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

Forums - Nintendo - Nintendo Fans Same Excuse?

KingHades said:
osed125 said:

Some Nintendo franchises are more popular than they were back in the day. Mario Kart has a huge following and so as 3D Mario games, we can deduce that from Mario Kart 7 and Mario 3D Land sales (plus the insanely huge numbers Mario Kart Wii currently has). Don't forget the "Wii" series (Wii Sports, Party, Resort, etc), which are also really popular. 

So no, comparing GC with Wii U doesn't make sense for some franchises. 

Also those 2 Pokemon games were spin off and not related to main series, and those never sell as well as the main entries in the series. 

4 Zelda games? Wind Waker, 4 Swords (which is technically not in the main series) and Twilight Princess (which the Wii version took all the spotlight), so there's 3 unless you want to count the Ocarina and Majora's mask remake. So basically there were only 2 Zelda games during the GC era (and 1 of them technically being a spin off)

Plenty Mario games which include only 2 big franchises (Mario Kart, 3D Mario), the rest are simple sports games and a RPG (which again don't sell as high as Kart or 3D Mario). Mario Party only got very popular (7m+ units sold) with the Wii and DS (the decrease of Mario Party 9 can be attributed to Nintendo pretty much killing the Wii, not the franchise popularity per se).

Get your facts right next time.

Sorry,but remake/spinoff still accounts for it being part of the franchise. A mario game is a mario game therefore it should have sold regardless.

Same with Zelda I don't care if it's a spin off or not it's still a Zelda game.

Then you're not interested in having a productive argument, are you?



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
KingHades said:
Pavolink said:
You must have very well informed and realiable sources to claim every Wii U/Nintendo fan uses the same excuse regarding this terrible mismanagement and not consider this as flamebait while asks for no trolling in the thread.

Anyway, answering to the question in the OP maybe it is because all of us Nintendo/Wii U fans expect sales to pick up with the heavy hitters and a more steady stream of games.

What other argument should we use if the price cut didn't help?

Yes,but your missing the point the GameCube had the games which are what matters the most yet it failed to receive the sales that I guess it "should have" gotten.


There are a lot of variables in the market. We simply cannot guarantee that only one factor (games in this case) will "save" an entery console. It needs games, marketing and a healthy perception. Also, the actual situation is not the same than the one during the GameCube era as the market is no more concentrated basically in one solely console. Believing that the first party support was not enough ignoring all those different uncontrollable variables is not true.

Support from external developers it's now most likely multiplatform, not exclusive like in those years. Even some developers will be forced to put some of their games in the platform, which didn't happen during those years. This gives more options to players and the perception of a worth product purchased unlike the GC era where the others consoles have the "worthless perception" compared to the leader's amount of offerings.

Let's not forget about the late variants in gameplay that motion controls and touch screens are allowing to be developed, again, unlike in those years when every console was played in the same way (compared to this day) relying almost only on the traditional controller. Games are not the same as the GC era because the experience is not the same. Interfaces are evolving and offers different options to consumers which leds them to find worthy the idea of buying more than one device.

Market has grow enough, not in the number of consumer but in tha amount of different offerings. We cannot rule out, in this case, that the next sequel to Wii Sports is going to sell well if the market reacts to a new experience result of a combination of touch screen and motion controls, or that the NFC feature will explode if it's used in a way the market finds interesting.

"Games" are not Mario/Zelda, "games" are the experiences we expect the company to develop with these new interfaces. Market positive reaction is something that nobody can guarantee, not even Nintendo, but it is what we hope as it is their last card.



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


arcane_chaos said:
nintendo fans 2013=sony fans 2007


Sony fans had it A LOT worse!

 

lol it isn't even comparable..

 

 

now i'm leaving this thread



KingHades said:
osed125 said:

Some Nintendo franchises are more popular than they were back in the day. Mario Kart has a huge following and so as 3D Mario games, we can deduce that from Mario Kart 7 and Mario 3D Land sales (plus the insanely huge numbers Mario Kart Wii currently has). Don't forget the "Wii" series (Wii Sports, Party, Resort, etc), which are also really popular. 

So no, comparing GC with Wii U doesn't make sense for some franchises. 

Also those 2 Pokemon games were spin off and not related to main series, and those never sell as well as the main entries in the series. 

4 Zelda games? Wind Waker, 4 Swords (which is technically not in the main series) and Twilight Princess (which the Wii version took all the spotlight), so there's 3 unless you want to count the Ocarina and Majora's mask remake. So basically there were only 2 Zelda games during the GC era (and 1 of them technically being a spin off)

Plenty Mario games which include only 2 big franchises (Mario Kart, 3D Mario), the rest are simple sports games and a RPG (which again don't sell as high as Kart or 3D Mario). Mario Party only got very popular (7m+ units sold) with the Wii and DS (the decrease of Mario Party 9 can be attributed to Nintendo pretty much killing the Wii, not the franchise popularity per se).

Get your facts right next time.

Sorry,but remake/spinoff still accounts for it being part of the franchise. A mario game is a mario game therefore it should have sold regardless.

