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

Forums - Nintendo - Gametrailers post Wii U launch reaction. Watch and Discuss!!

DanneSandin on 10 December 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
animegaming said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
bazmeistergen said:
Xenoblade - another new IP... Kinda.


Nope.


wait i thought it was but what about the last story didn't nintendo did fund it and published it in japan 


Second party, its no different than Lost Odyssey for Microsoft or Gears of War. I doubt it sold well anyway.

Xenoblade is as much 1st party as Uncharted is actually, since Nintendo owns Monolith. The Last Story on the other hand is 2nd party game. Like Bayo2 will be.

@OP: They had some valid points to bring up. But what really caught my ears was Shane saying that he's always surprised by what Nintendo brings. It seems as if they're pretty surprised it's a good and fun system! "I feel like I underestimated the power of something so simple" - Shane. I have the feeling like this is what the industry as a whole always does with Nintendo. We, as gamers, see the potential, but the "experts" don't...


Uncharted was made by Sonys request to Naughty Dog. InFamous was also made by Sonys request to Sucker Punch, but at the time they were just a second party, once the title sold they purchased them thus ensuring their entrance into the family. Nintendos ownership of Xenoblade is yes first party, but the creation of said franchise had nothing to do with them, but rather Namco. Their first party ownership is more akin to Microsoft with Rare, where Nintendo let go of the shares and Microsoft picked up the pieces. None of their titles were created under Microsofts watchful eye and neither were Nintendos. Most of Sonys were since the beginning. As for the second party part, thats my mistake. I mixed it up with the Last Story which was second party like Lost Odyssey or Gears.

As per your other point, Shane has a point though. You see, Nintendo created a highly casual market with the Wii and that market will either grow with them or move onto other casual gimmicks. The kids will move onto the COD's and GTA's (its alarming how many kids are playing these games). 

I have no insight in how Sony or Nintendo operates regarding their studios, so you're probably right.

I just don't get why Shane was surprised that Wii U is as good as it is... The casuals have moved on, but that doesn't mean that Wii U as a gaming system would be bad, that's just a weird way of thinking. I could see the appeal the moment I read those rumors back in spring 2011, and it says a lot that almost all "experts" were sceptical - until actually trying the system.


He wasnt surprised, he just sees the Wii's movement, tech, and media awareness as trouble for sunstaining its marketshare. Thank goodness for Garnett Lee, because he gives me a glimmer of hope for Nintendo no matter how bad I feel about their position right now. The Wii U is going to sell off of first party with core third party titles behind it. Nintendo knows this. The question is, how many of the Wii owners who just joined in with gaming will translate to the Wii U? I am predicting about 10-20% of them. The sales of this new gen is going to be smaller than last gen, since Nintendo wont have that full casual audience carrying it when you look at console sales in general (not excluding competition).

I think you better watch that vid again; Shane is clearly surprised that he actually enjoyed WIi U.


I know that he enjoyed it, but it never changed his mind about the overall appeal or commercialism of it compared to the original Wii.

I think we might be talking about two different things entirely... I'm talking about that they were all kinda surprised they enjoyed it as much as they did, nothing more. And yes, it's apparent they have their doubts whether or not it'll have the same mass market appeal as Wii had - and I'm sure it won't.



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 11 December 2012
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
animegaming said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
bazmeistergen said:
Xenoblade - another new IP... Kinda.


Nope.


wait i thought it was but what about the last story didn't nintendo did fund it and published it in japan 


Second party, its no different than Lost Odyssey for Microsoft or Gears of War. I doubt it sold well anyway.

Xenoblade is as much 1st party as Uncharted is actually, since Nintendo owns Monolith. The Last Story on the other hand is 2nd party game. Like Bayo2 will be.

@OP: They had some valid points to bring up. But what really caught my ears was Shane saying that he's always surprised by what Nintendo brings. It seems as if they're pretty surprised it's a good and fun system! "I feel like I underestimated the power of something so simple" - Shane. I have the feeling like this is what the industry as a whole always does with Nintendo. We, as gamers, see the potential, but the "experts" don't...


