• 150 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#51 Posted by Darji (5294 posts) -

@darji said:

@oscar__explosion said:

@darji said:

@oscar__explosion said:

@darji said:

@extomar said:

It is cliche but "power" isn't so important but what devs do with what is available. If Nintendo is just going "Here you guys go" without further shepherding then it is DOA.

Power was always important. There were always graphic and power wars even in the times of Atari and co. More power also means new mechanics, new ways of playing, new possibilities.

Why wasn't EA making these complaints about the Wii then?

They did. And what was the Wii EA support about? Yeah they still got their madden and Fifa but beside that? Also remember the legendary "2 duct tapes together" quote? That back than came also from one EA employee.

and even with that the Wii did fine.

Yeah because it had appeal. It had a system seller called Wii Sports and motion control which was easy to get for people who never played a video game before. The Wii U has nothing of this and this could be very well end up as Nintendo's biggest failure to date. Mabye even Nintendo's downfall.

I don't know about all that downfall stuff but I do agree that Nintendo failed to provide a Wii Sports equivalent to help people understand what this system actually is. I think brand confusion might be more in play that this however. I can recall the handful of times I was at a Target or Best Buy and explained to parents what the difference between a Wii and Wii U is or that Wiimotes work with the Wii U (that packaging doesn't help at all) I believe this is one of the more major things Nintendo needs to fix.

They can not fix it anymore. It is done. They can not suddenly change the name. The Wii U is done for and nothing really can rescue this device. It was a total misconception in terms of hardware, system and marketing.

#52 Edited by sodapop7 (233 posts) -

A price drop and a few quality first party titles which you know are coming will most likely prove you wrong. I'm never going to bet against Nintendo.

@darji said:

@oscar__explosion said:

@darji said:

@oscar__explosion said:

@darji said:

@oscar__explosion said:

@darji said:

@extomar said:

It is cliche but "power" isn't so important but what devs do with what is available. If Nintendo is just going "Here you guys go" without further shepherding then it is DOA.

Power was always important. There were always graphic and power wars even in the times of Atari and co. More power also means new mechanics, new ways of playing, new possibilities.

Why wasn't EA making these complaints about the Wii then?

They did. And what was the Wii EA support about? Yeah they still got their madden and Fifa but beside that? Also remember the legendary "2 duct tapes together" quote? That back than came also from one EA employee.

and even with that the Wii did fine.

Yeah because it had appeal. It had a system seller called Wii Sports and motion control which was easy to get for people who never played a video game before. The Wii U has nothing of this and this could be very well end up as Nintendo's biggest failure to date. Mabye even Nintendo's downfall.

I don't know about all that downfall stuff but I do agree that Nintendo failed to provide a Wii Sports equivalent to help people understand what this system actually is. I think brand confusion might be more in play that this however. I can recall the handful of times I was at a Target or Best Buy and explained to parents what the difference between a Wii and Wii U is or that Wiimotes work with the Wii U (that packaging doesn't help at all) I believe this is one of the more major things Nintendo needs to fix.

They can not fix it anymore. It is done. They can not suddenly change the name. The Wii U is done for and nothing really can rescue this device. It was a total misconception in terms of hardware, system and marketing.

#53 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

@sodapop7: In Germany you already can get the Wii U premium for 199€ which is equivalent of 199$ in the US and no one is buying the Wii U. In Shops the Wii U does not even have a separated shelf but is packed in with Wii games. In The UK not one Wii U games sells over 1000 copies in a week. Just imagine you would be the best selling Wii U game if you could sell over 1000 copies. That is very very bad.

#54 Edited by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -

Oh no what will Nintendo ever do without third party developers.

How would the Wii and the Gamecube have survived without third parties.

#55 Edited by sodapop7 (233 posts) -

@darji: Yeah and why should it? There's no compelling games out right now. I'm saying that Nintendo will have those compelling games (first party) and then the Wii U will do fine. Those are two incredibly small markets you're mentioning. I'm not disputing that the Wii U is doing poorly right now. I'm challenging the idea that it's already done.

