By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Could the Wii remain dominant another five years?

 

Could the Wii remain dominant another five years?

Yes, no new console needed 75 33.94%
 
No, the competition will ... 146 66.06%
 
Total:221


Check out my video game music blog:

http://games-and-guitars.synergize.co/

 

 PROUD MEMBER OF THE PLAYSTATION 3 : RPG FAN CLUB

 

He who hesitates is lost

Around the Network

why teh fuck does this post keep going to the end of the forum instead of the damn person i wnat to reply to



Check out my video game music blog:

http://games-and-guitars.synergize.co/

 

 PROUD MEMBER OF THE PLAYSTATION 3 : RPG FAN CLUB

 

He who hesitates is lost

Resident_Hazard said:
patjuan32 said:
Resident_Hazard said:

A third party can build a game for the Xbox360 and port it to the PS (and/or PC) for relatively little cost.  Much cheaper than building said game from scratch to run on the Wii.  The other two are not a "technology race" anymore--nobody cares about the minor differences in architecture of those systems.  They're comparable, and making games multiplatform for those two isn't that hard.  Look at Final Fantasy XIII--the change to put it on both the Xbox360 and PS3 really did not lengthen development time, and no doubt, was financially smart for Square-Enix.  You act like the X360 and PS3 aren't successful.  The X360 is more successful than the original Xbox by a long shot, and the PS3 is a far cry from the GameCube's dismal 3rd place status.  Both companies (MS, Sony) are making tons of money now, and third party companies generally have quite a bit of success there.  This may have changed, but for the bulk of this generation, the X360 had the highest attach rate of any (current gen) system.

I did not "miss" the fact that Nintendo is enjoying its best software sales ever, you just chose to assume that in attempt to one-up me.  Everyone knows the Wii is the most successful Nintendo console ever, and from that, Nintendo's software is selling way better than ever.  That's just numbers.  More available consumers means higher available sales. 

Yes, the Wii is "still" selling well--especially compared to the GameCube at this time.  But it's sales are down year over year while Sony's and Microsoft's are roughly the same if not better--even before the new X360.  Besides that, how many of us still play the Wii and enjoy the motion control, and how many feel that it's grown to be gimmicky? 

I sincerely hope that Nintendo doesn't just kill off the Wii because if they do, they're going to piss off consumers and developers alike.  But the successor will likely be revealed at next year's E3.  It's their current pattern, and it's logical.  It will happen.  Nintendo's trend the last two generations has been to announce and launch a new portable system, then a year later, follow with a new home console.  This will be no different.

EDIT:  Shit, I can't believe I overlooked this:  By your logic, Nintendo wouldn't be "stupid enough" to put out a successor to the DS line at this point, because the DS is still the top selling system in the world.  Releasing successors while the previous system still has some strength in it, and while it's still in the public mindset is a smart way to maintain popularity and interest.  It actually makes more sense to replace the Wii right now over the DS, if all you're going by is hardware and software popularity--the DS still easily tops the Wii in both. 


You are mistaken, A third party can not develop a game for the Xbox 360 and port it with little cost to the PS3 nor can it do the same for the PC. The architecture of all three machines are different. That means it requires resources to port a game from one system to another. It's not as simple as you seem to think nor is the cost minimal. Also the Xbox 360 and the Wii have a similar architecture, The Power PC and their GPUs are built by AMD. The Wii development kit is very cheap and building a game for the system is very easy and cheap. If it were not so do you think that all of these no name companies would be developing games for the Wii? A lot of them are considered shovelware by us but others tend to enjoy them.

Final Fantasy XIII had been in development for what? About four or five years before they announced it was going to be ported. No one knows when they started porting the game . Unless you work for Square Enix, I doubt you know.

You state that the Wii is down year over year but it was only 200k the last time I checked and that is easily rectified. The Xbox 360 is enjoying great sales due to a new slim model being released and a clearence on the old model that is being replaced. The PS3 had a new model released last year and was above the Wii and the Xbox 360 but sales returned to normal when the effect wore off. Also if you look at the Xbox 360 sales. You'd see that no old software is popping back into the top twenty in software sales. This indicates that old users are Upgrading their consoles.

""Nintendo's trend the last two generations has been to announce and launch a new portable system, then a year later, follow with a new home console.  This will be no different.""

