Support NeoGAF

[Lupin the Third]

I already commented some, but let me echo that I think you made some great points. Though I think there's some clashing with your opener about being a "long-time Nintendo fanboy" and your avatar being nothing but PS and XBOne logos, but I digress.

I strongly feel that Wii U will be Nintendo's worst-performing platform (with the exception of Virtual Boy and Nintendo Color), with respect to both hardware and software. This, inevitably, would lead to large scale changes at Nintendo, including senior management and corporate philosophies. I also expect that Wii U will not be Nintendo's last home console, and that they next one, created with new management, philosophies and a restructured Nintendo Co., Ltd. would create a new home console that is as paradigm-shifting as the Wii but as aggressive as the PlayStation 4. I feel that this company, lately, has become too "Japanese" that is adversely affecting global operations and sales, and that this will be rectified for the next generation.

While I want to see much the same thing: competitive hardware and a more aggressive marketing and development strategy that brings it more in line with PlayStation and MS's offerings, I don't think there are any such guarantees. Will a head or two roll if Wii U is a flop? Maybe, but the GameCube sold nearly as poorly and they still didn't make any major changes other than Yamauchi stepping down. Plus, the GameCube WAS the result of the Board insisting on being more like the competition (disc-based media, more traditional controller, etc.), and that did not help Nintendo. But then, neither did their "insistence on being different": handle, no DVD support, missing controller buttons, did not court third parties properly, refused to explore online potential; I expect those sorts of issues would be rectified IF your assumptions came to fruition. But there's no "inevitability" that the next generation will bring any fixes. GameCube was followed up with the not-quite-dumb-luck of the Wii, and Iwata's back-up plan if Wii flopped wasn't to overhaul the next console offering, but to abandon the console market altogether.

 

[ASIS]

I already commented some, but let me echo that I think you made some great points. Though I think there's some clashing with your opener about being a "long-time Nintendo fanboy" and your avatar being nothing but PS and XBOne logos, but I digress.

The Blue rectangle is from the Wii U. His avatar has all three console logos, very smart.

 

[MercuryLS]

Your analysis has a glaring omission: the price cut.

Didn't help Gamecube, hell the Gamecube launched at $100 less than their competitors. Price mean shit if you don't provide something the market wants.

 

[Lupin the Third]

The Blue rectangle is from the Wii U. His avatar has all three console logos, very smart.

 

[kmax]

Some developers have become pessimistic about Wii U's sales performance

Fixed that for you, Mr. Iwata.

I wrote a piece about the Nintendo's shortcomings with the Wii U a couple of months back. Nintendo basically miscalculated how big of their consumer base would switch to much cheaper and and more convenient means, such as mobile and social games. Social games have exploded and become enormously big these last few years with social media and new state of the art devices. Now that games can be consumed almost free of charge, anywhere at any place, the mainstream consumer (I'm mostly referring to grandma and soccer-moms that bought the Wii before the social boom) and other does not see a big enough incentive to even consider buying a console.

The market that made the Wii such a huge success has simply switched. It's the reason why the Wii U's in the red, which in turn leads to poor support from third party publishers. It's a vicious cycle. With very few games to choose from and virtually no third party support, the hardcore consumer's not going to bother with it neither; not when the PS4 and XBOne's around the corner. What Nintendo needs to do is to bring out those console selling first party games. They should really have done this at launch already, but now that the ship has sailed, they need to start figuring out how to present a good enough incentive to people, so they really need to go full force in producing the quality games that they're capable of doing. With the mainstream market's migration over to social, and the hardcore market's focus on the big third party games and next gen, they have a mountain to climb.

 

[bishopcruz]

Perhaps a similarly appropriate analogy to this one would be SEGA's retailer relationship during the Saturn lifespan, culminating in Bernard Stollar's assassination of the platform at E3 1997. Retailers were still seeing success with Genesis products, but Sega was insisting retailers move from Genesis to Saturn. When push came to shove, some retailers just dropped Sega altogether and stocked PlayStation instead. Walmart wouldn't even carry Saturn because it wasn't involved in the midnight launch (not that Walmart was anywhere near the beast they are today). It didn't help matters that Sega had already launched two relatively unpopular platforms with Sega CD and Sega 32X. (Remember Toys R Us clearing out 32X attachments for $25 each? They were just sitting in a box at the end of an aisle at my store, it wasn't even a proper endcap.)

A few points, Wal-Mart was pissed not because of the midnight launch but because of the 4 month retailer exclusivity that was result of the early Saturn launch in the US, and Wal-Mart at least carried the system, Kay-Bee Toys said screw it and never did. But you make a good point, Sega unceremoniously killed its two most successful platforms in order make way for the new hotness. (Yeah Saturn was still more successful than the DC thanks to Japan.) Killing the revenue streams of the Genesis in the US and Europe not only hurt them financially, but helped kill goodwill when the system that was the follow up was overpriced and had a paucity of games available.

