Gamers Rage About Bayonetta 2 on Wii U

[Nikolas Murphy]

Get over it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYPIDJnN4zY&feature=plcp

 

[Kroxile]

Wii U is at least twice as powerful as current consoles. Its ridiculous to claim otherwise... unless you're too stupid to read tech specs, I guess.

 

[I.Muir]

Ive always disliked games exclusive to only one console but that's the way things are
It's odd to see it with Nintendo of all places but perhaps it won't be bad and I would have probably gotten a wii u anyway

 

[NoeL]

Hardcore game becomes exclusive to a casual console and gamers become upset.

"We never saw it coming."
Said absolutely no one ever.

How is the Wii U a "casual console"? When it hits stores it'll have more beef than any other console on the market (obviously not including PCs) and, if you've seen ANY Nintendo press releases (in other words, if you didn't have your head up your arse) you'd know that the hardcore market is one of the primary targets for the console. Of course they're still going to sell to the casual crowd - they'd be batshit insane NOT to given the massive consumer base they scored with the Wii - but to declare the Wii U a "casual console" because a) it's by Nintendo, and b) the standard controller you've yet to touch is too different and scary for you (hey, you can always pick up the Pro controller if that's what you need to sleep at night) only highlights your own prejudice.

 

[Stripes]

Why can they not release it on multiple consoles? Why are people ok with exclusives? How is it somehow fine for a game to be actively denied to people for no other reason than to force them to buy another console? This is just another casuality to a seriously anti consumer practice.

Oh and to those who think they are somehow mighty for belittling people who cant play the sequel to a game they liked: You arent being clever, you're being dickheads. Why on earth should people be forced to buy a console for games which clearly are not specific to the console in question?

Because the people who make the console are paying the bill to get the game made? Why should they use their money to make a sequel to a game everyone else gave up on, then make it for competitors consoles so other companies can have it, so you can avoid giving them your money for a console they've made and a game they have paid to publish? Not to mention it's WiiU so likely it WILL be exclusive to the console, and you expect Nintendo to foot the bill so it can ported to the X-Box 720 and the PS4? That sounds reasonable to you?

Seriously, it's pretty much entirely how the big three compete by who has the best exclusives, no-one would be saying shit if it was an X-box exclusive. Hell, there are people on this forum who still don't think Bethesda's handling of Dawnguard was f*cking shoddy by releasing it for X-box 2 months ahead of PS3 and PC, and that's a legitimate issue as it isn't hard to port DLC.

More OT: We don't ***** about Halo being only on X-Box or God of War only being on Playstation, it just so happens Bayonetta is now only going to be on WiiU. And? If you want to play the game I guess you're going to have to give WiiU a try, if you don't then give Platinum Games the money it needs out of your own pocket to buy back full publishing rights and make a game for the X-box or whatever. It'll only cost you something like 15 million dollars (conservative f*cking estimate there).

It's like Nintendo want us to buy their products or something crazy like that!

Get off your high horse, you arent as smart as you think you are. Nintendo is publishing the game, great! That doesnt mean its good for gaming to have that game be denied to other gamers purely to sell a console. I dont agree with exclusives, I think anyone who supports exclusives that are exclusive because one company wants to get an edge by denying the game to other consoles is retarded.

I can see why keeping the game exclusive to the Wii U is smart for Nintendo, I cant see how thats good for us. I dont want to buy a Wii U, not out of malice but because I cant afford to buy a Wii U and and Xbox 720 (if indeed I get another generation of console, depends on my circumstances. The 360 seems to be the strongest of the 3 consoles, going with that im gonna go to the next iteration of it. Plus I like the exclusives and all my freinds are getting it, though it having exclusives is no more ok than the Wii U or PS3 having exclusives purely for competition). Im not "avoiding giving them money for a console they've made", which somehow insinuates Im at fault for not buying it at all because they spent money making it, I just cant buy it in my circumstances because they are denying it on platforms I play on.

