-
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.
Wii U Speculation Thread 2: Can't take anymore of this!!!
- Thread starter ClovingWestbrook
- Start date
- Status
Confirmation bias, possibly...but based on when I picked up a 3DS and within 5 minutes was wondering how in the hell it got so much initial praise for being comfortable to hold.
I don't remember this at all.
The Wii, being the system it is, was priced at 250. The Wii U being way more powerful than current gen and the controller will be enough to place the Wii U at 350 or higher.
Now, if Nintendo is willing to take a considerable loss (somethin I highly doubt) I can see them pricing it lower but 299 at launch is just wishful thinking.
Like I mentioned before (in my welcome statement) I believe the pricetag will show 399, Euros and they will still sell at a loss of about 50, Euros!!
Yeah, that's part of my main concern about the Wii U. It's a clusterfuck of different concepts: tablet vs. remote, 2 screens vs. TV-off, play away from TV vs. not too far, 1 tablet vs. lots of remotes.
Wii U is a mass of contradictions, and it's going to be very hard for Nintendo to distill all that down into a simple thing that people get. The very opposite of the Wii. Things like the asymmetrical gaming push are just bandaids on a very confusing concept.
They better have a killer-app up their sleeves that solidifies the whole thing, or it's going to be a very awkward sell to anyone other than people who just want Nintendo games in HD.
I don't think what you're asking for is feasible within a 350 euro boundary, unless Nintendo subsidizes and takes a pretty hefty loss. Not to mention, they would probably need a bigger box for the console.
Posts like this make me sad that Nintendo's regressing back to dual-analog. PC will continue to be my home for first/third person games as well, I guess.
Yup, it's a bit of a mess. We can speculate all day about all of the next gen consoles, but in the end it all comes down to selling the mass market a game they really want. Software moves the consoles.
Yeah, that's always the case and Nintendo are best-placed out of all of them to be able to do it.
The Wii U's concept, or lack of it really, is concerning though. It's like Nintendo are trying to take a step forwards, backwards and sideways all at the time time. Doesn't give you the same degree of confidence that they know what they are doing, which was the whole problem with last E3.
The proof as always though will be in the pudding, and I hope they get it right.
GameplayWhore
Member
NES, SNES, N64 and GameCube were all way more powerful than the prior generation of consoles. The most expensive of those was $250 (the higher level NES sku), the least expensive $200 (everything else before the Wii). You're suggesting that Nintendo will go with a price 40% higher than they've ever gone before, in an environment where a large class of the gamers they're trying to court are really, really entrenched with their current brands due to online communities.
This is compounded by the situation where Nintendo just last year debuted a portable system at roughly 40% higher than their highest-priced previous portable (the DSi XL, I think, which was $170 or $180, no?). They did this due to a strong pre-release reception, but the high price ended up biting them in the ass, and now they're priced at a more conventional level, which is only slightly higher than the previous generation's introductory price.
It is pretty reasonable to suggest that Nintendo learned from the above a lesson about over-pricing their hardware. That's why I'm expecting an under $300 sku.
Fourth Storm
Member
Yes, multiple ways to navigate are a must really (what if the wii u controller malfunctions?) and can't you already navigate channels w/ the CC? I like the idea of the channels, but I hope they give it a revamp and at least some sort of category approach. I believe they plan on pushing alot more online content at us than before w/ the new system.
It is comfortable to hold, but there is a huge difference between playing Call of Duty and playing Pikmin. Look at the 3DS and Kid Icarus for an example of this. The 3DS is comfortable to hold, but it isn't comfortable for that game.
You haven't heard much about it because most games journalists do not play a lot of competitive multiplayer. The Giant Bomb year end discussion on competitive MP was ridiculous. Most of them played less than a few hours of any competitive MP game last year. There are millions of heavy MP gamers that play hundreds of hours a year.
I bought a Wii at launch and will do the same for Wii U, but I'm not expecting to play any Action or Shooting games on it.
Mr. B Natural
Member
People don't buy systems to play the game they can already play on a system they have with friends already playing on the older system.
