Topic: People Need To Stop Bitching

[Kairon]

I wonder how many people on ebay are going to take advantage of consumer ignorance by selling old Wii systems and lying and saying they are actually Wii U's.

You view the world quite negatively.

Maybe he's positive! Maybe he's thinking the number will be less than last time!

[Sarail]

I wonder how many people on ebay are going to take advantage of consumer ignorance by selling old Wii systems and lying and saying they are actually Wii U's.

You view the world quite negatively.

Have you been outside lately? Sheesh.. it's all demons and flying harpies and whatnot. Crazy, I tell you! o_O

[nickmitch]

I mean like someone sees a commercial for the Wii U, thinks "eh, I don't really care enough about a new controller for my Wii" and then doesn't look further into it.  They don't try to buy it and find out it's a new system, they just don't care at all because it's just some minor peripheral in their mind.

What makes you think they would suddenly care if they knew it was a new console? If they see the controller and aren't impressed enough to find out more, that's no sale whether they think it's for the Wii or a new console.

Graphics?

[Oblivion]

The casual gamer bought the Wii over the other consoles. They won't care about the Wii U. The only way they can market it to them is HD and the uPad.

[Sarail]

The casual gamer bought the Wii over the other consoles. They won't care about the Wii U. The only way they can market it to them is HD and the uPad.

Not necessarily true. The casual gamer bought the Wii because they mainly just didn't know or care about the PS3 or 360. It's not like all three consoles were placed right in front of their collective faces and told, "Now choose!"

Nintendo marketed it to casuals. That's why they bought it. Sony and Microsoft had no care in this until they saw the dolla dolla signs dropping fast for Nintendo - thus Move and Kinect. MS started marketing the 360 in a cheaper package toward casuals... and guess what! They started buying Kinect and the 360.

Crazy how that works.

[Chozo Ghost]

The casual gamer bought the Wii because they mainly just didn't know or care about the PS3 or 360.

I'm sure the fact the PS3 was at one time $600 and the 360 was like $400 had a lot to do with that. The Wii sorta won by default with a lot of consumers simply because it was the only one available at a price level they were willing to pay.

If it does turn out the Wii U is seriously underpowered, then at least it could mean Nintendo will be able to keep the price down. So maybe it wouldn't be all bad if the Wii U does end being a weak system.

[Sarail]

The casual gamer bought the Wii because they mainly just didn't know or care about the PS3 or 360.

I'm sure the fact the PS3 was at one time $600 and the 360 was like $400 had a lot to do with that. The Wii sorta won by default with a lot of consumers simply because it was the only one available at a price level they were willing to pay.

If it does turn out the Wii U is seriously underpowered, then at least it could mean Nintendo will be able to keep the price down. So maybe it wouldn't be all bad if the Wii U does end being a weak system.

True. But were Sony and Microsoft even going after that crowd? It wasn't until a year later after the 360 released that Nintendo screamed from the mountaintops, "Hey casuals and non-gamers! Look over here! Lookie at what we got!" I don't think Sony or Microsoft even knew the blue-ocean existed at the point -- especially Sony.. who's always been so adeptly clueless.

But yeah, weak system or not.. I'm expecting $329 to $349 - pack-in game or not.

[Louieturkey]

Blue ocean did not exist to Sony or M$ when Nintendo started selling the Wii.  The Wii is a phenomenon taht is very unlikely to be duplicated in the same way.  Nintendo had the smart advertising campaign of "Wii would like to Play."  Fans of Nintendo bought the system and showed it to their moms and dads and grandparents.  For the first time in history, there was a system that everyone in the family could enjoy together all at once.  Those family members started telling their friends about it and so on and so on until everyone who wasn't a gamer wanted a Wii.  It was sold out for nearly three straight years because of that.

Wii U won't happen the same way.  It'll sell well right away.  The only way the legs continue is if the casuals enjoy the system together as a family as much as they did with the Wii.  I don't think that'll happen but the Wii U will be just fine.

[Ian Sane]

One thing to note about the Wii's blue ocean success is that if you've never played videogames before the mere concept of playing a game is a thrill.  The entire experience is a complete novelty to you.  The first time I ever played a game part of the thrill was that I could control the guy on the screen.  You can't get that "wow, I'm playing a videogame" thrill more than once.  The Wii U cannot possible create the same frenzy unless it introduces yet another new audience to videogames.

