KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
I'm still guessing it'll be around 300k. I just can't believe it would be as low as sub 200k.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Wii U US November Sales Estimated at 149K by Pachter
- Thread starter Horse Armour
- Start date
- Status
GetemMa
Member
What is even Nintendo's next move?
I can't imagine they put out another piece of hardware before 2016.
That system needs to handheld with a big multitouch screen, slide out controls and an HDMI out.
Then they need all their development teams working on one system but still make games specialized for mobile vs. couch gaming.
Make it powerful enough to play PS4/Xbone ports.
Maybe include something similar to a WiiU pro controller and a Wiimote+ for couch gaming.
I can't imagine they put out another piece of hardware before 2016.
That system needs to handheld with a big multitouch screen, slide out controls and an HDMI out.
Then they need all their development teams working on one system but still make games specialized for mobile vs. couch gaming.
Make it powerful enough to play PS4/Xbone ports.
Maybe include something similar to a WiiU pro controller and a Wiimote+ for couch gaming.
I mean, I know we all like to speculate there is a move Nintendo can pull out that will right this ship, but let's face facts: there might not be anything Nintendo can do to fix Wii U sales numbers. They don't really have a good move here, I doubt they can put a console out before 2016 and they can't just not have a console for a year and a half.
I still think their best situation is a hybrid handheld console with HDMI out that is nearly on par with Xbone/PS4. It focuses all their efforts on one piece of hardware rather than two. They probably could prevent a drought if they were all focused on one set of hardware.
I still think their best situation is a hybrid handheld console with HDMI out that is nearly on par with Xbone/PS4. It focuses all their efforts on one piece of hardware rather than two. They probably could prevent a drought if they were all focused on one set of hardware.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
Start working on a big expensive handheld with $40 games now when cell phone games are doing really well? Less is more has been proven in the hand held arena since it's start.
jamesinclair
Banned
I bought the 3ds for ambassador, the system was overpriced garbage before that move....and even after. It took like a year for my most played game to have been actually one I bought, rather than nes gol or four swords
Do the same with wii u and +1 sale here
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
Wait... what? Perhaps you misheard it? An official Nintendo commercial? Got a link or description of the commercial, so we can find it? =/
I suppose the big question would be if it'll be designed for the expanded audience again, or if it'll be a concession towards attracting core gamers in the West. Some have said in threads past that the device known as a game console is not the best device for getting software such as "Brain Age" or "Art Academy" to the expanded audience (I know the quick and easy solution to that, but any strategizing on Nintendo's behalf should leave that one out
) Nintendo's consolidated creative control in Japan, they bought shares of PUX, so I'm thinking they'll continue trying to make software that goes for that expanded audience rather than an all out attempt at the Western core gamer. What that means for the design of future devices though is a mystery to me.As for the WiiU, when Mario games start underperforming, I'd say something involving the console itself would have to be done. The goal shouldn't be to worry about the sales of other consoles now, it should be to get as many WiiU consoles out there as can be in order to give people access to Nintendo console games and prevent first party software from bombing.
ZSaberLink
Media Create Maven
Nevermind about this post... seems like someone addressed an erroneous fact that a poster above made already.
GetemMa
Member
If the goal is to top the sales of mobile "games" like Candy Crush then I weep for the future.
I doubt that is Nintendo's goal.
Nintendo is doing quite well selling $40 games on a handheld device for people who know quality which is plenty of people.
*Groans*
Even after a year, the system is still being advertised as a Wii? Oh, boy...this can't be good for Nintendo...not at all.
They should just scrap the Wii name & start all over next gen.
Nikodemos
Member
NintendṺ
ionicbluebird
Member
Guys/gals.. if you think of the Wii U as the Wii HD (which is what I believe it was) and not really Nintendo's next true disruptive system then it doesn't seem so bad.
Somewhere along they messed up though because the Wii U should be at least getting 360/PS3 ports a plenty.
Somewhere along they messed up though because the Wii U should be at least getting 360/PS3 ports a plenty.
rhizomatic
Member
If these numbers are anything close to accurate, then this is pretty harrowing.
The sad thing is that I haven't the slightest idea as to what they could realistically do to save their home console business. Obviously, the smart thing to do would be to ride it out as long as possible, but what then? I guess they could start working on their next console ASAP and try to rebuild relationships with third parties, but what's the likelihood of a new Nintendo console with specs comparable to the competition actually selling well? That is, with no gimmicks (or rather, having gimmicks but not basing the entire console around them) and nothing to shoot themselves in the foot with (like the Gamecube's proprietary minidiscs). I've heard time and time again on here that third parties don't even really like publishing on Nintendo platforms because they don't want to compete with Nintendo's own software, but it's also nearly impossible for Nintendo to prop up their console entirely by themselves. It seems like a catch-22.
