Nintendo Warns of Weak Wii U Sales

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#-49 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

What really strikes me as odd is how pitiful the software schedule is currently looking for the Wii U.

Save Rayman and Monster Hunter, there are no truly notable exclusives coming for months and worse, most of the AAA multiplats are not being ported to the system.  

In many ways, the Wii U is far worse than a current gen system because it doesntt even get to enjoy the full breadth of software currently being released on the PS3 and XB360.

What a colossal blunder.

#-48 Posted by Bigboi500 (29053 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

Everything is unsubstantiated at this point. Did Sony learn from thier mistakes with PSP and apply them with Vita? And LOL, if I'm a "Nintendo apologist" and "Nintendophile", then that clearly makes you a HD twin console ass-kisser. I'm getting very tired of your off-handed insults every time we talk about consoles. If you can't tone them down then please stop quoting me and trying to have conversations with me in the future. I didn't come to this forum to have a sh*t-slinging fanboy war with posters.

Grammaton-Cleric

Your response to Shamus was snarky, as was your response to me. I've read plenty of your musings and you clearly have a hard-on for Nintendo and that zealous love clouds your ability to read the current situation objectively, which is why you are clinging to some remote hope that Sony launches the PS4 with an excessively expensive price tag.

As to your pejoratives, not only do I have absolutely no concern over how you view me, anybody who has ever read my posts knows I'm agnostic when it comes to this medium. While I have my favorites, those predilections are predicated entirely on the quality of software rather than some banal, mind-numbing brand loyalty rooted in some pitiful nostalgic devotion to a company. I have no problem pointing out the many flaws of the HD Twins, though, in response to your juvenile proclamation, I would assert that those systems are far more deserving of veneration than the Wii.

And I really don't much care what you are tired of because you came into MY thread to defend your favorite little company. I can't recall ever insulting you or showing you the type of overt discourtesy you have demonstrated here but if you choose to discontinue any future correspondence I'll manage to pick up the pieces and go on.  

Calling me those "nintendophile" and "nintendo apologist" is no different than me calling you an "xbot" or "mad cow" etc. I enjoy coming to this board for the (usually) mature discussions, yet you constantly call me those names, and even went after me by accusing me of being a blind Nintendo fanboy just because I said SMG2 was my favorite game of the generation.

 

Fact is, I appreciate all three consoles this gen and sue me if I like Nintendo and try to defend them when I think it's justified. I probably have supported Sony more this generation more than you have. All I ask is that you stop trying to label me as a blind Nintendo fanboy when that's absolutely not true. There's no reason to be so aggressive towards me over my opinions, just because they differ from your preferences and beliefs.

#-47 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]I didn't come to this forum to have a sh*t-slinging fanboy war with posters.GodModeEnabled
Aren't you a system wars poster? I don't remember ever seeing you here over the last several years.

Bigboi500 has been around for a while. Your whirlwind romance with BlackKnight has blinded you from the rest of the world/forum. :P

He's a pretty decent poster too. Dont treat him like a Nintendo fanboy. He's like dvader... just a bit too in love with Nintendo games. ;p

#-46 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -
lol Vader you said it had the worst campaign of any of the main games, that it was overpriced at $50, and that the only reason to own the game is some lame ass other mode called raid mode. All of this sounds like a complete failure of a game to me. Don't you remember any of this? o_0GodModeEnabled
I gave the game a 9. The campaign is right around zero, yes one of the worst for RE but that is still GREAT. And believe me many people love the campaign simg cause its slower paced. Raid mode is the greatest thing ever, it is not a lame mode, it is better than the campaign an the main reason to get the game in my opinion. Yes I think $50 is steep cause its a portable game being ported, plus I have it so I am not paying that. As I said most people will enjoy it far more than RE6 so if you pay full price for that this is worth it. What I am against are the people that claim this is some magical RE game that brings back the old school and is better than the new RE.
#-45 Posted by Bigboi500 (29053 posts) -

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"][QUOTE="Bigboi500"]I didn't come to this forum to have a sh*t-slinging fanboy war with posters.S0lidSnake

Aren't you a system wars poster? I don't remember ever seeing you here over the last several years.

Bigboi500 has been around for a while. Your whirlwind romance with BlackKnight has blinded you from the rest of the world/forum. :P

He's a pretty decent poster too. Dont treat him like a Nintendo fanboy. He's like dvader... just a bit too in love with Nintendo games. ;p

I guess I love Nintendo like you do Sony. :P  Actually I love Sony too. But thanks for that.

#-44 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18159 posts) -

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

True enough.

To be fair I get pretty heated when I see people making the same excuses that I've been reading for fifteen years regarding Nintendo so perhaps you are right.

The irony is, I really would like Nintendo to return to their former glory. I just don't think it will happen.

Grammaton-Cleric

Once you sell out, you can never go home again

Christ that is a sad sentiment.

And yet, you may be right.

It is sad, it's a matter of mathematics though: by catering to pretens and soccermoms, Nintendo has sold a staggering 100 million Wii units in 6 years and 153 million DS units in 8. At this point there's no chance in hell they could ever justify in front of their shareholders a change of direction which would decrease the product appeal on the most lucrative slice of the market. They can't go back, even if they wanted.
#-43 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -

I have all these thoughts on Nintendo. So many, in fact, that it is hard (impossible perhaps) to summarize them all. However, here are a few:

I feel that the market is reaching back towards normalcy after a really bad bout of popculture-itis. The Wii was a machine that sold in spite of every reason in the world why it shouldn't have. The Wii was a threat to the business (I felt) because it tried (and succeeded for a while) to sell the notion that conventional gaming experiences sucked and needed to be changed through reverse evolution, and had that continued, I feel it would have fvcked the whole industry even more than it already has. 

I feel remorseful, because the Wii U is more of a conventional machine than the Wii, and it's doing worse. However, I don't think a Wii 2 would have done any better. Just as Kinect hasn't helped Microsoft (their sales have dropped, not increased since its release), I think the market has moved on to tablets and cell phones, and that consoles have to come back and make the case for CONSOLES again. Not multimedia devices. Not movie spooling. Not music streamers. GAME CONSOLES. That is NOT a shameful term, it's a proud term, with a rich history that has survived for a long time. 

