@BestUsernameEver said:

@SharkEthic said:

@jdh5153 said:

It needs to actually be next gen. The 360 and PS3 are still outperforming it.... the 720 and PS4 will make it look archaic.

Yep, and good luck getting 3rd party support by then.

The need to sell more consoles to convince 3rd parties to keep making games for what will inevitably be, and pretty much already is, outdated hardware.

I disagree with this argument, the Wii was obviously under performing it's competition, but still managed to completely take the market for a long while. The thing that changes for the Wii U in my mind isn't that's it's held back by old tech, because the Wii proved it can be overcome with word of mouth and iconic games, BUT, the thing Wii U does not have is a Wii Sports. Wii sports was the only thing my extended family played on the wii, the only game, that's insane. The segment of the market that made the Wii a huge success barely bought games, they had Wii sports, Wii fit and Mario kart, the Wii U needs an iconic game to spread word of mouth, or else it will lag desperately behind the PS4 and Xbox, just in pure attention or excitement. Nothing about the wii u excites me, and that's my big problem with it, it's good, but not good enough for me to consider it.

The difference between the Wii and the Wii U is in the overall accessibility though. The Wii didn't need to compete with the 360 and PS3 in terms of hardware specs, because it had something that neither of the other consoles had - instant accessibility for every member of the family, young and old. The Wii U doesn't have that, a tablet-controller will not get grandma of the couch, and hence the Wii U will have to compete with the 360 and PS3 on their turf. So I stand by my original statement that Nintendo will have to aggressively push the console, in order for 3rd party developers to have an incentive to make games for the console.

I was talking to a friend about the Wii U. He thought it was a new handheld from Nintendo. As for me, no games I want, no buy. Get your shit together Nintendo.

Videogames.

I don't think the Wii U will succeed with a lot of the regs of gaming. You can't expect the old school people to bow down to Nintendo if they don't feel a part of the audience.

You can answer the question a few ways. 
 
To be technical, all Nintendo has to do is just sell systems and game ... regardless of if ist is any good.
 
But, it would be nice if they could bring the system up to the level of being WORTHY of excitement and sales.  For that they need to make some hardware changes, some firmware changes, and some administrative changes that would bring the system inline with what a modern western player would need/want.  But that would be too many changes to make, so that will never happen. 
 
The only realistic solution is to drop the price, while make a few firmware and administrative changes.  If they can bring the price down to $199, allow for moving profiles, allow for M-Rated games to be sold all day long in Europe not just 11PM to 3AM, allow for most games to have some sort of Pro-Controller support, etc.

While the WiiU does need some 3rd party support (mostly to drive innovation on the platform), what Nintendo really needs to do to attract that kind of attention from developers is put out very good versions of its flagship games. Give us some fucking amazing Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc. Make existing fans, including those who missed out on the Wii, want to pick up a WiiU. The only thing Nintendo really has going for it is its IPs, and it needs to exploit that advantage to its fullest extent.

It needs original content that takes advantage of the second screen. Less tired Nintendo franchise staples, unless they're going to offer something new and interesting to the table.

Honestly, I really don't think they can do anything to get me to buy one of their consoles. Besides being a big believer in the idea that cutting edge hardware can push innovation in ways I'm more interested in seeing (better AI, more detailed and populated worlds, fucking eventual *real* liquids, grass and foliage, and wildlife), there's the fact that Nintendo refuses to cater to a market outside of Japan which relies almost entirely on internet connectivity for any multiplayer games. At least, that's the position I'm in. I know exactly one person in real life that I could say is a "gamer." They're getting better by ditching friend code stuff, but their system is still an archaic mess from a features and usability standpoint.

And yet, I still have a 3DS. I guess I just have more faith that a Nintendo handheld platform can deliver unique experiences.

The closing of Sony and Microsoft.

@MAGZine said:

@DarthOrange said:

Some New IP's. Seriously, what was the new Nintendo IP last generation? The Mii?

oh this argument again.

You're criticising him for not having a new argument? A little ironic don't you think?

