Support NeoGAF

[SkylineRKR]

The Wii U was _nothing_ new.

The Wii was. Motion controls weren't done like that before. It had Wii Sports. Everyone saw Wii Sports, tried it and found it fun. I've visited parties where in fact the women would hook up the Wii and chuck a few rounds of WS, having lots of laughs. It was a phenomenon. Wii and Wii Sports sold eachother.

Now the Wii U. Touchscreen was tried and true, about everyone has it. It was a mere follower unlike the Wii (showing Nintendo was creatively bankrupt?) The gamepad is fairly dated tech at that too. Who should care about this? The 140 million Ps360 gamers who had these games and graphics already? The Wii crowd that wanted to Wii Sports at a low price? They had moved on, lots of Wii's started to collect dust around 2010. Tablets came, Facebook games, Angry birds and all that started to attract that audience.

On top of that the tablet is hard to market, hard to explain and simply not as cool. You can't make it as thrilling as the Wii.

Whats left are the loyal Nintendo fans. Nintendo was losing the casual crowd anyhow (its like every other hype out there), but the challenge should've been to recapture them. How? I don't know. Seeing the Wii's decline a simple Wii 2.0 wouldn't have worked. For VR it was way too early.

 

[Broritos]

I'm a Wii U owner and I say port it to the next system. The Wii U will limit the full potential of Zelda. That is a fact. Same with a new mainline Mario ala Mario 64/Galaxy.

No it's not.

My vote is on marketing. Regardless of power you won't sell shit if no one knows what it is.

This.

Marketing is one of the most powerful things in any business. It's the reason why some people think Apple invented earbuds. A great marketing team can sell anything.

 

[RaikuHebi]

I think a lot of the casuals/non gamers bought into the Wii and it fizzled out or had fad status. In the UK if someone buys a games console for around £300 -£350 they want it to last and they want it to have all the lastest 'blockbuster' games (FIFA, COD etc.). Nintendo literally had lighting in a bottle with the Wii but it doesn't strike twice, they're trying to advertise the Wii U Gamepad as a gimmick before they advertise the console and in this market people aren't going to buy a console just because it has a screen in the controller, they want the games.

I think Nintendo would have more success in the UK if it advertised it's critically acclaimed games and cheap price point (compared to PS4/XBONE) and even advertised upcoming games rather than the Gamepad. Some of the games on Wii U are spectacular and if they shown that along with the decent reviews people may take them a bit more seriously.

The price is a good point. If they could just come out front with an advert that said £150 (which I imagine it will get lowered to soon) that surely that'd help.

 

[Captain Tuttle]

There's been a whole bunch of different theories thrown around, but what's the most important factor, say, comparable to the N64 using cartridges or the GameCube's "kiddy" image? What is the single most important reason that the Wii U is the biggest financial failure in Nintendo's video game history? And why did it come right on the heels of their biggest success?

I would like to hear people's thoughts. Remember, the single most important reason, not a whole list of them.

Hubris. Nintendo has forgotten what makes people buy consoles."If you build it they will come" is only a line from a movie, not a truism

 

[Broritos]

Hubris. Nintendo has forgotten what makes people buy consoles."If you build it they will come" is only a line from a movie, not a truism

You're right. They forgot that people buy consoles for the games.

Games that are out on it now don't count. Just look at the SNES. People bought a SNES for games like Donkey Kong Country and Super Mario World. People won't buy a Wii U for Donkey Kong Country TF or Super Mario 3D World. They have to make real games.

 

[SkylineRKR]

Hubris. Nintendo has forgotten what makes people buy consoles

I think this can go 2 ways.

The Wii U was pretty much a letter towards the core audience. Like 'were still in here for you, Wii U will focus on core games'. Nintendo started to court EA et al, Mass Effect, Creed, CoD (true version) were all announced. They really were trying to get in touch with the core gamer again, I think they even said as much.

The Wii U is very much like the PS360, it plays and looks the same. Which is also why it fails, we've seen those games and graphics for the last 7 years. And Wii buyers obviously ignored that type of games and gameplay. Wii was simple and different after all.

So the Wii U was a bit for no one out there except the hardcore nintendo fans. And Nintendo found out this is a rather small number these days.

 

[PreyingShark]

Honestly I don't think that the executives at Nintendo really have any idea of what the market wants, especial the Western market. That company really needs new management.

