System Faults Didn't Stop THQ From Bringing Metro: Last Light To Wii U

[Mazty]

Aielyn said:

Mazty said:
Definitely your word for the day as you excuse for not being concise doesn't make sense...You were trying to imply my argument is that of a fanboy's rather then trying to logically refute it. That makes it an ad hominem, does it not? 
You explanation for developing for the Wii U is flawed from the start as you are comparing it to the Wii at launch, which is a fundamental failure in recognising where the Wii U stands in the current market.  
Again you make the same mistake comparing the Wii to the PS2 as the 360 was already on the market, as well as the PS3. The PS2 was being sold, but not supported to the same degree as when it was in it's prime.  Currently the Wii U is competiting head to head with two consoles which have over 70 million users each before the end of their lifecycle. As the Wii U is meant to appeal to core gamers, you are again failing to understand the difference in both the products on offer and the markets they are in. To spell things out clearly for you, the Wii U is Nintendo's Xbox 360. RE:Chronicles didn't sell extremely well. It sold pretty poorly considering it was an exclusive on the market leading console. Just Cause 2 on the PS3, a multiplatform game, outsold it, so did Dead Island, which was an abysmal game.

700,000 copies is terrible for an exclusive on a console which had the market majority. As stated above and if you have bothered to do any research, well advertised multiplatforms sell over double that on one platform alone. So in fact what you have shown is that core  exclusive games on the Wii sold like shit compared to multiplatforms on the other two consoles. This therefore brings us back to the point that why bother developing for the Wii U when you can save money and make a lot of sales by just selling games for the 360 & PS3? You have killed your own argument here and sorry, buy your argument is the one that's tied up in fanboy lunacy as you haven't bothered to actually compare sales whatsoever.

I find it hilarious that you're once again complaining about my lack of concisity, even as you write nearly incomprehensible blocks of text.

Ad hominem is where you attack a person, rather than their argument. Your assertion that I attacked your argument as a fanboy argument does not categorise itself as an ad hominem, as it was a matter of attacking an argument, and not you. But then, I didn't even do that. The only thing I did was attack your choice of words as being reflective of a trait I had predicted about you. It was independent of any actual argument being made. Indeed, the part that you're referring to was one relatively short paragraph in a reply that you were complaining about the length of. Did you not read the rest of it?

Indeed, I've pointed out a response to everything you've said here, except one, which I'll address below. For the rest, read my previous posts. There's a reason why I put a lot of detail into them - so I don't have to keep repeating myself.

So, the one point to respond to? The claim that RE:Chronicles didn't sell well. You compare it to Just Cause and Dead Island. There are multiple issues with that. The biggest one, though, is that Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles was a spinoff title that was a lightgun game, released less than half a year after Resident Evil 4. On a console that so many fanboys deride as being "casuals only" or "not for core gamers", you're talking about a game with multiple reasons for "weak" sales, yet still managing more than just "healthy" sales, but significant sales. Now imagine what would have happened if they'd followed it up with a new Resident Evil game in the style of Resident Evil 4.

And what I find hilarious is the "market leader" commentary... which always contradicts the other equivalent arguments. Apparently, because it had a higher install base, it must sell more of every game - actual game markets be damned.

Concise =/= consistancy. You draw comparisons between the Wii U and the Wii which is just jibberish with no logical thought behind it. 

Those sales weren't healthy. It proved that the 360 and PS3 are considerably more profitable to develop for. 

Well yes, if there are more WIi's sold, then you would expect that console to sell a greater volume of exclusive games rather then considerably less. If it sells less then the 360 and PS3, then why not just develop for those two platforms and triple your sales? Your argument has no basis. You think devs should make WIi U games as it will win customers over but you are completely ignoring just how many customers it'd win over. The answer is not enough to justify the development cost, more so when you consider the 140 million PS3/360's out there. 

But then again, maybe everyone in a multibillion dollar industry has it wrong and a random wii u owner on a forum has it right....