New Wii U Bundle For Japan Includes 32GB Console, Mario U, And Wii Party U

[Scisca]

JWeinCom said:

Scisca said:

JWeinCom said:

The PS4 has three games that can't be played on current gen consoles.  Tres.  The Wii U will have by that time... Uhhh lets see... New Super Mario Bros U, Wonderful 101, Sonic Lost World, Wii Fit U, Wii Party U, Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze, Super Mario 3D World, Lego City Undercover, Pikmin 3... etc? But, you know, no reason to buy that console, because games don't count unless they're shiny enough.  Looking at that current gen slop we call GTAV is offensive to my eyes.  How can anyone enjoy a game like that? But, we should rush out to get a PS4.  Because Knack!!!!!!! Knack just SCREAMS I need to buy this next gen system!!!

Graphics are clearly all that matters.  That's why the PS3 trounced the Wii, the DS got destroyed by the PSP, and the Vita sold over 300K units last week.  It's all about the graphics baby.

Not a single Wii U game from your list gives a next gen experience for me. Every single one of these games could be perfectly playable on PS360 with no or next to no difference to the gameplay or graphics. The only reason they are not available on other consoles is because they are made or moneyhatted by Nintendo, not because they just can't be experienced on PS360 in the exact same form and without having to cut assets.

 

A) Except that's not true.  Nintendo Land would need to have massive changes to work on a PS3 or a 360, and would require a $500+ investment before even being close to possible.  Same with Game and Wario.  Zombi U would lose a LOT without the second screen.  Rayman Legends loses quite a bit in the transition as well.  Wonderful 101 would have to have quite a few bits altered.

Also, New Super Mario Bros U, Wonderful 101, Lego City Undercover, Pikmin 3 are already out and so far people don't really care, which proves my point even better. Among the not yet released are games that will most probably bomb in comparison to their previous iterations, cause they are worse than their competition at this point (I'm talking mainly about Wii Fit U losing its crowd in favour of Kinect, it's gonna be Brain Training all over again).

B) Wii Fit losing its crowd to Kinect? Ummm, that didn't happen.  After the Kinect's hot start in 2010, Nintendo has consistently moved more Wiis than Microsoft has sold Kinects.  In terms of casual gamers, the Wii brand is growing faster than Microsoft's.  If you look at the software side of things, things are even clearer.  After 2010, Kinect Software sold like crap.

This year alone the dead Wii has sold 1.3 million units.  The Kinect?  750K.  So, Nintendo's lead over Microsoft among their fanbase is growing, not shrinking.  Factor in the Wii U, and it's clear that MS is not making headway with the Kinect.  Last year, 0 pieces of non bundled Kinect software made it into the top 100 games of the year.  Meanwhile, Wii Fit sold over a million units.  A six year old game sold more than any piece of Kinect software.  Maybe the Kinect 2.0 will change things, but the claim that the Kinect cut into Nintendo's sales is not supported in any way, shape, or form.  Looking at the XBox One's launch lineup, and chance of them cutting into Nintendo's market seems remote.

People point to Brain Age and Nintendogs (which btw sold something like 3X as much as Kinectimals on the 3DS?) but ignore the fact that games like Animal Crossing and Mario Kart 7 are outperforming their predecessors.  This shows clearly that Nintendo is gaining momentum in certain categories.  People will say "oh that doesn't matter cause Mario Kart 7 isn't casual enough" but Nintendo selling more with those games is nothing but a good thing.  Some of those Wii gamers left Nintendo, but perhaps others moved on from Wii Sports to Mario Kart.

As for Wii Fit U, it's a different thing than brain age entirely.  Weight loss is always something people that are interested in, not a passing fancy like memory training or virtual dogs.  I really like what I'm seeing with the Fit Meter and the community functionality.  I can't say without seeing the marketing, but Wii Fit U can be huge.  As big as Wii Fit?  Maybe not, but could easily sell 10+ million.  People who think it will bomb probably don't know all too much about the weight loss industry.

The Wii U's strong start shows that NSMBU was a big deal.  Sales jumped for all of the games listed except Wonderful 101.  So people do care.  Those aren't the big guns for Nintendo, so we shouldn't expect a complete turnaround from that software, but each was met with a boost in hardware.

