By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Soundwave on 09 May 2013
Edit Thread
curl-6 said:
Soundwave said:


EA is hardly going to be the only company that treats the Wii U like garbage.

If Nintendo wanted third party support then they should've just basically let third parties approve the hardware. I mean who cares, the EAD teams will make a great game even if you put a gun to their head and forced them to work on a 25 year old Sega Genesis chipset.

Making a chipset the "Nintendo way" = no third party support. That's all there is to it, these other companies don't have the time to waste on some experimental platform, either bring a modern console to the market or get lost, there's 140 million PS3/360s already out there for developers to make money off of if they want a chipset that performs like it's from 2006.

This isn't about "making friends", this is just a business. Nintendo is irrelevant enough to a lot of third parties that simply ignoring Nintendo is a very viable option when time/cost investments are factored into the equation. If Nintendo wanted to change that, they should've made a different type of hardware system. Period.

They made the Gamecube chipset modern for third parties and that got great third party support... oh wait, it was snubbed too.

If you invest in an audience early on, you build a base for yourself for future sales. Wii U represents a potential base; devs aren't investing in it, and as a result they're leaving potential profit on the table. Porting to Wii U well isn't that expensive.


The GameCube wasn't snubbed by third parties. It had a lot of support including by EA themselves (NBA Street, sports games, SSX, Lord of the Rings, etc.).

It had Resident Evil exclusivity and other exclusives from Namco, Sega, and Capcom and lots of big multi-plat titles like Prince of Persia, Beyond Good & Evil, 007 Nightfire, Timesplitters 2, Soul Calibur 2, etc.

It didn't get the GTA games or Final Fantasy, but Sony was smart enough to lock those up and had leverage over publishers because they had such a huge headstart on Nintendo/Microsoft (and actually took advantage of it).

It's not the fault of third parties that Nintendo opted to corner themselves into a kiddy reputation with the look of the console and cell-shading Zelda or that Nintendo made some odd choices with their core franchises which led to low hardware sales. That's all on Nintendo. It's not a third parties job to brand and market a console, that's on the hardware maker.

Third parties don't have time for "potential" in today's business, games cost more than ever to make, they have limited resources and have to pick which platforms are going to bring them back the best returns.

Instead of making a balanced, modern console that was easy for third parties to develop their next-gen engines on and taking advantage of a year head start, Nintendo opted to (once again) bet everything on a controller gimmick, only this time it isn't taking off with casuals at all. That's just the law of averages evening out, when you gamble on miracles, eventually you will get burned.