Why is DKC Tropical Freeze bombing worldwide?

[Mr Khan]

Carl2291 said:

Mr Khan said:

Not "excuses," hardly. Most were quite rational justifications for shit that the third parties did ahead of time to largely make sure that nobody had any good reason to pick up the Wii U version. This point has never been addressed (or has been addressed and people keep refusing to acknowledge it, or come up with their own, yet more tortuous counter-excuses). Your Shape i'll give you because i had never really heard of it. The others i mostly have heard of, and so understand the conditions surrounding their release, including the BS conditions 3rd parties tacked on.

The EA games should NOT be a part of this conversation, period, lest we all say things that we're going to regret in the name of defending the Worst Company in America.

Id call them all excuses, because the reasons why they may or may not have sold like they did doesnt matter. EA games have as much right to be in this conversation as any other games. What matters is that they were actual releases on Wii U, which is what the conversation was about. Look

Mr Khan said:

They had to be thinking third party was going to pick up the slack.

You were talking about releases. It doesnt matter if they were slightly gimped releases, late ports or anything else (just like the PS4 and One are getting).

The releases were there (even from EA), it was just that the Wii U userbase didnt pick them up in reasonable numbers. Like I said earlier, the release schedule for Wii U was similar to, if not better than the early release schedules for PS4 and Xbox One.

It might not have been the greatest of efforts, but 3rd parties actually tried. To pin the brunt of the blame on them, when Nintendo should shoulder just as much of it (if not more) is just refusing to see the incompetance shown by Nintendo. As the platform is Nintendo's own, they should have known about what support was/wasnt going to be there and gone all out to make sure they had something, anything set to release at those dates when 3rd parties couldnt release. That includes paying developers to port games to Wii U.

This should be a big lesson to them when they release the next console.

That's partly why i feel EA especially should be removed from this conversation. They had a commitment for a higher level of support, then backstabbed Nintendo in the most spectacular way, leaving them holding the bag. I would think EA's commitment would have been pretty reliable in early-stage planning for releases, wouldn't you have?

Nintendo paying for a port would have some advantages (guarantee no gimps), since it reflects the very inferior bargaining position they now have with just about everyone, except companies in greater financial straits like Sega or Capcom. It would just have to be applied judiciously still, as there's no sense in paying for a late port and it's sometimes hard to feel out whether it would be worth paying for game X or game Y (for a game that was just bad across the board, Sony and Microsoft at least got it for free but Nintendo had to pay for it).