Serebii Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 I'm all for innovation but dont innovate just for the sake of innovation. Seems to me they went with a tablet style controller not knowing what to do with it. How is that a good thing? The Nintendo difference should always lie in the software they produce. Its always been that way!! The wavebird to me was far more innovative than the Gamepad. Which started with the PS3/PSP You're right. If Nintendo push out a powerful console with just their games, it'll sell more than anything *looks at Gamecube* Oh....
liger05 Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 You're right. If Nintendo push out a powerful console with just their games, it'll sell more than anything *looks at Gamecube* Oh.... Considering where the wii u sales are right now compared the Gamecube I'm not sure what your trying to argue. The Gamecube was again another example of Nintendo doing something different to the industry standard with its own disc size. While xbox was showing everyone what a comprehensive online system was Nintendo thought online gaming was irrelevant. Not forgetting a purple box looked kiddy and something barny the dinosaur would use. I don't accept that because the GC wasn't a huge success that means Nintendo going to forward have to gimp out and forget about producing consoles which are similar to the competition.
Serebii Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 All I'm saying is let Nintendo be different. If you want to have consoles that are practically the same, just different UI and pricing, then go with Xbox One or PS4. Let Nintendo do what they want. Sometimes they'll strike a hit, others like this it's hard for them to convey so it'll flounder a little
Kav Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 Yeah, I'm sure Nintendo are just happy with floundering.
Serebii Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 Yeah, I'm sure Nintendo are just happy with floundering. No, but they have put plans in to attempt to rectify it. But still, I'm sure they'd also rather keep experimenting as opposed to just becoming a "me too"
Zechs Merquise Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 It's funny this thread got posted today, as the COD crowd were all discussing this very issue last night! Nintendo could easily sell the console without the gamepad. Everything in the OS could easily be done without the gamepad - with the exception of the rather excellent Miiverse drawings. The point is the gamepad has added very little to the system other than bumping up the costs. I mean just look at the flagship title Nintendoland, the vast majority of the games could easily be done without the gamepad with just minor re-tooling. The only game that genuinely needs it is Yoshi's Fruit Cart which I felt was pretty weak anyway and more akin to a £0.99 phone game! The multi-player only games could have been re-tooled to be online, Zelda, Metroid and Pikmin could all easily be done with Wii remotes, Donkey Kong could easily be done by simply tilting the Wii remote and the same is true of F-Zero! I could go on, but you get the idea! Other games simply add things like maps and inventory screens, which whilst more convenient and useful on a second screen hardly revolutionise gaming or make you feel like you miss the gamepad when it isn't there. The gamepad does add two things though - a huge amount of extra cost to the system and a barrier to entry to those who liked the simple approach offered by the Wii. I am not suggesting in the slightest that Nintendo should have gone for a super powered system to compete with Sony and MS. That isn't their territory and we all know that the Gameboy, DS and Wii were all less powerful than the competition and still won their respective sales wars. What I believe was part of Nintendo's success (that the gamepad harmed) was that the Wii was £175 with a game and it was instantly accessible to everyone. The gamepad has pushed the Wii U to £300 and makes it off putting to the people who found the Wii accessible. A Wii U priced at £199 with Wii Sports HD Online packed in with a Motion + would have been a great system at a great price. It would have been the same power as the Wii U but people wouldn't have minded, because the price would have reflected the fact it wasn't challenging the other next gen systems over graphics. They could still have made the new classic controller available for those who wanted it, but kept the key point of the system the simple and accessible controller that appeals to the masses at a price point that falls within an impulse purchase and with software that sells systems. As it stands, the gamepad is an albatross around the neck of the console. It makes the price point ridiculous (even more so when the PS4 is released), it is not accessible in the slightest for those who loved the Wii and were new to gaming, it adds very little to the experience (certainly not enough to justify the cost) and finally the whole concept is based on the shaky premise of the failed GBA/GC link up.
Clownferret Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 it only looks overpriced compared to PS3 and 360. When PS4 and Xbox 1 launch Wii U will suddenly be the cheapest console on the market.
Zechs Merquise Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 it only looks overpriced compared to PS3 and 360. When PS4 and Xbox 1 launch Wii U will suddenly be the cheapest console on the market. I feel it will look even more ridiculous then! Just remember in the US, the Wii was $250 the PS3 was $600. There was a massive gap in the price and it paid off. The Wii was a cheap option - people didn't mind the lower spec as the price was perfect. However putting up a $350 Wii U against a $400 PS4 is madness.
Sheikah Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 Yup. The PS4 looks remarkably good value compared to the Wii U.
Rummy Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 Valid points. But what makes Nintendo different from the rest are its highly prized franchises. Nintendo always stands apart from the rest because of this. But for the last two generations "ways of play" innovations seem to be the first thought on Nintendo's mind. Nintendo really doesn't need these to sell their consoles, and if they think they do then thats just sad news. That would be as if they have lost faith in their own games or production quality. Its not necessarily about more power but making a console that is third party friendly - in my eyes - come before tech 'innovations'... Why prioritize hardware that further alienates these third parties? Make progression; tackle issues that have been around for generations, first. D-pad on home consoles - Nintendo? Analogue Sticks on home consoles - Nintendo? -(N64 pad was awesome at its time too) Rumble on home consoles - Nintendo? Motion controls on home consoles - Nintendo? Unless I'm mistaken, it actually isn't all that new an 'approach' for them - the problem is they do things and then they get pilfered by the competition and improved upon. I agree in the current climate alienating third parties isn't ideal - but I equally agree that dropping the Gamepad is dropping the Wii U's identity and will fracture their own even currently limited market even further and possibly into oblivion. I genuinely think trying to drop the Gamepad will kill the Wii U entirely - consumer confusion, marketer confusion, mismatches on development and compatibility - it's just too late to consider reverting to something less tbh. (Long time no see btw @King_V! Hope you stick around!)
Blade Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 The point of the matter is that they should never have concentrated upon the gamepad in the first place. Is it an add on to the wii? Is it a new handheld? But will dropping the gamepad mean more confusion? Probably not to be honest its not like a lot of people know what the Wii U is anyway.
Jamba Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 it only looks overpriced compared to PS3 and 360. When PS4 and Xbox 1 launch Wii U will suddenly be the cheapest console on the market. You're underestimating how long the PS3 and the X360 are going to keep selling for. Developers and publishers may have wanted the new generation but the average Joe consumer doesn't want to buy a new piece of hardware. And as long as games keep getting published on both generations then I don't see why the vast majority would move over. Don't even get me started in the escalation of game prices. Wii U game prices are for the best part an absolute piss take.
Serebii Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 You're underestimating how long the PS3 and the X360 are going to keep selling for. Developers and publishers may have wanted the new generation but the average Joe consumer doesn't want to buy a new piece of hardware. And as long as games keep getting published on both generations then I don't see why the vast majority would move over. Don't even get me started in the escalation of game prices. Wii U game prices are for the best part an absolute piss take. Well Nintendo are sorting it, pushing their own games back down to £39.99 rather than £49.99, but other games are ridiculous. Splinter Cell is £54.99. PS4/Xbone are going to be even worse
Retro_Link Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 Splinter Cell is £54.99.If you buy a game for that you're a mug. It's under £40 for all consoles on Amazon. This RRP talk (as if it's the price) is ridiculous.
Cube Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 Game prices for now are returning to what they were around 13-15 years ago. When you consider inflation, it really isn't bad at all. Not to mention that the real price of games (not RRP - Splinter Cell is £36.85) will likely go back down again.
Guy Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 I didn't think I'd like the gamepad, but the gimmick is way more enjoyable than motion controls. Without it the Wii U will just be an underpowered system once XB1 and PS4 launch in a few months.
Serebii Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 If you buy a game for that you're a mug. It's under £40 for all consoles on Amazon. This RRP talk (as if it's the price) is ridiculous. It would be if retail didn't sell it at RRP, or slightly below
Daft Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 All I'm saying is let Nintendo be different. If you want to have consoles that are practically the same, just different UI and pricing, then go with Xbox One or PS4. Let Nintendo do what they want. Sometimes they'll strike a hit, others like this it's hard for them to convey so it'll flounder a little That's pretty facile. Microsoft and Sony's ethoi are as different from each other as they are from Nintendo's.
Kav Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 No, but they have put plans in to attempt to rectify it. But still, I'm sure they'd also rather keep experimenting as opposed to just becoming a "me too" We're not suggesting they ditch the Gamepad though. It's being suggested that they could release the WiiU without the Gamepad as a separate SKU and sell it for less. This is a great idea, especially for those not too concerned with the Gamepad!
Clownferret Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 You're underestimating how long the PS3 and the X360 are going to keep selling for. Developers and publishers may have wanted the new generation but the average Joe consumer doesn't want to buy a new piece of hardware. And as long as games keep getting published on both generations then I don't see why the vast majority would move over. Don't even get me started in the escalation of game prices. Wii U game prices are for the best part an absolute piss take. where do you shop? I have: Nintendo Land @ came bundled Zombie U @ came bundled FIFA 13 @ £12.99 Sonic Racing @ £7.99 COD @ £13.99 Need for Speed £30.99 Tank Tank Tank @ £12.00 New Super Mario U @ £34.99 Lego City @ £39.99 Darksiders II @ £14.99 Tekken @ £13.99 Batman Arkham City @ £19.99 plus 2 x pro controllers @ £19.99 each and these were all brand new games. shop around.
Aneres11 Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 Gotta agree with Clownferret here. Sorry Jamba but the game prices are not a piss take - they're pretty much the same price of new games on all other platforms? Unless of course, you're referring to digital downloads - in which case I agree they're often too high on eShop but that's for a different thread! Regarding selling the console without a game pad. No. Absolutely not. The whole console is based around the pad - it's a different way to play. Sure, it's not exactly been overwhelming with great uses of it yet, but that's what we will start seeing soon enough hopefully. I think if the Wii U was advertised a little more on TV, it would be the game pad that would intrigue people. People want to play the Wii U to see how the game pad works, what it does, what it can do etc - take that away and it becomes a bit pointless. Like others have said, despite the fact it hasn't exactly been used for much more than a map / inventory screen yet, off TV play and the ability to use Netflix solely on the pad makes it worthwhile for me.
