SM3DW sells 107k in Japan, lowest 3D Mario debut ever

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sergiepoo

Member
Jul 29, 2013
267
0
0
www.youtube.com
Where is this assertion that I made any suggestion that the days of the PS2 are coming back? All I said was that in order to be successful the PS4 is going to have to tap into more than the enthusiast market, and it will have to. But there's no inherent necessity to attempt to tap into all markets at once, that's how you end up with a product that appeals to none like the Wii U.
Big publishers have always been risk averse. They'll be risk averse on powerful hardware, they'll be risk averse on weaker hardware.

When you're one person, or a small group, working out of a garage without shareholders and quarterly earnings you don't need to be as risk averse.
The "delinquent" is the consumer market that drives demand. Consumer demand shapes consumer goods. There isn't a fix, nor does there really need to be.

Everyone chases COD dollars because that's where the dollars are. Everyone pushes shiny and pretty because that's what people are buying. Set-pieces and shooters are in vogue. If and when they go out of fashion, publishers will move on and if EA and Acti-Blizz could put out games with PS2 graphics and call it a day, they would.

Meanwhile, the idea that motion controls still excites the masses really requires some sort of evidential support, considering there's sales data that suggests the opposite.
I didn't say they were a stupid gimmick; they're certainly not to my taste, but I completely recognise that there was a large market for what they offered. "was" is the operative word. And I also recognise there are some things that they do better than traditional controls. "some" being the operative word, as they also come with their own unique and inherent limitations. I'm perfectly capable of separating my preferences from examination of the current market situation, where Just Dance is a declining franchise, where the fitness genre drops 50% year over year, where a console released that tried to concurrently appeal to both enthusiast and casual markets has failed at either.

You would be thrilled if everybody invested in motion controls and combined them more with core gaming. That's nice. Is there anything to suggest the wider marketplace is after that though? Is the casual market that's seemingly vacated the console space for their smartdevices hankering for more precise motion controls to bring them back? Is the core market that drives tie ratios up and buys annualized franchises crying out for more integration of these functions into the titles? No.
I'd be thrilled if Japan could get it's act together and release more RPGs. But they wouldn't sell in the current market.

You stated it [motion control] was the most relevant possible direction and I'm sorry but I entirely fail to see how. There are plentiful alternative routes to innovation in games that are just as, if not more, relevant than control schemes. And you still, as yet, haven't offered particularly strong argument as to why that's the best and most relevant way forward. You state a boost in creativity, yet don't elaborate on what exactly that entailed and how it's any more "creative!" than the apparently creatively bankrupt wastelands that are the PS3 and 360 libraries.

I don't necessarily disagree the industry needs to change. It needs things like variable pricing models and appropriate budgeting for those models. Meanwhile, "we" can keep doing what we've been doing and buy things that appeal to us, the onus is not on the consumer to change their appetites, it's on producers to cater to them.

It does not necessitate a wholesale move to primarily catering towards a comparatively fickle market by focusing on a control paradigm that they seemingly no longer care about. And it does not need some sort of draconian restriction on the march of technology in what is fundamentally a technology driven industry.
You fail to see any strong evidence because you discount the biggest and key piece of evidence that gives credence to my argument. We've come in a complete circle back to my original post. The Wii happened. Sorry. You can't just pretend it doesn't exist.

The idea that the casual market apparently abandoned motion controls is a myth constructed by armchair annalists who want to justify inaction and maintain the status quo that makes them fat and dumb. The traditional console market supports this theory wholesale because it does not want to change. Change is difficult and painful. As you pointed out, the industry is inherently risk adverse. But that does not justify ignoring the questions the Wii raised.

Everything goes back to the Wii. It's the best and most relevant direction because it's already proven itself, and it would continue to prove itself if Nintendo hadn't massively dropped the ball. I'll say it one more time: I'm not asking for a product like the Wii U. Period. I want the Wii 2. The Wii U has never been the Wii 2.

Lowering the threshold for what graphics need to be lowers the amount of resources need to put into that area. By leveling the playing field in that respect, resources can be put into other areas like gameplay.

I thoroughly disagree that this a tech driven industry. It's a creativity driven industry. The sooner people realize this, the sooner gaming can actually develop as an art form. Until then, the obsession with tech will limit gaming to the status of toy or technical marvel.

Edit: Because Kinect doesn't have nearly the same capabilities as the Wii remote. The Kinect might be the few times that the negative connotation of "gimmick" might be appropriate.
 

Zinthar

Member
Feb 27, 2008
1,072
0
0
Depends on how we define what fine is. Right now, I do not see the PS4 being able to match the PS3 in sales.
That's probably going to be largely dependent on just how much demand for home consoles drops off in Japan. The PS4 is starting out at just 2/3rds the cost that the PS3 launched at in Japan. I think they have a decent chance to do just as well with PS4 there as they did with PS3.
 

shinra-bansho

Member
Nov 13, 2011
16,595
0
0
You fail to see any strong evidence because you discount the biggest and key piece of evidence that gives credence to my argument. We've come in a complete circle back to my original post. The Wii happened. Sorry. You can't just pretend it doesn't exist.
Where did I pretend it didn't exist? I explicitly stated that motion controls had a large market.
The idea that the casual market apparently abandoned motion controls is a myth constructed by armchair annalists who want to justify inaction and maintain the status quo that makes them fat and dumb. The traditional console market supports this theory wholesale because it does not want to change. Change is difficult and painful. As you pointed out, the industry is inherently risk adverse. But that does not justify ignoring the questions the Wii raised.

