Wii U General Discussion

[Ville]

@Serebii The specs matter in relation to the other machines on the market. The ps4 and xbOne are going where the Wii U can't follow, meaning it's gonna miss out on the big multiplatform games. The machine might be ok on its own, but what does that matter if it's supported mainly by just Nintendo, and it's not gonna have the best, most cutting-edge 3rd party games on it? From a consumer viewpoint, it makes no sense to buy such a console that is behind the competition and which is gonna miss all the big games that are coming to all the other platforms.

 

As for the lack of advertising, that's on Nintendo.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

Whats actually wrong with the Wii U's specs?

 

Even when the Gamecube was thought to be the most or second most powerful console in that generation, that didn't especially promote more than expected third party support, give or take the proprietary discs.

 

Third parties know that on a Nintendo system, Nintendo games will outsell theirs, simple.

Edited May 8, 2014 by King_V

[Kav]

Whats actually wrong with the Wii U's specs?

 

Even when the Gamecube was thought to be the most or second most powerful console in that generation, that didn't especially promote more than expected third party support, give or take the proprietary discs.

 

Third parties know that on a Nintendo system, Nintendo games will outsell theirs, simple.

 

Nintendo just aren't forthcoming enough with 3rd Parties. Sure they got better but they're still by no means as helpful as the other two when it come to their relationships with the majority of 3rd Parties.

[Wii]

Whats actually wrong with the Wii U's specs?

 

Even when the Gamecube was thought to be the most or second most powerful console in that generation, that didn't especially promote more than expected third party support, give or take the proprietary discs.

 

Third parties know that on a Nintendo system, Nintendo games will outsell theirs, simple.

 

I hope that was asked in jest? Have you not noticed the dearth of 3rd party support? It's by far the worst supported platform ever released from Nintendo. That's partially because of weak specs compared to the competition. Things only get worse, not better from here on. If you own multiple consoles or are only interested in Nintendo games then you can gloss over this but I only buy Nintendo platforms and the Wii U is in bits.

[Blade]

Nintendo just aren't forthcoming enough with 3rd Parties. Sure they got better but they're still by no means as helpful as the other two when it come to their relationships with the majority of 3rd Parties.

 

How have they got better when we get 0 games?

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

I hope that was asked in jest? Have you not noticed the dearth of 3rd party support? It's by far the worst supported platform ever released from Nintendo. That's partially because of weak specs compared to the competition. Things only get worse, not better from here on. If you own multiple consoles or are only interested in Nintendo games then you can gloss over this but I only buy Nintendo platforms and the Wii U is in bits.

 

That doesn't answer my question.

 

How does lacking 3rd party support, equate to poor hardware?

 

If developers could make money from putting their games on the Wii U, I'm sure they would despite console specs. I would imagine its even easier to develop a game for a console whos architecture bares similarity to others that have been around longer. I could be wrong.

 

Do you really believe if Nintendo made the Wii U as powerful as the PS4, that would really make a difference? They would probably be reported twice as much losses.

[liger05]

Whats actually wrong with the Wii U's specs?

 

Even when the Gamecube was thought to be the most or second most powerful console in that generation, that didn't especially promote more than expected third party support, give or take the proprietary discs.

 

Third parties know that on a Nintendo system, Nintendo games will outsell theirs, simple.

 

Well considering thre Gamecube had attach rate of 9 and in the first 12 - 18 months had very good third party support I would say that third party support was a big benefit to Nintendo.

 

I also want to add that even though technically the GC was more powerful than the PS2 it was late to the party. The PS2 by then already had the huge install base wth third parties galore. Nintendo releasing a purple box didnt help either, made it look kiddy.

 

The biggest issue Nintendo have with third parties isnt specs of hardware but the way they treat them as an afterthought. From Nes onwards Nintendo have not taken the needs and wants of third parties seriously and until they do that there will always be a problem.

 

Third parties know that on a Nintendo system, Nintendo games will outsell theirs, simple.

 

Which doesnt mean third party games also cant sell well. Selling more than Nintendo 1st party games isnt the barrometer for success. I think it's more of an issue that the audience western third parties are targetting are not really those that buy Nintendo consoles and Nintendo themselves do not make games that target such an audience.

Edited May 8, 2014 by liger05

[Ville]

@King_V They're probably affecting each other, relations with 3rd parties and system specs that is. Nintendo has always been about 1st party games, and is still taking that route...which means the Wii U was also probably tailored with that in mind first, other developers second. The problem is that the 3rd parties seem to be opting out completely now...and why wouldn't they, much easier to just focuse on the consoles which will help sell the games!

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

How have they got better when we get 0 games?

 

Well, for one, I don't recall any other Nintendo console getting an Assassins Creed, let alone two. It started off pretty well.

 

And to be frank, I would rather the Wii U gets zero third party support as opposed to half-baked attempts such as: Final Fantasy Chrystal Chronicles, ports with less-than features, and remakes where other consoles get new games.

 

Just give me my Zelda, Smash, Pokemon etc and I'll be fine. Im a grown ass man with full days - Im not after every game when I don't even have the time for them.

[Sheikah]

Yeah, how dare I use facts and numbers to support my point? I'm a monster!

 

Don't you see what I had the problem with? It's that I knew you were so biased towards Nintendo that you would cite such a statistic; one that ignored the current situation in favour of the lifetime sales.

 

It would be like if someone argued the Wii was doing really well in terms of game releases or software sales in its final year by using a 'total Wiis ever sold' figure.

 

Don't do that. It's easy to see through and doesn't really mean anything.

 

And yes, you can. The latest car is new, but it still drives you from A to B using technology that has been around for a while, just with a few new bells and whistles.

 

Ah, so we're going down the literal route to serve your point here? That something released recently, regardless of what it is, is new?

 

You know what I'm saying. The technology we're seeing on it is not new. The new technology it has, it is not using, so for all intents and purposes, the technology we're seeing is 7 years too late.

[dazzybee]

Ah, look where we've ended up again.... ZZZZZzzzzzz.

 

Nintendo have specially said they're going to show games at e3 which couldn't be done without the gamepad. So again, why critisise them for something which they have specifically said they're going to address? Weird mentality.

 

Also, yeah, they're not going to get 3rd parties, but the other console isn't going to get nintendo games. I know which I'd rather miss out on!

 

And serebii using sales figures to combat the comment that it hasn't sold that well. How is that a bad thing to do? Or is it because it makes the original comment look a little stupid so of course they don't like it......

 

As normal some really, truly bizarre arguments going on in here. And ones we've heard a hundred times before....

 

The Wii u isn't getting 3rd party support to any decent level. People need to start getting over that fact. It's first parties, family 3rd parties and some exclusive partnerships, accept it. Don't like, get another console. But we need to start realising the situation and discuss around that!

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

Well considering thre Gamecube had attach rate of 9 and in the first 12 - 18 months had very good third party support I would say that third party support was a big benefit to Nintendo.

 

I also want to add that even though technically the GC was more powerful than the PS2 it was late to the party. The PS2 by then already had the huge install base wth third parties galore. Nintendo releasing a purple box didnt help either, made it look kiddy.

 

The biggest issue Nintendo have with third parties isnt specs of hardware but the way they treat them as an afterthought. From Nes onwards Nintendo have not taken the needs and wants of third parties seriously and until they do that there will always be a problem.

 

 

 

Which doesnt mean third party games also cant sell well. Selling more than Nintendo 1st party games isnt the barrometer for success. I think it's more of an issue that the audience western third parties are targetting are not really those that buy Nintendo consoles and Nintendo themselves do not make games that target such an audience.

 

The only noteworthy GC third party support imo came from Capcom, can't really see anyone else except for EAs mass produced sports/racing/Def Jam stuff - the highlights of that console was still 1st party.

 

I don't see this very good third party support.

[Ville]

@dazzybee Well I do hope they do something about it. You're right that it's a first party console mainly, but the question is that do they have the capacity to push out more games than they're doing right now? I don't think so...

 

All I know is that my Wii U's sitting there without use. 2 retail games bought, and I can't even get any used stuff because they don't exist or are just as expensive as normal games. It's really not a good console if you don't wanna buy games at full price...

[liger05]

The only noteworthy GC third party support imo came from Capcom, can't really see anyone else except for EAs mass produced sports/racing/Def Jam stuff - the highlights of that console was still 1st party.

 

I don't see this very good third party support.

 

Really. There was plenty third party games other than Capcom and EA.

 

Loads more than that!!!

 

The main thing was the Gamecube was getting the multiplatform third party titles which should be standard procedure but the specs of the Wii U mean that isnt even possible without extra work needed by developers.

 

You may not think it was very good but Nintendo would kill for that level of third party support right now.

Edited May 8, 2014 by liger05

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

Really. There was plenty third party games other than Capcom and EA.

 

Loads more than that!!!

 

The main thing was the Gamecube was getting the multiplatform third party titles which should be standard procedure but the specs of the Wii U mean that isnt even possible without extra work needed by developers.

 

You may not think it was very good but Nintendo would kill for that level of third party support right now.

 

Ok. So you feel Nintendo should have released a console with specs inline with the PS4 and X1 for the sake of third party, multi-platform games?

 

And that will be enough to justify the costs of the hardware?

[Ganepark32]

That doesn't answer my question.

 

How does lacking 3rd party support, equate to poor hardware?

 

If developers could make money from putting their games on the Wii U, I'm sure they would despite console specs. I would imagine its even easier to develop a game for a console whos architecture bares similarity to others that have been around longer. I could be wrong.

 

Do you really believe if Nintendo made the Wii U as powerful as the PS4, that would really make a difference? They would probably be reported twice as much losses.

 

Particularly with regards to the bolded, the lack of 3rd party has explicitly been stated by many developers due to a lack of power under the hood and not being able to run the engines being used by many of the studies. Yes, the likes of Unreal Engine 4 are scalable but when you're base game now virtually the same across the PC, PS4, and Xbone why bother making a second version that takes up additional resources and capital when devs are already being stretched due to a tough market at the moment.

 

If Nintendo had approached 3rd parties and asked them what they want from the console, such as what Sony did with the PS4, and produced something that fitted with the progression of the industry and the titles that 3rd parties are wanting to make, rather than focusing on what they themselves are hoping to put out, then yes there would be more support.

 

A lack of sales is a reason for some to stay away but Nintendo's insular nature about hardware specs and trying to 'revolutionise' gaming with the gamepad turned a lot of devs away straight off the bat regardless of who turned up in their sizzle reel of developers talking about the possibilities of the gamepad.

 

Yes, it's a well trodden argument that I've laboured many times before but simply showing the likes of Ken Levine and what not, who have been making some of the more interesting 3rd party titles in recent years, the gamepad rather than asking what their developers would like from the hardware is what has cost them dearly. It's the same reason why indies are shying away from the Microsoft currently to an extent because they aren't being as open to them as Sony and, to give them some dues, Nintendo.

 

3rd party support would come if Nintendo were more open with 3rd parties with the hardware; hardware that reflected the progression of the industry (even if you don't think more power is what's needed it's certainly where better game ideas, AI and what not are coming from) without forcing a certain control scheme that isn't desired by the majority of consumers, even if there are multiple control options (which again is more resources and capital needing to be used by devs unnecessarily). Conformity may not be what some want from Nintendo's hardware but in focusing on hardware that is GPU reliant (not as drastic as say the PS3's Cell chip but still clearly causing issues for optimisation) with a small amount of RAM and that gamepad, they have more or less produced a 1st party machine that isn't future proof.

