Ubisoft Sees No Profit or Point in Wii U Mature Titles

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

The WiiU being dropped isn't that surprising, what is surprising is that I expected this to happen around the same time the 360 was eased out.

Rainbow_Dashtruction:

Shoggoth2588:
-snip-

Yah know, the terrible third party sales were universal on all Nintendo systems since the 64. I don't get why people say: "The second coming of the gamecube". Theres a reason many exclusives on the gamecube quickly made ports for PS2 and Xbox (which nearly universally sold far better). No Nintendo system has ever had third party support without a monopoly, and if it began with them, it quickly lost it because of extremely low sales. Every single time. It is not a thing Nintendo systems have. Nearly ALL Nintendo games are focused for kids. Therefore, you got a history of systems with both extremely poor third party support, as well as very few mature games which even then, don't sell.

The gamecube was exactly the same as the 64, and the Wii, and the WiiU. A complete failure for anything other then first party games. Anyone who says the WiiU having no support is a stupid move on developers are completely ignoring reality. Of course, the 3DS, as shite a device as it is, does have a monopoly and therefore, will continue to have support, so Nintendo is fine financially. It's unfair that it is, but I guess its the unignorable truth.

What I just realized is that I'm kind of an outsider when it comes to the Gamecube...Now that the Gamecube has been left to rest I look back at all of the games that it has and I guess looking back paints a rosier picture than what there was back when the lunchbox was still relevant and, new. I didn't have a Gamecube between 2001 - 2006...I didn't get mine until 2010 and it was easy to forget (or not realize) that 3rd party GC games were lacking. All I know is the Gamecube had Dead to Rights, Splinter Cell, Prince of Persia and, Burnout among other titles...I guess what I didn't realize is that it didn't have things like Max Payne, Breakdown, Panzer Dragoon, Soul Caliber III...

Shoggoth2588:

Rainbow_Dashtruction:

Shoggoth2588:
-snip-

Yah know, the terrible third party sales were universal on all Nintendo systems since the 64. I don't get why people say: "The second coming of the gamecube". Theres a reason many exclusives on the gamecube quickly made ports for PS2 and Xbox (which nearly universally sold far better). No Nintendo system has ever had third party support without a monopoly, and if it began with them, it quickly lost it because of extremely low sales. Every single time. It is not a thing Nintendo systems have. Nearly ALL Nintendo games are focused for kids. Therefore, you got a history of systems with both extremely poor third party support, as well as very few mature games which even then, don't sell.

The gamecube was exactly the same as the 64, and the Wii, and the WiiU. A complete failure for anything other then first party games. Anyone who says the WiiU having no support is a stupid move on developers are completely ignoring reality. Of course, the 3DS, as shite a device as it is, does have a monopoly and therefore, will continue to have support, so Nintendo is fine financially. It's unfair that it is, but I guess its the unignorable truth.

What I just realized is that I'm kind of an outsider when it comes to the Gamecube...Now that the Gamecube has been left to rest I look back at all of the games that it has and I guess looking back paints a rosier picture than what there was back when the lunchbox was still relevant and, new. I didn't have a Gamecube between 2001 - 2006...I didn't get mine until 2010 and it was easy to forget (or not realize) that 3rd party GC games were lacking. All I know is the Gamecube had Dead to Rights, Splinter Cell, Prince of Persia and, Burnout among other titles...I guess what I didn't realize is that it didn't have things like Max Payne, Breakdown, Panzer Dragoon, Soul Caliber III...

I kind of truly realized the opposite with the PS2. I kept looking back on GEN 5-6 games to play to try and find the few games in the GEN 5 that had the extremely good parts of modern design and the many in GEN 6. And I realized something. Nearly every game that truly impressed me. Nearly every memorable series. Nearly every truly fantastic series. Was exclusive to the PS2. Or the PS2 had the best port. Or was exclusive and later got a rerelease on a GEN 7 console(s). This continued no matter how much I widden my search, whether I cared about era or not. Nearly every great game before GEN 7 was on the PS2. The other systems had barely any games that could keep up with it. Almost no games before it had even close to the quality of design logic that bloomed on the PS2. The earliest game I could find that had the quality of design that started with the PS2, was strongest in the PS2 at the time and defined ALL of the best games after GEN 6 was X-COM UFO Defence.