It's just really painful for me. I grew up on Nintendo, and it breaks my heart to see them continue to flounder about like this.
The sad thing is that I haven't the slightest idea as to what they could realistically do to save their home console business. Obviously, the smart thing to do would be to ride it out as long as possible, but what then? I guess they could start working on their next console ASAP and try to rebuild relationships with third parties, but what's the likelihood of a new Nintendo console with specs comparable to the competition actually selling well? That is, with no gimmicks (or rather, having gimmicks but not basing the entire console around them) and nothing to shoot themselves in the foot with (like the Gamecube's proprietary minidiscs). I've heard time and time again on here that third parties don't even really like publishing on Nintendo platforms because they don't want to compete with Nintendo's own software, but it's also nearly impossible for Nintendo to prop up their console entirely by themselves. It seems like a catch-22.
It's just really painful for me. I grew up on Nintendo, and it breaks my heart to see them continue to flounder about like this.
D
Deleted member 125677
Unconfirmed Member
If you're buying Earthbound for $150 then it's obviously for the sake of collection. And I think, though I'm not sure, most SNES cartridges are that are sold today are mainly sold to that purpose, though many of course will play the games as well.
Thursdayton
And this is affecting them as well. The Indy scene is exploding and a bunch of very creative, whimsical, interesting games are coming out for all platforms now or soon. So many places to get interesting games. Even if you look at such different games as Mario vs Angry birds I think you might see the change that's happening. Without AB I could see your average person seeing Mario as the 'fun, exciting' series for gaming that they might get into as a family. Then phones come and you get all these cute, accessible games at low prices and people get enough 'fun' from those experiences, it's only the enthusiasts who want more and a lot of those want third parties too.
That's a very simple, and arguable analysis I know, but I think it's part of the overall change in perception to gaming that has happened and that Nintendo failed to see and act on in a timely, or correct fashion.
GAF crash on Thursday confirmed?
Nintendo will never be able to compete with MS and Sony. Both companies are investing at least a billion dollar in online technology (cloudserver infrastructure, online services). This is paid for with the subscription fees. Those revenues really ramp up with 30-40 million subscribers paying $40-50 annually. MS has been pulling billion dollar revenues for a couple of years now, Sony wants a piece of that pie to to pour into Gakai.
Nintendo are wary of online features, they've been loath to invest anything, they'd rather use other companies' infrastructure and services, and their target audience is the least likely to go online or pay for online gaming.
Without having a full features Nintendo online that can compete feature by feature with PSN or XBL, there's no chance at all Nintendo will able to attract those 18-35 gamers who now flock to MS or Sony, even if they had a console that could match the PS4/Xbone's power.
Then there's the matter of Nintendo going for a completely different segment of gamers: young children and families. They've branded themselves specifically as the Disney of gaming but without Disney's expertise of branching themselves out into different areas or targeting different markets under different brand names. Sony recognized that the market had was changing and expanded the number of studios in the US and Europe so they could better cater western gamers' tastes, in 2006 they even switched to more adult games and dropped mascot games (R&C,J&D,SR) for mature games targeted at older gamers. Nintendo doesn't want to do anything new, they want to make the sort of games they've been making for the past two decades: primarily mascot platformers with some other old school genres inerspersed. The average quality is amazing, but there's a definite lack of innovation and ambition too. And those games won't attract the core gamers that third parties need to pick up a Nintendo conosle, while MS and Sony titles will.
Good post, but this just isnt true at all. I never see games with as much innovation and ambition as firstparty Nintendo-games.
You should've got the hint when you didn't have to spell it 'P-a-c-h-t-e-r'.
Aquamarine
Member
At least Pachter admits that his predictions are actually predictions.
VG_Chartz operates under the assumption that their random guesses are "sales."
LoveCake
Member
150k would mean it was almost TRIPLED by the GC in a similar November post-launch period. That's sub-Dreamcast numbers.
That is quite a graph !
Looks even a steeper drop than the GC & DC O_0
shinra-bansho
Member
Banned sites are banned for a reason. Bypassing the censor doesn't change that or make it acceptable to spread misinformation from them.
