Nintendo

Former Castlevania Producer Announces Bloodstained Explains Why It Isn’t Coming to Nintendo Platforms

You’ve probably already seen that former Castlevania producer Koji Igarashi has taken to Kickstarter to reveal his bold new project. The spiritual successor to Castlevania is titled Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night and is coming to the Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and PC. Nintendo platforms have been ruled out at present but at least Igarashi has given a reason why it’s skipping the Wii U. Here’s his explanation.

Our budget left us with two options: Build the biggest, most beautiful game we can, or make sure it runs everywhere from the start. As things stand today, we can’t afford to create the two separate versions of this game that would be necessary to make it run on every console. That said, we’ve heard legends about a remarkable treasure hidden in the castle basement…

Thanks, MasterPikachu6

Advertisements

137 comments

    1. It does… They could always put Wii U and 3DS Development as a goal and they would get even more support and the budget they need… Whatever… Let’s see if our luck changes with NX console… I want more good 3rd party games :(

      Like

      1. I want more good third party games too. I have all current consoles and the only one that doesn’t sit idle for long periods of time is the Wii U. There’s just not enough QUALITY games coming out on any of the consoles….

        Like

      2. “They could always put Wii U and 3DS Development as a goal and they would get even more support and the budget they need”

        Total speculation. Given the install base for all consoles and the lack of support and interest in the Wii U, it makes more sense to develop for consoles that will provide the best return and make it feasible to develop the game as best as it can be.

        Like

  1. Ok, so you can focus on 3 platforms, but not add a fourth one? What about stretch goals and the sort? I thought that’s what builds their budget?

    Like

    1. So what I got from this was that since they would have to lower the graphics a very tiny bit to run it on the Wii U they decided to just not make it for the Wii U.

      Liked by 6 people

      1. Same here dude, even if that’s the case, cause from the screenshots it seems to be a regular old 2d side scroller, correct me if I’m wrong.

        Like

      2. It is suppose to be a regular 2.5d sidescroller, but the pic is just concept art, it has no direct relation to the final product according to the kickstarter page.

        Like

      3. Nope not graphics, it’s architecture! Developing on Wii U is different than the other two twin consoles. It’s really not about the graphical fidelity. However, that’s in no way buying into this excuse for the simple fact that as mentioned in other comments, make additional stretch goals.

        Liked by 3 people

      4. Yooka-Laylee was going to be on Wii U, PS4 and XBox One for a smaller budget… it looks better than this game… again, no excuse.

        Trine: Enchanted Edition and Trine 2, both on Wii U and PS4, both have differen’t architecture yet the devs (Who are in a very small team) managed to develop for both systems, plus the PC.

        Stop damage controlling

        Liked by 2 people

      5. Every developer has their own way of handling development of the game and has reasons for why they choose which consoles to put the game on. Just because Trine was on Wii U doesn’t mean that every team can do that or is able to allocate their resources to it.

        Stop generalizing.

        Like

      6. Did you even read what was said?
        “Build the biggest, most beautiful game we can, or make sure it runs everywhere from the start.”
        Nobody even mentioned graphics, let alone that it would a “very tiny bit” of a change. Not to forget that “most beautiful” doesn’t necessarily mean best graphics, a game can be beautiful thanks to other factors as well.
        Also, *biggest* game they can build – porting games between XB1 and PS4 is just easier and less demanding, and they would need to spend extra budget to port the game to the WiiU, and instead of using that extra budget on porting the game to the WiiU, they’re using it to improve the game on the platforms it’s most likely going to sell better on anyway. Maybe Nintendo should have tried giving the WiiU a similar architecture like the ones the PS4 and XB1 have; like that, they wouldn’t have given developers reason *not* to develop for their console.

        Like

      7. I really, really hope so. I was looking forward to another Castlevania and am still awaiting it’s return to Nintendo platforms. I’m a strong advocate of Simon Belmont for smash, but this coming straight from Koji Igarashi is a huge disappointment and deters me from supporting something so undeserving. I remember trying my hardest to get the Special Edition of Portrait of Ruin back on the DS, which I finally did, and reading articles of Igarashi in Nintendo Power. Did Nintendo fans not support Castlevania enough? How could we when all we got in recent memory was Mirror of Fate? I honestly don’t see how a Castlevania game could not come to the Wii U. I understand the architecture is different, and honestly, I couldn’t care for Nintendo to have done that differently seeing as how there used to be support for it regardless. Even so, looking at the goals they have on Kickstarter, I don’t see the Wii U becoming a stretch goal. And Igarashi’s video talks about his legacy but he won’t bring this to Nintendo where his legacy is clear? He talks about this style of genre being lost in today’s gamers, but it his Nintendo fans that love his Gothic-horror style and can’t wait to play it again. If he would bring it to Nintendo I would gladly pitch in. What happened to Igarashi? Why is he on Kickstarter and why has he not been involved for so long?

        Like

      8. As I’ve said in my previous comment, graphics aren’t the only thing that can make a game “beautiful”. Yes, he might be talking about graphics, but he might very well be talking about other things that can contribute to the game turning out beautiful. He didn’t mention anything about hardware limitations either, so nobody said that the game couldn’t be as big as it’s going to be on the PS4/XB1. It’s about the developers wanting to make the game as big as they can.
        So I personally believe that he was more like implying that, instead of investing the time and money he would need to develop a WiiU version, he’d rather invest that same time and money into making the game bigger and better on the mentioned platforms, because, as already said, the PS4 and XB1 are similar enough to each other that one version is basically going work on both without having to waste too much time optimizing it for each platform. Meaning, no extra time + money will be needed to make the game work out perfectly on the 2 (or 3, if you count in PC) platforms, whereas he would indeed need extra time + money to have it work out equally well on the WiiU also.

        And honestly, I believe that calling developers “lazy” for not bringing a game to one’s console of choice is a lazy excuse, actually. People seem to refuse to grasp the idea of game development being business, and that the developers, naturally, want to make profit. The other two platforms are simply more likely to bring in bigger profits than the WiiU, because of their larger install bases alone. Developers are not going to invest time + money into something they don’t believe has a high enough chance to pay off in the end, as simple as that. Believe it or not, developers don’t make games just for the fun of it, they actually want their hard work to be worth it.

        Like

      9. “There’s an entire legion of fans who would GLADLY get this for Wii U.”

        Based on the sales of the console, of third party games (and hell, even 2ND PARTY games, the few that there are), and the overall direction that consumers have been moving in (as in, away from Nintendo consoles….), I seriously doubt it. Maybe 10 years ago Nintendo could have possibly capitalized on those fans. But now? Hell no.

        Liked by 1 person

      10. lol it’s not about the graphics, it’s about tailoring the game to use the gamepad and that development is different for the Wii U. You think it’s difficult to LOWER the graphical quality of a game to port it over? Please.

