Why nobody is giving out numbers of digital sales? If we don't have these numbers, it's impossible to claim how successful a game is and if it's a well known IP we can't compare it anymore with games from the past of the same IP. Also, I think it is interesting to know how's the ratio between physical discs and digital downloads of the same game.
I think digital sales must be still low, otherwise, don't you think they would proudly announce the impressive numbers?
You can always guess by looking at retail sales and sales on the eshop.
Wii U SW numbers streem a little strange to me. Vgchartz has 11.06 sold and Nintendo has 19.71 shipped. With so little Wii U`s being shipped and even with reports of people not being able to find the big games like Splinter Cell, CoD and AC 4, do stores really have that many million games stored?
If Wii U was selling more consoles and had more game releases that would be ok, but as it is, i really don`t understand the discrepancy. But this really isn`t something i master, so, in the end it might reasonable.
Fight-the-Streets said: Why nobody is giving out numbers of digital sales? If we don't have these numbers, it's impossible to claim how successful a game is and if it's a well known IP we can't compare it anymore with games from the past of the same IP. Also, I think it is interesting to know how's the ratio between physical discs and digital downloads of the same game.
I think digital sales must be still low, otherwise, don't you think they would proudly announce the impressive numbers?
They are low compared to retail, but not insignificant.
Hello everybody. I'm back. Been preoccupied with a busy work week & soon after a nasty cold so that's why you haven't seen me around lately. 3 months in & this thread is still as hot as ever. Thanks to all who contributed to this topic—supporters AND naysayers. You all have made this thread legendary. And speaking of naysayers....
On October 27, 2013, Zod95 gave me a rebuttal that sent me into shock. When I heard this guy say that Nintendo made low-budget "Kindergarten games" in the "Kindergarten niche" on the "Kindergarten level"... When he referred to Mario, Kirby, Donkey Kong, Pokémon as these low-budget "Kindergarten games" in that "Kindergarten niche" on that "Kindergarten level"... ...My brain simply EXPLODED!
I was like hell to the no he did not say something as full of tomfoolery as that. I did my best Booker T impersonation "Tell me he did not say that. TELL ME he did NOT...SAY THAT!" Could not BELIEVE the stuff he was saying here. I couldn't even muster the will to type a response, it was so outrageous. Then my work week got busy & the nasty cold further delayed my reply. But I was not gonna let these remarks stand unchallenged.
Problem was do I make a standard reply to his October 27th comment or do I reply to that & the many MANY comments he made to Final-Fan? I decided to do both. But I will use this post strictly to answer his outrageousness from October 27th. I'll try to keep it as short & sweet as possible.
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
NO price drop makes sales like what Wii made in December 2009. Price drops may give a little boost but they can't make consoles sell like that all alone. It was New Super Mario Bros. Wii on TOP of the established promise of the Wii that made that 3.8 million in December of 2009.
It was not "just another game". That's like calling Grand Theft Auto: Vice City "just another game". That's the game that helped the PS2 make that 2.7 million that December. The best-selling game that December of 2002 (nearly 1.6 million).
It's absurd.
This is very simple: from 2006 to 2008 Wii had strong and constant sales and the price was always 250 euros ; in 2009 they dropped a bit ; in the end of 2009 the console had its 1st price cut (after 3 immaculate years) and then sales went up like never before. This is cause-and-effect, my friend. You tell me it was because of NSMB Wii. And I tell you: no game produces such an effect, NO ONE. Hardware price drops are the most effective way to raise hardware sales. But lets assume you're right. Then NSMB Wii would have produced an increase in sales like no other Wii game did. And in that sense it's strange that game is not the best selling Wii game. Another interesting fact is that games like Wii Sports and Wii Play came out in 2006...and look at their impact on Wii sales. Not even close. And games like Wii Fit, Wii Sports Resort and Mario Kart Wii, which sold dozens of millions each, were unable to make in 2008 the greatest raise Wii ever had. No, it was NSMB Wii alone that did it. Now laugh a bit more, because when you laugh you just show your ignorance.