I would imagine that there's a lot of stuff like this going on:

NoA employees: To market the Wii U and its games properly in the West, we feel that it would be best to do this, this, and this. This will require this much money, so we would need a bigger budget to do this.

NoJ management: LALALALALALA YOUR CURRENT BUDGET IS FINE LALALALALALA

NoA: Uh, we're in a tight spot. We're screwed if we don't ramp up our advertising so pl-

NoJ: LALALALALALA DAIJOUBU LALALALALALALALALALALALA

NoA: ...Well fuck. Let's go lie to Reggie about our potential sales figures while we think of some half-assed marketing campaign that we can actually do with this budget.

Can also be applied to asking the western branches for feedback in general.

 

[BundysFeet]

No it's not.

Actually it is. The hardware limits the possibility of 1080p/60fps which is significant as Link Between Worlds displayed (60fps). It limits the AI. It limits visuals. It limits the size of the world. It limits quite a lot.

 

[BundysFeet]

You're right. They forgot that people buy consoles for the games.

Games that are out on it now don't count. Just look at the SNES. People bought a SNES for games like Donkey Kong Country and Super Mario World. People won't buy a Wii U for Donkey Kong Country TF or Super Mario 3D World. They have to make real games.

Are people buying the Wii U for Mario 3D World? No? OK. DKC? No? OK. Why? Because those games don't impress as much as their predecessors.

 

[TC McQueen]

I would imagine that there's a lot of stuff like this going on:

NoA employees: To market the Wii U and its games properly in the West, we feel that it would be best to do this, this, and this. This will require this much money, so we would need a bigger budget to do this.

NoJ management: LALALALALALA YOUR CURRENT BUDGET IS FINE LALALALALALA

NoA: Uh, we're in a tight spot. We're screwed if we don't ramp up our advertising so pl-

NoJ: LALALALALALA DAIJOUBU LALALALALALALALALALALALA

NoA: ...Well fuck. Let's go lie to Reggie about our potential sales figures while we think of some half-assed marketing campaign that we can actually do with this budget.

Can also be applied to asking the western branches for feedback in general.

Replace all the nonsense words with stone faced executives and every Nintendo related word, and you've got the western branch of Japanese company madlib.

 

[LegendofLex]

Then perhaps Nintendo should have just stayed with the NES all of these years. No reason to release the SNES. Fact is that graphics and physical capabilities of hardware are important. It's not just about purrtty graphics, it's about a deeper world, better AI, more enemies, possibly 60FPS while retaining impressive visuals, higher resolution while retaining impressive visuals, and much more. The Wii U limits these areas significantly.

Yes, but when Zelda and Mario (for example) can't even balance their use of the current technology with design that stands up to games made with weaker technology, why would even stronger technology suddenly make the games better (or even more desirable)?

 

[Towels]

The big Nintendo games are taking too long. As great as the Nintendo releases have been so far, I don't think Pikmin, DKC:TF, NSMBU, W101, LEGO and re-releases of Sports and LoZ:WW is enough to sell the console. I can imagine, for many people, 3D World is the only real reason to own the console so far.

Mario Kart, Smash, and Zelda need to be out already. I imagine X and Bayo 2 have got potential to be head turners, more so than the current library, too.

 

[Broritos]

Actually it is. The hardware limits the possibility of 1080p/60fps which is significant as Link Between Worlds displayed (60fps). It limits the AI. It limits visuals. It limits the size of the world. It limits quite a lot.

You specifically mentioned Zelda in your post and assumed Zelda U will be limited by the hardware within the Wii U as if you know already how they're going to design the next Zelda and passed that off as fact. Unless you actually know how the next Zelda will be designed and already know that Nintendo is running into technical limitation problems, passing of your assumption as fact is ridiculous.

You can say hardware does limit games from a technical level in which in turn does influence design but don't go saying that it's a fact the new Zelda will be limited because for all anyone knows, every future Zelda game could potentially use no more power than what is already available on the Wii U.

It's like complaining that 2D Mario is being limited because it's on Wii U and ignoring that 2D Mario by design doesn't require strong hardware to be good. The same can be said with Zelda especially when taking into account A Link Between Worlds where it seems like everyone is touting it as one of the best if not the best Zelda game every made.

Are people buying the Wii U for Mario 3D World? No? OK. DKC? No? OK. Why? Because those games don't impress as much as their predecessors.