#56 Edited by DonPixel (2585 posts) -

Is not like he is lying

#57 Posted by Vinchenzo (6192 posts) -

Wii U blows. Was this supposed to be a surprise or something? Defenders of Nintendo products must be living several decades in the past.

#58 Edited by Andorski (5309 posts) -

Outside the Wii and it's casual userbase, when did people buy Nintendo console - post SNES - for anything other than Nintendo games?

#59 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@andorski: The Wii U's current problem is not that people aren't buying third-party games, it's that people aren't buying the Wii U.

@sodapop7: The idea that people are going to rush out and buy a Wii U as soon as Nintendo announce a new Mario, Zelda or Metroid title is certainly an attractive sentiment for people invested in the success of the machine but it's likely as misleading as it is comforting.

#61 Edited by Mrsignerman44 (1100 posts) -

@ahaisthisourchance said:

The WiiU isn't exactly a powerhouse, but to call it weaker than the 360 seems to be stretching it a bit too far.

Have there been any games released (or even teased) that prove (or even hint that) this opinion/theory wrong?

I don't know man, Pikmin 3 looks pretty beautiful.

#62 Edited by sodapop7 (233 posts) -

@rebgav: What third party software sold the Nintendo 64, Gamecube, GBA, DS and Wii then? Nintendo IS those games and those are absolutely what sell the systems.

#63 Posted by Andorski (5309 posts) -

@rebgav said:

@andorski: The Wii U's current problem is not that people aren't buying third-party games, it's that people aren't buying the Wii U.

The Wii U hasn't had it's first price drop yet and both configurations of the system are still above the $199.99 USD sweet spot for console price. The Wii U won't get even close to selling the numbers of its predecessor once it hits the end of its life cycle, but the system is not in major trouble. Neither is Nintendo as a whole. Nintendo still controls the handheld market, and while smartphones are clearly eating up that potential base the 3DS is still selling at a good pace. Nintendo games also have proven to have a long sales tail. The series of Mario franchises are basically rehashed every generation (core Mario franchise aside, e.g. the Galaxy games), yet Mario Kart Wii sold over 30 million copies. New Super Mario Bros Wii went over 20 million.

What Nintendo is facing right now is what Sony and Microsoft will hit once their consoles are released. The number of people playing games on consoles is shrinking. Sony and MS will double down on this market and try to muscle the other one out. Nintendo is in a way better position to be profitable with a smaller base.

#64 Posted by Darji (5294 posts) -

@professoress said:

@ahaisthisourchance said:

The WiiU isn't exactly a powerhouse, but to call it weaker than the 360 seems to be stretching it a bit too far.

Have there been any games released (or even teased) that prove (or even hint that) this opinion/theory wrong?

I don't know man, Pikmin 3 looks pretty beautiful.

this was a wii game at first and it shows.

#65 Edited by Mrsignerman44 (1100 posts) -

@darji said:

@mrsignerman44 said:

@professoress said:

@ahaisthisourchance said:

The WiiU isn't exactly a powerhouse, but to call it weaker than the 360 seems to be stretching it a bit too far.

Have there been any games released (or even teased) that prove (or even hint that) this opinion/theory wrong?

I don't know man, Pikmin 3 looks pretty beautiful.

this was a wii game at first and it shows.

You think pikmin 3 could run a wii? I want whatever you're smoking man. It looks gorgeous.

#66 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@sodapop7 said:

@rebgav: What third party software sold the Nintendo 64, Gamecube, GBA, DS and Wii then? Nintendo IS those games and those are absolutely what sell the systems.

Third party software does not sell Nintendo systems. However, the idea that people will flock to the Wii U once Nintendo announce the old standbys assumes that people exist who will absolutely buy Nintendo software purely for the brands and regardless of any other factor, that those people have not yet bought their hardware, and that those people number in the millions. This seems very unlikely.