Everything goes back to the Wii. It's the best and most relevant direction because it's already proven itself, and it would continue to prove itself if Nintendo hadn't massively dropped the ball. I'll say it one more time: I'm not asking for a product like the Wii U. Period. I want the Wii 2. The Wii U has never been the Wii 2.
The idea that motion control games no longer sell in mass quantities is not a myth. Any more than the idea that plastic peripheral games collapsed is a myth. Rockband proved itself, and then it didn't.

You state others having an inability to separate their own personal tastes and desires from dispassionate analysis, and frankly you do the same. Who is the market for the Wii 2 and why do they buy it? What is the pain point?
Is the "casual" market looking for a replacement, do they need greater fidelity in translation of their motions into games? On what basis?
Do they want improved graphical fidelity to go with their fitness and minigames? What basis is there to suggest they will upgrade?

The Wii 2 you envisage is no more a sound idea in core conception than the Wii U is at appealing to both the enthusiast and the casual gamer.

Something old is not going to draw those people back; something new certainly might. But that something new is clearly not a tablet controller.
Lowering the threshold for what graphics need to be lowers the amount of resources need to put into that area. By leveling the playing field in that respect, resources can be put into other areas like gameplay.
This is the second time you've said this, and it's the second and last time I'll bother to ask - what exactly are you referring to that publishers and the developers who work for them neglecting? Are you referring to better AI? Are you referring to more realistic physics?

Or are you, once again, referring to them neglecting motion controls as synonymous with "gameplay"?
I thoroughly disagree that this a tech driven industry. It's a creativity driven industry. The sooner people realize this, the sooner gaming can actually develop as an art form. Until then, the obsession with tech will limit gaming to the status of toy or technical gadget.
Being a technology driven industry and being a creatively driven industry are not mutually exclusive, in reality, contrary to your assertion, the former enables the latter.

You state you want discussion with all the fat, dumb people on here and yet the condescension in your posts wholly suggests otherwise.
Edit: Because Kinect doesn't have nearly the same capabilities as the Wii remote. The Kinect might be the few times that the negative connotation of "gimmick" might be appropriate.
Kinect is a gimmick, but the Wii remote, well that's the future. :|
 
Nov 20, 2010
26,037
0
0
Charlotte, NC
You fail to see any strong evidence because you discount the biggest and key piece of evidence that gives credence to my argument. We've come in a complete circle back to my original post. The Wii happened. Sorry. You can't just pretend it doesn't exist.

The idea that the casual market apparently abandoned motion controls is a myth constructed by armchair annalists who want to justify inaction and maintain the status quo that makes them fat and dumb. The traditional console market supports this theory wholesale because it does not want to change. Change is difficult and painful. As you pointed out, the industry is inherently risk adverse. But that does not justify ignoring the questions the Wii raised.

Everything goes back to the Wii. It's the best and most relevant direction because it's already proven itself, and it would continue to prove itself if Nintendo hadn't massively dropped the ball. I'll say it one more time: I'm not asking for a product like the Wii U. Period. I want the Wii 2. The Wii U has never been the Wii 2.
You similarly can't pretend the Wii didn't fall off a cliff. It happened. You want to say it's because Nintendo dropped the ball, dropped support. Perhaps a different possibility exists, that Nintendo saw the writing on the wall? They saw sales softening, they saw the market leaving. Maybe Nintendo actually got that part right. The next step was Nintendo trying to chase that market with Wii U, and they got that part wrong. They misfired, it happens.
 

Ty4on

Member
Jun 22, 2011
11,588
0
520
Norway
Collapse is a very strong word to describe the 3DS.
The DS sold better while competing with the PSP and the 3DS now has the biggest PSP franchise as an exclusive. The DS had sold 6.15 million YTD at this point in 2007 while the 3DS has sold 4.07 YTD in 2013. The 3DS had also sold slightly more last year so it seems like it has peaked.
 

royalan

Member
Jan 19, 2011
34,455
0
0
Philadelphia
www.yobrando.com
Just to chime in a bit on this one particular point:

Lowering the threshold for what graphics need to be lowers the amount of resources need to put into that area. By leveling the playing field in that respect, resources can be put into other areas like gameplay.
But isn't that exactly what both Sony and MS are doing this gen? Neither have really put out machines that are technical beasts in the same way the 360 and PS3 were when they were released. Both have prioritized ease-of-development and accessible hardware this time around, which has resulted in hardware that, while powerful, isn't bleeding edge and doesn't require Sony and MS to massively loss-lead in the beginning of the gen. As an added bonus, more of the hardware is available to devs right out the gate (unlike the steep learning curves it took to figure out the 360's, and especially PS3's, exotic architecture).

So it seems like the industry is doing exactly as you suggest, you're just arguing that they aren't doing it the exact way Nintendo's doing it. But what gave Nintendo the right to determine when it is and isn't time for the industry to prioritize power? Certainly not their performance now.
 

ASIS

Member
Apr 7, 2008
8,483
0
0
29
The DS sold better while competing with the PSP and the 3DS now has the biggest PSP franchise as an exclusive. The DS had sold 6.15 million YTD at this point in 2007 while the 3DS has sold 4.07 YTD in 2013. The 3DS had also sold slightly more last year so it seems like it has peaked.
selling 4.07 means a decline, not a collapse.


You similarly can't pretend the Wii didn't fall off a cliff. It happened. You want to say it's because Nintendo dropped the ball, dropped support. Perhaps a different possibility exists, that Nintendo saw the writing on the wall? They saw sales softening, they saw the market leaving. Maybe Nintendo actually got that part right. The next step was Nintendo trying to chase that market with Wii U, and they got that part wrong. They misfired, it happens.
I don't think that's what happened though. in 2011 and 2012 there was a huge mismanagement in Nintendo, and some key titles we are seeing now were almost cancelled due to those constraints. But about the point of the misfire. Yes, yes they did, they misfired royally.


