Quantcast
Wii U beaten by the Dreamcast - what now?

Forums - Sales Discussion - Wii U beaten by the Dreamcast - what now?

Asriel said:
ps4tw said:

Dreamcast sold quicker and yet was still seen as a failure. Begs the question why Nintendo are still flogging a dead horse. 


Because if they cut and run now, they can't recoup any of the losses they incurred in the last few years of 3DS/Wii U. If they keep Wii U on the market and act to maximise profitability rather than marketshare, they can rescue some kind of financial positive from what is otherwise a poor generation for them. Launching a new console will be expensive, as would going third party. Better to make what money they can before they have to sink even more money into a change of direction. 

What's better for Nintendo launching their next home console? 15 million Wii U owners who received a lot of quality Nintendo software, and who were happy that Nintendo continued supporting the system? Or 7 to 11 million (assuming they cut and run sometime in the next 12 months) unhappy consumers who spent several hundred pounds/dollars on a system Nintendo weren't willing to stick with?

What looks better to a consumer buying the next home console from Nintendo? Nintendo, the platform holder who couldn't make Wii U succeed so they dropped support within three years of launch (and who cut the 3DS price massively after launch)?Or, Nintendo the platform holder that continued to bring their biggest, best titles to Wii U despite a small userbase?

What's a better bet for publishers and consumers? A platform holder who stands by their hardware, or a platform holder who runs at the first signs of trouble? If publishers and consumers are going to invest in new Nintendo hardware, Nintendo's decision to stick by or drop Wii U prematurely will play a major part in how well their next system does, at least initially. There are a lot of other factors Nintendo will need to nail, but sticking by Wii U and grinding out profit is far more sensible than dropping the system prematurely.

Cutting and running will be a disaster for Nintendo. It's what Sega tried when they saw Genesis sales declining, quick-fix solutions to eroding marketshare rather than making long-term decisions based around the future profitability and health of their platform business. Nintendo won't be happy with Wii U's peformance, and Iwata did say at the beginning of this year that so far Wii U and Nintendo have failed. But they won't be panicking about marketshare the way Sega did. Change is a-coming, it just isn't going to come while Nintendo have a niche of Wii U owners they need to keep happy and stockholders who need to see profits posted.

Excellent post!



Around the Network
BraLoD said:
To be fair the Dreamcast was a good seller until the PS2 appeared.

I don't know why Nintendo don't just stop making consoles and make their games multiplat
It would reach so many more people and make so much more money for them.

They can't seem to understand how to manage a console, they should keep doing games but stop making consoles.

Wouldn't you, core Ninty fans, like it?

Why would we like it? If Nintendo went third party they wouldn't have any need to make games based on their 2nd and 3rd tier IPs. They would just make mario, zelda and pokemon games for profit. Look at sega, they don't bother with the majority of their IPs anymore.



A system with a built-in DVD drive would have been cost-prohibitive in November 1998, especially for a system with a $199 launch price tag (29000 yen in Japan).

Sony launched the PS2 with an expensive DVD drive in 2000, but the same strategy backfired with the Blu-ray drive in the PS3 in 2006.

The perception that the PS2 was going to be soooooo much better than the Dreamcast was a bigger part of what killed it. Sony touted Episode 1-level graphics and a bunch of other PR drivel. Had the Dreamcast launched head to head with the PS2 at $100 cheaper, history may have been different (Other factors like lack of EA support, Sega's financials, Sega's previous failures, etc. obviously also played a part.).



ps4tw said:
Materia-Blade said:

"Looking at the sales figures, the Dreamcast, a console widely seen as a failure and the downfall of Sega, sold better than the Wii U to date."

try saying that agan in another week or two. and wii u is actually profitable for it's company.


Does the per unit cost cover the development cost? Also what are the long term costs of losing market share?

 

Gammalad said:
What do they do now? The continue supporting and selling the Wii U until the generation is over.

Is there really any point? By flogging a dead horse they risk losing more and more market share to either Sony or MS. Getting users then to hop over to a different platform would be very difficult considering trophy collections, friend lists etc unless you offer a very compelling console e.g. cheaper more powerful PS4 vs Xbox One.

 

RolStoppable said:
Nintendo will still be alive and kicking. Despite an atrocious eighth gen showing, they've mostly eliminated Sony from the handheld space already.

Additionally, their financials are on the rise again, so it isn't even up for consideration to bow out of the home console space. And due to the unique characteristics of the video game business (new system means a reset of perception), the Wii U's failure doesn't dent Nintendo's image all that much.

True, but what future does the handheld space have? The 3DS has sold considerably less than the DS, and with mobile gaming developing at a fast pace, will it result in the same situation that the Wii U currently has - only the diehard core fans will purchas the console?

Rising financials hardly means bowing out of the console race isn't up for consideration - that's a very narrow view of the situation. They've lost a huge percentage of the market to Sony and Microsoft and it's debateable (see above reply) as to whether they can realistically get these gamers back. Nintendo's image is also struggling with a childish image - do you think this could be shaken? Personally I think they'd have to make a spin-off company to distance themselves away from the vivid and percieved as childish games that they are known for. 

cfin2987@gmail.com said:

The dream cast was the downfall of saga because each unit didn't sell at a profit. Therefore apples and oranges. But yeah, just another forum about Doooooooooooōøõòôöóm. This is getting so old. I'm starting to wonder if people are paid to write about the same topic over and over. 

