Nintendo: We need some FPS games! Not enough of those in the world!
I know you are being sarcastic, but this is how I see it actually happening:
Gamers: "Hey Nintendo, I'd buy a Wii U if you ever made a good FPS/mature/GTA style game.
Nintendo: "We have the ones you're thinking of. Call of Duty: Ghosts, and Watch_Dogs I believe they are called. Please buy a Wii U!"
Gamers: "No, no, no... we want YOU to make a FPS/mature/GTA style game. YOU Nintendo! I'm buying CoD and Watchdogs on my Xbox 360!"
Nintendo: "Isn't that what third parties are for? Making games like that so we don't have to?"
Gamers: "Yeah, why don't you have more third party games! I'll buy a Wii U when you get the third party games I want."
Nintendo: "Oh, I see. We have the ones you're thinking of. Call of Duty: Ghosts, and Watch_Dogs I believe they are called. Please buy a Wii U!"
Gamers: "NO!!! I WANT THOSE BUT NOT ON WII U! I WANT NEW, ORIGINAL IP, MATURE FPS OR MATURE GTA STYLE GAMES ON WII U BEFORE I GET A WII U!"
Nintendo: "Umm... so we wasted our time getting those games on our platform?"
Gamers: "Look Nintendo here's the deal. No matter what you do, I will only buy a Nintendo system to play Nintendo-made games. But I also want Call of Duty type games. So YOU, NINTENDO, need to make those types of games for me. Because I won't buy third party games on your system even if they are the games I want. And since you don't have the right IP characters to use for that (although Metroid and Star Fox are close enough, if you REALLY need to use them), I also expect these new mature games to come hand-in-hand with a brand new beloved set of characters and worlds that you can milk until I get bored of them."
Nintendo: "Wouldn't it just be easier if you bought CoD and Watch_Dogs on Wii U? Those are the games you actually want to play anyway, and we did go to the trouble of putting them on the system for you, and I know Activision and Ubisoft have great ideas for the Gamepad..."
Gamers: "NO! WHY WOULD I BUY A WII U JUST TO PLAY EXCELLENT THIRD PARTY GAMES AND NINTENDO-MADE EXCLUSIVES, WHEN I COULD JUST BUY THOSE THIRD PARTY GAMES FOR MY XBOX AND HOPE YOU GO OUT OF BUSINESS SO I CAN PLAY MARIO ON MY XBOX TOO??? WHY DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND OUR LOGIC! LISTEN TO YOUR CUSTOMERS!!!"
Nintendo: "Umm... It's all Nintendo of Japan's fault? Or something? HEY LOOK OVER THERE! POKEMON X&Y!"
Nintendo runs away crying...
Gamers: "Hey everyone! Nintendo sucks! They are going to pull a SEGA and go third-party! *crosses fingers*"
Third parties: "Seems like the Wii U isn't popular, so I'm just going to not waste my money adding this multiplayer mode for the Wii U version of my new FPS/mature/GTA style game."
Third parties: "Looks like our new game didn't sell that great on Wii U! Shouldn't have wasted all that money making the last 4 levels of the single player campain on that version. Better focus on Xbox One development..."
Gamers: "OHHH SWEET XBOX ONE WITH PORTS OF ALL THE 360 GAMES I'VE BEEN WANTING ALL YEAR! LIKE CALL OF DUTY AND WATCH DOGS! LOL YOU KIDS AND YOUR KIDDY WII U!"
Well, maybe if they would have made a system that could compete spec wise with the other consoles of the generation that they are part of they wouldn't have had to compete for third party games with 7-8 year old consoles that people already own.
What incentive does someone who's had a 360 for 5 years have to buy a Wii U over a PS4 if what they're interested in is 3rd party games? This is where Nintendo playing it "safe" with the hardware is coming to bite them in the ass. And while people can try to spin it as being entitled consumers or whatever it is you're trying to do in your post, what it comes down to is Nintendo read the market completely wrong so far with the Wii U. Surprisingly people didn't want third party games that were only on par with the previous generation's versions of the same games but on a Nintendo platform.
The thing is...Nintendo just had incredible success with what you're implying is short-sightedness, with the Wii.
Not only that but their last two handhelds have been, in general, less powerful than the competitions, and smartphones, but have both been major successes.
Folks acting like it was obvious that a middle-ground move with the WiiU was bad are full of it, really; because that opinion itself is contrary to actual history.
It still boils down to Nintendo reading the market completely wrong. It still boils down to Nintendo not understanding what ended up selling the Wii in droves and that those people wouldn't be here this time around, no matter how many tablets you throw at them. They made a machine that is much more catered to traditional games control wise, without making it powerful enough for modern traditional games. Any loss of third party games because of lack of sales stems from that, not whiny consumers. Nintendo has to sell consumers and third parties on their product. So far they haven't.
And no, it was pretty damned obvious to me at how the Wii U would preform. In fact, I was saying this exact thing would happen well before the release of the system. It is incredibly short sighted to assume that the major surge of consumers from last generation are going to stick with you out of some sort of loyalty to your company for next generation. That has only happened once in console history as far as I know, and it was for Sony, not Nintendo... and it wasn't out of brand loyalty.
I mean, I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, but the last thing anyone should be doing is blaming the Wii U's current state on consumers. They didn't design/market/produce the system. And they have no obligation to buy it.
Let's be fair here, consumers marketed the system far more than Nintendo did.
Nintendo: We need some FPS games! Not enough of those in the world!