Ok? It doesn't matter if that's true or not because that post was a reply to someone that said Nintendo doesn't know why people buy consoles anymore. If they didn't know then those two games I mentioned wouldn't exist.

 

[Huff]

you just have to ask who was the market the wii u was created for?

if marketing is somewhere on your list of main failures, your not thinking clearly

 

[DECK'ARD]

Yeah you really have to wonder about that. "Hey guys, we could have this amazing tablet controller". Did nobody think to ask: what exactly will we use if for?

Honestly I don't think that the executives at Nintendo really have any idea of what the market wants, especial the Western market. That company really needs new management.

Nintendo do seem in their own bubble, and stubbornly so. I'd love to read a behind the scenes story of the development of the Wii U though, because it's just so baffling. I just don't see how anyone made a convincing case for it to be greenlit, it seems more of a case of them feeling they had to have something to be distinctive even if it was something they had no confidence in. I mean let's break down how broken a concept it is.

None of the initial tech-demos showed enough potential to plow ahead with a console based on it. And with good reason, they'd been there before with the GC and GBA link-up cable. Pacman Vs. and Four Swords were good games but not game-changing by any stretch of the imagination, and we saw so few applications of it because it does have limited uses and games also aren't going to be designed around needing those extra controllers. When the additional controllers don't even have a screen, as with Wii U, then applications are even more limited. There was just no mileage in this.

I cringed every time they mentioned 'asymmetric gaming' at E3, as it was obvious smoke and mirrors and we wouldn't see anything substantial from it. It was just to distract from the flaw of why one player would have a vastly different controller to any others. People however like sharing the same experience, and Nintendo know that better than anyone which is why the examples of multiplayer we've seen from them have still been conventional.

Then you have the dual-screen 'feature' of the console. On a handheld with a touchscreen this makes total sense, you may be obscuring one screen with your hand and you can still see both easily. With a console it makes zero sense though, as you lose sight of the TV completely. In general gameplay terms it's a drawback, and lo and behold the only game so far to make use of the GamePad is a game that turned that drawback into a gameplay feature - Zombi U. That's the only card you can play with it though. So all you are left with is maps and inventory management, which is no big deal and just adds an extra headache to development and ports which Nintendo definitely didn't want.

How about moving around for multiple viewpoints with the GamePad like the other tech-demos? Nope. Pointless and cumbersome, and better done with a camera stick in game.

Then we get onto off-TV play, which people do like. But that then TOTALLY rules out dual screen gameplay anyway! Never seen a console before where two of its main features are totally contradictory to each other. No wonder developers don't know what to do with it, and the public don't know what to make of it.

You also have a sensor bar on the GamePad seemingly just because you can put it on the ground to pretend to hit a golf ball. Wow! How did anyone in Nintendo think this was a worthwhile thing to include. It's ridiculous. It's like they reached a point where they just chucked everything in it in the hope that one day someone would come up with something magic. Same with the NFC sensor, whatever they show at E3 the ship has sailed with Wii U now. If these were defining features for your console and enabled the games you wanted to make they needed to be there at launch to show that. What were they doing for the last 2 years of the Wii's life?

Nintendo games are still great, they know what they do well and execute it perfectly. The Wii U on the other hand is a complete dog's breakfast. Not offering anything compelling and at the same time pricing itself out of the market that might have had any interest in it.

Being in your own bubble is a good thing when you are onto a winner, when you're not though it leaves you completely isolated and unable to respond.

 

[losi8ight]

the wii u to this date is the most powerful console per watt Nintendo have fabricated a MCM chip with 500g bandwith with low latency low heat.Now if the ps4 or xbox one was running on 33 watts I would like to see how they perform . I have seen the wii u do stuff which blows my high end pc out the water with 60fps no screen tear with lighting effects and shadows which would make my amd 7970 slow down below 60fps the game pad is great and most the people who are complaining about the wii u hardware I bet don't own a wiiu you or haven't even tried it propley. and to say the ps4 or xbox one is so much more next gen why is it then that all games on them platforms cat run at 1080p 60-fps no screen tear I look at titanfall cant run at 60fps not even 1080p looks bad same goes for second sun cant keep 60fps you should all forget about the hardware wars and just play the games lol

 

[JordanN]

Hardware.

