NeoGAF

Originally Posted by wildfire

This post is good but it's criminal you did nothing to speculate on and offer solutions to the problems with convincing 3rd parties to adopt the Wii U.

That's because that's a cultural issue of designing hardware based on the needs of third parties, be accommodating in cross promoting their software, developing a friendly a sustainable relationship, and create an ecosystem where people buy third party games.

Nintendo can't do that with the Wii U on the first point and fourth point, but they can start with the second and third point. The problem is that you need all four in concert to even remotely competitive and sustainable in this landscape. Heck, Nintendo even has a tough time with the 3DS, a console that is far more successful and has a ecosystem of people who want to buy third party games.

They should tell people it plays videogames. That isn't getting through somehow.

Also they should make more videogames.

Your answer in number 8 is spot on. The problem with Wii U isn't necessarily a lack of 3rd party content, but a lack of content, in general. If I get a great RPG on Wii U, I don't care if it was made by Square or MonolithSoft. Between MonolithSoft, Retro, Camelot, Next Level Games, HAL, and others they should be able to make great content in a variety of different genres. Forming publishing deals with certain 3rd parties like Sega and Platinum Games will help as well. That way Wii U would have sports games, shooters, RPGs, and action games, just not necessarily the same ones as those on PS4/XOne.

Great thread, zomgbbqftw - really start to dig you even if your avatar reminds me of Kagari all the time even though you already changed it :lol

That being said, I don't see how some points would work out in reality - was any device ever "renamed"? And what were the effects of it? I think it might push the conclusion even further

Crazy to think that all they had to do was to choose a whole different name for that thing instead with sticking with the Wii brand

Originally Posted by Mashing

They really need to expand. They've made their bed, so now they have to sleep in it. By that I mean they've destroyed any 3rd party relationships they have so they're going to have to float the system themselves. They really need to start hiring more talent, open more studios. To Nintendo, this is probably not cost efficient though. NCL needs to let their US/EU branches be more independent. Let them go out and court 3rd parties, acquire talent and build studios.

And with more studios, we wouldn't have the droughts that keep happening, or they'd be significantly smaller. New IP could be made and old series that Nintendo won't get around to making could return.

It would be nice to see but I worry that Nintendo would micromanage every studio and nobody would really have any independence.

Nintendo's gotta be consistent with their release schedule. This year was terrible.

Here's hoping that things change for them.

Originally Posted by Nibel

Crazy to think that all they had to do was to choose a whole different name for that thing instead with sticking with the Wii brand

They tried to do that whole iPad/iPhone thing without realizing that it's a bad idea for a successor that goes in a completely different direction than the original.

Hello everyone.

This time I would like to deliver directly to you our future plans for Wii U.

[Iwata does the "direct" gesture]

Lately you may have noticed a few problems with Wii U around the world.

[Fancy chart with Japanese text and random numbers]

As you can see, Wii U does not have enough new gaming content to satisfy console owners. Sales have also been less than satisfactory for Nintendo. For that I am very sorry.

[Long awkward pause]

However, do not be worried. We have been hard at work coming up with new ways to make Wii U better for consumers.

We are happy to announce that Wii U will be receiving a brand new title that will help consumers know that it is a brand new product with different content.

Introducing Wii Want U.



We have radically changed Wii U into a brand new name to easily communicate the ideals of Nintendo. Wii Want U tells consumers that Nintendo values their support.
We want people to continue playing our games, so families will feel welcomed whenever they turn on their Wii Want U.

Because I continue to deliver news directly to you [Iwata does the "direct" gesture] we at Nintendo have decided to incorporate my animated likeness into the logo.
Now consumers all around the world will know that Wii Want U will connect directly to them through our revolutionary GamePad, as well as immediately streaming any new Nintendo Directs to every Wii Want U system.

