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

Forums - Nintendo - Am I the only one worried about the future of Wii U?

Jumpin on 12 April 2012

Since all other points (save 2) have been effectively refuted.

Let me ask about point 2; what is a "hardcore gamer" and why do "Microsoft and Sony own them"?

This doesn't really make a lot of sense to me. As in the next generation, the definition of a "hardcore gamer" will be different or might not even exist; because the term is a little ridiculous as 1337 gamer was before it - and it also means something different now than it did a few years ago.

Second, Sony and Microsoft don't "own" anybody; gamers own Sony and Microsoft systems. Next generation is a new ballpark - people who may use Sony and Microsoft consoles now could easily buy a Nintendo console if it is enticing enough. Less than half of the PS2 audience bought a PS3, and many of those bought Wii and Xbox 360. I see no reason why it would be any different now. Nintendo has the greatest potential user base going into next generation considering 250 million pieces of Nintendo hardware have sold between Wii and DS this generation.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Around the Network
Mr Khan on 12 April 2012
Jumpin said:
Since all other points (save 2) have been effectively refuted.

Let me ask about point 2; what is a "hardcore gamer" and why do "Microsoft and Sony own them"?

This doesn't really make a lot of sense to me. As in the next generation, the definition of a "hardcore gamer" will be different or might not even exist; because the term is a little ridiculous as 1337 gamer was before it - and it also means something different now than it did a few years ago.

Second, Sony and Microsoft don't "own" anybody; gamers own Sony and Microsoft systems. Next generation is a new ballpark - people who may use Sony and Microsoft consoles now could easily buy a Nintendo console if it is enticing enough. Less than half of the PS2 audience bought a PS3, and many of those bought Wii and Xbox 360. I see no reason why it would be any different now. Nintendo has the greatest potential user base going into next generation considering 250 million pieces of Nintendo hardware have sold between Wii and DS this generation.

This is a valid point. Just as the definition of casual gamer has slid, so the definition of hardcore gamer has slid and will slide in the future, and the market could very well fall into Nintendo's grip for all we know



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Nem on 12 April 2012

I think theres nothing to worry about.

Nintendo isnt just trying to appeal to the hardcore. Nintendo is aiming at the same market the Wii had plus the hardcore. I dont think the sucess of the system depends on the hardcore, but it depends on that audience wether the system become suitable for hardcore games.



theARTIST0017 on 12 April 2012
mushroomboy5 said:
theARTIST0017 said:
radishhead said:
I honestly think the WiiU is going to go down the same way as the Gamecube - they're not going to get this "hardcore" audience, no matter how hard they try, and Microsoft own the casuals now. The 3DS will remain very popular, but I don't see the WiiU passing 30 million units


Just for your information you can't "own" the casuals, moreless an audience. The casuals flock to whatever is popular. And the Wii U has the backing of the once popular Wii audience which is very large.

uncertain if the bolded statement is even true...I work with plenty of middle aged housewives who still talk about their wii's quite a lot. Haven't heard a single mention of xbox from 'em. I don't think there's any reason to assume there isn't a casual market out there waiting to lap up the wii u


exactly. people are worried, when they don't even know anything about the Wii U



NINTENDO

nintendo forever . . .

archbrix on 12 April 2012
chocoloco said:

A)  I am clear that this seems probable they will come in 2013 and only furthers my point. The Wii U will be competing more closely with the 360 and PS3 than the PS4 nextbox because I see the Wii U being more like those consoles graphically. Once the PS4 and nextbox are out I presume they will be far superior in power to the Wii U as history has left me with no reason to think otherwise. At that point, I think the graphics whores and sony and MS fans will be ready to move on. The Wii U will be stuck competing with 4 consoles, PS3, 360, PS4, 720 and will not be that different to come anywhere close to dominating like they did early on this gen.

B)  This is not the same rules. Times change. People are looking for devices that do many things. The Wii does the least of all the consoles during the current time period and was doing well before the big hitters you mention like 3D Mario and 2D Mario, not to mention Mario Kart came out. The Wii's initial seller was it's motion controls which were fairly unique and as I said easier to pick up. The early sales of the wii were driven by this freshness and uniqueness and not a strong 1st party lineup othee than wii sports. What I am saying is many things sold the wii, but early on it was not it's exclusives alone it was the controls. How can exclusives sell a product more than a minor amount if they have not come out or been announced?

C)  Third parties will only need the Wii U if it sells very  well and quickly. If this does not happen it will probably be abandoned. This once again will be made worse after the PS4 and nextbox arrive and many graphics whore eager developers are ready to spend more of their capital on the MS, Sony combo.

D)  Nintendo can only win by being fres. And the tablet is nothing new and not fresh. Just look at what the Vita PS3 can do. The wii U is a redundancy in the industry until the Nextbox and PS4 arrive.