I dont know the full situation with Dawngaurd, if Microsoft paid for some sort of exclusivity then non-xbox gamers should not be denied the DLC. It isnt fair on gamers, even if the devs are better off. Halo should be on PS3 and God of War should be on xbox. Gamers are not benefiting from this competition, theres no good reason for us to support it.

I would love nothing more than for Bayonetta 2 to be available to everyone, unfortunately Platinum games decided they couldnt self publish (though they could publish the abysmal 'Vanquish') it and Nintendo is now publishing. That isnt my fault. Why is it somehow fine for Nintendo to act against our interests but not Activision or EA? They both go against our interests and are hated for it, why is it ok here?

Right, for clarity, you're immediately saying you won't buy the Wii U, instead you're going for the next X-Box. Why is that? Because it has better business practices? No, in your own words because of the exclusives (and some bonus reasons like familiarty or your friends had it but at some point down the line you bought it for the games, because that's why all of us choose one console or other, either we played Mario and enjoyed it or a good round of Halo, it's just how they're distinguished). My big issue with this thread in general is that nobody is complaining about Epic, Bungie, Sucker Punch, Nintendo bought a studio to make a game and because it's not on THEIR console there's outrage. It's just a touch hypocritical.

I agree that console exclusives aren't fantastic when you lack the console, but Bayonetta 2 wouldn't even exist unless Nintendo footed the bill and if the price to pay is it's only on their console well... Zelda isn't on X-Box either. Your comparison to Activision and EA is also a poor analogue, since those companies do go across all consoles they just happen to be douchebags to gamers in general. I'm not saying it's your fault that Platinum weren't going to release Bayonetta 2 or develop it but Nintendo have also sunk a HUGE amount of money in getting a 'grown up' exclusive. If Microsoft spent huge amounts of money to buy Sucker Punch away from Sony and make inFamous 3 I'd probably be annoyed since I prefer Playstation, but I'm admitting to it and I also get that the only reason they're DOING it is to sell their product and since I like the game I might consider switching.

You can be pissed off that a game you'd like to play is going to be on a console you've decided you don't want but Nintendo isn't doing anything malicious or intentionally to screw gamers which is why I'm defending them. Microsoft could have bought Platinum, Sony could have done it, they didn't. I don't ***** out Microsoft for buying out Rare and killing them (no matter how heinous that sin was) so I tend to get snarky when someone does the reverse.

I understand why Nintendo is doing what it does, however im saying its all artificial competition and we shouldnt support the practice of buying exclusives for one particular console in order to deny it on others. We dont benefit at all from it. It exists because the console manufactuers are producing pretty much the same product for the same games, theres little difference between the PS3 and the xbox to the consumer. I own an xbox, therefore I got to play Mass Effect 1. PS3 owners got denied that game because Microsoft didnt want them to have it. Not because the consoles were different in any way but because the consoles were not different so the manufactures had to create a difference. It might be smart business but it doesnt make it good for us.

Theres nothing stopping Nintendo from releasing it on xbox and PS3, they wont because they want to deny it to those people who dont own a Wii U. Yeah, they can do that its great for them and its great its getting a sequel. But its bad for us as gamers, we do not benefit. If it doesnt benefit us and gaming in any way then we shouldnt support it. I have never liked exclusives when they are exclusive because a console maker doesnt want them on other consoles, im not going to start liking them now when they make me worse off. Again.

 

[Stripes]

Why can they not release it on multiple consoles? Why are people ok with exclusives? How is it somehow fine for a game to be actively denied to people for no other reason than to force them to buy another console? This is just another casuality to a seriously anti consumer practice.

Oh and to those who think they are somehow mighty for belittling people who cant play the sequel to a game they liked: You arent being clever, you're being dickheads. Why on earth should people be forced to buy a console for games which clearly are not specific to the console in question?