Uncharted was made by Sonys request to Naughty Dog. InFamous was also made by Sonys request to Sucker Punch, but at the time they were just a second party, once the title sold they purchased them thus ensuring their entrance into the family. Nintendos ownership of Xenoblade is yes first party, but the creation of said franchise had nothing to do with them, but rather Namco. Their first party ownership is more akin to Microsoft with Rare, where Nintendo let go of the shares and Microsoft picked up the pieces. None of their titles were created under Microsofts watchful eye and neither were Nintendos. Most of Sonys were since the beginning. As for the second party part, thats my mistake. I mixed it up with the Last Story which was second party like Lost Odyssey or Gears.

As per your other point, Shane has a point though. You see, Nintendo created a highly casual market with the Wii and that market will either grow with them or move onto other casual gimmicks. The kids will move onto the COD's and GTA's (its alarming how many kids are playing these games). 

I have no insight in how Sony or Nintendo operates regarding their studios, so you're probably right.

I just don't get why Shane was surprised that Wii U is as good as it is... The casuals have moved on, but that doesn't mean that Wii U as a gaming system would be bad, that's just a weird way of thinking. I could see the appeal the moment I read those rumors back in spring 2011, and it says a lot that almost all "experts" were sceptical - until actually trying the system.


He wasnt surprised, he just sees the Wii's movement, tech, and media awareness as trouble for sunstaining its marketshare. Thank goodness for Garnett Lee, because he gives me a glimmer of hope for Nintendo no matter how bad I feel about their position right now. The Wii U is going to sell off of first party with core third party titles behind it. Nintendo knows this. The question is, how many of the Wii owners who just joined in with gaming will translate to the Wii U? I am predicting about 10-20% of them. The sales of this new gen is going to be smaller than last gen, since Nintendo wont have that full casual audience carrying it when you look at console sales in general (not excluding competition).

I think you better watch that vid again; Shane is clearly surprised that he actually enjoyed WIi U.


I know that he enjoyed it, but it never changed his mind about the overall appeal or commercialism of it compared to the original Wii.

I think we might be talking about two different things entirely... I'm talking about that they were all kinda surprised they enjoyed it as much as they did, nothing more. And yes, it's apparent they have their doubts whether or not it'll have the same mass market appeal as Wii had - and I'm sure it won't.


And there in is the rub, Nintendo needs the casuals to defeat their competition. Without the casuals the Nintendo will lose 50- 60% of their consumer base.



DanneSandin on 12 December 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


I know that he enjoyed it, but it never changed his mind about the overall appeal or commercialism of it compared to the original Wii.

I think we might be talking about two different things entirely... I'm talking about that they were all kinda surprised they enjoyed it as much as they did, nothing more. And yes, it's apparent they have their doubts whether or not it'll have the same mass market appeal as Wii had - and I'm sure it won't.


And there in is the rub, Nintendo needs the casuals to defeat their competition. Without the casuals the Nintendo will lose 50- 60% of their consumer base.

Yeah, but I wasn't discussing whether or not Nintendo needs casuals to thrive. I was talking about the fact that these "experts" already had judged Wii U on beforehand, but was positively surprised when they tried it. Only goes to show lots in the business is biased.

And regarding whether or not Nintendo needs casuals: No they don't. If they only got good 3rd party support they'd crush both MS and SOny. If they had the same kind of 3rd party support, the games looks and runs just as good on all 3 consoles, it all comes down to 1st party games. And we know who dominates that category.



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

S.T.A.G.E. on 12 December 2012
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
 


I know that he enjoyed it, but it never changed his mind about the overall appeal or commercialism of it compared to the original Wii.

I think we might be talking about two different things entirely... I'm talking about that they were all kinda surprised they enjoyed it as much as they did, nothing more. And yes, it's apparent they have their doubts whether or not it'll have the same mass market appeal as Wii had - and I'm sure it won't.


And there in is the rub, Nintendo needs the casuals to defeat their competition. Without the casuals the Nintendo will lose 50- 60% of their consumer base.

Yeah, but I wasn't discussing whether or not Nintendo needs casuals to thrive. I was talking about the fact that these "experts" already had judged Wii U on beforehand, but was positively surprised when they tried it. Only goes to show lots in the business is biased.