#67 Posted by GooieGreen (454 posts) -

@oscar__explosion: it matters when you are in the business of making multi-platform games and you are used to developing for higher-end systems. Working on the same level of hardware for over a decade would frustrate me, especially when something more advanced existed. You then have to scale down new games substantially because they have to run on this other platform, below the specs that you are used to last gen, not to mention for a small audience such as the WiiU install base.

Couldn't see why Nintendo matters when you really think about it.

#68 Posted by Hailinel (24782 posts) -

I'm getting the sense that trying to enter any sort of debate with Darji is a futile endeavor.

Online
#69 Edited by Levio (1784 posts) -

There's no way I'm going to buy a WU just to play Nintendo exclusives. There's plenty of other great games out there that I want to play that don't require their own freaking console.

#70 Posted by sodapop7 (233 posts) -

@rebgav: If you're idea is true what exactly sold all the consoles I mentioned previously? Once Nintendo makes the games there will be an increase in interest and sales. Nowhere did I say that EVERYONE would come buy the Wii U once this happened. I am questioning the idea that the system is already dead when Nintendo has barely released anything for their system yet.

#71 Posted by Darji (5294 posts) -

@darji said:

@mrsignerman44 said:

@professoress said:

@ahaisthisourchance said:

The WiiU isn't exactly a powerhouse, but to call it weaker than the 360 seems to be stretching it a bit too far.

Have there been any games released (or even teased) that prove (or even hint that) this opinion/theory wrong?

I don't know man, Pikmin 3 looks pretty beautiful.

this was a wii game at first and it shows.

You think pikmin 3 could run a wii? I want whatever you're smoking man. It looks gorgeous.

No I am saying that it first was a Wii game and you can see it still on the textures for example. Is it possible on the Wii? Hell no. But it is not any thing impossible that PS3/360 can not do.

#72 Posted by benpicko (2008 posts) -

@darji said:

damn XD

more quotes

Nintendo are still operating like it's 1990. They should have "done a Sega" and offered Mario/Zelda as PS4/Durango exclusives

It is an utterly intentional decision to focus our resources on markets which actually matter ... like mobile, and Gen4.

Yep, we've got plenty of problems, but WiiU isn't where that family/casual market is. It's on mobile/tablet now!

Looks like we have our next twitter Victim. He must be really drunk or so XD

xDD

He's right though.

#73 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@andorski said:

@rebgav said:

@andorski: The Wii U's current problem is not that people aren't buying third-party games, it's that people aren't buying the Wii U.

The Wii U hasn't had it's first price drop yet and both configurations of the system are still above the $199.99 USD sweet spot for console price. The Wii U won't get even close to selling the numbers of its predecessor once it hits the end of its life cycle, but the system is not in major trouble. Neither is Nintendo as a whole. Nintendo still controls the handheld market, and while smartphones are clearly eating up that potential base the 3DS is still selling at a good pace. Nintendo games also have proven to have a long sales tail. The series of Mario franchises are basically rehashed every generation (core Mario franchise aside, e.g. the Galaxy games), yet Mario Kart Wii sold over 30 million copies. New Super Mario Bros Wii went over 20 million.

What Nintendo is facing right now is what Sony and Microsoft will hit once their consoles are released. The number of people playing games on consoles is shrinking. Sony and MS will double down on this market and try to muscle the other one out. Nintendo is in a way better position to be profitable with a smaller base.

While both Sony and Microsoft will probably see a similar downturn in their fortunes it's important to recognize the difference in the scale of the issue for them. If Nintendo's sales projections were revised to be comparable to the worst case scenario for either of the other two, Nintendo would probably be overjoyed.

I don't understand how anyone could say that Nintendo fighting a war of attrition as a distant third-place non-competitive entrant is somehow beneficial for the company. That is not a viable long-term plan. While conventional wisdom holds that third-party titles don't make money on Nintendo systems it ignores that licensing fees are a lucrative revenue stream for the platform holder - while Nintendo fans are not going to shed a tear at EA abandoning the platform it seems deeply unlikely that Nintendo themselves share that lack of concern. The idea that Nintendo's homegrown games are some sort of evergreen property has yet to really be tested but with a generation of games-players aging out of their nostalgia for those franchises and the influx of new players who don't have any connection to Mario, Zelda & Co, combined with the likelihood of a much smaller installed base (and a shrinking console market) for the duration of this generation it's going to be very interesting to see how well that "wisdom" holds up.