And the Gamecube? I saw the same. I saw a console that got a damn fine amount of support, and a history of every developer on that system regretting it so heavily that they abandoned Nintendo. And for good reason. If you make games on a system where the only customers only buy Nintendo games, your an idiot, and you shouldn't be making such decisions.

And people question why I say the PS2 was the greatest system of all time, and truly deserved the title of best selling system of all time.

AdamRBi:

Rainbow_Dashtruction:
"Nearly ALL Nintendo games are focused for kids."

You know, it's attitudes like that which cause 3rd party developers and players to shun the console when making or buying their "super macho mature" titles.

It's really nothing more than a "comic book vs. graphic novel" difference in title, but it can make a world of difference.

It's attitudes like you guys that ignore that not all games that are more mature then Nintendo's are super macho mature ultra dark gritty racism theme filled games. And its attitudes like yours that ignore that there is actually a couple of good games in those games. The Witcher 2 for example.

Nintendo games are only childish because if they change, they will have lost the only customers they have left.

Rainbow_Dashtruction:

AdamRBi:

Rainbow_Dashtruction:
"Nearly ALL Nintendo games are focused for kids."

You know, it's attitudes like that which cause 3rd party developers and players to shun the console when making or buying their "super macho mature" titles.

It's really nothing more than a "comic book vs. graphic novel" difference in title, but it can make a world of difference.

It's attitudes like you guys that ignore that not all games that are more mature then Nintendo's are super macho mature ultra dark gritty racism theme filled games. And its attitudes like yours that ignore that there is actually a couple of good games in those games. The Witcher 2 for example.

Nintendo games are only childish because if they change, they will have lost the only customers they have left.

Okay, first point; fair enough; "ultra super macho man, grim and gritty dark mature super bloody fun times" is a bit of a stretch for most games. Exaggeration and stretches are terrible explanations for all games with exception of a choice few.

Second point, "they will have lost the only customers they have left if they change," is kind of a rude, unrealistic statement. It's partially true, if Nintendo went ahead and made Super Mario: Black Flag then yeah... it might just turn off just as many players as Assassin's Creed Galaxy. They'd lose everything if they didn't stick to a thematically kid friendly design? Well that's just unrealistic and off point.

Point is, mature audiences play Nintendo because our lingo is confusing and because joy and wonder are just as fun as action and adventure. So calling something childish or "for kids" is woefully dismissive.

Aiddon:

Robert Kalmar:

Wow... i thought the Wii U was released in 2012...

OT: Yeah, Ubisoft games doesn't sell on Wii U... WAIT A MINUTE! I tought that Rayman Legends sold better, than on other consoles with a considerable smaller user base. The attach rate on the Wii U was around 10%, while on other platforms it was around 0.5%. I also leave this here: http://sheattack.com/shovel-knight-wii-u-interview/, and this: http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/frozenbyte-trine-2-wii-u-sales-are-going-well-wii-u-will-be-our-best-system-and-more.452806262/

You know UbiSoft... if you want success on a Nintendo platform maybe you should develop games that catter to that specific audience

But that would take flexibility, diversity, and skill, all of which Ubisoft lacks. Their titles having been getting more and more homogenized as of late and it's increasingly clear that they're cripplingly rigid in their methods. It does not have to be this hard for them, they just MAKE it hard for themselves due to ineptitude. I am seriously wondering how these guys have been around this long when they clearly don't know how to market products properly.

Huh, i thought the only capable division of UbiSoft is the marketing department... I mean, they clearly sold an average at best GTA clone to millions of dissatisfied customers (Watch_dogs). I don't think it has to do with the skill of their developers, it's the guys above them, that makes these decisions. Yvet said in an interview that games like Rayman, Child of Light and Valiant Hearts are morale booster projects, where the developers gained creative freedom. So, you can guess how happy their developers are about making AssCreed every year.

It's a shame... My favorite game developer was UbiSoft back in the PS2 era, because they give us gems like Prince of Persia Sands of Time, Splinter Cell and Beyond Good and Evil. After that they kinda run out of juice and now they are just a money hungry company, which is a shadow of it's former glory.