Because the people who make the console are paying the bill to get the game made? Why should they use their money to make a sequel to a game everyone else gave up on, then make it for competitors consoles so other companies can have it, so you can avoid giving them your money for a console they've made and a game they have paid to publish? Not to mention it's WiiU so likely it WILL be exclusive to the console, and you expect Nintendo to foot the bill so it can ported to the X-Box 720 and the PS4? That sounds reasonable to you?

Seriously, it's pretty much entirely how the big three compete by who has the best exclusives, no-one would be saying shit if it was an X-box exclusive. Hell, there are people on this forum who still don't think Bethesda's handling of Dawnguard was f*cking shoddy by releasing it for X-box 2 months ahead of PS3 and PC, and that's a legitimate issue as it isn't hard to port DLC.

More OT: We don't ***** about Halo being only on X-Box or God of War only being on Playstation, it just so happens Bayonetta is now only going to be on WiiU. And? If you want to play the game I guess you're going to have to give WiiU a try, if you don't then give Platinum Games the money it needs out of your own pocket to buy back full publishing rights and make a game for the X-box or whatever. It'll only cost you something like 15 million dollars (conservative f*cking estimate there).

It's like Nintendo want us to buy their products or something crazy like that!

Get off your high horse, you arent as smart as you think you are. Nintendo is publishing the game, great! That doesnt mean its good for gaming to have that game be denied to other gamers purely to sell a console. I dont agree with exclusives, I think anyone who supports exclusives that are exclusive because one company wants to get an edge by denying the game to other consoles is retarded.

I can see why keeping the game exclusive to the Wii U is smart for Nintendo, I cant see how thats good for us. I dont want to buy a Wii U, not out of malice but because I cant afford to buy a Wii U and and Xbox 720 (if indeed I get another generation of console, depends on my circumstances. The 360 seems to be the strongest of the 3 consoles, going with that im gonna go to the next iteration of it. Plus I like the exclusives and all my freinds are getting it, though it having exclusives is no more ok than the Wii U or PS3 having exclusives purely for competition). Im not "avoiding giving them money for a console they've made", which somehow insinuates Im at fault for not buying it at all because they spent money making it, I just cant buy it in my circumstances because they are denying it on platforms I play on.

I dont know the full situation with Dawngaurd, if Microsoft paid for some sort of exclusivity then non-xbox gamers should not be denied the DLC. It isnt fair on gamers, even if the devs are better off. Halo should be on PS3 and God of War should be on xbox. Gamers are not benefiting from this competition, theres no good reason for us to support it.

I would love nothing more than for Bayonetta 2 to be available to everyone, unfortunately Platinum games decided they couldnt self publish (though they could publish the abysmal 'Vanquish') it and Nintendo is now publishing. That isnt my fault. Why is it somehow fine for Nintendo to act against our interests but not Activision or EA? They both go against our interests and are hated for it, why is it ok here?

Woah bro! Calm down!

I suppose this is my question to you: why have different consoles if you can get all the same games on just one? Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo would all go out of business if their consoles didn't have a strong selling point, and those points have to be the software. I do get your point, it can really suck if a game's coming out that you want on a system you don't own. But the bigger picture here is that exclusives help the industry and these companies survive. Consumer loyalty is a huge part of the industry, and it's very difficult to create that without a very clear, very defined reasons that separate the companies. We remove that, and it's very possible we could see a lot of collapse.

I doubt we would see a collapse, thats pushing it a bit. Why do two of the 3 consoles need to be pretty much the same? Exclusives dont help the industry they hinder it and they hinder gamers. The industry is not built around consumer loyalty, what your mis interpreting is peoples want of certain games directing them to certain consoles. They dont care for the company they just went with the best option for them, thats just a normal market. I bought an xbox because I liked the games, not because I liked microsoft (which would be the case if it was consumer loyalty). Furthermore you seem to think people only buy games out of loyalty, that doesnt make any sense.

