Im not claiming to be an expert on such matters, but the situation is rather poor. Blame could lay with either Nintendo, its customers or the third party developers. But its clear that third party devs tend to avoid Nintendos home systems.
If the blame is on Nintendo:
They should fund more games for their systems and advertise more.
If the blame is on the customers:
We could buy more games, but this links with the developers.
If the blame is on the developers:
Last generation, the Wii was flooded with "Shovelware". This generation, the developers haven't been seen to make much of an effort to appeal to Nintendo customers. Between this and last generation, we, the customers have been burned a lot. Last gens shovelware and this generations inferior versions of games when compared to the other systems. I will list a few examples, im sure there are many more:
Ubisoft. Rayman Legends was delayed around a year to port it to the other systems. They then went on to delay Watch Dogs, the Wii U version alone, to complete the versions for other systems.
EA. The laughable "Unprecedented Partnership". What a joke that turned out to be. Fifa 13, which was a reskinned Fifa 12, which less features than was given to other systems. Mass Effect 3, released at full price at the same time as other systems were given Mass Effect Trilogy at the same cost. Then, Madden 13, which didnt have the new physics engine that was in versions for other systems. EA went on to say that Frostbite 3 wouldnt work on the system (A claim later retracted after Microsofts XBox One announcement disaster).
Activision. They have put out various Call of Duty games, all with less support than the other systems received, such as a hyped up Youtube support, and a lack of DLC.
Wii U has also received multiple ports that were months or even a year late. Need for Speed and Watch Dogs were around six months late, and then Batman Arkham City was a full year later than on other systems.
I dont expect things to change. I expect inferior products with continue to be released, with developers expecting massive sales and blaming the potential customers when they refuse to buy the games.
All i can say is: If you dont care about the product, why should we?
Microsoft announced its financial results for Q3 of fiscal year 2026, including an update on its gaming Xbox business and more.
Not looking good. Hopefully Asha Sharma is able to turn Phil’s disaster around.
To me it's still quite remarkable how they can cash-in 5.3bn in revenue in a single quarter, since their hardware is basically dead.
The stock mark is what makes Microsoft remarkable, They have convinced every institutional and retail investor to just keep piling money into them. Like many big tech giants they are just a big growing pyramid scheme. As long as people keep dropping money into ETF's that cover the market Microsoft will always be liquid. At the same time it is completely stifling innovation and competition. People need to start being more discreet in how they invest their money as it's killing the system.
Riiiiight because people will just flock back to them for one or two games per year.
15+ years of bad performance is what they call irreparable in business. It is time for them to sell off the assets and get out of entertainment.
These declines are on the back of extra revenue received from releasing games like Forza horizon 5 on PlayStation. So I’m being sarcastic here when I said they should go back to exclusives. Killing off a revenue stream from Ps5 sales will only make things worse
The charity event will be streamed live from Gamescom in August.
Thanks to the slip-up of an artist working on the title, we now have more evidence that a new Injustice game is in the works.
The cheaper it is to port games to a console from the most popular console will determine the amount of third party games it will receive. Not only is not simple to port games from PS4 to Wii U, it's also not easy to port games from the X360 to Wii U. Which is why the support dropped. The only consoles that will receive ports while being difficult to port to is the most popular ones for example the PS2 during its generation.
It's sad because if they would have competitively priced it around 200 instead of 300 people would've gave the Wii U a chance. Also, casual gamers thought the WiiU was a big controller with a screen for the original Wii. Nintendo didn't really advertise or educate the casual audience. They should have given the console a different name to separate it from the original Wii.
Personally, I'd rather have Nintendo be a 3rd party publisher/developer. Super Mario 64 HD on Ps4/x1 would break all the Mario software records for sales. Even Super Mario 3 would.
I agree with you to some extent, but the way I see it, it’s more of a chicken and egg situation:
- Devs don’t want the additional costs of porting to a console with a small fan base for games such as these you brought up as examples, since most people with a Wii U got them for the first party titles and have little to no interest in said games, or as previously mentioned, thought it was an attachment for the Wii.
- When devs want nothing to do with a platform, they automatically reduce the amount of people interested in it as a potential multi-plat console.
Bottom line, it’s a mass market industry, so you go where there’s reasonable risk alongside a healthy profit margin. The Wii U doesn’t seem to represent that for third party devs, and these companies have access to some halfway decent info, so despite feeling like it’s a huge shame, I can see where they’re coming from.