        Like

  2. What relevancy does this treasure have to the Nintendo systems? Does that mean they’re making a whole other game where you climb down rather than up? Or do you unlock a Nintendo homage in-game somehow

    Like

  3. Ah yes, my very Favorite type of articles. : ).

    Play Continuum! Meet people from all over the World and…KILL THEM!

    FREE, & addicting. also hell fun. been playing since 1997.

    PEACE.

    SHEEPLE

    Like

    1. People like me, who are also able to enjoy a non-Nintendo game, burn with them… So yes, please make NX x86 Nintendo :(

      Like

      1. I play non Nintendo games. x86 isn’t good for gaming so say no Nintendo. Tell these third parties where to go. You can join them when the inevitable crash happens.

        Like

  4. What’s with the ending part but if he doesn’t want to put it on the Wii U even thought I have seen the game an I don’t see how it couldn’t run on the Wii U but if that’s how he want to do ok it will be other games

    Like

      1. I don’t know… Maybe because one who complains about how a project on kickstarter should make money but does not participate in helping the project make money seems silly?

        Besides, by actually pledging your money towards the project, it shows you actually give a crap that it is even being created in the first place. If you care enough to complain, then I assume that means you intended on buying it in the first place, if the game were to come to your choice of platform, but the game is still in its concept stage. So, if you care enough about the game to buy it and be this outraged by the news, then you would have pledged money towards the project already instead of just complaining.

        If someone complains enough without showing that they care enough to do something about it, then they are only complaining for the sake of complaining.

        Like

  5. “Our budget left us with two options, Build the biggest, most beautiful game we can, or make sure it runs everywhere from the start.” Isn’t that what fucking stretch goals are for?! Hell even Yooka-laylee and Mighty no.9 both had Wii U for stretch goals

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Actually Yooka had stretch goals for all console release on the same day of PC. But playtonic games did say Nintendo was like their favorite company.

      Like

    2. Yeah, even Rayman Legends looks better than this game and it was able to be ported on PC, PS Vita, PS4, PS3, Xbox 360, Xbox One and Wii U… These guys are just looking for an excuse not to develop for the Wii U.

      Fucking Trine looks better than this shit.

      Like

      1. It’s all about money. If they thought they could make the most money on the Wii U, they would have developed it for the Wii U. A developer would honestly have to be stupid to develop a game for the Wii U instead of the Ps4. There is more money to be made on the ps4… period.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. It depends on how ambitious & greedy they are, & how patient they are. If they managed their resources & scaled back on the fluff, focused on gameplay & chose an æsthetic that was less dependent on graphics, they could still create a quality game & generate a profit. Their efforts might even gain momentum & allow for a sequel, w/ a better budget & bigger than the original, maybe even affording ports to platforms that might’ve missed the original. Whatever happened to timed-exclusives?

        Then again, the current climate is out of balance, & gaming is becoming more & more institutionalized, even in the way some indies act. It’s more about profits & power, not the player or a console’s strengths, more about appealing to the lowest common denominator & the platform they gather around. There’s x86 in what should be dedicated, gaming consoles, for fuck’s sake! Red flag! Red flag! Well, 3rd parties got what they wanted, yet they still bite off more than they can chew, but @ least the masses will eat it up.

        Hel, 3rd parties used to have a buncha projects running @ once in several genres & on several platforms. When 1 IP seemed to align w/ the different flavors, it became a multiplat (both to generate more profits & to support more than 1 flavor, but it all fell in place & was mutually beneficial). I know it’s a bit different w/ indies, but the allure of power & the über profits necessary to maintain that power claim more devs. More multiplats to sustain what should be profitible to begin w/, & could eventually release elsewhere & w/ more content for the wait. But no, it’s gotta be now & everywhere except the only 8th gen platform that’s actually optimized for gaming. Worse yet, a console where 2D Platformers are more than welcome. But again, the industry started building an upside-down pyramid in the 7th dynasty; & by golly, their gonna try to finish it, 2 ton block by 2 ton block. No…no: 30 TON BLOCKS, BITCHES!

        I guess everyone, including those in charge, forgot about Circle of the Moon, Harmony of Dissonance, Aria of Sorrow, Dawn of Sorrow, Portrait of Ruin, & Order of Ecclesia. Oh, & Nintendo’s handhelds & success. Not to mention all the other Castlevania games on NES, Super NES, & N64 (wait, forget the N64 ones).

        Like

  6. You know, I can remember a time when it was rare for a game to be released across all platforms, and that each individual platform brought a unique experience. If we’re all looking to get the same exact games on each and every console, then what is the point of having individual consoles?

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Huh? How would it matter to you if a game came out on another platform along the system of your choice? Is it going to influence the experience you’re going to have with that game in any way? You should be happy others who might not have the chance to own more than one console are getting the opportunity to play the game as well.
      Besides, each console still has enough own exclusives and features you can’t find on the other ones, so I personally really can’t see what’s supposed to be the problem, lmao.

      Like

  7. Here we go again excuses saying the ps4 xbone are to powerful and 3ds and wiiu are weak and can’t run it bull shit

    Like

  8. Nintendo is going to have to make their next console 3rd party friendly. If not, they may never get back on top of the gaming industry…

    I love the Wii U honestly, but without a doubt it was a very stubborn design choice.

    Like

    1. Well the fact that AMD announced that they are working on an x86 CPU for an “upcoming console” which pretty much means the Nintendo NX, you can bet their next system will be either on par with the current gen systems or even more powerful seeing how the x86 chip for the system was in the works along side the HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) RAM back in 2010.

      Like

    2. Nintendo are never going to be “back on top” regardless of power, architecture etc. the platform can be as third party friendly as you like but all you’re going to see are vanilla ports. Why? because the the industry has changed, the console manufacturers don’t control the industry anymore, the AAA third parties do and the reason why they prefer MS and Sony is because third party games are the reason why people buy those consoles.

      If Nintendo want full third party support they’re going to have to do three things

      1: Make a lot less 1st party titles
      2: Give third party developers/publishers a ton of money
      3: Produce overpowered hardware that’s very hard to make profit from.

      The reason why Nintendo don’t do any of these things is because it’s a fast track to bankruptcy.

      Liked by 1 person

    1. It would be hilarious if they actually make an article about that. Even more hilarious would be if it actually did get announced for Wii U.

      Like

  9. see..but he didn’t exactly give an adequate reason. He COULD make the game just as beautiful (especially as the xbone version) but it isn’t. What he is admitting to is he doesn’t feel the extra work and the increased exposure of his inadequacies as a developer…are worth it because it would take too much time. Too much to risk. Both in sales and being exposed as incapable. I just wish they’d be totally honest instead of claiming the hardware can’t handle it. If the Wii U can handle Bayonetta 2 and X it can handle whatever this guy thinks he is going to deliver.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It kind of is an adequate reason: Resources.

