WiiUMarryMii Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 GoNintendo is reporting that a french retailer has listed the Wii U up for pre-booking. Here an image of it (IE users might not see this .png image) Source: http://www.gonintendo.com/?mode=viewstory&id=167961&sid=f7fef4c777110f0be1027d9910c7f09b
Cube Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 Retailers put up listing early all the time without getting any information from official sources. Zavvi already have their WiiU listing up.
WiiUMarryMii Posted December 7, 2011 Author Posted December 7, 2011 Retailers put up listing early all the time without getting any information from official sources. Zavvi already have their WiiU listing up. Yeah but regardless of that, many users at GoNintendo are going bonkers over that suggested price the Wii U is going for there. Paying $600 dlls for a console is too much. Even Sony had a hard time making that price point palatable for its core base.
flameboy Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 and in other news you have been able to preorder it from Zavvi for quite some time: http://www.zavvi.com/games/consoles/wii-u-console/10475210.html EDIT: didn't see cube's post before.
Magnus Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 I love GoNintendo. They're like the Kotaku of Nintendo gaming.
Cube Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 If a retailer puts the price too low, they either have to match that price or cancel or the pre-orders (and likely lose out on all those customers). If they put it too high then they simply lower the price when the official one is announced. They're just putting a safe guess in to cover themselves.
D_prOdigy Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 Yeah but regardless of that, many users at GoNintendo are going bonkers over that suggested price the Wii U is going for there. That's the real story here.
WiiUMarryMii Posted December 7, 2011 Author Posted December 7, 2011 If a retailer puts the price too low, they either have to match that price or cancel or the pre-orders (and likely lose out on all those customers). If they put it too high then they simply lower the price when the official one is announced. They're just putting a safe guess in to cover themselves. Yeah I understand that. Its like GameStop does here in the US with pricing games that are yet to go "gold" higher than the actual (final) retail price. Still, y'know how users on the web react to this. Especially the ones that are Wii U detractors. They're going to have a field day with "OMG Wii U is going to cost ya $600 dallerz!". Oh well...
flameboy Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 Yeah I understand that. Its like GameStop does here in the US with pricing games that are yet to go "gold" higher than the actual (final) retail price. Still, y'know how users on the web react to this. Especially the ones that are Wii U detractors. They're going to have a field day with "OMG Wii U is going to cost ya $600 dallerz!". Oh well... Yeah like you said the internet will be going crazy but I don't think after the high price of 3DS that Nintendo are dumb enough to make the same mistake again.
WiiUMarryMii Posted December 7, 2011 Author Posted December 7, 2011 Yeah like you said the internet will be going crazy but I don't think after the high price of 3DS that Nintendo are dumb enough to make the same mistake again. Indeed. The Pres of Nintendo did say that they wanted to avoid the same mistake they made with the 3DS's price. Lets hope they stick to that and sell the Wii U at an affordable price.
Cube Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 Yeah like you said the internet will be going crazy but I don't think after the high price of 3DS that Nintendo are dumb enough to make the same mistake again. I wouldn't be so sure. If they keep the name they'll have a hard time getting the point across that this is a new console - the same mistake they made with the 3DS.
WiiUMarryMii Posted December 7, 2011 Author Posted December 7, 2011 I wouldn't be so sure. If they keep the name they'll have a hard time getting the point across that this is a new console - the same mistake they made with the 3DS. But the Wii U was always suppose to be a continuation of the original Wii. Thus why you get to use the same controllers and add-ons. Plus the backward compatibility. And more importantly, how else would Nintendo cash-in on the million selling franchises they created on the Wii? Mainly Wii Sports, Wii Fit and Wii Play (and Wii Music, that game even sold millions). If they named the console something else, they would need to re-introduce themselves with mainstream gamers. Basically, start from scratch. And also they would need to rename the Wii franchises. Instead of just directly making profitable sequels that employ the same brand names.
Cube Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 If they named the console something else, they would need to re-introduce themselves with mainstream gamers. Basically, start from scratch. And also they would need to rename the Wii franchises. Instead of just directly making profitable sequels that employ the same brand names. I never said get rid of the Wii branding completely - but the announcement was so badly done that many (non-gaming) news journalists reported the controller as a new controller for the Wii. Wii2 would sufficiently get the point across.
darksnowman Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 Just an inflated placeholder. Did Iwata or someone allude to the fact that the Wii U won't be cheap, or something? Even still, they won't overprice it a la 3D, plus this is Carrefour here - a supermarket! I never said get rid of the Wii branding completely - but the announcement was so badly done that many (non-gaming) news journalists reported the controller as a new controller for the Wii. Gamers alike were baffled.
WiiUMarryMii Posted December 7, 2011 Author Posted December 7, 2011 I never said get rid of the Wii branding completely - but the announcement was so badly done that many (non-gaming) news journalists reported the controller as a new controller for the Wii. Wii2 would sufficiently get the point across. Oh, yeah I wanted that too. Wii U sounds kinda wonky. But as long as they kept the Wii brand alive was something that I thought was very important. Because lets face it, the Wii U is barely going to be 50% more powerful than what is already out there. And that's enough. It will keep productions costs down and devs won't have to spend millions creating every Wii U game. So it makes perfect sense to just make the Wii U a continuation of the Wii. Using the same popular brand names to get its foot in the door. And not have to re-introduce the console. And therefor, being at a disadvantage with the Sony and MS, who are keeping the brand names of their consoles practically intact with every generation. Xbox users simply moved up to the 360. 360 users will move up to the 720. Nintendo could use that same tactic, at least for the next generation coming up. After that, they can start from scratch if they want. Probably will have to anyway. Unless the motion control interface continues to be relevant and is not replaced with something better.
Beverage Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 Hmm I never understood what "confusion" that 'Nintendo' have apparently made with "getting the point across" that Wiiu is the successor to the Wii. For crying out bloody loud, does "This is the controller for the new console, the successor of the Wii, the Wiiu!" convey that point in the form of a wizard-levelled riddle or sumink? Jeeweez I think it was a mixture of unprofessional journalists doing a failtastic job of suck-reporting and wiitards yelling in orgasmic moans thus missing the build-up hype - which would've given them that "point" very clearly - of the Wiiu reveal. Daaah c'moooon, 'Wii 2' would be so dull/generic/bland! Wiiu is unique. Unifying, even. I think the sky's the limit with how jiggii u can get with it Wii = New Nintendo (0wn The W0rld Pr0ject )
Burny Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 Hmm I never understood what "confusion" that 'Nintendo' have apparently made with "getting the point across" that Wiiu is the successor to the Wii. First thing they showed was a Super Mario Brothers game, that could've just as well been a Wii game. Then they switched the game action from the TV to the tablet controller. Next thing they showed, was four Wiimote-players playing the game on the TV screen and one player playing on the tablet. The next couple of demos and applications they showed were either entirely doable on the Wii, or not game-related at all. All the while, there was a small white box lying under the TV, that could be easily mistaken for a Wii, having the Wii's white color, roughly same size and the already known horizontal position, as it was never even focused. So yes, they definitely confused the heck out of many people, until they started showing graphics demos clearly beyond anything the Wii is capable of and some footage of 360 games. That was at some point in the middle of their reveal video. At that point, they still had not mentioned that "WiiU", is actually the Wii's successor or bothered to highlight that this "WiiU"-thing isn't just a screen with attached buttons, but also consists of a box. Sure, at the end of E3, the point about the new console should've been clear to anyone. It should've already been clear three seconds into the reveal video though, which it wasn't.
Grazza Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 Am I the only one who would rather pay a high price for it if it meant the hardware was going to be better? Consoles are pretty cheap anyway compared to other consumer technology. Skimping doesn't get you anywhere other than regretting it's not more powerful years down the line (or sooner).
Beverage Posted December 7, 2011 Posted December 7, 2011 Nevermind what the first thing they showed was, what matters is you never needed to be three seconds into the vid for you to know it - the controller - was for the Wiiu. Not even for a split-second. Why? Teehee. Because if one were listening, then one would needn't anything other than what they were already told from a wealthy man in order to gain the thorough understanding that the upcoming footage was for the Wiiu's (the successor to the Wii) 'controller.' When I saw the NSMB thingy, I personally was thinking that it was a mere demonstration to show off how the Wiiu's controller could be used and also that it's fully backward compatible with the Wii, like what was promised : peace: . But once I saw the Mii's I must admit that I thought it was a new game for the Wiiu to appeal to the masses. Moreover, I didn't think that one would've had their mighty hopes crashing through the roof of the E3 building to see the box, as surely they would've known before the footage, as previously mentioned, that the footage was dedicated to the ass-grabbing controller However, I do agree that the confused ones would've not been upto detail of such. In any case, I had a powerful prediction that the box would've been white. Me and my friends gambled on it but none of us sorry fellows won a dime as we all betted on the same thing, so we all kept our ka-ching. It was quite obvious the box would've been white what with Nintendo expressing their little console-colouring strategy etc. I wish that the controller is able to expand off of the 3DS' Mii-Face-Capture-Thingy... Am I the only one who would rather pay a high price for it if it meant the hardware was going to be better? Consoles are pretty cheap anyway compared to other consumer technology. Skimping doesn't get you anywhere other than regretting it's not more powerful years down the line (or sooner). Depending on certain things I'd slap 1000rupees down for this whore machine.
