Ubisoft Sees No Profit or Point in Wii U Mature Titles

[seditary]

Of course these are the guys that actually made a game for the Wii U but just sat on it (and still are) because there wasn't enough consoles sold, wasting all their money without even trying to get any of it back.

Also delayed Watchdogs on Wii U for months after spending loads of time talking up how good it was going to be on the system.

Pulled Rayman Legends release on Wii U after the developer said it was already done to delay it for 6 months to put out a 360 and PS3 version at the same time. Ended up selling more on Wii U anyway. Hilariously tried to quiet outrage by releasing a second demo! lol

Its funny how much more appealing the Wii U gets with each AAA publisher that shits on it.

I never understood people who make this line. The console is now getting even less third party support, and you have an even lower selection of games, and there is nothing that can change that anymore. How is that a good thing? The console is a failure. A complete failure, and Nintendos refusal to not support the system is essentially them wasting money at this point.

Same reason I don't like the Kinect.

Its shit I don't want. How is this difficult for someone to understand?

 

[Therumancer]

The thing is that the other consoles seem to be doing largely the same thing. The WiiU is different and to take advantage of what makes it a product you need to pretty much develop with it's special features in mind. This means that what is a great game for other systems, and will find a good market due to more units to play it on, will just be an inferior version of itself for the WiiU due to lower system capabilities and take advantage of few, if any of the WiiU's special attributes, and those they do use will be in a tacked on way that will probably be more annoying than anything.

I honestly think Nintendo kind of shot themselves in the foot here last gen with the original Wii where they simply put didn't put much time into developing quality games for core and mature gamers. Those that were decent that we got in many cases took an act of congress. Some games like the Wii version of "Fatal Frame" I heard about never even came close to seeing an actual US translation and release. A lot of the games that might have secured a core audience in North America were never brought to North America it seems. As such few serious gamers are flocking to the WiiU given what happened last gen, and I don't blame publishers for wanting to get involved either.

Truthfully I'd think the way the WiiU could save itself, and broaden it's appeal, is if Nintendo itself started developing more in the way of "M" rated titles... in parallel to their usual stable of family friendly brands. The trick of course would be innovation, and to polish them as much as they did their normal stable of regulars. I just can't see Nintendo doing this though, as it seems just about every attempt to move away from their core brands and party games is half hearted at best.

Of course then again, I have to admit that a big part of the reason I'm not a "Wii" fan is simply because I do not find much appeal in standing up and spazzing around with motion controls. It was a cute idea for a while, but at the end of the day I want to sit down, relax, and play a video game, not jump around my living room. If they were ever able to do anything really innovative with the controllers I might think differently, but the things I might actually find fun, like say the lightsaber combat everyone thought of, proved to be beyond the capabilities of the system and it's motion sensing abilities, just about every attempt at doing things like that wound up not being very good. As far as most of the things the Wii does well, it usually amounts to a lot more effort to achieve what I could do with a quick finger movement on a controller.

But I'll also go even further, this isn't full immersive VR or anything, I feel ridiculous moving around in the middle of a room to control a pile of polygons. Initially when it was novel half the fun was for everyone to laugh at each other being ridiculous, but that kind of wore off.

 

[Robert Kalmar]

Secondly, Nintendo HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FOR KIDS AND CASUALS. As in, even back in the days of the NES. They have never pushed or made even mildly less kid focused games.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/ba/MetroidPrimebox.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0e/The_Legend_of_Zelda_Twilight_Princess_Game_Cover.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8d/Eternal_Darkness_box.jpg/256px-Eternal_Darkness_box.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Conkersbfdbox.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/90/Bayonetta2boxart.png

Just a few game, that's rated T or M. Your argument is invalidated. So i don't waste my breath on you. Maybe do some research next time.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Even as a strong supporter of PCs I have to say thats stupid. The nearly all of the best games last gen were console exclusives.

"Well that's just like, you're opinion man."
All my favorite games from last generation (Fallouts/TES, Borderlands, Bioshock, GTA) were on the PC; some were in much better shape too.
Not to mention that the PC gets exclusives that I like a lot more than the console exclusives.

Saying kids like anything is stupid. Kids have the lowest standards ever, and taking their word for quality is like asking a stock broker on the quality of a new type of cement.