      You take away x from xy and you are left with y. If you have 15 and take away 6 then you have 9… The same rules apply here. Adding in additional platform will pose new challenges and issues to get the game running on said platform. That can eat into development. It can take away time from work on features of the main game, require more workers, and thus pushes the cost of development up… All for a port. It would be smarter to look after extra platforms that would benefit from a completed game (late port) than to work with it during development as they can recoup some or all costs of development and then add additional platforms to increase the base audience. It’s a possibility that the game can come out for the Wii U at a later date.

      Xenoblade Chronicles X (is that why you meant by X?) doesn’t even look all that fantastic. It looks alright in terms of visuals, but there isn’t really anything beautiful about its. Gameplay-wise it looks good, but visually speaking that game looks like a PS3 game, which isn’t a bad thing but it’s still nowhere near PS4/XB1 or even close to PC level of visual fidelity.

      If you don’t do what they do, calling someone incapable at the task is a soulless insult since they are able to do things you cannot…. In the end it means you are the incapable one.

      Also, you answered your own post in your post: “What he is admitting to is he doesn’t feel the extra work […]…are worth it because it would take too much time. Too much to risk. ”

      The more time something spends in active development, the more money it will cost. When you’re on a strict plan, with a finite amount of resources and money, there is little room for negotiations.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Are you even trying to understand what he’s saying? He didn’t make a single remark about the WiiU not being able to handle the game, or its hardware capabilites at all.

        Like

      2. I keep hearing this uses Ureal 4 engine so it would have to recoded to fit Ureal 3 (or some other engine) or they would have to recode/scaled the Ureal 4 engine so it works with the Wii U. It seems like an awful lot to take on for an independent company to take on.

        Its too bad they didn’t use a more flexible engine, but bad decisions happen all the time. Maybe they will be able to recode it, if the game become successful.

        Like

      3. Shovel Knight had $311,000 to work with on their kickstarter budget. They were also developing for 3 platforms with a team size of FIVE. Considering the fact that they ran out of money well within development, doesn’t that make point that Igarashi and his team wouldn’t be able to sustain development on this game with 4 platforms?

        Here’s another example: The Yogcast went on to try and create a video game with a indie developer. They raised $567,000 for the title, which was to be released on Mac and PC. TWO platforms, and yet the game got cancelled due to money troubles, improper spending, etc. At the end of the day stuff like this can happen. There will ALWAYS be risks. “Risk-free” is an ignoramus’s term.

        Stretch goals mean very little. This is a game that hasn’t even begun development yet. All it is is concept art so far…. Don’t let your fandom blind you. Nintendo is the same as any other corporation out there. They don’t need defending. Afterall, didn’t Igarashi talk with numerous publishers for a bid on this kind of game? Wouldn’t Nintendo be included in those talks since Nintendo is known to “White Knight” some titles and bring them to life as second party games, just as they did with Bayonetta 2?

        The reason isn’t always about a platform’s capability to run a game…. The reason why a game will even be created or would even be put on such and such platform is MONEY.

        Like

      4. The money that went to Konami and not Iga, and the money that is not guaranteed to flow into this project given the lack of Wii U sales for both the console and third party games? Yeah, totally.

        Like

      5. Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate sold 600,000 copies (vgchartz). Comparatively, the top selling third party Wii U game sold 840,000 copies (vgchartz)… That is crap sales for how old those games are. They are years old now and still haven’t broken 1M units sold despite being launch titles! On the other hand, New Super Mario Bros. U received far more support from fans at launch despite being a copy and paste game with reused assets, music and lots of the things people shit on third parties for doing on the Wii U… Pretty hypocritical.

        Then what does that make Nintendo? If you cannot remember the name of the publisher or developer, that’s bad. Infact, that shows how little concern you have for the ones who made the game possible in the first place.

        Igarashi wasn’t the original producer. He came onto development well after the series was established.

        Can you see into the future and tell if Nintendo fans here would buy this game? Can you tell how many Wii U owners supported this kickstarter? You can say the same thing about pretty much every game that has had at least one sequel: “I grew up with games like Hotline Miami and Halo and Pikmin and Goat Simulator!”. It still doesn’t justify your argument to a selective group. It’s like saying just because you have such and such status you deserve something just because of this status, while totally ignoring the developers intentions of making a game. The video game industry is a business. If you cannot make money then your studio closes. If you develop games on a platform that does not make money, then you will not make money.

        Did you support third parties on the Wii U?

        Liked by 1 person

      6. “My support did not mean jack”

        And that is exactly it. Just because you or I support them doesn’t mean other people will. Is it useless to support them? No, as there are still a decent number of worthwhile third party titles to pick up on the Wii U, but when people do not care to support the developers you get the end result: Less resources and time allocated towards development on said platform, until it becomes a deficit on your profits. Then you cut support from that platform, which is essentially what happened to the Wii U.

        It is true that many third party games on Wii U were sub par, or were just flat out bad, but that doesn’t stand for ALL of them. There were a good number of titles that weren’t bad that STILL received the exact same treatment that the bad games got from Nintendo fans. Isn’t that contradictory to the idea of buying a good product?

        Many first party titles on Wii U were sub par too. Both on the tech side and/or the applications of gameplay. They have definitely improved this past year, but for just as long as the Wii U was being actively supported by third parties, Nintendo was just as inconsistent. Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze had a game breaking glitch that stopped players from progressing in-game, and it took several months before a patch was released to fix it; Pikmin had frame rate drops with random gameplay glitches and was 30fps… And then there’s New Super Mario Bros. U (again) with reusing assets, music and some level similarity between it and New Super Mario Bros. Wii…. There are more examples of their hiccups, but I think you get the point I’m trying to drive home.

        Nintendo is improving on some of these things, and the above doesn’t stand for all of their first party games but it’s unfair to blame just the third parties. That very same thing applies to third party games. Besides, by your account, you are showing that you held a bias against third parties and subjected it onto Igarashi not bringing this game to the Wii U.

        Like

      7. Again, development is different for every game and team. There are always differing variables and reasons why a game isn’t coming to a certain console. Simply because one team tries to put out a game on more consoles (or SAYS they can – that doesn’t mean they’ll meet that promise, as if we’ve never seen kickstarter games either spectacularly fail after meeting their funding, or have to cut back on features because they ran out of money….) doesn’t mean another team is able to do the same thing. It’s all about prioritizing money, resources, and time.

        Like

      8. 1) A system that has 9.5M units sold in 2.5 years
        2) A system where third party games are not known to sell large numbers of units
        3) A parent company that is known to not advertise games besides games they own
        4) A fan base that hyped Bayonetta 2 up from hell and despite its review scores and fan over hype it still didn’t crack 1M units…. And doesn’t look like it will anytime soon.
        5) A developer that wants to make money and needs to manage it accordingly cannot take on more than they can chew or what would chew through the game’s development fund and resources (people)

        I’d say that’s enough variables to understand why it’s not coming initially.

