Support NeoGAF

[Saint Gregory]

So... The wake up call is developing games for Nintendo hardware that is in line with PS360 hardware that resulted in many studios crashing?

That's an interesting way of looking at it but I'd prefer to phrase the situation as having nothing to do with developing for Nintendo. The wake up call I hope is not overextending your financial situation to the point where one bomb can destroy your studio.

If studios can do that going into next gen by only supporting the PS4 and 720 then I think that's great but I don't want to see a repeat of this gen where developers turned their noses up at the Wii, developed exclusively for the PS360/PC and then complained about Nintendo making all the cash while their studios closed.

HD development did finally recover when the PS3 and 360 took off during the CoD explosion but I doubt that there are many devs who want to relive those painful years before that happened.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

It's all relative to your tastes. Why buy anything for entertainment purposes?

For me it's because of the franchises. I like Nintendo games. I know Nintendo games are coming. Stuff like ZombiU being awesome and Rayman Legends, Monster Hunter Ultimate/Bayonetta 2 getting announced as exclusives is just icing when I decided to make my purchase.

I don't shit up Vita threads asking why someone would buy one when it has absolutely no future...why do this in a WiiU thread?

Asking why people think the WiiU is worth it at launch is not "shitting up" the thread. Why are YOU so defensive? Trying to justify your purchase?

 

[Refreshment.01]

So the same situation the Wii was in versus the PS2 eh?

This device is not the Wii, you said it yourself.

Wii was a phenomen from the outset. Everyone was at least curious abouth the device. And it had Wii Sports. Since june 2011, Nintendo has failed to demostrate any impressive use of the Upad, something that both elevates and differentiates them enough from other products.

It's all relative to your tastes. Why buy anything for entertainment purposes?

For me it's because of the franchises. I like Nintendo games. I know Nintendo games are coming. Stuff like ZombiU being awesome and Rayman Legends, Monster Hunter Ultimate/Bayonetta 2 getting announced as exclusives is just icing when I decided to make my purchase.

I don't shit up Vita threads asking why someone would buy one when it has absolutely no future...why do this in a WiiU thread?

Nah, there are people that just buy the thing because is a Nintendo product. Popular companies have really devoted user bases.

 

[Orayn]

I bet alot of people bought a $600 PS3 for the future games too. Of course, it was understandable coming off of the PS2 that people would think the PS3 would have amazing third party support. Coming off the Wii, how could anyone bet on a bright future for the WiiU? Wouldn't it be smarter to wait and see and also pay less for the WiiU in a year or two?

There are some games I want to play when they come out, not in two years.

What happens if the NextBox and the PS4 greatly outclass the WiiU? Won't that put the WiiU in the same position as the Wii was?

Maybe, but the Wii still had a lot of first party games that I really liked. Why assume that the Wii U won't be similar, if not better?

Asking why people think the WiiU is worth it at launch is not "shitting up" the thread. Why are YOU so defensive? Trying to justify your purchase?

You're not there yet, but trying to get a "deeper" answer than it having games people want isn't exactly productive for the thread either.

 

[Dreamwriter]

Since june 2011, Nintendo has failed to demostrate any impressive use of the Upad, something that both elevates and differentiates them enough from other products.

Say what?? Have you not seen anything about Nintendoland? What about ZombiU? What about playing games on the Gamepad without the TV? What about the touch screen interface used for RTS-style selection in The Wonderful 101 and Pikmin?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

This device is not the Wii, you said it yourself.

Wii was a phenomen from the outset. Everyone was at least curious abouth the device. And it had Wii Sports. Since june 2011, Nintendo has failed to demostrate any impressive use of the Upad, something that both elevates and differentiates them enough from other products.

Stop changing you're argument.

This has nothing to do with it being outside of the mass market pricing.

Hell, it's the exact same situation in that regard that the Wii was in. It's of similar capability at a good $50-$100 more than the last gen competitors consoles, with a large deficit of software.

This in no way means it's outside of mass market pricing.

The rest of your argument I tend to agree with. I was one of the first in line to get a Wii, because I was sold on the Wiimote still having no plans to pick up a WiiU. But that wasn't your argument.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Asking why people think the WiiU is worth it at launch is not "shitting up" the thread. Why are YOU so defensive? Trying to justify your purchase?

I don't give a flying fuck about defending my purchase. I'm saying just this: why is anything worth buying at full price?

It's because the value proposition is there for these people-it might not be for you.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

You're not there yet, but trying to get a "deeper" answer than it having games people want isn't exactly productive for the thread either.

Only pro-WiiU comments are productive?