Same with Zelda I don't care if it's a spin off or not it's still a Zelda game.

And they are not system sellers. Mario Party, Mario Golf, Zelda 4 Swords, Zelda remakes didn't give any boost to the sales. Those games were Mario Kart Double Dash, Zelda Wind Waker (although because of the cell shaded graphics people didn't like it as much) and Super Mario Sunshine. 

And like I said, those franchises (the system sellers) are the ones that are more popular now (Zelda has stayed the same) and the 3DS games show that. And don't forget the Wii series. 



Nintendo and PC gamer

Mazty said:
RazorDragon said:
GC's case actually didn't made any sense. It had games(1st and 3rd party), it had the controller, it had the online features, it had even an add-on that played GBA/GBC games and also GBA connection that allowed new gaming possibilities, it was the smallest and most reliable console of that generation and, most importantly for the gaming forums crowd, it had the graphics.

So, what can we conclude from all that? Gaming market makes no sense.

Actually it had weak core exclusives (Think Halo:CE & Fable, DMC/FF/etc), was the worst looking consoles (purple? Really?), had the worst controller (it's always PS vs xbox, not xbox vs GC or PS vs GC) and had no DVD playback. It makes a lot of sense why it didn't do well. 

Not to get into this spin cycle again, but really? FABLE (3 million) a stronger exclusive than Melee (7 million) Double Dash (7 million) and Sunshine? (5.5 million)

Halo sold the Xbox, it didn't have any other big movers.



Around the Network
AgentZorn said:
KingHades said:
snyps said:
am i the only one that thinks dvd functionality is what slaughtered ps2's competition? When ps2 released there was no games for it. But ppl drove up the install base by purchasing it to play dvds. The large install base gave developers reason to get working. Its a perfect storm.

Yes I do think people bought it for the DVD,but you can also say a hefty bunch bought it for the games.

The software sales justify this almost every third party game was guarenteed to sell atleast 1mil on the PS2 if not over 900k atleast lol.

I still think that the PS2 being a DVD player is what made it so succesful. The average person would have had much more use for a DVD player than a video game console.


It was among the cheapest DVD players when it launched and at the same time it was able to play games.  So a ton of people that wanted to have DVDs bought that (my sister did)

But then there is also the  "99% of phat PS2s died because of disk read errors" thing. (I swear I dont know a single person that still has a phat PS2  all have slims because the phat ones laser failed)  So basically its more like 70 million unique PS2 owners.

Well back to the gamecube.

Gamecube had hardware that was on par and not worse(google it!) than Xbox1 so graphics were not the problem.
The gamecube was super cheap  so the price was not the problem.
The gamecube had games like SmashBros  short time after launch  and also had Zelda, MarioKart, FZero, Luigis Mansion etc. Its really hard to find out why the Gamecube "failed" (which it never did but well...)

Maybe its because all the Nintendo first party games were like  mutations? 

Let me explain:
The Gamecube was Nintendos only console without innovations (well okay the Wavebird was the first modern wireless controller for a console but that was not a launch controller etc) So Nintendo tried to hard to make the games innovative and might have scared away the customers with that.

I mean  launch day  no Mario game but some kind of Luigi/Ghostbusters game.  

- MarioKart DoubleDash had 2 people on 1 kart (I hate this mario kart so bad because of this  and it was slow etc... had repetitive music etc...) 

- Starfox Adventures which was a cool game but because MS bought Rare  there was a ton of pressure from Nintendo/MS/and Rare itself to finish the game. They rushed out the game and had an idiotic final chapter etc.  and people were disappointed because their beloved on-rails space shooter turned into an action adventure. 

- Super Mario Sunshine was also strange because Mario was not simply a Mario like jump n run but somehow left Mushroom Kingdom behind and to take place on a tropical island where Mario had to use a strannge talking water pump all the time.

- Zelda even tho it was first shown as a game with an somewhat adult Link fighting Ganondorf with realistic graphics turned into a digital anime. The whole game looked like a cartoon.

- Metroid left the 2d metroidmania gameplay behind and turned into a first person action adventure game.

Only F-Zero, WaveRace a few other games were "normal".


This might have scared away alot of Nintendos fanbase.  I think Nintendo and a part of its fanbase had some kind of identity crysis going on during that time.



Mr Khan said:
KingHades said:
osed125 said:

Some Nintendo franchises are more popular than they were back in the day. Mario Kart has a huge following and so as 3D Mario games, we can deduce that from Mario Kart 7 and Mario 3D Land sales (plus the insanely huge numbers Mario Kart Wii currently has). Don't forget the "Wii" series (Wii Sports, Party, Resort, etc), which are also really popular. 

So no, comparing GC with Wii U doesn't make sense for some franchises. 

Also those 2 Pokemon games were spin off and not related to main series, and those never sell as well as the main entries in the series. 