That statement is conjecture and is false. The Gamecube was five years old when Nintendo pull the plug on that system While the GBA was only four year old. The DS is around six years  now while the Wii is only approaching it's fourth birthday. Nintendo will not kill the Wii for the sake of a hardware race with Sony and Microsoft. If they wanted to do that then they could have made an HD system instead of the Wii. Furthermore the Gamecube was in third place last gen. Yet Nintendo did not pull the plug on that system until after the five year cycle was up.

As I stated previously, The DS is appoaching it's 6th birthday and Nintendo has new technology to replace the system. Sony should have replaced the PS2 early in it's life span, using your logic, because it was inferior to the Xbox and Gamecube. They should have also replaced the PSX early in it's life span because it was severly underpowered when compared to the N64. But they did not, proving that your logic is flawed.

Nintendo will not kill the using your logic. There is still money to be made off the software and the hardware. All Nintendo has to do is release more games. The sales of the rise and fall depening on the amount of software that they release for the Wii. They also have a blue print to follow which was developed by Sony. I think they'll do that it's more beneficial in the long run. Besides Microsoft and Sony are not going to launch a new console any time soon.

 

Ughhh, this is turning into one of those internet nuances where logic is pummelled and abused the way religion treats science.  And you're making very incorrect assumptions.

For one thing, my "logic" doesn't automatically assume the PS2 should've been replaced early in it's lifecycle to compete with the GameCube and Xbox--for one major reason (that isn't sales), the PS2 was technically still in the same generation as the GC and XB. ---------------------------------------------------------------

No it was not. Resident Evil 4 proved that the PS2 was very far behind the Gamecube. The Game had long load times and effects had to be cut from the game just to get it to run properly.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Most games at the time were made on the PS2 and then ported to the "bigger brothers" because A) the PS2 had higher sales so it made sense to optimize for the PS2 and B) it's cheaper and easier to port a game from a weaker system to a more powerful one. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not always. You are forgetting the art that may have to be done again, Just go read what Retro had to do to get Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2  to look like a standard Wii game.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everything the PS2 could do, the GC and XB could do.  The same wasn't necessarily true the other way around.  The Wii is easily a generation behind--and everyone knows that.  It's as if the PS2 was running on N64-era hardware.  The Playstation was also not under-powered compared to the N64.  Looking back, many PS1 games made the N64 look like the weaker system thanks to those stupid cartridges and the N64's pathetic textures.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's your assuption about the Wii and it shows that you do not know much about technology. All I can say is that the Gamecube could not run Wii games that were developed by Nintendo, such as and it definately can not run a game like Monster Hunter or Red Steel 2.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You seem to be assuming that porting from the Xbox360 to the Wii is somehow cheaper and easier than porting from the Xbox360 to the PS3.  Which is just absurd.  For one thing, the Wii cannot even handle many of the new game engines such as that in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare or the Unreal 3 engine. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the development of World at War the team[Treyarch] figured out a process for porting down the COD4 engine onto Wii, which brought about a pretty impressive offering for fans that weren't afraid to jump into another World War II shooter.

http://wii.ign.com/objects/902/902591.html

 

Unreal Engine 3 IS in the works for the Wii

http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=12897s

If it happens it happens. If it does not. I doubt any one would care at this point.

 

Capcom Brings MT Framework to Wii

http://wii.ign.com/articles/103/1038907p1.html

Even if they never make a game for the Wii using this engine. It's there to be used.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's what happens when porting from Xbox360 to PS3:
--Programmers rework the game for the different system architecture.
--Graphics may be upgraded slightly if time and money permits--if it's even worth doing.

Here's what happens when porting from Xbox360 to Wii:
--Brand new engine must typically be used.
--Polygon counts must be dropped drastically across every facet of the game.
--Texture quality must be reduced so the Wii can handle it--if it's HD, it won't work.
--Some more detailed animation sequences will likely have to be redone as poly counts change.
--Depending on the physics engine of the game, that may need to be redone.
--Lighting will likely need to be changed.
--Smaller, specific things such as bump mapping and the like will not just transfer over from HD to Wii.

Just because the Xbox360 and Wii may have similar basic architecture, that doesn't automatically make porting shit to the Wii suddenly an easy task.  Remember, the Wii is roughly the same power as the original Xbox, and it's not even remotely close to the Xbox360.  If porting from HD to Wii was so easy, Activision wouldn't have handed the development of the Wii versions of Call of Duty to different development teams.  If it was so cheap and easy, development of the Wii version would've been done by the same team that made the HD versions.  For that matter, if porting from X360 to Wii was easy, then the Wii version of Dead Rising would've been more like the X360 version than the piece of crap the Wii ended up with.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Capcom used the Resident Evil 4 engine and the game 's development was outsourced,TOSE Software Inc. The original Dead Rising team did not work on the game.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...

