#1 Edited by Aegon (5471 posts) -

Man, it seems hard to believe that it hasn't even been a year since it came out. At this point, the sales for the Wii U have not been great and we've seen what the other 2 consoles are offering and at what price. I wonder how long it'll be before a price cut. There are some things about the Wii U I'm liking, but what it's going for right now is not worth it (IMO, obvs). When do you think the price cut will hit?

Also, come on, 32 gigs isn't close to enough anymore.

#2 Posted by Oscar__Explosion (2231 posts) -

I give any system at between 18 months and 2 years after launch before an offical price drop.

#3 Edited by Make_Me_Mad (3049 posts) -

I've been asking the same thing about the Vita for what seems like ages now. The only thing it's got going for it is Persona 4 Golden. Just give me a Vita that will ONLY play that one game, and I'd probably toss out 100 bucks for it.

Online
#4 Edited by crusader8463 (14419 posts) -

Unless Nintendo has a crap ton of mind blowing games to stealth launch this Christmas when the other two consoles come out I would expect a price drop then. Even if there is a price drop though they need some damn games. Maybe Nintendo as a company is just not for me anymore, but I have not seen a single WiiU game that has gotten me excited. The closest thing was that Lego game but after seeing the terrible load times all interest in that flew out the window.

If Nintendo is just going to keep milking the same few franchises over and over again then I guess I'm just done with Nintendo as none of that holds any appeal to me. If they want my money they need to start coming up with new and original franchises to milk to death. Or finally make that Pokemon MMO everyone has dreamed about for years. That's about the only way I see me buying a WiiU.

#5 Edited by Aegon (5471 posts) -

@crusader8463: Personally I'm excited for X from Monolith and honestly, I haven't owned many Nintendo consoles, so I can actually get excited for a Mario or Zelda game if it looks cool. But yes, they need more games and more original IPs.

#6 Posted by falserelic (5395 posts) -

Its Nintendo's fault their hardware and games are just lacking. A price cut would be a smart move to boost their sales.

#7 Posted by ll_Exile_ll (1556 posts) -

Without a price drop there is no chance I would even consider a Wii U. For $50 more you can a vastly more powerful system (PS4) that will actually have third party support and a decent online infrastructure. Being priced so close to a system that is so clearly better is going to be an absolute killer for Nintendo, they need to get the cost significantly lower.

#8 Edited by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

I think from their perspective, they are increasing the value of the system this holiday by releasing a new Mario, Mario Kart, Donkey Kong, and Zelda game. After this holiday, if sales start to drop again, then they can announce a price drop to renew interest yet again, after all those people have already paid full price for it.

#9 Posted by Helios1337 (325 posts) -

They go on sale here in Canada every couple weeks. The deluxe is normally $350, it was on sale at the "Real Canadian Superstore" for $299 and it was a tax free weekend. So I got it for $299 total and picked up games and controllers tax free. It's on sale right now at The Source for $299 again, but of course you have to pay taxes.

#10 Posted by mrcraggle (1894 posts) -

While not official, UK stores have been reducing the price by a lot. It launched here for £299 for the deluxe model and has since been reduced to £200, maybe even less as they haven't sold as well as retailers thought.

#11 Posted by Waffles13 (608 posts) -

I'll be honest; I totally thought the "good" model was $250 and was thinking that I would buy one when it dropped down to $199. Remembering that that thing is $350 is massively bumming me out.

#12 Posted by andrew2696 (304 posts) -

@helios1337: Isn't Real Canadian Superstore like Costco? And holy shit the Source is still a thing?

#13 Posted by Aegon (5471 posts) -

I'll be honest; I totally thought the "good" model was $250 and was thinking that I would buy one when it dropped down to $199. Remembering that that thing is $350 is massively bumming me out.

Yup, I as well was under the impression a little while back that it was quite a bit lower than the current price.

#14 Posted by axlvandamme (96 posts) -

That shit should be $199.99 by now. Pretty soon the new consoles will be out and no one will care about the U. Nintendo had a full year lead time and did nothing with it. How does Satoru Iwata not get more flak for this?

