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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Do you think Nintendo killed off the Wii too early

 

Was the Wii killed off too early?

Yes 41 53.95%
 
No, Nintendo needed to move on 35 46.05%
 
Total:76
Pyro as Bill said:
Soundwave said:

No they did the correct thing. The reality just is that pre-2010 the Wii was unique and special but after Kinect and Move came out it really wasn't. Just like Brain Training isn't really special anymore because there's like 20 apps on your phone you can get for free that approximate the same thing. 

Kinect Sports was relatively fun and polished, so was the Sony one, you can't really say "well only Wii Sports was fun". 

I think that had an impact on Wii sales for sure. Why buy two systems if you really don't have to. 

You can't really stop other companies from copying such ideas eventually though and having their own polished product, it's simply a matter of spending money. 

So even with 20:20 hindsight, you still think WiiU was the right move. Fair enough.

Also, it isn't just Brain Training that can be done on other ecosystems. Minecraft, PUBG, CoD, Pokemon, FIFA and Fortnite are all on smartphones too.

No I think making any kind of Wii successor was likely going to end in disaster for Nintendo because the uniqueness around the concept has burst and while there was still a sizable chunk of people wanting to play Just Dance ... a lot of people had lost interest in the whole "wave your arms around the TV for 30 minutes".

It gets boring after a while. 

But once you've committed to a hardware design, you can't back out of it or sit there and cry like a baby about it. Once it's greenlit, you have to give it all you got. Even if the headwinds were turning against Nintendo, they had to by 2011 simply suck it up and get to work. 

If anyone could make a Minecraft equivalent that attracted a large audience I'd say why are you on this forum. Make the game and go make a billion dollars. Character/brand driven traditional games like Minecraft, COD, Pokemon, FIFA, etc. can't be copied the same way because there is more depth and nuance to those games and the players are very specific about what they want. 

But a Brain Training game? Some small studio in Hong Kong can crap out 10 Brain Training games with multiplication, word puzzles, etc. and the audience base can be largely satisfied with that. The design level needed to make one is not equivalent to the other. 

Last edited by Soundwave - on 11 August 2020

Around the Network
Soundwave said:

So you're basically crying over 4 games. That can be counted on one hand. LOL. 

Like Nintendo had bigger concerns at that point than making sure Rol got a token 4 games for Wii. Tough shit, but there are development realities that you're being naive to. Nintendo didn't have "spare resources" to work on token Wii projects, the 3DS and Wii U launch windows were in dire straights as it was, diverting resources to unnecessary Wii projects would've been about the dumbest thing they could have done at that point. 

Even the 4 games on DS, tiny as that is was probably a stupid idea, they needed every hand on deck for the 3DS and Wii U because they had huge issues getting enough software out for those machines quickly enough. 

The Game Boy and PS2 are the best examples really, they got games released for them for a few years while the new platforms came in.

We know that it worked in those cases, the question is, would it work in the cases where it wasn't done or wasn't done properly (Wii, SNES, DS).

Also, it would have been possible to spare resources optimally (supporting as many coexisting consoles as they could), had they planned their tech right and allowed WiiU games to be playable on the Wii or even on the 3DS like I mentioned earlier (using a development framework). By the way, they knew about this problem and that's why they made Smash for 3DS/WiiU, it was an attempt at what I suggested.



Soundwave said:

6 years is not a "short life cycle" for any system. At worst it's above average. 

3-4 years is where one can cry about a short life cycle. 

The Wii U or Wii 2 or whatever they wanted to designate it as would've failed in 2013 or 2014 or whatever. The brand was stale and every system had the same mini-game motion games, if anything Sony's Move controller was by far the best motion controller any of the three released.

If there was any market juice there, they would've just copied whatever it was, things were never going back to the way they were pre-2010 when Wii was the only real motion gaming platform and you had no choice but to buy it to get that type of experience. 

It's not a blue ocean when every other console manufacturer is doing the same thing. It's not a blue ocean if everyone and their grandma has touch screen games on their smartphone sitting in their pocket at all times. 

