EA on Wii U: Not a next-gen console

#151VenomSymbiotePosted 2/1/2013 9:02:36 AM
Maybe it's like a trainwreck, Bonfini? You know it's horrible and should look away, but you can't. :p
---
"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
#152icarus231Posted 2/1/2013 9:20:06 AM
TheBonfini posted...
VenomSymbiote posted...
So what will people say if:

A) Wii U still becomes the basis for all multiplat titles if the userbase is huge enough, thus meaning the other consoles just get higher res or tweaked ports.

B) The other consoles "aren't" insanely more powerful than Wii U and ports are fine?


More wishful thinking.

Wii-U isn't selling enough. The consoles will be a generational leap over Wii-U making "A" irrelevant. Since we are using our crystal balls. What if then?


Isnt selling well. Hmmm did the PS3 or 360 sell 3 mil in 2 months. Maybe the vita did? I wouldnt count on to much power sony cant take a loss and no one is going to spend more then $400 for a system in this economy
#153googlerPosted 2/1/2013 9:43:26 AM
Those consoles also had a more limited stock but the whole point is nobody buys 3rd party games on Nintendo consoles so what real incentive is there to use it as a lead development platform, especially when the hardware is watered down by contrast. Its the same reason why the Wii was never a primary platform for anything
#154icarus231Posted 2/1/2013 9:55:47 AM
googler posted...
Those consoles also had a more limited stock but the whole point is nobody buys 3rd party games on Nintendo consoles so what real incentive is there to use it as a lead development platform, especially when the hardware is watered down by contrast. Its the same reason why the Wii was never a primary platform for anything


Wii had limited stock and still sold more then them. Vita has plenty of stock and is covered in dust. So do you really want to play the stock card? And from a dev standpoint everything should be made for a pc only then since none of the systems can compete. Please try harder next time. The only thing sony can beat Nintendo with is whose debt is bigger and who knows how to sell real estate.
#155SexPantherPandaPosted 2/1/2013 10:36:06 AM
This topic is so gross if someone says something agaisnt Nintendo they suck...
#156googlerPosted 2/1/2013 2:04:04 PM
icarus231 posted...
googler posted...
Those consoles also had a more limited stock but the whole point is nobody buys 3rd party games on Nintendo consoles so what real incentive is there to use it as a lead development platform, especially when the hardware is watered down by contrast. Its the same reason why the Wii was never a primary platform for anything


Wii had limited stock and still sold more then them. Vita has plenty of stock and is covered in dust. So do you really want to play the stock card? And from a dev standpoint everything should be made for a pc only then since none of the systems can compete. Please try harder next time. The only thing sony can beat Nintendo with is whose debt is bigger and who knows how to sell real estate.



Do you even see what most pc game sales are like? 360 and PS3 easily outsell PC ports of the same game several times over, so it makes perfect sense to prioritize them. So was there a payoff for companies like ubisoft to spend so much time and money to make a solid port of something that didn't even break-even? Just over a 100,000 vs. 4.5 million each on the other consoles...do the math. Maybe it was bad timing for the game to be released on U but its virtually the same story for every game on Wii or the U - people only really buy 1st party games for Nintendo systems. They've been grossly exaggerating everything. Their 3.8 games attach per console is really just over 2 per console, and chances are better that 1:2 games attached per owner was a boxed-in title.
do the math and stop thinking like a fan boy. What real incentive is there for a 3rd party to focus on the U now, given that:
-the cost of producing an optimized port can range from only dramatically less than, to equal what the game makes in sales.
-the console is getting a lower than anticipated reception.
-the demographics and the small, current install base just doesn't push their software.
-consoles with reliable demographics with a proven interest in their games are just over the horizon, with a high possibility of overshadowing the U even further
#157NeoMonkPosted 2/1/2013 2:05:16 PM
EA not a real publisher.
They made 1 game & port it over with updated rosters every year.
---
"How am i spelling?" Please call 800-WHO-CARES or online at Imlonely.com
#158strongo9Posted 2/1/2013 2:11:08 PM
EA also seems to think that the PS4/720 will mark the beginning of the "4th" gen.
---
Want Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon, Rayman Legends, and Bioshock Infinite.
i7-2670qm @ 2.2ghz | 6GB DDR3 | 1GB Geforce 540m
#159icarus231Posted 2/1/2013 2:16:38 PM
googler posted...
icarus231 posted...
googler posted...
Those consoles also had a more limited stock but the whole point is nobody buys 3rd party games on Nintendo consoles so what real incentive is there to use it as a lead development platform, especially when the hardware is watered down by contrast. Its the same reason why the Wii was never a primary platform for anything


Wii had limited stock and still sold more then them. Vita has plenty of stock and is covered in dust. So do you really want to play the stock card? And from a dev standpoint everything should be made for a pc only then since none of the systems can compete. Please try harder next time. The only thing sony can beat Nintendo with is whose debt is bigger and who knows how to sell real estate.



Do you even see what most pc game sales are like? 360 and PS3 easily outsell PC ports of the same game several times over, so it makes perfect sense to prioritize them. So was there a payoff for companies like ubisoft to spend so much time and money to make a solid port of something that didn't even break-even? Just over a 100,000 vs. 4.5 million each on the other consoles...do the math. Maybe it was bad timing for the game to be released on U but its virtually the same story for every game on Wii or the U - people only really buy 1st party games for Nintendo systems. They've been grossly exaggerating everything. Their 3.8 games attach per console is really just over 2 per console, and chances are better that 1:2 games attached per owner was a boxed-in title.
do the math and stop thinking like a fan boy. What real incentive is there for a 3rd party to focus on the U now, given that:
-the cost of producing an optimized port can range from only dramatically less than, to equal what the game makes in sales.
-the console is getting a lower than anticipated reception.
-the demographics and the small, current install base just doesn't push their software.
-consoles with reliable demographics with a proven interest in their games are just over the horizon, with a high possibility of overshadowing the U even further


I dont think they are grossly exaggerating i think you have been drinking the ps3/360 koolaid. First off pc has more games the only games you can compare ot are the inferior console versions. They wii u still has better sales then both ps3/360 only when compared to the wii is it doing bad. We will see how many people buy the overpriced new machines.
#160googlerPosted 2/1/2013 2:30:41 PM
You avoided half the points I made and your PC remark makes no sense, but U is not doing as well according to Nintendo's own estimates. The difference between the console launches is this: 360 only had a few hundred thousand units for sale the first few months - all sold out. Both ps360 had slow launches but demand kept growing until it basically plateaus and then stays consistent. Wii U never had a shortage issue so there was no reason it couldn't do better if the demand was really there and here's the difference...U demand fell right off of a cliff and then fell some more. People had plenty of time to be aware of it and they just dont care. The console's gimmick didn't have the same draw and neither did any launch games the way Wii sports did. All the other stuff like the billion Mario spin-offs and Zelda and metroid and Starfox are just preaching to the choirs. They aren't games that draw in new blood - they only keep the base happy