JWeinCom said: Jay520 said: JWeinCom said: Jay520 said: The problem I see is Nintendo making the gamepad worthwhile. Firstly, I can't even imagine any person using the Gamepad for any substantial period of time due to the sheer size of the thing. And secondly, I can't imagine any impressive gameplay advantages that the Gamepad can provide, aside from menus or something like that. For those reasons I think the Gamepad is a huge mistake on Nintendo's front. One things for sure, the Gamepad will never be as appealing as motion controls were. So I think a more powerful Wii with a stronger emphasis on motion controls would be a much better strategy. Gamepad weight 1.1 pounds.  Newest iPad weight 1.44.  iPad seems to be doing alright, and the Gamepad is more ergonomically designed.  By comparison, a 360 controller weighs 10.6 ounces.  Just over 5/6 of a lb.  Personally, the weight of the Wii U gamepad has not prevented me in any way shape or form from long play sessions.  Does it bother you from personal experience or is this just a random assumption? That's too bad that you can't imagine anything useful being done with the Gamepad, but we've already seen some creative stuff.  Check out some stuff from Game and Wario, Nintendo Land, and even some of the brief snippets of Wii U Party.  Check out the multiplayer mode of zombi u.  Off TV play is a lifesaver when grinding for speed points in most wanted. And the radar on Zombi U is essential to the experience.  A lot of people didn't see the potential in the DS or the Wii either.  I'd say by the end of the year we'll have a better idea of what the Gamepad is worth one way or another. You're a Sony fan, right?  If the Wii U was as powerful as the PS4, would you buy it?  Even if you did buy it, which system would you buy your multiplatforms for?  Nintendo is not going to win fans by going the same route as their competitors.   How does a more powerful console really make financial sense for Nintendo? In regards to motion controls, I think they've done about what could be done.  I'd love a nunchuck that had better motion capabilities, but other than that, all Nintendo could really do is go the Kinect route, which I don't think would work out for them. Not talking about weight. I'm talking about size. I'm sure I wouldn't mind it. But for the mainstream, I can't imagine the tablet being well received by a large pool of casuals. Unlike the Wiimote, it doesnt appear as nearly as accessible. Perhaps it will take off, but I doubt it. I can't imagine families across the world in their living rooms using tablets to play games on TV. You've listed some interesting uses that can enhance gameplay. But they just enhance the experience already presented. I don't see anything that creates new experiences. I don't see anything that has the appeal to bring in large pools of gamers. All those things seem great for people who already own those games, but nothing that has the ability to attract new gamers. When I said more powerful, I didn't mean more powerful than the Wii U. I meant a console essentially the same as the Wii, but more powerful. The mainstream is pretty used to using relatively large tablets.  People use tablets for lost of things, including gameplay, so I'm not sure why you find this particular use unappealing. As for new expereinces, I would say that Mario Chase is certainly a new experience that is really worthwhile.  Legend of Zelda battle quest as well.  Maybe not system selling experiences, but definitely experiences well worth playing through.  The multiplayer capabilities are especially cool.  This is just 4 months in.  Personally, I think Nintendo has some ideas in mind for the Gamepad which will surprise me as they did for the Wiimote and DS. Isn't the Wii U a more powerful Wii?  If you take away the tablet, the Wii U is just that.  Still could use the motion controls for it and everything.

Yes people are used to using large tablets when their focus is on the tablets themselves. But when people's focus will be on the television, the tablet could seem unnecessarily large. I can see a lot of people thinking why do I need a tablet when I'm looking at the television. But of course this depends on the experiences that the Gamepad provides. Sure, we don't know what Nintendo is planning and its possible that they could provide new e,experiences that the mainstream will love. But from what we know now, I see no reason to believe a tablet-television setup has the potential for any such experience.

Their strategy so far doesn't seem to ne matching the Wii's strategy. I'm particularly referring to a larger focus on motion controls. For example, instead of Nintendoland, Nintendo should have released a game like Wii Sports. Their primary concern should be accessibility imo, but the Wii U seems to have a larger emphasis on the hardcore.