Just to chime in a bit on this one particular point:



But isn't that exactly what both Sony and MS are doing this gen? Neither have really put out machines that are technical beasts in the same way the 360 and PS3 were when they were released. Both have prioritized ease-of-development and accessible hardware this time around, which has resulted in hardware that, while powerful, isn't bleeding edge and doesn't require Sony and MS to massively loss-lead in the beginning of the gen. As an added bonus, more of the hardware is available to devs right out the gate (unlike the steep learning curves it took to figure out the 360's, and especially PS3's, exotic architecture).

So it seems like the industry is doing exactly as you suggest, you're just arguing that they aren't doing it the exact way Nintendo's doing it. But what gave Nintendo the right to determine when it is and isn't time for the industry to prioritize power? Certainly not their performance now.
And yet another quote that I agree with 100%. The Wii showed that other areas need improvements just as raw power does, but that does not mean power is unimportant, not at all.
 

H_Prestige

Banned
Aug 2, 2008
15,476
0
0
You similarly can't pretend the Wii didn't fall off a cliff. It happened. You want to say it's because Nintendo dropped the ball, dropped support. Perhaps a different possibility exists, that Nintendo saw the writing on the wall? They saw sales softening, they saw the market leaving. Maybe Nintendo actually got that part right. The next step was Nintendo trying to chase that market with Wii U, and they got that part wrong. They misfired, it happens.
Good luck getting that through people's heads. It seems to be a deep rooted myth around here, that the Wii died because Nintendo "dropped support".

The reality is that Nintendo supported the Wii more than any other console they ever made. They released Smash. They released not one, but two 3D Marios. They released Mario Kart. They had Zelda. They had NSMB. They had Wii Sports and all the other Wii whatever games. What the fuck else were they supposed to do? The truth is, all these titles combined led to explosive hardware sales for a period of four years or so. Then sales fell off. Is it because Nintendo failed to release three extra games or something? No. That was just the natural lifespan of that particular product. Not even the ps2 stayed relevant forever, and there was nothing Sony could do to stop that. Markets change. Demographics evolve.
 

Sergiepoo

Member
Jul 29, 2013
267
0
0
www.youtube.com
Where did I pretend it didn't exist? I explicitly stated that motion controls had a large market.
The idea that motion control games no longer sell in mass quantities is not a myth. Any more than the idea that plastic peripheral games collapsed is a myth. Rockband proved itself, and then it didn't.

You state others having an inability to separate their own personal tastes and desires from dispassionate analysis, and frankly you do the same. Who is the market for the Wii 2 and why do they buy it? What is the pain point?
Is the "casual" market looking for a replacement, do they need greater fidelity in translation of their motions into games? On what basis?
Do they want improved graphical fidelity to go with their fitness and minigames? What basis is there to suggest they will upgrade?

The Wii 2 you envisage is no more a sound idea in core conception than the Wii U is at appealing to both the enthusiast and the casual gamer.

Something old is not going to draw those people back; something new certainly might. But that something new is clearly not a tablet controller.
This is the second time you've said this, and it's the second and last time I'll bother to ask - what exactly are you referring to that publishers and the developers who work for them neglecting? Are you referring to better AI? Are you referring to more realistic physics?

Or are you, once again, referring to them neglecting motion controls as synonymous with "gameplay"?
Being a technology driven industry and being a creatively driven industry are not mutually exclusive, in reality, contrary to your assertion, the former enables the latter.

You state you want discussion with all the fat, dumb people on here and yet the condescension in your posts wholly suggests otherwise.Kinect is a gimmick, but the Wii remote, well that's the future. :|
If you acknowledge there's a large market for motion controls, then why do you not see it as a possible direction for growth? Is the assumption that casual gamers will never upgrade from Wii and will always be satisfied with mobile gaming? I see no evidence for this just as much as I don't see any evidence that casual gamers will hop on the PS4 and Xbone in a few years. We can only predict the behavior of casual gamers based on what they buy, and they bought Wii in droves. It's not a logical leap that a new console with improved motion controls (not just graphics) will interest the casual gamers, especially if it opens up new possibilities for unique games like Wii Sports and Just Dance.

Oh what I'm suggesting is not entirely for my benefit, though I would not be arguing in favor of the technology if I didn't believe in it. I will only tangentially benefit from some of experimentation of using motion controls with more hardcore genres. Despite my criticisms of hardcore gamers, my taste aligns far more with them, and I would not necessarily like all the casual games that would be made. However, I have no hesitation to trying these games out before I judge them. The "pain" is that hardcore gamers like myself need to accept that we share this industry with casual gamers.

You want me to give a concrete definition of gameplay, so when I can't, you can return to your point that focusing on gameplay is an excuse for underpowered consoles. By gameplay I mean new mechanics. It could mean a number of different things, but it's basically everything divorced from pure aesthetics. That's about as specific as I can get because people's definitions of gamplay are extremely subjective. Gameplay can be innovated on with our without motion controls, but motion controls certainly help generate new ideas based on the amount of fun many people had with the Wii. The industry doesn't need motion controls to innovate, but we have the technology available, and as you point out, there's a large market for it.

@royalan: Sony and MS are perhaps doing half of what I'm saying. It's true that the graphical leap is more modest this time, though that didn't stop Sony from promoting their console as a powerhouse. However, there needs to be some hook outside of graphics to attract both groups of gamers and push forward the industry. The Wii tablet and Kinect have limited use, as proven the fact that neither company have produced a game that's justified their existance. However, I think motion controls have more than proven themsleves.

@H_Prestige: Right. You're weren't one of the guys saying the Wii has no games for the last six years?

I'm off for a few hours to have Thanksgiving dinner with my family. Have a happy Thanksgiving everyone.
 