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Nah, there are people that just buy the thing because is a Nintendo product. Popular companies have really devoted user bases.

The same can be said for anything.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

I don't give a flying fuck about defending my purchase. I'm saying just this: why is anything worth buying at full price?

It's because them value proposition is there for them-it might not be for you.

I would imagine that everyone weighed the pros and cons before dropping $350, probably asked themselves the same questions. Why does discussing it on a forum bother you?

 

[Orayn]

Only pro-WiiU comments are productive?

No, I'm saying that you're not going to be vindicated by "figuring out" peoples' preferences when they've already answered you.

"Why would you pay $X for Y?"
"Because I like Y enough that it's worth $X to me."
"But why would you REALLY pay that much?"

It accomplishes nothing.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

I would imagine that everyone weighed the pros and cons before dropping $350, probably asked themselves the same questions. Why does discussing it on a forum bother you?

I'm not saying it bothers me. As stated, there's no reason to question why someone has purchased something. They wanted it. It really requires no deeper thought than that.

 

[Refreshment.01]

Stop changing you're argument.

This has nothing to do with it being outside of the mass market pricing.

Hell, it's the exact same situation in that regard that the Wii was in. It's of similar capability at a good $50-$100 more than the last gen competitors consoles, with a large deficit of software.

This in no way means it's outside of mass market pricing.

The rest of your argument I tend to agree with. I was one of the first in line to get a Wii, because I was sold on the Wiimote still having no plans to pick up a WiiU. But that wasn't your argument.

I did not change anything Thunder. You need to understand that the situation is different, the Wii was competing with the PS3 and 360 and it was cheaper than both of them while giving an unique experience. Now the Wii U is the most expensive video game device available, and it's only offering is a tacked on touch screen device while falling behind (so far) to the cheaper competition in everything else.

As you see not even remotly the same thing.

The same can be said for anything.

Absolutly, that's my point of view too.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Thinking about it... it was actually a worse situation for the Wii.

It was $100-$120 more than the PS2 and there are still models of both PS3 and 360 selling for more than $299.

I did not change anything Thunder. You need to understand that the situation is different, the Wii was competing with the PS3 and 360 and it was cheaper than both of them while giving an unique experience. Now the Wii U is the most expensive video game device available, and it's only offering is a tacked on touch screen device while falling behind (so far) to the cheaper competition in everything else.

As you see not even remotly the same thing.

You're right!

It's a much better situation for WiiU than Wii.

It has no next-gen competition and it's pretty much at price parity with last gen consoles. Good point.

 

[MutFox]

It's all opinion, I'll be getting one at some point...
Not now, as the current users are guinea pigs...

I'm patient and in no rush...
Unless Nintendo were to magically release F-Zero and an on rails StarFox,
then I'd buy it ASAP.

 

[Teletraan1]

I don't see why people keep saying the dual screen thing is a game changer. It is the same thing they have been doing on the DS since 2004. If they haven't been able to do much more than inventory/map/tap manhole since 2004, why does anyone expect some big innovation here? Honest question.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

I don't see why people keep saying the dual screen thing is a game changer. It is the same thing they have been doing on the DS since 2004. If they haven't been able to do much more than inventory/map/tap manhole since 2004, why does anyone expect some big innovation here? Honest question.

Because.

 

[lwilliams3]

No, because the the Wii had a huge flaw that rendered it incapable of running games made for 360 and PS3 without their engines being completely rewritten and many assets remade. That flaw isn't that the system wasn't powerful or didn't support HD, it was that the Wii didn't support programmable pixel/fragment shaders, which forms the core of graphic engines for any GPU that supports it. Also, the Wii's control system meant that games had to be partially redesigned for it. Had the Wii just added support for Pixel Shaders (like the original XBox did) and threw a Classic Controller in the box so developers could be 100% sure all customers would have one, the Wii may have seen more third-party ports.

The Wii U doesn't have a flaw like that - the "NextBox/PS4" aren't going to be using any futuristic graphics tech, they are going to be programmed the same way modern PC games are programmed...which is the same way a Wii U is programmed. And of course the Wii U's controller is on par with what's become standard these days, just with a big ole screen in the middle.

So no, if the Wii U ends up in the same third-party-support position as the Wii, it won't be because of its technical prowess compared to the competition.

Good post. This has also been my stance on this subject.

 

[Refreshment.01]

Thinking about it... it was actually a worse situation for the Wii.

It was $100-$120 more than the PS2 and there are still models of both PS3 and 360 selling for more than $299.


You're right!

It's a much better situation for WiiU than Wii.