Many consumers were confused about the meaning of the U in Wii U. Well, worry no more.
Wii Want U not only communicates that our consumers are valued, but the letter itself serves as a Mii body for the animated Iwata character. That way, I can directly communicate that Wii Want U is the perfect console for you.

[Iwata does the "direct" gesture]

As you can see, I am a Mii.

[Long awkward pause]

Please be excited.

[Iwata bows]

When considering Nintendo's situation I generally just think back to what Yoshida said a while back when asked about the U, and I think in some sense he nailed the elephant in the room. The big issue with the U has always been a matter of conveying the message. I'm not speaking strictly about marketing but I mean generally, it did a terrible job in conveying exactly what the console is and who it is for.

I don't think it's so simple to say that there is no market for the console, it's just that Nintendo themselves don't know who or what that market is. The OP mentions it already, there seemed like too much of a focus on the hardcore despite the fact that what the console encompassed didn't seem like the kind of thing they'd be interested in.

I don't believe in the concept of the Wii U being an unappealing product because even if going by anecdotal evidence most people who've had their time with it really love using it. But there's just too many asterisks involved - what games can it offer? What does it have that others don't? Why is it a valuable purchase? What defines the Wii U and how does it work?

The Wii was perhaps not only the simplest console to understand, but the console with the clearest message - this is a new way for you to play your game. This controller will do everything. It will bring the family together. Going into this gen, PS4 also had the perfect message to convey - it's a machine for the gamers. They told us exactly what we needed to know about it. In contrast, Xbox One would play coy with it's consumers even if they'd reveal the features, but that was something they managed to reverse well before launch and right now it's a respectable console.

While there will be products that will always be inherently better than something else there is always room for improvement and the Wii U doing as bad as it is isn't just a matter of worse hardware or such. It is a culmination of miscommunication, lack of quality output, horrid relations with partners, a bad conveying of message and giving the consumer too much credit. No company should assume that the consumer will always know what it is.

Had the Wii U's output improved, had Nintendo communicated with it's audience better and not been so insular, had they not been so inconsistent in what they hoped to achieve and had everything been planned in due time, the Wii U could have done well enough to go passed Gamecube numbers, but at this point it's kind of too late to do that. I love my Wii U and I recommend all my friends to get one, but more than anything it is an example of misjudging what audience there is and what you have.

Anything is possible obviously, but if that is going to happen they have to play hard ball. Right now. None of this "play. the. game." bullcrap. Fucking do something about this, don't pretend like you know what you're doing. Know what you're doing.

Whatever "fix" Nintendo needs right now, one thing has to remain the same, and that's the quality of their software. Going third party would likely affect that drastically, so there would have to be a way for Nintendo to keep thier own hardware, but make it more attractive to the broader market. Obviously the Wii Remote and the Gamepad were thier solutions to that problem, but the latter failed to do so.

I think Nintendo should team up with a hardware partner that can work with them on the design process, as well as marketing. Apple seems to want to get into the games industry, so why not work with Nintendo to make that happen? The notariety of Apple products and Nintendo IP seems like a match made in heaven, and I don't think anyone else could really undo the mistakes Nintendo has made better than they could.

It sounds crazy, I know, but it seems like a good way for Nintendo to be brought into the new age, all while keeping the culture and identity that made them unique in the first place. Just spitballin' here.

I don't understand why they didn't force people to install some sort of Wii U app on the Wii that advertises it and the Wii U games. Discontinuing Nintendo Channel seems like a bad move.

Yeah, the name isn't such a huge issue, IMO. Xbox One being a comparable example. No complaining about brand confusion there. Also, who said "Super" ever meant 'successor' back in the day?

Also, I think a [temporary] fix for the lack of third party support would be to crank up the heat tenfold on releasing Nintendo's back-catalog via Virtual Console, eShop and start a venerable marketing campaign toward the HUNDREDS of titles that would be available. Fuck, just have a 30-second ad of Super Mario World or Super Metroid or (insert literally ANY NINTENDO TITLE) and bam, I mean, wtf 'tendo.

