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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Stop putting half assed ports on Wii U 3rd party companies!

 

Do you think 3rd party should stop this laziness?

Yes, it pisses me off 297 71.91%
 
No, Wii U deserves piss poor ports 115 27.85%
 
Total:412
Mr Puggsly on 17 June 2014
Wagram said:
There is a hardware difference, but I agree. Either take it seriously and optimize it to the best of their ability or don't release it at all.


I disagree.

If Wii U is the only console I own, I'd be happy with any port that's at par with PS360 (even if the frame rate isn't quite as good).

I don't get the impression my X1 games were optimized to the best of the developers ability but I still enjoy them.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Around the Network
sethnintendo on 17 June 2014

EA stopped awhile ago since their half assed ports didn't sell.  NFS was the only non half assed port but it still didn't sell probably due to being a late port with little to no marketing when it came out.



Mr Khan on 17 June 2014
SubiyaCryolite said:
pokoko said:

They need to look up and realize that the gaming world no longer centers on Japan.  They do an okay job with their partnerships over there but they completely fail when it comes to western developers that aren't Ubisoft.  We have so many smaller publishers over here looking for any competitive advantage they can get.  Nintendo could easily sweeten the deal by paying for ports.  Are NoA/NoE dropping the ball?  Are they being hamstrung by the home office?  I don't know but it needs to be sorted and it CAN be sorted.  Any problem they have with third-parties can be solved, if they're willing to make the investment.

Ive always wondered. What does Nintendo of America actually DO

Little to nothing, anymore. The organization's autonomy, which was important in building Nintendo's recognition in America, was more or less gutted after Howard Lincoln's departure and Iwata's rise to the presidency.

Though there is some debate on that, like how Reggie acted like his opinion was the reason why America never got "Disaster: Day of Crisis", or NoA's bizarre handling of the Project Rainfall titles compared to how easily Europe got them.

They certainly lack the institutional capacity they once had. Perhaps Nintendo looked at Sega's experiences, where Sega suffered from the problem of the San Francisco office having too much autonomy from headquarters in Ota, and decided to centralize decisionmaking power, but went too far in the other direction.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

CDiablo on 17 June 2014
oniyide said:
CDiablo said:
Gamers dont want to buy half ass ports, 3rd partys half assed ports dont sell, 3rd parties gimp games cause they dont sell. It is the circle of death.

Same issue happened with the Wii. 3rd parties didnt try, people didnt buy, 3rd parties abandoned the Wii. If people want good 3rd party support on the Wii U they have to go through buying inferior versions of games for some time. It is the way it is.


kinda like PS3 in the beginning, only difference is they didnt complain...much

Its a bit different because people that had PS3 back then didnt likely didnt have a different outlet to game on. If you wanted Bioshock or Fallout, you had to play on your PS3. Most U owners have a PS3 or X360 so they have the choice to play better versions of the same game.



Getting an XBOX One for me is like being in a bad relationship but staying together because we have kids. XBone we have 20000+ achievement points, 2+ years of XBL Gold and 20000+ MS points. I think its best we stay together if only for the MS points.

Nintendo Treehouse is what happens when a publisher is confident and proud of its games and doesn't need to show CGI lies for five minutes.

-Jim Sterling

oniyide on 17 June 2014
Mr Khan said:
SubiyaCryolite said:
oniyide said:

i wouldnt call Sonic or Rayman selling well. Has the bar really dropped that low?

But if they usually skip Ninty platforms that is even MORE reason for the games to do well since they dont usually get them. Why arent WIi U owners like man i usually dont play that im there! That tells me that they arent that interested to begin with or maybe they rather play it on another system they own.

The last sentence is BS and thats the nonsense im talking about. IVe personally played Tekken on Wii U and it runs just as fine as the PS3 version. This whole its not a great port is crap that people use to justify a game not selling well. Most of the ports are in fact NOT crap.

