Fusioncode said:
famousringo said:
You seem confused.
The Wii U is what Nintendo gets when it tries to appease 3rd parties. Poor differentiation, which bores customers and leads to competition on price/performance that only benefits the publishers.
Yeah weak HW and a useless tablet controller really gave 3rd parties want they want. Good job Nintendo.
The Wii was the console that ignored the 3rd parties, thoroughly differentiated itself, earning more profit than any home console in history and commanding better third party support as a result.
The Wii was also lightning in a bottle. Every other console depends on 3rd parties to survive.
|
|
Yes, the tablet controller is an attempt to appease 3rd parties. That's why, unlike the wiimote, it came built-in with every function that a traditional controller has. When the early prototypes didn't have clickable thumbsticks, 3rd parties asked for them, and Nintendo obliged.
And I don't agree that every console needs 3rd parties to survive. EA published just as many games on the 3DS as they have on the Wii U. Of the top twenty games on the platform, Wii U actually has more third party titles than Wii, 3DS, or DS. This suggests that Wii U's biggest problem is actually weak first party software, probably because poorly differentiated hardware limits first party potential.

"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event." — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.