Your points are only relevant if Nintendo bombs at this E3 and shows that they don't have the right games in mind...

A)  If it has the right games, WiiU competing with 360 and PS3 is a non issue this holiday, as it would be foolish to assume that it won’t have a great launch.  There are easily enough Nintendo fans looking to upgrade that a holiday launch will prove successful.  But if Nintendo provides games that are fun and utilize the controller in ingenious ways, it really doesn’t matter what 360 and PS3 do, as the new hype will be on WiiU and its games that the other consoles can’t replicate (including NeXtBox and PS4, unless they announce tablet/streaming as well).  Therefore WiiU competing with 4 consoles is irrelevant.  Also, it is erroneous to assume that the new consoles will dwarf the WiiU to the point that it will be left out once they arrive.  There will surely be exclusives on the new consoles that may look better than the majority of what’s on the market in the 8th gen, but they’ll be the minority.  Most companies are happy with around WiiU rumored power (which I believe will be a bit stronger than the HD twins), and when you consider developer budgets, making an astronomically powerful system will not result in more support; only a prohibitively expensive console.

B)  No, the rules have not changed in that people still seek fun experiences.  If WiiU delivers on this, it will attract people similar to the way the Wii did.  Furthermore, saying that it was not exclusives but rather the controls that made Wii a success is also not entirely correct.  Wii Sports was exclusive… and it proved why Wii’s direction of going with motion controls could be fun.  If someone had come out with a motion controlled system that was not backed up with something that proved it to people, it would have flopped.  Again, it comes down to Nintendo delivering on why the tablet controller/streaming ability is unique and fun.  If it has the right games, the concept could become the next big thing.

C)  See point A.

D)  The tablet controller is new and fresh when pertaining to consoles, with a highly intuitive interface to boot.  As far as I know, the PS3/Vita combo cannot stream a full PS3 game to the Vita while displaying it on the TV simultaneously.  The only edge Sony has is that the Vita is its own individual system, which is much more expensive and is only a boon of you already own/want a Vita (which, well, that’s another topic entirely).  In any case, WiiU is built with the controller interaction in mind; every WiiU owner will have this ability, making the Sony combo look like an afterthought by comparison.  Once again, if Nintendo delivers the right games, WiiU will hardly be a redundancy, and could instead shape the industry for the 8th gen.

Conclusion:  If Nintendo delivers the right games, WiiU will be a success regardless of the competition.



Around the Network
Pavolink on 12 April 2012
mhsillen said:
wick said:
Yes.

I have owned every Nintendo console released and I have absolutely zero interest in the WiiU.

I don't want another console collecting dust in 2 years.


Ah the famous dust collector point 

Wii U secret feature: more vents to collect dust inside.



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


chocoloco on 12 April 2012
Mr Khan said:

Why does a 1-year-gap further your point? There was a one-year gap between 360 and PS3, or between PS2 and Xbox/GameCube. If anything history suggests a 1-year gap is a good thing so long as you are able to support your platform (remember folks, Dreamcast was an anomaly. It was still doing well for itself when Sega pulled the plug because Sega was messed up as a company as a whole. Dreamcast would have outsold the GameCube and the Xbox if Sega had kept it going at least until 2004, because hell, with 2 years on the market, Dreamcast sold 50% of what the GC did in 5, and GC was only 2 million behind Xbox at the end of the day)

The Wii's initial seller was Wii Sports. Enabled by motion controls, sure, but we need to keep this fact foremost. Features NEVER significantly sell consoles. Games do. If the features enable console-sellers, good for them, but the games are at the root of all things.

The third party thing i'll grant can go either way, but only if we acknowledge the massive irrational conspiracy that exists against Nintendo platforms. If the publishers got their heads out of their asses, however, they know that porting costs are negligible (in terms of making a profit simply on the port, and adding revenue for the costs of the game as a whole), that the Wii U is deliberately easy to port to, and that (in all likelihood) Durango/Orbis are not going to be so insanely far ahead as to bring Wii U out of their league. If Durango/Orbis are that far ahead, even then third parties may still look to as many platforms as possible, because those games will be hella expensive to make.

And are we really suggesting that Vita/PS3 combo will have any impact on the Wii U? I don't even know how to begin deconstructing how wrong that is. It requires a 3,000-word answer or none.

The reason the gap between the Wii U's and Sony and MS releases should matter less is because the 360 was the first HD console and was unique for that. The Wii U is the 3rd HD console and is not bringing anything new to the table other than a few first part launch titles. Only big Nintendo fans would need that, especially when most consumers only have one console and if it is already an HD one they will be happy in most cases.