Josh7289

Member
Dec 9, 2006
7,387
1
0
Good luck getting that through people's heads. It seems to be a deep rooted myth around here, that the Wii died because Nintendo "dropped support".

The reality is that Nintendo supported the Wii more than any other console they ever made. They released Smash. They released not one, but two 3D Marios. They released Mario Kart. They had Zelda. They had NSMB. They had Wii Sports and all the other Wii whatever games. What the fuck else were they supposed to do? The truth is, all these titles combined led to explosive hardware sales for a period of four years or so. Then sales fell off. Is it because Nintendo failed to release three extra games or something? No. That was just the natural lifespan of that particular product. Not even the ps2 stayed relevant forever, and there was nothing Sony could do to stop that. Markets change. Demographics evolve.
A lot of people here also seem to think that the Wii U's biggest problem is marketing, not that the product itself is simply not appealing, so that's not surprising.
 

Davey Cakes

Member
Dec 5, 2008
14,150
70
855
Quincy, Massachusetts
A lot of people here also seem to think that the Wii U's biggest problem is marketing, not that the product itself is simply not appealing, so that's not surprising.
One of the biggest problems with the Wii U is marketing. It's not the biggest problem.

That said, a lot of us Wii U owners are distraught that this system can be called "unappealing." In my personal opinion it's a very appealing console in its own right.

Just being an HD Nintendo console makes it appealing to me. But, add in the Gamepad functionality (which is great), the much improved online functionality and focus on communities, and all of the extra little things here and there, and you have a really cool console. It doesn't have the same goals as the competition but I don't think that makes it unappealing, just alternative. The original price point was a problem but I honestly think the recent bundles have addressed that.

Also, the things needs a strong library of high profile games. It has a decent selection so far but needs more consistency. Nintendo is kicking ass as always but they don't have the strong backup needed to keep the console out of droughts, at least when it comes to high profile system-selling games.

From the outset I thought that, with Wii U, "playing is believing" is the case once again, and Nintendo's biggest obstacle is getting people to play the console and understand why the exclusive library is must have and why the Gamepad is awesome. A lot of what they need comes from marketing. Unfortunately, this console just does not market itself quite as easily as the Wii.
 

Darryl

Member
May 3, 2011
10,543
9
525
A lot of people here also seem to think that the Wii U's biggest problem is marketing, not that the product itself is simply not appealing, so that's not surprising.
A lot of people here even struggle to understand the system so I really do think marketing is the biggest issue. I tried to make a mock advertisement of the Wii U once out of boredom to try to prove how awful Nintendo's marketing was for the system and I ran into the same problems they likely did. It's just really hard to explain in few words. My best ideas were all to make people nostalgic for Nintendo products. The problem with that is that you're downplaying what makes the system different. Things like the ability to play games in your room is a hard idea to communicate. The Wii U is solving problems for people that they're not aware of which is difficult territory. I still think it is a very strong product. Nintendo just took on a very difficult marketing task and I don't think their current talent can handle it.
 

royalan

Member
Jan 19, 2011
34,455
0
0
Philadelphia
www.yobrando.com
A lot of people here even struggle to understand the system so I really do think marketing is the biggest issue. I tried to make a mock advertisement of the Wii U once out of boredom to try to prove how awful Nintendo's marketing was for the system and I ran into the same problems they likely did. It's just really hard to explain in few words. My best ideas were all to make people nostalgic for Nintendo products. The problem with that is that you're downplaying what makes the system different. Things like the ability to play games in your room is a hard idea to communicate. The Wii U is solving problems for people that they're not aware of which is difficult territory. I still think it is a very strong product. Nintendo just took on a very difficult marketing task and I don't think their current talent can handle it.
I think the fundamental issue with the Wii U here is that it's trying to solve a problem that, for most people, isn't really a problem. Case in point: the bolded.

The majority of homes in the West have more than one television, and this has been true for a while. I'm sure everyone has at least one childhood memory of fighting for the right to play videogames on a TV, but I think the current state of the Wii U is demonstrating that the severity of this particular problem has been a bit overstated.
 

RoombaDance

Member
Dec 8, 2012
519
0
0
I don't think the Japan sales will be very representative of US sales. The Wii U situation is even worse in Japan than in the United States. The software drought has been far worse there and the console looks pretty dead at this point.

Still I'm not expecting anything too crazy out of US sales.
 

Gilatif

Member
Jul 13, 2004
228
1
0
A lot of people here also seem to think that the Wii U's biggest problem is marketing, not that the product itself is simply not appealing, so that's not surprising.

Nintendo's biggest problem in North America is that people would rather play first person shooter or sports games online. There will always be a dedicated core of fans for Nintendo's first person games, but a lot of us moved on a decade or so ago.

We're getting the kids a Wii for Christmas. They seem to love Mario games, but for me, they are simply irrelevant.
 

NewGame

Banned
May 26, 2013
6,970
1
0
100k? But isn't that like 100% attach rate then??



realtalk: can we have console sales at Mario game launch figures to compare?
 

lensoftruth

Member
Apr 19, 2013
1,737
21
425
Nintendo's biggest problem in North America is that people would rather play first person shooter or sports games online. There will always be a dedicated core of fans for Nintendo's first person games, but a lot of us moved on a decade or so ago.

We're getting the kids a Wii for Christmas. They seem to love Mario games, but for me, they are simply irrelevant.
You're a fool then. I'd urge you to play some the finest games ever. You provably don't have the skill though :)
 

Davey Cakes

Member
Dec 5, 2008
14,150
70
855
Quincy, Massachusetts
I don't think the Japan sales will be very representative of US sales. The Wii U situation is even worse in Japan than in the United States. The software drought has been far worse there and the console looks pretty dead at this point.

Still I'm not expecting anything too crazy out of US sales.
The sales will be better. Probably much better. Just...still not as great as anyone wants them to be. It comes with the territory.

