For What It's Worth, Watch Dogs 2 Launches This November

i never gotten the first one. i may plan on getting the PC version more then a console version.

In before the people that never played Watch_Dogs on Wii U slate it.

I found it great to have on Wii U, as it offered something no other game did, and it did it really well.

I'll keep an eye on the sequel, but probably only if it comes to the next console I buy, or goes really cheap on PC.

I never bought it either

I did. Haven't spent much time on it since, but I wasn't impressed by what I saw.

i bought the first one for £4.99 a few weeks back it kept glitching so i haven't bothered with it much since

Woo-pti-doo... Too bad we'll never get this low-quality GTA pseudo-clone...

Oops, my sarcasm detector just exploded.

I actually got Watch Dogs on the Wii U, albeit as a Christmas present, and had a lot more fun with it than I expected. Hacking into camera's and blowing up enemies without them ever seeing you offers up one of the most satisfying feelings you can get in a video game.

I wouldn't call it an amazing game, but it was different from the usual games I play and had plenty of fun moments. A high 6 out of 10, perhaps a 7 out of 10 if I'm in a good mood. I'd prefer to play this sequel on the Wii U, but I know that is very unlikely, so I'll probably end up getting the Xbox One version instead.

'While the publisher has come under fire from Nintendo fans in recent years, it's worth remembering that it was one of the few major players to at least attempt to service the needs of Wii U owners.' - This is something I wish more people would remember. Whilst Ubisoft didn't offer the most amazing of support for the Wii U, they were still one of the few major 3rd party companies to try and support the Wii U, and for a far longer time than others. I appreciate their effort, particularly as Child of Light still remains my absolute favourite game of generation 8 so far.

@Souldin Exactly. Ubisoft still released ZombiU, Rayman Legends, Assassin's Creed 3 + 4, a Tom Clancy Game (I think), Child of Light, and Watchdogs on Wii U. But they get endlessly criticised. What the hell do Nintendo fans want?

I'm just not interested.If ubisoft starts this Bullcrap again with NX March release then they are fully to blame for it not selling 4 months later,If this is true why is it that when it's finished on a nintendo' platform first (Rayman)we have had to wait until the other Two xbox,ps to have finished.If its indeed out on NX Why can't they wait till march.My personal view is its not coming out on Nintendo's new hardware. UBIESOFT!!!.

I think the majority of the disdain towards Ubisoft comes from that Rayman Legends delay,if that hadn't happened then they would be held in much higher regard.With hindsight though it really was a silly move,as it ended up selling poorly everywhere anyway. If it had been released on time ,the Wii U sales would have been much higher and probably not any worse on the other consoles than they ended up being. Also who knows, if it had arrived on time,the Wii U's fortunes could have turned out differently,making it a more viable plarform for Ubisoft to continue to support.It's delay was the beginning of the end for the Wii U.

Because you think... the game will come out on Nintendo platforms...

and will have... exclusive DLC...

and maybe Ubisoft are biiiiiiiiiiiiiiig Nintendo fans, right?

Of course, they'll take their sweet time to develop a Wii U version after doing a simultaneous PS4 and Xbox One launch. They will, I'm serious!

@BensonUii Yup, I think you got them all...

Isn't it supposed to be "Watch_Dogs?" I remember Ubisoft pointing out that they want it spelled that way.

@OorWullie You're right. Also the Yves Guillemont review in which he said "Wii U gamers only like Just Dance" or something along those lines and the Watch_Dogs Wii U 6 month delay to "improve features" (but they did the usual off TV gameplay and active map on the GamePad screen like they did with their other ports) probably caused even more disdain.
They left Wii U for dead.

@BensonUii "It was release 6 months later, why would you expect it to sell? Blah blah blah"
But really, why would you expect a full price game to sell 6 months after initial launch when by that point everyone knows it's an average game with some technical hiccups and when you can buy a better version at a cheaper price?

Well I bought the first one...it is really glitchy(I fell through the world with the spider tank and momentum glitches!) but I had fun with it!

Not a huge loss. Personally I am rather biased against Ubisoft - its just another EA for me. Havent bought a game from them in probably 10 years - Zombi U is the only exception - its still sealed though - maybe I am gonna sell it

I'm sure w2 is not coming to Wii u or NX. The first game sold so poorly that ubisoft just won't revisit that path again.

I kinda liked the first one. More than any recent GTA to be honest. Sure it was rough around the edges but it was an ok entry and I'm sort of looking forward to the next one on some platform.