I feel glad, because machines with gimmicks and no games should not be rewarded with stellar sales. Content has driven sales and predicted generational dominance forever prior to the Wii. That long established trend looks set to resume (although we can't say for sure -- Microsoft has its head so far up its ass that it could make its entire thrust be motion based, and well, Sony IS Sony) and the best third-party offerings and exclusives will again determine who succeeds and who doesn't. There are really good signs of a market correction occurring, and well, that works for me just fine.


I feel vindicated, because outside of a few specialty products, games should be built around concepts, NOT CONTROLLERS. Especially controllers that are limiting or otherwise don't work. This was the hardest thing for me to understand last generation... I witnessed smart people who love games trying to convince themselves that using an inferior control method was more fun. All the way back to the 2600, there was a reason that the paddles were only used in an ancillary capacity, and that was because they SUCKED for 95 percent of the games on the system (and brother, there were a LOT of games on the 2600). It's also the same reason that ROB the robot never took off, and that was because ROB's presence didn't add anything to the game. It was a bullshlt gimmick. Trackballs. Racing wheels. And on. And on. And on. There was a reason why they were called peripherals. Last generation, we witnessed the peripheral become the standard, and look at the results. 

So yeah, there's a few. I'm done with Nintendo, and I'm not surprised to see the sun setting on the Blue Ocean era, but there is also a part of me that grew up with the company and knows what they are capable of when they are at their best, and I only wish that one day that company could resurface again. 

Shame-usBlackley
I have been seeing gamers like me who have played games forever that are absolutely 100% opposed to ANYTHING that is different from what they are used to. Who refuse to allow this medium to actually move forward with new ways to control. It is ridiculous that we are still using the same things we have been using for 30 years. Games can be better with new modes of input. As I have said over and over the wii is just a starting point, motion controls does not mean every game should have waggle. Now let me get back to HOTD Overkill which is IMPOSSIBLE to enjoy in the same way without MOVE.
#-42 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

 I have been seeing gamers like me who have played games forever that are absolutely 100% opposed to ANYTHING that is different from what they are used to. Who refuse to allow this medium to actually move forward with new ways to control. It is ridiculous that we are still using the same things we have been using for 30 years. Games can be better with new modes of input. As I have said over and over the wii is just a starting point, motion controls does not mean every game should have waggle. Now let me get back to HOTD Overkill which is IMPOSSIBLE to enjoy in the same way without MOVE.dvader654

vader, Sony is listening to you. They are including a revamped Dual Shock and a move controller with an Eye Toy with every PS4. So you get the best of both worlds and nothing is compromised in the process. 

#-41 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -
You think they're bad now, wait for E3 when the new xbox is announcedBlack_Knight_00
Can't wait. ( Go Sony! :p)
#-40 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -

[QUOTE="dvader654"] I have been seeing gamers like me who have played games forever that are absolutely 100% opposed to ANYTHING that is different from what they are used to. Who refuse to allow this medium to actually move forward with new ways to control. It is ridiculous that we are still using the same things we have been using for 30 years. Games can be better with new modes of input. As I have said over and over the wii is just a starting point, motion controls does not mean every game should have waggle. Now let me get back to HOTD Overkill which is IMPOSSIBLE to enjoy in the same way without MOVE.S0lidSnake

vader, Sony is listening to you. They are including a revamped Dual Shock and a move controller with an Eye Toy with every PS4. So you get the best of both worlds and nothing is compromised in the process. 

And that is why I love my Playstation.
#-39 Posted by c_rakestraw (14579 posts) -

What really strikes me as odd is how pitiful the software schedule is currently looking for the Wii U.

Save Rayman and Monster Hunter, there are no truly notable exclusives coming for months and worse, most of the AAA multiplats are not being ported to the system.  

In many ways, the Wii U is far worse than a current gen system because it doesntt even get to enjoy the full breadth of software currently being released on the PS3 and XB360.

What a colossal blunder.

Grammaton-Cleric

I think it's because it came out at such a weird time.

Most of what's coming down the pipeline for the PS3 and Xbox are likely so close to completion that starting work on another version isn't lucrative enough to justify. And with a couple new consoles coming this year, I doubt many are going to want to make many more games for for the PS3 and 360, which would be the Wii U's quickest means of gaining software.

The Wii wasn't much better in its first year, but it came out at the right time to ensure that, if anyone was gonna be making games for it, they were making games for the Wii. Helped that it was flying off shelves, too -- good incentive for the time. Right now, they don't have any of that. The 360 was sort of like that as well in its first year, if I'm not mistaken. Just one of the problems of being the first out of the gate. (Not that Nintendo had any choice in the matter. Had to be first if they wanted a chance at some success with this thing.)

#-38 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18159 posts) -
[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]You think they're bad now, wait for E3 when the new xbox is announceddvader654
Can't wait. ( Go Sony! :p)

Yeah. As soon as it's confirmed the PS4 has party chat I'll say goodbye to microsoft for good.
#-37 Posted by Lucky_Krystal (1730 posts) -

Ok soooo...

I'm trying to put things into perspective. This is actually the first gen where I'm actively following how the consoles are fairing in the market and what kind of games they have. So, serious question: Is the Wii U in the same boat as the PS3 when it first came out or is it even worse off?

I may not have followed the news of the PS3 after launch but I do remember the whole "PS3 HAZ NO GAEMESSS!!" thing around the time it first came out. That and its insane $600 price tag. Also it seems to me that people are really quick to predict the doom and gloom early on in a console's life cycle. Before its even out a year it seems people are quick to jump "it suckz, haz no gamez, itz gonna fail!!!111" bandwagon (people seem to be doing this with the Vita as well).

And I'm not saying you're doing that TC, its just a general observation. That and it seems like history is repeating itself. Perhaps Nintendo would benefit from a price cut to the Wii U as well. Ok lastly, did any of the older consoles go through this? It seems to me that it makes sense that a new system that just came out a few months ago wouldn't have a nice selection of games. That, and sales would really pick up one or two years after its launch after more quality games come out and a possible price cut. But did any the older console come out, guns blazing with an unbeatable price that sold like hot cakes right off the bat? Or were any of them in a similar predicament?

Just curious...

#-36 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

What really strikes me as odd is how pitiful the software schedule is currently looking for the Wii U.

Save Rayman and Monster Hunter, there are no truly notable exclusives coming for months and worse, most of the AAA multiplats are not being ported to the system.  

In many ways, the Wii U is far worse than a current gen system because it doesntt even get to enjoy the full breadth of software currently being released on the PS3 and XB360.

What a colossal blunder.

c_rake

I think it's because it came out at such a weird time.

Most of what's coming down the pipeline for the PS3 and Xbox are likely so close to completion that starting work on another version isn't lucrative enough to justify. And with a couple new consoles coming this year, I doubt many are going to want to make many more games for for the PS3 and 360, which would be the Wii U's quickest means of gaining software.

The Wii wasn't much better in its first year, but it came out at the right time to ensure that, if anyone was gonna be making games for it, they were making games for the Wii. Helped that it was flying off shelves, too -- good incentive for the time. Right now, they don't have any of that. The 360 was sort of like that as well in its first year, if I'm not mistaken. Just one of the problems of being the first out of the gate. (Not that Nintendo had any choice in the matter. Had to be first if they wanted a chance at some success with this thing.)

Well said. This is going to be really bad for NIntendo, this maybe the most First party focused system they ever had. The had a bunch of devs trying new things on it, everyone wanted a shot to make something new. That kind of fever is not happening with the wii u.
#-35 Posted by Pedro (21003 posts) -

It's the worst Nintendo console to date and this is going to result in their worst generation yet. They're going from top to rock bottom at an alarming rate and I'd be lying if I said that I'm not enjoying seeing them fall.

UpInFlames

Make room for me :). Nintendo failure in the console market is absolutely necessary for good gaming. 

#-34 Posted by Pedro (21003 posts) -

More on topic, my wii u is gathering tons of dust.dvader654

 

tumblr_m2yfy2Ke4I1rs311go2_500.jpg

#-33 Posted by Pedro (21003 posts) -

I have all these thoughts on Nintendo. So many, in fact, that it is hard (impossible perhaps) to summarize them all. However, here are a few:

I feel that the market is reaching back towards normalcy after a really bad bout of popculture-itis. The Wii was a machine that sold in spite of every reason in the world why it shouldn't have. The Wii was a threat to the business (I felt) because it tried (and succeeded for a while) to sell the notion that conventional gaming experiences sucked and needed to be changed through reverse evolution, and had that continued, I feel it would have fvcked the whole industry even more than it already has. 

I feel remorseful, because the Wii U is more of a conventional machine than the Wii, and it's doing worse. However, I don't think a Wii 2 would have done any better. Just as Kinect hasn't helped Microsoft (their sales have dropped, not increased since its release), I think the market has moved on to tablets and cell phones, and that consoles have to come back and make the case for CONSOLES again. Not multimedia devices. Not movie spooling. Not music streamers. GAME CONSOLES. That is NOT a shameful term, it's a proud term, with a rich history that has survived for a long time. 

I feel glad, because machines with gimmicks and no games should not be rewarded with stellar sales. Content has driven sales and predicted generational dominance forever prior to the Wii. That long established trend looks set to resume (although we can't say for sure -- Microsoft has its head so far up its ass that it could make its entire thrust be motion based, and well, Sony IS Sony) and the best third-party offerings and exclusives will again determine who succeeds and who doesn't. There are really good signs of a market correction occurring, and well, that works for me just fine.


I feel vindicated, because outside of a few specialty products, games should be built around concepts, NOT CONTROLLERS. Especially controllers that are limiting or otherwise don't work. This was the hardest thing for me to understand last generation... I witnessed smart people who love games trying to convince themselves that using an inferior control method was more fun. All the way back to the 2600, there was a reason that the paddles were only used in an ancillary capacity, and that was because they SUCKED for 95 percent of the games on the system (and brother, there were a LOT of games on the 2600). It's also the same reason that ROB the robot never took off, and that was because ROB's presence didn't add anything to the game. It was a bullshlt gimmick. Trackballs. Racing wheels. And on. And on. And on. There was a reason why they were called peripherals. Last generation, we witnessed the peripheral become the standard, and look at the results. 

So yeah, there's a few. I'm done with Nintendo, and I'm not surprised to see the sun setting on the Blue Ocean era, but there is also a part of me that grew up with the company and knows what they are capable of when they are at their best, and I only wish that one day that company could resurface again. 

Shame-usBlackley

 

Well said Shame_Us. You could not have worded that any better. 

#-32 Posted by wiouds (5014 posts) -

I can see the WiiU haviing problems. They have shows an ipod in a controler as the main step. It is not the same as motion control so I not curpise there is not a flood of non gamers rushing to get the system. I can see a number of more hobby gamers standing back from the WiiU for now after all Nintendo has not been the impressive with it.

One a side note, I hate how any negative criticism against motion control or a touch pad is attack by the ideal that you just stuck in the past and not want games to go forward. I find it a poor argument since many times motion controls seem to have made games take a step back. I want games to go forward and this is way I am not embrassing motion control and touch pad.

#-31 Posted by JustPlainLucas (73564 posts) -
I'll always be a Nintendo supporter, albeit a begrudging one. I know I'll be buying the same Nintendo staples (as much as I dislike the need to put Yoshi through Kirby's yarn aesthetics, it still looks like a gorgeous game), but dammit, I want them to put the lead out. I also still hate the Wii U name, and still hate the Wii name. I want to see Nintendo on top, although that will never happen. If Nintendo ever does go under, I'll be with them on the long ride down, just like I was with Sega.
#-30 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18159 posts) -

The Wii was a threat to the business (I felt) because it tried (and succeeded for a while) to sell the notion that conventional gaming experiences sucked and needed to be changed through reverse evolution, and had that continued, I feel it would have fvcked the whole industry even more than it already has. Pedro
Precisely. I've been advocating this for years. I would also add that a game like Wii Fit, which is barely a game at all, is considered the crowning jewel of Nintendo's offering by the company's top brasses because it sold 40 million copies and this fact is poison to the industry. It shows they have no respect for the medium they are working on and that sales are everything to them. Microsoft has immediately followed on those footsteps.

Thank god for Sony this generation, they kept the industry afloat.

#-29 Posted by GodModeEnabled (15314 posts) -

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"][QUOTE="Bigboi500"]I didn't come to this forum to have a sh*t-slinging fanboy war with posters.S0lidSnake

Aren't you a system wars poster? I don't remember ever seeing you here over the last several years.

Bigboi500 has been around for a while. Your whirlwind romance with BlackKnight has blinded you from the rest of the world/forum. :P

He's a pretty decent poster too. Dont treat him like a Nintendo fanboy. He's like dvader... just a bit too in love with Nintendo games. ;p

lol whirlwind romance. He would be so lucky to land me. Anyways my bad bigboi500 I didn't recognize you is all. Carry on.
#-28 Posted by JustPlainLucas (73564 posts) -

Precisely. I've been advocating this for years. I would also add that a game like Wii Fit, which is barely a game at all, is considered the crowning jewel of Nintendo's offering by the company's top brasses because it sold 40 million copies and this fact is poison to the industry. It shows they have no respect for the medium they are working on and that sales are everything to them. Microsoft has immediately followed on those footsteps.

Thank god for Sony this generation, they kept the industry afloat.

Black_Knight_00

Yeah, but don't forget, Sony isn't entirely innocent either. 

PlayStation-Move-Gaming-Console-Warranty

:P

#-27 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18159 posts) -
[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"] Aren't you a system wars poster? I don't remember ever seeing you here over the last several years.GodModeEnabled

Bigboi500 has been around for a while. Your whirlwind romance with BlackKnight has blinded you from the rest of the world/forum. :P

He's a pretty decent poster too. Dont treat him like a Nintendo fanboy. He's like dvader... just a bit too in love with Nintendo games. ;p

lol whirlwind romance. He would be so lucky to land me. Anyways my bad bigboi500 I didn't recognize you is all. Carry on.

I'd be extremely unlucky if you landed on me, belly boy.
#-26 Posted by GodModeEnabled (15314 posts) -
[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"][QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

Bigboi500 has been around for a while. Your whirlwind romance with BlackKnight has blinded you from the rest of the world/forum. :P

He's a pretty decent poster too. Dont treat him like a Nintendo fanboy. He's like dvader... just a bit too in love with Nintendo games. ;p

Black_Knight_00
lol whirlwind romance. He would be so lucky to land me. Anyways my bad bigboi500 I didn't recognize you is all. Carry on.

I'd be extremely unlucky if you landed on me, belly boy.

Well i'd be extremely unlucky.... if .... I .... your mom?. ..... shutup! T_T
#-25 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18159 posts) -
[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"][QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"] lol whirlwind romance. He would be so lucky to land me. Anyways my bad bigboi500 I didn't recognize you is all. Carry on.

I'd be extremely unlucky if you landed on me, belly boy.

Well i'd be extremely unlucky.... if .... I .... your mom?. ..... shutup! T_T

Look S0lid, you made GME cry. You should be ashamed of yourself.
#-24 Posted by GodModeEnabled (15314 posts) -

[QUOTE="Pedro"]The Wii was a threat to the business (I felt) because it tried (and succeeded for a while) to sell the notion that conventional gaming experiences sucked and needed to be changed through reverse evolution, and had that continued, I feel it would have fvcked the whole industry even more than it already has. Black_Knight_00

Precisely. I've been advocating this for years. I would also add that a game like Wii Fit, which is barely a game at all, is considered the crowning jewel of Nintendo's offering by the company's top brasses because it sold 40 million copies and this fact is poison to the industry. It shows they have no respect for the medium they are working on and that sales are everything to them. Microsoft has immediately followed on those footsteps.

Thank god for Sony this generation, they kept the industry afloat.

lol except for the d1ldo controller they released that plays all the casual games they are making trying to cash in on Nintendo. They pretty much copied the wiimote wholesale for christsakes. Difference is though they still make good games to go along with the crud but are far from the shining saviors you seem to think they are. I hope the new system is awesome and gimmick free though, cause I would like to jump on board again.
#-23 Posted by Archangel3371 (15234 posts) -
Well this is kind of good news for me. I'm really itching to pick up a Wii U so if this means I can get one cheaper sooner rather then later then I'm on board for a price cut. :D
#-22 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18159 posts) -
[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"] lol except for the d1ldo controller they released that plays all the casual games they are making trying to cash in on Nintendo. They pretty much copied the wiimote wholesale for christsakes. Difference is though they still make good games to go along with the crud but are far from the shining saviors you seem to think they are. I hope the new system is awesome and gimmick free though, cause I would like to jump on board again.

One reason why the Move doesn't suck half as bad as the wiimote: It's optional. People who despise motion controls can avoid the Move and still play all the games, but if you wanted to play Mario and Zelda this generation you were forced to deal with that wiimote abomination.
#-21 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -

I can see the WiiU haviing problems. They have shows an ipod in a controler as the main step. It is not the same as motion control so I not curpise there is not a flood of non gamers rushing to get the system. I can see a number of more hobby gamers standing back from the WiiU for now after all Nintendo has not been the impressive with it.

One a side note, I hate how any negative criticism against motion control or a touch pad is attack by the ideal that you just stuck in the past and not want games to go forward. I find it a poor argument since many times motion controls seem to have made games take a step back. I want games to go forward and this is way I am not embrassing motion control and touch pad.

wiouds
Some people clearly have a vendetta against any kind of different controls, every thing about them is a plague to the industry to them. It's a BS way to look at things. Motion controls can absolutely move games forward and yes it can move it back. If we stick with what we have had before we go no where. One day games are going to be far more involved than just holding a controller and watching a TV.
#-20 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

Calling me those "nintendophile" and "nintendo apologist" is no different than me calling you an "xbot" or "mad cow" etc. I enjoy coming to this board for the (usually) mature discussions, yet you constantly call me those names, and even went after me by accusing me of being a blind Nintendo fanboy just because I said SMG2 was my favorite game of the generation.

 

Fact is, I appreciate all three consoles this gen and sue me if I like Nintendo and try to defend them when I think it's justified. I probably have supported Sony more this generation more than you have. All I ask is that you stop trying to label me as a blind Nintendo fanboy when that's absolutely not true. There's no reason to be so aggressive towards me over my opinions, just because they differ from your preferences and beliefs.

Bigboi500

You label yourself when you defend the indefensible and frankly, Nintendo's actions over the last decade have been just that regarding consoles.

 Most people who adopt your position regarding Nintendo don't see those aforementioned labels as pejoratives but regardless, if they bother you, I'll cease using them.

Regardless, I'm not obliged to respect a differing opinion when said opinion doesn't mesh with a heap of evidence to the contrary. There is a marked difference between attacking an opinion versus attacking a person and, to my recollection, I've never attacked you on a personal level.

#-19 Posted by Vari3ty (11111 posts) -

[QUOTE="wiouds"]

I can see the WiiU haviing problems. They have shows an ipod in a controler as the main step. It is not the same as motion control so I not curpise there is not a flood of non gamers rushing to get the system. I can see a number of more hobby gamers standing back from the WiiU for now after all Nintendo has not been the impressive with it.

One a side note, I hate how any negative criticism against motion control or a touch pad is attack by the ideal that you just stuck in the past and not want games to go forward. I find it a poor argument since many times motion controls seem to have made games take a step back. I want games to go forward and this is way I am not embrassing motion control and touch pad.

dvader654

Some people clearly have a vendetta against any kind of different controls, every thing about them is a plague to the industry to them. It's a BS way to look at things. Motion controls can absolutely move games forward and yes it can move it back. If we stick with what we have had before we go no where. One day games are going to be far more involved than just holding a controller and watching a TV.

Here's the problem I have with motion controls, and I think it's the main issue a lot of people have as well. The problem is motion and videogames just do not mix well. Now hear me out before you call me a lazy ass: I go to college classes, I have a job, and I'll workout every now and then when I get the opportunity. So at the end of the day, all I really want to do is be able to kick back in my recliner and play games with minimal movement required. Anything that requires me to be standing up just is not comfortable. Same goes for having to hold my arms out in front of me for the controller movements to register, or twisting my body in some awfully uncomfortable position to control a game (I'm looking at you, Kinect). Motion controls are ok for those kinds of games you break out at parties every once in a while, but other than that, their practical use is quite limited. 

It's not the controls that need to evolve, it's the games.

#-18 Posted by JustPlainLucas (73564 posts) -
[QUOTE="dvader654"] Some people clearly have a vendetta against any kind of different controls, every thing about them is a plague to the industry to them. It's a BS way to look at things. Motion controls can absolutely move games forward and yes it can move it back. If we stick with what we have had before we go no where. One day games are going to be far more involved than just holding a controller and watching a TV.

Yet, we keep going back to what worked the best, the traditional controller. Even Nintendo realized they couldn't do the Wii's motion controls again. The problem is, people keep trying to reinvent the wheel when it simply doesn't need to be reinvented. Our hands and fingers are quite capable of interacting with simple input devices. This is why mice and keyboards are still used for PC gaming decade after decade. Console gamers still prefer a traditional dual stick controller, which Nintendo even acknowledged by releasing the Pro Controller. Some people in the industry seem to think that we have to go forward, when in reality we're still pretty much happy right where we are. If you push change for the sake of change, you get... well... the Wii, and then you get other people thinking that's the way to go as well, such as Kinect and Move.
#-17 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

I'll always be a Nintendo supporter, albeit a begrudging one. I know I'll be buying the same Nintendo staples (as much as I dislike the need to put Yoshi through Kirby's yarn aesthetics, it still looks like a gorgeous game), but dammit, I want them to put the lead out. I also still hate the Wii U name, and still hate the Wii name. I want to see Nintendo on top, although that will never happen. If Nintendo ever does go under, I'll be with them on the long ride down, just like I was with Sega. JustPlainLucas

The difference for me is that Sega didn't deserve to perish.

For all the mistakes they made with the Saturn, the Dreamcast was a brilliant console oozing with innovation and replete with a fantastic library of games.

After getting their ass handed to them (and deservedly so) with the N64 and GC, Nintendo simply got lucky with the Wii by tapping into an ultra-casual market. If they end up getting drummed out of the console business, they most certainly deserve it.

#-16 Posted by c_rakestraw (14579 posts) -

Some people clearly have a vendetta against any kind of different controls, every thing about them is a plague to the industry to them. It's a BS way to look at things. Motion controls can absolutely move games forward and yes it can move it back. If we stick with what we have had before we go no where. One day games are going to be far more involved than just holding a controller and watching a TV.dvader654

To be fair, most motion-controlled games haven't made a compelling case. Almost all you ever saw on the Wii was waggle, which was a goddamn pain to work with because it lacked precision. The tech isn't there yet for it become a larger presence in controllers; not with the way games are designed and played.

Skyward Sword worked very well with motion. Heck, might as well be the best use of motion control outside of a shooter yet. But that's one game, and I can't imagine many other games following its path. Apart from it taking a lot of extra time and effort, it also require heavy retooling of mechanics. Something like Dark Souls, for instance, would be unplayable with motion control of any sort because it disrupt the very deliberate pacing of its combat. That's one of those games where even a second of latency or misread input would end you instantly. Fighting games, too, would be impossible to play with motion.

I don't see motion control disappearing -- at this point, it's probably gonna stick around, albeit as a minor extra than a primary feature, because it certainly works here and there. I just can't see it rising to dominance. Not with how things are now.

#-15 Posted by wiouds (5014 posts) -

[QUOTE="wiouds"]

I can see the WiiU haviing problems. They have shows an ipod in a controler as the main step. It is not the same as motion control so I not curpise there is not a flood of non gamers rushing to get the system. I can see a number of more hobby gamers standing back from the WiiU for now after all Nintendo has not been the impressive with it.

One a side note, I hate how any negative criticism against motion control or a touch pad is attack by the ideal that you just stuck in the past and not want games to go forward. I find it a poor argument since many times motion controls seem to have made games take a step back. I want games to go forward and this is way I am not embrassing motion control and touch pad.

dvader654

Some people clearly have a vendetta against any kind of different controls, every thing about them is a plague to the industry to them. It's a BS way to look at things. Motion controls can absolutely move games forward and yes it can move it back. If we stick with what we have had before we go no where. One day games are going to be far more involved than just holding a controller and watching a TV.

What is also a BS way to look at things is that change is good or new is better. Chance does not means that it improves.

Is motion control moving gaming forward, sideway or backwards? What if a gamer is thinks that motion control is moving games backwards and want games to go forward?

If that is true then you can not argue that motion control making gaming forwards when another person see motion control drag gaming backwards.

Motion control needs to prove itself and motion control has not proven itself to many gamers.

Is there a place for motion control and tables in games?

I am sure there is, but they need to be a clear improvement to games. I find that a good controller reflect my actions in a game better than motion control.

#-14 Posted by Strakha (1778 posts) -

The next generation might be a tough sell for all the console manufacturers and launching early with an underpowered console may have exacerbated the problem further. They need to be able to show games that make you want to go out and buy a new console. It's going to be a while until 3rd party developer get working on true next generation titles and the Wii U might miss out on these anyway due to the potential hardware differences between it and the next Xbox/PS. I think they will be ok because they have great 1st party developers but I could see the Wii U becoming more like an underpowered (relative to the competition) N64 or GC rather than a SNES or NES. It would have been interesting if Nintendo used it's money and success from the Wii to take Sony and MS head on this generation. Though it's still unclear what MS and Sony themselves will do.

#-13 Posted by CarnageHeart (18316 posts) -

[QUOTE="wiouds"]

I can see the WiiU haviing problems. They have shows an ipod in a controler as the main step. It is not the same as motion control so I not curpise there is not a flood of non gamers rushing to get the system. I can see a number of more hobby gamers standing back from the WiiU for now after all Nintendo has not been the impressive with it.

One a side note, I hate how any negative criticism against motion control or a touch pad is attack by the ideal that you just stuck in the past and not want games to go forward. I find it a poor argument since many times motion controls seem to have made games take a step back. I want games to go forward and this is way I am not embrassing motion control and touch pad.

dvader654

Some people clearly have a vendetta against any kind of different controls, every thing about them is a plague to the industry to them. It's a BS way to look at things. Motion controls can absolutely move games forward and yes it can move it back. If we stick with what we have had before we go no where. One day games are going to be far more involved than just holding a controller and watching a TV.

I'm fine with different controls in the right context (for real time strategy games and a handful of other genres/subgenres, they are a vast improvement over the traditional conroller), but I think cramming them down everyone's throat is a bad idea because they don't improve most genres.

That being said, I don't see how traditional controls are less involving than any other type of control. A well made game with any control interface can suck me in, and traditional controllers tend to suck me in more because I don't have to mind my footing or where everybody is (my eight year old is short for her age I don't want to be the guy below).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drKjZOuV1DI

#-12 Posted by Bigboi500 (29053 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

Calling me those "nintendophile" and "nintendo apologist" is no different than me calling you an "xbot" or "mad cow" etc. I enjoy coming to this board for the (usually) mature discussions, yet you constantly call me those names, and even went after me by accusing me of being a blind Nintendo fanboy just because I said SMG2 was my favorite game of the generation.

 

Fact is, I appreciate all three consoles this gen and sue me if I like Nintendo and try to defend them when I think it's justified. I probably have supported Sony more this generation more than you have. All I ask is that you stop trying to label me as a blind Nintendo fanboy when that's absolutely not true. There's no reason to be so aggressive towards me over my opinions, just because they differ from your preferences and beliefs.

Grammaton-Cleric

You label yourself when you defend the indefensible and frankly, Nintendo's actions over the last decade have been just that regarding consoles.

 Most people who adopt your position regarding Nintendo don't see those aforementioned labels as pejoratives but regardless, if they bother you, I'll cease using them.

Regardless, I'm not obliged to respect a differing opinion when said opinion doesn't mesh with a heap of evidence to the contrary. There is a marked difference between attacking an opinion versus attacking a person and, to my recollection, I've never attacked you on a personal level.

Well we obviously differ on what's good and bad for the industry. I find Microsoft to be just as guilty for setting consoles in a wrong direction as you do in your feelings about Nintendo. Microsoft charging for online when everyone else's is free, Microsoft switching focus with their first party devs to Kinect and almost abandoning the base that made the 360 popular in the early years, charging high prices for HDD's and wireless adapters, having a welfare system that takes advantage of poor people with their buy for cheap upfront, and get locked into a higher-than-normal subscription fees for Gold program, terrible backwards support, popularizing DLC and FPS on consoles (much to the chagrin to PC FPS fans everywhere because they casualize and strip them down to bare-bones to please the masses) and so on.

 

At least Nintendo continues to provide excellent and high quality first party support, free online, lots of variety and options to play games and always has reliable hardware. Of course, on the negative side they're slow to adapt, don't focus on graphics, over-use some of their franchises and have droughts due to a lack of western developer support. I don't defend that stuff.

 

There's nothing to be gained by attacking people's opinions, since the attacker doesn't live or walk in the other person's shoes. They didn't grow up in the same situation, don't have the same likes and dislikes, or have the same experiences with games. It just comes off as either a) being egotistical, or b) not being able to accept opinions.

 

#-11 Posted by Bigboi500 (29053 posts) -

Ok soooo...

I'm trying to put things into perspective. This is actually the first gen where I'm actively following how the consoles are fairing in the market and what kind of games they have. So, serious question: Is the Wii U in the same boat as the PS3 when it first came out or is it even worse off?

I may not have followed the news of the PS3 after launch but I do remember the whole "PS3 HAZ NO GAEMESSS!!" thing around the time it first came out. That and its insane $600 price tag. Also it seems to me that people are really quick to predict the doom and gloom early on in a console's life cycle. Before its even out a year it seems people are quick to jump "it suckz, haz no gamez, itz gonna fail!!!111" bandwagon (people seem to be doing this with the Vita as well).

And I'm not saying you're doing that TC, its just a general observation. That and it seems like history is repeating itself. Perhaps Nintendo would benefit from a price cut to the Wii U as well. Ok lastly, did any of the older consoles go through this? It seems to me that it makes sense that a new system that just came out a few months ago wouldn't have a nice selection of games. That, and sales would really pick up one or two years after its launch after more quality games come out and a possible price cut. But did any the older console come out, guns blazing with an unbeatable price that sold like hot cakes right off the bat? Or were any of them in a similar predicament?

Just curious...

Lucky_Krystal

Wii U did better at launch than both PS3 and 360, sales-wise. As far as games, PS3 didn't have much at all to offer early on. Pretty much the same for every console, so you're right, they all start off slow.

#-10 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18159 posts) -
Wii U did better at launch than both PS3 and 360, sales-wise. As far as games, PS3 didn't have much at all to offer early on. Pretty much the same for every console, so you're right, they all start off slow.Bigboi500
True, they all start off slow and manage to keep people hyped with the promise of better games to come. Even the Wii kept people tuned in the (vain) hope motion controls would start being used to make games better. Yet for the first time in gaming history we are now looking at a system whose potential seems to be already spent. What are Wii U owners looking forward to, I wonder? Xenoblade 2? That could run on xbox 360 no problem. Wind Waker repackage? An 11 years old game which, again, could run on xbox. Is the promise of asymmetrical multiplayer (whatever the attractive is) and being able to keep playing during toilet breaks enough to justify the 300+ bucks spent on a Wii U?
#-9 Posted by Bigboi500 (29053 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Wii U did better at launch than both PS3 and 360, sales-wise. As far as games, PS3 didn't have much at all to offer early on. Pretty much the same for every console, so you're right, they all start off slow.Black_Knight_00
True, they all start off slow and manage to keep people hyped with the promise of better games to come. Even the Wii kept people tuned in the (vain) hope motion controls would start being used to make games better. Yet for the first time in gaming history we are now looking at a system whose potential seems to be already spent. What are Wii U owners looking forward to, I wonder? Xenoblade 2? That could run on xbox 360 no problem. Wind Waker repackage? An 11 years old game which, again, could run on xbox. Is the promise of asymmetrical multiplayer (whatever the attractive is) and being able to keep playing during toilet breaks enough to justify the 300+ bucks spent on a Wii U?

It's already justified for platformer fans with NSMBU and Rayman Legends. It would be like FPS fans being happy with Far Cry 3 and Halo 4. Who cares what this or that can run on when the games and franchises are what's important to the player. When I think about getting a PS4, it's not because of some promised jump in power, but more about the Sony games I know will come with it. Xbox 720 could promise a trip to the moon but I wouldn't be interested in it because I know that more Halo, Gears and Forza are what's in store for the system and I'm tired as hell of those franchises.

#-8 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18159 posts) -

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Wii U did better at launch than both PS3 and 360, sales-wise. As far as games, PS3 didn't have much at all to offer early on. Pretty much the same for every console, so you're right, they all start off slow.Bigboi500

True, they all start off slow and manage to keep people hyped with the promise of better games to come. Even the Wii kept people tuned in the (vain) hope motion controls would start being used to make games better. Yet for the first time in gaming history we are now looking at a system whose potential seems to be already spent. What are Wii U owners looking forward to, I wonder? Xenoblade 2? That could run on xbox 360 no problem. Wind Waker repackage? An 11 years old game which, again, could run on xbox. Is the promise of asymmetrical multiplayer (whatever the attractive is) and being able to keep playing during toilet breaks enough to justify the 300+ bucks spent on a Wii U?

It's already justified for platformer fans with NSMBU and Rayman Legends. It would be like FPS fans being happy with Far Cry 3 and Halo 4. Who cares what this or that can run on when the games and franchises are what's important to the player. When I think about getting a PS4, it's not because of some promised jump in power, but more about the Sony games I know will come with it. Xbox 720 could promise a trip to the moon but I wouldn't be interested in it because I know that more Halo, Gears and Forza are what's in store for the system and I'm tired as hell of those franchises.

That's the thing with die hard Nintendo fans: no matter if the system won't be able to handle any third party game in a year or two: they are content with an HD edition of an old game or the fourth reskin of New Super Mario Bros. On one hand I must admit it's a blessing, not feeling the need for technological advancement.
#-7 Posted by Bigboi500 (29053 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] True, they all start off slow and manage to keep people hyped with the promise of better games to come. Even the Wii kept people tuned in the (vain) hope motion controls would start being used to make games better. Yet for the first time in gaming history we are now looking at a system whose potential seems to be already spent. What are Wii U owners looking forward to, I wonder? Xenoblade 2? That could run on xbox 360 no problem. Wind Waker repackage? An 11 years old game which, again, could run on xbox. Is the promise of asymmetrical multiplayer (whatever the attractive is) and being able to keep playing during toilet breaks enough to justify the 300+ bucks spent on a Wii U?Black_Knight_00

It's already justified for platformer fans with NSMBU and Rayman Legends. It would be like FPS fans being happy with Far Cry 3 and Halo 4. Who cares what this or that can run on when the games and franchises are what's important to the player. When I think about getting a PS4, it's not because of some promised jump in power, but more about the Sony games I know will come with it. Xbox 720 could promise a trip to the moon but I wouldn't be interested in it because I know that more Halo, Gears and Forza are what's in store for the system and I'm tired as hell of those franchises.

That's the thing with die hard Nintendo fans: no matter if the system won't be able to handle any third party game in a year or two: they are content with an HD edition of an old game or the fourth reskin of New Super Mario Bros. On one hand I must admit it's a blessing, not feeling the need for technological advancement.

Really the only reason to have a Xbox console is if the player doesn't have a gaming PC (or wants that "fourth reskined Halo or Gears), which is what I'm going to get into next gen. Superior multiplats that will make any console game look like garbage, PS4 and Wii U for Sony and Nintendo franchises.