Nice writeup, zomg. I mentioned in the other thread that something about the gamepad is off-putting to me. I use a Nexus 7 every day, I have a relatively modern smartphone... the gamepad to me just looks like the first generation of tablets, chunky and clunky.

If they redesigned the gamepad, upgraded the screen, etc., I would be a good bit more interested. Maybe it's unfair, but every time I see the gamepad I just think that it's too late to the tablet party.

Originally Posted by 10k

No major third party games for 2014 are announced for Wii U? That's his source.

No MGSV, KH3, FFXV, NHL, Madden, FIFA, dragon age III, destiny, etc. Ubisoft, Activision and Warner Bros are pretty much the only western third parties on board. No EA, Square, Namco, Take Two, etc. Capcom is the only major third party in japan supporting it.

You're forgetting Sega.

It's funny that I never even realized how little support Nintendo has received from other Japanese companies. If the Wii U had captured at least a sizable portion of the Japanese console market, there was a chance at getting a healthy stream of quirky B-titles between the big Nintendo titles. But with even the languishing Japanese sales, disinterest in console gaming in general and the popularity of the 3DS, there's little chance of that happening.

This puts all the burden of delivering enough titles to keep Wii U owners on Nintendo's shoulders, The droughts will become even longer than they were in the worst Gamecube days. Nintendo is royally fucked.

Just to restate the completely obvious, zomg is an investment banker. His establishment deals in the general financial soundness of business practices, roadmaps and strategies of the various companies around the world. Man knows his shit.

Originally Posted by Nickodemos

Just to restate the completely obvious, zomg is an investment banker. His establishment deals in the general financial soundness of business practices, roadmaps and strategies of the various companies around the world. Man knows his shit.

I knew he was in finance, especially from the first sentence from the OP but I never knew specifically what, and I didn't want to ask in-case it put his position into jeopardy or something. Good to know though :)

Originally Posted by Stumpokapow

Erm, I doubt you could name more than 4 high profile future first-party titles for either other system. The root of the issue here isn't that Nintendo is abnormal in this regard, it's that the absence of external publishers on the system puts an additional burden on Nintendo that they can't satisfy because they simply can't produce software fast enough to compete with every other publisher on every other platform.

In fact in general I think many of these problems are just odd symptoms of other problems. I don't think a name needs to convey anything all that clearly. No one is confusing Xbox One with the original Xbox. And given how dead the original Wii is and how little retail shelf space it has at this point in time I think any momentary Wii versus Wii U confusion is not going to be a long-term thing. The promotion, awareness, retail partnership, advertising, etc. is the actual issue.

Sony have repeatedly talked about 20 SCE developed/published titles. Beyond that it doesn't really matter, I know that within those 20 titles my gaming needs will be catered for. MS did the same thing and said 15 titles are coming for the first year from their publishing/development. Again, that's enough.

Nintendo have not laid out anything like that kind of roadmap for title releases.

As for the name. If it was a momentary issue then people wouldn't still think that the Wii U is a tablet accessory for the Wii. Microsoft made absolutely clear that the Xbox One was a whole new system and it looks completely different too. The issue stems from Nintendo putting so much prominence on the tablet during the reveal and leading up to the release. There is a massive proportion of people out there who still think it is just a tablet accessory, I think it is wrong to say otherwise.

You have, wrongly IMO, jumped onto the "it's all marketing issues" bandwagon. Yes their marketing message is poor, and yes it can easily be improved. There are so many other problems that need to be addressed though. Even with improved marketing there will be no recovery in Wii U sales. Nintendo need to address all of the points raised and many others before they can even reach GCN sales.