The PS3 and xbox are functionally identical, they have no natural difference. To differentiate them sony and Microsoft buy exclusivity deals. They dont benefit the gamers on the console which recieves the exclusive, they simply hinder the gamers on the one which doesnt. Its artificial competition, thats not good for the industry as a whole or us as gamers. No one is vying for our affections they are simply making our other options worse without improving themselves. The Wii had plenty of exclusive games because the technology was different, those games would not have existed if Nintendo had produce something similar to the xbox or PS3. That is good competition, they did something different and made themsleves more attractive. How companies enter the hardware market should not be our problem, we shouldnt have to pay the price for their lack of innovation. Sony and Microsoft dont give us different things with their consoles, they just take from each others. We shouldnt support that.

 

[Lrbearclaw]

From what I understand a sequel to Bayonetta wasn't on the cards at all until Nintendo stepped in. Yeah it sucks to have to fork out for a new console for a sequel to a game you like but unfortunately that is just the way it's gone.

You mean like the Kingdom Hearts franchise?

 

[NoeL]

yeah, just add more buttons until the controller is nothing but buttons
maybe you like to stick to the past but I want more than just one way to enjoy a game, people like you who think everything should stick with what was good in the past are pathetic who wouldn't even try something new if it was given to you for free.
and quit using the word 'gimmick' I've said this before that everything is a gimmick before it became popular even the computer in front of you

I'm willing to be that if companies somehow managed to cheaply build a holographic gaming system that you'd sit there and complain of "why there be no buttons?! buttons make a game good, innovation doesn't do nothing"

Uuuh, YES!

Gamers are ALREADY doing this, this is the direction the CONSUMER is going, putting more buttons on custom xbox controllers, usually for macros but also alternate buttons though is stymied by lack of developer support. There has been a steady trend to more buttons on controllers.

I am proposing that it is advancing things in a sensible direction according to consumer's needs, not marketing gimmicks.

"people like you who think everything should stick with what was good in the past are pathetic"

I'm not offend by such insults, you are not insulting me but a "straw man", you have made up an imagined person that is supposed to be me but unlike me is some sort of Luddite.

Fail fallacy.

"and quit using the word 'gimmick' "

gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick gimmick

No. I won't stop using this very fitting term. I can tell people don't want this term used as it is so fitting. This is a bad solution in search of a trivial problem, it doesn't serve a practical purpose worth it's effort, it's a gimmick.

What I never EVER even came close to implying or leading to: "why there be no buttons?! buttons make a game good, innovation doesn't do nothing"

Let's give a slow clap for your fail attempts at straw-manning.

I mean you COULD actually stay on topic and address my actual argument. But no. I don't tink you can. So you just jump to ridiculous and fraudulent conclusions of my stance to attack me rather than my argument.

That WiiU's tablet controller is a gimmick IN AND OF ITSELF!

I'm sorry, I've been reading through pages on your tripe without commenting, but after this load of horse shit something needs to be said.

You are a hater. Plain and simple. How do I know this? Because you claim that having more buttons is a good thing, and that's the direction the consumer base is going (I don't agree with you, but let's hypothetically say that's the case), yet claim a controller with a massive touch screen controller in the middle - read: practically limitless custom and dynamic extra button setups - "doesn't serve a practical purpose worth it's effort". Your argument is, essentially, that smart phones employ a useless "gimmick" by giving the user a general-purpose interface instead of a static keypad.

Please, for the love of god, don't blame Nintendo for your own lack of imagination. The GamePad has SOOOO MUCH potential, but you are simply too blinded by fanboy hatred to recognise it.

Imagine, if you will, playing something like WoW on a console. You're probably like "Pffft, all those hotkeys on a console controller? Surely you must be mad! Only a keyboard can wield such a variety of functionality!". Now here comes the Wii U GamePad, and lets you easily drag and drop attacks and spells into your touch screen hotbar - now there's no need to whip out that cumbersome keyboard!

