Kontergurke
Member
someone tell me the music pleassee!
The soothing music in the background is the save room theme from Resident Evil Zero.
someone tell me the music pleassee!
Sounds like the RE0 save themesomeone tell me the music pleassee!
You know I have a 7 years old nephew. When he saw NSMBU last december he said, "we've got it on the wii". Two weeks ago I showed him the Mario 3D World trailer and he went nuts, like my girls did, asking his dad for a Wii U. That was prior to playing Artwork in Game & Wario, then it was his mom who asked me Wii U questions for the 1st time in months.
The more Nintendo games get released, the easier it will be to sell this console. This is quite simple. Assuming the console gets more affordable at one point.
GTAV timed exclusivity would have been huge. And I'm sure it wouldn't have cost Nintendo too much in the end. The publicity alone would be worth it.
He has a 3DS. And the more people with a 3DS, the more chances Wii U has, because at one point they'll want more goodness from the franchises they own and love, the real deal like Mario 3D World, Donkey Kong or Smash are compared to the handheld versions.Your nephew doesn't have a 3DS I assume?
He has a 3DS. And the more people with a 3DS, the more chances Wii U has, because at one point they'll want more goodness from the franchises they own and love, the real deal like Mario 3D World or Donkey Kong are compared to the handheld versions.
People buy consoles for games, franchises, first and foremost. 3DS a key factor of success to promote these franchises that are about to land on Wii U. The next logical step for 3DS owners seeking for more of these great games they like, is the sequels that are exclusive to Wii U: Mario 3D World, Donkey, Mario Kart, etc. The fact these games all include multiplayer and that most people already have wiimotes at home, makes it a nice value prop, once the entry price is lowered.I really don't think this is true, if anything it's the inverse that is true. If people are content with the 3DS offerings, that would if anything disincentive them towards spending $350 on a console. People can get their Smash, DK, Zelda, MK and Mario fix on a piece of hardware they own, or on a more desirable product in general. I honestly think the 3DS is hurting the Wii-U not helping it. The value proposition of the 3DS is far superior.
People buy consoles for games, franchises, first and foremost. 3DS a key factor of success to promote these franchises that are about to land on Wii U. The next logical step for 3DS owners seeking for more of these great games they like, is the sequels that are exclusive to Wii U: Mario 3D World, Donkey, Mario Kart, etc. The fact these games all include multiplayer and that most people already have wiimotes at home, makes it a nice value prop, once the entry price is lowered.
This whole post really resonated with me a lot, but the bit in bold especially so. Nintendo wants to drag the "core" back to local, but it's never going back to that. We need some serious online efforts from Nintendo besides MK8. The crazy part is that they don't have to reinvent the wheel for this. Tons of stuff like 3D Mario, Donkey Kong and Pikmin 3 would be amazing with online and it wouldn't take away from the offline local multiplayer that many fans currently enjoy.One huge issue is the lack of example by nintendo for online play. None of their 1st party efforts on Wii U have online. Whether it's possible to even have a good online mode in Mario is irrelevant when the atmosphere on Wii U is that you just don't fucking play online period. Modern gamers cannot reverse back to only local multiplayer it's just impossible.
Another thing is the OS. Miiverse is cute, but today fucking 7 year olds use the interent daily so it just feels like a kinderkarten that might've worked a decade ago. I have no interest in messaging my friends because it's slow and cumbersome and what would I even message them for? To come and play nintendo games online with me?
Nintendo doesn't realise how fast technology and the online mentality of people move forward. The time for a kid friendly and safe device seems to be long past now in the avalanche of smartphones and tablets. Nintendo is a dinosaur on the online field and the Wii U will fall because of this.
This whole post really resonated with me a lot, but the bit in bold especially so. Nintendo wants to drag the "core" back to local, but it's never going back to that. We need some serious online efforts from Nintendo besides MK8. The crazy part is that they don't have to reinvent the wheel for this. Tons of stuff like 3D Mario, Donkey Kong and Pikmin 3 would be amazing with online and it wouldn't take away from the offline local multiplayer that many fans currently enjoy.