1. The name. - Agreed
2. Price/power ratio. - Irrelevant. Nobody goes "But this system does more teraflops and has more geebees than the others for a hundred more dollars!" They want cheap, but not so cheap that it's CHEAP.
3. The differentiator is poor. - Entirely subjective. I think it's a hell of an idea and it's a lot of fun.
4. The information blackout for future titles.- I don't see what this matters at all.
5. Nintendo Directs are a poor idea - If they were only posted on Miiverse or something, I'd agree. But they're on Youtube, so I don't get where you're coming from here.
6. It is deficient in terms of hardware power - As were the NES, SNES, PS1, the PS2, and the Xbox 360 before it. Literally meaningless.
7. The advertising has been piss-poor. - I don't know about that UK ad you're talking about, but in the US version of the 3D World ad, they basically say that the family needs to "Upgrade to a Wii U" so they can have family time while playing Mario. I think it makes it pretty clear that it's a new system.
8. Third party support is basically dead - Pretty much, but it doesn't matter to me (and most people on this forum, I'd imagine). Third party games will be better on PC than any console.

Originally Posted by wildfire

Well it's not just a cultural problem. It's also a business one. Nintendo could moneyhat more companies like Platinum.
Nintendo could offer to shoulder the advertising costs which the Nintendo Directs are sort of doing but as has been pointed out is more of a means to advertise to people who browse forums like Neogaf or /v regularly instead of everybody else who isn't as dedicated in looking for specific gaming content.

In the past I have suggested that Nintendo help developers reduce dev costs by making a team that helps them make Wii U gamepad specific features. Another thing they could do is take on the costs of porting.

Also in the past a forum member very familiar with Nintendo's business practices pointed out Nintendo changed their policies on how they get paid after the economy collapsed in 2008. Their response to the crash was to force publishers to pay up front for discs that had to be shipped while MS and Sony allow them to purchase their discs on credit. The consequence is that publishers didn't know how much demand any game would have for their platform so to pay up front is essentially forcing them to bet on how well their games would sell on Nintendo's platform. I might be misremembering the details of the deal but I do remember the consequences.

I like how people suggest "fixes" like this which would cost way more money than would be helpful, rarely get results, and probably do way more harm than good. They can do stuff like Bayonetta 2 because Platinum wanted to make it and couldn't get anyone else to help. The really big name third parties will never switch to Nintendo unless Nintendo essentially funds a game entirely for them, including giving them a baseline profit (because there's this thing called opportunity cost: Even if it succeeded and made money, they need to make more money than they would using their resources on something else). It's not enough to just get the games on Nintendo consoles, since most gamers will never look at the Nintendo version if there is a ps4/xbone version anyways. I'm sure Nintendo is trying to improve relationships with third parties, but no matter what they do it'll come down to historical sales and install base, and that's not something Nintendo can depend on third parties to fix.

What Nintendo really needs to do is focus on promoting the wii u as a second console- a better choice for someone who already has a gaming pc/xbone/ps4 and wants to play exclusives. Then, they can work on making a new console that will fix some of the mistakes they've made and compete with consoles that come after ps4 and xbone, but it'll probably have to wait until this generation is much closer to a close or you'll just get similar issues to what the Wii U had. I think people like to shoot out "solutions" that would only work if Nintendo had access to an infinite amount of money and resources (Which would make the whole failure thing irrelevant anyways).

Nintendo is trying to produce games, but that takes time and money. SO yeah they aren't releasing games from all their franchises at once, but starting with ones they'd already been working on(Pikmin 3) or ones that have historically sold the best (Mario. This is also why NSMBU came out before 3DW). I find it hilarious when gamers suggest all their issues would be fixed if they just released a new star fox or fzero, and ignore the fact that those series haven't really done that well. It's even harder on Nintendo because for years (long before the wii) it's been "cool" to make fun of Nintendo and look down on them regardless of what they do

I think they need to launch a new sku without the tablet - change their development to allow for games not relying on touch, and then sell it significantly cheaper. Still keep the bundle with the gamepad, but sell it separately as an accessory too.

