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

Forums - Gaming - Nintendo needs to drop WiiU's price soon and here's why

Tagged games:

oniyide on 06 July 2013
KingdomHeartsFan said:
oniyide said:
KingdomHeartsFan said:

That controller will be the death of the Wii U, it costs so dam much to make that they had to sacrifice the recources they could put in the actual console.  Why can't Nintendo just make a refular powerful console, instead of always trying to innovate with these gimmicks.

they tried that twice, it was calle N64 and GC...didnt exactly go their way.


GC was not a regular console, they wanted to use small discs for some reason, and the N64 they were dead set with sticking with carterages even thought they were out of date, I'm talking about a regular console where they are on level with their competition, then they would stomp them.

what you asked was why cant they have a powerful console, and thats exactly what the GC and N64 were, what format they used is irrelevant the hardware they had was stll more powerful and it made no difference back then.



Around the Network
oniyide on 06 July 2013
pezus said:
TheLastStarFighter said:
pezus said:
TheLastStarFighter said:

I hate online fees and I hate that Sony is implementing them.  And they can give any reason why they are doing it... they are doing it because they can.  I'm just saying it makes sense, because consumers are willing to accept it.  Sony reveals a $599 PS3 at launch and people freak and buy 360's and Wii's.  Sony reveals a $399 PS4 with a $50 annual fee (so $799 @ launch?) and people cheer.  I'm saying the subscription model works because people are dumb.  And since it works, it's wise to do. Nintendo could have launched a $249 Deluxe with more gigs of RAM, more cores and more flops and still made money if they added annual fees for online.  Throw in a free download of old games people already have on Virtual Console and people would even try to say it's worth the money.  Bam, gen won, and no one could bitch because every console would now be charging to play the games you buy.

So people were dumb for paying for Plus up until now? Do you even know how much content you get with it? For a measly $50

No, Nintendo could not have done that. There's no guarantee that they'd get enough subscribers or that the subscribers would keep subscribing long enough, especially since their online service is so far behind the others. Sony won't be losing much money at all on the $399 PS4. PS4 price isn't too low, it's just WiiU's that is way too high. I don't know what they include in those tablets, but they need to find a way to make them cheaper.


What is the weakness of Wii U's online vs PSN?  I know how much content you get, I'm saying it's not of much value.  Most people don't play a lot of games, and those that do buy the games upon release and have little need for them when they become free.  That's why Sony can do it, it's costing them very few lost sales.  Wii U:  click button, play COD match.  PSN:  Click button, play COD match.

I should've said 'especially since their online service has historically been far behind the others', the subscribers would be hard to get (at first at least). Its main weakness now is the low population in most online games, even CoD (would be nice to see how many are still playing that now on average) and just the low interest in the usual popular online games in general. The cloud is another area where Nintendo will lag behind soon enough. Nintendo charging for online play would look bad when One and PS4 will be charging too with many more features included (like free games, discounts, betas, the cloud).

They will change their way of buying when they see what Plus offers, as I did. And of course Plus has ridiculous value. The first millions of PS4 owners will be mostly hardcore gamers, as you said, who usually buy quite a bit more than 10 games per system. Because PS4 will be brand new, the games you will be getting will also be brand new to a few months old. There are also plenty of gamers that don't buy games at release. Heck, probably way more than half of them don't buy the game at release. Some simply aren't willing to pay for a game, but still would want to play it. Plus allows them to do that.

less than 1000 

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/call-of-duty-black-ops-2-goes-offline-on-nintendo-wii-u/



KingdomHeartsFan on 06 July 2013
oniyide said:
KingdomHeartsFan said:
oniyide said:
KingdomHeartsFan said:

That controller will be the death of the Wii U, it costs so dam much to make that they had to sacrifice the recources they could put in the actual console.  Why can't Nintendo just make a refular powerful console, instead of always trying to innovate with these gimmicks.

they tried that twice, it was calle N64 and GC...didnt exactly go their way.


GC was not a regular console, they wanted to use small discs for some reason, and the N64 they were dead set with sticking with carterages even thought they were out of date, I'm talking about a regular console where they are on level with their competition, then they would stomp them.

what you asked was why cant they have a powerful console, and thats exactly what the GC and N64 were, what format they used is irrelevant the hardware they had was stll more powerful and it made no difference back then.