#15 Posted by Turtlebird95 (2343 posts) -

I'll be honest; I totally thought the "good" model was $250 and was thinking that I would buy one when it dropped down to $199. Remembering that that thing is $350 is massively bumming me out.

I keep thinking this all the time no matter how much I correct myself. It's weird.

#16 Posted by Oscar__Explosion (2231 posts) -

That shit should be $199.99 by now. Pretty soon the new consoles will be out and no one will care about the U. Nintendo had a full year lead time and did nothing with it. How does Satoru Iwata not get more flak for this?

I would think it be real bad looking seeing a Wii U and a 3DS XL priced at the same amount.

#17 Edited by Turtlebird95 (2343 posts) -

They're going to drop it sooner than later. My bets are between March and September of next year, unless they're really desperate and try it this holiday in an attempt to compete with the other consoles.

#18 Posted by JJOR64 (18941 posts) -

They keep saying no price drop. I think they should drop the price around Christmas this year. It would help them a lot.

#19 Posted by spankingaddict (2660 posts) -

You can't put a price tag on a new Pikmin . I bought my Wii U pretty cheap on Amazon . $280 for the standard . Also , ZombiU is pretty great .

#20 Edited by LiquidPrince (15901 posts) -

I've been asking the same thing about the Vita for what seems like ages now. The only thing it's got going for it is Persona 4 Golden. Just give me a Vita that will ONLY play that one game, and I'd probably toss out 100 bucks for it.

This is untrue. The Vita has a huge variety of good games on it, unlike the current state of the Wii U. Persona 4 and Muramasa just stand out because of how awesome they are.

#21 Edited by spankingaddict (2660 posts) -

@liquidprince said:

@make_me_mad said:

I've been asking the same thing about the Vita for what seems like ages now. The only thing it's got going for it is Persona 4 Golden. Just give me a Vita that will ONLY play that one game, and I'd probably toss out 100 bucks for it.

This is untrue. The Vita has a huge variety of good games on it, unlike the current state of the Wii U. Persona 4 and Muramasa just stand out because of how awesome they are.

Yeah , I really don't understand all the Vita hate . It has a lot of solid games , and PS+ is just a bonus on top of that . If it's the only gaming system you own then I totally understand being bummed out about it . Still , I love my Vita and even my WiiU . And even though I enjoy my 3ds , it's the one lacking in games . Although , it is picking up this year ..

#22 Edited by Make_Me_Mad (3049 posts) -

@spankingaddict: @liquidprince: Well, I suppose it'd be better worded to say that "The only thing on the Vita that I would actually be interested in spending system-buying money to play is Persona 4 Golden". Which is saying something, considering I've played Persona 4 an unreasonable amount already. Not to mention watched other people play the game... what I'm saying is I've seen a lot of Persona 4, and I'm down for more of it. It's just an unfortunate fact that the only thing I'd want on the Vita is Persona 4, because I can't justify buying a system for a single game. Dragon's Crown seems like it'll be cool when it comes out, and there are a few that look interesting (which PS Plus would help with), but... eh.

As it stands, the one 'new' system I have that I'm totally happy with having is the 3DS. Kid Icarus Uprising, Fire Emblem Awakening (my current Game of the Year), a bevvy of Pokemon games that are always good to kill time; it's been a blast. It's the only thing I'd recommend buying now instead of waiting for better games or a price cut.

I mean, the Wii U's got Monster Hunter and Mario (which is still good) going for it, and the eventual promise of a particularly cool version of Watch_Dogs, Bayonetta 2 and the next Smash Brothers (which I am contractually obligated to obtain, because Megaman). With the PS4 and Xbox One coming out and generally having nothing I'd want to play that badly at launch, I'm basically sticking with the systems I've got until at least the middle or end of next year. It'd be nice to see the Vita... and honestly just about everything get a price cut before then. I just don't think any of it's worth the price as-is.