Emphasise the remote play aspects - maybe leverage the PS4-vita getting a bit of public awareness about he benefits of off-TV play,nadvertise around the typical family home with many demands on the TV

Longer term, prepare for a shorter generation. Hit the reset button in three years, mid-cycle for PS4. Use the emerging technologies of stacked ram etc to get a performance advantage (or match performance with a cost advantage)

Lack of information on future titles is almost universal and doesn't seem to be hurting the competition. Systems are out long enough for confusing names to properly be explained. Marketing isn't limited to Nintendo Directs - plenty of news outlets and forums talk about what goes on in them. Making the system more powerful wasn't going to help with the price tag or with third party support (just look at this year).

Their main problems are in the planning stages. The pricing, the central concept and its costs/limitations, the brand value - those weren't well thought out enough. Playing Mr. Innovator was always going to catch up to them because great ideas are limited and even if the idea is great, the technology might not be advanced enough to really flesh the idea out (both apply to the Wii U). I don't think they'll ever reach core audiences or get the third party support the way the other two have either.

Solution - find a different, less direct way to get their games onto TVs that frees up the resources they'd put into manufacturing consoles but still makes them a competitor to MS and Sony. There are companies with cloud tech that want to expand into gaming, surely, and Nintendo's history gives them leverage to form a partnership.

Originally Posted by wildfire

This post is good but it's criminal you did nothing to speculate on and offer solutions to the problems with convincing 3rd parties to adopt the Wii U.

Because I don't believe there is any scenario that Nintendo can achieve decent third party support as they are currently structured. The expense would be too great.

The idea of creating internally developed sports, RPG, action and titles in other mainstream genres would be about securing third party games for the next console though. They could end production of those titles in return for full third party support. That has been done in the past.

For the Wii U it would take teams of people at Nintendo working to port third party games which is expensive, too expensive. There is also no guarantee that any ports would be given the same release date as the originals because of IP and asset protection issues. Internally developing titles for mainstream genres seems like a better solution because at least Nintendo will own something even if a trade doesn't work.

Killing the Wii U early could go either way. You had the Saturn which did awfully in the west and well in Japan replaced by Dreamcast which fixed the Saturn's problems and led to 3rd party support returning in the west(sans EA). Yes ultimately Dreamcast was killed 2 years later but Nintendo are in much better shape financially and would likely be able to weather this. You also have the og Xbox, killed in 2005 yet the 360 went on to sell what? 80m units? Also og Xbox had an install base of ~25m vs Wii u with less than 5. It is flopping worldwide too unlike Saturn or Xbox which both had strong markets. If killed you aren't going to screw over that many people comparatively and if there's a recognition of your Wii U purchase with something like free extra controller and 2 games. That could work in alleviating people's disappointment.

Originally Posted by Mashing

NCL needs to let their US/EU branches be more independent. Let them go out and court 3rd parties, acquire talent and build studios.

Absolutely not. Who are these people and why should NCL trust them so blindly? Nintendo's creative process has always been a largely internal, Japanese affair. That's what sets Nintendo apart, the fact that the craft of their business is a passion for all those people at the top of the pyramid. If you take that out of the equation the whole structure will crumble. Look what happened to Rare without NCL's guidance.

Hey zomg, would it be possible to make an extrapolation regarding the "nuclear option" (extirpating the gamepad from the system's innards, with everything that it would entail), or would that require me to cough up a sum based around a number and four zeroes :D ?

Originally Posted by Stumpokapow

The promotion, awareness, retail partnership, advertising, etc. is the actual issue.

Yup. The biggest blunder Nintendo made while pushing out Wii U is the total lack of promotion creating awareness. There was none. Ever since E3 2011 Nintendo didn't do enough to promote the system. The other two just kept on dripping info, but with Nintendo I think they kept the lid on Wii U on for a year. And with the final reveal, they just didn't create enough enthousiasm. Compare that to the original Wii and it's reveal... man what a difference. Although the Wii hype carried itself at times. I think that's the angle they were hoping for the Wii U as well.

