Support NeoGAF

[marc^o^]

Unfortunately the market has moved on and people want more than that. People want a good infrastructure (MiiVerse is OK but it could be so much more). People want a great selection of indy games (indy has skyrocketted this gen but the eShop is basically dead). People want connected experiences, dare I say it, much more than local multiplayer. And a large portion of gamers want some decent specs to realise more grander ideas than they have been playing the last 8 years.

Some comments on your points:

Miiverse is evolving to something grand, private communities is a huge feature, I'm not sure people realize it yet.
And we have new miiverse updates every month since launch.

I believe private communities will solve some Nintendo issues with online. We know it's almost ready, and that they will include its support in WiiFit U, out of all games. Based on that, and the fact private communities is a mean to protect their younger audience (something they are paranoïd of), we can expect some progress here for future games. The bare minimum is to use this feature to include leaderboards. When you are one of the few serious arcade games providers, you ought to include a mean to compete online for scores.

3rd parties (those who are still there) can and do support online as usual, free of charge.

About local multiplayer. Nintendo doesn't get half the praise they deserve for what they are achieving in that field. Well at least kids value that. And kids are more important to Nintendo than to MS and Sony. Nintendo's existence relies on Pokemon, Mario, mascots. That's a still a chock to some, but that's their most important audience. Good thing is, they are still years ahead of everyone else in building game design made to please kids and gamers. most of their games work on all levels, like a good Pixar movie.

Now about the decent specs:
I'm playing the Last of Us which is blowing my mind. GTA5 also looks more interesting than any next gen game I've seen at E3.
There are more creativity in Nintendo land and Game & Wario than in lots of AAA games I've played recently.

I don't believe specs is the sole mean to support grander ideas than what we have been playing these last 8 years. Based on what we've seen at E3, it's not the case yet. It probably will eventually. On the one hand, I'm afraid studios will be even more risk averse. On the other hand, I can't help but marvel at what a studio like Naughty Dogs will do on PS4, or how amazing a real next gen FIFA will be. B

Wii U's audience is people who enjoy Nintendo game design behind their mascots.
Can Wii U specs & GamePad/Wiimote versatility bring new things, or old things people still love, while refining gameplay and convenience to engage with the medium (through off tv)? Answer is yes. I believe Wii U is a good foundation to foster creativity and greatness.

Real problems Wii U faces are not the ones you raised.

It's all about the 8 months Nintendo franchise drought/delays (execution problem) ; the dissonance between the price to entry - moreso with the delays - and a family oriented target audience ; and the amateurish handling of their communication, leading to an easy and effective execution from people not having interest in Nintendo taking off.

 

[Metallix87]

I'll still say, I'm quite shocked that Nintendo still hasn't even announced Wii Sports U. I would've had that title out in the launch window!

 

[marc^o^]

Without a remote its pointless.
Nintendo's greatest mistake, apart from the whole "everyone loves tablets!" controller idea, is not packing a remote+ into every box.

They bundled a wiimote with lots of games on wii, and based on their succes with this approach you can bet they will do it again on Wii U.

 

[kingkaiser]

I know Iwata's fanboys and defenders of his direction uses the GameCube failure as argument to defend Nintendo to keep it's underpowered hardware approach because they believe Nintendo can't compete in graphics against Sony and Microsoft, but this is bullshit, actually, persisting in this underpowered hardware for unique gameplay experiences is what'll make them to become uncompetitive more and more.

I think there is some misunderstanding here. Nintendo never claimed that they can't compete in graphics and that's because of that they are going a different route, it's because the market is simply not big enough to support three almost identical consoles.

 

[AzaK]

I think there is some misunderstanding here. Nintendo never claimed that they can't compete in graphics and that's because of that they are going a different route, it's because the market is simply not big enough to support three almost identical consoles.

Thing is

They wouldn't be identical. Nintendo's ones have their games

Nintendo could do powerful and unique controller. They need to just weight more towards high end tech. An XBO lite machine with enhanced split controller Wii Remote might have worked better.

All the other features would be different like MiiVerse etc.

Nintendo's choice of controller and low end tech (compared to PS4 etc) is failing badly.

 

[Dave Long]

You know, people like to call the Wii U Nintendo's Dreamcast, but the only thing that's the same is how an unreleased Sony console that we haven't even touched yet as an actual product is being held on high as something amazing. Does PS4 target nuclear missiles too? Are there even better claims? What dictator is preparing to leverage the power of PS4 to take over the world?

It's the fucking summertime. Nothing is selling well right now. Nintendo can't change sales of Wii U in the dead of summer. Let's just relax and see what happens this winter. Maybe the TV console isn't as exciting to people anymore? Maybe both Xbox One and PS4 are going to be products people have little interest in too? They are expensive. People aren't exactly swimming in money. I wouldn't count all these chickens before they have hatched...

 

[Effect]

I'm trying not to be to pessimistic about things in the end. What really will signal to me that Nintendo is serious about turning things around is when Pikmin 3 comes out in North America. I know they've already started new ads in Japan but North America has always been a problem on this front and things were horrible at the Wii U's launch. They have to say the simplest of things to explain what the Wii U is. The equivalent of "The Nintendo Wii U is Nintendo's brand new gaming console. The successor to the Wii" must be said in TV ads. The ads have to spell things out clearly so there is no confusion.

They must show game footage. Less live people and more of the actual game so people have a clear understanding of what they are getting and can compare it with memories they have of the Wii. This would have been so more effective though if Mario Kart 8 was releasing this year.