Hardware price drops are NOT the most effective way to raise hardware sales. System-selling software is the most effective way to raise hardware sales. The strategy of combining a price drop with a system seller raise incentive to purchase that system selling software. Price drops alone only give a short term boost.
3DS got a MASSIVE price drop in July of 2011 & it gave it a short term boost but the system didn't REALLY start selling until Super Mario 3D Land came out in November of that year. Hardware Year-Over-Year Comparison for 3DS
Vita got a price drop in February 2013 in Japan & August 2013 in the rest of the world. How's that price drop working out for them? Hardware Year-Over-Year Comparison for Vita
Face facts, brother. New Super Mario Bros. Wii was the killer app that powered those 2009 & 2010 world records. The game's the thing. Wherein you'll catch the conscience of the King.
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
No such thing as "Hardcore Games" or "Casual Games" either. Let's get that straight right now.
Ok, lets get things straight: when I say "hardcore games" I'm refering to games that are really from the present generation and "casual" when they are retro (and almost any Wii game is retro, from Wii Sports to Mario Galaxy, from Wii Party to NSMB, from Mario Kart to Kirby, etc.). If you want, I can shift it to "real games" and "mini-games".
Real games. Mini-games. And you said these words with a straight face.
Real games...as opposed to all these invisible Imaginary games running around here. People too poor to afford a console take their imaginary game discs & load them into their imaginary game consoles pretending to play on their imaginary controllers. They have an imaginary Gamestop where they camp outside waiting on imaginary release dates to pick up their imaginary pre-orders. They even have imaginary voice chat to pwn imaginary n00bs on their imaginary online multiplayer.
EVERY game is a Real Game. And there's nothing mini about Mario Kart or New Super Mario Bros. Hell, from what I heard 2010's Medal of Honor was a mini-game with its too short single player mode. Enough of this madness.
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
PS2 was a less powerful console too. Didn't stop it from getting all the games in the 6th gen. Sega Genesis/Mega Drive was much weaker than the SNES but I remember Mortal Kombat & Street Fighter II coming out for both systems in the 4th gen.
Now you make me laugh. The difference between PS2 and Game Cube or between Mega Drive and SNES was nothing compared to the difference between Wii and PS3/X360. It's like comparing N64 with Dreamcast. It's not about small or big differences...it's about different generations (HUGE differences). To put a game like GTA IV on Wii would require to downgrade the graphics to the 5th generation or even worse (and that's something gamers wouldn't accept, it's not about Rockstart's good/bad will). Because the difference between Wii and PS3/X360 is not in graphics, it's in power. And if graphics consume power, so does any other element in gaming (physics, game rules, AI, nr of objects displayed, draw distance, sound, etc.). For the Wii to run every element GTA IV has (which was designed for the 7th generation) it would require to have at least non-gameplay elements (such as graphics) downgraded. And the same applies to Assassin's Creed, LA Noire, Bioshock, Fallout, Rage and many many others. But even if this little BIG detail didn't exist at all, Wii would still have the problem of "real games" to sell badly. So a lot of devs would avoid it anyway...
The Sega Mega Drive/Genesis had a palette of 512 colors. The Super Nintendo Entertainment System/Nintendo Super Famicom had a palette of 32,768 colors. SNES was MUCH more powerful than the Mega Drive/Genesis & the difference was comparable to Wii vs. the PS3 & 360.
Downgrade the graphics to the 5th generation? This is trolling. I'm being trolled. What part of 'Wii was a 7th generation console that was stronger than EACH of the 6th generation consoles' don't you understand? Didn't the naysayers call it 2 Gamecubes duct-taped together? Wasn't Gamecube the strongest or right next to the strongest of the 6th gen consoles? Double a powerful Gamecube is 5th gen???
In the 4th generation, cross-platform games on Genesis & SNES sometimes had to take drastically different builds due to the power differences between the consoles. Take Mortal Kombat for instance.