Okay then. 

Old software suddenly "not showing up in sales charts" is not proof that most new Xbox360 sales are going to users simply upgrading.  Older games, for one thing, are not typically in constant production throughout the lifespan of a console.  They are not still making Fable II, for instance. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Typical when a console gets a large boost in sales or a new model old games that were popular pop back into the charts. This shows that new buyers are purchasing the console. When old games that are popular do not resurface in the charts is a sign that current users are trading in consoles for a newer model or just upgrading their old console for other reason, different colors, speciality model like a Halo edition Xbox, or other factors.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was mistaken in one thing, however, and that is that I was a year off in thinking of the launch of the DS.  I was thinking 2005, not 2004.  Still, Nintendo did not just kill off the GBA because the DS was out--it was still fairly heavily supported for another year all-around.  Nintendo did axe the GameCube in 2006 when the Wii launched, which was pretty foolish--but then, there was almost no support on the thing, and the fact that the Wii was barely any different meant that many GC games could just easily be dropped onto the Wii.

Nintendo is also not going to follow Sony's blueprint for console/system development and sales.  They didn't the last two generations, why would they do it all of a sudden now?  Essentially, you're not using logic.  You're making really loose assumptions like equating the PS2 to the Wii in their respective generations, which is grossly innacurate.  The Playstation & N64, and the PS2 and GC/Xbox were in similar leagues with one another.  The Wii is at least a league behind the Xbox360.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The last two generations Nintendo consoles were in second and third place. Support for both systems were slim and they were at their five year life span. Also the returns for the systems were low and they'd already had drop the prices on the systems as far as they could. Lowering the price would have not increased the sales enough to Justify continuing to sale and support the system with software.

 

I enjoyed the debat.  Thanks, I look forward to us debating another topic someday.





If Nintendo is successful at the moment, it’s because they are good, and I cannot blame them for that. What we should do is try to be just as good.----Laurent Benadiba

 

patjuan32 said:

No it was not. Resident Evil 4 proved that the PS2 was very far behind the Gamecube. The Game had long load times and effects had to be cut from the game just to get it to run properly.

--

Not always. You are forgetting the art that may have to be done again, Just go read what Retro had to do to get Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2  to look like a standard Wii game.

That's your assuption about the Wii and it shows that you do not know much about technology. All I can say is that the Gamecube could not run Wii games that were developed by Nintendo, such as and it definately can not run a game like Monster Hunter or Red Steel 2.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Me:
You seem to be assuming that porting from the Xbox360 to the Wii is somehow cheaper and easier than porting from the Xbox360 to the PS3.  Which is just absurd.  For one thing, the Wii cannot even handle many of the new game engines such as that in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare or the Unreal 3 engine.
 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the development of World at War the team[Treyarch] figured out a process for porting down the COD4 engine onto Wii, which brought about a pretty impressive offering for fans that weren't afraid to jump into another World War II shooter.

http://wii.ign.com/objects/902/902591.html

Unreal Engine 3 IS in the works for the Wii

http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=12897s

If it happens it happens. If it does not. I doubt any one would care at this point.

Capcom Brings MT Framework to Wii

http://wii.ign.com/articles/103/1038907p1.html

Even if they never make a game for the Wii using this engine. It's there to be used.


Capcom used the Resident Evil 4 engine and the game 's development was outsourced,TOSE Software Inc. The original Dead Rising team did not work on the game.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Typical when a console gets a large boost in sales or a new model old games that were popular pop back into the charts. This shows that new buyers are purchasing the console. When old games that are popular do not resurface in the charts is a sign that current users are trading in consoles for a newer model or just upgrading their old console for other reason, different colors, speciality model like a Halo edition Xbox, or other factors.

Me:

Nintendo is also not going to follow Sony's blueprint for console/system development and sales.  They didn't the last two generations, why would they do it all of a sudden now?  Essentially, you're not using logic.  You're making really loose assumptions like equating the PS2 to the Wii in their respective generations, which is grossly innacurate.  The Playstation & N64, and the PS2 and GC/Xbox were in similar leagues with one another.  The Wii is at least a league behind the Xbox360.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The last two generations Nintendo consoles were in second and third place. Support for both systems were slim and they were at their five year life span. Also the returns for the systems were low and they'd already had drop the prices on the systems as far as they could. Lowering the price would have not increased the sales enough to Justify continuing to sale and support the system with software.