[AnGer]

I think the major reason for people bitching about the E3 presentation or to be precise, the WiiU presentation, was that Nintendo themselves showed a lot of future titles when the 3DS was first announced in 2010. We had Kid Icarus, Paper Mario, Kingdom Hearts and Luigi's Mansion – and none of these titles was a launch window game. KI came out in March 2012, almost a year after the 3DS' release, Kingdom Hearts is due in July and Paper Mario as well as Luigi's Mansion are due this holiday season.


Compared to that, Nintendo has shown nothing that goes beyond the "launch window" period. We know there's a new IP coming from Retro Studios and we know of the "usual suspects" – meaning Zelda, Pokémon, Smash Bros and Mario  – but there is nothing beyond that.

[nickmitch]

Nintendo did that on purpose. When the 3DS was announced, we got all excited about the games. By the time the system launched, it was basically a bait-and-switch. To avoid getting our hopes up and leaving us disappointed at launch, they only showed launch window games they know are going to be ready in time.

Remember, the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

[Louieturkey]

Everyone said Nintendo screwed up the 3DS launch because the games weren't there (and the price, but that's beside the point). This time around, Nintendo wants everyone's expectations to be realistic so as to not cause a need to drop the price of the Wii U less than 8 months into the system's lifecycle.  This is one thing they fixed from the 3DS launch.

[Evan_B]

There's been a pretty significant amount of stupidity in regards to the showing this year. Nintendo's not going to upset people with waits like they had for Kid Icarus, Luigi's Mansion, and Paper Mario. It's just unwise to show games off that are further down the line than we know. So by announcing games closer to their actual release, they're ensuring little to no delays.

[rlse9]

Nintendo did that on purpose. When the 3DS was announced, we got all excited about the games. By the time the system launched, it was basically a bait-and-switch. To avoid getting our hopes up and leaving us disappointed at launch, they only showed launch window games they know are going to be ready in time.

Remember, the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

But is it any better to have people be disappointed from the start than it is to get them excited then have them be disappointed?  Either one seems like a negative to me.

I can understand them not wanting to say too much about games that are a ways down the line but why not a little tease of games further off, especially with the launch of a new system, a system that is supposedly going to cater more to the core crowd?  A little tease of an HD Zelda, any sort of small piece of information about the next Smash Bros.  Something to get people excited about what's coming down the road beyond the launch window, which while not bad by any means, doesn't look like anything that is going to attract current non-Nintendo gamers.

[Stogi]

A little tease of an HD Zelda, any sort of small piece of information about the next Smash Bros.

Hahaha this sentence is funny for two reasons: You obviously don't remember the backlash after showing an "HD Zelda"  before the GC launched. Plus, they've already done it last E3 (so maybe Nintendo doesn't remember either; but they did remember to say that it's just a tech demo...repeatedly).

Secondly, they just gave a little tidbit of Smash Bros. not even a week ago. Look at the Talkback forum.

[NWR_insanolord]

There's been a pretty significant amount of stupidity in regards to the showing this year. Nintendo's not going to upset people with waits like they had for Kid Icarus, Luigi's Mansion, and Paper Mario. It's just unwise to show games off that are further down the line than we know. So by announcing games closer to their actual release, they're ensuring little to no delays.

I agree that it's good not to show things too far in advance, but I've made the argument that even if you only consider games that were actually at E3 this year, Nintendo could have put on a vastly better show than they did. Show P-100, talk about Zombi U instead of Batman, don't spend so much time on the hub world of Nintendo Land and give a more general overview of the games instead of spending so much time on one of them.

In the long run it's not going to matter how much their E3 press conference sucked, but they could have done so much better than they did.

[rlse9]

A little tease of an HD Zelda, any sort of small piece of information about the next Smash Bros.

Hahaha this sentence is funny for two reasons: You obviously don't remember the backlash after showing an "HD Zelda"  before the GC launched. Plus, they've already done it last E3 (so maybe Nintendo doesn't remember either; but they did remember to say that it's just a tech demo...repeatedly).

Secondly, they just gave a little tidbit of Smash Bros. not even a week ago. Look at the Talkback forum.