I know you are being sarcastic, but this is how I see it actually happening:
Gamers: "Hey Nintendo, I'd buy a Wii U if you ever made a good FPS/mature/GTA style game.
Nintendo: "We have the ones you're thinking of. Call of Duty: Ghosts, and Watch_Dogs I believe they are called. Please buy a Wii U!"
Gamers: "No, no, no... we want YOU to make a FPS/mature/GTA style game. YOU Nintendo! I'm buying CoD and Watchdogs on my Xbox 360!"
Nintendo: "Isn't that what third parties are for? Making games like that so we don't have to?"
Gamers: "Yeah, why don't you have more third party games! I'll buy a Wii U when you get the third party games I want."
Nintendo: "Oh, I see. We have the ones you're thinking of. Call of Duty: Ghosts, and Watch_Dogs I believe they are called. Please buy a Wii U!"
Gamers: "NO!!! I WANT THOSE BUT NOT ON WII U! I WANT NEW, ORIGINAL IP, MATURE FPS OR MATURE GTA STYLE GAMES ON WII U BEFORE I GET A WII U!"
Nintendo: "Umm... so we wasted our time getting those games on our platform?"
Gamers: "Look Nintendo here's the deal. No matter what you do, I will only buy a Nintendo system to play Nintendo-made games. But I also want Call of Duty type games. So YOU, NINTENDO, need to make those types of games for me. Because I won't buy third party games on your system even if they are the games I want. And since you don't have the right IP characters to use for that (although Metroid and Star Fox are close enough, if you REALLY need to use them), I also expect these new mature games to come hand-in-hand with a brand new beloved set of characters and worlds that you can milk until I get bored of them."
Nintendo: "Wouldn't it just be easier if you bought CoD and Watch_Dogs on Wii U? Those are the games you actually want to play anyway, and we did go to the trouble of putting them on the system for you, and I know Activision and Ubisoft have great ideas for the Gamepad..."
Gamers: "NO! WHY WOULD I BUY A WII U JUST TO PLAY EXCELLENT THIRD PARTY GAMES AND NINTENDO-MADE EXCLUSIVES, WHEN I COULD JUST BUY THOSE THIRD PARTY GAMES FOR MY XBOX AND HOPE YOU GO OUT OF BUSINESS SO I CAN PLAY MARIO ON MY XBOX TOO??? WHY DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND OUR LOGIC! LISTEN TO YOUR CUSTOMERS!!!"
Nintendo: "Umm... It's all Nintendo of Japan's fault? Or something? HEY LOOK OVER THERE! POKEMON X&Y!"
Nintendo runs away crying...
Gamers: "Hey everyone! Nintendo sucks! They are going to pull a SEGA and go third-party! *crosses fingers*"
Third parties: "Seems like the Wii U isn't popular, so I'm just going to not waste my money adding this multiplayer mode for the Wii U version of my new FPS/mature/GTA style game."
Third parties: "Looks like our new game didn't sell that great on Wii U! Shouldn't have wasted all that money making the last 4 levels of the single player campain on that version. Better focus on Xbox One development..."
Gamers: "OHHH SWEET XBOX ONE WITH PORTS OF ALL THE 360 GAMES I'VE BEEN WANTING ALL YEAR! LIKE CALL OF DUTY AND WATCH DOGS! LOL YOU KIDS AND YOUR KIDDY WII U!"
Well, maybe if they would have made a system that could compete spec wise with the other consoles of the generation that they are part of they wouldn't have had to compete for third party games with 7-8 year old consoles that people already own.
What incentive does someone who's had a 360 for 5 years have to buy a Wii U over a PS4 if what they're interested in is 3rd party games? This is where Nintendo playing it "safe" with the hardware is coming to bite them in the ass. And while people can try to spin it as being entitled consumers or whatever it is you're trying to do in your post, what it comes down to is Nintendo read the market completely wrong so far with the Wii U. Surprisingly people didn't want third party games that were only on par with the previous generation's versions of the same games but on a Nintendo platform.
The thing is...Nintendo just had incredible success with what you're implying is short-sightedness, with the Wii.
Not only that but their last two handhelds have been, in general, less powerful than the competitions, and smartphones, but have both been major successes.
Folks acting like it was obvious that a middle-ground move with the WiiU was bad are full of it, really; because that opinion itself is contrary to actual history.
It still boils down to Nintendo reading the market completely wrong. It still boils down to Nintendo not understanding what ended up selling the Wii in droves and that those people wouldn't be here this time around, no matter how many tablets you throw at them. They made a machine that is much more catered to traditional games control wise, without making it powerful enough for modern traditional games. Any loss of third party games because of lack of sales stems from that, not whiny consumers. Nintendo has to sell consumers and third parties on their product. So far they haven't.
And no, it was pretty damned obvious to me at how the Wii U would preform. In fact, I was saying this exact thing would happen well before the release of the system. It is incredibly short sighted to assume that the major surge of consumers from last generation are going to stick with you out of some sort of loyalty to your company for next generation. That has only happened once in console history as far as I know, and it was for Sony, not Nintendo... and it wasn't out of brand loyalty.
I mean, I'm not trying to be a dick or anything, but the last thing anyone should be doing is blaming the Wii U's current state on consumers. They didn't design/market/produce the system. And they have no obligation to buy it.
I don't think anyone rational is blaming it on the consumers, that dude with the absurd 'dialogue' was pretty random.
But I think it's just as disingenuous to lay it all at the feet of Nintendo, considering, again, they've been wildly successful not worrying about the power of their systems, particularly relative to their supposed competition.
