MrHide-Patten said:
Well obviously somebody fucked up, or else they wouldn't have jumped ship. The onus is on the dev's (one of which was EA, and people act surprised when they did something screwy) and yet partially some of it's on Nintendo's. There is a failure in communication, marketing, or incentive's that isn't drawing them in (besides Platinum).
I highly doubt there was sudden fuck up in what the console was about 2 months before the thing hit shelves. Those devs knew exactly what the Wii U was, what it did, and how much of it it did. Enough so that devs sat in front of cameras talking about all the things the Wii U can do.
EA bailed because Nintendo refused to implement their DRM scheme Origin into their online play nothing more to it then that.
All the other devs bailed right before launch because they heard the HD twins were coming soon.
And for the record, after Bayonetta 2, Platinum games came to Nintendo on their own accord because Sony, Microsoft, and all the other big publishers ditched them for dude bro titles that make all of the money, with zero of the originality.
Just like Sega, they were increasingly having nowhere else to go and running out of money fast.
I was just merely remarking that somebody would have had to have had approached them about this, potentially somebody who prefers their Nintendo console and can only afford the one console, would've liked to partake in a Skyrim-esc game. It's a niche crowd, and whilst it is inferior to play a Bethesda game on a console (I played Skyrim on the PS3 with all the lag until it was patched) there are people out there.
That is a very huge, and very inaccurate assumption. I only own Nintendo consoles and yet the only place I play Elder Scrolls games is on my computer. Because they are buggy pieces of garbage on consoles.
It is more reasonable to assume that the person who asked this question is one that is aware that at this point the Wii U is more than capable of handling Bethesda's current titles. If not the newer ones, than certainly the older ones and inquired why they still don't make games for their systems.
Frankly a games console is nothing without games, and if you don't make your machine or business practices accommodating towards developers, the how are they in the right? Why are Bethesda being selfish dicks for putting out their honest opinion on how Microsoft and Sony treat them better, or basically just treat third party publishers better.
People say it time and time again that the only thing worth buying a Nintendo console is the games made by Nintendo.
The only accommodations Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo should be doing when making their consoles is making sure the hardware and specs are of good quality. That's it. There is no giant hurdle for developing anything on the Wii U. I don't understand how so many indie devs with 10 people in it have no fucking problem making ports of their games to the Wii U, yet some multi million dollar company with a staff of 300 whine out the ass about putting a sub menu on a controller.
That's a pretty shitty relationship to have with third party developers. Look at what it cost the Xbox One. All those features everyone hated was more or less a direct result of all the third party devs crying about how piracy is killing their sales and how they want more control over their games.
Sony shouldn't have to bend their backs backwards to make consoles to accommodate to their games. It's not like Bethesda did a stellar job anyway with the mess of a port those console games were anyway.
Microsoft and Sony aren't treating them better. Microsoft and Sony are basically babying a spoiled brat that doesn't even give half the effort in return for their overt kindness, and is throwing a temper tantrum because Nintendo has a backbone and wasn't going to pay (excuse me accommodate) the company so they can make games on their system.
Their words will have weight to me, the day they decided to put a modicum of effort into making a polished game port for the two companies that were "oh so nice to them."