Rainbow_Dashtruction:
And holy shit 10 million units!? I guess it was at the height of the Wii's fitness craze but daaaamn, is that like, higher then most of Nintendo's first parties or what?

Nintendo 1st party games are the biggest sellers of the entire industry. I mean, some of it is because they marry a title to the console sales so it's obscured. For example, WiiSports was sold with every Wii and it's up above 80 million copies sold. But had it not been sold with every console the number would have been much lower. But games like WiiFit sold over 20 million. Mario Kart Wii sold nearly 35 million.

3rd party publishers understand they're not going to sell as well as Nintendo on Nintendo consoles in most instances. But they do want it to be an equitable business deal that makes everyone money. On the Wii they were the most profitable 3rd party developer with the just dance series alone. Even obscure fitness games like, "My Fitness Coach" sold millions of dollars. So why not?

But now they're struggling to get even 1 million out. That's mostly because they'd need to have an insane attach rate to get that many games sold with so few consoles on the market. But what we're seeing now is a much more harmful market for 3rd party games even when Nintendo had almost no first person games on the market for about a year. Their ZombieU game was a launch title and should have made an easy million with being so alone in the game market for so long. But it just didn't cut it.

So Ubisoft is looking at their history of games on Nintendo consoles and they've noticed a trend. Something we all recognize. Nintendo is the Disney of gaming. It is family friendly and group fun. It isn't dark and gritty. It's light and humorous and cute. There's nothing wrong with that either. With the number of consoles so low and the fact that the WiiU is both severely underpowered (for 8th gen) and proprietary when all other systems are now x86, the company is recognizing a really high overhead in porting games with little promise in return.

It's basically a no brainer for Ubisoft. The people saying they just don't like money don't understand the demographic that Ubisoft is looking at. I hate ubisoft. They're basically EA in training. But this is a good decision on their part.

Robert Kalmar:

Lightknight:
Rayman isn't an adult game, is it? Their statement would still allow for Rayman development. Are we just going to ignore that they specified mature titles like Assassin's Creed rather than say, Just Dance 8 or whatever?

It's not an adult game, yet it's not a casual game like Just Dance either. It's in the "for everyone" category like Mario games. The funny thing is AFAIK, Just Dance sold barely better, than AC games on Wii U. Sure, it's a smaller budget game, but why is it ok to sell just 280k of Just Dance and not ok to sell 260k of AC3? But really, i won't miss these games on the platform... I'm done with UbiSoft AAA games since AC Brotherhood, it made me lose all my faith in their big budget games. Yeah, i know i'm part of the problem, but there is a problem for a reason... Mainly: Nintendo fans don't want dark and gritty "Mature" games on their platform. They bought a Nintendo platform for a simple reason: they want colorful and fun games, which can be played by anyone. I play "mature" games mainly on my PC and local coop with my friends on my Wii U.

You've got to look at Ubisoft's past with the Wii to understand their comment. As I said above, they sold better than all other 3rd party developers (almost combined) with the Just Dance franchise by itself.

Now, you said it yourself, just dance is a really low development cost game. I'm sure most of the cost is in music licensing anyways. But going forward, Ubisoft may be progressing to the 8th generation consoles. If that's the case then creating a 7th gen quality game for the WiiU just because it's Nintendo's 8th generation entry would be an extremely high cost for them. This is the same reason why we didn't see many AAA ports to the Wii due to the huge power disparity then too.

So I think they accept Just Dance sales because they believe the market is good for it there and are withholding judgment. If things don't change in a couple years they may drop that too.

FYI, AC was released in 2012 as a port when the WiiU came out (three months from being two years old in November as a port), the Just Dance came out in October 2013, less than a year ago. So in less than half the time the Just Dance game outsold AC III.

Robert Kalmar:

Huh, i thought the only capable division of UbiSoft is the marketing department... I mean, they clearly sold an average at best GTA clone to millions of dissatisfied customers (Watch_dogs). I don't think it has to do with the skill of their developers, it's the guys above them, that makes these decisions. Yvet said in an interview that games like Rayman, Child of Light and Valiant Hearts are morale booster projects, where the developers gained creative freedom. So, you can guess how happy their developers are about making AssCreed every year.