@egg: He's talking about interface load times. My point was that the guide was never meant to be displaying the amount of content that xbl offers up digitially, nor the amount of pages and sections. Also, it was never designed for parsing 250gb hardrives, which I'm sure that they never imagined would be useful or necessary. The current form is just a best attempt at working around those limitations. Remember, the 360 and PS3 are drastically evolved versions of what they set out to be in the mid 2000's. The WiiU was designed for today's uses

All disc based consoles have in game load times at some point or another. And a lot of that can be due to optimization on the part of the developers. Nobody was looking at the Duke Nukem Forever load times and blaming the hardware for it

@SharkEthic said:

@BestUsernameEver said:

@SharkEthic said:

@jdh5153 said:

It needs to actually be next gen. The 360 and PS3 are still outperforming it.... the 720 and PS4 will make it look archaic.

Yep, and good luck getting 3rd party support by then.

The need to sell more consoles to convince 3rd parties to keep making games for what will inevitably be, and pretty much already is, outdated hardware.

I disagree with this argument, the Wii was obviously under performing it's competition, but still managed to completely take the market for a long while. The thing that changes for the Wii U in my mind isn't that's it's held back by old tech, because the Wii proved it can be overcome with word of mouth and iconic games, BUT, the thing Wii U does not have is a Wii Sports. Wii sports was the only thing my extended family played on the wii, the only game, that's insane. The segment of the market that made the Wii a huge success barely bought games, they had Wii sports, Wii fit and Mario kart, the Wii U needs an iconic game to spread word of mouth, or else it will lag desperately behind the PS4 and Xbox, just in pure attention or excitement. Nothing about the wii u excites me, and that's my big problem with it, it's good, but not good enough for me to consider it.

The difference between the Wii and the Wii U is in the overall accessibility though. The Wii didn't need to compete with the 360 and PS3 in terms of hardware specs, because it had something that neither of the other consoles had - instant accessibility for every member of the family, young and old. The Wii U doesn't have that, a tablet-controller will not get grandma of the couch, and hence the Wii U will have to compete with the 360 and PS3 on their turf. So I stand by my original statement that Nintendo will have to aggressively push the console, in order for 3rd party developers to have an incentive to make games for the console.

That does make sense, making their strategy make even less sense when pitted against the other two. We shall see.

Better hardware.

So far it doesn't seem like there's anything inherently wrong with the system itself, aside from the slow loading (the whole profile swapping thing is a lot of bitching over a problem that will only occur for a fraction of owners). And honestly for a launch I'd say their game line up is pretty good. So really they should just keep releasing cool Nintendo games.

It's almost 2013. How about a HDD that isn't a joke?

If the WIIU had a 250gb HDD I'd have one by now.

I'd buy it if it had an open world 3D Pokémon game (heck, just make a more modern Pokémon Colosseum which wasn't so linear - or at least had a big side-content). I would even be ok with them releasing it with one region and then either releasing DLC or expansions/sequels with different regions (if the game was good enough, I would also settle for their side-game policy of a completely new region just for the purposes of that game). If they also included NFC with Pokémon Cards then I would probably be tempted back in to their TCG and become broke in weeks.

Basically I just want another Final Fantasy XII but with Pokémon.

@Bones8677 said:

@MAGZine said:

@Aegon said:

@MAGZine said:

@DarthOrange said:

Some New IP's. Seriously, what was the new Nintendo IP last generation? The Mii?

oh this argument again.

I think it's a pretty valid argument.

It really isn't. Care to name me a studio that has more unique pieces of IP than Nintendo? Those iconic brands are what Nintendo does... it's their bread and butter. Nintendo needs more developers to bring both exclusive and non-exclusive content... but not more IPs. I mean, nothing wrong with more IPs, it's just that it's awfully dumb to say they "need more".

... because if Nintendo needs more, you're not speaking very highly for the rest of the damn industry

Nintendo:

Mario

Zelda

Pokemon

Metroid

Pikmen

Kid Icarus

Star Fox

Donkey Kong

Kirbey

Smash Bros.