Or how about something as simple as typing, to name your character, or put your initials on a high score? No more manually cycling through the alphabet, or using the Wiimote to point at the screen and shoot letters - no, an actual fucking touchscreen keyboard shows up in the palm of your hand! How convenient! Can you push a button and turn your TV into a touchscreen keyboard? No? And even if you could, you'd have to get off your fat arse to actually use it? Golly gee willikers, that GamePad touchscreen is clearly nothing more than an inconvenient substitute for a button, amirite?

Again, let me repeat myself - just because you are too stupid to see the tablet as more than a gimmick doesn't make it so. It'll add a ton of useful functionality, offer new and innovative gameplay mechanics, and hey, if you're just too lame to try something new they're also releasing the Pro Controller. Everyone wins. Go Nintendo.

 

[Orekoya]

Motion controls don't really translate well to a fighting game like Bayonetta.

Which is why it'll be using the gamepad controller.

The giant touchscreen one? Still makes for a little difficult transition.

If you're talking about the classic controller, fine, but I still say that is the least comfortable controller to use in this generation.

Good thing they fixed the issue of comfort in the next generation.

 

[Judgment90]

yeah, people just need to chill out, they are overreacting just like people overreacted to the ME3 ending.

If it wasn't due to Nintendo, the game wouldn't probably see the light of day.

All one can hope is that the game is good once it comes out.

Although, the "I WANNA KICK A DOLPHIN IN ITS VAGINA" comment did get some laughs out of me.

 

[Carnagath]

Bayonetta is the only game that I was ever forced to put down due to how horrendous the writing was. I'm not really picky about writing in games either, it can suck all it wants if the gameplay is ok, but Bayonetta was really something else. I felt like I was being fumbled by a 50 year old Japanese rapist who never finished grade school and buys used panties off vending machines while playing it.

 

[cikame]

I won't be able to play it, alot of Bayonetta fans won't be able to play it, because it's coming out on an expensive console not targeted towards us.
I don't want to play Wii/WiiU games, i don't want to use the touch screen gyroscope thing, i'm not going to spend hundreds of £'s for 1 game, stop trying to make it sound like it's not a big deal.

 

[MonkeyPunch]

I too am unhappy that Bayonetta 2 is only on Wii U (for the moment?)
But being so overtly angry about the situation only plays in to Nintendo's hands.

Whilst people are raging on the net (btw. I believe half the "killing myself" comments are purposefully extreme just to make a point) Nintendo is rubbing it's hands in glee that they've got a title that will make people buy the console.

In fact if it was a timed exclusive before all this outcry, you can bet your ass that Nintendo will now try and make it a permanent exclusive because of this outrage.

If it was a choice between a Wii U exclusive Bayonetta 2 and no Bayonetta 2 at all, wouldn't the console exclusive be the better option?

I don't think that helps people who really aren't going to buy the system. If it's on a system they just don't have and will not have access to on a regular basis it might as well be published on the 3DO for all the use it is to them.
If you don't have the console, well... you don't have the console. The game might as well not be published for all you care.

IMO if B2 was released on Wii, people would have been just as upset for exactly the same reason.

People need to chill and put things in to perspective but people also need to realise how the internet works and what people will say when they are annoyed and what OTT superlatives people will use to get their "point" across.

 

[MeTheMe]

Really? REALLY? This is down right shameful. I can understand being upset about a game that's exclusive to a single console, it's annoying to me too, but OUTRAGE at this is alarming in a very bad way. Seriously? This is down right disturbing to see. The twitter posts are garbage. They're upset because they've already decided they don't like the Wii U or Nintendo because it's not a real console and makes stupid casual games. Really? Okay, you can have your opinion and be angry about that, but then the posts? Burn down Nintendo? Punch a dolphin? Disappointed in the dev? These posts are uncalled for. What is wrong with people?

 

[Atmos Duality]

Really? REALLY? This is down right shameful.

No, that would imply that these trolls who inexplicably keep making it into the news, would somehow be aware of the concept of shame.

These are just a vocal minority; a group of whiny assholes stirring up shit for attention.
Where was this vitriol 3 years ago when the Wii ruled the gaming world?
Or damn near any other time another console got an exclusive game?