JWeinCom said: UltimateUnknown said: I don't think the Gamepad is a problem, and I don't think the Wiimote was really the heart of the Wii's success. I don't think that the Wii achieved such success simply because people liked Motion Controls.  What made the Wii a success was the fact that it presented people with games that they could play.  It was a matter of accessibility which was certainly complemented by motion controls, but not dependent on them.  I think that Nintendo can create games that are accessible and attractive to so called casual gamers without motion controls, as they did with titles like Animal Crossing, New Super Mario Bros, or Mario Galaxy. As for why the Wii U isn't selling well, it's pretty much due to the library.  Take my sister for instance.  She had a Wii, but she didn't really like Mario Bros that much.  She loved Mario Kart however, and plays it really often with her roommates.  So, just because she's not going to rush out and buy a Wii U day one doesn't mean she's not going to get one when Mario Kart comes out, although that seems to be the bizarre assumption a lot of people round here are making.  Wii Fit U, Wii Party U, Mario Kart Wii U, and Mario Galaxy U should all be coming before this year ends.  If those games don't bring back a lot of Wii owners (and perhaps some new fans), THEN I'll start worrying about the Wii U

I back this 100%, which is why I said we will have to wait and see for the real results. I am personally still doubtful if the control scheme for these games will make them as consumer friendly as the Wiimote made them, but if Nintendo proves me wrong, then good on them.

Jay520 said: JWeinCom said: Jay520 said: JWeinCom said: Jay520 said: The problem I see is Nintendo making the gamepad worthwhile. Firstly, I can't even imagine any person using the Gamepad for any substantial period of time due to the sheer size of the thing. And secondly, I can't imagine any impressive gameplay advantages that the Gamepad can provide, aside from menus or something like that. For those reasons I think the Gamepad is a huge mistake on Nintendo's front. One things for sure, the Gamepad will never be as appealing as motion controls were. So I think a more powerful Wii with a stronger emphasis on motion controls would be a much better strategy. Gamepad weight 1.1 pounds.  Newest iPad weight 1.44.  iPad seems to be doing alright, and the Gamepad is more ergonomically designed.  By comparison, a 360 controller weighs 10.6 ounces.  Just over 5/6 of a lb.  Personally, the weight of the Wii U gamepad has not prevented me in any way shape or form from long play sessions.  Does it bother you from personal experience or is this just a random assumption? That's too bad that you can't imagine anything useful being done with the Gamepad, but we've already seen some creative stuff.  Check out some stuff from Game and Wario, Nintendo Land, and even some of the brief snippets of Wii U Party.  Check out the multiplayer mode of zombi u.  Off TV play is a lifesaver when grinding for speed points in most wanted. And the radar on Zombi U is essential to the experience.  A lot of people didn't see the potential in the DS or the Wii either.  I'd say by the end of the year we'll have a better idea of what the Gamepad is worth one way or another. You're a Sony fan, right?  If the Wii U was as powerful as the PS4, would you buy it?  Even if you did buy it, which system would you buy your multiplatforms for?  Nintendo is not going to win fans by going the same route as their competitors.   How does a more powerful console really make financial sense for Nintendo? In regards to motion controls, I think they've done about what could be done.  I'd love a nunchuck that had better motion capabilities, but other than that, all Nintendo could really do is go the Kinect route, which I don't think would work out for them. Not talking about weight. I'm talking about size. I'm sure I wouldn't mind it. But for the mainstream, I can't imagine the tablet being well received by a large pool of casuals. Unlike the Wiimote, it doesnt appear as nearly as accessible. Perhaps it will take off, but I doubt it. I can't imagine families across the world in their living rooms using tablets to play games on TV. You've listed some interesting uses that can enhance gameplay. But they just enhance the experience already presented. I don't see anything that creates new experiences. I don't see anything that has the appeal to bring in large pools of gamers. All those things seem great for people who already own those games, but nothing that has the ability to attract new gamers. When I said more powerful, I didn't mean more powerful than the Wii U. I meant a console essentially the same as the Wii, but more powerful. The mainstream is pretty used to using relatively large tablets.  People use tablets for lost of things, including gameplay, so I'm not sure why you find this particular use unappealing. As for new expereinces, I would say that Mario Chase is certainly a new experience that is really worthwhile.  Legend of Zelda battle quest as well.  Maybe not system selling experiences, but definitely experiences well worth playing through.  The multiplayer capabilities are especially cool.  This is just 4 months in.  Personally, I think Nintendo has some ideas in mind for the Gamepad which will surprise me as they did for the Wiimote and DS. Isn't the Wii U a more powerful Wii?  If you take away the tablet, the Wii U is just that.  Still could use the motion controls for it and everything.  Yes people are used to using large tablets when their focus is on the tablets themselves. But when people's focus will be on the television, the tablet could seem unnecessarily large. I can see a lot of people thinking why do I need a tablet when I'm looking at the television. But of course this depends on the experiences that the Gamepad provides. Sure, we don't know what Nintendo is planning and its possible that they could provide new e,experiences that the mainstream will love. But from what we know now, I see no reason to believe a tablet-television setup has the potential for any such experience. Their strategy so far doesn't seem to ne matching the Wii's strategy. I'm particularly referring to a larger focus on motion controls. For example, instead of Nintendoland, Nintendo should have released a game like Wii Sports. Their primary concern should be accessibility imo, but the Wii U seems to have a larger emphasis on the hardcore.

