The Wii was, what, 6 years? By the time Zelda comes out in 2015, as many speculate, the WiiU will have been out nearly 2-3 years, 1/3-1/2 its life. It seems a little late to wait until then to decide how well it's doing.
Kart and Smash then.
The Wii was, what, 6 years? By the time Zelda comes out in 2015, as many speculate, the WiiU will have been out nearly 2-3 years, 1/3-1/2 its life. It seems a little late to wait until then to decide how well it's doing.
Mark my words, the next Metroid by Retro will be a 2D sidescroller. Who doesn't love Super Metroid?
Mark my words, the next Metroid by Retro will be a 2D sidescroller. Who doesn't love Super Metroid?
Didn't the horse actually die during that scene too?
Like it actually got stuck and drowned.
Someone predicted a few months ago that the WiiU would meet or exceed its yearly projection of 9 million, and Xbone and PS4 wouldn't even break 2 million each.Sarcasm and hyperbole/exaggeration. You missed the point
URGH... Are some people on here STILL preaching this 'worse than GameCube' line of deception!?
First, the Dreamcast was out in North America well after it had been on shelves in Japan. In turn, by the time that it launched, it had more games in its library. You can also see that it had a lower point of entry to ownership than the Wii U. The Dreamcast was the first 6th Generation home console to launch.
You can see very clearly in that graph that the GameCube also had a lower point of entry than the Wii U. The GameCube was the third 6th Generation home console to launch. When both price cuts came into play, their prices are HALF of what the Wii U is now, and that was in a better economic climate.
Skeleton Statistics won't cut it here (that is, simply quoting numbers without flesh/substance). To understand WHY the GameCube is doing better at this point, I'll leave this below:
I went into details about the growth of Nintendo IPs since the GameCube era in that post, but I feel that the above can cast some light on why the GameCube is faring better at a similar point. My position is the same as it's always been - that it needs more of the games that people want, and the biggest selling games (Smash Bros., Mario Kart) aren't there yet; However, I am not in the business of predicting numbers. Super Mario 3D World will continue to do well - However, one must note that the Mario & Luigi Bundle is currently the most popular, and that NSMBU saw a rise, too. I would imagine that there are enough Mario platform games for people to play should they bite now, and would say that those who bought that bundle, and other prospective buyers will most probably buy Super Mario 3D World at some point - This is why they are considered as 'Evergreen'. They might also want to play other games on it, so that they don't suffer from a Mario overload (for want of a better expression) - You can see in threads on here, that some new owners bought Pikmin 3 or The Wonderful 101, for example, and that those waiting to bite are asking for recommendations. There is a sense that its tide is making a turn - More positivity in Wii U-related articles, and a brighter change with regard to perceptions. To reinforce those statements, you can see in the Media Create threads of the last fortnight that following the release of Super Mario 3D World, its numbers picked up, and in the second week, those numbers continued to elevate. There are differences between complete disinterest (which isn't the case here), waiting for the games that you want (which IS happening - some are waiting for Bayonetta 2, Monolith Soft's X, Smash Bros., Mario Kart 8, etc.), and waiting for the right time, whenever that may be, to bite (this could be when there are enough games that one wants to play to justify the purchase, or waiting for a $249 entry point, lots of possibilities here). It is important to differentiate between each, and I feel that time and time again, many fail to do this.
Also, Nintendo released a new LOZ game on the 3DS (According to Iwata, the 3DS is expected to lead Nintendo's drive for 2013-14), and Super Mario 3D World on the same day as the XBox One - that was 22nd November in North America. You had the PS4 launch a week before it, too. So, if we can agree that more or most people had bitten when SM3DWorld released, then one would have to look at what was achieved in the last nine days of that calendar month, and if the majority of units for November were sold in that time, it is actually rather remarkable for a console still with many cards to play, and in the face of two other console launches. I'm saying that a greater insight is needed here. I'm also saying that for a console with such cards available to it, it's in a better position than many on here think it is, and there is no reason for Nintendo to panic. They'll be fine. During its life, it can still hit a profitable $249 point of entry, then a profitable $199, and even a profitable point below that when it reaches its twilight years. It is worth noting that the PS360 consoles did not achieve a full recovery until 2011, some 5 and 6 years after their releases - So, writing off the Wii U at this point is not right or proper, in my opinion. I'm not in the business of predicting numbers. I'm not saying that it will rise to DS heights, and I'm not saying anything about 'winning' the 8th Generation, only that it is extremely misleading to say that it is doing worse than the GameCube, when it's very apparent that without its top cards, without notable support from other parties, and without a stronger marketing drive, it would've suffered a significantly worse fate at the same points.
Furthermore, Nintendo are a compassionate conservative company. They won't kill off the Wii U early, when they've just made a transition to HD game development to release a more powerful system, and potentially quadruple their development costs, which happened with first party studios on the PS4 at launch. They are in a position where a Wii U Fire Emblem game would be viable with sales of 700,000 units - that is profitable to a point of satisfactory return on investment, profitable, or, at worst, breaking even, all on a system showing noticeable steps. With this in mind, I suspect that they will stick with it for quite a while, because it's very much in their interests. Still, the GameCube didn't cease production after having played more of its cards, and it was there for over five years, so it is rotten, premature, fanboyist folly to declare 'death'. As for 'sold at a loss' - No. It has been known that one game makes the transaction profitable, and it won't be sold at a loss forever. Still, this loss is in the U.S. - $299 is NOT the same as 299, or in Britain, £249. They're in the business of making profits, so, where a loss is made, it is natural that they will raise that concern, as investors will want to make the greatest returns possible.