Mario Kart

Sony:

Uncharted

Heavy Rain

Last of Us

Crash Bandekoot

Beyond

Jak and Daxter

Ratchet and Clank

Resistance

inFamous

Mario Kart Flower

Journey

Gran Turismo

Killzone

Little Big Planet

Motorstorm

Sly Cooper

Twisted Metal

And most of those are from THIS generation.

Except that Nintendo is the developer and publisher of all of those titles you listed, and the ones you listed for Sony are merely PS3 exclusive titles not necessarily develeoped or published by sony. What's your point? That Bayonetta 2 is Nintendo IP? I just went over this.

Also, Fire Emblem, Animal Crossing, Yoshi; and "mario" is pretty generic considering the other related games that aren't necessarily mario. See: Wario Ware, Luigi's Mansion. Also, "Mario" is pretty all empassing. Sure it's just a single character, but compare Call of Duty to Super Mario Bros., Super Mario 64, Super Mario Galaxy, Paper Mario. The basic premise of the game is the same (kill enemies, save princess, etc) but they're vastly different games. In fact, I think someone could successfully argue that of that list of tiles [for Sony], you'll find more variation between 2 Mario games, than between a chosen two from your list.

Throw some new skins on, change gameplay a bit, add a gimick or two and BAM "new IP," apparently.

@hwy_61 said:

@MAGZine: Do you think Nintendo's well of creativity will dry up with its current IP, though? I mean, it has to, right? I agree that new IP doesn't necessarily equate to success, but its gotta happen. Right?

THIS is a good question to ask. The answer is: I don't know. As long as the creative minds at Nintendo keep innovating, there is no reason that they can't take their games to new places. They DO manage to change up their games from time to time with success. Look at Super Mario Bros, Super Mario 64, Super Mario Galaxy, Super Mario 3DLand, New Super Mario Bros. Not to mention the Mario games outside of the Super Mario franchise (Smash Bros, Kart, Paper, et al). If they keep on with New Super Mario Bros, then yeah, it's possible people will actually tire of it, but right now it's just a bunch of sophistry. The mario franchise alone visits all sorts of fun and interesting places.

@Jimbo said:

@MAGZine said:

@DarthOrange said:

Some New IP's. Seriously, what was the new Nintendo IP last generation? The Mii?

oh this argument again.

You're criticising him for not having a new argument? A little ironic don't you think?

I've already elaborated more than once on this forum why it's a bad argument that doesn't make any sense. I think this actually my third time going through it.

And no, how is that ironic? He made a shitty argument, and I pointed out that his argument was shitty. There was no counter argument. I fail to see the irony. Perhaps you can enlighten me?

games , isnt this an easy question . people will no doubt run for wii u once there is games ,overall though the launch in japan and usa and eu combined out sold the hd twins launches . just fail to out sell wii , and thats understand able ,

Compelling first party titles

Third party titles that can stand on their own and justify their own existence (No More Heroes or Boom Blox as opposed to a ME3 port without the first two games or DLC options...)

@jdh5153: and that is still false.

@Bones8677: Hehe best joke on the site. Sony and Microsoft aiding in games being taken seriously.

@DarthOrange said:

Some New IP's. Seriously, what was the new Nintendo IP last generation? The Mii?

All of this.

- New 3D Mario Game
- New Zelda game using 2 of the Gamepads
- At least a new Pokemon Game like Colosseum/Gale of Darkness
- New big 2D Metroid Game (Metroidvania)
- New Star Fox Game
- Bigger/better Smash Bros. Game

I'm honestly surprised just how ignorant people are of what the Wii U is capable of, and the fact that its launch line up is probably the best I've seen in years. I also think it's funny that so many people really think that the successors to the Xbox and PS3 (if they choose to release a PS4 that is) will be absolute powerhouses of technology, all indications point to that not being the case at all. So far I've been really impressed with the system, and I've got a nice stack of great games for it already along with some cheap Wii games I missed out on. Being able to play games exclusively on the gamepad is fucking fantastic, and it's really nice that it has a great web browser that I can use without having to close my game too.