Topic: Square-enix: No DX11 = No KH3 on WiiU. Sonic Boom Devs: Here's the game running on DX11!

Just arrived on the thread. Why are we talking about DirectX being a factor on Nintendo and Sony consoles? Wii U doesn't run DirectX 11. Too bad, the Playstation 4 doesn't run it either. They both support a little thing called OpenGL 4, you know the worldwide standard for computer graphics on everything that isn't made by Microsoft?!

I saw this exact same topic multiple times on a GameFAQs board earlier, as well as IGN, word-for-word. Since OP's not even participating in the thread, I don't take any of this seriously.

Square-Enix had been Sony's supporter since their shares were bought by them (Sony), but now since Sony has sold all of SE shares, I don't think that future FF games will be Sony's exclusive.

I saw this on IGN as well.

Actually Sony never used 4K gaming as a argument at all, thay said you'll be able to download 4K films at some point in the future. It was Microsoft that went on about 4K gaming.

This whole 'it's not the cool thing to release games on Wii U' cracks me up. You guys honestly think game devs and publishers are like a bunch of high school kids? I can tell you a much more realistic reason why they don't release on Wii U. They look at success other 3rd parties had on the platform and say we don't think it would be worth investing in the Wii U.

>Was talking about FFXV.

Yeah, just realized that as well. Sorry about that. But then it boils down to even less logical reasons not to release KH3 on WiiU. The DX11 thing is a hoax, Squenix themselves have more than enough money to redo KH3 from scratch anytime, and PS4/XBone sales figures apparently lost a lot of momentum recently.
The only point for them is the possibility of performance issues, since the WiiU is still the slowest of the three next-gen consoles.

So was I. I have no clue why I typed KH3 at the end of my post :/ Weird

3rd party games just dont sell on the platform. Either ppl arent interested or choose to play them on different hardware. I'd like more 3rd part games on my Wii U but I cant get upset when publishers dont choose to support the console.

Except there are many times when they are like high school kids.

They don't release the game on certain platforms because their game won't sell on it. However, a previous series they've put on the platform was far below par and no one wants awful quality games, so they don't buy future installments or other games from the companies.

Then there are other times when a game "won't sell on a platform", but they haven't even tried.

And of course, the obvious, "there isn't a large enough install base, so I won't make games for it" even though making games would increase the install base.

If you expect on par ports than Nintendo should make on par hardware. These companies are there to make money and not take gambles all the time just hoping it pays off. It's not the job of the 3rd parties to make consoles sell. This is just a case of fans on forums turning the video game market into a new Mean Girls movie.

Implying Nintendo DOESN'T make on par hardware. Putting a game on the Wii U wouldn't be a gamble because it's got an install base just as large as the PS4 and One. Hell, for a time, it had an install base larger than the PS4 and One and a lot of devs still didn't put a port on it. Apparently, it is the job of the third parties to sell consoles, because when it comes down to it in an argument, Nintendo's got the best first party games hands down, but not being able to play the next Bethesda or EA game turns people off from buying the console.

@RancidVomit86
Well, considering Wii U has been proven to run DX11 level graphics, multiple times, and people still didn't believe it, it does get pretty annoying. I don't think 3rd parties are required to put games on Wii U, for the time being, but Wii U has more consoles than Xbox One and Wii U can run the games, so I see no reason why Nintendo gamers would be left out.

So what you guys are telling me is that Wii U is just as powerful as XB1 and PS4? It maybe able to run DX11 and others but that doesn't mean that as time goes on it will do it as well as PS4 or XB1. Sure there's not as big of a gap as there was between Wii-360-PS3 but there is still a gap. What I mean by on par hardware is that if people want a version every bit as good as all the other systems then Nintendo needs to create hardware just as good.

It's not 3rd parties fault that the demographic who buys Wii U is not buying 3rd party games. The is no incentive for them to invest in Wii U when every game put out on it under performs in sales compared to its counter part on other consoles. Ubisoft had openly said it cost them around 1.2 million to port games to Wii U and if they don't make a profit on any of the titles ported to Wii U then what drive do they have to continue throwing money away?