Originally Posted by Mato

Absolutely not. Who are these people and why should NCL trust them so blindly? Nintendo's creative process has always been a largely internal, Japanese affair. That's what sets Nintendo apart, the fact that the craft of their business is a passion for all those people at the top of the pyramid. If you take that out of the equation the whole structure will crumble. Look what happened to Rare without NCL's guidance.

Where has this "Japan first" approach got them? Sony are a Japanese company and have significant non-Japanese game development. Their non-Japanese development is miles more successful than what comes out of their Japan based developers.

Japanese game development isn't innately superior to western development, it is a similar attitude at Nintendo which has held them back.

The real solution:

Leave home consoles, keep making handhelds and be the best selling software publisher in the world for games.

Another possible fix:

Rush your Wii U successor to be ready for Christmas 2015 and be a true next-gen console.

How to make bank:

Dump your back catalog on iPhone and don't care how poor the Wii U sells until 2017.


Also, REBRAND THE WII U IMMEDEDIATELY

Originally Posted by Nickodemos

Hey zomg, would it be possible to make an extrapolation regarding the "nuclear option" (extirpating the gamepad from the system's innards, with everything that it would entail), or would that require me to cough up a sum based around a number and four zeroes :D ?

It would be easier for Nintendo to get rid of the U-pad than for MS to get rid of Kinect. The tablet is, so far, a non-essential accessory to the system. Games can all be played with the regular controller and multiplayer is done with Wiimotes. I think all of four titles require the use of tablet features and the major titles do not.

However, getting rid of it doesn't make sense because the saving is not that great (not enough for Nintendo cut prices significantly), it would irritate a lot of people who already own the system and bought it for the tablet controls, and they would be selling a system with PS3/360 level graphics without the 80m installed base that each of those already have and without a differentiator. For better or worse, they are stuck with the tablet. For that reason I think they will have to kill it in 2015 or 2016 at the latest.

Originally Posted by zomgbbqftw

However, getting rid of it doesn't make sense because the saving is not that great (not enough for Nintendo cut prices significantly),

But didn't several industry people claim that it was a rather expensive peripheral?

Originally Posted by zomgbbqftw

it would irritate a lot of people who already own the system and bought it for the tablet controls,

Given the small installed base, I'd not go that far as to claim "a lot".

Originally Posted by zomgbbqftw

and they would be selling a system with PS3/360 level graphics without the 80m installed base that each of those already have and without a differentiator.

It would make development a lot simpler, though. That would count for something. Even if (or, rather, particularly because) they're going to kill it late 2015.

Originally Posted by Sulik2

How to make bank:

Dump your back catalog on iPhone and don't care how poor the Wii U sells until 2017.

Terrible idea. This goes against essentially all Nintendo has worked for in creating their userbase with not only the 3DS but the Wii U as well. It's akin to saying "Nintendo go [3rd Party] and be a family man"

Originally Posted by Stumpokapow

Erm, I doubt you could name more than 4 high profile future first-party titles for either other system. The root of the issue here isn't that Nintendo is abnormal in this regard, it's that the absence of external publishers on the system puts an additional burden on Nintendo that they can't satisfy because they simply can't produce software fast enough to compete with every other publisher on every other platform.

In fact in general I think many of these problems are just odd symptoms of other problems. I don't think a name needs to convey anything all that clearly. No one is confusing Xbox One with the original Xbox. And given how dead the original Wii is and how little retail shelf space it has at this point in time I think any momentary Wii versus Wii U confusion is not going to be a long-term thing. The promotion, awareness, retail partnership, advertising, etc. is the actual issue.

This is probably the biggest problem for me concerning Nintendo and I always sound like a broken record saying it. But NCL really needs to get the other branches to help out. They need to have the weight taken of their shoulders. Output just plain sucks.
And like you mentioned, promoting has been dire too. They should take a leaf out of Sakurai and The Pokemon Company's books and show off all they can for announced titles. Waiting a few weeks before launch is just plain idiotic.