I don't think a large focus on motion controls would work.  Motion controls should still be an important part of the console, and I'm hoping Nintendo still makes Wii-mote games, but you need to provide something new.  I don't think a jump to HD would have been enough on its own.  Like I said, I think the tablet does have the potential to appeal to casual gamers and hopefully Nintendo will prove me right with games.

@Ultimate Unknown- Wii Fit should work with the balance board mostly, but there are some good things to be done with the gamepad.  For a lot of the exercises, I have to be in a position where I'm not facing the TV (Pushups for instnace) so it'll be useful for that.  Not having to do weigh ins on a TV screen is also good. 

The Wii Fit team didn't get enough credit for just how creative they were with the design on a lot of their activities.  Alot of the stuff they did (Rhythm Boxing, Rhythm Parade, driving range, circus juggling, bird eye bullseye, etc) made phenomenally creative use of the Wiimote/Balance board.  Hopefully they'll have some great ideas for the Gamepad.

For Mario Galaxy U I think it will control in a standard way, but multiplayer will be a big focus.  Nintendo's been kicking around the idea of a Mario and Luigi 3D platformer since the N64 days, and the Gamepad seems like it could make 3D co op platforming possible without being awkward.  Super Mario Bros Galaxy?

Wii Party we've only seen clips of, but the idea of a board game seems natural.  In most board games you constantly pass some item (spinner, dice, etc) between players, so it'll be a natural way to get players used to the idea of asssymetrical gameplay. 

With Zelda U I'm torn.  Part of me really would like another game in Skyward Sword style, but I also think its important for Nintendo to show off the gamepad.  For a game like that, I can't really imagine much beyond the standard inventory/map kind of thing.  Hopefully I'll be surprised.

JweinCom said "I don't think a large focus on motion controls would work. Motion controls should still be an important part of the console, and I'm hoping Nintendo still makes Wii-mote games, but you need to provide something new. I don't think a jump to HD would have been enough on its own. Like I said, I think the tablet does have the potential to appeal to casual gamers and hopefully Nintendo will prove me right with games."

I don't think so. Sure, there needs to be new experiences, but this usually depends on software. You don't necessarily need new controls to implement new experiences.

Do you think a Wii Sports-like launch title would have helped the Wii U sell more than it did?

i'd have preferred (and i'll be the "market would too) a "super wii". a wiimote that was more accurate and robust than the standard wiimote. that would have at least made sense to me. the wiiU gamepad is just so awkward imo.

Jay520 said: JweinCom said "I don't think a large focus on motion controls would work. Motion controls should still be an important part of the console, and I'm hoping Nintendo still makes Wii-mote games, but you need to provide something new. I don't think a jump to HD would have been enough on its own. Like I said, I think the tablet does have the potential to appeal to casual gamers and hopefully Nintendo will prove me right with games." I don't think so. Sure, there needs to be new experiences, but this usually depends on software. You don't necessarily need new controls to implement new experiences. Do you think a Wii Sports-like launch title would have helped the Wii U sell more than it did?

New controls expand on what you can do with software development.  There is still dons of new stuff that could be done with the Wii Remote, or an X-box controller, or an NES controller for that matter.  But, having something new always opens more opportunities.

I actually think Nintendoland is a really cool game, and I believe it could have sold more systems with a few adjustments.  As for a Wii Sports type game, I'm not exactly sure what you mean.  Something simpler that uses mainly the Wiimote?  Do you literally mean Wii Sports 2 (or 3 I guess)?  Probably would have sold better at launch, but I think it would sell worse in the long run.

The Gamepad makes a lot of sense with a lot of the Wii features.  For instance Miiverse (which I think will become way more important as time goes on) is something that works really well that wouldn't with a standard controller or motion controller.   I think a co-op 3d mario with gamepad will be more enticing than a more standard sequel.  I think having off screen play makes the console waymore living room friendly for parents.  I like the Gamepad, and I think it could be a system selling feature if it was marketed better.

