Nintendo and Third Party... Who is really to blame?

[thom]

Nem said:

pokoko said:

It's a far cry from fact.  Businesses are not servants.  Supply is as an important side of the equation as demand.  They have every right to do with their product what they want.  They can tell you to take a hike if they wish, just as a consumer can choose to buy elsewhere.  I've told more than one person that they are not welcome in my establishment.  What you're looking for as a business is an equitable and respectful transaction between two parties with regards to the exchange of goods or services.  There is no implied servitude in that.

Third party developers and publishers have zero obligation to support the Wii U.

 

This is taking a spinny turn. The thread says gamers are to blame. They certainly arent. And no, its not a farcry from a fact, its the very definition of marketing.

Wether companies decide to try and make a profit on that market is a completely separate issue. If they do make them and they dont sell well, then its their products fault.

Not trying to single you out, but you've mentioned marketing several times in this thread, and I think you are confusing it with, or lumping it in with product development and sales.  They are three very different things.

Marketing does not take place until a business has decided that a product has the potential to sell, and development time has been put against said product.

If third parties are not even making games for Wii U, their marketing team has nothing to do with it.

Likewise, if the company develops a product, but it is a turd, marketing can only go so far (see Sonic Boom).

I guess what I am trying to say is that in regards to lack of third party support on Wii U, marketing has extremely little to do with it.  A marketing team cannot market what does not exist.  I mean they could, I guess, but it probably would not be a very sustainable business model.