It has no next-gen competition and it's pretty much at price parity with last gen consoles. Good point.

Glad you came to your senses and realised is not the same situation Thunder

See i wasn't the one changing the argument?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Glad you came to your senses and realised is not the same situation Thunder

See i wasn't the one changing the argument?

Weren't the only one. I just figured if you were I might as well too.

 

[Saint Gregory]

It's all opinion, I'll be getting one at some point...
Not now, as the current users are guinea pigs...

I'm patient and in no rush...
Unless Nintendo were to magically release F-Zero and an on rails StarFox,
then I'd buy it ASAP.

That's probably the first time I've seen anyone actually ask for something on-rails on a Nintendo system in a long time lol

I agree though, no more adventures please.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

I don't see why people keep saying the dual screen thing is a game changer. It is the same thing they have been doing on the DS since 2004. If they haven't been able to do much more than inventory/map/tap manhole since 2004, why does anyone expect some big innovation here? Honest question.

That's been my thoughts ever since they showed it at E3 2011. The best thing they ever did with the second screen on the DS was marking the map on the Zelda games and even that wasn't a game changer.

 

[Freezie KO]

I don't see why people keep saying the dual screen thing is a game changer. It is the same thing they have been doing on the DS since 2004. If they haven't been able to do much more than inventory/map/tap manhole since 2004, why does anyone expect some big innovation here? Honest question.

It's not really a gamechanger so far for gameplay. You're right. I don't know what they can do beyond local multiplayer that will really push the boundaries.

That said, Miiverse is a blast and couldn't be done without the GamePad. I'm beginning to think Miiverse, as a system-wide app that will affect many games into the future, is the true killer app for the GamePad.

I still favor the Wiimotes, but if Miiverse retains its novelty, then this GamePad might have a use.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

It's not cheating if I wear brass knuckles under my boxing gloves is it?

 

[Davey Cakes]

I don't see why people keep saying the dual screen thing is a game changer. It is the same thing they have been doing on the DS since 2004. If they haven't been able to do much more than inventory/map/tap manhole since 2004, why does anyone expect some big innovation here? Honest question.

"Game changer" isn't the right way to put it. But the Gamepad still has a lot of potential and is not the exact same thing as a DS's lower screen. People downplay the Pad but it's a defining feature of the system. Shame on the person who said it's "tacked on."

People really need to play Nintendo Land before jumping to conclusions about the Gamepad's practical functionality (or lack thereof) in games.

That said, time will tell how much devs can actually get out of the thing.

 

[Refreshment.01]

I don't see why people keep saying the dual screen thing is a game changer. It is the same thing they have been doing on the DS since 2004. If they haven't been able to do much more than inventory/map/tap manhole since 2004, why does anyone expect some big innovation here? Honest question.

Is a convenient feature, the Upad is really cool. But is not a concept they can ride solo like they did with the Wii. The Wii U should have been a more "complete" console to put it in some way.

I hope that at least the console takes of in Japan and becomes a mine for the Japanese made games. As i don't see Nintendo leading the Europe and America markets when the cycle comes to a close.

"Game changer" isn't the right way to put it. But the Gamepad still has a lot of potential and is not the exact same thing as a DS's lower screen. People downplay the Pad but it's a defining feature of the system. Shame on the person who said it's "tacked on."

People really need to play Nintendo Land before jumping to conclusions about the Gamepad's practical functionality (or lack thereof) in games.

That said, time will tell how much devs can actually get out of the thing.

So far is tacked on mostly, except for the local asimetrical gameplay in Nintendo Land. It is not an opionion, is what we are seeing with the mayority of games.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

"Game changer" isn't the right way to put it. But the Gamepad still has a lot of potential and is not the exact same thing as a DS's lower screen. People downplay the Pad but it's a defining feature of the system. Shame on the person who said it's "tacked on."

People really need to play Nintendo Land before jumping to conclusions about the Gamepad's practical functionality (or lack thereof) in games.

That said, time will tell how much debs can actually get out of the thing.

It's like saying "People need to play Wii Sports before judging the WiiMote" back in 2006. It's true that Wii Sports helped the WiiMote but it's future never got much brighter. In fact, people came to hate that motion control was pushed into games where it didn't belong.

 

[Haunted]

Orbis and Durango prices will be interesting.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Actually, Tomb Raider was "hinted", also, the latest rumour of Ideaman was a "next gen game some believed it couldn't run on Wii U"

Tomb Raider is slated for March iirc, before Injustice. Ergo, if it were planned for the Wii U I don't see why it wouldn't have been announced yet.

