Support NeoGAF

[TreasureHunterG]

This has already been answered many different times by many different posters. The PS3 had different sales and different prospectives than the Wii U. Also, your 'major support' is a serious overstatement.

Why are you trying so hard to point out the PS3 ands Wii U are in the exact same situation when it's so easy to point out the differences between them?

Sure, they have differences, but both had bad headstarts. You and the others are relying on the differences between PS3/WiiU bad headstarts as way to make PS3 not seems like it had a bad headstart. It had. Sure, WiiU looks worse, but in no way makes PS3 not look a bad one. Thus, WiiU's detractors defends the idea to completely shaft the platform without consider the possibility of a recovery after a price drop and this line-up fall's release.

Like I said, not in exact same situation, but my comparison between them is based on the bad headstart both system had. PS3 managed to turn around and come back. WiiU can do the same, unless you're in the "doom and gloom" team.

About major support. MGS4, DMC3, FFXIII, VF5, AC1, GTAIV, RE5 were all announced before PS3 was launched. This was big.

It doesn't need to hide anything. The PS3 was not exactly top priority for publishers in 2007.

How wasn't a priority with the games I mentioned above announced?

And I think Burnout 2 was one of the prime example of bad selling third party games on the GCN.

Not true. It had solid sales. As far I remember, it reached 200/250k+. Someone, please provide the NPD numbers.

Its hard arguing with them when they refuse to believe anything other than third parties are conspiring against Nintendo.

It's even harder to argue with people defending the idea third-parties needs to shaft Nintendo completely. Unless you're a fanboy, you should be aware this will negatively affect the company and serious damage their reputation as a hardware maker.

 

[Manmademan]

But if they were equal , or close to equal with the ps4xb1 , they'd then be the only console where you can play all the (full on versions) of next gen titles and nintendo 1st party stuff.

Its the same for Sony, Sony has their well regarded first party stuff, but allow 3rd parties to flex their muscle, not curtail their games.

Nintendo 1st party titles are not enough to compete, no 1st party stuff is...Nintendo chopped off their own legs in terms of 3rd party support.

I'd disagree. Nintendo's first party is fine. moves tons of software to gamers who totally ignore everything else. you could probably add 10-20 million console sales if nintendo were ever to develop for a competitor.

the problem here is that Nintendo's hardware has never been stellar. They simply aren't equipped or possibly aren't interested in out-engineering Sony or Microsoft. The GC was better than the PS2 (though it launched WAY later) but the Xbox launching aside it absolutely crushed it in performance.

Part of this is because nintendo likes to build in healthy profit margins to hardware (as apple does) and Sony and Microsoft don't. The other is a deliberate decision by nintendo to target a different market than Sony and Microsoft, rather than going head to head for the same audience in a tougher battle.

 

[SmokedMeat]

iirc RE4 did 1.6 million on GC and 2.2 million on PS2.
So well that they decided to have a late port to the PS2 which outsold by quite some sales..

It was mind boggling at the time that Capcom wanted to move the entire mainline Resident Evil series onto Gamecube, when the series had a strong audience and tremendous success on Playstation, where it all began.

After seeing the sales of RE4, the shareholders as I recall, demanded they bring the game over to PS2 so it could enjoy better sales.

Even though games like Wonderful 101 and Bayonetta 2 are technically second party titles, it's going to be very telling in how well they sell. If they flop then it's hard to argue against the audience only caring for Nintendo's own games, and that's going to make the case for better third party support harder.
UBI Soft decided to stick with U through Christmas and decide whether they waned to continue support or not. Hopefully their games perform well, but with newer consoles to compete against, I'm not expecting the U versions of Watchdogs and Assassin's Creed 4 to do as well as the other platforms.
Rayman might be the exception, as it was made for the U, and will play best on U (and Vita). That might be enough to keep UBI Soft invested in U development.

 

[Nozem]

Considering there´s not a SINGLE ps3/ps4/360/Xbone game i want to play, im grateful nintendo is different from these systems and get different games.

Wow, you must be the dullest person ever.

 

[Kelthink]

Really!? You think so?!

Oh you were trying humour! I do apologise

 

[Manmademan]

Sure, they have differences, but both had bad headstarts. You and the others are relying on the differences between PS3/WiiU bad headstarts as way to make PS3 not seems like it had a bad headstart. It had. Sure, WiiU looks worse, but in no way makes PS3 not look a bad one. Yet, WiiU's detractors defends the idea to completely shaft the platform without consider the possibility of a recovery after a price drop and this line-up fall's release.

The PS3 launched against strong next gen competition, at $600. The WiiU is $349, only competing against 8 year old hardware, and is selling less units than the PS3 and MUCH less third party software. The situations are not comparable.

Like I said, not in exact same situation, but my comparison between them is based on the bad headstart both system had. PS3 managed to turn around and come back. WiiU can do the same, unless you're on the "doom and gloom" team.

PS3's only barrier was price. Sony did what it had to to redesign the system and get the cost into parity with the 360. This is not possible for the WiiU. Price is not the barrier. A price drop will do nothing. In addition the WiiU's primary competition has not launched yet. Once they do, sales will drop even lower than they already are.

About major support. MGS4, DMC3, FFXIII, VF5, AC1, GTAIV, RE5 were all announced before PS3 were launched. This was big.

Because sony had built a huge audience with the PS2 that was still in the market and buying games long after the PS3 launched. The Wii in comparison has been dead for years, with no one buying hardware OR software. do you see the difference here?

 

[Mithos]

Fight Night 3 was a 7-9 month old 360 port.

NFL 07: Gimped.

NFS was poorly reviewed and yet sold (comparatively) well.