For Nintendo to get some of the COD crowd out of Xbox's corner (or the crowd for any of these established titles), they need to make a game specifically for the system (and sold nowhere else,) or market it heavily as a nintendo product...and Nintendo doesn't like spending money on things other than directly to themselves (and such a thing would cost a very impractical large mint anyway), so that's not gonna happen.
And for god's sake I still see GAF blaming everyone but nintendo for their lack of 3rd party support. If nobody comes to your party, it's not the 100's of missing visitor's fault, it's the hosts. Theirs clearly something wrong with the host of the party if nobody wants to be their friend. Nintendo doesn't understand what 3rd party support means this day and age. They're still stuck in 1986 when it comes to their business model. There's more to third party support than shipping a dev kit and then handing out a stamp of approval after a bit of testing. In the 1980's that was a revolutionary idea that brought the industry back from death's door, just as the idea that console makers should support the increasingly heavy load of marketing and be a part of the knowledge-base that assisted to bring western devs out of the shadows and blast past the now struggling Japanese developers.
Simply put, 3rd parties recieve, deserve and require more out of their 10 dollars a unit from Sony and Microsoft.
And of course Nintendo realizes that much, they're not blind. But they're not stupid either. They realize that they make more money selling mario consoles than video game consoles...and 3rd parties are aware of that as well. The vibe is there. An untold understanding and I have seen NO indication that it was gone when the 3ds was coming out and I see no indication for the WiiU. And it's been there since the N64. It single-handedly opened the door letting Sony and Microsoft profit in the business in the first place. At one point, Nintendo had EVERYONE but Sega in their hands and they let them go. Again, not everyone else's fault. It's not a conspiracy. It wasn't a conspiracy. And yet fanboy gamers don't want to recognize it, even when casual gamers do. Aand in a way have become a part of the problem by doing so, because now casual gamers expect the next Nintendo console to be a mario console and nothing more.
So when you make a 3rd party game for Nintendo, you dip in lightly. Splash around a bit but don't expect much. And they don't get much. There's always that slight chance that things will pick up for the Wii-U third party wise, but there's a much higher chance that history will repeat itself again and again because nothing is actually changing. When a multi-platform game comes out, at the end of the barrage of commercials, it will say "now available on Xbox 720" (or PS4) and not "Now available on WiiU" whether it sells on WiiU or not...and the sales will, oddly enough, not side in Nintendo's favor.
i really like the idea of a console with multiple "standard" controllers though... with visuals getting to the "good enough" point, having the right interface device for the job is a nice differentiator, as well as enabling more genres in general.
of course, as you say... it's going to be a tricky proposition to brand/market the thing in an easy to grasp way, and we *still* only have a handful of games that really rock the remote/nunchuk setups, so here's hoping they both "get it" and can pull it off (Nintendo seems to "get it" a lot more than they're able to "pull it off" lately, which is worrysome).
Third party developers... dual analog pad... autoaim...
High Voltage and Treyarch may be your lone wolves.
Mr. B Natural said:
You realize that some of Nintendo's own software sells more than the vast majority of third party titles across all platforms, comparable to CoD for all intents and purposes
Cerebral Assassin
Member
What exactly do MS & Sony provide that Nintendo don't?
Simply not true, otherwise they would be perfectly happy with the way the Wii market went.
Again this is not strictly true, 3rd parties were actively looking for an credible alternative to Nintendo since the NES days, Sony were the first to offer one, either way Nintendo back in 96 was fairly different to Nintendo of 2012, any 3rd party still harking back to those days is crazy.
Ubisoft didn't dip in lightly at the Wii launch, & they managed to sell about a million copies of Red Steel (a pretty mediocre game), unlike Capcom whose "tests" left plenty of potential money on the table.
I would love to see Nintendo task a company like n-Space with making a Wii U-exclusive Call of Duty-like title. I honestly don't believe it needs the brand. It just needs the content. And the promise of balls to the wall Hollywood-style action!
