Support NeoGAF

[CronoShot]

This is it. The age of mature AAA titles on Nintendo platforms is officially over. They're not coming back next gen either.

Oh please. On Wii U? Yes, it's absolutely over. But never count Nintendo out permanently.

 

[Popnbake]

Nintendo owners aren't dumb. They're not going to buy mechanically shallow, glitchy, pointless collect-a-thons that play themselves (like Assassin's Creed) when they could be playing Mario Kart 8 or Super Mario 3D World instead. OTOH, if Ubisoft does make a game with great art direction and game play, like Rayman Legends, then the Nintendo fans will show up with their wallets. The Zombi U situation is unfortunate as that was a good title, but a poor name and lack of marketing did that one in (like a lot of 3rd party Nintendo games).

Zombi U had poor marketing?

That game was one of the first main showcases for the Gamepad.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

The problem isn't that Nintendo consumers have no interest in third party games, it's that Nintendo consumers have no interest in the games the major third parties are focusing on. The solution, then, would be for Nintendo assist and foster third parties which do focus on games which are more amenable to their ecosystem.

But will that really broaden the market for their consoles or just give their base more of the types of games they like to play?

For example, If someone isn't buying a Nintendo console for Mario, it's unlikely that a third party platformer will get them to buy one. And on down the line for all the types of games they have.

The problem seems, at least partly, that their kid/family friendly games just don't sell hardware at the level the CoDs, GTAs, Halos, Maddens etc do. Absent a new hit like Wii Sports, Wii Fit, Brain Age etc that gets more casuals on board, I don't see how they widen their market. More of the same types of games they make from third parties is great for their fans, but doesn't help appeal to either the core gamer or casual gamer crowd.

 

[MilesTeg]

Zombi U had poor marketing?

That game was one of the first main showcases for the Gamepad.

ZombiU got mediocre reviews and honestly, having played it, it's a mediocre game. Not exactly the best case scenario when your supposed system selling third party exclusive is getting 5's and 6's for reviews on day of release.

 

[Aaron D.]

Nintendo owners aren't dumb. They're not going to buy mechanically shallow, glitchy, pointless collect-a-thons that play themselves (like Assassin's Creed) when they could be playing Mario Kart 8 or Super Mario 3D World instead.

Please don't do this.

All the franchises you listed are critical successes.

You don't have to s**t on one of them just because it's not in your wheelhouse.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

What they can fix is helping to foster third parties which focus on games targeted at a broad demographic.

As mentioned in my post above, those types of games actually do very well on Nintendo's systems, even if made by third parties: Guitar Hero did best on Nintendo's systems. Just Dance was a huge hit that could not possibly have been replicated on PS/Xbox. Lego games sold best on Wii last generation. Sonic games almost always sell best on Nintendo systems, which is why Sega made an exclusivity deal with Nintendo in that regard.

The problem isn't that Nintendo consumers have no interest in third party games, it's that Nintendo consumers have no interest in the games the major third parties are focusing on. The solution, then, would be for Nintendo assist and foster third parties which do focus on games which are more amenable to their ecosystem.

They actually need to get back to the late-SNES and N64 approach in the western market they had in the time. This was the pinnacle of Nintendo's westen support. What you're suggesting is Nintendo to keep their family/casual approach from Wii days, this will not work. They need to have a broader appeal and not restrict themselves to a limited audience.

Actually, they should base themselves on what Tom Kalinske was doing against Nintendo in the Genesis/SNES days. They need to be aggressive, bold, heavily promote their games to all kinds of audiences, bring back the "XXX do what XXX don't" to their side. That's how Sega grabbed the market at that time.

 

[alf717]

Well at least they tried. I played AC III and IV on my PC and then later bought the Wii U versions. I'm still on the fence with Watch Dogs I've yet to play it so we'll see.

 

[Ishida]

Nintendo owners aren't dumb. They're not going to buy mechanically shallow, glitchy, pointless collect-a-thons that play themselves (like Assassin's Creed) when they could be playing Mario Kart 8 or Super Mario 3D World instead. OTOH, if Ubisoft does make a game with great art direction and game play, like Rayman Legends, then the Nintendo fans will show up with their wallets. The Zombi U situation is unfortunate as that was a good title, but a poor name and lack of marketing did that one in (like a lot of 3rd party Nintendo games).

People who think like you are the reason the Wii U is getting the cold shoulder by third parties. Congratulations.