The idea that EA stiffed the Wii U at launch has merit, but it ignores the fact that EA have stiffed every launch platform ever. Usually, the next-gen sheen is enough for people to overlook the shortcomings of launch games. Either the Wii-U has the most discerning consumers ever, or it has a lot of owners that only buy Nintendo games. I think I know which it is, given that all the other third party games have seen shit sales too.

I guess I have higher expectations then the people that buy the games even if they are gimped then. I mean there is no way I'd buy a Fifa 12 rebranded to Fifa 13. No way I'd buy ME3:SE for $60 when everyone else get Trilogy for $60, I took ME3:SE of the buylist the second Troligy was announced, EA lost my purchase there THEY did it no one else.

Need for Speed Most Wanted U, I probably will get though, but then again, why should I? I won't get a followup, why spend time and money on it?

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

]Sure, they have differences, but both have bad headstarts. You and the others are relying on the differences between PS3/WiiU bad headstarts as way to make PS3 not seems like it had a bad headstart. It had. Sure, WiiU looks worse, but in no way makes PS3 not look a bad one. Yet, WiiU's detractors defends the idea to completely shaft the platform without consider the possibility of a recovery after a price drop and this line-up fall's release.

Like I said, not in exact same situation, but my comparison between them is based on the bad headstart both system had. PS3 managed to turn around and come back. WiiU can do the same, unless you're on the "doom and gloom" team.

About major support. MGS4, DMC3, FFXIII, VF5, AC1, GTAIV, RE5 were all announced before PS3 were launched. This was big.

Dude are you being this ignorant and obtuse on purpose. You cannot equate the two just because they both had bad starts. That would be ignoring major differences that had an effect on future third party support which many people have repeated but you seem to just ignore.

Bolded statement is just absurd. Guess the Vita can recover too because the 3DS managed to do a turn around eh?
PS3 had third party support, WiiU does not. You don't have to be on the "doom" team to realise that the WiiU may not do a turn around lol. Just look at the hardware sales, software sales and future third party support.

It's even harder to argue with people defending the idea third-parties needs to shaft Nintendo completely.

No one is saying that, just that a lot of third parties do not need Nintendo.

 

[shinra-bansho]

It's even harder to argue with people defending the idea third-parties needs to shaft Nintendo completely.

Your wording is always so emotive.

Third parties do not "need to shaft Nintendo." And they aren't.

Again, Warner is bringing LEGO Marvel and Scribblenauts DC, because Scribblenauts performed relatively well.

Activision will bring Skylanders, as the franchise performed best on the Wii.

For some reason Nintendo thought it wise to co-publish Sonic, even though Sega would have brought the game to the platform anyway, since their Sonic and All-Stars Racing was one of the better performing games saleswise.

Ubisoft has Just Dance 2014. And despite Zombi U being unprofitable and not justifying a sequel, they haven't cancelled the "core" properties they've had in development for the platform.

Third parties will bring their games to it. They may not be the games you want.

EA is not devoid of capital. If the major decision makers wanted to they could burn money putting port after port on the Wii U to sell poorly. But it's their prerogative to not do that. The most mass-market/"casual" franchises EA has are its sports line, and they performed poorly on the Wii U. EA's other franchise most attuned to the audience being displayed by the Wii U's software sales - The Sims - has never translated that well to consoles. Replace EA with Bethesda, same thing. Replace Bethesda with Take-Two Interactive, same thing.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Considering there´s not a SINGLE ps3/ps4/360/Xbone game i want to play, im grateful nintendo is different from these systems and get different games.

When i see people defending the state the game industry is right now, with tons of GRITTY and MATURE dudebro shooters that look and play and feel the same, i dont know if you´re all joking or if this is really the sad point we really are right now.

And there's TONs of nongritty games that aren't shooters available on the platforms, but you're the type of person that probably doesn't own a Playstation or an Xbox, and just makes an assumption because shooters are popular. You'd be surprised to know these systems have hundreds more games than Nintendo's platform, and they cover ALL genres.

But hey, if there's not a single PS3/PS4/360/Xbone game you want to play then clearly the third party publishers are correct in ignoring the Wii U. There's no pleasing the person who only has eyes for Nintedo's games and doesn't care to notice anything else.

 

[Canis lupus]

Sure, they have differences, but both had bad headstarts. You and the others are relying on the differences between PS3/WiiU bad headstarts as way to make PS3 not seems like it had a bad headstart. It had. Sure, WiiU looks worse, but in no way makes PS3 not look a bad one. Thus, WiiU's detractors defends the idea to completely shaft the platform without consider the possibility of a recovery after a price drop and this line-up fall's release.

Like I said, not in exact same situation, but my comparison between them is based on the bad headstart both system had. PS3 managed to turn around and come back. WiiU can do the same, unless you're in the "doom and gloom" team.
.

PS3(usd/eur 599) Q1 2007: 1.80M
WiiU(usd/eur 349) Q1 2013: 0.39M

The PS3 had a bad headstart, the WiiU is on life support.

 

[Jonm1010]

Sure, they have differences, but both had bad headstarts. You and the others are relying on the differences between PS3/WiiU bad headstarts as way to make PS3 not seems like it had a bad headstart. It had. Sure, WiiU looks worse, but in no way makes PS3 not look a bad one. Thus, WiiU's detractors defends the idea to completely shaft the platform without consider the possibility of a recovery after a price drop and this line-up fall's release.

Like I said, not in exact same situation, but my comparison between them is based on the bad headstart both system had. PS3 managed to turn around and come back. WiiU can do the same, unless you're in the "doom and gloom" team.