Occam's razor really needs to be applied to a lot of these notions about the Wii U, whether it be about third party titles or port performance.

Quick question. Do you have one? I got mine yesterday and I can already see how appealing the GamePad and games could be.

There's a psychological phenomenon known as post-purchase rationalization.

I'm not saying you or others are necessarily succumbing to this, but the idea that one must have something to form a rational opinion of it is generally flawed.

As an NB I don't have one, but have played it.

Priced out of the mass market?

Aside from Wii that is the cheapest dual pricing scheme we've seen from a console manufacturer last gen and this new gen.

Concept I'll give you. Upad is not the hook of the Wiimote, but price is just crazy talk man. WiiU will be the cheapest of the three platforms. I don't see either MS or Sony hitting $599 ever again, but I also don't see them hitting $299 either.

Microsoft did this gen. I don't see why they wouldn't aim to again. Even if it earns a "tard pack" stigma. Starting at $299 is a powerful marketing tool.

I'm thinking the absolute floor is $299. An unlikely floor. The ceiling is definitely $499. I can't see either being crazy enough to go over.

I still see a ceiling of $399. Sony should have learned and Microsoft was never that dumb.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Orbis and Durango prices will be interesting.

I'm thinking the absolute floor is $299. An unlikely floor. The ceiling is definitely $499. I can't see either being crazy enough to go over.

Microsoft did this gen. I don't see why they wouldn't aim to again. Even if it earns a "tard pack" stigma. Starting at $299 is a powerful marketing tool.

Yeah, but given the rumors what could they cut out that would allow it to be possible? That still is the floor of my expectations, but I really don't see it being likely.

I still see a ceiling of $399. Sony should have learned and Microsoft was never that dumb.

Split the difference for a ceiling of $449?

 

[Colonel Mustard]

I'm thinking the absolute floor is $299. An unlikely floor. The ceiling is definitely $499. I can't see either being crazy enough to go over.

I wouldn't discount a subscription model for Microsoft's next system. Something like $39.99/month (which covers gold, netflix, hulu, maybe an instant collection) with a base price of $199+ sub might actually work.

 

[Pimpbaa]

that is wrong. Pc back in 1990 did not have a sound card, did not have 256 color graphics.

I know he was banned but, good lord

-1987 - AdLib Card - First mass market PC soundcard for computers released using FM synthesis (YM3812 chip by Yamaha)

-Video Graphics Array (VGA) refers specifically to the display hardware first introduced with the IBM PS/2 line of computers in 1987

Even the monkey island youtube links he gave proved himself wrong about sound. Hell monkey island even supported external midi devices like the roland mt-32 (which used real instrument samples).

 

[Thunder Monkey]

I wouldn't discount a subscription model for Microsoft's next system. Something like $39.99/month (which covers gold, netflix, hulu, maybe an instant collection) with a base price of $199+ sub might actually work.

I'd be really really shocked if anyone tries this on a new platform.

I've seen crazier though. *cough* Sony

 

[TheGreyHulk]

I don't see why people keep saying the dual screen thing is a game changer. It is the same thing they have been doing on the DS since 2004. If they haven't been able to do much more than inventory/map/tap manhole since 2004, why does anyone expect some big innovation here? Honest question.

I agree. When I looked at my Wii U, I really just thought that Nintendo just gave us the DS in console form.

It's like Nintendo didn't innovate at all this gen. They really just looked back and said "DS was very successful. Let's use what we did there in the console world" and boom... the Wii U is born.

I like the Wii U, I bought one at midnight, but it really is a DS console and I think it's a great comparison. I expect similar things done on the DS on the Wii U

 

[Refreshment.01]

I'm thinking the absolute floor is $299. An unlikely floor. The ceiling is definitely $499. I can't see either being crazy enough to go over.


Yeah, but given the rumors what could they cut out that would allow it to be possible? That still is the floor of my expectations, but I really don't see it being likely.

Thunder, you should start considering that there's a strong possibilty for a subsidized pricing model to be applied. Specially for MS and in America.

Edit: A bit late, the Colonel already pointed it out, nicely done!

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Thunder, you should start considering that there's a strong possibilty for a subsidized pricing model to be applied. Specially for MS and in Amarica,

It's always possible.

I just doubt it. Or more specifically I doubt it works.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

I'd be really really shocked if anyone tries this on a new platform.

I've seen crazier though. *cough* Sony

It could be viable. The system alone could still be purchased for say $599 or something.

 

[Tchu-Espresso]

Why Nintendo chose to go this route with their system is strange.