Watch Dogs on Wii U was a train wreck.

First one only sold well because there was nothing else at the time and it's an average and boring game.

Everyone will remember this, watchdogs 2 won't sell very well and there won't be a watchdogs 3.

I've literally got Watch Dogs on Wii U being delivered today from Amazon. Reading these comments I hope I haven't made a mistake!

Hahaaa..... oh no, not this again!

I'm not a huge Ubi fan, but I'll at least give them some credit that they actually did get their feet wet with Wii U unlike some other developers I know.

But yeah, the Wii U version of the first one never really ran that well...even with it's delay and whatnot. Ubi definitely gave up on Nintendo there at the end.

"Complete with "will it, won't it" Nintendo-exclusive DLC?"

Lol, dlc for a game that won't arrive! It won't arrive on Wii u. The Wii u is dead and Ubisoft has enough of the Wii u anyway!

I really hope the Nx doesn't launch with ports of games that came out four-six months prior. It really would be the Wii U all over again.

"but we could potentially see an NX version in 2017 - a situation which feels awfully familiar, for some reason."

Everything about NX is starting to feel awfully familiar to Wii U.

They'll port it to NX to see if it sticks. If it doesnt, they'll be their arms up and say "Least we tried"

Really looking forward to see what they do with the sequel as I loved the original even if there was problems.
I'd gather there will be an NX port, cause Ubisoft/

The first one was crap on Wii U. Framerate was appalling and it looked like a sub par 360 game visually.

Fingers crossed it comes to NX and that it builds on the solid ideas the first one gave us.

I keep forgetting that the first Watch Dogs actually released for Wii U. Which is weird, as I own the disc.

Also, "last major Ubisoft release" on the console? How dare you insult Just Dance! It's all Nintendo gamers want, that's why Zombi U is Ubi's best selling title on the console!

"...the chances of it coming to the Wii U are slim to none..."

Lol, that's not even accurate. Its more like, "There's no way on God's green earth this will be on Wii U."

NX, maybe. That's probably where they slim to none part should go. Even if it does make it to NX, it will be another instance of a game that has already been out to the masses for way too long, and no one will care that its on the system. Some of the same problems that plagued the Wii U's launch.

There's some awesome comments in here!

With that said I still have some respect for them. After all they gave us more games then most 3rd parties and good enough quality. Lets also hope those rumors a while back about Beyond Good and Evil 2 are true!

@OorWullie I have seen many people over the years saying stuff like this, so this isn't really directed specifically at you, but...

Do you really think that if Ubisoft released Rayman Legends earlier and as just a Wii U exclusive that it would have somehow sold millions? I find it hard to believe something like a million people just decided to no longer buy. the game because of a delay. The majority of sales for the game were not on the Wii U. So to me, it looks like that multi platform release definitely helped out.

@RainbowGazelle When it comes to bringing games to the WiiU or any other console, come on time or don't come at all. It was late, and they barely did anything with the WiiU game pad. I wouldn't want Watch_Dogs 2 on the NX because it would come MONTHS after the release and then it wouldn't sell well. I guess if they did a Ultimate edition with all the DLC and add NX than that would be fine. Yea, Obisoft tried I will grant them that, but still Watch_Dogs came to late and to little for it to really sell at all on the WiiU.

I recall being really excited for this game until I read that it was prone to glitching and occasionally had some technical issues on the Wii U. I decided to wait for a price drop. After my experience with multiple ACIII freezes (though I suspect this had something to do with the game phoning home to Ubi's servers), I'm even more hesitant to pick this up.

I'm bummed that there is a "complete edition" on other consoles, and we'll never get it because the DLC was never released on Wii U. I would definitely have double-dipped if there had been a Wii U release.

I for one would be happy to play Watch_Dogs 2 if it were to arrive on Wii U, but considering that they hadn't even bothered porting the Bad Blood expansion to Wii U (damn you so much Ubisoft), I'm not getting my hopes up.

Yes, the frame rate wasn't the best, and the story and vocal performances were stupid (though my expectations are not high of any narrative produced by Hollywood and its subsidiary factions), but the gameplay, which is what matters most here, was a lot of fun. The stealthy gang hideout stages were exhilerating and I loved the online multiplayer. I'd love to play a game like this in VR.