Renaming it Wii U HD wouldn't be good. "I thought the Wii U was already HD? What is this?"

They should just ride out the name for the console's lifetime. It's too late to change anything.

I don't think Nintendo really has a road to success.

Gamecube did almost everything you suggest to fix Nintendo console. And the Gamecube is considered a failure. (It made a profit for Nintendo though).

Nintendo then made a conscious decision to leave the performance rat race and instead produce cheap consoles (with a relative to their performance high price) with a (negative) gimmick / (positive) innovation.

So they released the Wii with the Waggle. That actually became a hit and validated Nintendo's strategy. But Nintendo also got the idea that this was a planned success and not just plain luck (startup investors invest in dozens of companies with the expectation that one or two of them hit it, knowing that most of them fail).

The 3DS was then released, with the gimmick of 3D. The price was a joke (same price as the vastly superior Vita). That almost became a failure but Nintendo was able to turn the tide around. The lowered the price (to the point of making a loss on the system), got their staple of franchises on it and Japan is still in love with handhelds (Note that Nintendo still states that the handheld is underperforming in the West). They also invested money in Capcom to kill of the Vita (MH). But the 3D gimmick did not really pan out (heck, there is now a 2DS...).

The Wii U has the table gimmick. I guess Nintendo management thought they could ride the tablet hype, their tablet is cheaper than most other tablets (and comes with a console). Unfortunately it looks also like a cheap tablet and is not really mobile. Leave your home and it becomes a doorstop. That gimmick is also dead. While it would be an option to release a Wii U without tablet and lower the price I don't think it will turn the tide. Once Zelda, Metroid and most important the Mario games hit the system it will sell a couple of millions more after which Nintendo can work on the next console (in three years or so).

I think if Nintendo evaluates their strategy they have two options:
* continue of making "cheap" consoles (with a good profit margin), attaching a gimmick to me them and hoping that the gimmick has mass appeal
* producing another Gamecube, with comparable specs to other systems, without any gimmick, try to get 3rd party support

I think Nintendo will still go for the first option. 3rd party support is not really what Nintendo needs with their strong franchises. And 3rd parties want to see the sales. They might give a little support on release day but they will drop it very fast if the sales are not there. Wii U and Vita both had to experience this.

Of course MS is now going a little bit in the same direction as Nintendo, make a weak system with a gimmick for a high price. But MS is not afraid to throw money at the problem, i.e. marketing the shit out of the system plus spending hundreds of millions of dollars on 3rd parties. Nintendo has done it with MH but that was basically a sure thing for both sides (Capcom knew it would sell about the same on Vita or 3DS, so going 3DS would not harm the franchise and Nintendo knew it would be a hit and would kill the Vita), there is no such franchise on consoles.

Originally Posted by chaosblade

In totally random order:

I think Nintendo feels like they have been kind of burned on new IPs. I don't think they avoid them entirely, but I do think they are afraid to make an "AAA" sort of game with all the marketing expense and everything that goes along with it. Nintendo doesn't seem to like the high risk-high reward strategy, they seem to spend less on new IPs and see how they are received before investing more later (see Xenoblade getting what seems to be a spiritual sequel). The problem is that they're not going to see many major successes out of this just because they aren't getting the games out there in a big enough way to make them successful - JRPGs, lowish budget action games, and puzzle games aren't the sort of things that are going to draw major word of mouth and they aren't getting pushed heavily by Nintendo. I suppose the consensus is that Nintendo does need to try making a big risky IP, throw the money at it they throw at Mario and Zelda. They might be more willing to do that sort of thing with a bigger install base...

Well the issue there is they've been throwing money at Japanese studios. They bought Monolith Soft, moneyhatted Monster Hunter, had Sakaguchi make them a new JRPG, funded two games from P* (both of which have more budget than Bayonetta 1), etc.

