Rayman Legends delayed, no more exclusivity

[Deleted]

www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/07/rayman-legends-delayed-no-longer-wii-u-exclusive

Bumped to September, when it was supposed to release at the end of the month. Pretty much because they want to do a multiplatform launch instead of releasing it on the Wii U THEN releasing it on the 360 and PS3.

It's cool that I get to play it, but you just pissed off a ton of people with the Wii U. What could've been a decent system seller is now all for naught.

Bad move, Ubisoft. Bad move.

[Koda, Master Crunchyroller]

Feb 7, 2013 15:39:30 GMT -5 @teamkillswitch said:

www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/07/rayman-legends-delayed-no-longer-wii-u-exclusive

Bumped to September, when it was supposed to release at the end of the month. Pretty much because they want to do a multiplatform launch instead of releasing it on the Wii U THEN releasing it on the 360 and PS3.

It's cool that I get to play it, but you just pissed off a ton of people with the Wii U. What could've been a decent system seller is now all for naught.

Bad move, Ubisoft. Bad move.

To be fair, this is Ubisoft hedging their bets. Rayman Origins only sold like 2 million or so copies across the PS3, 360, Wii, and Vita.

I do still think it is dumb to delay the for all intents and purposes finished Wii U version......

[darbus alan]

I think it's because of how little confidence third parties currently have in the Wii U. The sad thing is that it's a brand new console and in some areas the specs are actually worse than the 360 and PS3. Games that use anything that relies heavily on RAM like the Unreal Engine 3 games (which is a lot of third party games) are going to suffer on the Wii U for performance. It's why launch ports like Arkham City and Mass Effect 3 performed much worse than their PS360 counterparts.

The bone dry library after a decent launch lineup doesn't help things much either. Not that the Wii U is the first console to have a really bad dry spell after launch (see: just about every console released the last 15-20 years or so except maybe the Dreamcast). But unlike the Wii, Nintendo can't ride on the coattails of a hot fad to cover up for a lack of games.

[Fundertaker]

Dick move, Ubisoft, dick move.

Quite frankly I think it will bite them in the ass. Hard. There's GTA V in September and that's the first "big releases" month after summer. Rayman Legends will be barely a blip in the radar by then.

[Rumble McSkirmish]

Feb 7, 2013 16:31:40 GMT -5 Fundertaker said:

Dick move, Ubisoft, dick move.

Quite frankly I think it will bite them in the ass. Hard. There's GTA V in September and that's the first "big releases" month after summer. Rayman Legends will be barely a blip in the radar by then.

Ubisoft Executive: I can't hear you over the sound of our Assassin's Creed/Just Dance profits being counted. ;P

[amaron]

Feb 7, 2013 16:02:06 GMT -5 darbus alan said:

I think it's because of how little confidence third parties currently have in the Wii U. The sad thing is that it's a brand new console and in some areas the specs are actually worse than the 360 and PS3. Games that use anything that relies heavily on RAM like the Unreal Engine 3 games (which is a lot of third party games) are going to suffer on the Wii U for performance. It's why launch ports like Arkham City and Mass Effect 3 performed much worse than their PS360 counterparts.

The bone dry library after a decent launch lineup doesn't help things much either. Not that the Wii U is the first console to have a really bad dry spell after launch (see: just about every console released the last 15-20 years or so except maybe the Dreamcast). But unlike the Wii, Nintendo can't ride on the coattails of a hot fad to cover up for a lack of games.

Except the hardware isn't worse.

[Fundertaker]

Feb 7, 2013 16:36:16 GMT -5 Rumble McSkirmish said:

Feb 7, 2013 16:31:40 GMT -5 Fundertaker said:

Dick move, Ubisoft, dick move.

Quite frankly I think it will bite them in the ass. Hard. There's GTA V in September and that's the first "big releases" month after summer. Rayman Legends will be barely a blip in the radar by then.

Ubisoft Executive: I can't hear you over the sound of our Assassin's Creed/Just Dance profits being counted. ;P

They would count those anyway. They will just count the losses of this Rayman as an extra instead of probable, if still small, profit.

[SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman]

Here's hoping for a PC port soon enough cause I haven't got any of those systems but Rayman origins was a very pleasant surprise so I'm definitely looking forward to the sequel.

