The Wii U is practically extinct, how is it not in a really bad spot?
Are developers phasing out Wii U on purpose?
- Thread starter Spoo
- Start date
The Wii U is practically extinct, how is it not in a really bad spot?
rohlfinator
Member
Except third parties could make quick and dirty ports of next-gen games instead of current-gen games. Not many people want to buy a six-month-late port of Need for Speed or Mass Effect, but a day-and-date version of Destiny or The Division might be worth buying on a Nintendo platform.
That's where hardware matters -- it means you're getting support from the A teams instead of B team ports or last gen hand-me-downs.
It's the slowest season of the industry less than 9 months after the system's launch. Nintendo better absolutely be discussing what they are going to do within the next 2-3 months and for the holidays. But our outside view of their performance now? performance of ALL systems and software is sucking hard, the same as it does every summer. Wii U isn't sucking any harder than earlier in the year compared to the other systems right now.
Revisiting this conversation in mid-October will give both of us much better information to evaluate the health (or lack there of) of the system.
Its selling worse than 7 year old systems right this moment despite the season and no other new console from a major company has sold so bad so quickly since the Saturn :/
Its in a bad spot and its Nintendo's doing.
both PS3 and 360 were selling worse than a 5-6 year old system (PS2) for quite some time after they launched. Same thing with DS (GBA SP) and 3DS (DS Lite). Hell, I'm guessing that PS3 and 360 will GREATLY outsell both next systems this fall. Comparing a new system trying to find its footing to the WILDLY successful and still popular incumbents is just silly. C'mon now.
No one is arguing that Wii U isn't in a bad spot, I mean really. But stuff like "extinct" and "already dead and abandoned" is hyperbole at best. If you want to have a serious conversation, let's do it. If you want to trash the system with stupid hyperbolic nonsense, you're going to get called out.
My post wasn't to say Wii U is doing just fine. It was to say that gauging performance now is like talking about an athlete's health in the off season. Relatively pointless. Once the buying season starts ramping up we will have a much better indicator of the system's true health.
Nintendo's hardware decisions are only part of the problem.
The main problem with Nintendo consoles is that they don't attract a large enough portion of the demographic that buys 3rd party games. And that's the result of the way Nintendo position themselves in the market.
Publishers aren't going to release games like GTA, Elder Scrolls, The Division etc. on an ecosystem built around countless Mario spin-offs, casual and juvenile games. Not because of some mysterious anti-Nintendo conspiracy, but because it doesn't make sense from a business perspective. It's a clash in terms of demographic appeal.
There is almost no overlap between the audience that buys Nintendo games and 3rd party games. This is Nintendo's biggest problem. And as Nintendo's mentality keeps moving away from the core audience the situation will only get worse in regards to core games on their systems. Even titles like Zelda are playing an increasingly smaller role in the way Nintendo position themselves in the market today.
Does that mean that Nintendo should stop making games like Super Mario Galaxy?
No.
But, if Nintendo wants to receive 3rd party support, they need to position themselves in the market in a different way. They need to build a different image for their consoles and stop positioning them around the image of Mario or just as Nintendo Boxes.
They need to build their image and their ecosystem around a wider and thematically diverse library. Because, no, you don't appeal to different demographics by releasing tons of Mario spin-offs among many different genres. By doing this, you narrow your appeal and you just squeeze money from the same group of people over and over again.
They need to create, and promote, games that appeal to an audience beyond the hardcore Nintendo brand loyalist, kids and casual gamers. Because it's one thing having some of those games on your system, but it's a different thing building your ecosystem around them.
The main problem with Nintendo consoles is that they don't attract a large enough portion of the demographic that buys 3rd party games. And that's the result of the way Nintendo position themselves in the market.
Publishers aren't going to release games like GTA, Elder Scrolls, The Division etc. on an ecosystem built around countless Mario spin-offs, casual and juvenile games. Not because of some mysterious anti-Nintendo conspiracy, but because it doesn't make sense from a business perspective. It's a clash in terms of demographic appeal.
There is almost no overlap between the audience that buys Nintendo games and 3rd party games. This is Nintendo's biggest problem. And as Nintendo's mentality keeps moving away from the core audience the situation will only get worse in regards to core games on their systems. Even titles like Zelda are playing an increasingly smaller role in the way Nintendo position themselves in the market today.