I also am way past tired of the 'generational' argument, as if the WiiU can't handle good games or some nonsense. Probably the vast majority of games I've bought on the PC in the last year or two have been at worst moderately demanding, but more commonly they've been indie games that have the system requirements of a calculator; things the WiiU can handle perfectly fine. Will it run Watch Dogs as well as the PS4? No, but it will run it better than the PS3/360 and it provides a means for developers to do something more interesting with smaller indie games that don't even care about horsepower like Battlefield 4 or something.
Having said that, yeah, obviously, all the creativity in the world that smaller dev houses (or anyone really) could come up with for the wiiu doesn't amount to much when there's not enough of an install base for the WiiU to sell copies anyway.
However, that the reasoning behind it is much at all to do with horsepower I think is patently false, and I think has more to do with the economy, console fatigue, and piss poor promoting by Nintendo; that's where they misjudged, not anything with the hardware or technical specs.
I still fully believe that the WiiU will be, at worst, a Gamecube for Nintendo; a system that has a bunch of great games, classics, that pulls profits for Nintendo (over its life), but people who don't know what they're talking about will point to as some 'failure' because they don't understand how Nintendos financials don't work the same as their not-really-competition.
Your Nintendo. The Wii is on the decline and you have to launch new hardware soon. The problem is that you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Launch the Wii U with an equivalent power level of the PS4/XB1:
-super expensive at $400-$500
-slightly underpowered compared to the newer consoles launching a year later
-even more expensive if you add in the tablet
-gamers don't buy because the new consoles are out next year
-3rd parties don't support the system fully because they "can't go head-to-head with 1st party content" or still developing for 360/PS3 so full power not utilized
-gamers don't buy 3rd party games because they can get them on their 360/PS3
-3rd parties jump ship to newer consoles next year and port some games to the Wii U but never optimize them
-Nintendo loses lots of money on hardware sales
Launch with the Wii U in current form:
-less expensive at $350/$300
-extremely underpowered compared to the newer consoles launching a year later
-gamers don't buy because the new consoles are out next year
-3rd parties don't support the system fully because they "can't go head-to-head with 1st party content" or still developing for 360/PS3 so full power/features not utilized
-gamers don't buy 3rd party games because they can get them on their 360/PS3
-3rd parties jump ship to newer consoles next year and port some games to the Wii U but never optimize them
-Nintendo loses little to no money on hardware sales
-Nintendo falls into niche market and stays afloat from 1st party titles, indie games, and select 3rd party gems (see Gamecube)
To me, the biggest reasoning behind Nintendo's choice here was the inclusion of the tablet brought the price up so the money had to be saved in weakening the hardware. Given history, Nintendo knew that 3rd parties wouldn't support them. With no other product to fall back on (except the 3DS), Nintendo can't lose lots of money on hardware like MS and Sony.
Personally, I think Nintendo made the right long-term decision. If we could look into the future, we'll see that the Wii U will probably be the Gamecube 2. Profit will be made and a new system will be unveiled sometime in 2016 for a 2017 launch. Now THAT will be an interesting system with XB1 and PS4 hitting their first decline at year 4. Plus their might be this Steam thing to consider, which will be more of a headache to MS and Sony instead of Nintendo.
Need a voice actor? Hire me at bengrayVO.com
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051 Steam ID Twitch Page
If it had equivalent power to the PS4/One, why are you acting like it would be underpowered?
Can you see how that statement doesn't make any sense?
And if the One is pushing out a SKU with a Kinect at $500, I'd be willing to bet Nintendo could have done the same with their Game Pad
"It's too expensive" doesn't quite fly, because the Wii U is relatively cheap and selling like the plague and pre-orders for the new, more expensive systems are pretty insane
This hypothetical 'High Spec Nintendo Console' is problematic for a number of reasons.
Just look at what we have got from Sony and Microsoft this generation. It's a PC in a black box. It's the most linear, predictable iteration of console evolution. The PS4 in particular is bare basics hardware. Microsoft has tried to do more with Kinect and it's nearly priced them out of the competition.
So what would this 'High Spec Nintendo Console' be? A PS4 with a different logo on the front? A tablet controlled system with a price tag similar to the XBox? I believe that if Nintendo waltzed back into direct competition with the PS4 and XBox they would be no better off than the current situation with the Wii U.
I just want to throw out here that I kind of miss the days when developers had less power to work with, so they put more into it, and we ate it up. Like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: The Arcade Game. Far from arcade perfect, but damn if we weren't happy with it.
Hell, most people swear by the 2-player, voiceless, less powerful SNES Turtles in Time than by the 4-player, voiced, more powerful arcade version.
Never mind when they'd go about making something suited to the hardware, and wind up surpassing the arcade versions in overall experience: Contra, Super C, Bionic Commando, Ninja Gaiden...
Call me nostalgic, but can you blame me? *ducks onslaught of blame*
Incidentally, maybe that's part of why I've been largely mellow on the graphics/power front...
LBD_Nytetrayn on
Like Mega Man Legends? Then check out my story, Legends of the Halcyon Era - An Adventure in the World of Mega Man Legends on TMMN and AO3!
If it had equivalent power to the PS4/One, why are you acting like it would be underpowered?
Can you see how that statement doesn't make any sense?