But Genesis put a good hurtin' on SNES despite its lack of power, didn't it? Wii to 360/PS3 is comparable to Genesis to SNES. Here's comparisons of NBA 2K12.
Obviously Wii's weaker but is it THAT much weaker? Weak as in 5th gen weak? The biggest thing is the resolution difference. And I know since 3rd party developers didn't consider Wii priority they didn't TRY their best to make Wii games look good. The cheap & dirty port. The 3rd party developers considered Wii inferior so they did inferior work. Wii was capable of MUCH more than most 3rd party developers did with it. What would have happened if they actually tried?
So Nintendo pretty much shut the Wii down to make sure this obstruction never happens again.
This is funny. How does Wii U prevent 3rd parties to avoid it like they did to Wii? As far as I know, Wii U has no next-gen multi-platform games (games that will be launched on PS4 and XOne but not on PS3 and X360). History repeats itself. Within 5 or 6 years, Nintendo will launch Wii U's successor and you will tell the very same thing...
The very first post in this thread tells you how (along with many others I have posted in here). Wii U will crowd out the PS4 & One. PS4 & One will hit a wall because of graphical diminishing returns. Without the graphical hook, they'll be forced to deliver gameplay but that's not Sony's & Microsoft's strongsuit. But the push for 'MOAR GRAFIXX' from PS4 & One will strain the 3rd parties who develop for those platforms when game sales don't offset game costs enough. To recoup returns in investments, they'll begin turning to the Wii U.
Selling 5 million in the 7th gen & selling the same 5 million in the 8th gen won't have the same weight when it took $100 million to develop it in the 7th gen & $200 million to develop it in the 8th gen. 5 million in games sold × $60 game price = $300 million in revenues. So you took home $200 million in the 7th gen & $100 million in the 8th gen. I see why they call it Crysis because Crysis 3 took $66 million to make & so far has only sold 1.48 million on all platforms COMBINED according to VGChartz.
Old school gaming? Microsoft & Sony are "old school gaming"? What in the Gargamel are you talkin' 'bout?
I'm talking about the games' natural evolution, my friend. Something that Nintendo was unable to do. That's why N64 and Game Cube were demolished by PS1 and PS2. Because Sony was capable of giving to Nintendo's old-school fans what they really wanted, while Nintendo continued to be focused on low-budget kindergarten games like Mario, Kirby, Donkey Kong, etc.
Anybody who looks at the history of Mario alone can NEVER say that Nintendo doesn't evolve. Donkey Kong to Super Mario Bros. to Super Mario World to Super Mario 64 to Super Mario Galaxy & you have the nerve to tell me they don't know how to evolve??? Nintendo changes & tweaks their franchises more than any other entity in this industry! They change HOW we play more than any other company in this business! And yet throughout all of these changes they STILL keep the core essence of what the franchise is about. Old school where it counts. Innovative where it counts.
N64 & Gamecube were "demolished" because of the 3rd party exodus. The old school gamemaster Nintendo knew that it would all return back to them in time & kept delivering their old school time-tested tenets. Not swayed by the fashions of the day they didn't make a Grand Theft Mario & maintained the integrity of what the Mario universe is all about. When everybody said browner, darker, grittier, Nintendo stayed true to themselves & gave you colorful, brighter, lighter. The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker has outlived its critics & now the game is reaching a whole new generation through Wii U.
DON'T YOU EVER EVER insult my intelligence by calling the greatest game series of all-time "low-budget Kindergarten games". I play Animal Crossing. The character you play with looks like a Raggedy Ann & Andy doll. The villagers you interact with look like stuffed animals. Do you know who's in my play group? 40 year olds. 50 year olds. 60 year olds. Retirees. Veterans. People with grandkids. MALE and FEMALE. Animal Crossing deals with adult subjects like mortgages, the stock market, homeowners associations, city beautification, & thank you letters. But you wanna call that a Kindergarten game, eh?