If Nintendo murdered the Wii U or did anything similar, they would lose, I'm sure, a lot of retailer goodwill thanks to unsold product on shelves which lead to heavy losses from retailer-instituted price cuts, and generally just wasted space during the lifespan of the product (dedicating space to a platform is just as much an investment for the retailer in securing future accessory and title sales as it is for the consumer in having future titles come to the platform).

Just my two cents.

Killing a system has to be something a company is DAMN sure about. Microsoft was able to nix the OG Xbox because it was losing money with each sale, and the 360 was attractive enough to migrate most of their audience. It would make no sense for any of the current struggling platforms to get put to sleep right now.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

Something I see repeated but have never agreed with is that Nintendo "targeted casuals again" and that failed.

Very little about the Wii U is aimed at the wider audience; it's at least $100 too expensive, it's primary controller has two analogs (this can not be understated), the vast majority of its library is aimed squarely at traditional players (even Nintendoland is a skill based old school arcade high score design), the name of the console was explicitly stated as referring to "YOU" the traditional single player, and off screen play only really benefits your traditional player.

The problem is that Nintendo made a console for traditional players, but traditional players don't care about Nintendo. Nintendo is left with a console that is too expensive for the mass market but doesn't have the raw horsepower required to sell to "gamers." Even then they'd have to face the reality that even if Wii U were literally a Playstation 4 but with a Nintendo logo on it, your traditional player would still have very little interest because A) Nintendo and B) why not just buy the Playstation if they're both the same (see: Gamecube and PS2)?

 

[Days like these...]

That's why started my analysis with the fact that Nintendo is currently in a no-win situation with he Wii U. It's a failure, but currently riding out that failure in my opinion is worse than the short term damage of publicly declaring the Wii U a failure and scrapping it early.

Cause that worked out so well for Sega and the sat... oh wait

 

[Lupin the Third]

A few points, Wal-Mart was pissed not because of the midnight launch but because of the 4 month retailer exclusivity that was result of the early Saturn launch in the US, and Wal-Mart at least carried the system, Kay-Bee Toys said screw it and never did. But you make a good point, Sega unceremoniously killed its two most successful platforms in order make way for the new hotness. (Yeah Saturn was still more successful than the DC thanks to Japan.) Killing the revenue streams of the Genesis in the US and Europe not only hurt them financially, but helped kill goodwill when the system that was the follow up was overpriced and had a paucity of games available.



Killing a system has to be something a company is DAMN sure about. Microsoft was able to nix the OG Xbox because it was losing money with each sale, and the 360 was attractive enough to migrate most of their audience. It would make no sense for any of the current struggling platforms to get put to sleep right now.

I wasn't aware of the 4-month exclusivity period, but I must have gotten some names mixed up because I could have sworn I read that Walmart never carried Saturn. That said, we didn't HAVE Walmart here until many moons after Saturn's demise.

As for your last paragraph, on the nose.

 

[onipex]

Something I see repeated but have never agreed with is that Nintendo "targeted casuals again" and that failed.

Very little about the Wii U is aimed at the wider audience; it's at least $100 too expensive, it's primary controller has two analogs (this can not be understated), the vast majority of its library is aimed squarely at traditional players (even Nintendoland is a skill based old school arcade high score design), the name of the console was explicitly stated as referring to "YOU" the traditional single player, and off screen play only really benefits your traditional player.

The problem is that Nintendo made a console for traditional players, but traditional players don't care about Nintendo. Nintendo is left with a console that is too expensive for the mass market but doesn't have the raw horsepower required to sell to "gamers." Even then they'd have to face the reality that even if Wii U were literally a Playstation 4 but with a Nintendo logo on it, your traditional player would still have very little interest because A) Nintendo and B) why not just buy the Playstation if they're both the same (see: Gamecube and PS2)?

I agree with everything you said here.

 

[Mysterious]

Something I see repeated but have never agreed with is that Nintendo "targeted casuals again" and that failed.

Very little about the Wii U is aimed at the wider audience; it's at least $100 too expensive, it's primary controller has two analogs (this can not be understated), the vast majority of its library is aimed squarely at traditional players (even Nintendoland is a skill based old school arcade high score design), the name of the console was explicitly stated as referring to "YOU" the traditional single player, and off screen play only really benefits your traditional player.

