-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
34,000 pieces of Wii U software were sold in the UK in January (incl. NintyLand)
- Thread starter CrunchinJelly
- Start date
Unknown One
Member
Yeah, in terms of brand power and recognition Mario is the King. People that don't play games know about Mario.
Vire
Member
You don't think Mario and Zelda have enormous budgets?
Steve Youngblood
Member
I think you have a point, and that some of the opposition to what you're trying to get at is ultimately overly pedantic and nitpicky, however, let's be clear: you've done yourself no favors in the manner in which you've tried to make your case. And by that, there is something to be said for the fact that you overreached in making your case, and as such, it's no surprise that you were called out on it. Yes, I understand that ultimately your point was that there haven't been major investments in brand new IPs from first class teams. That's largely correct. However, your definition of what specifically constitutes a Nintendo first-party offering was rather stupid, and the attempt to cross out titles you didn't care about from the list was just a bad idea.
Basically, I think some of your opposition has been unfair, but you could have avoided a lot of this.
Vire
Member
Sounds like a pretty fair assessment. However, normal reasoning was clearly not getting through so to show them visually through the list how ridiculous their argument was, (apparently necessary).
Nonetheless, I've had a good time debating with everyone here and there is absolutely zero hard feelings to anyone I quoted.
If wiiU doesn't pick up, they'll get ignored by MS and Sony to the point where they might as well not exist - in terms of influencing their business as a competitor.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
But that list does serve to show that Nintendo consistently try and do that, even when they fail to actually do so (Disaster Day Of Crisis, Geist, Excite Truck, Sin & Punishment).
But they also release titles in known 'safe' franchises and genres (Mario, Zelda, Pokemon), as well as expanding their titles in different non-traditional areas (Wii _, Brain Training, Rhythm Heaven, nintendogs).
If 'make AAA character driven core gamer pleasing shit ton selling game' was as easy as the armchair analysts claim, Medal Of Honour: Warfighter would have been the best selling game last holidays, and THQ would be rolling in record profits right now.
Niether does Nintendo, that's why it isn't a bullet point on their packaging. They know that no piece of disposable plastic encrusted electronic hardware is 'eco friendly',--especially one that serves no practical function, like say the circuitry and control mechanisms of a furnace that help stop people from freezing to death in the winter.
I get a kick out of people who buy things like Prius cars, and think they are saving the planet or whatever.
And people who think that the wii u, whatever it's failings might be, is cheaply made should read the comments Jim Morrison from chipworks wrote about the chip design being slick and not cheap.
Zerodoppler
Member
Not really. Why would they have?
I believe Zelda games have budgets of 5 million now. Or at least, I believe Skyward Sword did.
Cos graphics silly!
Vire
Member
Time = Money.
Both Mario and Zelda have very long production cycles. The continuous funding for something years on end gets rather pricey. Twilight Princess to Skyward Sword was a 5 year gap. That's a extraordinarily long time in the game industry to fund something.
That's often why you hear about Publishers rushing games out the door because the additional cost of a delay is extremely expensive. (ME3)
Nintendo however works on something until they feel it's finished and properly polished.
Nintendo's body is not ready. Yikes at those numbers.
Bad examples. Warfighter didn't sell because it was putrid shit and THQ killed itself with Udraw and mismanagement. With all the talent Nintendo has at their disposal, making a new IP that's commercially and critically successful shouldn't be that challenging.
The critical part at least.
Bad examples. Warfighter didn't sell because it was putrid shit and THQ killed itself with Udraw and mismanagement. With all the talent Nintendo has at their disposal, making a new IP that's commercially and critically successful shouldn't be that challenging.
The critical part at least.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
They're still cheaply made. The long dev cycles are a part of that cheapness, because there are not many people working on them.
A Zelda game might take 60 people 5 years, or a CoD might take upwards of 500 people 2 years. One is waaaaaaaaaay more expensive to produce than the other.
EDIT:
EA clearly didn't try and make a terrible game that was unanimously hated, and THQ clearly didn't try and badly misjudge how many people were prepared to go out and buy Homefront or Darksiders day one.
Vire
Member
Once again, arguing semantics on what is expensive and what is not. That's not the point.
The point is they haven't invested the same amount of money OR resources into something to the level of a Zelda or Mario. Not that they need to invest as much as a COD game...
It is all relative.
Zerodoppler
Member
5 years? That's about the same dev time as Pandora's Tower then.
dreamer3kx
Member
This is absolutely pathetic, whats going on, why, do people think its a Wii accessory, has to be a reason for this.