There was literally no reason to go with 360 level power in 2012. It basically killed third party support from last gen (ports struggling at launch? wtf?) and next gen (10x weaker than other consoles).

To add insult to injury, the most powerful console did win this gen and it's only $50-$100 more than Wii U.

I have seen the wii u do stuff which blows my high end pc out the water with 60fps no screen tear with lighting effects and shadows which would make my amd 7970 slow down

This is your first post on Neogaf? Really?
You're being delusional or don't actually play video games. Or maybe you're shilling...

 

[Future PhaZe]

They lost the hardcore market a while back hid the symptom by having overwhelming casual success with the Wii.

They weren't able to bring that crowd in again with the Wii U and this is the result.

I suppose the key question then is how do they get the casual market back? I'm not sure what the answer is since the wii might have been a once in a lifetime success story

 

[Linkyn]

Hands down, the price. The cut last year helped somewhat, but they really need some distance between it and the PS4. After all, I'm assuming the XBONE is trailing behind the PS4 now primarily for that same reason.

 

[Freezie KO]

Games, and it's not even a question. Software moves hardware. It's always been that way. If you're underpowered but you have the right games, the console still sells.

Here's Wii U: No new experiences with constant sequels. Droughts. Lack of diversity. The wrong games (e.g. mini-games for an audience that isn't there). Nothing to prove the GamePad is anything more than an arbitrary price-hike.

 

[losi8ight]

they haven't gone with 360 hardware them consoles would grind to a halt at 33 watts lol also the wii u is the only console which can steam 60fps to the gamepad so game pad and tv are running at 60 fps at the same time have you seen the xbox play call of duty on to screens? no don't think you have the gpu is doing multiple displays at the same time at 33 watts the wii u is more powerful than you think and nintendo will harness the power to watt ratio to make the most powerfull handheld and will upscale their MCM chip for the future embedded edram on gpu die you will see future pc tec take this route in a few years

 

[wondermega]

They've already admitted the issue - they misunderstood the market. I can't say that it means they do understand it now, but that is certainly what led to some of their major decisions which has brought upon this current situation.

I'd say all eyes are on Nintendo to show up with some fantastic news this E3, but after the last 3 and the state of the rest of the market, I'd be wrong. I think nobody cares (on a large scale) anymore. Maybe that is good for them, they can return to their original "blue ocean/disturbance" philosophy and try, once again, to develop a new market of their own.

 

[ComaPrison]

- bad decisions in branding, naming, marketing
- lack of must-have titles. If they had console release date WiiU-exclusives for: Fire Emblem games+new iteration of Chrono Trigger+Monster Hunter+SMT and its derivatives+Bravely Default+Radiant Historia+Zelda+Smash Bros+Mario Kart+Mega Man, more people would've bought their consoles

 

[losi8ight]

Jordan N have you played wonderful 101? all the way? I have like I said been in gaming since the 1970s lol I was palying crisis 2 with dx11 patch and all that and messing around with doom3 silkmod patch I no about graphics and what it takes to have major effects at 60 fps 1080p now like I said name me a platform which can outrun the the wii u with 33 watts

 

[Otakumegane]

Should have posted this sooner.

 

[JordanN]

Jordan N have you played wonderful 101? all the way? I have like I said been in gaming since the 1970s lol I was palying crisis 2 with dx11 patch and all that and messing around with doom3 silkmod patch I no about graphics and what it takes to have major effects at 60 fps 1080p now like I said name me a platform which can outrun the the wii u with 33 watts

Sorry but most most Wii U games are actually 720p @ 30-60fps. 33 watts is nothing impressive either. The Wii U came out 6-7 years after the 360. Moores laws says you can double the efficiency every 2 or so years.

Wii U can have nice games with a nice artstyle but it's technically stuck in the same era as the PS3/360. That's a fact.

It's not the first time anyway. Wii was PS2/GC/XBox era. If you debate that, then I have used up all reasoning.

 

[losi8ight]

if it was stuck in the same time as the xbox it wouldn't be able to do what it does do you have a wii u?

 

[gigantor21]

The main issue is that the product is such a mish-mosh of contradictory ideas. It's too convoluted to appeal to anyone outside of their core customer base. Everything wrong with the device goes back to that key issue.