The problem is that Nintendo made a console for traditional players, but traditional players don't care about Nintendo. Nintendo is left with a console that is too expensive for the mass market but doesn't have the raw horsepower required to sell to "gamers." Even then they'd have to face the reality that even if Wii U were literally a Playstation 4 but with a Nintendo logo on it, your traditional player would still have very little interest because A) Nintendo and B) why not just buy the Playstation if they're both the same (see: Gamecube and PS2)?

If that were to be true, then it would be implied that the two platforms would share a majority of the multiplatform titles. So on this front, the two platforms would be seen as equal.

However, this is when the magic of first-party exclusives come in.

Hypothetical example situation:
PlayStation has Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Call of Duty, Watch_Dogs, FIFA, NBA 2K, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, God of War

Xbox has Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Call of Duty, Watch_Dogs, FIFA, NBA 2K, Halo, Gears of War, That new Black Tusks game

Nintendo has Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Call of Duty, Watch_Dogs, FIFA, NBA 2K, Mario, Zelda, Metroid

At this point is up to the marketing and business divisions of these companies, and not the hardware/software development teams, to distinguish the three platforms. In other words, Nintendo would have to prove that Zelda is a game that provides more value than Metroid.

Although I do not condone that Nintendo just make a PS4-like console themselves.

 

[Buddha Beam]

And then what? After killing consumer confidence, they'll somehow convince third parties to develop on their machine that is 2 years late to the party, with no install base? If you hadn't noticed, they aren't getting timely 3rd party ports now when it'd be a quick/dirty job, they won't be in 2 years if they tried to play catchup again.

In addition, because of that killing of consumer confidence, no-one buys it, and the people who were big enough nintendo fans to have bought wii u feel ripped off by nintendo and won't buy them again because they'll be rightfully worried they'll be forced to upgrade again in another 2-3 years.

No, nintendo has no choice but to try to stick it out until 2016 at least, if they want to remain in the home console market. Probably 2017 being realistic. The alternative plan of dropping out of the home console market entirely and focusing all of nintendos mighty development power on the constantly more successful handheld side, with an optional adapter in the handheld using the seamless streaming tech in the gamepad to allow output to a tv would be an alternate and frankly, less suicidal plan.

WHAT consumer confidence? Nobody even knows about the thing, save for hardcore gamers. The vast majority of those people are almost certainly aware of Nintendo's situation and, if they came out with another console, would probably say, "I understand why they're doing this".

I'll grant you, they only get to do this once. If they were to release a new system and THAT flopped too... then yes, releasing a third system would probably result in a cratering of consumer confidence (unless they were somehow able to move to an Apple-style model of annual upgrades and convinced people to buy it). It's always a risky to abort a product, irrespective of what industry we're talking about. Sometimes it's the smartest move, however.

Right now, nobody knows what the Wii U is. It's only consumers are people like us at this point, and maybe some financially well off parents who bought it for their kids.

Nintendo is waffling between what kind of company they want to be. Do they want to run with the Sony and MS big boys, or do they want a piece of that casual consumer pie? If they want to compete for the dollars that MS and Sony are getting, they have to release a new system. If they don't, they lose mindshare and relevancy. That's a far more damaging loss than the pitiful amount of consumer confidence they'd lose.

 

[Pancakes R Us]

So what killed the Wii U momentuim?? The system was going strong in it first 2 months and then it faded. It July now why did the build up stop? Why didn't Nintendo this past march(MH3U,LCU,NFS:MWU,WD) all released not advertise WII U?

Nintendo needed to have Pikmin 3 ready by this march

That wasn't real momentum, just a little launch excitement made up by super-core Nintendo fans and early adopters. To me personally, I could see that that the system wouldn't be in a good state when I couldn't persuade myself to buy one (and I've bought every Nintendo system at launch for a long time now). Guess what? Still not interested.

 

[Lupin the Third]

If that were to be true, then it would be implied that the two platforms would share a majority of the multiplatform titles. So on this front, the two platforms would be seen as equal.
...
It is up to the marketing and business divisions of these companies, and not the hardware/software development teams, to distinguish the three platforms.

Nintendo has never found favor with third parties to that degree over the last few generations, though. How on earth would they make a box that got the third parties on board equally well with the PS4? People have said ease of porting, people have said moneyhats, people have said changing the console's ecosystem. But what is the REAL answer? Just a hodgepodge combination of them?

Also, in the hypothetical scenario, how is it not up to the software development teams to distinguish the platform? You can't distinguish with Mario and Zelda brands if you're not making Mario and Zelda software. Or are you talking about OSes there more than applications?

Although I do not condone that Nintendo just make a PS4-like console themselves.

Interesting edit. Why not?

 

[SmokedMeat]

WHAT consumer confidence? Nobody even knows about the thing, save for hardcore gamers. The vast majority of those people are almost certainly aware of Nintendo's situation and, if they came out with another console, would probably say, "I understand why they're doing this".

