Nintendo understands what made the Wii successful, but those conditions can't be replicated in 2014.

It's like asking an artist who has a hit record to constantly make new hit records by simply following the same formula. It doesn't work that way for everyone, pop culture crazes like the Wii are a product of being the right thing at the right time. They are partly a product of the moment, just like Guitar Hero was the hottest brand in gaming for a couple of years. 

The Wii was great for what it was but its time has come and gone. In some way the Wii U flopping so hard so quickly may be a blessing to Nintendo because it liberates them from having to keep following that dated legacy. Their next hardware can have its own identity and ideas and doesn't have to beholden to certain "Wii formulas" (ie: the lead game must be a mini-game casual collection).

Nintendo is historically a company that clings too much to the past and embraces the future too slowly. 

Nintendo's biggest mistake on the Wii U was that they listened to the so called "hardcore fans", i hope they have learned the lesson and never do that again.

I think they understood. It's just that there were forces beyond their control, or at least sacrifices they had to make.

For example, I suspect that the 3DS absorbed a lot of development resources that could have gone to the Wii U. Whereas the DS had reached running pace by the release of the Wii, the 3DS was still having problems late into 2012. Hence, more development resources for 3DS games.

Kid Icarus: Uprising, much as I love it, is the reason why Super Smash Bros 4 was not a Wii U launch title. Paper Mario: Sticker Star could have been an early Wii U title, but the 3DS was short on RPG's in its early life, so it became the first handheld entry in the series. And of course, NSMB2 required extra work from the same studio that made Pikmin 3, likely causing the game to be delayed by months. Fire Emblem: Awakening could easily have been a console game, like Radiant Dawn before it.

Imagine a scenario where Nintendo said "Screw the 3DS, we'll let it survive off of Animal Crossing, 3rd parties, and 2011 titles this year." Their launch lineup would have likely included a 2D Mario, NintendoLand, and Super Smash Bros 4, which could also have come out on the 3DS! Fire Emblem: Awakening would come out early in the system's life, probably in Q1 2013 in Japan at least, giving the system a notable RPG quickly. LEGO City Undercover would come in at the end of the financial year, in march. As Spring and Summer came, Pikmin 3, Game & Wario, The Wonderful 101, and Paper Mario: Sticker Star would come out every so often. And finally, during Q4, we'd still have Super Mario 3D World, Wind Waker HD, Wii Party U, and Wii Fit U.

That's over a dozen games by the end of 2013!

Why was 2013 different than 2007? Because by 2007, the DS already had all of its big sellers: Nintendogs, Animal Crossing, and Mario Kart came out in 2005 and Brain Age, New Super Mario Bros, and Pokemon G4 came out in 2006, at least in some parts of the world. In the beginning of 2013, the 3DS was in a worse situation: 3D Mario had become a bigger deal for the 3DS than the DS, but Brain Age and Nintendogs had declined drastically, and Pokemon simply wasn't out yet. So Nintendo had to split their resources, something they're not very good at.

In short, if the Wii U had to be released in 2012, either it or the 3DS had to pay the price of coexistence.



My personal opinion: Nintendo should have released the Wii U fairly much like it is, but at least a few months later, maybe even in Q4 2013. Nintendo would simply make a couple more games for the Wii (Pikmin 3 could have been their big game for Holiday 2012, NintendoLand and Game & Wario resources could be used in other ways, etc.) Meanwhile, when Holiday 2013 came around, the Wii U would launch at $300 bundled with one of several killer apps, like a 3D Mario, Wind Waker HD, Wii Party U, and Wii Fit U. The Wii U would lack the post-launch blues of real life, with Donkey Kong and Mario Kart coming along soon afterwards.

Yes, hardcore gamers asked for a last gen chipset, no HDD, low electricity consumption over console horsepower, and a tablet controller?

Look at Nintendo's Wii U software offerings

Bridge/Casual-Core Games: New Super Mario Bros. U, Mario 3D World (2)

Casual Games: Nintendo Land, Game & Wario, Wii Sports Club, Wii Party U, Wii Fit U, Sing Party, Mario & Sonic Sochi Olympics (7)

Core Games: Ninja Gaiden 3 (port), Zelda: WW (port of a 10 year old game), Pikmin 3, Wonderful 101. (4)

Kids Centric Games: LEGO City Undercover (1)

Half of their game output is mini-game/party game collection and the two Mario games are also clearly aimed at the Wii casual audience with the focus on replicating the simpler Mario games and multiplayer action. 

There's virtually nothing specific for "hardcore" gamers. 

It's total BS to pin this on hardcore gamers especially when the multiplats are no different from the PS3/360 which every core gamer already owns. Nintendo Land, Wii Sports Club, Just Dance, Wii Fit U, Wii Party U, Mario & Sonic Olympics should be bringing in casual consumers. They're the ones not showing up for Nintendo. 

PS4 and XB1 sales show perfectly well that hardcore gamers are happy to upgrade to new consoles and even pay high prices provided the system is actually an upgrade over the PS3/360 in sizable ways. Nintendo is one who decided to follow the "Wii formula" of a underpowered console + controller gimmick + lots of mini-game-athons to sell everything. 

The only difference is this time they controller gimmick did not take off with consumers and they're now screwed. 

I seems I touched one of those "hardcore" sesitive strings. Anyway, next time they should try with a cheap entry and not with the ridiculous price of $350, cheap hardware and quality titles along with a good marketing to start off.

I'm just stating facts. Look at their library. Look at their hardware. It's made for casuals. It's only $50 more than the Wii right now, which with inflation taken into account is about the same price as the Wii was in 2006/2007.

All the Wii U illustrates is that the formula of a controller gimmick + moderately overclocked last gen hardware + heavy emphasis on mini-game collections is a boom-bust formula ... sometimes you win big with it, and sometimes you lose big with it. We are just seeing the ugly side of that formula this gen, that's all. 

It's like going to Vegas one night, making more money in a few hours than you would by working for a few weeks and saying "screw this, I'm just going to play in Vegas and make my living this way". Yeah it's great when it works, not so great when you lose though, because you don't have much to fall back on. 

Wii U needs more and bigger hardcore franchises like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed or Batman.

Mr. Soundwave explained everything.You can lock the thread and copy his explanation to all WiiU topics.It's so perfectly explained,I don't have to add a single word.Well done,sir.