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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Ubisoft: Wii U Owners Don’t Buy Assassin’s Creed; More Interested in Just Dance

AZWification on 20 August 2014
Roma said:

I know that was sarcasm but honestly the way Ubi has treat me as a Nintendo fan I won't be buying any of their games ever again weather that be on Nintendo systems or any other for that matter as I've had enough of their BS!

Meh.. I'm going to support Ubisoft by buying the games I'm interested in ( Rayman games and Beyond Good & Evil 2 for example)..



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

Around the Network
H.E.R. on 20 August 2014

Ubisoft's right. I'm not getting Bayonetta bundle or Watch Dogs because they're rated M. I'm gonna purchase them because they look like very good games.

But seriously, if Ubisoft is done fully supporting the Wii U other than Just Dance, **** them.



Dunban67 on 20 August 2014
padib said:
t3mporary_126 said:
Just make more Rayman games for the Wii U Ubisoft.

It's not like Rayman Legends did any better than AC on the U. Once again it seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy by Ubi to just discredit "mature" games on the U.


Rayman sold about 340k on the wiiu ACIII and ACIV sold aprox 250 and 200k



lord_of_flood on 20 August 2014

If Ubisoft had actually spent some money marketing the Wii U versions of these games and made ports on par with PS3/360 versions, I wouldn't have a problem with what Guillemot is saying. However, they didn't market AC games for Wii U at all and they made gimped ports, so the lack of real parity makes this extremely hard to justify as a consumer.



NNID: TheCCluc

atomicblue on 20 August 2014
Mr Puggsly said:

I think what you're saying are good reasons for why core games are more successful on other platforms. I'm simply arguing there is a very small core audience on Wii U and that won't change.

It looks like the people buying Wii U overwhelmingly just want casual experiences. The type of stuff we expect from Nintendo.

In a nutshell, Nintendo should focus on the type games that brought people to Nintendo platforms.

Define "casual".

I wouldn't call most Nintendo-published games casual, outside of a few like Wii Sports and Wii Fit. Things like Starfox, Pikmin, Zelda and F-Zero are aimed at "core" gamers. Things like Smash, Pokémon and MarioKart tend to bridge the gap between both casual and core gamers; I work at an annual gaming convention over here and I know all of those games (especially Smash and Pokémon) have a huge, very hardcore fan community.

The problem is not that Ubisoft is trying to release core games or "mature" games on a Nintendo console. If core/mature titles didn't sell well, then games like ZombiU or MadWorld or the Pikmins or the Resident Evils wouldn't sell upwards of half a million copies apiece. If all Wii U owners wanted were casual experiences, then Wii Fit U and Wii Sports Club and the newer Just Dance titles would probably have sold a lot more, too.

My impression is that casual gamers exist in different forms with all of the consoles, whether they're kids who only play MarioKart or frat boys who have a PS4 and only play shooters. One of my friends has a PS3, but outside of CoD and GTA games, he hardly plays anything and I'd consider someone like that a casual gamer as well. People don't gravitate to Nintendo consoles because they're casual gamers, they do so because they don't want the same kind of experience they'd get in spades elsewhere (you know, that open-world shooter/action/adventure hybrid that is everywhere at the moment). If Ubisoft or anyone else wants to release something on the Wii U and have it sell, it doesn't need to be a casual game, it just needs to be unique. Or, if it's a port of something on PS3/PS4/etc., then it needs to be a *decent* port, and it needs at least a little bit of marketing.

Thing is, it feels like publishers should have figured this out by now. Every once in a while, someone comes along with a MadWorld or a ZombiU or a Resident Evil 4 or a Muramasa and it sells well.



Around the Network
PigPen on 20 August 2014

I had every Nintendo console ever made. I have never played Just Dance in my life. I will be getting Super Smash Bros and Bayonetta 2 though.



Nyeguy81 on 20 August 2014

I bought one. Oh well guess I don't need another one.



Never on 23 August 2014

The vast amount of wii u owners do not buy just dance. To collectively label all wii u gamers together and say they like Just Dance is insulting and misleading. Just Dance may have sold better on wii u than assassins creed but it's still only a tiny fraction of wii u gamers who bought, or would ever buy, Just Dance.



IamAwsome on 23 August 2014
Darc Requiem said:
NightDragon83 said:
Darc Requiem said:
NightDragon83 said:
If Wii U owners actually put their money where there collective mouths are then 3rd parties wouldn't be running for the hills. Why should a developer waste resources and money to port a game that will sell a fraction of what it will on other platforms?


It's a chicken and the egg scenario. Most diehard Nintendo fans haven't seen good third party support since the SNES era. That's two decades ago. Any newer Nintendo fans have seen nothing but crap and half hearted efforts 3rd parties. At this point, an audience would have to be essentially built from the ground up. I look at younger gamers like my cousin. He's 14 years old, he's never seen a Nintendo home console with good third party support. He doesn't even consider third party games on Nintendo platforms because he's never had a reason too.

Well to be fair it's also been awhile since Nintendo released a console that was technically on par with its competitors in the same generation, something that younger gamers like your cousin have never experienced either.  GameCube was the last to do that, and it also had decent third party support for most of its life although it missed out on some of the heavy hitters like GTA because of Nintendo's self-fulfilling prophecy of being labeled as a "kiddie" company for their refusal to develop and / or promote M-rated games on their consoles... which ironically is now back in the news as Ubisoft announced it'll no longer make M-rated games on Wii U because *gasp* they don't sell!

The problem is that did promote  M Rated games on the Gamecube. They released Eternal Darkness and made a deal with Capcom for the Resident Evil franchise. When Iwata took over for Yamauchi during the GC era, he actively pursued third parties and got little in return. He made a deal for Tales Of, which was supposed to net multiple titles and got Tales of Symphonia in return. He went after Metal Gear and even gave Konami a team to develop it for them and Konami didn't promote the game. "They didn't want it taking away from MGS2 sales", the game didn't even release at the same time. Sega titles sold better on GC on average than did on even PS2. Yet PS2 and Xbox got better support from Sega. They still got gimped 3rd party games. The Splinter Cell games on GC were half assed ports the PS2 version. Despite being more powerful, the GC version of third party games usually often ran the worse, they were often half assed ports of the PS2 version of the games handled by third tier development teams. The Gamecube is the prime example of why Nintendo platforms are where they are now in terms of third party support. Nintendo did what they everyone wants them to do now and handed cash to third parties for support. GC owners bought third party games and  they still got the shaft.

Quoted because this is the truth. 



HaloReach2014 on 23 August 2014

both of those are crap series