they put two AC games on Wii U and they both bombed but all of a sudden you would buy Rouge? a game that is heavily tied to the two ones prior? right

what are these games you want? Cause GTA is out the window.

How do u know he didn't buy the other Assassin's Creed games on Wii U?

Do you have issues reading? Serious question because if you did you'd know microtransactions weren't even being compared to them in any context, the fact you even thought that makes me question if you could.

You just highlighted the thinking of why the userbase on Nintendo platforms ignore such games, the fact is they do have a choice and that is to not buy the game and save for something else or in this case drop it on Smash which would fill the void of not buying it until the next game they want on the platform. The are many games I want but I don't spend aimlessly especially with the commitments I have and I have a really good job so I imagine those who aren't as fortunate can't be dropping full price for a game in the bargain bins when Smash is out right next to it, if you have no commitements or live in your parents house it'll be hard to fathom.

You're champ[ioning a point that late ports sold on PS3 right? Those games were late ports and didn't sell, the are factors behind why and that's the point the are factors behind why the late ports didn't sell as well, some such as releasing games with missing features, modes, no access to DLC current and future to being released a long side big titles Like Smash, 3DW etc...

If you think you can approach the consumer with an approach of you have no choice then your understanding of them is as bad as some of your reading as even if someone really wants something the's always a limit, Nintendo's userbase passed that a while ago which makes third parties' wayward attempts to test the waters comical as the fanbase detects it like moths to lights. The funny thing is a games like ZombiU which had effort put in to it did well and was dropped.

I haven't had 3rd party "entitlement" since the GCN days, and that was b/c everything back then was on equal ground. When the PS exclusive GTA contract expired, and OG Xbox finally got it but Cube didn't, I was legit pissed.

But as long as Ninty stays a gen or 2 behind on HW power and features, I will never blame 3rd parties, Its like, after Nintendo got dumped by a certain fanbase during GC era, they just stopped trying (weaker hw etc). For wii U I'm still baffled how Nintendo didn't take advantage of the 1 yr headstart by having a real next gen console. After 2 straight gens of this weak hw bs, I think we can put to rest any dream of a grand Ninty return. The competitive SNES days are dunzo, faneto.

That's why us Fusion enthusiasts discuss theories that will help Nintendo fix some of their problems, without factoring in / practically 0 regard for major 3rd parties.

How is this thread allowed to continue? The title is basically flame bait and the OP doesn't clarify anything. It is very much a copy/paste without summary or commentary. I've read the first few posts in this 250+ thread and they basically say the same thing. Weird.

To be fair, even with the GCN there were issues that prevented many 3rd party games being easily ported. Max Payne got cancelled because the system didn't have enough RAM. However, this was an architechture choice rather than a "weaker system" choice.

Nintendo (very admirably I must say) went for shit hot super fast RAM, but as a result, didn't put as much of it in the box as the PS2 and especially OG Xbox had. This is great for environments being streamed in (as games like Metroid Prime do) and meant loading times on the GC developed software was lightning fast in comparison with especialy the PS2 (XB used HDD caching to help) however when games were designed to load a load of data into the RAM all at once, the GCN struggled.

Rockstar/Remedy stated they couldn't get the game running up to snuff on GCN and so that version of the game got axed.

In the case of GTA, you've also got the capacity limitations of the discs. Can you really break a game like GTA into multiple discs easily? Plus it has the added development costs. By that point in the systems life, it wasn't really worthwhile doing. While the Xbox was basically a PC in a box with it's Pentium 3 Processor and Ge Force GPU making that port much more straight forward.

Third parties just don't need Nintendo. Now that there are two better alternatives for them in Sony and MS, Nintendo just isn't needed. 

Even during the GameCube days though I remember that GCN multi-plats would often sell the worst by a fair margin versus the PS2 and XBox versions even when Nintendo did things like get Mario characters into games like NBA Street and SSX and EA emphasied the GameCube logo in TV marketing for those ads, those games still tanked on the GameCube. 

Emily Rogers did a piece on it a while ago, but yeah basically I remember that, things like Prince of Persia and other multiplats all sold worse on the GameCube. 

The real issue is that Sony/MS took away the gamer who bought a lot of of third party games on the NES/SNES ... that gamer grew frustrated with Nintendo during the N64 days and jumped ship to Sony (and maybe subsequently MS), but the Nintendo audience that bought a lot of third party games was already on the Sony bandwagon by the time 2000/2001 rolled around and Nintendo's never really gotten them back. They've just gotten stuck with a core Nintendo fanbase that buys primarily Nintendo games on their Nintendo consoles. 

