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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - The problem with Wii U

Shiken said:
I can sum it up better...

Limited network
lack of power
lack of 3rd party support

See how quick and easy that was? =P




Around the Network

The $180 pad, the name, the specs. It was doomed from the start. DOOOOMED! But seriously, the $180 controller is a setoff for me. They could have put that towards more HDD space or better CPU...something man, something. Well, hopefully we can quit talking about Wii U woes and enjoy the ride and hopefully when the ride is over, Nintendo will have put what they learned into a worthy next gen console.



This thread gets my stamp of agreement.



Official Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE Thread

                                      

Marketing has always been Nintendo's problem. It is one of the reasons Wii U hasn't sold well or some of their games (Like The Wonderful 101)

And to back up your claim on power, the Gamecube was the strongest console in the Xbox, PS2 and Gamecube era yet it still sold bad.



[Switch Friend code: 3909-3991-4970]

[Xbox Live: JissuWolfe]

[PSN: Jissu]

RolStoppable said:
Terrible thread, unless its intention was to be terrible.


Ow, my pride.



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
Redgrave said:

Ow, my pride.

So you think for real that marketing is Nintendo's main problem?


I do indeed, you just have to look at the Wii to see that.



"lack of content killed the Wii. It's hard for consumers to buy games and keep playing their console when they have hardly any worthwhile games to choose from."

That! Nintendo mostly released niche japanese games, and most of them had trouble being released in occident.



Sigh. No, wii u's problem is lack of profesionalism from third party companies.



RolStoppable said:
Redgrave said:

I do indeed, you just have to look at the Wii to see that.

I don't and I am happy to see someone who agrees with me:

"In addition, we have product development issues to be addressed. The development side must consider why a certain game is not selling well even though the game is fun to play, and the Metascore and User Score are high. I believe that if they were to blame it all on the marketing side, we would make no progress at all. Rather, our developers must ask themselves whether the game’s appeal can be communicated to consumers at a glance, it can be explained to others in a way that is easy to understand and whether it is easy to invite other people to play the game, because if the product includes aspects that sell themselves, it has the potential to become a smash hit. For example, "Minecraft" is a game that a very large number of people around the world are playing and it uses user-generated content to keep people interested, and one after another, players are inviting others to join them."

Full text here (Q5 and A5): http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/150217qa/03.html

Sums up why the Wii sold and why the Wii U doesn't. And "the novelty of the Wii" wore off because Nintendo prematurely scaled back/stopped support for it. Wasn't a matter of processing power or gimmicks; lack of content killed the Wii. It's hard for consumers to buy games and keep playing their console when they have hardly any worthwhile games to choose from.

How are people supposed to know if they like something or not if it isn't marketed properly?

Serious question, how can a game sell well if the console isn't? The old school word-of-mouth crap doesn't work nowadays. It's not like Nintendo's the only option. It may apply to Minecraft and other similar games that can be picked up on multiple platforms, but it doesn't work with Nintendo. They're cracking down on Youtubers as well, so there's little to no advertisement there. Other than popular Youtubers panning their actions. And whoever is sticking with them is losing pennies. So it's just negative press all around for Nintendo there.

The Wii sold well due to two things, one being Nintendo's heavy marketing campaigns - an example being here in the UK, we had cringeworthy ads with pop groups The Saturdays and Girls Aloud playing the DS and Wii, and obviously, impressionable kids are going to want one because they see their favorite bands playing it. Multiple TV spots, talk show appearances with Reggie, and so on helped sell the system.

And number two, it was different and easy to use, it wasn't the usual sit back and eat chips console with the same controls as the last. Marketed towards a much broader audience than it's competition.

Lack of content? Are you serious?

The Wii had a plethora of excellent games and add-ons to keep people happy. Don't kid yourself, it comes down to the casual market being entitled and extremely fickle. They move freely from fad to fad, look at Angry Birds, Flappy Bird, Tapped Out, and all that "Saga" trash as some examples.



Intrinsic said:
Thats just a lot of BS and the writer of that article is disillusioned if he thinks that is the problem with Nintendo.

Nintendo can market that console all they want, it just wouldn't make a difference. The people he's suggesting would pick it up if marketed properly, just don't care about consoles anymore, not even the PS4/XB1. Right now Nintendo's only change is to sell their console to the die hard Nintendo's elite and the 150M+ people or so that bought a PS3/360 last gen; unfortunately for Nintendo, those people care about the stuff he says doesn't matter. Like power, graphics and online features.

How come so few people around these parts see it this way.

It's not the name.  It's not the ads.  It's not the games.  It's the zeitgeist.  Nintendo just isn't the du jour  gaming company right now.  And when people make claims about "good games selling" I think about music.  I think about all the crap that is popular and I'd still go with my favorite indie/undeground artists who aren't responding to market or label pressures and who create amazing music. It doesn't mean that it's bad or should be marketed differently.  It's just not for everyone.

I think many people around here act more like share holders as opposed to sociologists and cultural anthropologists.  It's the latter that really helps you understand markets, in my opinion.