Nintendo Did Not Learn Anything from the Wii U's Failure.

[xxbrothawizxx63]

Miyamotoo said:

xxbrothawizxx63 said:

Switch is benefiting from being the single platform they have to focus on. Honestly, the numbers don't seem all that impressive to me when you consider that in prior gens they've had two successful platform they were supporting. 

If Wii U had a 3rd party hole in its 1st year, Switch has a damn chasm imo. Oh, but indies. The scene is bigger and Switch is benefiting from initiatives and attitudes started during the Wii U era. 

The Switch has a more appealing concept, but the Wii U's gimmick wasn't anywhere near useless. Nintendo poorly communicated the benefits, but I did agree that the marketing has improved dramatically.

They also learned that people don't like a slow, bloated, OS. What an amazing revelation...and they cut a ton of features to do it. I don't know how you're getting the idea that the Switch is a continuation of the Wii. The Wii U was literally the Wii's successor and named so despite being based on a completely different concept because they were carrying over may of those philosophies. 

I'll concede on this one though. I'm just annoyed they're still getting so much wrong. 

Of Course that Switch is benefit from that, I mean you cant make hybrid console if you still have seperate platforms. Actualy they rarely had two successful platforms, GC and N64 couldnt exactly be called successful platforms, not to mention Wii U, so we talking about 3 from last 4 platforms. Switch is still one platform, not two, and sales numbers for HW and SW are very good.

But multiplatform games are not what selling Nintendo hardware on first place, Wii U had actualy very good 3rd party support for Nintendo system in first year, Switch had much weaker first year regardless 3rd party support and yet destroyed Wii U sales and passed Wii U LT numbers in less than one year. Zelda BotW, MK8D, Splatoon2 and Odyssey in first 9 months are titles that made huge difrence compared to Wii Us first year. But totally opposite to Wii U, where Wii U ended whitout 3rd party after 1st year, Switch is getting actually more 3rd party games and stronger 3rd party support after 1st year.

Yeah, they learned that also, and thats why they made Switch very fast, they didnt wanted any feature for launch they just wanted that play games very fast and simple, and they done that. I didnt said that Switch is continuation of Wii, but that when you look how Switch is handheld, it very similar to how Wii is handheld, great concept, great/big launch and 1st year system seller games, and great marketing/branding. While Wii U was totally opposite of that, no big/system seller games on launch and in its hole 1st year, not appealing concept and terrible marketing/branding, those all 3 main reason why Wii U failed and why Wii is success and why Switch is also success.

They doing some things still wrong, but they are doing most important things right and thats most important, sales and Switch popularity proves that.

At end its crazy to say that Nintendo didn't learn anything from Wii U failure because they actually with Switch corrected biggest Wii U mistakes, you even have Switch sales and popularity like proof of that.

Tell that to investors. There's a reason Nintendo was so quick to change their tune on mobile in the Wii U/3DS era and is now charging for online. They were looking for revenue streams to fill the hole they were about to create in their bottom line. Obviously, there are inherent costs when developing and maintaining another platform they no longer have to consider, but it's nowhere near certain that one platform would result in flat or increased revenue even with the positive numbers we have so far. 

Nintendo wanted to go in the complete opposite direction of Wii U regardless of whether that was a positive change for consumers or not. I don't feel like they deserve all that much credit for the changes made. Nintendo has been around for 50 years in games hardware. Did they really need to learn that proper 1st party support is what led to their previous successes? It's their own ineptitude as a platform holder and prowess as a developer that has led to the current Nintendo platform mindset (1P is the only thing worth $60, and the only reason to buy). 3rd party is worse on a Nintendo platform for reasons beyond just power. What do GC, N64, and Wii U have in common? Droughts. Any Avg Joe could have told you that. In fairness to the GC, Nintendo brought the heat starting the following Summer, but the PS2 was just a monster. Xbox had to be a generation ahead to carve out the place it did and after a generation of greatly reduced influence during the N64, it just wasn't surprising to see them flounder. It suffered from similar issues to the Wii U though I guess. Some Nintendo fans felt burned by their output because it wasn't what was expected. I think they've started to acknowledge the importance of their core audience  again following the Wii's completely blue ocean approach (Zelda selling like crazy, proper Metroid, increased scope of Odyssey). Wii U was the first Nintendo system a lot of Nintendo fans didn't even care to buy because after an extra generation of waiting, Nintendo delivered experiences that didn't feel worthy of the platform. It is by far their biggest failure not only because of the numbers, but because they were coming off of such a successful generation. 

The truth is, Nintendo is the only one that could have so much variation in sales and profitability generation to generation because they've shown time and time again they don't fully understand their audience. PS3 could have been a Wii U like failure because of its launch. It wasn't because Sony responded to its audience quickly. 

I already gave up on this idea though. Just my ramblings at this point.

Last edited by xxbrothawizxx63 - on 17 September 2018