        Like

      9. Xbone released a YEAR LATER and it’s ahead of the Wii U. That excuse just fell flat on its face. Sorry. Also, this is another thing I really don’t understand people keep doing. Why do you keep comparing Bayo 2’s sales to the last one? That doesn’t instantly make it a success. Focus on its own sales if you’re gonna try and use that as an argument. Seriously, why do you try so hard to make it always seem like it’s not Nintendo’s fault? Like people have said before, they had their chance to convince developers to make games on the Wii U, but they failed. Just take a look at this quote from Bethesda:
        “The time for convincing publishers and developers to support Wii U has long passed,” Hines said.

        “The box is out. You have to do what Sony and Microsoft have been doing with us for a long time. It’s not that every time we met with them we got all the answers that we wanted, but they involved us very early on, talking to folks like Bethesda and Gearbox, saying, ‘Here’s what we’re doing, here’s what we’re planning, here’s how we think it’s going to work,’ to hear what we thought, from our tech guys, and from an experience standpoint.”
        He added: “You have to spend an unbelievable amount of time upfront doing that. If you’re going to sort of decide ‘Well, we’re going to make a box and this is how it’s going to work, and you should make games for it,’ – *Well, no! No is my answer!

        “I’m going to focus on other ones that better support what it is we’re trying to do. You’ve got to spend more time trying to reach out to those folks before you even make the box when you’re still designing it and thinking about how it’s going to work.”

        Like

      10. “That year head start was not a head start at all” Uhh, NO. It clearly was. And Bethesda was completely right with that quote too. They should’ve reached out to developers and started making plans long before the Wii U launched. Not just “Here is our new system! Now start making games for it!” I’d say no too. That was terrible and I wouldn’t want to work with Nintendo either if that’s the way they’d treat my company. Nintendo made a huge mistake because when they made the Wii U, they were not thinking about what third party developers would’ve liked. They only thought about themselves. Which was stupid on Nintendo’s part. You can’t try and place the blame on developers for not making Wii U games because Nintendo isn’t doing anything to convince them to. And the Nintendo fans always place the blame on the devs when they don’t even buy the games themselves. And no, don’t give me the “it was gimped, it was delayed it was a port, excuse. Because I GUARANTEE that if a huge AAA game like CoD came to Wii U day one with all of the support as the other versions, (DLC, patches and all) it would still fail hard. Nintendo gamers (as much as they like to lie about it) obviously have no interest in these types of games. Now if I’m a developer, why should I release my game on the Wii U? So you can pass it in favor of Splatoon instead? No thanks.

        Like

      11. “Because I GUARANTEE that if a huge AAA game like CoD came to Wii U day one with all of the support as the other versions, (DLC, patches and all) it would still fail hard. Nintendo gamers…obviously have no interest in these types of games.”

        & that’s the crux of this thread & why IGA’s decision is so frustrating & confusing: Nintendo gamers obviously have more interest in Platformers, 2D or 3D; games w/ puzzles, focused gameplay, formulaic approaches, & abstract aesthetics rather than photorealism, unfocused gameplay, & FPSes & Open Worlds. Games from the pre-AAA paradigm & pre-Western takeover fit so much better on a Nintendo platform.

        A generalization, perhaps, but most 3rd parties have certainly alienated me. I’m not exactly into FPSes (which are all the rage now), never did care for the GoldenEye game (loved the movie), nor did I care for Turok or Perfect Dark. But both Red Steel & RS 2 had my attention, & my money. I even enjoyed The Conduit (except for its difficulty spikes), & Destiny (except for the length & glut of cutscenes). I know the following are 3rd Person Shooters or hybrids, but Buck Bumble, Dead to Rights, Killer7, Resident Evil 4, RE: Revelaitons [sic] (3DS), & Metroid Prime got my money, & Devil’s 3rd has my attention, & will likely get my money, too. But you’re right: FPSes like CoD &, for that matter, Open Worlds like Assassin’s Creed are unappealing to me. 3rd parties’ recent efforts just seem to lack that…I dunno right now, je ne sais quoi? that I look for on ANY platform. 3rd parties dropped gaming fundamentals, largely stopped catering to the gaming paradigm that was so prevelant in 6th gen, but was subsequently upheld mostly by Wii (& 3rd parties), & is upheld on Wii U (but from 1st/2nd parties & indies).

        Was the industry not profitable during 6th gen? GCN was 3rd place, yet Nintendo managed to profit on hardware much sooner than the sales leader. & 3rd parties seemed more than capable of filling PS2’s library w/ multiple franchises & genres, sometimes from a single publisher. & not every game needs to reach such high sales if done conservatively. 6th gen seemed diverse enough, & each console, even GCN, received support. Even N64 in 5th gen seemed to have better support than Wii U, & it was far behind the original PlayStation’s sales; GCN was tailing Xbox sales but both received more support than Wii U. Regardless, AAAs are even riskier. Hard to believe that w/ all the technology we have now, publishers are struggling & it’s become mandatory to multiplat, work almost exclusively w/ x86, rush their games to market, use photorealism, DLC, microtransactions, cutscene fillers, etc just to profit. Games were always products, of course, but now that’s pretty much all the publishers & shareholders see them as. Yet, before all the middleware, pre-built engines, & use of x86, 3rd parties were able to profit & cater to upwards of 4 different & major platforms (Nintendo [home-consoles & handhelds], SEGA, & Sony), & 3rd parties’ catalogs & aesthetics were far more diverse & active than they are now. Games were actually seen as unique & something to be proud of. & greed is more & more condoned by the masses in the name of ‘business’; there seems no sacred ground anymore as time moves forward, while industries move backwards. “Exploit the consumer & rape the land, as long as it makes us profit, that’s just good business.” An exaggeration, but closer to reality.

        @ least Ubisoft released Rayman Legends, but they fell into the AAA trappings of having to multiplat & generate huge profits instead of simply healthy profits. So, they made a game that fits well w/ the Nintendo subculture, something to appease to the 2D Mario & 2D Donkey Kong crowds, plus its abstract aesthetics, history w/ Nintendo platforms, & use of the Gamepad. Yet Ubisoft yanks its exclusivity before release, & puts the completed game on hold during a Wii U game drought w/ in its launch window. Thus, Ubisoft somehow deserves support in the name of business. Because they can tell the future & shareholders know best.