[darbus alan]

Feb 7, 2013 16:59:45 GMT -5 amaron said:

Feb 7, 2013 16:02:06 GMT -5 darbus alan said:

I think it's because of how little confidence third parties currently have in the Wii U. The sad thing is that it's a brand new console and in some areas the specs are actually worse than the 360 and PS3. Games that use anything that relies heavily on RAM like the Unreal Engine 3 games (which is a lot of third party games) are going to suffer on the Wii U for performance. It's why launch ports like Arkham City and Mass Effect 3 performed much worse than their PS360 counterparts.

The bone dry library after a decent launch lineup doesn't help things much either. Not that the Wii U is the first console to have a really bad dry spell after launch (see: just about every console released the last 15-20 years or so except maybe the Dreamcast). But unlike the Wii, Nintendo can't ride on the coattails of a hot fad to cover up for a lack of games.

Except the hardware isn't worse.

Reading comprehension: "in some areas." Not all. The RAM especially is much worse and it's why games that run UE3 struggle on the Wii U compared to 360 and PS3.

Nintendo had to cut corners in a lot of areas thanks to the expense of the tablet controller. This is already the first console Nintendo's ever made that's actually sold at a loss. I believe the GPU is better than the 360's or PS3's, but the next Xbox and Playstation will likely blow it out of the water.

[Deleted]

I'm honestly not shocked. "Third Party Nintendo Exclusive" = Out on PS3 and 360 months later with exclusive material.

[Malcolm]

The worst part of all this is that they're delaying the Wii U version which, for all intents and purposes, is finished. I say they should release that version now and the PS360 versions later.

[Deleted]

This is what Nintendo gets for being cagey with all their exclusive stuff. Which is a death wish when you're competing with Microsoft and Sony. So now you have Mario and Zelda, so what? You honestly think those alone can sell your entire system and the other, mediocre ancillary games? They deserve to go under for pulling this for so many years. No game should have to be exclusive to any system.

[Deleted]

Feb 7, 2013 18:49:08 GMT -5 @mightykretzler said:

This is what Nintendo gets for being cagey with all their exclusive stuff. Which is a death wish when you're competing with Microsoft and Sony. So now you have Mario and Zelda, so what? You honestly think those alone can sell your entire system and the other, mediocre ancillary games? They deserve to go under for pulling this for so many years. No game should have to be exclusive to any system.

So according to your logic....games like Halo and God Of War should be other system too

[Malcolm]

Feb 7, 2013 18:49:08 GMT -5 @mightykretzler said:

This is what Nintendo gets for being cagey with all their exclusive stuff. Which is a death wish when you're competing with Microsoft and Sony. So now you have Mario and Zelda, so what? You honestly think those alone can sell your entire system and the other, mediocre ancillary games? They deserve to go under for pulling this for so many years. No game should have to be exclusive to any system.

But exclusitivity is what makes people buy certain consoles in the first place... I do not understand this.

And yes, Mario and Zelda alone would be enough to sell systems, as much as I hate to admit it.

[Koda, Master Crunchyroller]

The thing is this isn't the first Wii U "exclusive" to go multiplatform either. The Razor's Edge version of Ninja Gaiden 3(which, thanks to fixing a lot of technical problems while also adding extra content, is considered the best version of this game) was not too long ago announced to be coming out on the PS3 and 360 this year. And the big difference here is Nintendo was the publisher of the Razor's Edge version.

[Deleted]

Feb 7, 2013 18:52:10 GMT -5 @shadowcage said:

Feb 7, 2013 18:49:08 GMT -5 @mightykretzler said:

This is what Nintendo gets for being cagey with all their exclusive stuff. Which is a death wish when you're competing with Microsoft and Sony. So now you have Mario and Zelda, so what? You honestly think those alone can sell your entire system and the other, mediocre ancillary games? They deserve to go under for pulling this for so many years. No game should have to be exclusive to any system.

So according to your logic....games like Halo and God Of War should be other system too

Yes, they should. Although I really dislike Nintendo's policy on it because (A) They've been doing this for so long and (B) Instead of concentrating on making good systems or trying to get good game developers to work with them, their business model revolves around hoarding all of these old IPs that no one else can have access to. It just seems petty and backwards.

Sure, Sony and Microsoft aren't angels with the exclusive material business, but they at least have a diverse catalogue of games and really quality systems on the market.

[Deleted]

Feb 7, 2013 19:01:09 GMT -5 @mightykretzler said:

Feb 7, 2013 18:52:10 GMT -5 @shadowcage said:

So according to your logic....games like Halo and God Of War should be other system too

Yes, they should. Although I really dislike Nintendo's policy on it because (A) They've been doing this for so long and (B) Instead of concentrating on making good systems or trying to get good game developers to work with them, their business model revolves around hoarding all of these old IPs that no one else can have access to. It just seems petty and backwards.