About major support. MGS4, DMC3, FFXIII, VF5, AC1, GTAIV, RE5 were all announced before PS3 was launched. This was big.



How wasn't a priority with the games I mentioned above announced?



Not true. It had solid sales. As far I remember, it reached 200/250k+. Someone, please provide the NPD numbers.



It's even harder to argue with people defending the idea third-parties needs to shaft Nintendo completely.

I really am lost by your points in this thread? What are they? I've read all your comments and its becoming a jumbled mess to me.

Ps3 had continuing support due to historical precedent and success and already heavily invested capital into the system. That's why third parties stayed the course.

Nintendo on the other hand has the opposite issue, a historical precedent going back to the N64 days of poor sales and poor success.

Pile on Nintendo's always behind the times hardware and infastructure(think poor online network and odd hardware architecture choices) along with their walled off structure that often times actively ignores the third party community until the final stages of their new hardware development cycle foregoing their input and add it all up and you have a recipe for unease and hesitation from third parties.

Can Nintendo bounce back? Sure but the odds are stacked against it. It will take far more then a bump in Christmas sales to get third parties back on board. At this point third parties have made their choices about their financial support and unless their is an unprecedented and a prolonged sales drought for the other next gen twins while wiiU all of the sudden enjoys sustained and monumental success, those third party business plans aren't gonna shift much.

Noe throw into the pot Nintendo's admitted difficulty adjusting to HD development and I think this Nintendo generation is going to be a poor mans version of the N64 gen. Mostly absent third party support and even less second and third party output.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

Dude are you being this ignorant and obtuse on purpose. You cannot equate the two just because they both had bad starts. That would be ignoring major differences that had an effect on future third party support which many people have repeated but you seem to just ignore.

Bolded statement is just absurd. Guess the Vita can recover too because the 3DS managed to do a turn around eh?
PS3 had third party support, WiiU does not. You don't have to be on the "doom" team to realise that the WiiU may not do a turn around lol. Just look at the hardware sales, software sales and future third party support.

No, I'm not ignorant, you just seems to hold a bias against WiiU and can't stand to see someone supporting it.

About the Vita. Of course it can. PSP managed (in Japan and Europe at least) to sell nicely even with DS selling gangbusters after sometime. Vita can do the same when the price become acessible.

Your wording is always so emotive.

Man, quit with this cheap punch-line.

It's not a punch line. It's an observation of tone, one which suggests emotional investment colouring perspective, rather than dispassioned consideration of available data from an external view point.

LOL. Thanks for the overview, dr. shinra-bansho.

Pile on Nintendo's always behind the times hardware and infastructure(think poor online network and odd hardware architecture choices) along with their walled off structure that often times actively ignores the third party community until the final stages of their new hardware development cycle foregoing their input and add it all up and you have a recipe for unease and hesitation from third parties.

Can Nintendo bounce back? Sure but the odds are stacked against it. It will take far more then a bump in Christmas sales to get third parties back on board. At this point they have made their choices about their financial support and unless their is unprecedented and a prolonged sales drought for the other two will wiiU enjoys monumental success those thir party business plans aren't gonna shift much. Throw on Nintendo's admitted difficulty adjusting to HD development and I think this Nintendo generation is going to be a poor mans version of the N64 gen. Mostly absent third party support and even less second and third party output.

Agreed on this.

PS3(usd/eur 599) Q1 2007: 1.93M
WiiU(usd/eur 349) Q1 2013: 0.39M

The PS3 had a bad headstart, the WiiU is on life support.

Is this WW or just US?

 

[Diablos54]

After seeing the sales of RE4, the shareholders as I recall, demanded they bring the game over to PS2 so it could enjoy better sales.

The PS2 version was actually announced before the 'Exclusive' GC version was even released!

 

[d[-_-]b]

After seeing the sales of RE4, the shareholders as I recall, demanded they bring the game over to PS2 so it could enjoy better sales.

Lol unless they had a time machine, seeing how the announcement end of October 04 and the game wouldn't be released till January of 05...

 

[M°°nblade]

suicide. the PS2 hype would have crushed it. remember the GC was coming off of severe droughts with N64 software, and nintendo was not in a good place with core gamers.

releasing earlier also means that whatever tech advantage it had would have been minimal, or nonexistant.

You are right that it would have losed some technical advantage but I think, overall, the console would have sold much better.

If Nintendo launched the gamecube in 2000, every sale it got in 2000, would have been an extra sale as compared to launching in 2001-2002. Even if the PS2 still outsold it.
Not giving your competitor a 1,5 year headstart is much, much, much more important than being marginally more powerful. Being later but more powerful can work.
However, this only works if you can convince gamers that your console is worth waiting for and that whatever is already on the market, is NOT a next-gen console. It's all about perception.

- The PS2 convinced gamers that the dreamcast was just a transitional console and not a true next-gen console so they were willing to wait and save their money.
- The PS4 and Xbone seem to be doing the same with the Wii U. Nobody thinks of the Wii U as a next-gen console and now it's doing dreamcast sales.
- The Gamecube, the Xbox and the PS3, however, did not succeed. These consoles were considered being marginally or not superior at all compared to the other systems that were already on the market.

 

[Huff]

Considering there´s not a SINGLE ps3/ps4/360/Xbone game i want to play, im grateful nintendo is different from these systems and get different games.

When i see people defending the state the game industry is right now, with tons of GRITTY and MATURE dudebro shooters that look and play and feel the same, i dont know if you´re all joking or if this is really the sad point we really are right now.

it's a shame that you arn't joking

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

Your wording is always so emotive.

No, I'm not ignorant, you just seems to hold a bias against WiiU and can't stand to see someone supporting it.

.