If you don't think there's something here worth talking about a) don't reply and b) look at the facts and figures. The Wii U will have been made on the assuption it would return a certain amount of profit, not just profit. That simply demonstrates a woeful lack of understanding business models. 


Oh look! Another marketing expert and business analyst in Vgchartz! But this time, the user has a picture of a celebrity as a avatar.

 

Nintendo's not going anywhere, they're more likely to remain in the business for more time than the competition. That's business models, no Rockefeller strategies.



I'm second hand embarrassed by some of the posts in this thread. Nintendo should go third party? Nintendo should just drop support for the Wii U and rush out a new console?

...And why is that? What would they have to gain? A loss of consumer respect and profit is all. They need to recoup their losses, do what they can to make this gen as profitable as possible and keep releasing quality title after quality title. That's it. And when the 9th gen rolls around. knock it out of the park with a well-planned and designed system. Nintendo are not SEGA. They didn't rush multiple consoles into the market, all within the same time period. That was SEGA. They didn't drop support of each system, further alienating their fanbase. That was SEGA. And perhaps most importantly, they didn't sell each console at a loss, tanking their financials. THAT was SEGA. So everyone, please research the facts before you spew such baseless claims.



Official Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE Thread

                                      

Around the Network
ps4tw said:

Looking at the sales figures, the Dreamcast, a console widely seen as a failure and the downfall of Sega, sold better than the Wii U to date. As Nintendo has the cash assest to survive a failed console, where will they go from here? It seems that they do not want to adapt to the demands of the modern gamer, and their core user base is smaller than ever. This being said, will this force Nintendo's hand out of the console business just as the Dreamcast did to Sega? How can Nintendo repair the publicity damage the Wii U has done to them in the eyes of gamers? 

The tittle is so much wrong!!! How OP able to tell Wii U life time sales and compare with Sega Dreamcast which already dead (not selling).

Anyway there are only two categories on wining in general : Market share and profit, Wii U has a smaller portion of  market share but they have a good profit in return, and for 3DS, it  dominating in core portable gaming market and profiting. So Nintendo is actually in far better position compare to SEGA.

Other thing such as license, Amiboo, character license and games sales also make a lot of profit for Nintendo, and their current financial statement is far better then SONY and bigger then SEGA.

So Nintendo will still able to produce next gen console in the future along with their handled and still able to support their console and handle for a very, very,very long time even if they would failed in the future.

So OP it's to soon for you to write the tittle.



ITT people don't remember what really killed the Dreamcast.

The Dreamcast was and is a great machine. It fell victim to poor timing and piracy. Sony filled every publication they could with utter horsesh*t in regards to how much more powerful the PS2 was. They outright lied about its capabilities by about a hundredfold. If the dreamcast had come out at around the same time, Sony would have looked fucking stupid because their boasting would have turned on them when pissed off consumers could turn to the Dreamcast.

Then there was the fact that everyone with a CD burner had access to literally every single Dreamcast game ever made. The piracy truly killed it.

At the time of its release the Dreamcast was revolutionary and sold like crazy, so of course it did better than the much maligned Wii U in the same time frame.



Skullwaker said:
I'm second hand embarrassed by some of the posts in this thread. Nintendo should go third party? Nintendo should just drop support for the Wii U and rush out a new console?

...And why is that? What would they have to gain? A loss of consumer respect and profit is all. They need to recoup their losses, do what they can to make this gen as profitable as possible and keep releasing quality title after quality title. That's it.


How  would you feel if someone said the same thing about your post? Obviously everyone thinks they're right because they're using facts. But other people can use different facts to make a completely different point.

Example: What did MS gain from completely abandoning xbox after it underperormed and then rushing to release xb360? 

1. They turned things around. Won US, Uk and so many other countries. 'No one' saw them beating Sony like they did (for almost an entire generation).

2. They made huge profits with live-gold. 

Did it hurt their brand? Would it have been more profitable or a good decision overall to keep supporting xbox?

Look, I'm not saying that Ninty should drop the WiiU, but attacking others for their opinions doesn't seem the best way to have a discussion. 



Experimental42 said:
ITT people don't remember what really killed the Dreamcast.

The Dreamcast was and is a great machine. It fell victim to poor timing and piracy. Sony filled every publication they could with utter horsesh*t in regards to how much more powerful the PS2 was. They outright lied about its capabilities by about a hundredfold. If the dreamcast had come out at around the same time, Sony would have looked fucking stupid because their boasting would have turned on them when pissed off consumers could turn to the Dreamcast.

Then there was the fact that everyone with a CD burner had access to literally every single Dreamcast game ever made. The piracy truly killed it.

At the time of its release the Dreamcast was revolutionary and sold like crazy, so of course it did better than the much maligned Wii U in the same time frame.

Well actually i own Dreamcast, you are right with one of the  best console on market when it was launced, but OP is comparing Wii U sales and Dreamcast so thats not the answer  and didn't bring something new in the discussion. and Wii u in term of sales can't compared like that. If you want to discuss purely on games that will be a subject matter.



hmmmm....how did I answer this the last thirty times this was made for the Wii U or Vita?

Wii U is about to pass the Dreamcast in sales right?



    The NINTENDO PACT 2015[2016  Vgchartz Wii U Achievement League! - Sign up now!                      My T.E.C.H'aracter