When I was a kid we played army men, we played cops & robbers. Today "adults" are playing army men (Call of Duty), today "adults" are playing cops & robbers (Grand Theft Auto). There's nothing wrong with that. I'm a child-at-heart always. But let's not get it twisted about what's an adult game & what's a kid game OK?
Oh yeah kids play Nintendo games no doubt. They play more on Nintendo systems than any other competitor. Adults play more on Nintendo systems than any other competitor. Elders play more on Nintendo systems than any other competitor. EVERYBODY plays more on Nintendo systems than any other competitor. And that's why they're the BOSS of the Biz. I had never been more proud to be a gamer than I was after seeing more elders enjoying videogames. A "low-budget Kindergarten game" like Wii Sports created situations like this & it showed once again that Nintendo was the living breathing heart & soul behind this videogame business. Here's your Kindergarten.
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
Yawn. A simple paint job, brother. The power of the 25th Anniversary of Super Mario Bros. was all it took. You talk about "several new bundles" & forget that the 360 TOTALLY OVERHAULED THEIR ENTIRE SYSTEMS. THEN added a Kinect! And Microsoft had been doing this 'shifting bundles' type of thing from doggone near the beginning.
Sometimes you just answer your own questions. It's true that the PS3 and X360 were frequently blundled with different games, accessories, etc. since the beginning of the generation. But with the Wii is was the first time. In 3 years, Wii was always bundled with Wii Sports, nothing more and nothing instead. In 2010, Wii was bundled with Wii Sports Resort and Wii Motion Plus for the same 200 euros, with Mario Kart Wii, with NSMB Wii, etc. This was a change, this was another desperate move to try to stop the HD turnaround. In 3 years they had maintained a console always bundled with the same game, always for the same price. In October 2009 they dropped the price in 50 euros. A few months later they bundled the console with 1 additional game and accessory for 220 euros, a few months later they dropped it to 200 euros, a few months later they've created alternatives to Wii Sports...but the sales didn't stop to decrease. They've realized they couldn't keep on offering more for less quarter after quarter (otherwise in...let's say 2013...Wii would be...well...like...for free!). So they've started to think about new ways to fool the consumer. Wii's family edition is the greatest example of that. A console that is bigger, has no retro-compatibility and costs the same 0.o
Nintendo sold the exact same package for almost 3 years straight. Sold it at the same price for almost 3 years straight. That's a strength not a weakness. There was no HD turnaround. That's why both of those 7th gen HD consoles are still hanging around 80 million 7 & 8 years into their lives. What it was was a Wii dropout & the HD consoles filling the void.
When they packed in that New Super Mario Bros. Wii & painted it red, it showed that Nintendo could conquer those HD consoles anytime they got ready. Once they removed focus from Wii, they mixed it up a little bit to keep it interesting for buyers. They had to since they were withdrawing focus on the console in true support. Wii Family Edition was a cost-cutting measure since R&D & market preparation for Wii U was underway. I still hate it but that was the purpose of that move. Wii Mini is totally unnecessary. They already had their cost-cut Wii in the Wii Family Edition but why not squeeze out a few more sales to keep their lifetime total just out of PS3's & 360's reach. Hey Wii Mini might be good for the nursing homes & the baby brother's/sister's rooms. Just pop & play—no online.
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
Nintendo quit on Wii after the 2010 holiday season. This is the period when they focused more on Wii U's development (Project Café). Like I said they let Wii run on autopilot picking up lazy sales by sheer past momentum.
If that's the way to think, I just have 1 thing to tell you: Nintendo is running on autopilot since 1998.
I think you got that a little confused. Nintendo Pilots the Auto. Nintendo Drives the Car. Nintendo Flies the Plane. Nintendo's in the Driver Seat. Nintendo's in Pilot's Chair. Nintendo will be your pilot for the evening. Expect some turbulence in the 8th gen before we make our smooth landing in Kyoto. Like in Star Fox, Nintendo will do a barrel roll, charge shot the attackers, then napalm them all with the Megaton bomb. Hey that pilot looks like Iwata!