I said regular powerful console, the GC was anything but that and same with the N64, they were so different.



oniyide on 06 July 2013
KingdomHeartsFan said:
oniyide said:
KingdomHeartsFan said:
oniyide said:
KingdomHeartsFan said:

That controller will be the death of the Wii U, it costs so dam much to make that they had to sacrifice the recources they could put in the actual console.  Why can't Nintendo just make a refular powerful console, instead of always trying to innovate with these gimmicks.

they tried that twice, it was calle N64 and GC...didnt exactly go their way.


GC was not a regular console, they wanted to use small discs for some reason, and the N64 they were dead set with sticking with carterages even thought they were out of date, I'm talking about a regular console where they are on level with their competition, then they would stomp them.

what you asked was why cant they have a powerful console, and thats exactly what the GC and N64 were, what format they used is irrelevant the hardware they had was stll more powerful and it made no difference back then.


I said regular powerful console, the GC was anything but that and same with the N64, they were so different.

how were they NOT regularly powerful? that makes no sense, n64 was twice as powerful as PS1, that was the strongest system of the gen. GC was more powerful than PS2 how was it no regular cause it used a different disc format? so did PS3



oniyide on 06 July 2013
pezus said:
oniyide said:
pezus said:
TheLastStarFighter said:
pezus said:
TheLastStarFighter said:

I hate online fees and I hate that Sony is implementing them.  And they can give any reason why they are doing it... they are doing it because they can.  I'm just saying it makes sense, because consumers are willing to accept it.  Sony reveals a $599 PS3 at launch and people freak and buy 360's and Wii's.  Sony reveals a $399 PS4 with a $50 annual fee (so $799 @ launch?) and people cheer.  I'm saying the subscription model works because people are dumb.  And since it works, it's wise to do. Nintendo could have launched a $249 Deluxe with more gigs of RAM, more cores and more flops and still made money if they added annual fees for online.  Throw in a free download of old games people already have on Virtual Console and people would even try to say it's worth the money.  Bam, gen won, and no one could bitch because every console would now be charging to play the games you buy.

So people were dumb for paying for Plus up until now? Do you even know how much content you get with it? For a measly $50

No, Nintendo could not have done that. There's no guarantee that they'd get enough subscribers or that the subscribers would keep subscribing long enough, especially since their online service is so far behind the others. Sony won't be losing much money at all on the $399 PS4. PS4 price isn't too low, it's just WiiU's that is way too high. I don't know what they include in those tablets, but they need to find a way to make them cheaper.


What is the weakness of Wii U's online vs PSN?  I know how much content you get, I'm saying it's not of much value.  Most people don't play a lot of games, and those that do buy the games upon release and have little need for them when they become free.  That's why Sony can do it, it's costing them very few lost sales.  Wii U:  click button, play COD match.  PSN:  Click button, play COD match.

I should've said 'especially since their online service has historically been far behind the others', the subscribers would be hard to get (at first at least). Its main weakness now is the low population in most online games, even CoD (would be nice to see how many are still playing that now on average) and just the low interest in the usual popular online games in general. The cloud is another area where Nintendo will lag behind soon enough. Nintendo charging for online play would look bad when One and PS4 will be charging too with many more features included (like free games, discounts, betas, the cloud).

They will change their way of buying when they see what Plus offers, as I did. And of course Plus has ridiculous value. The first millions of PS4 owners will be mostly hardcore gamers, as you said, who usually buy quite a bit more than 10 games per system. Because PS4 will be brand new, the games you will be getting will also be brand new to a few months old. There are also plenty of gamers that don't buy games at release. Heck, probably way more than half of them don't buy the game at release. Some simply aren't willing to pay for a game, but still would want to play it. Plus allows them to do that.

less than 1000 

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/call-of-duty-black-ops-2-goes-offline-on-nintendo-wii-u/

It was less than 1000 a week after launch. Dear god, there must be less than 100 people playing now. I wonder if you can even find games properly.

