Imru’ al-Qays;126171656 said:If you were representative of Nintendo gamers games like ZombiU and Wonderful 101 wouldn't be selling so terribly on the Wii U. We know what Wii U gamers like, and it's not what PlayStation and Xbox gamers like.
Imru al-Qays;126171656 said:If you were representative of Nintendo gamers games like ZombiU and Wonderful 101 wouldn't be selling so terribly on the Wii U. We know what Wii U gamers like, and it's not what PlayStation and Xbox gamers like.
I don't see the point in getting offended. You're free to provide evidence that Wii U gamers actually like all the same sorts of games that are popular with the rest of the market, if you have any.
R.I.P Deadly Creatures 2.Wii U owners do not buy shitty ass buggy games.
Wii U owners do not buy shitty ass buggy games.
40 mio 3ds.A decent percentage of "Nintendo gamers" may very well want AC and Call of Duty...but as we have seen on Wii U and 3DS, there aren't that many Nintendo gamers out there to begin with. .
R.I.P Deadly Creatures 2.
A decent percentage of "Nintendo gamers" may very well want AC and Call of Duty...but as we have seen on Wii U and 3DS, there aren't that many Nintendo gamers out there to begin with. Subtract little kids who haven't caught on to those mature franchises yet (or aren't allowed to play them) and you have the rest who a) don't care or b) have other consoles.
Group b has little reason to buy a third party game that runs poorly and lacks a decent online community/features. This is Nintendo's fault. They've repeatedly shown that they are unwilling to be competitive with hardware and they also refuse to allow for more widespread communication features for fear of harming children.
I agree to an extent with Amir0x on how they can go about rebuilding their software ecosystem. I fear that it may simply be too late for that, however. With the financials the way they are, Nintendo are not in the position to be throwing around money to AAA devs. Costumes and Nintendo character guest appearances have done little in the past to help matters, if we look back to games like the one NBA Street game on Gamecube and then as recently as Tekken Tag Tournament 2 on Wii U. Soul Calibur 2 with Link was an exception to that rule, probably because it was just a perfect fit for the game and SCII GCN was also extremely competitive with the other 2 versions in every other aspect.
I just don't see how this gets turned around without Iwata going back on what he believes are core values (which he keeps reiterating even after the Wii U failure) and massive amounts of money getting spent creating new studios and buying exclusives franchises that western gamers actually care about.
40 mio 3ds.
Imru al-Qays;126175316 said:Nintendo can't compete with Sony and Microsoft for the core. They're just not positioned to do it: Nintendo couldn't create competitive hardware at this point even if they wanted to, and bankrolling a bunch of Naughty Dogs and Bungies isn't going to do anything for them so long as their hardware is so out of date.
Nintendo needs to find some alternative audience and cater to them properly. They were halfway there with the Wii, but they apparently didn't understand their new audience at all.
Having seen the Nintendo aisle at Bestbuy in comparison to the Sony and Microsoft aisles, none of this surprises me. Total marketing failure.
Imru’ al-Qays;126175316 said:They're just not positioned to do it: Nintendo couldn't create competitive hardware at this point even if they wanted to, and bankrolling a bunch of Naughty Dogs and Bungies isn't going to do anything for them so long as their hardware is so out of date."
Imru’ al-Qays;126175316 said:Nintendo can't compete with Sony and Microsoft for the core. They're just not positioned to do it: Nintendo couldn't create competitive hardware at this point even if they wanted to, and bankrolling a bunch of Naughty Dogs and Bungies isn't going to do anything for them so long as their hardware is so out of date.
Nintendo needs to find some alternative audience and cater to them properly. They were halfway there with the Wii, but they apparently didn't understand their new audience at all.
Or maybe there is no such alternative audience and they should just give up.
False, and you know this.
Nintendo won't compete on hardware because
1) They've been successful at cheap components at half the performance (or less) of their competitors in the past
2) They prefer different architecture than competitors. This has been a constant since the SNES days. Whether this decision is driven by internal developer familiarity or just plain being difficult, we will never know. Nintendo's spoken about a hardware differentiation before. They don't like off-the-shelf components whereas Sony and Microsoft wen't pretty off the shelf this generation, and Microsoft has beaten Nintendo with Generic PC Parts before.
Wasn't the WiiU supposed to be related to X360's architecture to make ports easy?2) They prefer different architecture than competitors. This has been a constant since the SNES days. Whether this decision is driven by internal developer familiarity or just plain being difficult, we will never know. Nintendo's spoken about a hardware differentiation before. They don't like off-the-shelf components whereas Sony and Microsoft wen't pretty off the shelf this generation, and Microsoft has beaten Nintendo with Generic PC Parts before.
this has been happening since n64... nintendo console = nintendo games
ps: i bet bayonetta 2 port for x1/ps4 in 6 month or so
And...
3. A lot of their base won't buy $400+ consoles. That's pricey for the younger kid/family set--especially in the face of handme down smartphones/tablets with super cheap gams that work just as well to babysit young kids.
4. Even fewer core gamers would buy a Nintendo console as a second or third machine at $400+.
Nintendo tried what you're suggesting with Wii. It was made with exactly this same line of logic. They tried to make Wii as alternative for third-parties to follow their business model. This is was Iwata making clear what was Nintendo's strategy with the Wii:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2005/03/04/nintendo-president-talks-revolution-2
In the end, this didn't worked and few third-parties fully supported this idea. Wouldn't be a good idea to repeat something that didn't met their expectations. The best thing they need to do is change their mentality as most of the biggest publishers and developers disagree with this "unique" strategy.
Their base is diminishing and using higher power processors would not essentially equate to higher price. You're essentially swapping out one component for another. Nintendo preferred a customized expensive package design instead of a more elegant, possibly cheaper AMD APU design.
Imru al-Qays;126167756 said:If the Wii had been of equal power to the PS360 it would have been of equal price as well, and it would not have sold what it did.
If they want to have equal power to whatever Sony and MS are putting out, get equal ports etc. then it's going to cost the same as those consoles. They can't take huge losses, and if they go cheaper and still stay underpowered they are in the same boat as now where a lot of gamers will scoof at the hardware and devs won't bother with ports.
They've got to find a way to expand the market as they're highly unlikely to ever get core gamers back. If they can't do that, and still want to make games, they need to take a long hard look at getting out of hardware. They'd have to fail another time or two to ever get to that point though with their long history and amount of cash sitting around from the Wii and DS huge sales.
The PS4 launched and made profit for each machine at launch, at a decent margin. Pachter estimated $275 build price per console. Wii U launched at $299, had a deluxe at $349 and still managed to lose money on even Deluxe units. They're still forecasting breaking even on consoles as they sold, 20 months after launch.
Somewhere along the line there was a huge design mistake.
The sales weren't that great. So it wasn't worth the trouble. The PS3 version sold worse though? But on hardware that is very similar to the sales leader, which means it was worth the budget as it was probably relatively cheap to port.
Madden IIRC didn't sell that great on the platform either. So they attempted to mix it up, as the Wii audience was huge and so was the title, so they mixed it up a bit and tried targeting the audience a bit better in an attempt to increase sales. But now we diss them with our 20/20 hindsight and ask why they thought sales would drop. Well they didn't know at the time.
The Wii was again, a platform which did not have a large audience for what third parties were making their bread on. There is only so much experimentation a company is going to do before they give up.
I remember their attempt at a sims game, looked hyper cute. Yet it didn't do so hot. I mean, what are we going to say "Well it wasn't the best game ever so what do you expect"? Honestly it was a good attempt and they got little in return. So they just went back to the audience they knew. Its important to know your audience and what they purchase. Casuals? Tough to crack on a console. Difficult to know for sure what they'll like. This is why mobile is still dominated by entrepreneurial upstarts. They threw their die and won the lottery. While on console we know that shooty bang bang games do well with the young male demographic. And that's why you see GTAV on 7th gen machines and not Wii or Wii U.
Pachter estimated $275 build price per console.
Imru al-Qays;126171656 said:I don't see the point in getting offended. You're free to provide evidence that Wii U gamers actually like all the same sorts of games that are popular with the rest of the market, if you have any.
COD3 Wii outsold PS3 version. Wii version sold sbove 2M, while PS3 version was 1.5M. Deal with it..
A Wii on the level of the 360 (same amount of ram, ~half gpu power, ~2/3 cpu power) for 350$ would still have sold like hot cakes.
This could have been their (last) chance to come back.
The first people that bought a Wii were hardcore gamers, but they left when motion controls wore off and they realized that, aside from motion controls, the Wii was a last gen console.
The audience was there, but the console wasn't.
and CoD 3 on PS2 outsold them all.
What's your point?
No and no. $250 was perfect anything else would've have been pressing their luck. as evident by the 3DS and Wii U launch prices. The price point is one of the key reasons for the success of the Wii early on. Not that an accesible control scheme and new kinds of games didn't hurt. heh
and CoD 3 on PS2 outsold them all.
so what? there were a lot more of a playerbase on the playstation ecosystem than the nintendo one. consolidate technology on the next gen platforms and convert people up as they adopt new systems.
CoD was successful on the Wii, this is a fact.
But to say it was more than the other systems is not looking at reality.
Well I think the point (not that I really agree) is that if CoD3 outsold the PS3 version why was there no attempt to get Modern Warfare on the system in a timely matter. Honestly, I think the lack of CoD4 was the death of 3rd parties on the Wii. The reason I disagree though is that the horrendous online of the Wii would've kept it from becoming as big as it was on other platforms. I highly doubt CoD4 Wii would have outsold CoD4 PS3
I consider myself enough evidence of that. If that's not to your satisfaction, I'm sure there are plenty of Wii U gamers both on and off GAF that could tell you all about the games they play on their complementary consoles and/or PCs. Hence, generalization. Also, if you can't see how you expressed yourself in quite a condescending fashion, furthering this thread of discussion will be fruitless. In any case, such a conversation would more suitably be carried out in private. I just wanted to call this to your attention. You're not the first one to wrongfully try to pin Nintendo's failings on their customers, but you were certainly the first one likening them to cultural eremites and savage islanders while doing so.
Wii and PS3 were the next-gen systems at the time and they were competing against each other for the next-gen market. PS2 was losing it's steam by that time. Wii version outsold the PS3 version, so they had upper hand by that time for the next-gen race.
Really, this isn't that hard to understand.
Wii and PS3 were the next-gen systems at the time and they were competing against each other for the next-gen market. PS2 was losing it's steam by that time. Wii version outsold the PS3 version, so they had upper hand by that time for the next-gen race.
Really, this isn't that hard to understand.
You're forgetting about the 360 version here. If you're point is that they should have released CoD going forward on the Wii in a timely manner I agree, but CoD4 exploded due to it's online multiplayer which would have been severely gimped on the Wii. In the end, the series became a billion dollar franchise per game so I don't really think they made a bad decision ignnoring the Wii
Imru’ al-Qays;126181433 said:Consider for a moment the difficulty of downporting a game designed for an HD console to a console with the graphical power of a GameCube and you'll understand why Modern Warfare was never released on the Wii.
Imru’ al-Qays;126181433 said:I'm not pinning Nintendo's failings on their customers, I'm pinning Nintendo's failings on their inability to understand their customers. Nintendo's core fans (the ones who've followed them through the wilderness to buy the Wii U as their only console) are by and large conservative, insular, and divorced from the mainstream of the console gaming market. They play Nintendo games and they do not like non-Nintendo games, especially games that are violent or mature in content. That doesn't mean that you as an individual are these things, and it's not even inherently a bad thing to be, but it is nevertheless the truth for the bulk of console owners who only have Wii Us.
No and no. $250 was perfect anything else would've have been pressing their luck. as evident by the 3DS and Wii U launch prices. The price point is one of the key reasons for the success of the Wii early on. Not that an accesible control scheme and new kinds of games didn't hurt. heh
Imru’ al-Qays;126181433 said:Consider for a moment the difficulty of downporting a game designed for an HD console to a console with the graphical power of a GameCube and you'll understand why Modern Warfare was never released on the Wii.
Let's not forget NIntendo didn't even have a method of distributing DLC back in 2007 when CoD4 came out. But looking back, the real reason CoD4 seemed to skip the Wii was that Infinity Ward seemed to want to focus on PS3/360 at the time and like most developers had no idea the Wii would be the success it was. It's really hard to fault developers for ignoring the Wii that first year. It's success caught everyone, including Nintendo, off guard. By the time it was apparent how big the Wii was going to be, a new developed game wouldn't have come out until years later. It's also hard to blame them when Nintendo set the example with their own Wii ____ line of software on how to make big money.
COD3 sold above 2M and by 2007 Wii was already selling like hot cakes, so no, at least for Activision, they were already aware that COD had an audience there. They could let Treyarch port COD4 Wii simultaneously to PS3/360, like they did with all Wii versions, if they wanted.
So yes, they can be blamed for it.
Allow more third parties to utilize classic Nintendo characters in big game releases or crossovers. Spend more on promising indies and give them the budget to revive the AA category of games on their platforms, a whole legion of games which used to give Nintendo their stellar unique personalities. Approach devs for partnerships on games with themes and adult directions that Nintendo themselves are to scared to develop (or more accurately, inappropriately believe it'd damage their family friendly image - Disney has done fine), and market those titles as if they were just as big as Mario or Zelda or Wii Sports. Come up with their own bold new ideas that highlight why they've always preferred family friendly titles, but doing so whilst casting off the prohibitive net of the expectations and limitations of having to work with a very well established old gaming IP. Don't worry about Mushroom Kingdom, don't worry about how many cameos Luigi needs to make. It doesn't matter if jumping is in this game, and no princess needs saving. Instead, remember the time those games were born in and why they resonated the way the did, and try your damndest to apply those ideals to the new realities of 21st century gaming.
Hire people who actually know how to deal with online functionality, so that your next system makes it a cornerstone and not only competitive but boldly open and original. Unified Account systems. Working with pubs/devs to ensure they can release whatever services they have in mind for the network (same as Sony and Microsoft's), and then offer them various ways you can incentivize they're placing games on their platform it a sort of prioritized way. An occasional marketing deal here, special Nintendo-themed costume pack there... and you start lots of mini Soul Calibur II-esque system-specific boosts. You show publishers and developers you're humbled, and you're not above any sort of mutually beneficial deal. Tell them you have plans to go in bold new directions and to put those games at the forefront with just as much emphasis as our time tested family friendly affairs.
Again, Nintendo did their job perfectly on the Wii. Third parties dropped the ball and that audience was lost.
Did CoD3 sell 2 millionon the Wii at launch or was it spread out over years?
I did what I could. I bought AC 3 launch day with my Wii-U, AC 4, Rayman Legends, and Zombie U. Even though I have a PS4, I was waiting to purchase Watch Dogs on Wii-U. If Assassin's Creed Rouge came out this fall I would pick it up.
I wanted to prove that Nintendo fans buy 3rd party games. I give Ubisoft credit for sticking out with the Wii-U for this long. I guess I'm just fighting a losing battle.