By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - I bet COD Ghosts Wii U gets delayed

S.T.A.G.E. on 25 October 2013
Cobretti2 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
ListerOfSmeg said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

If Nintendo fans have demand for it, it would come sooner. Even on the Wii 100 million (but not so strong) there was very little demand. Thats half the reason Activision or some other third parties wont kill themselves to put certain games on the Wii (and sometimes even PC as well).



COD being on Wii at all proves your whole post wrong.

Truth is up intil COD MW skipped the Wii COD was selling better on it than the other 2.

Activision has nobody to blame but themselves for decreased demand

I stopped buying a lot of 3rd party games on ALL platforms til I see a change in how they treat Nintendo.

Whether its on PC or Wii U, I wont be buying another EA game no matter how high its rated or how much I want it because not only did they flat out lie to me, but they expected me to pay more for less.


What the hell, bro? Really Is this your argument. My argument was based on the Wii and how low it sold with a 100 million userbase. This is pathetic.


What don't you get?  Before COD become popular it was selling reletively the same on all console.

Because IW was all high and mighty and Activision didn't have the balls to tell them to make a Wii version it skipped the system. By then everyone who wanted to play the game simply went to the other two platforms, hence creating a LOW userbase for COD games on Wii.

When Activision eventually released the game years later it was too late the damage was done.


Um, bro. I hate to break it to you but Nintendo wants Wii sales even though they dont have HD Twins popularity they want to be considered the "cool console". I doubt IW had anything to do with it. Everything involved there is up to the publisher and World at War was a secondary game so they came up with the resources to make a watered down version which allowed use of the Wii mote for the Wii. It was prett fun too, so I fail to see where you don't see Nintendo's error. Activision is an asshole, but in Nintendo's case and track record, I will give them a pass just this once. Nintendo is pretty damn hard headed.



Around the Network
Cobretti2 on 25 October 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Cobretti2 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
ListerOfSmeg said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

If Nintendo fans have demand for it, it would come sooner. Even on the Wii 100 million (but not so strong) there was very little demand. Thats half the reason Activision or some other third parties wont kill themselves to put certain games on the Wii (and sometimes even PC as well).



COD being on Wii at all proves your whole post wrong.

Truth is up intil COD MW skipped the Wii COD was selling better on it than the other 2.

Activision has nobody to blame but themselves for decreased demand

I stopped buying a lot of 3rd party games on ALL platforms til I see a change in how they treat Nintendo.

Whether its on PC or Wii U, I wont be buying another EA game no matter how high its rated or how much I want it because not only did they flat out lie to me, but they expected me to pay more for less.


What the hell, bro? Really Is this your argument. My argument was based on the Wii and how low it sold with a 100 million userbase. This is pathetic.


What don't you get?  Before COD become popular it was selling reletively the same on all console.

Because IW was all high and mighty and Activision didn't have the balls to tell them to make a Wii version it skipped the system. By then everyone who wanted to play the game simply went to the other two platforms, hence creating a LOW userbase for COD games on Wii.

When Activision eventually released the game years later it was too late the damage was done.


Um, bro. I hate to break it to you but Nintendo wants Wii sales even though they dont have HD Twins popularity they want to be considered the "cool console". I doubt IW had anything to do with it. Everything involved there is up to the publisher and World at War was a secondary game so they came up with the resources to make a watered down version which allowed use of the Wii mote for the Wii. It was prett fun too, so I fail to see where you don't see Nintendo's error. Activision is an asshole, but in Nintendo's case and track record, I will give them a pass just this once. Nintendo is pretty damn hard headed.


HUH???

What error did Nintendo make exactly. Also IW is the one responsible they even said it themselves in the past why you thing Treyarch made all the Wii ports? And for that matter why you think they making the Wii U port of Ghosts now lol.  Yet when Treyarch made the games for the other systems they where able to also fit in the Wii version in their schedule. All the facts point to IW not wanting to work on Nintendo systems.



 

 

S.T.A.G.E. on 25 October 2013
Cobretti2 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Cobretti2 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
ListerOfSmeg said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

If Nintendo fans have demand for it, it would come sooner. Even on the Wii 100 million (but not so strong) there was very little demand. Thats half the reason Activision or some other third parties wont kill themselves to put certain games on the Wii (and sometimes even PC as well).



COD being on Wii at all proves your whole post wrong.

Truth is up intil COD MW skipped the Wii COD was selling better on it than the other 2.

Activision has nobody to blame but themselves for decreased demand

I stopped buying a lot of 3rd party games on ALL platforms til I see a change in how they treat Nintendo.

Whether its on PC or Wii U, I wont be buying another EA game no matter how high its rated or how much I want it because not only did they flat out lie to me, but they expected me to pay more for less.