Buying a console nowadays isn't about that one "killer app" that Nintendo is so desperately hoping will turn their ship around, but more about the ecosystem that a user is buying into. Ever since the Xbox 360's introduction of Netflix, consoles are entertainment investments for consumers.
When you buy an Apple product, you're investing into the App store, iTunes, and the rest of Apple's (near) stellar applications.
When you buy an Xbox, you're (usually) falling into your social circle of gaming friends through a streamlined online media experience.
For Nintendo, what are you getting? Under supported apps (Netflix is terrible on Wii U), a third-party software library that is usually always a compromised experience (Batman's lack of multiplayer, same for Splinter Cell), and a completely disjointed online infrastructure, to name a few. Nintendo hasn't made a system that is friendly to developers, publishers or consumers. Their online store sucks, their online infrastructure is terrible, and they're unwilling to court any kind of publisher/developer to their platform. Their own hubris is sinking their ship, leaving consumer's pissed (anyone who's bought a Wii U partners like EA to move on to greener pastures.
I don't think in this day and age, a single game can turn around a console. It takes time (word of mouth), momentum (great games) and spikes of interest (price cuts) to gain the public's attention. What's disappointing for Nintendo is that they had a chance to capture the public's interest and at least embed a conversation in the industry that would make the consumer question whether to get a Wii U or another next-gen system. Instead, they release their biggest game of the year in the same two week gap of next-gen machines; one of the few times where the average consumer sees news about a "new video game console" anywhere on TV.
From here on out, the Wii U is officially the third wheel of its current and next-gen cycles. No one will take the console serious and third-party will be a complete joke by Christmas of 2014. Ring the bell, the Wii U may be on its feet, but it's about to hit the mat. =(
When you buy an Apple product, you're investing into the App store, iTunes, and the rest of Apple's (near) stellar applications.
When you buy an Xbox, you're (usually) falling into your social circle of gaming friends through a streamlined online media experience.
For Nintendo, what are you getting? Under supported apps (Netflix is terrible on Wii U), a third-party software library that is usually always a compromised experience (Batman's lack of multiplayer, same for Splinter Cell), and a completely disjointed online infrastructure, to name a few. Nintendo hasn't made a system that is friendly to developers, publishers or consumers. Their online store sucks, their online infrastructure is terrible, and they're unwilling to court any kind of publisher/developer to their platform. Their own hubris is sinking their ship, leaving consumer's pissed (anyone who's bought a Wii U partners like EA to move on to greener pastures.
I don't think in this day and age, a single game can turn around a console. It takes time (word of mouth), momentum (great games) and spikes of interest (price cuts) to gain the public's attention. What's disappointing for Nintendo is that they had a chance to capture the public's interest and at least embed a conversation in the industry that would make the consumer question whether to get a Wii U or another next-gen system. Instead, they release their biggest game of the year in the same two week gap of next-gen machines; one of the few times where the average consumer sees news about a "new video game console" anywhere on TV.
From here on out, the Wii U is officially the third wheel of its current and next-gen cycles. No one will take the console serious and third-party will be a complete joke by Christmas of 2014. Ring the bell, the Wii U may be on its feet, but it's about to hit the mat. =(
Pristine_Condition
Member
That's the thing. Even if Pachter is wrong by half, and the Wii U does 250k, that's still one-foot-in-the-grave-style bad. This is the run to Christmas.
And if it's lower, really--think about it--if it's lower...Wow. If it's lower, and all Nintendo did was send Reggie out there with Cranky and a smile and that goofy fucking "is it a tease/is it not a tease?" Metroid lapel pin...well, shit. That'll go down as one of the dumbest moments in gaming history. I mean, if they even have a hint their numbers are nearly this low going into the holiday, and they are still being coy like that, instead of digging deep and fucking selling the thing like there is no tomorrow...that's just insanity. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns. If that's the best Reggie can come up with, or if that's the most Reggie is authorized by Japan to do, then he's more useless than even I thought he was.
I haven't been a Nintendo console owner myself for a long time, but I still buy the systems for my nieces and nephews, and still like to play the new games when they come out. Normally, I pretty much find their miscues amusing, but this is infuriating. I can't imagine what it's like to be a big Nintendo fan right now and see this apathetic attitude from the company as far as selling and supporting the system is concerned.
No you can't. That's a banned site.
Will be interesting to see who has the more accurate assumptions in the end.
Following Pachter and these banned other site it seems that Pachters accurateness in predictions is worse.
