Yes, we have a new entry, I think this thread will see a lot of activity from E3 next week.
2K Sports will not publish NBA 2K14 for Wii U:We are not doing a Wii U version this year," Argent said. "The decision was made internally that our resources would be best put toward making a really amazing current-generation and next generation game, and we did not want to take resources away from making a great experience on those platforms.
Wii U not current or next gen apparently 
And developing for it takes resources away from the 'good' platforms.
Couldn't they have just said that 2K13 didn't sell well enough, maybe next year?
Not on Wii U:
lol
EA VP Frank Gibeau on Wii U support:It’s been 60 days since we launched Need for Speed Most Wanted on the Wii U. We’ve launched four games. We’re proud of them. They’re in the marketplace and they’re selling. The guys inside the studio are looking at the Wii U tech and they’re looking at the platform. They understand it. As it develops, if there’s an opportunity to publish more games on the Wii U, we’ll do that. We’re not writing it off. We’re not not developing for the Wii U. We’re just watching it, and we’re really focused right now on PS4 and Xbox One, to really nail that transition.
So EA on Wii U is the Watcher:
"One of the oldest species in the universe, committed to observing and compiling knowledge on all aspects of the universe. But with a policy of total non-interference."
Bethesda: ‘Never Say Never’ on Wii U, Vita Support
“But what we have going on right now doesn’t fit with that.”
Bethesda said:“There’s a decent list of stuff that you don’t associate with us. We don’t have any games on Facebook. We’re not heavily into mobile. Here and there we’ve done some stuff. We did a little free Dishonored thing. We did the Rage thing, which was John [Carmack] going, ‘hey, I can get this to work on that, it’ll be fun.’ But in general, month over month, year over year, we don’t have stuff that we’re developing or talking about."
"We don’t have anything announced for Wii U," Hines continued. "We don’t have anything announced for the handhelds. Are there opportunities that could come up there that could make sense and be the kinds of things we would want to do? Absolutely. But what we have going on right now doesn’t fit with that.”
We want it out on as many platforms as we can support that will support the game as it’s envisioned, where we don’t have to cut features or dial stuff back or end up delivering a game where Wolf on this platform is nothing like it is on the PS4,” he explained.
“Other platforms that we’re not doing anything for, we’ll wait and see. I would never say never. There are a lot of talented folks doing a lot of cool stuff, and maybe opportunities arise, or maybe somebody internally says, ‘hey, I have this great idea to do this thing on this platform.’ If that makes sense and it feels like something Bethesda would do, okay. But we’re not just going to bang a round peg into a square hole. That’s not how we work. It doesn’t make sense for us.”
So Wolfenstein the New Order "doesn't fit" with Wii U but fits for the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and Microsoft Windows. And they "don’t want to have to cut features or dial stuff back or end up delivering a game where Wolf on this platform is nothing like it is on the PS4” ...but its fine for PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360.
Gotcha.
Eurogamer on EA and Nintendo: the collapse of the "unprecedented relationship" :With none of EA's major spring slate headed to Wii U and just the delayed port of Need for Speed: Most Wanted still left on the horizon, the unprecedented relationship was very much on the rocks. EA cemented the break-up with its next announcement: that its upcoming major wave of games would run on DICE's Frostbite 3 engine, which it claimed was not Wii U-compatible. The framework will be used in 15 upcoming titles, including Battlefield 4, Need for Speed: Rivals, Mass Effect 4, Dragon Age: Inquisition, Mirror's Edge and its unannounced Star Wars games. Wii U will miss out on them all.
By way of explanation, DICE technical director Johan Andersson claimed via Twitter that "FB3 has never been running on Wii U. We did some tests with not too promising results with FB2 and chose not to go down that path." Andersson's claims raised eyebrows as the Frostbite 2-powered Wii U version of Need for Speed - despite being released later than on other platforms - was considered the best of all. It was "the definitive console version" in the eyes of Digital Foundry, and, clearly, a passion project on the part of developer Criterion Games. With Need for Speed at least, you can't blame them for a lack of effort.