        Where’s the next 3D Rayman, or Prince of Persia (3D &/or 2D)? Mario 3D World was a success on Wii U, right? In the past, 3rd parties would usually capitalize on that. How much would it cost to make another 3D Rayman, especially w/ all the remakes & copy-&-paste sequels generating quick profits for Ubisoft? Cash-ins like that usually helped fund cult games & exclusives. Or are AAAs inhaling the lion’s share of profits & employees? The FPSes & Open Worlds their main focus (blinding them to other markets that, while smaller, can still be lucrative if they’d stop biting off more than they can chew? & the multiplats (most of which clearly favor the PC/Sony/MS crowds) are now the only way to sustain their business? Sounds rotten to me, & that rot has spread to console-gaming.

        & then there are indies, & more conservative budgets & strategies. Genres they seem keen on upholding (2D Platformers, & 3D Plaformers reminicient of the N64 era), which typically suit any console that still adheres to the previous path, the fundamentals that were so prevalent in 6th gen. Indies, who would likely not be so power-hungry (which bloats budgets), although Shi’nen is hellbent on pushing Wii U to its limits (but has any game yet used all of Wii U’s cores?) A game like Bloodstained & a small team led by IGA, for example, would be right @ home on Wii U, & a rational, modest approach could easily produce a healthy profit. But hey, I thought Kickstarter would’ve made things even easier if the goal was healthy profit. Focus on the core audience, generate a profit, then work to include more platforms, maybe use the power of Kickstarter again. I know if Wii U was blatantly put forward, I’d contribute to that cause.

        But I guess not every indy can escape the allure of multiplatting from the get-go, to rake in hige profits. Nor can they escape the prevalence of x86, noatter how cheap, old, & ill-suited it is for gaming. Not everyone is immune to getting their hands stained w/ blood.

        Like

      12. *A game like Bloodstained & a small team led by IGA, for example, would be right @ home on Wii U, & a rational, modest approach could easily produce a healthy profit, ALL WHILE STRENGHTENING THE CORE AUDIENCE AND WII U’S LIBRARY.

        & it’s not just that Castlevania has history on Nintendo platforms (from NES to N64, on GBC & even Wii [ReBirth]), but specifically, it’s the ‘metroidvania’ subgenre which gained such a footing w/ Nintendo fans. See, not just handheld fans, but a distinct subculture of gamers who still value a brand & what its platforms represent.

        Sure, the 1st ‘metroidvania’, Symphony of the Night, started on PlayStation, despite Sony’s efforts to distance themselves from 2D gaming (& that didn’t stop Capcom w/ Mega Man X). I’m still pissed @ Konami for depriving Nintendo of SotN, but it looks like they’ll soon be focusing more on gambling & health spas. They not only dropped support of Nintendo, but of the fundamentals, & got too wrapped up in AAA.

        Anyway, the next ‘metroidvania’, Circle of the Moon (still my favorite), was on Nintendo’s GBA. & GBA hosted 2 more, then Nintendo’s DS hosted 3; a total of 6 ‘metroidvanias’, in sucession, on Nintendo platforms. Plus, all the more traditional Castlevanias on NES, Super NES, N64 (2 3D entries), Game Boy Color, Wii Shop Channel [ReBirth], & even 3DS hosted the subpar Mirror of Fate (medicore regardless of franchise legacy). & there’s more: both eShops (3DS & Wii U) offer past Castlevania games, as well as past entries in its subgenre, ‘metroidvania’. But when a new incarnation (but supposedly following the same formula) is announced, it immediately ignores those platforms for the cheaper route & the big, short-term profit POTENTIAL. Hmm, appease the core-audience on a popular handheld that carried nearly all the previous ‘metroidvanias’ but has yet to get a new entry?
        Or bring it to a platform that has a userbase almost entirely of console-gamers & 1s old enough to remeber, fondly so, of the Castlevania legacy? A comparatively smallER userbase, but w/ the highest consentration of followers…
        Aha! Let’s forget all that & multiplat on x86 AND use Kickstarter to front the costs. Let’s not even gauge interest from our core audience to see of we can make a healthy profit. No. Kusokuraenn, Keiji Inafune. Eat shit, WayForward. Eat shite, Playtonic. Essen scheiße, Shin’en. We’re completely dropping Nintendo platforms from the get-go & going by the sheer #s of POTENTIAL buyers on every other platform, no matter what their tastes are. Kutabare, POTENTIAL cult followers; we don’t even wanna know how that would’ve turned out. Bur maybe, MAYBE we’ll work our way “down” to the tried-&-true fanbase. Maybe we relegated you to the basement, & maybe we left you out entirely; either way, you get the bird as a consolation prize. Have 2 birds. Consoles are dead, bitches!

        Hel, the fan monicker, ‘metroidvania’, shows where the audience is, AND that fans of proper Metroid games have an alternative (personally, Metroid is my alternative to ‘metroidvanai’). If Nintendo games are so great, then capitalize on their success. Used to be that way.

        W/ the last 6 ‘metroidvanias’ being on Nintendo handhelds, IGA should be focusing on 3DS & go from there. Or, some of those ‘metroidvanias, are on Wii U’s VC, plus Wii U has a 2nd screen, which worked so well w/ those 6 ‘metroidvanias’. If IGA was in it for the long-term, & serious about catering to his fans, then budget PC & full-PC platforms would be 2ndary objectives, maybe a cash bonus. But yeah, IGA’s move & his explanation for using ‘Igavania’ instead of ‘metroidvania’ is a slap in the face. Again, it’s his explanation, which seems to distance himself further from Nintendo & the core fanbase of ‘metroidvania’. Everyone wants to be a Jackson Pollock nowadays, throwing their paint on all bit the best canvases. Guess that’s why IGA has to be such a Square…soft when it comes to a Nintendo platform. But @ least Squaresoft came back to Nintendo, & for the Gamecube, no less, providing the userbase w/ some form of Final Fantasy. & they didn’t even rely on a kickstarter. & hey, Squaresoft also supported GBA, & as Square-Enix, they supported DS, & continue to support 3DS. But momentum has to be fed to sustain it. & w/ Square-Enix, they abandoned Nintendo, but also changed what FF is after IX. Square-Enix returned to Nintendo, but offered something new while retaining the spirit of FF they were hellbent on killing after IX. & of course, the DS & 3DS saw a new franchise but in a nearly identical mold as classic FF. IGA, however, is prolly retaining much of the ‘meteoidvania’ formula, but ignoring 3DS, Nintendo, & ‘metroidvania’ fans, putting a stake into the heart of the pre-Kickstarter backers & bleeding the momentum that was building since Order of Ecclesia. Now that Bloodstained’s platforms have been announced, IGA’s actions are loud & clear: Bloodstained is not for Castlevania fans or ‘metroidvania’ fans of yore.

        Well, I’m certainly not spending money on a Kickstarter that might only benefit the other Sony/MS/PC subculture. I have, however, supported GBA’s Circle of the Moon, Harmony of Dissonance, & Aria of Sorrow; & supported DS’s Dawn of Sorrow, Portrait of Ruin, & Order of Ecclesia; sorry, I expect a new entry & refuse to double-dip. I also refuse to support other platforms that offer me so little of what I want.