Does that mean that Nintendo should stop making games like Super Mario Galaxy?
No.
But, if Nintendo wants to receive 3rd party support, they need to position themselves in the market in a different way. They need to build a different image for their consoles and stop positioning them around the image of Mario or just as Nintendo Boxes.
They need to build their image and their ecosystem around a wider and thematically diverse library. Because, no, you don't appeal to different demographics by releasing tons of Mario spin-offs among many different genres. By doing this, you narrow your appeal and you just squeeze money from the same group of people over and over again.
They need to create, and promote, games that appeal to an audience beyond the hardcore Nintendo brand loyalist, kids and casual gamers. Because it's one thing having some of those games on your system, but it's a different thing building your ecosystem around them.
I took this comment:
As an excuse for Nintendo to use weaker hardware. Apologies if that wasn't your point.
I don't agree with your assumptions that there's nothing Nintendo could have done to help 3rd party support. You can look back at the last three home consoles to support your theory, but I think that's a flawed way of looking at this situation. With the N64, it was obvious how Nintendo fucked up and lost 3rd party support. With the GC, the lack of software sales resulted in dwindling support, regardless of performance parity. With the Wii, publishers were caught off guard, but the lack of power in the system was likely the main factor to the lack of support.
There are good reasons why the past three generations really don't support the notion that the situation was hopeless for their next gen console. We have to look at the problems the current design is facing:
-The gamepad controller failed to gather the same amount of excitement and interest as the Wiimote did in 2006. This is due to the fact that motion controls were new in 2006, but a touch screen is old news in 2012.
-The absence of a generational leap in power. This is a big contribution in the lack of 3rd party support and will continue to be a hurdle going forward.
-Horrible marketing, especially compared to the Wii.
-Lack of software from the manufacturer. Nintendo admitted that it made mistakes with the 3DS in terms of rolling out software and promised to fix that with the Wii-U. Well that never happened.
-Lack of direction or identity for the platform. On top of the other issues, to this day, many of us have a hard time figuring out who the Wii-U is supposed to be geared towards. Is it the casual, core, or Nintendo audience? I hate using such demographics, but it's the easiest way to separate the types of markets IMO. This lack of identity with the system is also related to the horrible marketing we've seen so far.
-Price. With the lack of a jump in power, and fumbling with software out of the gate, it's hard to justify buying the system at its current price.
Now it's easy to see how some of these current problems relate to issues Nintendo has experienced in the past, but I don't see how 3rd party companies are at fault here. I understand they thought they could capture lightning in a bottle twice, and I don't fault them for that, but I believe they lacked foresight to the potential issues they'd face with their current design. Of course there's no guarantee but with a more traditionally designed console, equipped with more power, things could have turned out differently in a number of ways. With a more traditionally designed console they:
-Would have an easier time marketing the system, creating this much needed identity. A Nintendo console that offered a leap in generational performance directed at the core audience, an audience that has proven to be early adopters and buyers of software.
-The price would likely need to be more than it is now, but at least with a visible leap in performance, more people would have an easier time justifying the asking price.
-With more power, it would have been harder for publishers to make excuses to leave the system out. So for example, if it takes 3 months to port a game instead of 6 months, that's a smaller investment necessary to port said software. This would require less titles to be sold to recoup the money spent on the port job. We wouldn't see quotes from developers like 4A or DICE saying that it's taking too much work to get games running on the system. This is really a major factor that some are overlooking. There is no low hanging fruit with the system, to bring it up to just parity with current gen offerings, these studios need to make a big investment in the current platform.
-I'm sure you're thinking "performance parity didn't help the GC, why should it make a difference here?" Well in the PS2/Xbox/GC generation, it wasn't necessary to support all platforms when the PS2 sales alone usually were enough. Now it's different with how high development costs are. If it's easier to port a game to your system, requiring less investment, there is far more incentive to do the port since every platform helps recoup the cost. The problem now is the investment is far too great to port titles to the Wii-U.
Of course there's far more to this topic than what I'm describing here, but really the last three generations don't apply to what we're seeing with the Wii-U. Also don't get me wrong in saying that the lack of power is the only problem Nintendo is facing with the Wii-U or that every issue would have magically went away with having more power. I could already see potential issues with the above direction as well, I just don't see as many problems as they are facing now.