Except their clear lack of understanding of how to sell to Nintendo customers contradicts that. The marketing department actually comes off as a section that, at best, only knows how to sell to ONE type of gamer and that is NOT good from a business standpoint. In fact, more and more pubs seem to be encouraged by their dev teams to be as exclusive and elitist as possible, making themselves incapable of truly bringing new customers. For as much as people compare the current state of the industry to the film industry, gaming clearly does not GET what the film industry does to be successful. If anything, gaming is like the American comics industry right before its collapse. They really lack the kind of pragmatism to be considered competent businessmen. They have no clear long-term vision and they waste money on the stupidest crap.

I can see some logic in that.
Most people who bought Watch_Dogs or even Assasin's creed did play it on a pc, xbox or playstation. So there's little point in redeveloping a game for a console that has a completely different audience.
And if you make more money with other IP's, then there's nothing wrong with it,really. I'd rather have them put more effort into other games that do sell. (Rayman, splinter cell, etc.)

I'd rather have them put more effort in games for the platform that they know would sell well, than porting games for a very small audience. Because, face it, M-rated ports aren't the reason to buy a Wii-u.

Micah Weil:
Lemme guess...couldn't find a way to stick uPlay into it...

Unfortunately, they did.

Here's what this says to me from Ubisoft. "We do not like to actually work on development for games. Therefore, we're dropping a console that demands us to do proper work as a gaming company."

Lightknight:
Of course they're inferior quality compared to the other platforms. The Wii U is a mild step above the 360 technologically (uses the same CPU and only 1GB of RAM is available for games). You can't expect anyone, not even developer Jesus, to cram 8th generation games into 7th generation technology no matter how much people stress that it's part of the 8th generation. It may very well be Nintendo's 8th generation entry but it's old technology. Sorry, but true.

And yet that doesn't stop the AAA publishers to release most of the new 8th gen titles in the XBOX 360 and PS3 too. The issue is money, but I think the problem comes from the inflated costs.

Lightknight:

ZombieU (a launch title which should have been free money) at 700k units.
Rayman Legends (a 2013 title and the 15th best selling title on the entire console) at 360k units.

These numbers are deplorable.

Well, 700,000 sales are enough if the title doesn't cost $50 millons to make. A title with a budget of $12 millons may not be enough for today's AAA inflated standards; but it doesn't need it just to be a mature game.

Not to utterly derail the topic here, but it's stuff like that this just proves my point that it was silly for Platinum Games to make any sort of deal with Nintendo because Bayonetta 2 is going to sell a fraction of a percentage of an iota of a scintilla of what the original sold on the 360/PS3. The vast majority of WiiU owners aren't into mature games (not that much of Bayonetta could be called mature with a straight face, and God bless 'em for it), or games that are too challenging. People buy Nintendo consoles because they like Nintendo games. People buy consoles and PCs because they like all other games. It's really just that simple.

Lets see how well 3rd party did on the WiiU.

Deus Ex: HR - A great port with improved things, added content, better graphics than on the PS3 and 360, more expensive than any other version. Then SquEnix announced (before the WiiU version was launched) that all the previously WiiU exclusive content will be sold as DLC for less than $10 on every other platform (it was fucking $12.5 to buy the game +literally all DLC on steam while it was $40 to get just the improved version on the WiiU).

Mass Defect 3 - Truly one of EA's finest moments. A ridiculously bad port that had huge FPS drops, in places looked worse than the 360 version, had missing content, released for $60. Mind you, the game was already released on other consoles for over a year. A week before the release of the WiiU version EA announced they will sell the who e trilogy + many DLC for $50 on the PS3, possibly on the 360.

Rayman - A great game, made exclusively for the WiiU, had a great release date in middle of April (iirc, first announced even earlier but delayed 1-2 times) with a game drought killing WiiU owner, people were hyped. Then Ubisof announces it's not exclusive and delays the game for half a year despite the game being 100% finished and ready for release. Was released to compete against CoD, Mario and other hard hitter. Still sold the second best on the WiiU despite having a 35 times smaller player base.