At worst, it was relegated to forum posts, Youtube comments and Facebook.

More importantly, where was it not at that time?
IN THE NEWS.

 

[kburns10]

You want that game so bad?
Then get out your wallet!

THIS again and again! Would I like to play it? Sure I would. But if I wanted to play it as bad as "supposedly" some of these people raging about it do, I'd just buy a Wii U. I don't see why people are livid over this.

 

[Treblaine]

I'm sorry, I've been reading through pages on your tripe without commenting, but after this load of horse shit something needs to be said.

You are a hater. Plain and simple. How do I know this? Because you claim that having more buttons is a good thing, and that's the direction the consumer base is going (I don't agree with you, but let's hypothetically say that's the case), yet claim a controller with a massive touch screen controller in the middle - read: practically limitless custom and dynamic extra button setups - "doesn't serve a practical purpose worth it's effort". Your argument is, essentially, that smart phones employ a useless "gimmick" by giving the user a general-purpose interface instead of a static keypad.

Please, for the love of god, don't blame Nintendo for your own lack of imagination. The GamePad has SOOOO MUCH potential, but you are simply too blinded by fanboy hatred to recognise it.

Imagine, if you will, playing something like WoW on a console. You're probably like "Pffft, all those hotkeys on a console controller? Surely you must be mad! Only a keyboard can wield such a variety of functionality!". Now here comes the Wii U GamePad, and lets you easily drag and drop attacks and spells into your touch screen hotbar - now there's no need to whip out that cumbersome keyboard!

Or how about something as simple as typing, to name your character, or put your initials on a high score? No more manually cycling through the alphabet, or using the Wiimote to point at the screen and shoot letters - no, an actual fucking touchscreen keyboard shows up in the palm of your hand! How convenient! Can you push a button and turn your TV into a touchscreen keyboard? No? And even if you could, you'd have to get off your fat arse to actually use it? Golly gee willikers, that GamePad touchscreen is clearly nothing more than an inconvenient substitute for a button, amirite?

Again, let me repeat myself - just because you are too stupid to see the tablet as more than a gimmick doesn't make it so. It'll add a ton of useful functionality, offer new and innovative gameplay mechanics, and hey, if you're just too lame to try something new they're also releasing the Pro Controller. Everyone wins. Go Nintendo.

I hate bad design and you should hate it too.

No free-passes for brand loyalty, especially to the Nintendo brand which has proven it is not loyal in return.

Crappy resistive touchscreen that the WiiU uses does not make for lack of buttons. It's certainly not "limitless possibilities" it's hugely limited by lack of tactile feedback (you need to look down at the touch area) and how you need to take one hand off the other buttons to use a stylus for precision and reliability you need.

THIS IS NOT COMPARABLE WITH SMARTPHONES!

For one, smartphones use the far superior capacitative touch screen. For two you are SUPPOSED to be looking at the seen of yoru phone, but with a home console you are supposed to be looking at the big-screen.

Please, for the love of god, don't excuse Nintendo with your over-active imagination. The GamePad has SOOO LITTLE potential, but you are simply too blinded by fanboy love to recognise that.

Drag and drop with a stylus?!?!? You NEED the stylus for reliability and precision. Even a bodged solution using your thumb, you need to take your hands OFF one side of the heavy and bulky controller foryour finger to reach across the screen and take your eyes off the main screen and refocus back down. That's FAR FAR inferior to a Mouse and Keyboard.

You are just giving the WiiU tablet credit because it's new and from Nintendo, not for its inherent worth.

Typing>!?!?!? On a RESISTIVE TOUCHPAD! You can claim ignorance only so much on this... Nintendo may be acting like they are giving you an iPad interface BUT THEY ARE NOT! I need to resort to caps-locks as I am fed up to the back teeth of people ignoring this point. Reistice touchpads are cheap but crap.