Moosehole
Member
Freaking Call of Duty sold like 10 copies on Wii U dude. That is not going to make third parties excited to jump on board.
On the other side of the coin, check out CoD4's sales on PS3 when it had these so-called "similar ties" to the Wii U.
It's a huge difference. And the Wii U is a full generation behind in tech when third parties are ratcheting up development on engines that Wii U can't even run. This situation really isn't that hard to understand. And third parties are not at fault.
At the same time once Nintendo drop Mario & Co from the line-up and rely on games like Pikmin and Bayonetta and TW101 and X people whine about "these games don't sell well! blah blah blah"
What your saying is a process that will take years and will result in some of Nintendo's worst preforming years while getting there. Wasn't that a point Nintendo made in making both the 3DS and Wii U launches less packed with Nintendo titles? To let things like Zombi U shine. A game that sold like shit apparently while NSMBU did alright?
shinra-bansho
Member
Didn't see this before. People keep trying to draw these flawed parallels. If you read jvm's full article, you'd realise not only is he being generous with regard to calculation, but that as the PS3's hardware was selling better it had sold more software as well.
The PS3's tie ratio was 2.3 by March, if that didn't grow through May, the system would have sold around 3.1M in software. The Wii U's revenues put software unit sales at likely around half a million less.
The PS3 was also $599. When the price of entry is high it will hamstring software sales. The Wii U doesn't have this problem, it should be selling more software. The 360's tie ratio through a similar period was 4.5.
This is without factoring that around 800K of the Wii U's software sales are solely NSMBU.
And no one is saying the software sales were great on the PS3 anyway, they simply weren't as abysmal. It's one of several reasons why there was no publisher exodus, despite displeasure at the mediocre sales.
People tend to take issue with the notion that the system is essentially competing for consumers against the PS3 and 360, but it is and will be, far more so than the high end and expensive PS4 and Xbox One. It's sales, when viewed against past systems, look more like a system struggling to compete for the tail end of a consumer adoption curve rather than leading the start of a new one. And people who are saying that hardware isn't a problem whatsoever, should realise that hardware is part of the problem with the product, if it is to be aimed at "core" gamers. There is no up-sell from current gen systems these consumers already own - a tablet controller is not cutting it.Well yeah, but this is Nintendo's problem not mineAll absolutely fair points, and ones nintendo has to figure out to not be utterly fucked. As I said to KageMaru, the best bet seems to be going toe to toe with PS360 instead of PS4BONE. Yes you'll still have price drops and massive catalogs to compete with, but at least at that point Nintendo DOES have exclusive desirable content AND room to still grow from a quality standpoint.
They absolutely should be working towards price parity against the PS3 and 360.
The systems were selling to different markets though.
The person in 2007 buying a $599 next gen system, with all of it's new shiny sheen, really wasn't the same person considering finally getting a PS2 when it hit $129.
Its hard not to use hyperbole when the sales of the Wii U are so atrocious. The gamecube, which was an embarrassment, was selling better during the same point in its life. The PS3 and 360 have never in their 7 years sold as badly as the Wii U is now.
Bigmac1910
Member
If Nintendo fans only buy Nintendo franchises, then I think it's time for them to go 3rd party.What's the point of making a box for only Nintendo games? I would love to play some of the Nintendo franchises on my PS3 or PS4/Xbone in the future. But I'm not going to buy an expensive box for 5 games.
Some people might say, but Sega blah blah blah, Nintendo has plenty of money in the bank to adjust it's development, and in the end it's not about the hardware, it's about the games.
Some people might say, but Sega blah blah blah, Nintendo has plenty of money in the bank to adjust it's development, and in the end it's not about the hardware, it's about the games.
To be fair, RE4's PS2 port was announced before the game was even out for GameCube. And not at the last second either, it was well before. AND they announced ahead of time that it would have more content on that platform.
While one would find it hard to prove how much that affected the GC version's sales, RE4 isn't really a clean example.
It was a relic of the time more than anything. Mass market DVD drives were still fairly new. Sony went 'whatever' and shipped the PS2 with a terribly slow DVD drive, hence the PS2's notorious load times. Some games let you install to a PS2 HDD in Japan to speed them up, but the functionality was strangely removed in the US version.