Wasn't the backlash not that they showed an "HD Zelda" but that they completely changed course with Wind Waker and people who were looking forward to the "HD Zelda" were disappointed?  And wouldn't that exact thing happen again if they went that route with the first WiiU Zelda?

The problem is that you're viewing things as a Nintendo fan.  You remember the Zelda tech demo, you know everything that was announced at Nintendo Direct.  That's all great and good but people in the general gaming media, general tech media, and media in general don't know, remember, or even care because E3 was Nintendo's one chance to give them a reason to care and they failed.  Their response has been disinterest which is passed on to their readers/viewers/listeners.  Maybe it's all irrelevant if the WiiU turns out to be just as fun as the Wii when it first came out and they get good 3rd party support and Microsoft and Sony don't blow them out of the water technologically in a year or two but right now non-Nintendo gamers seem not to care about WiiU and non-gamers either don't know exactly what it is or even care.

[Ian Sane]

I remember prior to the Gamecube launch the big challenge was getting people to pay attention.  It really seemed that outside the Nintendo fanbase their wasn't much coverage of the Cube.  I found it very frustrating to see it ignored by magazines and web sites like it was a non-factor before it even came out.

Nintendo should want to get people talking and that doesn't happen if you're all private about things and save announcements for Nintendo-only events.  If Nintendo has a game in the works that would create a major buzz, that isn't due until some time in 2013, they could still potentially sell Wii U's on the hype of that title alone.  Or at least keep people interested until that title comes out.  If you blow the chance to grab their attention when are people going to suddenly care?  You could release a game they want next year but they might NEVER KNOW ABOUT IT because if they've already written the Wii U off and how much effort are they going to put in to keep up to date with a system they don't care about?  If someone is not interested in Nintendo they will not pay any attention to Nintendo Direct.  Everyone pays attention to E3.  If you make a splash there you might enter the field of vision of people who otherwise don't care about you.

Of course this was the first impression and they blew it.  So good luck getting anyone who's written off the Wii U to ever pay attention again.  It's much easier to get general interest in "the new Nintendo console" than "the new games for that existing Nintendo console that you don't own or care about".  Next E3, gamers who don't already own a Wii U will pay less attention to Nintendo's showing.  The first E3 appearance of a system always attracts the most general attention.

[MagicCow64]

I remember prior to the Gamecube launch the big challenge was getting people to pay attention.  It really seemed that outside the Nintendo fanbase their wasn't much coverage of the Cube.  I found it very frustrating to see it ignored by magazines and web sites like it was a non-factor before it even came out.

Nintendo should want to get people talking and that doesn't happen if you're all private about things and save announcements for Nintendo-only events.  If Nintendo has a game in the works that would create a major buzz, that isn't due until some time in 2013, they could still potentially sell Wii U's on the hype of that title alone.  Or at least keep people interested until that title comes out.  If you blow the chance to grab their attention when are people going to suddenly care?  You could release a game they want next year but they might NEVER KNOW ABOUT IT because if they've already written the Wii U off and how much effort are they going to put in to keep up to date with a system they don't care about?  If someone is not interested in Nintendo they will not pay any attention to Nintendo Direct.  Everyone pays attention to E3.  If you make a splash there you might enter the field of vision of people who otherwise don't care about you.

Of course this was the first impression and they blew it.  So good luck getting anyone who's written off the Wii U to ever pay attention again.  It's much easier to get general interest in "the new Nintendo console" than "the new games for that existing Nintendo console that you don't own or care about".  Next E3, gamers who don't already own a Wii U will pay less attention to Nintendo's showing.  The first E3 appearance of a system always attracts the most general attention.

I agree that it was a tactical blunder to parse out such an underwhelming E3 showing, and could have major ramifications about the viability of the Wii U, fairly or not.

But I think you can possibly extrapolate a strategy from this, for reasons you allude to. Next E3 is going to be all about the new Playstation and XBox. To stand any chance of withstanding that tide, Nintendo is going to have to have a flood of announcements. As people have mentioned, they're extremely inconsistent about how long ahead of time they debut games in the press, so I'm inclined to believe its more about strategy (correct or incorrect) than having a genuine policy of not showing games off until six months before they launch. Why else would they supposedly nix a Retro demo? That by itself could have created enough buzz to balance out all the negative impressions that have flooded from E3. I'm guessing Nintendo is secretly scared shitless about the Orbis and Durango, and is really hoping they're not going to make the Wii U a tech orphan.