I own Tekken for Wii U that port is anything but crap. They threw in extra content, ALL the DLC AND a new mode.

I hadn't heard much about the game one way or another (traditional fighters don't appeal to me much, and Tekken stands lower on the list for being more technical and obtuse to a guy like me).

I stand corrected, then.

Although didn't TTT2 sell badly on PS3/360 as well?

no, no they didnt. They did ok at worse. Jeez its like some people just have to keep making excuses



Around the Network
oniyide on 17 June 2014
se7en7thre3 said:
Its not fair to put all the blame on 3rd parties. Nintendo has to build a proper (powered) console to attract the audience of those 3rd party games.

Let's assume that no matter what, Nintendo will have the lowest selling version (i.e. Gamecube situation). However, Nintendo has to give itself a chance, at the very least, by having the game perform similarly as far as graphics so its easy(ier) to port. But by having the lowest install base + drastically different & underpowered version, there is no real incentive for 3rd parties to care, and its hard to blame them IMO.

Back the GCN point. When GTA was a PS2 exclusive, but finally made its way to Xbox and NOT GC, I was rightfully pissed at Rockstar. There was no excuse not to bring it over to GC. Now in these last two gens, with underpowered HW, I fully understand if 3rd parties won't bother, because Nintendo made the declaration of "not competing" anymore. Instead of fixing the GCN's actual problems (image, image image), Nintendo went and messed with one of its strengths (power/performance) and that's why the audience of those 3rd party games has shrunk even more.

We fans need to stop being enablers, and put the proper blame on the actual culprit (Nintendo) for "quitting" after GCN.

Also want to say, I proudly own and support Wii U (near 40 games retail & digital). But also have over $500 on deck to buy a PS4. Why? Not because I want uncharted or w/e sony exclusive, but b/c I want the best PERFORMING version of 3RD PARTY games (the GTAs, ACs, WDs Sports games, etc etc etc). I supported 3rd party on Wii U for its launch and part of 2013, but I'd be selling myself short if I continue to do so with superior versions available in 2014 & beyone. So until ninty starts to compete again in tech specs, and shows they care about that 13-25+ audience as well, it will be hard for me to put blame on 3rd parties.

This. i loved the GC it didnt have the best support. BUt it was a hell of a lot better than WIi and Wii U and thats all gamers wanted. Hell i bought a bunch of games becasue they ran better than they did on PS2.

ANd you are on the nose about them giving up. Thats whay they did, they gave up fighting PS360 worked with WIi not so much WIi U. ANd the funny thing is some here will swear Ninty doesnt compete with the other two to make Wii U sales  look better but will complain that they are not getting the games that are popular on the other two systems. As for GTa thats a fine example. MS actually DID something to get GTA on xbox, while Ninty did nothing. Matter of fact if i remember correctly Ninty didnt want the game on the system.



oniyide on 17 June 2014
pokoko said:
Mr Khan said:

Almost definitely the former. As much as i hate that the state of affairs is the way it is, Nintendo essentially needs to pay to get a few third party success stories on their platforms before they'll be considered for top-tier development in general.

In this way, their rescue of Bayonetta and Devil's Third could be significant, assuming either or both games do decently well. The next step up, then, would be forming a Sony-like partnership with Destiny, big new 3rd party IP to make it best on Nintendo platforms (although this would only be possible from the outset if Nintendo had competitive hardware. Hence the conundrum).

Ultimately they're doing an okay job seeking alternate resources, like the Tecmo-Koei and Sega partnerships, Bayonetta and Devil's Third, they just need to greatly expand the quantity of such efforts, without throwing money at any old project, good or bad.

They need to look up and realize that the gaming world no longer centers on Japan.  They do an okay job with their partnerships over there but they completely fail when it comes to western developers that aren't Ubisoft.  We have so many smaller publishers over here looking for any competitive advantage they can get.  Nintendo could easily sweeten the deal by paying for ports.  Are NoA/NoE dropping the ball?  Are they being hamstrung by the home office?  I don't know but it needs to be sorted and it CAN be sorted.  Any problem they have with third-parties can be solved, if they're willing to make the investment.