Secondly, Nintendo HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FOR KIDS AND CASUALS. As in, even back in the days of the NES. They have never pushed or made even mildly less kid focused games.

They sold Chiller for the NES. Anyone else here old enough to remember Chiller? If they made that game now, it would get an AO rating.

Kids are adults with less experiences: some are stupid, some are smart, some have high standards and some have ChuckECheese.

Made and published by Exidy, not Nintendo. Nintendo only denied games that were outright terrible (and had pretty low standards at that). Just because someone sold a game on a Nintendo system, when there was no other option aside from the incompetant SEGA, does not mean Nintendo pushed more mature games. Nintendo has always pushed kiddy games.

EDIT: Oh, and it had censoring on the NES version, to double ruin your point.

That wasn't even my point. My point was that it was ON the console...and still pretty sick.

 

[AdamRBi]

Firstly, I cant seem to find gameplay of Pikmen 3 with someone also showing the hand held screen, so I guess figuring out what your talking about there is going to be difficult for me.

Secondly, moving information to the second screen is "Removing the hud" they're the same thing.

Thirdly, most games in gameplay use a second screen for a number of things.
A quick time event, see Castlevania Dawn of Sorrow, which is a cop out use.
They use it for movement, which is far better suited for buttons universally.
They use it for accuracy in a strategy game. Which is stupid, because touch screen mechanics have to be dumbed down seeing as the vast majority of your players will be sacrificing all their buttons used for things traditionally outside of movement, which means you cant have any depth with those games.
They use it as a second way to interact with an interface, which I guess is helpful to 3 year olds.
They let you draw things, which is stupid because all visual touch screens are way too inaccurate to allow quality or accuracy in such things. Touch screen does not equal graphics tablet.
They use it for majority of control, such as with The World Ends With You or Trauma Center, which universally proves to cause clunky gameplay mechanics.
They use it to tell two stories at once, which outside of visual novels, is confusing at best.
They use it to show unique cutscenes between the two, which is gimmicky at best and unnecessary at worst.
They use it to control a second character, such as with Rayman Legends or once again TWEWY, which is always stupid.
They use it in point and click games, which due to far worse accuracy and the general low market for them on consoles, would be better suited to a PC game anywho.
EDIT: Or they use it on the 3DS for a camera, which requires you to be a tad soft in the head to believe thats a good idea, as to hold the device while using the touch screen requires your hands to be at the wrong angle to the touch screen to use it as a touch pad, as well as most touch screens are far to inaccurate to use as a touch pad, when the only reason they do is because Nintendo cheaped out and didn't put a second stick. See the horrible controls of Kid Icarus, where even using the fucking buttons as a camera was less painful.

So yeah, that list there is about every single thing they've ever used with the touch pad. And all of them are gimmicks, or hurt games. Or they removed the hud, which for some reason most people find unnecessary outside of the DS and 3DS and their stupidly small default version screens when in reality it vastly improves the atmosphere of most games, but I digress, those games still need to be good for it to matter anyway.

OH, wait I get it now; YOU'VE found these features not fun or unnecessary so you assume it's because they're terrible and the device is shit. Well okay then, guess if I find some of them fun I guess me and everyone else don't matter.

BUT let's take a stab at some of your opinions stated as fact, shall we?

QTEs as extra mechanics in games not build around them are annoying anyway, not a fault of the system.
Movement is dependent on intended game feel, buttons are not always the best option.
You assume depth in strategy games are restricted to their controls, simplified or not that isn't the case and most benefit from simpler controls for accessibility.
Just because interface interaction isn't a chore doesn't mean it's for 3 yr old; or am I to assume you don't own a smartphone.
Personally, I like drawing; they're not trying to compete with Wacom, it's just for fun so why're you being so hard on it? Besides, limitations haven't stopped artists from making awesome stuff with it [https://miiverse.nintendo.net/posts/AYMHAAABAABtUV57qWlZzg], or even just having a some fun. [https://miiverse.nintendo.net/posts/AYMHAAACAABnUYn2IDVx9w]
Ability to show two scenes, or two perspectives at once for a story is not automatically confusing.
Playing as two characters, if done right, can be fun. See games like TWEWY or Brothers: A tale of two sons.