I'm not going to say that Nintendo can't fix these problems and bounce back but right now it doesn't seem like they acknowledge that there are problems and that, more than anything else, is a huge cause for concern.

#74 Edited by JZ (2125 posts) -

Agreed

#75 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@sodapop7 said:

@rebgav: If you're idea is true what exactly sold all the consoles I mentioned previously? Once Nintendo makes the games there will be an increase in interest and sales. Nowhere did I say that EVERYONE would come buy the Wii U once this happened. I am questioning the idea that the system is already dead when Nintendo has barely released anything for their system yet.

The system is obviously not dead but it seems to be on a downward trajectory and general skepticism around the platform doesn't suggest that there's particularly bright future in store for the Wii U - and we're still less than a year out from the launch.

The N64 and the Gamecube did reasonably well but the narrative of both those generations of hardware was one of Nintendo losing traction in the market and being surpassed by their competitors. If the Wii U represents Nintendo's return to also-ran status then it's going to be very difficult not to write them off entirely next time. What happens if the general malaise which characterized the last few years of the Wii's life simply carries over to the Wii U from the start? We seem to be in the process of finding out.

#76 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -

@darji said:

@extomar said:

Here is a fun thought experiment: Why are there not more games like Minecraft or Tiny Towers or any number of other small scale games months ago? It certainly isn't about the power of the Wii U platform that is stopping them. For games with sub $100k budget the Wii U platform might be unattractive not because of the "power" of the Wii U platform but because the way Nintendo manages the system and services.

It is unattractive because there is no user base. No market nothing. and yeah it also hurts that Nintendo's E-shop is so bad. Why would I buy digital games on a console which account is console bound. That is why Nintendo should go out of the hardware business. Just create the stuff you are good at. Hardware is it not.

O_o

Nintendo makes the BEST hardware.

Firstly, Nintendo, if you forget the first console, has always put out pretty stable hardware. Where Xbox's were known to catch on fire and PS2's were known to cease working altogether, Nintendo consoles all pretty much do what they say they will.

Secondly, who was the first to include shoulder buttons on a console? Nintendo. Who was the first to have an analog stick? Four controller inputs? Nintendo. Rumble? Nintendo. VR Headset? Nintendo. Wireless? Nintendo. Motion? Nintendo. Tablet? Nintendo. They're the most innovative hardware makers out there in the console space.

Thirdly, one of the biggest reasons Nintendo games are as exceptional as they are is because of the hardware they are based on. Duck Hunt, FZero, Pilotwings, Wave Race, Pikmin, and Wii Sports were all tech demos to demonstrate the hardware that were then turned into games. If Nintendo had to rely on third party manufacturers to produce hardware, their games would be worse and the industry would be worse overall.

#77 Edited by Mrsignerman44 (1100 posts) -

@darji said:

@mrsignerman44 said:

@darji said:

@mrsignerman44 said:

@professoress said:

@ahaisthisourchance said:

The WiiU isn't exactly a powerhouse, but to call it weaker than the 360 seems to be stretching it a bit too far.

Have there been any games released (or even teased) that prove (or even hint that) this opinion/theory wrong?

I don't know man, Pikmin 3 looks pretty beautiful.

this was a wii game at first and it shows.

You think pikmin 3 could run a wii? I want whatever you're smoking man. It looks gorgeous.

No I am saying that it first was a Wii game and you can see it still on the textures for example. Is it possible on the Wii? Hell no. But it is not any thing impossible that PS3/360 can not do.

It could definitely work on a ps3/360 and it definitely isn't par with the footage we've seen from the ps4 conference but I think it's a definite step up from the wii and I think that's what they were trying to accomplish.

