Wii General Discussion

[Hogge]

it looks freaking sweet, but no internet?! really what is that about then? no virtual console just games? i suppose its a cheap entry level console....at the end of a life cycle

 

To be honest, Nintendo probably are going to discontinue the Wii online services some day, and the day the current Wii will stop getting new online content is even closer.

[Dcubed]

Exclusive to Canada!? WTF!? How random! (Good thing that VGPlus are based in Canada )

 

Is it wrong that I want this just for collection purposes?

 

I'd probably never actually use it but I kinda want one just to sit alongside my NES toploader and SNES Jr. Just looks so 90s cool

Edited November 27, 2012 by Dcubed

[Hero-of-Time]

From Gaf...

 

 

*drools at next shot*

 

[Jamba]

I don't understand this from a strategic point of view at all. Surely the best thing for the Wii U is for them to properly pull the plug on the Wii? Also Nintendo's classic enemy... consumer confusion much?

[lostmario]

I don't understand this from a strategic point of view at all. Surely the best thing for the Wii U is for them to properly pull the plug on the Wii? Also Nintendo's classic enemy... consumer confusion much?

 

Yeah, all parents need to do now is buy that new Wii U Controller and they are good to go.

[Hogge]

I don't understand this from a strategic point of view at all. Surely the best thing for the Wii U is for them to properly pull the plug on the Wii? Also Nintendo's classic enemy... consumer confusion much?

 

I'd say that this is excellent to counter consumer confusion. The Wii looks a bit too similar to the Wii U, so Nintendo redesigned the Wii.

 

Why pull the plug on a successful console? Despite me not wanting it to happen, the Wii U may be a total flop. Nintendo kept earning money from the NES until well after the N64 came out.

 

The Wii and Wii U aren't competing. The Wii was aimed at casuals, and now with a reduced cost and more colourful design, it can truly become a kids console. No, seriously, today way too many parents decide to get their kids tablets instead of consoles, because it's cheaper. This could make them come to their senses.

 

Overall, I love this design, although I'd rather see the lid in a glossy plastic rather than that sort of rough industrial finish.

[Zechs Merquise]

I don't understand this from a strategic point of view at all. Surely the best thing for the Wii U is for them to properly pull the plug on the Wii? Also Nintendo's classic enemy... consumer confusion much?

 

It's actually a very good strategy. Not everyone has the money to drop on a Wii U and a load of full priced games.

 

There's a section of the market that is looking to spend around $100 and this suits them perfectly. What's more, it's likely that Nintendo are turning a tody profit on each unit sold - so this could well be a nice little earner.

 

It's like with the DS and the 3DS, there is some confusion that the DS still selling well is a problem for Nintendo! It's not at all, as each DS sold makes Nintendo a profit. Not everyone is going to stump up the cash for a new 3DS, so why not let them buy a DS?

 

Either way, Nintendo wins because they're selling something to both ends of the market.

[Jamba]

I'd say that this is excellent to counter consumer confusion. The Wii looks a bit too similar to the Wii U, so Nintendo redesigned the Wii.

 

Why pull the plug on a successful console? Despite me not wanting it to happen, the Wii U may be a total flop. Nintendo kept earning money from the NES until well after the N64 came out.

 

The Wii and Wii U aren't competing. The Wii was aimed at casuals, and now with a reduced cost and more colourful design, it can truly become a kids console. No, seriously, today way too many parents decide to get their kids tablets instead of consoles, because it's cheaper. This could make them come to their senses.

 

Overall, I love this design, although I'd rather see the lid in a glossy plastic rather than that sort of rough industrial finish.

 

You see, this is where I disagree. Nintendo did the same thing with Pokemon by putting it on the DS. If it had been a 3DS exclusive then it would have been a massive system seller. It's competing for giving people their Nintendo fix.

 

It's actually a very good strategy. Not everyone has the money to drop on a Wii U and a load of full priced games.

 

There's a section of the market that is looking to spend around $100 and this suits them perfectly. What's more, it's likely that Nintendo are turning a tody profit on each unit sold - so this could well be a nice little earner.

 

It's like with the DS and the 3DS, there is some confusion that the DS still selling well is a problem for Nintendo! It's not at all, as each DS sold makes Nintendo a profit. Not everyone is going to stump up the cash for a new 3DS, so why not let them buy a DS?

 

Either way, Nintendo wins because they're selling something to both ends of the market.

 

And by them doing this they slow down the growth of their user base by not directing the market. This will in turn reduce the chances of publishers putting 3rd party games on the system. Games sell consoles... yaddah yaddah

[Rummy]

It's almost as if they're a business :p

 

I never said they weren't, I just said I thought it was a bit shameless. Don't get hung up on the wrong bits!

 

As I said, why? Like...they made the 'family edition' thingy, so why this now? Why so close to Wii U? Why NOT be focusing more resources on the Wii U? Why not release it with a real killer app of a title or two? N64 had SM64 AND MK, right? Gamecube had melee. SNES had Super Mario World? All of which have gone on to be classics gamers games, some of the most well recieved of their generation - whilst being release titles. Will the Wii U do that? I'm not sure.

 

Is this going to confuse people, too? People looking for the 'new wii'...well, which one? It just seems out of place to me, almost like something's afoot. When do they start focusing too much on the money and less on the customer?

 

The Wii U is tearing me up, because it's something just not appealing to me at the moment. Nintendo has ALWAYS been a part of my life since I was like...2/3 playing mario land on my cousin's gameboy. Yet now it's not quite so much, and I guess I just wonder...why have they left me behind? Are they coming back? They've made a mint on the wii and 3DS, how much more do they need to make? Part of the lack of appeal is the what I perceive as the company's attitude and practise too, not just the consoles appealing less; but Nintendo themselves too. Of course, it could just me who's left them behind; but I don't think that's the case quite yet.

 

There's a lot of controversy around the Wii U too, I mean...it's pretty much underpowered compared to everyone's expectations. I *know* this is a controversial point to make, I *know* its been done in the other threads; resultantly I don't want to labour it and get hung up on it - but I don't want to ignore it. The system has other points that pose advantage, but they don't cancel out the fact it is generally being perceived as underpowered. They've taken a different direction, and I'm hoping it's the right one; I've started reading NotEnoughShaders as a result of the locked thread - it had some good discussion points in it that were unfortunately marred. NES is raising some really good points though about dev costs etc, countless devs have gone bust this generation - maybe Nintendo AREN'T just grabbing money with larger profit margins than other companies, maybe they ARE putting in bigger things that will affect and possibly even drastically boost the future of the gaming industry.

 

 

Or...maybe they're not. Maybe they're just about the money. Hey, Sony were just looking after their business interests when they forced LikSang down the pan, right? They were just looking after their business interests when they were putting rootkits on CDs, right? They're a business after all. I don't recall if there was a court ruling finding them guilty of manufacturing the ps2 to break, but I know for a while it was quite a well held view. Of course, that's just business if it WAS true, right? The law only forces the warranty for a year or two, so manufacturing them to break after 3...just good business moves. Yes this last point is unsubstatiated and exaggerated, but if it were true I could easily argue it's just good business. My point is not that they shouldn't be and shouldn't operate AS a business, it's just how far is it until everything is just down to the business/money rather than the customer, too?

Edited November 27, 2012 by Rummy

[Cube]

Not to mention that it looks like they'll have no trouble getting rid of their Wii U stock before Christmas, so the MiniWii won't take any sales away from it, and it's priced extremely well for a Christmas present.

 

That purple one looks nice, but the image of the red one makes it look incredibly cheap (which, I suppose, it is).

[Zechs Merquise]

And by them doing this they slow down the growth of their user base by not directing the market. This will in turn reduce the chances of publishers putting 3rd party games on the system. Games sell consoles... yaddah yaddah

 

No, they're not.

 

You cannabilise your market when you release two or more near identical products at similar price points. Those products then compete with one another because they occupy the same space in the market.

 

This is different, because Nintendo are releasing one thing for people looking to stump up $300 and one thing for people looking to spend $100.

 

The people looking to spend $100 on a gaming system aren't going to buy a Wii U at all - even if the Wii Mini isn't there. If the Wii Mini isn't available - they just won't buy a Nintendo product so it means Nintendo won't be getting their $100.

 

The Wii Mini is there to hoover up the impulse purchases and take the lower end of the market who aren't looking for a high end machine with a large price tag.

 

This is actually a very sound business strategy which is very common.

[Mokong]

What we all must remember is that for now this Wii Mini is only available in one country...Canada....which is an odd move in itself...I don't think there's even any garauntee it would come out here?

 

I do seem to remember someone at Nintendo say they'd like to do with the Wii like Sony were able to do with both the PS1 and PS2 and have still sell well (and make them money) even after the successor is out. So this would play well into those lines.

 

Remember the "PSone" when did that come out? Pretty sure that was a few months after the PS2 came out.

 

The only possible mistake Nintendo will have made here is releasing it shockingly close to when the Wii U came out... though I guess maybe they are trying to see how it goes over the Xmas period (and try get a few impluse buys) and using Canada as some sort of tester before deciding if they want to release it worldwide.

 

 

....oh and the lack of online compatibility seems an odd move too....even if this is not aimed at people who might buy a CoD or Monster Hunter game.... a "casual" might still buy MKWii or more likely Just Dance 4....in which case they'll be unable to access any of the DLC for it

[Jamba]

No, they're not.

 

You cannabilise your market when you release two or more near identical products at similar price points. Those products then compete with one another because they occupy the same space in the market.

 

This is different, because Nintendo are releasing one thing for people looking to stump up $300 and one thing for people looking to spend $100.

 

The people looking to spend $100 on a gaming system aren't going to buy a Wii U at all - even if the Wii Mini isn't there. If the Wii Mini isn't available - they just won't buy a Nintendo product so it means Nintendo won't be getting their $100.

 

The Wii Mini is there to hoover up the impulse purchases and take the lower end of the market who aren't looking for a high end machine with a large price tag.

 

This is actually a very sound business strategy which is very common.

 

Ah OK... you have me convinced

 

Also I hadn't really taken in the concept that this was $100 not £100. Which changes things quite a bit. On the other hand, I picked up my Wii second hand for £40 so...

[Daft]

Not to mention that it looks like they'll have no trouble getting rid of their Wii U stock before Christmas, so the MiniWii won't take any sales away from it, and it's priced extremely well for a Christmas present.

 

That purple one looks nice, but the image of the red one makes it look incredibly cheap (which, I suppose, it is).

 

I actually really like that it looks cheap. It's got a whole retro 80's vacuum forming look. Also matte plastic > the shiny dust whoring rubbish everything uses.

 

...Also, that purple one isn't a Wii Mini.

 

I look forward to the Xmas video on YouTube of a kid getting this instead of a Wii U because the parents got confused about the 'new Wii'. You know it's going to happen. There's always one.

[Dcubed]

Yeah, all parents need to do now is buy that new Wii U Controller and they are good to go.

 

Good thing that the can't buy the Gamepad seperately

[Cube]

...Also, that purple one isn't a Wii Mini.

 

It looks like one. Unless it's blue, not purple (I can't tell the difference).

[Ashley]

Edit: No Wifi is...annoying.

 

It's fine. The Wii isn't an online console anyway.

 

 

 

They didn't call it the Wiini! How dare they! I want my consoles to be named after noises that horses make.

[Rowan]

I can see why Nintendo has gotten rid of internet connectivity. If you're the sort of consumer interested in WiiWare and Virtual Console then you'd probably already have a Wii or can just buy the 1st redesign. There's only a small selection of games that took advantage of online well that I can think of.

[Wii]

 

Good God above is this hideous! What the fuck have they done? The Wii is one of the sexiest looking little consoles around. How do you end up going from that to an ugly, plain, cheap looking thing like this? It's like they're not even related. Seriously, my eyes, put it back, I'm going to get sick, it's absolutely vile.

[Magnus]

Wait, are you insulting yourself now?

 

I guess that saves time.

[Rummy]

Out of interest, what's the price comparison of this to an older style Wii, in Canada? I find it peculiar they haven't even written the 'mini' bit on it either.

[Murr]

From Gaf...

 

 

 

I have that Zelda Game & Watch

[Hero-of-Time]

Out of interest, what's the price comparison of this to an older style Wii, in Canada? I find it peculiar they haven't even written the 'mini' bit on it either.

 

On VGP they are $149 which when using the sites converter is £95. Your probably looking at around £70 for the new model, which makes it very tempting for me. I'm just waiting for them to put it on their site...

[Tamazoid]

I never said they weren't, I just said I thought it was a bit shameless. Don't get hung up on the wrong bits!

 

As I said, why? Like...they made the 'family edition' thingy, so why this now? Why so close to Wii U? Why NOT be focusing more resources on the Wii U? Why not release it with a real killer app of a title or two? N64 had SM64 AND MK, right? Gamecube had melee. SNES had Super Mario World? All of which have gone on to be classics gamers games, some of the most well recieved of their generation - whilst being release titles. Will the Wii U do that? I'm not sure.

 

Is this going to confuse people, too? People looking for the 'new wii'...well, which one? It just seems out of place to me, almost like something's afoot. When do they start focusing too much on the money and less on the customer?

 

The Wii U is tearing me up, because it's something just not appealing to me at the moment. Nintendo has ALWAYS been a part of my life since I was like...2/3 playing mario land on my cousin's gameboy. Yet now it's not quite so much, and I guess I just wonder...why have they left me behind? Are they coming back? They've made a mint on the wii and 3DS, how much more do they need to make? Part of the lack of appeal is the what I perceive as the company's attitude and practise too, not just the consoles appealing less; but Nintendo themselves too. Of course, it could just me who's left them behind; but I don't think that's the case quite yet.

