twintail said:
Well the problem was in relation to the current consoles at the time, which naturally had larger libraries, but had better surpport post wiiU launch, and were stronger devices. Honestly, the value for the Wiiu was not there unless you were a diehard fan. I think the issue with the name is that by the WiiU, there were other Wii *insert word* software and hardware products on the market. Especially at the time when the large percentage of game consumers were not jumping onto the net for discussion or info. Xbox1 is better I think. Its a weird name but 'Xbox' is the defacto name of the console much like Playstation. the next xbox could be called Xbox Q and it would still make more sense than WiiU because the Xbox branding is pretty much associated with the console name, and not much else. |
I meant the launch ps3 typo. The WiiU launched against the ps3 and 360 slim consoles, which ofcourse had huge libraries by that time. Maybe in combination with the name and the relatively weak power it wasn't seen as the start of a new gen, leading to even more of a struggle as the ps4 pro and Scorpio are facing now. Perhaps WiiU was indeed seen as an expensive add-on for a slightly better experience.
Btw the Switch cost me more than the WiiU deluxe did (thanks to conversion rates). It was the same price as I paid for ps4 at launch. I don't know how well it sells in Canada to check if price has any effect. To compare Switch CAD 400, ps4 slim CAD 350, ps4 Pro CAD 500, XBox One S CAD 380. Switch is pretty expensive here again, same as when WiiU launched. I found a price of $270 for ps3 slim in 2012, so $300 and $350 for WiiU wasn't that different of a situation.
Switch is pretty weak power wise too, so I guess it's mostly the name and that a handheld makes more sense than a tablet. Ofcourse the jury is still out what's going to happen to the Switch this holiday. Mario Oddessey and Splatoon 2 better deliver.