Would EA now have the same technical problems with Frostbite on Wii U had the console been selling like hot cakes? Or was EA simply eyeing a less-than-spectacular return on Wii U releases? "It's both," Patrick Bach, executive producer of Battlefield at DICE told Eurogamer.
We could mitigate this, because it is a technical problem," Bach said. "It is a technical problem at its core because the Frostbite engine is not designed to run on that hardware, and the hardware is quite different from the next-gen consoles and the previous gen consoles."
But the Wii U is at least as powerful as current generation consoles and Frostbite 3 is designed to be scalable - we'll see current-gen versions of Battlefield 4, for example. With Frostbite 2 appearing to work on Wii U fine, does the argument about having technical difficulties really still stand up?
"From our perspective it's not as powerful as it should be to be able to run a Battlefield game," Bach responded. "Straight out of the box, as in Frostbite 3, it doesn't run that well on the Wii U, which means it takes a lot of time and energy from us that would then take from something else.
"So, we made the decision to say, no, let's not take away the focus from the PlayStations and the Xboxes and the PCs to do this. At the end of the day it's about focus and priorities. If we could press a button to move it over to Wii U, of course we could make a Wii U SKU, but it would take some substantial time to do it. I know some fans get very upset when we say that, but it's true. There's a reason why not all games are on the Wii U platform."
And again, should Nintendo turn around Wii U's fortunes, DICE is open to returning to the platform, Bach concluded.
"Absolutely. Of course. There's no reason why we couldn't focus down and make a Nintendo GameBoy version of it as well. It's all about where you put your focus and how you scale things. Where do you scale down? Where do you put your team efforts?
"We need to do what is right for the franchise and what feels right in our gut. If you have to scale your game down in the wrong places too much, then you lose some of the core values of what your game stands for. It's complicated. It's more complicated than people would like it to be. I would love for us to be able to be on Samsung TVs as well, but we have to draw the line somewhere."
More DICE bullshit. So it would take time and money to get the engine running on Wii U. Boo-fucking-hoo. I'm sure they just flipped a switch to get games running between PS3 and 360 at the start too. 
And what, the Wii U is below "the line" to run a Battlefield game but 360 and PS3 are fine?
One of the user comments on the article sums up how I feel:
"My problem is this whole situation is saturated in top-grade bullshit. If publishers/devs were honest about it, you know I'd give them some grudging respect. But it seems not only they lie, but they actively try to talk down Nintendo"
All I see is either flawed logic, flat out lies, lack of planning, ridiculousness (ME3? Trilogy on other systems etc) or "it would take time, effort" i.e 'we cannot be bothered'
I have no problem with Dave Cox for instance explaining about the lack of lords of shadow 2 on U.
It was hilarious to see Gibeau at E3 trying to defend EAs' output on Wii U
Let's look at EA's amazing Wii U games:
Mass Effect 3 (NOT EVEN MADE BY EA) ported by an overseas outside company Straight Right. EA's magnificent decision was to introduce Nintendo gamers to Mass Effect by releasing the third part of a trilogy they had no experience with.
Genius.
Then before the game even launches EA basically destroys sales of the game by announcing a Mass Effect Trilogy for every platform other than Wii U. 
To top it all off, the game launched 9-10 months after it had already launched on every other platform. By the time it launched, the other versions were half the price. So they expected Wii U gamers to part with $60 when it was half that or less on other platforms they owned.
Not to mention that the U version did not receive any DLC, other platforms got it automatically.
- Crysis 3 - cancelled by EA when almost ready to release, thanks.
- Madden recurring template games, launching late and offering less than the other versions, more expensive too.
- FIFA recurring template games, launching late and offering less than the other versions, more expensive too.
Need for Speed Most Wanted - actually a great game that U owners should pick up (if you fancy an open world Burnout).
It cannot be ignored that it launched 6 months late with no marketing behind it. Launching late also means something else - the other versions were half the price by the time it launched and all the games marketing push was done 6 months earlier when the game was still relevant. Once again this is another Wii U game missing DLC, whilst the other versions received it automatically Wii U owners were left begging for it on twitter with cap in hand like Oliver Twist. Another point to make was that it was a small team at Criterion who did this -according to interviews- not the whole studio. So EA bitchfesting about this game which they dedicated very little resources too is monkey shit.