Right now, nobody knows what the Wii U is. It's only consumers are people like us at this point, and maybe some financially well off parents who bought it for their kids..

I don't get this myth that nobody knows what the U is.

- It was talked about in the major media outlets when it was announced as well as the launch.
- It's on display at big box retailers, and has been featured in sales circulars.
- Nintendo toured popular malls across the country with Wii U events letting the public test drive the system
- They ran commercials at movie theaters and on television

Saying "nobody" knows what a U is is complete bullshit. People know it exists, they just don't give a shit about it. Why is that so hard for people to comprehend?!

And NO gamers wouldn't be ok with Nintendo killing off the system they just dropped $350+ on, without properly supporting it.The ultra devoted are the ones that bought this thing despite the lack of games, and they suffered through the drought, and you think they'd be cool if Nintendo just decided to up and pull the plug? You think it's perfectly fine to burn your diehard fans that supported your flop system? Really?

 

[BlackJace]

I don't get this myth that nobody knows what the U is.

- It was talked about in the major media outlets when it was announced as well as the launch.
- It's on display at big box retailers, and has been featured in sales circulars.
- Nintendo toured popular malls across the country with Wii U events letting the public test drive the system
- They ran commercials at movie theaters and on television

Saying "nobody" knows what a U is is complete bullshit. People know it exists, they just don't give a shit about it. Why is that so hard for people to comprehend?!

This would hold water if people weren't still asking for the Wii U controller add-on for their Wiis.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

If that were to be true, then it would be implied that the two platforms would share a majority of the multiplatform titles. So on this front, the two platforms would be seen as equal.

However, this is when the magic of first-party exclusives come in.

Hypothetical example situation:
PlayStation has Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Call of Duty, Watch_Dogs, FIFA, NBA 2K, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, God of War

Xbox has Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Call of Duty, Watch_Dogs, FIFA, NBA 2K, Halo, Gears of War, That new Black Tusks game

Nintendo has Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Call of Duty, Watch_Dogs, FIFA, NBA 2K, Mario, Zelda, Metroid

At this point is up to the marketing and business divisions of these companies, and not the hardware/software development teams, to distinguish the three platforms. In other words, Nintendo would have to prove that Zelda is a game that provides more value than Metroid.

Although I do not condone that Nintendo just make a PS4-like console themselves.

I still believe that in this scenario, traditional players still buy PS4 or XBONE, then complain that they're only buying Nintendo for Nintendo games and they should go third party to save them the hassle. The fact that people (forum goers and journalists alike) were saying that the Wii U multiplat games in the announcement sizzle reel looked worse than PS3/360 counterparts despite the fact that it was PS3/360 footage should be all the evidence you ever need.

I've been in these trenches too long to believe otherwise.

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

I miss the Dreamcast

Saturn too.

 

[mrklaw]

Third parties have no incentive to develop for wiiU. Even if the hardcore buy it for their Nintendo magic, publishers know they'll probably own one of the HD twins too, so simply developing for those gives them good vp coverage of hardcore Nintendo owners. And the mass market Nintendo owners don't buy very many games, and most of those are Nintendo first party.

So why bother? Nintendo clearly develop and price their consoles to not lose money, so maybe they can accept slower than desired sales?

 

[borghe]

My biggest observation about the Wii U?

Nintendo has been making consoles "for Nintendo games" really since the N64. Then the GCN. Wii was a fluke really. and now Wii U. They have always SURVIVED just fine owning the handheld market, and making "Nintendo games" for their consoles that sell to the tune of millions.

The problem as it exists... and please correct me if I'm wrong.. Is that there are relatively few "Nintendo games" out for Wii U.

N64:
Mario 64
Pilotwings 64
Shadows of the Empire (not a great game, but technically stunning at the time)
Wave Race 64
Mario Kart 64
Killer Instinct Gold
Star Fox 64
Diddy Kong Racing
GoldenEye 007

That was ALL OUT within the first 16 months of the system's life.. (Aug96-Dec97)

GCN:
Luigi's Mansion
Wave Race: Bluestorm
Pikmin
SSBM
Super Mario Sunshine
Eternal Darkness
Animal Crossing
Starfox Adventures
Mario Party 4
Metroid Prime

Again, ALL WITHIN the first 12 months of the system's life!!!! HOLY SHIT!

Wii:
Wii Sports
Excite Truck
Zelda Twilight Princess
Pokemon Battle Revolution
Warioware: Smooth Moves
WiiPlay
Battalion Wars 2
Endless Ocean
Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn
Mario Party 8
Metroid Prime 3
Super Paper Mario
Super Mario Galaxy
Wii Fit

Again, ALL WITHIN 12 months!!!!!!!

