Nintendo and 3rd parties *Formerly; Nintendo is f*cking up big times with 3rd parties*

[DanneSandin]

Aielyn said:

DanneSandin said:
Y u write so much? =(

I used those terms because I was excited about what we will see! I never thought about how those choices could hurt my credibility :P And while not a single one is too far fetched, but together they add up to a pretty unlikely scenario. And since I only have my source to go by I can't say that 100% of these will come true, and I have since learned that some of these titles might be shown at tgs and not e3 as I first thought.

I'm really not all that good at giving hints and nods... When that Wii U exclusive title is announced I will say something; I think there should be enough hints in here to add up. And I don't know any dates or anything. I wish I could spell it out SOMEWHERE, but my source has said no. How do you suggest that I hint these things?

I don't know how he knows all of this, but I figure that they're working pretty closely with SOny and needs to co-ordinate the releases or something.

what happened was early on a very large publisher got their mitts on source code to a 1st party title accidentally (was meant to be sent a code segment on disk for assistance with a gpu addressing issue, but ended up with whole game source), and in the source for that, it became obvious that 3rd party sdks lacked vital and very helpful api's for graphics rendering, and the 'nintendo space' banned from use for 3rd party devs was being used without reservation - so basically 3rd party devs other than the one that found this got wind, and we've all basically said 'fix this shit or we go elsewhere', nintendo then issued an sdk update that added SOME of the api's for gpu processing but the memory restriction still in place - just with the commented code saying nintendo space changed to 'system reserved' - essentially nintendo got caught with its pants down blatently gimping 3rd party titles, then scrambled to fix it by letting some of the 1st part sdk features through a few months early, but all that did was piss devs off more, because it still shows that nintendo aren't playing fair and fucking 3rd party devs over.

But you see, that's just it - if you had said "all of these will be at E3", and hadn't described it as a prediction, I might have said it was unlikely enough to make it into the "could be proof" realm (although the other issues would still remain).

Like I said, something that might be convincing is a specific hint - something that is clearly and obviously accurate if it does show up, but which is completely cryptic now. For instance, suppose that you'd known ahead of time about the second Wii Zelda adventure. You might have said something along the lines of "a classic franchise will be heading skyward". Now, there's really no way, before hearing of Skyward Sword, to know that this is what is being referred to, but once it's announced, it's absolutely clear that it's what you were referring to. It doesn't give away anything ahead of time, but it demonstrates after announcement that you knew about it, because "skyward" is an unlikely word to show up in a game title.

But I dno't know anything about the names of the games being made, so those kind of hints is REALLY hard to make... Head over to my PS4 prediction thread and check out my predictions; I tried being cryptic, but... Well... I've some good guesses and some not as good ^^ But I think that reading this thread AND the PS4 thread the hints should add up...

On the flipside, going "a franchise from the PS1 era will make a return" is entirely generic - it coming true doesn't prove a thing, because anybody could guess that part, and if it doesn't explicitly come true, it could be easily hand-waved away using arguments like "Oh, I was referring to XYZ, which originated in the PS1 era and hasn't been seen for a few years". Kind of like how most horoscopes work - I just called up Aquarius on a horoscope site, and it says for today "He or she may see what you don't want to see". Not exactly an iron-clad prediction, that. The fact that you also don't know how your source knows these things is also a bit of a warning light, I must say.

I wish you could have told me all of this BEFORE I made that thread :P I think it's too late to change the hints now... I'm coming to think of a couple of hints now... damnit!

And coming back to the actual claim again, like I said, there's the problem of WHY Nintendo would do it. What possible benefit would Nintendo have for doing such a thing in the first place, when they've clearly been working so hard to address the third party issue over the last few years? It would be like Nintendo intentionally sabotaging their own efforts. A far more likely scenario is that the rumour of this thing happening originated from someone who has a stake in Sony (or maybe Microsoft), and isn't actually true. If it were true, there'd be at least one instance of it being leaked to the media already - it's way too big a deal for you to be the first to find out about it.

I don't know what's in it for Nintendo by doing this, and I don't know why it hasn't been leaked. That's why I'm trying to let this thread just... fade away... I'm trying to not reply to everybody writing here anymore.