THIS i dont know why cite Bayo and Devil's 3rd as some kind of proof that Ninty is doing something. Those games are only relevant in Japan and they are very niche. Ninty isnt in a position ot be niche. Sega hasnt been relevant in years. Tecmo even worse. They need to actually get with guys who are relevant.



oniyide on 17 June 2014
CDiablo said:
oniyide said:
CDiablo said:
Gamers dont want to buy half ass ports, 3rd partys half assed ports dont sell, 3rd parties gimp games cause they dont sell. It is the circle of death.

Same issue happened with the Wii. 3rd parties didnt try, people didnt buy, 3rd parties abandoned the Wii. If people want good 3rd party support on the Wii U they have to go through buying inferior versions of games for some time. It is the way it is.


kinda like PS3 in the beginning, only difference is they didnt complain...much

Its a bit different because people that had PS3 back then didnt likely didnt have a different outlet to game on. If you wanted Bioshock or Fallout, you had to play on your PS3. Most U owners have a PS3 or X360 so they have the choice to play better versions of the same game.

i kinda agree, but heres the thing. THey didnt HAVE to buy a PS3, they could have easily bought 360 or a PC, and still played all those games you mentioned and more. It is a bit different but i bring that point up to say. Why did people buy PS3s in the first place? it was doing better than Wii U in the same time frame despite higher price. Why did people continue to buy PS3s even though it was found out that the games didnt perform as well? It could be A) PS is just a more popular brand than Ninty WW B) people trust Sony that they would  right the ship and they did the games did get better C) the demograph for those types of games are just there anyway, and maybe people are putting too much stock into port quality...ill go with D) all of the above



oniyide on 17 June 2014
SubiyaCryolite said:
Mr Khan said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mr Khan said:
SubiyaCryolite said:
The only ports I'd consider "bad" are those with low or inconsistent performance and I'd blame Nintendo's R&D department for that.

We're talking about the ones with removed modes of all sorts, more. Like Splinter Cell Blacklist missing co-op, or Arkham Origins missing multiplayer.


They do that because they know its not worth the investment with Nintendos installed base. These people watch consumer activity and pay attention to sales. 

Again, though, cyclical. If they give the platform the inferior version, why not expect Wii U owners to go elsewhere? And if you're then encouraging them to go elsewhere, why develop for Wii U at all?

It's the same madness to do with Call of Duty on Wii U, really.


Im not sure about DLC but online modes might be removed because of fewer players online. I dont own a single CoD game on the Wii U but I understand the number of players online is tiny compared to every other platform. If one of the biggest console multiplayer games has so little activity relatively smaller games like Batman AO cant really be blamed for ditching the feature entirely.

In Tekken it can take anywere from 10 seconds to 3 minutes to find a friendly or ranked game and thats with players from all over the world (not just one region). Othere games I play online [on PC] like Dirt 2, Battlefield (BC2, 3 and 4), Super Street Fighter IV and even Skull Girls connect almost instantly. Im guessing there are less people online.

dont need to guess sales speak for themselves



oniyide on 17 June 2014
fps_d0minat0r said:
curl-6 said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
Im tired of half assed ports on PS3.
I think they should play like the PS4 version. I dont care if the hardware is weaker, but I feel like blaming the devs for lazyness because everyone knows the powah of teh cell can match the PS4.

Your analogy fails because Wii U is more powerful than PS3/360, not vice versa.

Thats not my analogy though. In my analogy the wii U would take PS3's place.

Anyway, what the wii U is more powerful at than the PS360 isnt going to bring much more advantages than higher native resolution and better frame-rates, which it already is getting. OP also fails to mention theres PLENTY of games on PS3 and 360 which frequently drop below 30fps.

yet they still manage to do ok, imagine that.