We have keyboards. PC hase been using them since, well since they were PCs. And PS3 and 360 have keyboard adapters:

Spoiler

These are a hell of a lot quicker than any resistive touchscreen as you can use them by feel alone.


To paraphrase what you ignorantly said to me right back at you:

Again, let me repeat myself - just because you are too stupid to see the technological limitations of tablet that makes it no more than a gimmick, doesn't mean it isn't a gimmick.

"they're also releasing the Pro Controller. Everyone wins. Go Nintendo."

it's good to see you wearing your nintendo-fanboyism on their sleeve. It makes it easier to gauge the "worth" of your opinions.

But surely an "everyone wins" scenario would Nintendo Selling the WiiU WITHOUT this expensive gimmick, they could knock $170 of the price and save me money as if I were to get the WiiU it would be for MUCH MUCH less than their current asking price.

It WiiU Tablet Controller was so good then they would sell it as a separate option and people would get it.

 

[saleem]

Really the excuse that you have to buy a new console to play the game is rather pathetic and quite frankly short sighted. If Bayonetta2 was to come out on the next version of the Xbox or PS you'd be in the exact same boat, you will still have to buy a new console.

I guess its safe to be said that morons will be moronic.

 

[Kurenaino]

Why can they not release it on multiple consoles? Why are people ok with exclusives? How is it somehow fine for a game to be actively denied to people for no other reason than to force them to buy another console? This is just another casuality to a seriously anti consumer practice.

Oh and to those who think they are somehow mighty for belittling people who cant play the sequel to a game they liked: You arent being clever, you're being dickheads. Why on earth should people be forced to buy a console for games which clearly are not specific to the console in question?

Because the people who make the console are paying the bill to get the game made? Why should they use their money to make a sequel to a game everyone else gave up on, then make it for competitors consoles so other companies can have it, so you can avoid giving them your money for a console they've made and a game they have paid to publish? Not to mention it's WiiU so likely it WILL be exclusive to the console, and you expect Nintendo to foot the bill so it can ported to the X-Box 720 and the PS4? That sounds reasonable to you?

Seriously, it's pretty much entirely how the big three compete by who has the best exclusives, no-one would be saying shit if it was an X-box exclusive. Hell, there are people on this forum who still don't think Bethesda's handling of Dawnguard was f*cking shoddy by releasing it for X-box 2 months ahead of PS3 and PC, and that's a legitimate issue as it isn't hard to port DLC.

More OT: We don't ***** about Halo being only on X-Box or God of War only being on Playstation, it just so happens Bayonetta is now only going to be on WiiU. And? If you want to play the game I guess you're going to have to give WiiU a try, if you don't then give Platinum Games the money it needs out of your own pocket to buy back full publishing rights and make a game for the X-box or whatever. It'll only cost you something like 15 million dollars (conservative f*cking estimate there).

It's like Nintendo want us to buy their products or something crazy like that!

Get off your high horse, you arent as smart as you think you are. Nintendo is publishing the game, great! That doesnt mean its good for gaming to have that game be denied to other gamers purely to sell a console. I dont agree with exclusives, I think anyone who supports exclusives that are exclusive because one company wants to get an edge by denying the game to other consoles is retarded.

I can see why keeping the game exclusive to the Wii U is smart for Nintendo, I cant see how thats good for us. I dont want to buy a Wii U, not out of malice but because I cant afford to buy a Wii U and and Xbox 720 (if indeed I get another generation of console, depends on my circumstances. The 360 seems to be the strongest of the 3 consoles, going with that im gonna go to the next iteration of it. Plus I like the exclusives and all my freinds are getting it, though it having exclusives is no more ok than the Wii U or PS3 having exclusives purely for competition). Im not "avoiding giving them money for a console they've made", which somehow insinuates Im at fault for not buying it at all because they spent money making it, I just cant buy it in my circumstances because they are denying it on platforms I play on.