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
Nintendo abruptly puts out the 3DS to answer Apple, Samsung, & the gang...The 3DS was announced in 2010 not 2009 (2009 would have been even worse!) & its announcement overshadowed the large-size revision of the DSi XL...Abrupt just like I said. And it was like this because DSi wasn't enough to stem the tide of Apple & the rising Androids from Google...They were making the argument that a dedicated handheld gaming device was STILL necessary even with the new PC platform of the smartphones & tablets. And they are succeeding in that argument as evidenced by the marvelous sales.
You are not making much sense. If the DSi XL was already an answer to the smartphones, why would Nintendo need 3DS to address to the very same issue? And you think 3DS sales are marveouls? They are worse than what the DS had...What kind of an argument is succeding when the argument's owner is losing?
No, Zod95. They ATTEMPTED to answer the smartphones with the DSi (DSi XL was just a revision of DSi) but it was not enough so they made the 3DS to hold the fort. It's holding up quite well, don't you think? The Nintendo DS came out on November 21, 2004 starting in America. At the end of its roughly 2 year period at December 31, 2006 (the end of Nintendo's 3rd Quarter), DS had sold 35.61 million worldwide according to Wikipedia (can't find VGChartz life-to-date by year figures right now). The Nintendo 3DS came out on February 26, 2011 starting in Japan. At the end of its roughly 2 year period at March 31, 2013 (the end of Nintendo's 4th Quarter & Fiscal Year), 3DS had sold 31.09 million worldwide according to Wikipedia. Keep in mind that the 3DS had a terrible go of things that first year so the fact that they are this close to the DS with launches aligned is really saying something. I believe 3DS is headed toward the 50 million mark by the end of the year.
They're winning the argument. That's why Vita is failing & why handheld consoles are not made obsolete by the smartphones/tablets.
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
Generations talk about competitive systems on the market not merely tech.
That's why the technologically superior Mattel Intellivision & the technologically inferior Atari 2600 were both considered part of the 2nd generation.
Wii was 7th gen by market competition AND tech. It was stronger than all of the past 6th gen systems. Wii U is 8th gen by market competition AND tech. It is stronger than all of the past 7th gen systems.
If you think that way, I have some questions for you:
1 - Are the Dreamcast (1998), PS2 (2000) and Game Cube (2001) from different generations? Because Dreamcast (1998-2001) competed more with PS1 (1995-2002) than with PS2 (2000-2009).
2 - Are the PS2 and PS3 from different generations? Because they were selling, having production and game launches at the same time during several years.
3 - Is the Zeebo (2009) from a different generation than X360 (2005)? Maybe...and that would mean Wii U (2012) is from the 9th generation...and maybe PS4 (2013) is from 10th generation...or have the consoles from the past (launched in different years) made us going already in the 20th generation?
4 - PS3 (2006/2007) is stronger than the past systems: X360 (2005) and Wii (2006). Is it from a different generation?
5 - How do you conciliate market competition and tech (what formula do you use)? How do you define market competition in the first place?
That's right, my friend, you're biased, inconsitent and incoherent.
In my opinion, generations are defined by tech. If I decide to create in my garage a console as powerful as the PS1, it doesn't make it 8th generation just because we are in 2013. If time was the relevant aspect, then generations would stop making sense. We could just talk about years (each one would be a generation). Tech is was comes to the screen, to the controller, to the columns...it's the outcome...the thing that make us look at a game and say"this is a 7th generation game...in which year was it launched?".
I would ask a question about recreational drug use but I'll leave that alone.
Dreamcast STARTED a new generation, Zod95. Saturn was the fighter of the PS1 & N64. Dreamcast introduced a new fight. PS2, Gamecube, & XBox answered the challenge. PS2 & PS3 are from different generations. PS3 answers the challenge of the XBox 360 who started a new fight. Zeebo was on the sidelines during the 7th gen fights. It is within the 7th gen era but not a major factor. 360 started the 7th on the home console side. PS3 & Wii answered 360's challenge. They are all 7th gen systems.