- It's built around an expensive peripheral that Nintendo is doing a shit job of leveraging. The best games on the system don't need it for much, if anything.
- The Gamepad is supposed to be a Wii-like hook, but is MORE complicated than a traditional controller.
- The price-performance ratio is a complete joke because of the Gamepad.
- Their online strategy is all over the place. You have wonderful ideas like Miiverse alongside missing features the goddamn PSP had 10 years ago.
- They pushed third-party support on a console that wasn't built with them in mind, then doubled down on their usual franchises once outside devs abandoned them.

The Wii was built around a clear, easy-to-market idea--expanding the consumer base with a more approachable control scheme. The Wiimote worked because it was such a straightforward and intuitive concept. The Gamepad and "asymmetric gameplay" are a muddled mess in comparison. Random hail mary passes that Nintendo itself has no clue what to do with, and doesn't even bother with half the time.

I don't know what the WiiU is supposed to be or who it's supposed to be for. And frankly, I don't think Nintendo knows either.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Jordan N have you played wonderful 101? all the way? I have like I said been in gaming since the 1970s lol I was palying crisis 2 with dx11 patch and all that and messing around with doom3 silkmod patch I no about graphics and what it takes to have major effects at 60 fps 1080p now like I said name me a platform which can outrun the the wii u with 33 watts

You are about one post away from creating a meme, keep going!

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

It's just a failure of a concept in my opinion. I've always hated multi display setups. I never got the point with the DS, I definitely don't get the point with the 3DS (I'm a huge fan of 3d and just never want to look at the bottom screen), and I certainly don't get it with the wii u.

It's not a good direction to take, I don't like breaking my focus, and I didn't buy a nice TV to play on a game pad, a bad one at that.

Motion controls were brilliant, and they should have stuck with their guns. Made them better, and kept their unique appeal. Instead they separated the DS, and continued using an expensive peripheral to display maps and other crap.

Things that can be replicated elegantly via software don't deserve their own screen.

 

[Miles X]

Jack of all trades, masters of none comes to mind. Basically they failed to target a particular audience. The casuals are gone and were never sustainable anyway, they should have seen this, and their core/gamer efforts have been ... incredibly poor. They appeal to Nintendo fans, but then they always will because of the IP.

So year, the very concept of WiiU.

 

[Tabular]

That controller doesn't have mass market appeal. Too big and dorky. Not saying there is any validity to it but that's how these things go.

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

Sorry but most most Wii U games are actually 720p @ 30-60fps. 33 watts is nothing impressive either. The Wii U came out 6-7 years after the 360. Moores laws says you can double the efficiency every 2 or so years.

Wii U can have nice games with a nice artstyle but it's technically stuck in the same era as the PS3/360. That's a fact.

It's not the first time anyway. Wii was PS2/GC/XBox era. If you debate that, then I have used up all reasoning.

Also I'm not so sure a home console should prioritize efficiency so much. It's not going anywhere, and your diminishing the benefit of being constantly plugged in. It's why there will always be a chasm between Mobile phone chips and pc lol.

 

[Miles X]

Hands down, the price. The cut last year helped somewhat, but they really need some distance between it and the PS4. After all, I'm assuming the XBONE is trailing behind the PS4 now primarily for that same reason.

Because dropping the gamecube to $99 early on worked wonders? If price was an issue it would be selling far better than it is. XBO, PS4, PS3, 360 all launching at $400/$500/$600 doing vastly better than WiiU.

The whole value thing does not come into it, it's at a price low enough that it should be getting more sales than it is.

 

[losi8ight]

Jordan I have had 3 Xboxes a zx81/spectrum 48k/a sega master system/a nes/ snes/ a mega drive/a ps2/dreamcst/gamecube/neo geo/ps3 /high end pc oh I also had a grandstand and a pong console when I was five lol. im 43 now work for HP and I know as a hardware engineer the wii u is no slouch like I said do you have a wii u Jordan?have you seen Mario kart 8 it may be 720p but have you played them games on a good plasma tv? I bet you wont see the diff at 4 feet away keeping 60fps is what counts or may I say keeping to the native res of the tv or monitor you have

 

[Spieler Eins]

Games, and it's not even a question. Software moves hardware. It's always been that way. If you're underpowered but you have the right games, the console still sells.

Here's Wii U: No new experiences with constant sequels. Droughts. Lack of diversity. The wrong games (e.g. mini-games for an audience that isn't there). Nothing to prove the GamePad is anything more than an arbitrary price-hike.

