By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Gametrailers post Wii U launch reaction. Watch and Discuss!!

Squilliam on 10 December 2012

Outside of me none of my friends have even heard of the Wii U.



Tease.

Around the Network
happydolphin on 10 December 2012

S.T.A.G.E., I learnt this one lately, but despite so many years of reading up on vg stuff, there is no such thing as 2nd party. Everything is either 1st party or 3rd party.

 

From Wikipedia:

Second-party developer

A company closely tied to a console manufacturer (or a publisher) is known as a second-party developer. Confusingly, the publishers themselves are sometimes referred to as third-party developers in their relationships to the console manufacturers (Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo). This distinction of first-, second- and third-party developers does not generally apply to PC-game development. The term "second-party" developer is colloquially used in the sense of "subsidiary", referring to a non-owned third-party developer specializing in development for a particular platform. Some studios may have exclusive publishing agreements (or other business relationships) with a manufacturer, while maintaining independence. Examples are Insomniac Games (which developed games solely for Sony's PlayStation platforms as an independent studio) and Game Freak, (which primarily develops the Nintendo-exclusive Pokémon game series). Studios like Insomniac and Game Freak are rare in the video-game industry; without support from the platform owner, it is financially risky to be developing solely for a particular platform. Other studios known as "second-party" may be wholly owned and funded by their parent company.

Monolith are 1st party.



megaman79 on 10 December 2012

Why aren't they talking about Bayonetta 2?

Or Sony going bankrupt?

Oh thats right, advertising.



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

DanneSandin on 10 December 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
animegaming said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
bazmeistergen said:
Xenoblade - another new IP... Kinda.


Nope.


wait i thought it was but what about the last story didn't nintendo did fund it and published it in japan 


Second party, its no different than Lost Odyssey for Microsoft or Gears of War. I doubt it sold well anyway.

Xenoblade is as much 1st party as Uncharted is actually, since Nintendo owns Monolith. The Last Story on the other hand is 2nd party game. Like Bayo2 will be.

@OP: They had some valid points to bring up. But what really caught my ears was Shane saying that he's always surprised by what Nintendo brings. It seems as if they're pretty surprised it's a good and fun system! "I feel like I underestimated the power of something so simple" - Shane. I have the feeling like this is what the industry as a whole always does with Nintendo. We, as gamers, see the potential, but the "experts" don't...


Uncharted was made by Sonys request to Naughty Dog. InFamous was also made by Sonys request to Sucker Punch, but at the time they were just a second party, once the title sold they purchased them thus ensuring their entrance into the family. Nintendos ownership of Xenoblade is yes first party, but the creation of said franchise had nothing to do with them, but rather Namco. Their first party ownership is more akin to Microsoft with Rare, where Nintendo let go of the shares and Microsoft picked up the pieces. None of their titles were created under Microsofts watchful eye and neither were Nintendos. Most of Sonys were since the beginning. As for the second party part, thats my mistake. I mixed it up with the Last Story which was second party like Lost Odyssey or Gears.

As per your other point, Shane has a point though. You see, Nintendo created a highly casual market with the Wii and that market will either grow with them or move onto other casual gimmicks. The kids will move onto the COD's and GTA's (its alarming how many kids are playing these games). 

I have no insight in how Sony or Nintendo operates regarding their studios, so you're probably right.

I just don't get why Shane was surprised that Wii U is as good as it is... The casuals have moved on, but that doesn't mean that Wii U as a gaming system would be bad, that's just a weird way of thinking. I could see the appeal the moment I read those rumors back in spring 2011, and it says a lot that almost all "experts" were sceptical - until actually trying the system.


He wasnt surprised, he just sees the Wii's movement, tech, and media awareness as trouble for sunstaining its marketshare. Thank goodness for Garnett Lee, because he gives me a glimmer of hope for Nintendo no matter how bad I feel about their position right now. The Wii U is going to sell off of first party with core third party titles behind it. Nintendo knows this. The question is, how many of the Wii owners who just joined in with gaming will translate to the Wii U? I am predicting about 10-20% of them. The sales of this new gen is going to be smaller than last gen, since Nintendo wont have that full casual audience carrying it when you look at console sales in general (not excluding competition).

I think you better watch that vid again; Shane is clearly surprised that he actually enjoyed WIi U.



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

DélioPT on 10 December 2012

I liked it. Thought it was good seeing people "admit" the console being better than they thought and that people are really enjoying it.

In terms of 3rd part support, supposing Wii U is the only one who presents controller changes, yes, it will cost them more to port something to Wii U and making it unique. But at the same time, how much will cost them to develop and take advantage of the power of the consoles? Budgets are going to increase again and it`s safer to have one more platform to sell games to, to recoup costs.

About the new IPs, part, Adam did mention more mature IPs and to some extent he is right. Nintendo doesn´t have a Halo, Gears of War, Gran Turismo, Uncharted. It would only benefit Nintendo if they could somehow provide new experiences of the same caliber.



Around the Network
Voice0fReason on 10 December 2012

LOL you guys posted nothing that proves me wrong. a 6 year olds first console being Wii doesnt prove Nintendo created the casual market out of thin air. you have no proof all PS2 owners went PS3 360 and neither of you have explained how Rugrats,Blues Clues, Barbie, etc thrived on PS1 and PS2 if its entire user base was hardcore.

I get it kids. You have some bias against Nintendo and are most likely first gen gamers getting your information second hand.

Women didnt start gaming with Wii and just because you know a few who might have doesnt mean every woman on the planet started this gen.
I love how you guys are so bias you condier women to be casual simple because they are female.

Casuals have beena round since the arcade days. My 70 year old grand mother isnt a hardcore gamer but she was playing Space Invaders in the arade and local drug store.