So, to clarify; everything you've said is stupid and is a reason the whole system is a piece of shit and is the reason Nintendo hasn't done anything worthwhile since the N64 is just your rather shallow opinion of what makes a game a fun and worthwhile experience.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

This decision is the opposite of that. No profit, no production - that is a fundamental law of capitalist enterprise. If they are not making as high a profit as they would like to turn off of mature Wii U games, their time will be spent on more profitable endeavors than porting their mature games.

After all, time you are spending on a Wii U port that won't sell very many copies is time you are not spending on more profitable endeavors.

Except that's a lie because a lot of those ports were done by sub-teams or outside teams as well as the fact that porting is not all that expensive thus you don't need to sell that many copies to turn a profit. Furthermore, you then get into the fact that a lot of 3rd parties did nothing to promote their products on Nintendo.

As for more profitable endeavors, I have three figures for you: 3. D. S. Putting aside the Wii U, why are there no Ubi games on the 3DS right now? Seriously, if we're talking about maximizing profit, why do they not make anything for it? Especially since:

A) it's not expensive to develop for, thus meaning you don't have to sell as many copies to be profitable as well as being able to be more experimental and diverse in your release for it

B) It doesn't take as many people or time to develop for, thus meaning you can get multiple titles out in a year or be able to get things out quickly without sacrificing quality

and most of all C) It is most likely going to hit 50 million units by the end of this year, thus meaning there are TONS of potential customers. Why would ANYBODY in their right mind ignore that? The more I step back and analyze the actions of 3rd parties, the more I'm left confused as a lot of their actions don't strike me as businessmen acting professionally or a company trying to maximize profits. They can't just say one thing and then do something that completely contradicts it

 

[Robert Kalmar]

Secondly, Nintendo HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FOR KIDS AND CASUALS. As in, even back in the days of the NES. They have never pushed or made even mildly less kid focused games.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/ba/MetroidPrimebox.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0e/The_Legend_of_Zelda_Twilight_Princess_Game_Cover.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8d/Eternal_Darkness_box.jpg/256px-Eternal_Darkness_box.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Conkersbfdbox.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/90/Bayonetta2boxart.png

Just a few game, that's rated T or M. Your argument is invalidated. So i don't waste my breath on you. Maybe do some research next time.

Firstly, Metroid Prime I guess is hard to argue. Twilight Princess is albeit a bit more mature then most Zelda games, although outside its art style, not much other then that. Majora's Mask would even have been a better example.

The rest?

Its funny how Eternal Darkness and Conker's Bad Fur Day both were complete and utter financial failures, (proving Nintendo shouldn't even try because its always been ingrained in the public that Nintendo consoles are for Nintendo games) with both studios dead or Microsoft. I wonder how well they'd have done on the competing systems. Regardless, Bayonetta 2 was published along with many titles that were in Nintendos gambit to get mature titles, which has since failed and Nintendo has stopped even trying anymore. It will be a financial failure of course as per nearly all third party games on Nitnendo systems, but I guess never make or game or make one game then bankruptcy is a better route for Platinum.

Oh and don't fuck with me about the ESRB. That is a completely meaningless thing in America. The most casual games get stupidly high ratings, with any game showing even the teensiest blood seems to get as a high rating. It's not as bad as the PEGI system, which gives pretty much every game an 18+ rating, but still.

You didn't said we are talking about sales... i thought we were talking about pushing mature games on Nintendo platforms, which Nintendo does since the NES era. They are just shadowed by Nintendo's big franchises. What i really like about Nintendo is the diversity in their IPs. You want fun/casual games? Sure, play Mario games. You want more mature games? Sure, play Metroid, Fire Emblem, Zelda games, etc. Other consoles sadly, lacks this diversity. Sony is at least trying... but funny enough, Sony's attempt at making profit from games made for everyone or kids is a failure most of the time. Puppeteer is an excellent example. It's a fun platformer, which is highly underrated and sold poorly. So did Tearaway. Their only successful "kiddy" IP is Patapon and Little Big Planet. But still, Sony can't find the balance, that Nintendoes (pun intended). The ratio of mature to "kiddy" is around 19:1 on Sony, while it's 1:4 on Nintendo platforms. Also M$ isn't even trying... All they have to offer is macho games and timed exclusive CoD DLCs.