ZombiU - A good, yet at times tedious survival horror game. Had some great moments but too many small problems. Got bad scores from reviewers because the reviewers are too retarded to know how to play survival horror games and wanted to play CoD: Zombie Edition. Sold 700k which is freaking awesome for a niche genre as this but that wasn't enough for Ubisoft who is run by mongrels who don't know how to limit their budget based on the potential sales number (realistic potential sales numbers and not their dream sales numbers).

AC3 - Possibly worst port on the WiiU. Run like shit.

MonHun3U - Best selling monster hunter game in the west. Oh, look at that. A good port sells well. Color me surprised.

Batman: Arkham City - Bad port. The port was so bad that textures went missing, Catwoman got a nice manly jaw, run badly and was a tiny bit old.

Batman: Arkham Origins - Canceling DLC already selling them to the people. Why would people be pissed off?

Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge - Same as DE:HR. All the improved things were sold as DLC on other version and for much cheaper.

And not Watch_Dogs. Gets released after everyone who wanted to game has already played it and/or realized that the game is actually shit, the hype was for nothing and have lost all interest in playing it. Gee, I wonder why Watch_Dogs will flop hard. It's probably the user. It has nothing to do with the business being run by morons.

The good 3rd party support on the WiiU is non-existing. If they expect people to buy their shit just because they are released, they are dead wrong. They don't deserve anyone's sympathy or gratitude. But hey, at least Ubisoft released 3 Just Dance games on the WiiU with the 4th coming in October.

Well...

To be honest I wasn't that interested in Ubisoft mature titles on any platform, really.

FalloutJack:
Translation: "Money is icky and we don't like touching it."

You know, guys, for a business, your bottom line is more than a little wonky.

That would ignore that their Nintendo ports aren't selling.

Now, people have brought up reasons they're not selling, which may be valid. But a hatred of money has little to do with it.

This console generation is all messed up.
Nobody wants to support the one console I may consider buying at some point...I probably wont...because nobody will support it.

But I'm still wondering why Nintendo doesn't make their own mature titles. They're good at making the Mario and Kirby games, why the hell don't they put together a team to make a mature fantasy rpg or a killer fps, or maybe an rts since they have the touchscreen anyway.

And only now do I realize the implications of Ubisoft saying 'no more M rated Wii U games'. No Red Steel 3, no ZombiU 2, no, No More Heroes 3. There may be no plot reasons to continue those series but at least with ZombiU, the second one was going to be the good one (going by Red Steel's progression anyway).

Oh well: they may not be Ubisoft but at least we're going to get Bayonetta 2 and, Devil's Third

GonzoGamer:
This console generation is all messed up.
Nobody wants to support the one console I may consider buying at some point...I probably wont...because nobody will support it.

But I'm still wondering why Nintendo doesn't make their own mature titles. They're good at making the Mario and Kirby games, why the hell don't they put together a team to make a mature fantasy rpg or a killer fps, or maybe an rts since they have the touchscreen anyway.

*points at Bayonetta 2 and Devil's Third*

CaitSeith:

Lightknight:
Of course they're inferior quality compared to the other platforms. The Wii U is a mild step above the 360 technologically (uses the same CPU and only 1GB of RAM is available for games). You can't expect anyone, not even developer Jesus, to cram 8th generation games into 7th generation technology no matter how much people stress that it's part of the 8th generation. It may very well be Nintendo's 8th generation entry but it's old technology. Sorry, but true.

And yet that doesn't stop the AAA publishers to release most of the new 8th gen titles in the XBOX 360 and PS3 too. The issue is money, but I think the problem comes from the inflated costs.

I assume this was part of a generation-bridge period. If Ubisoft continues to release content on the ps3 and 360 going forward then we've got something to talk about. However, they are historically correct when they say that dark games don't sell nearly as well on Nintendo systems as their other titles. So they may only need those merits to dismiss the console as a bad console for dark titles.

Well, 700,000 sales are enough if the title doesn't cost $50 millons to make. A title with a budget of $12 millons may not be enough for today's AAA inflated standards; but it doesn't need it just to be a mature game.

