Topic: Wii U: the first 6-8 months that might have been...

[ShyGuy]

Many people have said that what the Wii U needs more than anything is games. I don't know if people realize how many games that were, at one point in time, going to release early in the Wii U's life that didn't come to be. Here is my list.

Confirmed Killed or Missing in Action:

Ghost Recon Online: The first Wii U third party game we saw playable at E3 2011, it is a mutliplayer online shooter that is currently in extended beta on the PC. http://ghost-recon.ubi.com/ghost-recon-online/en-us/home/index.aspx

Status: currently on hold while they focus on the PC version. https://twitter.com/GhostRecOnline/statuses/335518953105412097

Metro: Last Light: Single Player first person shooter that released on other platforms this May. Originally part of the Wii U E3 2012 sizzle reel, THQ backpedaled and then developer 4A games insulted the Wii U. http://enterthemetro.com

Status: THQ died, 4A badmouthed the Wii U CPU, and it ain't never coming now.

Aliens: Colonial Marines: Once upon a time this game was supposed to be good. I for one was looking forward to it. Turns out to be such a bad game they cancelled the Wii U version. http://www.sega.com/aliens-colonial-marines/

Status: Sega dun goofed and Randy Pitchford is slimey.

Sniper: Ghost Warrior 2: I think what excited people the most about this game coming to the Wii was the fact that it ran on CryEngine 3. http://www.sniperghostwarrior.com/

Status: Originally listed on the ESRB site as coming to the Wii U, It came out on March 12th 2013 for other platforms. DLC has been canceled for the other platforms, so I really doubt we are getting a Wii U release.

Delayed:

Game and Wario: this game was originally slated to come out before March 31st, but got pushed back to June 23rd, 2013. At least we got it before the fall.

Pikmin 3: First it was a launch title, then launch window, now we finally get it in the back half of summer. Apparently Miyamoto had trouble learning shaders.

Wonderful 101: When is the game coming out? Next week... in stores...  Actually September 15th in North America. Lucky Europeans get it earlier.

Wii Fit U: Another launch window game that got delayed. Now it is coming in December of this year. I'M GAINING WEIGHT OVER HERE NINTENDO

MultiPlatform Betrayalton:

Rayman Legends: Originally a Wii U exclusive scheduled for February 26th, 2013, it is now being sent to die on September 3rd. Reason for the delay? It's coming to the PS3, 360, and Vita as well. Yay...

Deus Ex: Human Revolution This was rumored to be coming in May 2013, but now it is delayed to later this  year and is hitting PS3, 360, PC and Mac as well.

So there we have it, TEN games that we may have had already on the Wii U. Multiple reasons why we don't have them, but it does make you wonder what if?

[BranDonk Kong]

Those are essentially 10 factors as to why the Wii U is on a downhill slide too. Pretty shameful.

[nickmitch]

Well, 9 really.

[Kytim89]

To add insult to injury, look at all of the good games that could have come to Wii U but didn't:

• Max Payne 3
• Spec Ops: The Line
• Bioshock Infinite
• Metal Gear Solid Reveangance
• Tomb Raider
• Dead Space 3
• Remember Me
• Fuse
• Dead Pool
• TMNT: Out of the Shadows
• Castlevania: Lords of Shadow

[azeke]

Scribblenauts Unlimited (launch game) never showed up in Europe.

I'm still bitter about it and the fact i eventually got it for 3 bucks on Steam recently only adds more salt to the wound.

Also Wii Fit U and Wii Party U were delayed.

They even delayed summer patch.

[BlackNMild2k1]

I would have bought DeadPool on the Wii U....

I probably would have been the only one, but I'd like to think that I am worth the effort!!  [/Sadness]

[broodwars]

Ubisoft is on record as saying that the Wii U version of Rayman Legends was delayed and ported to the other platforms because Zombi U and the Wii U in general were flops.  Looking at this list, I see a fair number of 3rd party games that would have come out if Nintendo were capable of selling Wii U hardware.  That doesn't excuse the 1st party and Wonderful 101 delays, though.  Those were caused by sheer incompetence, as Nintendo ignored 8 years of developer issues transitioning into the HD era and decided not to be ready to make HD games.

[RedBlue]

  Looking at this list, I see a fair number of 3rd party games that would have come out if Nintendo were capable of selling Wii U hardware.  That doesn't excuse the 1st party and Wonderful 101 delays, though.  Those were caused by sheer incompetence, as Nintendo ignored 8 years of developer issues transitioning into the HD era and decided not to be ready to make HD games.

I like how most of time you state your opinions as facts.

I was glad that aliens didn't come out, that game was toxic and DOA.