Yeah thats it lol. Everyone in this thread is giving you valid reasons and yet you just ignore them and go on about the same points that ps3 turned around so therefore the WiiU can or third parties are working against Nintendo.

Also I didn't say its impossible for the WiiU to do a turn around just very unlikely.

 

[impact]

it's a shame that you arn't joking

I imagine he's not buying Bayonetta 2

 

[cacildo]

And there's TONs of nongritty games that aren't shooters available on the platforms, but you're the type of person that probably doesn't own a Playstation or an Xbox, and just makes an assumption because shooters are popular. You'd be surprised to know these systems have hundreds more games than Nintendo's platform, and they cover ALL genres.

But hey, if there's not a single PS3/PS4/360/Xbone game you want to play then clearly the third party publishers are correct in ignoring the Wii U. There's no pleasing the person who only has eyes for Nintedo's games and doesn't care to notice anything else.

Had a PS3 for 3 years.

Played dozens of games.

Two of those stood out: Red Faction Guerrilla and Just Cause 2. They were fun and free, and felt like PS2 games. (they were a lot alike, but at least they were good-alike)

(almost every thread about PS3 i talk about how Just Cause 2 and Red Faction are great)



The other games i played, seriously, i cant remember having fun with any of em!!!

I tried uncharted. I bought Resistence. I got Infamous. I tried Bioshock. I played Loco Roco. I gave Gran Turismo a spin. I had a HOME avatar that looked just like me. I bought Metal Gear 4 and GTA 4. Tried the Fat Princess Demo. I tried Blur and Split Second and got Dead Space 2. Everything was awful!!!

I have this thing, if i buy a game i have to finish it, otherwise im throwing money away. I tell you, it was HARD to finish most of em! A chore!!!!!

Gave the PS3 to my brother last christmas.
Right now he has the same impression as me: all the games are the same, most of em games are pretty bad.
He´s enjoying Red Faction and Just Cause 2, but he feels both are the same, he even mix em up sometimes (he´s older and funnier)

My brother likes Space sims and Horror games. He´s dead in the water with the PS3. The only space sim is (kinda) Xcom (we both hated), and the horror games DIED in this generation


Owning a PS3 made me realize im not happy with the Dudebro way of life. And the whole "but there are other games that are not shooters and they´re great!" im sorry, didnt found any!

Got a WiiU. PLayed Nintendo land, ZombiU and Wario. Had more fun than my 3 years with the PS3


PS: I played Dead Space on PC and it was great. Than i got Dead Space 2 on the PS3 and it was terrible!!! They dropped the ball hard, dont want to ever try DS3

 

[borghe]

The power of the system is a result of a philosophy that has failed to excite anyone, gamers or developers.

The low third party sales IMO is linked to the "type" of machine Nintendo put out. Another low-power, gimmick centered device vs. a system designed to excite the young male demographic which is impressed by graphics and not gimmicks. I understand how and why Nintendo was trying to replicate the success of the Wii, but they failed and was predictable to many.

If they had a more powerful system designed to impress this demographic, third parties would have supported it with more software early on, it would have sold much better than it is currently and there would be far more hype for the system.

Nintendo absolutely destroyed any hype for this system.

This entire post is based solely on your assumption that one single segment of the consumer base is responsible for the industry as a whole succeeding or failing. This despite the fact that we know that the games that segment buys are only a portion of entire industry revenue.

I would say we just need to agree to disagree, except for the fact that there are plenty of examples proving your argument wrong. DS was practically DOA and the much more powerful PSP launched only 4 months later. By your entire logic here, that handheld generation should have never in a million years turned out the way it did, yet the DS went on to become the best selling system of all time.

People don't need to be wowed to buy something. They just need to feel reasonably good that they are going to have fun with it and get good value out of it. The wow factor causes an early surge, but lasts very shortly and doesn't ensure longevity. And that part is what brings the developers in.

 

[kick51]

Considering there´s not a SINGLE ps3/ps4/360/Xbone game i want to play, im grateful nintendo is different from these systems and get different games.

When i see people defending the state the game industry is right now, with tons of GRITTY and MATURE dudebro shooters that look and play and feel the same, i dont know if you´re all joking or if this is really the sad point we really are right now.

Please tell me this is satire

 

[shinra-bansho]

Man, quit with this cheap punch-line.

It's not a punch line. It's an observation of tone, one which suggests emotional investment colouring perspective, rather than dispassioned consideration of available data from an external view point. As if publishers' actions are some sort of direct affront to you and a company you presumably hold a liking towards.

Given that, it's quite clear why you think this is some grand conspiracy and ignore stark realities when presented with them. You cut out a large chunk of my post, just to quote that one line for instance.

And no, the Vita cannot turn around. Systems do not turn around from selling 15K a month in the US.

Can the Wii U turn around? Define "turn around." Selling 100K in a non-holiday month would be a significant improvement at this stage, it would still be abysmal for a new platform.

LOL. Thanks for the overview, dr. shinra-bansho.

Numerous people have presented and highlighted the myriad differences between the PS3's situation and the Wii U's situation.

You have either ignored those differences or brushed them all off as people trying to make "the PS3 look less bad", over and over, and again repeat the same false notion that the situations are the same when they aren't.

You wonder why people ask if you're being deliberately obtuse, and your response to such is to cry bias. You seem wholly convinced of some sort of grand conspiracy using the most rudimentary of comparisons and ignoring important nuances even when they are laid out for you. It makes further discussion with you rather pointless.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

Seems its the retailers that are phasing out the WiiU.

 

[Pie and Beans]

Had a PS3 for 3 years.

Played dozens of games.

