WiiU: Why are you so disinterested?

  • 57 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by BlazeHedgehog (1091 posts) -

NeoGAF has a habit of taking gaming news way more seriously than most other places would, and half the fun of an event like E3 is observing all of the arguments and meltdowns that follow as the big three run through their press conferences. Thus, when arguments quickly sparked in to flamewars about how powerful Nintendo's new console is (or isn't), how many jaggies were in that HD Zelda screenshot, or how they're forsaking the Wii's "blue ocean" strategy in favor of begging hardcore gamers to come back, I figured that it was just GAF being GAF - these are the same people who, for example, will over-hype themselves for a game like GTA4, which inevitably develops in to a huge backlash against that game when it doesn't live up to their unrealistic expectations, which then in itself evolves in to a backlash against the previous backlash. Yeah, GAF's a weird place.
 

 Weeoo weeoo weeooo
Yesterday, Nintendo announced... well, they announced something. Similar to when they brought out the Nintendo 3DS, Reggie and Iwata blew through a highlight reel of factoids about what they're calling the " WiiU" without really touching too much on concrete details. Much like the 3DS, information beyond vague promises is being slowly coaxed out of the third parties that are working with Nintendo to produce software for the device. What we do know, though, is that the console has HD capabilities, a touch screen embedded in the controller, and pledged support from a number of developers working on highly anticipated 360/PS3/PC games. Nintendo is acknowledging which demographics they've been neglecting with the Wii, and are taking steps to, essentially, "please everybody" - hardcore gamers who want traditional controls, and casual gamers who just want to poke at stuff to hear funny noises.
 
And yet, as I'm sure Nintendo is quickly rediscovering, those hardcore gamers are incredibly fickle. The amount of lukewarm sentiment I'm seeing - not just from places like NeoGAF, but the entire internet - is shocking to me. Part of that is Nintendo's confusing way of unveiling the device - there's a lot of people out there who still aren't clear as to whether or not this is a peripheral for the existing Wii, or if there's even a console attached to it at all. Nintendo did an amazingly poor job of outlining what the "WiiU" is, and the awkward naming scheme does not help. And even among those who seem to "get it", the WiiU has failed to excite. My question is: Why?
 
When you break it down, the WiiU is like the polished result of every weird experiment Nintendo's been doing since 2005. It incorporates touch, multiple screens, and motion controls, on top of a traditional controller interface, with dual analog sticks, triggers, bumpers, and face buttons. It is, theoretically, a Nintendo DS, Wii, and Playstation 3 all in one console. No longer do you have to worry about buying a Wii for a couple of novelties while the rest of system is flooded with cut-down versions of big budget HD console releases. There's little danger in traditional gaming experiences being spoiled by the Wii's lack of buttons or analog sticks. And the new controller opens the door to a wealth of unique gaming possibilities: Playing a multiplayer game? Everybody with a controller in their hands has a mic. Everybody. Remember some of the weird stuff games like Burnout Paradise were doing with the Playstation Eye and 360 Vision? Now everybody has a camera, too. Don't want to show the world your neckbeard? Touchscreen keyboard for text chat. And with the screen embedded in the controller, you can push the chat window off your TV to keep the interface unobstructed. Heck, imagine being able to browse the Xbox Guide without exiting, pausing, or even overlaying your main game screen. The potential here is incredible.
 
Silent Hill: Great use of Wii motion control, or greatest?
"But we've already heard about potential with the Wii!" I hear you cry. "The number of Wii games that successfully implemented motion controls can almost be counted on one hand! Most of the DS stuff was equally underwhelming! We're not falling for this again!" And you're right. But that was in part due to the fact that you had to make games specifically for the Wii or the DS and nothing else. A Wii game that successfully implemented motion control was difficult to translate upwards to the 360 or PS3. Similarly, titles like Red Faction Guerrilla and Assassin's Creed were difficult to replicate on the considerably weaker tech. Interchangeability was not really worth the time, money, or effort it would take to make it work. This was a problem that was twofold, because it meant many publishers, to make those "specifically built for the Wii and nothing else" titles, had to assemble teams of developers who would exclusively create games for that platform. These teams were often made up of low-budgets and B-tier developers, while the company's best and brightest focused their attention elsewhere, on larger budget and higher profile Xbox, Playstation, and PC games. 
 
Assuming the WiiU has the horsepower third party developers are implying it does, that allows guys like Cliff Bleszinski, Yves Guillemot, John Carmack, Ken Levine, Dan Houser and everybody at Valve Software to look at the console and parlay their existing strengths in to creating a new experience without having to break off and create a Wii-specific team, with Wii-specific programmers, and Wii-specific designers, who are compressing their idea to fit within the Wii-specific limitations. This works to eliminate the prevailing thought of "My ideas are impossible on the Wii, so I'm not even going to consider it" among a lot of high-profile developers. Sure, you can argue that Sony and Microsoft have been providing those options to developers for at least a year already - and you're not wrong. But attach rates on Playstation Move and to a lesser extent Kinect have not exactly been 1:1. There are a lot of Xbox 360s out there without Kinects, and even more Playstation 3s out there with no Move controllers. Trying to sell to somebody who has to own two individual gadgets together is a small market compared to a console that launches with all of these features packed in every box ever sold with the console for its entire lifespan. This leaves the door open for developers to play with the WiiU's more unique capabilities, knowing that the console's entire install base can experience the full suite of control options available. The fruits of this are already starting to appear - Gearbox Software has mentioned the possibility of displaying the iconic Aliens motion tracker on the controller's screen, providing Colonial Marines with a slightly more authentic experience.

The "achilles heel" in all of this is an issue of time: All of Nintendo's hard work setting the WiiU up to be an apology for neglecting "hardcore gamers" could be undone with two simple words: "Next Generation". Despite Sony and Microsoft looking for longer tails out of their console hardware, if either of them announced new console hardware at E3 2012, that would give Nintendo mere months of parity before being dumped back down to the exact same hardware disadvantage they spent the majority of the Wii's lifecycle in. Microsoft has already been spotted hiring engineers for the next Xbox, and while Sony once constantly reminded us that the Playstation 3 was on a "ten-year cycle", there's no way they're going to lag behind their biggest competitor when it comes time to pull the curtain back on the Playstation 4. I'm sure this is a fact that already weighs heavy in many third-party developers minds, given companies like Epic Games teasing the next generation of Unreal Engine.
            

"Samaritan" is currently impossible on consumer-grade graphics hardware - but it won't take long for that to change.
           

Perhaps the impending next generation explains the malaise towards the WiiU: Nintendo is banking on Microsoft and Sony keeping true to their word and riding their consoles out for at least another two years. In actuality, it would not be a surprise to find out that either Microsoft, or Sony, or both are probably having meetings right now discussing ways to snipe Nintendo's play at catch-up as soon as financially possible. E3 2012 is when the boys are separated from the men.
 
But until that other shoe drops, The WiiU is an exciting prospect and I'm interested in seeing how it all shakes out.
#1 Posted by BlazeHedgehog (1091 posts) -

NeoGAF has a habit of taking gaming news way more seriously than most other places would, and half the fun of an event like E3 is observing all of the arguments and meltdowns that follow as the big three run through their press conferences. Thus, when arguments quickly sparked in to flamewars about how powerful Nintendo's new console is (or isn't), how many jaggies were in that HD Zelda screenshot, or how they're forsaking the Wii's "blue ocean" strategy in favor of begging hardcore gamers to come back, I figured that it was just GAF being GAF - these are the same people who, for example, will over-hype themselves for a game like GTA4, which inevitably develops in to a huge backlash against that game when it doesn't live up to their unrealistic expectations, which then in itself evolves in to a backlash against the previous backlash. Yeah, GAF's a weird place.
 

 Weeoo weeoo weeooo
Yesterday, Nintendo announced... well, they announced something. Similar to when they brought out the Nintendo 3DS, Reggie and Iwata blew through a highlight reel of factoids about what they're calling the " WiiU" without really touching too much on concrete details. Much like the 3DS, information beyond vague promises is being slowly coaxed out of the third parties that are working with Nintendo to produce software for the device. What we do know, though, is that the console has HD capabilities, a touch screen embedded in the controller, and pledged support from a number of developers working on highly anticipated 360/PS3/PC games. Nintendo is acknowledging which demographics they've been neglecting with the Wii, and are taking steps to, essentially, "please everybody" - hardcore gamers who want traditional controls, and casual gamers who just want to poke at stuff to hear funny noises.
 
And yet, as I'm sure Nintendo is quickly rediscovering, those hardcore gamers are incredibly fickle. The amount of lukewarm sentiment I'm seeing - not just from places like NeoGAF, but the entire internet - is shocking to me. Part of that is Nintendo's confusing way of unveiling the device - there's a lot of people out there who still aren't clear as to whether or not this is a peripheral for the existing Wii, or if there's even a console attached to it at all. Nintendo did an amazingly poor job of outlining what the "WiiU" is, and the awkward naming scheme does not help. And even among those who seem to "get it", the WiiU has failed to excite. My question is: Why?
 
When you break it down, the WiiU is like the polished result of every weird experiment Nintendo's been doing since 2005. It incorporates touch, multiple screens, and motion controls, on top of a traditional controller interface, with dual analog sticks, triggers, bumpers, and face buttons. It is, theoretically, a Nintendo DS, Wii, and Playstation 3 all in one console. No longer do you have to worry about buying a Wii for a couple of novelties while the rest of system is flooded with cut-down versions of big budget HD console releases. There's little danger in traditional gaming experiences being spoiled by the Wii's lack of buttons or analog sticks. And the new controller opens the door to a wealth of unique gaming possibilities: Playing a multiplayer game? Everybody with a controller in their hands has a mic. Everybody. Remember some of the weird stuff games like Burnout Paradise were doing with the Playstation Eye and 360 Vision? Now everybody has a camera, too. Don't want to show the world your neckbeard? Touchscreen keyboard for text chat. And with the screen embedded in the controller, you can push the chat window off your TV to keep the interface unobstructed. Heck, imagine being able to browse the Xbox Guide without exiting, pausing, or even overlaying your main game screen. The potential here is incredible.
 
Silent Hill: Great use of Wii motion control, or greatest?
"But we've already heard about potential with the Wii!" I hear you cry. "The number of Wii games that successfully implemented motion controls can almost be counted on one hand! Most of the DS stuff was equally underwhelming! We're not falling for this again!" And you're right. But that was in part due to the fact that you had to make games specifically for the Wii or the DS and nothing else. A Wii game that successfully implemented motion control was difficult to translate upwards to the 360 or PS3. Similarly, titles like Red Faction Guerrilla and Assassin's Creed were difficult to replicate on the considerably weaker tech. Interchangeability was not really worth the time, money, or effort it would take to make it work. This was a problem that was twofold, because it meant many publishers, to make those "specifically built for the Wii and nothing else" titles, had to assemble teams of developers who would exclusively create games for that platform. These teams were often made up of low-budgets and B-tier developers, while the company's best and brightest focused their attention elsewhere, on larger budget and higher profile Xbox, Playstation, and PC games. 
 
Assuming the WiiU has the horsepower third party developers are implying it does, that allows guys like Cliff Bleszinski, Yves Guillemot, John Carmack, Ken Levine, Dan Houser and everybody at Valve Software to look at the console and parlay their existing strengths in to creating a new experience without having to break off and create a Wii-specific team, with Wii-specific programmers, and Wii-specific designers, who are compressing their idea to fit within the Wii-specific limitations. This works to eliminate the prevailing thought of "My ideas are impossible on the Wii, so I'm not even going to consider it" among a lot of high-profile developers. Sure, you can argue that Sony and Microsoft have been providing those options to developers for at least a year already - and you're not wrong. But attach rates on Playstation Move and to a lesser extent Kinect have not exactly been 1:1. There are a lot of Xbox 360s out there without Kinects, and even more Playstation 3s out there with no Move controllers. Trying to sell to somebody who has to own two individual gadgets together is a small market compared to a console that launches with all of these features packed in every box ever sold with the console for its entire lifespan. This leaves the door open for developers to play with the WiiU's more unique capabilities, knowing that the console's entire install base can experience the full suite of control options available. The fruits of this are already starting to appear - Gearbox Software has mentioned the possibility of displaying the iconic Aliens motion tracker on the controller's screen, providing Colonial Marines with a slightly more authentic experience.

The "achilles heel" in all of this is an issue of time: All of Nintendo's hard work setting the WiiU up to be an apology for neglecting "hardcore gamers" could be undone with two simple words: "Next Generation". Despite Sony and Microsoft looking for longer tails out of their console hardware, if either of them announced new console hardware at E3 2012, that would give Nintendo mere months of parity before being dumped back down to the exact same hardware disadvantage they spent the majority of the Wii's lifecycle in. Microsoft has already been spotted hiring engineers for the next Xbox, and while Sony once constantly reminded us that the Playstation 3 was on a "ten-year cycle", there's no way they're going to lag behind their biggest competitor when it comes time to pull the curtain back on the Playstation 4. I'm sure this is a fact that already weighs heavy in many third-party developers minds, given companies like Epic Games teasing the next generation of Unreal Engine.
            

"Samaritan" is currently impossible on consumer-grade graphics hardware - but it won't take long for that to change.
           

Perhaps the impending next generation explains the malaise towards the WiiU: Nintendo is banking on Microsoft and Sony keeping true to their word and riding their consoles out for at least another two years. In actuality, it would not be a surprise to find out that either Microsoft, or Sony, or both are probably having meetings right now discussing ways to snipe Nintendo's play at catch-up as soon as financially possible. E3 2012 is when the boys are separated from the men.
 
But until that other shoe drops, The WiiU is an exciting prospect and I'm interested in seeing how it all shakes out.
#2 Edited by GuyIncognito (445 posts) -

Only CPU and GPU specs matter for multiplatform games.  The rumor is that the gpu is from the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_R700 family.   ...the tech is going to be 4 years old by the time WiiU comes out. 
 
EDIT: Reggie was whining about "experiences."  I want the *experience* of 60fps gameplay and anti-aliasing.  I'm already getting that on the PC...

#3 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -

I'm not interested in gimmicks.

#4 Edited by damswedon (3185 posts) -

Because it currently is just hardware and games that I'm already going to get this year. Thing is I buy my consoles based on the games that I want, I bought a 360 when I wanted Gears of War and Oblivion and I bought my PS3 when there were enough first party games out that I wanted to justify it.

#5 Posted by SlightConfuse (3963 posts) -

I have a ps2 and 360. I don’t need a big controller to enjoy games.

#6 Posted by Marcsman (3180 posts) -

Last decent Nintendo system I owned was the SNES.
#7 Posted by TotalEklypse (1000 posts) -
@GuyIncognito said:
Only CPU and GPU specs matter for multiplatform games.  The rumor is that the gpu is from the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_R700 family.   ...the tech is going to be 4 years old by the time WiiU comes out.  EDIT: Reggie was whining about "experiences."  I want the *experience* of 60fps gameplay and anti-aliasing.  I'm already getting that on the PC...
 
You are correct sir. 
 
I was not surprised to find all the montage footage was snagged from other devices.. With the promise they would look comparable. The reason the first Wii was a success was simple, make it cheap entry level and make it appeal to non-gamers, retirement homes, etc. This is nothing more than an attempt to ..no a PLEE for the core gamer group, which is where the real long term profits lie.. to give them another chance. 
 
Logically why would we want to go ahead and pay $300+ accessories or whatever, just to play the games we are already able to play on the other systems or our PC. Is that much cash worth it to play a HD Zelda?  
 
The gimmick they tacked on to it isn't even well done. The PSV in my opinion, one upped that whole deal simply because you can take it on the go Plus the damn thing isn't glued to the controller. I seriously don't want to have to hold an Ipad sized controller to sit on my couch and relax. I find it funny they chose now to enter this generation when the other 2 companies/PC is ready to jump into some crap like the original poster's video showed. I mean damn those were some slick visuals with the new unreal engine. 
 
WiiU is not next gen, it is this gen.. but a day late.. or actually 4 years late... and 300 bucks short.
#8 Posted by mfpantst (2574 posts) -
@TotalEklypse said:
@GuyIncognito said:
Only CPU and GPU specs matter for multiplatform games.  The rumor is that the gpu is from the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_R700 family.   ...the tech is going to be 4 years old by the time WiiU comes out.  EDIT: Reggie was whining about "experiences."  I want the *experience* of 60fps gameplay and anti-aliasing.  I'm already getting that on the PC...
 
You are correct sir. 
 
I was not surprised to find all the montage footage was snagged from other devices.. With the promise they would look comparable. The reason the first Wii was a success was simple, make it cheap entry level and make it appeal to non-gamers, retirement homes, etc. This is nothing more than an attempt to ..no a PLEE for the core gamer group, which is where the real long term profits lie.. to give them another chance. 
 
Logically why would we want to go ahead and pay $300+ accessories or whatever, just to play the games we are already able to play on the other systems or our PC. Is that much cash worth it to play a HD Zelda?  
 
The gimmick they tacked on to it isn't even well done. The PSV in my opinion, one upped that whole deal simply because you can take it on the go Plus the damn thing isn't glued to the controller. I seriously don't want to have to hold an Ipad sized controller to sit on my couch and relax. I find it funny they chose now to enter this generation when the other 2 companies/PC is ready to jump into some crap like the original poster's video showed. I mean damn those were some slick visuals with the new unreal engine.  WiiU is not next gen, it is this gen.. but a day late.. or actually 4 years late... and 300 bucks short.
word tangible experiences of 60 fps and AA.
#9 Posted by IamTerics (409 posts) -

TotalEklypse said it. I feel like this will get the family that only has a Wii in the first place. I already have a PS3 and a PC. Its just too little too late.

#10 Posted by kingzetta (4307 posts) -

we thought it was going to be a normal console.

#11 Posted by AgentofChaos (1565 posts) -

I'm tired of being fooled by Nintendo. Every year it seems a promise is made of bigger and better third-party support and it seems like EVERY time they come up short. I'm sorry, but for the first time in something like 13-14 years I'm not going to purchase a new Nintendo console.

#12 Edited by Subjugation (4720 posts) -
@kingzetta said:
we thought it was going to be a normal console.
Same thought. I feel slightly mislead by the hint dropping that made me believe it was going to have a traditional feel to it. Nope, more gimmicks.
@Marcsman said:

Last decent Nintendo system I owned was the SNES.

Have to agree with this.
#13 Posted by granderojo (1778 posts) -

I want to believe.

#14 Posted by TotalEklypse (1000 posts) -
@IamTerics said:
TotalEklypse said it. I feel like this will get the family that only has a Wii in the first place. I already have a PS3 and a PC. Its just too little too late.
It may not even get that family when you think about it. Most of the user base of the original Wii Probably wont move on to the harder core gaming. Hell a lot of them bought it for Wii bowling and the like when you look at the software figures. Those people want super simple and fun, not challenging and deep like we do.  
 
If you really want to throw a curveball into this debate.. there is one huge variable a lot of people are missing. Established online network.. Live, Steam, PSN took years to build and they are still being built. What the hell does Nintendo have along those lines that is even remotely close? We are led to believe they will accomplish the catch up game, be valid enough for us to invest in the new console with game's WE want and features we need.. in a year? Or less?
#15 Posted by Toxin066 (3280 posts) -

Duder, well written blog.

I'm not completely writing the system off. But it seems like a lot of the 3rd party support they showed was essentially games that are multiplatform (like Arkham City). I've already invested time in building up ps3 and 360 profiles, so I'm probably never going to get one of those games for the WiiU.

I'll probably get one so I can play first party games and 3rd party exclusives.

#16 Posted by ApertureSilence (1156 posts) -

A well-written, well-reasoned blog post. I applaud you, sirrah!

#17 Edited by Wrighteous86 (3782 posts) -

@TotalEklypse: For casuals, it's a Wii with prettier graphics and a tablet touchscreen. If they price it cheaply (which they absolutely can) I think it will do well with that audience. That's why they stuck with the Wii name. I know general wisdom says that "casuals don't care about graphics" but combining that update with the tablet and the name, and I think most will go for it, just like they do with Apple revisions. "It even uses the controllers and games I already have? What a deal!"

@weeman105 said:

@kingzetta said:
we thought it was going to be a normal console.
Same thought. I feel slightly mislead by the hint dropping that made me believe it was going to have a traditional feel to it. Nope, more gimmicks.

You mean all those rumors that said it was going to be in the same ballpark as a 360 and PS3, and that it was going to have a 6" touchscreen in the controller and wouldn't abandon the motion controls available on the Wii? Almost all of the rumors turned out to be right. It's capable of playing traditional games, and has additions to it to hopefully entice 3rd parties to add an extra feature or mode to their ports, just like the rumors were saying. Aside from the touchscreen, it's just like the 360 and the PS3. It's got traditional controls, and motion controls. How were you mislead? It's not like Nintendo created those rumors in the first place anyway.

I'm not saying I'm confident in the Wii U's success, but people calling it a failure already are being incredibly short-sighted.

Rumors range that it's power is equal to 360 or more powerful than PS3. PS4 and Xbox 720 aren't going to come out for a while. Developers are already having trouble selling games because of the economy and skyrocketing development costs. Do you really think jumping to a whole new console in the next year or two is going to help matters? It will only make dev times longer and more expensive for "AAA" games, and the developers will lose money. You don't really see many devs clamoring for more powerful consoles, and the ones that are probably aren't thinking ahead. Devs are just now starting to see returns and profits on the investments and tech they've created for this generation. The next consoles from Microsoft and Sony are either not coming out for quite a while (end of 2014 at the very earliest) or they aren't going to be as powerful as you're expecting. Do you really think PS4 is going to cost $600? I think Sony learned their lesson.

At this point in time for the Gamecube, they were showing footage that predicted games could look like this:

The console wound up being capable of this:

Based off of some of the rumored specs of the system, the way the Zelda HD demo looked, and the fact that other consoles will either be more cost-effective or coming farther down the line, I don't think the technical aspects of the Wii U are anything to worry about. 3rd parties, online, and innovative controls are more realistic avenues for concern.

#18 Edited by Gaff (1711 posts) -

A little too late, I guess is how the saying goes?

The biggest hurdle is that their competitors, Sony and Microsoft, have cultivated an incredibly feature-rich experience on their consoles. Xbox Live has become the de facto standard for online multiplayer, Xbox Marketplace and the PSN Store have become hotbeds of smaller, downloadable games, with Netflix, MUBI, etc the PS3 and the 360 are bringing an incredible amount of content onto consoles, and streaming media to consoles has become extremely easy, making the "One box for all your entertainment" prophecy come true. What is Nintendo showing? Retail games. Just games.

There's something very ironic as Nintendo is "returning" to the hardcore market, that the others are catering to the casual market. And succeeding. Kinect has done exceedingly well for Microsoft and Move is doing reasonably well too. It has become less about the games and more about the periphery, things that a cost-minded consumer has to think about (and yes, that also includes gamers). Comparing the bullet points, Nintendo is starting to lag behind. Games? All three will do. HD graphics? The Wii U will catch up, next year. HD video streaming? Well, the 360 and the PS3 will serve you nicely. And so on.

What Nintendo has going for it are their design philosophy and their first party titles, third party promises be damned (Hey, Capcom, whatever happened to those exclusive GameCube titles?). When push comes to shove, my nostalgia for ye olde days can't justify buying into a new platform for just the games. Frankly, my dear, I stopped giving a damn.

Addendum: Also, HAHA, YOUR FOOT'S IN YOUR MOUTH!

#19 Posted by BlazeHedgehog (1091 posts) -
@Gaff said:

A little too late, I guess is how the saying goes?

The biggest hurdle is that their competitors, Sony and Microsoft, have cultivated an incredibly feature-rich experience on their consoles. Xbox Live has become the de facto standard for online multiplayer, Xbox Marketplace and the PSN Store have become hotbeds of smaller, downloadable games, with Netflix, MUBI, etc the PS3 and the 360 are bringing an incredible amount of content onto consoles, and streaming media to consoles has become extremely easy, making the "One box for all your entertainment" prophecy come true. What is Nintendo showing? Retail games. Just games.

There's something very ironic as Nintendo is "returning" to the hardcore market, that the others are catering to the casual market. And succeeding. Kinect has done exceedingly well for Microsoft and Move is doing reasonably well too. It has become less about the games and more about the periphery, things that a cost-minded consumer has to think about (and yes, that also includes gamers). Comparing the bullet points, Nintendo is starting to lag behind. Games? All three will do. HD graphics? The Wii U will catch up, next year. HD video streaming? Well, the 360 and the PS3 will serve you nicely. And so on.

What Nintendo has going for it are their design philosophy and their first party titles, third party promises be damned (Hey, Capcom, whatever happened to those exclusive GameCube titles?). When push comes to shove, my nostalgia for ye olde days can't justify buying into a new platform for just the games. Frankly, my dear, I stopped giving a damn.

Addendum: Also, HAHA, YOUR FOOT'S IN YOUR MOUTH!

Wow. Well put.
#20 Posted by Little_Socrates (5675 posts) -

Wii U can still fail and nothing will happen to the company as a whole. Nintendo's had failing platforms before: the Virtual Boy, for example, as well as the Game Boy Micro and the DSi XL. Overall, those were sort of failures, but Nintendo always goes low-risk on their platforms when it comes to budget and tech, so I'm it'll all turn out fine. Wii U could fail, but it doesn't spell any ill for Nintendo if it does.

#21 Posted by SpaceInsomniac (3660 posts) -

Speaking of Nintendo, did you notice that they got through this entire press conference without ANY waggle? You can't even say that for Sony or Microsoft!  Anyhow, they might be off to an okay start, but from here Nintendo has to:

1) Make their system SLIGHTLY more powerful than the PS3 and 360, much like the Xbox was slightly more powerful than the PS2.

2) Push 3rd party developers to make the Wii U their lead platform, so the Wii U version typically has a higher frame-rate, better resolution, less slow down, etc.

3) Make some first-party titles that are at least somewhat more impressive than anything on the PS3 or 360. Think about how there was nothing on the PS2 was close to what Microsoft did with the original Halo. Like that.

4) Don't screw up when it comes to online. Nintendo has said that they'll have an announcement regarding online later this week, and Ubisoft let it slip that they're doing away with friend codes, so that's a step in the right direction.

5) When Sony and MS hit with their new systems, Nintendo needs to wait two years AT MOST and then put out another slightly more powerful system.

6) And more importantly than everything else, after the Wii U, Nintendo can never again afford to release a console with anything less than cutting edge hardware.


I really quite seriously doubt that Nintendo will be able to regain their core market share, but it will certainly be interesting to watch them try. 

Online
#22 Edited by ninjalegend (428 posts) -

I'm not disinterested. However, I have been burned as of recently. The wii was only good for SSBB and the Super Mario Galaxy as far as I was concerned. Wii sports was only fun for a few weeks. I sold it before Galaxy 2 and there have not been enough good games for me to regret it.
 
That being said, the tech and third party games announced impress me. I would love to have detective vision on all the time on the controller, without having to sacrifice the picture on the main screen. I imagine being able to play the game while my girlfriend watches tv at night would be cool. No more inventory screen pauses, and maybe even make RTS games like starcraft 2 possible on a console due to the touch screen. How about a control touch panel for space flight combat games? For the first time in a long while, I can say Nintendo may have something that may actually improve games. Mass Effect 3 has voice commands. EA said they would support it, and the controller does have a mic.......

#23 Posted by FacestabMan (75 posts) -
@SpaceInsomniac

No, no, no. We don't want to see Nintendo fall within next generation.

They're making a console that is quite a bit better already than PS3 and 360, enough to be considered, if not 8th gen, at least a good 7.5. Making a "better version" of the PS3 and 360 would only lead to people not to buy it if the price is higher than these, or they already own them. At least I know quite a few people that wouldn't be willing to pay for another system just to play games at 1080p instead of 640p.

What Nintendo has to do is take Metroid back to the Prime series, but make it more Super Metroid-esque, and at the same time, more FPS as well. Aside from that they won't be changing Mario or Zelda to cater to these so called "hardcore" gamers because people is looking for an adventure game like Zelda, not Oblivion. They could put out a new IP and make it innovative enough for the hardcore market, but that's kind of their own decision. I mean, I don't see Miyamoto making a Halo game, simply because he wants to make new stuff.

Regarding online, this is how I see it: Club Nintendo will be like Xbox Live/PSN. It will feature basic stuff like dedicated servers, friend lists, video chat, a decent web browser hopefully (which people bitch about on the 3DS, but where's my browser on Xbox?) and the normal stuff like DLC, downloadable games and the virtual console. Social integration may not be something they'll specialize in (which in my opinion, is great because I'm not the kind of internet social guy, and twitter and facebook on my console do not fit at all). For the most part I think they'll be doing good, because this console is centered around the entire market rather than the casual market they wanted back in 2006. They already admitted they did quite a few bad decisions when it comes to online features, and they'll probably hire some company for that.

Regarding two years at most, I think you're totally wrong. If the platform is powerful enough, that would pretty much kill them. They can't be following the .5th generations. That's what happened to the dreamcast, and it's also hard to say whether or not MS or Sony will release or even announce a new console next year. Remember the Saturn? That was some short lifespan. Nobody liked that.

And regarding the cutting edge hardware, that wouldn't be so good for third party developers. PS3 and the classic Xbox weren't precisely the winners in these generations, in terms of sales.

#24 Posted by Kandycane2029 (511 posts) -

I dig what the Big N is trying to do, but the price point is going to be outrageous... 

#25 Edited by WinterSnowblind (7615 posts) -

I wouldn't say I'm excited about it, but I am intrigued by the possibilities.. It's a gimmick, but at least a more useful one than the motion controls were. I loved games like the Four Swords and Crystal Chronicles on the Gamecube, so if they can utilize it for some more really cool multiplayer experiences, I'm on board. The problem is that I don't see it being used very well to most developers, especially third parties that are just porting games that have been developed for the other systems. Most of the time it's going to be used as a map or inventory screen and nothing more.

Excuse me if I'm not that interested in rushing out to buy a new console so I can have a separate inventory screen.

I also think it's going to suffer from being superseded very quickly by the next Xbox and Playstation. Sony can already copy their "alternate view" thing by using the NGP and it wouldn't be hard for Microsoft to release a new Zune or something similar that could too, if it catches on.. and these systems are bound to be much more powerful, leaving the new Wii either with no third party games at all again, or vastly inferior versions. I know people laughed at the Wii originally as well, but this time I do think Nintendo might be in trouble.

#26 Posted by DeeGee (2121 posts) -

That Chase-Mii thing seemed really neat. As long as they do some genuinely interesting multiplayer games like that, I'll get it.

#27 Posted by SpaceInsomniac (3660 posts) -
@facestabman said:
@SpaceInsomniac

No, no, no. We don't want to see Nintendo fall within next generation.

They're making a console that is quite a bit better already than PS3 and 360, enough to be considered, if not 8th gen, at least a good 7.5.

I'm not going to quote your entire post, but it seems like you either misread or misunderstood almost every single thing that I said.  Let me write an abbreviated version for you that will hopefully avoid confusion.  
  
I believe that Nintendo should:  
 
Make the Wii U more powerful than the current systems (this is completely unknown as of now, so I have no idea where you're getting that it's "quite a bit better already than PS3 and 360), support 3rd party developers and make sure that they're not developing for PS3/360 and then porting to the Wii U, have some 1st party titles that use graphics technology that couldn't be done on other systems, stop with the friend code BS and properly support online, don't wait around after MS and Sony release new consoles, and never again allow their latest console to have ridiculously outdated hardware.  
Online
#28 Posted by 02sfraser (847 posts) -

At the end of the day, 'hardcore' gamers already have something else to play 'hardcore' titles on so they're not going to win them back straight away. They're trump card is the controller and how to get developers to make exclusive and amazing experiences with it for a 'hardcore' audience. Also, they're Nintendo. They have some of the best, and my favourite, franchises in the world and will always be able to sell consoles on that merit.

#29 Edited by rawrsair (821 posts) -

I have a PS3, Wii and a DS amongst other consoles, I use my PS3 to play hardcore games and the Wii and DS to play games with my little brother and sister. 
I don't think I need a "slightly improved" Wii to continue doing that.

#30 Posted by predator (350 posts) -
@thabigred: Is that Hearts of Iron?
#31 Posted by Borodin (416 posts) -

@02sfraser said:

At the end of the day, 'hardcore' gamers already have something else to play 'hardcore' titles on so they're not going to win them back straight away. They're trump card is the controller and how to get developers to make exclusive and amazing experiences with it for a 'hardcore' audience.

That's pretty much where I'm at. On the face of it I'm not sold on the idea of the technology alone, so until some game/s rolls around that I want but can't get on PS3 or Xbox, or has some really cool use of Wii U's unique stuff, there just isn't all that much for me to get excited about.

#32 Posted by Hockeymask27 (3683 posts) -

I wish they would just make a fucking game console. If it was a standard console with a standard controller with the promise of new games from established franchise or heck even new ones from Nintendo. The third parties would jump on. Then if they wanted to have a WiiU controller as well they could. I mean even the current WiiU if it shipped with a "classic controller in the box my main problem with Nintendo would be solved. Think the wii but classic controller support was mandatory and the wiimote was optional would have been better in my eyes.

#33 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

I am interested. It's just... well... I don't know If I really NEED another multiplatform system. What I really want is a next generation system.
 
Albeit there's some Wii backcatalogue I'd like to get into and it would be a great replacement for doing multiplatform gaming on 360 or PS3.
 
Wait and see what Wii U can do and what it'll cost.

#34 Posted by BlazeHedgehog (1091 posts) -
@Hockeymask27 said:
I wish they would just make a fucking game console. If it was a standard console with a standard controller with the promise of new games from established franchise or heck even new ones from Nintendo. The third parties would jump on. Then if they wanted to have a WiiU controller as well they could. I mean even the current WiiU if it shipped with a "classic controller in the box my main problem with Nintendo would be solved. Think the wii but classic controller support was mandatory and the wiimote was optional would have been better in my eyes.
But... it is a standard controller, technically. It has all the triggers, buttons and sticks you'd expect from a Dualshock or an Xbox 360 gamepad. It just has a giant honkin' touch screen in the center. You don't need to ship a classic controller in the WiiU box, because this functions as good or better than one. It sounds as though Nintendo is making this controller exactly for guys like you who want games that control like they do on the 360/PS3. But they also want to support new ways to play on top of that. You should be happy that the controller can support both methods of play; you don't have to sacrifice your sticks and triggers for weird new gameplay gimmicks.
#35 Posted by niamahai (1405 posts) -

what if MS and Sony shoehorn this touch pad into their current controllers?

#36 Posted by Aus_azn (2224 posts) -
@HandsomeDead said:
I'm not interested in gimmicks.
Innovation, schminnovation.
 
I want my games with a freaking normal controller with freaking 1080p+ HD at 60fps. No motion, gyroscopes, tablets or any of that shit.
 
Handhelds, I'm willing to make exceptions for, as the market is already lost for straight gaming.
#37 Posted by JFetch (119 posts) -

Nintendo proved once again that they don't care what hardcore gamers want. That's fine with me. Keep your soccer moms and kids that play with it once and never use it again. Just don't tell me you have an HD system that is more powerful than anything out now, and then say the box with the CPU and GPU aren't important and that the controller is. It's a tablet, not a controller. What's the point of making a system so powerful it can do lifelike graphics if you are just going to make the same 3 or 4 games over again that look like cartons? I want the box with a normal controller, and awesome looking games, and I'll get those from Microsoft and Sony. They sell gimmicks also, but as an option, not the only option. I'm done with Nintendo because they are obviously done with me.

#38 Edited by ryanwho (12082 posts) -

It has a normal controller (that work with all games) and better graphics, but it also does a new thing and new things make me angry! I choose to believe any negative presumptions I read. I'll ignore the existence of the normal controller they showed at the fucking press conference and bitch that there's no normal control, cus that's how a "real gamer" rolls.

#39 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
@JFetch said:
Nintendo proved once again that they don't care what hardcore gamers want. That's fine with me. Keep your soccer moms and kids that play with it once and never use it again. Just don't tell me you have an HD system that is more powerful than anything out now, and then say the box with the CPU and GPU aren't important and that the controller is. It's a tablet, not a controller. What's the point of making a system so powerful it can do lifelike graphics if you are just going to make the same 3 or 4 games over again that look like cartons? I want the box with a normal controller, and awesome looking games, and I'll get those from Microsoft and Sony. They sell gimmicks also, but as an option, not the only option. I'm done with Nintendo because they are obviously done with me.
Went ahead and underlined the shit you got wrong. Thank god they don't have to deal with illiterates like you anymore. Take your Burger King salary elsewhere.
#40 Posted by DeeGee (2121 posts) -

@JFetch said:

Just don't tell me you have an HD system that is more powerful than anything out now,

They didn't.

It's a tablet, not a controller.

It has two analog sticks, a directional pad and four normal buttons and four shoulder triggers. Sounds an awful lot like a controller to me.

I want the box with a normal controller, and awesome looking games, and I'll get those from Microsoft and Sony.

Exactly. You want something you already have, so if they were to make a console with HD and a normal controller, you would not buy it. That's exactly why they didn't do that. I wouldn't buy a HD Nintendo console to play awesome looking games, I mean, I own a 360. It's a pretty sweet system and has some great games. Nintendo knew exactly what to do to appeal to me, since I can have my 360 for awesome looking games and I'll have my Wii U for unique stuff.

#41 Posted by Droop (1851 posts) -

I hate Nintendo first party games and I'm not interested in gimmicks.

#42 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11626 posts) -

I'm not so much disinterested as I am cynical that they'll manage to achieve what they are setting out to do. As someone who was a Nintendrone until the wii, I can't really go back to a world of spotty 3rd party support, constant reiteration of 1st party stuff, and entirely backwards online. Of course, it's far too early to tell if the Wii U will fall on any one of the fronts I just listed, but I would be pleasantly surprised if they didn't.

#43 Posted by JasonR86 (9657 posts) -

I think some people are disinterested because the majority are interested in it.  I call it the 'Call of Duty' effect.  Further, people are still all fired up about the Wii and think Nintendo don't care about he hardcore and blah blah blah.  This negative reaction has more to do with overreaction based off of the tiniest of information that was given then actual reasonable, logical concerns with the system.  It is way, way to early render any judgement on this system.  Anyone who says anything otherwise, positive or negative, are overreacting.

Online
#44 Posted by Valkyr (667 posts) -

All the extra coding effort that third party developers will have to invest in making the crazy UI for the controller is crazy, to 'port' games that hardcore gamers are going to keep buying on the ps3/360 for the sake of trophies/achievements , multiplayer and a more comfortable gamepad. So, the WiiU is a mess, we'll  get it only to play Nintendo first party games in HD and some cool exclusive game that uses the controller in a innovative way, but it's the same picture all over again, low third party software sales on a Nintendo platform.

#45 Posted by JFetch (119 posts) -

I love when people try to blast someone's post by name calling. It makes you sound really smart. I stand by what I said. If you disagree that's fine, and if you are excited about the Wii U, that's fine also. I personally don't like it, and feel like they are making the same shitty first party games over and over again, and I absolutely hate the controller. It's my opinion, so keep the internet thuggery to yourself.

#46 Posted by Lokno (386 posts) -

I remember the Wii announcement trailer in 2005. At the time I believe there was a similar reaction.

All we have here is the concept, focused completely on the interaction. Yes, Nintendo did at least mention that the WiiU is going to have HD graphics, and Reggie made it clear that we should just "tick that box." But after seeing what happened with the Wii, I see the WiiU controller as another bait-and-switch. That sounds harsh, but what I mean is that I don't believe them anymore that they're going to change gaming with their new device. This old trailer really got me daydreaming about the possibilities of the medium, but as the years went by that translated into mini-game collections with no depth, as well as great traditional games with unnecessary and unwelcome gimmicky controls. Is it really going to be different this time, just because the system will finally have programmable shaders?

I'm not writing them off, no doubt I will be compelled to buy a WiiU in holiday 2013 because of this or that Nintendo title (yes, I said 2013). What I'm really excited about is games; games with talented actors, writers, designers and implementers. Can that happen on a touch-screen? Absolutely. Ghost Trick is currently runner-up for my personally GOTY, second to Portal 2. Does that experience require interactive innovation to be meaningful to the player? NO.

Thousands of hours of video editing will never have the power of ten lines of code.

#47 Posted by mnzy (2914 posts) -

They were so vague about specs and actual games that I don't have an opinion yet. The device seems interesting and -for me personally- way better than the Wii which I never liked and still don't.

Online
#48 Posted by Wrighteous86 (3782 posts) -

A better question is: why did developers not take advantage of the Wii's unique points, and then as soon as Microsoft and Sony did the same thing, they started falling over themselves to do it? Why wasn't a game like the Gunslinger on the Wii, or that Star Wars Kinect game, or any of that other stuff. I'm not interested in any of these games, but it's an interesting thought.

#49 Edited by Kyle (2323 posts) -

I already have three machines that have graphical capabilities comparable to the Wii U; I don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on a fourth. That's pretty much the main reason.

#50 Posted by Kyle (2323 posts) -

@Wrighteous86 said:

A better question is: why did developers not take advantage of the Wii's unique points, and then as soon as Microsoft and Sony did the same thing, they started falling over themselves to do it? Why wasn't a game like the Gunslinger on the Wii, or that Star Wars Kinect game, or any of that other stuff. I'm not interested in any of these games, but it's an interesting thought.

What are you talking about? Game devs tried tons of things on the Wii. It's just that they were almost all bad. There's only a handful of Move and Kinect games by comparison.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.