Online
#23 Edited by Hector (3357 posts) -

The new Mario game, Zelda: Wind Waker HD and other titles coming out this fall we'll give consumers a compelling reason to buy a WiiU, Nintendo could seal the deal by dropping the price this fall.

#24 Posted by PillClinton (3291 posts) -

Can't believe Bayonetta 2's a Wii U exclusive. Who at Platinum thought that was a good idea? So many fans of the first one will likely miss out on it. But I suppose it could be a bit of a system seller for them. I mean, I know I'll probably buy a Wii U for it eventually, and whatever the next Zelda is.

#25 Posted by Hailinel (24284 posts) -

Can't believe Bayonetta 2's a Wii U exclusive. Who at Platinum thought that was a good idea? So many fans of the first one will likely miss out on it. But I suppose it could be a bit of a system seller for them. I mean, I know I'll probably buy a Wii U for it eventually, and whatever the next Zelda is.

Platinum probably thought it was a good idea because Nintendo was the only company willing to actually fund the development.

#26 Edited by DarthOrange (3858 posts) -

#27 Posted by Make_Me_Mad (3049 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@pillclinton said:

Can't believe Bayonetta 2's a Wii U exclusive. Who at Platinum thought that was a good idea? So many fans of the first one will likely miss out on it. But I suppose it could be a bit of a system seller for them. I mean, I know I'll probably buy a Wii U for it eventually, and whatever the next Zelda is.

Platinum probably thought it was a good idea because Nintendo was the only company willing to actually fund the development.

This. The amount of people who somehow think this is a slight by Platinum is insane. If anything it's just a sign that Microsoft and Sony are too busy butting heads to fund the sequel to the best action game in its genre. That Bayonetta 2 exists at all is thanks to Nintendo.

Online
#28 Edited by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@pillclinton said:

Can't believe Bayonetta 2's a Wii U exclusive. Who at Platinum thought that was a good idea? So many fans of the first one will likely miss out on it. But I suppose it could be a bit of a system seller for them. I mean, I know I'll probably buy a Wii U for it eventually, and whatever the next Zelda is.

Platinum probably thought it was a good idea because Nintendo was the only company willing to actually fund the development.

This. The amount of people who somehow think this is a slight by Platinum is insane. If anything it's just a sign that Microsoft and Sony are too busy butting heads to fund the sequel to the best action game in its genre. That Bayonetta 2 exists at all is thanks to Nintendo.

Well, honestly, we have no idea how that deal went down. I feel that it's likely Nintendo ended up with Bayo 2 because they were the first company to show interest, I kind of doubt that Sega were making any effort to sell the game off.

#29 Posted by Hailinel (24284 posts) -

@rebgav said:

@make_me_mad said:

@hailinel said:

@pillclinton said:

Can't believe Bayonetta 2's a Wii U exclusive. Who at Platinum thought that was a good idea? So many fans of the first one will likely miss out on it. But I suppose it could be a bit of a system seller for them. I mean, I know I'll probably buy a Wii U for it eventually, and whatever the next Zelda is.

Platinum probably thought it was a good idea because Nintendo was the only company willing to actually fund the development.

This. The amount of people who somehow think this is a slight by Platinum is insane. If anything it's just a sign that Microsoft and Sony are too busy butting heads to fund the sequel to the best action game in its genre. That Bayonetta 2 exists at all is thanks to Nintendo.

Well, honestly, we have no idea how that deal went down. I feel that it's likely Nintendo ended up with Bayo 2 because they were the first company to show interest, I kind of doubt that Sega were making any effort to sell the game off.

But what has been stated publicly by Inaba is that the game wouldn't exist without Nintendo. So regardless of the reason why Nintendo was the company that funded it, it's on their platform. People need to let go of these crazy fantasies that Platinum and Nintendo were out to screw people.

#30 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@rebgav said:

@make_me_mad said:

@hailinel said:

@pillclinton said:

Can't believe Bayonetta 2's a Wii U exclusive. Who at Platinum thought that was a good idea? So many fans of the first one will likely miss out on it. But I suppose it could be a bit of a system seller for them. I mean, I know I'll probably buy a Wii U for it eventually, and whatever the next Zelda is.