More then anything Nintendo has to come with a clear and strong message about what they want to offer with the Wii U. They must voice it every chance they get over and over again. Sony and Microsoft (people can hate on what they're doing but the have a vision of what they want to offer as a product) are doing that with their systems. Simply being the system for Nintendo games isn't enough. They have to show they want success and will fight for it and not simply rely on their brands to make them successful. That's how we get them releasing games without any advertising on the assumption they'll sell themselves because of the IP, Nintendo name, etc.

Nothing can be taken for granted. All the Wii U features must be showcased and explained. Don't hide anything.

I just hope they are smart enough to fire whatever marketing firm they've been using in the past. They've done nothing worthwhile when it comes to the Wii U.

They do need to diversify their offerings though and do so with the expectation they have to provide it and not expect it from third parties. Even if it's only a single game in certain genre that is constantly updated and pushed through the life of the system. They need to put out games in genres they've tried to avoid.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

You know, people like to call the Wii U Nintendo's Dreamcast, but the only thing that's the same is how an unreleased Sony console that we haven't even touched yet as an actual product is being held on high as something amazing. Does PS4 target nuclear missiles too? Are there even better claims? What dictator is preparing to leverage the power of PS4 to take over the world?

It's the fucking summertime. Nothing is selling well right now. Nintendo can't change sales of Wii U in the dead of summer. Let's just relax and see what happens this winter. Maybe the TV console isn't as exciting to people anymore? Maybe both Xbox One and PS4 are going to be products people have little interest in too? They are expensive. People aren't exactly swimming in money. I wouldn't count all these chickens before they have hatched...

Personally, I think it's very possible that the PS4 and Xbox One may not set the world on fire. It's quite possible that they may both underwhelm, and we'll have to come to terms with the reality that the industry -- as it currently exists -- is in serious trouble. Having said that, I'm not sure what the point of your post is.

While some may be getting carried away with PS4 fever, I think the more reasonable stance in regards to the threat it carries pertains simply to people noting that Nintendo will also be competing against shiny new toys when the suspected relaunch campaign finally kicks off. Maybe PS4 will be an unstoppable juggernaut, or maybe it'll struggle as well. But the launch of two new systems coinciding with Nintendo's campaign to salvage the Wii U certainly doesn't bode well for the platform.

And also, personally, I find all of the "is it doomed to be Nintendo's Dreamcast?" arguments to be rather counterproductive. Whether it's Nintendo critics making the argument, or Nintendo fans spinning criticism as sounding that hyperbolic, I think the sentiment serves to obfuscate a very reasonable conclusion: that the Wii U is performing absolutely abysmally right now. I don't think people that suspect Nintendo can turn the situation around are foolish, but I do think the extent to which they need to repair this platform needs to be properly understood, lest the person in question comes across as a blind optimist.

 

[SmokedMeat]

I just hope they are smart enough to fire whatever marketing firm they've been using in the past. They've done nothing worthwhile when it comes to the Wii U.

They need to hire whomever Microsoft has been using as of late. I don't know who they are but their Windows phone and Surface commercials have been hilarious. I love how they've taken jabs at Droid and Apple users, and the Surface commercial where Siri decides to play chopsticks is a riot.

 

[Dave Long]

Personally, I think it's very possible that the PS4 and Xbox One may not set the world on fire. It's quite possible that they may both underwhelm, and we'll have to come to terms with the reality that the industry -- as it currently exists -- is in serious trouble. Having said that, I'm not sure what the point of your post is.

While some may be getting carried away with PS4 fever, I think the more reasonable stance in regards to the threat it carries pertains simply to people noting that Nintendo will also be competing against shiny new toys when the suspected relaunch campaign finally kicks off. Maybe PS4 will be an unstoppable juggernaut, or maybe it'll struggle as well. But the launch of two new systems coinciding with Nintendo's campaign to salvage the Wii U certainly doesn't bode well for the platform.

And also, personally, I find all of the "is it doomed to be Nintendo's Dreamcast?" arguments to be rather counterproductive. Whether it's Nintendo critics making the argument, or Nintendo fans spinning criticism as sounding that hyperbolic, I think the sentiment serves to obfuscate a very reasonable conclusion: that the Wii U is performing absolutely abysmally right now. I don't think people that suspect Nintendo can turn the situation around are foolish, but I do think the extent to which they need to repair this platform needs to be properly understood, lest the person in question comes across as a blind optimist.

Just because I didn't say in my post that the Wii U is selling poorly doesn't mean I don't recognize that fact. My opinion is that a segment of this board in particular are on a runaway train to crazy land where Nintendo doesn't support this console. That's just silly.

Those same folks are also of the mind that PlayStation 4 is an unstoppable juggernaut of sales... and it hasn't even sold one unit! That's as silly as thinking Wii U is already dead!

If we go back to the OP for the thread, it's true that some developers are pessimistic about the Wii U, but frankly, many of them were pessimistic long before the console even shipped. And with sales not going as well as expected by Nintendo, they have every right to be pessimistic.

That said, Nintendo have the strongest first-party development studios in the world. They're not going anywhere. Only fools believe otherwise.

 

[fallingdove]

Just because I didn't say in my post that the Wii U is selling poorly doesn't mean I don't recognize that fact. My opinion is that a segment of this board in particular are on a runaway train to crazy land where Nintendo doesn't support this console. That's just silly.

