@CanisWolfred
Ok, but the people buying Madden and FIFA on Xbox One and PS4 would at least know enough about video games, right? I just think alot of it has to do with people not caring about whether Nintendo has these games or not. I'm convinced that even if Wii U would have had an 8th gen graphically enhanced version of Black Ops II, Xbox One and PS4 fans still probably wouldn't have coughed up money to buy it on Wii U, instead of Xbox 360 and PS3. They would have waited next year for Xbox One and PS4, regardless of what Nintendo and 3rd parties did for the console, which is why Nintendo fans truly got the short end of the stick in all this, and nobody else. If anything, that would have just made Xbox One and PS4 fans even more excited about those consoles, because most of them think Wii U is an overpriced, underpowered, supportless machine that can't do jack against Xbox or PS. If Wii U can do well, then Xbox and PS must be better than that. That's the type of mindset people have when they're fans, and I know that, because people were critising Wii U BEFORE Xbox One and PS4 WERE EVEN ANNOUNCED.
It's pathetic as hell, then we're supposed to believe these people that say Wii U getting a gimped version of FIFA and Madden is Nintendo's fault. Last time I checked, EA released those gimpy pieces of s***s that I didn't buy, because of that. They don't know how to use a new 2011 PowerPC machine in comparison to ones from 2005-2006. End of story. So, go buy your FIFA on PS4 or whatever, because all the Nintendo fans got screwed by those same 3rd parties, regardless of the circumstances. Not all of this is directly a response to you @Canis, if that wasn't obvious already , and yes, I'm being somewhat dramatic.
EDIT: Also, Battlefield 4, Watch Dogs on PC, GTA 7th gen port... That is all, and if I have to explain why I brought up those games, I don't even.
I think it's pretty obvious that whatever Nintendo did, third parties would bail anyway. They'll say the demographics are not there, just like they're saying now. Nobody really is saying that the Wii U isn't powerful enough. I think Batman was the only game they said that. Most after all are available on the 360 and PS3 and still didn't come to the Wii U, so it's an irrelevant point.
This. Third parties are probably just going to keep making excuses for why they don't want to put games on Nintendo consoles.
Why? What reason is there to do such a thing? You don't abandon a gold mine if there's still gold to be found.
You abandon it if you're lazy or not creative enough. Most people would abandon a gold mine - it's difficult to find gold even if there's gold to be found. He's correctly saying that 3rd parties are not willing to entice that demographic to buy the game. It's obviously there, which is why people are buying Bayonetta 2, it just demands a good effort. Regardless, the point was that nobody abandoned Wii U because of the architecture, just because of the demographics excuse. Which is why no port of Disney Infinity, Skylanders etc missed.
Also, the PS3 missed plenty of games early on. You have a terrible memory, Dumedum.
It's not really a memory issue. I don't care enough. But can you list the games it missed (and didn't get eventually), honestly was not aware of that.
Well, looking at the lists on Wikipedia, it got most of the ones it missed eventually once the PS3 sales improved, but that's the point here: it's effort vs. return. The PS3 missed a bunch until people started buying more PS3's, and ports continued to improve as they learned more and it seemed worth the effort to put in.
Also, the PS3 missed plenty of games early on. You have a terrible memory, Dumedum.
It's not really a memory issue. I don't care enough. But can you list the games it missed (and didn't get eventually), honestly was not aware of that.
Well, looking at the lists on Wikipedia, it got most of the ones it missed eventually once the PS3 sales improved, but that's the point here: it's effort vs. return. The PS3 missed a bunch until people started buying more PS3's, and ports continued to improve as they learned more and it seemed worth the effort to put in.
I might write more later...
So it didn't miss the games eventually, and there were certainly not plenty. So it wasn't that complicated after all. Architecture therefore is never an obstacle. That's the point. If they thought they could sell the games on Wii U, they'd port all of them. Simple.
...which is also kinda my point? I'm just saying it would reduce the sales threshold - it'd reduce the risk, even slightly, therefore increasing the chances of them deciding to make a port. As of now, we're getting, what, 3 AAA ports within the next year? I think having even slightly higher chances is better than nothing at this point...
Architecture is a problem or bad ports would never exist. (An extreme example is the Saturn version of Symphony of the Night which is a 2D game on the best 2D Console there has ever been).
It has always been the case that most of the time ports are done with as little effort as possible. (Some are done well but they are the exception).
“30fps Is Not a Good Artistic Decision, It's a Failure”
Freedom of the press is for those who happen to own one.
I still think that Nintendo was looking at a pricing perspective. Since gaming is the majority of their business they can't afford to price themselves out of the market. Of course I've heard people thinking the WiiU should be 200-150 as well (which is nuts by the way) so no matter what they choose they are going to catch it. I also think the gamecube made them cautious. Aside from the lack of dvd functionalty (which to their credit at the time nobody knew how big the marketing the ps2 as a cheap dvd player that plays games would be) and the odd disk size, Nintendo made that system pretty beefy and gave it a very good library and it had decent 3rd party support. Still it didn't sale what they expected. So they are trying to make a game machine that offers value (BC and VC), options (controller options and gamepad) as well as trying to step up the graphics game without breaking the R&D bank. Which allows them to market the system at a reasonable price point. Nintendo doesn't have enough padding to take crazy chances. And citing the war chest isn't enough. Microsoft can take chances with xbox (although the investors hate it) because they have Windows and the phones and the rest of their portfolio. Sony... is sorta the same though they are patching holes still. Nintendo can't break the bank and have a flop because they are DOA. They can at least struggle through the WiiU situation as they keep adding to the library.
Taiko is good for the soul, Hoisa!
Japanese NNID:RyuNiiyamajp
Team Cupcake! 11/15/14
Team Spree! 4/17/19
I'm a Dream Fighter. Perfume is Love, Perfume is Life.
But most games that are on the PS4 and Xbox One are also on the PS3 and Xbox 360 which both are PowerPC based consoles. Why is porting to the Wii U so difficult ? It's just 3rd pary dev lazyness not difficulty. The dont essentialy have to port from PS4 to Wii U but from PS3. But no they dont care bout Nintendo unfortunately. We could have had GTA V, Call of Duty Black Ops 3 and other games on the Wii U but no 3rd party dev cares.
Forums
Topic: People are too quick to blame Nintendo for not going X86
Posts 41 to 49 of 49
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.