 

[SmokyDave]

Zombi U had poor marketing?

That game was one of the first main showcases for the Gamepad.

It was also in a premium bundle with appropriately emblazoned box art.

 

[Paracelsus]

I wonder if they would if the hardware was the exact same as the PS4, if it's just a matter of perception of what a hyped current gen blockbuster is supposed to look like.

 

[Opiate]

But will that really broaden the market for their consoles or just give their base more of the types of games they like to play?

For example, If someone isn't buying a Nintendo console for Mario, it's unlikely that a third party platformer will get them to buy one. And on down the line for all the types of games they have.

The problem seems, at least partly, that their kid/family friendly games just don't sell hardware at the level the CoDs, GTAs, Halos, Maddens etc do. Absent a new hit like Wii Sports, Wii Fit, Brain Age etc that gets more casuals on board, I don't see how they widen their market. More of the same types of games they make from third parties is great for their fans, but doesn't help appeal to either the core gamer or casual gamer crowd.

I think you're looking at what currently exists and concluding "it must not be possible," which isn't reasonable.

What we can say is that people aren't currently doing it right now and on home consoles. But they are doing it elsewhere: games like Angry Birds and Clash of Clans are clearly driving iOS game adoption broadly. Thus, it's clearly a thing that can happen. You also have the examples you gave: things like Wii Fit or Wii Sports. That shows that not only is it possible, but it's happened on consoles, and happened recently.

I would argue that the current major console publishers are structurally incapable of making these types of games, just as I'd say Rovio is not going to wake up tomorrow and suddenly make a huge, AAA, M rated hit on Xbox. Any company will have a specific set of skills, and as of right now the skill sets of the major console publishers are focused pretty narrowly on the 16-35 male demographic.

Getting more games, therefore, would not be done by getting EA back on board, or getting Ubisoft to rescind their decision, or something. These companies already have their specific expertise, and trying to get them to radically change the companies' business plan is extremely difficult. A more likely solution would be to create whole new third parties that adopt business plans more like your own.

This is how iOS flourished: like Nintendo's systems, iOS (and Android and Facebook, for that matter), mostly got a cold shoulder from the established third parties, even once it was clear that the ecosystem was growing rapidly. As such, new, major third parties grew in their absence; companies like GungHo and Gameloft are now huge corporations in their own right. These markets couldn't be driven by the established players like Take 2 or Ubisoft, because those companies aren't really skilled at making that sort of game. Instead, it had to be driven by new blood with new design philosophies. I am suggesting that Nintendo is in the same position; their approach to game design is philosophically at odds with the major console publishers, so if they want support, they're going to have to foster new publishers who share their philosophy.

 

[Pancakes R Us]

I wonder if they would if the hardware was the exact same as the PS4, if it's just a matter of perception of what a hyped current gen blockbuster is supposed to look like.

I doubt it very much. The audience that buys Nintendo systems is pretty different to the PS4 crowd. Even if Wii U was even more powerful, I doubt it'd get the system anywhere with thee types of third party games we're discussing.

 

[MilesTeg]

It was also in a premium bundle with appropriately emblazoned box art.

A premium bundle at a very premium price, which also didn't launch in the US until months after the Wii U released.

 

[Opiate]

They actually need to get back the late-SNES and N64 approach in the western market they had in the past. This was the pinnacle of Nintendo's westen support. What you're suggesting is Nintendo to keep their family/casual approach from Wii days, this will not work. They need to have a broader appeal and not restrict themselves to a limited audience.

That is the broad appeal. SNES and N64 had limited audiences; Wii had a far less limited audience, as does iOS today. And PC. We've had this discussion before, and I still have no idea how you would describe the Wii as a "limited audience" when that audience is far broader in its demographics.

Actually, they should base themselves on what Tom Kalinske was doing against Nintendo in the Genesis/SNES days. They need to be aggressive, bold, heavily promote their games to all kinds of audiences, bring back the "XXX do what XXX don't" to their side. That's how Sega grabbed the market at that time.

