The WiiU port vs. Nintendo Switch version

Oh yes, I completely understand that, and as I said I have 4 copies, including one on wii u. I don't want to change my version, and in fact since I don't own any other system that could run it I would just request a refund and only get the 3.

Like I said before. If you're savvy enough as to Kickstart the spiritual successor of Castlevania Symphony of the Night which, lets face it, its relatively niche and you were still expecting to own only a WiiU for your gaming needs by 2017 when Bloodstained was supposed to come out it means one of two things:

1) You're most definitely a hardcore gamer.

2) You're a diehard Nintendo fan.

Or both.

What are the chances you, the Bloodstained backer who only owns a WiiU currently, will continue to exclusively use that console by 2018? You're hardcore. You will find a way to get yourself by then either a PS4, X1, PC/LINUX/MAC for sure.

On the other hand if this game switches to the, uh, Switch and you're a Nintendo diehard (because why wouldn't you be? Its 2016 and you still only game on a WiiU) you'll probably make the jump to the Big N's new console in the next year after the console comes out because, clearly, you're an enthusiast.

Bloodstained isn't appealing to the Call of Duty and FIFA crowd. And if you were willing to kickstart this game 2 years, now we know it'll be 3 years, before its eventual release means that I can trust you'll find a way to play the game you so much want in the next year and a half. You will not let yourself get to 2018 without owning some kind of device that lets you play current games in 2018.

Add to that the fact that by 2018 the PS4 and X1 will have gotten at least one more price cut and the tech needed to play Bloodstained in a gaming PC/Linux/Mac computer will be cheaper so we can't say we don't have options.

Notice how I didnt mention the Vita because I have a feeling that if they cancel the WiiU version making the port to Vita while also adapting the UE4 for just this one console in 2018 will probably make less sense now and could also get axed but we'll see.

Having said that of course Iga's team needs to give the WiiU backers the option to change their platform to any other and if, by any chance, you dont wan't any other then give you a refund. As long as Iga does this I'm confident he'll get through this probable cancellation with little to no drama.

I don't have any evidence to back this claim but I seriously doubt any substantial progress, if any, has been done on the WiiU and Vita versions at this point. The simple fact that they're clearly juggling the idea of canceling the WiiU version tells me they haven't really started working on it.

Remember they were going to port the game and engine to WiiU and Vita. The development is being done first for the UE4 platforms (PC, PS4, XB1) and the port was coming at later stages but since the game is still far from done you cant really start porting a game thats not ready. 

Of course this is all conjecture and educated guesses but I'm confident in my speculation. Like I said, if they didnt think dropping the WiiU made sense they wouldn't be thinking about it and thus I conclude the porting process might have not even started at this point.

Everyone has made really good points here. I have to think about how I'm going to vote... Here's my perspective as one of the outliers noted, and why I'm confused at this present moment:

The only "current-gen" console I own happens to be a Wii U, and I was a fairly late adopter (Late 2014). While not necessarily spectacular or legendary, the console has a very solid lineup, and the announcement of a quality Zelda (before it was announced as a dual Switch release) basically made it a must-have. Plus, I figured if they were still supporting it with a big Zelda, a Metroid entry might come at the end of its cycle to cap things off--after all, they made two original Metroid titles for the Wii (though, that sadly turned out to be a false assumption in terms of a Wii U entry. Moreover, there was talk about a Pikmin 4 and a Mario Galaxy 3-type game, but those are also no-gos now.)