Those same folks are also of the mind that PlayStation 4 is an unstoppable juggernaut of sales... and it hasn't even sold one unit! That's as silly as thinking Wii U is already dead!

If we go back to the OP for the thread, it's true that some developers are pessimistic about the Wii U, but frankly, many of them were pessimistic long before the console even shipped. And with sales not going as well as expected by Nintendo, they have every right to be pessimistic.

That said, Nintendo have the strongest first-party development studios in the world. They're not going anywhere. Only fools believe otherwise.

I don't think its foolish at all to believe the opposite. Iwata himself has said that their development teams are struggling with HD. That doesn't instill much confidence to corroborate your opinion. In fact, while Nintendo have talented devs, if they can't compete with the 343s and the Rockstars and the Naughty Dogs by pumping out quality titles relatively quickly, who cares what they have done in the past. The Wii U needs great stuff now, not great stuff 3-4 years from now.

 

[mantidor]

Far from the right choice. Wii's underpowered hardware was the reason for it's long-term decline and unability to keep it's numbers against PS3/360.

What is this nonsense.

It's cute people trying to spin things, if Wii's enormous success isn't proof enough power doesn't matter as much I doubt anything will convince you people otherwise. But at the end of the day this is simply not based in reality.

 

[Dave Long]

Struggling with HD graphics means very little because it's a hurdle that they just have to get over that results in more time required for one game. Where Nintendo is way beyond the others in first-party games is in game design. They have put more new entertaining ideas into games in the last two years than most first-party developers have done at Sony and Microsoft in the last fifteen years.

There's really no comparison. No one matches Nintendo there. No one.

 

[jvm]

Those same folks are also of the mind that PlayStation 4 is an unstoppable juggernaut of sales... and it hasn't even sold one unit! That's as silly as thinking Wii U is already dead!

I think the problem for me isn't to much the public but the publishers and developers. The publishers are (mostly) just finishing paperwork on their first fiscal quarter of the year (ATVI, for example, is on a different calendar). They're looking at what has and hasn't sold in the past three months and then looking at what projects they're going to greenlight for the future, and for what platforms.

The Wii U is not making a strong case right now for support in the future, in my opinion.

On the other hand, the publishers are looking at the projects they're already committed to (for different reasons) on Microsoft's and Sony's new platforms. Those are unproven, so they're not going to pull support for those now.

The difficulty for the Wii U is that it hasn't made a good case to publishers and developers for it to be included in some of those new projects. Microsoft's and Sony's platforms for the past couple of years have in several cases been dependent on each other for making third-party projects profitable (or more profitable). Target those two HD platforms with many of the same assets and some shared engine code, and you can hit a larger audience.

Now the same is true for the Xbox One and PS3, which (to my uneducated eye) are technologically more similar than their immediate ancestors were. Now much more can be shared between dual-platform games -- but these games don't appear to include plans for a Wii U version. The reasons for this may be manifold, but the net result is still that Nintendo isn't included in those plans.

I'm undecided on whether the PS4 or Xbox One will do well next year. We have a full year before we can hold their sales up against the current Wii U results. But at least in terms of mindshare we see Microsoft and Sony exploiting their moments at the forefront. That's the threat they pose -- not fanboy adoration, but publisher's optimistic expectations after seeing the Wii U fall flat and the known benefits of dual-platform cost savings.

 

[Can Crusher]

You know, people like to call the Wii U Nintendo's Dreamcast, but the only thing that's the same is how an unreleased Sony console that we haven't even touched yet as an actual product is being held on high as something amazing. Does PS4 target nuclear missiles too? Are there even better claims? What dictator is preparing to leverage the power of PS4 to take over the world?

It's the fucking summertime. Nothing is selling well right now. Nintendo can't change sales of Wii U in the dead of summer. Let's just relax and see what happens this winter. Maybe the TV console isn't as exciting to people anymore? Maybe both Xbox One and PS4 are going to be products people have little interest in too? They are expensive. People aren't exactly swimming in money. I wouldn't count all these chickens before they have hatched...

You can always look at it from a hundred perspectives. Thing is though, Wii U never really gained any traction and is selling less than the Gamecube did is it not? (timeframe)

The 360 and the Ps3 are outseliing the Wii U are they not? There's an image problem with the Wii U, from the box that makes people think it's an add on, to the lack of compelling software is there not?

PS4 and Xbox One certainly seem to carry much more awareness into launch than the Wii U ever did, and unfortunately for Nintendo the price of entry for one of those consoles is 399.
Even if the PS4 and Xbox One don't suddenly become Wii like phenoms, there are too many individual factors at play that make a Wii U like repeat unlikely.

And let me just say that trying to legitimize the failure of the Wii U as a consequence of the state of the industry, instead of the choices Nintendo made is disingenuous. Some fans even half hope the other consoles will bomb like it, just so they can point the finger at everybody but Nintendo.
It's not like Nintendo has set the world on fire these past generations, we like to forget that the N64 and the Gamecube came before the Wii. So out of 4 generations, they only had 1 in which they hit a home run. That makes it the exception, and it's time to accept it.

Is it the next Dreamcast? Nintendo has too much money to get dreamcasted. That said, it could perform poorly to the point where Nintendo cuts its legs sooner rather than later.

 

[Gartooth]

Struggling with HD graphics means very little because it's a hurdle that they just have to get over that results in more time required for one game. Where Nintendo is way beyond the others in first-party games is in game design. They have put more new entertaining ideas into games in the last two years than most first-party developers have done at Sony and Microsoft in the last fifteen years.