But Sega grabbed a very narrow market: the 14-25 male market. At the time that was a huge proportion of the gaming populace, but it was still a narrow market.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

I see some people saying that mature 3rd party titles won't thrive on Nintendo systems until Nintendo actually makes an effort with these type of titles. The thing is, they have tried. See:

• Goldeneye, Nintendo actually had the lion's share of high quality console FPS games in the N64 era, and the N64 outsold the SNES in North America. I don't think this example proves the point you think it does.
• Perfect Dark, See above. It's also worth noting that Nintendo abandoned the genre, until the late in the gen release of the next game...
• Geist, ...Which is complete fucking garbage, came out a year after Halo 2, and 2 months before CoD 2 and Perfect Dark Zero
• Eternal Darkness, The last great M-rated Western exclusive that Nintendo ever published. Note that this was 12 years ago, and it sold poorly despite amazing reviews
• Zangeki No Reginleiv (japan only), Nintendo didn't have the confidence to release this in the west
• Ninja Gaiden 3:Razor's EdgeA port of the worst game in the series
• Devil's Third An admirable grab
• Bayonetta 2 An even more admirable grab
• exclusive Fatal Frame titles, Niche often Japan-only series
• Disaster (Japan and EU only), A game Nintendo didn't bother releasing in the US
• Metal Gear Solid Twin Snakes, A port of a game that released after its sequel and didn't sell well anyway. Doubly troubling that they farmed out one of their few Western dev houses to make it.
  and others I'm sure I'm forgetting.

But clearly, they care about this audience. It just makes me wonder what the hell can they do going forward? I mean, I'm sure they wanted games like GTA, and probably tried to get them, but Nintendo just has the stigma of "Nintendo fans only buy Nintendo games" or "Nintendo fans only buy kiddie games" so publishers don't want to put in the effort. So while Nintendo does see value with these type of titles, I don't know how they can get the mindshare for people to actually see it.

Here's the thing, I bought GE, PD, ED, all the GCN REs, MGS: TS, Conker, Killer Instinct, Metroid Prime 1 & 2, and all the 007s on Nintendo consoles through Nightfire. This was an era where Nintendo was actually trying in the West, even as NoJ sabotaged the efforts by pushing a purple lunchbox with no online play and minidiscs on the public.

Nintendo sold Rare, cut the balls off of NoA, stopped making FPS and sim sports games, put Retro on Donkey Kong, and stopped seeking out big 3rd party publishing deals. They published Xenoblade ages after it was out in Japan after starving Wii owners begged them, and then exclusively to Gamestop.

Bayonetta, MonHun, Devil's Third, and Ninja Gaiden are all more admirable than anything they did during the Wii's lifespan, but they are all still niche Japanese action games that probably cost them a minimum to lock down because of limited interest by other publishers. They will ensure that the Wii U will get more Japanese action games in the future, but they aren't going to do anything to bring back Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed.

 

[Lenardo]

Oh well, not that i care much

for the record

own a wiiu
own MOST of the M rated ubisoft games for the Wiiu.

they were ok
could they have sold better? yep- biggest issue imo was

1 rayman delay- would most likely have sold better @wiiu release than when released-hell it would have been the best game avail.

2- lack of advertising that the game is/WAS available on the Wiiu(COD style problem on wii half the employees at stores didn't know that cod was avail on the Wii),

3 -multiconsole games - run better on the other consoles.

4- late ports - see watch dogs- by the time it comes out on the WiiU, it will be ~20 bucks on the other consoles..

also for the record

in my house, we have all the current consoles
xbone (son got for birthday )
ps4 (other son got for HIS birthday)
wiiU -got at release.

of the 3, the wiiu still gets the most use. it also is the only one hooked up to a 1080p tv...the son's only have 720p tv's in their rooms.

 

[Omega]

I find it hilarious they tried so hard with the Wii U yet give no fucks about PC, where they would make easy money if they saw us as more than just pirates

 

[shinobi602]

Nintendo owners aren't dumb. They're not going to buy mechanically shallow, glitchy, pointless collect-a-thons that play themselves (like Assassin's Creed) when they could be playing Mario Kart 8 or Super Mario 3D World instead. OTOH, if Ubisoft does make a game with great art direction and game play, like Rayman Legends, then the Nintendo fans will show up with their wallets. The Zombi U situation is unfortunate as that was a good title, but a poor name and lack of marketing did that one in (like a lot of 3rd party Nintendo games).

I hope to one day be as intelligent as Nintendo owners.

 

[Juken]

Nintendo owners aren't dumb. They're not going to buy mechanically shallow, glitchy, pointless collect-a-thons that play themselves (like Assassin's Creed) when they could be playing Mario Kart 8 or Super Mario 3D World instead. OTOH, if Ubisoft does make a game with great art direction and game play, like Rayman Legends, then the Nintendo fans will show up with their wallets. The Zombi U situation is unfortunate as that was a good title, but a poor name and lack of marketing did that one in (like a lot of 3rd party Nintendo games).

