| JusSayian said: My milk shake brings all the boys to the yard, |
You should have said this from the beginning and I would have agreed with you, but instead you made a comparison between two different pieces of tech that do not affect each other at all. Had you been more sensible before and realize that you wrote something that made no sense whatsoever we would not be here right now. Also the reason why I did not bother to question the OP is because there were enough comments attacking him already, and yours was one of them. I just felt the need to help him out. You know what before you continue on please re read what you wrote before and read what you wrote now. If you had been more clear on your points like you wanted to OP to be with his we wouldn’t be having this discussion right now.
What did I wrote? What did I wrote that made no sense? Point the parts in that sentences that make no sense and that are not any different to what I have been saying here and to which you agreed (at least). I wrote this and then you went into a craze of asking me for proof:
Just because casuals threw themselves once for the Wii doesn't mean they are waiting to get into gaming again, especially now that they are very occupied with their smartphones and stuff.
Tell me, what is found in here that needs clarification? What did I wrote here that gets you so worked up? I said that casuals are not waiting, not paying attention to jump ship into a new console, that is crystal clear and even you agreed to my post saying that I wrote exactly what you said, well what I said was this:
This is the casual market I am talking about. The one that doesn't even know the difference between a Wii and a WiiU. This is the casual market that is not paying attention to what is happening in the world of gaming and is not having much expectancy or maybe zero expectancy at all. This is the casual market that can't tell the difference between a Wii and a WiiU. Redirect to my first comment up there, maybe your own words will help you understand it better. In order to draw them casuals back into gaming, one of these companies needs to create an awareness that goes beyond the frontiers of gaming, to such an extent that can reach them.
You have your opinion about WiiU and why it hasn't been a spiritual successor to Wii in terms of sells, your opinion cannot be proven and it doesn't need to. Marketing could be a factor, yes, but IMO it simple wasn't an attractive offering that could get all things going like the Wii did, especially the "let's exercise our children with the Wii to show how good parents we are" thingy. Nintendo sat the children in order to play once again.
The casual market is not paying attention, not waiting to see what next console they buy, they don't even know the difference between a Wii and a WiiU, they won't jump into another console just because they did with the Wii, they need to be reached and no one can take for granted that they will get a piece of them this gen. You agreed to this. What did I need to clarify when you say I just repeated what you said? I, unlike Op don't talk in absolutes saying the consoles will perform X or X way. Tell me, what is so contradictory about what I said?
Also the reason why I did not bother to question the OP is because there were enough comments attacking him already, and yours was one of them. I just felt the need to help him out.
Yeah. that is what I thought, you hand picked who to argue with based on personal agenda, OP writes the same thing you are trying to accuse me for, the very first post of the thread, and you go all the way to the second page to pick up a discussion. Do as you wish, you are free to do so, I don't care.
*Faceplam*
You just realized you said the same thing I said, but you did it two paragraphs when I did it one sentence. I said Nintendo’s marketing team screwed up you are saying the same thing essentially that better marketing would have helped. You know what instead of re-reading what you wrote, re-read what I wrote as well.
Oh, I feel so bad. The guy in here facepalmed at me, and I should feel bad about it. I didn't say better marketing would have helped Nintendo. Where did I say that? Marketing is always good, but better marketing doesn't secure Nintendo would sell the WiiU as good as they did with the Wii, that the same casuals would be in their pockets. Marketing always helps, it helps Micro, Sony and Nintendo. But what really matters is what you are offering with the marketing and if it isn't anything that will attract the casuals marketing won't help that.
We talked about casuals not distinguishing Wii from WiiU. If they didn't get interested in this "new peripheral", do you think it will make any difference for them to know it is a new console and not a peripheral? What is your reasoning for it?
Casual walks into the store...
Casual: "Oh, a new peripheral for the Wii." "hmm, not interested".
or
Casual: "Oh, a new peripheral for the Wii." "hmm, not interested". store clerk: "That is not a peripheral, is a new console." Casual: "OMG! I so want! I will buy one!"
I mentioned the "casuals are clueless about gaming progress" just to state my point that casuals are not paying attention to what is happening in the gaming world. Even if they become aware of what is happening their endorsement will be subject to whether or not they get interested. Breaking the boundaries of gaming and reaching the casuals is done with more than marketing.
It did 3 years ago when Kinect came out; honestly your lack of basic business sense is astonishing.
The ps3 started to close the gap once the Kinect hyped died off about 2 years ago.
1) Show me the proof that these people who bought Kinect were casuals and not just the same people who already have an Xbox adopting it. You attack me saying that I lack business sense, I won't eat that and let you get a free pass. Show the evidence. Your point has no validity if you don't show evidence. Show me the proof. The Kinect was good business for Micro but Sony passed them with the PS3 even with the Kinect. PS3 sold more worldwide than Xbox even with Kinect.