[broodwars]

  Looking at this list, I see a fair number of 3rd party games that would have come out if Nintendo were capable of selling Wii U hardware.  That doesn't excuse the 1st party and Wonderful 101 delays, though.  Those were caused by sheer incompetence, as Nintendo ignored 8 years of developer issues transitioning into the HD era and decided not to be ready to make HD games.

I like how most of time you state your opinions as facts.

They are facts. Miyamoto is on record as saying that Nintendo underestimated the resources needed to produce HD games. After 8 years of companies struggling to do just that, there is no excuse for Nintendo to not be ready when it came time to make Wii U games.  Likewise, Ubisoft is on record as saying that they delayed and ported Rayman Legends because Nintendo didn't sell Wii U units and Zombi U did not turn a profit.  EA has stated that Nintendo needs to sell more hardware before they'll bring more games to the Wii U.  For most of this year, the Wii U has been selling in numbers comparable with the Vita, as low as the mid-30,000s one month according to NPD.  Nintendo's total incompetence when it comes to selling Wii U hardware or making Wii U games is a FACT. Deal with it.

[RedBlue]

That's not what you previously stated. You previous post made it seem like you have an insider view of the inner workings of Nintendo and thus prove your opinions as fact. But you don't so you only have your opinions masquerading as fact.

[broodwars]

That's not what you previously stated. You previous post made it seem like you have an insider view of the inner workings of Nintendo and thus prove your opinions as fact. But you don't so you only have your opinions masquerading as fact.

What you choose to read into my posts is not my concern. I merely stated the situation as Nintendo has chosen to make it.  But by all means, keep living in that fantasy world where Nintendo has done no wrong and the entire world is out to get them. Quite a few people on this site are there right with you.

[Kytim89]

I would have bought DeadPool on the Wii U....

I probably would have been the only one, but I'd like to think that I am worth the effort!!  [/Sadness]

All of those games that I listed I would have loved to have been able to play on Wii U's Gamepad.

[azeke]

Looking at this list, I see a fair number of 3rd party games that would have come out if Nintendo were capable of selling Wii U hardware.

I am going to keep quoting my old post over and over again each time people will pretend Bioshock, Tomb Raider, Revengeance not hitting Wii U had anything to do with sales:

20.03.2012 (8 (eight) months before Wii U launch):

The way the player interacts with [Wii U} is very different than any other device out there. So if I were to make a game for the Wii U, it would have to be a unique game

26.01.2012 (10 (ten) months before Wii U launch):

Given that we’ve been working on the game quite a while before Wii U was announced I think it would not be right to try and port it across. If we started building a game for the Wii U we would build it very differently and we would build it with unique functionality

15.06.2012 (5 (five) months before Wii U launch):

"We haven't announced anything," says Zelnick on the possibility of moving the company's mature titles onto the Wii U. "I'm skeptical."
Don't mistake that skepticism for a pessimistic attitude about the next generation of consoles, though. If anything, Zelnick is eager to kick off the next line of game systems, because he sees it as a chance for Take-Two to continue to advance its position in the industry.
"For a company like ours, it's a great opportunity," he says. "[New console launches] separate the winners from the losers -- and we fully expect to be one of the winners."

25.11.2012 (a two weeks into Wii U launch, so no sales info available)

We get asked if there is going to be a Wii U version of Borderlands, and the reason why there’s not is because we couldn’t think of a natural, obvious, ‘OMG, I want that for what the Wii U brings to the table’ feature

26.09.2012 (a month before Wii U launch)

A compilation, dubbed the Mass Effect Trilogy, will include all three “award-winning� Mass Effect games in one box. It’ll be available on November 6th this year, for $60 on xbox/ps3/pc.

[RedBlue]

Again with opinions as facts. I rarely post here and not once have I made that statement. I play games on my PC and on Nintendo game consoles. If third parties want my money they have to support the Wii U or PC and if they don't I'm not going to cry about it. My money will go to Nintendo and 3rd parties that do.

[broodwars]

Looking at this list, I see a fair number of 3rd party games that would have come out if Nintendo were capable of selling Wii U hardware.

I am going to keep quoting my old post over and over again each time people will pretend Bioshock, Tomb Raider, Revengeance not hitting Wii U had anything to do with sales:

Dude, I was referring to the topic creator's list in the root post, not Kytim's usual cabaret of nonsense, and Shyguy didn't say anything about those 3 games.

Again with opinions as facts. I rarely post here and not once have I made that statement. I play games on my PC and on Nintendo game consoles. If third parties want my money they have to support the Wii U or PC and if they don't I'm not going to cry about it. My money will go to Nintendo and 3rd parties that do.