What the hell, bro? Really Is this your argument. My argument was based on the Wii and how low it sold with a 100 million userbase. This is pathetic.


What don't you get?  Before COD become popular it was selling reletively the same on all console.

Because IW was all high and mighty and Activision didn't have the balls to tell them to make a Wii version it skipped the system. By then everyone who wanted to play the game simply went to the other two platforms, hence creating a LOW userbase for COD games on Wii.

When Activision eventually released the game years later it was too late the damage was done.


Um, bro. I hate to break it to you but Nintendo wants Wii sales even though they dont have HD Twins popularity they want to be considered the "cool console". I doubt IW had anything to do with it. Everything involved there is up to the publisher and World at War was a secondary game so they came up with the resources to make a watered down version which allowed use of the Wii mote for the Wii. It was prett fun too, so I fail to see where you don't see Nintendo's error. Activision is an asshole, but in Nintendo's case and track record, I will give them a pass just this once. Nintendo is pretty damn hard headed.


HUH???

What error did Nintendo make exactly. Also IW is the one responsible they even said it themselves in the past why you thing Treyarch made all the Wii ports? And for that matter why you think they making the Wii U port of Ghosts now lol.  Yet when Treyarch made the games for the other systems they where able to also fit in the Wii version in their schedule. All the facts point to IW not wanting to work on Nintendo systems.


Treyarch made World at War. IW did exactly what Activision told them to do. Before the current gen they weren't a major player. They had absolutely no clout until COD4. It wasn't until that point that everything blew up. Treyarch handled the secondary gaming and still to this day they are the secondary team. Even after Black Ops got big and the major players left. Black Ops 2 went on the Wii U because Nintendo got the specs to get a major title. Nintendo got their big league game from Activision and most likely will get more, but trust me if the numbers remain low Activision will know who to cut. Nintendo has conditioned Nintendo gamers to not like third party because they've never worked with third parties the way they deserve to be worked with and this is echoed throughout the gaming community. Everything is done their way or no way at all.



curl-6 on 25 October 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:

 Nintendo has conditioned Nintendo gamers to not like third party because they've never worked with third parties the way they deserve to be worked with and this is echoed throughout the gaming community.

Third parties conditioned Nintendo gamers not to buy their games by releasing sub-par titles.

Besides which, in your haste to bash Nintendo, you're missing the point; having a smaller player base does not justify treating that player base like crap. If it is delayed, it will be because Activision are arseholes.



Videokameras on 25 October 2013

i also fail see how its nintendos fault



Around the Network
melbye on 25 October 2013
Devil_Survivor said:
So just because one game got delayed in AustraliaNew Zealand for Wii U that means COD Ghosts will get delayed? Your kind of reaching there lol.


Not one, two. Batman Arkham Origins got delayed two weeks Assassin's Creed 4 Black Flag got delayed three weeks. Arkham Origins Blackgate on 3DS also got delayed by the way.



Cobretti2 on 25 October 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Cobretti2 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Cobretti2 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
ListerOfSmeg said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

If Nintendo fans have demand for it, it would come sooner. Even on the Wii 100 million (but not so strong) there was very little demand. Thats half the reason Activision or some other third parties wont kill themselves to put certain games on the Wii (and sometimes even PC as well).



COD being on Wii at all proves your whole post wrong.

Truth is up intil COD MW skipped the Wii COD was selling better on it than the other 2.

Activision has nobody to blame but themselves for decreased demand

I stopped buying a lot of 3rd party games on ALL platforms til I see a change in how they treat Nintendo.

Whether its on PC or Wii U, I wont be buying another EA game no matter how high its rated or how much I want it because not only did they flat out lie to me, but they expected me to pay more for less.


What the hell, bro? Really Is this your argument. My argument was based on the Wii and how low it sold with a 100 million userbase. This is pathetic.


What don't you get?  Before COD become popular it was selling reletively the same on all console.

Because IW was all high and mighty and Activision didn't have the balls to tell them to make a Wii version it skipped the system. By then everyone who wanted to play the game simply went to the other two platforms, hence creating a LOW userbase for COD games on Wii.

When Activision eventually released the game years later it was too late the damage was done.


Um, bro. I hate to break it to you but Nintendo wants Wii sales even though they dont have HD Twins popularity they want to be considered the "cool console". I doubt IW had anything to do with it. Everything involved there is up to the publisher and World at War was a secondary game so they came up with the resources to make a watered down version which allowed use of the Wii mote for the Wii. It was prett fun too, so I fail to see where you don't see Nintendo's error. Activision is an asshole, but in Nintendo's case and track record, I will give them a pass just this once. Nintendo is pretty damn hard headed.


