Nintendo Gets Dark With 'Devil's Third' On Wii U, Includes A Surprise PC Edition

Status
Not open for further replies.

James Mason

Polypheme
Moderator
:/ Nintendo, smh.

I get Nintendo is always trying new things, but this isn't an interesting new thing, it's just a poor business decision that will earn them alot of flak when PC gamers get only "half" of a game.

I should also say that I doubt the multiplayer on a WiiU FPS/TPS will be good enough for a PC gamer to make them even bother with it. The only interest PC gamers would have in the game would be the story, if it all compelling.

Nintendo could easily make a lot of money if they weren't being such stuck-ups with their products and brands.
 

Vlad Rose

Reputable
Apr 7, 2014
732
0
5,160
61
Nintendo is better than Sony is with their 'console only' exclusive tiles (Uncharted, Gran Turismo, etc.). Even better than Microsoft who literally takes games developed for PC originally and forcing them as console exclusives for a while (Halo, new Tomb Raider, etc).

At least with what Nintendo's doing on this title, there will be something for the PC. Heck, it may even help spur WiiU sales as a result.
 

xenol

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2008
216
0
18,680
0
:/ Nintendo, smh.

I get Nintendo is always trying new things, but this isn't an interesting new thing, it's just a poor business decision that will earn them alot of flak when PC gamers get only "half" of a game.

I should also say that I doubt the multiplayer on a WiiU FPS/TPS will be good enough for a PC gamer to make them even bother with it. The only interest PC gamers would have in the game would be the story, if it all compelling.

Nintendo could easily make a lot of money if they weren't being such stuck-ups with their products and brands.
I don't think you understand the PC gaming market or Nintendo.

First of all, the loud vocal group of PC gamers will complain regardless. It has a console version. That means it's either going to be a bad console port or a watered down-for-consoles game.

Second, PC gamers care about the story? Last I checked, the top three played PC games were all multiplayer. And even then, games that do have storyline often aren't really cared about anyway. I don't play Skyrim or Fallout for its storyline (don't get me wrong, it was interesting, but I'm pretty sure that wasn't the selling point for most PC gamers who bought it). And the games that I have clocked more than 40 hours in (my average time to complete an RPG) are sandbox/open world style games or games that I've modded to hell and back.

And besides, the PC version is free. There's really no risk in getting it.
 

IInuyasha74

Splendid
Moderator
The PC version is not free. Nintendo mentioned it would be free to try, but currently hasn't stated if they will do this with a limited demo version, a timed trailer, or some other method. Ultimately PC users who want to play it will need to purchase it.
 

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0
Nintendo is better than Sony is with their 'console only' exclusive tiles (Uncharted, Gran Turismo, etc.). Even better than Microsoft who literally takes games developed for PC originally and forcing them as console exclusives for a while (Halo, new Tomb Raider, etc).

At least with what Nintendo's doing on this title, there will be something for the PC. Heck, it may even help spur WiiU sales as a result.
tomb raider as far as im aware is a time exclusive, while crappy, isnt ripping a multiplat dev away from other platforms.

and halo... well lets look at bunji for a moment... mac mac mac mac and windows later, mac and windows later... looks to me they were a mac developer and later became a pc because macs didn't cater to games, and when halo came out they went to microsoft because apple told them to pound sand, and the game that was going to be a pc version of halo was a rts, not a fps. than because it was microsoft published, they made the second game vista exclusive, fun fact, vanguard was also going to be published through microsoft but decided against it because of the same restriction.

:/ Nintendo, smh.

I get Nintendo is always trying new things, but this isn't an interesting new thing, it's just a poor business decision that will earn them alot of flak when PC gamers get only "half" of a game.

I should also say that I doubt the multiplayer on a WiiU FPS/TPS will be good enough for a PC gamer to make them even bother with it. The only interest PC gamers would have in the game would be the story, if it all compelling.

Nintendo could easily make a lot of money if they weren't being such stuck-ups with their products and brands.
"doubt the multiplayer on a WiiU FPS/TPS"

why? is it just the genre or is it because its a wiiu game? for me, late gen ps2 graphics were good enough for me to not care about the visuals anymore, wiiu is at least as powerful as a 360 or ps3 (i believe twice as powerful though) if i remember right, and when games are made, graphicly, its good enough... if anything holds it back it will be controlls, but i cant comment till the games out...


 

James Mason

Polypheme
Moderator


Mainly was concern about controls/gameplay feel, and then partly graphics.

Nintendo could make a killing if it could do good ports of some it's popular brands/titles to PC though. Emulators are super popular. If you don't sell the product people want to buy, it's your own fault.
 

Vlad Rose

Reputable
Apr 7, 2014
732
0
5,160
61
Actually, the original Halo that was originally to be on PC was a FPS. I remember it from the PCGamer magazine article comparing it to the Unreal Tournament series at the time. But yeah, you're right that Bungie was originally a Mac developer and that Microsoft tried to force it as a Vista exclusive on Halo 2.