Last point to make: no retail support. All I read on GAF in the thread were multiple people who couldn't even see it on store shelves, it was sent out to die and many had to download it from the shop instead. Update: Grainger Games a retail chain in the UK got 12 copies company wide.
Then there is that godawful Origin story.
There's another point to make, if Frostbite doesn't play nice with Wii U there are a fuckload of other engines that do including Unity 4, Criterions Chameleon engine, UE3/4 and Cryengine 3. By making the decision to go with Frostbite for all future games EA was essentially taking the conscious decision to lock Wii U out of all future content. Something is very fishy about that.
Reading all these pitiful excuses as to how the industry wants to bone Nintendo and impose restricting DRM makes me really hate the industry right now - 3DS is selling well, where are all the western 3rd party games?
At this stage I don't altogether mind having only japanese games to play on the U and 3DS. I just wish Nintendo hadn't gone with the stupid region lock. Or I hope they have the resources to localise a good portion of the games.
___
Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu
bugsonglass said:At this stage I don't altogether mind having only japanese games to play on the U and 3DS. I just wish Nintendo hadn't gone with the stupid region lock. Or I hope they have the resources to localise a good portion of the games.
Japanese Wii U support:
- Capcom = nothing
- Square = Deus Ex - no Kingdom Hearts or FF
- Konami = nothin
- Namco = Tekken and Smash
- Sega = Sonic X 3
Not sure I can do this.
jschreier from Kotaku on the non-investigation of the EA Wii U story:Let me try to explain this from a journalist's perspective, which will hopefully clarify a few things for the "rah rah video game journalism sucks" crowd.
Every good investigative story begins with a question. What really happened to Aliens: Colonial Marines? What's going on with Doom 4? Why was X-Men Destiny so bad?
In this case, we indeed have an interesting question: Did EA and Nintendo have a relationship that somehow fell apart?
For the curious journalist, there are two ways to try to answer that question.
The first is to go through PR, or PR-attended executive interviews. In this case, EA's PR gave an answer. I don't know whether anyone has asked any executives at Nintendo, but those questions are not always fruitful. If you'd like to see one example of what a conversation like that could look like, you can look at this interview I had with Reggie Fils-Aime about the Wii U and third-party support: http://kotaku.com/5943529/nintendo-d...l-collect-dust
The second way to try to find an answer is to go through back channels and try to use other methods to piece together the story, which takes a ton of time and effort. This likely means identifying and finding people who would be in a position to know this information, then convincing them to tell you, even if it could get them in trouble. The problem with this approach is that it could very well lead nowhere. There may not be much of a story there at all, or it may not actually be very interesting (the Wii U sold poorly, so EA pulled out!), or a journalist could spend hours and hours of digging only to find that he or she can't find any answers because nobody wants to talk.
You're right: a real journalist doesn't just phone PR and consider his/her job done. But a real journalist also knows when a story is worth a substantial time investment, and when it's not. The worst - and I do mean the worst - thing that happens during my job is spending hours on a story that turns out to be a waste of time. For me, investigating stories like how Aliens fell apart or what really happened to Doom 4 were well worth the considerable amount of time they took. But in this case, I can't imagine many journalists think this particular story is worth that kind of time sink. I certainly don't. A business story just isn't all that interesting to all that many people.
And if I'm going to spend time on a business story, I'm much more interested in the dysfunctional Amazon/Nintendo relationship, anyway.
GAFs take:So in conclusion:
- It's not the duty of a 3rd party developer to help Nintendo build an install base, but it is for Sony and M$.
- Wii U has a small install base, Xbone/PS4 has none. The latter is still better to develop for.
- The Wii U crowd doesn't like cheap, late ports. So EA will just stop developing games completely.
- EA is too lazy to make an effort with good games for Nintendo. And the Nintendo fans are to blame for it.
