It had way more to do with Nintendo not releasing games for it, leaving users with droughts that lasted months. Its the same problem that plagued the 3ds early in its life and is what's plaguing Wii U for the foreseeable future.
-
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.
Dice Summit: "nobody talking about the new WiiU projects they started, only canceled"
- Thread starter Pachterballs
- Start date
It had way more to do with Nintendo not releasing games for it, leaving users with droughts that lasted months. Its the same problem that plagued the 3ds early in its life and is what's plaguing Wii U for the foreseeable future.
Criminal Upper
Banned
You can't increase numbers unless you create games guys.
frankie_baby
Member
It can't be zombi u its almost certainly sold at least a couple of hundred thousand by now
walking fiend
Member
I definitely agree that people want them; I too have always wanted a very high end PC, but during my life I was able to upgrade to a high end PC only once, or maybe twice, and the budget restrained prevented me, despite my sheer amount of 'want'.
---
But I know one thing; if they are priced well, which by well I mean $300 for a basic model in the second holiday, and if they don't pull a stunt like lack of used game support or $100 yearly online fee, they most probably will take of without any kind of trouble, especially when you consider that it has been 7 years since the last gen started.
Well there was Rayman Legends in a few weeks. But....
Yep. 2011 had, if you were a North American consumer, Kirby and Zelda. That was it for the whole year. 2010 had Super Mario Galaxy 2, Monster Hunter Tri, Donkey Kong Country Returns, Sonic Colors, Kirby's Epic Yarn, Sin & Punishment 2, and probably a few others I missed. 2010 was goddamned fantastic for Wii.
What the fuck are you talking about? How can you be so clueless?
Always the same fucking lies and history rewritings -_-
tkscz
Member
the FPSey space monster shooter.
well, it had a lot to do with it? Xbox360 did gangbusters this past xmas. and ps3 tripled the wiiU's sales (I think) it was either tripled or doubled.
The Xbox didn't take off until the Kinect came along and they started marketing it as more of a multimedia entertainment device over just a gaming device. The PS3 had to drop it's prices significantly before people bought it. Graphics only work on gamers, and not even all of us at that. Graphics are not the WiiU's biggest weakness right now, the Wii is.
That has to be sarcasm.
Graphics are not the WiiU's issue right now. Think outside of the gaming box. The WiiU's biggest issue right now is the Wii. People still don't know that it's not just a controller for the Wii. They see no reason to buy it because of that. Nintendo is still oblivious to this fact and still makes ads that make it look like a Wii add-on.
They may not know what a third party is but they do know which company's systems have had series they like.
Of All Trades
Member
I think Mario overestimates the long-term strength of certain ecosystems and possibly underestimates what MS/Sony are planning (unless he has specific insider info regarding nextgen OS/services) but I'm also more optimistic regarding the ability of companies with other markets to adjust, particularly MS who is already implementing some changes in other areas (albeit somewhat poorly or haphazardly in some cases). If you've ever used WP8 the store has one interesting element in that certain games are semi-curated by having an Xbox label, visually separating them from the rest of the standard appstore-esque random junk.
I anticipate next-gen is the last console generation, though, before consoles migrate into... something else.
I think WiiU was a bad plan to begin with. But to be fair I'm not quite sure what they should have done instead.
Nintendo should finally learn their lesson and get more independent from 3rd parties by expanding internally. The DS and the Wii were both huge hits commercially - but the 3rds missed to support both systems in an appropriate way. Nintendo gave them a second chance with the launch of Wii U and 3DS and the 3rds failed again.
3rd parties are obviously not interested in the success of Nintendo's system. So Nintendo should start to see and treat them as competitors. 3rds will realize that is was a huge mistake but that's not Nintendo's problem then.
walking fiend
Member
He's not a random iOS dev (published Xbox/PS3 games as well), and the focus is on what he's heard from others regarding new Wii U projects. I disagree with him as far as the next gen being a failure, as I'd imagine most would.
walking fiend
Member
Ports are never high budget; and who expected it to sell even 100k when even before release they announce a Trilogy pack for 360/PS3?
As much as people like to compare WiiU to the Dreamcast, at least the DC had tons of games on shelves and in the pipeline that people were really excited to play. The rate WiiU is going, I doubt it'll be able to match in four years the kind of stellar library the DC produced in two.
At least Nintendo has money.
At least Nintendo has money.
That's...stupid.
Not the guess, the fact that ME3 has been considered the game the sales of which would have decided Wii U's western support.