JWeinCom said: Jay520 said: JweinCom said "I don't think a large focus on motion controls would work. Motion controls should still be an important part of the console, and I'm hoping Nintendo still makes Wii-mote games, but you need to provide something new. I don't think a jump to HD would have been enough on its own. Like I said, I think the tablet does have the potential to appeal to casual gamers and hopefully Nintendo will prove me right with games." I don't think so. Sure, there needs to be new experiences, but this usually depends on software. You don't necessarily need new controls to implement new experiences. Do you think a Wii Sports-like launch title would have helped the Wii U sell more than it did? New controls expand on what you can do with software development.  There is still dons of new stuff that could be done with the Wii Remote, or an X-box controller, or an NES controller for that matter.  But, having something new always opens more opportunities. I actually think Nintendoland is a really cool game, and I believe it could have sold more systems with a few adjustments.  As for a Wii Sports type game, I'm not exactly sure what you mean.  Something simpler that uses mainly the Wiimote?  Do you literally mean Wii Sports 2 (or 3 I guess)?  Probably would have sold better at launch, but I think it would sell worse in the long run. The Gamepad makes a lot of sense with a lot of the Wii features.  For instance Miiverse (which I think will become way more important as time goes on) is something that works really well that wouldn't with a standard controller or motion controller.   I think a co-op 3d mario with gamepad will be more enticing than a more standard sequel.  I think having off screen play makes the console waymore living room friendly for parents.  I like the Gamepad, and I think it could be a system selling feature if it was marketed better.

True about new controls. I was just responding to what appeared to be an implication that new controls were necessary new experiences

By Wii Sports like game. I mean something that heavily uses the Wii mote, yes. But hopefully instead of just introducing the concept of motion controls, it provided deeper gameplay and more accurate controls (I guess you could call it Wii Sports 3). Such a game would have done much better than Nintendoland or a Gamepad focused game imo, but I guess we'll never know.

I don't think the Gamepad's biggest problem is marketing. I think its getting a group of games focused around the device which provide experiences enticing to the mainstream. Seems like you agree with me here. We just disagree on whether such a game is possible. I guess we'll have to wait and see. Marketing should come secondary after first getting those games out there.

JWeinCom said: UltimateUnknown said: You are right. Nintendo needed to go the route of a new "novelty" with a not so powerful console, like the Wii, which has been a success, rather than beefing up the system to directly compete with the PS720, which has not been a big success for them with the GC and N64, which were both very powerful consoles but still got beat by competing consoles. The only caveat to this is that the Wii U's "novelty", which is the Gamepad, hasn't caught on to the Wii's consumer base (parents, grandmothers, etc) or some other untapped market like the Wiimote did many years ago, which is what propelled Nintendo to such amazing heights. People seem to think that the Nintendo enthusiasts who bought the Zelda/Mario/SSBB games were the ones who singlehandedly made Wii what it was, which is not the case. The Nintendo enthusiasts alone will bring Nintendo N64/GC level sales as proven before. It is the rather the combination of Nintendo enthusiasts AND the "casual" market that brought them the Wii level success, and this ratio is probably lopsided towards the casuals more than the enthusiasts. Now if we look at the Wii U, Nintendo rightfully tried to emulate what they did with the Wii, that is bring in another novel controller which will garner the attention of the wider fanbase once more. It was a high risk, high reward strategy, but that strategy so far seems to have failed. The "casuals" that came in last time don't seem to be picking up on the gamepad craze. So all Nintendo are left with now for the rest of this generation are the Nintendo enthusiasts who will buy the console and the Nintendo exclusives as they have been doing for years past. But we all know what happens when a Nintendo console is only supported by the Nintendo enthusiasts: N64/GC. Thus the Wii U as of now, given Nintendo releases all their exclusive goodness will be heading towards a N64/GC kind of future. This could only change if somehow Nintendo managed to bring back all those mothers/grandmothers who bought the Wii en-mass, or some other market we have not seen before, but you can judge for yourself for now whether that will be possible with the Gamepad, like it was made possible with the Wiimote. We will just have to wait and see. I don't think the Gamepad is a problem, and I don't think the Wiimote was really the heart of the Wii's success. I don't think that the Wii achieved such success simply because people liked Motion Controls.  What made the Wii a success was the fact that it presented people with games that they could play.  It was a matter of accessibility which was certainly complemented by motion controls, but not dependent on them.  I think that Nintendo can create games that are accessible and attractive to so called casual gamers without motion controls, as they did with titles like Animal Crossing, New Super Mario Bros, or Mario Galaxy. As for why the Wii U isn't selling well, it's pretty much due to the library.  Take my sister for instance.  She had a Wii, but she didn't really like Mario Bros that much.  She loved Mario Kart however, and plays it really often with her roommates.  So, just because she's not going to rush out and buy a Wii U day one doesn't mean she's not going to get one when Mario Kart comes out, although that seems to be the bizarre assumption a lot of people round here are making.  Wii Fit U, Wii Party U, Mario Kart Wii U, and Mario Galaxy U should all be coming before this year ends.  If those games don't bring back a lot of Wii owners (and perhaps some new fans), THEN I'll start worrying about the Wii U