#78 Edited by Cerberus3Dog (336 posts) -

If you put something on the internet, however throwaway, it might come back to bite you in the ass. Maybe the guy had a bad day at work. I'm going to feel bad if he loses his job over a couple impulsive tweets.

As for the WiiU, people own one because they want to play Nintendo games. If you want to play the latest EA games, you own a Sony/Microsoft console or a PC. There is no incentive for me to play a third party multiplatform console games on a WiiU when the only additive feature is a map on the second screen. Why wouldn't I just stay with what is familiar?

#79 Edited by GunGunW (60 posts) -

Huh, I'm actually browsing the internet from my Wii U right now.

#80 Edited by sins_of_mosin (1556 posts) -

Lets be 'real' for a moment. The Wii was one last attempt for Nintendo to stay in the hardware business. They got damn lucky, probably the luckiest the industry has ever seen. They can't compete, at all, so they need a hook/gimmick. They are using the same one for the Wii U and when you add that with hardware that is the same or just a little better then the stuff that is being replaced by much better stuff. Well, nobody is going to invest in that.

#81 Edited by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

I find it amusing hes sayin all this when he works for the company voted worst company 2 years in a row.

Just noticed his tweets where removed.

#82 Posted by Hailinel (24782 posts) -

I find it amusing hes sayin all this when he works for the company voted worst company 2 years in a row.

Just noticed his tweets where removed.

He also removed any mention of his employer/position from his Twitter bio. Dude is in full-on damage-control mode and probably due for a meeting with management on Monday morning.

Online
#83 Edited by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@the_laughing_man said:

I find it amusing hes sayin all this when he works for the company voted worst company 2 years in a row.

Just noticed his tweets where removed.

He also removed any mention of his employer/position from his Twitter bio. Dude is in full-on damage-control mode and probably due for a meeting with management on Monday morning.

It just shows that you need to use common sense and keep in mind who you represent when you play with social media.

#84 Posted by MedalOfMode (294 posts) -

EA is crap. Less moneyful than Activision.

#85 Edited by Oscar__Explosion (2298 posts) -

@oscar__explosion: it matters when you are in the business of making multi-platform games and you are used to developing for higher-end systems. Working on the same level of hardware for over a decade would frustrate me, especially when something more advanced existed. You then have to scale down new games substantially because they have to run on this other platform, below the specs that you are used to last gen, not to mention for a small audience such as the WiiU install base.

Couldn't see why Nintendo matters when you really think about it.

since the gamecube Nintendo has always been about the first party and third part exclusives. those exclusive games have always been the reason for getting a Nintendo system.

#87 Edited by TruthTellah (9073 posts) -

@rebgav: Hey, fack you!!! U sh-yay dat Wii U iz dreamcas then you hide behind asain beecthes when u get scare of mi.

u fackin poosee. I fack err azz up when i find u, u pock azz beetch.

Hizang? :3

#88 Posted by TruthTellah (9073 posts) -

I don't think this EA engineer's opinions are invalid or completely incorrect, but he certainly could have expressed himself in a better manner. His tone is clearly inflammatory, and when faced with how unnecessarily inflammatory it was, he just decided to double down on it. A very unfortunate display.

#89 Posted by Darji (5294 posts) -

I find it amusing hes sayin all this when he works for the company voted worst company 2 years in a row.

Just noticed his tweets where removed.

I find it amusing that people see this as valid. EA only won because it was an internet vote and "normal" people do not care.

#90 Edited by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

Dude has gone oddly quiet in the last day.

#91 Edited by atomic_dumpling (2473 posts) -

Yeah well, "Nintendo LOL, Origin *fart noise*" is clearly not the way to represent EA right now. I believe "twitter-savvy" should be a job requirement these days.

#92 Posted by SpaceInsomniac (3728 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@the_laughing_man said:

I find it amusing hes sayin all this when he works for the company voted worst company 2 years in a row.

Just noticed his tweets where removed.