Microsoft countered the slower DVD drives with their standard included hard drive. This let them load data to a utility partition from the slow DVD upon boot and then stream commonly used data off the hard drive during game play. Halo leaned on this functionality, and a lot of other games were basically installing themselves upon the first boot.
Nintendo took the route of making the disc smaller. You can spin smaller discs faster more safely, and even if you can't, all your data exists in what is the fastest part of the disc on PS2 and Xbox. And of course, they were easier for kids to handle. The downside was the 1.5GB data limit. The upside was that it was really hard and annoying to pirate for the longest time.
That entire generation can almost be summed up as everyone had to deal with the shitbrick that was DVD at the time, and came up with separate ways of dealing and not-dealing with it.
They'd make less money per piece of software sold that way due to licensing costs, they'd also miss out on the money from licensing costs for their console. They'd miss out on the money from their consoles which usually turn a profit per unit from launch if not early on in their life spans. They'd also be unable to do any connectivity between their handhelds. I could go on but to keep things brief it's a horrible shortsighted idea, 34 million copies of Mario Kart plus the console to play it on made them a hell of a lot more money than 34 million copies of it on someone else's console would have.
Bigmac1910
Member
While true that it has worked so far, but even Nintendo is in the HD era now where development costs have gone up. At this moment they are loosing money on the Wii U, and very few 3rd parties are supporting it, the royalty fees they get are not nearly as much as it used to be. I also believe that even though they would have to pay a license fee to be on other consoles, they could sell a lot more copies of each title and even make "lesser" franchisees like Metroid etc sell a lot more copies just because the install base is much larger.
What should save Wii U is that, despite still missing Nintendo, Platinum and Sega exclusives, an OS completed and a first price drop... well, all these are coming. And Wii U platform is already pretty awesome, these issues solved will make it evident.
In few months I'll recommend a Wii U to any Wii owner I know, and I expect everyone will do the same. The narrative will change.
In few months I'll recommend a Wii U to any Wii owner I know, and I expect everyone will do the same. The narrative will change.
lwilliams3
Member
It will not be 'extinct' for long, at least in terms of first-party support.
Metallix87
Member
People seem to be very short-sighted, and insisted what is true today will still be true a year from now.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Extinct is a fairly good word for it.
I mean... if Nintendo can get the system selling at GCN levels it will be the single biggest rebound in gaming history. They'd have to increase their monthly sell through rate 2-3x just to fail like the GCN. WiiU makes the PS3's slow start look damn impressive in retrospect.
This coming from me. A guy that has to have his Mario and Zelda fix at least once a generation.
This is also the single largest fall of a market leader we've ever seen. PS3 by the time it stops selling will have sold 50-60 million units less than the PS2. WiiU currently will have luck selling 70-80 million units less than Wii. Right now that's a seemingly daunting proposition just to hit 20 million units.
I do think Nintendo in general has a more constrictive price barrier than either Sony or MS, but games and a price cut will only do so much. I doubt they will carry the system to a higher baseline than the GCN... and again even that is a daunting prospect when you're literally under that level by 100,000 units MONTHLY.
I mean... if Nintendo can get the system selling at GCN levels it will be the single biggest rebound in gaming history. They'd have to increase their monthly sell through rate 2-3x just to fail like the GCN. WiiU makes the PS3's slow start look damn impressive in retrospect.
This coming from me. A guy that has to have his Mario and Zelda fix at least once a generation.
This is also the single largest fall of a market leader we've ever seen. PS3 by the time it stops selling will have sold 50-60 million units less than the PS2. WiiU currently will have luck selling 70-80 million units less than Wii. Right now that's a seemingly daunting proposition just to hit 20 million units.
I do think Nintendo in general has a more constrictive price barrier than either Sony or MS, but games and a price cut will only do so much. I doubt they will carry the system to a higher baseline than the GCN... and again even that is a daunting prospect when you're literally under that level by 100,000 units MONTHLY.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Everyone knows nintendo's first party studios will work on it lol. Its the third parties that flesh out a consoles software release schedule throughout its years and that is what people are worried about.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Sorry for the disorganized post up there, but it really hurts to see Nintendo fans in such huge denial about the WiiU's prospects for the future.
This system is all but dead. It's being outsold by 3-4x platforms that have been on the market since 2005. To think that software alone will have an impact is insane.