I see your point here but respectfully disagree.  The Wiimote was designed to resemble a TV remote and Wii Sports to be played with only needing to use one or two buttons, if any.   Nintendo understood that the dual analog controller was a barrier to entry for casuals.  And now they've gone back to it only now with a tablet inserted.   The tablet does not make it seem simplier, it makes it seem every less attractive to casuals.   Where Wii's sold themselves, with WiiU Nintendo must overcome the stigma the gamepad creates.   So far they have failed to do so.   I've tested the games in stores and when they've had all games available to play at mall demos, and while I didn't get to try ZombiiU, NintendoLand, NSMBU, Rayman Legends, and some other 3rd party games failed to justify the gamepad's existence.  It didn't add anything to the games, and from a casual viewpoint were less intuitive to play than a Wii game - or Kinect game - or tablet game.

This is the fundimental problem.  Casuals don't have a choice of Wii or nothing like in 2006, they now have vast choice - Move, Kinect 2, tablets/smartphones, WiiU of which WiiU is currently the least appealing choice due to price, lack of games, cost of games and lack of features.  The off TV gameplay is not appealing to casuals who don't want to play with a dual analog set-up.  Sure you could play Angry Birds on TV/gamepad but you don't need a WiiU for that.   Sure the WiiU has a cool internet browser, but you don't need a WiiU for that - tablet's do it just as well.   Yes you can control your TV off your WiiU but this is becoming a feature of tablets/smartphones too.    For casuals, who don't want to use dual analog - which is all those Wii Sports / Wii Fit / Just Dance players out there - There is no benefit to owning a WiiU.  

Nintendo needs to come up with some really compelling, accessible gameplay that casuals can get into (motion + two screens) - that can't be easily duplicated on Kinect (2) + smartglass or Android devices  (PS4/Vita is too expensive to compete effectively).  

I concur that making the WiiU the same power as PS4/720 would not have helped them.  I agree a WiiHD would do little better than WiiU (unless they had some great new Wii____ ideas but then they could have just kept Wii going with them too.   They don't need the most powerful system (one more capable of playing 720/PS4 games would have been better) but they needed to extend that they did with Wii.   Take motion controls to a whole new level of immersion and fun.  A modified/enhanced Wiimote/Nunchuk with touchscreen(s) added would have been better and the touch screen could have even replaced some buttons or D-pad to make it seem even more natural to use.   

Basically they needed to provide compelling gameplay that other consoles - and now tablets - can't - that appeals to the mass market.  Much like Wii did.  From the WiiU games I've played, none of them do this.  ZombiiU is not appealing to the mass market and I submit, neither is NintendoLand or NSMBU if casuals (think women 30+) are forced to use the dual analog controller to play them.

The gamepad is a hinderence in it's appearance, convoluted controls (dual analog +++), size, and cost factor (adding $100 to the price of a WiiU).  I'm sure it does have some great benefits too but selling those non-obvious benefits over it's immediate non-appeal is a huge stumbling block and an absolute marketing nightmare.  Plus many of it's benefits are already possible with tablets/smartphones which people already own and play games on and will likely be possible on PS4/720 as well (with tablet apps or motion controls).

Unless they come up with some unforseeable NEW casual hit, the same old games Wii Fit U (again?), Wii Party U (again?) and Mario Kart U will not sell many systems.  Casuals want NEW experiences.   Mario Galaxy was not a hit with casuals - look at it's sales and especially SMG2's, it's primarily Nintendo Core.   NSMB IS a hit with casuals but the combination of dual analog controls/cost and that it's really not much different than NSMBWii all work against NSMBU having the success NSMBWii did.  Unless Nintendo really changes them up far more than we've seen thus far - I feel the same will go for the others mentioned here as well.  They are not different enough or enticing enough to overcome WiiU's immediate shortcomings. 

