It's obvious that these developers barely have the resources to make a PS3/360/PC multiplat

So in this case it's more excusable. Unlike, for instance, Rockstar.

While wii U owners may be happy to buy more games in a care-free mindset, the fact is a developer would probably still sell more on the 360 with a more scrutinising market simply due to the sheer volume of 360's out there. 

Actually this descision is simple economics. To try and claim it's a bad one is just a failing to do the math on your part, sorry. The fact that they aren't alone in this decision should speak volumes. 

It doesn't matter what their reason was. The fact that wiiu is missing yet another multiplat is the point. There's nothing to defend, nintendo messed up again lol.

#bigsurprise

So if a company (that's almost near bankruptcy) doesn't have the resources to put a game on the Wii U, it means is Nintendo's fault?

It's THQ they don't have the money to develop on so many platforms, especially on a game that probably won't sell millions.

Actually, the CPU is just 32 bit.  It was the GPU that was 128 bit.  No console has had a 128 bit CPU.  And it's very unlikely any console ever will.

I'd almost agree with that if half of them posted just as often in the actual PS3 boards (which as I said, half don't) and all they post is negativety.  That's not widening your horizon, that's trolling to feel surprior and get a rise out of people.

It was 2 weeks to get the engine code working.  Not 2 weeks to port the entirety of content.   And yes, it is cheap to port..relative to normal port costs.  Ubisoft stated it costs $1.2 or $1.3 million ( I forget the exact figure) to port to Wii U.

But if you don't have $1.2 million to allocate, or even people sitting idle to work on it, or enough development kits to port the game, or the engine will take a lot of tweaks...in those cases, it still takes more planning and it's not just a "hey, let's magically put our game on Wii U".   It's cheaper and easier than before but that doesn't make it a simple whim either.

More than 20 posts in the last month.  All but 2 were in the Nintendo board.  All were berating Nintendo.   Is that all you plan to do here?  Because it's already gotten old.

Despite that beeing a faulty comparison, we can agree that the 1.5Ghz and the 3Ghz are equally as powerful in that analysis. That also proves the point.

Clock speed does not equal power.

Also lets link a proper benchmark:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/47?vs=677

Not only whats convenient for your argument, and the i7 is clearly more powerful.

But yeah i should've used a clearer example. I guess logic and common sense just isnt enough sometimes.

Ah yes, I see. Thanks for the correction.

I stopped reading after '200MHz' .

Had the Wii U been faster I can make a good assumption that they would have done more than a preliminary investigation. Nintendo's claim for easy portability doesn't seem to hold water at the moment given the number of games which aren't being ported.

thanks nem, for explaining it more. people still think more is powerfull. and i was just makeing a poing.
its new hardware devs still need to learn it. in about a year this will all beforgotten