Quit being argumentative for argument's sake. Everybody knows this stuff. All consoles are by design DIFFERENT. They're not going to have the same tech within them. But all consoles of a generation have similarities. The concentration on networks & various media center influences all described each of the 3 competitors of the 7th gen. All 7th gen consoles had internal storage of varying degrees. Graphical tech is always similar within generations also but it is just one of many factors which separate generations. N64 was much stronger than PS1 or Saturn but all put emphasis on polygons & 3D space during that 5th gen era. All 5th gen consoles had memory cards of one sort or another.
The 7th gen had a fundamental philisophical difference within it which was shown in the industry divide. Wii won the argument with motion controls, smaller budgets, & expanding demographics going over existing controls, bigger budgets, & HD visuals. 360 & PS3 followed suit with Kinect, Move & their attempts to mimic the Wii (Kinect Sports, Sports Champions, & the rest). Nintendo winning that fight THEN decides that HD should be common & makes Wii U HD. They do it when it is RIGHT to do it not trying to go so far beyond the curve shredding their budgets like the other guys. And ironically the old champions of HD can't even get their new games running at 1080p at 60 frames per second while Wii U DOES!
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
You seem to be the type that buys into a lot of bullspit....As you can see from the naked eye, there's no discernable leap in graphics. Nintendo President Satoru Iwata already warned you about this in 2004 at E3. He said, "The time when horsepower alone made an important difference is over."
Your problem is that you're so focused on graphics...so focused (even more focused than the gamers who appreciate top-notch graphics)...that you miss the point. It's not about graphics...it's about power...it has ever been so. Specially in this 8th generation, where the major evolution was in RAM, not in processing power, you will not see a major leap in graphics. But you will see, for example, games that struggled to be launched on consoles (or that weren't launched on them at all, just on PC) to come to PS4 and XOne. I personally like the way things are evolving at the moment. RAM is much more important to be pushed up than processors. I was tired of seeing games / gaming experiences not coming to consoles because they didn't have enough RAM do run it. For me that's much more important than graphics. But guess what? Wii U will miss that...Nintendo will remain in the kindergarten level...Iwata will continue to make easy money while fooling Nintendo fans like you.
Power to do what? Most of this horsepower has always been to process graphics, the objects on the screen. Sloppy programming is why you had games struggle on consoles. How 360 & PS3 games have to have that giant hard drive just to install a game while Wii pretty much loaded right up with its EXTEMELY limited storage space. How if Wii U HAS to install an update the file size is much smaller & it can do it in the background while you play the game right from the disc. You don't need all the jazz if your code is tight. If you got quality programmers.
TAURUS on that ARIES. BULL on that RAM. Nintendo makes things efficient. They get the most out of their machine. No wasted movement. They don't put in 500 GB drives because they don't need it. Nintendo is the Professor of the Class. The Dean of the University. The President, Principal, & Chancellor. The Rector that'll correct ya. You can stuff that noise about the kindergarten level. That's why their games are timeless & can stand up throughout the decades. DECADES I said. Not just years. DECADES. Other companies would kill to have the power & impact Nintendo does. It is a core component of their resentment of Nintendo.
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
I remember them saying they couldn't run a Call of Duty game on the Wii at one time. Years later I see Modern Warfare 3 on the Wii not long after Black Ops was on there, not long after World at War was on there.
Yeah, I know...and NFS Shift skipped Wii while NFS Hot Pursuit (launched 1 year later) didn't. From what I've heard, the game is just not the same. Sure they can make a game called "GTA IV" and launch it on the Wii. The title is easy to "develop", the content isn't.
Wii wasn't a pocket calculator. If they wanted to put the content in they could have. They didn't treat the console like a legitimate console. They had a prejudice going in & it influenced how they developed games on it. Cartridge-bound N64 got a quality version of Resident Evil 2 right there on cartridge when everybody made excuses saying the disc-based game from the PS1 couldn't fit on a Nintendo cartridge. In the case of once-Gamecube exclusive Resident Evil 4, they fit the content on the PS2 just fine. Might not have looked as pretty but it was good enough. Same goes for games that could have been done properly on Wii. They made Mortal Kombat games fit the Genesis when the SNES version had more capabilities. Where there's a will, there's a way. They had no will so they didn't find a way.
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
The 3rd parties PROVED why Nintendo must set the terms for the health of the industry. XBox One's fiasco was the 3rd parties' doing.
You forget that PS4 didn't do anything of that and that Microsoft did a 180 on their measures to XOne because of PS4's position w, not Wii U's. You forget also that, taking into account the tech, Wii was the most expensive console of the last generation...and Wii U is on its way to make the same thing. You forget that Nintendo launched a Wii's version with lower specs for the same price and, later on, launched a version 30 euros cheaper but without online. Talking about online, you forget that Nintendo has always delivered the worse online service. As for the games, it has produced always low-budget games that sold dozens of millions...to the pockets of the shareholders, because the following titles continued to be low-budget and many IPs using always the same formula (like Super Mario Bros and Pokemon). Nintendo has remained on the kindergarten niche, once they saw it was easier to fool childreen than teenagers or adults. That's what you get from a company that you think it deserved to dominate the industry. I just don't want to imagine how mediocre the industry would become if that happened.
What? You haven't kept up with the news have you? What do you think that Day One Patch for the PS4 is all about? And just because they might not have done the DRM the same way Microsoft did (when game doesn't work in system when not online) doesn't mean it's not in there. Why would a system need a patch to access online multiplayer functions & Blu-ray playback? Weren't these things default right out of the box for the PS3? Why isn't Call of Duty: Ghosts running at 1080p right out of the box? Why does the system need a patch to play this game at this resolution instead of 720p without it? One of the biggest proponents of HD in the 7th generation & they actually have to do last-minute patches to get the choice HD resolution they have been going on & on about for years & years?? Something's fishy about all this but it'll all sort itself out in time. Looks like a lot of last-minute scrambles to me.
How was Wii the most expensive console of the 7th gen? How did Nintendo sell this at a profit from day one if it was so expensive? How did Sony Computer Entertainment lose nearly the equivalent of the profits they had made in the entire decade-plus of the PS1 & PS2's existence in the existence of the PS3? Wii was uniform at launch. It was one color, one configuration, one price. There was no lower specced model at launch & Wiis didn't REALLY change functionally until 2011's Wii Family Edition. Online services through Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection were available on day one. Why are you spreading all these falsehoods?
Nintendo doesn't deliver with online? Please. Nintendo has been doing online before any of these other companies GOT into the gaming biz. Have you ever heard of the Famicom Modem? The stuff the rest of us saw with Wii, the Japanese had already seen long ago from the Famicom. You could play online games, check the weather, get jokes, game tips, receive downloadable content, & even make live stock market trades. It was following in the spirit of the Atari 2600 GameLine. And I'm sure you heard of that Satellaview thing for the Super Famicom (just read man). Nintendo did Cloud before Cloud was cool.
But Dad has to be responsible & Nintendo saw the dark side of the emerging World Wide Web of the Internet so they wanted to find a way to moderate & monitor the bad behavior that can go on in an anonymous online world. That's why the Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection was designed the way it was. That was the purpose behind Friend Codes as restrictive as it was. Nintendo can easily do a wide open service like all the others but what price will they pay seeing as they're the elder statesman of this business? The Keeper of the Grounds. When Jack Thompson & the Hot Coffee Incident & Mortal Kombat's Fatalities scare the general public, it's responsible Nintendo who stands at the gateway keeping all the political barbarians from storming the castle. Without them, you might not HAVE a business right now because the government would have censored the bejesus out of it.