Regardless, as it stands, I haven't yet touched Mario Kart 8 (or its DLC), Pikmin 3 (or its DLC), Shovel Knight (or its DLC), New Super Mario Bros Wii U, New Super Luigi U, Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze, Star Fox Zero (and Guard), Bayonetta 2, Captain Toad: Treasure Trackers, or the DLC for Super Smash Bros Wii U. While they might not be earth-shattering, that's a lot of solid gaming experiences there with a fair amount of depth in terms of content length. When you combine that with the brand-new and presumably huge Wii U experiences that will be Zelda: Breath of the Wild and Yooka-Laylee in 2017, that's more than enough content to carry me as a gamer into 2018 for Bloodstained. In fact, I doubt I will get through half of that by then. I'm a skilled player, but I only have so much free time, and I like to savor my gaming experiences, as there aren't tons of games that appeal to me these days. A certain mixture of gameplay and aesthetic is important to me; Nintendo, Capcom, and Konami have made up probably 70% of my lifetime of gaming, and no offense, but Nintendo's really the only one of those that's still putting out consistent content (even if it plays it a lot safer than I'd like with its catalog these days). So, in theory, it was actually comforting to know I was getting a Mega Man-type experience (Mighty No. 9), a Banjo-Kazooie-type experience (Yooka-Laylee), and a Castlevania-type experience (Bloodstained) on the back end of this Nintendo console, as it helped round it out closer to what would be an ideal lineup for me. (The idea of writing notes for Bloodstained on the Gamepad was also an appealing notion.)

And that's where we get to a broader point. Overall, I was underwhelmed by my experience with PS3 after PS2, and so I did not jump onto PS4. And deep into PS4's lineup, for better or worse, there still aren't as many games I want to play as there are on Wii U. I can't justify that purchase. Meanwhile, the Microsoft consoles as a whole have only ever had a handful of exclusive games that intrigue me, and they're not consistently backwards compatible, so they've never been a factor.

As best I can tell, by the time Bloodstained comes out, we're going to be near the end of the PS4 and XBoxOne cycles, which makes it dicey to adopt late if the next Bloodstained or the next outlier game that appeals to me comes to, say, PS5 or its Microsoft equivalent.

I haven't seen enough on the schedule to convince me I'll be jumping onto a PS4 or XboxOne; and given my position, it doesn't make sense to buy a Switch upon release, or even the first year, really. I'm still getting value out of Wii U, and after the early exit of the Wii U, I need to wait to see a more long-term lineup for Switch. In my current mindset, the earliest I might upgrade would be early 2019, I think.

This gets you into the curious mind of those of us who are confused about the Wii U vs. Switch argument. I backed Bloodstained in part because it would get a Wii U port. All of that said, given what Ben Judd said in the interview, for the greater good, I think the compromise solution might end up looking like this, theoretically speaking: In my case, I would perhaps upgrade to the Switch version of Bloodstained, and then just keep the game in its box, unopened and unplayed, until sometime in 2019. To say that's disappointing is sort of an understatement, but it would solve the problem, as I imagine I eventually will be forced to get a Switch.

However, I want to bring up two more sobering points:

1.) How does the Vita version make much more sense? It's not mainstream, and probably has a similar cult following as Wii U. The shelf space I've seen for the Vita in stores is even smaller than the Wii U, and often close to nonexistent. By 2018, I have to imagine it will be almost invisible.

2.) The new interview talks about sales beyond the backers. I never really considered all of the ramifications, and Olrox beat me to the punch in saying this to some extent, but I wonder if there can be much support beyond the backers. Castlevania is niche, and indie games in general have largely been niche. With as much money as this did in the Kickstarter, I wonder how much extra support it can get on the market. It's going to be coming late in the current console cycle, regardless of Nintendo's position. So, it has to basically get the following groups:

-People who like Castlevania but didn't want to fool around with Kickstarter.
-People who like to jump on bandwagons (assuming this game grows in media coverage/hype as *the* SotN successor)
-People who perceive it as a fun retro/nostalgia game, like some indie game supporters who jumped on board with Shovel Knight.
-People who have left the Castlevania scene for years, particularly after SotN or the DS games, and want a new entry point.
-People, especially young people, who have never been exposed to Castlevania, and decide they like the aesthetic/gameplay.
-Metroidvania/Castleroid fans, particularly those who may have started late with things like Axiom Verge.