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted September 2, 2013 Author Posted September 2, 2013 D-pad on home consoles - Nintendo?Analogue Sticks on home consoles - Nintendo? -(N64 pad was awesome at its time too) Rumble on home consoles - Nintendo? Motion controls on home consoles - Nintendo? Unless I'm mistaken, it actually isn't all that new an 'approach' for them - the problem is they do things and then they get pilfered by the competition and improved upon. I agree in the current climate alienating third parties isn't ideal - but I equally agree that dropping the Gamepad is dropping the Wii U's identity and will fracture their own even currently limited market even further and possibly into oblivion. I genuinely think trying to drop the Gamepad will kill the Wii U entirely - consumer confusion, marketer confusion, mismatches on development and compatibility - it's just too late to consider reverting to something less tbh. (Long time no see btw @King_V! Hope you stick around!) Yeah, good points - the d-pad and analogue stick are very relevant. But those were the sort of base-level mechanics we needed to play games with. After that, in my eyes, nothing else is really essential. I felt motion controls took away some appreciation I had for Skyward Sword. I feel off-tv play - being very convenient - takes away the grandeur from experiencing games on my big HD tv and speakers as I intended. The handheld-home console dynamic also gets a bit blurry. The Gamepad can never be as essential as a classic controller. And yes, I'm not talking of dropping the Gamepad, but instead providing a cheaper bundle pack with just a pro controller instead of the gamepad. Buyers of that pack could buy a Gamepad if they feel it necessary to enhance gameplay - which I feel would have been the better option. I also feel the time invested in the Gamepad has taken away distinct features from the Wii U that it should have as standard... Such as Dolby Digital sound. I'm not sure if the console even has Dolby pro logic II anymore. I can't see the logo on any games. So I assume Nintendo forgot about the importance of sound quality over the Gamepad. Anyway, I love you back! Considering where the wii u sales are right now compared the Gamecube I'm not sure what your trying to argue. The Gamecube was again another example of Nintendo doing something different to the industry standard with its own disc size. While xbox was showing everyone what a comprehensive online system was Nintendo thought online gaming was irrelevant. Not forgetting a purple box looked kiddy and something barny the dinosaur would use. I don't accept that because the GC wasn't a huge success that means Nintendo going to forward have to gimp out and forget about producing consoles which are similar to the competition. Great point.
Clownferret Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 The problem we have here is because the Wii U has not sold, everybody is playing the blame game and the game pad seems to be chief culprit. Ask yourselves this question, if the Wii U had sold the numbers people were expecting, would you all be on here moaning about the game pad? It's all very hypothetical as to why the Wii U has not shifted the numbers expected, but the bottom line is we have a console that launched with a strong third party line up, has access to a huge back catalogue of Wii games, has free online gaming and has three different control options in the wiimote, pro controller and game pad. If you don't like the game pad, use the pro controller, but it's certainly nice to have the option and anybody who has a Wii U will tell you that the ability to play off screen is priceless and for me personally games like multiplayer local COD are so much better with a game pad instead of using split screen.
Sheikah Posted September 2, 2013 Posted September 2, 2013 Well Nintendo are sorting it, pushing their own games back down to £39.99 rather than £49.99, but other games are ridiculous. Splinter Cell is £54.99. PS4/Xbone are going to be even worse Oh come on. You know that the games for PS4/One are going to be £40 or less. Stop reporting sensationalist figures. We also both know that most of the PS4/One titles are going to reduce in price like games should. They're not going to hang around at £35 forever like most first party Nintendo titles.
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted September 2, 2013 Author Posted September 2, 2013 The problem we have here is because the Wii U has not sold, everybody is playing the blame game and the game pad seems to be chief culprit. Ask yourselves this question, if the Wii U had sold the numbers people were expecting, would you all be on here moaning about the game pad? It's all very hypothetical as to why the Wii U has not shifted the numbers expected, but the bottom line is we have a console that launched with a strong third party line up, has access to a huge back catalogue of Wii games, has free online gaming and has three different control options in the wiimote, pro controller and game pad. If you don't like the game pad, use the pro controller, but it's certainly nice to have the option and anybody who has a Wii U will tell you that the ability to play off screen is priceless and for me personally games like multiplayer local COD are so much better with a game pad instead of using split screen. The sales wouldn't really matter - if there was no game that stood out as to prove why the Gamepad was absolutely necessary, I would still ask the question. I believe the Gamepad may be alienating, not only consumers but third parties as well and Nintendo aren't doing much about it. I don't really see strong third party support. How does a console release almost a year ago and still find itself almost in the same position? But meh, I disgress.
Recommended Posts