Which console launch was handled worse, PS3 or Wii U?

[curl-6]

TheJimbo1234 said:

curl-6 said:

TheJimbo1234 said:

 

Still no links to these experts getting it wrong, thus I'm just going to say you are wrong.

1. No. How can they relate a touchpad to gaming, not "how can they relate to a touchpad".

2.But a 3DS looks 3D, that is unique. What is special about the WiiU? It looks the same, plays the same. It just has a pad that does nothing special.

3.Only if the other rivals are not low in price too. If they are, then what will the WiiU do then?

4.And are of what quality? Let me guess, same thing, different day, 7th gen graphics?

5.Yes, but so will the rivals.

6.Difference =/= good or better. 

I can't be bothered digging them up, as they've all been buried by similar articles about Wii U, but if you knew anything about the industry at the time you'd know it was considered common knowledge up until just before launch. Nintendo had been diminishing in sales since the 80s and the so-called "experts" said the trend would continue. I suggest you not place so much stock in what these people say. Think for yourself. Michael Pachter is an "expert" and his inaccuracy is legend.

1. People plays games on their touch phones/pads.

2. The pad can do many things that are special. And it certainly does not look the same as the Wii, or play the same as any other console.

3. 8GB RAM and the kind of CPUs/GPUs alleged to be in PS4 and Nextbox don't come cheap. The Wii U will be able to undercut them.

4. The top-tier quality that Nintendo consistently proves itself capable of producing.

5. See 3.

6. To many people, it will be. Different means less direct competition and hence less lost sales.

So those articles don't exist and never had. Thought so.

And yes, these experts are so wrong; "In a recent interview on MSNBC’s “In-Game” feature, video game analyst Michael Pachter argues that a majority of players who flee World of Warcraft for Star Wars: The Old Republic will quickly find their way back to Azeroth “within a year.”"

Oh hold on, he was perfectly right!

Anywhos;

1. Yes, they play casual, simple games on the phones and tablets they already own...when they are on the bus or toilet. Why buy another one and play it at home?

2.So many things you can't even name one. It adds nothing to a game. That is the whole point the guy is making.

3.Actually they do come failry cheap compared to other electonic gadgets on the market, and they will be sold at a loss to begin with. Also the difference is very clear so you know what you are paying for.

4.Not even going to bother arguing this one. All I'm going to say is that if you think those games have been as innovative as the rivals, you are gravely mistaken and wrong.

6. No it doesn't. That is merely your opinion and not obejctive in any way. Also as said in 2. how is it "different"? It offers nothing new, hence the huge debate about what generation to label the console.

 

They do, find them yourself.

And let's just forget that Pachter said (A) a Wii HD was coming in 2009-2010, (B) the next Xbox was coming in 2010, (C) on the rise of MMOs that "I don't think there are four million people in the world who really want to play online games every month…. eventually it will come back to the mean, maybe a million subscribers." Along with dozens more dead wrong predictions. The "experts" are a joke in this industry. I'd rather think for myself than trusts a group of people who are so wrong so often.

1. Millions of people who play games on tablet/mobile also own and play a console.

2. Nintendoland is full of great gamepad implementations. As are Rayman Legends and New Super Mario bros U. Not to mention off-screen play in most titles so far, and TV/Pad splitscreen in Black Ops 2.

3. Wii U will still be able to undercut them. You think 8GB of RAM costs the same as 2GB?

4. You're wrong if you think they're not. See how opinion works? :)

5. See 2. You don't get a fully integrated second screen or great Nintendo franchises like Zelda, Mario, Metroid, et al on any competing console.