Please post some actual facts to back up your claims of Nintendo creating 90 million gamers out of thin air.

Sales for PS1,PS2 games back up what I am saying. Nothing you guys posted is proof just opinion



HoloDust on 10 December 2012
Soundwave said:

I have two cousins who are girls and growing up they played maybe a grand total of 15 minutes of Super Nintendo and would never touch a N64/Playstation/etc. 

They have a Wii. It's the only video game console they've ever owned and probably could be the only one they ever buy. 

A close friend's 6-year-old daughter, they got her a Wii for the TV in her bedroom because it's easy for her to use Netflix For Kids on it and point/click. 

Virtually every woman I talk to has played Wii actually. That was Nintendo's biggest break through was getting all these female consumers who wouldn't even play Super Mario Kart (and once they got the system then it becomes "well OK ... I'll try Mario Kart" and away you go). 

I completely agree with this - if industry wants to expand, they really have to start thinking of how to get women en masse to play games (and I'm not talking about Hidden Object games here that more than proved the point) - in my opinion, next Blue Ocean might be AA/AAA games that cater mostly to that audience.



S.T.A.G.E. on 10 December 2012
happydolphin said:

S.T.A.G.E., I learnt this one lately, but despite so many years of reading up on vg stuff, there is no such thing as 2nd party. Everything is either 1st party or 3rd party.

 

From Wikipedia:

Second-party developer

 

A company closely tied to a console manufacturer (or a publisher) is known as a second-party developer. Confusingly, the publishers themselves are sometimes referred to as third-party developers in their relationships to the console manufacturers (Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo). This distinction of first-, second- and third-party developers does not generally apply to PC-game development. The term "second-party" developer is colloquially used in the sense of "subsidiary", referring to a non-owned third-party developer specializing in development for a particular platform. Some studios may have exclusive publishing agreements (or other business relationships) with a manufacturer, while maintaining independence. Examples are Insomniac Games (which developed games solely for Sony's PlayStation platforms as an independent studio) and Game Freak, (which primarily develops the Nintendo-exclusive Pokémon game series). Studios like Insomniac and Game Freak are rare in the video-game industry; without support from the platform owner, it is financially risky to be developing solely for a particular platform. Other studios known as "second-party" may be wholly owned and funded by their parent company.

 

Monolith are 1st party.

I know monolith is Nintendo first party, however, I grew up playing Xenosaga on the PS2. Its no different to me as Microsofts first party of Rare which was all on Nintendo.



S.T.A.G.E. on 10 December 2012
megaman79 said:
Why aren't they talking about Bayonetta 2?

Or Sony going bankrupt?

Oh thats right, advertising.


Thats what you want, but they always do reviews. When the new consoles come out next year, you'll see.



S.T.A.G.E. on 10 December 2012
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
animegaming said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
bazmeistergen said:
Xenoblade - another new IP... Kinda.


Nope.


wait i thought it was but what about the last story didn't nintendo did fund it and published it in japan 


Second party, its no different than Lost Odyssey for Microsoft or Gears of War. I doubt it sold well anyway.

Xenoblade is as much 1st party as Uncharted is actually, since Nintendo owns Monolith. The Last Story on the other hand is 2nd party game. Like Bayo2 will be.

@OP: They had some valid points to bring up. But what really caught my ears was Shane saying that he's always surprised by what Nintendo brings. It seems as if they're pretty surprised it's a good and fun system! "I feel like I underestimated the power of something so simple" - Shane. I have the feeling like this is what the industry as a whole always does with Nintendo. We, as gamers, see the potential, but the "experts" don't...


Uncharted was made by Sonys request to Naughty Dog. InFamous was also made by Sonys request to Sucker Punch, but at the time they were just a second party, once the title sold they purchased them thus ensuring their entrance into the family. Nintendos ownership of Xenoblade is yes first party, but the creation of said franchise had nothing to do with them, but rather Namco. Their first party ownership is more akin to Microsoft with Rare, where Nintendo let go of the shares and Microsoft picked up the pieces. None of their titles were created under Microsofts watchful eye and neither were Nintendos. Most of Sonys were since the beginning. As for the second party part, thats my mistake. I mixed it up with the Last Story which was second party like Lost Odyssey or Gears.

As per your other point, Shane has a point though. You see, Nintendo created a highly casual market with the Wii and that market will either grow with them or move onto other casual gimmicks. The kids will move onto the COD's and GTA's (its alarming how many kids are playing these games). 

I have no insight in how Sony or Nintendo operates regarding their studios, so you're probably right.

I just don't get why Shane was surprised that Wii U is as good as it is... The casuals have moved on, but that doesn't mean that Wii U as a gaming system would be bad, that's just a weird way of thinking. I could see the appeal the moment I read those rumors back in spring 2011, and it says a lot that almost all "experts" were sceptical - until actually trying the system.


He wasnt surprised, he just sees the Wii's movement, tech, and media awareness as trouble for sunstaining its marketshare. Thank goodness for Garnett Lee, because he gives me a glimmer of hope for Nintendo no matter how bad I feel about their position right now. The Wii U is going to sell off of first party with core third party titles behind it. Nintendo knows this. The question is, how many of the Wii owners who just joined in with gaming will translate to the Wii U? I am predicting about 10-20% of them. The sales of this new gen is going to be smaller than last gen, since Nintendo wont have that full casual audience carrying it when you look at console sales in general (not excluding competition).

I think you better watch that vid again; Shane is clearly surprised that he actually enjoyed WIi U.


I know that he enjoyed it, but it never changed his mind about the overall appeal or commercialism of it compared to the original Wii.