Game 1: Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2/      Castlevania: (NES) Action-Adventure.

According to Cox, MercurySteam possesses “a limited amount of people working on the title.” He would anticipate needing to have an extra 20-30 staffers in order to complete a Wii U version. Development has also reached a certain point in which “it would be very hard for us to work on a Wii U version without negatively effecting the general development of the title.”

“The reason that we’re not making a Wii U version of Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2 is because of our resources. We have a limited amount of people working on the title. About 60 people worked on the first title and that’s a pretty small team. With the sequel we have slightly expanded that team, but in order to make a Wii U-version, we need about 20 to 30 extra people. Next to that, we’re already pretty far into the development of Lords of Shadow 2, so it would be very hard for us to work on a Wii U version without negatively effecting the general development of the title. That’s the only reason there won’t be a Wii U-version, it’s not that we don’t want to make it, it’s just that it wouldn’t make sense for us to do so right now.”

You can choose to either believe that the developer is telling the truth or lying in this statement.

I understand why people are skeptical when it comes to rumors from an unproven source, but I also understand that there's usually more than one side to every story.

Is it completely out of the realm of possibility that Nintendo have also done something recently to repel third parties? Any answer but 'No' is plain irrational, and this has nothing to do with Nintendo either. You could say the same about relationships between any companies.

Personally, the reason I'm keeping an open mind about this one comes down to two words:
I'll give you a hint: The second word starts with Y, and ends with amauchi.

For one, the man has been known to be a ruthless vindictive bastard in the past, and this has been seen in the way he ran the company on several occasions during the 80s and 90s.

Second, he's still alive and very much in a position to affect major company policies, and there's no reason to believe he wouldn't exercise this right. I'm sure it's still very much his company, as far as he's concerned. 

For me, those two points are enough to add up and convince me there's a possibility some of this is on Nintendo.

I'd love to hear arguments about flaws or mistakes in my point of view.

Men seriöst nu får du fan ge dig, rent skitsnack

Well it seems like the Xbox 720 will have 8GB. The PS4 has 8GB. The problem with Nintendo is that their console has 1-2GB of RAM, not to mention other specs that I don't know much about.

Its their own fault because they made more money than Sony and Microsoft with the Wii, they had the resources to come up with a console on par with their consoles, instead of creating a console thats going to be outclassed by the PS4 and the Xbox 720 in the a space of one year.

Nintendo never had a chance considering their current philosophy. To go from the Wii to a PS4-type console is quite possible, but it would be far too giant of a leap in terms of development costs in my opinion. It would be fair to say that Nintendo should have prepared for HD development years in advance, but what you are asking also took the the industry at least five-six years to fully understand the capabilities of the PS360. So it would be like asking Nintendo to fast track over that part and start making games on par with next-gen tech demos now which is unreasonable. Though, I'm sure third parties would appreciate the hardware.

Personally, I'm not that concerned with third parties. Their first party software and exclusives are much more valueable. The Wii money should be used to expand and start up new studios to gain more developers and increase their software output.

uh, I don't think the Wii U is powerful enough to utilize the 8GB GDDR5 anyways.

And what's even more troubling is that I just heard that Nintendo has canceled 2 3rd party games to the Wii U; 1 being exclusive and 1 being a multiplat. And these games are well known, popular titles by a major publisher. The exclusive games will now probably be heading to the PS360.

You say you have things to back everything you're saying up. Where is the proof behind these two canceled third-party games that we've never heard about?

And why you do you say Nintendo canceled them? Nintendo can't cancel someone else's games. That makes no sense.

håller fullständigt med det är så löjligt så de e inte sant.

Att killzone skulle visas va de tup 80% chans ingen svår gissning och att de skulle gå o streama till vita var typ 90% säkert.

Han har gått på en riktig svensk Mindfuck.

Credible as in the PS4 will cost $350? If this turns out to be true, without hidden costs such as a subscription plan, I will eat my socks and post a video on youtube of the process. Yes, quote me on that. Not saying your source is all wrong but obviously, as you already mentioned yourself, not totally reliable.

Also, I remember reading an interview with Miyamoto about "keeping secrets" for third party developers. Many years ago, can't find it. Needless to say he denied it.

This is from an Iwata asks about MH 3:

Iwata:

Looking at the graphics objectively, I feel like the game’s visuals are one of the representative examples of what can ultimately be done with Wii.

Fujioka:

Thank you very much.

Just to let people. You should really press him to reveal everything he claims he knows. As of now he technically cant be wrong( or chances of him wrong lower) because he can pretend he was right on anything that fits the criteria. Lets say hes hinting at crash to be the ps1 comeback game but its actually spyro. He still won in a sense. Everything BS intill you give us something to judge you by.