Zoramon089
Banned
Thinking about this how many big budget games could possibly have been released for the WiiU? And how many have flopped? I'm not saying games haven't greatly undersold but it's not like there's a large number of games I would even consider big budget even released for the system. Just a bunch of cheap ports. ZombiU is pretty much the only "big budget" game that isn't a port
You have moved on beyond the chicken and egg debate of does the Wii have no games because no one wants them or is there no audience for games because no games were made to cultivate an audience and blamed it on graphics, apparently. Not even on the lack of pipelines at third parties for dedicated SD games, or the lack of support from even Nintendo, but just graphics.
That's one way to interpret things.
I really, really doubt it would have done much better.
Hydrogen Bluebird
Member
Nintendo shouldn't have cheaped out on the Wii U's graphical capabilities as much as they have.
Would anyone seriously buy that game after the shitstorm it had earlier in the year? Honest question.
The N64 didn't really employ any gimmicks, though. It was hamstrung by the cartridge format Nintendo stubbornly decided to stick with. That forced nearly every narrative-based game onto the Playstation out of the necessities of storage volume. With the N64, Nintendo lost the console JRPG, and haven't recovered it since. In addition, cartridge publishing costs were so prohibitively high that only the most confident of developers could afford to make games for the system. Most who tried got burned, hard. Nintendo burned a whole pile of third party good-will with the N64.
The Gamecube, by comparison, was a much friendlier console to developers. Not as PC-like as the Xbox, but a far cry from the arbitrarily complex PS2. Even so, Nintendo bafflingly opted to stunt the system's disc size, forcing the scant few cutscene/narrative-heavy games to opt for multiple discs. (Killer 7, Baten Kaitos, Tales of Symphonia, MGS, etc) Nintendo had plenty of (great) ports of third-party action games at the time, but couldn't hold a candle to the PS2's more robust, "cinematic" library.
The Wii was actually a product out of its time. It relied on Gen-6 development paradigms that shut out middleware options that became extremely popular with the PS3 and 360. You simply couldn't port games to the Wii--they had to be written from the ground-up for the system. At first, a lot of developers instead opted for Wii-specific extensions of existing franchises (Dead Space Extraction, Umbrella Chronicles, CoD: Reflex Edition)...which they then refused to market against their AAA counterparts. Eventually, due to (understandably) poor sales, even that dried up, leaving Nintendo (yet again) the sole curators of their platform.
If the Wii U is more architecturally similar to Orbis and Durango, then straight ports might be more viable. In addition, Nintendo seems to be more proactive about securing exclusives (see: Platinum games, Monster Hunter (Capcom Five, anyone?)) than ever before. In all likelihood, however, we'll see yet another Gamecube situation, where the the Wii U gets a smattering of third-party support, but is largely propped up by a handful of stellar exclusives.
Dunno about you, but that's okay by me. Nintendo won't make BANK like they did 2006-2009, but they'll float along, and the games will keep coming.
Thought it was established earlier that it was a high profile game, not necessarily a high profile port.
ME3 does seem unlikely though, it was released many months after, unlike AC3.
Now this is an interesting development. Nintendo can fall back on Japanese third parties but what are these Japanese third parties going to do if Orbis/Durango come out and sell like gangbusters? Companies like Capcom and Konami are going to want some of that worldwide pie. Do you sacrifice millions you could have made by making the game only for Orbis/Durango or help Nintendo out with exclusive games? This is what I think we're going to see a lot of next gen.
I'm going to say there's a zero percent chance given how Mass Effect sells.
I mean, yeah, it does a fair amount, but not anywhere near enough to think a year late port could sell millions.
What?
frankie_baby
Member
If its done 100k in the USA its a fair assumption its over 200k worldwide
Right. But nevertheless, which parent would bought the console and the game? It's about 400$. I don't think that it makes sense, especially if you take into account that the game is on other consoles too. And even in a period of 12 months, I don't think that it could sell more than 1 million. But ten of thousands is really low thought.
Zoramon089
Banned
EA guide to success on the WiiU:
1. Announce months old game at full price
2. Announce trilogy set of series for the same price on different systems
3. ???
4. Don't profit
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
I would guess either Zombie U or COD.
walking fiend
Member
Why not? Firstly, Wii was still rather hot back then, and PS3/360 weren't outselling Wii by this amount.
Secondly, it would making direct ports quite easy to the system;
Thirdly, removing the Gamepad would reduce the cost a lot.
Fourthly, it would probably be marketed much more easily.
---
However, I believe Nintendo couldn't add proper online support to the system till now.
Anticitizen One
Banned
Against my better judgement I bought a wii U at launch even though I knew (and posted about) how it was an obvious flop from a mile away
Oh well I did kinda sorta enjoy playing NSMBU and Nano Assault Neo
Oh well I did kinda sorta enjoy playing NSMBU and Nano Assault Neo
Who the fuck expected Mass Effect 3 to sell millions? Look at the facts:
- Port of a one year old game.