It seems "opinions as facts" is now forum-speak for "WAH! YOU'RE SAYING SOMETHING I DON'T LIKE, SO I'M GOING TO JUST WHINE THAT YOU'RE SAYING SOMETHING AS IF IT'S A FACT."  I'm not going to stick "in my opinion" before every single goddamn post I type.  If you're confused if something I'm saying is an opinion or fact, take 2 seconds and figure it out.  Or break out your 2nd grade textbook. Whichever is quicker for you.  And now, this conversation is DONE.

[bustin98]

I agree with broodwars. The statements from Nintendo and developers back up the basic idea that Nintendo was not ready for HD, nor ready to go live with a complicated system capable of higher graphical effects. Their lag in producing toolsets for developers to take advantage of the WiiU caused many devs to thumb their noses and claim the CPU too slow to run their games, and not see the potential of a GPU based system.

[azeke]

I was referring to the topic creator's list in the root post

I can give you Rayman and Deus Ex, but other third party game ports seemed to fell through due to their development troubles. Of course bad situation on the platform post launch did contribute.

As far as i remember, Ghost Recon port folded before Wii U launch. Metro had a publisher going bankrupt. Aliens game had publisher and two developers playing the blame game.

Sniper game... When was this announced? I was vaguely aware of "second sniper game, not the one with exploding eyeballs", but i must have missed it completely.

[ShyGuy]

I was referring to the topic creator's list in the root post

I can give you Rayman and Deus Ex, but other third party game ports seemed to fell through due to their development troubles. Of course bad situation on the platform post launch did contribute.

As far as i remember, Ghost Recon port folded before Wii U launch. Metro had a publisher going bankrupt. Aliens game had publisher and two developers playing the blame game.

Sniper game... When was this announced? I was vaguely aware of "second sniper game, not the one with exploding eyeballs", but i must have missed it completely.

It wasn't formerly announced, but it was listed at the ESRB. http://www.esrb.org/ratings/synopsis.jsp?Certificate=32412

The game didn't do so hot and I think they scaled back their platforms to release on.

[shingi_70]

Yo I'm betting Ghost Recon Online makes it too the Xbox One/PS4 before it does Wii U.


I know Nintendo doesn;t like tp play the game but I wpuld have moneyhatted Ubisoft to make sure ZombiU, Ghost Recon Online, and Rayman Origins were released and exclusives.

[ShyGuy]

I don't know if Ghost Recon Online is making it off the PC. The beta hasn't set the world on fire. It's a free to play game that has been in beta since last year.

We know an early build was running on the Wii U, so I guess there is still a chance.

[smallsharkbigbite]

Some developers have had internal issues but the majority of future games that won't get released never confirmed a Wii U release. Poor sales is the reason they won't consider the Wii U. 

Didn't codemasters have Dirt running on the Wii U?  They recently said no F1 series for the Wii U. 

I like unique experiences as much as the next guy, but it would be nice if there was more traditional experiences. The Wii U does them well and its not like everygame needs to use the gamepad. Darksiders, Ninja Gaiden, Need for Speed were all great traditional experiences on the Wii U. I feel like the unique experience is the new pr spin on not supporting the Wii U.

Does every xbox game use the kinect?  No?  Some just rely on the traditional aspects of the console?

Do developers only make unique experiences?  GTA5 is being made because it will bring in buckets of money, not because its unique. Same for a majority of the sequels or franchises as Ubi likes to call it.

I know people may think this pessimistic, but
..... When I hear this didn't come because we couldn't think of unique ways to use the gamepad, it makes me think they really mean that they don't think their games will sell enough to make it worwhile. But they aren't ruling out the Wii U if they can think of a casual touch screen game with the budget of an ios game.

Nobody is making Wii U exclusives or spending extra time on Wii U specific features. To say you can't think of ways to make a Wii U version standout just means you aren't suporting the Wii U at this time.

[Ian Sane]

I get Nintendo delaying Pikmin 3 because the game looks gorgeous.  There is no excuse for not observing what the rest of the industry was doing for the last several years and then running into the same roadblocks but that does seem like a typical Nintendo thing to do.  It isn't really out-of-the-ordinary for them.  But what's with the delays for Game & Wario and Wii Fit Plus?  Those aren't exactly pushing the Wii U hardware to its limits.  The excuse of being unprepared for HD development really should not apply to those games.

And it isn't like Nintendo's current drought just started.  The last two years of the Wii were slim pickings.  The only notable first party Wii game to come out in North America in 2012 was Xenoblade which was merely a localization of a game that was a couple years old.  So they spent all year working on Nintendoland and NSMB U?  Seriously?  And the year before it was all spent on Zelda?  Nintendo has had a very slow output of console games for a while and I don't know why.  Has Wii U game development been so taxing that it affected the last few years of the Wii?  But the Wii U launch date was already set so surely they knew they had to continue to release Wii games in the meantime.  Nintendo mismanaging game development has been going on for a while suggesting that something aside from HD development has changed.