        Does the gaming industry really have to use Michael Bay movies as a basis for business? Is butchering The Transformers & Teenage Mutant Ninja turtles okay as long as someone other than a fan benefitted?
        Does the gaming industry really have to follow Gene Simmons’ greedy tactics & KISS’ venture into disco to profit?
        Why do most gamers want Sony & 3rd parties, even indies to aspire to the likes of Donald Trump, especially Nintendo. Just good business, aye? Prolly better Nintendo followed Kurt Cobain, reach Nirvana that way. Sorry to be so unfiltered but hey, man, that’d be a nice shot.

        Like

      13. “Now if I’m a developer, why should I release my game on the Wii U? So you can pass it in favor of Splatoon instead?”

        Depends upon your genre & how you present your game to me. Also, how quickly & large do you want your payoff? What do your shareholders say?

        If you want my business, then wow me, or @ least make a quality “rehash”. & as someone who started gaming before 7th gen, & who happens to dislike their what AAA games represent, you could start by looking @ what works on my preferred console, which includes genres, aesthetics, & some level of innovation or a certain hook not found in Western reality or the cirrent climate except on Wii U, 3DS, in some cases Vita, in what indies create. Look to the East & the 6th gen for inspiration; you might find what I’m looking for, & possibly what many Nintendo, SEGA, & pre-7th gen Sony fans seek. Look to PS2 & Dreamcast.

        But Splatoon is different, & not just as a shooter or a Nintendo product. Splatoon is also different than what’s out on PS4 & X1 because they current industry has largely abandoned its past. In that way, Splatoon is different because it’s the same…as games used to be made, particularly from Nintendo, SEGA, & 3rd party games catering to their respective strengths.

        But, since devs no longer want to support Nintendo’s style (& SEGA’s for that matter), or the fundamentals of gaming altogether, then maybe 3rd parties no longer or’ve never had any business providing those subcultures games. Trying to have an all-in-1 platform clearly fails as it kills diversity, as do the budgets of AAAs. 3 platforms share a vast amount of multiplats, yet they’re mostly photorealistic & are either FPS & Open World, w/ the occasional Sports SIMs & real-time RPGs. I’m not saying those games should never come to a Nintendo platform, but I don’t see how those types of games would all fit there. Now, multiplats of the past had a place on Nintendo platforms, but they generally followed several conventions particular of the entire eras before 7th gen.

        W/ Wii, 3rd parties found a way to keep in line w/ what 6th gen laid before. W/ Wii U, however, most 3rd parties tried forcing Nintendo into following what has largely become in a homoganized landscape (PS360/PS4/X1/PC). 3rd parties are also afraid of evolutionary changes in controllers, @ least compared to the boon seen in DS. Or 3rd parries feel they cannot escape the AAA quagmire they themselves helped create. Granted, Nintendo hurt Wii U, too; partly because they greatly overestimated 3rd parties, as well as the Wii brand & DS’ boon. Nintendo also apparently committed the crime of putting games & a console 1st: PowerPC for optimized software, a modest leap to lessen dev costs, etc. But Nintendo largely abandoned Wii in its later years, & apparently 3rd parties no longer felt the need to make a lot of genres, instead going all in w/ AAA & a few genres. It is noce to see Ubisoft is @ least trying to put some of their profits into new IP, but I dunno if they’ll be enough or even return to the rails.

        & Sony’s deviation? They had financial troubles in their other business sectors, & PS3’s launch was nightmarish. So, Sony finally took a huge hit by dropping PS3’s absurd price, & fell in line w/ 360’s approach. Of course, Sony still tried to capitalize on Nintendo’s Wiimote, but they hindered that evolution by relying on PS2’s EyeToy. Bit Sony AND MS always heavily relied on 3rd parties, especially Western 3rd parties. So, Sony further bowed to their whims & cut corners on PS4 by using x86 & off-the-shelf parts. But careful what you wish for: Sony implemented a huge increase in power, but w/ little return in output & 3rd parties now have to spend more money catering to that power, which makes profitting harder & devving more demanding. Either way, Sony lost its brand relevance by aligning their identity w/ the Xbox brand. & since 3rd parties no longer want to deal w/ so many systems & subcultures, & have recently started devving on PC 1st, they’ve looked to similar architecture, @ the expense of optimized, dedicated experiences. & 3rd parties no longer want so many genres & aesthetics, so their games, or rather products, are streamlined & copy Hollywood conventions rather than gaming conventions. & screw evolving the controller, which would further disrupt their new assembly line.

        But hey, profits are all that matter; just look @ how successful the Irish potato farmers were for sticking to 1 kind of potato. That’s why diversity is so unhealthy, & any market who craves it should either change or die (Ah, Robotech…on *gasp* GameCube!).

        “No thanks.” But did you even try? Have you strayed so far from the past, you forgot how to make a fun-but-conservative game? Even though the tech makes it easier, & indies can do it, & somehow better w/ even less resources? Again, if you look @ what works for a particular platform, & invest what you can afford to lose (after all, risk is part of any healthy business), then you might actually be successful on Wii U, or @ least plant the seeds of success, if your business is strong enough for the future.

        However, if you base a decision on the success of, say, ZombiU, an M-rated Wii U launch game, loosely based on a game from 1986, 1 that needed a bit more polish, & was released on a console known for quality? But because that particulat experiment struggled & merely profitted, you then decide to yank exclusivity on an upcoming, promised exclusive that better fits the Wii U userbase & delay it during a drought? Well, it’s hard to tell what would’ve happened, especially since Wii U was so young @ the time, & both ZombiU & Rayman Legends had they’re own situations (another element 3rd parties want to eliminate, IF they even acknowledge that distinction). But, you prolly doomed yourself, AND helped sew the seeds of failure for the console. & you’re likely going overbudget if you have to constantly pester platform-manufacturers for money. Again, look to the past, bit this time to see how to make a game @ or under budget. Maybe invest in middleware &/or a pre-built engine that works on every platform (for future porting).

        I wonder, though, if profits are so important, why not leave the gaming industry for something w/ a better profits to work ratio? Say, gambling or health spas? Or stay in the gaming industry, but invest in the biggest platform of them all: mobile. All that time, effort, money, & people spent on AAA to make products on PC, PS4, & X, & such an endeavor to not only place on the charts, but see a return in your investments (reaching the charts isn’t enough anymore). If leaving consoles behind was as easy as dropping Wii U (& likely never touching 3DS), maybe leaving PCs behind would be easy, too. Phones & tablets, Apple & Android, or Hel, just pick 1 & watch the profits roll in. Everyone’s got 1, the majority of budget-PC owners are young, they don’t care about quality hardware or software… Graphics? Phones are catching up. Dedicated devices are no longer necessary, & dedication to most platforms is uneccesary since they’re largely the same. I’m sure going full-touchscreen is doable; or there are controllers compatible w/ phones now.