No one is going to mention how absurd this teaser is? Unless that phone has some sort of morphing physical surface feedback... that guy is just randomly squishing terminal windows around and hoping it will do something. Is he supposed to be so familiar with it that he knows where it all is without looking? Then, why isn't it all scripted so he doesn't have to touch it. What is the point of even having it visually spit out logs in a command-line interface in windows so small that you can't even see them and then also not even try. I just... all I could do was think about the absurdity and then there was random snowy TV imagery including the terrifying SPIRAL OF DOOM!

There must be something here for fans of the first that I'm not seeing, but with a sequel to a game with such mixed to negative reputation I'd think they'd want a stronger teaser suggesting how it will be better this time. :/

It appeared that Ubisoft tried harder than any third party to support the Wii U. I do think that the squandered opportunity to release Rayman Legends on Wii U first had a good chance of helping Wii U sales in the West and the sales of the game itself. Unlike the giant games, the smaller games tend to do well when it is available on one platform for awhile and gets positive press before coming to another.

Even then, they were classy enough to release a pretty great and unique challenge game during the wait. Didn't help Wii U public perception, though.

The bigger sin of Ubisoft is the mediocrity of some of the game releases. For me all is forgiven, though, as Rayman Legends and Child of Light were fantastic and unique. My guess is that Rayman Legends will be one of the games that Wii U collectors in 5-10 years will consider integral.

I'm curious about the DLC problems with almost all 3rd party Wii U games. I'm guessing it's because the ports are all outsourced and the logistics of DLC are problematic. I'm wondering where the breakdown is, though, because DLC development is typically less intensive.

I wonder if it's just a figure like 10% of people buy DLC and 10% of 0.01% of sales just isn't worth even the little risk it would be? I'm genuinely curious because it seems like it's publicly damaging, personally offending to customers, and money on the table.

Hopefully it's not a hardship of some kind levied by Nintendo. That would be a major shame, but I won't jump to place blame unless there's some real evidence.

@greengecko007

That part is an interesting topic. What I will say to that though is that Ubisoft jumping ship right before their release date caused irreversible damage to the Wii U's image and all other third parties ended up doing the same.

Now, I personally find that launching on Wii U first, then porting would have given them the same numbers. It was a decision I've never agreed with that continued to send the Wii U into a tailspin. It could be easily argued that the Wii U would have ended up cratering anyway cause Nintendo couldn't get their ducks in a row fast enough, but the Rayman "business-move" delay was a crucial moment that helped flat-line the Wii U permanently.

I simply don't agree with it cause they were so close to the release date, and pulled the rug out from the people who pre-ordered. And Ubisoft's, "Oh sorry, here's another demo" didn't help matters. I just saw it as bad business, even if they sold a couple more copies as a multiplatform release in the long run.

In summary:
From the get-go, I don't believe it was ever possible to earn enough back to make the "business-move" a success, so they should have just stuck with the plan (release the Wii U first, then release the others later) and they would have likely ended up with the same numbers. But in doing so, it caused damage to their image, and to the Wii U.

Don't care.
Trying to remember how many ubisoft games I have.
It's nearly 0.
Love Rayman, but as for most of Ubisoft games, if I wanted core gamer games is own a different console!

@MoonKnight7 I think I'll meet you halfway and say that, completely in hindsight, the best outcome would've been to release on Wii U first, then release on PlayStation systems later, and just not bother with Xbox systems, which I think accounted for the lowest sales group. Porting to Xbox systems is also what caused the delay I think. Something about Microsoft having a tendency to not approve games out on other systems already.

Looking at the numbers though, I'd still have a hard time being convinced that the sales on Xbox systems would have been outweighed by Wii U owners earlier on in the year. A move like this would've have somewhat balanced profit interests and also consumer interests.

Hopefully an enhanced port will launch with the NX with all the DLC. I really enjoyed the first game on the Wii U.

when they make another a good game, call me

I had no idea they were making a sequel... I was under the impression that the original flopped.

I can't get hyped about this game but will see what it is all about at E3.

@gcunit most people's problem with the Wii U version was that it came to the system so much later than everyone else and it was full price when it was being heavily discounted on other platforms.

To be fair, Ubisoft are also the guys who had the then-very-hotly-anticipated Rayman Legends finished and ready to ship for Wii U, then delayed it for months and months to port it to Playstation and Xbox and release it simultaneously.

Then they proceeded to release games on Playstation/Xbox while the Wii U got the same games months and months later.

So logical.