Oh well, i guess it will still play Mario and Zelda but its becoming harder to justify a system for a few games these days, especially when free time to play games gets less and less.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I'm thinking the absolute floor is $299. An unlikely floor. The ceiling is definitely $499. I can't see either being crazy enough to go over.

Yeah, but given the rumors what could they cut out that would allow it to be possible? That still is the floor of my expectations, but I really don't see it being likely.

Split the difference for a ceiling of $449?

I generally view $_49 as not particularly good psychological/marketing price points. But it's a possibility.

In terms of Durango at $299 - I just can't fathom how the Wii U hardware is sold at a negative margin without something gone terribly wrong, even considering the controller - which really doesn't seem that expensive when one examines it.

It depends on the cost of bundling Kinect 2.0 though I imagine and whether there's a Kinect-less SKU. The other option could be as mentioned above - some form of subscription model tied to Live.

For Orbis - we haven't heard any credible rumors of a gimmick/hook yet afaik - ergo more money for silicon budget and more room for a lower price at a small negative or net neutral pricepoint.

Out of curiosity does anyone know what kind of PC one could build at a BoM of around let's say $280.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Why Nintendo chose to go this route with their system is strange.

Oh well, i guess it will still play Mario and Zelda but its becoming harder to justify a system for a few games these days, especially when free time to play games gets less and less.

I already unraveled this mystery months ago. Keeping manufacturing and dev costs down. I mean their last three home consoles survived (one even thriving) on little more than their own support.

So they make what they want and fuck every other developer if they won't support it.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

I already unraveled this mystery months ago. Keeping manufacturing and dev costs down. I mean their last three home consoles survived (one even thriving) on little more than their own support.

So they make what they want and fuck every other developer if they won't support it.

You really think Nintendo doesn't care about third party support?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

You really think Nintendo doesn't care about third party support?

Overall I'd say it's of importance to them, but not enough that they will lose much in manufacturing or increase their own development costs.

So in essence "If you're there cool, if not fuck off."

 

[gashikunFLCL]

Why Nintendo chose to go this route with their system is strange.

Oh well, i guess it will still play Mario and Zelda but its becoming harder to justify a system for a few games these days, especially when free time to play games gets less and less.

If you have less time for games, you'll play less games, right?

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Being honest though is there any other reason you can see Vane in why they'd launch a console in 2012 with completely anemic memory bandwidth and a CPU loosely based on a 1999 design?

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Being honest though is there any other reason you can see Vane in why they'd launch a console in 2012 with completely anemic memory bandwidth and a CPU loosely based on a 1999 design?

I think they launched the WiiU now because sales of the Wii were dying off and because they wanted to beat the competition to market. I also think they built another underpowered system with a controller gimmick because it worked last time and they think it will work again. I am not so confident that the WiiU will sell as well as the Wii did.

 

[Dreamwriter]

It's not cheating if I wear brass knuckles under my boxing gloves is it?

Long as you don't put a nail in the thumb

 

[xbhaskarx]

Why Nintendo chose to go this route with their system is strange.

Maybe they didn't have a choice? Maybe they're not able to keep up in terms of power / price given their resources and exchange rates?

 

[Meelow]

Why Nintendo chose to go this route with their system is strange.

Oh well, i guess it will still play Mario and Zelda but its becoming harder to justify a system for a few games these days, especially when free time to play games gets less and less.

Because it was different enough from the DS and Xbox 360 controller and was guarantied to give them sales.

 

[test_account]

It may already be. There's no real way to know if the Origin/WiiU rumors are true unless one side or the other comments on it (which will probably never happen) but something strange has happened to Nintendo and EA's relationship over the last year. EA was introduced as a major partner for the WiiU launch at E3'11 and now EA's attitude towards the WiiU seems to be less than stellar bordering on disinterest.

Hopefully those issues will work themselves out in the near future because Nintendo is really going to need EA's support if the WiiU is going to be successful.

I can see that situation, but i dont think that 3rd parties will drop WiiU developement because they cant have Nintendo IPs in their games. Unless i misunderstood what you ment?

I don't shit up Vita threads asking why someone would buy one when it has absolutely no future...why do this in a WiiU thread?

Are you saying that the WiiU doesnt have any future?

Spoiler

just kidding hehe. I know what you mean =)

 

[Thunder Monkey]

I think they launched the WiiU now because sales of the Wii were dying off and because they wanted to beat the competition to market. I also think they built another underpowered system with a controller gimmick because it worked last time and they think it will work again. I am not so confident that the WiiU will sell as well as the Wii did.

Underpowered to you, overpowered for Nintendo's bottom line.

They freaked when they spent $12 million to develop Twilight Princess.