This, basically. And not a single game that justifies a new generation. No innovation like Metroid Prime, Galaxy, Goldeneye, and many more had right at the beginning of their generations. 2D- and minigame sequels that barely differentiate themselves from their predecessors that came like 2 years earlier on cheaper hardware. Plus, the 3rd party prejudice for the first time becomes a fact and there's literally no company left making WiiU software, except for a shovelware title every month at best. And the very few positive aspects crumble away under shitastic marketing. They should be hyping the shit out of Xeno as the next big thing, but instead it doesn't even have a working title and Nintendo employees never talk about it, probably because of some guidelines that prevent anyone to talk about any game until it's 2 weeks away from release. I guess it was initially a good idea to stop TP-esque scenarios of announcing games too early, but it has now evolved into a constant radio silence that's nothing but moronic. Like two weeks before WiiU launch you didn't even know which exact games would be available Day 1 , lol.
Going from market leadership to this requires nothing but monumental incompetence, looking deeper into the subject would present much more than a single factor that caused it and it seems like the current leadership is too stubborn to acknowledge any kind of mistake. Now bundling the goddamn HD port of Wii Sports in Japan, as if anyone still gives a flying fuck about that. Then shifting their whole company plan towards QOL aspects regardless of the fact that these past non-gamer successes are now flopping hardcore everywhere and even their last fans that kept the GCN alive are scared away by this... Unbelievable.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Games, and it's not even a question. Software moves hardware. It's always been that way. If you're underpowered but you have the right games, the console still sells.

Here's Wii U: No new experiences with constant sequels. Droughts. Lack of diversity. The wrong games (e.g. mini-games for an audience that isn't there). Nothing to prove the GamePad is anything more than an arbitrary price-hike.

I'd say there's a pretty good question.

Launched with Zombi U and NintendoLand, both of which arguably do show the Gamepad to be more than an arbitrary price hike.

Meanwhile, PS4 selling like gangbusters with droughts, no new experiences, and constant sequels.

I'm leaning towards marketing being the first culprit. Bad word of mouth took it from there.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

1. Backwards compatibility with Wii and extremely low power budget (~35W) combined to make it technically lackluster especially for its asking price. Even raising to 50W (substantially less power than the X360 and PS3 slim revisions) and not using a legacy CPU design could have meant a much beefier system for its price. This probably could have greatly reduced talk of "not next gen lol" and enticed some people who were getting desperate for a new system after the last gen had been going on for so long. The value proposition would have seemed much more appealing if the graphics didn't seem exactly the same as PS360 - and have many ports that ran WORSE than the competition.

2. It arrived too late. The "perfect timing" to pick up slack from the Wii would have been 2010ish. Nintendo probably didn't know they were going to drop off so fast, but a 2011 launch would have been much better in terms of getting a headstart over the competition. As it stood they had a 1 year window to build a buffer before the competition hit, and with a longer window they might have stood a better chance. During this one year window they had to secure developer support and produce enough games to convince a lot of people to buy it, which would in turn secure more developer support for the future. They failed.

The announcement of other systems, and efforts of MS and Sony to court developers to make games for them could only have hurt Nintendo's chances here. The PS4 generated a LOT of hype merely months after the launch of the WiiU. The earlier Nintendo launches, the more time they get before this shit goes down. Unfortunately, they were launching the 3DS in 2011, so...

3. Launch OS was a complete clusterfuck, lack of basic online features enjoyed by the competition for years now are completely absent. Account system, for fucks sake Nintendo. This stuff probably wasn't a major issue but it couldn't have helped when people started hitting up message boards and youtube with complaints of how shitty, laggy and featureless it all was. Them load times, too.

4. Nintendo has a certain reputation to begin with, and although that is intangible and difficult/impossible to measure, I can't help but feel this hurt them not only in the sense that some customers avoided jumping straight on, but also caused developers to be much more hesitant to support it.

 

[BlazingDarkness]

Because Nintendo failed to make this

as appealing as this

they just got it wrong on a fundamental design level, and none of their marketing convinced audiences otherwise.

Also, they made a box and then expected developers to flock to it, instead of asking developers what they'd like to see in the box first. And then came more appealing hardware, to both consumers and developers. And the rest is history.