I think Ubisoft, should this come out on a Nintendo system, try to keep other releases in mind. The original May release would've been really good and I planned to get it then, but the delay led me to pick up Kirby instead. Then the new release date was the same week as Smash Wii U and OR/AS so that's where my priority was.

@Mr_Zurkon I bought it for £12, good value.

@Clownshoes Clearly different people have different standards of acceptability. I don't understand how you can say it looked pretty terrible, as visually it was a treat IMO. And I can honestly say I didn't notice any framerate issues in 50hrs of gameplay.

How much of it did you play?

Also, I thought Deus Ex and Need for Speed were meant to have their best versions on Wii U

They sold enough to make a sequel? Well the game had some decent ideas so perhaps the sequel will pay off.

@gcunit I owned it on Wii U, and I felt that it was mediocre.
At best.
It didn't do anything stupendously wrong, but it didn't do anything that justified releasing it so much later than other versions, either.

I hold no expectations for its successor.

@smashbrolink I'm not sure how when a game is released on Wii U compared to other consoles affects whether the game is any good or not. Are we saying we're incapable of judging a game objectively and have to make the game a scapegoat for the business decisions of the developer?

As someone who finished the campaign, and dabbled in the online aspects, I found the game played great, looked great, and filled a Wii U niche nicely. I don't care when it released. I would give it a minimum 8/10 score, but from memory I think I was giving it more in the region of 86% when I finished it. I've got hundreds of unfinished games, but I was happy to play this one through, and have loads of extra content to revisit if I ever get round to it (I found the information about the Chicago landmarks interesting, but didn't really bother with them at the time, for instance).

Watch_Dogs would have been a lot more enjoyable without the main story. I still put it in on occasion to play the AR games and mini-games. I loved playing the Foursquare game. I just wish they would have had something like Ingress that would have been more multiplayer and active than the stupid invasion stuff they did. As for the main story, it was mostly uninspired and became a chore to finish.

I enjoyed it more than gta but I pretty much enjoy all open sandbox games more than gta. That's not dissing Rocksteady as RDR is my favorite open sandbox game.

The sequel no one asked for.

@SetupDisk *Rockstar

One day I might play the first on the Wii U and one day , but only if I'm drunk or something, I might decide to play this sequel on PC. Of course both games should cost less than $10... together.

Didn't get the first one and don't plan on getting this one. Pretty sick of getting burned at this point. Ubisoft won't get my money. Besides, the first game was the definition of mediocre from what I remember.

@gcunit I would be able to agree with you more easily if it weren't for the fact that it was purposefully delayed, then sold for the same price almost a year later, when other versions were already being sold for less.
It was a mark against the developer to treat the Wii U fanbase as if they were starved for Watch Dogs and were desperate enough to pay full price for it en masse a full year after Ubisoft had obviously stopped caring about the game.

The full game itself wasn't really worth that high a price to begin with. I got it for just about $20 and I felt that that price was just right, for the content on offer, but I would never have bought it for $50, let alone $60 or more.

@BensonUii
It's hard to find a single 3rd party game that's sold over a million copies on Wii U.

Most 3rd party games, AAA, exclusive or otherwise, sold between 50,000 and 500,000

Those are just the facts. Make of it what you will.

@smashbrolink
When Tomb Raider releases on PS4 this holiday season (a year after the fact) it's going to be full price regardless of whether it was out on another system for a year. Even though you can pick that game up for 25 bucks on Xbox.

Yet it seems only Wii U gamers think they don't have to pay full price for brand-new games on their system. You don't get the right to pay $20 for a game until they've had a chance to collect full price sales from players on that system for a few months. The reason you could get it so cheap on other consoles is because they had already collected full price sales from those gamers. But you can't just expect them to skip that process- that's what keeps them in business.

@JaxonH
It's no better for them to be doing that with Tomb Raider than Ubisoft did with Watch Dogs.

This isn't a "Wii U gamers" thing, this is a "Bad developer decisions" thing.
Delaying the game when there was no reason to do so for the Wii U was already a mark against them, but then they made Wii U gamers pay the same price as if it weren't already a year old game that people had already been playing on their PS3's and 360's. [Many Wii U owners were also multiconsole owners, ya know]
I can't recall precisely, but I believe there was also some optional content missing.