But yeah, the US is the best market for this game and, at this point, the best market for the Wii U.
 

Darryl

Member
May 3, 2011
10,543
9
525
I think the fundamental issue with the Wii U here is that it's trying to solve a problem that, for most people, isn't really a problem. Case in point: the bolded.

The majority of homes in the West have more than one television, and this has been true for a while. I'm sure everyone has at least one childhood memory of fighting for the right to play videogames on a TV, but I think the current state of the Wii U is demonstrating that the severity of this particular problem has been a bit overstated.
Well this sort of demonstrates what I think is the biggest problem with the marketing. They are forced to advertise you on a single function of the tablet controller ("screenfighting"), but it is actually capable of tons more. I would guess that you don't own a Wii U and just watched the advertisements. This is their problem. I had a friend come over and he thought it was dumb, too. It took a few days of him playing with me for him to start to see the benefits in it. It's useful in tons of small ways but none of them are easy to sell people on, especially while simultaneously being forced to sell people on the games in the same advertisement.

They spent way too much time focusing on how to make a great product rather than how to make a device whose values are easily communicable.
 

Gilatif

Member
Jul 13, 2004
228
1
0
You're a fool then. I'd urge you to play some the finest games ever. You provably don't have the skill though :)
LOL. My skills were forged in the 8 bit days where "fairness" was a foreign concept for gamers. Pretty much the only game that ever broke me back then was Ninja Gaiden. Grrrr....

I'm not disputing whether the games are GOOD or not. I'm sure they are. But, they just aren't the kind of games I want to play. Whether you like it or not, Angry Birds is probably more relevant to gaming than Mario. That's right. I went there. "Back in the day'", casual gamers knew the difference between the NES and Super NES. Now, everyone knows about the Wii....but good luck finding a casual who knows, or cares about the Wii U. The problem, in my opinion, lies squarely with Nintendo.
 

Biker19

Banned
Apr 1, 2013
6,623
0
0
Good luck getting that through people's heads. It seems to be a deep rooted myth around here, that the Wii died because Nintendo "dropped support".

The reality is that Nintendo supported the Wii more than any other console they ever made. They released Smash. They released not one, but two 3D Marios. They released Mario Kart. They had Zelda. They had NSMB. They had Wii Sports and all the other Wii whatever games. What the fuck else were they supposed to do? The truth is, all these titles combined led to explosive hardware sales for a period of four years or so. Then sales fell off. Is it because Nintendo failed to release three extra games or something? No. That was just the natural lifespan of that particular product. Not even the ps2 stayed relevant forever, and there was nothing Sony could do to stop that. Markets change. Demographics evolve.
Exactly. Sergiepoo keeps singing the same song & dance of what he's repeating again & again, & plenty of times we told him why the strategy of what he's coming up with (& what Nintendo's doing right now with the Wii U) isn't working.
 

Sergiepoo

Member
Jul 29, 2013
267
0
0
www.youtube.com
Exactly. Sergiepoo keeps singing the same song & dance of what he's repeating again & again, & plenty of times we told him why the strategy of what he's coming up with (& what Nintendo's doing right now with the Wii U) isn't working.
I've stated numerous times what I wanted isn't the Wii U and pointed out repeatedly what makes it different from the Wii U, but OK.

There's no debate to be had when people cling to the presumptions they have as absolute truths. "The Wii was a fad. Releasing an 'underpowered' console with a "different" controller means you're doing the exact same thing as the Wii. Casual gamers are fickle people who are too much trouble to deal with, so let's just sweep any idea of a casual focused console under the rug. The third-party problem had nothing to do with the collapse of the Wii. Casual gamers don't like to play many games." There's no evidence to back up these assumptions other than hearsay and armchair wisdom.

Meanwhile the Wii happened. It did something no other console did before it. Some say it's a fluke, and want to completely ignore it, but I'm not as willing to let it go as some people here. The Wii is the proof that makes or breaks my argument, and as long as people continue to negate what it did, there's nothing to be discussed here.

Nintendo is currently stuck with an unappealing console that more likely than not will be one of their worst selling main-line console ever. Creating a PSBox is not an option, so they really have no other option than what has proven to work. If Nintendo is smart, and they want to stay in the console business, they need to recapture what they did with the Wii. There's no other option.
 
Apr 27, 2011
5,246
2
0
100k? But isn't that like 100% attach rate then??



realtalk: can we have console sales at Mario game launch figures to compare?
There's a chart for the 3D games including the DS Mario 64 remake on the first page.If you want New Super Mario (Note: These are all MC figures. For older games Famitsu numbers can be harder to find here so I'm sticking with this for consistency):

NSMB DS: 899k
Wii: 934k
3DS: 407k
Wii U: 163k
 

shinra-bansho

Member
Nov 13, 2011
16,595
0
0
If you acknowledge there's a large market for motion controls, then why do you not see it as a possible direction for growth? Is the assumption that casual gamers will never upgrade from Wii and will always be satisfied with mobile gaming? I see no evidence for this just as much as I don't see any evidence that casual gamers will hop on the PS4 and Xbone in a few years. We can only predict the behavior of casual gamers based on what they buy, and they bought Wii in droves. It's not a logical leap that a new console with improved motion controls (not just graphics) will interest the casual gamers, especially if it opens up new possibilities for unique games like Wii Sports and Just Dance.

Oh what I'm suggesting is not entirely for my benefit, though I would not be arguing in favor of the technology if I didn't believe in it. I will only tangentially benefit from some of experimentation of using motion controls with more hardcore genres. Despite my criticisms of hardcore gamers, my taste aligns far more with them, and I would not necessarily like all the casual games that would be made. However, I have no hesitation to trying these games out before I judge them. The "pain" is that hardcore gamers like myself need to accept that we share this industry with casual gamers.