GG its over, Wii U wont be getting any significant 3rd party games. Maybe it was a self fullfilling prophecy. I dont know. I do know those games would not sell well on the Wii U, that is the bottom line. Even a brand new 3rd party game at the same time as other consoles wouldnt sell as well. I bet PS4 and One launch games that come out at the same time as a Wii U version would outsell the Wii U version even though those systems dont even have an install base yet. People that want to play those kinds of games are buying the other consoles to do so.
Dvader said:GG its over, Wii U wont be getting any significant 3rd party games. Maybe it was a self fullfilling prophecy. I dont know. I do know those games would not sell well on the Wii U, that is the bottom line. Even a brand new 3rd party game at the same time as other consoles wouldnt sell as well. I bet PS4 and One launch games that come out at the same time as a Wii U version would outsell the Wii U version even though those systems dont even have an install base yet. People that want to play those kinds of games are buying the other consoles to do so.
I don't think anyone is debating that there won't be much cross-platform 3rd party games on WiiU. I agree with GG however that it's jarring that PR people will construct this false reasoning to justify this. Only a handfull are admitting that they can't be arsed to spend the time necessairy to downscale and adapt to the interface, if it will only result in a small number of sold units. Personally I find EA's stance the most insulting: "yeah, our half baked ports of half year old games, retailing for half the price on other systems, aren't selling good enough to justify creating new games for WiiU'.
I must admit I am impressed by Ubisoft on this front. Contrary to EA, who'll just release the same game everywhere, Ubi really seems to think about what games to develop for what systems. Take Rabbids Go Home. Fun game, good art style, exclusive to Wii, sold just over a million units.
Dvader said:GG its over, Wii U wont be getting any significant 3rd party games. Maybe it was a self fullfilling prophecy. I dont know. I do know those games would not sell well on the Wii U, that is the bottom line. Even a brand new 3rd party game at the same time as other consoles wouldnt sell as well. I bet PS4 and One launch games that come out at the same time as a Wii U version would outsell the Wii U version even though those systems dont even have an install base yet. People that want to play those kinds of games are buying the other consoles to do so.
Firstly you cannot be comparing like for like sales on a system with 3.5 million userbase vs existing consoles with 75 million plus userbase. You have to calculate sales based on a percentage of owners which is something Ubisoft seemed to be doing and they seemed pretty happy and realistic with their sales expectations. Also you have to factor in that U came with a free game, which probably eats into what people will spend on, 1 game less for instance.
Secondly, if the Xbone and PS4 were getting shitty, late, lazy current gen ports or remixes, that were twice as expensive, I would not expect them to sell well either compared to new games on the market.
Look at this boning:
"FIFA 14, EA Sports will launch the mega-selling football franchise on the original Wii but not Wii U. It will launch for PC, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360, Xbox One, on mobile, on 3DS, on PSP, on Vita and even for the decade-old discontinued PlayStation 2 but not Wii U."
But I agree it is a self fullfilling prophecy, if you don't support a system then it's foundation is weaker and the building falls. If it were any other platform it would crumble into dust, but Nintendo is strong enough to keep things good enough for a generation by themselves - with obvious lulls.
To quote myself from page 1:
I have a theory on Nintendo 3rd party support, Wii certainly didn't help but to an extent there is a Pavlovian training going on here. They've taught us and we've taught them. It's a very circular system. There's been over a decade of lacklustre 3rd party support and it's going to take a similar period of investment and parity to fix things. As consumers we've learnt that they view Nintendo hardware as an afterthought, so we don't buy what we assume is second class product. 3rd parties do themselves no favours with overpriced, late ports missing features. Then they get huffy when we don't buy it and give us even worse support. A few scraps thrown here and there don't help. Gamers know where their bread is buttered as gaming doesn't exist in a vacuum. Things like Konami announcing MGS 3DS then announcing MGS trilogy for the same price... and ME3 then the trilogy on other platforms? Do they think people are mugs?