But I digress; the point is that Wii U gamers shouldn't have been treated any differently than the others.
If they're only going to charge $20 on any other system, for the exact same game, then there's no reason for them to scalp Wii U owners just because they released it late there.
When it came out on the Wii U, it was not a brand new game any longer.
Ubisoft treated Wii U owners as if they were desperate idiots that would buy anything they shoved down their throats.
You don't get to suddenly decide that it's fair to make Wii U owners pay more than others for a year old game.
And, again, the same goes for cases like Tomb Raider coming to PS4; that's NOT a new game. Anyone wanting to play it has the option of picking it up for the XBone or PC.

Their sales bombed because of it, and I'm hoping it taught them a valuable lesson about how they should NOT go about things when approaching the NX with their games.

@greengecko007 rayman legends sold the best on wiiu just saying. Lool and trust me i know my brother is a ubisoft marketing manager for europe.

@driftydrift

Rayman Legends did not sell best on Wii U. I don't know where you get your information but the only estimates we have are on VGchartz, and last I checked even the PS3 version out sold it.

@smashbrolink
Yeah yeah I know that's what so many Wii U gamers use as their excuse. "It's bad developers". But see they didn't buy that game even after it dropped to $15 just mere months after launch. They didn't buy Splinter Cell Blacklist, or Rayman Legends, they didn't buy any other 3rd party port either.

The reason the other platforms were paying $20 is because they had already been charged $60. So all the people who are willing to pay full price for it did so- The lower price was to entice people who weren't willing to pay $60. That's how prices work.

But you seem to think that just because the game was available on other consoles, that the entire process of selling for full price can be skipped on Wii U. That we were somehow entitled to a $20 price tag right out of the gate simply because that was the price at the time on other consules. No. Players on other consoles paid their dues. They payed full price for months and months. Wii U players did not. You don't get the right to a $20 price tag until you've paid your dues. What's going on elsewhere on other consoles is irrelevant.

So you might say to me, "but they could just go buy it for cheap else where". Well, sure, but only if they owned one of the other platforms it released on. And if that's the case then the person paid their dues on that platform. But you have to pay your dues on each and every platform before you see the price drop.

RotTR isn't a new game on Xbox One or PC but it will be a new game on PS4. I cannot stress this enough- you don't get to pay less until they've collected full price sales already to cover the cost of investment. Releasing later is unfortunate and it's something that, I agree with you- people should complain about if they want. But that still doesn't mean the game shouldn't be full price at launch.

Especially in the case of Watch D

@BensonUii

Well I do agree that it's the consumer's choice. There is no right or wrong in a persons choice to buy games. And I believe 3rd parties do try to entice Nintendo gamers to play on other consoles.

But people should own up to it, they should say I just don't like those types of games because I'm a Nintendo gamer. Not, "oh well YA that game came late, and that game was delayed, and that game didn't have this, and that game didn't have that... it just seems like excuses to cover up the fact that they don't like those types of games but don't want to appear as if they don't like those types of games.

It's not wrong to not buy a game but it is a result of the consumers. If the game doesn't sell it's because consumers didn't buy it. But it seems like instead of just saying yeah, we didn't buy it because of our preferences, it gets played off as everyone else's fault.

@JaxonH "They didn't buy Splinter Cell Blacklist, or Rayman Legends, they didn't buy any other 3rd party port either."
Yeah, because most of the third party ports on Wii U had issues that did not warrant a purchase, or released at too high a price for their age.

And avoiding a game because it's not receiving the same treatment as its twins on other systems, is not just some "excuse".

That's on the developers, and anyone saying otherwise is not putting the responsibility for bad ports on the right shoulders, because it's THIRD PARTIES that decide the content of said ports and the prices they go at.

And when you make the stupid business decision of trying to sell crap ports at new-game prices, especially after you've already made mistakes in the past that have basically lost all trust from a console's fanbase, you're going to see not only a drop off in sales for those initial efforts, but also a butterfly effect, wherein there's not enough trust from the console base to make future titles sell well either, unless harder efforts, over a longer term, are put in.
Ubisoft didn't make those harder efforts, and neither did the majority of the other third party scum that skipped town the moment they realized Wii U owners had had enough of their BS.

"What's going on elsewhere on other consoles is irrelevant."
No, it is not.
If it were, then those games would have sold better than they did.
But facts are facts; most of the games were old ports with issues, and DID NOT JUSTIFY A FULL PRICE TAG.

