Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare isn't coming to Wii U

  • 77 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by Blackbond (24490 posts) -

EXPOSED

#52 Posted by Sword-Demon (6963 posts) -

I don't see why anyone should care. If you bought a Wii U to play multiplats, you're doing it wrong.

@Sword-Demon: Trouble is, this is just a weak excuse. The reason it's not selling is because fewer and fewer people are finding reasons to buy a Nintendo console and it's stuff like this which matters to people.

I've heard all the usual fanboy cliches used in this thread so far. "Water makes you wet" and "pretty predictable". As if this is so obvious. Nintendo has many CODs going back a while, so this IS news. Even on the underpowered wii they had a version of Call of Duty Modern Warfare. As this is another cross gen title this is doubly surprising as they could port it if they wanted. There's no real barrier other than the cost vs reward.

"I never wanted it anyway". Just like you never wanted Assassins Creed. Or Batman. Or FIFA. Or GTA. Or The Witcher. I could go on and on. This is said every time a game is announced for all platforms other than wii u. It's a face saving lie.

"This is trash anyway". See above. Just like Assassins Creed. Or Batman. Or FIFA. Or GTA. Or The Witcher are all trash. Every game in a similar position is trash, no matter how valued the series or credibility it has, suddenly becomes "trash" because presumably, instead of buying FIFA you'd rather have another Mario Strikers.

"Exclusives are all that matters". NO. This one is hilarious. Exclusives or multis only matter between consoles of two similar libraries. If you're talking about a console you own, only the whole library matters. All my fave games of the outgoing gen were multiplatforms. Because some of the biggest names in the business like Rockstar put lots of money in and want to justify it by spreading their incoming revenue about. Nintendo being the only developer who matters is another lie you tell yourself to save face. It's not remotely true, it has never been true, and it has never been close to the truth. And a game is a game no matter what the origin. Multiplats, exclusives, just words. Doesn't matter when you fire a game up. IF you can on your console.

"I'm not missing much". Oh, you are. Because this isn't the only game you're missing. Nintendo gimped the system, the fans never supported the games they needed to, and now it's getting a release a month and a half if you are very lucky. Not exactly what I'd call a savvy investment for the price they charged for the system. You're missing a lot. Shadows of Mordor, which you don't want, AC Rogue/Unity, which you don't want, Dragon Age Inquisition, which you don't want, Far Cry 4, which you don't want. At least you have Sonic Boom to keep you amused for two minutes.

You seem to be under the impression that the Wii U is the only system I own.. And I like how you made up a bunch of arguments for me, and told me I was lying to myself and missing out.

Anyways, my main point is that, just like with the Wii, gamers won't buy the Wii U as their primary gaming system; its place is as a secondary system used to play the amazing Nintendo exclusives, while another system is used for multiplats.

So yeah, I don't see why anyone should care that a secondary console isn't getting another dumbed down version of a game when everyone would have bought the better version on a more powerful system anyway.

#53 Posted by drummerdave9099 (651 posts) -

That's too bad, then again I only buy the Treyarch COD games since they have zombies mode. Still a few great looking games coming to the system in the next months though

#54 Posted by Micropixel (865 posts) -

:O

^ This is my "shocked" face.

#55 Edited by Speak_Low (945 posts) -

Once again DocSanchez is right on and calling people out on their statements regarding third-party.

If Sheep are this blasé about Activision completely shutting their doors in Nintendo's face, then it's no wonder Nintendo always has problems with third-parties. Even their hardcore fanbase doesn't care. And they don't care, then neither will Nintendo. Why should Nintendo extend and exert themselves (and pay more money) when the most active gamers constantly act so unimpressed with every third-party game? AC is crap, COD is crap. Destiny is overrated crap (hasn't even come out, but it's crap). GTA is crap. Far Cry, Crysis and Mass Effect? Crap Crap Crap. All CRAP

With that attitude, Nintendo will never get anywhere, and the Wii U successor is screwed already.

