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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Should Nintendo bring back the Wii-style marketing?

happydolphin on 19 June 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:

1. Tablets being seen as more practical by casuals is the primary reason why the casuals wont give it the time of day. Nintendo needs to make a practical tablet with the ability to add things. This is where Microsoft has the advantage.

2. Nintendo didnt start the tablet tend...therefore they are late to the part, just like Microsoft was late to the Zune party trying to tear into Apples Ipod marketshare and failing. 

3. The third party support for the Wii U is a joke...stop defending it. Even when the Wii was selling well third parties still couldnt take the hardware seriously outside of Ubisoft. The U has current gen support and very little of it, this is a change but Nintendo needs to do more as far as tech is concerned, but they wont initial profit to do it.

I know you're a fan of Nintendo, but they get things wrong just like everyone else. Accept this fact.

I definitely am a fan of Nintendo and I know that they get things wrong, but I've seen so many doubters over the years that I know when I see a problem in the logic.

1. This has nothing to do with why the U is not selling well. I've told you why and you just ignored all the points I brought up. Address them or leave:

 

  • Wii launched 100$ cheaper.
  • Included Wii Sports with every console (did not have 2 skus).
  • Wii did not compete against much (sorry 360 and PS3 early years), U competes against vibrant 7th gen.
  • Wii Sports instant-hit, non-gaming appeal. Nintendoland can't compete.
  • Smartphone/tablets argument same as ever, back in Game Boy color days.
2. You mentioned Android. Android didn't exist when Nintendo came up with the DS. The App Store was launched in 2008 while the Wii had channels back in 2006. They weren't late to the party.
3. I never said it wasn't a joke, and I wasn't defending it. I just don't think it's a good argument. When Nintendo prooved its 3DS, 3rd parties came to support it. That's how it is for Nintendo, so this argument is no good. They offer tech that is at the proper maturity and cost level for them, and strive to include novelties that can push the boundaries of gaming, in this case the touch screen in the padlet. If 3rd parties disagree its their prerogative.

 



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 19 June 2013
happydolphin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

1. Tablets being seen as more practical by casuals is the primary reason why the casuals wont give it the time of day. Nintendo needs to make a practical tablet with the ability to add things. This is where Microsoft has the advantage.

2. Nintendo didnt start the tablet tend...therefore they are late to the part, just like Microsoft was late to the Zune party trying to tear into Apples Ipod marketshare and failing. 

3. The third party support for the Wii U is a joke...stop defending it. Even when the Wii was selling well third parties still couldnt take the hardware seriously outside of Ubisoft. The U has current gen support and very little of it, this is a change but Nintendo needs to do more as far as tech is concerned, but they wont initial profit to do it.

I know you're a fan of Nintendo, but they get things wrong just like everyone else. Accept this fact.

I definitely am a fan of Nintendo and I know that they get things wrong, but I've seen so many doubters over the years that I know when I see a problem in the logic.

1. This has nothing to do with why the U is not selling well. I've told you why and you just ignored all the points I brought up. Address them or leave:

 

  • Wii launched 100$ cheaper.
  • Included Wii Sports with every console (did not have 2 skus).
  • Wii did not competed against much (sorry 360 and PS3 early years), U competes against vibrant 7th gen.
  • Wii Sports instant-hit, non-gaming appeal. Nintendoland can't compete.
  • Smartphone/tablets argument same as ever, back in Game Boy color days.
2. You mentioned Android. Android didn't exist when Nintendo came up with the DS. The App Store was launched in 2008 while the Wii had channels back in 2006. They weren't late to the party.
3. I never said it wasn't a joke, and I wasn't defending it. I just don't think it's a good argument. When Nintendo prooved its 3DS, 3rd parties came to support it. That's how it is for Nintendo, so this argument is no good. They offer tech that is at the proper maturity and cost level for them, and strive to include novelties that can push the boundaries of gaming, in this case the touch screen in the padlet. If 3rd parties disagree its their prerogative.

 


What in the hell kind of argument is this? That has nothing to do with the point plaguing the Wii U. The Wii's issues had nothing to do with androids, the only thing that ever slowed it down was the Kinect and move selling over 30 million peripheral devices off of Nintendos back.



happydolphin on 19 June 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
happydolphin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

1. Tablets being seen as more practical by casuals is the primary reason why the casuals wont give it the time of day. Nintendo needs to make a practical tablet with the ability to add things. This is where Microsoft has the advantage.

2. Nintendo didnt start the tablet tend...therefore they are late to the part, just like Microsoft was late to the Zune party trying to tear into Apples Ipod marketshare and failing. 

3. The third party support for the Wii U is a joke...stop defending it. Even when the Wii was selling well third parties still couldnt take the hardware seriously outside of Ubisoft. The U has current gen support and very little of it, this is a change but Nintendo needs to do more as far as tech is concerned, but they wont initial profit to do it.

I know you're a fan of Nintendo, but they get things wrong just like everyone else. Accept this fact.

I definitely am a fan of Nintendo and I know that they get things wrong, but I've seen so many doubters over the years that I know when I see a problem in the logic.

1. This has nothing to do with why the U is not selling well. I've told you why and you just ignored all the points I brought up. Address them or leave:

 

  • Wii launched 100$ cheaper.
  • Included Wii Sports with every console (did not have 2 skus).
  • Wii did not compete against much (sorry 360 and PS3 early years), U competes against vibrant 7th gen.
  • Wii Sports instant-hit, non-gaming appeal. Nintendoland can't compete.
  • Smartphone/tablets argument same as ever, back in Game Boy color days.
2. You mentioned Android. Android didn't exist when Nintendo came up with the DS. The App Store was launched in 2008 while the Wii had channels back in 2006. They weren't late to the party.
3. I never said it wasn't a joke, and I wasn't defending it. I just don't think it's a good argument. When Nintendo prooved its 3DS, 3rd parties came to support it. That's how it is for Nintendo, so this argument is no good. They offer tech that is at the proper maturity and cost level for them, and strive to include novelties that can push the boundaries of gaming, in this case the touch screen in the padlet. If 3rd parties disagree its their prerogative.

 


What in the hell kind of argument is this? That has nothing to do with the point plaguing the Wii U. The Wii's issues had nothing to do with androids, the only thing that ever slowed it down was the Kinect and move selling over 30 million peripheral devices off of Nintendos back.

Something tells me you didn't read it.



hatmoza on 19 June 2013
RolStoppable said:
The system is trash, so it sells like trash. Any commercials will be ineffective without a price cut and more games.

But yeah, it won't hurt to do something different than what they are doing now.


I agree. The only thing the Wii U needs right now is a price cut WHEN a decent library of games are available. Otherwise it'll be a waste of a price cut.



I am the black sheep     "of course I'm crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong."-Robert Anton Wilson

Jumpin on 21 June 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Jumpin said:
A gimmick is a characterization to attract attention but do not otherwise serve any real purpose. Nowadays when someone is talking about a gimmick, most of the time it has to do with a rapper's gimmick. For example, "Snoop Dogg" is a gimmick of Calvin Broadus, "Snoop Lion" is another one of his gimmicks. He uses these gimmicks purely to market his music, they serve no other purpose. When referring to consoles the new Wii colour introductions would be gimmicks, PS3 Slim would be a gimmick, etc...

Actual controls which alter or add to the interface making games like Wii Sports possible is not a gimmick, it's a legitimate feature, like the D-pad, like analog sticks, etc...

Snoop Dogg, is known as an Alias. Gimmicks don't last twenty plus years, its generally a short lived technological fad.

A rapper's character is also known as his gimmick. It doesn't matter how long it lasts.

As for my second point: Actual controls which alter or add to the interface making games like Wii Sports possible is not a gimmick, it's a legitimate feature, like the D-pad, like analog sticks, etc...

When referring to consoles the new Wii colour introductions would be gimmicks, PS3 Slim would be a gimmick, etc... 



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Around the Network
Soundwave on 21 June 2013

I think they should just hire Penelope Cruz and her sister and let them do all the marketing in the same style from now on.

Their celebrity commercials are really their best commercials (the Cruz sisters, the Robin/Zelda Williams ones, etc.), the generic "family playing Wii U" spots are just a awful early 90s-style marketing and it's done poorly too.

Enough of "little 8 year old Johnny" playing Wii U with his parents/annoyed big sister.