For more details on just how steep a decline would have to be to 'fail harder than the GameCube', I wrote this a while back. It's a lengthy post. Whatever. That's all that I'll write here.
At what point is this any different from the infamous and oft-mocked "wait for the Vita's first Christmas!" that was said when the console's low sales were questioned?Kart and Smash then.
Why are so many people acting as if these numbers are 100% accurate?
as I tried to post before I got rudely interrupted by GAF servers
I will not buy DK but a Metroid using that same engine would get a sale from me
Why are so many people acting as if these numbers are 100% accurate?
Why are so many people acting as if these numbers are 100% accurate?
I think it would be irresponsible to buy a wii u at this point. There is no guarantee that the system will still be on shelves in a year.
When it hits fire sale prices it would be ok to buy it. Same as other unique, but failed, items.
$300 for a last gen console that may be dead within months? That's a bad purchase. Better off spending $100 more for a true next gen system that will be around in 5 years.
Oh my god, enough with the fucking 2D platformers. Wii U is already drowning in them and we don't need them cannibalizing the sales of each other. Besides those kinds of games are beneath Retro and should be kept in the 90's. Here Nintendo has a unique western studio as an asset, and they put them on a fucking 2D platformer that any other developer owned by Nintendo can make. I'm not buying 2D fucking Metroid to support this and I can't wait to see when it is proven that 3D action-adventure Donkey Kong in space would have outsold it and catered to a demographic not already on Wii U.hehehehehehe
He's not THAT bad at predicting numbers, and honestly, these numbers seem possible. Not likely mind you...but possible. And that's scary. And now we're discussing this pot full of crazy Nintendo's cooked up for us.
No one is acting like they are completely accurate. But the fact that he would estimate it so low is still worrying because it's a believable number.
I believe so, yeah. Was pretty devastating for me as a kid.
Why are so many people acting as if these numbers are 100% accurate?
Mark my words, the next Metroid by Retro will be a 2D sidescroller. Who doesn't love Super Metroid?
I did my part, but it looks like I need to buy...450k more.
150k would mean it was almost TRIPLED by the GC in a similar November post-launch period. That's sub-Dreamcast numbers.
No, I mean the horse actually died during production.
I did my part in November, but it looks like I need to buy...450k more.
Which doesn't really effect my question. It's still silly for people to act as if these are facts until they have been verified. I'm not calling Pachter's abilities into question, but he freely admits that they're ESTIMATES.
I will be crushed if that happens. 2D /2.5D seems to be the safe defacto design choice, but I would personally love something that shows what a Prime-like title can do. Frankly, sen if it's just an HD remake of PRIME, I'll be happy.
It's almost cruel to tease metroid fans with the offering in NintendoLand. That was an AMAZING sample of what Metroid can be on the Wii U, and the controls were flawless.
URGH... Are some people on here STILL preaching this 'worse than GameCube' line of deception!?
(Dubious argumentation follows.)
Why are so many people acting as if these numbers are 100% accurate?
Why are so many people acting as if these numbers are 100% accurate?
150k in one month isnt great by any means but its still selling consoles... nintendo prob wants something like 500k tho right?
Here in the midwest we're having the complete opposite of a heat wave. Maybe probably could have an effect on Wii U sales, we should at least wait till the weather warms up before writing it off.
So should Apple enter the console market? Or sega? to replace Nintendo?
I mean we need a third player in this.
No one should be surprised by Wii U's performance really. I mean, we had all their other consoles indicate this was a very possible direction for sales to go. But the worrisome part is, is that Nintendo will see what was the real problem, as they've always have. They've always known exactly what kept their consoles from succeeding and instead of learning from their mistakes and rectifying any deficiencies, they decide to "be different", as if to defy expectations and market demands.
Like, if the issue was X with a console, then next iteration will do Y instead of providing X.
Super Nintendo didn't perform as well as the NES as there was less third party support because many saw Sega as a viable company to do business with.
Well, do we mend relations with them? Fuck no, they don't need no stinking CD's, carts it is motherfucker. Shits expensive. You're gonna pay for not support us.
Oh, wow, well Nintendo 64 didn't sell as well as the Playstation, or even its predecessor. I guess part of the problem was alienating third parties further and not projecting an image that was as cool as Sony. Guess we were not E.
Well, let's try mini-discs that are a fraction of the density of DVD and let's go ahead and market a purple purse.
This "different and defiant on purpose" strategy worked well with Wii, as it was a fad...but now they're right back at square one.
etc, etc
I don't mind them doing their own thing. That can have incredible benefits like with the Wii. What I dislike is them refusing to follow some basic standards that other competitors set. Having long periods where no major games are released on your console is not creative or being different, it is just shitty management. You also can't act like you discovered some revolution in gaming and then just give up on it like five years later. What does that say about the company?
What if Pachter is overestimating? Is sub 100K possible?
2D Metroid isn't exactly a 2D platformer, at least it's very far away from "regular" 2D platformers.
150k in November is astonishingly bad.
What if Pachter is overestimating? Is sub 100K possible?
As has been noted, he would have to be off by an entire order of magnitude for these sales to be anything less than awful
As I posted in the other thread:
The average GAFfer makes better predictions than Pachter.
What if Pachter is overestimating? Is sub 100K possible?