Ok now guys.. prepare for it...... Wii U:
NSMBU
NintendoLand
Sing Party
Lego City Undercover
Game & Wario
New Super Luigi U
Pikmin 3 (unreleased)
The Wonderful 101 (unreleased)
Yarn Yoshi(?) (unreleased)
Super Mario World 3D (unreleased)
Wii Fit U (unreleased)
DKC: Tropical Freeze (unreleased)
Wind Waker HD (unreleased)
Wii Party U (unreleased)

N64 and GCN had games within the first year or so that would to the end of their lives remain as some of the best games on the systems. Wii had not only a few similar releases, but also a few that would go on to be the BEST SELLING TITLES OF THE GEN! Wii U? Ouch..

Forget 3rd party support for the Wii U... where is the FIRST PARTY SUPPORT FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!?!?!?! If we got N64/GCN levels of first party support, or even Wii levels... I don't think anyone would be complaining.. but instead we are getting DS and 3DS launch levels of support.

So I don't doubt Nintendo can turn things around.. Super Mario 3D could turn it around. Pokemon MMO could turn things around. Wave Race U could turn things around (ok, fine.... but I would buy like 10 copies at least.....)

I mean honestly? Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon... why wasn't it a Wii U game? Paper Mario: Sticker Star(? Not a great example.. but still...)

If/when Nintendo gets first party support going up to speed... I think Wii U will turn around. But I see stuff like Wii Party U, Wii Fit U, NSMBU.. and the only thing that comes to mind is... what are they thinking?

edit - I am hoping that 2014 is going to be that year... Mario Kart? Check. SSB? Check. Already two potential classics.. So c'mon Nintendo... give us what WE want. Metroid Prime. Super Mario 3D. New Zelda. Rhythm Heaven. Star Fox. Fire Emblem. Your stable of IPs is not lacking. Start putting some of your exceptional talent to work and give us something to love..

 

[Deadstar]

I really wish Nintendo would just put out some games that would be easy money. The last super smash game in hd and mario galaxy 1 and 2 in hd. I'd buy those immediately.

 

[eddfromtheriver]

Nintendo needed to have Pikmin 3 ready by this march

Hate to break it to you but Pikmin is not a system seller.

 

[Lupin the Third]

Hate to break it to you but Pikmin is not a system seller.

Anyone who argues otherwise is kidding themselves.

Pikmin's still a good GAME, but come on.

 

[Of All Trades]

This would hold water if people weren't still asking for the Wii U controller add-on for their Wiis.

Your anecdotal evidence and a broader issue of consumer disinterest can both be true.

 

[BlackJace]

Your anecdotal evidence and a broader issue of consumer disinterest can both be true.

Okay? Never said it was one or the other, unlike the fellow I quoted.

 

[borghe]

I really wish Nintendo would just put out some games that would be easy money. The last super smash game in hd and mario galaxy 1 and 2 in hd. I'd buy those immediately.

yeah.. Wind Waker HD is actually one (along with TW101) that really has the best chance of getting me to say "FINALLY Nintendo!!!" It's been over 10 years since I've beaten it, and I STILL have memories of it possibly being the best 3D Zelda I had ever played (sorry OoT and MM). SSBB is a little redundant IMHO.. But Galaxy 1 and 2 in a double pack would be VERY easy money. Upscale them.. maybe frequent texture rework (Mario, etc) and sell it for $40.

Anyone who argues otherwise is kidding themselves.

Pikmin's still a good GAME, but come on.

Yeah.. Pikmin is a gamer's game. It's a game that a console can brag about having in its stable.. but not one that most will rush out to buy. Okami, Odin Sphere, God Hand, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Advance Wars etc.

 

[Brera]

Something I see repeated but have never agreed with is that Nintendo "targeted casuals again" and that failed.

Very little about the Wii U is aimed at the wider audience; it's at least $100 too expensive, it's primary controller has two analogs (this can not be understated), the vast majority of its library is aimed squarely at traditional players (even Nintendoland is a skill based old school arcade high score design), the name of the console was explicitly stated as referring to "YOU" the traditional single player, and off screen play only really benefits your traditional player.

The problem is that Nintendo made a console for traditional players, but traditional players don't care about Nintendo. Nintendo is left with a console that is too expensive for the mass market but doesn't have the raw horsepower required to sell to "gamers." Even then they'd have to face the reality that even if Wii U were literally a Playstation 4 but with a Nintendo logo on it, your traditional player would still have very little interest because A) Nintendo and B) why not just buy the Playstation if they're both the same (see: Gamecube and PS2)?