I think U will get a few significant third party games, but probably commissioned like Wonderful 101 and Bayonetta 2, Endless Ocean, Fatal Frame, The Last Story. But in terms of any kind of parity it's a complete bust for current gen and next gen ports. It's just getting ignored. 3DS is doing great in sales but where is the support there? Publishers made all these excuses last gen about power and now power can't be used as an excuse it's audience or architecture - or whatever cockamamy bullshit they can dream up:
No NBA this year:
We are not doing a Wii U version this year," Argent said. "The decision was made internally that our resources would be best put toward making a really amazing current-generation and next generation game, and we did not want to take resources away from making a great experience on those platforms.
Wii U not current or next gen apparently and developing for it takes resources away from the 'good' platforms.
SupremeAC said:I don't think anyone is debating that there won't be much cross-platform 3rd party games on WiiU. I agree with GG however that it's jarring that PR people will construct this false reasoning to justify this. Only a handfull are admitting that they can't be arsed to spend the time necessairy to downscale and adapt to the interface, if it will only result in a small number of sold units. Personally I find EA's stance the most insulting: "yeah, our half baked ports of half year old games, retailing for half the price on other systems, aren't selling good enough to justify creating new games for WiiU'.
I must admit I am impressed by Ubisoft on this front. Contrary to EA, who'll just release the same game everywhere, Ubi really seems to think about what games to develop for what systems. Take Rabbids Go Home. Fun game, good art style, exclusive to Wii, sold just over a million units.
These guys don't even advertise the games. A retail chain in the UK got 12 copies of NFS most Wanted U.
If these publishers won't port games to the system then I would like to see a Wii 1 approach with smaller scale but more inventive, original and interesting. A De Blob, Elebits or Boom Blox. One thing that is bothering me is that these publishers, they never seem to ask themselves what will sell on Nintendo systems. They never try and make Nintendo - like games. I'm pretty sure stuff like Sly Cooper and Rachet and Clank would wash well on Wii U - even Knack, LBP like games. Rabbids Go Home was fun, I liked that a lot.
Ubisoft have at least gone with the parity approach, we knew about AC3, Zombi U and Rayman but then they added Splinter Cell, Watchdogs and AC4 to the mix. Even if they give up like everyone else after this holiday at least they gave it a fair stab.
EA seemed to give up well before the Wii U launched, they announced an unprecedented partnership then gave up and did not even appear at e3 2012 at the nintendo conference and showed no new games whatsoever. And it's painfully obvious the implications of widespread Frostbite 3 adoption would cause - they could have gone with any other engine - they decided to lock Wii U out many, many moons ago.
Activision wants Wii U to be successful, will do anything they can to help
Coming from a GamesIndustry interview with Activision's Eric Hirshberg.GI: When you look at the Wii U, does its sales level change the way you think about that platform is a publisher? You guys have always been a bit slower to jump on new platforms compared to a publisher like Ubisoft.
EH: I don't think we're slower to move; we're a very choiceful company. We're very choiceful in the number of titles we make. We scrutinize opportunities very carefully, and when we go into them we go big. And I think that's been part of the formula for our success. We were there with a lot support for the Wii U at launch with a Call of Duty game, with a Skylanders game and with several other titles. We want to see Nintendo be successful and we want to do anything we can to help them be successful. Obviously the Wii U is struggling - that's not a secret, I don't think there's any other way to read the narrative right now - but they're a really good company and they've got some incredible IP that has yet to come, that they honed for that platform. We have a vested interest in making them successful.
This^ 3rd parties should be looking to build and sustain a market. Having one odd game or late ports does nothing but tell the audience that you have no commitment and that consumers should not bother with your games on the platform. You treat it as second priority and we see it.
Now EA are saying that Frostbite 3 on Wii U is possible:
EA Vice President Patrick Söderlund said:Electronic Arts released Mass Effect 3 and FIFA 13 for the Wii U, but currently we’re focusing our resources on Xbox One and PS4, so it’s a fact that the priority (of the Wii U) is slightly lower. Howerver making Frostbite 3 work on the Wii U is not impossible. Where there are gamers, we’ll be there as well.
This is the true meaning of “omnidirectional”
EA are omnidirectional.
