Wii U lacks of 3rd party games

I got a Wii U to play Nintendo licensed IPs and whatever exclusives are worth a damn. I had no illusions it'd be a major contender this gen in sales of hardware and games. Rather, I saw it as one with a smaller library of quality titles I couldn't play anywhere else. On that end I'm satisfied. For everything else that's why I'm getting an Xbox One.

@Thunderdrone: LOL @ pretending a 2D plane fighting game takes up more power than a fully 3D shooter.

People keep saying the Wii U is more powerful than last gen. Like they did about the wii. Well prove it. Show me a game that beats what was done last gen. One game they could not do last gen.

Owners of Nintendo consoles don't purchase third party so third party stopped giving them games.

I don't think this is true. Just imagine a Nintendo console with hardware similar to the PS4, using the pro controller. I think devs would want to have their game on the Nintendo console since it wouldn't require the effort and graphical downgrade it requires right now. Then with all your typical multiplats and exclusives do you honestly think people would ignore it?

@ianhh6: it was called the Gamecube.

Devs want their games to sell. It's not about the power.....Nintendo owners haven't supported third parties much since the GC era...

1. 3D fighting games actually DO take up a lot of resources. It has to be designed (in the case of Smash) to work with up to EIGHT players simultaneously with no lag, no visual clutter and millions of particles, effects and shit going on without breaking the 60fps framerate.

Uncharted loads one small area at time and only has to account with whatever the programers limited and scripted to happen. Its also a "cinematic" roller coaster so super clarity for quick visual registration is not required. Hence all the effects, reflections, shaders, bloom lighting and all other atmosphere related visual tricks.

Put all that shit in a fast paced fighter and you won't see what is happening in a multiplayer match.

2. Wii U has a more modern arquitecture, better GPU, more RAM and supports newer shaders. You want an example of a game that couldn't have been made on PS360?

Fine, I''l leave exclusives out and give you something that can be compared. Need For Speed Most Wanted U uses the PC version's high rez texture maps that couldn't have been implemented on the PS360 releases.

Straight from a devs mouth:

"Owing to the 1GB of RAM available to developers - compared to the 512MB on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 - the Wii U version features the enhanced textures currently found only on the PC version. It sounds like an ambitious addition, but it proved to be no issue for the team.

"There's a switch in our build pipeline that says 'use PC textures' and we flipped that and that was all,""

@LJS9502_basic: My idea is a console that will appeal to your typical twins gamer, rather than hoping Nintendo fans will show interest in 3rd party multiplats.

Either way I think it's all about the marketing... I think it can be done, but it has to be done well.

Well of course Nintendo doesn't have 3rd party support. I mean this has been known for so long and at this point it's to be expected. It's why most sheep have Wii U + another console or PC to play the multi platform games. But I mean seriously almost most of them have been utter garbage, especially from Ubisoft. It's a shame that the Wii U haters won't even give it a try because they don't want there mighty gods of Sony or Microsoft to know they are double dipping, oh no sir, that wouldn't be good at all..

Like I said it wouldn't matter. Gamers would then be saying 'I'll wait for the PS5 to come out.' Its the same song and the same dance no matter what Nintendo does. So in the end Nintendo does what it has to do and makes quality games.

Routine is not on ps4 and xbox one as well . It's PC exclusive.

@FreedomFreeLife:

Routine is not multiplat. It's Pc exclusive . You're confusing it with Soma , which is coming to ps4 and Pc. Routine is not coming to consoles.

@bunchanumbers: Ah but then the solution would be to launch the next console at the same time as Sony and Microsoft, that way rather than wait, they's have to choose. If Nintendo does things right in this very hypothetical case then many gamers would choose the console with higher value, no?

I do get what you're saying but I think there are ways around the obstacles put in front of Nintendo.

I don't really believe that though. Up until the Wii Nintendo consoles used controllers like anyone else, and even now the Pro controller has an almost exact layout to the dualshock and xbox controllers. The Wii used motion control, but the Wii U doesn't. Instead it uses a gamepad not entirely necessary for the games they make; a gamepad that will probably disappear in their next console. Their own products would work just fine if they chose to design them with more powerful hardware and a standard controller in mind.

And the sky is blue and most Wii U owners couldn't care less.

More at 11.

this just in water is wet

Sheep can just play them on their supercomputers & last-gen consoles.

Every cow last gen had a supercomputer since the 360 beat the PS3 in overall library due to PC/360 titles.

@Lucianu: Extremely curious to know the specifics of this.

BREAKING NEWS!!! Water is wet.

How to play Gamecube games on WiiU? No problem.

Water is also wet.

Heard the Sky is Blue too.

