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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare Website Hides Wii U Logo In Source Code

curl-6 said:
joel1989 said:

yet you only own 2 nintendo games.  the only nintendo games that are really good  mario games, so your saying nintendo fans only want to play mario, cause those are the only games over a million in sales.

I own Ghosts cos I was craving a Wiimote FPS, something non-Nintendo consoles don't offer. I bought Need for Speed  cos the dev actually put effort in and used Wii U's superior horsepower. I bought Sonic Racing for the 5-player splitscren, again not available on PS3/360. Every one I've bought offered something to make it better than on other systems.

And no; Nintendo gamers also bought Pikmin and Zelda, despite the latter being a remake of an old game.

zelda is heavily bundled and pikmin sold 700k, sales are pretty pathetic, when those are suppose to be huge sellers.



Around the Network
joel1989 said:
curl-6 said:

I own Ghosts cos I was craving a Wiimote FPS, something non-Nintendo consoles don't offer. I bought Need for Speed  cos the dev actually put effort in and used Wii U's superior horsepower. I bought Sonic Racing for the 5-player splitscren, again not available on PS3/360. Every one I've bought offered something to make it better than on other systems.

And no; Nintendo gamers also bought Pikmin and Zelda, despite the latter being a remake of an old game.

zelda is heavily bundled and pikmin sold 700k, sales are pretty pathetic, when those are suppose to be huge sellers.

Do you understand the concept of "attach rate"?



curl-6 said:
joel1989 said:
curl-6 said:

I own Ghosts cos I was craving a Wiimote FPS, something non-Nintendo consoles don't offer. I bought Need for Speed  cos the dev actually put effort in and used Wii U's superior horsepower. I bought Sonic Racing for the 5-player splitscren, again not available on PS3/360. Every one I've bought offered something to make it better than on other systems.

And no; Nintendo gamers also bought Pikmin and Zelda, despite the latter being a remake of an old game.

zelda is heavily bundled and pikmin sold 700k, sales are pretty pathetic, when those are suppose to be huge sellers.

Do you understand the concept of "attach rate"?

yes i do, and that doesn't matter those sales are not impressive, when you consider these are some  nintendo biggest franchises



joel1989 said:

yes i do, and that doesn't matter those sales are not impressive, when you consider these are some  nintendo biggest franchises

Incorrect. Pikmin has never been one of Nintendo's biggest franchises, and Zelda is a remake of a game a decade old. Yet both have over a 10% attach rate, that is high.



curl-6 said:
joel1989 said:
curl-6 said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

yeah the theory which nintendo fans mostly use. Biased publishers.

Why would publishers be biased against the Vita?


Why would publishers be biased against the nintendo?

On Nintendo systems they have to compete against the likes of Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, etc. On Vita the first party games don't pose as much of a threat.

If you are right, why would they bother with a wii U version if vita has nothing to pose a threat against it but mario zelda and pokemon do?

But youre wrong because if anyone wants an fps, they are not going to buy mario zelda or pokemon instead.

Vita version makes sense because it could be the best handheld version because vita is more powerful and has 2 analogue sticks.

wii U would basically be getting a watered down version of the PS4/X1, it wont sell, and nintendo fans will claim its because people like mario or zelda better when the truth is anyone who was interested in the game simple wasnt interested in the wii U version.



Around the Network
fps_d0minat0r said:

If you are right, why would they bother with a wii U version if vita has nothing to pose a threat against it but mario zelda and pokemon do?

But youre wrong because if anyone wants an fps, they are not going to buy mario zelda or pokemon instead.

Vita version makes sense because it could be the best handheld version because vita is more powerful and has 2 analogue sticks.

wii U would basically be getting a watered down version of the PS4/X1, it wont sell, and nintendo fans will claim its because people like mario or zelda better when the truth is anyone who was interested in the game simple wasnt interested in the wii U version.

Games do not have to be in the same genre to compete. Any game people might buy instead is competition.

So  what's your reasoning, that devs all have a bias against the Vita, just because?

It's cheap to port COD to Wii U. They have a dedicated team for it. With VIta, likely not so easy.



curl-6 said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

If you are right, why would they bother with a wii U version if vita has nothing to pose a threat against it but mario zelda and pokemon do?

But youre wrong because if anyone wants an fps, they are not going to buy mario zelda or pokemon instead.

Vita version makes sense because it could be the best handheld version because vita is more powerful and has 2 analogue sticks.

wii U would basically be getting a watered down version of the PS4/X1, it wont sell, and nintendo fans will claim its because people like mario or zelda better when the truth is anyone who was interested in the game simple wasnt interested in the wii U version.

Games do not have to be in the same genre to compete. Any game people might buy instead is competition.

So  what's your reasoning, that devs all have a bias against the Vita, just because?

It's cheap to port COD to Wii U. They have a dedicated team for it. With VIta, likely not so easy.


Why? What makes you think porting to vita significantly harder than the wii U that the difference in sales wouldnt cover for it? It would be cheaper in the long run if they fired the dedicated wii U team and set up a dedicated vita team.

The vita has more RAM than the PS3 and it doesnt need a GPU as powerful because the resolution is only 960x544, and the developers can set the native resolution lower if required. Even if the game isnt locked to 60fps, no-one is gonna care because it will still the best handheld version. The same cant be said about the wiiU .

People will consider the ps3/360/X1/PS4/PC versions before they consider the wii U version. Thats the true reason why its not gonna sell on the wiiU, not because of mario or zelda.



fps_d0minat0r said:
curl-6 said:

Games do not have to be in the same genre to compete. Any game people might buy instead is competition.

So  what's your reasoning, that devs all have a bias against the Vita, just because?

It's cheap to port COD to Wii U. They have a dedicated team for it. With VIta, likely not so easy.


Why? What makes you think porting to vita significantly harder than the wii U that the difference in sales wouldnt cover for it? It would be cheaper in the long run if they fired the dedicated wii U team and set up a dedicated vita team.

The vita has more RAM than the PS3 and it doesnt need a GPU as powerful because the resolution is only 960x544, and the developers can set the native resolution lower if required. Even if the game isnt locked to 60fps, no-one is gonna care because it will still the best handheld version. The same cant be said about the wiiU .

People will consider the ps3/360/X1/PS4/PC versions before they consider the wii U version. Thats the true reason why its not gonna sell on the wiiU, not because of mario or zelda.

Again, what's your explanation? A secret conspiracy by the Illuminati against the Vita?



Hey, there's the FBK logo too, maybe it'll be a browser game!



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW! 
 


curl-6 said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
curl-6 said:

Games do not have to be in the same genre to compete. Any game people might buy instead is competition.

So  what's your reasoning, that devs all have a bias against the Vita, just because?

It's cheap to port COD to Wii U. They have a dedicated team for it. With VIta, likely not so easy.


Why? What makes you think porting to vita significantly harder than the wii U that the difference in sales wouldnt cover for it? It would be cheaper in the long run if they fired the dedicated wii U team and set up a dedicated vita team.

The vita has more RAM than the PS3 and it doesnt need a GPU as powerful because the resolution is only 960x544, and the developers can set the native resolution lower if required. Even if the game isnt locked to 60fps, no-one is gonna care because it will still the best handheld version. The same cant be said about the wiiU .

People will consider the ps3/360/X1/PS4/PC versions before they consider the wii U version. Thats the true reason why its not gonna sell on the wiiU, not because of mario or zelda.

Again, what's your explanation? A secret conspiracy by the Illuminati against the Vita?

Again, I'm the one who raised the question, unless you have a reasonable explanation I'm not sure why you are bothering.