[Chozo Ghost]

Hopefully at next year's E3 Sony and/or Microsoft will have just as underwhelming an unveiling of their new consoles as Nintendo did this year. I wouldn't count on that, but for Nintendo's sake hopefully that's what ends up happening.

[NWR_insanolord]

If you just look at the developers we haven't heard from in a while, Nintendo looks like they could have the goods for a repeat of E3 2010 next year. Assuming they don't blow all that by trickling it all out ahead of time in Nintendo Directs. If you're going up against console reveals, having games from your two best developers (Retro and EAD Tokyo) to unveil at the show is about as well as you can hope to do. That, and strong third party support, could show the Wii U hitting its stride months before the competition even launches.

Not holding my breath, but it's something to hope for.

[AnGer]

But is it any better to have people be disappointed from the start than it is to get them excited then have them be disappointed?  Either one seems like a negative to me.


I can understand them not wanting to say too much about games that are a ways down the line but why not a little tease of games further off, especially with the launch of a new system, a system that is supposedly going to cater more to the core crowd?  A little tease of an HD Zelda, any sort of small piece of information about the next Smash Bros.  Something to get people excited about what's coming down the road beyond the launch window, which while not bad by any means, doesn't look like anything that is going to attract current non-Nintendo gamers.

This. While the 3DS launch was somewhat disappointing and the pricing policy also can be considered an utter failure (or at least a slap in the face of the customers), there was at least an outlook on what's in store for the device over the course of the first two years.


They should have at least shown one or two games for 2013/2014, but... well, we shall see what they've really got up their sleeve.

[Guitar Smasher]

I'm going to disagree with the majority, in that I agree with Nintendo's reluctance to show future titles.  First, it keeps the competition guessing as to your strategy.  But more importantly, it allows Nintendo to go all out next E3, stealing the attention away from Sony and Microsoft's next consoles.  Timing is as important as the nature of your news.  Could Nintendo have shown one major game to create a positive impression?  Sure, (and I don't think Pikmin 3 was this game) but I think having mostly tech demos to stimulate the imagination of your audience is sufficient for now.  The whole point is to not be forgotten next year when the competition increases.

[shingi_70]

The notion that a company likr nintrndo doesnt want to show stuff that will be out later sue to fear of delays is honest to god bullshit. Take surfa e a d Google Glass. Both are a ways out (the pro version of surface wont be out until early next year and glass wont be out till 2014 for consuners and  next year for devs). And yet they were shown off and now all your hewring is good arti les about microsoft and google and how they are pushkng their ecosystems and the future of computer electronics. By showing things that wont be out yet your showing people you have a viable product and your brand will be a place to usher in a fantastic space for developers.

Also im wonder how the Wii U will be marketed? If they push too hravoly with tbe its a tablet like they have bee  doing they will be going up against real tablets too closely.

[rlse9]

I'm going to disagree with the majority, in that I agree with Nintendo's reluctance to show future titles.  First, it keeps the competition guessing as to your strategy.  But more importantly, it allows Nintendo to go all out next E3, stealing the attention away from Sony and Microsoft's next consoles.  Timing is as important as the nature of your news.  Could Nintendo have shown one major game to create a positive impression?  Sure, (and I don't think Pikmin 3 was this game) but I think having mostly tech demos to stimulate the imagination of your audience is sufficient for now.  The whole point is to not be forgotten next year when the competition increases.

Your point that they need to have a good showing next year when they're going to have to compete with the next generation consoles is a good one.  The only thing I wonder is if by that time, it's already going to be too late to have a chance to capture the core gaming audience.  Many seem to have already lost interest and forgotten and the system isn't even out.  Maybe I'm crazy but this feels like the WiiU could end up like the Dreamcast, caught half way in between generations and people will take a wait and see approach and end up choosing the next Sony or Microsoft consoles because they're far ahead technologically.  Obviously, Nintendo is in a completely different place financially and Nintendo's first party games are superior and they're coming off of the best selling console of last generation so it's a different situation so who knows.  I want the WiiU to be successful but I just don't see that being the most likely scenario at this point.