| naruball said: I ... I really have no words. To think that a multi-million company needs an excuse to not develop games for a console that almost no one bothers releasing games on is... silly to me. What exactly do they achieve by doing that as a company? I know that some of you want to think of them as EVIL but seriously it makes zero business sense. No company is willing to throw away money like that. The only way I could entertain that idea is if Ninty had a contract with them (i.e. paid them) to develop x games for wiiu and the loophole was that if they sell less than x copies, they can stop releasing games on it and keep the money. I highly doubt that that happened. |
It makes sense to me. Ubisoft had made a claim early on in the Wii U's life about supporting the system. A well known company (especially one that does happen to make games that do well on the Wii U) will need to find a reasonable excuse (according to an average customer, let's say) to stop making certain types of games on the system in order to not receive backlash and possibly harm their sales on bigger titles.
I wouldn't say that Watch_Dogs for Wii U was solely made for this purpose, but that the way they've been handling their releases on the Wii U seem to point to this. Given the kinds of opinions people have of the Wii U, their lack of a good effort on the Wii U version of multiplatform titles could be just written off as something to do with hardware. The whole delay thing can have multiple explanations, but one could also be to further make sure sales do not meet expectations. Why do that? It is kind of a stretch, but it's possible that given the current trend, they expected further losses over this.
Of course, none of this is guaranteed to be the case. It's just a possibility. Also, not every company makes the best decisions so arguing they could have done X or Y doesn't necessarily mean that it didn't happen.