At least some of that money going to stuff like Pandora's Tower, etc that will never sell should go into making a new Western AAA core IP for the Wii U.

Originally Posted by zomgbbqftw

Where has this "Japan first" approach got them? Sony are a Japanese company and have significant non-Japanese game development. Their non-Japanese development is miles more successful than what comes out of their Japan based developers.

Japanese game development isn't innately superior to western development, it is a similar attitude at Nintendo which has held them back.

Where it's gotten them? Are you seriously doubting Nintendo decades-worth of achievements? It has generated tens of billions of profit and stunning collection of dazzling, state of the art games. Granting more power to Reggie and Bill fucking Tranen is a hasty, patchy approach that will result in more Metroid Other Ms and RE6s. Nintendo's problem is of strategic planning nature not a creative one.

Originally Posted by Nickodemos

But didn't several industry people claim that it was a rather expensive peripheral?

I hope not. There isn't really anything special in it. It's expensive in terms of the proportion of the total cost, but in absolute terms it's not really a big deal. The bigger cost Nintendo will be dealing with right now is low volume penalties from production and assembly partners.

Given the small installed base, I'd not go that far as to claim "a lot".

The problem is that they would be pissing of the most hardcore Nintendo fans, these are the people who "believe" in the tablet controller and are the people Nintendo rely on to sell their systems via word of mouth and demonstrations to family/friends. Pissing off this group is a poor idea.

It would make development a lot simpler, though. That would count for something. Even if (or, rather, particularly because) they're going to kill it late 2015.

Yes, but I don't think it will help get third parties back. The Wii U installed base will not be big enough by the time the generation transition is done for all but the annualised franchises. It won't be able to warrant any extra expense at least.

As for the earlier question on creating a PS4 competitor in terms of graphical power for a 2015/16 release. It could be done at a "Nintendo" price point. The PS4 will be at $299 by then IMO and possibly even profitable. As for the hook, it really depends on what they do. If it's like Kinect then it will be tough to hit the price, if it is like Wiimotes then it's easy.

Dayum

OP basically nails it on the head

They would be wise to

- Get a redesign going
- Get the price down to 199
- Redo the Nintendo Network under one banner
- Completely rebuild their firmware and hire a damn expert software engineer
- Pump money into advertising and deals
- Reach media parity with it competitors. Get apps WORKING seamlessly (If chromecast can get the job done.....)

Originally Posted by Mato

Where it's gotten them? Are you seriously doubting Nintendo decades-worth of achievements? It has generated tens of billions of profit and stunning collection of dazzling, state of the art games. Granting more power to Reggie and Bill fucking Tranen is a hasty, patchy approach that will result in more Metroid Other Ms and RE6s. Nintendo's problem is of strategic planning nature not a creative one.

And what has it done for them lately? For the Wii U specifically or their home console presence? Fuck all.

NCL are only as good as the most recent success, and for home consoles that was a long time ago. A new development strategy is needed.

That's not to say close Japanese development. They need to be freed of the burden of providing every single game for their home console. It is leading to franchise fatigue for Mario games.

I wouldn't be too mad if they pulled a Twilight Princess on most of their current WiiU games.

I'd actually like to play X with better framerate.

They really need to differentiate the software on the Wii U from the 3DS. When pretty much every franchise is available on the 3DS at a cheaper price, why should I get a Wii U?

-Mario 2D
-Mario 3D
-Donkey Kong
-Smash Bros
-Zelda

Software on the Wii like Wii Fit look pretty damn similar between the two systems too.

The 3DS also has stuff like Wario, Fire Emblem, and Animal Crossing. For the Wii U they should use older IPs that have been resting, or create totally new ones. From the top of my head the Wii U has Pikmin 3 and W101 as games that aren't available on the 3DS. In the future I see X and Bayonetta 2. That's only four unique games for the system, where only 2 of which are actually made internally by Nintendo.