I dont know the full situation with Dawngaurd, if Microsoft paid for some sort of exclusivity then non-xbox gamers should not be denied the DLC. It isnt fair on gamers, even if the devs are better off. Halo should be on PS3 and God of War should be on xbox. Gamers are not benefiting from this competition, theres no good reason for us to support it.

I would love nothing more than for Bayonetta 2 to be available to everyone, unfortunately Platinum games decided they couldnt self publish (though they could publish the abysmal 'Vanquish') it and Nintendo is now publishing. That isnt my fault. Why is it somehow fine for Nintendo to act against our interests but not Activision or EA? They both go against our interests and are hated for it, why is it ok here?

Woah bro! Calm down!

I suppose this is my question to you: why have different consoles if you can get all the same games on just one? Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo would all go out of business if their consoles didn't have a strong selling point, and those points have to be the software. I do get your point, it can really suck if a game's coming out that you want on a system you don't own. But the bigger picture here is that exclusives help the industry and these companies survive. Consumer loyalty is a huge part of the industry, and it's very difficult to create that without a very clear, very defined reasons that separate the companies. We remove that, and it's very possible we could see a lot of collapse.

I doubt we would see a collapse, thats pushing it a bit. Why do two of the 3 consoles need to be pretty much the same? Exclusives dont help the industry they hinder it and they hinder gamers. The industry is not built around consumer loyalty, what your mis interpreting is peoples want of certain games directing them to certain consoles. They dont care for the company they just went with the best option for them, thats just a normal market. I bought an xbox because I liked the games, not because I liked microsoft (which would be the case if it was consumer loyalty). Furthermore you seem to think people only buy games out of loyalty, that doesnt make any sense.

The PS3 and xbox are functionally identical, they have no natural difference. To differentiate them sony and Microsoft buy exclusivity deals. They dont benefit the gamers on the console which recieves the exclusive, they simply hinder the gamers on the one which doesnt. Its artificial competition, thats not good for the industry as a whole or us as gamers. No one is vying for our affections they are simply making our other options worse without improving themselves. The Wii had plenty of exclusive games because the technology was different, those games would not have existed if Nintendo had produce something similar to the xbox or PS3. That is good competition, they did something different and made themsleves more attractive. How companies enter the hardware market should not be our problem, we shouldnt have to pay the price for their lack of innovation. Sony and Microsoft dont give us different things with their consoles, they just take from each others. We shouldnt support that.

You're sort of zeroing in on a smaller point in a larger point. Here's the real big issue, from a consumer point of view. If everyone got the same games, first off, your major franchises are going to die off. Things like Mario, God of War and Halo are going to become a thing of the past because companies won't put time and effort into crafting games that benefit the competition. All you'd have are third party developers making games, and giving third parties all the power to make all the games isn't a good thing, just like if you had a system that existed completely on first party games (cough cough the wii cough cough).

The second and bigger issue is by making all games cross-platform, you're going to run into a developer monopoly, since Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo no longer have their hands in the development. You get shit companies like EA and Ubisoft dictating what we can and can't do, and while that certainly exists now to an extent, it'll get worse without some first party competition out there. It's part of the reason so much of the multiplayer stuff on the Xbox and PS3 are such shit. By making their consoles virtually identical, they've given up a lot of power to the third party developers, and the consumer base has suffered for it.

I do get what you're saying, I do, but free market sort of dictates that exclusives exist to give competition and options. It limits the consumer, yes, absolutely, but it's like that with everything.

 

[Wesley Brannock]

I can understand why it's getting backlash. The reason being that the current nintendo system is a substandard system. Nintendo thinks that by having it's content " exclusive " it will improve it's image. That might have been true last generation but not now. Now a days you MUST improve your hardware AND software. The wiiu has improved it's software but NOT the hardware. They STOLE the pad idea from apple ( to which I'm sure will turn into a law suit ) just to add a gimmick to encourage sales growth. Not realizing that tactic is only a short term fix to a much larger problem being that they need a high definition AND new games not just one. So instead they listen to HALF of the problems add a poorly thought out gimmick that turns out like this.