I know this Activision news isn't fully confirmed because the developer working the on the PS360 versions of Advanced Warfare hasn't outright said there is no Wii U version, but this year we've seen Ubisoft and Activision starting to distance themselves from Nintendo. If Activision, Ubisoft and EA (three biggest publishers out there) see Nintendo as a financial risk, I'm not so sure they are guaranteed to come back with the Wii U successor. We assume they may come back, but I think some damage has been done already, and they have lost patience with Nintendo.

Keep calling everything CRAP, and your next console will FLOP, again!

#56 Posted by Micropixel (865 posts) -

Activision HAS confirmed that this isn't coming to Wii U. They even gave reason as to why they're not doing it:

-----

We're not developing a Wii U version. That was a business decision made by Activision to focus us on Xbox One, PS4 and PC. Another studio is doing current-gen. The Wii U wasn't on the business key plan. So that was off our radar, but I know the company's not doing it.

All I can say is we analyse each game and the platforms we think are appropriate for each game each time. It's a judgement call each time. This is the judgement we made.

We want to make sure we're bringing the games to the platforms where the audiences for our games live. Nintendo's a great partner. They've continued to be a great partner and we're going to continue to support them with the IP it makes sense with.

-----

Activision's Eric Hirshberg also weighed in, maintaining that Activision was still supporting Nintendo systems, particularly with franchises — such as Skylanders — that perform well on the hardware.

[Source]

#57 Posted by Sphensen (735 posts) -

seeing how the previous two versions lacked DLC and support, there's no wonder that they didn't sell.

#58 Posted by KingsofQueens (2175 posts) -

@Sword-Demon said:

I don't see why anyone should care. If you bought a Wii U to play multiplats, you're doing it wrong.

@DocSanchez said:

@Sword-Demon: Trouble is, this is just a weak excuse. The reason it's not selling is because fewer and fewer people are finding reasons to buy a Nintendo console and it's stuff like this which matters to people.

I've heard all the usual fanboy cliches used in this thread so far. "Water makes you wet" and "pretty predictable". As if this is so obvious. Nintendo has many CODs going back a while, so this IS news. Even on the underpowered wii they had a version of Call of Duty Modern Warfare. As this is another cross gen title this is doubly surprising as they could port it if they wanted. There's no real barrier other than the cost vs reward.

"I never wanted it anyway". Just like you never wanted Assassins Creed. Or Batman. Or FIFA. Or GTA. Or The Witcher. I could go on and on. This is said every time a game is announced for all platforms other than wii u. It's a face saving lie.

"This is trash anyway". See above. Just like Assassins Creed. Or Batman. Or FIFA. Or GTA. Or The Witcher are all trash. Every game in a similar position is trash, no matter how valued the series or credibility it has, suddenly becomes "trash" because presumably, instead of buying FIFA you'd rather have another Mario Strikers.

"Exclusives are all that matters". NO. This one is hilarious. Exclusives or multis only matter between consoles of two similar libraries. If you're talking about a console you own, only the whole library matters. All my fave games of the outgoing gen were multiplatforms. Because some of the biggest names in the business like Rockstar put lots of money in and want to justify it by spreading their incoming revenue about. Nintendo being the only developer who matters is another lie you tell yourself to save face. It's not remotely true, it has never been true, and it has never been close to the truth. And a game is a game no matter what the origin. Multiplats, exclusives, just words. Doesn't matter when you fire a game up. IF you can on your console.

"I'm not missing much". Oh, you are. Because this isn't the only game you're missing. Nintendo gimped the system, the fans never supported the games they needed to, and now it's getting a release a month and a half if you are very lucky. Not exactly what I'd call a savvy investment for the price they charged for the system. You're missing a lot. Shadows of Mordor, which you don't want, AC Rogue/Unity, which you don't want, Dragon Age Inquisition, which you don't want, Far Cry 4, which you don't want. At least you have Sonic Boom to keep you amused for two minutes.