Fable was also another series that was originally stated for PC, then turned into an exclusive for Xbox, then eventually released as a horrid PC version port years later. There were a few others as well, but those 2 were the ones that made the most noise.
 

airborn824

Honorable
Mar 3, 2013
226
0
10,690
3
WOnder what Nintendos plans are with this developer, surely they did not buy them for this IP as i dont hear about it. Maybe Nintendo wants more IPs for T and M ratings on the console. With a new CEO inc, i imagine things could possbily change but Nintendo is very old school
 

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0


there is a difference with nintendo and everyone else they ever competed with, nintendo makes profit off every console they sell and always have, everyone else sells at cost or at loss to get better than nintendo.

if nintendo does step away from the console race, than we could see a glut of their stuff come to the pc, but i highly doubt anything major would go pc while they still sell systems.
 

hasten

Distinguished
Oct 25, 2007
152
0
18,690
3
:/ Nintendo, smh.

I get Nintendo is always trying new things, but this isn't an interesting new thing, it's just a poor business decision that will earn them alot of flak when PC gamers get only "half" of a game.

I should also say that I doubt the multiplayer on a WiiU FPS/TPS will be good enough for a PC gamer to make them even bother with it. The only interest PC gamers would have in the game would be the story, if it all compelling.

Nintendo could easily make a lot of money if they weren't being such stuck-ups with their products and brands.
I don't think you understand the PC gaming market or Nintendo.

First of all, the loud vocal group of PC gamers will complain regardless. It has a console version. That means it's either going to be a bad console port or a watered down-for-consoles game.

Second, PC gamers care about the story? Last I checked, the top three played PC games were all multiplayer. And even then, games that do have storyline often aren't really cared about anyway. I don't play Skyrim or Fallout for its storyline (don't get me wrong, it was interesting, but I'm pretty sure that wasn't the selling point for most PC gamers who bought it). And the games that I have clocked more than 40 hours in (my average time to complete an RPG) are sandbox/open world style games or games that I've modded to hell and back.

And besides, the PC version is free. There's really no risk in getting it.
Why would PC Gamers not care about story? That's such an asinine comment. Why would they be purchasing the games then? It literally makes no sense.
 

Vlad Rose

Reputable
Apr 7, 2014
732
0
5,160
61
The Unreal Tournament series and Quake 3 didn't have a story line (at least not really noticeable) and they sold like crazy on PC. All people cared about was the action.
 

James Mason

Polypheme
Moderator


Have you also noticed how Unreal Tournament and Quake are dead brands though now?
 

Vlad Rose

Reputable
Apr 7, 2014
732
0
5,160
61


True, the brands may be quiet right now, but there are others as well: TeamFortress 2, Wolfteam, etc.... IE, pretty much any game is only online multiplayer. They are also free to play. This is exactly like the what Nintendo is proposing with the PC version.

If anything, I'd say they paid more attention to consumer habits than what was suggested.
 

James Mason

Polypheme
Moderator


Right, and those are old old IPs with an established playerbase.
They're trying to just throw a new one at us.
In a market already overflowing with "f2p" fps games.
 

Vlad Rose

Reputable
Apr 7, 2014
732
0
5,160
61
I completely agree that the market is severely over flooded with f2p fps games. I'm not saying Nintendo is exactly smart, but I will give them credit for following trending habits. ;)

Actually, when thinking about games without a storyline... there's one entire genre out there that the games have almost no storyline to them... MOBAs. They usually have at most is Lore; but not much story to the game itself. Understandably it is hard to do since there isn't a campaign mode at all, just contests.
 

James Mason

Polypheme
Moderator


LoL had decent lore until they got lazy and just threw the whole lore department out the window and onto a pile of burning tires. And they made really good attempts at having players interact with the story, but then they decided to never do it again or improve on any faults with their first attempts. Noxus vs. Ionia was a really nice first try for having an interactive story.

 

Vlad Rose

Reputable
Apr 7, 2014
732
0
5,160
61


Again, as mentioned... Lore only.

League of Legends is the only one that pretty much tried to attempt anything more; as you mentioned. The game itself doesn't have a story though. Why would two characters on the same side fight each other in a round? Again as you said, they did try to have an addendum to what was 'supposedly' happening in the world, but it never affected game play. The only noticeable changes where mainly custom skins.

DOTA2 is one with a lore of the characters, but no story to the game itself. I do not know much more about it since the game never really caught my attention.

Smite is another with lore due to human history, but the game itself is just "What if multiple gods through human history get into a fight with each other and no one is an ally; regardless of religion."

Then you have Heroes of the Storm, which gives no explanation why characters from different universes show up and fight not only each other, but also their allies? Blizzard even stated that there is and will be no plans for a narrative. At least they have lore from their previous games.

Finally, there was Infinite Crisis (now shutdown). It should have a phenomenal story line since it's supposed to be based on a DC comics story line, but again it has no story of it's own. The only resemblance to the comic is the characters used; meaning lore.

It is the inherit problems with MOBA's since every battle is a 'what if?' and is really hard to create a story line to. It doesn't mean that they aren't fun in any way though. It also doesn't mean that people won't spend money on them because of a lack of story. I play three of them on a regular basis and have spent money on two of those.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS