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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Ubisoft Mexico Comfirms Watch Dogs Wii U to launch Nov. 18(Update- Ubisoft comfirms Nov 18 NA, 21st Euro, and Dec 4 Japan)

genismeteor on 13 September 2014
flagstaad said:
episteme said:

SC: Blacklist has a stable framerate when you play the ghost or panther style, but it has problems when you play the assault style against multiple enemies.

AC4 has the worst framerate of all games that I played on Wii U (and it's the buggiest).

I was never interested in AC games, but I tried them to show support for third parties on Wii U... Damn... I played almost all Splinter Cell games and Blacklist is one of the best ones.

My prediction is that Bayonetta 2 will easily outsell all M-rated multiplats from Ubisoft on Wii U combined.

@bolded 1: Maybe that is why I did not found any problems with the game, I did not played it on assault style

@bolded 2: Very bold prediction, I think you are forgetting about ZombiU, that alone is 700k, then you will have to add 200k from AC IV, 260k from AC III, and 70k from Splinter Cell, and you can add maybe 100k - 150k from Watch_dogs, for a total of... 1.355 million units (I took WD for 125k). And that is a very big number for Bayonetta 2 alone, I don't think it will reach that number, sadly.

those games will have  combined ltd much higher than 1.35 million, but so will bayonetta 2.



Around the Network
oniyide on 14 September 2014
curl-6 said:
oniyide said:

Why even bring it up then. didnt make your argument better in any way.

How about you stop using percents as they dont give any actual data. 10% with a terrible install base is nothing. Even then so what? you picked ONE game out of dozens that have been released, the game you picked was a launch game that WAS bundled and it still has about 700k sales. Thats not good no matter how you want to spin it.

Because it shows an M-rated game has sold more than even a major NIntendo franchise.

Let me break it down: "Wii U gamers don't buy M-rated games" is a factually incorrect statement when 10% of them own ZombiU, an M-rated game. You can't just pretend 10% of the install base doesn't exist.

That's like saying "PS4 gamers don't buy Need for Speed" despite 10% of PS4 owners having Need for Speed Rivals.

No it is factually right. you are just cherry picking. It sold more than DKTF? come on man are you that desperate to lie to yourself that game hasnt been on the market for a full year yet. Zombi U has and it hasnt been bundled AND its on track to sell more than ZombiU. The game sold 700k, facts according to Ubi themselves, that aint crap. Nothing to be proud of, hence their statement. Now you could argue those are good or even decent sales, but if the publisher themselves say its crap, whose word do you think holds more weight? and that doesnt explain the other M rated games that did MUCH worse



oniyide on 14 September 2014

i could see Bayo 2 doing a mil. HOWEVER it needs to sell a mil at FULL price or close to hit. If it gets most of it's sales from bargain bins( which lets be real alot of these games do) it will be a moot point.



theRepublic on 14 September 2014

My question is why was it so important for those other versions to hit their date? Games get pushed back all the time, why not do it here? Was Ubisoft strapped for cash at the time? Did they mismanage the game so badly that it was too late to push back by the time they realized it was behind schedule?

The smart decision is to always have all versions release at the same time. I am sure they know that. Why did they mess that up?



Switch Code: SW-7377-9189-3397 -- Nintendo Network ID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
Switch - Super Mario Maker 2 (2019)
Switch - The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (2019)
Switch - Bastion (2011/2018)
3DS - Star Fox 64 3D (2011)
3DS - Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Trilogy) (2005/2014)
Wii U - Darksiders: Warmastered Edition (2010/2017)
Mobile - The Simpson's Tapped Out and Yugioh Duel Links
PC - Deep Rock Galactic (2020)

oniyide on 14 September 2014
theRepublic said:
My question is why was it so important for those other versions to hit their date? Games get pushed back all the time, why not do it here? Was Ubisoft strapped for cash at the time? Did they mismanage the game so badly that it was too late to push back by the time they realized it was behind schedule?

The smart decision is to always have all versions release at the same time. I am sure they know that. Why did they mess that up?


No that would not have been smart. The game was ALREADY pushed back twice. So yes it was very important for them to hit that date otherwise they would have lost sales. If your game isnt on the shelf it cant make money. Maybe they were scrapped for cash, maybe they did mismanage(hell the delays tell me they were mismanaged). The wii U version was going to be the worse selling by far anyone who thinks otherwise is lying ot themselves. So you might as well sacrifice the weakest link in the chaing anyway to maximize profits. So if they waited Watchdogs would have had stiffer competition in the fall/winter. So yes they did the best thing they could have did.



Around the Network
flagstaad on 14 September 2014
theRepublic said:
My question is why was it so important for those other versions to hit their date? Games get pushed back all the time, why not do it here? Was Ubisoft strapped for cash at the time? Did they mismanage the game so badly that it was too late to push back by the time they realized it was behind schedule?