the article says you cant, which explains why we've yet to see a DLC for Wii U version. THere is more to this than how much copies are being sold. If people arent playing the game online, COD we talking here, we are less likely to see support for future installments, even if every version of it comes out, it STILL is the inferior version by virtue of not having access to DLC



Around the Network
oniyide on 06 July 2013
pezus said:
Gamegears said:
pezus said:

1. PS3 hasn't even come close to 20k in a single week...ever. So no, WiiU sales are nowhere near PS3 sales. Even though PS3 didn't launch in PAL regions until late March 2007. And you know that PS3 and 360 won't disappear from the market when PS4 and One come out, so WiiU will still be more expensive than they are. Why would PS4 and One costing more have any effect on WiiU's state in the world? In the eyes of the hardcore gamers, there are good reasons for PS4 being $100-$150 more expensive than a PS3. The reasons for WiiU being $30 to $80 more expensive than a PS3 are harder to see.

2. This point counters your first point. It's the same thing I pointed out.

3. Some years ago, Mario would be mentioned as Nintendo's biggest IP. 20-30k per week for months sure is steady, but in this case steady isn't good at all. Of course the games will boost the sales, but the boost won't be big enough (to turn things around) without a price cut.

4. Possible. But a few hundred k units doesn't change much in the grand scheme of things. The price cut needs to be permanent.

You seem to be the opposite to many Nintendo fans in here, who say the WiiU needs a price cut but don't think it will get one.


Actually there was plenty of times the PS3 sold around 20K worldwide.. and actually.. some weeks the Wii U is doing better in the US then the PS3 did.. I don't think it will help it too much.. but still.. and a few hundread K Units don't make a differance?? it does if the momentum carries.. and that few hundread K becomes Millions by years end.. and no Point 2 does not exactly counteract point one.. what I was saying is when the others come out.. they will not only have their last gen.. but also Wii U to compete with which is next gen.. at the end.. they could suffer more than the Wii U for that.. or maybe not.. The Wii U might be able to holsd it's own because it is a next gen system.. and will have the games to back it up.. (From Nintendo)


Bold: Like...when?

Its lowest sales point in 2007 was 50k...without being out in PAL regions. I don't know what charts you are looking at, but WiiU is doing significantly worse in USA than PS3 did back in 2007.

A few hundred K units don't make a difference, indeed. There is no momentum after BF if the price goes back to where it was. Vita got a nice increase last BF, but did that ultimately help it much? 

The consumers look at systems, not generations. They don't think: Oooh, this is a next gen system and this one is not, especially when the games look so identical between PS3/360/WiiU. Already they are shunning the WiiU over PS3 and 360, and since PS4 and One will appeal to them with similar game support along with next-gen exclusives, with better graphics than PS3, 360 and WiiU, they will sell well. You also disregard the extra competition WiiU will get come November when it won't be the only "next-gen" system around. If WiiU is being shunned now for last-gen systems, why won't it continue to be shunned for last-gen systems AND other next-gen systems? That is, if there is no pricecut.

why wont people answer this question? THey'll say games, but its not like the HD twins arent getting a new installment in one of the biggest franchises in the industry even if that wont boost consoles it will keep people playing, and attention away from Wii U and even the newer ones, theres not coming out on Wii U this year besides maybe Wii FIt that is close to GTA status and even wii fit is a stretch as i doubt people are clamoring to throw down hundreds of bucks on a system just for that.



Zero999 on 06 July 2013
Gamegears said:


Actually there was plenty of times the PS3 sold around 20K worldwide.. and actually.. some weeks the Wii U is doing better in the US then the PS3 did.. I don't think it will help it too much.. but still.. and a few hundread K Units don't make a differance?? it does if the momentum carries.. and that few hundread K becomes Millions by years end.. and no Point 2 does not exactly counteract point one.. what I was saying is when the others come out.. they will not only have their last gen.. but also Wii U to compete with which is next gen.. at the end.. they could suffer more than the Wii U for that.. or maybe not.. The Wii U might be able to holsd it's own because it is a next gen system.. and will have the games to back it up.. (From Nintendo)

that's true, wii u only had ps360 on the market at the same time. ps4/xone will have to face ps360 + wii u. and for an 8th gen options, not only wii u is the cheapest one but it also has lot's of exclusives to make it different from ps360 while ps4/xone will have mostly ps360 ports.