They said it didn't even come close to recouping costs. You and I likely both agree that development studios suck at budgeting though.

Now I kinda want to buy Watch Dogs on my Wii U out of spite.

And I really don't want to buy Watch Dogs.

Is it me or is Ubisoft paranoid that their multimillion company, will disappear if they loose bit of money from their personal accounts or are their management just crap? I bet that their budget wouldn't be so overblown if they toned down the marketing.

Disappointed that we likely will never see a ZombiU 2 but aside from that, there isn't a whole lot that Ubisoft publishes that I would want on the WiiU. I don't care for the yearly installment franchises and anything that does interest me and is multiplatform I will buy on PC .

AJ_Lethal:

GonzoGamer:
This console generation is all messed up.
Nobody wants to support the one console I may consider buying at some point...I probably wont...because nobody will support it.

But I'm still wondering why Nintendo doesn't make their own mature titles. They're good at making the Mario and Kirby games, why the hell don't they put together a team to make a mature fantasy rpg or a killer fps, or maybe an rts since they have the touchscreen anyway.

*points at Bayonetta 2 and Devil's Third*

Are those out yet? Do we know if they're any good?
Also, I think those are being developed outside Nintendo. I'm talking about them making an In-House mature title...or two, or three.

Hey, it makes sense. Nintendo never did specialize in "mature" titles.

AdamRBi:

Rainbow_Dashtruction:
"Nearly ALL Nintendo games are focused for kids."

You know, it's attitudes like that which cause 3rd party developers and players to shun the console when making or buying their "super macho mature" titles.

It's true though. Most first-party developed games on the Wii U are created with kids as their target audience.

GonzoGamer:
This console generation is all messed up.
Nobody wants to support the one console I may consider buying at some point...I probably wont...because nobody will support it.

But I'm still wondering why Nintendo doesn't make their own mature titles. They're good at making the Mario and Kirby games, why the hell don't they put together a team to make a mature fantasy rpg or a killer fps, or maybe an rts since they have the touchscreen anyway.

They have second party studios doing wonderfully with those (Metroid Prime for example); also they made Twilight Princess so I mean, for every Splatoon there's a Bayonetta.

novem:
Disappointed that we likely will never see a ZombiU 2 but aside from that, there isn't a whole lot that Ubisoft publishes that I would want on the WiiU. I don't care for the yearly installment franchises and anything that does interest me and is multiplatform I will buy on PC .

Let's be honest, you probably weren't going to see a ZombiU 2 anyway...

Which is a damn shame, because ZombiU could easily have been expanded on, if it were in a more confident, experienced environment and without the limitations of being a launch title. But who gives anything a second chance?

LysanderNemoinis:
Not to utterly derail the topic here, but it's stuff like that this just proves my point that it was silly for Platinum Games to make any sort of deal with Nintendo because Bayonetta 2 is going to sell a fraction of a percentage of an iota of a scintilla of what the original sold on the 360/PS3. The vast majority of WiiU owners aren't into mature games (not that much of Bayonetta could be called mature with a straight face, and God bless 'em for it), or games that are too challenging. People buy Nintendo consoles because they like Nintendo games. People buy consoles and PCs because they like all other games. It's really just that simple.

The reason why Bayonetta 2 is being released exclusively on the Wii U is because Nintendo's funding it out of their pockets. It's because nobody else, not even SEGA despite owning the rights to the IP, wanted to make it. I'm sorry for sounding like an asshole, but what's so difficult to comprehend about that?

AdamRBi:

GonzoGamer:
This console generation is all messed up.
Nobody wants to support the one console I may consider buying at some point...I probably wont...because nobody will support it.

But I'm still wondering why Nintendo doesn't make their own mature titles. They're good at making the Mario and Kirby games, why the hell don't they put together a team to make a mature fantasy rpg or a killer fps, or maybe an rts since they have the touchscreen anyway.

They have second party studios doing wonderfully with those (Metroid Prime for example); also they made Twilight Princess so I mean, for every Splatoon there's a Bayonetta.