There's really no comparison. No one matches Nintendo there. No one.

You can't be serious about that. Nintendo 1st party, while still great and at a high quality, has been stagnating and relying on IP recognition for a very long time now. A unique and cool title will come out of them every once in a while, but they have been very by the numbers in the last few years.

Sony in particular has been doing a very good job of trying new things in game design. They don't always succeed as evidenced by some of their games, but their studios seem to be experimenting much more lately than Nintendo.

 

[Can Crusher]

That said, Nintendo have the strongest first-party development studios in the world. They're not going anywhere. Only fools believe otherwise.

They have the strongest brands, not the strongest first party studios.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

They have the strongest brands, not the strongest first party studios.

Where did those brands come from, I wonder?

 

[Pie and Beans]

Just because I didn't say in my post that the Wii U is selling poorly doesn't mean I don't recognize that fact. My opinion is that a segment of this board in particular are on a runaway train to crazy land where Nintendo doesn't support this console. That's just silly.

Those same folks are also of the mind that PlayStation 4 is an unstoppable juggernaut of sales... and it hasn't even sold one unit! That's as silly as thinking Wii U is already dead!

If we go back to the OP for the thread, it's true that some developers are pessimistic about the Wii U, but frankly, many of them were pessimistic long before the console even shipped. And with sales not going as well as expected by Nintendo, they have every right to be pessimistic.

That said, Nintendo have the strongest first-party development studios in the world. They're not going anywhere. Only fools believe otherwise.

You appear to be trying to sugar coat quite a lot. PS4 and Xbone pre-orders are preeeetttty darn healthy, with full third party support. The "lol maybe CONSOLES are just doomed" kamikaze hopes approach of defending Nintendo's disaster is pretty thinly veiled.

Meanwhile not "some" developers are pessimistic about WiiU. ALL third parties are. This winter will mark the end of their support, with no other projects greenlit until other third party starts selling on the system.

For Nintendo's strong first party (theyre not the strongest anymore as evidenced by struggling to get games out on their own HD system for a whole year), a console doesnt do well with just first party. Thats just not how this shakes out. They couldnt carry the Gamecube, they can't carry this.

Oh and lol at Nintendo being the kings/queens of game design innovation. They don't own that particular avenue, and they certainly aint been showing their muscle for quite a while.

 

[Gartooth]

Where did those brands come from, I wonder?

The 80's and 90's where the development teams and employees making the games were very different than they are now. Since then teams and studios have been restructured, new people have been brought on the series, and those senior game designers are probably in senior positions at Nintendo overlooking the creation of games rather than actually having their hands in them.

 

[Scrawnton]

The 80's and 90's where the development teams and employees making the games were very different than they are now. Since then teams and studios have been restructured, new people have been brought on the series, and those senior game designers are probably in senior positions at Nintendo overlooking the creation of games rather than actually having their hands in them.

the problem is not that nintendo doesnt have the talent, they refuse to higher thousands of developers to quickly make the games their brilliant designers come up with.

Nintendo needs to hire more developers, that is the end of it. They admitted to shuffling developers form the pikmin team to the nintendo land and NSMBU team to make those games. The logical thing to do would be higher new people to finish those games, or contract employers, NOT steal people from another game to finish a launch game because then you have to end up delaying pikmin and pissing your fans off..

 

[fallingdove]

Struggling with HD graphics means very little because it's a hurdle that they just have to get over that results in more time required for one game. Where Nintendo is way beyond the others in first-party games is in game design. They have put more new entertaining ideas into games in the last two years than most first-party developers have done at Sony and Microsoft in the last fifteen years.

There's really no comparison. No one matches Nintendo there. No one.

Struggling with HD graphics means a hell of a lot when your competitors have already mastered the process. Do you honestly believe that Nintendo - lacking third party support, can afford to take an extra year or two to release compelling software? I don't care if the greatest games the world has ever known are in the Nintendo pipeline, if PS4 and Xbone build up enough momentum, Nintendo will be an afterthought for a second generation in a row.

 

[Kimawolf]

Struggling with HD graphics means a hell of a lot when your competitors have already mastered the process. Do you honestly believe that Nintendo - lacking third party support, can afford to take an extra year or two to release compelling software? I don't care if the greatest games the world has ever known are in the Nintendo pipeline, if PS4 and Xbone build up enough momentum, Nintendo will be an afterthought for a second generation in a row.

See this is where personal taste comes in. The Wii was not an "Afterthought" it WAS the generation, it is what propelled the industry into the giant bubble that makes it think it's bigger than it is. do you REALLY think those 100 million Wii owners will just pick up a PS4 or XB1? no. To me and many others the 360 and Ps3 could have not even existed and it would not have made much difference. (I do most my gaming on the PC, so for me actually the 360 and PS3 harmed my gaming... but it's another thread for that...) So different tastes for different people, but let's not downplay what the Wii did because you happen to not like the games it had, or the system, or whatever. I happened to think personally the wii mote was one of the biggest innovations of the last generation, and it was smart for Sony to copy it.

And Nintendo will keep truckin along as they do no matter what the other two do, it's only a matter of how far they fall, not if they self destruct.

 

[Shion]

Sounds right. The whole thing is extremely worrying. Seeing the figures and then reading Iwata's comments about how publishers will change their tune, there are titles yet to be announced, and so forth... what are we supposed to make of that?