You want me to give a concrete definition of gameplay, so when I can't, you can return to your point that focusing on gameplay is an excuse for underpowered consoles. By gameplay I mean new mechanics. It could mean a number of different things, but it's basically everything divorced from pure aesthetics. That's about as specific as I can get because people's definitions of gamplay are extremely subjective. Gameplay can be innovated on with our without motion controls, but motion controls certainly help generate new ideas based on the amount of fun many people had with the Wii. The industry doesn't need motion controls to innovate, but we have the technology available, and as you point out, there's a large market for it.
I said there was a large market for it and stressed that being the key word. There was a large market for Tony Hawk games. There was a large market for plastic music peripherals. There was a large market for JRPGs. They bought the Wii in droves, as they bought Rockband in droves. You'll presumably strawman this as my calling the Wii a "fad", and it wasn't, any more than JRPGs and survival horror were a fad. Any more than FPSs are currently a fad. The market changes, consumer desires change. The "core" market is also fickle with regard to what it buys, but it's simply been a more reliable software consumer in the console space.

You keep ignoring my repeated queries as to why a "casual" gamer would upgrade to a mooted Wii 2? Why would they care about increased fidelity in translation of their movements? What evidence is there for this? You presumably assert that they would not care about the marginal improvement in graphical fidelity.
This mantra you keep repeating about how "They bought the Wii." isn't an answer.

I'm not particularly interested in an answer that involves some intangible "something" that someone will come up with eventually to make the product compelling to the consumer market. I've no interest in entertaining that argument, whether that be for the Wii U, the Vita back touchpad or a hypothetical Wii 2.

We share the industry with casual gamers, we share it with Facebook gamers, we share it with mobile gamers. And? That doesn't imply that the only sound strategy for a console cycle is to either target that market, that isn't interested in expensive early adopter prices for hardware, first or try and concurrently target that market in the early phase of a console cycle and end up with a product that doesn't appease either. The irony being that Microsoft is trying to do the latter and you've seemingly deigned the Kinect unworthy or incapable of offering "unique" games.

I want you to give some sort of definition for "gameplay" as you've made the claim that it is suffering and without some sort of definition, I've no clue what you think publishers are sacrificing in lieu of investing in better visual fidelity. You've again given a vague answer: that publishers are focusing on aesthetics and this is causing everything that's not aesthetics to suffer. If you're talking about better AI or more realistic physics or more interesting methods of storytelling I can concur; these are things that can be approached more creatively and should be given more thought and time - and some developers indie or otherwise do this while others don't. If you're talking about interesting gameplay mechanics like the physics-based gameplay of Portal, then I concur. Or something relatively novel like Superhot.

If you're simply talking about their lack of interest in exploring Kinect, Move and the Wii remote, then I don't.

I was wondering how long until the word "fun" cropped up; again you talk about intangible "new ideas" without specifying anything in particular. What does "fun" have to do with the generation of "new ideas?"
 

Log4Girlz

Member
May 23, 2006
40,795
0
0
The future of gaming is music games with plastic peripherals. None of you can deny they were huge a few years back.
 

kubricks

Member
Jul 30, 2012
1,018
0
0
I still can't believe it sold so low. That's ~10% or less of the total Wii U owners in Japan. What the hell is the other 90% doing?
Late to this thread so I guess this has already been addressed thoroughly, but really, what the hell is that 90% of WiiU owner doing with their WiiU? If they are doing anything with it at all?

Guess I am part of the problem? I have a 3DS and never feel the need for a WiiU...
 

ASIS

Member
Apr 7, 2008
8,483
0
0
29
Damn... tick tock.... tick tock...
That board is just putting every little thing fans were excited about just to prove a "point". Some did the same thing with the PS3 at launch. Personally, I think it would have been funnier if they only showed the key movements that Nintendo did, just to see how few of them there really are.
 
D

Deleted member 125677

Unconfirmed Member
Collapse is a very strong word to describe the 3DS.
I agree, this is relatively speaking of course. The 3DS is a remarkable success in Japan as I see it, in the post-tablets/smartphones days.

Nevertheless the DS sold ~16 millions units there in the first three fiscal years, while 3DS did ~11 millions.

But I was trying to describe the general dedicated gaming hardware market, where even the successful 3DS is part of a picture of general decline
 

Parmenides

Banned
May 9, 2006
578
0
0
FF and Mario bombed. No surprise here. Japanese gamers are losing interest in traditional games (FF, GT, WE, Mario3D...)

Oddly enough, some western games are gaining ground in Japan.

Japan Japan Japan

So far this generation:

PSP collapsed into Vita
Wii collapsed into Wii U
DS collapsed slightly more elegantly into 3DS
MS lol

I'm not too optimistic for the PS4 over there to be honest.

Meanwhile in Japan:

no fucks is given

The erosion of the Japanese market is not a cyclical phenomenon. Unfortunately, Japan is facing a structural decline.

Code:
Media Create - Software Sales

   2009 –>  68M           2013 -> 41M  (Week 47)
Code:
Media Create - Hardware Sales 


        (Jan 1,2007 – Nov 25,2007)                (Dec 31,2012 - Nov 24,2013)
      
NDS	        6,153,877                 3DS              4,032,539
PSP	        2,385,574                 PSV              940,854
GBA	        50,247                    PSP              404,060
	
Handhelds	8,589,698                 Handhelds        5,377,453
	
	
Wii	        2,951,022                 PS3              733,341
PS3	        934,310                   Wii U            563,669
PS2	        682,503                   Wii              66,104
360	        202,358                   360              22,785
GC	        10,385                    PSV TV           50,040
	
Home Consoles	4,780,578                 Home Consoles    1,435,939


Total	        13,370,276                Total            6,813,392

Third party software sales peaked in the PS1 heyday. Since then, software sales have steadily declined:

- PS2 software sales were disappointing.