2) How do you consider, like OP which you are defending in here, that Kinect will undoubtedly make a difference and take Xbone over the competence when it failed to do so already? What precedent did 360 make with Kinect that you expect to be repeated? Tell me which one? The performance of Kinect and how it did not put Xbox360 over the PS3 is only a precedent that Kinect will not necessarily put Xbone over the PS4. PS3 outsold the Xbox360
But then you say:
I cannot answer any of this, and you cannot either. Just by looking at the marketing for Kinect with whole Oprah give away and commercials the Kinect was targeted to the causals and not the hard core gamers. So it’s safe to assume that assume that Kinect sold well with the causals.
It isn't safe to assume anything here. What Kinect sold was very good, it came to be have a good attach rate in regards to the already established number of consoles sold. What is safe to say here is that the PS3 outsold the Xbox360 even with Kinect. I wrote in response to OP and his baseless assumptions:
Xbox Live will attract millions of gamers and non-gamers and so will Kinect.
He is the one taking things for granted. The only precedent of Kinect is not stopping PS3 from outselling 360.
But then you say:
It did 3 years ago when Kinect came out; honestly your lack of basic business sense is astonishing.
It did what? Outsell the PS3? lol
2010 (year of release for Kinect)
2011
2012
Kinect NEVER prevented PS3 from outselling Xbox360. The way you assure things without proof and your lack of knowledge is astonishing.
What’s your point? Oh wait I know, I gave you clear cut evidence that shows how fast XBL is growing and this only way you could figure out how to take a negative spin on it. -_-
Did you honestly think that every Xbox owner will have a gold membership?
A negative spin? What is my point? That unlike OP, there is no proof casuals want Xbox Live and no one, no one can take for granted that Xbox Live will be something that will attract millions:
Xbox Live will attract millions of gamers and non-gamers and so will Kinect.
Of course Xbox Live grows yearly, 360 sells millions yearly, not as much as PS3 but it sells. More people, more people buying Live. What is the proof that casuals are eating Xbox Live like OP said and to which I replied with all this?
Oh man, think about it this way. If those new Xbox owners did not think XBL was worth it and it didn’t attract them to the console why did they buy an Xbox? They could have just bought a Playstation right? The fact is XBL is still seen as the best service (which it still is) by the causals cause as you said before causal are not in touch with the gaming world and MS has been king of the online market for so long they basically solidified themselves in the eyes of the average joe of having the best online service. Hence XBL attracts new customers.
Yeah, they have an option of buying a PS3 and that is why PS3 is outselling Xbox360 yearly. How is Xbox Live an option that draws people and makes a difference that gives an upper hand when the competition is outselling it with what it offers. Best service? That is an opinion and pointless to argue.
Why don’t you prove to me the touchpad will be practical and useful to gaming? Just think about it for a moment. Everything you do with a touchpad can be achieved with your basic tumbstick.
lol don't try to throw the burden on me. YOU said there was no way it would be used in a meaningful way. You like OP talk and take things for granted without considering possibilities. Tell me what is the proof you have that demonstrates the touchpad can't be used in a meaningful way.
Halo wars worked well without a touchpad, so your RTS point just became invalid. I can use a thumbstick like a cursor. Oh so now I remove my hand from one handle from the controller to swipe across the touchpad to do moves in a game? So now the entire left or right side of controller cannot be accessed at all when it probably needs to be. Yes we will see how it works but I do see any practical uses for it.
And what is the meaningful experience the rumble in triggers achieve? It is just more rumble. An input feature is more meaningful than just more rumble. Just because you can get things done with a different input doesn't mean the touchpad won't provide a different approach to get things done. Can you do this with a joystick, can you make this attacks without making a mess of the joysticks:
I say lets wait and see how developers make use of this feature, I am opened to possibilities. You just say without any doubt that there is no meaningful way this feature can be used, without coming with proof for anything. No wonder why you came here like OP's savior, you both have much in common.
……. It’s more practical than a touchpad. If touchpads worked well for gaming why hasn’t caught on in pc gaming?
If controllers work so well for gaming, why haven't they been caught on in PC gaming? Let us all burn our PS3s and Xbox306s because what PC gamers use as methods of inputs are the only meaningful ways of gaming. Mouse and keyboard >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rumble, analog sticks, showder buttons, toucpads, etc. I like your opinions, they are very interesting.
Hopefully. if you reply you will finally provide proof of what you are trying to claim and not keep coming up with more assumptions.
Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1