 

[losi8ight]

its all about how much you can make a chip most efficient with less power that's the key for future tech you will sere how much this way of thinking with low latency embedded edram will change in the future

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

its all about how much you can make a chip most efficient with less power that's the key for future tech you will sere how much this way of thinking with low latency embedded edram will change in the future

Oh I get the benefit, don't get me wrong, but here's my problem. They don't have to compete anymore in the custom chip department. The ps4 for example is a bunch of off the shelf parts.

Nintendo could have easily put together better performance to power consumption parts, and have just gone with a higher energy budget.

How much do you think Sony's losing per ps4? The Wii u was unprofitable, and unimpressive. A horrible combination.

 

[Taker666]

Poor software choices...stuff like Game & Wario and Wii Party U were clearly not going to sell systems to any part of the market and were a complete waste of resources (although to be fair the Wii U software line-up for the first six months was no worse than PS4's or XB1's). If you're not going to market a game then don't fund it/make it..Wonderful 101 and Wii Fit U were also sent to die due to the lack of promotion (a good chunk of first party games were).

Branding is terrible..made the same mistakes as the 3DS but worse.

Poor marketing. Few tv ads (I saw more PS4 ads for Second Son in a month than the Wii U and its software combined since launch), little in-store marketing (local supermarket had a PS4 rolling demo and shelving unit on day one, Xbox1 had a rolling demo and shelving unit on day one...I've yet to see Wii U get more than half a shelf of software..and that's at best).

A basic and premium SKU was a mistake as well. Should have just had the premium SKU...its makes things clear and simple. The branding confused things enough as it was without adding another hurdle.

A severe lack of high profile first party titles that showed why the gamepad was included in the first place..and still none on the horizon to be honest.

 

[DECK'ARD]

I'd say there's a pretty good question.

Launched with Zombi U and NintendoLand, both of which arguably do show the Gamepad to be more than an arbitrary price hike.

Meanwhile, PS4 selling like gangbusters with droughts, no new experiences, and constant sequels.

I'm leaning towards marketing being the first culprit. Bad word of mouth took it from there.

Zombi U turned the flaw of the concept into a gameplay feature, only because it worked with that game. Getting fucked because you are forced to look away from the TV isn't something that can be applied to many games at all. Which is why you haven't seen a game use it substantially since, it's a card you can only play once.

Nintendoland was just a bunch of tech-demos that couldn't standalone as their own games, and you needed extra controllers to get any fun out of it at all. It gave the impression the GamePad was a novelty rather than focus on a single standout idea like Wii Sports. It also went against the theory that the GamePad was something substantial for the single player which is where the whole U name came in.

When Nintendoland was unveiled at E3 it was Nintendo throwing up their hands and saying "Remember all those tech-demos from a year ago? Yeah, we didn't know what to do with them either lol".

Nearly 2 years on and they still don't know what to do with it. Because the system was designed with no clear idea or game in mind, it wasn't even a gamble just a vague hope.

A costly one.

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

On the Internet, most people are going to say that the Wii U failed for not including things that core gamers want such as better graphics, more third party games, or a better account system. However, the Wii U isn't doing poorly because core gamers don't want it, the Wii U is doing poorly because casual gamers don't want it.

The truth is Nintendo deliberately chose to ignore core gamers to chase after the casual audience that made the original Wii a success. The original WIi sold off the novelty of motion controls. The Wii U is trying to sell off the novelty of the GamePad. The simple fact is that casual gamers don't care about the GamePad at all. With the GamePad not having the same appeal as the motion controls, the Wii U returns Nintendo to it's downward trajectory from the N64 and GameCube.

What's worse now is that smartphones are providing casual games at a much cheaper cost than Nintendo can provide. Casual gamers can now get casual games for free or a dollar on devices that they already own and have little incentive to buy a system for $300 and pay $60 for casual games. The people who buy expensive systems and pay $60 for games are the traditional core gamers that Nintendo doesn't care about anymore.

Historically, Nintendo was able to make games at low development budgets and high costs due to market barriers imposed by the difficulty of distributing games. Games have to be manufactured in a factory and then transported and sold in retail stores. This high barrier of entry basically keeps small budget developers from competing against Nintendo and kept the prices of Nintendo's games high. This is also the reason why the N64 had cartridges, because Nintendo's business model revolves around controlling the barrier of entry so they can make high profit margins on low development budget games.

