By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
oniyide on 29 August 2014
Edit Thread
KungKras said:
DerNebel said:
KungKras said:
ICStats said:

Nothing forces them to make games for Nintendo in the first place.

If they wanted it to fail they had the opportunity to just release no games from the start.  Nothing would flop faster than Nintendo launching Wii U with no 3rd party.

Nothing forces them to support the PS4/Xbone like they do either. They could have given all platforms equal support and then seen what happened. Does it look like the Wii U get equal support to you? They gave it some bones so they wouldn't miss a large market if it suceeded.

They were afraid that the Wii U would carry Wii momentum and be successful.

Wii got close to jack shit for support because the industry bet (and hoped) that it would flop. People tend to forget just how much the industry had to get dragged kicking and screaming into supporting the Wii.

The shit people make up just to justify that the Wii U isn't getting any third party support is ridiculous sometimes.

Third parties aren't afraid of the Wii U becoming a success, what would they be afraid of? "Oh shit now we have one more system we might be able to viably sell our games on, what now?" lol

And the Wii wasn't supported because it was underpowered and unconventional in its control scheme, most developers couldn't be arsed to make a version of their games on way weaker hardware that also had to support motion controls, just for it to sell only a couple 100k if at all, cause even back then Wii owners hardly bought the same games that 360/PS3 owners bought.

The industry believes that the most profitable path for them is one that excludes Nintendo consoles. They don't want Nintendo making consoles, otherwise there wouldn't be all the "Nintendo would be better off as a third party" propaganda being constantly shoved out by the gaming industry media. If they wanted strong Nintendo consoles, why the propaganda?

You're dead wrong about the Wii. Almost to the point of a gish gallop fallacy. All developers had to do was to use their Gamecube development kits, and they could have churned out software INCREDIBLY cheaply. That is even what Iwata recommended third parties to to. Instead companies WENT BANKRUPT left and right throwing all their resources at expensive HD development.

Resident Evil 4 sold TONS on the Wii. Call of Duty 3 outsold the PS3 version. Suda 51 threw a party because of No More Heroes sales. Then the unfair industry treatment of the Wii started to shape gamer biases and the audience changed.


um no, you have no basis of proof for your entire first paragraph. The people saying Ninty should go 3rd party are GAMERS. NOT people in the gaming media. Link me an article to a reputable source that ever said anything of the sort. Blogs by fanboys dont count.

Thats exactly what they did, which is why we saw so many ports intially, problem with that is that you can only do that in the beginning and people will and did get bored, sales drop. And they did make games cheaply, where do you think those shelves of shovelware came from? If anything they took Iwata's advice TOO far. what company went bankrupt? THQ? they were making dumb decisions, starting with uDraw which was on Wii.

Tons a strong word, but lets ignore that fact that it was a cheap port, cheap in that when it released it was already bargain basement price of course it sold well, no one is patting minecraft on the back, cause its a cheap as hell game. COD3 sold better than the PS3 version? so what? it was supposed to, didnt do better than 360 no even close, so not sure what your point is, and yes lets ignore EVERY cod game after that. NMH is some niche gmae, they dont seem to need to sell alot for that to make profit, lets get real. YOu think someone like say...Rockstar would be happy with that?