He also removed any mention of his employer/position from his Twitter bio. Dude is in full-on damage-control mode and probably due for a meeting with management on Monday morning.

I'm betting the Origin comment is really the only thing that could possibly get him fired. His comments about Nintendo were harsh, but EA has clearly proven that they don't care about developing for the console.

#93 Edited by Oldirtybearon (4800 posts) -

Lets be 'real' for a moment. The Wii was one last attempt for Nintendo to stay in the hardware business. They got damn lucky, probably the luckiest the industry has ever seen. They can't compete, at all, so they need a hook/gimmick. They are using the same one for the Wii U and when you add that with hardware that is the same or just a little better then the stuff that is being replaced by much better stuff. Well, nobody is going to invest in that.

Bullseye. I would say that they could compete, however, they just choose not to. The EA engineer was right on the money when he said that Nintendo acts like it's still 1990 and they dictate to the games industry. The truth is that the third party developers dictate the games industry and platform holders who are savvy appeal to them. They say "we need this much horse power and this much ___" and the platform holders either give it to them or they compromise. Nintendo outright refuses to do this. They refuse to bend even in the slightest to the third party creators and instead continue to release inferior consoles. I would not be surprised if the Wii U is what ends up killing Nintendo in the same way the Dreamcast killed Sega.

It's frustrating, to be honest, and I'm glad that at least one person in the industry isn't afraid to express that frustration.

#94 Edited by WinterSnowblind (7617 posts) -

@darji said:

@the_laughing_man said:

I find it amusing hes sayin all this when he works for the company voted worst company 2 years in a row.

Just noticed his tweets where removed.

I find it amusing that people see this as valid. EA only won because it was an internet vote and "normal" people do not care.

The same could be said for these comments about the Wii U. As soon as the console gets games people care about, sales will improve. We saw exactly the same thing happen with the 3DS, it came out, did badly, people said Nintendo were doomed.. then games started coming out and it's selling ridiculously well now.

They won't necessarily completely turn it around, I don't think the Wii U is ever going to be in the leading position, but the PS4 and 720/Infinity will likely launch in a similar position to this. They'll be expensive, have few games and not many people will care for the first few months. The fact anyone is acting like Nintendo is doomed when their console has been out for 5 months is mind bogglingly stupid. I know it's been a while since the last console generation, but I have to assume at least some gamers are older than 14 and remember this cycle.

#95 Edited by MAGZine (437 posts) -

@the_laughing_man said:

@hailinel said:

@the_laughing_man said:

I find it amusing hes sayin all this when he works for the company voted worst company 2 years in a row.

Just noticed his tweets where removed.

He also removed any mention of his employer/position from his Twitter bio. Dude is in full-on damage-control mode and probably due for a meeting with management on Monday morning.

It just shows that you need to use common sense and keep in mind who you represent when you play with social media.

This whole quote-train...

SMH

BTW, guys, since when has one SE in a company of nearly 10,000 employees represented the entire company? Most people don't feel the need to put "The views posted here are my own and not representative of my employer" because it's a) redundant (and obvious) and b) there are much better things to populate your bio with.

#96 Posted by Darji (5294 posts) -

@darji said:

@the_laughing_man said:

I find it amusing hes sayin all this when he works for the company voted worst company 2 years in a row.

Just noticed his tweets where removed.

I find it amusing that people see this as valid. EA only won because it was an internet vote and "normal" people do not care.

The same could be said for these comments about the Wii U. As soon as the console gets games people care about, sales will improve. We saw exactly the same thing happen with the 3DS, it came out, did badly, people said Nintendo were doomed.. then games started coming out and it's selling ridiculously well now.

They won't necessarily completely turn it around, I don't think the Wii U is ever going to be in the leading position, but the PS4 and 720/Infinity will likely launch in a similar position to this. They'll be expensive, have few games and not many people will care for the first few months. The fact anyone is acting like Nintendo is doomed when their console has been out for 5 months is mind bogglingly stupid. I know it's been a while since the last console generation, but I have to assume at least some gamers are older than 14 and remember this cycle.