- PS3 software sales are laughable.

- Handhelds have downright terrible sales, once you exclude MH, DQ and Nintendo games.


Code:
 Famitsu Top 30 – Since 3DS Launch (Feb 21, 2011 – Nov 24, 2013)


Third Party SW        TOT           TOT - (MH + DQ)
-----------------------------------------------------------

    PS3            23,088,527         22,677,115

    
    3DS            17,316,813         10,247,725

    
    PSV            3,035,874          3,035,874

Rising development costs and declining software sales are a toxic combination. Explains why Japanese third parties are slowly abandoning handhelds and home consoles. And that doesn't bode well for PS4. That said, the destiny of traditional games lies in the hands of PS4, since:

-PS3 and 3DS have only a couple of years left.

-PSV and Wii U are useless.


I have a few scenarios. At first glance, the PS4 should sell worse than the PS3.

-FF could "fall over the brink" and become irrelevant. And FF is more than a system seller. It sends the message to the japanese industry that PlayStation has matured and is strong enough to sell software. And GT, WE and a few others are becoming irrelevant in Japan.

-However, there are a couple of things that could save the PS4. Need time to figure out . The best thing you can say is that Kaz Hirai, Andrew House and his team are hungry. Ken Kuturagi was a genius, but got bored.
 

NeonZ

Member
Dec 7, 2005
14,231
4
1,180
32
Good luck getting that through people's heads. It seems to be a deep rooted myth around here, that the Wii died because Nintendo "dropped support".

The reality is that Nintendo supported the Wii more than any other console they ever made. They released Smash. They released not one, but two 3D Marios. They released Mario Kart. They had Zelda. They had NSMB. They had Wii Sports and all the other Wii whatever games. What the fuck else were they supposed to do?
You're completely ignoring their release dates there. People don't say that Nintendo dropped support from the Wii because of the overall line up, but due to the small line up in the last few years of the console. They had already released many mainstays, but then they should have released creative sequels or completely new high profile titles, not just close the book and drastically drop support.

There was a fairly big drought already after Smash Bros and Mario Kart, where Wii Music and Animal Crossing were the only big titles for almost an entire year (sales worldwide continued fine here, but they did drop in Japan, and it was at this point that sales of core 3rd party games seemed to drop, which suggests that a certain segment of the market abandoned it here), after that, support returned and continued for another period though, but then it just stopped again.

Skyward Sword came very late into the system's life, but there was little around it by that point, it wasn't a sustainable environment by the time it came out. Do you know any example of a console that continued selling for a long period even without any significant releases? It's true that especially the hardware sales had to come to a decline at some point, but I don't see how that justifies the fairly early abandonment of a console with a bigger user base than they had had in years.
 

Lebon14

Member
Sep 24, 2013
1,316
0
0
Somewhere.
I'm going to give my thoughts.

* You are right to think that Japan, right now, is heavily into mobile devices. The 3DS, in particular, sell like hot cakes. 1.3M WiiU console sold in one year is far from great but not abysmal. I would define abysmal less than 1M for a year. It will take more than one Mario game to potentially turns the table around. It'll really need a strong argument to convince that it's a good buy.

* In the US, as far as I know, the sales figure aren't out yet. I believe that teh WiiU is a less dire situation in the US and Canada than the rest of the world. Consoles are still pretty popular. What you need is good advertisement which... well, see my 6th point. Games aren't lacking, definitely not, and some big guns are already out such as Monster Hunter, Pikmin 3, SM3DW, Wonderful 101, Wind Waker HD, NSMBU, to name a few. And we haven't explored the indie world on the eShop.

* A lot of people seems to believe that selling the console 200$ or below is the solution. Now, let's put that into perspective. You are selling a car that costs 15k to build (all other costs included) and you decide to sell it 8k. Would you be willing to make a deficit of 7k on each car in order to sell it? No? Then, why would Nintendo do that for the Wii U? I understand that the Wii U is in a dire situation but selling the console at a bigger lost is shooting yourself in the foot. If you want to pay that low, get it second-hand.

* Then, some people came with the idea of manufacturing a new SKU package: offer a lower price (ex.: 200$) without the Gamepad but a Pro Controller instead. In theory, that's a good idea. In practice, however, most game will need it and if a consumer buy the cheap SKU and buys NintendoLand (again, an exempel) along, it will receive a message saying "You need a Nintendo GamePad to play this game". Then, it will discover that the Gamepad is 150$ alone. Result? Will probably return both console and game. Imo, the best option is to keep the same price but to throw in a Pro Controller and two extra wiimotes and nunchucks. There, more value for 300$.

* I'm in the gang that believes that Iwata must go. He had the Wii which was succesful. He botched the 3DS launch but has been able to recover it (phew) and, of course, the DS line was extremely succesful the minute the Lite model was released. However, the GameCube didn't succeed when it had everything on his side (power and all) and the WiiU is looking that way too (minus power). You might be a respected figure at Nintendo but, sorry to say, but you just aren't fit for a CEO.

* For me the real problems of the WiiU are (a) public perception because of lack of effective marketing, (b.1) Third-party programmer willing to develop for it and (b.2) or, if they do, they are lazy and produce lazy and bad ports, (c) Nintendo still not willing to offer online on some games where it would be a great match; still thinking we are in the 90s (ex.: NintendoLand) - this includes the problems such: no voice-chat, ineffective friend management, no trophies/achievement, etc, (d) online services' moderation way too strict (talking about Miiverse moderation), (e) unable to play medias other than offered services and online w/browser (includes no cd/dvd player, USB media player (pictures, audio and video)), (f) etc.