There was the huge Wii Sports factor, but DS success also helped Wii get traction.I don't know man, we'll see, but I really don't agree. I don't think it's much of a natural progression, Gameboy was huge, but it didn't really rub off on the N64 for example. The only natural progression I see happening, is from handheld to handheld. Mobile is putting a dent in there too, but the dedicated handheld will continue to be a base for core gamers who like buttons.
It depends on how long Nintendo plans to keep the Wii U on the market.With the exception of the Wii, every Nintendo home console has sold worse than its predecessor:
NES - 62m
SNES - 50m
N64 - 33m
GC - 22m
-----
Wii U - 16-18m?
If you think of the Wii as an outlier I think Nintendo is finding the floor of people who want to play just Nintendo games and are willing to pay $300 for it.
Why would either of them be interested in Pikmin 3 - a franchise that wasn't on the Wii except for two remakes?
I'm talking about Mario Kart, etc Nintendo games that sold a lot (on both the DS and Wii). I'm not sure how you even interpreted that I was talking about Pikmin in the first place.
I think you're right on this. Wii U looks like it will never be a stand-alone console for the masses (does anyone at all have just a Wii U??), but something you'll have on the side of your other console/pc/handheld to play those - hopefully delightful - 1st and 2nd party console titles. And as such it the price needs to be set accordingly, and Nintendo will have to deliver at least a handful of niche hit and critically acclaimed games.
Does PC count? I only have a WiiU (and a Wii) beside this. Sold the PS3 before the PS4 announcement for a nice price. Won't buy the PS4 either on release, maybe later.
Of course it does, you're definitely getting more coverage than you would with the Wii-U alone. I pity Nintendo only gamers this gen.
I don't see how anyone needs to pity 3DS owners.
I don't see how anyone needs to pity 3DS owners.
If all you got is a 3DS, I'd still pity you, because that's a lot of games to miss out on. But I guess some people can be content with the sole offerings of that system, it is a solid platform with a variety of software. However, I am not one of them, my 3DS is complementary to my other systems and PC. I suppose it's the Wii-U only(?) owners, who I truly feel sorry for.
This whole post really resonated with me a lot, but the bit in bold especially so. Nintendo wants to drag the "core" back to local, but it's never going back to that. We need some serious online efforts from Nintendo besides MK8. The crazy part is that they don't have to reinvent the wheel for this. Tons of stuff like 3D Mario, Donkey Kong and Pikmin 3 would be amazing with online and it wouldn't take away from the offline local multiplayer that many fans currently enjoy.
It was just an exaple. Those people are not spending 300$ on Mario Kart alone.
New Mario Bros. Wii sold more than the CoD that was released the same year and ended up selling more than 25 million units.
New Mario Bros U did not make the WiiU sell those 25 million units to the game's loyal fanbase because there isn't one.
He has a 3DS. And the more people with a 3DS, the more chances Wii U has, because at one point they'll want more goodness from the franchises they own and love, the real deal like Mario 3D World, Donkey Kong or Smash are compared to the handheld versions.
Re: Online vs. Local
Adding online isn't just a matter of "flipping a switch" a.k.a. we've decided there will be online and poof there is online. It requires some amount of development time, development resources, manpower, design, testing, etc.
You know how people complain about singleplayer games getting shoehorned multiplayer, because there's an opportunity cost and the time/money/effort spent on the multiplayer could be used on improving the singleplayer?
Try viewing looking at Nintendo's choice of including or not including online through a zero-sum (if you add something, you must also take something else away) lens. None of us have played it, but what part of Pikmin 3 would you be willing to sacrifice in exchange for online multiplayer?
Also, Nintendo loves "competitive co-operation" in its multiplayer, which really only works when you are face to face with the other players. Stealing all the powerups in NSMB is hilarious face to face, but it's griefing online. Actually, scratch that. How many times have you wanted to break up with your girlfriend or punch your friend in the nuts for stealing all the powerups? Now imagine it's some faceless homophobe 12 year old on the other end of an ethernet port.
Your analysis has a glaring omission: the price cut.
Re: Online vs. Local
Adding online isn't just a matter of "flipping a switch" a.k.a. we've decided there will be online and poof there is online. It requires some amount of development time, development resources, manpower, design, testing, etc.