Burny Posted December 8, 2011 Posted December 8, 2011 (edited) Nevermind what the first thing they showed was, what matters is you never needed to be three seconds into the vid for you to know it - the controller - was for the Wiiu. Not even for a split-second. Why? Teehee. Because if one were listening, then one would needn't anything other than what they were already told from a wealthy man in order to gain the thorough understanding that the upcoming footage was for the Wiiu's (the successor to the Wii) 'controller.' Sure. Until they started showing the Zelda demo though, it was also entirely possible that the controller was in fact the console. Meaning it wasn't a home console at all, but a tablet that somehow interacted with the Wii. No matter which way you slice it, unless you were privy to some secret information, had unwavering believe in the rumors that the console was streaming to the controller or could identify the white box to be not a Wii, which Nintendo made hard by not showing it properly, you could have taken all kinds of things from that footage. Even if you believed it to be a new home console streaming to the controller, showing Wii-level applications and spouting "the new controller, the new controller, the new controller" doesn't exactly drive home the point, that you're presenting a "next gen"-machine, instead of a slightly overclocked Wii called "WiiU", streaming to a new controller. It was extremely confusing. Am I the only one who would rather pay a high price for it if it meant the hardware was going to be better? Consoles are pretty cheap anyway compared to other consumer technology. Skimping doesn't get you anywhere other than regretting it's not more powerful years down the line (or sooner). Probably not. Consoles are never cheap though. Manufacturers simply accept that they're getting slim margins out of them or will downright take losses for a couple of years to even get them into that price range. And at the start of this generation "cheap" "high-end" consoles still meant 400€-600€ to the end consumer, with MS and Sony taking losses, even at those prices. Take this price (purely speculative) for instance. Who buys a 450€ Nintendo console? Parents searching for a Christmas present? Sure, there are parents willing and able to part with that amount of cash for a present which is useless, unless you spend another 50€ on an actual game, but it won't be many. Hardcore Nintendo fans? There aren't that many of them around, or the GameCube and N64 wouldn't have sunk as hard. Sony and MS fans, eager for a new, powerful machine? Probably aren't all too interested in Nintendo games and can expect to get all the games they want on their respective new systems. Those systems can be expected to be at least as or more powerful than the WiiU, even if Nintendo went all out. If in doubt, MS and Sony would probably just outspend Nintendo and accept to take more losses. On top of it, those people are probably invested in XBL and PSN, so there's little reason to switch. People actually interested in having the most powerful machine around? Those have been enjoying actual HD-games instead of the "high-end" console's <=30fps/<=720p parade on their PCs for some years and there's little reason to believe PCs will take longer than a year to overtake consoles again. That's provided consoles will even be able to overtake them, as there are limitations for consoles, that simply aren't there for PCs. A modern PCs graphics card alone can well draw as much power as a whole console. Edited December 8, 2011 by Burny
Grazza Posted December 8, 2011 Posted December 8, 2011 @Burny You're right, obviously. I'm just saying it's a bit of a shame people don't value consoles as much as, say, smartphones, which I think cost a fortune.
Burny Posted December 9, 2011 Posted December 9, 2011 (edited) @Grazza It really is. Smartphones are extremely versatile portable computers though and have the added advantage of being "life style" objects on top of that. When they come with a contract, which basically subsidizes the phone, the impact of their price is also far less immediate than say, paying 400-600€ up front for a pure gaming machine - without a game. The problem is how some console gamers are expecting to get high-end machines under value. It's not an option for Nintendo, as they can't survive on enthusiasts alone. I'm personally fine with Nintendo going for moderate hardware, as long as they don't overprice it, like they did with the 3DS. I'd rather have a "cheap" Nintendo console and buy an expensive gaming PC on top of that, than an expensive powerhouse from Nintendo, that sinks as hard and fast as the N64 and the Gamecube, as it doesn't distinguish itself enough and/or misses the "comfort zone" for parents. The balance between having reasonably priced moderate hardware and not being completely underpowered for the 3rd party's needs will be difficult to achieve. It's probably still better to lose some 3rd party high-end games for Nintendo, than to miss their audience though. Edited December 9, 2011 by Burny
LostOverThere Posted December 11, 2011 Posted December 11, 2011 Part of me secretly wants Nintendo to release a $700 console just to see the shit storm that happens. Of course, this will never happen.
darksnowman Posted December 11, 2011 Posted December 11, 2011 Part of me secretly wants Nintendo to release a $700 console just to see the shit storm that happens. Of course, this will never happen. Then instead of panic reducing the price by a third, they can reduce it to a third.
Recommended Posts