Nobody is going to buy a console for Sonic :P DK and 3D Mario are ok, but even among Nintendo franchises they aren't the strongest ones and will give you just as much as they gave GCN in its fight with PS2. But what's most important - there is just no new experience there. When I look at InFamous, new KZ or the XO launch titles I see that this is something new, something not possible on my current console. I see it as an upgrade. The games you listed are not upgrades, they are just different titles, but on the same level as the games I've been playing for years. That's the problem. There is no new experience, not even a visual one, let alone something like motion controls on the Wii to compensate for the lack in that department.

C) Wait, so we're going back to the Gamecube era now?  You know, the time when Call of Duty was a franchise that sold 2 or 3 million units?  Things have changed since then, Nintendo has far greater exposure, and there are other titles around it like Wii Fit U, Sports Club, Party, and so on.  The situation has changed in the last ten+ years.  Basing 2013 predictions off of the 2000 market is silly.  We can take some historical information into account, but we have to take other factors into consideration.

I look at Infamous 2 and I see a minor graphical upgrade.  I look at Super Mario 3D World, and I see 4 player co-op in a 3D Mario game, that I've never had before.  I look at Wii Party U, and I see some really cool game ideas not possible without the Gamepad.  Same thing for Nintendo Land.  Wonderful 101 is the best game I've played in quite some time, and Sonic looks to be the best one since the Genesis days.

I'm just honestly confused how something as unique as Wondeful 101 or Nintendo Land is somehow lumped together with the games you already played, but Infamous a game that (based on what I've seen so far differs little from its predecessor) is somehow new and exciting.  Boil down the argument, and you get "better graphics are the only thing  that matter". 

The only next gen stuff on Wii U so far for me is X and the new Mario Kart (forgot about this one earlier!). The rest is meh. The multiplats are 100% current gen, when the PS4 ports do actually give a different experience and are an upgrade of some sort. I can clearly see a difference between ACIV on PS3 and PS4. Is there any between the game on PS3 and Wii U? This is what drags Wii U under and you ignoring it won't make it go away.

D) So, again, just graphics?  Shiny graphics and upside down driving is next gen?  So far, out of Nintendo's franchises on the Wii U, Mario Kart 8 has evolved its series the least (except for perhaps Tropical Freeze).  We've seen nothing of X's gameplay.  It's pretty though.

I can see a clear difference between Super Mario 3D World and Mario Galaxy.  You know, because there is 4 characters, a different gameplay style, and so on.  If there is a 4 player co-op platformer that's as good on that on PS3 or XBox 360, please let me know, because I'd love to play it.  That's something I can't get on my current systems.  Is it theoretically possible?  Sure, but it's not there.

PS. You keep running to the safe haven of graphics not being the only thing. Yes, but still they are a part of what every next gen is. A significant part. Wii U is not delivering here, so what next gen is there about it? Wii had motion, DS has two screens. What does the Wii U have? A tablet that most people would want to get rid of just to get the console $100 cheaper?

 

E) Wii U has remote play ( feature that is touted by Sony but with a $250 added fee), social features that far surpass the PS3 or 360 and might outdo the PS4 and One, New gameplay possibilities (show me anything on the PS4 that couldn't be done gameplay wise on a 360).

And it has games.  Tell me, what was the big feature of the 3DS that made it successful?  Nobody cared about the  3D effects in the least bit, and it was actually a deterrent to many people.  The graphics were far below what the Vita was capably of, and only slightly above what the PSP could do.  There was no system selling feature, no graphical leap, but it's selling.  Why?  Because games.

Nintendo simply offers different styles and different games than PS3, PS4, XBox One, etc.  Their first party software is still the best in the business.  Their local multiplayer is the best in the business, and can be greatly enhanced with the Gamepad. 

 

Now, riddle me this.  I'm a gamer who loves platformers and is lukewarm on shooters.  I don't play online much.  I have young kids I want to play with, and a girlfriend who was into the Wii stuff, but isn't going to sit around and play Halo with me.  I had a Wii, and I was one of the many who loved Mario Kart, NSMB, and Brawl.  There are no new games for my Wii, and I want a new console.  Which one should I buy?

Just to put this seperately because it bears repeating.

Nintendo Land offers gameplay that cannot be done on current consoles without either huge sacrifices or an obsecene price tag.  Sonic Lost World features completely reworked gameplay for the series.  Wonderful 101 is a completely new IP that plays differently than anything else out there.  Wii Fit U offers social integration that has not been seen on other consoles.  Wii Party U offers gameplay that is unique.  Super Mario 3D World offers 4 player coop, which is a first for the series, and if memory serves correctly the first time 4 player coop has been done (or done well) on any system. 

