It's impossible to deny that the Wii U thus far has been a financial failure. That being said, it also foolish to think that the Wii U couldn't make a comeback. Now there are a lot of things that can help, but this post will focus on two games. Two games that have the realistic potencial of saving the Wii U. The point of this game isn't to simply list popular games to sell the Wii U, but to do in depth with exactly what these games would need to do to make someone who would not have otherwise purchaced a Wii U bite the bullet. These aren't just creative "wish lists" of dream games. These will be games created to not only sell well by themselves, but also incorperate things that will help other games sell better, thus improving the Wii U's over all ecosystem. With that said, I urge you to read more than just each game's title, because it's not the game idea itself that will save the Wii U, but what that game would specifically do to save the Wii U.

1. Multiplayer Pokemon game

I hate beating a dead horse, but this so obvious that it hurts. Not only is Pokemon one of the strongest IPs of all time, but it also has the most untapped potencial.

The important thing with this game, is that it needs to have a lot of mass market appeal. They need to take back the audience that doesn't care about Pokemon anymore, while keeping the interest of veterans like myself. Do with this game what Toy Story 3 did. How can they do this? Two things. First is the setting. Make this game only take place in Kanto, with Johto as a surprise after beating the game. Then take 1996 Kanto and age it 17 years. Show all that has changed while that original 40 million where gone. Milk the nostalgia. Second. The Pokemon. Only have the first 251 Pokemon and their later evolutions appear in the game. Only avertise the first 151. Again, play on their nostalgia. Don't confuse them with the newer Pokemon. Let them focus on all of the old guys that they remember.

Now obviously, the game would render a full 3D world, but here's where things get complicated. First to tackle the battle system. We have to throw out the turn based battle system. It just doesn't work with what this game is supposed to be. Action is the way to go. That being said, it also needs to be simple and easy to learn, yet difficult to master. It has to be accessable for returning fans, but deep for current ones. Super Smash Bros does this well. This should too.

That being said, it also needs to bring to life everything that people wanting this game dreamed of. Pokemon X and Y's "Pokemon Amie" is an exellent start. Mountable Pokemon is also a must. Dynamic weather, seasons, everything. Character customzation. It's all in this game.

But then there's the multiplayer. This game handles multiplayer in many ways. First, it takes a message from games like Journey and Watch_Dogs. At any time during your journey, as long as two people are in the same area, they can appear in each other's game randomly. To be more specific, let's say two people are in Pallet Town. At the same town. They don't know each other at all. There is a chance that they will appear in the same game world. That's a passive multiplayer experience in a singleplayer game world. The two can battle, trade, or just meet. The next is Co-op. It's done the same way games like Destiny and The Division. You travel the regions with a group friends online, and take on tasks, incover co-op only quests, and meet other groups along the way. The last is straight up online battles. Perhaps in Johto's (new) Battle Frontier, you can partake in stadium-style battles with random people online instead of NPC's. Also, every year, there could be a mass "Pokemon League" tournament where, as long as specific qualifications are met, people from around the world could battle for the chance to be the "World Champion." By winning, your NPC would appear in every players game as the new chamion, with certain accolades showcased on your "Trainer Card/Profile."

The last thing to make this game would be expansion packs that add new regions. What I mean is, every one to two years, they release the next region to download. That makes certain that the game never gets stale, and promotes an active community of players. The expansion pack would be expensive at first, but would be equivilant in scale to a new game, with new Pokemon, areas, and content added. Basically, it's what COD does, but done right. The other thing is that when each new expansion pack is released, a physical copy is also released as it's own game without the prior regions, and the prior ones go down in price. Also, the digital expansion pack would be released like two weeks before the retail release. For example, let's say the expansion pack for Sinnoh is $40. Now the Hoenn expansion pack is $30 and the Kanto/Johto one is $20. Two weeks later, a retail release of the expansion pack is sold new for $60. That would be it's own new game for players who never bought the originals with only Sinnoh, but a player could go back and download Hoenn for $30 and/or Kanto-Johto for $20 to their game later. This way, the game world get's bigger and bigger with each expansion, but it isn't ever daunting for a new player to get into it.

The logic behind this is that the game's value increases over time, and that every year or so, new players can join old players in this singleplayer semi online world. It begins by taking a cheap shot at peoples' nostalgia, and then uses popular modern gaming conventions to add value. But more importantly than that, it would do something that the Wii U desperately needs. It would poplularize online gaming to the Wii U userbase. It takes a game that is guaranteed to do well, and uses that to introduce online gaming to the Nintendo audience so that when they decide what games to buy next for their Wii U, they will choose more games with online, boosting the overall desirability of 3rd party multiplayer games and online activity. Now third parties can worry less about games not doing well due to weak online activity, and make more games for the Wii U that have online.

2. An action adventure TPS Metroid game with online multiplayer.

Wait! Come back! It's not what you think!

Okay. I think I need to start off my saying that I love Metroid, and I'm a major fan. What I'm suggesting is not something that is ment to tarnish the integrity of the Metroid franchise. It would still have it's singleplayer main campaign, completely devoid of any multiplayer shinanigans. It would still be the isolated, desolate game that we all know and love. The perpose of the... ehem... other modes... is to expand the universe of the main campaign. Now for the other taboo. Shooter. Ick. Metroid fans squirm at this word when associated with Metroid. Metroid is an adventure game, right? It's not a shooter, right? Adding shooter mechanics to Metroid is therefore completely blasfemy then. Eh. I don't agree.