        Or, make a game like Monster Hunter & release it on platforms w/ userbases that not only appreciate it, but a platform where resources aren’t so demanding.

        Or whatever.

        Like

      14. It’s weird how I couldn’t reply to your comments in the website but I could through email. this comment was a great read as are your other ones. I don’t know how you do it, but I’m glad you are doing it. I could use a good metroidvania right about now.

        Liked by 1 person

      15. Yeah, sometimes I’ve had to go the email route to reply, too. It is weird.

        Thanks for the kudos! It really does mean a lot.

        I guess if we wanna play ‘metroidvania’ now, all we can do is look to the past. Wouldn’t it be interesting, though, if those eShop titles saw a big enough sales spike that IGA noticed? I wonder what he’d do then. But, for me, I still have all my original copies & the platforms to play them on.

        Like

      16. I would be great! I posted the news about Konami to my friends and one immediately responded with Bloodstained. I had to shut him down since I have no idea if those basement doors that Igarashi mentioned will be Wii U versions. I never got Rebirth and Order of Ecclesia escaped me back then. I will look for those.

        Like

      17. 1) Xbox One released a whole year after the Wii U and also has more total sales than the Wii U does. It also had a slow start, but Microsoft pushed their product and supported it effectively. They dropped Kinect 2, lowered the price for multiple short periods of time and worked together with developers to improve their games so that they would run better (don’t mind if I reuse your point, HollowGrapeJ?).

        2) How is Rayman legends a last gen port? Development for the game started for the Wii U version… Or are you implying that the Wii U is a “last-gen” platform? Bayonetta 2 is a “last-gen” game actually, so I suppose you must be right about the correlation between “last-gen” not selling well, afterall, considering the extensive advertising efforts and fan hype, Bayonetta 2’s figures aren’t all that great sales-wise.

        3) So, Need For Speed Most Wanted U, which is regarded as the best version out of all console versions and included the first available DLC pack for free, wasn’t worth the advertising efforts? Rayman Legends which received high ratings and praise from many reviewers and critics, and even being one of this generation’s top rated games, wasn’t worth it either?

        4) Let’s see here…. You are comparing video game sales of one console to two consoles that were available, and released, years before? Furthermore, Bayonetta was a fresh, new, IP at the time which did not have big of a cult following as it now does. The increase in its sales are acknowledged, as it’s pretty obvious that it should have sold more after the first game getting so much praise, and the second game also getting so much praise as well, but that’s not the problem I presented. The problem is why didn’t Bayonetta 2 sell more units? So much fan hype, and extensive advertising efforts on Nintendo’s part leads to those kinds of sales?

        5) Why did Nintendo push so much on showing off the pretty visuals the Wii U had when they revealed the console then? It’s because the aesthetic is important. I will make note here so you cannot throw this point at me: Both visuals and gameplay are equally important, with visuals varying with art styles and gameplay designs of today. There is, however, no gameplay present yet, so it’s impossible to judge whether or not this game would even benefit from the increase in visual fidelity offered by the other platforms.

        You’re ignoring something so important it’s funny. What was the NES back in the day? It was that one platform that would receive the best support as it had a majority market share and a high install base. By all means, Castlevania being released on the NES did exactly what Iragashi plans on doing with this game: Appealing to the broadest audience available.

        What about game development is a quick buck? As far as I’m aware of, developing a game can take several months of daily 10+ hour days or a year or two of constant work…. Have you done any coding before?

        Like

      18. “That year head start was not a head start at all. The games that third parties put out on the system and Nintendo’s negligence in releasing more first party that ensured that, so your excuse falls flat.”

        Nintendo had no means of releasing more games on the Wii U as they were too focused on the success of the 3DS. How does their point fall flat though? The Wii U basically had not many games offered on it because nobody, not even Nintendo, gave it proper attention. Still, it got games that were not old releases either, such as Sonic All-Star Racing, Assassin’s Creed 3, etc. For a launch, it had a lot of games, but by no means was it what hurt the console. The Wii U probably saw the biggest growth of its install base during that time. I believe the system sold almost 4M units that time? So that’s basically ~35-42% of the install base being developed right then.

        What hurt it was the heavy drought of games, which was both third parties and Nintendo’s fault, but mainly Nintendo’s fault for not securing games to be released on the system during that time.

        Regarding Bethesda and gearbox: The Wii U was a risky proposition, especially with the pre release problems many developers encountered, as noted in “The Secret Developers: Wii U – the inside story” by Eurogamer. Considering the game sales issues encountered in the later portion of the Wii’s life cycle, it’s quite apparent that neither developer was keen on working on the system without some proof of concept. Besides that, it was of their on choice to not develop for it. It still doesn’t mean that they cannot be a spectator to the events that pass by.

        Also, were’t you just stating how sub par third party games were on the Wii U?

        Lastly, Bayonetta sold 2M copies between the PS3/360. How is that 3/4ths? That’s more like 1/4th.

        Like

      19. Indeed. Most people (especially the developers who start these Kickstarters) vastly underestimate the amount of capital needed to get the game developed, and they bite off more than they can chew and the game is either cancelled or delayed a great deal.

        Like

  10. The industry has abandoned its game making icons. . . . Besides nintendo.

    Its sad. long live retro gaming and I dislike that term im a gamer i play video games it doesn’t matter if the game is from 1970 or 1997 or 2015 a fun game is a fun game.

    Nintendo valve and indies only matter to me any more

    Fuck capcom ubi ea Microsoft sony Activision epic sega Konami and lots more.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. There are other great developers out there. Bethseda, CD Project, Platinum, Rocksteady, From Software….. Just to name a few… Arkham Knight, Witcher 3, Elder scrolls 6, Bloodbourne, Dark Souls,…

      Nintendo is great, I love them. But you do not want to miss these games… Not if you love a good video game..

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Ooo, what is this? I need to see gameplay. Anyway, it’s a shame it’s not coming to the Wii U. Sorry, guys. :/

    Like

    1. Oh well, that’s what my Ps4 is for. I seriously believe every gamer should own a Wii U and a Ps4. That way you wont miss anything the entire console generation. I would say PC instead of Ps4, but dah hell with a mouse and keyboard…

      Like

  12. You can pretty much get every Castlevania game worth having via the Wii U on eShop and Shop channel anyway so this isn’t really a big miss.

    Like

  13. This is the first article about Bloodstained on the site far as I can tell.

    SO considering we’ve never even heard of it on here, how is this newsworthy? The previous excuse was that ‘it had been reported/rumored so we’re following up to close the issue’.