- Not the best port of all time.
- Port of a game which got good review scores but bad fan feedback.
- Selling it for full price while selling all three games bundled together on other systems for the same price.
- The franchise doesn't have a background on Nintendo systems.
If someone was expecting Mass Effect 3 Wii U selling millions he is a huge dickhead.
With the kind of thinking that goes on nowadays in this industry, this expectation wouldn't surprise me at all.
From IGN
Lego City Stories
Monster Hunter
The Walking Dead Survival Instinct
Need for Speed Most Wanted
The Croods: Prehistoric Party!
The Amazing Spiderman
And if Alien Colonial Marines isn't coming out this month than maybe March (I have no source this is just my guess)
This sucks. I honestly never expected anything at all from DICE or EA. If I wanted to play BF4 the PC was going to be my own option. However I hope this has the added benefit of really lighting the fires under Nintendo something fierce. They have to accepted that they never will get the amount of support they want. Partly because they are a pure games company and Sony and Microsoft are gaming divisions of larger conglomerates. They can afford to sink the amount of money they do into their hardware. Nintendo and Sega never could. As a result the compromises Nintendo makes and feels they have to make will never make these companies happy. Especially when the other two are willing to go into the red for years to achieve their ultimate goals. Control over the living room so their other divisions can have new markets and enjoy the benefits.
Nintendo has to speed up localization once games are done. They have to do world wide releases if at all possible. They need to put their own studios into overdrive and continue to embrace the indie market and smaller studios the way they have. They more importantly need to expand to genres they haven't made games in before. They need to produce a FPS series of their own the way Sony has. They need to product more action adventure games the way Sony has. They need to product new IPs, even if they don't end up being mascots. Get the engine so it can be reused over and over again to help cut down cost so even if these games don't do huge numbers they still can be considered profitable.
Edit:
However what makes me mad is the double standard at play. The PS3 has issues it's first year and companies kept on pushing forward and giving it games. The Wii U while having trouble compared to the Wii but still doing better then most other consoles of the past has some stumbles companies start jumping ship as soon as possible. Just like the 3DS you know there are titles coming that will move hardware as they've always done. How is that acceptable?
This will never be called out either by the gaming media either because they're the same way with their coverage too.
I don't think graphics are that big of a selling point now honestly (to the average gamer). Not that graphics have ever been that huge, but we're at the point where all consoles are HD and can provide impressive graphics. There was a big difference between Wii and PS3/360, but because of diminished returns, the difference between Wii U and PS4/720 will be smaller.
Your average CoD gamer isn't going to buy a PS4/720 over Wii U for the graphics. He'll buy one and/or the other due to liking the Sony/MS brand, their online, and that's where their friends are likely to move.
I think Nintendo just being Nintendo is something that will hurt them. Not with handhelds, but with consoles...
Your average CoD gamer isn't going to buy a PS4/720 over Wii U for the graphics. He'll buy one and/or the other due to liking the Sony/MS brand, their online, and that's where their friends are likely to move.
I think Nintendo just being Nintendo is something that will hurt them. Not with handhelds, but with consoles...
DragonSworne
Banned
Wonderful
It's like the reserve Wii.
Publishers were certain Wii was just a fad and sales would pummel within the year of release. Publishers are now certain that Wii U sales will never increase and stay low for good.
It's like the reserve Wii.
Publishers were certain Wii was just a fad and sales would pummel within the year of release. Publishers are now certain that Wii U sales will never increase and stay low for good.
That still shouldn't make as much of a difference because they're still going to have to support the current consoles for another 2 or 3 more years. They have a combined userbase of 150+ million units out there and it would literally be foolish to leave that much money on the table. They can only hope to sell a few million units of the new consoles in the first year or two. The money to make next gen titles has to come from somewhere.
lwilliams3
Member
The poster Mario himself admits that it is antedoctic, and we don't know which games he is referring to. Some of these cancelations may be current-gen games that may arrived to late too be relevant for the Wii U userbase (like a lot of the launch titles), so they are instead transtitioning to next-gen development (which may or may not include the Wii U depending if/when Nintendo get things back on track for the system later this year.)
The PS3 came out after the 360 been out for a year, so it didn't deal with this transtitional period when it was underperforming. Devs instead made exclusives multi-platform.
You're the one imposing that condition there, though.
BLOPS 2, ME3, and COD are still big budget releases, even if they weren't exclusive.
Pseudo_Sam
Survives without air, food, or water
Somebody make sense of this for me, please. Who the hell would expect to sell "millions" of a third party game on a platform that only just released? The attach rate would be astronomical, no? Am I being dumb, or is that as stupid as it sounds?