With the rise of smartphones, the barrier of entry for low development budget games has essentially been broken. Without this barrier entry, the market is now being flooded with casual games by low budget developers. In the eyes of consumers, the value of casual games is now either free or a dollar. The days where consumers will pay $40-$60 for casual games is now over. The casual blue ocean that Nintendo original chased with the original Wii is now even redder than original core gamer blue ocean that Nintendo abandoned.

They should never have designed a console around a concept that they hadn't proved internally. Wii was only a success because it went hand in hand with Wii Sports, they knew they had something that worked and was appealing. It had a point, and that point was easily understood by people.

The E3 unveilings of Wii U were amazing for all the wrong reasons, you could almost feel the lack of belief in what they were saying. They knew it wasn't going to fly in the same way the Wii did. When the benefits of something are so hard to communicate, it's more likely those benefits aren't there rather than miscommunication.

Nintendoland just summed up what a half-baked and confused concept the Wii U was. The best they could come up with is a repackaging of tech-demos under familiar branding. None strong enough to stand on their own and be developed into a fully-fledged game.

The biggest problem for the Wii U was the very concept itself. If internally Nintendo couldn't prove the concept then there was no way the public would buy into it.

These posts really highlight a disastrous 1-2 punch that hit Nintendo this generation.

 

[axisofweevils]

I do think its the lack of system-selling games. Don't get me wrong, the Wii U has an awesome library, but it doesn't have many system sellers. The two games so far that had that potential suffered from appearing to be similar to their handheld products, and were released with incredibly bad timing.

NSMBU came mere months after NSMB2, and people were already experiencing "Mario fatigue" with the handheld title.

3D Mario never sold as well as 2D Mario, and 3D World's first trailer was very divisive. So much so, people spent the first few months believing it was a "lazy 3DS rehash". To make matters worse, the game was released at the same time as the PS4.

Also, the overall negative stigma surrounding the system. (Some of this is Nintendo's fault, some isn't.)

 

[Forgottonone]

This, combined with a system that relies on an expensive, heavy, clunky controller that simply doesn't resonate with consumers. The WiiU gamepad feels like a Fisher Price toy, especially when most consumers are used to sleek phones/tablets. It didn't help that Nintendo has been unable to verbalize a single good use for the tablet controller to consumers.

in the end the casual market isn't interested and the hardcore audience doesn't want to pay $300 for underpowered hardware.

No it doesn't. Why do people love to say this. Hey and if it does. It's the best darn fisher price toy ever created.

 

[Freezie KO]

I'd say there's a pretty good question.

Launched with Zombi U and NintendoLand, both of which arguably do show the Gamepad to be more than an arbitrary price hike.

Meanwhile, PS4 selling like gangbusters with droughts, no new experiences, and constant sequels.

I'm leaning towards marketing being the first culprit. Bad word of mouth took it from there.

Blaming marketing is the most facile, meaningless criticism because it takes no analysis and no specifics of the market into consideration. You can just blame marketing for any product failure. The truth is that marketing cannot force people to like a product they don't want.

As for NintendoLand, Nintendo only wishes it proved the worth of the GamePad in the way that Wii Sports proved the value of the remote. NintendoLand was an undesirable failure as a proof of concept and quickly unbundled. Nintendo's only shot at making that multiplayer-centric mini-game collection a success would've been an online mode, and it's a failure of the game that it didn't have one.

Zombi U is a bomb, so it obviously didn't prove the value of the GamePad to most potential customers. I'll personally give it credit for taking a drawback of the GamePad (that you have to shift your eyes from the TV screen) and turning it into a mechanic. But that's not that enticing to the larger market.

No marketing was going to turn NintendoLand or Zombi U into hits. As for PS4, it did launch with a new IP, Sony built up a lot of goodwill in promising new experiences, and for many people the lure of the same games in bigger, better-looking worlds counts a new way to relive old experiences. Nintendo failed on all three of those counts. It didn't launch with anything new, it has negative trust in delivering new experiences now or in the future, and they can't rely on graphics since the console is about as powerful as PS3.

 

[larrybird33]

nobody knows hat it is and it has no 'killer app'

 

[Woo-Fu]

Nintendo.

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

I just wish they hadn't abandoned motion control.

It's unimaginable to me, that Sony is using motion control to get a leg up on Oculus in the immersion scene, on the PS4, and the company who pulled all the stops and made it the focus of the wii stops using it (at least for most of the core experiences)

Wtf lol