I don't think delaying the 3DS and Wii U for a year would've changed anything and you can't redesign a hardware concept in a year's time either. 

Nothing you said holds any value when Just Dance 2020 was still released on the Wii. Even with Nintendo's negligence, the Wii still comfortably outlived its motion control competition. The continued yearly release of the Just Dance series proves two thing about the Wii: The console and its concept had much more juice left in it that Nintendo wanted to grant it, and the so-called casual audience wasn't fickle, but reliable.

If it now needs to be explained to you why the Wii U was nothing like the Wii, then it would be just another case of your ineptitude to recognize the obvious. Normal are able to tell the difference between a motion controller and a non-motion controller, and they are also able to tell that the vast majority of games for any given console will be designed for its standard controller.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

RolStoppable said:
Soundwave said:

6 years is not a "short life cycle" for any system. At worst it's above average. 

3-4 years is where one can cry about a short life cycle. 

The Wii U or Wii 2 or whatever they wanted to designate it as would've failed in 2013 or 2014 or whatever. The brand was stale and every system had the same mini-game motion games, if anything Sony's Move controller was by far the best motion controller any of the three released.

If there was any market juice there, they would've just copied whatever it was, things were never going back to the way they were pre-2010 when Wii was the only real motion gaming platform and you had no choice but to buy it to get that type of experience. 

It's not a blue ocean when every other console manufacturer is doing the same thing. It's not a blue ocean if everyone and their grandma has touch screen games on their smartphone sitting in their pocket at all times. 

I don't think delaying the 3DS and Wii U for a year would've changed anything and you can't redesign a hardware concept in a year's time either. 

Nothing you said holds any value when Just Dance 2020 was still released on the Wii. Even with Nintendo's negligence, the Wii still comfortably outlived its motion control competition. The continued yearly release of the Just Dance series proves two thing about the Wii: The console and its concept had much more juice left in it that Nintendo wanted to grant it, and the so-called casual audience wasn't fickle, but reliable.

If it now needs to be explained to you why the Wii U was nothing like the Wii, then it would be just another case of your ineptitude to recognize the obvious. Normal are able to tell the difference between a motion controller and a non-motion controller, and they are also able to tell that the vast majority of games for any given console will be designed for its standard controller.

Just Dance is the exception, not the norm. Just Dance, shovelware crap that comes out every year with minimal effort put in, is one thing; Mario, Zelda, Xenoblade, and Nintendo’s other franchises is another. 

The fact still remains that Nintendo’s resources were limited and if they had spent any more of them on developing games for the Wii post-2011, those are less games coming out on 3DS, let alone the Wii U.

Hindsight: 20-20 The Wii U was going to flop regardless and there was nothing that was going to save it. The 3DS on the other hand? That could still have been salvaged and it was. If you took some of the early 3DS games like NSMB2, FE: Awakening, KI: Uprising, Tomodachi Life, 3D Land, and Sticker Star and put them on the Wii. The 3DS was already struggling enough to gain traction. How much more fucked would that system have been if it lost some of those titles?  

Not only was the 3DS going to sell considerably less. Some of those titles I listed would have sold considerably less on the Wii than they did on 3DS. Galaxy 2 had already sold around 5 million less than Galaxy 1, and that was when Wii sales were still relatively healthy. So what would 3D Land have done on the Wii at a time when the Wii was all but dead post-2011? How about Uprising? Does Sticker Star still do 2.5 million?

What about Fire Emblem? Awakening was supposed to be the last game in the series until it blew sales expectations out of the water, being on the 3DS when its sales and momentum was at its peak, was one reason why. Does Awakening still reach those levels on a dead system where its last entry, Radiant Dawn, didn’t even reach .50 million when the Wii was at its early peak? Congratulations, Rol. In your scenario, Fire Emblem is dead.

The only game out of that bunch that I could see doing better would have been NSMB 2. 

But one game doesn’t justify the underachieving performances of other games and especially underachieving hardware. 2011-2023 was the one time where Nintendo posted operating losses, how much steeper would those losses have been if they went down the route of giving more support to a system in its way out? 

