Either this guy is crazy or 100% right. Either way, dont close to thread because some people are too sensitive, get some new skin people.

Anyone who can defend Nintendo's relationship with third parties in the west over the generations, I really have to question to what degree they've been paying attention. Fan or not, Nintendo makes decisions without consulting third parties and then surprises them with their hardware as if they never existed. Nintendo has forgotten that third parties have alternatives and they dont have to be held down by them anymore to make money. Its not the 90s anymore, where you could hold Sega back from getting games and keep third parties under lockdown.

The reason is simple. Because they dont sell. Nintendo's first party prowess chokes third parties that dont deliver high quality content.

The wii had the added effect that it was a casual gaming device and wasnt very popular with the hardcore. Nintendo has fixed that with the Wii U, but the installed base is still low.

These conspiracy theories that Nintendo are evil and trick the 3rd parties are figments of the imagination. Why? Because as i told you these third parties work with Nintendo creating games for the 3DS. Its all about the sales. If there was something, it would be western third parties hating on Nintendo, because they are heavily influenced by the gratuitous hating the internet brings, in special the US. Also, probably due to cultural barriers that certain companies do not bother to try and overcome and try to ram through (EA). We all know their practices, and we know that it was EA that got greedy as usual and messed the deal they had with Nintendo that originated all this speculation. Its what they do ALL the time.

hmmm on the one hand, the Ninty thing doesnt seem to be outside the realm of possibility, its not like Ninty hasnt done questionable things in the past. Like the whole sabotage Virtual console in order to boost the WiiWare titles, which I would love to hear someone have an alternative to why we simply stopped getting VC games. But on the other hand, it could be wrong and really who cares? Im more interested in these megatons. Ninty home consoles not getting the greatest 3rd party support is an old hat by now.

You make a good point, I myself am considering getting a Wii U and a PS4. The first part exclusives and the backwards compatability are good reasons to own the console.

And Nintendo didn't necessarily have to from Wii to PS4 architecture. I mean it looks like that 8GB of PS4 memory is partly because of the Share feature which I would imagine takes a bit of memory. We don't know how much memory developers are allowed to utilise for the PS4 memory. It might not be the full 8GB, not to mention memory for the OS.

Its possible Nintendo could have given the Wii U 4GB of memory and still secured third party games without any of the specialist online features Microsoft and Sony are going for. They could have made it slightly less powerful than both consoles, kept the price cheaper and still secured the same third party games.

Nintendo make good games, but personally the games that I mostly look forward to are third party games. But you never know, we all thought the Wii would fail but it didn't, the Wii U is getting Watch Dogs, it is possible they will also get similar third party games.

You're missing the point. The use of the terms "megatons" and "meltdowns" wasn't an issue due to English - you used the terms correctly in that regard. The problem is the CHOICE to use those terms. You could have said "major titles" instead of "megatons". You could have said "big surprises". Instead, you said "megatons" and "meltdowns".

If you had inside information, you wouldn't be making predictions. And none of your predictions are so far outside of the realm of likely events as to be proof of anything, while the fact that you expect only half of them being true being proof of something is an issue since if you had inside information, it would be 100% correct, not 50% correct.

If you can't provide solid proof that your information source is trustworthy, then providing vague and insubstantial claims isn't going to convince people. Solid proof can come in plenty of forms without exposing the person's identity. Kind of like how, in Groundhog Day, Bill Murray's character proves that he's not lying by mentioning things he knew were about to happen. None of them were major things, but it showed foreknowledge. But vague comments like "there'll be an old Sony franchise return from hiatus", which won't be confirmed for another 3-4 months at best, do not constitute solid proof.

And if your source was third-party, and their information was first-hand information, how could they possibly know what Sony's first-party lineup looks like, the system price (which almost certainly hasn't been set in stone yet), or about other third-party titles that weren't from that person's studio (if that person's studio was the one that is making that "meltdown" game, then it would risk their identity)?

And let's not forget the other issue - the claim that Nintendo is actively and visibly (to them) screwing over the third parties by telling them that they can't use a certain section of RAM because it's for Nintendo only. It's the only specific claim you made, and it doesn't make any sense. Even if Nintendo were locking off some of the RAM, there's no way they'd be telling third parties that it's for Nintendo titles only, after spending so much time and effort in wooing them. Meanwhile, I find it highly unlikely that, in intending to send a third party a small code fragment explaining how to use the graphics chip in a certain way, Nintendo screwed up and sent a GB-sized file instead of one measuring in the kB range. That takes a special kind of incompetence that doesn't occur in a company as secretive as Nintendo.

It's far more valid, logical, and likely than Nintendo blocking part of the RAM on purpose jut to handicap third party games versus theirs. That's just preposterous.

certainly not, but we never heard 3rd party games cancelled by first party before. And you said those games are almost completed which means it's likely gaming medias are ware of them.

Two nearly completed 3rd party games are cancelled for Wii U BY NINTENDO. That's certainly gonna generating hits.

indeed.

And more to the point why would we find out about this at E3. If they have been cancelled and they haven't been annouced why would they annouce them being cancelled.

I can jsut imagine:

NIntendo conference begins.

LIghts come on.

Reggie comes out on stage.

"We will begin by telling you that zelda wind waker will be released in october"

"Now for the final part of the conference here is a lsit of games we cancelled..........." 

I love Nintendo.