CVG said:I don't blame EA for not heavily supporting the Wii U at this moment because there's no denying that the system hasn't sold as well as expected so far. That may change once this slew of upcoming first-party Nintendo games is released, and maybe then EA will jump back on-board.
What I don't buy, though, is EA's argument that it isn't releasing FIFA 14 on Wii U because nobody bought FIFA 13 on Wii U even though it "featured FIFA's award-winning HD gameplay". Aye, it did feature FIFA's gameplay - but it was FIFA 12's gameplay, with no first touch control and big features like Ultimate Team removed. People aren't idiots.
I wish EA had just said "not a lot of people have bought a Wii U yet, so we're waiting for the userbase to grow before committing to it". Instead, it went with "nobody bought FIFA 13 even though it was brilliant, so stuff them", which is bollocks. FIFA 13 on Wii U was a half-arsed FIFA 12 port with big modes missing, so in my opinion EA shouldn't have pretended it had done nothing wrong and was being hard done by.
- Andrew Wilson, EA Sports on Wii U support :I build for a userbase. I made games on Facebook because I thought people were there that wanted to play them. Then it became apparent to me that either I had the wrong game or they weren’t there. We had a strong offering on Wii U at launch. The platform hasn’t had the take-up. Our games hasn’t had the take-up we’d have liked. So at this moment we are not focused there. Now they could do a range of things that might change that situation, and we’d never count them out. And should there be a sizeable gamer base there in the future, we would build games for Wii U. But for us it’s less about building for a platform, and more about building for a group of gamers on a platform where they are. And sports gamers weren’t there.
“In the near future, the next wave of tablets and phones will have nearly Xbox 360 or PS3 capabilities in terms of graphics,” Gibeau told IGN. “Some of our engine technology that used to be console-specific now can, with modifications, be able to power games on tablets and on phones in the near future. We’re just getting ready for that.”
“You have to redesign the game,” he explained. “You can’t just bring it over and have a virtual D-pad on the tablet. It doesn’t work. You have to re-architect it around touch, voice, camera. Our teams are having a lot of fun with that, reimagining an experience on a tablet using the same graphics and assets in some ways, but completely remixing the meal. Same ingredients, completely different meal. That’s kind of the way we think about it.”
But not on Wii U.
Touch, voice, camera, similar capability check. Support? Empty tick box.
Bethesda on What Wii U needs to do to be more attractive:
It’s a number of factors. The truth is, it’s not something that we are currently developing for. I don’t know whether that changes down the road or not. It depends on the games that we are making and how we think it aligns with that console, and how the hardware aligns with the other stuff we are making. We will see.
Apparently Elder Scrolls, Wolfenstein and The Evil Within don't fit with Wii U. So.... what does?
Ubisoft and Nintendo titles!
Foolz said:Ubisoft and Nintendo titles!
If Wii U fails at Christmas, Ubisoft is dropping support too.
What is more bewildering is that they said because they are making other versions a Wii U port only costs $1 million and marketing is shared across the board. With such a low cost for a port, what is the problem with multiformat support? If they are worried about distribution costs or unsold boxes on shelves than go digital only. There are plenty of full length retail games on the eShop. You can self publish very easily too.
This is what Crysis 3 should have been^
Well I hear Last Light's engine is CPU intensive. It might not be the case that Wii U's CPU is "horrible and weak" as 4A games put it but that they would have to significantly change the engine layout to get it running on U. People have to understand that 360/PS3's way of running code is weird and outdated, relying on high floating point performance and drawing graphics using the CPU for SIMD, and even the audio is running on the 360 CPU. Where U's CPU has more registers and integers, a shorter pipeline and offloads SIMD to the GPU, sound to the DSP etc.
I'm only logging those devs who have actually said that they are not making games for it and given a reason. I think Bioshock Infinite was a pretty stupid omission just because Levine was on the Wii U showreel praising the system and though he's pooped on motion controls in the past, now Move is out he suddenly likes and incorporates them. Take Two are still taking the view that Wii U is a kiddy/casual demographic. Even getting past whether a system is technically enough or not, publishers are still avoiding Wii U because of what they see as a not mature demographic.
You burned your clothes?