Topic: COD: Advanced Warfare NOT coming to WiiU (after pg 2. nobody cares)

[Nile Boogie Returns]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/08/21/nintendo-loses-third-party-staple-as-call-of-duty-advanced-warfare-will-skip-wii-u/




**** EM' I'll play Splatoon!

[NWR_insanolord]

I just wish they'd put the last two on the eShop. I really don't understand why Activision doesn't put their stuff on there, it seems like a win-win for them.

[ShyGuy]

Wasn't the rumor Activision demands a higher than standard cut of profits from all digital sales? And Nintendo would not make an exception for them so they stay off the eshop?

[Nile Boogie Returns]

I still hate Activision/Bungie for making the Destiny logo look like the Wii U logo, not to mention in the Destiny promo video "My Body Is Ready" meme.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

I am genuinely curious is this the worst they have been in terms of 3rd party sales or is there a similar time period we could look to? I mean I know Activision has never abandoned Nintendo before but I am not familiar with Ubisoft much as they only came to major prominence last gen and I mostly sat that one out. I don't think shrugging this of with **** you I will just prove your point and play the game Nintendo makes anyways is a good attitude. I am wondering who is left then? We all know Sega can't fill in the gaps and Capcom has never been fully dedicated to Nintendo and THQ is long gone.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

They are as bad as they've ever been. But its only WiiU, 3DS is still marginally better with 3rd party support. Nintendo just has to...nah, it's nothing else they can do for Wii U save for Smash 4 selling 2-3million WiiU's by March 2015.




OR




Nintendo invades China.

[Mop it up]

If we just go by the number of games then the N64 has the least amount of third-party support, even less than Wii U currently. But I think the N64 may have more third-party exclusives than Wii U currently has.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

But is that TOTAL games or is it worse if you remove eShop releases? I mean eShop exclusives not full retail games. According to Wikipedia (I know not best source but still) there have been 415 total games released to Wii U but how many are RETAIL games because that is what we have to compare, considering 1, N64 didn't have an eshop equevilent and 2, a lot of those eshop games are either mini games or Virtual Console anyways. Also that list includes dozens of unreleased games that might never see the light of day so I wonder what the real numbers are, N64 had just shy of 300 total well if you count US only I am not sure there was like 3 exclusive to PAL and fifty or so exclusive to Japan I think.

[NWR_insanolord]

I don't think it's fair to not count eShop stuff in that comparison. They're still games that you can play on the system, regardless of the distribution method. Virtual Console shouldn't count, but I think original eShop titles should, at least to a certain extent.

[Mop it up]

The 415 number doesn't include the Virtual Console. Again, I just said "the numbers," not other factors, though I don't think things like distribution or content matters much. A game's a game.

Besides, the Wii U's been out for less than two years. After two years, the N64 had around 60-70 total games for it, way less than Wii U. Compared like that, Wii U has more support.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

I guess when you put it that way it does look a little better. I guess its just the few games N64 had were just so mind blowing for the time maybe?

What I meant by discarding eShop was that is different market then N64 if N64 would have had an indie scene it would have been different too, I was just going for major investment type games because that is what we were comparing I thought, indie games are different they don't require as much risk and Nintendo has made eShop indie friendly that was not the case on N64 so I was going by full retail releases to get a clue on full support, if that makes sense.

[NWR_insanolord]

The industry now is very different than it was in the N64's time, in a lot of ways. I'm not sure there's a good way to directly compare the two that would be fair to both.

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

The industry now is very different than it was in the N64's time, in a lot of ways. I'm not sure there's a good way to directly compare the two that would be fair to both.

In some ways yes, but indie games had a life on PC even then, just not at all on consoles. But you are right a direct comparison is not 100% possible. Still I am a numbers guy so I was just curious. I am not convinced Wii U is doing better than N64 but I am not convinced it is worse either.

[Triforce Hermit]

Wasn't this was confirmed when the released Nuketown on Blops II for Wii U? I thought they did it to make up for not putting Advanced Warfare on the Wii U.

[BranDonk Kong]

Hardly anyone would buy it if they did. The costs outweigh the (lack of) profits.

[Mop it up]

That's why I went by the number of releases, since it's a fact. Which system has better-quality releases is debatable, and based on a lot of subjective factors. But the Wii U is not the Nintendo system that has gotten the least amount of support.

For me personality, I think the N64 has better games than Wii U, including third-party games, but I'm sure many would disagree with that.

[NWR_insanolord]

It's hard to compete with the level of groundbreaking stuff on the N64. The introduction of polygonal 3D opened up a lot of possibilities that had never been there before. Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, and others invented new types of games and set precedents that are still in use today. I'm not sure there's anything that could bring about that type of shift again. Maybe VR, if that ever really takes off.

[Ian Sane]

There are three third parties that support damn near anything, where bragging about their support is like bragging about having a nose, and they are Activision, EA and Ubisoft.  The silliest arguments about the Wii U attracting good third party support prior to launch always revolved around games from these three companies.

Well Nintendo has now pissed off all three.  They effectively have nothing now.  What is the Wii U's future release schedule going to be?  Five retail games a year, all made by Nintendo?  Retailers don't carry videogame systems that have no games.  That's a situation where not counting eShop really makes sense.  Gamestop, Best Buy, Toys 'R' Us, they don't get a dime from the eShop.  Unless Nintendo expects to sell Wii U hardware exclusively online they kind of need to keep physical retailers happy to get the console into people's homes.

I just don't see how this situation with third party support being virtually non-existent and Nintendo being incapable of making games faster is going to last for any amount of time, especially long enough to be the typical timeframe of a console generation.  This isn't going to last five years.