It will need software, concise marketing, and a lower price to make any kind of dent. And even then there's no guarantee that it will hold. When the baseline is under 40,000 units monthly in Nintendo's largest market (just shy of half of all Wii's sold were sold in the USA) you know there's a rot at the core of the console that won't be fixed cheap or easy... if at all.
This system is all but dead. It's being outsold by 3-4x platforms that have been on the market since 2005. To think that software alone will have an impact is insane.
It will need software, concise marketing, and a lower price to make any kind of dent. And even then there's no guarantee that it will hold. When the baseline is under 40,000 units monthly in Nintendo's largest market (just shy of half of all Wii's sold were sold in the USA) you know there's a rot at the core of the console that won't be fixed cheap or easy... if at all.
TriangularDuck
Member
And the port of COD was after the game's release, on a series that people jump into day one to play with their friends. If the Wii U version had made any attempt to harness the Wii U's features besides off screen play, and was advertised as the superior version (which a non-lazy port should have been), there could have been a different story. I don't think Ghosts will do gangbusters on Wii U, but I bet it'll hit a million lifetime. Maybe two if you can pet the dog on the gamepad.
RE on gamecube happened because the creator of it hates Sony.
LightOfTruth
Member
It would be a dream come true if Nintendo went third party. I'm salivating at thought of having pokemon on my iphone and Zelda on the PS4.
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
Yup this is true. Don't forget of course that both Sony and Microsoft have the opportunity to put the screw in even further when dropping their 'old' consoles with MS possibly going to $150 and Sony at $200. Sony particularly has to because I think the current model is like $300 right now, and thats just not far enough away from their new premium box that will need its own spotlight.
Not only that, but they can incentivise even further with entire game packs like Sony jamming the Uncharted trilogy in there and of course what a packed in trial of PS+ brings, while MS could market a Gears trilogy box or, if they are sprucing up Halo 2 for re-release, some insane Halo Hexalogy box with Halo Anniversary, Halo 2, Halo 3, ODST, Reach, and 4. Not to mention both companies "family friendly" titles to push like LBP and things like Journey on Sony's end, and of course Minecraft and plenty more for Microsoft.
Oh and of course a GTAV bundle. Thats going to beast all the way up to Christmas.
All while Nintendo roll up to Christmas with Mario and Sonic again. Quality games, sure, but theres some point at which just sheer franchise fatigue is going to start really impacting perception there.
Well, nothing's really spectacular about TM's (no offense, TM, you're a good poster) post, considering that software, marketing, and a price drop are what "Nintendo fans" are clamoring will help the system in the first place. I really would like to meet the person that thinks software alone is the Phoenix Down the Wii U needs.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
There have been more than a few posts in this very thread elucidating that.
My point is some seem to be expecting miracles. The system is the lowest selling Nintendo system in America since the first few years of the NES. Back when they had to rebuild an entire market. Coming off of a system that had more than a few nonholiday weeks above 120,000 units. Weeks. It'd take WiiU 3 months to sell what Wii did in many nonholiday weeks through it's explosive start. Depending on the month WiiU is selling half as well as the GCN did in it's first year. It's selling worse than the Dreamcast.
Nintendo would have to hit the sweet spot on games, marketing, and price to increase their baseline to GCN levels. And that in itself would be a monstrous turnaround.
My point of contention isn't that the Wii U is in a bad way, it is, however, I don't believe those three things actually helping the system is some astronomical impossibility either. It's very clear where Nintendo has made mistakes with the Wii U, and, I don't know, call me foolish, but I'm not counting out the possibility that they can work something out.
I don't see the Wii U turning around. It is not possible to overstate how poorly it is selling. The only possibility is that sales are so low because its potential audience might actually be totally ignorant of its existence as they are not videogame enthusiasts and if Nintendo does a better job of explaining to the casual base that a new Wii has been released, perhaps a certain percentage of prior buyers may boost sales.
Problem is that the gamepad is not exciting. There is no free marketing from news outlets. I remember with the original Wii, mainstream media were enthralled and were showcasing the machine in all kinds of talk shows and programs for free. This was great free marketing that really put the word out. This excited families who wanted a cheap, unique game experience for the family and felt it was a perfect holiday gift.
The Wii U's tablet is not exciting and at best its received a blurb about its release and nothing else really. Additionally, I get the feeling most of the Wii's original core base has moved on and is not interested in purchasing any consoles to begin with and are more interested in smart phones and tablets which have really exploded in the last few years.
The best Nintendo can do is start planning their next system. Like the original Xbox, kill the Wii U after 4 years and deliver an exciting machine. BUT, I am not sure Nintendo is willing to create the kind of machine that videogame enthusiasts would like to see. I think Nintendo is completely in the dark, or perhaps in denial, or perhaps just stubbornly refuses to cater to the young male demographic. They seem to yearn for a broad age range and want to entice casuals who have clearly moved on as other devices suit their needs just fine with games that are often free.
If Nintendo does not change its philosophy then it is sitting on death row. It is a dead man walking. The business will wither away and they will no longer be in the hardware business.
Nintendo needs to learn from its mistakes with the Wii U.
1. Create a distinctive console. The Wii U looks just like its predecessor, making some people think the gamepad was a Wii upgrade.
2. Specs should be impressive. Videogame enthusiasts want value per dollar and they see specs as something worthwhile as it ensures new, impressive visual experiences. The value proposition of the Wii U is lost on the demographic that will be buying consoles this generation.
3. Launch with a suite of impressive software. Each system needs a "killer app". Something that will wow the consumer base. Nintendo not only needs an impressive first party "Nintendo" title, but they need other, impressive titles appealing to the gaming enthusiast market. They need a "dudebro" title, developed in house. Get Retro on that. Why do you have a western studio working on fucking Donkey Kong?
Will they learn their lessons? Probably not. It'll be fun to observe though.
Problem is that the gamepad is not exciting. There is no free marketing from news outlets. I remember with the original Wii, mainstream media were enthralled and were showcasing the machine in all kinds of talk shows and programs for free. This was great free marketing that really put the word out. This excited families who wanted a cheap, unique game experience for the family and felt it was a perfect holiday gift.
The Wii U's tablet is not exciting and at best its received a blurb about its release and nothing else really. Additionally, I get the feeling most of the Wii's original core base has moved on and is not interested in purchasing any consoles to begin with and are more interested in smart phones and tablets which have really exploded in the last few years.
The best Nintendo can do is start planning their next system. Like the original Xbox, kill the Wii U after 4 years and deliver an exciting machine. BUT, I am not sure Nintendo is willing to create the kind of machine that videogame enthusiasts would like to see. I think Nintendo is completely in the dark, or perhaps in denial, or perhaps just stubbornly refuses to cater to the young male demographic. They seem to yearn for a broad age range and want to entice casuals who have clearly moved on as other devices suit their needs just fine with games that are often free.
If Nintendo does not change its philosophy then it is sitting on death row. It is a dead man walking. The business will wither away and they will no longer be in the hardware business.
Nintendo needs to learn from its mistakes with the Wii U.
1. Create a distinctive console. The Wii U looks just like its predecessor, making some people think the gamepad was a Wii upgrade.
2. Specs should be impressive. Videogame enthusiasts want value per dollar and they see specs as something worthwhile as it ensures new, impressive visual experiences. The value proposition of the Wii U is lost on the demographic that will be buying consoles this generation.
3. Launch with a suite of impressive software. Each system needs a "killer app". Something that will wow the consumer base. Nintendo not only needs an impressive first party "Nintendo" title, but they need other, impressive titles appealing to the gaming enthusiast market. They need a "dudebro" title, developed in house. Get Retro on that. Why do you have a western studio working on fucking Donkey Kong?
Will they learn their lessons? Probably not. It'll be fun to observe though.
Again with the specs. It isn't a specs issue, it's a return on investment issue. It's not getting ps360 ports NOW and I'd wager that "dudebros" aren't going to buy a Nintendo console even if it had double the ps4 specs. Especially seeing as it wouldn't be sold at a major loss like the other manufacturers are willing to do. Who wants a 599 Nintendo console? Even less people than want a Wii u.
As far as retro goes - I know many on this board are pissed about donkey kong. Retro DID want to work on it, and it has far more selling potential than metroid did and does. That's all that really needs to be said.
Even if they made "super arena shooter bros" or some other shooter it wouldn't sell anyone who has their preorder plunked down on the ps4 to play battlefield or killzone or call of doggie.
As far as retro goes - I know many on this board are pissed about donkey kong. Retro DID want to work on it, and it has far more selling potential than metroid did and does. That's all that really needs to be said.
Even if they made "super arena shooter bros" or some other shooter it wouldn't sell anyone who has their preorder plunked down on the ps4 to play battlefield or killzone or call of doggie.
Again with sweeping specs under the carpet as some non-issue as if videogame enthusiasts have never clamored for significantly better graphics generation to generation. Pure ignorance of reality.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
Because it sold and they wanted to make a sequel to the game that sold well and was critically acclaimed.
Nice unoriginal use of "fucking" too.
I don't remember what the transfer taste on the GameCube DVD was, but this is backwards. The fastest transfer rate on a constant angular velocity drive is at the outside of the disc, not the inside. (If it's a constant linear velocity drive, then the data rate is the same throughout the disc because the drive spins slower in rpms as the head moves to the outside.)
Yes, as opposed to creating a new IP which fills a gaping chasm in their game line-up. They chose yet another 2D platformer, as if the New Super Mario game and Rayman Legends wasn't enough and shit Trine is a 2D side-scrolling RPG lite. Excellent choice. I'm sure Wii U sales will skyrocket :/
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
In the long run, the only thing that matters is compelling software selling to the mass market. We may care about specs. Most people don't give a damn. We are so myopic on this forum sometimes.
Software sells hardware - never the other way around. Anyone claiming otherwise is displaying ignorance.
You take risks with new platforms. You need big new IP which caters to the videogame enthusiast market. Instead Nintendo went with a safe sequel trying to appeal to casuals. Which would have been great on a successful machine, like DKCR was on the Wii when it had tens of millions of units in households already. I understand why they are making it, and it is a mistake. Plain and simple.
fluffydelusions
Member
I'd say yeah. I mean it's basically like 99% guaranteed that when a new game is announced it won't be on the Wii U.
I'm pretty sure I remember Dreamcast and Gamecube having amazing libraries full of near legendary titles.
It is not just software. You have to have mindshare. You have to excite the consumer base. Nintendo targeted casuals successfully last gen, and that audience has vanished for good. They are left with the videogame enthusiasts and they are excited by the newest, shiniest graphics.
Hardware is a key factor in the failure of Wii U. Not in isolation of course, but it is a critical issue. It altered the landscape, it kept third parties away as they did not wish to bother with a machine targeted at casuals and which their ports for 7 year old machines wouldn't even show much graphical improvement which if they had, enthusiasts may have been excited to purchase the console and its ports as they did with the Xbox 360 and PS3 back in the day.
Ignoring hardware specs is folly.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
No, that would be low install base/third party games not selling well on the system.
The outside is the fast part of the disc. Cf peak/average transfer rates of 2.5" HDDs vs 3.5" HDDs at the same rpms. 3.5" HDDs are faster because their platters have more "outside" area.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
And Sony and Microsoft have far more software to offer, whether from them or all of the third parties. They have all of the software the core audience desires, and you can have the upmost confidence, that your favorite third party franchise will be there, when buying one of their consoles.
With the Wii U it's virtually all on Nintendo's shoulders. Outside of UBI Soft (who is taking a wait and see through Christmas), and WB, Nintendo has to finance everything. I applaud them for doing so, but the sheer fact that they have to finance a Sonic game is nothing but troubling.
And that is due to shit specs. No hype, no mindshare, no sales with videogame enthusiasts. The casuals that made the Wii a success are gone. That is the only audience left and they care about visual experience. This is why Microsoft cannot sell the Xbox 360 forever and must have a new system. They have grown bored and it is time for new systems with dramatically higher power than the last generation.
No, it's really not. Nine months later and it's still crap compared to just about every console I've ever bought in my life. Nintendo had a year head start and they blew it. By the time they get their act together the PS4/Xbone will be here and it will be game over. There is no gimmicky waggle to save them this time around...the Wii U is dead in the water and anyone who thinks otherwise is in serious denial. Take a screenshot, bookmark the page, do whatever you want, this post is gospel as far as the U is concerned.
Yet there are still plenty if people who own and are still buying Wii U who enjoy the system. But you simply defend your baseless theories by either dismissing them or insisting that they are delusional. The entire problem to your argument is that you are providing one type of gamer as an example and insisting that is the industry.
What? Huh? Wait, how many people are buying and enjoying the Wii U each month again?
coinoperatedboy
Banned
Your user name and avatar gave me a chuckle.