By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
McDonaldsGuy on 19 January 2015
Edit Thread
CDiablo said:
McDonaldsGuy said:

a) That's the thing. The Wii U doesn't even appeal to Nintendo gamers. Nintendo gamers (mostly) want a Super Mario 64 HD sequel, a Zelda with OOT/TP graphics, etc. etc. It just blows my mind Nintendo finally gets an HD console and instead of giving us something as incredible both graphically and gameplay wise as Galaxy is just mindblowing. Not to mention 3D World doesn't even have online, which was UNACCEPTABLE in 2013. Nintendo wanted a multiplayer Mario and didn't even make it online.... that is surreal. Even if they wanted to focus on local multiplayer online is just an option.

b) The Wii U actually sold for a loss anyway because of the high price of that gamepad controller. If Nintendo went to the power route they'd find profit faster because the price of the CPU/GPU would have went down significantly (they usually go down 40% after the first year). And at least they'd be getting ports, much better than getting nothing. Also the Wii U could still have BC because Wii games shouldn't be too hard to emulate, but even then I'd rather have a super powerful console without BC than what the Wii U is now.

a)The Wii U does fine with Nintendo gamers. The brand just isnt strong enough to have a console that sells more than 20m lifetime. I agree about online I dont get how Nintendo doesn't see it as an intergral part of gaming.

b)You assume the gamepad hasent dropped drasticaly since release. Touchscreens are as prevalent as ever and there isn't a ton else going on in the inside of the controller otherwise. My point about ports it it would turn out exactly the same as it has now. Devs would not try with their releases(even with the specs you provided) as they didn't with the U because they are afraid to invest in their games on Nintendo. Nintendo would not get good sales with their half assed tries(just like the U) because people would buy the definitive versions of games on PS3/4/X1/360 and the 3rd party execs would do what they do now. "We gave them the (shittiest version of the) game and they wouldnt buy it. We cant justify spending more money on releasing U games." The specs you gave would have the same result we are having now(save for better looking 1st party). If the U were 2x as powerful as the PS4 we would end up with the same results as we have now. 3rd parties gave up on Nintendo because of the Gamecube and that has never been repaired.

a) Has Nintendo ever explained why they hate online gaming so much? In 2004 their excuse was that "No one cares about online" but what about their excuse now?

Anyway the Wii U isn't doing well among Nintendo gamers. 3D World and Celda aren't what they wanted really, and the gamepad has faced similar backlash.

b) By 2013 Nintendo was still losing money and they have yet to release separate gamepads so it shows it costs more money than we think. A super powerful console loses its costs fast. The PS3 cost $840 to make in 2006 but by 2009 it was only $300. The 360 cost $525 to manufacturer in 2005 but by 2006 it was only $325.

And yeah, Nintendo would still have to work with third parties. It wouldn't just magically happen if they had a more powerful console. This is why I think Iwata and Miyamoto need to either get fired or retire as soon as possible.