release and let it be!
Switch!!!
Should NoA publish Devils third? | |||
| No, another publisher should do it! | 45 | 40.91% | |
| Yes | 65 | 59.09% | |
| Total: | 110 | ||
They released Mario Party 10 without a second thought so clearly quality isn't the issue. They just know Devil's Third isn't going to sell anyway unlike Mario Party getting guaranteed sales on name alone.
| Einsam_Delphin said: They released Mario Party 10 without a second thought so clearly quality isn't the issue. They just know Devil's Third isn't going to sell anyway unlike Mario Party getting guaranteed sales on name alone. |
To be fair, Mario Party 10, as lame as it is, looks like a decent game compared to Devil Third
Predictions for end of 2014 HW sales:
PS4: 17m XB1: 10m WiiU: 10m Vita: 10m
Aerys said:
|
that is your opinion.
with regard to the thread, NoA should publish it, which should be in conjunction with NoJ and NoE have done. Regardless if it is not so good or a great game, you supported the dev team to do that game from the start. They should take the responsibility to publish it.
if they think it was a bad game to begin with, they should (the bigs from Nintendo) should push Valhalla to stop the development as it isn't worth it. Nintendo is in a bad position again and they haven't learned from their past mistakes on how handle this situation.

| Einsam_Delphin said: They released Mario Party 10 without a second thought so clearly quality isn't the issue. They just know Devil's Third isn't going to sell anyway unlike Mario Party getting guaranteed sales on name alone. |
Mario Party is okay for the genre that it belongs to, also it's not a broken game or full of glithches or whatever.
Also who else is going to publish a Mario Party game? That is like saying Sony has second thoughts of publishing an Uncharted game.

gabzjmm23 said:
that is your opinion. with regard to the thread, NoA should publish it, which should be in conjunction with NoJ and NoE have done. Regardless if it is not so good or a great game, you supported the dev team to do that game from the start. They should take the responsibility to publish it. if they think it was a bad game to begin with, they should (the bigs from Nintendo) should push Valhalla to stop the development as it isn't worth it. Nintendo is in a bad position again and they haven't learned from their past mistakes on how handle this situation. |
Not only my opinion, but the opinion of most reviewers you'll see
Predictions for end of 2014 HW sales:
PS4: 17m XB1: 10m WiiU: 10m Vita: 10m
| Aerys said:
To be fair, Mario Party 10, as lame as it is, looks like a decent game compared to Devil Third |
MP10 may be more technically and graphically sound, but the concepts and execution still fail miserably, and with these being the most important factors means the game still sucks overall.
ARamdomGamer said:
Mario Party is okay for the genre that it belongs to, also it's not a broken game or full of glithches or whatever. Also who else is going to publish a Mario Party game? That is like saying Sony has second thoughts of publishing an Uncharted game. |
Did you not read my second sentence? They knew probably before development even started that they were gonna release MP10 regardless of how good or bad it was because they know it'll make them money either way. They're not afraid of releasing glitchfest the game either, see Dark Moon. As long as the game is from an established franchise with iconic characters that are proven to sell, they'll release the game. Same deal with Uncharted, except of course they don't have any quality issues.
I find it funny that if Nintendo publishes a game it "tarnishes" their reputation. They didn't develop it. It's like saying Sonic Boom tarnishes their brand. No it didn't, it's just a bad game that got released on the system.
Einsam_Delphin said:
|
Animal Crossing: Amiibo Festival is looking like a far worse culprit of this than MP10.
I predict NX launches in 2017 - not 2016