Delayed third party ports at the Wii U launch were never going to sell worth a damn and that was always a major reason to NOT go with last gen hardware this time.  The Wii U should be starting a new generation but because of its design it's more like it's arriving late to the PS360 generation and having to compete with consoles with large pre-existing game libraries and userbases.  A PS360 owner should see the Wii U as a potential purchase for their next generation of gaming but instead it's like a PS360 alternative or a second console.  I'll bet when the PS4 and XB1 debut, third parties will not make excuses about their initially small userbases because they'll see them as next gen and thus a new beginning where the userbase has to be built up.  But they probably see the Wii U as a PS360 competitor and it's userbase is ridiculously small compared to those other consoles.  The PS4 and XB1 will be the number one and two consoles of the next generation by default.  While Nintendo might like to think of the Wii U as the number one console of this new generation by default, third parties and the general public see it as the distant LAST place console of the current generation.  It looks like a PS3 with a touchscreen controller and Nintendo marketed it so poorly that people thought it was an accessory for the Wii.  It looks like a souped up Wii designed to bring Nintendo on par with the competition.  It's Pachter's Wii HD, only released years after such a product would have made sense.  It doesn't come across as next gen, has not been marketed that way, and in terms of specs actually isn't.  So Ubisoft considers Rayman to be a current gen game and they look at the Wii U sales and figure "why should we make this exclusive to the console with by far the smallest userbase?"  If the Wii U was truly next gen porting the game to the PS360 would have been impossible and not even considered and would be as ridiculous as delaying a PS2 game so you could port it to the PS1 and N64.

[pokepal148]

Again with opinions as facts. I rarely post here and not once have I made that statement. I play games on my PC and on Nintendo game consoles. If third parties want my money they have to support the Wii U or PC and if they don't I'm not going to cry about it. My money will go to Nintendo and 3rd parties that do.

THIS TO THE 64th POWER

[Adrock]

If the Wii U was truly next gen porting the game to the PS360 would have been impossible and not even considered and would be as ridiculous as delaying a PS2 game so you could port it to the PS1 and N64.

There's a rumor going around that PS4 is 40% more powerful than Xbox One. LOL XBOX One! What an outrage! Why is Microsoft even launching such a WEAK ASS BULLSHIT console? They should just cancel the whole thing and fire everyone on the research and development team for wasting everyone's time with such limp dick hardware and go third party forever. Then, we can all masturbate each other to PS4's specs because only real next gen consoles with the best specs anywhere can play TRUE next gen games. **** CREATIVTY IN IT'S STUPID ASSHOLE! Who needs that ****? Only high specs make a console worthwhile and I don't want to hear anyone say otherwise or I'll **** punt their mother.

Seriously, dude, knock this "truly next gen" **** off. Companies can make any kind of game now. They're bound by nothing except their desire to sell prettier games. The only things that are changing with these new consoles are graphics (which isn't as big a jump anyway) and anti-consumer crap that people had to practically pre-rage quit to force a change while Sony and Microsoft are still probably thinking of ways to implement it without pissing off everyone. If you really think these specs are going towards stuff like better artificial intelligence, you're just crazy and/or gullible. Programmers have to stunt AI in order to make a game playable. So, really, it's the same games with a new coat of paint while the novelty of HD has worn off. Now, it's the norm. There's 4K/Ultra HD, but the distance most people sit from their TVs makes it less noticeable. Ideas haven't outgrown the specs we have. Better specs are simply an inevitability of introducing new hardware, but it's sad that people are so ingrained in thinking that specs make a console next generation rather than the promise of experiences that weren't possible on the previous generation. Nintendo practically had to release a new console because Wii wasn't capable of running certain types of games, not just graphically. So far, there's nothing on PS4/One I've seen that I think isn't possible on the PS3 sitting under my TV gameplay wise, just prettier pictures and frankly, that's not worth $400/$500.

Consider that Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain is coming out on PS3/360 in addition to PS4/One. Yeah, Kojima's Fox Engine is scalable on two generations so there's that. If you're bemoaning today's graphics, just fucking stop playing videogames. You're literally never going to be happy.

[UncleBob]

But I want my Toy Story level graphics!

[Oblivion]

Toy Story looks gross compared to what PC can do today. Brave, on the other hand...

[alegoicoe]

i planned on buying DE: Human Revolutions, but i ended up getting free on PSN thanks to the delay.