HUH???

What error did Nintendo make exactly. Also IW is the one responsible they even said it themselves in the past why you thing Treyarch made all the Wii ports? And for that matter why you think they making the Wii U port of Ghosts now lol.  Yet when Treyarch made the games for the other systems they where able to also fit in the Wii version in their schedule. All the facts point to IW not wanting to work on Nintendo systems.


Treyarch made World at War. IW did exactly what Activision told them to do. Before the current gen they weren't a major player. They had absolutely no clout until COD4. It wasn't until that point that everything blew up. Treyarch handled the secondary gaming and still to this day they are the secondary team. Even after Black Ops got big and the major players left. Black Ops 2 went on the Wii U because Nintendo got the specs to get a major title. Nintendo got their big league game from Activision and most likely will get more, but trust me if the numbers remain low Activision will know who to cut. Nintendo has conditioned Nintendo gamers to not like third party because they've never worked with third parties the way they deserve to be worked with and this is echoed throughout the gaming community. Everything is done their way or no way at all.


I think you missed the point.

 

COD Ghosts for PS3, 360, PC, PS4, XBOX ONE is being made by IW, Treyarch is making the Wii U version. Why is this?

So why is it everytime Treyarch is the lead developer (i.e. when Black Ops is being developed by them) they seem to be able to make all the versions including the Wii, yet IW always skip the Wii and now Wii U? How can by your own words the "second team" be able to work on more versions than IW and yet do a fantastic job? 



 

 

S.T.A.G.E. on 25 October 2013
curl-6 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

 Nintendo has conditioned Nintendo gamers to not like third party because they've never worked with third parties the way they deserve to be worked with and this is echoed throughout the gaming community.

Third parties conditioned Nintendo gamers not to buy their games by releasing sub-par titles.

Besides which, in your haste to bash Nintendo, you're missing the point; having a smaller player base does not justify treating that player base like crap. If it is delayed, it will be because Activision are arseholes.


What the hell are you talking about? Before and even into the GC era Nintendo had superior or on par graphics to the competition. It was the format that lured them away. They didn't get crappy ports. Its how they deal with third parties that turns them off. Somtimes its about the console power, sometimes its the format or even politics. As third parties grow Nintendo stays in their own world and cares not to share in their growth.



curl-6 on 25 October 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
curl-6 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

 Nintendo has conditioned Nintendo gamers to not like third party because they've never worked with third parties the way they deserve to be worked with and this is echoed throughout the gaming community.

Third parties conditioned Nintendo gamers not to buy their games by releasing sub-par titles.

Besides which, in your haste to bash Nintendo, you're missing the point; having a smaller player base does not justify treating that player base like crap. If it is delayed, it will be because Activision are arseholes.


What the hell are you talking about? Before and even into the GC era Nintendo had superior or on par graphics to the competition. It was the format that lured them away. They didn't get crappy ports. Its how they deal with third parties that turns them off. Somtimes its about the console power, sometimes its the format or even politics. As third parties grow Nintendo stays in their own world and cares not to share in their growth.

The sub par games on the Wii and Wii U are not excusable by hardware power, because you can make high quality games without high end graphics. And 99% of third party Wii/Wii U games don't even make good use of the resources those systems have.



S.T.A.G.E. on 25 October 2013
curl-6 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
curl-6 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

 Nintendo has conditioned Nintendo gamers to not like third party because they've never worked with third parties the way they deserve to be worked with and this is echoed throughout the gaming community.

Third parties conditioned Nintendo gamers not to buy their games by releasing sub-par titles.

Besides which, in your haste to bash Nintendo, you're missing the point; having a smaller player base does not justify treating that player base like crap. If it is delayed, it will be because Activision are arseholes.


What the hell are you talking about? Before and even into the GC era Nintendo had superior or on par graphics to the competition. It was the format that lured them away. They didn't get crappy ports. Its how they deal with third parties that turns them off. Somtimes its about the console power, sometimes its the format or even politics. As third parties grow Nintendo stays in their own world and cares not to share in their growth.

The sub par games on the Wii and Wii U are not excusable by hardware power, because you can make high quality games without high end graphics. And 99% of third party Wii/Wii U games don't even make good use of the resources those systems have.

Third party didn't want to make sub par ports so they didn't port at all, which will be their issue with the Wii U (and is already Epic's issue with Nintendo already). Nintendo didnt get with the times. THey stay in their own world. You shouldn't force others who are worthy partners to break their backs just because you choose to be superior or inferior without giving them the heads up on your tech. You know Nintendos history, they are a very controlling company and when they aren't being that way they are extremely selfish in their communication.