[dazzybee]

@dazzybee Well I do hope they do something about it. You're right that it's a first party console mainly, but the question is that do they have the capacity to push out more games than they're doing right now? I don't think so...

 

All I know is that my Wii U's sitting there without use. 2 retail games bought, and I can't even get any used stuff because they don't exist or are just as expensive as normal games. It's really not a good console if you don't wanna buy games at full price...

 

Of course they can, easily. This year they have - mario kart, yoshi, x, bayonetta 2, smash, an NFC game.... That's one a month. Plus loads of studios who have been silent a long time. I can see them being able to keep that going,build onthe indies and 3rd party exclusives!

[Ashley]

Technology age is not solely determined by power. With that logic, PS4 and Xbox One are also outdated because PCs of that power have existed for a few years.

 

You realise the tech expected for consoles is different from that expected for PCs and nobody is including PCs when discussing consoles...right?

 

Power isn't everything. PS2 was weak and sold the most. 3DS is weaker than the Vita, yet the Vita is dead and the 3DS is thriving.

 

You also realise what the actual definition of "dead" is Mr. Always-Speaks-Facts...right?

 

And serebii using sales figures to combat the comment that it hasn't sold that well. How is that a bad thing to do? Or is it because it makes the original comment look a little stupid so of course they don't like it......

 

That's good! In fact, it's great!

 

However when he was blustering about other consoles having software droughts yesterday he then ignored my response that provided stats and figures suggesting otherwise. If anyone (not just Serebii) is going to argue "I've provided stats" don't then ignore anyone else doing the same thing but arguing a different point.

 

Confirmation bias is a bit of a chore when it keeps cropping up.

[Sheikah]

And serebii using sales figures to combat the comment that it hasn't sold that well. How is that a bad thing to do? Or is it because it makes the original comment look a little stupid so of course they don't like it......

 

Except it doesn't, and you might have realised that if you paid a little more attention. He said the 3DS was thriving. How does using lifetime figures prove that?

 

As I said, nobody would use the term 'thriving' to describe the Wii in its final year of sale, despite it having great lifetime sales. The 3DS is in nowhere near the same situation but it is certainly past its peak.

Edited May 8, 2014 by Sheikah

[liger05]

Ok. So you feel Nintendo should have released a console with specs inline with the PS4 and X1 for the sake of third party, multi-platform games?

 

And that will be enough to justify the costs of the hardware?

 

No I feel Nintendo should of spoke to third parties and get an understanding of what they wanted instead of going it alone with not a care in the world for third parties again which results in a barren calender. Remember it was Nintendo who said this time round they were targetting the core and things would be different with third parties, Nintendo said that.

 

 

As for the costs of hardware. Well unless you can tell me how much a PS4 and Wii U cost to produce then we dont really know which one is the more cost efficient. All I do know is a PS4 @ launch was £349 and a Wii U premium was £299. Now considering both were sold at a loss from day 1 and both were profitable from the purchase of a game or PSN I would say Sony seemed to of been able to produce a far more powerful machine for less than Nintendo did with the Wii U?

 

I'm still waiting for someone @ Nintendo to justify the cost of the Wii U as from what I can see it cost a crazy amount to manufacture for what it is.

[Sheikah]

Ok. So you feel Nintendo should have released a console with specs inline with the PS4 and X1 for the sake of third party, multi-platform games?

 

And that will be enough to justify the costs of the hardware?

 

Alternate question: you feel they shouldn't? Why?

[dazzybee]

 

 

That's good! In fact, it's great!

 

However when he was blustering about other consoles having software droughts yesterday he then ignored my response that provided stats and figures suggesting otherwise. If anyone (not just Serebii) is going to argue "I've provided stats" don't then ignore anyone else doing the same thing but arguing a different point.

 

Confirmation bias is a bit of a chore when it keeps cropping up.

 

Ah, well I don't know about that, but yeah, it'd be better all round if people didn't use whatever means to support their agenda, and be more even with their criticisms/praise/justifications.

 

(Anyways. You have mario kart, get in there and tell us everything we want to know )

 

Except it doesn't, and you might have realised that if you paid a little more attention. He said the 3DS was thriving. How does using lifetime figures prove that?

 

As I said, nobody would use the term 'thriving' to describe the Wii in its final year of sale, despite it having great lifetime sales. The 3DS is in nowhere near the same situation but it is certainly past its peak.

 

I saw Your justification after I posted and it made a little more sense, however, haven't nintendo posted a forecast which shows even better predicted sales for this year? Plus the 3DS still sells extremely well month by month doesn't it (don't actually know for sure though).

[Rummy]

He confirms what I've been saying as QoL. Building other avenues as a safety net, which MS and Sony both use for their divisions.

 

You do realise the greatest flaw with that, right?

 

The big news is that they are now profiting on the Wii U!

 

Which was always known to be with an attach rate of 1 at launch - it's hardly rocket science(as I've mentioned weeks ago in context with your wild mis-estimations) that they will be either turning profit or minimal loss now, given cost of production should go down with time.

 

It was difficult reading that article. It won't really affect sales or dissuade people from buying the system though because there aren't a great deal of people interested in it in the first place. Somehow, Nintendo have managed to create a stealth console that the public don't know about.

 

The amount of children who I work with on a day-to-day basis who simply don't know what the Wii U is or even know its name is staggering. It's sad walking into a supermarket and seeing a huge row of PS3/4 360/One games and maybe, if you're lucky, a tiny Wii U shelf right at the bottom of the Wii stuff.

 

The more you say it to yourself, the more ridiculous it sounds. This is Nintendo. They're meant to be the ones ruling this market and instead they can't even get their games on supermarket shelves.

 

This is the sort of stuff I find interesting - when it comes to gaming and similar that they DO talk about - what tends to dominate the subject matter? Is it smartphones etc, XBone, PS4, social media, something else altogther?

[Ashley]

 

(Anyways. You have mario kart, get in there and tell us everything we want to know )

 

I'm at work

[Goron_3]

That doesn't answer my question.

 

How does lacking 3rd party support, equate to poor hardware?

 

If developers could make money from putting their games on the Wii U, I'm sure they would despite console specs. I would imagine its even easier to develop a game for a console whos architecture bares similarity to others that have been around longer. I could be wrong.

 

Do you really believe if Nintendo made the Wii U as powerful as the PS4, that would really make a difference? They would probably be reported twice as much losses.

 

The manufacturing cost of the PS4 is not much more than the Wii U; at the Wii U's RRP at launch is took a game to break even. PS4 breaks even with the sale of a PS+. So not much difference.

 

The issue that people are ignoring is that Nintendo's problems are not just because the hardware is not attractive. For a start, the Wii brand has been dead and buried for the last 2-3 years and on top of that the branding is intertwined with the casual gaming audience, most of whom have left. It's a very hard sell to say to a 3rd party because:

 

1. It means hiring a team to port the game to console. This will likely be from PS3/360 code, which is hard enough as the Wii U has different architecture.

 

2. The consoles name and branding is aimed at casual gamers who have left. Sales figures evidently SHOW that people are not buying the thing.

 

3. The only people that have purchased the console are hardcore Nintendo fans, who mainly want to play Nintendo games. In many cases, they'll also own another console, be it PS3/PS4/PC.

 

Why would you go through the effort of making a game on a system where the target audience left years ago and where the console itself isn't powerful enough to run new engines.

 

Also, some people have mentoned the Gamecube...The Gamecube did NOT fail because it was powerful, it failed in spite of it. Launching late, terrible branding, giving the FPS market to Microsoft....Many reasons why it sold poorly.