If Nintendo had released the WiiU in 2006 or even in 2010, it would have sold gang busters.

That's the problem. They made a current gen console for core gamers but core gamers are ready to move on to the next gen.

We've been suffering from PS360 fatigue for at least two years. We've been dying for the next gen to come along.

 

[SmokedMeat]

This would hold water if people weren't still asking for the Wii U controller add-on for their Wiis.

Some anecdotal evidence of some unsure consumers means everyone now?

 

[BlackJace]

Some anecdotal evidence of some unsure consumers means everyone now?

Neeeever said it did, chief. It's a combination of two problems. The lack of communication and understanding with the public, and/or the public's disinterest in the product itself. An image problem isn't "complete bullshit" when things like that are still happening.

 

[Buddha Beam]

And NO gamers wouldn't be ok with Nintendo killing off the system they just dropped $350+ on, without properly supporting it.The ultra devoted are the ones that bought this thing despite the lack of games, and they suffered through the drought, and you think they'd be cool if Nintendo just decided to up and pull the plug? You think it's perfectly fine to burn your diehard fans that supported your flop system? Really?

Of course they would be ok with it. Let them bitch and throw a fit. They'll still be there for the launch window, at the very least. You never lose the true hardcore or the diehards. They'll forgive Nintendo at the first chance they can. Just like they did the XBox One. Just like the PS3 before it, and Sega with the Dreamcast before that.

Nintendo has very little to lose by relaunching.

 

[Didly]

"If...consumers...prefer the Wii U version’s unique entertainment value, ...the ability to play games only with the Wii U GamePad (while the rest of the family is watching TV)..."

Anyway..

I've considered buying a Wii U. Ironically, enough, in spite of Nintendo's ridiculously recognizable franchises, my consideration for the Wii U is not for Mario or Zelda, but for Monster Hunter - which I fell in love with on the PS2 a decade ago and haven't picked up since.

Their IP's are tired. Mario, somehow remains relatively fresh, but Zelda is getting ragged. As far as I'm concerned, Wind Waker was the final hailing achievement for that franchise.

Frankly, Super Smash Bros. is not enough for me to buy the system because I know my friend will have it and I'll play it with him at his place.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Nintendo needed to have Pikmin 3 ready by this march

You mean Mario Kart.

And they should've flat out BOUGHT Titanfall exclusivity. Seriously, open up that war chest and buy exclusivity for that sucker instead of pissing away money funding that has been Sonic the Hedgehog.
FPS games are obviously huge in the west, and this would give them arguably the hottest new FPS ip the business.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

If Nintendo had released the WiiU in 2006 or even in 2010, it would have sold gang busters.

That's the problem. They made a current gen console for core gamers but core gamers are ready to move on to the next gen.

We've been suffering from PS360 fatigue for at least two years. We've been dying for the next gen to come along.

I think Wii U could have done fine in 2012 but:

A) The experiences were "old" both figuratively and literally (even if the games wouldn't have literally been old ports, they were the same types of games everyone was burnt out on over the last eight years)

B) There was nothing to really get the deserter to come back, like Twilight Princess. The gamer that wrote off Nintendo as "too kiddy" during the Gamecube era was enticed back with a "traditional" OoT inspired Zelda, but there wasn't anything at Wii U launch that would have brought back gamers that had written off Nintendo as "too casual" during Wii.

But I agree with your general assertion that Wii U is late (probably not too late, but close); it should have launched in 2011 with some sort of incentive for Skyward Sword players (a limited run 25th Zelda Wii U at launch would have been fucking nuts); launching in 2011 would mean that by the time the Wii U was five years old and ready for the successor (2016) the PS4/XBONE would have only been three years old (and still three+ years from their successors) meaning Wii 3 or whatever could have launched with PS4/XBONE level specs in 2016 without breaking Nintendo's wallet.

Why Nintendo waited until 2012 will always blow my mind.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Of course they would be ok with it. Let them bitch and throw a fit. They'll still be there for the launch window, at the very least. You never lose the true hardcore or the diehards. They'll forgive Nintendo at the first chance they can. Just like they did the XBox One. Just like the PS3 before it, and Sega with the Dreamcast before that.

Nintendo has very little to lose by relaunching.

Sega sure lost them.

 

[superchunk]

While Iwata is correct, that sadly doesn't explain away Zombi U.

What's to explain?

Console simply didn't have a large enough userbase. Had it reached its 5.5m by end of first quarter, then ZombiU would have been profitable. It had a 14% attach rate after all. Even Ubi has stated in the past that their only real complaint is the low console sales. Their games hit the expectations for that userbase size.