Given n-Space's record of superb Call of Duty titles on DS, I have no doubt they could pull it off, given the required budget and a two year time frame for development and hype.
IceDoesntHelp
Banned
I sure do hope that Fatal Frame project was moved over to the Wii U, and not just cancelled.
I'm still on the fence on the issue of price.
On one hand, one of Nintendo's advantages has always been exceptional gaming hardware at a very friendly price (not budget, but friendly), and I would never want them to pull a Sony and completely abandon that philosophy and release an over-priced, poorly designed device. Their consoles will always be cheaper than the competition, and they will always be better off for it.
But, at the same time, I don't think they should pull another Wii and release a budget-priced console that's had its wings clipped in every area except controls. I think downplaying the specs to achieve budget pricing while making a profit on every console sold was incredibly short-sighted of Nintendo, and led to the situation they're in now: a market-leading console that inexplicably has next-to-no 3rd party software support and will have been dead for about 2 years in terms of compelling software releases by the time its successor launches. I mean, it's insane to think about how deflated the Wii brand is right now when it was so untouchable just 2 years ago.
The lesson I hope Nintendo takes from this is that long-term platform viability is just as important as mass-market appeal, and that it's possible to achieve both (just look at how well the 360's doing so late in its life). But with that controller, I don't think it'll be possible to do at a -$300 price. If it meant sustained viability (an entire gen of 3rd party relevance, for example), I'd happily pay 350-400 for the Wii U, and I think a lot of people would if Nintendo could communicate that value. -$400 is not nearly as insane as 599 US DOLLARS.
in controls too. if they had had m+ in the first boxes they shipped, stuff like Red Steel could have been stuff like Red Steel 2. would have made a difference.
software issue way more than a hardware one. if they can get all the third party games, then no problem (even with the obviously third-place-in-graphics box).
Skiesofwonder
Walruses, camels, bears, rabbits, tigers and badgers.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Acceptable but clearly enraged speculation until here
Then it starts getting in to things I have never heard before and am generally assuming have no basis in things you have heard.
The numbers don't back up, the history doesn't back it up, industry chatter doesn't back it up, but you can sense the vibe so I guess that backs it up. Nintendo's shit at courting third parties, I'll agree there. But your reasoning is stupid.
Then it starts getting in to things I have never heard before and am generally assuming have no basis in things you have heard.
The numbers don't back up, the history doesn't back it up, industry chatter doesn't back it up, but you can sense the vibe so I guess that backs it up. Nintendo's shit at courting third parties, I'll agree there. But your reasoning is stupid.
Do you have a link to that demo, and were the controllers tethered? That would make a lot of difference.
Just like the 3DS.
Not useless at all. That's encouraging. So long as Epic and Crtyek do top jobs on it, things should be good!
http://mynintendonews.com/2012/01/20/nintendo-is-preparing-nintendo-network/
Probably a stretch, but something about a Nintendo Network
Probably a stretch, but something about a Nintendo Network
I was wondering when someone would mention this.
I dont know, from what I understand, it just seemed to me like a natural thing to happen.
TheCongressman1
Member
I hope this is good.
The 3DS photo contest is held on nintendonetwork.net. Something is definitely up, but it might not be for what we're thinking. #loweredexpectations
Earnings report comes out.
Doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to me.. Isn't that usually where the Touch and other unified logos go?
The name, Nintendo Network, is decent I guess.
Next thursday, yes.
I mean, it might be whatever the Network Service Development division was working on in the past three years. If Nintendo planned to integrate 3DS and Wii U online, it would make sense that the service wasn't ready in time for the 3DS launch. On the other hand, it's Nintendo - I won't hold my breath.
It's better than "nintendo wifi connection"
Skiesofwonder
Walruses, camels, bears, rabbits, tigers and badgers.
TheCongressman1
Member
That's a bit odd that they would pick that name if it's already in use. Could it be that they are setting up completely connected system? From wii u to 3ds and to everything Nintendo? Sounds too good to be true.