And if the One is pushing out a SKU with a Kinect at $500, I'd be willing to bet Nintendo could have done the same with their Game Pad
"It's too expensive" doesn't quite fly, because the Wii U is relatively cheap and selling like the plague and pre-orders for the new, more expensive systems are pretty insane
Equivalent power is fine to you and I, but the perceived vision would be that it is underpowered since it launched first. Indeed it probably would be underpowered too, but nothing major (less processor speed, ram, etc). I guarantee you that no one would have bought the Wii U for $500, even with a tablet. Dead on arrival for sure. Microsoft can (barely) get away with that because gamers know that the 3rd party support will be there, but even so, they have taken a huge hit to the PS4 before the "console war" has even begun.
Again, I'm thinking of the masses and perceived value. $400-$500 for SUPER POWERED new systems is one thing, $350 for a 360/PS3 with a tablet is another.
Need a voice actor? Hire me at bengrayVO.com
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051 Steam ID Twitch Page
I just want to throw out here that I kind of miss the days when developers had less power to work with, so they put more into it, and we ate it up. Like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: The Arcade Game. Far from arcade perfect, but damn if we weren't happy with it.
Hell, most people swear by the 2-player, voiceless, less powerful SNES Turtles in Time than by the 4-player, voiced, more powerful arcade version.
Never mind when they'd go about making something suited to the hardware, and wind up surpassing the arcade versions in overall experience: Contra, Super C, Bionic Commando, Ninja Gaiden...
Call me nostalgic, but can you blame me? *ducks onslaught of blame*
Incidentally, maybe that's part of why I've been largely mellow on the graphics/power front...
This process still exists
All you have to do is own the most powerful console but not own a gaming PC
You'll get compromises all over the place, but damn if you won't be happy for what you get
There's no reason a higher-specced Wii U couldn't do all the cool unique stuff like Miiverse and Game Pad
It would simply add "actually gets multiplatform ports" to its system features
But there's no guarantee of that. In fact it's quite unlikely
The GameCube had issues with 3rd party support and it was probably the most powerful console of that generation.
The Wii had the largest install base last generation and 3rd party titles were scarce because a) Mature/violent titles didn't sell at all and b) only Nintendo titles did.
And the GamePad adds like $100 to the price of the console. The Mii-verse could have existed, but I think the drawing features from the GamePad add a lot to the experience.
Something to consider... things aren't particularly rosy on the other side of the fence either. Sure things look good for Activision, but there's plenty of 3rd party developers doing badly (Capcom, Squeenix). The XBox is going to have an uphill battle. Sony is selling the PS4 at a loss. Most multi-platform games can be played on the PC for cheaper (game price) and better graphics.
There's going to be a real shakeout in the next few years. When all is said and done, I think Nintendo the company will come out reasonably ok compared to some games companies.
Third-party titles were scarce because mature/violent titles didn't sell? How would you know how they sold if they weren't there? They got half-hearted shit on that front. A neutered Dead Rising and a light-gun gallery for Resident Evil instead of an actual RE title. Laughable attempts at Call of Duty ports (which apparently actually sold well) instead of something new and exciting for it.
And while there's no guarantee that they would get those third-party titles even with a more powerful system, a less-powerful system has guaranteed that they won't
And since we're talking about third-party stuff too and how things aren't so rosy, let's take a second and consider that indie games are "third party" stuff too, despite not coming from big publishers, and they seem to be doing reasonably well for themselves and have lined themselves up with Sony in a big way and, to a lesser extent, Microsoft.
The Wii U is looking pretty good for indie games isn't it?
Here's 20 games and I'm pretty excited for most of them.
The Wii U being lower spec isn't cutting it out of the Indie scene. Having off-screen play probably makes it the best platform.
What the Wii U is missing out on is the AAA titles. Some of these are legitimate disappointments (new Castlevania, Tomb Raider, MGS). But we are also talking about sequels, micro-transactions, short campaigns with DLC and a limited set of gameplay genres.
These are some of the best selling titles out there, but for me personally the Wii U has a much fresher line-up: Ninty 1st party titles, Indie games, good retro options and a smattering of interesting 3rd party titles. It's not the one system to rule them all, and public opinion is certainly against it, but I think it's actually a really well rounded game console.
There's no reason a higher-specced Wii U couldn't do all the cool unique stuff like Miiverse and Game Pad
It would simply add "actually gets multiplatform ports" to its system features
You think third parties are going to make games for the platform, just because?
People still need to buy the console and show that they are willing to buy third party games on it before the third parties will go there. They're not just going to show up because the power is there.
And nobody would buy the console because it's Nintendo and they've got a stigma about doing online poorly and not having achievements etc. and yet it's just as expensive as the other guys. Everyone is always going to buy every third party game elsewhere, forever.
So instead, you make a cheaper machine, hoping that price alone will help. Nobody was going to buy those third party games anyway.
There's no reason a higher-specced Wii U couldn't do all the cool unique stuff like Miiverse and Game Pad
It would simply add "actually gets multiplatform ports" to its system features
C'mon son, history has shown this isn't guaranteed. The Gamecube followed the power arm race, being equal to the Xbox and more powerful than the PS2, but third party software was something it rarely saw.
The problem with Nintendo is that ever since the post 16-bit era, they have had nothing but shaky relationships with third parties. I fully believe that if Nintendo followed the arms race now, and made a powerhouse machine to rival the PS4/Xbone, they would be in a much more dire situation.
Chances are they would still be skipped over by the same third parties skipping over them now (such as, for example, the many current gen games still not coming out to the WiiU). Nintendo would still have to make up the bulk of the support like they have since the N64. It sucks, but that's the life of Nintendo and the burden of the Nintendo fan.
It's why the ideal solution any more is basically to make Nintendo's system a companion to another system...that way you can get the best of both worlds. Just my 2 cents.
I don't mind Nintendo missing a few multiplatform games. However, I do hope they can keep some relationships - specifically I hope they stay tight with Sega. I think that the two companies have a lot in common in terms of not being afraid to put out family friendly, bright colored games that are just plain fun.
I still say if Nintendo moneyhatted just one game - a Nintendo themed Minecraft edition - it would be the biggest help they could have right now for sales.
I think Nintendo has proven time and again they are willing to get by on 90% first party titles. There's nothing wrong with that. They're not trying hard to compete to get people to buy the new Call of Duty game on Wii instead of Xbox/Playstation. They COULD compete in that space if they were willing to put in the effort to do so, but their actions show that even when they try, they're not trying that hard.
If they can make their system a little cheaper than the others with differentiating factors(Motion last gen, Gamepad this gen) and still put out Mario, Zelda, etc. then there's no problem for them.
I get that people who want to only buy one console per generation will be bummed that they can't just get a Wii U and get the Nintendo stuff as well as all the 3rd party goodies, but it's just not in the cards.
Thing is, if you have a Wii U and then you just pick one of the following PC/PS4/XBox One then you will only miss a few exclusives and you'll be good to go. If you can only afford one system then you should probably go with a PS4/Xbox/PC only, and just miss out on the few Mario/Zelda games that come out this gen.
Or just save like a tiny amount of money, like 20 bucks a month and in a couple years buy whatever system you want when the libraries are nice and robust.
First of all, it would be guaranteed that the Wii U would be weaker than the XBOne and PS4 by launching a year earlier even if they had a similar architecture because the current state of both systems was only finalized in the last year or so. They got lucky on some RAM price points/production capacities, and parts yields (among other things). I also doubt it would have been an attractive proposition to those already married to Sony and Microsoft since it would have had a high price point, likely forcing consumers to make it their only console choice, and as it was everyone was taking a "wait and see" approach.
Also, telling Nintendo to go third party is silly. Right now they either make money on every console sold or lose so little they make it up in a couple of game sales. In addition they make money on every single game sold due to licensing fees. On their own titles they get the full sale after retailers take their cut. If they went third party then not only would they lose a larger portion of all of their game revenue, they would lose the additional income from third party game sales as well as hardware sales (including accessories/peripherals).
Not sure if Moneyhat is the right word here. Nintendo funded development of W101 as a first party title. Platinum approached Nintendo with an idea to fund a game that was like a Nintendo allstars type game, but Nintendo asked them to make it original instead. So then we got W101, a Nintendo owned IP by Platinum.
Bayonetta 2 could technically be called a moneyhat if you wanted, but then again, Sega didn't want to front the money for another Platinum sales disappointment, so Nintendo picked up funding development.
Yeah. I intend to get a PS4 as my secondary system.
Still gonna get whatever game's do come multiplatform on the Wii U, and use the PS4 for games that either miss the U, or pull an Arkham Origins.
Did the Arkham Origins WiiU port get cancelled?
I think he's referring to the missing multiplayer mode.
Bingo.
However, it did get a price drop for the Wii U version specifically, so I might still get it.
0
Options
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
The only reason I'm still getting Origins on my PS3 is because I have a need for game uniformity. I have Asylum and City on the PS3, so I must get Origins on the PS3.
Oh yeah I forgot about the dropped multiplayer and the resulting reduced price. I was thinking about getting Batman on PC, but I may reconsider because of that. Also GFWL is still not dead yet right, I don't want to deal with that again. Though I wonder what's gonna happen to my other Batmans on my PC once that goes away.
for my next game. Even if i pace those out to one a month to six weeks I start bumping into other games that I bought I would like. This is not counting Earthbound and other stuff. I'm really happy with the prospects for this system for at least a year.
for my next game. Even if i pace those out to one a month to six weeks I start bumping into other games that I bought I would like. This is not counting Earthbound and other stuff. I'm really happy with the prospects for this system for at least a year.
Pikmin and Wonderful 101 are both fantastic.
Sonic looks to continue the upward trend of Sonic games.
Speaking of Sonic, I cannot be alone when I say that I would snap up a port of Generations to the WiiU in an instant. Even though I already have it on my PS3, I would still rebuy it. Sonic just feels better on a Nintendo system to me.
I know 3rd party support for the Gamecube wasn't phenomenal, but it was certainly better than the Wii (assuming you're ignoring the shovelware). So yeah, I think there's a certain amount of support you'd get just because you have comparable specs to the other guys.
I don't think the Wii U's "power curve" or whatever has much of an effect on next-gen ports coming to it. I do think that the architecture difference is going to, let's say, "inspire" developers to skip it when porting between X1/PS4/PC.
Really, now that I've owned one for a few weeks, the biggest problem I can see in their future is that their online services and social capabilities are going to be way, way behind the pack.
I don't think the Wii U's "power curve" or whatever has much of an effect on next-gen ports coming to it. I do think that the architecture difference is going to, let's say, "inspire" developers to skip it when porting between X1/PS4/PC.
Really, now that I've owned one for a few weeks, the biggest problem I can see in their future is that their online services and social capabilities are going to be way, way behind the pack.
Did you mean like with a lack of streming video and stuff? I must be old, but I prefer the Facebook-like "post a picture and add a comment" thing to the streaming video options, but I realize that I'm a strange backward individual who hardly represents the average consumer.
