Why is it hard to believe that third parties are biased against Nintendo?

[Hynad]

impertinence said:

Hynad said:

impertinence said:

Your statements afe nonsensical. Of course the statement "having no major market for your products" isn't a bias, however, to hold as true that there is no major market for games on Nintendo hardware is a bias. And if you truly believe that there is no bias in how companies try to make a profit, you are sorely mistaken. The videogame industry is overflowing with decissions made based on the purest of bias, including Nintendo. There is also easy to see that there are strong biases against Nintendo from fans and many, many developers.

There are also biases against Sony and Microsoft, but in the current video game market the echochamber rings loud with the kind of unsubstantiated drivel that you have been parroting in this thread: "There is no market on Wii U for third parties", "The is more profit to be had on the PS4 or Xbox One". etc. Statements like these are inherently biased, but most people are to full of themselves to be able to see their own biases.

When people say "There is no market for our games on the Wii U" that really means "We don't want to make games that will appeal to the users of the Wii U". The bias is in prefering to make a certain type of game marketed at a certain type of gamer that they assume is easier to target on other platforms. Developers making statements like these are hiding their own bias from themselves (Meaning, they dismiss the posibility of creating a different kind of game than what they personally prefer, even though that might very well be much more profitable). And as an extention they are making irrational decisions in the marketplace. The same can be said for all other statements along the lines of "The hardware is too weak for our artistic ambitions", "Our game relies on a robust online infrastructure", etc. etc.

What a load of crap.  You're basically saying that a desk maker is biased because he doesn't also manufacture cars. -__-

How more unreasonable can you get?

Just throwing that here: Business deals aren't made with only one party. It takes two to make a deal. Nintendo is the console maker. They're the one that, ultimately, are responsible for the fate of their consoles. Blaming the third party developers is laughably similar to all those modern parents blaming everyone but themselves for their kid's bad upbringing.

Sigh. Are you trying to imply that making Playstation 4 and Xbox One games are like making desks and making WiiU games is like making cars? I am going by the assumption here that professional game developers have the skills and the know how to be able to make games on the Wii U as well as the Playstation 4 and the Xbox One.

Your counter example is obviously completely meaningless. Unless of course you hold on to a bias that developing games for the Wii U is so extremly easy compared to other platforms that it is akin to the difference between making a desk and a car? To answer your question, your useless interpretation of what I said is pretty close to as unreasonable as anything can get.

Finally, your last point about who is responsible for what is another statement right from the echo chamber. Also, it is completely irrelevant to the discussion just like your first example. First of all, who is blaming anyone for anything? Third parties (and Niontendo, and Sony, and Microsoft, and you and I) all operate based on bias to some extent or another. That doesn't mean I am blaming third parties for anything. They make their decission (irrational as they are) that effects their business and their money, reputation, feeling of self and whatever else motivations they have. Good for them. I am simply pointing out that these decissions are not driven solely by clear analytical thought, and that the underlyig bias is very easy to see. And yeah, one of the strong biases in the videogame industry right now is that Nintendo is out of touch, the hardware too weak, can only sell to casuals etc etc. I am sure you can add to the list.

You missed the point. You were asking devs to adjust what they create to what the audience of the Wii U might want. If what they're good at making are FPSs (desks)  like CoD, and they don't sell well on the Wii U, it's only normal that they will prefer making those for the market for which they sell, like the Playstation and Xbox consoles.  

You're asking devs to change what they're good at doing to maybe please an audience that might or might not exist for their hypotetical games (asking a desk maker to manufacture cars) ... -__-

You're being very disingenious and unreasonable so far in this discussion. While I agree with the fact that everyone has biases, companies aren't run on gut feelings. That's a very naive way to picture how a board of directors works. ¬_¬