Why do most third party publishers ignore the Wii completely ?

[cAPSLOCK]

boilermaker11 said:

No....it uses pretty much all the logic people have been using when buying consoles since the Atari. You buy the console based on the games that are available and wil be available, not buy a console and pray to God that certain game come to it, and when they don't, complain about it.

And sure, no one specifically used the term "every game" but it sure as hell is implied. Every time the next blockbuster 3rd party title comes out, there's alwas a "Why wasn't the Wii considered?" thread or comment from tons of people, and since it happens every time, I would assume that it pertains to "every game".

So please pick your poison and stick with it. First it was complaining about why 3rd parties aren't putting their established franchises on the Wii, and now it's about certain amounts of effort. They obviously don't feel like putting their games on the Wii, so it seems like YOU made the wrong console choice. You don't see people buying 360s and complaining about why Ubisoft isn't putting the "Petz" games on that platform.

And in terms of effort, they obviously don't want to put effort into making a AAA Wii game, and instead invest in HD. Once again, YOU made the wrong console choice. If they want to "ignore buckets of money", let them, because at the end of the day, it doesn't matter if the company goes bankrupt, just as long as they produce a quality game that the consumer can play. It's just like what people have been saying about the PS3 since launch. Sony has been in the red since PS3 launched, yet they continually put out great games. Does it matter to you that they "bleed money"? It shouldn't, as long as you get enjoyable games.

You want established 3rd party franchises that aren't spin-offs or remakes, you're not gonna find the majority of them on the Wii. If you want games where 3rd parties worked extremely hard, marketed it properly, and makes people say "I must have this game", again, you aren't gonna find that on the Wii, based on what we've seen in the past 3 years. So instead of complaining about it, why don't you just suck it up and buy the appropriate console in which 3rd parties put "that level of EFFORT" into their games? As easily as you bought your Wii, you could've bought a 360 in which 3rd parties are putting that level of effort into their games

/smh

 

EDIT

This is one of those chicken or the egg things. Games sell the console and guess what? Nintendo makes the best games in the world right along side Blizzard and Valve.  No matter how much people like to sit in the corner masturbating with tears in their eyes over GTA4, it didn't move hardware like expected--all you have to do is look across the aisle at WiiSports which definitely moved hardware better than any game in history. There's a reason 19 of the top 20 best selling games are Nintendo (at least they will be in a few months).

Games traditionally move to the best selling console.

So here we are, the fastest selling console in history, the cheapest to develop for and a company that's getting people interested enough to pick up games like Mario Kart. Generally, this is when companies jump on board like they did with the PS1 and PS2. What's odd is that they're not, hence this topic.  My personal thoughts on it are that most developers just aren't talened or creative enough, not even worthy to wash Nintendo's sweaty ballsack.  Apparently people buy games for the Wii, because the attach rate is higher than the PS3.

We didn't make the wrong console choice. Apparently Midway, Sierra, Take-Two, Eidos, ACES, EA, and Activision all did--because all of those companies are either dead or had to make massive cutbacks. That's just the ones I can think of off the top of my head this year. Does that sound to you like healthy, strong industry? Especially amidst record profits for Nintendo? Sounds to me like they all backed the wrong horse and are getting fucked for their stupid decisions.

Good riddance, I hope a lot more companies crumble in 2010. Adapt or perish, and apparently most companies are choosing "perish"