Nintendo Warns of Weak Wii U Sales

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#101 Posted by Vickman178 (1035 posts) -

This feels like it should be in System Wars. Also I don't understand the hatred and pessimism some of you have regarding Nintendo. Actually...I think I kind of do understand, since I was the same way when the PS3 came out. I was 13 and making fun of how retardedly expensive it was and how it had no games and how Sony was going to leave the console market.

 

But then something magical happened, I grew up.

#102 Posted by CarnageHeart (18316 posts) -

This feels like it should be in System Wars. Also I don't understand the hatred and pessimism some of you have regarding Nintendo. Actually...I think I kind of do understand, since I was the same way when the PS3 came out. I was 13 and making fun of how retardedly expensive it was and how it had no games and how Sony was going to leave the console market.

But then something magical happened, I grew up.

Vickman178

Cool story bro.

What happened for the rest of the world was that Sony chopped the price of the PS3, improved PSN (though crossgame chat never came its way because that is the sort of thing one needs to implement in the OS), published lots of original games across a broad variety of genres (many of which sold quite well, demonstrating to developers there was profit to be had) and greatly improved the development tools.

#103 Posted by Planeforger (15713 posts) -
Has any console ever -not- seen a slump in sales/games drought in the months following launch? They're going to pick up again once they actually get some of their announced games onto shelves. If not, they'll pick up after some marketing/modeling/pricing shifts. It's what Nintendo does (lately, at least).
#104 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

This feels like it should be in System Wars. Also I don't understand the hatred and pessimism some of you have regarding Nintendo. Actually...I think I kind of do understand, since I was the same way when the PS3 came out. I was 13 and making fun of how retardedly expensive it was and how it had no games and how Sony was going to leave the console market.

 

But then something magical happened, I grew up.

Vickman178

GGD/PGD has always been system wars-lite. Especially when new consoles are coming out. As long as we are respectful towards each other, and we almost always are, there is nothing wrong with bashing systems... especially when they deserve it.

#105 Posted by capaho (1253 posts) -

Congratulations on finally getting a thread going on this topic that lasted more than a day.  I tried to discuss low Wii U sales twice and both times the threads disappeared.

#106 Posted by UpInFlames (13279 posts) -

[QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

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.

YoshiYogurt

I was going to say **** you, but nice GY!BE emblem thing.

:lol:

#107 Posted by Shinobishyguy (22468 posts) -
[QUOTE="burgeg"]

[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.

LongZhiZi

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.

did you even do your research before buying the thing? I mean their's a bunch of good games on it already and it's lineup for 2013 looks solid.
#108 Posted by Rattlesnake_8 (18414 posts) -
They have done so many things wrong with the Wii U, it's no wonder it's not selling well.
#109 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

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.

 

Bigboi500

Sorry to break it to you but attacking an opinion, chipping away at the logic (or lack thereof) of a postulation, is the basis of argumentation and rhetoric. You've entered into a debate space and then take offense that your assertions are challenged, which is entirely nonsensical.

Your opinion, without backing, evidence or logic, is flatly worthless. People walk around with this notion that having an opinion shields their views from criticism when in reality you open yourself to such attacks the moment you make that opinion public. If you can't roll with argument and debate then remove yourself from those situations where such skills are necessary because opinion alone doesn't insulate your ideas from criticism or rebuttal.

Your analysis of MS is further evidence of your inability to objectively analyze this medium beyond the narrow parameters of your myopic fandom. While I certainly agree that Kinnect was a weak peripheral, your admonishment of Microsoft's online interface is flatly amusing given that, as a console manufacturer, they are essentially the most directly responsible entity for the propagation and proliferation of online gaming as it pertains to the console model. The fee they charge for XBL is nominal and clearly profitable given Sony's own attempt to adopt a pay model. On the other side of the spectrum is Nintendo's online interface, which is perfunctory at best and at least five years behind the curve. The only reason Nintendo has even attempted to implement online functionality (feeble as it may be) is because of the trail blazed by MS and, to a lesser extent, Sony.

The claim that the XB "popularized DLC and FPS" is nothing more than specious propaganda; FPS were popular long before even the original XB launched and DLC is hardly a new model, even if this generation ushered in a new level of widespread micro-transactions that have delivered mixed dividends. (And for the record plenty of the DLC released this generation has been excellent and worth the price)

The notion that Microsoft's newest model is exploitive of "poor people" is nonsense. Like any subscription-based service, this newest model offers consumers an option to mitigate upfront costs by paying a larger fee per month. Such a practice is hardly exploitive and actually par for the course among consumer electronics, specifically media-infused cell phones. I agree the plan is a rip-off from a consumer standpoint but the model is hardly as nefarious as you would hyperbolically suggest.

Objectively, regardless of pitfalls, Microsoft's contributions to this medium since their entry into the marketplace far exceed Nintendo's over the course of the last decade. MS pioneered and standardized HD resolution for consoles, pushed for hard drives as a standard, created the most coherent and centralized hub for online gaming, created and executed an excellent online storefront for downloadable content, and created a dedicated conduit for indie gaming.

By contrast, Nintendo has used outdated tech, latched onto outdated physical media that in turn limited the type of software that could appear on their console, largely ignored the benefits of having a dedicated hard drive, refused to implement, on any level, support for HD resolutions, implemented only the basest of online functionality, stubbornly utilized controllers that limited certain genres by default, and ushered in motion gaming, which was eventually proven to be a gimmick that the casual crowd initially embraced but inevitably abandoned. (And if you want to really discuss the issue of impediment, we can talk about the early tyrannical years of Nintendo, when they tried to block, among other things, the rental market and also enacted and advocated censorship within this medium)

And your postulation is that MS is doing more harm than Nintendo?

For all their mistakes (some of which have been epic) both MS and Sony have done far more to propel this medium forward than contemporary Nintendo who, post-SNES, has been nothing short of an egocentric entity, entrenched in hubris and buoyed by fans who will forgive them any and all transgression because of that aforementioned devotion, which is a mixture of both misplaced adoration and blind veneration. While I will be the first to concede they are, for all time, one of the most important companies to ever grace this medium, that historical reality does nothing to negate their persistent failure to deliver quality consoles.   

#110 Posted by rragnaar (27023 posts) -

Iwata is talking like he might step down if he can't turn things around.

