freenudemacusers
Member
it's a dud because nobody wants it
nobody wants it because it's a dud
nobody wants it because it's a dud
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Ancel believes Wii U's challenges are related to making the message clear
- Thread starter marc^o^
- Start date
prag16
Banned
That's a good way to put it. The value proposition definitely IS difficult to explain. I have had the same experience... I no longer bother trying to explain to people why the Wii U is good, but anyone who has played it at my house has enjoyed it.
In many cases it really DOES need to be played to be understood, which (as has been said) wasn't necessarily the case with the Wii.
I'm not saying people have a massive epiphany or anything; it's more like, "Oh, I really didn't get it before, but damn, that's fun."
PotionBleue
Member
Even after E3, Nintendo themselves still don't have a game to justify the GamePad's existence.
is there any racing game where I can see the track map with all 12 players' position and items without eating half my television screen?
did you complain about Mario Kart DS and Mario Kart 7? Do you know they don't use the touch screen for anything special besides displaying the map, and other players' position / items to free top screen space?
Because posting this picture again and again only proves bad faith as far as I understand.
I think it's entirely possible that the WiiU is both a system with unique properties which are beneficial but hard to appreciate without trying AND a system which no one really wants. Game consoles are ultimately just devices which play entertainment software. The benefits of their innovation and the attempts they make in transforming the lifestyle and conveniences for the users is limited by how much the users are interested in allowing it to. Gaming is a luxury and not a must-have for everyone. So while Nintendo might be "ahead of the curve" in solving problems which no one thought they had, in the end if there aren't a wide range of games and constant developer support, no one cares. It's all secondary.
it doesnt help that almost every single journalist, podcaster, forum poster etc calls it a tablet
the damage is done
Bullshit. PS4 and XBOXone will sell like hotcake. 360 and PS3 did so all the time. Software is selling crazy amounts.
The Wii U doesn't sell for one reason: It does NOT fullfill the needs of it's potential customers.
I am the complete opposite. Although I am a huge Retro Gamer with a lot of "old" consoles at home, which I love a lot, I want innovation and a new feel to the games. Obviously, I'm a huge fan of motion controls therefore, in all of it's forms - from Zelda Skyward Sword, Mario Kart Wii and Wii Sports Resort to IR pointer shooters (which use a lot of motion, too).
To me, it's an evolution of gameplay. I want next gen consoles and next gen games to use it that way, since next gen doesn't equal improved graphics only to me.
???
Software sales last month were the lowest in 13 years.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=594001
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-06-17-game-sales-at-us-retail-plummet-in-may
The second screen on the DS was wasted more times than it was useful tbh.
walking fiend
Member
This is probably the most factually wrong repeated sentence regarding Wii U.
Even after E3, Nintendo themselves still don't have a game to justify the GamePad's existence.
It has been stated by Iwata, that Gamepad was clearly made for off-tv play before and in front of everything else. The rest is just add-on bonus.
People didn't want gaming in the first place either; it is how most things work in a capitalist economy; you create 'needs'.
walking fiend
Member
Gamepad was made for Off-TV play; it doesn't make sense to show that it is not adding to gameplay in a meaningful way, and then claim even Nintendo doesn't know why they added the Gamepad.
They added it for off-tv play, and a lot of games support that already.
---
And of course, Nintendo's most important innovation with Wii U, Miiverse, wouldn't have been even remotely as functional without a proper input method like Gamepad. Why do you think there is no such a thing on PS4/X1? Because it is not fun just typing something in a forum by selecting characters using your gamepad.
Once the games are out (starting from August to the Holidays, there will be a realease marathon), people will want it AND they will then experience its unique properties.
Nintendo fucked up the marketing pretty badly, which impacted them negatively in the first half to one year, but ultimately I believe the Wii U + its unique properties that the Wii U Gamepad offfers will benefit them nicely in the short to long term.
Especially since I think hardware power as a selling argument is on the decline, with many graphic enthusiasts investing in PC rather than consoles and because the "baseline" in console hardware power this generation - which is gonna be the Wii U - is more than sufficient enough to display good looking visuals.
