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

Forums - Nintendo - WiiU will sell better than Gamecube.

happydolphin on 26 June 2013
Arius Dion said:

If I were a business man, coming off the success in the home console market with the Wii, I would not in turn then emulate my most failed console ever. I would not confuse or try to fuse handheld and home console markets. I would keep them seperate. So I'd have to disagree with your summation on that. 

Yes, games are what sell consoles..But the question then become what games? Gamecube+ games will not. As they did not in the past.

We will just have to agree to disagree on this one Happy. 

@Bold is where you are deeply mistaken. The U takes almost no cues from the cube, but largely emulates the 3DS in terms of software.

In terms of hardware, you can't possibly be equating the U to the cube, so I'll just ignore that. Having said that, instead of mimicking the Wii, which sold 90m units, Nintendo opted to mimic the DS (in terms of hardware), which yielded 150m units sold.

Tell me how that's a losing strategy.



Around the Network
Kwaidd on 26 June 2013
DietSoap said:

anthony64641 said:

He went on to say that he thinks initial sales for this generation will be better than last generation for Microsoft and Sony because of limited competition from Nintendo.

Ha, as if anyone who actually plays games went Wii only that gen to begin with.  Everyone had a 360, PS3, or powerful PC to play everything the rest of the industry was playing, as will be the case once again with the Wii U.

This is also an incredibly milquetoast prediction. I expect roughly 35  - 55 million lifetime.

Went Wii only gaming last gen and I survived just fine.



curl-6 on 26 June 2013
Cold-Flipper said:
curl-6 said:

There are plenty of gamers who played Nintendo as a kid, moved on to other systems, but would revisit it for agame that combines their childhood (Zelda) wirth the values of the systems they've moved on to. (An "epic", less rated-E-for-everyone approach)

It may not kill Wii U, but a light-hearted Toon Zelda as Wii U's main Zelda would be a heavy blow to the system. Many potential sales would go down the toilet.

I agree that Zelda U should have a darker feel to it to attract the core crowed more but would the graphics really be a heavy blow? Yes, if the game sucked, it wouldn't help the system any but if the game was still great, it would still help push systems. 

Either way, I more or less agree with you.

People like to judge at surface value. A lot of people will decide whether to buy it or not depending on whether it looks dark or toon.



Egann on 26 June 2013
happydolphin said:

The U is in no trouble of failure, it is employing the same hardware strategy as the DS and a similar software projected strategy as the 3DS. The only thing it needs to fix is its price. That'll come.

Really? I would've said so long as it stays the cheapest system it'll do fine. Right now, it's one of three HD consoles, so it struggles against the PS3 and 360 as the HD system with the highest price and fewest titles.

That flips when the PS4 and XB1 come to market.

Really, the argument that convinced me that the Wii U will probably win this generation, shaky start notwithstanding, is that console generations are almost always won by the middle or lower power console. Happened with the Wii, PS2, PSOne (hard to believe the N64 was actually the power system of gen 5), and in the handheld space, this happened with the 3DS and the DS. And that's just as far back as I'm willing to look, because before this be pyramids.

The difference in power between the PS4 and XB1 is neglegible, as are their libraries. They should sell well, but for one of them to "win" Gen 8 would upset a major historical trend. 



pauluzzzz1981 on 26 June 2013
curl-6 said:
Cold-Flipper said:
curl-6 said:

There are plenty of gamers who played Nintendo as a kid, moved on to other systems, but would revisit it for agame that combines their childhood (Zelda) wirth the values of the systems they've moved on to. (An "epic", less rated-E-for-everyone approach)

It may not kill Wii U, but a light-hearted Toon Zelda as Wii U's main Zelda would be a heavy blow to the system. Many potential sales would go down the toilet.

I agree that Zelda U should have a darker feel to it to attract the core crowed more but would the graphics really be a heavy blow? Yes, if the game sucked, it wouldn't help the system any but if the game was still great, it would still help push systems. 

Either way, I more or less agree with you.

People like to judge at surface value. A lot of people will decide whether to buy it or not depending on whether it looks dark or toon.

Dark tone, light tone. Doesn't matter. Look at the sales of zelda games. Will boost sales, but doesn't do wonders.



Around the Network
curl-6 on 26 June 2013
pauluzzzz1981 said:
curl-6 said:
Cold-Flipper said:
curl-6 said:

There are plenty of gamers who played Nintendo as a kid, moved on to other systems, but would revisit it for agame that combines their childhood (Zelda) wirth the values of the systems they've moved on to. (An "epic", less rated-E-for-everyone approach)

It may not kill Wii U, but a light-hearted Toon Zelda as Wii U's main Zelda would be a heavy blow to the system. Many potential sales would go down the toilet.

I agree that Zelda U should have a darker feel to it to attract the core crowed more but would the graphics really be a heavy blow? Yes, if the game sucked, it wouldn't help the system any but if the game was still great, it would still help push systems. 

Either way, I more or less agree with you.

People like to judge at surface value. A lot of people will decide whether to buy it or not depending on whether it looks dark or toon.

Dark tone, light tone. Doesn't matter. Look at the sales of zelda games. Will boost sales, but doesn't do wonders.