 

I enjoyed the debat.  Thanks, I look forward to us debating another topic someday.



Are you actually claiming the PS2 wasn't technically in the same league as the GC and Xbox?  It was mildly weaker than the GameCube--not a whole generation behind.  If it was a whole generation behind, they wouldn't have even bothered porting RE4 to it at all.  Altogether, the changes were minimal and largely unnoticable, and the PS2 version actually had more content and gameplay modes.  The Wii RE4 is actually, largely, the PS2 version of the game with Wiimote controls.  Look:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qz0LbKpZtI  The PS2 and GameCube versions are nearly identical with the exception of a few fancy effects.  Had Capcom put some effort into it, I'm sure the effects could have remained more intact, but I would imagine Capcom simply removed some of them altogether just to get the development done sooner.  You need to stop dismissing the power of the PS2.   You're essentially saying this: 
Where hardware is concerned, the Wii is to the Xbox360 what the PS2 is to the GameCube, and that's just plain wrong.  It's not even remotely correct. 
Essentially, on a technical level, it's more like this: The PS2 is to the GameCube what the Xbox360 is to the PS3.  You're either grossly over-estimating the power of the GameCube, or vastly under-estimating the power of the PS2.  Hardwar tech last gen went in this order from weakest to strongest:  Dreamcast-PS2-GameCube-Xbox, with the Xbox way out in the lead.  The GameCube is closer to the PS2 than the Xbox in overall hardware strength. 

Now, going by hardware strength, the Wii is to the Xbox360 what the N64 is to the Playstation 2.  Give the PS2 some credit.  It was not "very far" behind the GameCube.  It was only marginally behind the GameCube, and a bit further behind the Xbox. 

What did Retro do to move Prime 1 and 2 to the Wii?  Update a few textures and add bloom lighting?  Because aside from better particle effects, slightly better textures, and bloom lighting--Metroid Prime 3 didn't really look any better than the GameCube games.  http://www.gamespot.com/features/6178117/index.html  Take a close look, the only things that are tuly different are that the lighting has been sharpened and that increased lighting adds a lot to the overall look of the game.  In fact, lighting goes a long way when there's sufficient tech behind it.  Some texture detail is improved, but overall, polycounts appear to be largely the same.  It's not a very big leap, and judging by the fact that Retro pumped out the Trilogy compilation, what, only two years after Prime 3 hit, I'd say it probably wasn't too arduous a task.  After all, Prime 1 and 2 are massive games, and to bump up the textures and lighting for two such massive games--along with changing the control scheme, would take quite a while.  We also now know that Retro has been working on Donkey Kong for quite a while, probably as far back as late 2008 or early 2009, which means that updating MP 1 & 2 was a side project.  Prime 3 sure looks prettier, but not like it's a generational leap forward like going from Call of Duty 3 to Modern Warfare.  For that matter, have you even seen any of the God of War PS2 games?  I mean look at this:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goG14Lbl2_I  

 

I'm not going to go into detail where you accuse me of "not knowing about technology" since you have shown quite clearly, that you dismiss the power of the PS2 as if it was as puny as the N64 compared to the GameCube.  Either you're being deliberatly obtuse, or you actually understand next to nothing about hardware power.  Just that the GameCube could probably run Red Steel 2 or Monster Hunter 3--all it would take is the kind of minor downgrade that they gave to RE4 to put it on the PS2 because, let's be frank, the GameCube falls pretty much right in the middle between the PS2 and Wii in terms of overall power--and the Wii is about a match to the original Xbox. 



The original Dead Rising team did not make DR for the Wii for two reasons: 
1--There's no way in hell the game, in it's original form, would run at all on the Wii.
2--Capcom listened to Wii owners who constantly cried for another game "like RE4."  They got it, and they still weren't happy.

 

Going by the new engines running on the Wii--they are gimped versions with a lot of their vast tech removed.  It's the only way an engine optimized for HD-standards (X360/PS3/PC) will run on the Wii.

 

I would like to see your evidence that old, popular games suddenly all appear on sales charts when consoles are adopted.  Logically speaking, this means that if console sales are steady--as they typically are now--that game sales would remain steady throughout--which isn't generally true (except for a few Wii releases like Wii Play).  Again, not every game remains in production for the run of a console--as a matter of fact, almost no games remain in production during the entire run of a console.  Production of Bioshock, Burnout Revenge, Fable II, and several other titles had long ceased by the time that I got my Xbox360 in late 2008.  At the time, all copies of Bioshock were first-run copies that had been discounted to clear them out of stock.  In fact, my copy of Fable II is a Platinum re-release with two downloadable bits included. And that version is also no longer in production. 

How then, can sales of these titles--most of which would no longer be in production--suddenly shoot back up into the charts at any time just because hardware sales suddenly see a spike?  It's extremely rare to find any game, ever, that remained in steady production during the entire lifespan of a console.  Even Tetris wasn't constantly made for the entire run of the original Game Boy--and it's the highest selling title on that system because it was originally a pack-in.   By your logic, all "popular" titles would have suddenly jumped back into the charts just because the Game Boy Pocket was released.  I'm reasonably certain that many of those games, such as Metroid II and Super Mario Land were long out of production by the time the Game Boy Pocket brought new life to the Game Boy line. 

No games released during the first two or three years of the Xbox360, no matter how popular, are still in wide release or production now--as we near the fifth anniversary of the Xbox360's launch.  The only exceptions will be massively popular titles like Halo 3, or rereleases in the Platinum Hits line.  The simple fact is, the new Xbox360 is selling, and not just to previous owners.  For instance, I didn't buy an X360 and upgrade later, the 60-gig Pro got me to adopt.  Same with the DS.  I didn't buy that original ugly thing--I wasn't sold until the Lite hit.  A lot of consumers are like that.  There will always be new adopters, but two things always create (sometimes brief) increases in sales--a new lower price point, and a new edition of the system.

 

Finally, we seem to talking about two completely different things concering the final parts of our last two posts.  I have no idea what you're talking about.  Initially you said something about about Nintendo following Sony's methods of console development, which I dismissed, and now you're talking about average life spans of Nintendo systems (5 years), and seem to be agreeing with my original statement that the Wii will not remain dominant and that a successor is coming around 2011/2012.



Galaki said:
Joelcool7 said:

Now at the moment Nintendo has the upper hand technically yet its sales are dropping year on year and Nintendo is loosing market share. Why is that? Simple the market growth is now occuring in PS3 and somewhat with X-Box.

So, Xbox360 outselling the PS3 somehow does not have have as much market growth as PS3? What kind of math is that?

And for the Wii to not increase the market, it would have to sell zero unit. Again, what math are you using?

Take off your glasses...


If you read what I wrote I was refering to Market share, market share is the amount of the market dominated by a single company. According to VGChartz Nintendo controls 48% of the market. Many months since the launch of the Slim the PS3 has been beating X-Box 360. I was refering to the growth in Sony's market share they managed to increase their market share by tons since two years ago. Market growth by Microsoft and Sony is dropping Nintendo's market share.

Its not math its common sense! If Sony and Microsoft have market share growth then Nintendo is loosing market share. Which it is.



-JC7

"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer

 

Around the Network

Wii is losing third party support as fast as a crashing plane is losing height. For 2011, there are only 2 third party games listed : Driver San Francisco and Ghost Recon Future Soldier. Those games will sell a lot more on HD systems so there's no chance they will lift Wii sales. With no games coming Wii hardware sales will only slow down as Kinect/Move appeal to people that have no system yet. Existing users surely buy whatever games Nintendo has to offer but hardware sales won't return 2008-2009 levels without outstanding exclusives.

As for Nintendo releasing Wii2, that certainly won't be a simple matter. Nintendo faces defiance from core gamers disappointed buy the orientation taken by Wii/DS software, so this audience is not likely to buy Wii2 without a rock solid line-up (which Nintendo can't have without third parties), especially if good games keep releasing on PS3/X360. Wii owners probably won't buy the system at once because it's bound to be expensive (at least if Nintendo puts the technology to compete with PS3/X360), and casual gamers (i.e. people who spend little time playing and don't consider video games as their primary leisure) won't see the necessity to upgrade especially with Wii is their first system.

Therefore whenever it releases, Wii2 probably won't see many early adopters unless it comes with something revolutionnary (like motion control was for Wii)



ryuzaki57 said:

Wii is losing third party support as fast as a crashing plane is losing height. For 2011, there are only 2 third party games listed : Driver San Francisco and Ghost Recon Future Soldier. Those games will sell a lot more on HD systems so there's no chance they will lift Wii sales. With no games coming Wii hardware sales will only slow down as Kinect/Move appeal to people that have no system yet. Existing users surely buy whatever games Nintendo has to offer but hardware sales won't return 2008-2009 levels without outstanding exclusives.

As for Nintendo releasing Wii2, that certainly won't be a simple matter. Nintendo faces defiance from core gamers disappointed buy the orientation taken by Wii/DS software, so this audience is not likely to buy Wii2 without a rock solid line-up (which Nintendo can't have without third parties), especially if good games keep releasing on PS3/X360. Wii owners probably won't buy the system at once because it's bound to be expensive (at least if Nintendo puts the technology to compete with PS3/X360), and casual gamers (i.e. people who spend little time playing and don't consider video games as their primary leisure) won't see the necessity to upgrade especially with Wii is their first system.

Therefore whenever it releases, Wii2 probably won't see many early adopters unless it comes with something revolutionnary (like motion control was for Wii)

Keep in mind Iwata stated just that. The next Nintendo console will revolutionalize the industry. Now I'm not sure how Nintendo plans to revolutionalize the industry a second time in a row but heck if they succeed then they shouldn't have a problem attracted the newer gamers the casuals , now the core you talk about may be alittle harder for Nintendo to attract. However when the 3DS launches and successfully follows in the footsteps of the DS I'm sure consumer confidence in Nintendo will be high.

I don't think Nintendo will have a problem, they will probubly launch an HD probubly with 3D support and some new revolutionary controller for 275.99$ Consumers will go wild and many will purchase the new console.

I think the reason third parties failed on the Wii is infact their own and Nintendo's fault. Big hardcore franchises (Most notably shooters) were absent from the Wii at launch. UbiSoft was alone in supporting Wii out of the gate and even they only released one of their core franchises (FarCry) which was very poorly ported. Then Red Steel honestly it wasn't that great. Then we saw a handful of bad ports like COD:III but not a genuine push into the hardcore demographic. By the time publishers decided to bring shooters to the Wii and other hardcore titles it was too late and too little. I mean seriously the best shooter on Wii is arguably The Conduit or WaW (Port) of course their won't be any audience left for the hardcore franchises. Had AssasinsCreed, GhostRecon , Call Of Duty Modern Warfare, Resident Evil 5 (A real Resident Evil), Grand Theft Auto. If the third parties gave Wii consumers established franchises early on their would be a market for them today. Nintendo could have also encouraged publishers to bring their big guns to Wii but instead chose to allow shovel ware and party games to over flow, casual galore. Lastly Nintendo themselves could have released a shooter (Third or first person) they could have released a horror (EternalDarkness 2) but Nintendo chose instead to stick to its most popular demographics (Platforming fans and casuals). Had Nintendo targetted hardcore gamers from the get go they could have had a much more successful platform. Then again casual software has flown off the shelves it has just cost Nintendo alot of publisher support and core gamers!

In the end those familiar with those franchises all the hardcore fans went over to X-Box and PlayStation. Their just isn't a market for those demographics. If Nintendo and third parties launch core titles out of the gate for the new Nintendo platform then I think the hardcore will adopt the console early on. In the end Nintendo's next console could be far more popular with the core demographic then Wii ever was.



-JC7

"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer

 

Gamerace said:

I'm a huge supporter of the Wii but the answer is clearly 'No' but as I stated elsewhere, Wii was never intended to last 10 years.    All other generations were 5 years long, and Nintendo moved forward on the basis that this gen would be 5 years long too.   Proof is in the pudding.    Back in '05 Nintendo seriously considered HD graphics for Wii but ultimately declined based on the low penetration HD had at that time.   They reasoned it wouldn't matter really until the start of the next generation which would then have to be HD.

Based on a 5 year plan that would put a new Nintendo console out in Nov 2011.  HD for sure but what else it delivers we can only image.

Despite MS and Sony retoric about Move/Kinect giving them another 5 years they'll be forced to respond with new consoles of thier own by 2012 or else Nintendo will run away with the next gen (almost) uncontested.


totaly agree... imagine Nintendo in HD with the most powerful machine on the market in 2012 !



I think it's impossible for any of the other two to catch up with Wii's numbers, but as we're seeing, it no longer rules the market for some time, and the pace of its sales will decrease over time, I think.



Maneco's Hall of Lame
As of October 2010 and, hopefully, until the end of times

4.3

4.6

6

6.8

7
Notable Mentions (a.k.a. "Games I Played and Hated")

The Legend of Zelda:
Ocarina of Time

Pokémon Channel

Sonic Riders: Zero Gravity

This poll result is beyond tragic.