4 Zelda games? Wind Waker, 4 Swords (which is technically not in the main series) and Twilight Princess (which the Wii version took all the spotlight), so there's 3 unless you want to count the Ocarina and Majora's mask remake. So basically there were only 2 Zelda games during the GC era (and 1 of them technically being a spin off)

Plenty Mario games which include only 2 big franchises (Mario Kart, 3D Mario), the rest are simple sports games and a RPG (which again don't sell as high as Kart or 3D Mario). Mario Party only got very popular (7m+ units sold) with the Wii and DS (the decrease of Mario Party 9 can be attributed to Nintendo pretty much killing the Wii, not the franchise popularity per se).

Get your facts right next time.

Sorry,but remake/spinoff still accounts for it being part of the franchise. A mario game is a mario game therefore it should have sold regardless.

Same with Zelda I don't care if it's a spin off or not it's still a Zelda game.

Then you're not interested in having a productive argument, are you?

Who said I was here to argue? I'm here to listen to the opinions of the people unless you think otherwise of me?



The PS2 was THAT much of a beast. Thats all their really is too it. (or most of it). It would have been an ass whipping regardless. And its not like the GC was that much more powerful and it still didnt have the heavy hitters (your MGs, FFs etc.)



snyps said:
KingHades said:
AgentZorn said:
KingHades said:
snyps said:
am i the only one that thinks dvd functionality is what slaughtered ps2's competition? When ps2 released there was no games for it. But ppl drove up the install base by purchasing it to play dvds. The large install base gave developers reason to get working. Its a perfect storm.

Yes I do think people bought it for the DVD,but you can also say a hefty bunch bought it for the games.

The software sales justify this almost every third party game was guarenteed to sell atleast 1mil on the PS2 if not over 900k atleast lol.

I still think that the PS2 being a DVD player is what made it so succesful. The average person would have had much more use for a DVD player than a video game console.

To be honest the PS2 would have outsold the GameCube regardless of the DVD player.



we'll never know


Bullshit. The Playstation 2 sold mostly because of its library of games, no way in hell more than half of the install base bought it for a DVD player, and without the DVD player it still would've pushed 100M units. The PSX had no DVD player and it DOMINATED the N64. That was so delusional of you to say.



JazzB1987 said:
AgentZorn said:
KingHades said:
snyps said:
am i the only one that thinks dvd functionality is what slaughtered ps2's competition? When ps2 released there was no games for it. But ppl drove up the install base by purchasing it to play dvds. The large install base gave developers reason to get working. Its a perfect storm.

Yes I do think people bought it for the DVD,but you can also say a hefty bunch bought it for the games.

The software sales justify this almost every third party game was guarenteed to sell atleast 1mil on the PS2 if not over 900k atleast lol.

I still think that the PS2 being a DVD player is what made it so succesful. The average person would have had much more use for a DVD player than a video game console.


It was among the cheapest DVD players when it launched and at the same time it was able to play games.  So a ton of people that wanted to have DVDs bought that (my sister did)

But then there is also the  "99% of phat PS2s died because of disk read errors" thing. (I swear I dont know a single person that still has a phat PS2  all have slims because the phat ones laser failed)  So basically its more like 70 million unique PS2 owners.

Well back to the gamecube.

Gamecube had hardware that was on par and not worse(google it!) than Xbox1 so graphics were not the problem.
The gamecube was super cheap  so the price was not the problem.
The gamecube had games like SmashBros  short time after launch  and also had Zelda, MarioKart, FZero, Luigis Mansion etc. Its really hard to find out why the Gamecube "failed" (which it never did but well...)

Maybe its because all the Nintendo first party games were like  mutations? 

Let me explain:
The Gamecube was Nintendos only console without innovations (well okay the Wavebird was the first modern wireless controller for a console but that was not a launch controller etc) So Nintendo tried to hard to make the games innovative and might have scared away the customers with that.

I mean  launch day  no Mario game but some kind of Luigi/Ghostbusters game.  

- MarioKart DoubleDash had 2 people on 1 kart (I hate this mario kart so bad because of this  and it was slow etc... had repetitive music etc...) 

- Starfox Adventures which was a cool game but because MS bought Rare  there was a ton of pressure from Nintendo/MS/and Rare itself to finish the game. They rushed out the game and had an idiotic final chapter etc.  and people were disappointed because their beloved on-rails space shooter turned into an action adventure. 

- Super Mario Sunshine was also strange because Mario was not simply a Mario like jump n run but somehow left Mushroom Kingdom behind and to take place on a tropical island where Mario had to use a strannge talking water pump all the time.

- Zelda even tho it was first shown as a game with an somewhat adult Link fighting Ganondorf with realistic graphics turned into a digital anime. The whole game looked like a cartoon.

- Metroid left the 2d metroidmania gameplay behind and turned into a first person action adventure game.

Only F-Zero, WaveRace a few other games were "normal".


This might have scared away alot of Nintendos fanbase.  I think Nintendo and a part of its fanbase had some kind of identity crysis going on during that time.

Nailed it.

Nintendo made weird decisions with almost all its franchises on GC that almost always reduced their appeal. The Wii made them accessible again, which is one of the reasons it did better.