    Unless they appear with a Wii U stretch goal, this doesn’t belong here. And considering it’ll be at ~1 million+, it’s still not worthy.

    Like

  14. Why should I give a shit? If it is not coming, then why would I want to know, stop wasting space, mynintendonews, print stories about nintendo games, you might as well talk about Tom Brady being suspended.

    But that has nothing to do with nintendo, well neither does this news, so if this MY NINTENDO NEWS, THEN. Print stories about nintendo, why should I care if this game is not coming to the Wii u?

    Like

  15. ‘Saw Castlevania successor’ Good good. ‘Sees it’s not coming to Wii U’ Seeing alot of original backers cancelling this. Face it, a majority of IGA’s Castlevania games were on Nintendo platforms. The only ones that weren’t, and I’m not counting remakes, were Symphony of the Night(PS1), Lament of Innocence(PS2) & Curse of Darkness(PS2 & Xbox). Just another case of a developer being too lazy and forgetting the fans that made his games a success.

    Like

  16. guys there´s one thing we are skipping (sorry for my english, not my primary language), the kickstarter page has a goal chart with the shape of a castle (how am i going with my english?), and has TWO closed door at the bottom, then when asked about nintendo, he says: “That said, we’ve heard legends about a remarkable treasure hidden in the castle basement…”, what the developer is saying basically is that if the kickstarter surpasses about 1,000,000 or 1,200,000 maybe, then he´ll consider a wii u version, i only wanted to notice that.

    Like

      1. No. Do not give impression to Nintendo fans, that this game could come to platforms.
        Until it is out there in plain word, gamers should not shovel money to this project for an off chance.
        It could end up being orchestral or some other unnecessary shit.

        Liked by 1 person

  17. Traitorous son of a bitch, Iga, I hope karma bites you in the ass, it’s lovely how you’re forgetting who are the people that made your beloved sub-genre such a success, NINTENDO FANS, and NINTENDO FANS have been the ones asking for a 2D Metroidvania.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Fuck Nintendo fans, you mean Metroidvania fans.

      Nintendo killed off Metroid, so i think it’s safe to say those fans don’t exsist on their platforms anymore.

      Like

    2. Absolutely! Not the first part, but definitely the last part. Let’s hope the two doors leading to the basement are ports for the Wii U.

      Like

    3. Nintendo fans are sure doing a good job of supporting the Wii U and third party games and giving other third party developers a reason to make games for it.

      Oh wait.

      Like

      1. “Nintendo fans are sure doing a good job of supporting the Wii U and third party games and giving other third party developers a reason to make games for it.”

        & 3rd parties gave Wii U owners, more specifically the Nintendo fanbase, reason to buy their Wii U games? Never mind the higher pricing points & later release dates compared to the games’ other ports, but did they release:

        Their 3D platformers? Prince of Persia? 3D Rayman? Sphinx & the Cursed Mummy? Crash Bandicoot? Spyro? Do the Sonic games on Wii U really count? Tomb Raider (as if that franchise is still what it once was)?

        Their 2D platformers? Ubisoft was the only 3rd party to release 1, Rayman Legends, & look how that was handled (see poorly, & broken promise of exclusivity during a Wii U game drought w/ in the launch window).

        Their Arcade Racers? Ridge Racer? Cruis’n? Burnout?

        Their Survival Horror? Last I checked, RE: Revelations was a port of a 3DS game (likely the Nintendo fanbase already played), & not exactly a real Survival Horror game. Silent Hill? Alone in the Dark? Ah, @ least there was ZombiU, but look how Ubisoft handled that.

        Their turn-based JRPGs? True Final Fantasy? Skies of Arcadia?

        Their turn-based Strategy RPGs?

        Their interesting FPSes? Timesplitters? Red Steel 3? The Conduit 3?

        Their Railshooters? RE Chronicles? House of the Dead?

        Their Adventures?

        Their games like No More Heroes, Killer7, Tenchu, MadWorld, Super Monkey Ball, NiGHTS?

        Seems 3rd parties mostly treated Wii U like PS360 AND a 7th gen platform. Seems they expected the Nintendo fanbase to have the same tastes as the 3 other fanbases (PS/X/PC). But because they are so caught up in AAA & the Hollywood, Western style, they’ve largely given up, the only thing they really tried was creating another cookie-cutter platform.

        & yet, it’s indies that not only support Wii U but actually cater to the Nintendo fanbase. Bloodstained is perfect for a Nintendo platform, both in terms of Castlevania’s history w/ Nintendo (& the ‘metroidvania’s success on GBA & DS), & it’s genre. Profit is doable, & Kickstarter helps make that possible if starting @ Wii U, especially as a timed-exclusive. & how difficult is it to be conservative, on a 2.5D game w/ all the middleware & pre-built engines floating around? If small teams back then were to have access to that tech…& I think IGA worked in that era. That seems like a practical business plan while still catering to the core audience, & leaving room for the other platforms in the future. Start small w/ a strong foundation, then work up to something bigger.

        Liked by 1 person

  18. I’m a big fan of Igarashi and his work including Michiru Yamane and Ayami Kojima. It’s sad that this won’t be getting a Wii U release since they are using Unreal Engine 4. Unless they plan to put a stretch goal for them to use Unreal Engine 3 this won’t ever be coming to Wii U, PS3 or Xbox 360 since these 3 consoles don’t support UE4. Good thing I combo my Wii U to a solid gaming PC. Its weird why people recommend a PS4 + Wii U combo when they only complain about using a keyboard and mouse since you can use console controllers on a PC.

    Like

  19. Bloodstained? More like shitstained.

    Probably a bunch of black people working on this game since they’re so lazy.

    Like

  20. Hey look at all the ignorant people who don’t know a goddamn thing about game development acting like they’re experts and know how to make such a game!

    Brilliant, people. /facepalm to the highest degree.

    Like

  21. I came back here after looking at the Kickstarter and I’m definitely backing it. I know it’s already destroyed its goal by now but you get some really neat stuff from it. I’m honestly having a hard time deciding between $60 or $100. Cause with $60 you get the game and some exclusive content as well. You can also get a physical copy or if you decide to go digital, you get the digital soundtrack. But for $100, you choose between either physical or digital, get the exclusive content, (and a few other things like a keychain and soundtrack CD) and YOUR NAME on the credits. Lol. I want everyone to beat this game and look closely. And you will see “HollowGrapeJ”. Hahaha, well… Unless you have to use your real name. :/ I’m sure they’ll let me use that name but either way, I don’t think anyone will actually care if they see it in the credits anyways, so I may just go for $60 instead. XD

    Like

  22. On his own for the first time & one of his first acts is to abandon the Nintendo fanbase that supported his Castlevania franchise? Wow. Fuck you, too, Igarashi. I don’t care, either way, but I feel bad for the fans that do.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s