Zero999 on 06 July 2013
pezus said:
TheLastStarFighter said:
Nintendo can surely afford a price cut in the west at the moment with the falling yen. The question is, would they want to? Losing $50 potential income per unit or more is significant cash to throw away. The key would be how many more units they would sell. If at the current price they would sell 5 million more Wii U's through the end of the year and price drop would bump it to 6, I doubt they would do it. But if the difference was 3 million and 7 million, surely they would.

I think we'll be able to tell if they are going to do it once Pikmin 3 launches. If that, and the following software, bumps sales of Wii U's to more respectable levels, they may stay the course. If sales stay awful, a price cut is coming.

Pikmin 3 won't boost sales much and even if it does boost by a few dozen k's, then it will be only for 2 weeks or so. I feel like another Donkey Kong Country and a Mario 3D Land type Mario won't help the WiiU enough for Nintendo to not need a price cut. That is, if they care about beating the competition at all. Because you can forget that if there's no price cut this year. 

if lego city boosted sales to almost 80k, certainly pikmin 3 will give it a higher boost.. if you think it will only be a few dozen k's you are delusional. and even if that was for 2 weeks (i don't think it will), there's splinter cell and the european version of W101 coming 2 weeks later, than rayman 10 days later, than US verison of W101 another 10 days later. see where things are going? october will grab august/september momentum and raise it with zelda ww remake, wii party u, sonic lw, batman and AC4 and the holidays will be huge with DK, mario, watch dogs, wii fit u, mario and sonic, call of retrocess + other multis.



radha on 06 July 2013
MohammadBadir said:
radha said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

The price is about $50/year for online multiplayer.


50 x 10 = 500 <--- Online play throughout the 10 year plan

399 + 500 = 899 <--- Final price


Game over.


you are missing the games from the instant game collection, is multiplayer AND one game per month...lets ignore the discounts

so is 

nitendo        

   1 console = 350 

   0 games = 0

Sony 

 1 console = 400

 120 games (1 per months x 10 years) = 500

 

so is nintodo console 350

sony console and 120 games 899, i says fair.

the 350 one comes with a game -.-

I'm buying a PS4, but I'm sure as hell not paying for PSPlus, if I want to skip not paying for a while I lose the rights to play these so called "free" games? yeah, no deal


You are missing much



dd if = /dev/brain | tail -f | grep games | nc -lnvvp 80

Hey Listen!

https://archive.org/details/kohina_radio_music_collection

oniyide on 06 July 2013
Zero999 said:
pezus said:
TheLastStarFighter said:
Nintendo can surely afford a price cut in the west at the moment with the falling yen. The question is, would they want to? Losing $50 potential income per unit or more is significant cash to throw away. The key would be how many more units they would sell. If at the current price they would sell 5 million more Wii U's through the end of the year and price drop would bump it to 6, I doubt they would do it. But if the difference was 3 million and 7 million, surely they would.

I think we'll be able to tell if they are going to do it once Pikmin 3 launches. If that, and the following software, bumps sales of Wii U's to more respectable levels, they may stay the course. If sales stay awful, a price cut is coming.

Pikmin 3 won't boost sales much and even if it does boost by a few dozen k's, then it will be only for 2 weeks or so. I feel like another Donkey Kong Country and a Mario 3D Land type Mario won't help the WiiU enough for Nintendo to not need a price cut. That is, if they care about beating the competition at all. Because you can forget that if there's no price cut this year. 

if lego city boosted sales to almost 80k, certainly pikmin 3 will give it a higher boost.. if you think it will only be a few dozen k's you are delusional. and even if that was for 2 weeks (i don't think it will), there's splinter cell and the european version of W101 coming 2 weeks later, than rayman 10 days later, than US verison of W101 another 10 days later. see where things are going? october will grab august/september momentum and raise it with zelda ww remake, wii party u, sonic lw, batman and AC4 and the holidays will be huge with DK, mario, watch dogs, wii fit u, mario and sonic, call of retrocess + other multis.

Lego is a MUCH bigger franchise than Pikimin, not even close