I always laugh at these posts. Nintendo consoles are for Nintendo games. People on SW have been making this exact same post for three generations. This matters if you are poor. Otherwise you get the Nintendo console and Ps4 or X-box one. People asking Nintendo not to be Nintendo is just silly and repetitive. Get over it.

@FreedomFreeLife: Wii U lacks of 3rd party games

.......no way, really?

Like I said, its all excuses from elitists who were never going to buy the system in the first place. That's all the first post and the argument is. If Nintendo did this and made a system more powerful than PS5/X2 when they launch and with improved online and all the complaints that people had about Wii U were addressed people will still find some other excuse to hate Nintendo. If Nintendo made a system like this, it would pretty much be Nintendo falling for the trolling that the 'mature, hardcore' gamers here has done and Nintendo will have spent billions developing hardware that goes far beyond what Nintendo needs and will probably have to sell at a loss. It would probably cost Nintendo their entire nest egg and more.

Did you stop having fun playing games or something, TC?

@bunchanumbers: Well, it is true there's always gonna be this "Nintendo is for babies" mentality in the way of progress... I dunno, seeing as Nintendo always take risks with new hardware innovations, perhaps they'll take this risk.

@farrell2k: I suppose... still I think Nintendo would make amazing games for whatever type of hardware they have. They wouldn't have to necessarily fit in motion control or a second screen.

I am genuinely curious as to what happens with their next console, though I'd like that to stay where it is - down the road. I just got my Wii U a few months ago :P

Thank you captain obvious.

Yeah, maybe Nintendo could have made better hardware, that's a fair argument. But let's be honest here, third-parties never gave the Wii U a chance. They openly put out gimped, and often late versions that never had to a chance to compete. Why in the hell would third-party games sell at all when companies are practically gloating that the the Wii U versions won't get features, modes, and DLC?

Let me be blunt here, third-parties shamelessly screwed over Nintendo with their support. And no amount of "Its weaker hardware" changes that fact. The Wii U is at least as powerful as the PS3 and Xbox 360, and some places even put it above those systems it power.

These companies lied about their support, put out inferior versions of games, and then had the guts to blame Nintendo fans for not buying their gimped, crappy ports. These third-party companies for whatever reason never wanted Nintendo to have a chance. How else could they justify sorry ports that have less content?

The issue I have is simple, third-parties have every right to support whoever they want, and even offer exclusive content for systems. But that also carries the assumption that all versions of a game, will get the same level of support and for the most part content. Third-parties screwed Nintendo and the Wii U over, plain and simple. For whatever reason, they don't want a Nintendo console to get the same versions the other consoles get. Maybe they are scared of a Nintendo that has both first and third-party support on their consoles. Maybe they think for whatever reason, their games would not sell.

But its an excuse when you blame Mario for you game not selling when your product is a gimped, inferior port that has better versions on other consoles. It's an excuse that quite frankly, does not hold water.

Nintendo deserves its share of the blame, but third-parties are not innocent in this. In fact, they deserve a large share of the blame themselves. I find it amazing how every single time something involves Nintendo, they can magically find excuses and delay games that they never would on a Xbox or Playstation platform.

It's a horrible double standard.

I'm very curious to see how Nintendo responds with their next console. If they continue in the direction they are going now I might never buy another Nintendo system. After being an earlier WiiU adopter I feel pretty disappointed in Nintendo.

Nintendo does innovate. But not through raw hardware power. After the N64 and Gamecube, both of which were more powerful than their competition and little sales to show for it... there's no point in a power game when their focus has always been on the games. Sure there is some power with generational leaps but their real innovations has always been through how you interact with those games. D pad, Analog Sticks, rumble, Diamond Button Layout, Shoulder Buttons, Analog Triggers, Motion Controls, Speakers in controllers, camera in controllers, NFC etc.. That is where Nintendo's real innovation is. Problem is that in todays Digital Foundry society people like to pretend that specs make games.

I don't think Wii U fans are giving a **** about those over-hyped, broken games you listed.

Don't forget borderline non-existent (Beyond Good and Evil 2 is on that list).

@bunchanumbers: right. Nintendo's just the poor victim here. Not like they've done anything to deserve it, let's just blame the consumer. It's much easier that way.

Joke thread? Everyone and their mother knows this.

Nintendo has a lot to do with its current predicament- they shat the bed with the third parties pretty hard back in the 1980s and 1990s, and while they have made efforts to improve their relations with them since then, working with Nintendo is a less conducive environment for a third party studio than working with Xbox or PlayStation is. That is a fact.

What is also a fact is that third parties never actually fairly support Nintendo, or at the very least, they never did with the Wii U. This post:

Sums it up very well.