And @kyuubikid213 why is it 3rd parties responsibility to sell Wii U consoles? Its Nintendo's system not EA, Activision, or any other 3rd parties console. It's all on Nintendo's shoulders to get the console into consumers hands.

Edit: it looks like people are using their own personal feelings for Nintendo too much in this. It's a business and a business needs to make money to stay in business.

@RancidVomit86
There are still occurrences, where Wii U gets the short end of the stick. Xbox 360 and PS3 continue to get a majority of games coming to Xbox One and PS4(CoD, AC, Child of Light, etc), so Wii U's version of said games automatically derives from the 7th gen version, because of PowerPC.

They aren't putting any extra work into the Wii U version(besides GamePad), because they already have a version that will run.

I don't understand why people are still debating this Sony and Microsoft gave up to developer wishes they changed to x86 architecture so it would be easier and cheaper for developers to make titles for the two consoles and pc or to port titles between the three. They sacrificed the opportunity to even try backward compatibility in order to give developers what they wanted

Nintendoes what others don't... they released a console with a different architecture than all the rest and in addition to being different its also less powerful... this means that while for developers making a game PS4/Xbone/PC is not significantly more expensive than making it for just one of the three platforms, adding Wii U to the mix requires more time and effort which means more money..... maybe if the Wii U had a bigger install base porting or making games exclusively for the Wii U would make sense, but as things are bringing games for the Wii U costs more than third party can reasonably expect to recoup.......

An if rumours are true Nintendo had a x86 based platform that could match or even outpower PS4/Xbone. However, for some reason they scrapped that...... they may have thought that a console with power equivalent to the other two + gamepad would have been to expensive and preferred the gamepad, or were worried about backward compatibility and decided to stick with power pc....... fair enough but they can't just cry now about lack of third party support when everybody knew what third parties wanted.... Bethesda called Nintendo on this....

So they are using a cheaper method on a console that has failed to yield a return on their investment. Can you blame them?

@RancidVomit86
I think it's fine, but it still affects perception of the Wii U's ability.

This wouldn't be an issue if not nearly every 3rd party game was an insanely lazy and sloppy kind of port of insulting quality. They blindly expected to sell on the name alone, but porting old games with audiences far away from WiiU simply doesn't work out. So the actual issue is bad marketing from 3rd party devs.

It's not 3rd parties fault that the demographic who buys Wii U is not buying 3rd party games. The is no incentive for them to invest in Wii U when every game put out on it under performs in sales compared to its counter part on other consoles. Ubisoft had openly said it cost them around 1.2 million to port games to Wii U and if they don't make a profit on any of the titles ported to Wii U then what drive do they have to continue throwing money away?

I agree, not every developer (especially small studios) can gamble on a platform. But just assuming bad sales figures based on badly marketed (and badly produced) ports is pretty unprofessional from their end. But it's still their fault that nobody buys their crude ports. You reap what you sow.

And @kyuubikid213 why is it 3rd parties responsibility to sell Wii U consoles? Its Nintendo's system not EA, Activision, or any other 3rd parties console. It's all on Nintendo's shoulders to get the console into consumers hands.

That's a difficult point. Sony and Microsoft are completely dependant of 3rd parties to keep their consoles in business, since they never develop games themselves (they support some games financially at best, and barely any of them sold really well). But Nintendo serves both hard- and software, so of course it's to be expected from them to provide good stuff in the first place.
What many ignore, though, is that this means double duty for Nintendo. They can't just focus on games alone - they also need to maintain, expand, and observe the many services they offer. That takes loads of manpower, regardless of Nintendo's riches.

Edit: it looks like people are using their own personal feelings for Nintendo too much in this. It's a business and a business needs to make money to stay in business.

True, some people overtdramatize things in favor of Nintendo, and that's also where logic is ignored for the sake of whining. A lot.
But gaming business isn't the usual kind of business.
It's a market that is nearly impossible to figure out or calculate anything reliably. It's dependant of surprising the consumer with creativity beyond any possibilities other markets could possibly offer. But instead of balancing out both quality and profit, most developers (especialy the big ones) do everything solely for maximizing profit while disregarding quality.

@SCAR392 I can agree with that. But that's not the 3rd parties problem. Just an unfortunate side affect.