That's the audience beyond the Backers in a nutshell, as far as I can see. All are limited in number, and those are all best-case scenarios. It's going to come down to the quality of the game and the marketing to reach those groups. Having it on the most current consoles will give it the best chance, but the way the market and console cycle are unfolding, ironically, it might have its longest staying power on the Nintendo Switch. And that's strange to me, because in a sense, regardless of its power, Switch is the first console of the "next" generation, and to me Bloodstained was originally set up to be a console game for this generation.



That's another good point, and something else I liked about the Wii U version. However, Nintendo's been coy about whether of not this is the truth yet regarding the Switch. They may just be trying to distance themselves from Wii U image right now. It's possible the Switch console/controller can beam its signal to the TV separate from its docking station, which is partially a charger. There's still a lot that hasn't been revealed, allegedly.

They really should have had the foresight to see this coming. If I could tell it wasn't a good idea during the Kickstarter, I don't see how they could have missed it. And even if the game was released today, the Wii U version is probably not selling many copies. But they still decided to use it as a stretch goal. So while I can definitely understand cancelling the Wii U version, as this project really needs to be as successful as possible, they need to offer full refunds to those who are expecting Wii U versions. I don't think they should worry about the Switch yet either. Who knows how it'll sell. Worry about getting the game out on the promised platforms, and if the Switch looks like a good idea in 2018, you can always port it then.

I don't see how it would be easier to do it now just because they will be working on download content later on. Either way they're still doing work concurrently. Not that they would have to do it while creating the download content anyway. And yes, I'm well aware of the point of the topic. That's why I'm, ya know, adding my opinion.

It should be noted that Ben Judd insinuated that the staggered release idea has been removed now that the game has been moved to 2018 and has a publisher. The game will likely come with all modes packaged in. At least, that's what he seemed to suggest in the new interview with the webmaster here.

Its virtually impossible to buy new physical Vita games in brick and mortar stores. Its sad but its a reality and its been since 2015 I think. You can still comfortably buy them on Amazon though. 

As for the WiiU's situation. Its not as bad as the Vita right now but it'll be soon. What with the Switch in the horizon and less than 5 months for its launch retailers will want to get rid of the existing stock and by the time the Switch is released you can bet your bottom dollar no mainstream retailer will give the WiiU any shelf space anymore. Any WiiU games you still see on shelves by April 2017 will just be discounted stock they want to get out the door.

Bloodstained on WiiU smack dab in the middle of 2018 a full year or more after the Switch's launch makes no business sense whatsoever outside of delivering to a, I assume, minority of Kickstarter backers. Many of whom would gladly take the change towards PS4, X1, PC or even Switch. 

For Iga's sake and the good of this new IP we so much love and hope it does great so it can expand into a franchise as significant and prolific as Castlevania before it we need to vote for the WiiU version to be dropped. If that means the game has a better chance, which it seems it would according to Judd, we have to have Iga's back and support this decision. It already made little sense when the game was coming out in 2017 it makes zero sense in 2018 to have a WiiU version and would make Iga loose money (again: this according to Ben Judd, not me). Symphony of the Night and the GBA Igavanias lacked dual screens. We'll survive having to push a button to see the map.

The Vita version does little sense to me as well but at least a direct successor isnt going to come out and replace it in a few months.

Seeing some of the leaked features to the switch has made me more receptive if there were a change, mostly the multi-touch

I was just thinking about Armature making the Wii U port and the Wii U not really using a true UE4. The Wii U/Vita ports would end up being slightly different from the PS4/X1/PC games, wouldn't they? Possibly having issues that the other versions wouldn't have? Whereas the Switch version would be pretty much identical to the non-port versions since it can run UE4 straight out without any extra coding hoops to jump through.

Bottom line...if the Armature port of Bloodstained on Wii U would end up being inferior to the other versions in any way, but the Switch version would be identical, then I think the Wii U version should be dropped and the Switch version made instead.

(I'm currently down for Bloodstained versions on PS4, Steam, and Wii U.)