The smart decision is to always have all versions release at the same time. I am sure they know that. Why did they mess that up?

It was important for 2 reasons... first the game was delayed already and it was losing hype, which could be even worse if released after this year E3 and in the middle of the summer when consoles and games sold their worst compared to the rest of the year. Second the numbers would reflect badly in their quaterly report, specially if they waited to a more purchase friendly month like september in which it would have to complete with another game with a lot of hype, Destiny.

The option to release at the same time was not available, they have limited resources and at the time many things were running against the Wii U version of Watch_dogs, it was behind schedule, it was the harder to code for, it had the most bugs and the simultaneous release of Black Flag (even early if take into account X1 and PS4) did nothing for the sales of the game which sold only 10% of which the other consoles did. They made the best bussiness decision available to them, split the Wii U team to help the better selling editions on time at the cost of slicing the version that was going to sell the least any way (based on previous sales data from their own games).

A good question is why did they allowed the team to get back together and complete the Wii U edition at all? it is going to sell bad (not sure how bad, I hope not too bad) I am not sure what it the answer to that question, but I am going to do my best to support that getting the game published for the system was the right one also, even if it is a delayed port, I rather have it late than never, and I know some other Wii U owners like it also.



curl-6 on 14 September 2014
oniyide said:
curl-6 said:

Because it shows an M-rated game has sold more than even a major NIntendo franchise.

Let me break it down: "Wii U gamers don't buy M-rated games" is a factually incorrect statement when 10% of them own ZombiU, an M-rated game. You can't just pretend 10% of the install base doesn't exist.

That's like saying "PS4 gamers don't buy Need for Speed" despite 10% of PS4 owners having Need for Speed Rivals.

No it is factually right. you are just cherry picking. It sold more than DKTF? come on man are you that desperate to lie to yourself that game hasnt been on the market for a full year yet. Zombi U has and it hasnt been bundled AND its on track to sell more than ZombiU. The game sold 700k, facts according to Ubi themselves, that aint crap. Nothing to be proud of, hence their statement. Now you could argue those are good or even decent sales, but if the publisher themselves say its crap, whose word do you think holds more weight? and that doesnt explain the other M rated games that did MUCH worse

It would only be factually right if M-rated games sold 0 copies on Wii U. ZombiU alone is 700,000 reasons why it's not factually right.

Again, 10% of an player base cannot just be discounted.



oniyide on 14 September 2014
curl-6 said:
oniyide said:
curl-6 said:

Because it shows an M-rated game has sold more than even a major NIntendo franchise.

Let me break it down: "Wii U gamers don't buy M-rated games" is a factually incorrect statement when 10% of them own ZombiU, an M-rated game. You can't just pretend 10% of the install base doesn't exist.

That's like saying "PS4 gamers don't buy Need for Speed" despite 10% of PS4 owners having Need for Speed Rivals.

No it is factually right. you are just cherry picking. It sold more than DKTF? come on man are you that desperate to lie to yourself that game hasnt been on the market for a full year yet. Zombi U has and it hasnt been bundled AND its on track to sell more than ZombiU. The game sold 700k, facts according to Ubi themselves, that aint crap. Nothing to be proud of, hence their statement. Now you could argue those are good or even decent sales, but if the publisher themselves say its crap, whose word do you think holds more weight? and that doesnt explain the other M rated games that did MUCH worse

It would only be factually right if M-rated games sold 0 copies on Wii U. ZombiU alone is 700,000 reasons why it's not factually right.

Again, 10% of an player base cannot just be discounted.

sure it can when those numbers equal to be not good, which is exactly what Ubi thinks. 



curl-6 on 14 September 2014
oniyide said:

sure it can when those numbers equal to be not good, which is exactly what Ubi thinks. 

Somebody call Oxford, "none" has been redefined to mean "700,000 or less"... :p



flagstaad on 14 September 2014
oniyide said:

No that would not have been smart. The game was ALREADY pushed back twice. So yes it was very important for them to hit that date otherwise they would have lost sales. If your game isnt on the shelf it cant make money. Maybe they were scrapped for cash, maybe they did mismanage(hell the delays tell me they were mismanaged). The wii U version was going to be the worse selling by far anyone who thinks otherwise is lying ot themselves. So you might as well sacrifice the weakest link in the chaing anyway to maximize profits. So if they waited Watchdogs would have had stiffer competition in the fall/winter. So yes they did the best thing they could have did.

The original delay (from holiday 2013 till summer 2014) was related with the quality of the game, the engine was working, the gameplay was there, but it was boring as hell, a lot of the city was empty, and it had many bugs, if released on that state the average review was going to be around 60, not the 77 - 80 that it finally got, yes it was that bad, so they delay it for all consoles, in January things started to look a little better but they need manpower to release before June, and that is when the Wii U edition got sacrified, because of the poor sales of Splinter Cell and Black Flag.