Heavenly_King said: The tablet gaming + TV gaming at the same time is a bad idea, because you need to watch the tv and the tablet in order to interact in an efficient way with the game; and would be a pain in the a$$ to look to the tablet, and then look to the TV, the tablet, TV, tablet-TV-tablet-TV-tablet-TV-tablet-TV-tablet-TV-tablet-TV over and over again in order to avoid getting killed while watching the other screen. I bet this will be a major complain when the console releases. I bet most people will play only with the tablet, because that is the only way you can play without having to watch 2 screens at the same time. The DS/3DS was not a problem because the screens are very close. It is like a big screen that is foldable. You can see both screens without moving your eyes and head, making a simultaneos view for both screens (or at least you can the other screen with yout peripherical view) The problem with the WiiU is that you will be looking front (TV), down (Tablet) over and over again, so that you dont gent killed in a game; and that will be a major problem. For example in a game like in Zombi U you will be bussy checking the inventory, and while doing so you will be eaten by a zombie. RE LOL This console WiiLL FAIL U

If the Wii U fails, look for the entire industry to collapse, because it looks like Sony, Microsoft, and heck even Apple, feel what the Wii U is doing is a future part of gaming.

In regards to your complaints about the interface, SERIOUSLY?  Something like a pause button didn't occur to you?  And somehow, adding touch screen to a home console is a waste of time?  Care to explain how the heck you do a competent RTS without a touch screen?  Or is it that you don't consider an RTS to be an actual genre for games?

As for the WiiU, it does one thing you can't now: When someone comes into the room to watch TV, or is watching the TV and you want to play, the action doesn't stop.  I guess you don't consider this concept important, do you?

Your LOL there tells me you clearly aren't getting it, and is the LOLs that usually come before something succeeds.  It is also way I am having ever decreasing regard for what naysayers in forums like this have to say.  I can also be fairly sure, Nintendo has given FAR more thought to this than you have.

Talk about jumping the gun.

We will see a 3D Mario game
We will see a 2D Mario game
We will see an HD Zelda game
We will see a Super Smash Bros game
We will see Pikmin 3
We will see a Metroid game
We will see a Mario Kart game
We will see lots of new IP's
We will see the strongest third party support since the SNES
We are very likely to be seeing Star Fox and F-Zero finally make their return

And some of that has already been seen.

RolStoppable said: Nintendo needs to make games that their audience wants to buy in order to sell consoles. If this goal doesn't mash with what third parties want to see, then tough luck for third parties.

That's not what Nintendo said at the investor's briefing. They are targeting the core, and in so doing, they are aligning themselves at least in part with 3rd party goals. This is a non-issue.

If third parties want to make quality games for a Nintendo system, they are welcome to do so. Nintendo shouldn't pursue third parties at the expense of their consumers' entertainment. Now this may conflict with your view of "I want all the best third party games on my Nintendo system!", but I am afraid that Nintendo and third parties have different visions, so this is not possible.

Who said it had to be at the expense of their consumers. Are you saying it isn't possible for Nintendo to cater to their secured demographic (families) and to the core at the same time? Tell me how that works, please.

Here are some points to consider: 1) Nintendo wants to offer something unique with their hardware. Third parties want all hardware to be the same to port everything everywhere without additional things to consider.

Check -> WiiUPro Controller. Thankfully they figured that one out.

2) Nintendo maintains high quality standards, their games ship basically bugfree. Third parties have adopted an attitude of ship first, then patch later.

Who cares? It's not Nintendo's issue what 3rd parties do if people are buying the stuff. The problem is when it alienates customers, that's the problem. So far, I don't see these attitudes deter customers from buying HD games.

3) Nintendo is of the opinion that games should ship in a complete state. Third parties want to nickel and dime gamers and sell less content for a higher price, plus DLC afterwards.

Then let them choose so, how is that any of Nintendo's business? If customers don't want that, then they'll simply flock to Nintendo's offerings. The main thing is that people are buying Nintendo's platforms, nothing else. As for which games they buy, that's a whole separate, unrelated issue. Nintendo's aim should be to gather the greatest number of console owners as possible. The only moment this would be an issue is if Nintendo faced a shadow of itself, a shadow that, contrarily to them, actually succeeded in making quality a marketable alternative in the HD market. I'd be hard pressed but it's possible...

4) Nintendo knows how to make games with broad appeal, thus they dominate the sales charts on their systems. Third parties maintain the ill-belief that first party software takes away sales from third party software.

The only argument you have.

5) Nintendo sees itself as a company that makes family entertainment (hence why it all started with the Family Computer), thus they are local multiplayer focused. Third parties want to sell to loners, because online multiplayer means that everyone needs to buy their own copy of the game.

Check. They give 3rd parties the option, and follow their own path for their games, it's their business. It shouldn't reduce respect in any form so long as Nintendo stays with the times and doesn't make partners feel like Nintendo is stuck in a time-loop.

On all points, Nintendo's audience sides with the Nintendo way. It is why consumers appreciate gaming on Nintendo systems.

But Nintendo is aiming another audience, and they're failing. This audience is important, as it acts as:

1) A backup market in case things go wrong.

2) A catalyst to progress (see Naughty Dog et al.)

3) A powerful entryplace for participating in cutting-edge activities, and being part of the movement of most respected developers.

These are all natural and fundamental yearnings for a serious gaming business.

If Nintendo doesn't give in to third parties, they won't get much third party support. If Nintendo does give in, they will not sell many consoles and games

Wai???

Therefore either option will lead to poor third party support and another SNES (best first party and best third party on one and the same system) is a dream that cannot materialize unless third parties are willing to change their ways.

Why a SNES, why not a PS2? Don't you know the PSX was the natural successor to the SNES. Nintendo got nailed on that. Why is PSX levels of success not in your realm of possibilities. It blows my mind at times how your frame of mind works.

You will note that on the five points above Sony and Microsoft support the third party way of thinking.

As they very well should. Good on them.

Even if Nintendo doesn't follow the ideas, they should be a part of it at least in terms of enabling 3rd parties in what they desire. This is a platform after all is it not??

IIIIITHE1IIIII said: Talk about jumping the gun. We will see a 3D Mario game We will see a 2D Mario game We will see an HD Zelda game We will see a Super Smash Bros game We will see Pikmin 3 We will see a Metroid game We will see a Mario Kart game We will see lots of new IP's We will see the strongest third party support since the SNES We are very likely to be seeing Star Fox and F-Zero finally make their return And some of that has already been seen.

The bolded can't be guaranteed but it does look like they are going in a better direction.

Kresnik said: I think this whole situation comes down to the Nintendo/Sony dispute that led to the creation of the Playstation. Once Sony created the Playstation, marketed it as being really 'cool' (see: WipEout etc.) and brought in a whole new demographic of gamers, the third parties went with them. It was the third-parties that absolutely propelled Sony to dominance in the fifth and sixth gen and gave them so much traction in the industry. Nintendo could - and should - have done something about it before it was too late. Heck, they should have stopped the Playstation being created by agreeing to a venture with Sony, but their stubborn-ness of cartridges instead of optical discs - and what I can only assume was arrogance that they'd easily beat Sony since they were already beating Sega - led to the loss of third party stuff which never came back. The Wii has been a nightmare in terms of this. Gamecube had many problems, but at least there was a decent outside developer showing which Nintendo embraced. They have pretty much single-handedly propped up the Wii for its whole lifespan which isn't a road they should have gone down. I'm not saying they shouldn't have made the great first-party stuff - of course they should, but there needed to be more of a push for other things rather than Just Dance and Lego games, and that showed in their E3 conference since they had very little ouside support. Heck, Mass Effect 3 shows just what a problem it is. Sure, you can dip straight into Mass Effect 3 without any knowledge of the previous two, but it won't be the same - and you won't be able to move your Shepard across, which is a big part of the whole series. I like that they're trying to entice the third-parties back, but there's a long LONG road to go down before they can - and personally, I don't think Wii-U is the answer. I'm pretty certain they have the financials to prop themselves up until the neXtbox/PS4 come out, which they should have done and built a matching console - but that's just my view. Also, to all the doomsayers: Boo. Nintendo have weathered far worse storms than this (N64, Gamecube). Even though I think the console won't be a success - they'll still capture a portion of the casual market, and I'm pretty certain they won't lose any money on it. So maybe they'll get it right next time around.

@Bold NEVER!! but yeah, I agree with this post.

@boo doomsayers. Who cares if they're successful if it doesn't lead to a console that represents us and gives us the games we want. Some of us want to have the HD games on board and see them affect Nintendo in a positive way. So yeah, Boo.

Also, as Rol said, when the N64 and Cube failed, Nintendo was able to rest on its handhelds. It seems like the west is getting cold to Nintendo though, so that pillar is now beggining to show signs of concern.

Just sayin'

happydolphin said: Kresnik said: I think this whole situation comes down to the Nintendo/Sony dispute that led to the creation of the Playstation. Once Sony created the Playstation, marketed it as being really 'cool' (see: WipEout etc.) and brought in a whole new demographic of gamers, the third parties went with them. It was the third-parties that absolutely propelled Sony to dominance in the fifth and sixth gen and gave them so much traction in the industry. Nintendo could - and should - have done something about it before it was too late. Heck, they should have stopped the Playstation being created by agreeing to a venture with Sony, but their stubborn-ness of cartridges instead of optical discs - and what I can only assume was arrogance that they'd easily beat Sony since they were already beating Sega - led to the loss of third party stuff which never came back. The Wii has been a nightmare in terms of this. Gamecube had many problems, but at least there was a decent outside developer showing which Nintendo embraced. They have pretty much single-handedly propped up the Wii for its whole lifespan which isn't a road they should have gone down. I'm not saying they shouldn't have made the great first-party stuff - of course they should, but there needed to be more of a push for other things rather than Just Dance and Lego games, and that showed in their E3 conference since they had very little ouside support. Heck, Mass Effect 3 shows just what a problem it is. Sure, you can dip straight into Mass Effect 3 without any knowledge of the previous two, but it won't be the same - and you won't be able to move your Shepard across, which is a big part of the whole series. I like that they're trying to entice the third-parties back, but there's a long LONG road to go down before they can - and personally, I don't think Wii-U is the answer. I'm pretty certain they have the financials to prop themselves up until the neXtbox/PS4 come out, which they should have done and built a matching console - but that's just my view. Also, to all the doomsayers: Boo. Nintendo have weathered far worse storms than this (N64, Gamecube). Even though I think the console won't be a success - they'll still capture a portion of the casual market, and I'm pretty certain they won't lose any money on it. So maybe they'll get it right next time around. @Bold NEVER!! but yeah, I agree with this post. @boo doomsayers. Who cares if they're successful if it doesn't lead to a console that represents us and gives us the games we want. Some of us want to have the HD games on board and see them affect Nintendo in a positive way. So yeah, Boo. Also, as Rol said, when the N64 and Cube failed, Nintendo was able to rest on its handhelds. It seems like the west is getting cold to Nintendo though, so that pillar is now beggining to show signs of concern. Just sayin'

I'm not sure the Cube failed by your definitions.  I mean, if I'm reading you wrong please ignore this - but you're saying you want to play all the big third party games on a Nintendo console, correct?  I mean, a lot of my favourite games of that generation made an appearance on the GC - Timesplitters 2, SSX3, Tomb Raider Legend, Crazy Taxi etc.  Sure, you missed out on the stuff that Sony and Microsoft paid to keep as exclusives (Metal Gear Solid, Grand Theft Auto, Project Gotham Racing) but nothing much could be done about that.  And you got all this stuff alongside Super Mario Sunshine, Metroid Prime, Pikmin, Double Dash etc.  I like the Gamecube - I like the PS2 more, but the GC has a very solid lineup of games.

Anyway, I'm sorry you're so disappointed by the Wii-U.  Hopefully there will be some more announcements in the coming months to ease your pain!

^Thanks bro.

About multiplats, today's day and age is a little different. nowadays paid exclusives don't really happen so much, it's more the developer's choice now to go with one or the other I found. Epic with GeoW, Quantic Dream with Heavy Rain and such. Most other games are multiplat with minor exclusivity on DLC and such (amiright? idk)

So, the day where you prefer your PS2 to your Cube for anything other than 1st party offerings should be almost gone. I think.

Kresnik said: I'm not sure the Cube failed by your definitions.  I mean, if I'm reading you wrong please ignore this - but you're saying you want to play all the big third party games on a Nintendo console, correct?  I mean, a lot of my favourite games of that generation made an appearance on the GC - Timesplitters 2, SSX3, Tomb Raider Legend, Crazy Taxi etc.  Sure, you missed out on the stuff that Sony and Microsoft paid to keep as exclusives (Metal Gear Solid, Grand Theft Auto, Project Gotham Racing) but nothing much could be done about that.  And you got all this stuff alongside Super Mario Sunshine, Metroid Prime, Pikmin, Double Dash etc.  I like the Gamecube - I like the PS2 more, but the GC has a very solid lineup of games. Anyway, I'm sorry you're so disappointed by the Wii-U.  Hopefully there will be some more announcements in the coming months to ease your pain!

If you are thinking SadDolphin doesn't like the GC then you are wrong. He loved the GC. (Sorry if I read your comment wrong. )

TeddostheFireKing said: mike_intellivision said: Is it me or is it the people who complain the loudest about Nintendo want it to be more like the other companies. But if it were more like Sony and Microsoft, then it would not longer be Nintendo. And chances are, people (these same people no doubt) would complain about that too. Nintendo is Honda. It does what it wants to do. It is solid but not flashy. It is not for everyone. Nevertheless, it is generally successful at doing it. Mike from Morgantown This is true, Nintendo fans don't want Nintendo to be that different and still support their old franchises, but you know who does that too? Sony, and then they also make new franchises on top of that, Nintendo can still be Nintendo, just develop some new and exciting franchises. If they want to attract new consumers, why release games of the same franchise?

I do not disagree that it would have been better (wiser) for NIntendo to have also shown a new IP -- something that it has not truly done in a genreation.

 

Mike from Morgantown

IIIIITHE1IIIII said: Talk about jumping the gun. We will see a 3D Mario game We will see a 2D Mario game We will see an HD Zelda game We will see a Super Smash Bros game We will see Pikmin 3 We will see a Metroid game We will see a Mario Kart game We will see lots of new IP's We will see the strongest third party support since the SNES We are very likely to be seeing Star Fox and F-Zero finally make their return And some of that has already been seen.

Where was any of it. Only thing we have is HD Zelda from a tech demo last year. Where is the info on any of this, even concept art I don't friggin care.