I think it's all obout the games, innovative gameplay concepts, but also convenience - and so far the Wii U looks very good in all those regards, regardless of the typical first year post launch gaming drought or the mishandled marketing by Nintendo.
Admiral Bone to Pick
Banned
At this point the Wii U has basically done every last thing wrong. I'm not sure someone is a genius for pointing out a single flaw.
And when it doesn't work, you're stuck with something no one wants. Yes.
walking fiend
Member
Of course, but I believe what he is trying to say is that it is an issue related to the marketing and not the device itself; basically, that if most people had the chance to try Wii U in a substantial form, they would understand the message.
I have rarely heard people buying a Wii U and not being pleasantly 'surprised' by the system.
metalslimer
Member
I wish they would releae a gamepad with a 720p screen. As it is i dont have much interest in off tv play when their are real handhelds. I doubt the screen component cost would be more than 15-20 bucks higher
Yeah i don't ever get kicked off the tv so why not just play with my 1080p tv It might be cool for some people but i think the vast majority of people don't find off tv play that exciting
Yeah i don't ever get kicked off the tv so why not just play with my 1080p tv It might be cool for some people but i think the vast majority of people don't find off tv play that exciting
freenudemacusers
Member
http://www.ecinews.eu/index.php?opt...lds-will-fall-in-2012-&catid=19&Itemid=300669
average number of TVs per household in 2011: 2.97
walking fiend
Member
1. Firstly, US is not the whole world.
2. Wii U [like the statistical case with Wii] most probably is going to end up being connected to the main TV in the living room, which other people will want to use.
3. Even if you have a TV, being able to play with the screen in the palm of your hand is a very satisfying experience.
4. Read the article, TV is in decline.
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
If they built this thing with the intention only ever of Off TV Play (a feature not all games support!), everyone involved should be tarred and feathered and reminded they have handheld hardware to push commercially to fulfill that need.
Its also not true as the GamePad was devised in tandem with minigames and whatnot that become the core of NintendoLand which I guess they hoped would be another Wii Sports phenomenon.
http://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/#/wiiu/nintendo-land/0/0 EAT HOT TROOFS
Turns out any concept that starts with "Okay so the 4 of you pick up this SOLD SEPARATELY thing and look over at the TV, while this person gets the gamepad and then..." is about 3-4 steps too many for people looking for instant "oooooooooh" appeal.
Yep. Same with the second screen. Never have I looked at my TV and thought "I'd be great if I had another, smaller screen in my hands right now to access my inventory instead of just pressing a button. Because trying to look at two screens is more fun!" Never.
Again, yep.
I also played TP on Gamecube because I didn't want to deal with the Wii motion controls. And the thing that held me back from buying a Wii was not the low resolution or anything, it was the fact that every game that I could normally play with a controler (DKR, for example) had some weird motion control gimmicks thrown in.
And once more, yep! Remote play is about the only appealing WiiU feature for me. Luckily, it also comes to PS4/Vita (with a much better selection of games. Can't wait to play Witcher 3 while lying in bed
.I know it was worse recently, but it's overall better than previous generations, isn't it?
But I disagree, I feel that even if people did understand it, the advantage would be minimal. There are far greater challenges the system faces - lack of content, lack of support, perceived as overpriced, etc. Even if people do "get" the advantages of the system, it probably wouldn't be enough to make the majority of consumers decide to suddenly switch tracks.
We've seen this happen before with the Wii. Motion controls for the most part did work when Nintendo put effort into it, but they were the only ones who did. There wasn't a lot of interest at large to support the technology for games in a meaningful way. Later on Sony and MS also tried to jump on the bandwagon, but the interest from third parties was just as lukewarm. Now we're headed to a new generation and suddenly motion control buzz has mostly died down even for Nintendo. MS is the biggest supporter left with their Kinect technology, and even then they're making compromises with the games to allow them to be played with a controller or to use a hybrid control scheme.
I think it's an example that even if the tech is good, and the design philosophy is sound, in the end when you're in the entertainment business, it might not matter if you can't get the widespread support.