* For the hardware future (includes software it runs), I believe that Nintendo should embrace x86-64 for good. I'd definitely see them with Intel and nVidia. Also, if they can't do something or would need more development time and money, I would consider taking an open source software (exemple, for an Internet Browser, Firefox or Chromium) or operating system (thinking of Linux) and code around it. There's zero shame in doing that. However, I feel that being Japanese and their pride stop them of doing just that. Also, they need to become much more lax on paying royalties to bring more features. Exemple: paying royalties to DVD Forum to play DVDs. Many people aren't willing to connect multiple device for each thing they do on their TV. Or pay for FAT32 compatibility on hard drives, etc.

* For games, there's only one thing I ask: let the user create their own content! I can't count how much hacks of New Super Mario Bros. Wii and Mario Kart Wii are available online which proves that users are willing to spend time to create their own content to the game AND it gives infinite replay value as long as there is user-created content. IP-wise, I'm more of somebody that wishes for something but doesn't put any pressure. For exemple, it'll be cool to have a new IP but if you don't do one, it's okay. Of course, other gamers might boo (pun not intended) to that idea.

The last two points were me talking for hardcore-gamers. Just saying.

Anyway, I'm still a Nintendo fan and they are the only company I find fun in. The competitors doesn't have anything I find attractive. If by chance there's something I find attractive on another console, most of the time, it's a multiplatform and my PC is able to run it. So, yeah.

I don't care what anybody says about what I think. This is my opinion and everybody has one.

P.S This post was written in multiple sittings. Things might not exactly be coherent even though I tried really hard to cover as much as I can.
 

Conor 419

Banned
Oct 23, 2011
5,977
0
0
Stand by my earlier claim, Steve Youngblood's argument of calling the systems death after sales figures for only one major software title, is unreasonable.
 

RobFox64tm

Member
May 24, 2013
2,480
0
0
Stand by my earlier claim, Steve Youngblood's argument of calling the systems death after sales figures for only one major software title, is unreasonable.
Normally, I'd agree with this, but the reaction to Super Mario 3D World in Japan is shocking on so many levels. For one, it's about as good of a game as Nintendo has ever made; way up there at the very least. Secondly, Mario is one of the most popular video game franchises, and to see it barely budge hardware sales is very discouraging. Lastly, while games in the Mario Kart and Smash Bros series are on the way, I honestly can't see them making anymore of a dent than 2D or 3D Mario did.

Of course we also have to consider the state of console gaming in general over there, even if some think that's some kind of excuse for Nintendo's failures, you can't really deny that it's been trending downward for quite some time now. I think sales in the US over the holiday season will be very telling, and if they are average or lower, then I think it would be safe to say the Wii U won't ever find a decent momentum.
 
Jun 7, 2004
14,567
1
1,470
Stand by my earlier claim, Steve Youngblood's argument of calling the systems death after sales figures for only one major software title, is unreasonable.
I never called the system dead. In terms of the prognostication game, I think the situation is pretty dire, and I'm pretty pessimistic about a recovery plan. But I have no problems with people who are more optimistic than me. What I have a problem with is your tone of dismissing opposition to your outlook as idiocy (a pattern with you), and the fact that your rhetoric is pretty flimsy, consisting of nothing but arguing that it's not over until its over while dismissing arguments you don't agree with as stupid.
 

Log4Girlz

Member
May 23, 2006
40,795
0
0
Stand by my earlier claim, Steve Youngblood's argument of calling the systems death after sales figures for only one major software title, is unreasonable.
I've followed your conversation with him, out of curiosity, did you actually read anything he posted in response to you, or are you kind of making things up as you go?
 

cyberheater

PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
Mar 10, 2005
19,061
1
0
Just a question. Is SM3DW expensive relative to other games in Japan? I was in my local GAME in the UK and they are charging £49.99 which I would presume is the full retail price for the game.
 

H_Prestige

Banned
Aug 2, 2008
15,476
0
0
You're completely ignoring their release dates there. People don't say that Nintendo dropped support from the Wii because of the overall line up, but due to the small line up in the last few years of the console. They had already released many mainstays, but then they should have released creative sequels or completely new high profile titles, not just close the book and drastically drop support.

There was a fairly big drought already after Smash Bros and Mario Kart, where Wii Music and Animal Crossing were the only big titles for almost an entire year (sales worldwide continued fine here, but they did drop in Japan, and it was at this point that sales of core 3rd party games seemed to drop, which suggests that a certain segment of the market abandoned it here), after that, support returned and continued for another period though, but then it just stopped again.

Skyward Sword came very late into the system's life, but there was little around it by that point, it wasn't a sustainable environment by the time it came out. Do you know any example of a console that continued selling for a long period even without any significant releases? It's true that especially the hardware sales had to come to a decline at some point, but I don't see how that justifies the fairly early abandonment of a console with a bigger user base than they had had in years.
I'm well aware that the release schedule became more barren in the later years. But that's because the first few years were so frontloaded.

Nintendo is a small company. They can't just pop out some super popular game at will that everyone needs to have. If they could do that, the Wii U wouldn't be floundering so hard right now.
 

steveovig

Member
Jun 29, 2008
3,023
0
0
They need to stop relying so much on their established characters. For lack of a better term, they give people the perception of being kiddie. They have nothing that appeals to the COD gamer. Nothing that is strictly action based and goes along with current trends in console gaming. Gamers that are into the PS4 and Xbone, don't give a damn about playing Mario anymore. I love Nintendo and their games more than any other company out there but they're getting passed by. I'm not saying they're doomed but they're in a rut and they need to get out.

Count me in with the notion that Iwata needs to go. Give him another position just not as the head. Get someone aggressive in that position. Nintendo needs ruthless aggression.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.