Pristine_Condition
Member
Will be interesting to see who has the more accurate assumptions in the end.
If you turn off your cookies, you'll be able to read the thread where we discuss it.
Stripper13
Member
Will be interesting to see who has the more accurate assumptions in the end.
Following Pachter and these banned other site it seems that Pachters accurateness in predictions is worse.
Proof? Sounds like absolute rubbish to me - particularly given that the banned site has an awful history of retroactively changing sales figures.
BUT HE HAD A METROID PIN!! Then he said "We have nothing to announce"
Aquamarine
Member
Do you know what's worse than changing their numbers every single week?
They specifically state "Weekly sales charts at retail." They don't state "Weekly predictions." They don't state "Our assumptions for weekly sales." No...they intentionally deceive people.
I've looked at their raw data sources for USA weekly sales. It consists ONLY of the following:
1) User polling
2) Leaderboards, achievements and trophies
3) Website awareness
4) A tiny amount of channel checks (sales from a couple of stores)
5) Historical data (sometimes they steal from NPD and "massage" the figures a bit / use NPD figures to generate numbers)
6) Sales PR
...That's it. They randomly make up numbers from bullshit, anecdotal sources and call them "retail sales figures." They steal from other trackers. They change their numbers every single week. They make a mockery out of respected sales trackers like GfK and NPD.
Hell, the president of NPD Group has publicly disowned them for being a bunch of nonsense. It's really frustrating when people don't realize their mass deception and think it's appropriate to weasel them into the conversation.
Pachter makes ONE prediction every month. Pachter is honest and doesn't try to deceive people. Pachter doesn't steal his predictions from other sources. Really, it is NOT appropriate to bring up that stupid banned site anywhere on GAF. It's banned FOR A REASON.
Nope. I can confirm this. Been seeing this ad couple of times in Finland television.
Picture is about WiiU but speaker says Wii. Sadly I cant find the ad (althought it Finnish but you can still hear the word "Wii").
It'd be a better marketing phrase than Nintendo has managed to do.
That was pathetic of him. He's in no position whatsoever to be teasing. The console is failing and Nintendo has strung it's customers along for a year with little to show and they still think they have the status to be able to tease us. Arrogance to the nth degree and a little sad to see them so desperately maintaining their 'We are so great' persona.
I will be so sad when a Metroid is released two years from now to like, fucking zero sales.
Wake me up when Nintendo conceives of a sandbox game with online enabled functions where other people can change your gameworld. My point was that Nintendo never goes outside of its comfort zone so they are continuously refining game concepts that originated in the the 90ies or earlier. It's great that there's a company that makes a super polished game like Super Mario World 3D when other companies don't think there's a market for platformers, but it's not innovative.
Could be for 3ds. Chin up at least that would be something.
MarkMclovin
Member
Adverts like this isn't helping and is just confusing people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTvo7XJV600
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTvo7XJV600
Katana_Strikes
Member
I also thought it was rather telling when Geoff/Joel were grilling Reggie on the VGX on Mario/WiiU sales. He was hardly enthusiastic or sounded promising. Reggie doing his usually skirting around the "issue".
ZSaberLink
Media Create Maven
You've got to realize that sometimes that one company isn't meant to make every type of game on the planet. It's likely that no one really has the expertise to make a good FPS in their Japanese studios, or even an online open-world sandbox game, and thus they haven't done it so far.
Most companies are really focused in what they make, and these make like 3-4 different types of games. That's typically where having third party support helps. Since Nintendo is fairly terrible at garnering third party support, a primarily Japanese company is supposed to suddenly be able to make games for a Western audience. You've seen how well that worked with Capcom... Anyways, hopefully they do build up their Western studios more in the future.
That is perhaps what interests me the most about all this.
Sony was humbled by what happened to the PS3 and came back stronger from it. Nintendo seems so stuck in the "we do our own thing, please understand" mindset, that I'm not sure they're willing to learn and change.
BTW, I'm not trying to derail this into a "How can we save Nintendo" thread, because we have enough of those already.
Christopher
BDE (Big Dad Energy)
Even if they released a new console what do we hace to look forward to Mario and Zelda again? Great games but I think we're reaching franchise fatigue...
Do they even have the men to do that still?
Kabuki Quantum Lover
Member
There's a hole in my heart,
As deep as a well,
For that poor Wii U,
Who's stuck halfway to hell
As deep as a well,
For that poor Wii U,
Who's stuck halfway to hell
- Status