''Suppose Nintendo had beefed up their specs to the point of the X-Box 720 and PS4. How much do you suppose that would cost them? Let's say... 70 dollars. Would that be a fair estimate? First parties make about 7 dollars per third party game sold. So, Nintendo would have to sell 10 third party games to make up the added cost. The attach rate for a system is, on average, about 10. So... the odds of Nintendo winning out on this would be slim. Of course this is an oversimplification as other factors come into play, but financially a more powerful system would not likely work.''

That argument is completely flawed. It assumes that the price of the console will stay the same with more expensive specs, and that the more expensive parts would have to be earned back with software sales. Nintendo doesn't like to lose money on it's hardware so they would have added $70 on top of the price. That means that it doesn't impact profitebility of the system at all. The question is would people buy a $400 Nintendo console?

''The other option would be eliminating the tablet and using that money to beef up specs. If they did that, we'd have a Wii U that would be an X-Box 720/PS4 but with the added benefit of Nintendo first party software. THIS would be the equivalent of a Gamecube, and that strategy would work out poorly. If Nintendo aimed at the same market as Microsoft and Sony do, they'd lose. Unless Nintendo radically changed their development strategy and alienated their fanbase AND did a 180 in terms of marketing, they'd struggle very mightily to tear Call of Duty fans away from their console of choice.''

That's not true either, they could have sold it with a improved Wii mote and a decent ''hardcore'' controller instead of the tablet controller. The motion controls made the Wii sell like it did, and the tablet controller is a step backwards.

Jay520 said: JWeinCom said: Jay520 said: JweinCom said "I don't think a large focus on motion controls would work. Motion controls should still be an important part of the console, and I'm hoping Nintendo still makes Wii-mote games, but you need to provide something new. I don't think a jump to HD would have been enough on its own. Like I said, I think the tablet does have the potential to appeal to casual gamers and hopefully Nintendo will prove me right with games." I don't think so. Sure, there needs to be new experiences, but this usually depends on software. You don't necessarily need new controls to implement new experiences. Do you think a Wii Sports-like launch title would have helped the Wii U sell more than it did? New controls expand on what you can do with software development.  There is still dons of new stuff that could be done with the Wii Remote, or an X-box controller, or an NES controller for that matter.  But, having something new always opens more opportunities. I actually think Nintendoland is a really cool game, and I believe it could have sold more systems with a few adjustments.  As for a Wii Sports type game, I'm not exactly sure what you mean.  Something simpler that uses mainly the Wiimote?  Do you literally mean Wii Sports 2 (or 3 I guess)?  Probably would have sold better at launch, but I think it would sell worse in the long run. The Gamepad makes a lot of sense with a lot of the Wii features.  For instance Miiverse (which I think will become way more important as time goes on) is something that works really well that wouldn't with a standard controller or motion controller.   I think a co-op 3d mario with gamepad will be more enticing than a more standard sequel.  I think having off screen play makes the console waymore living room friendly for parents.  I like the Gamepad, and I think it could be a system selling feature if it was marketed better. True about new controls. I was just responding to what appeared to be an implication that new controls were necessary new experiences By Wii Sports like game. I mean something that heavily uses the Wii mote, yes. But hopefully instead of just introducing the concept of motion controls, it provided deeper gameplay and more accurate controls (I guess you could call it Wii Sports 3). Such a game would have done much better than Nintendoland or a Gamepad focused game imo, but I guess we'll never know. I don't think the Gamepad's biggest problem is marketing. I think its getting a group of games focused around the device which provide experiences enticing to the mainstream. Seems like you agree with me here. We just disagree on whether such a game is possible. I guess we'll have to wait and see. Marketing should come secondary after first getting those games out there.

I don't think a deeper or more accurate version of Wii Sports is really what people are after.  That's what Sony tried to market Sports Champions as, and it didn't work too well.  I think the reason behind Wii Sports' success was that it was really accessible and simple.  If Nintendo created a really in depth version of Wii baseball, it could be really fun for big baseball fans, but probably wouldn't be fun to Wii Sports fans.

When I say marketing, that includes games.  Games are a way of marketing features, or at least that's part of what I meant.  That being said, the traditional marketing is off as well.  In store demos now feature Rayman Legends, Sonic Racing, NBA 2K13, and NSMBU.  Pretty crappy way to show off the unique features if you ask me.