Mr Khan said:
chocoloco said:
Mr Khan said:
1. Sony and Microsoft are only going as far as holiday 2013 before bringing their successors out. This is becoming more and more clear as time proceeds
2. Exclusives do win generations, and always have, but you need the right exclusives. The relationship between 3D Mario and 2D Mario, as well as some of the other missteps Nintendo took with their own games in the N64 and GC era shows simply that Nintendo lost their way, not that the rules of the game changed. The Wii U will stand or fall by presence or absence of Wii and NES-type titles.
3. Third parties need the Wii U just as much as Wii U needs third parties. Skyrocketing develoment costs mean they need somewhere to put their games. Whether they put them there well or shortchange the machine as they did with the GameCube is what remains to be seen. However, with the likelihood of third party parity increasing, then we have a playing field where the only competition is in exclusives, one in which (see point 2) Nintendo can utterly dominate if it so chooses.
|
A) I am clear that this seems probable they will come in 2013 and only furthers my point. The Wii U will be competing more closely with the 360 and PS3 than the PS4 nextbox because I see the Wii U being more like those consoles graphically. Once the PS4 and nextbox are out I presume they will be far superior in power to the Wii U as history has left me with no reason to think otherwise. At that point, I think the graphics whores and sony and MS fans will be ready to move on. The Wii U will be stuck competing with 4 consoles, PS3, 360, PS4, 720 and will not be that different to come anywhere close to dominating like they did early on this gen.
B) This is not the same rules. Times change. People are looking for devices that do many things. The Wii does the least of all the consoles during the current time period and was doing well before the big hitters you mention like 3D Mario and 2D Mario, not to mention Mario Kart came out. The Wii's initial seller was it's motion controls which were fairly unique and as I said easier to pick up. The early sales of the wii were driven by this freshness and uniqueness and not a strong 1st party lineup othee than wii sports. What I am saying is many things sold the wii, but early on it was not it's exclusives alone it was the controls. How can exclusives sell a product more than a minor amount if they have not come out or been announced?
C)Third parties will only need the Wii U if it sells very well and quickly. If this does not happen it will probably be abandoned. This once again will be made worse after the PS4 and nextbox arrive and many graphics whore eager developers are ready to spend more of their capital on the MS, Sony combo.
Nintendo can only win by being fres. And the tablet is nothing new and not fresh. Just look at what the Vita PS3 can do. The wii U is a redundancy in the industry until the Nextbox and PS4 arrive.
|
Why does a 1-year-gap further your point? There was a one-year gap between 360 and PS3, or between PS2 and Xbox/GameCube. If anything history suggests a 1-year gap is a good thing so long as you are able to support your platform (remember folks, Dreamcast was an anomaly. It was still doing well for itself when Sega pulled the plug because Sega was messed up as a company as a whole. Dreamcast would have outsold the GameCube and the Xbox if Sega had kept it going at least until 2004, because hell, with 2 years on the market, Dreamcast sold 50% of what the GC did in 5, and GC was only 2 million behind Xbox at the end of the day)
The Wii's initial seller was Wii Sports. Enabled by motion controls, sure, but we need to keep this fact foremost. Features NEVER significantly sell consoles. Games do. If the features enable console-sellers, good for them, but the games are at the root of all things.
The third party thing i'll grant can go either way, but only if we acknowledge the massive irrational conspiracy that exists against Nintendo platforms. If the publishers got their heads out of their asses, however, they know that porting costs are negligible (in terms of making a profit simply on the port, and adding revenue for the costs of the game as a whole), that the Wii U is deliberately easy to port to, and that (in all likelihood) Durango/Orbis are not going to be so insanely far ahead as to bring Wii U out of their league. If Durango/Orbis are that far ahead, even then third parties may still look to as many platforms as possible, because those games will be hella expensive to make.
And are we really suggesting that Vita/PS3 combo will have any impact on the Wii U? I don't even know how to begin deconstructing how wrong that is. It requires a 3,000-word answer or none.
|