Again, just to be clear, I am not excusing Nintendo here, nor am I divesting them of where they did in fact go wrong (and where they go wrong is highlighted very well by Caryslan's post)- but I am saying, people like to pretend like it is all Nintendo's (or their fans') fault, when it isn't. Third parties have to shoulder their fair share of the blame too.

Which is what I've tried to say in previous threads regarding to Nintendo and third party support (but cary said it better than I ever did or could). I'm just sick of certain people getting a pass for a crime they had involvement and in this industry, any side, be it the companies and/or the consumers (further confirming this century old motto as bunk) can be blamed. And both the consumers and third parties seem to get that pass A LOT.

Unlike previous generations the lack of 3rd party support doesn't bother me that much. I don' t really care for most of the 3rd party games coming out today. In other generations usually something Capcom or SEGA would come out with would convince me but they are sort of missing in action.

Nearly every third party in existence refuses to put their games on Nintendo's machine. Ask yourself: when everyone is against you, do you think that perhaps the problem lies with you, and not with everyone else?This is not some grand conspiracy by the Illuminati to bury Nintendo, the abysmal support we are seeing is the product of Nintendo "not caring" (as they put it) what their competition does and is the product of years upon years of failures and neglect based on this attitude. Companies desire to make money, personal vendettas or grievances are short on the list. You'd have to be delusional to think that they are not putting games on Nintendo's systems out of spite in lieu of the dollar, or whatever else you may think.

Here's why they don't:

• Nintendo does not care for creating a modern online platform because they hold a philosophy that doesn't consider it to be a core component of gaming today. Yes, it's obligatorily present but still lags behind what MS and Sony offer. Gamers want the best, and therefor have migrated to where their desires are being met. Third parties see this, they want this business and desire modern online functionality to be able to offer it.
• Nintendo does not care for creating hardware for anything past their own interests. Third parties desire cutting edge tech to push their visions (there is nothing wrong with this), and they also wish for compatibility for cost effective ports. They don't find this with Nintendo, so why are they going to waste putting the extra effort into porting games to another architecture, when the fan base for that type of game is elsewhere precisely BECAUSE Nintendo has failed to nurture that audience through years of dismissing many different types of tastes, which they continue to do?
• Nintendo does not care for broadening its appeal past its own little niche. Third parties want the largest possible user-base to recoup their investments. Now, it could be argued that the reason that audience isn't there is because third party games aren't, but again, there's a reason they're not, elaborated on above which still remain the faults of Nintendo.

So who's largely at fault here?

In the end, this is a business, and companies don't operate on good faith. They are making serious investments.....especially in today's AAA environment. They cannot afford to enter an ecosystem so poorly run as Nintendo's. So they see two potential scenarios to success: one that has the tech they need, the audience they desire, and the features supported to feed that audience. Then they see one that is behind on the tech, lacks the audience, and is behind on the features. How in the hell can anyone in their right mind blame third parties for that? I'm astonished that there are any non-Nintendo games for the Wii U. That there are demonstrates that they are going the extra mile.....for what, I don't know.

Nintendo is hugely to blame in this.

That post does nothing to sum up anything. This....

"For whatever reason, they don't want a Nintendo console to get the same versions the other consoles get. Maybe they are scared of a Nintendo that has both first and third-party support on their consoles. Maybe they think for whatever reason, their games would not sell."

.....no offense to caryslan2 meant, but I think this sentence demonstrates a complete lack of understanding as to why there's no support, or the meager nature of the support there is. His post did nothing to delve into the deeper issues as to why that support is literally non-existent, it was only an expression of frustration with it being non-existent and poorly done. If third parties "screwed over" Nintendo in any way, there are very good reasons, and those reasons lie entirely on Nintendo's side of the fence.

Third parties are not a charity and are not obliged to do anything. If anything, Nintendo fans should be appreciative that they would put their games on their system at all considering Nintendo's actions and decisions.

@FreedomFreeLife: I have a PS4 so I'm all set on 3rd party games. I didn't buy a wiiu for 3rd party games anyway. It's all about mario zelda and metroid.

So, because of Nintendo's actions, that gives third parties the right to give their audience the shortest end of the stick?

Because 3rd Party licensing fees and royalty fees make you money?

Because having 3rd Party support builds you a higher user base which in turn brings more potential customers to buy your games.

What kind of dumb question was that lol

Congratulations, you just made a crap rendition of a list that has been going on for a while now: For Everything But Wii U

Additionally, you reported on something that is so obvious that it makes me wonder why you bothered to make the thread at all. What's next? "Heye guize, da sky iz blu!!! lolololololol!"

It's just damage control.

WiiU has been getting some heavy hitters lately while Xbox One and PS4 have been getting disappointing installments of certain franchises.

At least they have Dragon Age.