You know how people complain about singleplayer games getting shoehorned multiplayer, because there's an opportunity cost and the time/money/effort spent on the multiplayer could be used on improving the singleplayer?
Try viewing looking at Nintendo's choice of including or not including online through a zero-sum (if you add something, you must also take something else away) lens. None of us have played it, but what part of Pikmin 3 would you be willing to sacrifice in exchange for online multiplayer?
Also, Nintendo loves "competitive co-operation" in its multiplayer, which really only works when you are face to face with the other players. Stealing all the powerups in NSMB is hilarious face to face, but it's griefing online. Actually, scratch that. How many times have you wanted to break up with your girlfriend or punch your friend in the nuts for stealing all the powerups? Now imagine it's some faceless homophobe 12 year old on the other end of an ethernet port.
Also, Nintendo loves "competitive co-operation" in its multiplayer, which really only works when you are face to face with the other players. Stealing all the powerups in NSMB is hilarious face to face, but it's griefing online. Actually, scratch that. How many times have you wanted to break up with your girlfriend or punch your friend in the nuts for stealing all the powerups? Now imagine it's some faceless homophobe 12 year old on the other end of an ethernet port.
I really don't think this is true, if anything it's the inverse that is true. If people are content with the 3DS offerings, that would if anything disincentive them towards spending $350 on a console. If people can get their Smash, DK, Zelda, MK and Mario fix on a piece of hardware they own, or on a more desirable cheaper product in general, why should they make the jump to the Wii-U? I honestly think the 3DS is hurting the Wii-U not helping it, the value proposition of the 3DS is far superior at this point.
You've clearly never played Super Mario 3 and taken someone's turn to play a level by winning the battle stage. This is like, Griefing 101. Especially when powerups are at stake.Re: Online vs. Local
Adding online isn't just a matter of "flipping a switch" a.k.a. we've decided there will be online and poof there is online. It requires some amount of development time, development resources, manpower, design, testing, etc.
You know how people complain about singleplayer games getting shoehorned multiplayer, because there's an opportunity cost and the time/money/effort spent on the multiplayer could be used on improving the singleplayer?
Try viewing looking at Nintendo's choice of including or not including online through a zero-sum (if you add something, you must also take something else away) lens. None of us have played it, but what part of Pikmin 3 would you be willing to sacrifice in exchange for online multiplayer?
Also, Nintendo loves "competitive co-operation" in its multiplayer, which really only works when you are face to face with the other players. Stealing all the powerups in NSMB is hilarious face to face, but it's griefing online. Actually, scratch that. How many times have you wanted to break up with your girlfriend or punch your friend in the nuts for stealing all the powerups? Now imagine it's some faceless homophobe 12 year old on the other end of an ethernet port.
It sure was an example, but the only way it could have been worse would be if you used X or Shin Megami Tensei x Fire Emblem instead of Pikmin.
I've already addressed your points earlier, but ill summarize them for you: a Wii U with only NSMBU looks very different to prospective buyers than one with NSMBU, 3D World, and Mario Kart. No one is paying $300 for Mario Kart. But they might if it had other games, too. People buy video game consoles to play video games (despite what GAF says about tech).
Now, I don't want to critique focusing on local multiplayer, as I think it's a good focus in an era where it is mostly neglected. For a family company, it's smart. But I do think a wanton disregard to pretty ignore what is considered a pretty basic piece of functionality doesn't reflect well on them, particularly at a time when they are struggling. Mind you, online Pikmin multiplayer probably isn't going to sell much more copies than an offline-only copy will, but I do think that this general attitude is unfortunate given that the current year is 2013.
No, he is still right. The argument regarding the WiiU's price reminds me of some of my colleages at the University. Whenever we presented them for a plan in order to watch an art exhibition, they declined because "the entrance was too expensive". It was just 10 euros. Then one month latter, we found yet another cheaper one: 5 euros only. They kept thinking that it was yet "too expensive". When we finally found one art exhibition with free entrance, they simply "did not have enough time for this".
Bottom line is, when you have no interest or whatsoever in a product or activity, it will always be overpriced for you, period. And the WiiU's original sin is a badly concieved product. The public simply doesn't see the value of a gaming experience that they can have on their regular tablets (which btw, they already own). The WiiU would be "expensive" for them, in the same way that it would be "expensive" for you to have a free huge boat anchor in the middle of your living room, despite its nominal value. Yea, iron is valuable, but what would be its utility to you? Why the hell you would want one ginormous anchor taking space in the middle of your home? Why would you want a dedicated tablet gaming console? There are already other platafforms for tablet gaming experiences, and hell, even other plataforms for Nintendo gaming experiences too (3DS).
Re: Online vs. Local
Adding online isn't just a matter of "flipping a switch" a.k.a. we've decided there will be online and poof there is online. It requires some amount of development time, development resources, manpower, design, testing, etc.
You know how people complain about singleplayer games getting shoehorned multiplayer, because there's an opportunity cost and the time/money/effort spent on the multiplayer could be used on improving the singleplayer?
Try viewing looking at Nintendo's choice of including or not including online through a zero-sum (if you add something, you must also take something else away) lens. None of us have played it, but what part of Pikmin 3 would you be willing to sacrifice in exchange for online multiplayer?
Also, Nintendo loves "competitive co-operation" in its multiplayer, which really only works when you are face to face with the other players. Stealing all the powerups in NSMB is hilarious face to face, but it's griefing online. Actually, scratch that. How many times have you wanted to break up with your girlfriend or punch your friend in the nuts for stealing all the powerups? Now imagine it's some faceless homophobe 12 year old on the other end of an ethernet port.
I think one serious problem Nintendo faces in the area of online multiplayer is general attitudes in 2013. See some above comments: some people feel online multiplayer is an absolute pre-requisite in *any* game with multiplayer otherwise multiplayer is a waste. In my experience, this attitude is very common today.
As a result, the current generation of gamers will always see Nintendo as behind the times so long as they release a single game which has multiplayer and it isn't online, because so many people have devalued local play. It's part of the shifting of society that's being reflected in video games - people becoming increasingly isolated from one another because they can fall back on the internet to maintain contact.
It may be difficult for Nintendo to appeal in contemporary times no matter how hard they try unless they abandon much of what they traditionally are good at (like face-to-face social multiplayer) and essentially go full-on western lifestyle for core games. I'm not sure they could do that if they tried, it's not in their company DNA. Nintendo is, in general terms, out of step not because they're doing anything "wrong" in principle. But culture, in the west at least, is currently incompatible with what they are.
You say this as though families don't exist. People who have children live under the same roof and couples are having children every single day. Nintendo has a huge market to sell the Wii U to that want to play videogames together in their home. Because you've outgrown it or other people who are still gaming past the age of 18 have outgrown it doesn't mean there aren't still millions who haven't!I don't think it's case of people devaluing local multiplayer because they are becoming more isolate but that a lot of people simply are incapable of taking part in it for a variety of reasons. Especially as they get older. The physical location between friends and family is an extremely significant factor that can not be overlooked. Nintendo does that far to often and I'm really sick of it.
There are also a fair number of households who have both. A wise company would court both markets with their first-party offerings.You say this as though families don't exist. People who have children live under the same roof and couples are having children every single day. Nintendo has a huge market to sell the Wii U to that want to play videogames together in their home. Because you've outgrown it or other people who are still gaming past the age of 18 have outgrown it doesn't mean there aren't still millions who haven't!
There is an old saying to the effect that you should not bite more than you can chew. Nintendo is releasing an AAA family oriented lineup. If in parallel to that they plan a mass market price for the Wii U, then Wii U will sell. Then the bottom up lineup can/may occur.There are also a fair number of households who have both. A wise company would court both markets with their first-party offerings.
Does PC count? I only have a WiiU (and a Wii) beside this. Sold the PS3 before the PS4 announcement for a nice price. Won't buy the PS4 either on release, maybe later.
Yeah, but you never had something like a new great Zelda game coming out on Gameboy and Nintendo being like "We're putting the sequel on N64! GO GO GO"I don't know man, we'll see, but I really don't agree. I don't think it's much of a natural progression, Gameboy was huge, but it didn't really rub off on the N64 for example. The only natural progression I see happening, is from handheld to handheld. Mobile is putting a dent in there too, but the dedicated handheld will continue to be a base for core gamers who like buttons.