Wii U players don't "owe dues" to third parties for late, crappy ports.
If the multiplats are old when measured by the time of their INITIAL RELEASE, or have other issues like missing content or horrible optimization, then they should NOT be sold at new game prices.
PERIOD.
That's BASIC BUSINESS.
You don't go selling a slightly rotten fruit at the same price as a fresh piece if you want it to sell at all, and you don't go selling a game that's been ON A REGION'S MARKET FOR AGES as if it's JUST RECENTLY ARRIVED.
The console that a game has been on before makes literally no difference; a release date is a release date, and unless it's something like an overseas import that never had a chance of selling out here in the first place, old games should never go for full price.

ESPECIALLY if they want to entice people who've already played it elsewhere to double-dip for it.

Don't enable third party BS by pretending we somehow "owe them dues" for old games.
We don't owe them JACK.
ESPECIALLY if those old games don't even offer the OPTION of buying content that the others got the opportunity to purchase, like with Black Ops II.
If they want new game money, they put out new games.
Not wait a year then expect everyone to pony up the same price a second or third time depending on the console.

@BensonUii
No, he's not. Either it sold better or it didn't. User base has nothing to do with it.

You can better attach rate, but that's not really a fair comparison because all consoles have that core 10 million base of gamers and anything beyond that is usually the casuals who buy 3 games a generation. Only reason Wii U would have a better attach rate is because it sold so poorly aka doesn't have 60 million casuals diluting the attach rates

@jaxonh i think all thos is childish anyhow i must apologise as i was talking exclusively uk not the entire world so my mistake but rayman legens innitially tiped xbox 360 and ps3 for sales on wiiu at launch period rayman_legends_sells_more_copies_in_the_uk_on_wii_u_than_any_other_format that is the original nintendo life article headline cant paste the link. That was at the time the sales came out for the uk that year.

@BensonUii thats what i was saying dude lol.

@smashbrolink

A year is not that long. Just because a game doesn't get a simultaneous launch doesn't mean it should just be a handout

X-COM 2 just announced for PS4, and you can believe it'll be FULL PRICE. And unlike Wii U gamers, won't throw a fit and complain it should be $20 either

"realized Wii U owners had had enough of their BS"

I think it's the other way around. Why waste time bringing games to a console that flopped, and even then making goodwill with gamers bringing games to a dying console, and all they get for it is a middle finger while gamers scream "it's late it should be $20" and ignore the games.

Late... Pffft. We were lucky to be getting games from them at all given the circumstances.

@BensonUii

Totally agree. They should have. And just ported to PS later and Xbox if their policies changed.

But they did bring ZombiU as launch exclusive, and I RARELY see Ubisoft exclusives on any other console. But people aren't thankful for that. They seem to ignore the preferential treatment they receive and only focus on the bad. And then blow it out of proportion and hide behind it as reason for ignoring all these games.

It disturbs me greatly. Splinter Cell Blacklist is one of the greatest games on Wii U, same for Darksiders 2, but there's always "a reason" people skipped it, but never use those reasons with Nintendo. Nintendo delays finished games all the time and people still buy them

I don't get it.

@BensonUii

Well ya there is a lot of "screw Nintendo" but from a different group. Those people are usually the ones who supported AAA ports and wanted to see more.

Very rarely do I see the ones blaming publishers for them not buying their games do the same with Nintendo.

@BensonUii

It's like, people get wrapped up in the console war mindset and want the clout of having 3rd party support and AAA games. But they have no interest in actually playing them. It's just bragging rights.

Then when support gets shaky and publishers start pulling out and not releasing DLC, as soon as people realized it was only a matter of time before support completely dried up, then they feel embarrassed and quickly shift blame from "you took your games away from us because we don't actually buy them" to something which lets people keep some fanboy-minded dignity, "you can keep your games- we chose not to buy them cause we aren't satisfied... stupid publishers"

Not saying that's everyone, but I see a lot of it.

@BensonUii

It's a double standard either way,

It's cool to bash 3rd parties now it seems. So many great games released on Wii U from 3rd parties and almost all of them flopped. Which is fine, but to then spin it to make it appear it's all because of the publishers just gets under my skin. So many great games that were launch titles or released at same time or were well done, complete games and those were ignored just as much as the others.

Which tells me those excuses carry little weight.

@whodatninja
Ninja Turtles must had been on my mind. <_<

I got the first one with my PS4, and I haven't spent much time with it. I should actually sit down and play it at some point.

From the little bit I have played, my favorite thing to do is just walk around and see what the NPCs are all about.