1. The 3ds is not doing that well in the west. It is far behind Nintendo's forecast

2. The Wii U is not a 3Ds and will never sell this way. People just do not care about the Wii U. Hell the people who bought a Wii do not even know that the Wii U is a new console but rather an addon. And yes this is still the case.

3. The Ps3 meeting was alone watched by over 20 million people. There is a ton of hype behind this machine and Microsoft will have this hype in the US as well. nlike the Wii U both consoles will be sold out for the first months for sure. I can tell yo at least that.

4. Nintendo is making more and more loss. They almost loost all the money they earned with the DS and Wii. Their stocks a very very low and more and more people demanding Nintendo going 3rd party and develop for Iphones and tablets. Iwata himself already that he will resign from his position if they will not meet this ridiculous high goal they have until 2014.

You can say that Sony is in financial trouble too but Sony has a HUGE advantage. Sony is not only about video games and videogames was never the section that was really in trouble. Nintendo only have this Industry and if they fail they will be out for good.

#97 Posted by WinterSnowblind (7617 posts) -

@darji: That's a hell of a lot of conjecture. Disappointing performance isn't the same as poor sales. I'm not going to turn this into a list war or link to a million articles, but 3DS sales are strong in the west and have improved dramatically in the past few months. Considering how poorly it did at launch, there's no reason to believe the Wii U isn't going to improve as well.

I'll also remind you that the PS3 had a lot of hype behind it and ended up doing very badly at launch. It's now in a stronger position worldwide than the Xbox 360, which had a huge headstart.

#98 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

@darji: That's a hell of a lot of conjecture. Disappointing performance isn't the same as poor sales. I'm not going to turn this into a list war or link to a million articles, but 3DS sales are strong in the west and have improved dramatically in the past few months. Considering how poorly it did at launch, there's no reason to believe the Wii U isn't going to improve as well.

I'll also remind you that the PS3 had a lot of hype behind it and ended up doing very badly at launch. It's now in a stronger position worldwide than the Xbox 360, which had a huge headstart.

3DS sales according to Nintendo themselves are not "satisfying" You can read it all in their financial report. And no Nintendo can be lucky if they could reach Gamecube numbers. The PS3 had a huge problem and that were shipping umbers in Japan and of course the huge price. This will not happen again. The Wii U does not even sell for 199 Euro in Europe. Hell even the Vita has better software sales than the Wii U. And that alone is an embarrassment.

#99 Edited by geirr (2570 posts) -

The 3DO was more powerful than the PS1 but it didn't mean shit, did it?

#100 Posted by Hailinel (24782 posts) -

@magzine said:

@the_laughing_man said:

@hailinel said:

@the_laughing_man said:

I find it amusing hes sayin all this when he works for the company voted worst company 2 years in a row.

Just noticed his tweets where removed.

He also removed any mention of his employer/position from his Twitter bio. Dude is in full-on damage-control mode and probably due for a meeting with management on Monday morning.

It just shows that you need to use common sense and keep in mind who you represent when you play with social media.

This whole quote-train...

SMH

BTW, guys, since when has one SE in a company of nearly 10,000 employees represented the entire company? Most people don't feel the need to put "The views posted here are my own and not representative of my employer" because it's a) redundant (and obvious) and b) there are much better things to populate your bio with.

He doesn't represent the entire company, but then neither did Adam Orth represent Microsoft. He was just an employee who happened to use Twitter to make some comments that were bad PR for Microsoft. Now he's no longer a Microsoft employee.

This situation is not that dissimilar. Whether or not you agree with his assessment on the Wii U, he's an EA employee that used his Twitter account to badmouth hardware that the company has produced games for produced by a company that EA still maintains a relationship with. And while EA may not currently be making any Wii U titles and may not make any titles for the platform in the future, I'm pretty sure that EA also does not want some slackjawed employee making unauthorized antagonizing comments in a public forum for the world to see (i.e.: Ranting on Twitter is a fucking no-no).

And what does SMH mean?

Online