Yea, if I got a WiiU, I would get Bayonetta 2 but it doesn't make me want to get the machine.
And mature doesn't necessarily mean violent (though that does usually come with the territory), but I want to see something that huge and deep that would take me several months to play. Something I can really sink my teeth into like I can with a Bethesda or R* title.

DarklordKyo:

LysanderNemoinis:
Not to utterly derail the topic here, but it's stuff like that this just proves my point that it was silly for Platinum Games to make any sort of deal with Nintendo because Bayonetta 2 is going to sell a fraction of a percentage of an iota of a scintilla of what the original sold on the 360/PS3. The vast majority of WiiU owners aren't into mature games (not that much of Bayonetta could be called mature with a straight face, and God bless 'em for it), or games that are too challenging. People buy Nintendo consoles because they like Nintendo games. People buy consoles and PCs because they like all other games. It's really just that simple.

The reason why Bayonetta 2 is being released exclusively on the Wii U is because Nintendo's funding it out of their pockets. It's because nobody else, not even SEGA despite owning the rights to the IP, wanted to make it. I'm sorry for sounding like an asshole, but what's so difficult to comprehend about that?

You're not sounding like an asshole, and I completely get that. My point merely was that despite Platinum's idiotic statement of "wanting to have the game reach a wider audience," Bayonetta 2 isn't going to sell anything close to what the first did precisely because it's being released on the wrong system for it. B1 was sold in 2010, right after the Christmas glut (at least outside Japan) and this was still the height of CoD fever. Gamers are finally over than banal crap and are looking for something different. If it was released now, I'm sure it would do a lot better, and they could have just gone to Kickstarter to get funding. I know I sure as hell would have donated.

It's one thing to make an all new IP exclusively for a system, but it's another to make a sequel exclusive. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't have a couple hundred bucks to blow on a system I'd only buy for one game. Maybe three games including Devil's Third and Shovel Knight (if my computer wasn't a slow piece of crap and I liked gaming on a PC).

Well Ubisoft when you stop making homogenized crap I will actually care about you not supporting the only next-gen system I own. Until then let me express my thanks at saving my money for me by not releasing any interesting games.

LysanderNemoinis:

It's one thing to make an all new IP exclusively for a system, but it's another to make a sequel exclusive. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't have a couple hundred bucks to blow on a system I'd only buy for one game. Maybe three games including Devil's Third and Shovel Knight (if my computer wasn't a slow piece of crap and I liked gaming on a PC).

Except Bayonetta 2 comes with Bayonetta 1 as an incentive.

GonzoGamer:

AJ_Lethal:

GonzoGamer:
This console generation is all messed up.
Nobody wants to support the one console I may consider buying at some point...I probably wont...because nobody will support it.

But I'm still wondering why Nintendo doesn't make their own mature titles. They're good at making the Mario and Kirby games, why the hell don't they put together a team to make a mature fantasy rpg or a killer fps, or maybe an rts since they have the touchscreen anyway.

*points at Bayonetta 2 and Devil's Third*

Are those out yet? Do we know if they're any good?
Also, I think those are being developed outside Nintendo. I'm talking about them making an In-House mature title...or two, or three.

Nintendo's own developers don't know how to develop a Mature title. So it's probably easier from there standpoint to rent a developer that would not make as many rookie mistakes.

LysanderNemoinis:
It's one thing to make an all new IP exclusively for a system, but it's another to make a sequel exclusive.

This happened through the history of gaming many time and mostly it was bad for Nintendo with franchises moving from the SNES to the PS1 instead of the N64. Funny how people don't make a big deal out of that, yet this is a big deal.

Also if you buy Bayonetta 2, you get Bayonetta 1 for free included.

direkiller:

GonzoGamer:

AJ_Lethal:

*points at Bayonetta 2 and Devil's Third*

Are those out yet? Do we know if they're any good?
Also, I think those are being developed outside Nintendo. I'm talking about them making an In-House mature title...or two, or three.

Nintendo's own developers don't know how to develop a Mature title. So it's probably easier from there standpoint to rent a developer that would not make as many rookie mistakes.

I hope that isn't their excuse. This is a Japanese company.
They don't want to spend the money would be a more likely excuse. Problem is you have to take a chance of spending money if you want to make more.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here