I don't think it's needed. To be honest, I don't even know anyone outside of the few people who love to mock the Wii U on every occasion here on GAF who is not content with the resolution of the Gamepad screen.
I myelf have no issues whatsoever. It displays everything clear, sharp and fine. I can browse the intenet, play movies, play games on it etc, and never have I thought "boy, I wish it was sharper/the resolution higher".
And I believe internal tests conducted by Nintendo have come to the same conclusion. That's why I think even adding 20 to the cost would be a waste, since - really - most people are just fine with it.
walking fiend
Member
If a game doesn't offer off-tv, it is then because it is heavily using the touch screen [ZombiU]; so either way it is being put into a substantial use.
Read here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...ndo-rivals-are-already-copying-the-Wii-U.html
Becaue they didn't invest in it. Imo their biggest mistake. It could've been their new brand seller for generations imo.
I made a thread about it 1 year ago: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=483446
freenudemacusers
Member
telling me to read the article while not reading the article:
And yeah, having content in your hands is fun, which is why people already have portable game systems and tablets.
To your other point, my lazy google search gives me a survey of 5,000 Japanese residents:
http://www.japan-guide.com/topic/0107.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...ritish-households-have-three-televisions.html
or
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-21828961
I think it's pretty obvious that offscreen play on a console is not answering a fundamental need in households.
walking fiend
Member
But Wii was the most profitable console, probably ever, despite all these issues. I bet Nintendo would be happy even with half the success.
However, of course I do agree that you have good reasons for disagreeing that Wii U's only problem is in marketing [lack of support, cost, etc.]; but well, that's another issue, and actually I do agree with you. For me, personally, Wii U is expensive and doesn't have enough unique content to justify a purchase yet. However, the difference is that I believe that in concept the addition of the Gamepad was a sound decision, and overall like the characteristics of the system [that is, I prefer to pay for Miiverse and Gamepad, instead of paying merely for a more powerful hardware]
Don't misunderstand me. I didn't say that people wanted off-tv play [that's a really difficult question to answer], but that 'Nintendo' wanted that. So implying that even if they don't know why they added Gamepad, is factually incorrect.
And of course, they are not necessarily targeting people who are adding more TVs to their houses. As it seems to be the case, although the average TV per household is increasing, but at the same time more people are getting rid of it; average is increasing, but disparity is increasing as well. And as you can see, the average is much lower in Japan. [UK is probably one of the worst regions for Wii U, and what you showed can show at least one reason].
metalslimer
Member
Going from my 720 phone to the 480 gamepad screen from the times ive seen it at a friends house i definitely wish the resolution was higher. Its not that big of a deal though.
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
And of course thats the ridiculous Catch 22 Nintendo creates. If you have Off TV Play, you can never make having two screens at once integral to the game design and experience. If you have Off TV Play, the second screen becomes meaningless beyond simple menu poking. You create an environment where the two uses of your new hardware are at direct odds with each other and customers will penalise software either way:
- Not buying because I use OTP often
- Not buying because its offering nothing new
Which sounds like the PR after-the-fact intention for the device and not the prototyping "using a second screen" taped together wiimotes and lcd's phase.
It all culminates in clearly displaying Nintendo had no one great "eureka!" moment and unifying vision for the project. Hilarious enough, from the same Iwata Asks you spot the same short sightedness of jamming the gyros into the 3DS hardware completely ignoring that waving the handheld about to engage such mechanisms breaks the 3D effect! These are no longer men at the top of their game, but prone to making continually poor decisions on hardware.
360 and PS3 were selling like shit for YEARS. The PS4 and XB1 will certainly sell out of launch shipments (even the Wii U sold decently during its launch period). The test for them will be throughout the slow season/post-launch drought.
Frankly, I don't think either of them will bottom out as much as Nintendo's console did. But, I don't think either of them (yes, even the PS4) are going to sell like fire during that post-launch drought when supply has caught up with demand. The core gamer (i.e. us) can't sustain a platform and there simply isn't a market for expensive game boxes right now, imo. That's why Microsoft was so adamant on having the entertainment angle focus, for better or worse.
Software sales aren't as brisk as you claim they are, either. This industry is in for a bit (or maybe even more than just a bit) of a contraction, and those wheels are already in motion (and have nothing to do with Nintendo's dud).
I think messaging is part of the problem. They need to find a better way of communicating the pros and benefits of the system.
This leads to another issue I believe they have. Who is the target audience for this system? Core gamers would likely have a PS360 and I don't see much reason for these owners to pick up a system so close to something they already own. On the flip side, the more casual audience isn't usually the type to spend $300+ for a new system when there are comparable and cheaper options available. So that leave Nintendo's core maket, which seems to be who they are mostly selling to so far.
This leads to another issue I believe they have. Who is the target audience for this system? Core gamers would likely have a PS360 and I don't see much reason for these owners to pick up a system so close to something they already own. On the flip side, the more casual audience isn't usually the type to spend $300+ for a new system when there are comparable and cheaper options available. So that leave Nintendo's core maket, which seems to be who they are mostly selling to so far.
So you're suggesting that Nintendo created a console based around a convenience that doesn't improve gameplay experience AND only affects a small group of people (MOST people have multiple televisions in their homes), expected it to have mass market appeal, and charged a premium for it?
I mean, I don't doubt you that this is the case, but holy fucking hell what were they thinking? if this is true.
walking fiend
Member
Read just after and before that line. Their main reasoning was that Wii is majorly connected to the main TV in the living room; it doesn't matter how many TVs people have at their home, if eventually Wii U was going to be connected to the main TV which everyone uses.
They are not forcing either; and naturally each may be more beneficial for one game while the other for another game.
It is the issue people initially had with 3DS; you couldn't have 3D and touch screen support at the same time.
freenudemacusers
Member
An offscreen device can be attached to a 12" CRT from 1998 for all it matters, since the television in this scenario is not being used by the console.
walking fiend
Member
I thought we were having a serious discussion; whatever.
freenudemacusers
Member
What part of my post is not true?
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
Yep, and lets not forget most homes and their kids or whatever have a PC in their rooms, complete with an HD ready monitor (or easily turned into such) if an SDTV isn't good enough. After getting henpecked off the family TV too many times in a row, you decide its time to put this box where you're going to get to use it yourself whenever. I know its what I did back when I lived with the 'rents.
Also of course, this is after an entire generation of Nintendo PR persuading people HD just wasn't as important as you'd been lead to believe, for some reason.
Septimus Prime
Member
I don't see why they can't just port 3DS games to the Wii U or even merge software lines eventually.
Use case: I don't own a 3DS but do own a Wii U. I'd love to play some 3DS titles, and the tablet controller would function almost flawlessly as a second screen, except for a few titles.
Use case: I don't own a 3DS but do own a Wii U. I'd love to play some 3DS titles, and the tablet controller would function almost flawlessly as a second screen, except for a few titles.
Indeed. That's the concept issue.
- make a Touchpad Gamepad, because Casuals love easy input design, see Wii
- make Buttons on Gamepad, because HCs love Gamepads with buttons, see 360/PS3
So, casuals are rejected by the gamepad, because in opposite to the WiiMote it seems like it's the MOST complicated input thing ever. It's huuuuuuge, thousand buttons on it and then also a screen. Weird. Seems like something for nerds, it's not like wii bowling. Keep it, Nintendo.
Then HCs come into play - yeah, cool, a touchpad, nice addition. Controller looks a bit weird, but if the games are good...wait what, you are using tech from 2005? Games will look only as good as this gen? Wait, what, you want HOW MUCH money for that thing? But nextgen consoles come out soon, with much more power. And you didn't show one game so far that makes me want to own this gamepad. And for off-screen-play I got my Handheld anyway. Keep it, Nintendo.
Some other things to note:
- two of the main features of the thing, which are multiplayer aspects and off screen play, are only relevant if you are sitting in front the TV with other guys on a regular base.
- even then, you probably got another TV somewhere around - or your handheld
- online multiplayer is MUCH bigger than offline multiplayer I'd guess. I got no statistics but I would guess 98% of gaming time is done alone in front of the TV/Monitor - but Nintendo is focusing offline multiplayer instead of creating a great online infrastrucutr
Sorry, but those flaws in the concept are SO BIG, I simply can not believe that this system got released. It's...weird.
Welp, looks like it was still a pretty off bet. I think Iwata grossly overestimated how much of a problem tv sharing is for people.
Keeping in mind that the majority of households in the US have multiple televisions, In a traditional family setup the appeal of offtv play is probably weakened by the fact that if anyone in the family is a serious gamer, they likely don't have their system hooked up to the main TV anyway (or, if they do, they're prepared to unhook it and take it elsewhere for long play sessions). That was the case for me when I lived at home (and for pretty much all of my friends). And for casual households, well, they're probably not as dedicated to gaming as a hobby to object if someone wants to watch something else on the television.
It's an innovative idea to be sure, but I think it can be said now that off-tv play isn't a very practical idea, nor is it very appealing to the market. I love that Nintendo keeps an innovative spirit, but they really need to get out of the track of innovating for the sake of innovating.
Lack of content = this holidays there will be more content than most gamers can handle. 1st and 3rst party. And if 3rd party multiplats like Assassins Creed 4, Watch Dogs, Splinter Cell, Rayman Legends, Cod Ghost (which very likely will come), Batman Arkham Origins end up good, I don't see why anyone would complain about a "lack of content" for the Wii U. And especially in the case of Watch Dogs, Splinter Cell and Batman AO - there is good chance that the use of the Gamepad - which would be perfect for those games - could potentially make them the definitve versions come this Holidays.
Oh, and don't forget the exclusive Sonic Lost World, which looks tremendously, is also coming this holiday.
Lack of support = This is something that has to be seen. Right now, the support is very good. Will it continue to be good, who knows? If the console sells well this holidays season, why would the support stop?
Perceived as overpriced = Is that really the case? And if, this can be addressed by a pricecut. And don't forget that in Europe - for example - the Wii U is not perceived as overpriced AT ALL. Why? Because retailers set the prices and there are no retailers who are asking 349 Euro for the console. You can get it here for 250 to 299 Euro. I don't think price is an issue here.
Everyone I know that has owned a Wii, doesn't have any interest in the Wii U because of the game pad. They have this mentality of "I already own a tablet, why would I want a weaker tablet?" And while obviously it's not trying to be a tablet, these same people just don't think it's worth the added price to the console.
walking fiend
Member
Well, yeah, I do agree that they may have overestimated the appeal of off-tv play; I was merely stating that they knew why they added it [whether it was a good decision to make or not]
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I'd much rather have a range expander. The beauty of off screen play is kind of lost when you can't roam around the house playing your game.
Would you say the PS3 is using "tech from 2002" because it's a DX9-based GPU?
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
For the sake of argument let's take a few things Nintendo has said at face value. At the original E3 unveiling they talked about recognizing that the Wii didn't service "core fans" as much as the core audience required. Everything they've done so far seems to go along with that - from the swiss-army knife nature of the console supporting every device known to man, to putting an overabundance of "conventional" games into development first so that your stock-standard Mario Karts, platformers, JRPGs, 3D Mario, 2D Mario, and Smash Bros would be out the door within a year or so of the console launch.
I'm going to reserve full judgement on what they were thinking until a bit longer, when the supposed "new game ideas" Iwata has referenced are unveiled. It sounds as if those may be the big push towards serving the expanded, mainstream, and family audiences.
Until then I kind of suspect they were aiming to support two primary audiences - Nintendo core who weren't happy with the Wii, and either drifted away or didn't buy into Wii at all. And any expanded audience from the Wii whose interest could be rekindled. Thus so much emphasis on Wii U being an upgrade to Wii, complete with full backwards compatibility and peripheral support. I do not think Nintendo had some delusion that they would have a chance at ripping away any worthwhile percentage of gamers who had bought into Microsoft and Sony this gen.
For the moment my take remains... Nintendo knew this was going to be a tough row to hoe, that they'd have to work to redefine the niche they occupy to survive. But whatever plans they did have got knocked back by failing to conquer the practicalities required to launch the product in a robust state.
Similar threads
- Poll