[Ymeegod]

"If you really think these specs are going towards stuff like better artificial intelligence, you're just crazy and/or gullible."

LOL, not sure what you're talking about but developers are already adding tons of advance AI to next generation games.  Adaptablitity is going be an huge improvement.  For example if you keep taking shortcuts in racing game the AI wll adapt to your playstyle and either take the shortcut themselves or block you from taking it. In fighting games they Ai will counter you more often if you continue to do the same combos.

Interactions is going be another noticeable feature.  Not only will you have more objects in game but they are going have true to life physics.  One of my pet peeves in video gaming is the "disappearing bodies" or fading.  When I blast through a room and have to return later in the game I want the room the way I left it--bloody bodies and charred walls.    With more memory and CPU power you're not going have to deal with fading anymore.

-----------------------------------------

 

[Adrock]

They've been talking about all that for years. If any of that finally happens this upcoming generation, I'll buy you a coke.

Seriously, send me your address and I will literally mail you a can of Coca Cola if that happens regularly with PS4/One. Gladly, even. I want to see these kinds of advancements, but so far, it's all been empty promises.

[ShyGuy]

Fighting games have had adaptive AI before now I believe.

edit: heck most games haven't reached No One Lives Forever levels of AI yet.

[Adrock]

It's a shame that the IP has been MIA since 2002. I've heard good things about it.

Better AI and such have been possible for some time. I'm not claiming otherwise. Rather, they're not implemented with any regularity across the board. Developers can but aren't using specs to improve these aspects of games. I mean that generally if that needed to be clarified from my other posts. They're just making the same kinds of games except nicer looking.

[lolmonade]

Good job, Shyguy.  That's a nice list of "what happened?" neatly organized.
 
I think the real question is: if those games actually got pushed out when they were originally slated, do we believe the time period between now and winter would see more games being released?  I don't think so.  I think we'd see an influx of a variety of games in Q1 & Q2, and then just experience the drought from now leading into the holidays.
 
It's facinating watching the business decisions of Nintendo.  They're so incredibly risk averse in some ways (not hiring more talent so they can push out a larger volume of titles, releasing iterative versions of games such as NSMB U & Super Mario 3D World), while at the same time taking large gambles on unknown quantities (Wii Remote & Wii U Gamepad), that it's like there are two separate heads trying to move in opposite directions without making any meaningful movement.
 
The problem is I think their lack of direction business-wise is hurting their core consumers, especially ones who are long-time devotees.

[Ian Sane]

The specs thing is simple - the Wii missed out on practically every single third party game worth a damn last gen and it was because its hardware was too weak to be included in multiplatform development.  That's not about being a graphics whore it's about the games not showing up on the console.  Even if YOU don't think it matters every third party DOES and THEIR opinion matters, not yours.

[Adrock]

And I gave you an example of a major third party game (e.g. Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain) that is using a scalable engine that allows the game to be on current and next generation hardware. It's the same game. The Wii was too weak for porting which I addressed. Wii U, on the other hand, is debatable. It may not handle the visuals as well, but it certainly seems like it can handle the game design which wasn't always true on Wii. That's the point. Developers so far seem to be using the extra power for better graphics as opposed to better AI and whatnot. They can, but they aren't for the most part. So when third parties claim Wii U isn't powerful enough or whatever the excuse of the week is, I have a hard time believing them. Until game design and AI exceeds what we have today because it's not possible on hardware we have today, they're talking out of their ass.

Part of me wants to see Nintendo compete on the hardware level again just to see what third parties say because I'm not buying the hardware excuse for a second. Not yet anyway since they keep talking about these things they can do except there's no consistency. Some games will have decent AI while others will not. As I said in another thread, I've yet to see one game on PS4/One that couldn't be done on current generation hardware (albeit it with lesser graphics). If all these companies are going to vaunt powerful hardware, it's on them to prove why it matters. Until then, they can get the **** out of my face with their excuses.

[Kytim89]

I am no expert on technology but I kind of figure that third parties will simply modify the engines they already have made for Xbox 360 and PS3 for the PS4 and Xbone. This will make it cheaper to develop games for the PS4 and XBone. It will also make it easier to port games over to the Wii U.

[Ceric]

PS3 engines are going to get ditched like a McDonald's Wrapper.  360 ones may migrate but, if what Cerny said about developing for the PS4 engine wise is true they might actually just go ahead and roll a new one.


To answer Adrock's question the only game I can think of we've seen that would probably fit the bill is Knack.  The main controlled character being made up of many modelled objects with their own physics and interactions while being player controlled.