You seem to be under the impression that the Wii U is the only system I own.. And I like how you made up a bunch of arguments for me, and told me I was lying to myself and missing out.

Anyways, my main point is that, just like with the Wii, gamers won't buy the Wii U as their primary gaming system; its place is as a secondary system used to play the amazing Nintendo exclusives, while another system is used for multiplats.

So yeah, I don't see why anyone should care that a secondary console isn't getting another dumbed down version of a game when everyone would have bought the better version on a more powerful system anyway.

I don't think he was directly talking to you, but more towards Sheep and their idiotic statements. Sure, there are WiiU owners who have other systems, but the main point he was trying to address is how the WiiU is unappealing, the excuses Sheep make in regards to the severity of the lack of 3rd party support on the WiiU, which the console direly needs, the lack of interest in 3rd party WiiU games from Sheep, which repeats the cycle over and over and over and over.....is the main problem......recycling the same asinine excuses from Sheep, which is downright sad.

There was a time when gamers ACTUALLY had Nintendo consoles as their primary console and literally got away with it, because, HERE'S A CLUE.....THEY ACTUALLY HAD 3RD PARTY SUPPORT, aside from the top tier exclusives.

#59 Posted by DocSanchez (1564 posts) -

@KingsofQueens: Spot on. Basically my first line was a direct response to him, the rest was to the other fanboys on this thread. Which I'm hoping he already knew as I made it very clear.

#60 Posted by m_machine024 (14865 posts) -

Yeesh..... now that's bad. If Ubi, EA and Activision are done with it then it can't get any worse. It does have indies but still..... :/

I don't care what anyone say tho but the Wii had some great 3rd party games here and there. A lot less the competition but still had some nice 3rd party niche gems. To me honestly, the Wii was more than a 1st party only system....... but the WiiU.... yikes! It's really sad that it's not even getting the 10% (maybe I'm generous :P) of the support the Wii was getting last gen, which wasn't high to begin with. It's hard to argue that it isn't a failure at this point. :/ I'll get one for the 1st party but beside Platinum games and Rayman, not sure what else is there..... upcoming Devil's Third? Sonic games? ZombiU? Last gen ports? Hmm...... U__U

The Wii brand is dead. Nintendo needs to get rid of it next gen.

#61 Posted by scottpsfan14 (3784 posts) -

Of course it's not. It's a next gen title. But they should have at least brought the PS3/360 version made by another studio over to the Wii U.

#62 Posted by Boddicker (2517 posts) -

It isn't coming to any system I own because I am not buying it.

#63 Posted by LegatoSkyheart (24896 posts) -

Of course it's not. It's a next gen title. But they should have at least brought the PS3/360 version made by another studio over to the Wii U.

They could have gotten Treyarch to do it since they've always done Call of Duty on Wii/WiiU, but I'm pretty sure this is more of a "WiiU owners don't buy Call of Duty" thing than a "Can't do it" thing.

#64 Posted by Sword-Demon (6963 posts) -

@KingsofQueens: Spot on. Basically my first line was a direct response to him, the rest was to the other fanboys on this thread. Which I'm hoping he already knew as I made it very clear.

Oh, sorry about that then.

So to respond to your statement to me, "Trouble is, this is just a weak excuse. The reason it's not selling is because fewer and fewer people are finding reasons to buy a Nintendo console and it's stuff like this which matters to people."

I wasn't making an excuse, trying to defend Nintendo, or saying anything about sales. I was saying that multiplats that do come to the Wii U are downgraded, so If someone bought a Wii U with the intention of playing multiplats on it, then I'd question their logic.

After 3 generations of Nintendo consoles getting crap 3rd party support, I think people should know what to expect from the Wii U: not many 3rd party games, downgraded or absent multiplats, and awesome exclusives.