Sure, Sony and Microsoft aren't angels with the exclusive material business, but they at least have a diverse catalogue of games and really quality systems on the market.

[Malcolm]

Feb 7, 2013 19:01:09 GMT -5 @mightykretzler said:

Feb 7, 2013 18:52:10 GMT -5 @shadowcage said:

So according to your logic....games like Halo and God Of War should be other system too

Yes, they should. Although I really dislike Nintendo's policy on it because (A) They've been doing this for so long and (B) Instead of concentrating on making good systems or trying to get good game developers to work with them, their business model revolves around hoarding all of these old IPs that no one else can have access to. It just seems petty and backwards.

Sure, Sony and Microsoft aren't angels with the exclusive material business, but they at least have a diverse catalogue of games and really quality systems on the market.

Except Halo and God of War are 1st(or 2nd?) Party games. Those are published by Microsoft and Sony respectively so it wouldn't make sense for them to be other consoles.

If every system had every game there would be no point in competition and that would be bad for business and ultimately the consumer because it would lead to a monopoly.

I'm guessing your beef with Nintendo isn't so much exclusive titles as it it more on their handling of 3rd party support.

[Deleted]

Feb 7, 2013 19:09:23 GMT -5 Malcolm said:

Feb 7, 2013 19:01:09 GMT -5 @mightykretzler said:

Yes, they should. Although I really dislike Nintendo's policy on it because (A) They've been doing this for so long and (B) Instead of concentrating on making good systems or trying to get good game developers to work with them, their business model revolves around hoarding all of these old IPs that no one else can have access to. It just seems petty and backwards.

Sure, Sony and Microsoft aren't angels with the exclusive material business, but they at least have a diverse catalogue of games and really quality systems on the market.

Except Halo and God of War are 1st(or 2nd?) Party games. Those are published by Microsoft and Sony respectively so it wouldn't make sense for them to be other consoles.

If every system had every game there would be no point in competition and that would be bad for business and ultimately the consumer because it would lead to a monopoly.

I'm guessing your beef with Nintendo isn't so much exclusive titles as it it more on their handling of 3rd party support.

You're right, it's not so much the exclusivity that bothers me. I don't think it has to be that way, and I don't think it accomplishes much in the end, but I don't think that's going to change. But my problem with Nintendo is more about how fiercely they've guarded these old series instead of trying to make a good game system that's worth playing. They don't have their priorities straight at all and they're finally paying for it.

PS3 is a system that caters to high-end gaming because of its specs.

360 is more affordable and easily accessible and stresses multiplayer gaming.

Wii...what do they do better than either of the other two systems? And there's games available to the former two that the Wii can't handle or apply in a multiplayer setting properly. And it's killing them, but they don't seem to care as long as they've got their ironclad grip on a handful of titles.

[Deleted]

Feb 7, 2013 22:08:57 GMT -5 @mightykretzler said:

Feb 7, 2013 19:09:23 GMT -5 Malcolm said:

Except Halo and God of War are 1st(or 2nd?) Party games. Those are published by Microsoft and Sony respectively so it wouldn't make sense for them to be other consoles.

If every system had every game there would be no point in competition and that would be bad for business and ultimately the consumer because it would lead to a monopoly.

I'm guessing your beef with Nintendo isn't so much exclusive titles as it it more on their handling of 3rd party support.

You're right, it's not so much the exclusivity that bothers me. I don't think it has to be that way, and I don't think it accomplishes much in the end, but I don't think that's going to change. But my problem with Nintendo is more about how fiercely they've guarded these old series instead of trying to make a good game system that's worth playing. They don't have their priorities straight at all and they're finally paying for it.

PS3 is a system that caters to high-end gaming because of its specs.

360 is more affordable and easily accessible and stresses multiplayer gaming.

Wii...what do they do better than either of the other two systems? And there's games available to the former two that the Wii can't handle or apply in a multiplayer setting properly. And it's killing them, but they don't seem to care as long as they've got their ironclad grip on a handful of titles.

So you don't like the fact that Nintendo wont let game, like Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, etc that they created themself to appear on their rival's system?.......So I'm guessing Microsoft should let Halo, Gear Of War or Fable appear on PS3/Wii U and Song should let Little Big Planet, God Of War, Infamous appear on 360/Wii U too.