#-6 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18159 posts) -
Really the only reason to have a Xbox console is if the player doesn't have a gaming PC (or wants that "fourth reskined Halo or Gears), which is what I'm going to get into next gen. Superior multiplats that will make any console game look like garbage, PS4 and Wii U for Sony and Nintendo franchises. Bigboi500
In fact the console to buy is the PS3 and hopefully soon PS4. XBOX as it is today is a waste of money, and so is the Wii U, unless the trend changes drastically.
#-5 Posted by Metamania (11964 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Really the only reason to have a Xbox console is if the player doesn't have a gaming PC (or wants that "fourth reskined Halo or Gears), which is what I'm going to get into next gen. Superior multiplats that will make any console game look like garbage, PS4 and Wii U for Sony and Nintendo franchises. Black_Knight_00
In fact the console to buy is the PS3 and hopefully soon PS4. XBOX as it is today is a waste of money, and so is the Wii U, unless the trend changes drastically.

And yet, you currently own an XBox 360. What do you say to that? :P

#-4 Posted by CarnageHeart (18316 posts) -

Ok soooo...

I'm trying to put things into perspective. This is actually the first gen where I'm actively following how the consoles are fairing in the market and what kind of games they have. So, serious question: Is the Wii U in the same boat as the PS3 when it first came out or is it even worse off?

I may not have followed the news of the PS3 after launch but I do remember the whole "PS3 HAZ NO GAEMESSS!!" thing around the time it first came out. That and its insane $600 price tag. Also it seems to me that people are really quick to predict the doom and gloom early on in a console's life cycle. Before its even out a year it seems people are quick to jump "it suckz, haz no gamez, itz gonna fail!!!111" bandwagon (people seem to be doing this with the Vita as well).

And I'm not saying you're doing that TC, its just a general observation. That and it seems like history is repeating itself. Perhaps Nintendo would benefit from a price cut to the Wii U as well. Ok lastly, did any of the older consoles go through this? It seems to me that it makes sense that a new system that just came out a few months ago wouldn't have a nice selection of games. That, and sales would really pick up one or two years after its launch after more quality games come out and a possible price cut. But did any the older console come out, guns blazing with an unbeatable price that sold like hot cakes right off the bat? Or were any of them in a similar predicament?

Just curious...

Lucky_Krystal

The problem isn't the slow start, its that the Wii U is a replication of the Wii (last gen hardware with a pricey new controller) but this time casuals (for whom touchscreens are old hat) haven't gotten excited. Couple that with the fact that core gamers still prefer traditional controllers and the Wii U has a huge problem.

Further complicating the picture is that the two games on the Wii U that have sold well are Mario and Nintendoland (games like Zombi U, Arkham City, Mass Effect 3 and AC3 have sold poorly). Probably as a result, most publishers and developers are skipping the relatively easy task of bringing PS3/X360/PC games to the Wii U (the perception of consumer fixation on a handful of franchises is the reason many third parties avoided supporting the GC, which was plenty powerful).

The current piss poor third party support is only going to worsen over time because by all accounts the PS4 and X720 will be a generation ahead.

http://www.destructoid.com/developers-what-s-your-issue-with-the-wii-u-gamepad--243371.phtml

#-3 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18159 posts) -

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Really the only reason to have a Xbox console is if the player doesn't have a gaming PC (or wants that "fourth reskined Halo or Gears), which is what I'm going to get into next gen. Superior multiplats that will make any console game look like garbage, PS4 and Wii U for Sony and Nintendo franchises. Metamania

In fact the console to buy is the PS3 and hopefully soon PS4. XBOX as it is today is a waste of money, and so is the Wii U, unless the trend changes drastically.

And yet, you currently own an XBox 360. What do you say to that? :P

I bought it 4 years ago, give me a break :lol:
#-2 Posted by Metamania (11964 posts) -

[QUOTE="Metamania"]

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] In fact the console to buy is the PS3 and hopefully soon PS4. XBOX as it is today is a waste of money, and so is the Wii U, unless the trend changes drastically.Black_Knight_00

And yet, you currently own an XBox 360. What do you say to that? :P

I bought it 4 years ago, give me a break :lol:

Too late. :lol: :P

#-1 Posted by CarnageHeart (18316 posts) -

Interestingly, despite the troubles of the Wii U, Nintendo is determined not to chop the price. As others have pointed out, that is the same stance Sony has taken with the Vita. I'd add to that by saying that the cuts didn't happen for the same reason, neither system is its maker's primary focus.

Portables take a backseat to consoles for Sony and consoles take a backseat to portables for Nintendo.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/185793/Theres_no_Wii_U_price_drop_on_the_way_anytime_soon_says_Nintendo.php

#0 Posted by LongZhiZi (2453 posts) -

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

lol! This thing had the worst marketing campaign of all time. Even Sony didn't f*ck up this bad. They had two years to market it as a new console, yet even the press that attended their press conferences couldn't tell the difference b/w the Wii and the Wii U.

Part of me thinks it's because the games looked so much like current gen games, no one could tell it was a new console. But then again, the Wii games looked last gen as well. I am just glad releasing last gen consoles and handhelds with gimmicks finally came back to bite Nintendo in the ass. They f*cking deserve it.

The 3DS becoming a success after the price drop really pisses me off because no way an antique handheld like that should be selling that well. No second analog stick, terrible PS2 quality graphics, awful 3D, single touch screens. I guess you put Nintendo on a handheld and a Mario game on it and it will sell like hot cakes. Meanwhile Sony's amazing Vita slowly dies like a heroine addicted whore.

burgeg

So much truth here. What's even sadder is that I'm actually one of those idiots that bought a 3DS. Stupidest system purchase ever, and I regret my purchase more than I've ever regretted buying a game system in my life.

Honestly, I'm glad someone else posted this because it's becoming how I'm feeling about the system as well. Sure, Revelations was great (but now I could've gotten almost anywhere else) but that's really it for me. I picked up OoT 3D because I had never beaten it (or even gotten to adult Link!) before, but I just look at the system and think, "Now what?" I can't imagine wanting to play anything that needs a 3D camera. I really should've just bought a few titles for something else and called it good.