At an analysts' meeting on the 31st, Nintendo President Satoru Iwata (53) implied that there is a possibility that he may resign if he is unable to achieve 100 billion yen (US$1.09963 billion) in operating income for the next fiscal year. The company had recently revised its forecast for operating income for the full year ending March 31, 2013 to -20 billion yen (US$220.144 million), making the goal a high hurdle. Iwata aimed to appeal to investors by putting himself on the line to recover the business.

President Iwata, having seen 2 consecutive years of losses, apologized by saying, "We feel greatly accountable for this severe outlook." He further explained that the basis of meeting the goal by saying, "...we plan to actively release our key titles for Nintendo 3DS which could potentially lead the markets this year."

In the midst of sluggish sales for the next-generation home console Wii U released last year, Iwata also indicated that portable and home console development groups would be merged.

When asked how he would take responsibility if the goal is not met, Iwata emphasized his strong determination by saying, "Please understand that [achieving it] is my commitment."

Iwata, formerly the president of a development company making games for Nintendo, was selected in 2002 at the young age of 43 by former Nintendo President Hiroshi Yamauchi, being called a person who had skill in both game development and administration.

Shares of Nintendo stock were sold off on the Osaka Securities Exchange on the 31st, at one point falling 530 yen from the previous close to 8820 yen.

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

This feels like it should be in System Wars. Also I don't understand the hatred and pessimism some of you have regarding Nintendo. Actually...I think I kind of do understand, since I was the same way when the PS3 came out. I was 13 and making fun of how retardedly expensive it was and how it had no games and how Sony was going to leave the console market.

 

But then something magical happened, I grew up.

Vickman178

If personal growth is something you crave, I can give you a significant heaping of self-improvement by showing your how puerile your comments actually are.

Firstly, a discussion on the slowing sales of a new system belongs precisely here. Perhaps you operate under the myopic self-delusion that only those topics which don't offend your personal sensibilities belong on this forum but since this board is an extension of libertarian free expression rather than some personal fascist construct then we can safely (and intellectually) arrive at the conclusion that this topic is apropos.

This is further evinced by the fact that sales data is regularly posted and discussed in this very place.

Your false-empathy, while neither clever nor poignant, does serve the purpose in delineating your misunderstanding of an issue that has been ongoing for the better part of two decades in regards to the many mistakes that Nintendo has made, many of them egregious and damaging to the propulsion and healthy development of this medium.

Your decision to label these criticisms, many of them valid and provable, as hatred further illustrates your own tenuous grasp of the deeper nuances of this ongoing issue, which is both polarizing and decidedly complicated. Your infantile banter has contributed nothing but rather serves to obfuscate the matter further by attempting to make this an issue of superficial fandom rather than objective analysis and criticism of one of the most prominent console manufacturers in this medium.

Ironically, your post is the most obvious example of system wars banter so while I applaud your growth I don't think the journey is yet complete.

#112 Posted by rragnaar (27023 posts) -

My issue with Nintendo is that they take all the wrong risks.  They are willing to spend money on R&D for oddball controllers, and unwilling to invest in games that aren't a sure thing.  They rely on two things: their tried and true franchises as well as low budget games that have broad appeal to nongamers.  They've let great IPs like F-Zero fall by the wayside in favor of an F-Zero minigame in Nintendoland.  Imagine if F-Zero U was a Wii U launch title with graphics on par with WipEout.  It would have sold great and would have been an awesome graphical showcase for the system.

When they decided that 'gameplay is more important than graphics' and that their business model could survive on their core Nintendo fanbase as well as soccer moms, they didn't realize that their core base likes good graphics and that soccer moms don't buy games in the same numbers that we do.  Nontraditional gamers also don't care about new hardware.  My mom wants a Wii, she doesn't want a Wii U.  Meanwhile Nintendo is about to get left behind again by companies who realize that graphics and gameplay aren't mutually exclusive.

#113 Posted by Metamania (12010 posts) -

My issue with Nintendo is that they take all the wrong risks. They are willing to spend money on R&D for oddball controllers, and unwilling to invest in games that aren't a sure thing. They rely on two things: their tried and true franchises as well as low budget games that have broad appeal to nongamers. They've let great IPs like F-Zero fall by the wayside in favor of an F-Zero minigame in Nintendoland. Imagine if F-Zero U was a Wii U launch title with graphics on par with WipEout. It would have sold great and would have been an awesome graphical showcase for the system.

When they decided that 'gameplay is more important than graphics' and that their business model could survive on their core Nintendo fanbase as well as soccer moms, they didn't realize that their core base likes good graphics and that soccer moms don't buy games in the same numbers that we do. Nontraditional gamers also don't care about new hardware. My mom wants a Wii, she doesn't want a Wii U. Meanwhile Nintendo is about to get left behind again by companies who realize that graphics and gameplay aren't mutually exclusive.

rragnaar

It's really interesting to hear that. Everyone heard about the Wii and what it can do and a lot of people have come in and bought it. Now, with the Wii U, people either do or do not know about it and therefore, it hasn't sold as well as the Wii did. That's one of the reasons why I think the Wii U has potential, but it may fail in the end; I don't think Nintendo really did a good job advertising the Wii U and instead just thought to sneak it in, hoping it will take everyone by surprise. Guess that didn't work as well as they hoped it would.

#114 Posted by rragnaar (27023 posts) -

[QUOTE="rragnaar"]

My issue with Nintendo is that they take all the wrong risks. They are willing to spend money on R&D for oddball controllers, and unwilling to invest in games that aren't a sure thing. They rely on two things: their tried and true franchises as well as low budget games that have broad appeal to nongamers. They've let great IPs like F-Zero fall by the wayside in favor of an F-Zero minigame in Nintendoland. Imagine if F-Zero U was a Wii U launch title with graphics on par with WipEout. It would have sold great and would have been an awesome graphical showcase for the system.

When they decided that 'gameplay is more important than graphics' and that their business model could survive on their core Nintendo fanbase as well as soccer moms, they didn't realize that their core base likes good graphics and that soccer moms don't buy games in the same numbers that we do. Nontraditional gamers also don't care about new hardware. My mom wants a Wii, she doesn't want a Wii U. Meanwhile Nintendo is about to get left behind again by companies who realize that graphics and gameplay aren't mutually exclusive.

Metamania

It's really interesting to hear that. Everyone heard about the Wii and what it can do and a lot of people have come in and bought it. Now, with the Wii U, people either do or do not know about it and therefore, it hasn't sold as well as the Wii did. That's one of the reasons why I think the Wii U has potential, but it may fail in the end; I don't think Nintendo really did a good job advertising the Wii U and instead just thought to sneak it in, hoping it will take everyone by surprise. Guess that didn't work as well as they hoped it would.

All of my Aunts have a Wii.(Phonetically speaking, that sentence is amazing.) My mom wants Wii Fit and all of that. She's got a Kindle Fire for tablet type gaming, and doesn't have much interest in traditional games.

#115 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 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

That is factually incorrect.

The XB360 sold out of stock, thus claiming the Wii U outsold it is disingenuous. The Wii U has no such depletion of stock and is readily available, even during the holiday shopping season.

Also, as I understand it, these new projections are placing their numbers closer to the launch of the PS3, which was abysmal given the console, in 2006 no less, sold for between 500-600 dollars.

The Wii U did not sell particularly well during the holiday season and those sales are only getting worse, which is why we are seeing a change in projections from corporate.

The system is overpriced, poorly marketed, and has almost no AAA software forthcoming for the first half of this fiscal year. (The second half isn't looking much better thus far)

#116 Posted by D3s7rUc71oN (5180 posts) -

It was going to bite them in the ass for not caring for the hardcore gamers, they got arrogant a few years back because they were selling millions of system without having many quality games. I remember them saying the hardcore crowd was not their priority. I dont feel sorry for them,  MS could end up the same way but at least they got third party support and secure timed exclusives. Nintendohas made a truckload of money but they are too cheap , not willing to take risks, all profit from day 1 and thinking they can get away with it. The honeymoon is over, Nintendo. 

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

did you even do your research before buying the thing? I mean their's a bunch of good games on it already and it's lineup for 2013 looks solid.

Shinobishyguy

Most of those "good games" are ports of older titles that not only look and play inferior to their counterparts but are also currently far more expensive.

At this moment the Wii U is about the most redundant console I've ever seen, which also means it is almost entirely unnecessary.

  

#118 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -

[QUOTE="dvader654"][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.

Vari3ty

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.

Outside having to point at the screen meaning you can't be lying in bed I find the wii to be very relaxing. You never have to stand for most motion control games, so that shouldn't even be part of the equation. You never have to hold your hand out either, I rest my hand on my lap and with small wrist movements I perform most movements. Because the wii mote is not one solid piece I can stretch my arms out to much more comfortable positions.
#119 Posted by SulIy (112 posts) -

Doesn't surprise me. I bought one at launch, beat NSMBU, (great game) and rapidly lost interest. The third party software is a poor value, (inferior versions of Mass Effect 3 and Batman that are overpriced grossly compared to the existing superior versions) and is also badly optimized. The first party front is poorly represented, as great as NSMBU played, it's still just another NSMB game, and no kind of showcase at all for the system.  So I sold it off and am waiting for an actual worthwhile game library to take shape before I give it another shot. (I had to sell it at a loss to Gamestop because no one wanted it) It feels incomplete, like it really needed to be delayed until at least Spring 2013.

As an aside, it's funny that after how all through 2005 to 2006 on various forums we had to suffer through extended talk of how X360 and PS3 were not "true" next gen because they were just the "same old thing" in HD, (non-literally) one of the most anticipated titles for the Wii-U coming down the pipe this calendar year is (literally) the same old thing in HD, Wind Waker.  I'm not going to harp on them for that, I actually really liked Wind Waker, and would love to play it again.  But hopefully it does signal we are past the psuedo-intellectual nonsense that plagued so many gaming forums before and after the first Wii launched.  AS has already been said in this thread, graphics and game play are not mutually exclusive.

#120 Posted by Shinobishyguy (22468 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"]

did you even do your research before buying the thing? I mean their's a bunch of good games on it already and it's lineup for 2013 looks solid.

Grammaton-Cleric

Most of those "good games" are ports of older titles that not only look and play inferior to their counterparts but are also currently far more expensive.

At this moment the Wii U is about the most redundant console I've ever seen, which also means it is almost entirely unnecessary.

  

I was talking about the 3ds, that's what the quote was referring to

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

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"]

did you even do your research before buying the thing? I mean their's a bunch of good games on it already and it's lineup for 2013 looks solid.

Shinobishyguy

Most of those "good games" are ports of older titles that not only look and play inferior to their counterparts but are also currently far more expensive.

At this moment the Wii U is about the most redundant console I've ever seen, which also means it is almost entirely unnecessary.

  

I was talking about the 3ds, that's what the quote was referring to

Oops, my mistake.

In that case, I agree. The 3DS has a solid library. Then again, I consider Nintendo handhelds to be mostly brilliant devices.

 

#122 Posted by Shinobishyguy (22468 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"]

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

Most of those "good games" are ports of older titles that not only look and play inferior to their counterparts but are also currently far more expensive.

At this moment the Wii U is about the most redundant console I've ever seen, which also means it is almost entirely unnecessary.

  

Grammaton-Cleric

I was talking about the 3ds, that's what the quote was referring to

Oops, my mistake.

In that case, I agree. The 3DS has a solid library. Then again, I consider Nintendo handhelds to be mostly brilliant devices.

 

yeah exactly. The recent nintendo direct showed that nintendo themselves are hard at work on the wii U, but they still have an uphill battle to fight with it without third parties to pickup the slack
#123 Posted by GodModeEnabled (15314 posts) -

My issue with Nintendo is that they take all the wrong risks.  They are willing to spend money on R&D for oddball controllers, and unwilling to invest in games that aren't a sure thing.  They rely on two things: their tried and true franchises as well as low budget games that have broad appeal to nongamers.  They've let great IPs like F-Zero fall by the wayside in favor of an F-Zero minigame in Nintendoland.  Imagine if F-Zero U was a Wii U launch title with graphics on par with WipEout.  It would have sold great and would have been an awesome graphical showcase for the system.

When they decided that 'gameplay is more important than graphics' and that their business model could survive on their core Nintendo fanbase as well as soccer moms, they didn't realize that their core base likes good graphics and that soccer moms don't buy games in the same numbers that we do.  Nontraditional gamers also don't care about new hardware.  My mom wants a Wii, she doesn't want a Wii U.  Meanwhile Nintendo is about to get left behind again by companies who realize that graphics and gameplay aren't mutually exclusive.

rragnaar
I remember the Fzero game on the gamecube was a lot of fun I wouldn't mind seeing that series coming back. I also wish they would give Metroid back to Retro and not have sh1tty Team Ninja continue to ruin the series. Other M was an abortion. There are two series that would be awesome to see.
#124 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

  AS has already been said in this thread, graphics and game play are not mutually exclusive.

SulIy

Absolutely.

In truth, better processing power often facilitates better gameplay, such as steady framerates, superior physics, etc.

This entire mantra of "gameplay before graphics" was merely an oft-cited defense to the piss-poor specs of the original Wii. Before that console, this medium was almost entirely propelled by the advancement of processing and graphical fidelity and this crucial evolutionary component is further evidenced by the fact that each generation has enjoyed games that could not have been fully realized on prior consoles.

#125 Posted by Lucky_Krystal (1730 posts) -

Oops, my mistake.

In that case, I agree. The 3DS has a solid library. Then again, I consider Nintendo handhelds to be mostly brilliant devices.

 Grammaton-Cleric

Yes! I agree with you there. I've always loved Nintendo's handhelds. I've had a Gameboy advance SP, a DS, and now a 3DS. Ahhh, good times with some great games.

But for some reason, I was never too crazy about their consoles. And I'm even less interested in the Wii U, with its poor lineup. Maybe the Wii U will pick itself up and get going like the 3DS did. Though I highly doubt that. They even just announced that they had no intention to cut the price. Really Nintendo? :|

#126 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

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.

 

Grammaton-Cleric

Sorry to break it to you but attacking an opinion, chipping away at the logic (or lack thereof) of a postulation, is the basis of argumentation and rhetoric. You've entered into a debate space and then take offense that your assertions are challenged, which is entirely nonsensical.

Your opinion, without backing, evidence or logic, is flatly worthless. People walk around with this notion that having an opinion shields their views from criticism when in reality you open yourself to such attacks the moment you make that opinion public. If you can't roll with argument and debate then remove yourself from those situations where such skills are necessary because opinion alone doesn't insulate your ideas from criticism or rebuttal.

Your analysis of MS is further evidence of your inability to objectively analyze this medium beyond the narrow parameters of your myopic fandom. While I certainly agree that Kinnect was a weak peripheral, your admonishment of Microsoft's online interface is flatly amusing given that, as a console manufacturer, they are essentially the most directly responsible entity for the propagation and proliferation of online gaming as it pertains to the console model. The fee they charge for XBL is nominal and clearly profitable given Sony's own attempt to adopt a pay model. On the other side of the spectrum is Nintendo's online interface, which is perfunctory at best and at least five years behind the curve. The only reason Nintendo has even attempted to implement online functionality (feeble as it may be) is because of the trail blazed by MS and, to a lesser extent, Sony.

The claim that the XB "popularized DLC and FPS" is nothing more than specious propaganda; FPS were popular long before even the original XB launched and DLC is hardly a new model, even if this generation ushered in a new level of widespread micro-transactions that have delivered mixed dividends. (And for the record plenty of the DLC released this generation has been excellent and worth the price)

The notion that Microsoft's newest model is exploitive of "poor people" is nonsense. Like any subscription-based service, this newest model offers consumers an option to mitigate upfront costs by paying a larger fee per month. Such a practice is hardly exploitive and actually par for the course among consumer electronics, specifically media-infused cell phones. I agree the plan is a rip-off from a consumer standpoint but the model is hardly as nefarious as you would hyperbolically suggest.

Objectively, regardless of pitfalls, Microsoft's contributions to this medium since their entry into the marketplace far exceed Nintendo's over the course of the last decade. MS pioneered and standardized HD resolution for consoles, pushed for hard drives as a standard, created the most coherent and centralized hub for online gaming, created and executed an excellent online storefront for downloadable content, and created a dedicated conduit for indie gaming.

By contrast, Nintendo has used outdated tech, latched onto outdated physical media that in turn limited the type of software that could appear on their console, largely ignored the benefits of having a dedicated hard drive, refused to implement, on any level, support for HD resolutions, implemented only the basest of online functionality, stubbornly utilized controllers that limited certain genres by default, and ushered in motion gaming, which was eventually proven to be a gimmick that the casual crowd initially embraced but inevitably abandoned. (And if you want to really discuss the issue of impediment, we can talk about the early tyrannical years of Nintendo, when they tried to block, among other things, the rental market and also enacted and advocated censorship within this medium)

And your postulation is that MS is doing more harm than Nintendo?

For all their mistakes (some of which have been epic) both MS and Sony have done far more to propel this medium forward than contemporary Nintendo who, post-SNES, has been nothing short of an egocentric entity, entrenched in hubris and buoyed by fans who will forgive them any and all transgression because of that aforementioned devotion, which is a mixture of both misplaced adoration and blind veneration. While I will be the first to concede they are, for all time, one of the most important companies to ever grace this medium, that historical reality does nothing to negate their persistent failure to deliver quality consoles.   

feel better now that you got that all out of your system. :P Great points on most parts but again I feel the motion stuff gets put down simply cause grrrr I don't like it. I think the most interesting thing to happen this gen is the wrench Nintendo threw into the whole simply upgrade the power of your systems mentality. They did something no one has done in many many generations, attempt to change the way we play games. Whether it works now or not is not the point, it's that the change has started and inspire of all your dreaming that it will simply go away it won't. The future may not look like a wiimote at all. It maybe controllers but being used with kinect where you can have conversations with characters. I don't know what the future holds but now controller input will be just as important as better graphics and to me that is a good thing. It all started cause Nintendo did what they did, and I don't care why they did it (as I know a bunch of you have tried to discredit anything Nintendo has done by making excuses for why they do things). Everything else you mentioned they are terrible at. But that one thing is huge.
#127 Posted by Grammaton-Cleric (7513 posts) -

feel better now that you got that all out of your system. :P Great points on most parts but again I feel the motion stuff gets put down simply cause grrrr I don't like it. I think the most interesting thing to happen this gen is the wrench Nintendo threw into the whole simply upgrade the power of your systems mentality. They did something no one has done in many many generations, attempt to change the way we play games. Whether it works now or not is not the point, it's that the change has started and inspire of all your dreaming that it will simply go away it won't. The future may not look like a wiimote at all. It maybe controllers but being used with kinect where you can have conversations with characters. I don't know what the future holds but now controller input will be just as important as better graphics and to me that is a good thing. It all started cause Nintendo did what they did, and I don't care why they did it (as I know a bunch of you have tried to discredit anything Nintendo has done by making excuses for why they do things). Everything else you mentioned they are terrible at. But that one thing is huge.

dvader654

You make a very well-argued and fair point and given your willingness to concede Nintendo's many faults I shall thus concede that motion control was incredibly innovative, even if said innovation wasn't fully realized during the lifecycle of the console.

Personally, I think Nintendo still has greatness in them; I would argue it is an essential part of their DNA. I just wish they would look to their own storied past in an effort to recall why they were once the frontrunner of both hardware and software and how, once upon a time, they were able to cater to both casuals and hardcore alike with quality software.

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

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

Oops, my mistake.

In that case, I agree. The 3DS has a solid library. Then again, I consider Nintendo handhelds to be mostly brilliant devices.

 Lucky_Krystal

Yes! I agree with you there. I've always loved Nintendo's handhelds. I've had a Gameboy advance SP, a DS, and now a 3DS. Ahhh, good times with some great games.

But for some reason, I was never too crazy about their consoles. And I'm even less interested in the Wii U, with its poor lineup. Maybe the Wii U will pick itself up and get going like the 3DS did. Though I highly doubt that. They even just announced that they had no intention to cut the price. Really Nintendo? :|

After the SNES, Nintendo made a series of increasingly odd and foolish mistakes that gradually eroded many of the pillars that had previously made the overall structure of their model so effective.

By contrast, the handhelds have enjoyed the retention of these figurative pillars, specifically outstanding third party support and broad functionality, so that all manner of games and genres can be implemented on the systems.  

#129 Posted by Vickman178 (1035 posts) -

[QUOTE="Vickman178"]

This feels like it should be in System Wars. Also I don't understand the hatred and pessimism some of you have regarding Nintendo. Actually...I think I kind of do understand, since I was the same way when the PS3 came out. I was 13 and making fun of how retardedly expensive it was and how it had no games and how Sony was going to leave the console market.

 

But then something magical happened, I grew up.

Grammaton-Cleric

If personal growth is something you crave, I can give you a significant heaping of self-improvement by showing your how puerile your comments actually are.

Firstly, a discussion on the slowing sales of a new system belongs precisely here. Perhaps you operate under the myopic self-delusion that only those topics which don't offend your personal sensibilities belong on this forum but since this board is an extension of libertarian free expression rather than some personal fascist construct then we can safely (and intellectually) arrive at the conclusion that this topic is apropos.

This is further evinced by the fact that sales data is regularly posted and discussed in this very place.

Your false-empathy, while neither clever nor poignant, does serve the purpose in delineating your misunderstanding of an issue that has been ongoing for the better part of two decades in regards to the many mistakes that Nintendo has made, many of them egregious and damaging to the propulsion and healthy development of this medium.

Your decision to label these criticisms, many of them valid and provable, as hatred further illustrates your own tenuous grasp of the deeper nuances of this ongoing issue, which is both polarizing and decidedly complicated. Your infantile banter has contributed nothing but rather serves to obfuscate the matter further by attempting to make this an issue of superficial fandom rather than objective analysis and criticism of one of the most prominent console manufacturers in this medium.

Ironically, your post is the most obvious example of system wars banter so while I applaud your growth I don't think the journey is yet complete.

#130 Posted by Vari3ty (11111 posts) -

So now Iwata has hinted that he might step down if Nintendo doesn't post a profit in the next fiscal year. Things could get interesting. 

Edit: Source

#131 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -

So now Iwata has hinted that he might step down if Nintendo doesn't post a profit in the next fiscal year. Things could get interesting. 

Edit: Source

Vari3ty
Noooo. He is great. But seriously, the wii u pad direction seemed like a bad idea from the start, shame they didn't see it.
#132 Posted by Bigboi500 (29914 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

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.

 

Grammaton-Cleric

Sorry to break it to you but attacking an opinion, chipping away at the logic (or lack thereof) of a postulation, is the basis of argumentation and rhetoric. You've entered into a debate space and then take offense that your assertions are challenged, which is entirely nonsensical.

Your opinion, without backing, evidence or logic, is flatly worthless. People walk around with this notion that having an opinion shields their views from criticism when in reality you open yourself to such attacks the moment you make that opinion public. If you can't roll with argument and debate then remove yourself from those situations where such skills are necessary because opinion alone doesn't insulate your ideas from criticism or rebuttal.

Your analysis of MS is further evidence of your inability to objectively analyze this medium beyond the narrow parameters of your myopic fandom. While I certainly agree that Kinnect was a weak peripheral, your admonishment of Microsoft's online interface is flatly amusing given that, as a console manufacturer, they are essentially the most directly responsible entity for the propagation and proliferation of online gaming as it pertains to the console model. The fee they charge for XBL is nominal and clearly profitable given Sony's own attempt to adopt a pay model. On the other side of the spectrum is Nintendo's online interface, which is perfunctory at best and at least five years behind the curve. The only reason Nintendo has even attempted to implement online functionality (feeble as it may be) is because of the trail blazed by MS and, to a lesser extent, Sony.

The claim that the XB "popularized DLC and FPS" is nothing more than specious propaganda; FPS were popular long before even the original XB launched and DLC is hardly a new model, even if this generation ushered in a new level of widespread micro-transactions that have delivered mixed dividends. (And for the record plenty of the DLC released this generation has been excellent and worth the price)

The notion that Microsoft's newest model is exploitive of "poor people" is nonsense. Like any subscription-based service, this newest model offers consumers an option to mitigate upfront costs by paying a larger fee per month. Such a practice is hardly exploitive and actually par for the course among consumer electronics, specifically media-infused cell phones. I agree the plan is a rip-off from a consumer standpoint but the model is hardly as nefarious as you would hyperbolically suggest.

Objectively, regardless of pitfalls, Microsoft's contributions to this medium since their entry into the marketplace far exceed Nintendo's over the course of the last decade. MS pioneered and standardized HD resolution for consoles, pushed for hard drives as a standard, created the most coherent and centralized hub for online gaming, created and executed an excellent online storefront for downloadable content, and created a dedicated conduit for indie gaming.