And regarding whether or not Nintendo needs casuals: No they don't. If they only got good 3rd party support they'd crush both MS and SOny. If they had the same kind of 3rd party support, the games looks and runs just as good on all 3 consoles, it all comes down to 1st party games. And we know who dominates that category.


Keep saying Nintendo can beat Sony and Microsoft at their own game by having a console with adequate third party support and less power. By your will alone you will usher their destruction. Nintendo couldnt catch a break the second Sony entered the industry and Microsoft only helped them by creating a roadblock because Microsoft wants Sony to fear them. Nintendo can win by being Nintendo, the family to teen oriented console. Casuals can only help them.



Soundwave on 12 December 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
animegaming said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
bazmeistergen said:
Xenoblade - another new IP... Kinda.


Nope.


wait i thought it was but what about the last story didn't nintendo did fund it and published it in japan 


Second party, its no different than Lost Odyssey for Microsoft or Gears of War. I doubt it sold well anyway.

Xenoblade is as much 1st party as Uncharted is actually, since Nintendo owns Monolith. The Last Story on the other hand is 2nd party game. Like Bayo2 will be.

@OP: They had some valid points to bring up. But what really caught my ears was Shane saying that he's always surprised by what Nintendo brings. It seems as if they're pretty surprised it's a good and fun system! "I feel like I underestimated the power of something so simple" - Shane. I have the feeling like this is what the industry as a whole always does with Nintendo. We, as gamers, see the potential, but the "experts" don't...


Uncharted was made by Sonys request to Naughty Dog. InFamous was also made by Sonys request to Sucker Punch, but at the time they were just a second party, once the title sold they purchased them thus ensuring their entrance into the family. Nintendos ownership of Xenoblade is yes first party, but the creation of said franchise had nothing to do with them, but rather Namco. Their first party ownership is more akin to Microsoft with Rare, where Nintendo let go of the shares and Microsoft picked up the pieces. None of their titles were created under Microsofts watchful eye and neither were Nintendos. Most of Sonys were since the beginning. As for the second party part, thats my mistake. I mixed it up with the Last Story which was second party like Lost Odyssey or Gears.

As per your other point, Shane has a point though. You see, Nintendo created a highly casual market with the Wii and that market will either grow with them or move onto other casual gimmicks. The kids will move onto the COD's and GTA's (its alarming how many kids are playing these games). 

I have no insight in how Sony or Nintendo operates regarding their studios, so you're probably right.

I just don't get why Shane was surprised that Wii U is as good as it is... The casuals have moved on, but that doesn't mean that Wii U as a gaming system would be bad, that's just a weird way of thinking. I could see the appeal the moment I read those rumors back in spring 2011, and it says a lot that almost all "experts" were sceptical - until actually trying the system.


He wasnt surprised, he just sees the Wii's movement, tech, and media awareness as trouble for sunstaining its marketshare. Thank goodness for Garnett Lee, because he gives me a glimmer of hope for Nintendo no matter how bad I feel about their position right now. The Wii U is going to sell off of first party with core third party titles behind it. Nintendo knows this. The question is, how many of the Wii owners who just joined in with gaming will translate to the Wii U? I am predicting about 10-20% of them. The sales of this new gen is going to be smaller than last gen, since Nintendo wont have that full casual audience carrying it when you look at console sales in general (not excluding competition).

I think you better watch that vid again; Shane is clearly surprised that he actually enjoyed WIi U.


I know that he enjoyed it, but it never changed his mind about the overall appeal or commercialism of it compared to the original Wii.

I think we might be talking about two different things entirely... I'm talking about that they were all kinda surprised they enjoyed it as much as they did, nothing more. And yes, it's apparent they have their doubts whether or not it'll have the same mass market appeal as Wii had - and I'm sure it won't.


And there in is the rub, Nintendo needs the casuals to defeat their competition. Without the casuals the Nintendo will lose 50- 60% of their consumer base.


I think the problem here is also ... do casuals even want another video game console today? I think Nintendo may have made a console that no one but Nintendo fans really asked for. 

There are 10-20 million people I believe on both the PS3 and 360 side who are tired of their aging 360/PS3 and would be interested in a large upgrade to the PS3/360, but they're stuck waiting for Sony/MS in 2013. 

*That* is an audience that's actually has demand and dollars to back that demand, IMO Nintendo should've made a system aimed at them and seen how far of a headstart they could've gotten. Sure maybe Microsoft overtakes them someday, but I don't think Sony has the money to catch Nintendo in this situation with a year headstart. 

Casuals ... I think Wii Sports/Fit had its moment and just like Nintendogs and Brain Training ... that moment has passed. Relying on this audience is like relying on your flakey friend to come through with money in an emergency for you. Lets see if they back Nintendo with Wii U ... I have serious doubts though. I think they've moved on to the iPad and cheap games. 



Around the Network
Kenology on 12 December 2012

I'm assuming this isn't a good vid being as though S.T.A.G.E. posted it?

EDIT: Made the decision not to watch it.



Kenology on 12 December 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:


Its not that people are hard to please, its that gamers who have grown up want mature titles from Nintendo and they wont give it to them. It's not too much to ask, as long as you dont ask Nintendo for it, its as simple as that.

You should speak for yourself, not everyone.  So if, by mature titles, you mean turning Mario into Conker (with blood and swearing) or giving Zelda a 'M'-rating.  That's never going to happen.  Therefore, if some people are waiting for that, their just delusional.  Nintendo makes games for everyone.  Their not going to alienate an entire fanbase just to please "mature" gamers who to blood, sex, and hear curse words in their videogames!  It says more about these "grown up" gamers you speak of than anything.  And I don't even think people are really saying they want this from Nintendo, even if Nintendo made these types of games there would be some other excuse!

There's a reason why Nintendo's software reach heights of 10-20 million +.  And to pigeon hole Nintendo software into Wii Sports/Fit category is short-sighted.



S.T.A.G.E. on 12 December 2012
Kenology said:

I'm assuming this isn't a good vid being as though S.T.A.G.E. posted it?

EDIT: Made the decision not to watch it.


Watch it...its a very valid conversation. Brings up the good and the bad of the launch.



DanneSandin on 12 December 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
DanneSandin said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


And there in is the rub, Nintendo needs the casuals to defeat their competition. Without the casuals the Nintendo will lose 50- 60% of their consumer base.

Yeah, but I wasn't discussing whether or not Nintendo needs casuals to thrive. I was talking about the fact that these "experts" already had judged Wii U on beforehand, but was positively surprised when they tried it. Only goes to show lots in the business is biased.

And regarding whether or not Nintendo needs casuals: No they don't. If they only got good 3rd party support they'd crush both MS and SOny. If they had the same kind of 3rd party support, the games looks and runs just as good on all 3 consoles, it all comes down to 1st party games. And we know who dominates that category.


Keep saying Nintendo can beat Sony and Microsoft at their own game by having a console with adequate third party support and less power. By your will alone you will usher their destruction. Nintendo couldnt catch a break the second Sony entered the industry and Microsoft only helped them by creating a roadblock because Microsoft wants Sony to fear them. Nintendo can win by being Nintendo, the family to teen oriented console. Casuals can only help them.

I think you're reading way too much into what I'm saying. You imply I want to see the destruction of MSony, which I don't. And what I said is that if all three consoles had the same 3rd party support, choosing a console would come down to 1st party games (as far as games goes anyways). I therefore thought I implied that all 3 consoles would be just as powerful, but I guess you missed that. Sorry about that.

And regarding Nintendo not catching a break when Sony entered the business; Nintendo have only themselves to blame for the utter domination of PS1 and 2. They (Ninty) had mistreated 3rd parties for years and refused to switch over to the disc format, and sticking with cartridges. That's the main two reasons why Sony was so successful. And this can be observed in this past generation when MS got good 3rd party support, and in doing so took a large bite out of Sony's market share.



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

Baddman on 13 December 2012

lol@ xenoblade and xenosaga being the same series never seen someone who knows so little boast like they know so much