padib said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
padib said:
| S.T.A.G.E. said:
When last gen consoles lose the majority of the major support the Wii U can kiss the support goodbye. As I told someone before its blindly be obvious Nintendo is going to bite the dust with third party for coming out with a subpar powered console. Its also an underpowered console with no massive following so the third party doesn't even have incentive to create tailor made games for the Wii U.
Take heed that one of the lead developers of the Elder Scrolls online said the PS4 and Xbox One were not on the list of consoles to get the game. It was meant to be PC only, but when they found out that the consoles were up to snuff as far as power was concerned they were more than happy to make a console port of the game. The Wii U will NOT get anything because its power is not on par with next gen expectation but rather slightly above last gen and its Nintendos fault for not consulting with third parties when they developed the Wii U. Bethesda said it best I think despite the fact that they do make buggy games, but Skyrim was awesome.
|
COD was selling fine on the Wii originally, viper has already explained to you why the Wii versions of COD dwindled release after release, it's nothing of Nintendo's fault. If you want to build a brand on a platform, you gotta work bitch (to quote a famous artist).
Even if Nintendo was on par graphically, if Acti does no work, they get no monyz. Simple. So it actually has nothing to do with Nintendo other than Nintendo's effort in smoothening relationships with 3rd parties is broken. But it has nothing to do with performance.
You've learned a few things in this thread, but they are mostly erroneous.
To further my point:
- The DS is largely weaker than its competition, it still cleans the house.
- When the U was out and there was no PS4/X1, the U's version of COD did not sell well either.
- Some devs are at the moment saying things like "we have no audience on Nintendo consoles (laughs)", rather than "Nintendo's consoles aren't strong enough". That alone should make you think twice about your theory. Devs are just not supporting Nintendo consoles because they have not built a market on the platform. That takes effort and that effort was not put into place by 3rd party devs. They were in it for the easy cash. All except Ubisoft.
|
The DS is a completely different story. Third party react differently to consoles and opportunity therin.
|
That's just one of many points, but even then, that difference that you cite was created by the industry, e.g. it was fabricated. Because intrinsically there's no reason for it to exist.
A good game is a good game no matter the machine it runs on (at a certain point).
|
Yes, a good game is a good game and third parties know which console is profitable and with Nintendo its the DS. NIntendo never wavered on their handhelds. They did on their consoles and lost third parties as a result. Even when they were on top they had a shakey relationship with them.