Are these experiences possible on other consoles?  Maybe.  Are they available on other consoles?  No.  Is there anything really similar on other consoles?  No not really.  Super Mario 3D World is easily as different from Galaxy (or 3D Land) as Killzone 3 is to Shadow Fall.  Unless you want to just come out and say you think graphics are what matters (and you're entitled to that opinion), you'll have to explain why none of these experiences are worth buying a console for but Killzone and Assassin's Creed Wind edition are.

Arguing with you sometimes feels like arguing with a 3yo, but ok...

A) You give a list of games. I tell you what I think, then you say I'm wrong, because Nintendo Land, Game and Wario and Zombi U blah, blah, blah. Well take a look at your list and find Nintendo Land, Game and Wario or Zombi U (a hint - they are not there!!).

B) and C) Oh you think it's not happening? Then you're in for a huge surprise! And don't give me that "you underestimate the weight loss industry" or "you're basing 2013 predictions off of the 2000 market". You are the one who doesn't seem to understand the current market in this case. Wii Fit was huge, because it was a novelty, but at this point Ms is gonna eat it, cause it's just miles ahead. Even just working out with the Balance Board feels gimmicky, crappy and limited if you compare it to the new Kinect. Add to that the new workout app on XO that gives you P90X, Insanity and two workout routines for women, which will be free till 2015. Additionally there will be other workout games like the Nike ones from X360, UFC instructor, etc., all better and more modern than the Wii Fit U. The market has changed, it has developed incredibly and is growing all the time, while Nintendo offering isn't even near to the top of the flock anymore. It will sell something (there are people with BBs after all and XO is going to be expensive at first), but won't come close to what Wii Fit was, just wait for XO to take that market with ease. Also arguing that Kinect is selling worse than Wii indicates anything when you just had a much better Kinect 2 unveiled and it being mandatory with every XO is really a very questionable argument. Also Wii is selling better than Wii U most of the time, so Kinect losing to it really is no shame :P You say chances of XO cutting into N market here are remote? I say it's abslutely impossible for that not to happen. Nintendo won't even come close to MS here in the long run, this market is MS for the taking.

Nintendo had huge exposure with Wii... So what? It had huge exposure with NES and SNES and still N64 and GCN happened. Sony has huge exposure all the time and yet Vita is struggling.

D) and E) Graphics is the biggest part of moving to the next gen. It can easily be the only difference and totally justify it - you just have to accept that. NES -> SNES. PS/SS/N64 -> PS2/DC/GCN/Xbox. The only difference between these generations were graphics and yet nobody is denying that these were valid next gen products and that games from these newer consoles were "next gen". Yet, as Wii or DS has proven, graphics don't have to be the only thing and I respect that. The problem for Nintendo is that with Wii U they fail to deliver on the most basic front (graphics), so they have to deliver somewhere else and so far they are failing. There is a thin line between such a thing like the GamePad being considered a next gen idea and a stupid gimmick and it's all decided but the success of the product. You had Wii and you had Virtual Boy. Nobody says VB was a next gen product, it was just a crappy gimmick, cause nobody wanted it and it failed. So far the Gamepad is is on the verge, cause people just don't care about it enough, even though it's a far better idea (I love remote play).

To sum up, it's not like you say "better graphics are the only thing  that matter". But better graphics are absolutely enough. If you fail to give better graphics, you have to give something else instead to compensate for that. So far Nintendo is failing to do to that.

I'm not sure if the 3D Mario cuts it for me. It's a controversial idea for the game and I haven't seen enough of it. I'm not sure just how good the graphics are and how well it uses the GamePad - the two things that define being next gen on Wii U for me. In short, I think that a Wii U game is next gen when it has graphics that are superior to what I see on my PS3 (cause I believe Wii U is easily capable of that!) and (preferaly) it makes smart use of the GamePad (though this usually contradicts with Remote Play, so I'm actually sometimes willing to forgive it here, when at least the graphics are in place and GamePad has basic functions that make for a more smoother gameplay).

Obviously, there are the minigames that don't need good graphics but focus solely on GamePad instead, but so far they don't seem to be much of a gamechanger, especially in the era of tablets and people just don't seem to case about them, so it's hard now to say whether they deserve to be called "next gen" experiences or are just "crappy gimmicks". Surely they are nowhere near to what Motion Gaming was this gen.

 

Also - if you really think that Wii U is so awesome, next gen, everything is so pretty and rosey, then why the hell is it struggling so bad, even eating Vita's dust and why don't people care about it at all?