Two of those stood out: Red Faction Guerrilla and Just Cause 2. They were fun and free, and felt like PS2 games. (they were a lot alike, but at least they were good-alike)

(almost every thread about PS3 i talk about how Just Cause 2 and Red Faction are great)



The other games i played, seriously, i cant remember having fun with any of em!!!

I tried uncharted. I bought Resistence. I got Infamous. I tried Bioshock. I played Loco Roco. I gave Gran Turismo a spin. I had a HOME avatar that looked just like me. I bought Metal Gear 4 and GTA 4. Tried the Fat Princess Demo. I tried Blur and Split Second and got Dead Space 2. Everything was awful!!!

I have this thing, if i buy a game i have to finish it, otherwise im throwing money away. I tell you, it was HARD to finish most of em! A chore!!!!!

Gave the PS3 to my brother last christmas.
Right now he has the same impression as me: all the games are the same, most of em games are pretty bad.
He´s enjoying Red Faction and Just Cause 2, but he feels both are the same, he even mix em up sometimes (he´s older and funnier)

My brother likes Space sims and Horror games. He´s dead in the water with the PS3. The only space sim is (kinda) Xcom (we both hated), and the horror games DIED in this generation


Owning a PS3 made me realize im not happy with the Dudebro way of life. And the whole "but there are other games that are not shooters and they´re great!" im sorry, didnt found any!

Got a WiiU. PLayed Nintendo land, ZombiU and Wario. Had more fun than my 3 years with the PS3


PS: I played Dead Space on PC and it was great. Than i got Dead Space 2 on the PS3 and it was terrible!!! They dropped the ball hard, dont want to ever try DS3

So the problem is, you are terrible at actually finding games you enjoy, not that the platforms have nothing for you. You described an awful lot of launch year and 2nd year PS3 stuff there, and nothing after it. No Demon's Souls, no Valkyria Chronicles, no Flower, no Journey, no LittleBigPlanet, no Siren (for horror games, plus Dead Space 1 is also the superior horror entry for that series), no Dragon's Dogma, Red Dead Redemption, Vanquish, Bayonetta, Yakuza 3 or 4, Batman Arkham games, Katamari, Ni No Kuni, Metal Gear Rising: REVENGEANCE, and a whole heap more like current day releases such as Last of Us and the entire PSN digital set of titles. Oh and of course we're leaving out Xbox and XBLA, and Xbox exclusives up the wazoo.

With the WiiU however, you're funnelled into the same 3-4 games that are even worth playing on the system in any given half of a year, so you perceive it as having the better library. Your problem is a lack of research when faced with overwhelming choice. Not the fault of the library, but your own ability to parse information from the internet.

 

[Petrae]

Had a PS3 for 3 years.

Owning a PS3 made me realize im not happy with the Dudebro way of life. And the whole "but there are other games that are not shooters and they´re great!" im sorry, didnt found any!

Got a WiiU. PLayed Nintendo land, ZombiU and Wario. Had more fun than my 3 years with the PS3

WiiU: Not for Dudebros and their "way of life".

All of those PS3 Dudebros, I'll tell you what... with their Flowers and their Journeys. Oh, wait...

Truth is that PS3 has "non-Dudebro" games-- if that even has to be such a designation. You seem to have not looked hard enough, and now you seem to feel the need to justify your WiiU purchase instead.

 

[SolidSnakex]

This entire post is based solely on your assumption that one single segment of the consumer base is responsible for the industry as a whole succeeding or failing. This despite the fact that we know that the games that segment buys are only a portion of entire industry revenue.

I would say we just need to agree to disagree, except for the fact that there are plenty of examples proving your argument wrong. DS was practically DOA and the much more powerful PSP launched only 4 months later. By your entire logic here, that handheld generation should have never in a million years turned out the way it did, yet the DS went on to become the best selling system of all time.

People don't need to be wowed to buy something. They just need to feel reasonably good that they are going to have fun with it and get good value out of it. The wow factor causes an early surge, but lasts very shortly and doesn't ensure longevity. And that part is what brings the developers in.

From the point of view of developers it's quite clear that a substantial power upgrade is incredibly important to them. And if you don't excite them then they're a real possibility that they won't support your console. That's what happened with the Wii and that's what's happening with the Wii U. Nintendo once again decided to bank on a controller to be the main selling point behind their console. That worked beautifully with the Wii because just playing one game would instantly showed you just how much it could change that game. But there's yet to be that piece of software that demonstrates that for the Wii U. And what's more worrying is that there isn't even any upcoming games from third party or even Nintendo's own developers that seem like it's going to do that. Instead its main use is still offscreen gaming, which has shown to not be as big of a selling point as Nintendo may have though.

So that leaves Nintendo in a position where they've got a really expensive controller that's driving up their console price even though there really isn't any software that's justifying that controller to a large number of consumers.

 

[coinoperatedboy]

It doesn't take a genius to see that Nintendo shouldn't count on any support from third parties.
Nintendo fucked many things with the release with the wii u. They weren't ready in almost any form and have not yet released any first party games (except Nintondoland, which i think is grossly underrated).
They should have been ready with at least a few more games.
So they haven't marketed it at all, most people don't know of it.

I really like the direction Nintendo are going with the wii u, with local multiplayer games that are a ton of fun and very easy to understand. I have had my GF play Nintendoland and other coop games and we have had a blast, I've also had my sisters 13yo COD playing boy come over and enjoy the hell out of these games.

Regarding thirdpartie titles I think it has been a mixed bag so far.
We have had crap ports but also a few gems that haven't been given the recognition for some reason or other.
I think it was sad that zombieU got such bad reviews and it deserves more. Just like NFSMW-U was a bloody good game, to bad it was months late after the twins.