Platinum probably thought it was a good idea because Nintendo was the only company willing to actually fund the development.

This. The amount of people who somehow think this is a slight by Platinum is insane. If anything it's just a sign that Microsoft and Sony are too busy butting heads to fund the sequel to the best action game in its genre. That Bayonetta 2 exists at all is thanks to Nintendo.

Well, honestly, we have no idea how that deal went down. I feel that it's likely Nintendo ended up with Bayo 2 because they were the first company to show interest, I kind of doubt that Sega were making any effort to sell the game off.

But what has been stated publicly by Inaba is that the game wouldn't exist without Nintendo. So regardless of the reason why Nintendo was the company that funded it, it's on their platform. People need to let go of these crazy fantasies that Platinum and Nintendo were out to screw people.

I've no interest in conspiracy theories or defensive fanboyism but I do think that Sega could have sold the game sooner, to a company with a larger install base, if a good faith effort was made. Both MS and Sony have had a weird couple of "holidays" as far as exclusives go, can't really see them turning down a sequel to Bayonetta at any time in the last couple of years.

#31 Posted by sl1ppyfist (82 posts) -

@waffles13: I completely thought the Wii U was $250. I wasn't interested even at that price. Looks like I'm never buying a Wii U... and I'm okay with that.

#32 Posted by PillClinton (3291 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@rebgav said:

@make_me_mad said:

@hailinel said:

@pillclinton said:

Can't believe Bayonetta 2's a Wii U exclusive. Who at Platinum thought that was a good idea? So many fans of the first one will likely miss out on it. But I suppose it could be a bit of a system seller for them. I mean, I know I'll probably buy a Wii U for it eventually, and whatever the next Zelda is.

Platinum probably thought it was a good idea because Nintendo was the only company willing to actually fund the development.

This. The amount of people who somehow think this is a slight by Platinum is insane. If anything it's just a sign that Microsoft and Sony are too busy butting heads to fund the sequel to the best action game in its genre. That Bayonetta 2 exists at all is thanks to Nintendo.

Well, honestly, we have no idea how that deal went down. I feel that it's likely Nintendo ended up with Bayo 2 because they were the first company to show interest, I kind of doubt that Sega were making any effort to sell the game off.

But what has been stated publicly by Inaba is that the game wouldn't exist without Nintendo. So regardless of the reason why Nintendo was the company that funded it, it's on their platform. People need to let go of these crazy fantasies that Platinum and Nintendo were out to screw people.

I hold no crazy fantasies that Platinum and Nintendo were out to intentionally screw people. Just figured Platinum could have possibly pitched the game around more and maybe found a non-exclusive, wider reaching, third party and/or better publishing deal. If they just couldn't find that, and Nintendo was simply the best (or only) option, that sucks. Regardless of their intent, the game's potential audience is absolutely limited with Nintendo as the publisher, and by extension, many fans of the first game simply aren't going to play it.

#33 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11588 posts) -

I have resigned myself to getting a Wii U at the point when a critical mass of decent to great exclusives are available, or whenever that Shin Megami Tensei x Fire Emblem game comes out. Either way, that's not going to be for a while. The part where the premium Wii U will only be $50 less than a PS4 if they don't drop the price by November is a continued reminder that I'm okay holding out until then.

#34 Posted by BisonHero (6400 posts) -

@andrew2696 said:

@helios1337: Isn't Real Canadian Superstore like Costco? And holy shit the Source is still a thing?

Can't tell if you're Canadian, or from elsewhere, so I'll dive in assuming you ain't from around these parts.

Real Canadian Superstore is basically Wal-mart. You don't need a membership or anything, it's just basically a Wal-mart alternative. Food, clothes, electronics, whatevs. In my town, there is an RCS in the same big box plaza thing as a Walmart, which I think is weird. RCS is owned by Loblaw Companies, which owns a whole bunch of different chains of supermarkets.

