The Wii U's Name Isn't The Problem

[Mythmaker1]

UncleScrooge said:

Mythmaker1 said:

UncleScrooge said:
Long story short: They think it's a peripheral and they don't intend to buy it because in their mind it'll only support a handful of games or "isn't needed to play". It's actually true. It was also true with the 3DS.

That's a good point, but I find myself asking if, in general, someone who didn't want to buy it for that reason would buy it if they knew the truth.  Afterall, this is a person who won't support it, with the presumption of a low price, unless it supports a significant portion of games. If it did support a significant portion of games, but cost 4x as much as they thought it would, would they still think it worthwhile?

I'm not saying someone wouldn't but I don't see the general consumer making that leap.

No one bought a PS Move yet plenty of people are interested in a $500 PS4. Does that answer your question?

It would, except that it really isn't the same thing. Whether it is a Wii peripheral or a stand-alone console, the Wii U would still have the same appeal; a new controller. The Move, on the other hand, is a controller, but the appeal of the PS4 is the internals.

NoirSon said:
The system looks a lot like the Wii redesign they had shipped previously, along with their main advertisements for the Wii U, it is pretty easy for a non gamer to make the mistake that it is just a new add on/accessory to go with the long line of them that Nintendo has released for the Wii. 

That may be the case. However, I'm presenting the argument that any confusion it causes doesn't really have any bearing on whether someone would consider buying it.