I love the indie titles for the wii u. I love nintendo to death for getting more indies on board.
I can see Nintendo creating a eco system on their own with indie titles and som rad first party support.

A lot of people say Nintendo should have gone toe to toe with sony and MS regarding the power. I don't agree. Nintendo must do what Nintendo does best, and that is innovate. One may debate if the gamepad was a good idea, but between the gamepad and wiimote&nunchuck and pro controller i think Nintendo have done a damn good job.
The amount of stuff and gameplay that can be created with them is great.
Loads of possibilities.
Some say they should have ditched that gamepad and beefed that hardware to some extent. I think that would be bad since then all you would get is a PSXBONE watered down wannabe.

My two öre.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

It's not a punch line. It's an observation of tone, one which suggests emotional investment colouring perspective, rather than dispassioned consideration of available data from an external view point. As if publishers' actions are some sort of direct affront to you and a company you presumably hold a liking towards.

Given that, it's quite clear why you think this is some grand conspiracy and ignore stark realities when presented with them. You cut out a large chunk of my post, just to quote that one line for instance.

LOL, after you decided to go "psychoanalysis therapy" I couldn't stop but laugh.

 

[shinra-bansho]

LOL, after you decided to go "psychoanalysis therapy" I couldn't stop but laugh.

You can laugh.

It's not psychoanalysis. It doesn't require deep training to see someone being emotionally invested in something. It's not like you're the first or last person to ever be such on this board.

It's just simple observation.

Nuance, data, facts have been laid out for you detailing the differences in situation.

If you're actually willing to see the points that other people are laying out for you rather then brushing it off as people serving as apologists for the terrible third parties colluding in their grand conspiracy, it would be much more conducive to discussion.

The Wii U is currently doing 38k or something?

May was 33K.

 

[Pie and Beans]

LOL, after you decided to go "psychoanalysis therapy" I couldn't stop but laugh.

Perish the thought that he's entirely correct. You're far too invested in one company to see the wood from the trees. Anyone that's crying "conspiracy against Nintendo!" is. You can laugh it off, but that doesn't make anyone pointing it out to you less right.

 

[M°°nblade]

Sure, they have differences, but both had bad headstarts. You and the others are relying on the differences between PS3/WiiU bad headstarts as way to make PS3 not seems like it had a bad headstart. It had. Sure, WiiU looks worse, but in no way makes PS3 not look a bad one. Thus, WiiU's detractors defends the idea to completely shaft the platform without consider the possibility of a recovery after a price drop and this line-up fall's release.

Like I said, not in exact same situation, but my comparison between them is based on the bad headstart both system had. PS3 managed to turn around and come back. WiiU can do the same, unless you're in the "doom and gloom" team.

Nobody is saying that the PS3 didn't have a bad headstart. People are just pointing out that the constant equalisation of the PS3 and Wii U situation to justify a conspiracy theory is deeply flawed. There's a difference between selling 'bad' and selling 'atrocious'.

Sure, the chances of the Wii U coming back are there. But no matter how you turn it, they are far, far, far smaller than the chances the PS3 had because it:
1. never sold as bad as the Wii U did in the first place
2. it had much better prospectives (pricedrop, futureproof hardware, online network, ...)

About major support. MGS4, DMC3, FFXIII, VF5, AC1, GTAIV, RE5 were all announced before PS3 was launched. This was big.

How wasn't a priority with the games I mentioned above announced?

Like you just said, those games were announced BEFORE the launch.

AFTER the launch, when the PS3 tanked:
- Sony lost the exclusivity of all these titles, one by one, except for MGS4 which they probably paid for a lot.
- Most third party games were developed using the xbox 360 as lead platform and then ported over to the PS3, with far less effort and running worse
- Many high profile games were pushed back until Sony dropped the price of the PS3 with $200 and the console was finally selling an acceptable 200k units a month in the USA instead of 100k. I believe FFXIII was pushed back to 2010.

The Wii U is currently doing 38k or something? That's atrocious.

 

[Didly]

Had a PS3 for 3 years.

Played dozens of games.

Two of those stood out: Red Faction Guerrilla and Just Cause 2. They were fun and free, and felt like PS2 games. (they were a lot alike, but at least they were good-alike)

(almost every thread about PS3 i talk about how Just Cause 2 and Red Faction are great)



The other games i played, seriously, i cant remember having fun with any of em!!!

I tried uncharted. I bought Resistence. I got Infamous. I tried Bioshock. I played Loco Roco. I gave Gran Turismo a spin. I had a HOME avatar that looked just like me. I bought Metal Gear 4 and GTA 4. Tried the Fat Princess Demo. I tried Blur and Split Second and got Dead Space 2. Everything was awful!!!

Sounds like you just like "shooty shooty boom boom", there is a market for you. Also, stop playing games that people suggest, I've never had that turn out well. Most of those games you mentioned, except Uncharted and Gran Turismo, I found uninteresting as well.

Play Journey. Play Arkham City. Play Dark Souls. Play Last of Us. Play Ni no Kuni. Play Vanquish. The list goes on.

The list you mentioned seemed to just be a "hype" list; a list of games that had hype, you joined it, played and were disappointed. Don't do that. Learn to find games that you enjoy on your own.

And for the love of god, play more indies!

 

[RadarScope1]

OP is assigning malice where there's merely apathy.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

Nobody is saying that the PS3 didn't have a bad headstart. People are just pointing out that the constant equalisation of the PS3 and Wii U situation to justify a conspiracy theory is deeply flawed. There's a difference between selling 'bad' and selling 'atrocious'.