Looking at the sales of 3D Zelda games, dark sells better than toon.



happydolphin on 26 June 2013
Egann said:

Really? I would've said so long as it stays the cheapest system it'll do fine. Right now, it's one of three HD consoles, so it struggles against the PS3 and 360 as the HD system with the highest price and fewest titles.

That flips when the PS4 and XB1 come to market.

Really, the argument that convinced me that the Wii U will probably win this generation, shaky start notwithstanding, is that console generations are almost always won by the middle or lower power console. Happened with the Wii, PS2, PSOne (hard to believe the N64 was actually the power system of gen 5), and in the handheld space, this happened with the 3DS and the DS. And that's just as far back as I'm willing to look, because before this be pyramids.

The difference in power between the PS4 and XB1 is neglegible, as are their libraries. They should sell well, but for one of them to "win" Gen 8 would upset a major historical trend. 

The problem with that historical constant is that in two very important cases, the weakest system wasn't the cheapest (PSOne and PS2). Also, the PS2 demolished the Dreamcast, which violates the "weaker system sells" principle.

It seems that being the weakest system, even being the cheapest system is not what always makes you win (see the dreamcast). It's always a combination of games (sorry cube), price (sorry cube) and marketting (sorry dreamcast).

So if the U gets the 3DS type of games library and marketing, all it will need is the price that goes with the winning combination.

The PSOne and PS2 really were exceptional to sell at the prices they were sold at.



Viper1 on 26 June 2013
pauluzzzz1981 said:
auluzzzz1981 said:

Great kickstarter indeed. But there ''good'' decisions then formed there arrogance later on. So no, it wasnt a succes. It was the beginning for someone else his succes. The revival of the industry? Ofcourse. But only in the handheldbussiness they hold there own.

I know they revived it. But that is not my point. It was good. Thats my opinion. The wii  was a succes, because there idea was great. The idea with the nes wasn't great. Psx idea was great ( cd's ), Ps 2 was great ( dvd ), DS was great ( dual screen ). NES was not great with their third party restrictions. It looked great but it wasnt. It gave them a boost, but not on the long run. It gave them arrogance.

It wasn't a success?  How do you even qualify that?

It was a market success - owned more than 50% of the market.
It was a commercial success - revived a dead industry.
It was a financial success - highly profitable.

It also established some of the most beloved IP's in video game history.
It established dozens of fundamental innovations still in use today.
It renewed investor confidence that had black balled the entire video game industry.
It also established the fundamental 3rd party licensing system used even today

The only factor you've stated that negates the 'success' was the fact the licensing prices were rather high and number of allowed liscense per year per publisher was low which I'd hardly call a negation.

I mean this in the kindest sense bu your definition of success could use some revision.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

pauluzzzz1981 on 26 June 2013
Viper1 said:
pauluzzzz1981 said:
auluzzzz1981 said:

Great kickstarter indeed. But there ''good'' decisions then formed there arrogance later on. So no, it wasnt a succes. It was the beginning for someone else his succes. The revival of the industry? Ofcourse. But only in the handheldbussiness they hold there own.

I know they revived it. But that is not my point. It was good. Thats my opinion. The wii  was a succes, because there idea was great. The idea with the nes wasn't great. Psx idea was great ( cd's ), Ps 2 was great ( dvd ), DS was great ( dual screen ). NES was not great with their third party restrictions. It looked great but it wasnt. It gave them a boost, but not on the long run. It gave them arrogance.

It wasn't a success?  How do you even qualify that?

It was a market success - owned more than 50% of the market.
It was a commercial success - revived a dead industry.
It was a financial success - highly profitable.

It also established some of the most beloved IP's in video game history.
It established dozens of fundamental innovations still in use today.
It renewed investor confidence that had black balled the entire video game industry.
It also established the fundamental 3rd party licensing system used even today

The only factor you've stated that negates the 'success' was the fact the licensing prices were rather high and number of allowed liscense per year per publisher was low which I'd hardly call a negation.

I mean this in the kindest sense bu your definition of success could use some revision.

discussion ended half an hour ago. Point taken. We think differently. I like it here.



happydolphin on 26 June 2013
pauluzzzz1981 said:
Viper1 said:

It wasn't a success?  How do you even qualify that?

It was a market success - owned more than 50% of the market.
It was a commercial success - revived a dead industry.
It was a financial success - highly profitable.

It also established some of the most beloved IP's in video game history.
It established dozens of fundamental innovations still in use today.
It renewed investor confidence that had black balled the entire video game industry.
It also established the fundamental 3rd party licensing system used even today

The only factor you've stated that negates the 'success' was the fact the licensing prices were rather high and number of allowed liscense per year per publisher was low which I'd hardly call a negation.

I mean this in the kindest sense bu your definition of success could use some revision.

discussion ended half an hour ago. Point taken. We think differently. I like it here.

Problem is, he makes more sense and justifies his qualification of the NES as a success quite well.

But I still see some validity to your point. The easiest way to go about it is that the NES was mostly a short-lived success due to the bitterness of 3rd parties towards Nintendo, which bit Nintendo in the ass come the N64 generation and even affected them in the SNES generation.

Nevertheless, the statement Nintendo is only very succesfull in the handheldmarket. doesn't hold up in the face of the NES and the SNES, despite the bitterness it caused 3rd parties.