And the adoption rate of nintendo consoles is a lot like politics: image is what's important, not truth. Nintendo's image is family-friendly because when they got into games most of us were children and children were the only people who cared about video games. Now those people are grown up, most modern children are playing Angry Birds or Minecraft (depending on age) and the only people interested in Nintendo products are nostalgia addicts, kids who grow up in households where parents provide nintendo products because they remember them from their youth and odd ducks like me who this generation went, "You know what? I think I'm rather done with shooters with regenerating health and chest high walls and mild rpg elements. I think I'm gunna go play somewhere where I can get some color and varity."
Nintendo is synonomous with Mario and it should be because Mario is awesome, but he's the mascot we deserve and not the mascot people want right now. What they want is Master Chief and Nathan Drake. But to each their own right?
Given the meteoric rise of the 3DS, especially in Japan, I'm sure Nintendo will have enough time and money to rethink their strategy going into their next generation of hardware. I've heard people kick around the idea of a significantly more powerful DS style handheld that can stream to your TV and if they could make that work, I think there could be a future in that (assuming the price tag doesn't get in the way.) Especially since I've felt like if a goodly number of games made for the 3DS as of late (for the sake of argument, let's say it was Fire Emblem, Luigi's Mansion aaaaaaand SMT IV) if made for the Wii U would definately push sales even if they weren't significantly nicer looking. They're just flippin' good games. If they could condense their focus down to a single platform, one that is mobile for their Japanese market, but fully capable of letting you play on a big screen TV and a comfy couch if you so desired for the NA audience (and maybe the EU audience too? Sorry, I'm not sure exactly what you guys want from your gaming experience either way) then they could cover all bases and release the maximum number of quality games for one format. Probably entirely impossible, but it would be cool.
Nintendo Network ID: Oniros
3DS Friend Code: 1461-7489-3097
Did you mean like with a lack of streming video and stuff? I must be old, but I prefer the Facebook-like "post a picture and add a comment" thing to the streaming video options, but I realize that I'm a strange backward individual who hardly represents the average consumer.
Posts
Let's be fair here, consumers marketed the system far more than Nintendo did.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
I don't think anyone rational is blaming it on the consumers, that dude with the absurd 'dialogue' was pretty random.
But I think it's just as disingenuous to lay it all at the feet of Nintendo, considering, again, they've been wildly successful not worrying about the power of their systems, particularly relative to their supposed competition.
I also am way past tired of the 'generational' argument, as if the WiiU can't handle good games or some nonsense. Probably the vast majority of games I've bought on the PC in the last year or two have been at worst moderately demanding, but more commonly they've been indie games that have the system requirements of a calculator; things the WiiU can handle perfectly fine. Will it run Watch Dogs as well as the PS4? No, but it will run it better than the PS3/360 and it provides a means for developers to do something more interesting with smaller indie games that don't even care about horsepower like Battlefield 4 or something.
Having said that, yeah, obviously, all the creativity in the world that smaller dev houses (or anyone really) could come up with for the wiiu doesn't amount to much when there's not enough of an install base for the WiiU to sell copies anyway.
However, that the reasoning behind it is much at all to do with horsepower I think is patently false, and I think has more to do with the economy, console fatigue, and piss poor promoting by Nintendo; that's where they misjudged, not anything with the hardware or technical specs.
I still fully believe that the WiiU will be, at worst, a Gamecube for Nintendo; a system that has a bunch of great games, classics, that pulls profits for Nintendo (over its life), but people who don't know what they're talking about will point to as some 'failure' because they don't understand how Nintendos financials don't work the same as their not-really-competition.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Launch the Wii U with an equivalent power level of the PS4/XB1:
-super expensive at $400-$500
-slightly underpowered compared to the newer consoles launching a year later
-even more expensive if you add in the tablet
-gamers don't buy because the new consoles are out next year
-3rd parties don't support the system fully because they "can't go head-to-head with 1st party content" or still developing for 360/PS3 so full power not utilized
-gamers don't buy 3rd party games because they can get them on their 360/PS3
-3rd parties jump ship to newer consoles next year and port some games to the Wii U but never optimize them
-Nintendo loses lots of money on hardware sales
Launch with the Wii U in current form:
-less expensive at $350/$300
-extremely underpowered compared to the newer consoles launching a year later
-gamers don't buy because the new consoles are out next year
-3rd parties don't support the system fully because they "can't go head-to-head with 1st party content" or still developing for 360/PS3 so full power/features not utilized
-gamers don't buy 3rd party games because they can get them on their 360/PS3
-3rd parties jump ship to newer consoles next year and port some games to the Wii U but never optimize them
-Nintendo loses little to no money on hardware sales
-Nintendo falls into niche market and stays afloat from 1st party titles, indie games, and select 3rd party gems (see Gamecube)
To me, the biggest reasoning behind Nintendo's choice here was the inclusion of the tablet brought the price up so the money had to be saved in weakening the hardware. Given history, Nintendo knew that 3rd parties wouldn't support them. With no other product to fall back on (except the 3DS), Nintendo can't lose lots of money on hardware like MS and Sony.
Personally, I think Nintendo made the right long-term decision. If we could look into the future, we'll see that the Wii U will probably be the Gamecube 2. Profit will be made and a new system will be unveiled sometime in 2016 for a 2017 launch. Now THAT will be an interesting system with XB1 and PS4 hitting their first decline at year 4. Plus their might be this Steam thing to consider, which will be more of a headache to MS and Sony instead of Nintendo.
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051
Steam ID
Twitch Page
Can you see how that statement doesn't make any sense?
And if the One is pushing out a SKU with a Kinect at $500, I'd be willing to bet Nintendo could have done the same with their Game Pad
"It's too expensive" doesn't quite fly, because the Wii U is relatively cheap and selling like the plague and pre-orders for the new, more expensive systems are pretty insane
Just look at what we have got from Sony and Microsoft this generation. It's a PC in a black box. It's the most linear, predictable iteration of console evolution. The PS4 in particular is bare basics hardware. Microsoft has tried to do more with Kinect and it's nearly priced them out of the competition.
So what would this 'High Spec Nintendo Console' be? A PS4 with a different logo on the front? A tablet controlled system with a price tag similar to the XBox? I believe that if Nintendo waltzed back into direct competition with the PS4 and XBox they would be no better off than the current situation with the Wii U.
It would simply add "actually gets multiplatform ports" to its system features
Hell, most people swear by the 2-player, voiceless, less powerful SNES Turtles in Time than by the 4-player, voiced, more powerful arcade version.
Never mind when they'd go about making something suited to the hardware, and wind up surpassing the arcade versions in overall experience: Contra, Super C, Bionic Commando, Ninja Gaiden...
Call me nostalgic, but can you blame me? *ducks onslaught of blame*
Incidentally, maybe that's part of why I've been largely mellow on the graphics/power front...
Like Mega Man Legends? Then check out my story, Legends of the Halcyon Era - An Adventure in the World of Mega Man Legends on TMMN and AO3!
Equivalent power is fine to you and I, but the perceived vision would be that it is underpowered since it launched first. Indeed it probably would be underpowered too, but nothing major (less processor speed, ram, etc). I guarantee you that no one would have bought the Wii U for $500, even with a tablet. Dead on arrival for sure. Microsoft can (barely) get away with that because gamers know that the 3rd party support will be there, but even so, they have taken a huge hit to the PS4 before the "console war" has even begun.
Again, I'm thinking of the masses and perceived value. $400-$500 for SUPER POWERED new systems is one thing, $350 for a 360/PS3 with a tablet is another.
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051
Steam ID
Twitch Page
This process still exists
All you have to do is own the most powerful console but not own a gaming PC
You'll get compromises all over the place, but damn if you won't be happy for what you get
But there's no guarantee of that. In fact it's quite unlikely
The GameCube had issues with 3rd party support and it was probably the most powerful console of that generation.
The Wii had the largest install base last generation and 3rd party titles were scarce because a) Mature/violent titles didn't sell at all and b) only Nintendo titles did.
And the GamePad adds like $100 to the price of the console. The Mii-verse could have existed, but I think the drawing features from the GamePad add a lot to the experience.
Something to consider... things aren't particularly rosy on the other side of the fence either. Sure things look good for Activision, but there's plenty of 3rd party developers doing badly (Capcom, Squeenix). The XBox is going to have an uphill battle. Sony is selling the PS4 at a loss. Most multi-platform games can be played on the PC for cheaper (game price) and better graphics.
There's going to be a real shakeout in the next few years. When all is said and done, I think Nintendo the company will come out reasonably ok compared to some games companies.
Third-party titles were scarce because mature/violent titles didn't sell? How would you know how they sold if they weren't there? They got half-hearted shit on that front. A neutered Dead Rising and a light-gun gallery for Resident Evil instead of an actual RE title. Laughable attempts at Call of Duty ports (which apparently actually sold well) instead of something new and exciting for it.
And while there's no guarantee that they would get those third-party titles even with a more powerful system, a less-powerful system has guaranteed that they won't
And since we're talking about third-party stuff too and how things aren't so rosy, let's take a second and consider that indie games are "third party" stuff too, despite not coming from big publishers, and they seem to be doing reasonably well for themselves and have lined themselves up with Sony in a big way and, to a lesser extent, Microsoft.
Here's 20 games and I'm pretty excited for most of them.
The Wii U being lower spec isn't cutting it out of the Indie scene. Having off-screen play probably makes it the best platform.
What the Wii U is missing out on is the AAA titles. Some of these are legitimate disappointments (new Castlevania, Tomb Raider, MGS). But we are also talking about sequels, micro-transactions, short campaigns with DLC and a limited set of gameplay genres.
These are some of the best selling titles out there, but for me personally the Wii U has a much fresher line-up: Ninty 1st party titles, Indie games, good retro options and a smattering of interesting 3rd party titles. It's not the one system to rule them all, and public opinion is certainly against it, but I think it's actually a really well rounded game console.
A highly controversial opinion, good sir.
You think third parties are going to make games for the platform, just because?
People still need to buy the console and show that they are willing to buy third party games on it before the third parties will go there. They're not just going to show up because the power is there.
And nobody would buy the console because it's Nintendo and they've got a stigma about doing online poorly and not having achievements etc. and yet it's just as expensive as the other guys. Everyone is always going to buy every third party game elsewhere, forever.
So instead, you make a cheaper machine, hoping that price alone will help. Nobody was going to buy those third party games anyway.
C'mon son, history has shown this isn't guaranteed. The Gamecube followed the power arm race, being equal to the Xbox and more powerful than the PS2, but third party software was something it rarely saw.
The problem with Nintendo is that ever since the post 16-bit era, they have had nothing but shaky relationships with third parties. I fully believe that if Nintendo followed the arms race now, and made a powerhouse machine to rival the PS4/Xbone, they would be in a much more dire situation.