Overtime ZombiU will be profitable. Rayman and others will do fine this holiday as Wii U brings in better numbers. (console sales-wise)

 

[onipex]

If that were to be true, then it would be implied that the two platforms would share a majority of the multiplatform titles. So on this front, the two platforms would be seen as equal.

However, this is when the magic of first-party exclusives come in.

Hypothetical example situation:
PlayStation has Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Call of Duty, Watch_Dogs, FIFA, NBA 2K, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, God of War

Xbox has Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Call of Duty, Watch_Dogs, FIFA, NBA 2K, Halo, Gears of War, That new Black Tusks game

Nintendo has Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Call of Duty, Watch_Dogs, FIFA, NBA 2K, Mario, Zelda, Metroid

At this point is up to the marketing and business divisions of these companies, and not the hardware/software development teams, to distinguish the three platforms. In other words, Nintendo would have to prove that Zelda is a game that provides more value than Metroid.

Although I do not condone that Nintendo just make a PS4-like console themselves.

The Wii U launched with a similar lineup and sales collasped. I think it was Nintendo's first party output that was weak and not the third party games. This year it will have Watch_Dogs, Rayman, Splinter Cell, Assassins Creed, Batman :Arkam Origins, Deus Ex: Human Revolution Director's Cut, Disney Infinity,Skylanders, Call of Duty, Just Dance .. and as exclusive it will have Sonic, 2D Mario, 3D Mario, Donkey Kong, Pikmin 3, Zelda Wind Waker HD, The Wonderful 101, Wii party , Disney Planes, Scribblenaunts Unmasker,and Wii Fit.

I would argue that this year the Wii U will have stronger third party and first party games than it had at launch. It has many of the big third party releases, third party exclusives, and plenty of first support ,so this will be Nintendo's best chance to sell it.

 

[Of All Trades]

Okay? Never said it was one or the other, unlike the fellow I quoted.

Your evidence being true does not make it meaningful.

 

[MercuryLS]

You mean Mario Kart.

And they should've flat out BOUGHT Titanfall exclusivity. Seriously, open up that war chest and buy exclusivity for that sucker instead of pissing away money funding that has been Sonic the Hedgehog.
FPS games are obviously huge in the west, and this would give them arguably the hottest new FPS ip the business.

There is absolutely zero chance EA would have given Nintendo exclusivity on this title. Zero. Hell I'm amazed that MS was able to secure a time exclusive on it.

Nintendo needs to fund mature titles like they did in the N64 days, stuff like Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. Losing Rare hurt them when it comes to this stuff. They need to create or buy medium size developers with a lot of talent in the West and put them to work on these types of games.

 

[War Eagle]

Understatement of the year right here.

 

[Mysterious]

The Wii U launched with a similar lineup and sales collasped. I think it was Nintendo's first party output that was weak and not the third party games. This year it will have Watch_Dogs, Rayman, Splinter Cell, Assassins Creed, Batman :Arkam Origins, Deus Ex: Human Revolution Director's Cut, Disney Infinity,Skylanders, Call of Duty, Just Dance .. and as exclusive it will have Sonic, 2D Mario, 3D Mario, Donkey Kong, Pikmin 3, Zelda Wind Waker HD, The Wonderful 101, Wii party , Disney Planes, Scribblenaunts Unmasker,and Wii Fit.

I would argue that this year the Wii U will have stronger third party and first party games than it had at launch. It has many of the big third party releases, third party exclusives, and plenty of first support ,so this will be Nintendo's best chance to sell it.

As I mentioned before, there is no compelling reason for a consumer to actively chose to buy the Wii U version.

PS3/Xbox 360 have their friends playing on that online ecosystem.

PS4/Xbox One have the "shiny new graphics", which some consumers do care about. These consumers would be shifting to these platforms over the course of this coming generation, and may want to build their catalog of games starting with these.

Wii U has the Off-TV Play feature going for it. The online infrastructure is not up to par with the competition nor does it look/play better than on other platforms.

 

[BlackJace]

Your evidence being true does not make it meaningful.

...what?

 

[TreasureHunterG]

Your analysis has a glaring omission: the price cut.

Agreed.

But... before the price cut, they need the games and an efficient marketing campaign. WiiU's advertising has been a joke. What's Nintendo thinking?! Really?

Nintendo should announce a 100$ or more price drop in september and advertise the hell out of games like Pikmin 3, Splinter Cell: Blacklist, Rayman Legends, Super Luigi U, Wonderful 101, Sonic Lost World, Batman: Arkham Origins, Watch Dogs and Assassin's Creed IV, the earliest high profiles games they have on their schedules.

Create bundles. Like: Rayman Legends and Splinter Cell: Blacklist into one at 270. Or Pikmin 3 and Wonderful 101 for 300. They don't have much choice at this point.

