Mr Khan said:
Third parties were and remain lazy. We've handily established this with evidentiary support. Third parties will likely be irrationally neglectful of Wii U, and apologists will continue to blame Nintendo for the industry's intransigience. |
But whether via design decisions or via poor 3rd party talks and negociations, the only person to blame for this, in all reason, is Nintendo.
You claim bias, and I agree with you, but where did that bias stem from, propaganda? I have a hard time believing it. If Nintendo is on the bad side of 3rd party partners, it's up to Nintendo to fix it.
And no, 3rd parties should not be subordonate to the manufacturers, it is a partnership, and the platform needs to be attractive to partners. In a situation where Nintendo is really outperforming the competition (as in the NES days), this may be possible, but only until another competitor comes and steals the trusts that Nintendo takes for granted from right below their feet. Woops! It already happened...
The laws of competitions are proving you wrong on this one Khan. Also, is it really that difficult to be graphically relevant while having enough control over your 1st party direction and decisions. Come on, it's an easy yes. The cube was graphically relevant against its competitors (the ps2 and xbox), so it is always a possibility. If the competition goes too far (like Sony with the PS3), it doesn't excuse Nintendo for not going far enough!







