I don't mind this -- I just don't want to hear western 3rd parties bitch about their games not selling well when they decide to put their low-effort late ports on the NX. You can't bitch about your games not selling on Nintendo platforms when you make little to no effort to court the Nintendo audience.

Yeah, GTAV. One of the best selling, highest rated games of all time. Huge open world, tons of different ways to play, awesome music, nice story and interesting characters. Not many bugs for such a massive world. A groundbreaking game the developers worked hard on for 5 years.

But yeah, we threw our fat ass on the couch and played it for a few hours and declared it shit. Go gamers!

I play GTA for the missions but the fetch questish nature of GTA V's missions completely ruined the game for me.

This is exactly what they shouldn't do just to get some half assed version of a game!

Nintendo needs to get on the scene early with those 3rd party developed collaboration games that we didn't get until the 3rd year of the WiiU's life. The only thing I'd like to see them pay for is games like Bayonetta 3, Beyond Good and Evil 2 and keeping Monster Hunter. Nintendo needs games that aren't on the other platforms because no one is going to pick the Nintendo version of the same game over the other 2,  just not happening... 

Honestly the NX doesn't need 7-8 month ports..

If NX hardware (or rather the docking station of it) demonstrates the ability to handle PS4 games or run better than PS4, then we probably will see the next iteration of these games with the DLC etc thrown on the disc. Pretty much every new game these days has some directors cut or game of year edition BS now. This is what Nintendo shoudl be aiming to get not the date ports when the competition platform will get a better revised version.

I think it'll be kinda hit and miss with ports.

A Tegra X2 is about 625 gigaflops, but in portable mode it'll have to likely run below that, so that's well below even an XBox One.

This is probably why Dragon Quest XI sounds like it has to be its own version (on NX) rather than being a direct port of the PS4 game.

I think it'll depend on a game by game basis. Games that maybe don't push the PS4/XB1 so hard like Sonic probably will be easier to port than some of the big rung PS4/XB1 multiplats, for those developers will likely have to decide if it's worth it to make a NX version from the ground up.

Why does it have to be a direct port? Porting is like rebuilding the game from scratch in some ways anyways. Any advanced physics could easily be downscaled to the prevoius gen without people noticing. There is nothing in CoD that the previous gen of hardware couldn't handle except maybe the draw distance. Building an engine that has all the features and then using that as a base for the Wii versions of future CoDs wouldn't be unreasonable.

My Goldeneye example is more valid than your splatoon example in this case. Goldeneye plays identically to CoD, has split screen multiplayer. So the hardware is capable of it, end of discussion. If there was a splatoon-like game with the same physics and paint effects on 3DS allready, then I would make the same case about that, but there isn't, so it's different. You may have to rewrite some parts of the game engine when making the first ports. But they probably had to do that anyway.

They got half assed version of the games because Nintendo never paid for them. Nintendo can also do the port them self by  a 2nd-party . And if they do this at the beginning the port will not be that old.

What's wrong with this generation of gamers that they actively seek for Nintendo to spend money for parity in 3rd party support, when they can just utilize those funds for truly exclusive games. Even if these 3rd party games were on the NX what difference does it make if people say their friends are on Xbox live or PSN... 

Fact of the matter is that there's always going to be some reason as to why the NX version isn't selling as well and Nintendo shouldn't bother spending money unless the game is exclusive! 

Porting /can/ be rebuilding a game from the ground up. But that's really only if the system is difficult to port to. Typically multi-platform games have one lead platform and it is ported to the rest. In the time of the PS3/X360/Wii, typically the X360 was the lead platform, and games were then ported to the PS3 and the Wii. Can you guess which of the two platforms between the PS3 and the Wii was much, much, much easier to port to? I'll give you a hint: It was made by Nintendo. The Wii's lack of power didn't just mean scaling down 3D models, or animation, or AI, or physics, or shaders. It often meant stripping them down to their core, and completely re-doing them. Whereas with the PS3, most of the time, it was just a matter of figuring out how to make it work as it did with a different hardware configuration, with little to no "degredation" of the game itself.

And please spare me with talk about how easily anything can be done. If you're speaking from experience, then you should know that how easy something is to do is dependant on many different factors, and you can't just paint it with a broad brush. Sure, it's possible, and theoretically, advanced physics can be scaled down without people noticing, but in practice that might actually require rewriting the entire physics engine because the hardware isn't powerful enough to run that advanced physics engine when its reduced to its most basic functions. Rewriting an entire physics engine from the ground up isn't an easy task, I assure you. If you think building a wii engine that is capable of doing everything the PS3 and Xbox 360 engines can do, and still maintain a level of visual quality with the game that the target audience would find acceptable, I implore you to do so. Developing such an advanced, yet lightweight engine should easily be a very lucrative business opportunity for you, as studios would be lined up to license it from you. I mean you could easily make that same engine work on PS4/X1/WiiU, right?

Your Goldeneye example is pretty funny. It was an improved remake of a game made in 1997. While that game was advanced for its time, making an remake 13 years later on hardware that was many magnitudes more powerful than its predecessor is far easier of a task than porting a game that pushes the limits of much more advanced hardware.   As for your splatoon explanation, the people who made the game were the ones that said it wasn't possible I'm pretty positive they know more than you or I ever will about what it takes to port that game to the 3DS. . What makes you think you know more than them? To be able to make a statement on how easy it would be to port that game, you would have to have intimate knowledge of the Wii U hardware, the 3DS hardware, how the game is made, how the game interacts with the WIi U, and how the game would have to interact with the 3DS. In order to say how feasible that is, I would say you would at very least have to be a lead developer on a WIi U game, as well as a 3DS game, and likely have experience as a lead developer in porting a game from one to another in order to begin to question how feasible it is, and even then I would defer to the developers themselves. I just don't see how you can question this. I know I certainly don't.

As for AAA third party Wii games that didn't do very well:

• Madworld
• Okami
• No more heroes (both of them)
• Trauma Center
• Zack and Wiki
• SSX Blur
• Boom Blox Bash Party
• Scarface: The World is yours
• Medal of Honor (all of them)
• The Conduit
• Fire Emblem
• Tatusnoko Vs. Capcom
• Muramasa: The Demon Blade
• Sin and Punishment
• The Guitar Hero series

Need I go on? All of these games were solid efforts on the Wii, but I guarantee most, if not all of these games never met their sales objectives. Most of them broke even, or barely made a profit at best. Some of them lost studios millions. Third parties struggled to put out million+ selling games on the wii. There is no denying that.