[Ian Sane]

I heard all the same "well the hardware SHOULD be good enough to port the game if you put the proper effort into it" and "these next gen graphics don't look THAT much different to me" stuff with the Wii.  I'm sure SOME games can be ported but not all of them and we're not just talking about PS4 launch games but whatever titles are being made years from now.

But ultimately if it requires extra effort on the part of the third party then they have all the more incentive to not do it.  Nintendo is not making Wii U multiplatform support a no-brainer easy decision.  They're asking third parties to spend extra development time and money to scale the games down or, if that's not really feasible, to make exclusive Wii U software in order to have something on all three consoles.  Of course the easiest decision here is to just skip the Wii U entirely which is what they started doing on the Wii.  The whole approach is the same one as the Wii, which failed miserably in regards to attracting third party support.

Nintendo is approaching a group of companies that already don't support them and asking them to jump through hoops to support their console.  What the hell sort of delusional GALL does a company have to ask that from a position of weakness?  They should be bending over backwards to be accomodating because they have no clout whatsoever.  Yet they continue to act like King **** and everyone just ignores them.

I want to see what happens when third parties don't have an easy excuse.  Nintendo has been providing them since 1996 so who knows what would actually happen if Nintendo released something that followed the current industry conventions and didn't ask third parties or potential customers to make special concessions?  They haven't competed on equal footing since the Super Nintendo.  They show up to the race every time with their shoelaces tied together.  Show up in proper condition to run the race for a change and then you can complain about the refs.

[NWR_insanolord]

What was the easy excuse on the GameCube? Mostly traditional controller, hardware on par with the competition, why didn't they support it?

[Kytim89]

What was the easy excuse on the GameCube? Mostly traditional controller, hardware on par with the competition, why didn't they support it?

The discs held 1.5 GBs compared to the PS2 and Xbox's 8 GB discs.

[NWR_insanolord]

I thought the PS2 and Xbox discs were single layer, so they would only have been 4.7 GB. Outside of a few specific cases I don't think that was a real problem.

[Ceric]

What was the easy excuse on the GameCube? Mostly traditional controller, hardware on par with the competition, why didn't they support it?

[size=78%]The discs held 1.5 GBs compared to the PS2 and Xbox's 8 GB discs. [/size]

Ironically enough that was the excuse even though many games weren't that big.  Suffice it to say if its coming out for the PS3 and the 360 I don't really see an excuse for it to not come to the Wii  U on Tech Specs.

[Kytim89]

Rockstar was going to put Max Payne and GTA 3 on the Gamecube but cancelled because it had less RAM memory than the PS2.

[Ian Sane]

What was the easy excuse on the GameCube? Mostly traditional controller, hardware on par with the competition, why didn't they support it?

The Gamecube actually did REALLY well on third party support compared to the Wii and Wii U.  Multiplatform games were not the industry standard yet but when they occured the Cube was often included (and probably excluded for seemingly no reason a similar amount of time; that used to drive me nuts).  The Cube's third party support was weak because it didn't get many exclusives and the ones it did get were later ported to the PS2.  Exclusives were the way third parties worked then (Japanese devs tended to favour the market leading PS2 while American devs favoured the Xbox because it had PC-style architecture that they were used to).  I would be thrilled if the Wii U got Cube level support.  It had the best third party support of all the post-SNES Nintendo consoles and that's because it was the most conventional.  It was attracting about the amount of support I would expect from a follow-up to a console that didn't lead the market and the support got weaker as the console failed to sell.

But Nintendo still showed up to the race with their shoelaced tied together.  Not going online when everyone else is?  Okay so you've already not matched up to the competition and now your race results are completely tainted.  They also had smaller discs, a less flexible controller, small memory cards that cost the same as PS2 cards that were 16 times the size, no demo discs, no DVD support, a discounted "hits" label that was more expensive than the competition's, a purple purse design that made the console look kiddy in America, Nintendo taking their most respected franchise in Zelda and turning it in a "kiddy" cartoon (not really but that's what it looked like to).  Those are all minor but when you add them up the Cube just was not appealling to gamers that had written Nintendo off with the N64.  Nintendo needed to win the public back but compared to the other two consoles the Cube wasn't the best at anything and was often the worst.  It gave no indication that things were going to be different this time.  It was Nintendo assuming they could just release a console with a bare-minimum effort and everyone would love it as if the N64 years never happened.

The Wii U is in a similar position in regards to core gamers.  We ask "show me things will be different this time" and Nintendo releases the most by-the-book Wii sequel you could possibly come up with.

[Adrock]

I'm sure SOME games can be ported but not all of them and we're not just talking about PS4 launch games but whatever titles are being made years from now.

That still doesn't explain what the issue is today and for the last eight months. Third parties ported a few old games and expected Wii U owners to just take what was given. If you went to the grocery store for cookies and the only box left was half-crushed and a year past the expiration date, would you buy that box of cookies? Would you?

And I'm still not convinced game design is really going to advance to the point where these new consoles are doing things we never dreamed was possible the past eight years. Ceric brought up Knack. The physics are impressive, but is the gameplay not possible on PS3? I've seen the footage and I'll reserve final judgment for when the games releases, but I think it is possible. If all companies are doing is scaling graphics on engines designed to do just that, I'm having a hard time believing that specs are really a roadblock here.

Honestly, I want that to happen. I want game design to advance and justify the existence of these new consoles past "Well, it's been seven to eight years, might as well launch a new one." I want to, for example, play a Resident Evil game that makes me feel the way I did when I first tried the Resident Evil 4 demo. Seven and a half years and a new console later, Resident Evil 6 was the best Capcom could do? How the **** is that advancement? Try again.

But ultimately if it requires extra effort on the part of the third party then they have all the more incentive to not do it.  Nintendo is not making Wii U multiplatform support a no-brainer easy decision.

I agree that there's less incentive to support a platform when asked to do extra, except they already have to do that. PC is already more powerful than PS4 and One; the gap is only getting larger. Third parties are going to have to do some work at some point. If the rumors are true and PS4 is 40% more powerful than One, that's even more work they have to do so I don't want to hear it. What they're really saying is, "We'll do the work. We're just not doing it for Nintendo consoles." Blaming the specs doesn't work when current generation content that is clearly more than possible still isn't being brought over.

Hypothetically, say in the sideways world Wii U was between PS4 and One in terms of specs. Would that change anything? We've already heard the silly "The controller is too unique!" line. Ugh, fine. You keep bringing up the hardware and it's just seems like the excuse third parties picked out of a hat that day.

What the hell sort of delusional GALL does a company have to ask that from a position of weakness?  They should be bending over backwards to be accomodating because they have no clout whatsoever.  Yet they continue to act like King **** and everyone just ignores them.

Nintendo gave publishers an alternative. Wii was dominating for YEARS yet third parties kept insisting on spending boatloads of money on HD development then deeming those games failures for selling a measly six million copies. "Ugh, Wii was a fad." Maybe, but it was a pretty aggressive fad that could have made more than just Nintendo a lot of money. It seemed like publishers wanted it to fail and well, everyone loses. And who was really in a worse position? Nintendo, who was raking in cash, or third parties that were slogging through the HD era.

I'm not absolving Nintendo of all responsibility. They've certainly made their mistakes. I simply disagree that they should be bending over backwards for these companies. Why? Third parties have just as much to gain. Perhaps Nintendo should extend their hand further and be more proactive, but publishers have to meet them in the middle. And they're not based on their own words. It's like publishers want Nintendo to grovel the entire way, but Nintendo is too proud for that (rightfully so, groveling is for suckers). Unstoppable force meet immovable object.

It's this ridiculous vicious cycle. Now, third parties want Nintendo to sell more consoles and when (not if) Nintendo does with their own major releases, they'll just say Wii U owners only buy Nintendo games. That's a "**** you" in disguise. Nintendo is perpetually in a lose-lose situation. It's a shame really because no one really wins.

[Ian Sane]

I can see one or two companies refusing to support Nintendo for bizarre personal reasons.  That would demonstrate poor business sense but some companies will crash and burn on stupid stuff.  "That's stupid" is not a good enough logic to rule something out.  But EVERY third party just hating Nintendo?  The odds of that happening independently are too great to be possible.  A more likely possibility would be collusion but what is the obvious benefit of colluding against Nintendo?  It could be incompetence but they wouldn't ALL be incompetent.  Some, yes, but not all of them.

We're talking business so it's all about money.  If the third parties felt they could make money on Nintendo consoles they would go for it.  Obviously they don't feel that they can.  Maybe it's hardware or market share or the feeling that only Nintendo games sell or maybe there is some element of Nintendo's third party agreement that we don't know about that is so undesirable to the third party that it would kill off support (Nintendo's NES licence was so ridiculously restricted that if it was selling like the Wii U no one would ever agree to those terms).  Third parties don't feel they can make money on a Nintendo console and Nintendo needs to address that.  They need to be as accomodating and friendly as realistically possible from a financial perspective.  That's what I mean by making third parties jump through hoops.  Just because of the hardware alone Nintendo is not even being neutral, let alone accomodating.  How will they ever win any support when they insist on playing hardball and demanding this exception and that compromise the whole time?  The hell with bending over backwards, how about showing up to the table with the appearance of striking a fair deal for a change?

[Ymeegod]

Have you looked at sales data?  Hardcore sales on a Nintendo system have always been the low ball with a few exceptions like Soul Calibur 2 and a few others. 

Publishers need to make a profit (and one large enough) to justicfield porting an game.  It can cost up to 1-2 million just to port an game (modern games anyhow, indie games are a lot less).  To make an 2 million for publisher the game would have to sell over 100k to retailers.  Sales data has most WII U ports have been less than 50K meaning most publishers are going be losing money just to make a few fans happy?  While you'll at it why not cry for some Mac support or Vita?

[ShyGuy]

When I make videos games they will only come out for Nintendo consoles and Linux.

[broodwars]

What was the easy excuse on the GameCube? Mostly traditional controller, hardware on par with the competition, why didn't they support it?

Because the GameCube was run over by that bus with the PS2 license plates.

[Kytim89]

I appears that the Strider remake is not coming to the Wii U. 

[Adrock]

We're talking business so it's all about money.  If the third parties felt they could make money on Nintendo consoles they would go for it.  Obviously they don't feel that they can.

I agree though that's only half the story. These are the same companies who stumbled through the HD era with inflated budgets and underperforming software. They left a lot of money on the table practically disregarding Wii. If they were really so business savvy, this thread wouldn't exist.

The hell with bending over backwards, how about showing up to the table with the appearance of striking a fair deal for a change?

Accommodating is not the same as groveling so this I agree with too. I've been saying the same for years except it shouldn't be just for appearances. I mean, actually strike fair deals. The expectations have to be leveled on both sides. If third parties want handouts, they can get the hell out of here with that noise. At the same time, Nintendo can't impose ridiculous restrictions and policies (pick one, there are many). They're getting better at it even if they shouldn't have been issues to begin with.

At this point, I think it starts with Nintendo. While I don't believe specs are really an issue, just about everything else about Wii U is either a mess or kind of a mess. They really need to take care of the basics (e.g. system level stuff, voice chat, releasing games in a timely manner etc.) which stands to benefit them first and foremost so, you know, figure that out already. Once it starts looking like a console people want to support, work on getting that support.

[broodwars]

We're talking business so it's all about money.  If the third parties felt they could make money on Nintendo consoles they would go for it.  Obviously they don't feel that they can.

I agree though that's only half the story. These are the same companies who stumbled through the HD era with inflated budgets and underperforming software. They left a lot of money on the table practically disregarding Wii. If they were really so business savvy, this thread wouldn't exist.

I think Activision, EA, Ubisoft, Rockstar, and perhaps even Capcom would disagree with you on "underperforming software", despite individual titles that have performed poorly.  Much has been made of the companies who failed to survive this last generation, but I honestly don't see what the big tragedy was.  The companies who have either gone under or transitioned to new business models were weak: they couldn't make software that people would actually buy, so they failed.  That's how this market is supposed to work.  The weak die out, and their death leaves the room for new companies and the expansion of the remaining developers.

In fact, I'd actually argue that we wouldn't have seen this explosive growth in digital download software if so many companies hadn't failed with the traditional model.  In my opinion, the industry is stronger now with a more diversified distribution structure and more specialization.  Sure, you have the race to top Call of Duty, but is that any different than when platformers were all the rage and everyone was racing to top Mario?  Or when RPGs were all the rage and everyone was racing to top Final Fantasy 7?  If you think there's homogenization now, check out all the me-too JRPGs that sprang up in the wake of FF7, not to mention all the mediocre mascot platformers of the NES and SNES years.

Failure and loss isn't always a bad thing.  This last generation in general reminds me of one of Walt Disney's most famous quotes (and people forget just how often Walt Disney failed and failed BIG):

“It is good to have a failure while you’re young because it teaches you so much. For one thing it makes you aware that such a thing can happen to anybody, and once you’ve lived through the worst, you’re never quite as vulnerable afterward.  To some people, I am kind of a Merlin who takes lots of crazy chances, but rarely makes mistakes. I’ve made some bad ones, but fortunately, the successes have come along fast enough to cover up the mistakes. When you go to bat as many times as I do, you’re bound to get a good average. That’s why I keep my projects diversified.â€�

[Adrock]

Just off the top of my head, didn't EA just lay off like 9000 people and close two studios in an effort to restructure the company? No company just does that for fun. I believe Capcom too was hit was some major layoffs, including Chris Svennson (or did he recently resign in light of the layoffs?).

And some of you guys really need to stop be Sith Lords about my posts. I'm not talking absolutes. I didn't say "all software underperformed" (or "no games had better AI"). Certainly, some did and enough for some of these companies to feel restructuring necessary.