See, Metroid is about exploring an alien planet alone and descovering its many mysteries. As long as you maintain that essence, there's no reason why it can't be done with a behind the back camera and an aiming reticule. In the same way Metroid went from 2D side scrolling to first person sho- I mean adventure, and was still Metroid, this mechanical change would still be metroid. 

Now before I get into the contriversal multiplayer modes, I want to talk more about the singleplayer, because that's what this all stems from, I promise. With the single player, it's mostly standard affair. Vast open world. Collecting upgrades to explore further. Killing bosses. Perfect. But then there's the story.

Wait! Come back! Samus is silent in this one!

Okay. There we go. So with the story, it is told mostly through audiolog-like information similar to Bioshock and the prime series. You are rewarded for exploration with story. All the scanned information is voice acted. Now with the story, the Space Pirates and the Galaxtic federation are at war. That is something that passively effects the plot. The war and effects of it will effect Samus' journey, but it is not what is driving the plot. It is what is driving the setting. It's why you may come across other federation bounty hunters searching for wanted space pirate generals. It's why a planet may be in shambles due to a battle being waged there. It's why the wildlife may be more aggressive than they should normally be. It may even be part of why you are on your mission. Samus is a bounty hunter after all. Maybe it's about time we see her take up a bounty. Also, this Metroid could add an air of being a thriller. Is she the hunter, or the hunted? Can she trust the Federation? Can she even trust her suit anymore? Has the Choze race been found? Ken Levine would be hired as the writer.

Now that I've mentioned important bits of the single player, I'd like to explain the multiplayer's purpose. It's to world build. I mentioned that in this game, there is a war. Now I want to explain the two multiplayer modes, but more importantly, their function in building the world. In the first one, it's standard multiplayer VS. One side plays as the federation, while the other plays as the space pirates. The combat is like if Vanquish had a multiplayer mode. The Federation use more mechanical weapons while the Pirates use more organic weapons and things like mechs and monsters would be used like vehicles, but they are designed to fit metroid's universe. Instead of a tank, the Feds use giant spider-like tank things for example. The second multiplayer would be like borderlands. You explore the universe, this time as a bounty hunter/assassin in a party of like three, two, or alone. Assasin's are under the pirates and the bounty hunters are under the federation. You go on missions and kill or capture people with bounties or bounty hunters to get paid. If you are a bounty hunter, you fight bosses associated with the pirates or assassins. If you are an assasin, you enter the game of someone searching for a bounty and assassinate them before they can finish their mission. When you finish a mission, you get loot and money to upgrade yourself. If you are an assassin, every time you take out a bounty hunter or important federation officer, your bounty increases. This is sort of like a leveling system, but it also means that stronger bount hunters will come after you. The same concept is done for hunters.

With this, it takes a popular Nintendo franchise and makes it appeal to people who like shooters, people who like online multiplayer, and online co-op, while maintaining the "hard core" image and having an impressive single player campain that is expanded because of the multiplayer. It still appeals to fans of the series, and encourages them to play beyond the single player, again enriching the online community and building an installed base that is more receptive to shooters, online multiplayer, and "hardcore" games so that third party games that do the same thing do better.

What do you think? Can these games save the Wii U? Do you have a better idea?

Zelda and Metroid. And yes a pokemon could work too.

I think Nintendo should follow the EA/Activision strategy with annual releases to a few of their big titles. A new Zelda/Mario/whatever every fall could help the consol. I would buy one.

That wouldn't work, I'm assuming your talking about 3D Mario games which take a long time to make as well as the Zelda games, for what your proposing Nintendo would have to make a lot more teams and they are not gonna hand 3D Mario and Zelda over to other random teams, the teams they have now are probably the only ones they trust with those games.

Neither one, they will sell some systems but not enough. The lack of 3rd party support is hurting them more.

Even if you came up with the greatest idea in the world, it's probably too late, it's already well into 2014, a great new game generally speaking requires 2 years of planning/dev time, you're talking mid-2016 at the earliest. Too late for this console.

Mario Kart is super big for Nintendo consoles at the moment, it should help boost sales for the Wii U greatly.

Pokemon dominates on the handhelds, but I would love to see how well it can do on consoles. Hell, I'll even buy a Pokemon game if it's all about petting, feeding, playing minigames with it, adventuring, etc. Come on, GameFreak!

Next cod game exclusive to Wii U
Next GTA exclusive to Wii U


Out of these only an idiot would trully believe metroid would be the better pic.

No I'm definitely not talking about 3D Mario games. I think a new 2D mario game every year would work. I can't imagine it being too hard to rehash Zelda every year. They'd be be able to feel the gap in between with smaller games and heavy hitters like ssb and 3D Mario. I think this strategy would give people more incentive to buy their console for Nintendo games, since that's the only reason to one. With the way they do things currently, it's not worth the purchase, as these games are spread apart to far. 

IMO the battle system is what makes pokemon, pokemon.

Turn based battles are also the perfect place to use the gamepad (alongside the pokedex/gear) to control the battles whilst the action takes place on the TV.

I do like the idea of returning to Kanto, and slowly increasing the size of the world (although I think your pricing is way off, it should be no more than £20 for the new region and the older regions only a modest discount, say £15). I also like the idea of a persistently online world, but without going full MMO. Maybe each area they take 5-10 other players of a similar level and insert them into your world, replacing a portion of the computer trainers in the process.

I think the one thing a console Pokémon needs to do to be successful (let's not forget that there were 2 on the 'cube, and they both bombed) is still be a Pokémon game. You could set it as a third person adventure, with jumping and over the shoulder camera and more exploration. You could even switch the majority of random battles for ones where you see the pokemon and choose to fight (a la xenoblade), but the battle mechanics have to be sacred.