No matter how you turn it, the chances of the Wii U coming back are there. But they are far, far, far smaller than the chances the PS3 had because it:
1. never sold as bad as the Wii U did in the first place
2. it had much better prospectives (pricedrop, futureproof hardware, online network, ...)

Like you just said, those games were announced BEFORE the launch.

AFTER the launch, when the PS3 tanked:
- Sony lost the exclusivity of all these titles, one by one, except for MGS4 which they probably paid for a lot.
- Most third party games were developed using the xbox 360 as lead platform and then ported over to the PS3, with far less effort and running worse
- Many high profile games were pushed back until Sony dropped the price of the PS3 with $200 and the console was finally selling an acceptable 200k units a month in the USA instead of 100k.

The Wii U is currently doing 38k or something?

I agree with your post.

Yes, WiiU is now somewhere around it. Yet, it's overpriced, awful advertising from Nintendo and few to none compelling software avaliable. Let's see if this changes by this year-end.

 

[M°°nblade]

I agree with your post.

Yes, WiiU is now somewhere around it. Yet, it's overpriced, awful advertising from Nintendo and few to none compelling software avaliable. Let's see if this changes by this year-end.

Agreed!

 

[cacildo]

Sounds like you just like "shooty shooty boom boom", there is a market for you. Also, stop playing games that people suggest, I've never had that turn out well. Most of those games you mentioned, except Uncharted and Gran Turismo, I found uninteresting as well.

Play Journey. Play Arkham City. Play Dark Souls. Play Last of Us. Play Ni no Kuni. Play Vanquish. The list goes on.

The list you mentioned seemed to just be a "hype" list; a list of games that had hype, you joined it, played and were disappointed. Don't do that. Learn to find games that you enjoy on your own.

And for the love of god, play more indies!

That was exactly what happened
All those games had a lot of press, a lot of name, a lot of high review scores.

I wanted to see "what the fuss is all about" and "if everybody is talking about and playing it etc they´re probably great"

And then i got em... and was pissed that i didnt like em!
Just Cause 2 and Red Faction were games i only knew about because of demos. And they were amazing.

About the other games you mention

I had Vanquish!!! And it was very good. Not as good as JC or RF, but good. probably the third best game i played on PS3. My brother is enjoying it too! Forgot about it above
The first batman was... ok.

Journey, Last of Us the second Batman, the dark souls games, i missed em all, since i gave my PS3 away last christmas and i had already given up on it a few months back. Last game i played was Sleeping Dogs on a rental and i remember i found it uninsteresting as GTAIV

 

[D.Lo]

If I were a publisher id not dare spend money on any game for the WiiU unless it was a title targeting players under 12 yrs old. That's just how Nintendo looks..and has looked to most of the gaming world.

I always say, nintendo failed to address the fact that their NES players grew up into adults who now make the game console choice in the house. These people are not kids anymore, mario cart and mario everything loses its appeal to many as they age..for some it is nostalgic and that's good, but sales do not lie, they have missed the boat.

Mario 'Cart' Wii is the highest selling game of all time.

the problem here is that Nintendo's hardware has never been stellar. They simply aren't equipped or possibly aren't interested in out-engineering Sony or Microsoft. The GC was better than the PS2 (though it launched WAY later) but the Xbox launching aside it absolutely crushed it in performance.

Xbox did not 'crush' the Gamecube in performance, it had more RAM and more flexible shaders, but the GCN had its own advantages, and was more powerful in some ways, and had the highest polygon count of the generation in the Rogue Leader games.

Also, it's pretty easy to make a powerful 'console' by stuffing a bunch of PC components in a box if you're willing to lose $4 billion dollars to do it. $160 lost NET per console sold, even including all money made back from software and royalties.

 

[SmokyDave]

Mario 'Cart' Wii is the highest selling game of all time.

No it ain't. Wii Sports crushes it off the top of my head, there are probably others.

Edit: Not that that invalidates your point in any way, just sayin'!

 

[metalslimer]

I agree with your post.

Yes, WiiU is now somewhere around it. Yet, it's overpriced, awful advertising from Nintendo and few to none compelling software avaliable. Let's see if this changes by this year-end.

And if it doesn't? If Ubisoft's games bomb? What will be the excuse?

No it ain't. Wii Sports crushes it off the top of my head, there are probably others.

Edit: Not that that invalidates your point in any way, just sayin'!

Way too packed in for me to count although a good amount of MKWii sales came from that standard bundle. Either MK or some CoD is the best selling not including a bundle. Hard to say with no real up to date LTDs

 

[SmokedMeat]

The PS2 version was actually announced before the 'Exclusive' GC version was even released!

Guess I'm wrong, but that's how I recall it happening. I had the Gamecube version preordered, and don't remember any kind of PS2 announcement at the time.

 

[impact]

Had a PS3 for 3 years.

Played dozens of games.

Two of those stood out: Red Faction Guerrilla and Just Cause 2. They were fun and free, and felt like PS2 games. (they were a lot alike, but at least they were good-alike)

(almost every thread about PS3 i talk about how Just Cause 2 and Red Faction are great)



The other games i played, seriously, i cant remember having fun with any of em!!!

I tried uncharted. I bought Resistence. I got Infamous. I tried Bioshock. I played Loco Roco. I gave Gran Turismo a spin. I had a HOME avatar that looked just like me. I bought Metal Gear 4 and GTA 4. Tried the Fat Princess Demo. I tried Blur and Split Second and got Dead Space 2. Everything was awful!!!

I have this thing, if i buy a game i have to finish it, otherwise im throwing money away. I tell you, it was HARD to finish most of em! A chore!!!!!