That he's either trying to calm down investors by lying to them, or that he's absolutely clueless about how things actually work.

Aside from the technical factors that make next-gen games impossible on Wii U, if Iwata actually believes that, by releasing a bunch of cute platformers and Mario spin-offs, Wii U will suddenly transform into a viable ecosystem for 3rd party games like GTA 5, The Division, Destiny, Call of Duty, Witcher 3 etc, then, he's in for a rude awakening.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

What is this nonsense.

It's cute people trying to spin things, if Wii's enormous success isn't proof enough power doesn't matter as much I doubt anything will convince you people otherwise. But at the end of the day this is simply not based in reality.

That's why I said it was a short-term success. Wii couldn't stand a full generation against PS3/360.

 

[Aaron Strife]

You can't be serious about that. Nintendo 1st party, while still great and at a high quality, has been stagnating and relying on IP recognition for a very long time now. A unique and cool title will come out of them every once in a while, but they have been very by the numbers in the last few years.

Sony in particular has been doing a very good job of trying new things in game design. They don't always succeed as evidenced by some of their games, but their studios seem to be experimenting much more lately than Nintendo.

Nintendo may be using the same IPs, but they've been pretty good about injecting new ideas to make them fresh and exciting. Mario Galaxy, for instance.

Sony's been pretty good about diversifying their library, but their own IPs aren't particularly inspired. They're just takes off of established genres that they happen to do well.

 

[Vermillion]

Nintendo may be using the same IPs, but they've been pretty good about injecting new ideas to make them fresh and exciting. Mario Galaxy, for instance.

Sony's been pretty good about diversifying their library, but their own IPs aren't particularly inspired. They're just takes off of established genres that they happen to do well.

Huh. Superhero, zombie, shooter... huh, interesting.

 

[Gartooth]

Nintendo may be using the same IPs, but they've been pretty good about injecting new ideas to make them fresh and exciting. Mario Galaxy, for instance.

Sony's been pretty good about diversifying their library, but their own IPs aren't particularly inspired. They're just takes off of established genres that they happen to do well.

And this makes Nintendo better how? Yes when Nintendo does use a new idea or concept in a game, for the most part they tend to execute it very well. However they have been playing it very very safe in recent years, the only game from 2012 until now that I can think of where Nintendo took a risk with changing the game design in an existing IP is Kid Icarus: Uprising. (and that game was incredible)

Your Sony quote on the other hand doesn't make much sense either. Yes every once in a while we get a Playstation All-Stars, but your discrediting the innovation that Sony's 1st parties have been putting out. I wouldn't call the likes of Journey and LittleBigPlanet as derivative of other games.

Nintendo 1st party as it stands is high quality and highly polished, arguably one of the best in the industry when it comes to those things. Cutting edge or breaking the mold on game design though? I don't see it very often to see that kind of praise warranted.

 

[mantidor]

That's why I said it was a short-term success. Wii couldn't stand a full generation against PS3/360.

Full generation? Nintendo moped the floor from 2006 to 2010, the normal gen cycle of five years, since when "full generation" means more than five years? since it fits your idea that the Wii was a "short term" success?

That this past gen was abnormally long, for many reasons, including the financial disaster it was for some of these companies and needed to recover the losses as much as possible, in no way or form makes the Wii a "short term" success.

 

[Vermillion]

And this makes Nintendo better how? Yes when Nintendo does use a new idea or concept in a game, for the most part they tend to execute it very well. However they have been playing it very very safe in recent years, the only game from 2012 until now that I can think of where Nintendo took a risk with changing the game design in an existing IP is Kid Icarus: Uprising. (and that game was incredible)

Your Sony quote on the other hand doesn't make much sense either. Yes every once in a while we get a Playstation All-Stars, but your discrediting the innovation that Sony's 1st parties have been putting out. I wouldn't call the likes of Journey and LittleBigPlanet as derivative of other games.

Nintendo 1st party as it stands is high quality and highly polished, arguably one of the best in the industry when it comes to those things. Cutting edge or breaking the mold on game design though? I don't see it very often to see that kind of praise warranted.

Yup. And this round of Wii U games seems to look merely "good" not "groundbreaking."

 

[Snowden's Secret]

That he's either trying to calm down investors by lying to them, or that he's absolutely clueless about how things actually work.

Aside from the technical factors that make next-gen games impossible on Wii U, if Iwata actually believes that, by releasing a bunch of cute platformers and Mario spin-offs, Wii U will suddenly transform into a viable ecosystem for 3rd party games like GTA 5, The Division, Destiny, Call of Duty, Witcher 3 etc, then, he's in for a rude awakening.

I think it's people that think Nintendo needs the "3rd party games like GTA 5, The Division, Destiny, Call of Duty, Witcher 3 etc," who are mistaken. Nintendo needs and wants third party exclusive games.

How is having a mutliplat a reason to get a console? If all three consoles have a game, it's a common denominator and cancels out. Not having a multiplat may be a reason to not choose a certain console (i.e. I won't buy Wii U but that doesn't make you choose PS4 over XBONE, for example). I imagine that Nintendo (rightly or wrongly) wants to sell consoles by being the console people want ("We have Smash Bros!") and not by not being the console people don't want ("No DRM!")

Let's be honest, if Witcher 3 were multiplat the Nintendo version would likely sell the fewest copies (even if Wii U has the largest install base). This will be apparent next holiday when the Wii U will (most likely) have a larger base than either PS4/XBONE but it's multiplats will still (most likely) perform worse. But if Witcher 3 were Nintendo exclusive the situation would be much different.