I don't know what you're trying to say, but Homefront/Darksiders did decently commercially. THQ would still be dead if Darksiders 2 sold gangbusters.
Baconsammy
Banned
It's got no games. It costs as much or more than you can buy a comparable 360 or PS3. 360 and PS3 have shitloads of games. It has virtually no third party support. It's had anemic marketing. The future release list for the year is pretty empty. There are new consoles from Sony and MS on the horizon. What is the incentive to buy one before Nintendo's heavy hitters release?
Problem with Nintendo is that even when they experiment with new IP's for core AAA game they dont market or make it there focus at all.
I have been to many E3's and its all about the Zelda, Metroid, Kirby, Mario etc.. They them-self don't give the IP chance to succeed. Hell most don't even come here in west.
But, I believe the main problem is because the core Nintendo fans are happy with the old redone franchise. You have to see the room in E3 when the name zelda comes every single E3. They audience forget about everything before and after.
I have been to many E3's and its all about the Zelda, Metroid, Kirby, Mario etc.. They them-self don't give the IP chance to succeed. Hell most don't even come here in west.
But, I believe the main problem is because the core Nintendo fans are happy with the old redone franchise. You have to see the room in E3 when the name zelda comes every single E3. They audience forget about everything before and after.
Even more worrying for Nintendo is what will be the incentive once other next gen consoles come out? The amount of hype for whatever is shown for the Durango/Orbis will be off the charts.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
Okay, so if you remove the time factor;
Would Nintendo be better or worse off if they had sunk a $100 million budget into Disaster: Day Of Crisis and gone balls out with recognisable celebrity voice actors and a full licenced sound track, and it still sold what it sold and got the reviews it did?
Or if they'd funded Mad World or No More Heroes, and they'd sold what they sold and got the review that they did?
Because that's not Nintendo, and it will never be Nintendo.
You might think dropping $100 million on a CoD clone is exactly what Nintendo needs to do, but I don't. And they don't.
They WOULD however drop $100 million on 20 different games, some for the handheld, some for the console;
some being a more polished iteration of a limited prototype game they have previously released (a Luigis Mansion, or a Kirbys Canvas Course, or a Rhythm Heaven)
some being a surefire long tail seller (a Mario Kart, a NSMBU)
some on some new gameplay concept prototype they want to test out (a Nintendoland, a Wii Music, a Face Raiders)
some on some crazy weird ass thing some designer wanted to do as a vanity project I guess (a Tingles Rupeeland, a Captain Rainbow)
some on building third party partnerships (a Metroid: Other M, a Sonic & Mario at the Olympics)
some on rebooting an old Ip and making it relevant again (a Pilotwings resort, a Kid Icarus)
Nintendo diversify, and when they get a hit, they exploit it.
Because they diversify they are never predictable.
Because they diversify they never only release games that you will definitely like.
They really didn't. They made a lot of revenue. That is not the same thing. At all.
Decent commercially implies high profitability.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I'd happily concede that he hasn't argued his point perfectly in his thread, but to be fair, this is a disingenuous take on the point he's been trying to articulate to varying levels of success. All he's arguing is that he wants to see something that has the same level of effort that gets put into something like Mario Galaxy put into something brand new. I don't personally know if I agree with that, as I know that I would be perfectly happy to buy Mario Galaxy 3 myself, but not whether or not whatever new IP they cook up would be of any interest to me. Still, he's clearly not arguing that they have to make a Call of Duty killer.
Devilgunman
Member
Nintendo doesn't have to worry about Orbis/Durango yet. Every console experiences slow start during cross-gen period, unless Sony delivers megatons (aka the Last Guardian) right off the bat then the WiiU will definitely be in deep trouble.
Baconsammy
Banned
Same incentive as always. Nintendo-made/published games. When you subtract the casual gamers that flocked to the waggle, are there enough people left over to make the Wii U a huge success for both Nintendo and third parties? Doubtful for third parties. Looks like Ubisoft is feeling that heat right now.
If someone had to choose one console between Durango, Orbis, and Wii U when they're all on store shelves, chances are Durango/Orbis will win out over Wii-U. There's absolutely no proof for that, but that's how I see the future.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
Fair comment, I am extrapolating to extremes.
I still think Nintendo are one of the most conservative publishers, and don't open up the purse strings until something has proven itself to be profitable on a limited initial investment though, which is why Zeldas and Marios get proportionately higher budgets (but which pale in comparison to other publishers AAA budgets).
In some ways this makes them more risk adverse than other publishers (as they don't bankroll 'obvious' successes to the extent we get something mind blowing as a result), but in others ways it makes them less, as they frequently greenlight all sorts of crazy crap and let a studio prove if a concept will take or not.
outunderthestars
Banned
The fact that you consider the Last Guardian to be a megaton of any sort should be evidence enough that you are wrong.
Vire
Member
I'm just going to ignore his last post since he clearly didn't read what I said and just decided to make a different argument completely. :lol
To your point, I don't have a problem with them making Mario and Zelda games till the end of time, just give some very talented studios the chance to make something new and original. If they gave Retro the same budget as a Mario or Zelda game and said, "Have at it, create whatever you want and go". I'd end this conversation here and now and go to Best Buy and get a Wii U.
But they aren't going to do that to my dismay. I will give credit for Nintendo for ALMOST doing something like that with Kid Icarus. Sure, it's based on an existing franchise, but it was reinvented to the point where it was hardly recognizable. So they do get points for that, but it isn't enough.
To my original point of this entire conversation: The last game they did that kind of thing we got Pikmin... and look how amazing that turned out.
Devilgunman
Member
I might be wrong, who knows. Look at Ni No Kuni. Who would have thought a game that bombed in Japan would become a huge success in US? You cannot predict market.
Have the NPD charts been released yet or is that an assumption?
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
I just don't understand why they launched this with next to nothing available software-wise. It was seemingly rushed out the door for whatever reason, games have been delayed and now they seem to be in a panic mode. Did they think it would just fly off the shelves? it all seems so poorly planned, given the head start they got from dumping the Wii.
Baconsammy
Banned
Are you from the future?
outunderthestars
Banned
hype on GAF is one thing, actual huge success outside of the hardcore is another.
I was afraid this would happen when Nintendo spent so much time hyping Nintendoland at their conference. At the time I couldn't tell if they were desperate or oblivious to the fact that the Nintendoland wasn't going to be a hit.
This is silly.
If Disaster had a 100mil budget it would have been a completely different game, with bigger and better marketing, and thus a larger audience. It probably would have been much more successful. And it would have done A GREAT DEAL MORE to convince 3rd Parties that there is an audience for hardcore titles than the next iteration of one of Nintendo's proven franchises that only serves to convey to 3rd Parties that only proven Nintendo franchises sell.
Devilgunman
Member
Yes, it is my assumption based on the fact that it was Amazon top selling for a few weeks so I'm pretty certain it will do much better than int Japan.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
Third parties have historically complained about having to compete with nintendo titles at launch, because that's what people pick up when they launch the console and don't give them a chance to make their sales.
Nintendo left a huge gap for third parties to make their sales.
Marketing only goes so far with a mediocre game. MoH:Warfighter reference again, I guess.
outunderthestars
Banned
You say that as though you believe Nintendo planned on NSMB and Nintendoland receiving underwhelming sales. NSMB Wii sold 27 millions copies. They clearly thought they were launching with a big hit right out the gate...
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
Neither of them are a Zelda or a 'real' Mario though, are they?
They might well both go on to be million sellers, but they're still not Nintendo 'big guns'.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I think it's much more likely that they simply didn't have the big guns ready as opposed to some situation where they could have launched with a killer app, but decided that they wanted it to be the third parties' time to shine.
outunderthestars
Banned
New Super mario Bros Wii sold more than the four Zelda and 3D mario wii games did combined.
How is that not their "big gun"?
In a period spanning years, on a console with a colossal user base, with it being the first 2D Mario game on a home system since 1990. Hmmm
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
You don't think they have finished titles ready that they are holding back for strategic deployment against PS4 / Xbox720 release dates that they could have instead released at launch for a console announced 2 years ago?
The Wii is self evidently not the WiiU, and the people buying it at launch are not the same people who had the Wii being scalped on eBay for its first year of release.
Zelda is a big gun to the people buying the WiiU right now. NSMB is not.
The Wii is self evidently not the WiiU, and the people buying it at launch are not the same people who had the Wii being scalped on eBay for its first year of release.
Zelda is a big gun to the people buying the WiiU right now. NSMB is not.
I honestly don't expect much from Europe when it comes to Nintendo due to past history. NoE just needs to find a way to make it more appealing later in the year. The Vita sales may be low but Sony at least included it in a bundle with AC and CoD at its retail price to make it slightly more attractive.
outunderthestars
Banned
No, no I don't. The fact that this thread exists should be proof enough that Nintendo simply doesn't have anything ready. Why else would they have a Nintendo direct that basically said "Seriously guys, trust us! games are coming at some point!" if they could have actually just shown the games?