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

It's Nintendo's problem, but not in the sense that they released an incapable machine. It gets thrown into the PowerPC crowd, as I mentioned, and Xbox 360/PS3 can't run Child of Light, CoD, AC, Splintercell, etc. at 1080p.

EDIT: It's definitely a side effect of a transitional period, along with budgets.

@Kaze_Memaryu

1. Need for Speed Most Wanted U best version of a big name franchise. Still didn't sell well.
2. See #1
3. Sony and Microsoft don't make any in house games? They financially back games that don't sell well? What planet are you on? A planet where Halo, Uncharted, Rachet and Clank, Jak and Daxter, Sly Cooper, Gears of War, Forza, Gran Turismo don't exist?
4. Problem is that game quality all comes down to opinion.

As I stated, not all ports were bad, but most of them. But Need for Speed was still too well-established on Playstation family to become instantly successful.
Besides, NFSMWU wasn't well-advertised at all, not to speak of the fact that EA barely mentioned the WiiU version being the most advanced one.

2. See #1

Covered above.

3. Sony and Microsoft don't make any in house games? They financially back games that don't sell well? What planet are you on? A planet where Halo, Uncharted, Rachet and Clank, Jak and Daxter, Sly Cooper, Gears of War, Forza, Gran Turismo don't exist?

None of those were system sellers, except for Halo. Rachet & Clank was Naughty Dog without any active Sony ivolvement (second shot at establishing a Sony mascot, didn't work again), Jak & Daxter was Insomniac under the same circumstances. Sly, GoW, Forza and GT sales figures were underwhelming. And just throwing out money to developers so they make games is simply ordering exclusives, they still didn't develop a single game themselves.

4. Problem is that game quality all comes down to opinion.

Stability, balancing and logical storytelling have no opinion. Add to that the mindless increase in microtransactions, on-disc DLC and developers who are too lazy to make 60fps games nowadays (as well as lying developers everywhere), and you can see what I mean.

Rahcet and Jake both had Sony invovment since Sony published them and owned both IP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment#Soft...

All aside from Insomniac (which made Ratchet & Clank not Jak & Daxter) are 1st Party brands from Sony, tho Ratchet & Clank is owned by Sony even tho Insomniac created it.

Okay, I wasn't aware of that ownership, but your example doesn't work. It would be more fitting to compare it to Monolithsoft or Camelot (both owned by Nintendo), who still make games by themselves, but exclusively work for Nintendo and Nintendo consoles.
Whether Sony owns these developers or not barely makes a difference. They still never developed a game on their own, instead requiring other companies to do the job. As such, Sony didn't do anything except dishing out money - the same applies to Microsoft (Microsoft Game Studios is merely a publisher, don't even try).
That's not even slightly the same thing as Nintendo's situation.

@Kaze_Memaryu All I can do at this point is LOL at your post. None of those were except Halo were system sellers? Sales of them were under performing? Now your just grasping at straws. They are all IP's owned by Sony or Microsoft and are either developed in house or had an outside company hired to make them. Point is they all still are owned by Sony or Microsoft and sell very well. Nintendo isn't the only company making good games that people buy the system to play.

How does Nintendo get involved? Because Shiguru Miyamoto advises other Nintendo developers? PS people will work together. Does Kaz Hirai need to visit developers in his Chariot of Glory for Sony to be involved with making the games? Sony made the PS4 with its first-party developers in mind too.

Umm dude Microsoft owns about 20 studios in all man. Hell most of them were made either internally or though a aqustion.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Studios

@shingi_70 But it's not the same because they don't have Microsoft in the name even though they are owned entirely by Microsoft.

@Kodeen It's simply that it's not Sony themselves - not the same company which built the Playstation family, but external studios, workplaces that function independently to Sony headquarters. They get their projects, and how they handle them is completely outside of Sony's control. Not even concepts are created by Sony, but always by others.
No matter what game supposedly is from Sony, it's always an extra company with an own name developing it, not Sony's headquarters - not the same building where the hardware is designed and maintained. They create a distiction by giving those external studios explicitly different names. SCE London is SCE London, not Sony Computer Entertainment, period.
Nintendo did the same same several times (Metroid Prime, Golden Sun, Pokémon), and stricktly speaking, those are games from Retro Studios, Camelot, and GameFreak, respectively, NOT Nintendo.

@jaz007 Miyamoto's position isn't the same as in the past, but he's still an integral part of Nintendo's game development. Hirai is Sony's president, but not in any way involved in game development (well, maybe he was before, but I don't know), so the comparison should be Iwata and Hirai, if anything. But my point doesn't depend on single persons. It's about which company the development team(s) belong to.
Sony has no game developers in their main building, they entirely focus on the hardware, leaving games to other companies, even if they own them.

@Kaze_Memaryu Geez before insulting other companies do a bit of research.
http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/?name=god+of+war
http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/?name=gran+turismo
http://www.vgchartz.com/gamedb/?name=uncharted

I still wish KH3 was coming to Wii U. SE coulda seen how sales worked out if they released one of those KH remixes on Wii U. Just sucks

Or take the less risky move of making it digital only. Just an idea of getting it on Wii U that would be lot less cost. But as stated before I can't entirely blame them.

If Kindom Hearts III ends up being on Wii U(I'm not saying it is, or isn't), then I could see the remix showing up on Wii U.

Kingdom Hearts 2.5 is a PS3 exclusive.

The freaking Kingdom Remix games AREN'T EVEN COMING TO ANY SORT OF XBOX PLATFORM.... NOW HOW DOES THAT MAKE SENSE???

ITS ALMOST LIKE... SQUARE ENIX WANTS TO PRETEND THAT KINGDOM HEARTS IS A SONY EXCLUSIVE (SOMETIMES) EVEN THOUGH ITS OBVIOUSLY NOT.

@brewsky
Oh, NVM then. I thought it was on Xbox 360... That doesn't make any sense, since Xbox One is getting 3.

Exactly the point I make and why Wii U makes more sense.

The PS3 and 360 have very different architectures, so they probably didn't think it was worth it.