Iwata has said repeatedly that Nintendo's goal is to provide games and experiences you can't have anywhere else. That's why they include "gimmicks" in any hardware, that's why they never release even really old games on mobile platforms, it's why Wii U has the largest number of exclusive games this holiday (known at current).

 

[Kimawolf]

Full generation? Nintendo moped the floor from 2006 to 2010, the normal gen cycle of five years, since when "full generation" means more than five years? since it fits your idea that the Wii was a "short term" success?

That this past gen was abnormally long, for many reasons, including the financial disaster it was for some of these companies and needed to recover the losses as much as possible, in no way or form makes the Wii a "short term" success.

Yeah I don't think people really grasp that. This generation went on longer than the "norm" because Sony and MS and a bevy of 3rd parties HAD NO CHOICE. They had to extend it because of the financial mess they were in, not because of anything else. The Wii lasted a normal generation, and even now, the other two are just now trying to catch up to it.

And now we're poised for everyone to make the same mistakes, releasing the exact same kind of games, and the industry will be saved? the only thing that saved the industry last generation was little SD box with a waggle control, why would another PS3 and Another 360 save anything when they were dragged along by the SD box before hand?

 

[Roto13]

Far from the right choice. Wii's underpowered hardware was the reason for it's long-term decline and unability to keep it's numbers against PS3/360.

People keep saying this as though the Wii isn't the most profitable current generation console by a huge margin.

Oh, the Wii was insanely successful and made Nintendo bazillions of dollars, but it was all for nothing because it's not selling RIGHT NOW!

 

[fallingdove]

See this is where personal taste comes in. The Wii was not an "Afterthought" it WAS the generation, it is what propelled the industry into the giant bubble that makes it think it's bigger than it is. do you REALLY think those 100 million Wii owners will just pick up a PS4 or XB1? no. To me and many others the 360 and Ps3 could have not even existed and it would not have made much difference. (I do most my gaming on the PC, so for me actually the 360 and PS3 harmed my gaming... but it's another thread for that...) So different tastes for different people, but let's not downplay what the Wii did because you happen to not like the games it had, or the system, or whatever. I happened to think personally the wii mote was one of the biggest innovations of the last generation, and it was smart for Sony to copy it.

And Nintendo will keep truckin along as they do no matter what the other two do, it's only a matter of how far they fall, not if they self destruct.

I actually don't think that Nintendo will ever self destruct. They will always retain a specific part of the market because of their risk adverse strategies.

I am of the opinion however, that outside of a few really incredible games, the Wii was failure of a console and a high percentage of the 100 million buyers of the console were always going to be lost this next generation regardless of what the big three did. It was a novelty console, something SO unique and accessible that people that don't like video games liked what it had to offer. The Wii U is not unique, nor is it particularly accessible for the same market that enjoyed the Wii - so what does the Wii U have left? It has its tried and true franchises from it's fantastic development teams that are not being released often enough.

For me the PS3 and 360 added as much good and bad to the industry as the Wii did. I can appreciate the efforts Nintendo made to popularize motion gaming, but really, if Nintendo had any confidence in the Wii's "innovation" they should have bet on that horse instead of taking a half step in the direction of the PS4 and Xbone, and a half step in the direction of smart phones/tablets. If Nintendo had released a Wii HD with more precise motion controls, and was on par with the PS4 and Xbone, I might have kept it instead of selling the Wii U like I did a month or so after I purchased it.

 

[Aaron Strife]

And this makes Nintendo better how? Yes when Nintendo does use a new idea or concept in a game, for the most part they tend to execute it very well. However they have been playing it very very safe in recent years, the only game from 2012 until now that I can think of where Nintendo took a risk with changing the game design in an existing IP is Kid Icarus: Uprising. (and that game was incredible)

Your Sony quote on the other hand doesn't make much sense either. Yes every once in a while we get a Playstation All-Stars, but your discrediting the innovation that Sony's 1st parties have been putting out. I wouldn't call the likes of Journey and LittleBigPlanet as derivative of other games.

Nintendo 1st party as it stands is high quality and highly polished, arguably one of the best in the industry when it comes to those things. Cutting edge or breaking the mold on game design though? I don't see it very often to see that kind of praise warranted.

I thought most of the games in NintendoLand were pretty original and well executed, but hur minigame collection.

How is LBP not derivative? It's a platformer. That genre's been around since Pitfall Harry. The difference here is you can make your own levels and shit, which is cool, but something I remember wanting when I was a kid playing Mario and Sonic. It's an obvious step forward, but sure, props to Sony for doing it.

You could say Journey, but if we're counting PSN titles, we may as well count Nintendo's eShop titles then. Like Dillon's Rolling Western, HarmoKnight, and Pushmo/Crashmo.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

Full generation? Nintendo moped the floor from 2006 to 2010, the normal gen cycle of five years, since when "full generation" means more than five years? since it fits your idea that the Wii was a "short term" success?

That this past gen was abnormally long, for many reasons, including the financial disaster it was for some of these companies and needed to recover the losses as much as possible, in no way or form makes the Wii a "short term" success.

