RolStoppable said:
Wrong. Nintendo's approach with the Wii U was to show off all multiplatform games that they expected to be coming. At E3 2012 they couldn't show CoD: BO2 because Activision had not confirmed it to be available on the Wii U, even though it was clearly in development. The Soul Calibur II example is better because it's realistic. It's also what Nintendo did back in the day, but GC sales show that the criteria you set are far from common. Why should a device that is intended for the massmarket focus on a tiny minority? It doesn't make sense, hence why Nintendo's time is better spent by showing off interesting games. Of course the situation is different for Sony and Microsoft, but I never said otherwise. |
I edited my post to say Wii not Wii U before you posted because it was with the Wii that ninty's stopped getting multiplats completely. That was when they decided to focus on casuals which worked for them no doubt. However, their approach so far with the Wii U has being to recall the more traditional gamers, don't forget that.
Nintendo's current approach makes sense because they don't even have multiplats to show for the most part even if they wanted to. However, the OP specifically mention Sony and M$ which was why I originally responded to the thread. When you said multiplats don't matter, you should've said that you were only talking about the Wii U. Multiplats definitely matter on PS4/XB1 and I don't see how anyone can say they should be absent from sony and microsoft's conferences.
"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)
"WAR is a racket. It always has been.
It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler







