Evidently Iwata wants to take things slow and learn a lesson from the 3DS launch. Still, this means no Wii U until summer '12 at the earliest. Thoughts?
Nintendo won't be showing Wii U until E3 2012
That sounds a bit too early, given the E3 news and all.Evidently Iwata wants to take things slow and learn a lesson from the 3DS launch. Still, this means no Wii U until summer '12 at the earliest. Thoughts?
@Kyle said:
Who in their right mind thought the Wii U was coming before holiday 2012?
Yeah this is more of doing things the way everyone expected rather than taking things slow.
I forgot that thing even existed. Will be interested to see how this works out for Nintendo. I think it's going to flop hard as they learn that siding with the casuals means being a fad. Fads may burn bright, but they die quick.
If nintendo has solid marketing this thing will succeed. Never underestimate the easily brainwashed masses (see: Wii).
I think this means anyone who speaks with any authority on what the specs actually are on something that's clearly not nailed down at all can be easily dismissed. Which is great, cus those bitches like writing walls of text based on that dumbass assumption. Now Im just like "oh he's full of shit, ignoring". Makes things easy.
Also note, they won't be showing WiiU until summer 2012, that's a window of Holiday 12 at the earliest. This isn't Sega Saturn where they show it at E3 and then go "and you can buy it tomorrow". You shouldn't misinterpret shit like that, OP. Nothing in the article says WiiU will come out summer 12.
Cant wait until Nintendo makes their shoddy hardware go away and just license out their fantastic games. Their Apple approach of small improvements does not work for gaming. Say what you will about the Wii being a big improvement control wise, I can't see someone siding Nintendo when it comes to quality of support for the specific control scheme. Nintendo makes great products, but they don't last more than a year of enjoyment because they don't know how to maintain it. That is only a recent thing though, the DS had massive success because the dual screens with touch was easy to implement, and rarely took away from a classic, button only experience. The Wii had a great launch and post year with the new Zelda, and a very high quality mini game collection that is Wario: Smooth moves. They at least tried to make third parties tempted, but when you can't give any ideas about to control the new Wii at the time with original ideas through the first party titles meant to inspire 3rd parties, you're stuck in the water, and that's just what happened with the Wii, stagnation, and that's why they want to push the Wii U faster so they can get 3rd parties inspired again. Problem is, I don't think it's going to happen, Nintendo's new console is more of a gimmick than ever.
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
Cant wait until Nintendo makes shoddy hardware
I quit reading here. My launch Wii plays great. My Xbox 360, well, sent in twice and finally got a new one. Shoddy hardware? Please.
clearly you stopped reading. If you read on I explained it was shoddy in the fashion that it wasn't supported. The hardware itself is great when it is supported by quality software. I am not literally speaking about build quality.
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
Cant wait until Nintendo makes shoddy hardware
I quit reading here. My launch Wii plays great. My Xbox 360, well, sent in twice and finally got a new one. Shoddy hardware? Please.
Same here. My Wii, bought at launch, still works like a charm. I sold my 360, purchased a year after launch, when it kept having disc drive errors even after shipping it off for a month to get it fixed, and it actually damaged my game discs. Say what you will about their online policy, or their refusal to release certain games in North America, or their reliance on a few key franchises every generation, but the track record of their hardware quality is hardly "shoddy" in any sense.
As for the Wii U, it doesn't surprise me that they're holding their cards close to the chest. The console is still under development, and they really need a line-up of games to show off at their press conference, not to mention quality titles to ship with the console at launch.
@BestUsernameEver said:
Nintendo's new console is more of a gimmick than ever.
Again, gimmick is the wrong correlation to what has evolved in gaming. Is there true gaming and gimmick gaming? If I create a game with a stick is it a gimmick or a game? Will it sale, that's the end product.
@Hailinel said:
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
Cant wait until Nintendo makes shoddy hardware
I quit reading here. My launch Wii plays great. My Xbox 360, well, sent in twice and finally got a new one. Shoddy hardware? Please.
Same here. My Wii, bought at launch, still works like a charm. I sold my 360, purchased a year after launch, when it kept having disc drive errors even after shipping it off for a month to get it fixed, and it actually damaged my game discs. Say what you will about their online policy, or their refusal to release certain games in North America, or their reliance on a few key franchises every generation, but the track record of their hardware quality is hardly "shoddy" in any sense.
As for the Wii U, it doesn't surprise me that they're holding their cards close to the chest. The console is still under development, and they really need a line-up of games to show off at their press conference, not to mention quality titles to ship with the console at launch.
"clearly you stopped reading. If you read on I explained it was shoddy in the fashion that it wasn't supported. The hardware itself is great when it is supported by quality software. I am not literally speaking about build quality." Response to Claude when he/she stopped reading.
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
Nintendo's new console is more of a gimmick than ever.
Again, gimmick is the wrong correlation to what has evolved in gaming. Is there true gaming and gimmick gaming? If I create a game with a stick is it a gimmick or a game? Will it sale, that's the end product.
Sorry, can't have an honest debate over what you just said there. You either don't understand what I said, or have no idea what you're talking about, and is just taking the words I used and disagreed with them. Not sure what you're trying to accomplish other than to flame.
@BestUsernameEver said:
@Hailinel said:
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
Cant wait until Nintendo makes shoddy hardware
I quit reading here. My launch Wii plays great. My Xbox 360, well, sent in twice and finally got a new one. Shoddy hardware? Please.
Same here. My Wii, bought at launch, still works like a charm. I sold my 360, purchased a year after launch, when it kept having disc drive errors even after shipping it off for a month to get it fixed, and it actually damaged my game discs. Say what you will about their online policy, or their refusal to release certain games in North America, or their reliance on a few key franchises every generation, but the track record of their hardware quality is hardly "shoddy" in any sense.
As for the Wii U, it doesn't surprise me that they're holding their cards close to the chest. The console is still under development, and they really need a line-up of games to show off at their press conference, not to mention quality titles to ship with the console at launch.
"clearly you stopped reading. If you read on I explained it was shoddy in the fashion that it wasn't supported. The hardware itself is great when it is supported by quality software. I am not literally speaking about build quality." Response to Claude when he/she stopped reading.
regardless of your intention, "shoddy" is a poor word choice. Just because you want to make a word mean something else to suit your intentions, doesn't always mean you can. All it leads to is confusion as people think you are using shoddy in it's proper context.
@BestUsernameEver said:
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
Nintendo's new console is more of a gimmick than ever.
Again, gimmick is the wrong correlation to what has evolved in gaming. Is there true gaming and gimmick gaming? If I create a game with a stick is it a gimmick or a game? Will it sale, that's the end product.
Sorry, can't have an honest debate over what you just said there. You either don't understand what I said, or have no idea what you're talking about, and is just taking the words I used and disagreed with them. Not sure what you're trying to accomplish other than to flame.
I quoted you. You know nothing just as I. We speak and portray a belief in technology that hasn't been released yet. It's futile. I'm done.
@BionicRadd said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
@Hailinel said:
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
Cant wait until Nintendo makes shoddy hardware
I quit reading here. My launch Wii plays great. My Xbox 360, well, sent in twice and finally got a new one. Shoddy hardware? Please.
Same here. My Wii, bought at launch, still works like a charm. I sold my 360, purchased a year after launch, when it kept having disc drive errors even after shipping it off for a month to get it fixed, and it actually damaged my game discs. Say what you will about their online policy, or their refusal to release certain games in North America, or their reliance on a few key franchises every generation, but the track record of their hardware quality is hardly "shoddy" in any sense.
As for the Wii U, it doesn't surprise me that they're holding their cards close to the chest. The console is still under development, and they really need a line-up of games to show off at their press conference, not to mention quality titles to ship with the console at launch.
"clearly you stopped reading. If you read on I explained it was shoddy in the fashion that it wasn't supported. The hardware itself is great when it is supported by quality software. I am not literally speaking about build quality." Response to Claude when he/she stopped reading.
regardless of your intention, "shoddy" is a poor word choice. Just because you want to make a word mean something else to suit your intentions, doesn't always mean you can. All it leads to is confusion as people think you are using shoddy in it's proper context.
It only leads to confusion without context. No one is arguing with what I said, they are just arguing about the specific words I used? This is getting desperate guys.
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
Nintendo's new console is more of a gimmick than ever.
Again, gimmick is the wrong correlation to what has evolved in gaming. Is there true gaming and gimmick gaming? If I create a game with a stick is it a gimmick or a game? Will it sale, that's the end product.
Sorry, can't have an honest debate over what you just said there. You either don't understand what I said, or have no idea what you're talking about, and is just taking the words I used and disagreed with them. Not sure what you're trying to accomplish other than to flame.
I quoted you. You know nothing just as I. We speak and portray a belief in technology that hasn't been released yet. It's futile. I'm done.
Cool story bro, we both know its a touchscreen controller that won't be properly supported by third parties and turn into a PS3 with a gimmick controller, good day.
@BestUsernameEver said:
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
Nintendo's new console is more of a gimmick than ever.
Again, gimmick is the wrong correlation to what has evolved in gaming. Is there true gaming and gimmick gaming? If I create a game with a stick is it a gimmick or a game? Will it sale, that's the end product.
Sorry, can't have an honest debate over what you just said there. You either don't understand what I said, or have no idea what you're talking about, and is just taking the words I used and disagreed with them. Not sure what you're trying to accomplish other than to flame.
I quoted you. You know nothing just as I. We speak and portray a belief in technology that hasn't been released yet. It's futile. I'm done.
Cool story bro, we both know its a touchscreen controller that won't be properly supported by third parties and turn into a PS3 with a gimmick controller, good day.
No, we don't know that. Why? Because it hasn't happened yet.
@ryanwho said:
I think this means anyone who speaks with any authority on what the specs actually are on something that's clearly not nailed down at all can be easily dismissed. Which is great, cus those bitches like writing walls of text based on that dumbass assumption. Now Im just like "oh he's full of shit, ignoring". Makes things easy.
Also note, they won't be showing WiiU until summer 2012, that's a window of Holiday 12 at the earliest. This isn't Sega Saturn where they show it at E3 and then go "and you can buy it tomorrow". You shouldn't misinterpret shit like that, OP. Nothing in the article says WiiU will come out summer 12.
It's going to be on shelves in about a year and you think they haven't fully committed to a hardware architecture? Wow.
I can wait 6 years till the zelda machine wii u is the price of a game, then ill play the only 3 amazing nintendo games and not feel terrible buyers remorse. PLAN.
Yupe, showcase it at around the time Sony and MS will probably be hyping their next gen console ... Brilliant marketing decision.
I have to agree somewhat with BestUsernameEver, Nintendo might want to consider calling it on the hardware side. They are simply no match for MS and Sony when it comes to pushing out powerful hardware. Sure gimmicks will sell to the causal crowd, but a game platforming gimmicks do not make - just look at the Wii.
Don't tell me graphics doesn't matter OK. Gamers are already complaining the console graphics are looking dated. Maybe not you, but many are.
@tourgen said:
@ryanwho said:
I think this means anyone who speaks with any authority on what the specs actually are on something that's clearly not nailed down at all can be easily dismissed. Which is great, cus those bitches like writing walls of text based on that dumbass assumption. Now Im just like "oh he's full of shit, ignoring". Makes things easy.
Also note, they won't be showing WiiU until summer 2012, that's a window of Holiday 12 at the earliest. This isn't Sega Saturn where they show it at E3 and then go "and you can buy it tomorrow". You shouldn't misinterpret shit like that, OP. Nothing in the article says WiiU will come out summer 12.
It's going to be on shelves in about a year and you think they haven't fully committed to a hardware architecture? Wow.
Welcome to the world of hardware development. This is not a new phenomenon.
@NaCl said:
Yupe, showcase it at around the time Sony and MS will probably be hyping their next gen console ... Brilliant marketing decision.
I have to agree somewhat with BestUsernameEver, Nintendo might want to consider calling it on the hardware side. They are simply no match for MS and Sony when it comes to pushing out powerful hardware. Sure gimmicks will sell to the causal crowd, but a game platforming gimmicks do not make - just look at the Wii.
Don't tell me graphics doesn't matter OK. Gamers are already complaining the console graphics are looking dated. Maybe not you, but many are.
First off, thank you for that advice Yoda, second the gimmick as you so snidely put it, did have a positive affect for them. And by that, I mean, it allowed them to sell millions of units world wide, so while you may dislike their choices, it doesn't really matter to them. Since they achieved what they were trying to do, which is to make money by selling video games to people (which you do not have to be included in).
And I know my remarks may be seen as aggressive, but I dislike it when people make snobbish remarks about gaming (oh, that game/console doesn't matter, it only for the 'causal' therefore, it isn't really a game/console)
My problem is that I cannot figure out who the target market for the Wii U is supposed to be.
Incoming anecdote: earlier this year, my older sister decided to buy herself a Wii after having played The Michael Jackson Experience over at a friend's house. Her friends actually owned the Kinect version, but she settled on the Wii for the lower overall price. Being the knowledgeable person in the family when it came to games, I got to tag along with her while she went to buy herself a system, Michael Jackson, Wii Fit and some other fitness game that she hasn't even taken the plastic wrap off of to this day. She occasionally played with her new toy for a couple weekends and let the thing collect dust. The last time she told me about it, she just wanted me to set it up so she could use it as a Netflix box.
Do I see her buying a Wii U? Nope. She's perfectly satisfied with her current party/exercise/Netflix box and the allure of better graphics mean nothing to her. This is dangerous to Nintendo, as it is people with her her exact mindset that made the Wii into the success that it was. Nintendo needs a way to make the Wii U into as much of a must-have casual party machine as its predecessor, and I just don't see that Wii U controller stirring the imaginations of the Oprah and Ellen crowd like the Wiimote did.
A major focus of the Wii U is to lure the core, male 18-35, dude-bro set back into Nintendo's fold, but how successful will this tactic be? Will people who have been perfectly satisfied sticking to their 360s, PS3s and/or PCs pick up a Nintendo system just because it's finally in HD? Why would they when Microsoft and Sony will be making them drool with tech demos and sneak peaks at their new hardware? The controller will have some great tricks up its sleeves, but only Nintendo and a few experimental third party titles will put a real focus on it. Most third parties will likely do the bare minimum implementation of the controller's features so they can still smoothly release the title on 360, PS3 and PC, which would further feed the stigma that the Wii U is a half-step to the real next generation.
That just leaves the hardcore Nintendo crowd, the loyal fans who'll follow the plumber barefoot into hell. They'll of course get the Wii U because they get all the Nintendo hardware. Nintendo has shown that they can be successful while being limited to this audience; the Nintendo 64 and the Game Cube ultimately made them money, right? It's just that there's no way that the Wii's success could be replicated or surpassed with such a comparatively tiny audience.
Nintendo did an excellent job outmaneuvering its competition this cycle by pushing new, innovative ideas that appealed to a much greater audience. It goes without doubt that the dual screens and touch control of the DS and the motion based gameplay of the Wii combined with broad appeal, inclusive software is what put Nintendo on top. However I fear that Nintendo is out of get-out-of-jail-free cards and will suffer greatly for it. The recent troubles of the 3DS seem to vindicate this thought.
TL,DR: The glory days of the Wii and DS are over and Nintendo has an uphill battle ahead of them in the coming generation.
What I don't get from everything that is known now about the Wii U . Why they would be releasing a console that is the equivalent to current Gen ( again what is kinda know now) . When Next Gen is coming pretty soon after the expected release of the Wii U . Along with that but the games they are looking to have with the Wii U ( as far as 3rd party).Are current gen games that are already released or going to be released on the PS3, Xbox and PC respectively.
I am just confused on what their strategy is with this new system. It seems that the optimum window for releasing this was 1 to 2 years ago if not earlier. But I think they were too busy sitting on their laurels and putting focus into the wrong platform namely the 3DS.. I understand that the handheld market is or was Nintendo's "bread and butter" for a long time . But the sands have shifted in the mobile gaming market and they should of paid more attention to that. They expected they would release it and people would go rushing for the 3DS like they have done in the past . Honestly if they expect people to do that with the Wii U from other current gen or even the original Wii. I think they are making another grave error.
I have always had a Nintendo console in my home sense I was a kid. From the Nes to the Wii and enjoyed them all. I did eventually get I guess you would say jaded with the Wii because of the lack of content. I latter sold the Wii and never looked back. Now on the horizon of new console rumors from the other big companies. From what I read and saw about the Wii U from the press and event coverage. I can say that this will probably be the Nintendo system I do not get when released. Maybe latter on down the road if it survives and has some games I want. But as of now even that is looking grim.
@ShatterShock said:
Do I see her buying a Wii U? Nope. She's perfectly satisfied with her current party/exercise/Netflix box and the allure of better graphics mean nothing to her. This is dangerous to Nintendo, as it is people with her her exact mindset that made the Wii into the success that it was. Nintendo needs a way to make the Wii U into as much of a must-have casual party machine as its predecessor, and I just don't see that Wii U controller stirring the imaginations of the Oprah and Ellen crowd like the Wiimote did.
Indeed, this will be Nintendo's biggest hurdle. Getting the same croud who bought the Wii to buy a Wii U, when that crowd uses their Wii once or twice a year in the first place. Honestly, the present and future of casual gaming is in iOS and Facebook.
@Zor said:
@NaCl said:
Yupe, showcase it at around the time Sony and MS will probably be hyping their next gen console ... Brilliant marketing decision.
I have to agree somewhat with BestUsernameEver, Nintendo might want to consider calling it on the hardware side. They are simply no match for MS and Sony when it comes to pushing out powerful hardware. Sure gimmicks will sell to the causal crowd, but a game platforming gimmicks do not make - just look at the Wii.
Don't tell me graphics doesn't matter OK. Gamers are already complaining the console graphics are looking dated. Maybe not you, but many are.
First off, thank you for that advice Yoda, second the gimmick as you so snidely put it, did have a positive affect for them. And by that, I mean, it allowed them to sell millions of units world wide, so while you may dislike their choices, it doesn't really matter to them. Since they achieved what they were trying to do, which is to make money by selling video games to people (which you do not have to be included in).
And I know my remarks may be seen as aggressive, but I dislike it when people make snobbish remarks about gaming (oh, that game/console doesn't matter, it only for the 'causal' therefore, it isn't really a game/console)
Yes they sold a lot ... but how many of the best most popular games end up on it?
They sold a TOY, not a gaming platform, and like most other toys it was a one-off profit item - they made next to nothing on game sales which is why their profits nose-dived once the Wii reached saturation.
The Wii was a successful toy, but a failure of a game console.
@ryanwho: Considering your little bit about assumptions, I find it amusing that you assume anyone thought that summer '12 was infact when the console would be released. It was clearly stated that it was at the earliest, obviously it's not coming out earlier, and this rules out ONLY the time before it's shown off at E3. It's totally possible that it'll be a silly 360 S type deal. Is it at all likely? No. I'd say your best bet would be that holiday at earliest, but it certainly isn't impossible that it be released earlier.
While I'm glad they will be "taking their time" I just hope they know what that needs to mean: games, games, games. They need to be out their pushing their product on developers. Get everyone they can on board to have games out within 4 months of launch, even if there are a fair number of releases of past multiplatform titles and remakes. Anything'd be better than 3 re-releases and a fuck load of nothing else. And obviously they need to lead with new first party titles. If they don't have a new (an actual NEW, not repackaged, remade, remastered, or re-anythinged) Mario game for the platform at launch, I won't know what to say. A good Zelda game should probably launch around the same time as the U, and they need to get a big name developing a new exclusive IP to draw in the core audience. They need to stop fucking around with their software and get on that shit. Fix the online stuff, launch with a wide range of software options, and of course keep the price low.
@Hailinel said:
@tourgen said:
@ryanwho said:
I think this means anyone who speaks with any authority on what the specs actually are on something that's clearly not nailed down at all can be easily dismissed. Which is great, cus those bitches like writing walls of text based on that dumbass assumption. Now Im just like "oh he's full of shit, ignoring". Makes things easy.
Also note, they won't be showing WiiU until summer 2012, that's a window of Holiday 12 at the earliest. This isn't Sega Saturn where they show it at E3 and then go "and you can buy it tomorrow". You shouldn't misinterpret shit like that, OP. Nothing in the article says WiiU will come out summer 12.
It's going to be on shelves in about a year and you think they haven't fully committed to a hardware architecture? Wow.
Welcome to the world of hardware development. This is not a new phenomenon.
I'm sure they are absolutely locked in with an architecture. Do they have specs down? No, certainly now. But they need to start seeding the developer population, and that can only happen if they have some idea of what to build for. The specs will in all likelihood not change drastically between then and now. Remember, the Wii launched at about the same power level as the previous generation. The Wii U is setting up to do the same. And even if the specs change, an entire re-hash of the architecture is going to set back developers a hell of a lot if they want to release something that doesn't play like an emulation. It may end up a bit more or less powerful, but the general idea will likely stay the same. Nintendo doesn't want to have a top of the line crazy powerful console out right now. They want to make a cheap machine that puts the prices of the $400-$500 consoles of the next generation from Microsoft and Sony to shame when they announce them, which is very possibly going to happen at the very same E3 that Nintendo plans to show off the Wii U.
@XII_Sniper said:
@ShatterShock said:
Do I see her buying a Wii U? Nope. She's perfectly satisfied with her current party/exercise/Netflix box and the allure of better graphics mean nothing to her. This is dangerous to Nintendo, as it is people with her her exact mindset that made the Wii into the success that it was. Nintendo needs a way to make the Wii U into as much of a must-have casual party machine as its predecessor, and I just don't see that Wii U controller stirring the imaginations of the Oprah and Ellen crowd like the Wiimote did.
Indeed, this will be Nintendo's biggest hurdle. Getting the same croud who bought the Wii to buy a Wii U, when that crowd uses their Wii once or twice a year in the first place. Honestly, the present and future of casual gaming is in iOS and Facebook.
Or they could recognize that many of those folks will keep their Wii's and focus on the market that'll actually keep buying things like software, downloadable content, maybe even upgrading to a newer slimmer quieter version of what they already own. Thing is, Microsoft and Sony both make a pretty decent chunk of money. Microsoft recognized that hardware isn't the important thing to make money off of, because no one really needs more than one console. But they can keep buying software and downloadable content and paying for media and features like Xbox Live for years and years. Everyone I know with a PS3 or 360 easily spent more on all of those things than they did on their $300 console. At this point, you could have spent that much money alone on the Halo franchise, if you include things like DLC or perhaps a pre-order for an upcoming re-release of Combat Evolved. Same thing with Call of Duty. Gears of War? Sure thing. And you know what? Pretty much everyone I know buys into all of those franchises. They all have Xbox Live Gold subs, and have for years, many since the service launched. In fact, soon, the'll have hit that magical $500 mark, if they haven't already, just in money gone towards a Gold subscription. The lesson Nintendo needs to learn is to not fight the quick and easy battle, but to establish a base that'll eventually become very cheap to support and by sheer surface area catch a whole lotta dough.
@NaCl said:
@Zor said:
@NaCl said:
Yupe, showcase it at around the time Sony and MS will probably be hyping their next gen console ... Brilliant marketing decision.
I have to agree somewhat with BestUsernameEver, Nintendo might want to consider calling it on the hardware side. They are simply no match for MS and Sony when it comes to pushing out powerful hardware. Sure gimmicks will sell to the causal crowd, but a game platforming gimmicks do not make - just look at the Wii.
Don't tell me graphics doesn't matter OK. Gamers are already complaining the console graphics are looking dated. Maybe not you, but many are.
First off, thank you for that advice Yoda, second the gimmick as you so snidely put it, did have a positive affect for them. And by that, I mean, it allowed them to sell millions of units world wide, so while you may dislike their choices, it doesn't really matter to them. Since they achieved what they were trying to do, which is to make money by selling video games to people (which you do not have to be included in).
And I know my remarks may be seen as aggressive, but I dislike it when people make snobbish remarks about gaming (oh, that game/console doesn't matter, it only for the 'causal' therefore, it isn't really a game/console)
Yes they sold a lot ... but how many of the best most popular games end up on it?
They sold a TOY, not a gaming platform, and like most other toys it was a one-off profit item - they made next to nothing on game sales which is why their profits nose-dived once the Wii reached saturation.
The Wii was a successful toy, but a failure of a game console.
I see you counter my snob comment by doubling down on the snobbish remarks (time to have some fun at your expense)... I could post a link to a list of million sellers on the wii (for NA), but i am sure you would just dismiss it as you have dismissed anything that doesn't fit into your narrow view of gaming.
Just wondering, but what is the difference between a Toy and a Gaming Console in your opinion?
@Zor said:
@NaCl said:
@Zor said:
@NaCl said:
Yupe, showcase it at around the time Sony and MS will probably be hyping their next gen console ... Brilliant marketing decision.
I have to agree somewhat with BestUsernameEver, Nintendo might want to consider calling it on the hardware side. They are simply no match for MS and Sony when it comes to pushing out powerful hardware. Sure gimmicks will sell to the causal crowd, but a game platforming gimmicks do not make - just look at the Wii.
Don't tell me graphics doesn't matter OK. Gamers are already complaining the console graphics are looking dated. Maybe not you, but many are.
First off, thank you for that advice Yoda, second the gimmick as you so snidely put it, did have a positive affect for them. And by that, I mean, it allowed them to sell millions of units world wide, so while you may dislike their choices, it doesn't really matter to them. Since they achieved what they were trying to do, which is to make money by selling video games to people (which you do not have to be included in).
And I know my remarks may be seen as aggressive, but I dislike it when people make snobbish remarks about gaming (oh, that game/console doesn't matter, it only for the 'causal' therefore, it isn't really a game/console)
Yes they sold a lot ... but how many of the best most popular games end up on it?
They sold a TOY, not a gaming platform, and like most other toys it was a one-off profit item - they made next to nothing on game sales which is why their profits nose-dived once the Wii reached saturation.
The Wii was a successful toy, but a failure of a game console.
I see you counter my snob comment by doubling down on the snobbish remarks (time to have some fun at your expense)... I could post a link to a list of million sellers on the wii (for NA), but i am sure you would just dismiss it as you have dismissed anything that doesn't fit into your narrow view of gaming.
Just wondering, but what is the difference between a Toy and a Gaming Console in your opinion?
Whether you think my comment are snobbish or not, is irrelevant to the discussion.
As for what is the differences ... it's pretty obvious isn't it?
A gaming platform is a device that serves as a delivery mechanism for games, a toy does not. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computing_platform
That's exact what a game console is, a platform.
The Wii was mostly sold as a toy, while it had platform characteristics it was a failure in that regard - thus a failure as a game console. It was too weak. Nintendo basically ignored the game developers. No surprise (serious) 3rd party support was almost non-existant.
I love how you fanboys like to "shift the goal posts". You can keep shifting them if you like, this way Nintendo can be No.1 in whatever you define as the "goal post" in your mind, but Nintendo as they currently stand is irrelevant in the minds of your average gamer - they don't carry the games they want. So yes, I'm saying the metric in which you measure Nintendo's success is rubbish - it's like measuring Michael Jorden's success as a basketball player by counting how many steps he took on the basketball court.
PS: Your link. LOL. Almost all were Nintendo's first party games - ergo, shit for 3rd party support. Overall the amount of software shipped pales in comparison to the 360/PS3 - a pretty good measure of a gaming platform's success. This is why Nintendo's profit stream dried up (the 3DS was suppose to prop them up; that didn't go too well did it) when the Wii hardware stopped moving, they had insignificant revenue from game sales licensing - the Wii wasn't moving many games.
PPS: It's not related to gaming, but should give you an idea what a platform is. https://plus.google.com/112678702228711889851/posts/eVeouesvaVX
I'm burned out when it comes to nintendo. When I first seen the Wii, I imagined an amazing new era for games, where one to one precision allowed people to interact with games in a more personal fashion than regular controllers could give. And now look. The biggest announcement people are excited about is the new Zelda...which roughly works like the old Zelda...and whose map is a tenth the size of wind wakers...
Look, the Wii is a lesser machine than the gamecube, the Wii was lightning in a bottle, it promised great ideas, and people bought it. Now, we're in denial because if we had to admit that they were full of crap, and that we had basically been suckered into a money-making lie, we'd have to admit we made a mistake, which would be embarrassing, but living this lie is just as bad right?
Innovation isn't making a motion controller that needs a thing to give it one-to-one precision. It's making that controller from the get-go, then creating some really amazing ways to use that technology. Nintendo haven't done that, and the most amazing part about this entire situation is that the Wiimote is being used for surgeries, and dozens of other everyday uses. And where are Nintendo? They're making a tablet controller, after 6 years of a technology that could have changed gaming utterly, they jumped ship. Who cares if the new console can only support one tablet controller? It's a fucking tablet, it's huge! Aren't game controllers supposed to be designed for comfort and aesthetic value? What the shit is going on with Nintendo nowadays?
@NaCl said:
Whether you think my comment are snobbish or not, is irrelevant to the discussion.
As for what is the differences ... it's pretty obvious isn't it?
A gaming platform is a device that serves as a delivery mechanism for games, a toy does not. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computing_platform
That's exact what a game console is, a platform.
The Wii was mostly sold as a toy, while it had platform characteristics it was a failure in that regard - thus a failure as a game console. It was too weak. Nintendo basically ignored the game developers. No surprise (serious) 3rd party support was almost non-existant.
I love how you fanboys like to "shift the goal posts". You can keep shifting them if you like, this way Nintendo can be No.1 in whatever you define as the "goal post" in your mind, but Nintendo as they currently stand is irrelevant in the minds of your average gamer - they don't carry the games they want. So yes, I'm saying the metric in which you measure Nintendo's success is rubbish - it's like measuring Michael Jorden's success as a basketball player by counting how many steps he took on the basketball court.
PS: Your link. LOL. Almost all were Nintendo's first party games - ergo, shit for 3rd party support. Overall the amount of software shipped pales in comparison to the 360/PS3 - a pretty good measure of a gaming platform's success. This is why Nintendo's profit stream dried up (the 3DS was suppose to prop them up; that didn't go too well did it) when the Wii hardware stopped moving, they had insignificant revenue from game sales licensing - the Wii wasn't moving many games.
PPS: It's not related to gaming, but should give you an idea what a platform is. https://plus.google.com/112678702228711889851/posts/eVeouesvaVX
Hi again, well, let see what we have this time.
First off, my remarks about your snobbish comment are in fact relevant, since I am suggesting that your opinions on the matter exist solely to reinforce your mentality, and therefore wrong... this actually came up in a recent article on this side, where Patrick was discussing an Uncharted 3 review. I believe he refereed to it as Confirmation Bias. (note how i link the article there, and didn't simple paste the html address)
Second, by your definition the Wii is a gaming platform, since it plays games... and so is a cell phone, ti-85 calculator, and paper (you didn't define what kind of games :P ) You assertion that it is 'too weak' and therefore not a gaming platform is wrong, since strengthen and weakness are subjective to the times, and any platform can be consider either one, and yet still called a platform.
Lastly, there no goal post shifting going on here (on my side), I stand by the assertion that the Wii is a gaming platform that has made them a lot of money (overall). That is what i started off with, and nothing has changed. Also, it is nice to know that you love fanboys, since you just ironically 'shift the goal posts' by implying that only 3rd party games matter to sales, but as you know the old saying, "birds of a feather, flock together.'