This is no excuse for Wii's sales decline and their consequently premature death. This was unprecedented in the gaming history for a leading system to fade away while two systems with lower userbase managed to remain active and supported by third-parties. Wii was basically an slightly enhanced GCN with motion controls, pretty much a PS2/GCN/Xbox system competing against a next-gen hardware-wise. You're talking like Wii was a generation above their predecessor hardware-wise, it wasn't. It was next-gen because of the motion controller gameplay. Third-parties didn't wanted to bring their PS3/360 games for it because it lacked the hardware and the control config was difficult to adapt them, at least this were their excuses.

Your "full generation" concept of 5 years isn't accurate to represent Wii's situation, hence it was a very different system from the average.

Yes, Wii was short-term success and they couldn't compete against PS3/360 for too long. Wii could manage to compete in it's first years because HD development was in initial stages and wasn't a huge gap of difference from PS2/Wii graphics, but after the difference became clear and clear, Wii started to loose appeal to the core market and only casuals and Nintendo loyal userbase kept the interest.

Don't be an apologist.

Yeah I don't think people really grasp that. This generation went on longer than the "norm" because Sony and MS and a bevy of 3rd parties HAD NO CHOICE. They had to extend it because of the financial mess they were in, not because of anything else. The Wii lasted a normal generation, and even now, the other two are just now trying to catch up to it.

And now we're poised for everyone to make the same mistakes, releasing the exact same kind of games, and the industry will be saved? the only thing that saved the industry last generation was little SD box with a waggle control, why would another PS3 and Another 360 save anything when they were dragged along by the SD box before hand?

Yet, besides all the struggling PS3/360 had and huge userbase gap, Nintendo didn't managed to keep Wii alive and the third-parties on board.

 

[Woo-Fu]

Where did those brands come from, I wonder?

The past, you're living in it.

 

[btrboyev]

This is no excuse for Wii's sales decline and their consequently premature death. This was unprecedented in the gaming history for a leading system to fade away while two systems with lower userbase managed to remain active and supported by third-parties. Wii was basically an slightly enhanced GCN with motion controls, pretty much a PS2/GCN/Xbox system competing against a next-gen hardware-wise. You're talking like Wii was a generation above their predecessor hardware-wise, it wasn't. It was next-gen because of the motion controller gameplay. Third-parties didn't wanted to bring their PS3/360 games for it because it lacked the hardware and the control config was difficult to adapt them, at least this were their excuses.

Your "full generation" concept of 5 years isn't accurate to represent Wii's situation, hence it was a very different system from the average.

Yes, Wii was short-term success and they couldn't compete against PS3/360 for too long. Wii could manage to compete in it's first years because HD development was in initial stages and wasn't a huge gap of difference from PS2/Wii graphics, but after the difference became clear and clear, Wii started to loose appeal to the core market and only casuals and Nintendo loyal userbase kept the interest.

Don't be an apologist.




Yet, besides all the struggling PS3/360 had and huge userbase gap, Nintendo didn't managed to keep Wii alive and the third-parties on board.

The Wii outhandedly outsold both HD systems from 2006- mid-2010, Nintendo stopped supporting the Wii with games other than Zelda by the end of 2010. That's what led to it's downswing. They also shifted their focus to the 3DS.

 

[Shion]

I think it's people that think Nintendo needs the "3rd party games like GTA 5, The Division, Destiny, Call of Duty, Witcher 3 etc," who are mistaken. Nintendo needs and wants third party exclusive games.

How is having a mutliplat a reason to get a console? If all three consoles have a game, it's a common denominator and cancels out. Not having a multiplat may be a reason to not choose a certain console (i.e. I won't buy Wii U but that doesn't make you choose PS4 over XBONE, for example). I imagine that Nintendo (rightly or wrongly) wants to sell consoles by being the console people want ("We have Smash Bros!") and not by not being the console people don't want ("No DRM!")

Let's be honest, if Witcher 3 were multiplat the Nintendo version would likely sell the fewest copies (even if Wii U has the largest install base). This will be apparent next holiday when the Wii U will (most likely) have a larger base than either PS4/XBONE but it's multiplats will still (most likely) perform worse. But if Witcher 3 were Nintendo exclusive the situation would be much different.

Iwata has said repeatedly that Nintendo's goal is to provide games and experiences you can't have anywhere else. That's why they include "gimmicks" in any hardware, that's why they never release even really old games on mobile platforms, it's why Wii U has the largest number of exclusive games this holiday (known at current).

Monetary reasons have made 3rd party exclusives disappear.

No one is going to invest in any serious projects just to release them on a single console in this day and age (let alone on a console that is bombing).

Publishers make serious investments only for multiplatform games because they can target millions of users at once.

Nintendo won't be getting any relevant 3rd party exclusives.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

The past, you're living in it.

Sony and Microsoft have old brands that people grew up with, no?

Smash Bros and PSASBR both came out at roughly the same time into each company's life in games (third generation of hardware) but one performed much better than the other. If gamers are propelled by nostalgia (which should have been equal in both cases) then shouldn't they have performed equally?

Conversely, aren't all series/characters/games new at some point? How did they get popular in the first place?

Also, if nostalgia were the reason for the strength of Nintendo's games, why did the Wii generation of games perform better than the prior two?

Nintendo won't be getting any relevant 3rd party exclusives.

Before responding to this, I'd like to know what your definition of "relevant" is?

 

[The Horror the horror]

The past, you're living in it.

How far back are we going, because I can name some relatively new Nintendo franchises that are every bit as polished, entertaining, and excellent as their first-generation iconic IPs (Mario, Zelda, etc.).

 

[royalan]

I think it's people that think Nintendo needs the "3rd party games like GTA 5, The Division, Destiny, Call of Duty, Witcher 3 etc," who are mistaken. Nintendo needs and wants third party exclusive games.

How is having a mutliplat a reason to get a console? If all three consoles have a game, it's a common denominator and cancels out. Not having a multiplat may be a reason to not choose a certain console (i.e. I won't buy Wii U but that doesn't make you choose PS4 over XBONE, for example). I imagine that Nintendo (rightly or wrongly) wants to sell consoles by being the console people want ("We have Smash Bros!") and not by not being the console people don't want ("No DRM!")

I see this argued all the time, and it never makes sense. HERE is why Nintendo needs those multiplat games:

It's about securing an installed base, which Nintendo has thanks to its brand and loyal followers.

The more big multiplats come to a Nintendo console, the less likely Nintendo's base are to buy another console to experience them.

If your base is increasingly less likely to buy other consoles? They spend more money on YOUR platform.

They spend more money on your platform? Your platform's software sales and attach rate go through the roof.

Attach rates increase? Developers notice.

Developers notice? Developers prioritize your platform with more multiplats (and maybe even the juicy exclusive here and there).

Developers prioritize your platform? Your platform's face gets covered in thick wads of games.

Your platform gets covered in games? It looks more appealing, more consumers buy into the platform.

Developers AND consumers buy into the platform? Nintendo makes money hand-over-fist in both hardware sales AND licensing fees, all the while getting to create the games they want, in the time-frame they want, because the pressure isn't on them to carry an entire platform.

That's why Nintendo wants (or SHOULD want) those games.

 

[Gartooth]

I thought most of the games in NintendoLand were pretty original and well executed, but hur minigame collection.

How is LBP not derivative? It's a platformer. That genre's been around since Pitfall Harry. The difference here is you can make your own levels and shit, which is cool, but something I remember wanting when I was a kid playing Mario and Sonic. It's an obvious step forward, but sure, props to Sony for doing it.

You could say Journey, but if we're counting PSN titles, we may as well count Nintendo's eShop titles then. Like Dillon's Rolling Western, HarmoKnight, and Pushmo/Crashmo.

Nintendo has had good eShop content, I agree with that.

I did have fun playing NintendoLand. Many games were hit or miss, for every poor game such as Octopus Dance there was another such as the Balloon Fight or Donkey Kong minigame that made up for it. However I was talking about changing game design in existing IP in regards to the quote, NintendoLand is more of it's own thing and I wasn't trying to discredit the game, I give Nintendo credit for trying something new with it.

However you are taking a lot of double standards in regards to game design. You can't say "NintendoLand is innovative game design!" when it uses common themes such as hide and seek, obstacle courses, and shooters and applies motion controls, yet at the same time call out LittleBigPlanet as "just another platformer" when it applies enough creation tools to let the user craft any kind of levels they want.

Regardless of the enjoyment you get from playing LBP (I found it pretty boring to be honest) it is probably one of the boldest platformers of the last 10 years in what it sought out to do. Giving Nintendo credit for trying to use motion controls to change established formulas in their games is fine, but your train of thought that Sony's games are all copycats and lack originality as if they just follow the crowd on what's popular is complete bullshit.

 

[Shion]

Before responding to this, I'd like to know what your definition of "relevant" is?

My definition of relevant = games that I want to play.

The market's definition of relevant = games that will make millions of people buy a console.

Metal Gear Solid 4 was a relevant 3rd party exclusive, Zombi U wasn't.

Franchises like Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Elder Scrolls, Assassin's Creed etc. made 155 million people buy an HD console this gen.

Those were relevant games.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Yet, besides all the struggling PS3/360 had and huge userbase gap, Nintendo didn't managed to keep Wii alive and the third-parties on board.

Nintendo did keep third parties on board. Instead of Assassin's Creed, it was Just Dance. Instead of Call of Duty (which was actually on there too), it was Skylanders. Sonic was there.

These games sold the best (and some continue to do so) on the Wii, even in cases when they were on both the 360 and PS3. You're confusing a lack of "core gamer" ports with a lack of third party support. There's support, but they may not be the games you want. And that's fine. Nintendo consoles and the audience they attract may just not be for you.

 

[Verendus]

I'd be pessimistic about a dying console too. Krillin is gasping for air at the moment. Soon, he'll have that faint smile on his face thinking the worst is over, then Frieza will appear and kill him.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

Franchises like Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Elder Scrolls, Assassin's Creed etc. made 155 million people buy an HD console this gen.

See, you group them together and say "HD consoles." Those third party mutliplats may convince someone to buy a console but they won't help anyone decide on your console.

 

[Dysun]

I'd be pessimistic about a dying console too. Krillin is gasping for air at the moment. Soon, he'll have that faint smile on his face thinking the worst is over, then Frieza will appear and kill him.

But Cell would be a better option for PS4 than Frieza!

 

[VariantX]

I think there is some misunderstanding here. Nintendo never claimed that they can't compete in graphics and that's because of that they are going a different route, it's because the market is simply not big enough to support three almost identical consoles.

The exclusive software at the end of the day is the difference. Similar hardware just makes it easy for third party titles to show up on the system with minimal cost and keeps your library healthy. The software and services should be were they differentiate.

 

[Kimawolf]

I'd be pessimistic about a dying console too. Krillin is gasping for air at the moment. Soon, he'll have that faint smile on his face thinking the worst is over, then Frieza will appear and kill him.

So lol who will be super saiyin goku in that scenario and avenge him?