Gamer @ Heart
Member
Exactly. It was already Copyrighted, SO NO ONE WOULD SEE IT COMING.
If it is a unified system, I hope that means a major update for the 3DS is coming soon. I would be disappointed if they saved everything until the Wii U launch.
It also matches the current naming convention: Nintendo eShop, Nintendo Video, Nintendo Zone, Nintendo Direct. "Nintendo" plus one other word, no ties to a specific platform or technology.
DXB-KNIGHT
Member
Since the logo is on the Final Fantasy box that's going to be released on the 16th of Feb I think we are going to hear something soon.
Skiesofwonder
Walruses, camels, bears, rabbits, tigers and badgers.
Well their E3 coverage is really awesome, and their efforts on the 3DS have greatly improved. Also Club Nintendo is already connected to the 3DS, and with the Nintendo Power e-book rumor.... I'm excited.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
What possible reason does Theatrhythm have to be online?
Exterminieren
Banned
Skiesofwonder
Walruses, camels, bears, rabbits, tigers and badgers.
Yep.
It pretty much confirms that we will hear something about this during the investor meeting. Also seems like perfect timing to get your new online system out in the open with GDC coming up.
DLC.
DXB-KNIGHT
Member
Multiplayer and DLC, I think?
GameplayWhore
Member
For what it's worth, a lot of the problems with the late-life Wii fizzle come down to elements other than the raw performance of the system. Even though it was relatively easy to develop for, it used very different toolchains* and methodologies compared to competing systems, so to developers it might as well have been a Blackberry. Additionally, the controller was so different that many of the design philosophies regarding gameplay had to be tossed away and reimagined if a game was to be ported over from other systems.
I believe that the Wii U helps this problem to a great extent by
(A) using a much more conventional graphics processor, which means that cross compiling using the same or similar code would be much easier. No more weird TEV handling, just the regular texture effect programming that devs have grown used to, for instance
(B) using a controller which is essentially directly mapped to competing controllers, with the exception of the (not that often used?) clickability feature of the analog directionals and (not sure about this) analogness of the bottom shoulder buttons.
edit: The difference being that with the Wii, 3rd parties had to make the controls vastly different for many genres, whereas for the Wii U, they can largely make the controls exactly the same, and anything beyond that (usage of accelerometer/gyrometer/magnetometer, touchscreen, camera, sound, etc) becomes purely optional
Keep in mind that the Wii started with next to no 3rd party support, at least in terms of the big runners. Anything that was brought over was, at least initially, often limited in ways that went beyond the technical limits of the console (like that zombie mode missing from CoD). It is difficult to say how Wii U will start off, but from the limited accounts we've heard, the 3rd party support will likely be stronger to start than it was with the Wii, and the relative performance, if important at all, will be a tiny, tiny fraction of the gulf that we saw from Wii to PS3/360.
The thing is, the 360 (and to a lesser extent the PS3) is doing well now because the companies behind them unloaded money as if it was on fire, for years, in order to achieve mindshare. We're talking about losses in the multiple billions of dollars until ongoing profit was attained. This strategy seems to have a 50% chance of working at best, and the downside is bankruptcy. Nintendo's philosophy is a far safer one, as it involves making a small profit or selling at or near breakeven from the start.
Wii was highly profitable from the start. At $250, Nintendo could have made a far, far more powerful machine which sold at cost. Right now, Nintendo could make a machine that is far more powerful than the current-gen systems at $250 with minimal loss, if any. The interpretation of the word "far" is, of course, subjective.
As for the controller? It looks to be much less expensive to build than the $70 Android tablet that we're seeing online. It has no processing or gpu capability to speak of, just a much lower resolution screen than the aforementioned, still-cheap devices. I'd be surprised if the Wii U controller cost them more than $50 to make, and I suspect it is likely less than that.
...walls of text become much more fun when Sales-Age is stoked by new releases.
* (edit) use of this word is an assumption
-Pyromaniac-
Member
Interesting, interesting.
But the Mayans predicted it would happen at the end of 2012
- Status