JWeinCom said:
I don't think that the Wii achieved such success simply because people liked Motion Controls. What made the Wii a success was the fact that it presented people with games that they could play. It was a matter of accessibility which was certainly complemented by motion controls, but not dependent on them. I think that Nintendo can create games that are accessible and attractive to so called casual gamers without motion controls, as they did with titles like Animal Crossing, New Super Mario Bros, or Mario Galaxy. As for why the Wii U isn't selling well, it's pretty much due to the library. Take my sister for instance. She had a Wii, but she didn't really like Mario Bros that much. She loved Mario Kart however, and plays it really often with her roommates. So, just because she's not going to rush out and buy a Wii U day one doesn't mean she's not going to get one when Mario Kart comes out, although that seems to be the bizarre assumption a lot of people round here are making. Wii Fit U, Wii Party U, Mario Kart Wii U, and Mario Galaxy U should all be coming before this year ends. If those games don't bring back a lot of Wii owners (and perhaps some new fans), THEN I'll start worrying about the Wii U |
I see your point here but respectfully disagree. The Wiimote was designed to resemble a TV remote and Wii Sports to be played with only needing to use one or two buttons, if any. Nintendo understood that the dual analog controller was a barrier to entry for casuals. And now they've gone back to it only now with a tablet inserted. The tablet does not make it seem simplier, it makes it seem every less attractive to casuals. Where Wii's sold themselves, with WiiU Nintendo must overcome the stigma the gamepad creates. So far they have failed to do so. I've tested the games in stores and when they've had all games available to play at mall demos, and while I didn't get to try ZombiiU, NintendoLand, NSMBU, Rayman Legends, and some other 3rd party games failed to justify the gamepad's existence. It didn't add anything to the games, and from a casual viewpoint were less intuitive to play than a Wii game - or Kinect game - or tablet game.
This is the fundimental problem. Casuals don't have a choice of Wii or nothing like in 2006, they now have vast choice - Move, Kinect 2, tablets/smartphones, WiiU of which WiiU is currently the least appealing choice due to price, lack of games, cost of games and lack of features. The off TV gameplay is not appealing to casuals who don't want to play with a dual analog set-up. Sure you could play Angry Birds on TV/gamepad but you don't need a WiiU for that. Sure the WiiU has a cool internet browser, but you don't need a WiiU for that - tablet's do it just as well. Yes you can control your TV off your WiiU but this is becoming a feature of tablets/smartphones too. For casuals, who don't want to use dual analog - which is all those Wii Sports / Wii Fit / Just Dance players out there - There is no benefit to owning a WiiU.
Nintendo needs to come up with some really compelling, accessible gameplay that casuals can get into (motion + two screens) - that can't be easily duplicated on Kinect (2) + smartglass or Android devices (PS4/Vita is too expensive to compete effectively).
I concur that making the WiiU the same power as PS4/720 would not have helped them. I agree a WiiHD would do little better than WiiU (unless they had some great new Wii____ ideas but then they could have just kept Wii going with them too. They don't need the most powerful system (one more capable of playing 720/PS4 games would have been better) but they needed to extend that they did with Wii. Take motion controls to a whole new level of immersion and fun. A modified/enhanced Wiimote/Nunchuk with touchscreen(s) added would have been better and the touch screen could have even replaced some buttons or D-pad to make it seem even more natural to use.
Basically they needed to provide compelling gameplay that other consoles - and now tablets - can't - that appeals to the mass market. Much like Wii did. From the WiiU games I've played, none of them do this. ZombiiU is not appealing to the mass market and I submit, neither is NintendoLand or NSMBU if casuals (think women 30+) are forced to use the dual analog controller to play them.
The gamepad is a hinderence in it's appearance, convoluted controls (dual analog +++), size, and cost factor (adding $100 to the price of a WiiU). I'm sure it does have some great benefits too but selling those non-obvious benefits over it's immediate non-appeal is a huge stumbling block and an absolute marketing nightmare. Plus many of it's benefits are already possible with tablets/smartphones which people already own and play games on and will likely be possible on PS4/720 as well (with tablet apps or motion controls).
Unless they come up with some unforseeable NEW casual hit, the same old games Wii Fit U (again?), Wii Party U (again?) and Mario Kart U will not sell many systems. Casuals want NEW experiences. Mario Galaxy was not a hit with casuals - look at it's sales and especially SMG2's, it's primarily Nintendo Core. NSMB IS a hit with casuals but the combination of dual analog controls/cost and that it's really not much different than NSMBWii all work against NSMBU having the success NSMBWii did. Unless Nintendo really changes them up far more than we've seen thus far - I feel the same will go for the others mentioned here as well. They are not different enough or enticing enough to overcome WiiU's immediate shortcomings.