Anywho, we have gotten too far off topic, this thread is about how Nintendo will show the Wii U (final specs) at E3 in 2012, and what that means for it launched schedule. From the sounds of it, the console is still in flux, hopefully they have nailed down the key features by now, but we'll see in about 7-8 months or so.
@Zor:
Second, by your definition the Wii is a gaming platform, since it plays games... and so is a cell phone, ti-85 calculator, and paper (you didn't define what kind of games :P ) You assertion that it is 'too weak' and therefore not a gaming platform is wrong, since strengthen and weakness are subjective to the times, and any platform can be consider either one, and yet still called a platform.
It's a failure of a platform, it sold on the basis that it was a good toy.
Lastly, there no goal post shifting going on here (on my side), I stand by the assertion that the Wii is agaming platformtoy that has made them a lot of money (overall). That is what i started off with, and nothing has changed.
FTFY.
Also, it is nice to know that you love fanboys, since you just ironically 'shift the goal posts' by implying that only 3rd party games matter to sales, but as you know the old saying, "birds of a feather, flock together.'
I hate to break this to you, but it's true.
1st party titles can only be used to sweeten the deal, but without 3rd party support you and your platform are pretty much dead to most gamers. 3rd party developers far outnumber 1st party ones.
Sony knows this, they continue to court 3rd party developers despite having some of the best 1st party developers in the industry - they really went all the way out with the PSV.
MS knows this, they have literally no 1st party developers at all.
3rd party developers define where the "center" of the gaming industry is and currently it's made up of the binary stars that are the PS3 and 360.
And despite you white-knighting for them, they themselves have more or less come to the same conclusion and are desperately trying to win back 3rd party developers they pissed off over the decades.
Anywho, we have gotten too far off topic, this thread is about how Nintendo will show the Wii U (final specs) at E3 in 2012, and what that means for it launched schedule. From the sounds of it, the console is still in flux, hopefully they have nailed down the key features by now, but we'll see in about 7-8 months or so.
Personally I'm "unconvinced".
Kind of disappointed to be honest. They really lucked out with the Wii [1] and have made a load with the DS [2], so where did all the money go? I had expected them to invest it in R&D labs so they can fight with Sony and MS on even footing.
But what did they do? Nothing. And all we got was the disappointing 3DS and WiiU which are again underpowered compare to the (upcoming) competition.
Say what you want. Power matters. Graphics matters.
If you don't visually grab the attention of gamers, your game will fail. This is reality.
If given the choice between 2 version of a game, gamers will pick the prettier version.
But I'm getting off topic again.
The WiiU? It will probably get Dreamcasted, the PS3 and 360 combined have so much clout that unless you can really wow the people - which the WiiU is currently not doing with it's non-next gen specs - you are more or less screwed.
[1] something I doubt they can repeat; gamers have gotten wise to their "tactics" - that their "creativity" most of the time mounts to nothing despite all the hype, i.e. nothing more than gimmicks. I'm sorry, but throwing random shit at the wall and hoping it sticks isn't innovation.
[2] lucky for them Sony drop the ball with the PSP but they not so lucky this time round though. Sony has taken the feedback to heart and fixed almost all of the PSP shortcomings, and now it's Nintendo's turn to drop the ball - similar battery life to the PSV, but weaker tech and they dare launch at the PSV's price level; than backtracked on the price giving early adopters of the system a bunch of 20 year old games as compensation ... then there is the add-on, way to highlight the weakness of your handheld Einsteins, the fix for lacking a 2nd analog stick that really more of a trade-off than a fix, given that it bloats the size of the 3DS by 30% and has you carrying around AA batteries.
Yeah, 90+ million units sold and hundreds of millions in game sales, including the highest selling game of all time and dozens of third party games with 400,000+ units in sales and it was a failure as a gaming platform. Idiot.
@Claude said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
Cant wait until Nintendo makes shoddy hardware
I quit reading here. My launch Wii plays great. My Xbox 360, well, sent in twice and finally got a new one. Shoddy hardware? Please.
Yeah, its the software thats awful. I've traded in all but two of my Wii games and even those are never played. Thankfully I only bought a Wii for the homebrew.
I learned not to bet against Nintendo this generation. Even the 3DS is recovering from its tepid launch, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt as far as success. However, I'm not sure about keeping everything under wraps until E3. There's only so much press coverage to go around and if the rumors are true and Microsoft is going to unveil their next platform then that's where all the spotlights will be focused even though it won't be out until holiday 2013. Since the Wii U will likely be available at the end of this year, Nintendo needs to make certain it's in the public conscious, and I fear it will be overshadowed by the shiny new "Next-box". Nintendo would have to really wow the press audience and, well how often does that happen at E3?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment