Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Since Wii U failed, what should Nintendo have done to follow up the Wii's success?

Could Nintendo have realistically produced another Wii-like success?

Yes. Nintendo magic. Just not the Wii U. 131 28.85%
 
No. Wii was a one time th... 262 57.71%
 
Yo Mama 61 13.44%
 
Total:454

Once the Playstation 4 fad subsides we'll see the sales pattern as more of a generational effect than by the faults (and yes I agree there are a few) made by the manufacturers.



Feel free to check out my stream on twitch 

Around the Network
bunchanumbers said:


Pro controller along with the power around the X1/PS4 area would have helped ensure more 3rd party support, or at least in theory. I think Nintendo should have kept the Wiimote/Nunchuck combo for the majority of their Wii U games, or at least included the option for those games. All I know for sure is that the gamepad wasn't thought out enough and although I love the off TV gameplay, it wasn't worth the cost to develop and produce the gamepad.

Although I do think that a refined wiimote and nunchuck could have helped bring back casual love to the Wii U. Either that or they should have abandoned the Wii U name completely and made the shape of their console and name completely different from the Wii.

By evolved wiimote + nunchuck, I mean all functionalities of those + all buttons and shape from the pro constroller = no need for pro controller. Power was never an excuse for third parties this gen, since wii u can get the games but they don't port it over.



A good console.

~Mod Edit~

This post has been moderated.

-Smeags



Materia-Blade said:
bunchanumbers said:


Pro controller along with the power around the X1/PS4 area would have helped ensure more 3rd party support, or at least in theory. I think Nintendo should have kept the Wiimote/Nunchuck combo for the majority of their Wii U games, or at least included the option for those games. All I know for sure is that the gamepad wasn't thought out enough and although I love the off TV gameplay, it wasn't worth the cost to develop and produce the gamepad.

Although I do think that a refined wiimote and nunchuck could have helped bring back casual love to the Wii U. Either that or they should have abandoned the Wii U name completely and made the shape of their console and name completely different from the Wii.

By evolved wiimote + nunchuck, I mean all functionalities of those + all buttons and shape from the pro constroller = no need for pro controller. Power was never an excuse for third parties this gen, since wii u can get the games but they don't port it over.


Oh I mean stuff like a new nunchuck with improved sensitivity and a speaker. A new speaker for the Wiimote and a rechargeable battery like the Pro controller. It should be able to hold a charge for 50+ hours including peripherals. Improve the button placement and you got a winner. Like I said the Pro controller would be for the mainstream stuff, but should always be a option. Stuff like this would have refined the Wii U into something else.



bunchanumbers said:


Oh I mean stuff like a new nunchuck with improved sensitivity and a speaker. A new speaker for the Wiimote and a rechargeable battery like the Pro controller. It should be able to hold a charge for 50+ hours including peripherals. Improve the button placement and you got a winner. Like I said the Pro controller would be for the mainstream stuff, but should always be a option. Stuff like this would have refined the Wii U into something else.

the evolved wii mote + nunchuck I have in mind is shaped like a pro controller but divides in two halves. so, it renders a pro controller useless.



Around the Network

Truth be told, maybe there's just a more fundamental issue at play here ...

Ultimately the mass market decides what direction they prefer by voting with their wallets.

And I think it's been largely shown the last 20 years that people overwhelmingly want a system that is more of a electronics device (rather than a toy/family aimed product ala the gaming scene in the 80s/early 90s) and has all the major third party support. We had this referendum during the PS2-GCN-XBox era, and people overwhelmingly chose Sony's approach.

The Wii is the only console ever to have mass market success for a few years without benefit of great third party support, and that was more of a flash in the pan, not a sustainable business model going forward (and if it was ever sustainable, Nintendo sure as heck doesn't know how to to do it, which renders it moot).

I don't think many casuals were upgrading their Wii ever, it didn't really matter what Nintendo did.

People have a fairly set idea of what they want in a console today, and you either provide that or your system is not going to sell past 20 million or so at best. Doesn't matter how many wonderful Mario or Zelda games it has.



Soundwave said:

Ultimately the mass market decides what direction they prefer by voting with their wallets.

And I think it's been largely shown the last 20 years that people overwhelmingly want a system that is more of a electronics device (rather than a toy/family aimed product ala the gaming scene in the 80s/early 90s) and has all the major third party support. We had this referendum during the PS2-GCN-XBox era, and people overwhelmingly chose Sony's approach.

The Wii is the only console ever to have mass market success for a few years without benefit of great third party support, and that was more of a flash in the pan, not a sustainable business model going forward (and if it was ever sustainable, Nintendo sure as heck doesn't know how to to do it, which renders it moot).

I don't think many casuals were upgrading their Wii ever, it didn't really matter what Nintendo did.

People have a fairly set idea of what they want in a console today, and you either provide that or your system is not going to sell past 20 million or so at best. Doesn't matter how many wonderful Mario or Zelda games it has.

I'm still shocked Nintendo went up against such a brick wall, far worse than Sony/MS with the casumobile market. I guess they were in denial about Wii's future as a brand and product overall. But now, Nintendo has no where to run, except back to its  foundation.   I wonder, when Iwata made this statement...

https://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugged-in/nintendo-says-open-merger-acquisition-220715429.html

 In a talk with Japanese newspaper The Nikkei, Nintendo president Satoru Iwata says he's open to mergers and acquisitions, a dramatic philosophical change for the company.

"We should abandon old assumptions about our businesses," he said. "We are considering M&As as an option. For this reason, we'll step up share buybacks." 

...if he was talking about mergers with companies like Panasonic.  The potential is great with these two. Nintendo seems like the missing link in panasonic's portfolio, and (unlike Sony, for ex.) they would not interfere with Nintendo's ideaology very much. Panasonic would obviously take care of the HW and give Nintendo and its devs a "bigger canvas" to create their magic w/o worrying about costs.  We saw a glimpse with the Panasonic Q (gamecube DVD player), but now they'd have blu ray, TVs and other products. 



se7en7thre3 said:


I'm still shocked Nintendo went up against such a brick wall, far worse than Sony/MS with the casumobile market. I guess they were in denial about Wii's future as a brand and product overall. But now, Nintendo has no where to run, except back to its  foundation.   I wonder, when Iwata made this statement...

https://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugged-in/nintendo-says-open-merger-acquisition-220715429.html

 In a talk with Japanese newspaper The Nikkei, Nintendo president Satoru Iwata says he's open to mergers and acquisitions, a dramatic philosophical change for the company.

"We should abandon old assumptions about our businesses," he said. "We are considering M&As as an option. For this reason, we'll step up share buybacks." 

...if he was talking about mergers with companies like Panasonic.  The potential is great with these two. Nintendo seems like the missing link in panasonic's portfolio, and (unlike Sony, for ex.) they would not interfere with Nintendo's ideaology very much. Panasonic would obviously take care of the HW and give Nintendo and its devs a "bigger canvas" to create their magic w/o worrying about costs.  We saw a glimpse with the Panasonic Q (gamecube DVD player), but now they'd have blu ray, TVs and other products. 

 

This was published over a year ago, but it was true.  Nintendo went on to buy a company or two if I'm not mistaken.  I doubt they would ever take on a supplementary role by merging with a larger company.

 



Feel free to check out my stream on twitch 

Soundwave said:

Truth be told, maybe there's just a more fundamental issue at play here ...

Ultimately the mass market decides what direction they prefer by voting with their wallets.

And I think it's been largely shown the last 20 years that people overwhelmingly want a system that is more of a electronics device (rather than a toy/family aimed product ala the gaming scene in the 80s/early 90s) and has all the major third party support. We had this referendum during the PS2-GCN-XBox era, and people overwhelmingly chose Sony's approach.

The Wii is the only console ever to have mass market success for a few years without benefit of great third party support, and that was more of a flash in the pan, not a sustainable business model going forward (and if it was ever sustainable, Nintendo sure as heck doesn't know how to to do it, which renders it moot).

I don't think many casuals were upgrading their Wii ever, it didn't really matter what Nintendo did.

People have a fairly set idea of what they want in a console today, and you either provide that or your system is not going to sell past 20 million or so at best. Doesn't matter how many wonderful Mario or Zelda games it has.


i would go a step further and people just stopped playing and buying a bunch toward the end. Just look at the difference in sales between PS360 and the Wii in the last few years



oniyide said:
dongo8 said:
Soundwave said:


The 3DS was "turned around" within 5-6 months. 

No system gets turned around this late in the game. Even the PS3 was selling much better than the Wii U by this point in its lifecycle. 

Nintendo actually isn't that great at turning around consoles either, all of the N64, GCN, and even Wii lost momentum as they went along in their lifecycle, all three pretty much were wheezing like a fat kid trying to get up a set of stairs by the generation end. 

Fair enough, I still place much more faith in Nintendo than I do either of the other console manufacturers. Mostly because I look at the other two, and what original top-tier titles have they produced this gen? I don't see anything screaming have to have it, and I'm confused as to how all of this raw power and graphics, and bluray capability, and entertainment hub is driving sales when there are no dedicated games of note on the consoles. It's strange how Nintendo puts out great title after great title (maybe with a small lull in between titles now that they are rolling) and attracts the attention of the indie scene, yet they are the odd-man out. I guess we'll see how it turns out, I'm jsut holding out hope that people will start realizing just how great they are.

With all due respect, i think you are letting your love for Nintendo blind you. What has the other two done? THe PS brand at least is bigger than Ninty worldwide. ANd what original top tier titles have Ninty done this gen? they had a year headstart and all they've done is follow ups to series they have been making for years. Hell they havetn even put out an original IP yet. 

You are confused and you and a few other people still dont get it. Ninty is not the end all be all in gaming no matter how you think, sales prove it. Peopel want to play non Ninty games. And for the longest time Ninty hasnt had a home console that had what would be considered the most popular games at any given time. and when they did get it it was some bad version (looking at you COD wii).

People have realized that Ninty isnt that great, at least not on their own and not to sacrifice missing out on stuff like COD and GTA

My love for Nintendo has FAR from blinded me, I am just tired of the same recycled games over and over. CoD is a joke now, after playing every iteration up through Ghosts it is old and tired, yeah Advanced Warfare changed some things, but it's basically now Call of Titanfall. Let's take the example of GTA, what's even the POINT of that game? You steal shit, you get chased by cops, you shoot random bystanders, you get chased by cops, you blow up buildings, you get chased by cops, and then you blow up the cops. There is a story there as well, but seriously, the games that people find "fun" and "original" are far from it. Nintendo does release titles with the same characters over and over, but rarely the exact same GAME or game play. They switch up the story, they switch up the game play, they even switch up the worlds. CoD changes time periods, that's about it since CoD Modern Warfare, they slap some gadgets and perks in and call it good. GTA takes their gameplay and switches cities and adds more cars to steal, and lets you have sex with hookers, wow great "upgrade" there guys, awesome game!

I'm a fan of Destiny right now because of the community aspect of the game and the progression combined with leveling. I'm a huge fan of the Batman games, I love Forza, Battlefield, the Master Chief based Halo series...I'm not blinded by Nintendo, they just know what they are doing. Unfortunately, people like yourself are blinded by mega-hits rather than legitimately good games. Games are meant to be fun, and inviting, Nintendo games are just that, and it's a shame that people are starting to move away from having fun and moving purely to either shoot everything that moves, or reach the top of the Leaderboard.
I think Nintendo deserves A LOT more credit than the mainstream media as well as the mainstream gamers are giving them, they're definitely doing things the right way.



NNID: Dongo8                              XBL Gamertag: Dongos Revenge