So why should people care that CoD isn't coming to the Wii U when [A] - They already know the Wii U will have almost no 3rd party support, and [B] - The Wii U sales for Ghosts accounted for less than a hundredth of the total sales?

I can't imagine anyone actually being disappointed by this news; by the looks of things, no one even wants CoD on the Wii U.

#65 Posted by Malta_1980 (11215 posts) -

that is bad news for Wii U (only) owners who are interested in the game...

#66 Posted by deltazero (68 posts) -

To be completely honest I dont see why developers should have to do extra work just to make an inferior version of the game for a platform it won't even sell on, and then on top of that have nintendo telling them that they must implement the use of the wii u tablet.

#67 Edited by TrappedInABox91 (527 posts) -

Good. COD is a cancer. No one buys a Nintendo console for 3nd party. Its a known fact.

#68 Posted by comptonst88 (264 posts) -

No surprise really, the hardware is pretty much 7th gen and not many people own a WiiU so it doesnt really make sense to port it over.

#69 Edited by PrincessGomez92 (3474 posts) -

@Sword-Demon:

I know some people much prefer the Wii Remote and Nunchuk for shooters, which is why I bought my CoD's on Wii rather than 360. There's a reason why someone might be disappointed.

#70 Edited by Kaze_no_Mirai (11115 posts) -

@deltazero said:

To be completely honest I dont see why developers should have to do extra work just to make an inferior version of the game for a platform it won't even sell on, and then on top of that have nintendo telling them that they must implement the use of the wii u tablet.

The Wii U versions of the CoD games were quite good ports. And being able to play two players online with one on the tablet and one on TV was fun. You make it sound bad that Nintendo wants developers to make use of their hardware, which I'm sure they don't since plenty of games really have no use for the tablet controller. Not to mention Sony does something similar requiring all developers to use the remote play on the Vita.

It's one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't things. You make devs use your hardware fully people complain about shoehorning stuff, devs don't use it because theres no real advantage with and people complain the hardware is not being utilized. You can never please everybody.

#71 Posted by thedude- (2071 posts) -

Surprise surprise

#72 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (7204 posts) -

@Sphensen said:

seeing how the previous two versions lacked DLC and support, there's no wonder that they didn't sell.

Exactly. People who own a Wii U likely own another console and they're going to get the version that gives them the best value and support. You can't expect good results if you're not going all-in.

#73 Posted by The_Last_Ride (70672 posts) -

I'm curious who even buy's this game on this forum

#74 Edited by inb4uall (5351 posts) -

Best on PC anyway.

#75 Posted by double_a73 (460 posts) -

Eh, Lucky for Wii U owners I suppose.

#76 Posted by Sword-Demon (6963 posts) -

@Sword-Demon:

I know some people much prefer the Wii Remote and Nunchuk for shooters, which is why I bought my CoD's on Wii rather than 360. There's a reason why someone might be disappointed.

Well that's fair.. I'd agree with them if I didn't have a pc.

but did Ghosts on the Wii U support the Wiimote and Nunchuck? or did it just have standard gamepad controls?

#77 Posted by nini200 (9604 posts) -

I will not buy it unless I can use pointer controls so I will not be buying this year's COD. I'll be waiting for Treyarch's next COD. I like their COD the best however I was willing to give sledgehammer a shot with it as the trailer looked pretty interesting. Guess they're another Infinity Ward when it comes down to it.

#78 Edited by PrincessGomez92 (3474 posts) -

@princessgomez92 said:

@Sword-Demon:

I know some people much prefer the Wii Remote and Nunchuk for shooters, which is why I bought my CoD's on Wii rather than 360. There's a reason why someone might be disappointed.

Well that's fair.. I'd agree with them if I didn't have a pc.

but did Ghosts on the Wii U support the Wiimote and Nunchuck? or did it just have standard gamepad controls?

Yeah, it supports Wii Remote and Nunchuk. Supports just about every controller Wii U supports.