[Adrock]

I feel like Nintendo stopped expecting Wii U to last five years sometime after they sold like 14 total units in March 2013. The thing is they still need to tow the line because the alternative is losing everything invested on Wii U (including the goodwill of fans who bought the console) then rushing a replacement. Best case scenario: take like two years to get a decent product to market. Their goal shouldn't be "decent." They need "good" to "great." Finishing their remaining Wii U titles in development while forging ahead on a successor for a 2016 launch is their best bet so long as they're taking that extra year to build a solid console, make things right with third parties, and have titles ready for launch, all easier said than done.

It's probably easier to make things right with Activision and Ubisoft because they'll support anything. Nintendo just needs to communicate better. EA has an ax to grind so unless Nintendo bends over and just accepts Origin, Nintendo will have to sell a bunch of units and wait for EA to come knocking.

[pokepal148]

Well Nintendo has now pissed off all three.  They effectively have nothing now.  What is the Wii U's future release schedule going to be?  Five retail games a year, all made by Nintendo?

That would probably be an improvement over the N64 technically...  Progress....?

[marvel_moviefan_2012]

Well Nintendo has now pissed off all three.  They effectively have nothing now.  What is the Wii U's future release schedule going to be?  Five retail games a year, all made by Nintendo?

That would probably be an improvement over the N64 technically...  Progress....?

While the sentiment is accurate go back and LOOK at the N64 library, even the third party games were mostly pretty damn good especially for the time. Wii U is different most of the 3rd party games, from what people say anyways, are just terrible sloppy ports missing half the content. Aside from MK Trilogy, I can't think of a single 3rd party port that was not at least on par with the PSX or Saturn versions. Maybe RE2 but that was to be expected. Again I think most people are talking retail releases here, I am not sure what is going on with the eshop but to be fair that sort of is part of the problem, lack of good awareness. Everybody knew about LostWinds and My Life as a King even if they didn't own a Wii or read Nintendo fansite. My brother in law who hated Nintendo and was all about Xbox 360 bought a Wii points card for me just to purchase both of those games for him to play when he came over so they had some buzz, I haven't heard about any Eshop games except NES Remix and Shovel Knight, all games I heard about here and I was actively seeking information on eshop games.

[Triforce Hermit]

For the sake of clarity, RE2 on the 64 was the best port out of them all, because it came with the most/best content.

[Ian Sane]

Finishing their remaining Wii U titles in development while forging ahead on a successor for a 2016 launch is their best bet so long as they're taking that extra year to build a solid console, make things right with third parties, and have titles ready for launch, all easier said than done.

There is a point where moving Wii U projects to the successor would make sense.  There is no value in releasing a Wii U game only a few months prior to the Wii U successor launch.  Both the N64 and Gamecube had games in development towards the end of their lives get moved to the succeeding console.  Supporting the Wii U while at the same time getting enough good stuff ready for launch that will make up for what will certainly be slow third party support at first seems beyond Nintendo's current capabilities.  They'll need more teams working on games, which is something that almost everyone has agreed on since the Wii U's initial release droughts.

Sega did a pretty lousy job transitioning from the Saturn to the Dreamcast with Bernie Stoler stupidly condemning the Saturn publicly before they officially discontinued it and Sega disappearing from the public eye for a good year or so until the Dreamcast launch.  And they did almost everything right with the Dreamcast itself but it still made no difference.  Is the damage to Nintendo's reputation already as permanent as Sega's was?  Just killing the Wii U off before a successor is ready would be doing the same thing as Sega but sticking around with a dud for too long would do no favours for public perception either.

The N64 actually had pretty consistent support from Midway, Acclaim and THQ.  Of course the quality of games from those guys tended to vary and all three companies are now defunct.  Still what N64 owner wasn't playing San Francisco Rush, Turok or the Aki wrestling games?  Nintendo was also at probably their peak as a game developer, just routinely busting out industry changing classics with Rare keeping up.  I don't see the 2014 equivalent of Super Mario 64 and Goldeneye in the pipeline on the Wii U.  Ocarina of Time was arguably the greatest game ever made when it came out.  What game is Nintendo working on that even attempts such ambition?  Nintendo was lucky that their weakest third party support coincided with their creative peak.  That's what it took to hang on.

Nintendo has had a rep for a while as having lousy third party support.  It would take a big splash of major third party titles at launch for their next console to overcome that.  Like I think getting a few token games where the idea is to suggest that things will improve won't cut it.  All anyone will see is their presumptions about weak third party support being confirmed.  I think right from the get-go it has to look like the problem has been solved.  Now I don't know how the hell you could actually pull that off but Nintendo has to pretty much assume that no one will give a **** and that they have to win people over on every little detail.  We've seen what years of asking people to "please understand" this and that has done.  They need to give gamers no excuses to ignore them.

[Adrock]

There is a point where moving Wii U projects to the successor would make sense.

That might have already happened with certain titles. Whatever Retro Studios is working on is likely already a Wii U successor title. I'd bet on Zelda being moved as well. Nintendo could go the Twilight Princess route and release the new Zelda on both Wii U and its successor. However, the successor needs a win right off the bat. Don't give people an alternative. Doubtful that anyone would be upset enough about the move to boycott it, and even then, there probably aren't a lot of them. It's open-world Zelda. The game sells itself on concept alone. Everything else Nintendo showed at E3 (minus the Star Fox proof of concept) was either too far along or small enough that finishing it on Wii U made sense just so they would have something to release.

[NWR_insanolord]

Nintendo needs to keep supporting the Wii U to make sure the kind of people who bought it early on (us) don't get too pissed off, because if the successor is going to be successful they need their biggest fans (us again) to be onboard from day one. If they abandon it now, they'll get a lot less early support for the Wii V.