Well, as a "fusionist" myself, I always thought Nintendo should have invested during the Wii/DS days and bought more studios and expanded their workforce. During the lifespam of most Nintendo consoles, the majority of games are from Nintendo. Software sales alone allowed the N64 and theGC to be profitable. Nintendo can survive a gen with sales close to 60-80 million units (HH and HC). This gen, Nintendo has faced problems from all angles: The WiiU didn't sell nearly as expected, the mobile market is eating handhelds, rising costs and HD developing costs are making games less profitable...

Third parties are difficult to satisfy at this point, at least in my opinion. Big western developers aren't interested in Nintendo consoles because most of their games don't sell as well (military shooters in particular). If this is because they expect to sell PS360 numbers on the device and moderate sales are not interesting for them (GTA V not being on the WiiU when it's everywhere else), or the Nintendo crowd don't care about those genres, I don't know. One thing I don't beliebe it's power as an excuse. I firmly believe that, if power was one of the main problems, the WiiU would have gotten (and still get) all those crossgen games: Destiny, most Telltale games, GTA V, FarCry 4, Wolfenstein TNO... But they aren't coming. Wii didn't get AAA titles from western studios, but you can't say they didn't support the system, and the same with the DS. Also, western developers never were really big on the handheld market, so when mobile appeared, they quickly abandoned it.

Eastern developers are different. They have supported more the Nintendo systems, specially on handhelds. But with the rise of mobile gaming, they have found a way to sell more risking less. If the next Nintendo system is the Fusion, they will be way more supportive than the western ones, that will probably ignore Nintendo for the most part. The thing with those is that they need to advertise their games properly on the west. Bravely Default was a great success, while other JRPGs haven't sold that much.

Nintendo have to rely on their own strenght, they have to focus on selling their hardware first. They can't waste time chasing the first year third parties. Look at what happened with the U: everyone promised to support it, and then quickly abandoned it. They need to bring the hardware numbers first, then third partis will slowly come to it.

P.S. : Seriously, why hasn't T2 brought GTA V to the U? I can understand Minecraft not coming to Nintendo because Microsoft doesn't want to lose those "kid's first console" sales (Mario, Mickey and Minecraft would be a real threat in that regard), but GTA is everywhere. It would have sold enough to justify the cost of the port at least.

Actually Western devs supported the Wii U a hell of a lot more than Japanese devs did. Same with the Wii. 

Rockstar is not interested in Nintendo consoles because they feel they are centered more towards the kids audience and GTA doesn't vibe with that. Nintendo probably feels the same way, I don't really think they want GTA on their systems. 

The Wii U was just a sh*t concept. It never was going to sell third party content. Why should a PS3 or XBox 360 owner buy a moderately better machine tech wise, that's 6 years late to the party just to play the same third party games they already have on their PS3/360? It was just a really poor miscalculation on Nintendo's part, that sales pitch wasn't attractive at all. "Pay us $350 to play the same 360/PS3 franchises you've been playing the last six years plus some Nintendo games". Audience: "no thanks, we'll wait for the Playstation 4 and a real generation upgrade". 

Im farily confident there was nothing PS2 had on GC except disc size.  IIRC GCN had more/faster ram, better cpu and gpu.  Heck some argued it was more efficient than OG xbox (resi 4 was arguably best looking game of that gen).  You're right about the disc limitations for certain games, but for a game like say, Vice City, a big chunk of that is audio files which could be further compressed or degraded in quality, and even have some tracks/stations removed if nec.  

Very true, MS just cleaned up the scraps that was already taken mostly by PS.  But to your point about using ninty chars. in some 3rd party games, there was ONE GC gm that performed the best of the 3, and that was the Soul calibur w/Link.  

My thing is, why not try to rectify the situation, don't take gamers for granted and don't flat out give up any segment of the game community.  Nintendo has lost a lot of respect for no longer "competing".  this passive aggressive, we're not really competing nonsense has to come to an end other wise Ninty will end up bullied out of business and become 3rd party/toy maker. 

Agreed with unquoted parts for sure, but for the 3rd parties not interested in Nintendo part, its up to NINTENDO to create enticing HW, that ensures the audience will get power and features like/better than the competition.  I hold the theory of "if you build it, they will come".  And nintendo simply hasn't been building it lately.  Its like, a straight man being accused of being...you know...and not defend himself! Very suspect.  Nintendo did react in the sega genesis war(fixed the blood issue in mortal kombat) but they got tired of that fight it seemed and just accepted the kiddie label, when they were actually very balanced all around during SNES and i'd guess NES days as well.