Gave the PS3 to my brother last christmas.
Right now he has the same impression as me: all the games are the same, most of em games are pretty bad.
He´s enjoying Red Faction and Just Cause 2, but he feels both are the same, he even mix em up sometimes (he´s older and funnier)

My brother likes Space sims and Horror games. He´s dead in the water with the PS3. The only space sim is (kinda) Xcom (we both hated), and the horror games DIED in this generation


Owning a PS3 made me realize im not happy with the Dudebro way of life. And the whole "but there are other games that are not shooters and they´re great!" im sorry, didnt found any!

Got a WiiU. PLayed Nintendo land, ZombiU and Wario. Had more fun than my 3 years with the PS3


PS: I played Dead Space on PC and it was great. Than i got Dead Space 2 on the PS3 and it was terrible!!! They dropped the ball hard, dont want to ever try DS3

So basically you like minigames instead of actual games.

Please buy The Wonderful 101 and Bayonetta 2 when they release. They will have the Nintendo seal of quality so its ok you will have fun, seal never lies.

 

[Canis lupus]

Is this WW or just US?

WW, thats right WiiU sold less than 400k worldwide in 3 months, can't wait on Q2 numbers.

 

[D.Lo]

No it ain't. Wii Sports crushes it off the top of my head, there are probably others.

Edit: Not that that invalidates your point in any way, just sayin'!

It's the highest selling 'primarily not bought included with a console bundle' game. Even though it was bundled itself later on, almost every contender for top selling games lists was bundled in some way at some point.

Likely the highest selling 'almost completely non-bundled' game is NSMB Wii, which basically backs up the same point!

 

[metalslimer]

WW, thats right WiiU sold less than 400k worldwide in 3 months, can't wait on Q2 numbers.

I don't even think it has sold 300k in 3 months.

Likely the highest selling 'almost completely non-bundled' game is NSMB Wii, which basically backs up the same point!

It was bundled. MK probably still wins as I believe it sold 25 million copies vefore bundle off the top of my head

 

[PdotMichael]

Guess I'm wrong, but that's how I recall it happening. I had the Gamecube version preordered, and don't remember any kind of PS2 announcement at the time.

Well, Capcom turned all GCN exclusive games (Killer7, Viewtiful Joe) into multiplattform titles because Capcom wasn't happy with the sales on the GCN.

P.N.03 was the only game of the Capcom Five that stayed an exclusive game and the sales were dissapointed.

 

[borghe]

From the point of view of developers it's quite clear that a substantial power upgrade is incredibly important to them. And if you don't excite them then they're a real possibility that they won't support your console.

riiiiiighhhtt... except:

That's what happened with the Wii and that's what's happening with the Wii U.

umm, the Wii had a SHITTON of third party support. Was a lot of it shovelware? Yes. Were the ports massively downscaled or entirely different games? Yes. Was it lacking in support? hahahahahaha. No.

This is where all of your "it's too underpowered for developers" thing falls apart. Yes Wii was a fluke. Yes its success caught everyone off guard. But more importantly than anything, it PROVED that, no matter those power of a system, if there is potential to make money off of it developers with support it. End of story.

PUBLISHERS don't see that potential on Wii U (I don't get why you guys keep saying developers. Unless they're indies, the developers and team leads are far removed from the people actually making those decisions). It has nothing to do with being "excited" or finding the system "sexy". This is all shit that's made up on fucking internet forums. You know why developers develop for a system? Because a VP of sales comes and says "Hey, so System X sold xxx,000 units last month and had a total of x,xxx,000 software sales according to NPD. How much was our portion of that? Oh zero? Well I guess we better do something about that then. Don't you agree?" At which point a team lead is like "fuuuckk....... Alright guys, what do we have?"

So let's talk about developers who actually make those decisions.. aka indies. Oh wait, the indie scene on Wii U is actually.. good? Wow. So let me get this straight. If a developer has to make a choice and has a modest budget, they choose to develop for the Wii U (along with like every other platform), but if a publisher (aka suits) have to make a choice and have budgets in the tens of millions, they choose not to.

That last paragraph is THE reality as it currently exists. And it doesn't have a damn thing to do with system power. Come the fuck on now.

So will Wii U sales turn around on their own? Not without some serious work by Nintendo of course. But at 8 months out from a company like Nintendo who is almost legendary for turning around slow sales, it is utterly silly to write it off. We get out to a year and it's struggling? Yeah, not good. 18 months and struggling? I would expect to see some drastic action.. because that would be epicly bad. But 8 months during the slowest time of the year and with a somewhat stronger lineup this fall? Yeah, reports of its death are being greatly exaggerated at this moment.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

And if it doesn't? If Ubisoft's games bomb? What will be the excuse?

No excuses. If it fails by this year end and PS4 and X1 sell great, it's done and you can blame Nintendo for fucking it up.

 

[SmokyDave]

Way too packed in for me to count although a good amount of MKWii sales came from that standard bundle. Either MK or some CoD is the best selling not including a bundle. Hard to say with no real up to date LTDs

It's the highest selling 'primarily not bought included with a console bundle' game. Even though it was bundled itself later on, almost every contender for top selling games lists was bundled in some way at some point.

Likely the highest selling 'almost completely non-bundled' game is NSMB Wii, which basically backs up the same point!

Ah, I wasn't discounting bundled games because I don't see the point, it just complicates things.

 

[borghe]

No excuses. If it fails by this year end and PS4 and X1 sell great, it's done and you can blame Nintendo for fucking it up.

See, this I agree with. If we get a year into the system's life and it still isn't even hitting triple digits during the holidays, yes then I seriously doubt Nintendo will have the ability to turn it around. But right now, in the summer, with no new releases of mention hitting the shelves? Really? That's the best time to assess ANY system's health?