And yeah, Canada has all kinds of stores that shouldn't be open anymore. The Source, before it was owned by Bell, used to be "The Source by Circuit City" (somehow that was an actual name, as if Circuit City is a fucking author or something), and before that it was "Radioshack" (though I believe the ownership was completely independent of the American Radioshack). And yeah, I have no idea how a electronics shop as small as The Source possibly makes any sense financially, when compared to Best Buy, and all the places online you can just order tech from. I guess they save money by only having one or two staff members at a time, which is why service always sucks there during any big shopping season.

Also, Canada's Blockbuster was still running in 2011, though apparently all stores were closed by December 31st of that year. Still, I think that's a year or two longer than it lasted in the US.

#35 Edited by DeF (4848 posts) -

@aegon said:

Man, it seems hard to believe that it hasn't even been a year since it came out. At this point, the sales for the Wii U have not been great and we've seen what the other 2 consoles are offering and at what price. I wonder how long it'll be before a price cut. There are some things about the Wii U I'm liking, but what it's going for right now is not worth it (IMO, obvs). When do you think the price cut will hit?

Also, come on, 32 gigs isn't close to enough anymore.

Price Cut: Holidays at the earliest (probably in the way of bundles). Next year more likely. A system with a ton of great games coming out doesn't need a price cut. They "solved" this issue, or are in the process of solving it by putting out a major game each month.

PS: If you pay attention to deals, you'll find the system has gotten some great ones already, just not officially.

32gigs: You're thinking of this from the wrong perspective. You think 32 gigs and think how your PS3 or 360 works and then you go "ugh, what?!" - but Wii U does not have installs! The only space that gets taken up is if you buy a game digitally. And at that point you can just shell out for an external hard drive of your choosing once you reach the limit. Also, you're getting flash memory, not just a shoddy HDD.

#36 Posted by frankfartmouth (1016 posts) -

I love Nintendo. They're my favorite developer overall. But this whole Wii U thing is balls. It's been out almost a year now, and it has absolutely nothing to interest even an old school, dyed-in-the-wool fan like myself. That's really bad.

I don't mind Nintendo being 3rd, or 4th or 5th, or whatever. Don't care. I just want them to be around as a viable option. Nobody else offers what they offer. But right now, they're not even offering it. New Super Luigi U? Zombi U? Bleck. They've got a couple semi-interesting game to me on the horizon--The Wonderful 101 and X--but that's not enough, not when the competition has so much variety on hand. They really don't seem to be taking this seriously at all.

It would take a pretty dramatic price cut for me as it stands, but I don't know when they'll do it. They've been making so many bad decisions lately, seems they're just ripe to make another.

#37 Posted by axlvandamme (96 posts) -

You can't put a price tag on a new Pikmin . I bought my Wii U pretty cheap on Amazon . $280 for the standard . Also , ZombiU is pretty great .

I bet they'll put a $50 price tag on it :)

#38 Posted by WickedCobra03 (2103 posts) -

I think from their perspective, they are increasing the value of the system this holiday by releasing a new Mario, Mario Kart, Donkey Kong, and Zelda game. After this holiday, if sales start to drop again, then they can announce a price drop to renew interest yet again, after all those people have already paid full price for it.

Yeah, this is what I am thinking although I think they need to get rid of the basic system all together and then drop the price of the deluxe by at least $50. I think it is going to be a hard sell when the Playstation 4 is coming out at $399.99 with what seems like now, a ton more potential for longevity than the WiiU at this point. I want to pick up a WiiU at some point, but I really have no pressing reason, and even if I did, the price is still kind of a hindrance.

#39 Posted by Cameron (596 posts) -

I think Nintendo is suffering from the delusion that their tablet controller adds value to the system. I'm sure it increases costs, but it's not much of a value add for the consumer. I really don't want to play games on a tablet with a bad screen, and even if I did many games don't support that feature. Once the PS4 comes out the Wii U needs to be about $199.99 to look even remotely interesting. Why buy barely better than last gen tech for $50 less than something current?