Chances are they would still be skipped over by the same third parties skipping over them now (such as, for example, the many current gen games still not coming out to the WiiU). Nintendo would still have to make up the bulk of the support like they have since the N64. It sucks, but that's the life of Nintendo and the burden of the Nintendo fan.
It's why the ideal solution any more is basically to make Nintendo's system a companion to another system...that way you can get the best of both worlds. Just my 2 cents.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Still gonna get whatever game's do come multiplatform on the Wii U, and use the PS4 for games that either miss the U, or pull an Arkham Origins.
Nintendo likes to make cheap consoles that are fun.
I still say if Nintendo moneyhatted just one game - a Nintendo themed Minecraft edition - it would be the biggest help they could have right now for sales.
If they can make their system a little cheaper than the others with differentiating factors(Motion last gen, Gamepad this gen) and still put out Mario, Zelda, etc. then there's no problem for them.
I get that people who want to only buy one console per generation will be bummed that they can't just get a Wii U and get the Nintendo stuff as well as all the 3rd party goodies, but it's just not in the cards.
Thing is, if you have a Wii U and then you just pick one of the following PC/PS4/XBox One then you will only miss a few exclusives and you'll be good to go. If you can only afford one system then you should probably go with a PS4/Xbox/PC only, and just miss out on the few Mario/Zelda games that come out this gen.
Or just save like a tiny amount of money, like 20 bucks a month and in a couple years buy whatever system you want when the libraries are nice and robust.
Also, telling Nintendo to go third party is silly. Right now they either make money on every console sold or lose so little they make it up in a couple of game sales. In addition they make money on every single game sold due to licensing fees. On their own titles they get the full sale after retailers take their cut. If they went third party then not only would they lose a larger portion of all of their game revenue, they would lose the additional income from third party game sales as well as hardware sales (including accessories/peripherals).
Did the Arkham Origins WiiU port get cancelled?
I think he's referring to the missing multiplayer mode.
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
Not sure if Moneyhat is the right word here. Nintendo funded development of W101 as a first party title. Platinum approached Nintendo with an idea to fund a game that was like a Nintendo allstars type game, but Nintendo asked them to make it original instead. So then we got W101, a Nintendo owned IP by Platinum.
Bayonetta 2 could technically be called a moneyhat if you wanted, but then again, Sega didn't want to front the money for another Platinum sales disappointment, so Nintendo picked up funding development.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Bingo.
However, it did get a price drop for the Wii U version specifically, so I might still get it.
I'm crazy! :rotate:
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Pikmin
Rayman Legends
W101
Wario
Sonic
for my next game. Even if i pace those out to one a month to six weeks I start bumping into other games that I bought I would like. This is not counting Earthbound and other stuff. I'm really happy with the prospects for this system for at least a year.
Nintendo ID: Pastalonius
Smite\LoL:Gremlidin \ WoW & Overwatch & Hots: Gremlidin#1734
3ds: 3282-2248-0453
Pikmin and Wonderful 101 are both fantastic.
Sonic looks to continue the upward trend of Sonic games.
Speaking of Sonic, I cannot be alone when I say that I would snap up a port of Generations to the WiiU in an instant. Even though I already have it on my PS3, I would still rebuy it. Sonic just feels better on a Nintendo system to me.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Really, now that I've owned one for a few weeks, the biggest problem I can see in their future is that their online services and social capabilities are going to be way, way behind the pack.
Nintendo Friend Code: SW-0689-9921-0006
I cannot wait for X though.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
It looks awesome.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Did you mean like with a lack of streming video and stuff? I must be old, but I prefer the Facebook-like "post a picture and add a comment" thing to the streaming video options, but I realize that I'm a strange backward individual who hardly represents the average consumer.
And the adoption rate of nintendo consoles is a lot like politics: image is what's important, not truth. Nintendo's image is family-friendly because when they got into games most of us were children and children were the only people who cared about video games. Now those people are grown up, most modern children are playing Angry Birds or Minecraft (depending on age) and the only people interested in Nintendo products are nostalgia addicts, kids who grow up in households where parents provide nintendo products because they remember them from their youth and odd ducks like me who this generation went, "You know what? I think I'm rather done with shooters with regenerating health and chest high walls and mild rpg elements. I think I'm gunna go play somewhere where I can get some color and varity."
Nintendo is synonomous with Mario and it should be because Mario is awesome, but he's the mascot we deserve and not the mascot people want right now. What they want is Master Chief and Nathan Drake. But to each their own right?
Given the meteoric rise of the 3DS, especially in Japan, I'm sure Nintendo will have enough time and money to rethink their strategy going into their next generation of hardware. I've heard people kick around the idea of a significantly more powerful DS style handheld that can stream to your TV and if they could make that work, I think there could be a future in that (assuming the price tag doesn't get in the way.) Especially since I've felt like if a goodly number of games made for the 3DS as of late (for the sake of argument, let's say it was Fire Emblem, Luigi's Mansion aaaaaaand SMT IV) if made for the Wii U would definately push sales even if they weren't significantly nicer looking. They're just flippin' good games. If they could condense their focus down to a single platform, one that is mobile for their Japanese market, but fully capable of letting you play on a big screen TV and a comfy couch if you so desired for the NA audience (and maybe the EU audience too? Sorry, I'm not sure exactly what you guys want from your gaming experience either way) then they could cover all bases and release the maximum number of quality games for one format. Probably entirely impossible, but it would be cool.
3DS Friend Code: 1461-7489-3097