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

[impertinence]

Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

impertinence said:

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're refusal to openly consider opposing arguments, makes discussion with you purely just banter. You came into this thread already locked in your own opinion. I will agree that since the Wii U and HD twins are essentially the same hardware, a more accurate example would be the HD Twins as Diesel cars, and the Wii U being electric. 

Bias is inherent to human nature. But your bias is, ironically, clouding your judgement.

Company's are a lot more rational then humans, because they have to be to survive, and they are the conglomeration of all the biases of the people working in the company. Even if the CEO's mother died playing the Wii, EA would still make games for it because the profit overwrites any bias against Nintendo.

Unless you can prove undoubtedly that 3rd parties not developing for the Wii U is detrimental to themselves, then it is pointless to try to analyze any possible bias.

The only argument I am refusing to consider is that compnaies are free from decission bias, and that is not because I am too biased to want to consider it, but rather because I know that statement to be completely and utterly false.

As for your last sentence: more hogwash. Just because a decission might be the right one, doesn't mean it was made after rational thought. There's no need to prove that 3rd parties are hurting themselves by their decissions, because it is irrelevant to the point of the discussion. You, like many others in this thread work under the assupmtion that because I expose the bias inherent in how many third parties approch Nintendo consoles, that I think they should be doing something else. As you will notice if you care to go back and read what I have said, I have never advocated for third parties to do anything. The assumption that I am somehow blaming third parties for anything, or trying to prove that they should act differently is a result of yours and others .... bias.