You shouldn't say there is a conspiracy against Nintendo it makes you and other Nintendo guys that say it sound paranoid. Companies are in it for profit first and everything else 2nd. 3rd parties have gone where it favored them the most each gen. It is just the way business works.

I do not think the PS3 vita combo will effect the Wii U much, but the vita is already advertized to be working with the PS3. The wii U will not be the first one to show that both forms of gaming can be done together. I am saying the Wii U is redundant for thinking it will be special if it gets third party support. It will not, most of the consumers that like these games have a PC, PS3, and or 360. I would not expect a Nintendo only fan to like this, but you do have a habit of only seeing Nintendo as being unable to make mistakes and it is very true that things people value change with time. It is no longer about what games you have, but also how many variety of things can be done with the machine. History is not stagnant and people values and desires change drastically with time. The game has changed.



Deoz on 12 April 2012
chocoloco said:
Mr Khan said:
 

Why does a 1-year-gap further your point? There was a one-year gap between 360 and PS3, or between PS2 and Xbox/GameCube. If anything history suggests a 1-year gap is a good thing so long as you are able to support your platform (remember folks, Dreamcast was an anomaly. It was still doing well for itself when Sega pulled the plug because Sega was messed up as a company as a whole. Dreamcast would have outsold the GameCube and the Xbox if Sega had kept it going at least until 2004, because hell, with 2 years on the market, Dreamcast sold 50% of what the GC did in 5, and GC was only 2 million behind Xbox at the end of the day)

The Wii's initial seller was Wii Sports. Enabled by motion controls, sure, but we need to keep this fact foremost. Features NEVER significantly sell consoles. Games do. If the features enable console-sellers, good for them, but the games are at the root of all things.

The third party thing i'll grant can go either way, but only if we acknowledge the massive irrational conspiracy that exists against Nintendo platforms. If the publishers got their heads out of their asses, however, they know that porting costs are negligible (in terms of making a profit simply on the port, and adding revenue for the costs of the game as a whole), that the Wii U is deliberately easy to port to, and that (in all likelihood) Durango/Orbis are not going to be so insanely far ahead as to bring Wii U out of their league. If Durango/Orbis are that far ahead, even then third parties may still look to as many platforms as possible, because those games will be hella expensive to make.

And are we really suggesting that Vita/PS3 combo will have any impact on the Wii U? I don't even know how to begin deconstructing how wrong that is. It requires a 3,000-word answer or none.

The reason the gap between the Wii U's and Sony and MS releases should matter less is because the 360 was the first HD console and was unique for that. The Wii U is the 3rd HD console and is not bringing anything new to the table other than a few first part launch titles. Only big Nintendo fans would need that, especially when most consumers only have one console and if it is already an HD one they will be happy in most cases.

You shouldn't say there is a conspiracy against Nintendo it makes you and other Nintendo guys that say it sound paranoid. Companies are in it for profit first and everything else 2nd. 3rd parties have gone where it favored them the most each gen. It is just the way business works.

I do not think the PS3 vita combo will effect the Wii U much, but the vita is already advertized to be working with the PS3. The wii U will not be the first one to show that both forms of gaming can be done together. I am saying the Wii U is redundant for thinking it will be special if it gets third party support. It will not, most of the consumers that like these games have a PC, PS3, and or 360. I would not expect a Nintendo only fan to like this, but you do have a habit of only seeing Nintendo as being unable to make mistakes and it is very true that things people value change with time. It is no longer about what games you have, but also how many variety of things can be done with the machine. History is not stagnant and people values and desires change drastically with time. The game has changed.

I disagree. The thing that made special the 360 first was that it had its own exclusive togheter with the 3rd party support the ps2 had and that sony was losing with the ps3. It will be the games that will sell the console, i think the 3ds showed this with its price cut and the coming of their own killer apps, also the ps3 when it got a fairful amount of exclusives and recovered 3rd party support.Games and price will be the thing that sell a gaming console.

About the conspiracy thing, i think conspiracy is the wrong word. I would say mentality from some devs.  Anyway if the WiiU got te 3rd party support i see it being very special, since it will have both Ninty first party and multiplats. I think there exist a meaningful share of the core market that had a wii first and moved later to the hd twins because3rd party ceased to exist. I agree with Mr Khan here, its more a defensive move. It's about filling all the bases, not stealing them.



Mr Khan on 12 April 2012
chocoloco said:
Mr Khan said:
 

Why does a 1-year-gap further your point? There was a one-year gap between 360 and PS3, or between PS2 and Xbox/GameCube. If anything history suggests a 1-year gap is a good thing so long as you are able to support your platform (remember folks, Dreamcast was an anomaly. It was still doing well for itself when Sega pulled the plug because Sega was messed up as a company as a whole. Dreamcast would have outsold the GameCube and the Xbox if Sega had kept it going at least until 2004, because hell, with 2 years on the market, Dreamcast sold 50% of what the GC did in 5, and GC was only 2 million behind Xbox at the end of the day)

The Wii's initial seller was Wii Sports. Enabled by motion controls, sure, but we need to keep this fact foremost. Features NEVER significantly sell consoles. Games do. If the features enable console-sellers, good for them, but the games are at the root of all things.

The third party thing i'll grant can go either way, but only if we acknowledge the massive irrational conspiracy that exists against Nintendo platforms. If the publishers got their heads out of their asses, however, they know that porting costs are negligible (in terms of making a profit simply on the port, and adding revenue for the costs of the game as a whole), that the Wii U is deliberately easy to port to, and that (in all likelihood) Durango/Orbis are not going to be so insanely far ahead as to bring Wii U out of their league. If Durango/Orbis are that far ahead, even then third parties may still look to as many platforms as possible, because those games will be hella expensive to make.

And are we really suggesting that Vita/PS3 combo will have any impact on the Wii U? I don't even know how to begin deconstructing how wrong that is. It requires a 3,000-word answer or none.

The reason the gap between the Wii U's and Sony and MS releases should matter less is because the 360 was the first HD console and was unique for that. The Wii U is the 3rd HD console and is not bringing anything new to the table other than a few first part launch titles. Only big Nintendo fans would need that, especially when most consumers only have one console and if it is already an HD one they will be happy in most cases.

You shouldn't say there is a conspiracy against Nintendo it makes you and other Nintendo guys that say it sound paranoid. Companies are in it for profit first and everything else 2nd. 3rd parties have gone where it favored them the most each gen. It is just the way business works.

I do not think the PS3 vita combo will effect the Wii U much, but the vita is already advertized to be working with the PS3. The wii U will not be the first one to show that both forms of gaming can be done together. I am saying the Wii U is redundant for thinking it will be special if it gets third party support. It will not, most of the consumers that like these games have a PC, PS3, and or 360. I would not expect a Nintendo only fan to like this, but you do have a habit of only seeing Nintendo as being unable to make mistakes and it is very true that things people value change with time. It is no longer about what games you have, but also how many variety of things can be done with the machine. History is not stagnant and people values and desires change drastically with time. The game has changed.

So you're one of the revisionists who thinks that Wii U isn't the next generation systems, i see.

Sadly i'm not currently in a position to argue the depth and breadth of the conspiracy, but one can see its elements dating back even to why the GameCube got passed over for multiplat games when it essentially had the same userbase as the Xbox, or the ludicrious "test games" on Wii. Conspiracy is a bit of a loaded word, but there is irrational bias that is pervasive, and that is the only element that could undermine Wii U third party support.

And video game consoles have been fighting against the variety machines since the 80s. Everyone's always been calling for the imminent doom of consoles because of the multitaskers, and every time they have failed.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Slimebeast on 12 April 2012
Jumpin said:
Since all other points (save 2) have been effectively refuted.

Let me ask about point 2; what is a "hardcore gamer" and why do "Microsoft and Sony own them"?

This doesn't really make a lot of sense to me. As in the next generation, the definition of a "hardcore gamer" will be different or might not even exist; because the term is a little ridiculous as 1337 gamer was before it - and it also means something different now than it did a few years ago.

Second, Sony and Microsoft don't "own" anybody; gamers own Sony and Microsoft systems. Next generation is a new ballpark - people who may use Sony and Microsoft consoles now could easily buy a Nintendo console if it is enticing enough. Less than half of the PS2 audience bought a PS3, and many of those bought Wii and Xbox 360. I see no reason why it would be any different now. Nintendo has the greatest potential user base going into next generation considering 250 million pieces of Nintendo hardware have sold between Wii and DS this generation.

Do you really believe this?

I think there definitely exists such a thing as hardcore gamers who make up the majority of the user base on PS3 and X360. And these guys are more or less locked to next gen Sony and MS (thanks to being hooked with their respective online infrastructures and whatnot).

I believe Wii U will be quite successful, they'll be all fine. They have their unique games and their loyal hardcore base, the Wii U will launch first in a new gen which is always an advantage and the projected launch price of $300 is amazing, and most importantly with that special controller they will be able to attract a big portion of the casual gamers and family gamers in the coming gen.

But the typical hardcore gamer for the most part still belongs to PS and Xbox I believe (note, I see it as there are two types of hardcore gamers - the HD gamer and the traditional Nintendo gamer). All the millions of gamers who play lots of HD games in this gen, all the Halo and Assassin's Creed guys, and the millions of semi-casual gamers, the COD and FIFA guys, they will mostly buy a PS4 and Nextbox.

Still as I say, the Nintendo Wii U will be fine. +50 million units lifetime is a reasonable goal.