Case in point the 11 & 12 year old girls who got raped & child porned through their 3DS Swapnotes. Nintendo TRIED to open it up a little more & look what happens. And no it's not Nintendo's fault ESPECIALLY when they go to extreme measures to promote Parental Controls. Doesn't matter. The gaming business is still looked at with a sideways eye & it doesn't take much to get that concerned parent/politician outrage started up again. The gaming business as a whole will be blamed. Nintendo makes those moves to protect themselves & to protect the entire industry itself. The Groundskeeper. The Steward. Dad has to be responsible to keep this House going. The others don't have to care, they're here to stripmine the fields. Nintendo has to care because this is where they grow their food. Online will ALWAYS go through a filter with Nintendo because as HHH, Hunter Hearst Helmsley, says "It's good for business."
I have a smart comment to make about your "Kindergarten niche" quip but it's best I keep it to myself. Civility & all that.
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
They began work on Wii U in 2008 & you can look back & see them draw back a little from Wii in the middle of 2009. A good deal of their resources was getting tied up with Wii U more & more. By the time 2011 rolled around they were knee deep in Wii U pudding so almost all focus on the Wii was withdrawn to get this console out by 2012.
...so they coudn't have aborted Wii on 2009. As you say, things take their time. It would be stupid to think "hey, let's kill Wii in 2009 already and endure 5 years with decreasing results!". They simply did the best they could. It's funny how you see Nintendo's good moments like good moments and Nintendo's bad moments like warm ups to Nintendo's even greater moments. Where are they? I'm looking forward to see Wii U selling 240 million as you predict.
I said you could see them pulling back in 2009 not that they flat quit in 2009. 2011 is when they dropped out. Yeah & their "best they could" bested the best 360 & PS3 could BY FAR. The greatest days are always yet to come for Nintendo. They always lead into a greater destiny. Their past is great, their present is great, & their future will be greater. I'm glad you're looking forward to Wii U hitting that milestone. Prepare your popcorn now. Watch this 8th gen show.
Zod95 said:
johnlucas said:
100 million Wiis sold is a long-term failure??? Good God this guy!! That is ridiculous what he's saying. Does he hear what's coming out of his mouth? Or is he just mad-libbing?
Success and failure are determined by expectations. PSP, for example, was a failure. It aimed to win the generation and it lost pretty badly. Of course I could say "how can 80 million units sold represent a failure?". Or "I just wanted the products of my business to sell the 6 million PS Vita sold"...does it make it a success? I don't think so. At the beginning Wii aimed to revolutionize the market but soon Nintendo understood they could attempt to win the generation. Expectations have changed in few months and they remained for some years...but now we see they've lost the software battle and they can even lose the hardware battle too.
They remained for some years??? Anything to downplay that curbstomping Wii put on the competition in the 7th gen. They moved resources to the Wii U. It was a transfer of power. They depowered Wii earlier than I expected & passed this power onto Wii U. In Japan there are only 2 real competitors, Nintendo & Sony. Microsoft might as well be one of those Jakks Pacific Plug & Plays over there. When Wii dropped out, there was only one competitor left: Sony! They picked up everything Wii left on the table & this consolidated with PS3 in the international markets. That's how PS3 overtook the 360 worldwide. Like I said Wii's soft exit from the 7th gen fight gave the 360 & PS3 the chance to eat up Wii's leftovers. They had already revolutionized the market (they not just aimed but fired, & got a direct hit) & now it was time to end the standoff as they finish the Revolution up.
Oh don't turn this thread into a FUD session about PS4 again. With those Amazon ratings about 200 last I checked had issues. Assuming twenty percent of people with dead consoles posted a review (fair percent?) then that's only 1,000 dead consoles out of the bajillions amazon has shipped. PS4's DOA rate is really really low.
However since you guys seem to want to talk about playstation, let's try to relate it to wii u? Now that the PS4 UI is fully disclosed, do you think the Wii U's will hold people back from buying?