Yeah. It's a shame that there doesn't seem to be enough people with the required intelligence to choose the Wii U instead of the other consoles and their damned collect-a-thons.

 

[DNAbro]

I hope to one day be as intelligent as Nintendo owners.

Even if you are a Nintendo owner you don't just reach that level of intelligence immediately. It takes time and only owning one console.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

Nintendo owners aren't dumb. They're not going to buy mechanically shallow, glitchy, pointless collect-a-thons that play themselves (like Assassin's Creed) when they could be playing Mario Kart 8 or Super Mario 3D World instead. OTOH, if Ubisoft does make a game with great art direction and game play, like Rayman Legends, then the Nintendo fans will show up with their wallets. The Zombi U situation is unfortunate as that was a good title, but a poor name and lack of marketing did that one in (like a lot of 3rd party Nintendo games).

Even in that case, Nintendo owners were shown to have very small wallets. Rayman Legends did not sell well. Assassin's Creed 4 and Watch_Dogs did.

 

[Aquamarine]

Nintendo owners aren't dumb. They're not going to buy mechanically shallow, glitchy, pointless collect-a-thons that play themselves (like Assassin's Creed) when they could be playing Mario Kart 8 or Super Mario 3D World instead. OTOH, if Ubisoft does make a game with great art direction and game play, like Rayman Legends, then the Nintendo fans will show up with their wallets. The Zombi U situation is unfortunate as that was a good title, but a poor name and lack of marketing did that one in (like a lot of 3rd party Nintendo games).

Define "showing up with their wallets."

Just because Rayman Legends may have sold more than other Ubisoft titles doesn't mean it's selling at a pace that Ubisoft is satisfied with.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

That is the broad appeal. SNES and N64 had limited audiences; Wii had a far less limited audience, as does iOS today. And PC.

Not really, SNES had a huge array of different genres to all types of audiences, it got even better after Nintendo decided to allow more contents with ESRB creation and the Mortal Kombat censorship controversy. Doom, MK2, MK3 and UMK3 got uncensored versions and they even published Killer Instinct, a T rated game, which was a big hit at the time.

N64 got major support from western developers and sold pretty much the same from SNES. Despite being outsold by PSX by a big margin, they kept the SNES numbers in US. Not really a failure as some try to paint it.

Wii was mostly targeted at casuals and family. Core gaming wasn't the major priority, especially 2008 onward.

But Sega grabbed a very narrow market: the 14-25 male market. At the time that was a huge proportion of the gaming populace, but it was still a narrow market.

Narrow market? Sega's "Genesis does what Nintendon't" was the first time a major first-party maker appealed to a teen/mature audience. This was a breach within Nintendo's marketing and Tom Kalinske successfully used for SoA favor and they managed to grab considerable market from Nintendo. This was even a major influence for Sony's strategy with PSX when they joined the market.

Yes, of course, in comparison to today's standards, the market at the time was narrow, but for the time's standards, they managed to reach a significant portion of the market. That's why Genesis was kicking SNES ass in the first years.

 

[Elija2]

Nintendo owners aren't dumb. They're not going to buy mechanically shallow, glitchy, pointless collect-a-thons that play themselves (like Assassin's Creed) when they could be playing Mario Kart 8 or Super Mario 3D World instead. OTOH, if Ubisoft does make a game with great art direction and game play, like Rayman Legends, then the Nintendo fans will show up with their wallets. The Zombi U situation is unfortunate as that was a good title, but a poor name and lack of marketing did that one in (like a lot of 3rd party Nintendo games).

I'm pretty sure Rayman Legends sold poorly on the Wii U too, even if it was the bestselling version. I looked it up and apparently the Wii U version only sold 99k as of this March. So much for Nintendo owners buying quality third-party games, eh?

 

[cloudyy]

Does this mean that BG&E2 is going to be a Wii U exclusive? Of course not, it will release on everything else and it's gonna bomb

 

[John Harker]

What they can fix is helping to foster third parties which focus on games targeted at a broad demographic.