The writing was on the wall. It was time to move on. 



Hardware Comparison Threads:

PlayStation 4/Xbox One/Nintendo Switch: 2019 vs. 2020
(https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/241660/ps4xbons-2019-vs-2020/1/)

PAOerfulone said:
RolStoppable said:

Nothing you said holds any value when Just Dance 2020 was still released on the Wii. Even with Nintendo's negligence, the Wii still comfortably outlived its motion control competition. The continued yearly release of the Just Dance series proves two thing about the Wii: The console and its concept had much more juice left in it that Nintendo wanted to grant it, and the so-called casual audience wasn't fickle, but reliable.

If it now needs to be explained to you why the Wii U was nothing like the Wii, then it would be just another case of your ineptitude to recognize the obvious. Normal are able to tell the difference between a motion controller and a non-motion controller, and they are also able to tell that the vast majority of games for any given console will be designed for its standard controller.

Just Dance is the exception, not the norm. Just Dance, shovelware crap that comes out every year with minimal effort put in, is one thing; Mario, Zelda, Xenoblade, and Nintendo’s other franchises is another. 

The fact still remains that Nintendo’s resources were limited and if they had spent any more of them on developing games for the Wii post-2011, those are less games coming out on 3DS, let alone the Wii U.

Hindsight: 20-20 The Wii U was going to flop regardless and there was nothing that was going to save it. The 3DS on the other hand? That could still have been salvaged and it was. If you took some of the early 3DS games like NSMB2, FE: Awakening, KI: Uprising, Tomodachi Life, 3D Land, and Sticker Star and put them on the Wii. The 3DS was already struggling enough to gain traction. How much more fucked would that system have been if it lost some of those titles?  

Not only was the 3DS going to sell considerably less. Some of those titles I listed would have sold considerably less on the Wii than they did on 3DS. Galaxy 2 had already sold around 5 million less than Galaxy 1, and that was when Wii sales were still relatively healthy. So what would 3D Land have done on the Wii at a time when the Wii was all but dead post-2011? How about Uprising? Does Sticker Star still do 2.5 million?

What about Fire Emblem? Awakening was supposed to be the last game in the series until it blew sales expectations out of the water, being on the 3DS when its sales and momentum was at its peak, was one reason why. Does Awakening still reach those levels on a dead system where its last entry, Radiant Dawn, didn’t even reach .50 million when the Wii was at its early peak? Congratulations, Rol. In your scenario, Fire Emblem is dead.

The only game out of that bunch that I could see doing better would have been NSMB 2. 

But one game doesn’t justify the underachieving performances of other games and especially underachieving hardware. 2011-2023 was the one time where Nintendo posted operating losses, how much steeper would those losses have been if they went down the route of giving more support to a system in its way out? 

The writing was on the wall. It was time to move on. 

You're spot on. 

This was also evident with the DS-3DS, even thought the DS only got 4 titles after the 3DS launched, even that was too much. 

They stupidly wasted Pokemon Black 2 White 2 on the DS when the 3DS was crashing and burning and dying for software because no one wanted freaking Nintendogs as a launch title. 

That forced them to have to cut the price of the system massively after just 3 months and lose hundreds of millions of dollars. 

That game should have been on the 3DS, it needed it about 10000000 times more than the DS did. 

Again this is like a parent feeding their fat ass 18 year old son but starving their newborn infant ... you need to have some freaking sense of priorities. 



Around the Network

Something I've come to realize in the discussions of this thread is that even though the Wii was initially crazy successful and had a shorter replacement cycle than its competitors (while still taking 6 years to be replaced), the problem lies in the Wii's specs and approach. The Wii had pretty garbage specs (even for 2006 standards) and that hurts the longevity of the console in terms of first and third party support. The Switch is a different case because it's a hybrid. Yes, its specs as a home console can be pretty garbage. But it is a clear generational leap over the 3DS and Vita in terms of the handheld market. Plus, the motion controls on Switch are more tastefully integrated.
So even though I do believe the Wii was killed off too early, they really would've had to shift the focus to justify waiting until 2013 for a successor. We would've needed more first-party support like Star Fox, another Mario spin-off, and maybe some remakes. We also might have needed a Wii Pro or something in 2010 or 2011 with at least 128 MB of RAM, a slightly faster CPU and GPU, and HDMI support.



Lifetime Sales Predictions 

PS4: 130 mil (was 100 million) Xbox One: 55 mil (was 50 mil) Switch: 110 million (was 73, then 96 million)

3DS: 75.5 mil (was 73, then 77 million)

"Let go your earthly tether, enter the void, empty and become wind." - Guru Laghima

padib said:

To understand the importance of supporting an existing machine, you have to look at examples in the past that did it succesfully. Those we have are the PS2 and the Game Boy, these existed side by side in parallel with a new generation, and sold well for a long time. The success of these consoles solidified the respective company's presence in the market. The Wii, at the volume of sales that it made, was such a potential for that form of execution.

That's not true of the PS2 at all.  The PS3 had a disastrous launch.  The PS2 being successful did absolutely nothing for the follow up console.



NNID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
3DS - Currently Gaming Like It's 2011 - The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D
PC - Currently Gaming Like It's 2012 - Borderlands 2
Mobile - The Simpson's Tapped Out and Yugioh Duel Links

theRepublic said:
padib said:

To understand the importance of supporting an existing machine, you have to look at examples in the past that did it succesfully. Those we have are the PS2 and the Game Boy, these existed side by side in parallel with a new generation, and sold well for a long time. The success of these consoles solidified the respective company's presence in the market. The Wii, at the volume of sales that it made, was such a potential for that form of execution.

That's not true of the PS2 at all.  The PS3 had a disastrous launch.  The PS2 being successful did absolutely nothing for the follow up console.

Exactly, lol, if you actually really look at the history of this stuff a lot of these assumptions that get thrown around aren't true. 

They stem really from logic that applied to Sega 25 years ago, that's not really applicable to Nintendo, MS, or Sony. 

Consumers don't give you any benefit of the doubt based on what you did with an older system when it comes to a new system, even Sony found that out the hard way, they went from the equivalent of being the big man on campus (PS2) to no one willing to return their calls (PS3 circa 2007) in a span of a year, lol. 

Last edited by Soundwave - on 11 August 2020

theRepublic said:
padib said:

To understand the importance of supporting an existing machine, you have to look at examples in the past that did it succesfully. Those we have are the PS2 and the Game Boy, these existed side by side in parallel with a new generation, and sold well for a long time. The success of these consoles solidified the respective company's presence in the market. The Wii, at the volume of sales that it made, was such a potential for that form of execution.

That's not true of the PS2 at all.  The PS3 had a disastrous launch.  The PS2 being successful did absolutely nothing for the follow up console.

I'm, like, not at ALL talking about the PS3's performance. I'm talking about the performance of the PS2.

If I did want to talk about the PS3, it's easy to imagine that the PS brand would have done even worse had all support for PS2 plumetted and everything focused on the PS3, which had, as you said, a disastrous launch. 

@Soundwave, stop agreeing with people just because they're disagreeing with me. The reply to me had nothing to do with what I said.



Quite frankly I like the game industry is this way. Your past success, even from 12 months ago doesn't mean much when you come to a new console.

You have to perform and prove yourself all over again. Doesn't matter if you supported your previous console for 4 years or 8 years, it doesn't mean shit. If Sony doesn't have a solid launch strategy and execution for the PS5, all the work they did for the PS4 doesn't mean shit. They will find themselves in trouble. Same with Nintendo and Switch 2. Nobody cares how good you were with the previous cycle, it buys you no brownie points and there are multiple examples of that just in the last 15 years.

You don't get to curl up into a ball and bask in your success in this business. You have a successful console? Great, congrats. You get a short time to enjoy that before you get your ass to work on the future. Plain and simple. If you want to be patted on the back continually for things you did 2-3 years ago or you think you're entitled to something because your last system did pretty well, you got another thing coming.

Last edited by Soundwave - on 11 August 2020