 

[Robert Kalmar]

Anyway, Nintendo tends to start every single generation except the Wii by pushing a small bit into more mature games, then immediately abandoning that and just hoping it'll stay afloat. In the end, it causes its ratio of kiddy to mature to be around 12:1, and that 1 is always 90% shit. I'll admit Sony doesn't really do it much either in the reverse, but when they do, they really tend to succeed quite consistently Knack aside.

You just called Metroid Prime 3, Xenoblade Chronicles, Pandora's Tower, The Last Story, Sin and Punishment 2, Resident Evil 4 (it was originally a GC exclusive) shit? Man... you must live a very sad life :/ Xenoblade Chronicles and The Last Story is regarded as the best JRPGs in the last generation...

EDIT: Few more words: Playstation All Stars Battle Royale. 'nuff said i think. But i don't really know who was the target demography of that one... Maybe no one?

 

[AdamRBi]

Brothers only had decent controls because there was barely any controls on there. It is two sticks and two buttons, and controlling both characters, unless you want to go the same direction together is an exercise in futility. The most effective way to play that game was either blindly move one brother out of way of danger if required to use both, or bunch the brothers up next to each other when possible and control both as one.

Simple controls does not mean bad controls. Funny enough, I have not played Brothers, but Nintendoland: Sweet Days had you controlling the patrol dogs the exact same way (mini-game mechanic into full game mechanic) and I was easily able to control both characters separate from each other.

Secondly, strategy games DEFINITELY are limited by their controls. Its literally the main reason you don't find RTS on consoles. Because the controls would be too bad to play the game enjoyably or quickly. You have to heavily limit every part of the game to get it to work, or it becomes painful.

Pikmin is an RTS, and that was on the Gamecube. You can't mash a established game into new controls, but that doesn't restrict a genre or limit it's possibilities.

Thirdly, I'm calling this now. In any game with freedom of movement, there has NEVER been a situation where buttons, or a stick, has been a better movement system by using a mouse or touch screen. Ever. It is not a thing. The only reason games like Diablo use it is because you need your spare hand free for the quick keys. Unless you mean strategy games, in which case, see the last point.

Kirby Canvas Curse was a lot of fun, and you moved by drawing lines that Kirby could ride on. Meanwhile, there are plenty of slower, less action packed games that are not hurt or hindered by the mechanic. Better in those cases would be a simple matter of opinion.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Then that point is super irrelevant, and has nothing to do with anything, and is essentially like bringing up horses in a discussion of music.

Lol, you do realize that you're the one desperately jumping from failing argument to failing argument.
But the point was that the WiiU doesn't Have to be a kids toy. It wasn't my main point but you seem to want to abandon my original argument: that the WiiU is the only console that isn't trying to just be a weak PC you hook up to the TV...with a monthly fee. It's the only one that remembers that you may want to sit on the couch with your friends and play games together.

 

[Olas]

Secondly, Nintendo HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FOR KIDS AND CASUALS. As in, even back in the days of the NES. They have never pushed or made even mildly less kid focused games.

If you think old Nintendo games are for casuals, try actually playing them and compare their difficulty to today's games. They didn't hold your hand, nor could you just look up all their secrets. If their aesthetics were simple it was mostly because graphics were simple and you couldn't have anything detailed like today. Honestly, what could be more casual than the Assassin's Creed games? Their combat is practically relaxing and makes Pong look deep.

Fourthly, people are way too quick to say "It had bad graphics for Gamecube". It looked like a 7th gen videogame, like all WiiU games. People rose tint the Gamecube so heavily its hilarious. The system looks far worse then any modern title, no matter how bad it looks. Fuck, the vast majority of Gamecube games had worse graphics then Deadly Premonition.

The Metroid Prime games still look really good if you ask me, even if they are technically primitive. I would say the same for the Pikmin games, and of course Resident Evil 4. Perhaps they're just an example of aesthetics triumphing over actual level of detail, but what matters is how it looks to the eye.

 

[McMarbles]

But we'll still get more Rayman, right? ...Right?