By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Bethesda wary of Wii U: ‘it doesn’t support our games’

digitalnasties on 07 September 2012

Never heard of them, are they some kind of anonymous nintendo trolls.



 

Around the Network
Viper1 on 07 September 2012

I am sick and tired of news outlets that twist statements out of context to gain hits.

Bethesda never said, "Wii U: ‘it doesn’t support our games’" But that is how they present their article.

I am calling for a boycott on any and all sites that deliberately misconstrue a quote to denigrate any console maker for the benefit of web site hit.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

twesterm on 07 September 2012
TomaTito said:
twesterm said:
Mr Khan said:
twesterm said:


It's honestly one of those chicken or the egg problems, both sides are pretty valid.

Personally, while I would love to see more awesome games on my Nintendo consoles I side with the publishers on this one.  Like I said, making even a modest budget game is a massive risk with little reward.  You want to do everything possible to mitigate that risk.  If that means not developing for a console that likely will not sell well, you don't develop for it.

The multiplatting mitigates the risk on its own. Remember: it took a team of a few guys (under 10) from Vigil something like 5 weeks to get a build of Darksiders II running on Wii U. With that comparatively tiny amount of man-hours they just tacked on at least (lowball estimate) another 200,000 sales for the game, or another 10 million in revenue (less overhead and publisher/retailer cut and all, but still, that makes up for the porting effort by a huge factor)

They're creating *more* risk for themselves by *not* putting it on Wii U


Different engines, different problems (Bethesda is great example of that idea).  We also don't know how well Darksiders II works on WiiU.  There's a *huge* difference between running and running well.  Again, thinking of Bethesda, Skyrim runs on the PS3 and I'm sure even Dawnguard runs on the PS3, it just doesn't really run at an acceptable quality level.  It will take a lot more effort to work that problem out.

It might have only taken 10 guys 5 weeks to get the game to work, but it would take more time and more staff (QA) to verify that it's shipping quality and pass TRC requirements.

Wii U ports cost under $1.3 million for Ubisoft
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-07-23-ubisoft-says-wii-u-ports-costing-under-USD1-3-million

Right, remember that article when the games release and the comparison videos come out.  

Like I said, getting a game working on another platform isn't hard.  Getting it to work well is what takes effort.



 

ECM on 07 September 2012

Never mind--wasting my breath.



A Board With No Name

Viper1 on 07 September 2012
ECM said:
Viper1 said:
I am sick and tired of news outlets that twist statements out of context to gain hits.

Bethesda never said, "Wii U: ‘it doesn’t support our games’" But that is how they present their article.

I am calling for a boycott on any and all sites that deliberately misconstrue a quote to denigrate any console maker for the benefit of web site hit.


I'd like to agree with this gentleman wholeheartedly on this point.

I used to post here, a couple of years ago, under a different alias, and it's stuff like this that drives people like me away*--it also refeclts badly on the site as a whole since the mods tolerate flat-out false and misleading information and statements. (This topic title is so far off the mark in accuracy, it makes the idiotic brouhaha over the twisted-out-of-shape Capcom comment from a week ago look mild in comparison.)

So yeah, do something about this, mods, or watch the site continually bleed users who are sick to death of this sort of sensationalized, braindead, makes Kotaku look honest, nonsense of which too many of your users are guilty.

*Been back lurking for about 6-months, but I'm on the verge of bailling again because this sort of thing seems to be tolerated for reasons I can't quite fathom.

P.S. And to (too) many of you: how about reading the actual OP--not just the headline--before throwing down your 2-cents, eh? You might find that what's written in the headline has *zero* relation to what was actual said that way we don't see these discussion going pages and pages deep before we get to the first person who actually *read* the damn post and called BS on it.

You, sir, are being quoted for verisimultude.

It does make me ponder to state a few more things regarding matters of a personal nature regarding this site and my site though professionalism is convincing me to stay silent.

 

Applause again for the comment.

 

EDIT: Do you wish me to edit my own post given your edit given that it undermines your own edit?



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Around the Network
Mr Khan on 07 September 2012

Ho there. We've been working at least to clarify thread titles recently. As for the rest, content is content



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

SaviorX on 07 September 2012

Being a part of a new system's software launch allows companies a lot of leeway.

No one is expecting Game of the Year material nor advanced graphical prowess. If your game is half decent and part of a franchise, you can be there from the beginning and collect users as time goes on.

There is 'risk' sure, but the risk taken in that one year could prove fruitful for the next 5.

In Bethesda's case, I am not a fan of their games, but they could always make something new next-gen that could surprise me and many others. Unfortunate that the article looks like another sensationalized anti-Nintendo test game bashing parade.



Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. "  thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."

KungKras on 07 September 2012
twesterm said:
melbye said:
Ugh, third parties never have a backbone when it comes to Nintendo-consoles. Always the wait and see approach and when they are ready to make games for it, it is already too late.


Can you blame them?

Making a AAA game is a huge risk with often little payoff.  Add onto that the fact that third party core games that aren't Nintendo properties typically don't sell well on Nintendo consoles.

Except for Resident Evil 4, Epic Mickey, House of the Dead Overkill, Sonic Colours, and you know, the games that actually appeared on the system that doesn't make it feel like you're getting a second rate deal compared to the other consoles.



I LOVE ICELAND!

DieAppleDie on 07 September 2012

if you make a good product and you advertise it properly you get the sales Bethesda....



twesterm on 07 September 2012
KungKras said:
twesterm said:
melbye said:
Ugh, third parties never have a backbone when it comes to Nintendo-consoles. Always the wait and see approach and when they are ready to make games for it, it is already too late.


Can you blame them?

Making a AAA game is a huge risk with often little payoff.  Add onto that the fact that third party core games that aren't Nintendo properties typically don't sell well on Nintendo consoles.

Except for Resident Evil 4, Epic Mickey, House of the Dead Overkill, Sonic Colours, and you know, the games that actually appeared on the system that doesn't make it feel like you're getting a second rate deal compared to the other consoles.

Riiiiight because I forgot those were the only big budget and/or high profile games on the system.  Silly me!