By contrast, Nintendo has used outdated tech, latched onto outdated physical media that in turn limited the type of software that could appear on their console, largely ignored the benefits of having a dedicated hard drive, refused to implement, on any level, support for HD resolutions, implemented only the basest of online functionality, stubbornly utilized controllers that limited certain genres by default, and ushered in motion gaming, which was eventually proven to be a gimmick that the casual crowd initially embraced but inevitably abandoned. (And if you want to really discuss the issue of impediment, we can talk about the early tyrannical years of Nintendo, when they tried to block, among other things, the rental market and also enacted and advocated censorship within this medium)

And your postulation is that MS is doing more harm than Nintendo?

For all their mistakes (some of which have been epic) both MS and Sony have done far more to propel this medium forward than contemporary Nintendo who, post-SNES, has been nothing short of an egocentric entity, entrenched in hubris and buoyed by fans who will forgive them any and all transgression because of that aforementioned devotion, which is a mixture of both misplaced adoration and blind veneration. While I will be the first to concede they are, for all time, one of the most important companies to ever grace this medium, that historical reality does nothing to negate their persistent failure to deliver quality consoles.   

What you consider Microsoft's "contributions" I think took console gaming in a wrong direction. Thanks to them, console gaming has become a FPS genre nightmare. I'm sure EA and Activision are greatful for that online, Call of Duty and its clones have stagnated the industry and made it hard for other developers to make money, and limited the US market to not much more than shooters for bro gamers and sports games for frat boys.

 

Sony tried to cater to the West and it was almost its downfall. The PS2 was a haven for JRPGs and Japanese games in general, and maybe it's just a coincidence, but since Sony started developing shooters and trying to appeal to western gamers, they've fallen off the top of the mountain. Vita is having problems, especially in Japan, for the same reasons.

 

I just think the consoles' jump to be a watered-down, pseudo PC experience isn't the way to go, and that consoles peaked during the PS2, Gamecube and Xbox generation and has gone downhill since. Instead of staying strong, there is a lot of speculation that this upcomming generation of consoles will be the last batch.

 

That's just my personal views on console gaming, and I believe consoles should be led by the Japanese, and western developed games should be done on PC.

 

Nintendo has never "failed to deliver quality consoles" either.  You and I just have vastly different views about where the console industry needs to be heading.

#133 Posted by wiouds (5204 posts) -

Nintendo can turn this around. They just need to get a wide spread of good games. The X-Box 360 and ps3 have a wide spread of games on them that are good. Also shooters is the genre has been the least stagnate this gen and the Wii did not have many on them. As many said you can have a weaker system as long as you can get the good games for it.

#134 Posted by dvader654 (44752 posts) -

Nintendo can turn this around. They just need to get a wide spread of good games. The X-Box 360 and ps3 have a wide spread of games on them that are good. Also shooters is the genre has been the least stagnate this gen and the Wii did not have many on them. As many said you can have a weaker system as long as you can get the good games for it.

wiouds
Who is going to make third party games for wii u when all development is going to be for the new consoles. Nintendo will have to do this all on their own.
#135 Posted by Bigboi500 (29914 posts) -

[QUOTE="wiouds"]

Nintendo can turn this around. They just need to get a wide spread of good games. The X-Box 360 and ps3 have a wide spread of games on them that are good. Also shooters is the genre has been the least stagnate this gen and the Wii did not have many on them. As many said you can have a weaker system as long as you can get the good games for it.

dvader654

Who is going to make third party games for wii u when all development is going to be for the new consoles. Nintendo will have to do this all on their own.

As long as they get Japanese third party devs all is good imo. Of course they'll still have EA, Activision and Ubisoft.

#136 Posted by wiouds (5204 posts) -

[QUOTE="wiouds"]

Nintendo can turn this around. They just need to get a wide spread of good games. The X-Box 360 and ps3 have a wide spread of games on them that are good. Also shooters is the genre has been the least stagnate this gen and the Wii did not have many on them. As many said you can have a weaker system as long as you can get the good games for it.

dvader654

Who is going to make third party games for wii u when all development is going to be for the new consoles. Nintendo will have to do this all on their own.

That is the answer that Nintendo need to come up with. If they can get a good libary behind the WiiU then they can have an under power system and still be able stand near the top.

#137 Posted by Shame-usBlackley (18266 posts) -

UH OH.

http://www.costco.com/Nintendo-Wii-U-8GB-Basic-Set.product.100021629.html

http://www.costco.com/Nintendo-Wii-U-32-GB-Deluxe-Set.product.100021626.html

#138 Posted by D3s7rUc71oN (5180 posts) -

UH OH.

http://www.costco.com/Nintendo-Wii-U-8GB-Basic-Set.product.100021629.html

http://www.costco.com/Nintendo-Wii-U-32-GB-Deluxe-Set.product.100021626.html

Shame-usBlackley

Wow not bad, the basic model looks attractive but Rayman is the only exclusive releasing in March. They need the games, look at the Vita. 

#139 Posted by Bigboi500 (29914 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

UH OH.

http://www.costco.com/Nintendo-Wii-U-8GB-Basic-Set.product.100021629.html

http://www.costco.com/Nintendo-Wii-U-32-GB-Deluxe-Set.product.100021626.html

D3s7rUc71oN

Wow not bad, the basic model looks attractive but Rayman is the only exclusive releasing in March. They need the games, look at the Vita. 

Rayman comes out in February. Lego City Undercover comes out in March.

#140 Posted by D3s7rUc71oN (5180 posts) -

Will Costco honor this "error" ? I've seen stores like Best Buy backpeddling when they accepted orders on PS3's and canceling afterward. Hmm..

#141 Posted by Shame-usBlackley (18266 posts) -

Will Costco honor this "error" ? I've seen stores like Best Buy backpeddling when they accepted orders on PS3's and canceling afterward. Hmm..

D3s7rUc71oN

I don't think it's an error.

#142 Posted by S0lidSnake (29001 posts) -

Will Costco honor this "error" ? I've seen stores like Best Buy backpeddling when they accepted orders on PS3's and canceling afterward. Hmm..

D3s7rUc71oN

Costco is f*cking awesome. They will honor it and then give you an 10 pound bag of chips on top of it.

#143 Posted by D3s7rUc71oN (5180 posts) -

I'd head to my local Costco this weekend and check it out, so other retailers will follow I guess. 

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

What you consider Microsoft's "contributions" I think took console gaming in a wrong direction. Thanks to them, console gaming has become a FPS genre nightmare. I'm sure EA and Activision are greatful for that online, Call of Duty and its clones have stagnated the industry and made it hard for other developers to make money, and limited the US market to not much more than shooters for bro gamers and sports games for frat boys.

 

Sony tried to cater to the West and it was almost its downfall. The PS2 was a haven for JRPGs and Japanese games in general, and maybe it's just a coincidence, but since Sony started developing shooters and trying to appeal to western gamers, they've fallen off the top of the mountain. Vita is having problems, especially in Japan, for the same reasons.

 

I just think the consoles' jump to be a watered-down, pseudo PC experience isn't the way to go, and that consoles peaked during the PS2, Gamecube and Xbox generation and has gone downhill since. Instead of staying strong, there is a lot of speculation that this upcomming generation of consoles will be the last batch.

 

That's just my personal views on console gaming, and I believe consoles should be led by the Japanese, and western developed games should be done on PC.

 

Nintendo has never "failed to deliver quality consoles" either.  You and I just have vastly different views about where the console industry needs to be heading.

Bigboi500

Again, your assertion that the XB360 is responsible for the proliferation of the FPS is factually incorrect. That genre had exploded long before the advent of even the original XB and, as a point of fact, you can trace the popularization of the genre on consoles to the overt success of games like Goldeneye 64, which was, for the time, among the best FPS on any console.

Let us also not forget that Nintendo was more than willing to capitalize on this trend by utilizing the efforts of a Western developer, which is why all three Metroid Prime games were rendered using the FPS perspective. The reality is that Nintendo has been plenty instrumental in the propagation of the genre, which has been popular on practically every console as well as the PC.

As to the notion that the success of the XB360 has led to stagnation within the industry, that again is merely specious, vapid and unsubstantiated pro-Nintendo/Japan propaganda. As a point of fact the XB360 offers a far greater amount of software than the Wii ever approached, including a massive amount of downloadable software, indie games, and far more genres and subgenres than the console you claim innovated and evolved this industry in a positive direction.

Also, your assertion that the PS3's lackluster performance was due to Sony's decision to cater to the Western market is entirely and provably false. Sony lost a great deal of ground due to their decision to use the PS brand as a means to foist Bluray onto the consumer, making their console far too expensive when it initially launched. You also seem to fail to grasp a fundamental and unchanging reality, which is that the Western gamers represent 80-85% of the international consumer market share.

Why would Sony, or any other developer for that matter, focus exclusively on market share other than the majority? And bear in mind, Japanese consumers are just as rigid in their purchasing habits as the Westerners who nab COD each year.

And while on the subject of Japanese games, I'm curious where one finds the sheer audacity to deride Western game design as stagnate while simultaneously claiming Japanese gaming is the apex of the medium. Not only have Japanese games largely stagnated throughout the various genres but even Japanese developers have gone on record decrying the lack of innovation within their own community. Even if I agreed that the military shooter has become the primary focal point of Western game design, there is absolutely no denying that Western gaming still offers far more variety than what is currently happening in Japan.

And the whole "watered down PC" mantra is so much tired nonsense and demonstrates a misunderstanding of how this medium has evolved. Some of the most innovative advancements were facilitated through PC gaming and essentially, every console is a "watered down" PC by default. This comment is dually ironic given that the Wii U shamelessly apes the widespread success of a Western technology that is basically a streamlined PC. (iPad and tablets)

As to Nintendo's systems, I consider a console a dud when it fails to deliver consistently great software over a broad spectrum of genres on a regular basis. You might consider redundancy and long, interminable droughts between software releases successful but most people would logically disagree with such an assertion. If you want further evidence of Nintendo's failures, go to any aggregate site and take a gander at the Wii's library, both in terms of critical consensus and quantity, contrasted to that of the PS3 or the XB360.

And that research will also yield similar result when you go back a generation or two.

And you'd have me believe that the Japanese should lead the console market while the West stays exclusive to PC?

 

 

 

#145 Posted by Metamania (12010 posts) -

I've always known that Nintendo excels with handelds.

So here's my question; if they are so good with the handelds, then why don't they just drop the console side of things and focus solely on handhelds? They are obviously the kings of handhelds, IMO.

#146 Posted by Systems_Id (8155 posts) -

My issue with Nintendo is that they take all the wrong risks.  They are willing to spend money on R&D for oddball controllers, and unwilling to invest in games that aren't a sure thing.  They rely on two things: their tried and true franchises as well as low budget games that have broad appeal to nongamers.  They've let great IPs like F-Zero fall by the wayside in favor of an F-Zero minigame in Nintendoland.  Imagine if F-Zero U was a Wii U launch title with graphics on par with WipEout.  It would have sold great and would have been an awesome graphical showcase for the system.

When they decided that 'gameplay is more important than graphics' and that their business model could survive on their core Nintendo fanbase as well as soccer moms, they didn't realize that their core base likes good graphics and that soccer moms don't buy games in the same numbers that we do.  Nontraditional gamers also don't care about new hardware.  My mom wants a Wii, she doesn't want a Wii U.  Meanwhile Nintendo is about to get left behind again by companies who realize that graphics and gameplay aren't mutually exclusive.

rragnaar

I'd like to quote this again just in case any Nintendo reps are listening.

#147 Posted by Bigboi500 (29914 posts) -

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

What you consider Microsoft's "contributions" I think took console gaming in a wrong direction. Thanks to them, console gaming has become a FPS genre nightmare. I'm sure EA and Activision are greatful for that online, Call of Duty and its clones have stagnated the industry and made it hard for other developers to make money, and limited the US market to not much more than shooters for bro gamers and sports games for frat boys.

 

Sony tried to cater to the West and it was almost its downfall. The PS2 was a haven for JRPGs and Japanese games in general, and maybe it's just a coincidence, but since Sony started developing shooters and trying to appeal to western gamers, they've fallen off the top of the mountain. Vita is having problems, especially in Japan, for the same reasons.

 

I just think the consoles' jump to be a watered-down, pseudo PC experience isn't the way to go, and that consoles peaked during the PS2, Gamecube and Xbox generation and has gone downhill since. Instead of staying strong, there is a lot of speculation that this upcomming generation of consoles will be the last batch.

 

That's just my personal views on console gaming, and I believe consoles should be led by the Japanese, and western developed games should be done on PC.

 

Nintendo has never "failed to deliver quality consoles" either.  You and I just have vastly different views about where the console industry needs to be heading.

Grammaton-Cleric

Again, your assertion that the XB360 is responsible for the proliferation of the FPS is factually incorrect. That genre had exploded long before the advent of even the original XB and, as a point of fact, you can trace the popularization of the genre on consoles to the overt success of games like Goldeneye 64, which was, for the time, among the best FPS on any console.

Let us also not forget that Nintendo was more than willing to capitalize on this trend by utilizing the efforts of a Western developer, which is why all three Metroid Prime games were rendered using the FPS perspective. The reality is that Nintendo has been plenty instrumental in the propagation of the genre, which has been popular on practically every console as well as the PC.

As to the notion that the success of the XB360 has led to stagnation within the industry, that again is merely specious, vapid and unsubstantiated pro-Nintendo/Japan propaganda. As a point of fact the XB360 offers a far greater amount of software than the Wii ever approached, including a massive amount of downloadable software, indie games, and far more genres and subgenres than the console you claim innovated and evolved this industry in a positive direction.

Also, your assertion that the PS3's lackluster performance was due to Sony's decision to cater to the Western market is entirely and provably false. Sony lost a great deal of ground due to their decision to use the PS brand as a means to foist Bluray onto the consumer, making their console far too expensive when it initially launched. You also seem to fail to grasp a fundamental and unchanging reality, which is that the Western gamers represent 80-85% of the international consumer market share.

Why would Sony, or any other developer for that matter, focus exclusively on market share other than the majority? And bear in mind, Japanese consumers are just as rigid in their purchasing habits as the Westerners who nab COD each year.

And while on the subject of Japanese games, I'm curious where one finds the sheer audacity to deride Western game design as stagnate while simultaneously claiming Japanese gaming is the apex of the medium. Not only have Japanese games largely stagnated throughout the various genres but even Japanese developers have gone on record decrying the lack of innovation within their own community. Even if I agreed that the military shooter has become the primary focal point of Western game design, there is absolutely no denying that Western gaming still offers far more variety than what is currently happening in Japan.

And the whole "watered down PC" mantra is so much tired nonsense and demonstrates a misunderstanding of how this medium has evolved. Some of the most innovative advancements were facilitated through PC gaming and essentially, every console is a "watered down" PC by default. This comment is dually ironic given that the Wii U shamelessly apes the widespread success of a Western technology that is basically a streamlined PC. (iPad and tablets)

As to Nintendo's systems, I consider a console a dud when it fails to deliver consistently great software over a broad spectrum of genres on a regular basis. You might consider redundancy and long, interminable droughts between software releases successful but most people would logically disagree with such an assertion. If you want further evidence of Nintendo's failures, go to any aggregate site and take a gander at the Wii's library, both in terms of critical consensus and quantity, contrasted to that of the PS3 or the XB360.

And that research will also yield similar result when you go back a generation or two.

And you'd have me believe that the Japanese should lead the console market while the West stays exclusive to PC?

 

 

 

The good ole "reviews give a game it's value" excuse. Never mind the cultural differences and what gets lost in translation. Judging a largly niche Japanese library of Wii games by what Western gaming critics think is equal to giving credibility to some unknown Japanese kotaku writing a review of Dragon Age in Japan. I've never said all Western games on consoles are terrible or don't deserve to exist, but compare games like Dragon Age and Fallout 3/New Vegas to their PC counterparts and they run like crap and look like crap comparatively. They're also full of bugs, don't have mods and are often "dumbed down" with missing content, lack of menus and features. The problem with consoles is the hardware isn't up-gradable and devs are forced to scale back for many years, and the results are apparent in the games. If those kinds of games were not forced to be co-developed or even fully developed on weaker consoles and then ported to PC, those games would be much better.

 

Japanese games don't usually depend on high-end hardware to be good, games like Disgaea and Fire Emblem, Mario and Ratchet, Dragon Quest and Shin Megami Tensei. With the inter-mingling of Western-developed games that sell well in the West, even the Japanese developers would rather make a quick buck and develop a Homefront or a Medal of Honor game instead of making a proper Chrono Trigger sequel. The decline of Japanese games in the West is due to that rather than an alleged "Western innovation" from genres like WRPGs were you sift through dialog trees and uninteresting characters with boring personalities.

 

You might be content to play inferior versions of multiplats that run on low frames per second and sub HD, but for those kinds of games I want the true and immersive experiences that the developers had in mind for their games. You can also console yourself that Sony and Microsoft consoles do infact look better than Nintendo games, but they're still sub-standard and tremendously inferior to what PC gamers are playing. That cycle will continue in to next generation as well.

#148 Posted by Systems_Id (8155 posts) -

I've always known that Nintendo excels with handelds.

So here's my question; if they are so good with the handelds, then why don't they just drop the console side of things and focus solely on handhelds? They are obviously the kings of handhelds, IMO.

Metamania

Consoles generally still make them a lot of money despite any tepid sales. Hell I think the Gamecube made Nintendo a tidy profit despite selling worse than the N64.

#149 Posted by IndianaPwns39 (5037 posts) -

I'm not surprised. I recently played the Wii-U at Best Buy with a handful of demoes and I can't say I was interested in picking the console up anytime soon. Mario was fun and looked gorgeous but at the same time it was a Mario game. It didn't feel fresh or interesting or worth the console price. 

I also hated the controller, so I'd have to buy the alternative controller to stomach the system. 

#150 Posted by zombehhhhh (452 posts) -

Nintendo is such a terrible game company. All their games suck now and there isn't enough hardcore games. Plus they're never adding anything new anymore. The original Nintendo DS was a revolution, as was the Wii because of their new takes on gaming (both console and handheld), but they've run out of ideas/new technology so they release garbage like the Wii U. I'm surprised Nintendo hasn't fallen completely. They're always the worst conference to watch at E3 because all they do is point out their few successes and show off a new remake of Mario or Zelda or some other BS. Some of these games are good, but look at the life of the Gamecube compared to the Wii. Even the original Gameboys and Advances were better than the DS/3DS.