As mentioned in my post above, those types of games actually do very well on Nintendo's systems, even if made by third parties: Guitar Hero did best on Nintendo's systems. Just Dance was a huge hit that could not possibly have been replicated on PS/Xbox. Lego games sold best on Wii last generation. Sonic games almost always sell best on Nintendo systems, which is why Sega made an exclusivity deal with Nintendo in that regard.

The problem isn't that Nintendo consumers have no interest in third party games, it's that Nintendo consumers have no interest in the games the major third parties are focusing on. The solution, then, would be for Nintendo assist and foster third parties which do focus on games which are more amenable to their ecosystem.

Well, yes, but you're missing one factor: Even those games you site as being successful on Nintendo platforms, are not particularly successful on Wii U. The system itself is not selling fast enough, and the users who currently own one are not buying enough titles a year to even make those ventures particularly attractive. The console will likely continue to get those titles - and I imagine Nintendo is lobbying for it- but will no longer be the 'prime' console. I just can't see anyone significantly dedicating resources for 100k, 150k units. The hope is they have a huge holiday with Mario Kart and Smash, and we can see where we are by end of Fiscal after March 2015.

And it absolutely is on Nintendo to drum up interest in their ecosystem; they need to create excitement and build a value proposition that increases raw Usage of the console itself, which then makes the platform more attractive for publishers to convert to their targeted software offerings. Gotta get those familes back!

 

[JinjoUnchained]

If what you're saying is true, than that's even less reason to develop for Nintendo platforms. Other console owners will buy the "shallow, glitchy, pointless collect-a-thons" and they'll buy the The Last of Us the Journey's and indies and "good" games.

Heck, Nintendo can barely convince Nintendo fans to buy their other IPs (look at the sales of Pikmin, Game and Wario, TW101, Wii Fit, Wii Party, etc...) which is why a chunk of their franchises are "dead" at the moment (FZero, Metroid)

Correct. Third parties like EA/Ubisoft/Activision want to produce for platforms whose owners will buy their games, whether the game is good or bad. COD Ghosts was the worst of the modern COD games (according to most), yet it was a huge financial success based mostly on its' brand name and marketing. Watch Dogs wasn't met with huge acclaim, yet due to great trailers and slick marketing, it's sold over 4 million copies.

Nintendo fans won't do that. Heck, they won't even buy most good games from third parties; they definitely aren't going to buy AC. So, unfortunately, it seems like these execs have an all-or-nothing approach. If you don't buy their bad games, you won't get the good ones either.

 

[AstroNut325]

I have no sympathy for for Nintendo. Create a "secondary" console, get treated like a second rate platform by developers.

I still enjoy some of their exclusives but this is completely on Nintendo.

 

[Sify64]

I'm pretty sure Rayman Legends sold poorly on the Wii U too, even if it was the bestselling version. I looked it up and apparently the Wii U version only sold 99k as of this March. So much for Nintendo owners buying quality third-party games, eh?

The sudden delay... Perhaps that had an impact. I was surprised that it was even the best selling version at all, considering the other systems have more than an 80m user base and the Miiverse backlash from last year lol.

 

[nephilimdj]

I'm pretty sure Rayman Legends sold poorly on the Wii U too, even if it was the bestselling version. I looked it up and apparently the Wii U version only sold 99k as of this March. So much for Nintendo owners buying quality third-party games, eh?

Well got to assume the PC version of Legends has sold atleast 150k, since 110k have played it online

Didnt Yakuza 1 & 2 HD sell like 2,000 copies in first week in Japan, I know people are blaming western games aimed at 16-25 year olds. But Japan had similar thing

 

[Aquamarine]

Well, yes, but you're missing one factor: Even those games you site as being successful on Nintendo platforms, are not particularly successful on Wii U. The system itself is not selling fast enough, and the users who currently own one are not buying enough titles a year to even make those ventures particularly attractive. The console will likely continue to get those titles - and I imagine Nintendo is lobbying for it- but will no longer be the 'prime' console. I just can't see anyone significantly dedicating resources for 100k, 150k units. The hope is they have a huge holiday with Mario Kart and Smash, and we can see where we are by end of Fiscal after March 2015.

And it absolutely is on Nintendo to drum up interest in their ecosystem; they need to create excitement and build a value proposition that increases raw Usage of the console itself, which then makes the platform more attractive for publishers to convert to their targeted software offerings. Gotta get those familes back!

If they are buying titles, it's Nintendo 1st-party titles. What good is an ecosystem that focuses so intently on Nintendo 1st-party and little else?

The good thing about a console like the PS4 is that a significant portion (like 76%) of its software ecosystem is realised through multiplatform sales.

 

[protomouse]

It's an open secret that Wii U owners want Mario games and little else.

For Wii U it's something even more specific: People don't buy it to play Nintendo games. They buy it to play Mario and Zelda games and little else.

You keep repeating these words, but I can't make sense of them. Are you predicting this or have you just made up your mind and called it a day? Bayonetta 1 & 2 bundle is releasing in October. I'm pretty sure people are buying Wii Us for that. Smash Bros. is releasing this holiday. I'm pretty sure people are excited about that, seeing as it's one of Nintendo's heaviest hitters. Look at the excitement Splatoon generated at E3. I can't remember people going "WTF is this, give me more Mario". In fact, it was the opposite. People actually want Nintendo to tackle new ideas, because they're arguably the best in the business at doing so.

3rd party publishers could do well if they took a page or two from Ubisoft's playbook. Especially EA, who made no effort towards understanding how to sell their games on the platform.

But trying to pin everything that goes wrong for Nintendo on its customers? Fuck that noise.

I think Disney's Planes 2 is a next-gen exclusive on Wii U

 

[Opiate]

Well, yes, but you're missing one factor: Even those games you site as being successful on Nintendo platforms, are not particularly successful on Wii U. The system itself is not selling fast enough, and the users who currently own one are not buying enough titles a year to even make those ventures particularly attractive. The console will likely continue to get those titles - and I imagine Nintendo is lobbying for it- but will no longer be the 'prime' console. I just can't see anyone significantly dedicating resources for 100k, 150k units. The hope is they have a huge holiday with Mario Kart and Smash, and we can see where we are by end of Fiscal after March 2015.

Oh, I don't disagree with the Wii U in particular. The Wii U, specifically, is a dying platform. I'm speaking more broadly: the Wii, for instance, was hugely popular yet received relatively weak third party support (relative to their market dominance, that is).

And it absolutely is on Nintendo to drum up interest in their ecosystem; they need to create excitement and build a value proposition that increases raw Usage of the console itself, which then makes the platform more attractive for publishers to convert to their targeted software offerings. Gotta get those familes back!

I agree completely.

 

[Ponn]

I think you're looking at what currently exists and concluding "it must not be possible," which isn't reasonable.

What we can say is that people aren't currently doing it right now and on home consoles. But they are doing it elsewhere: games like Angry Birds and Clash of Clans are clearly driving iOS game adoption broadly. Thus, it's clearly a thing that can happen. You also have the examples you gave: things like Wii Fit or Wii Sports. That shows that not only is it possible, but it's happened on consoles, and happened recently.

I would argue that the current major console publishers are structurally incapable of making these types of games, just as I'd say Rovio is not going to wake up tomorrow and suddenly make a huge, AAA, M rated hit on Xbox. Any company will have a specific set of skills, and as of right now the skill sets of the major console publishers are focused pretty narrowly on the 16-35 male demographic.

Getting more games, therefore, would not be done by getting EA back on board, or getting Ubisoft to rescind their decision, or something. These companies already have their specific expertise, and trying to get them to radically change the companies' business plan is extremely difficult. A more likely solution would be to create whole new third parties that adopt business plans more like your own.

This is how iOS flourished: like Nintendo's systems, iOS (and Android and Facebook, for that matter), mostly got a cold shoulder from the established third parties, even once it was clear that the ecosystem was growing rapidly. As such, new, major third parties grew in their absence; companies like GungHo and Gameloft are now huge companies. These markets couldn't be driven by the established players like Take 2 or Ubisoft, because those companies aren't really skilled at making that sort of game. Instead, it had to be driven by new blood with new design philosophies. I am suggesting that Nintendo is in the same position; their approach to game design is philosophically at odds with the major console publishers, so if they want support, they're going to have to foster new publishers who share their philosophy.

But isn't one of the arguments that the enormous userbase Wii built up just moved onto mobile/tablet gaming? I mean its obvious why mobile/android/ios became popular, semi-charming, easily accessible, CHEAP gaming. That base saw no point in getting a Wii U when they already had smartphones and ipads. In the case of mobile gaming that train was steamrolling and it didn't take a genius game designer to take advantage of it, on the contrary. Just companies taking advantage of the platform. Nintendo had that lightning in the bottle with Wii but they don't anymore and that is a very important piece of what you are describing.

I think it's a little more intricate of a situation then third parties making games similar to Nintendo to bring people over to buying a $300 dedicated gaming console from the juggernaut that is mobile/ios/android. If that really was the case you could reasonably expect some of these platforms that have been fostering these type of games (indies) to be seeing some kind of success but you still see those platforms that are havens for those type of titles, like Vita, languishing. On top of that you still have the stigma of third party games competing directly with Nintendo games on their own platform. Even more so if you say "make more Nintendo-like" games.

 

[Fourth Storm]

Oh please. On Wii U? Yes, it's absolutely over. But never count Nintendo out permanently.

I'm not counting out Nintendo - never would. I'm just observing the obvious in that Nintendo are doing nothing to create an ecosystem where mature AAA games can thrive. That would require not only a huge brand makeover but for Nintendo to drop their stance on protecting children when it comes to online community. It's not going to happen - nor do I think is it actually worth the investment. As Opiate and John Harker are discussing, there is the opportunity for a different type of market to thrive on Nintendo consoles, as it did on Wii. Nintendo still have their work cut out for them if they want to to achieve that, but it's much more realistic than saying they have a chance at converting PS/Xbox users.

 

[jimi_dini]

Not a multimedia device? Did it or did it not run stuff like Netflix and Youtube? So no, playing games was not the only reason to buy one.

Yep sure. People bought the Wii to surf the internet + for netflix.

There actually were people buying PS3 + PS2 as a DVD / BluRay player. None of that applies to the Wii, because they Wii didn't play DVD nor BluRays.

And also, I don't consider the Oprah and Ellen's audiences of soccer moms and grandmas to be gamers.

Then your opinion is wrong. By definition.

Let's play this "not a gamer" game. You know what the attach rate on the Wii was? It was nearly the same as on PS3/360. Now you either let grandma and grandpa count as gamers, or we will remove those from the equation, because like you said they "don't count". Which means that "real gamers" (according to you) bought way more games on Wii than on PS3/360. Pick your poison. Wii won in any case.

 

[AdanVC]

I really wanted to support Ubisoft games on Wii U but after the lame job they did porting AC IV there makes me wonder if Watch_Dogs will be the same with tons of technical problems and stuff. They offer inferior/bad ports of their games how do they expect them to sell well? Hope this extra months they taking on making the Wii U version are worth it and they can manage to bring a decent port. I will buy it just because I'm interested to see how they implement the Gamepad features on the game since they did a great job with that on Zombi U and because I haven't played a sandbox game in years.

 

[Juken]

I sometimes feel that getting the broader audiences back to buying Nintendo systems in significant qualities is almost as hopeless as trying to win the MS/Sony audience.

Most of that broad audience might be happy enough playing games on devices they already own and aren't particularly interested in spending hundreds of dollars on a Nintendo system anymore.

I'm not sure they are reliable enough to base a long term dedicated gaming hardware business on.

 

[Opiate]

Not really, SNES had a huge array of different genres to all types of audiences, it got even better after Nintendo decided to allow more contents with ESRB creation and the Mortal Kombat censorship controversy. Doom, MK2, MK3 and UMK3 got uncensored versions and they even published Killer Instinct, a T rated game, which was a big hit at the time.

It did not, actually. I think we're talking past each other. I'm talking about demographics.

Look at the Xbox 360 as (pre-Kinect) as an example here: it had a wide variety of software for a narrow demographic. If you were a 16-35 male, then the Xbox 360 had games of all types for you. Sports, swords, guns, you name it. That's the narrowness I'm speaking of. The same could be said of the Gamecube (I don't have access to SNES demographic studies, so if you do please share): it had a hugely disproportionate lean towards males, and a strong skew towards audiences younger than 30.

I'm not really sure what type of narrowness you're talking about. Can you explain in more detail?

Wii was mostly targeted at casuals and family. Core gaming wasn't the major priority, especially 2008 onward

The "casual and family" audience is far, far broader than the "core" audience. The core audience is hugely disproportionately male and hugely disproportionately 16-35. By contrast, the casual audience has virtually everyone else: young children, women, adult professional males, and the elderly.

 

[atr0cious]

The past seven years have seen inferior ports on one of the platforms, and yet the PS3's third party software sales didn't nosedive off a cliff because of it. There are examples of delayed and or feature-incomplete ports at the beginning of that last generation for both the 360 and the PS3 that sold considerably better and/or well for their respective publishers. I played the terrible port of Bayonetta on the PS3, because that's what I owned, and I wanted to play it.

That the quality of certain ports dissuaded some of the more informed individuals on here may in fact be the case. That it's the primary reason for the generally incredibly poor third party software sales [in certain categories] is fallacy. The idea that the poor sales of these titles is some principled stand against inferior ports seems really more an attempt to minimize the idea that as a product the Wii U is simply poorly conceived and ill-suited for the demographic userbase that fuels the AAA-console industry, and as a result the software for that userbase has performed poorly.

This is why I say that Nintendo owners are a different type of spender, and why third party is leaving. To say that they only buy Nintendo games is just a blanket statement for they only buy games that are made with the console in mind. Even No More Heroes found a home on Nintendo consoles. Forza 5 came out as half a game and people bought it, which tells publishers that they can put out what ever they want. When that happens on the Wii U, you get a million children posting in visible sight about how shit your game is. eShop has also proven that indies have a home if they try. The MiiVerse is the new marketplace, and pubs either have to exert effort or tap out.

 

[JinjoUnchained]

I'm pretty sure Rayman Legends sold poorly on the Wii U too, even if it was the bestselling version. I looked it up and apparently the Wii U version only sold 99k as of this March. So much for Nintendo owners buying quality third-party games, eh?

I oversimplified the case for Rayman for the sake of brevity. The first game sold well on Wii, the second game sold best on Wii U but poorly overall. What we're leaving out is the whole delay fiasco and the fact that the Wii U has done so poorly, leaving a smaller installation base overall. That's a whole other topic on Ubisoft's poor decision to launch with Zombi U instead of Rayman Legends and delay a completed game to launch it on other systems that don't support the franchise, sending it out to die against GTA V and pissing off the fans that supported the first game (Nintendo fans). Still, it did best on Wii U, and had a lot of buzz and momentum before Ubi inexplicably ruined it.

My overall point is that Nintendo first party games "crowd out" mediocre third party games on their platforms. This isn't an elitist "Nintendo games are better than third parties" rant. That is all subjective, whether you like Mario or Arkham, one isn't inherently better than the other. All I'm saying is that Nintendo fans don't give a shit about mediocre third party games because of first party content. That's what upsets EA/Activision/Ubi, they want fans to buy the bad AND the good games.

 

[daycru]

Love these posts where people are like "Hey, I bought that game! You sold one copy to me, personally. Clearly this negates everything (game company X) claims." Throw in a misuse of "hyperbole" just for fun.

 

[Shaanyboi]

No ZombiU sequel... Fuck everything.

 

[Sadist]

I'm still convinced third parties didn't do themselves any favor (and Nintendo) by largely ignoring the Wii last generation. That kind of destroyed any hope of selling "big name" third party titles on future Nintendo systems.

 

[John Harker]

Taking your personal feelings aside - which I know is hard - I still have difficulty seeing a scenario in which Rayman Legends being delayed actually turned out to be a 'bad idea' for the project.

And it seems to be cited often in this thread. I suppose that's just people who were upset they had to wait a few more months to play it? It can't be based on the reality of the software sales situation right?

 

[GenericUser]

It's a miracle that watch dogs even gets a release. There are plenty of healthy systems available to develop games for (mobile, pc, next gen console ...) so why bother with the WiiU?

 

[Stormwatch]

Unfortunately Nintendo alienated a lot of game developers when they went with underpowered systems that had control input gimmicks. I really enjoyed those "gimmicks" and I made sure I purchased a Kinect and Move as well. But, Nintendo made those controller mandatory and developers just didn't want to develop for them. This led to Nintendo having a smaller install base which led to developers making Nintendo platforms their last priority. This led to shitty ports which led to people not buying them which meant that developers don't want to develop for Nintendo anymore. We just have to face the fact that Nintendo systems have now become a great "second" system. I still love their games and own every system, but I understand that I must also own an Xbox and/or Playstation if I want a full gaming experience.

 

[protomouse]

Nintendo didn't "win" last gen because of gamers.

And also, I don't consider the Oprah and Ellen's audiences of soccer moms and grandmas to be gamers.

 

[Huff]

The "Wii u gamers are smarter and more wise with their money to buy nothing but the perfect game" excuse for sales gives me a chuckle every time

 

[SparksterMeta0]

That's... disappointing.