 

There's a lot of controversy around the Wii U too, I mean...it's pretty much underpowered compared to everyone's expectations. I *know* this is a controversial point to make, I *know* its been done in the other threads; resultantly I don't want to labour it and get hung up on it - but I don't want to ignore it. The system has other points that pose advantage, but they don't cancel out the fact it is generally being perceived as underpowered. They've taken a different direction, and I'm hoping it's the right one; I've started reading NotEnoughShaders as a result of the locked thread - it had some good discussion points in it that were unfortunately marred. NES is raising some really good points though about dev costs etc, countless devs have gone bust this generation - maybe Nintendo AREN'T just grabbing money with larger profit margins than other companies, maybe they ARE putting in bigger things that will affect and possibly even drastically boost the future of the gaming industry.

 

 

Or...maybe they're not. Maybe they're just about the money. Hey, Sony were just looking after their business interests when they forced LikSang down the pan, right? They were just looking after their business interests when they were putting rootkits on CDs, right? They're a business after all. I don't recall if there was a court ruling finding them guilty of manufacturing the ps2 to break, but I know for a while it was quite a well held view. Of course, that's just business if it WAS true, right? The law only forces the warranty for a year or two, so manufacturing them to break after 3...just good business moves. Yes this last point is unsubstatiated and exaggerated, but if it were true I could easily argue it's just good business. My point is not that they shouldn't be and shouldn't operate AS a business, it's just how far is it until everything is just down to the business/money rather than the customer, too?

 

Like I said a couple of pages back, the Wii mini could be a genius idea by Nintendo if they are planning on marketing it in developing countries, Sony sold millions of PS2s in South America this generation. Either way it seems to me that Nintendo are just copying what they did with the NES, SNES, and the GBA where they released downsized versions after they released its successor.

 

I think you're confusing "making money" with Nintendo's company philosophy. Watch Iwata's talk from E3 2001, he was talking about diminishing returns and the need to innovate new games in ways other than adding better graphics and effects. Nintendo left the 'power' race after the Gamecube flopped. I don't see them returning to it either after the success of the Wii and DS. From the various talks Iwata has given he doesn't believe in that path. I don't think they could afford it in the long term either, even with the war chest the DS and Wii accumulated for them. They are a public company, they still need to appease their shareholders which bleeding large amounts of money wouldn't do. They aren't like Sony or Microsoft, they don't have other divisions to boost their revenue.

 

I don't see how they are 'grabbing money with large profit margins' when it's making a loss in the US (Yes I know about the exchange rate + selling one game breaks even) Nintendo can't afford to sell hardware at a massive loss like Sony and Microsoft did at the start of this generation, I don't think Sony will attempt that again to be honest. I don't understand you're whole argument of they made a mint with the 3DS either, they sold that at a loss for almost 8 months. Just because you're not happy with the direction Nintendo is going in doesn't mean they are trying to scam consumers

[Rummy]

That's actually a typo, it's supposed to be wii and DS, my bad. The Wii turned profit from launch in every territory. Assume even £10(likely much more than that given original launch prices/exchange between territories and average cost of production going down over time) on each one, and worldwide sales to date apparently at 97.18million, that is £972 million in profit on the system sale alone. I also read it apparently has an average attach rate of 8 to 1, I don't have source to hand right now. 8 months of a loss on a console that lasts a good few years isn't major either imo, btw - not to mention how well it is now selling(22.2million to date?).

 

I'm not sure whether I'm confusing making money with the company philosophy, that's my point. I mean, IS it the company philosophy, or is it about the money? When's the point when making money becomes making too much money? I know Microsoft and Sony had other avenues of revenue, but I used the example of Sony because as I understand their most profitable sector was in fact, the gaming division when it came round(ironically born out of Nintendo, no less). Startup money from elsewhere gave them that, but from what I've been reading they're doing terrible as a whole now financially. They dominated with the PS1 and PS2 though, I think sales of those to date still outweigh the DS and Wii, of course the former are older but the Wii and DS are not far off at all. However they(sony) made a lot of money but now....what's gone wrong with them?

 

You say Nintendo can't afford to make a loss etc; but why not? Sure they don't have other sectors propping them up but...what about having two of the most successfully selling consoles of the current generation? That they never made a loss on(unless they did for DS, I don't know). Or are you saying, despite what you're saying, they haven't actually made any money on them? Loss leaders are another simple business practise, but they can be risky if you don't have the money - I am of the view that Nintendo surely do from the Wii and DS doing so well so far.

 

Also, my problem isn't with making money. My post was meant to illustrate that I understand they're a business; but as I said when does it become about making ALL THE MONIES! Will it? When is making enough, enough? When does it come to a point where everything can simply be rationalised with the de facto response of 'that's business'. Is their approach a decision on the future of the industry, or the future of their pockets? What happens when the former leads to the latter, but the latter takes over? What I'm saying is, I don't know which one it is; and that possibly worries me.

 

(sales figures taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_game_consoles; yes it's wikipedia no I haven't checked the sources; I'm assuming it's correct for what I've quoted)