 

[Buddha Beam]

Sega sure lost them.

Yeah... nobody ever laments how Sega is no longer in the hardware business; nor do they sing the Dreamcast's praises to the high heavens. Nobody ever gets excited at the prospect of Dreamcast-era revivals like Shenmue or Space Channel 5. Nobody gets excited for a new Sonic game either, even with the less-than-stellar track record since the mid-90's*. You never heard about anyone hoping for Yakuza to be localized... or having a sequel made to those Shenmue games.

Spoiler

*I know the Sonic games are actually pretty decent lately

 

[Van Owen]

Overtime ZombiU will be profitable.

What makes you think this? Ubisoft saying it isn't remotely close to being profitable?

 

[Of All Trades]

...what?

Anecdotal evidence can be factually true while simultaneously not having any meaningful weight for or against a separate argument.

 

[Shiggy]

What's to explain?

Console simply didn't have a large enough userbase. Had it reached its 5.5m by end of first quarter, then ZombiU would have been profitable. It had a 14% attach rate after all. Even Ubi has stated in the past that their only real complaint is the low console sales. Their games hit the expectations for that userbase size.

Overtime ZombiU will be profitable. Rayman and others will do fine this holiday as Wii U brings in better numbers. (console sales-wise)

You are either a Ubisoft manager or accountant or you took those numbers out of your ass, ZombiU definitely did not hit expectations and whether their other titles will do fine is completely up in the air. With no 3rd party title having hit 150k in the US, I don't share your optimism.

I would argue that this year the Wii U will have stronger third party and first party games than it had at launch. It has many of the big third party releases, third party exclusives, and plenty of first support ,so this will be Nintendo's best chance to sell it.

Why not get those 3rd party titles for PS3/360? The 3rd party exclusives are Scribblenauts and Disney Planes?


The Wii U could see some (but not a major) sales improvements if they cut the price to €150 and pack in NSMB U or Wii Party U or some easily marketable title.

 

[onipex]

As I mentioned before, there is no compelling reason for a consumer to actively chose to buy the Wii U version.

PS3/Xbox 360 have their friends playing on that online ecosystem.

PS4/Xbox One have the "shiny new graphics", which some consumers do care about. These consumers would be shifting to these platforms over the course of this coming generation, and may want to build their catalog of games starting with these.

Wii U has the Off-TV Play feature going for it. The online infrastructure is not up to par with the competition nor does it look/play better than on other platforms.

There is no problem playing games online on the Wii U. It works great. Outside of off-tv , and duel screen features it also has Miiverse. I'm not disagreeing that there is no reason to chose the Wii U version of the games over the PS3/360 though. Hell I don't see a reason to chose the PS4/X1 version over the PS3/360 versions either, since those consoles still will have the better lineup of games and PS4/X1 don't have backwards compatibility. Its not unusual for cross gen support to last for two years. I honestly see this being a slow transition to the next gen because I don't the industry wants to fully jump in just yet and gamers can still get the best games on current hardare. Nintendo lives and dies off of first party output.

 

[BlackJace]

Anecdotal evidence can be factually true while simultaneously not having any meaningful weight for or against a separate argument.

He said it's complete bullshit, I presented that. That seems pretty meaningful to me. If anything, this tangent isn't meaningful at all, so let's drop this, kay?

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

You mean Mario Kart.

And they should've flat out BOUGHT Titanfall exclusivity. Seriously, open up that war chest and buy exclusivity for that sucker instead of pissing away money funding that has been Sonic the Hedgehog.
FPS games are obviously huge in the west, and this would give them arguably the hottest new FPS ip the business.

:lol

FPS games are huge in the west, but not on Nintendo platforms. I somehow doubt Titanfall exclusivity would change that - especially when there are many more shooters with established communities in both the Playstation and X Box ecosystem.

 

[Teknoman]

I will say ZombiU was cool, but it just seemed like a title that would release in the summer. Similar to Shadows of the Damned where it looks great and is pretty fun, but doesnt really feel like anything that would make you want to buy that system.

PS4 and Xbox One both look like they'll have interesting futures, but Nintendo still has a really good chance to turn things around leading into the holiday. Both systems really dont have anything that interesting at launch aside from improved third party titles (Infamous and Killzone look pretty cool, dunno what Xbox One is launching with since Titanfall is down the line...Dead Rising 3 probably isnt going to move systems), so they should go for a huge marketing push.

Seriously though, Nintendo needs to start pulling out some high quality, interesting commercials for its exclusives. And yes, moneyhat some exclusive developed titles and put serious marketing behind those too (did ZombiU even have commercials? Probably was too niche to really drive sales anyway).