforts are nullified by companies like Nintendo, who just go on and release another Mario game as if it is still 1980s, without innovating in anything that matters, like storytelling and graphics. Video games will be accepted by everyone only if they become more movie-like.

Oh fucking please... is this some kind of joke?

 

[LTWood12]

Rightfully, if it is so. Nintendo is the biggest of the few companies that keep video games from becoming truly mature. If we ever want video games to grow, we should let Nintendo and their franchises go. Their continuing influence on gaming makes being a video game fan a struggle and makes it impossible for the industry to become something more than it is right now, something it should be.

wut

 

[Easy_D]

This is like assuming whores won't fuck you because they want you to die a virgin.

That's not the case - they don't wanna fuck you because you don't got no money.

This is a beautiful post.

 

[Canis lupus]

It seems to me that it's not out of the question that developers are, at this point, purposefully trying to phase out the Wii U. At first I didn't even understand why I thought that, but the more I've thought about it, the more it seems like a real possibility.

First, we've seen quite a few threads lately talking about developer dissatisfaction with Wii U -- the thing that initially comes to mind was the thread about ZombiU and how it failed to turn be a commercial success (though as I understand it, did better critically).

That alone is not enough to go by; it just means, to me at least, that one developer had what we'll just call "bad luck" for now -- it's not uncommon with new platforms for the platform maintainer to fund partially at least new games, since it's understood that the installed base is small, and it's more of an investment.

That's what led me to the realization that, frankly, it costs a lot of money to do all of this. When you're looking out for the interests of more than one fixed-hardware machine, you need to account for all of those extra development costs. In an ideal world (but not a practical one, since we all like competition) we build for one platform, and try to get as many people as possible on that platform.

So, in my mind, it's not out of the question that this may be a concerted effort. The Wii U stands as a relatively annoying niche to some of these developers, I'd imagine, since there's probably enough people there in that console space to make money, but it complicates matters.
.

I wouldn't call it bad luck of Ubisoft, all 3rd party games sold poorly on the system, to blame it on bad luck would be denying the awful state of the console. The console is bombing, Nintendo doesn't have good relationships with the publishers. EA is calling the system an ''offline experience'', Nintendo is quite uncooperative with them.

 

[borghe]

That makes no sense, modest sales at a modest price cannot even possibly equate the numbers AAA projects pull, not even close.

you left out the part where I said sheer volume and specifically mentioned revenue, on top of development costs.

how many people need to get paid for the release of Assassin's Creed IV, vs. how many people need to get paid for the release of Thomas Was Alone or Hotline Miami? Now take into account that we will see a few dozen AAA titles next year, and likely a few HUNDRED indie titles.

It's just a prediction.. but yeah.. revenue in the industry next year will be likely driven by indie development. ACIV sells 3M at $60 for $180M revenue dispersed among how many paychecks? Now take 20 indie titles at $15. If they sold 600K each across ALL PLATFORMS, they would have the same revenue as ACIV, and likely less paychecks grabbing a piece of the revenue.

I mean have you not seen the articles pointing to AAA development struggling? Tomb Raider not profitable enough at 4M copies sold? Do you really think AAA development is going to be less troubled with games being even MORE expensive to develop on the new generation?

edit - by way of comparison, we already know for a fact that AAA costs are going up much more dramatically with the next-gen, compared to indie development which is going up by very little. So not only will indie revenue be approaching AAA levels across all releases, but margin in the indie segment will VASTLY outpace margin on an AAA game, and taking into account again sheer quantity, profit actually handed out to indies will dominate the profit seen on any AAA release.

 

[Gwanatu T]

It used to be okay when it was 1980s and no one cared that most games were for children.
But this year we saw Bioshock Infinite and The Last of Us released, two games that transformed the idea of what video games could be. We see more and more of those kinds of games, but their efforts are nullified by companies like Nintendo, who just go on and release another Mario game as if it is still 1980s, without innovating in anything that matters, like storytelling and graphics. Video games will be accepted by everyone only if they become more movie-like.

When all games become like BioShock Infinite and The Last of Us I will quit gaming all together. So great story telling trumps any kind of flaws in gameplay? Whats the point of playing a GAME when all you care about is story and characters? Clearly these are important aspects of some types of games but not all. Indie games are the best of gaming right now, and likely ever. They ooze originality, style and most importantly new gameplay. Traditional gaming's heart is with indie gaming and Nintendo. Nintendo is being way too conservative right now, and it's their own fault for how the Wii U is turning out, but to damn them and any kind of traditional gaming just because it's not "mature enough"? Ludicrous. Let's just get rid of all the music you don't like too because it's clearly holding back the rest of the industry, right? I just don't even know what else to say, dear God.

 

[akaoni]

Rightfully, if it is so. Nintendo is the biggest of the few companies that keep video games from becoming truly mature. If we ever want video games to grow, we should let Nintendo and their franchises go. Their continuing influence on gaming makes being a video game fan a struggle and makes it impossible for the industry to become something more than it is right now, something it should be.

You can't be serious.... I refuse to believe it.

 

[K' Dash]

Rightfully, if it is so. Nintendo is the biggest of the few companies that keep video games from becoming truly mature. If we ever want video games to grow, we should let Nintendo and their franchises go. Their continuing influence on gaming makes being a video game fan a struggle and makes it impossible for the industry to become something more than it is right now, something it should be.

how old are you?

 

[Senor Kami]

Nintendo consoles have had terrible 3rd party support starting with the N64 almost 20 years ago. At least since the Wii, even when there were third party games they sold poorly unless they were very specific to the Wii crowd. Mainly exercise games and Just Dance.

So that's a bad legacy for third party and Nintendo home consoles. On top of that, the Wii-U is selling like shit on a global level. That's why third parties aren't flocking to the system.

 

[Dark Octave]

The WiiU is simply an extension of the Wii. Worse even, in that it will have an even shorter life span and doesn't have that fad hype around it that boosted the Wii's initial sales so high.

Publishers have gone through this before and only see it happening again but now with a much lower install base. Nobody is trying to sabatoge anything. You see a bad investment, you steer clear, simple as that.

 

[faridmon]

The continuing saga of Nintendo fans and their persecution complex.

You learnt a new word it seems.

Nintendo is in a situation and the fans know it.

 

[ParenegadeM]

The Wii U is not next Gen. That isn't next Gen hardware. The Wii U is holding developers back and selling terribly.

Why wouldn't they ignore it.

 

[moltonasty]

Rightfully, if it is so. Nintendo is the biggest of the few companies that keep video games from becoming truly mature. If we ever want video games to grow, we should let Nintendo and their franchises go. Their continuing influence on gaming makes being a video game fan a struggle and makes it impossible for the industry to become something more than it is right now, something it should be.

This better be a joke, or some hardcore trolling. As if Nintendo's franchises somehow PREVENT other developers from creating the types of games that you deem as "mature." Nevernind the fact that they have actually published M rated games in US and Japan (Eternal Darkness, Zangeki no Reginleiv,Fatal Frame). Geez, the hyperbole 'round deez parts is getting cray.