Topic: What COULD (have) save(d) the Wii U?

[Ian Sane]

Nintendo would never launch with top tier games ready for launch.

You mean they couldn't pull it off or that they wouldn't want to?  The need to space out big first party releases is more of a priority when you have horrible third party support but that's not supposed to happen, right?  If that's not addressed the console fails.  We now know what the potential amount of customers is for a Nintendo-only console and it's not big enough.

I was thinking the other day about how there really are three groups of potential customers:

1. Casual mainstream audience - largest audience, lowest customer loyalty
2. Hardcore Nintendo fan - smallest audience, highest customer loyalty
3. General videogame audience - in the middle of the other two group's extremes

The mainstream will make you the most money but their interest is fad based and flaky.  If you can get them you're making big money but they'll drop you on a whim and their tastes are hard to predict in the first place.  You can't rely on them in the longterm.  The hardcore fan is already on board and having their support doesn't really mean much at all.  They're too small of a group so if you focus just on them you'll go broke.  You would also have to really alter your product into something unrecognizable to turn them off.  The third audience is where you should focus.  They're results based.  They won't cut you slack for incompetence but they won't drop you like a fad either.  Treat them well and they'll stay on board and they're a large enough group that you can be successful with them during the lulls between the few times you'll happen to land mainstream interest.  They also have enough crossover tastes with your hardcore fans that you won't have to alter your product so significantly that the hardcores are turned off.

[Phil]

Since Super Mario 3D World has been done for a while, I would think we might see a new 3D Mario come out at the next console's launch. That would be really cool to see again.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

It's time for the Nintendo fanbase to let go of the Galaxy sequel idea completely. There's noting unique about that series except gravity and that wasn't even implemented well.

Really?

[ThePerm]

As far as Galaxy goes, i really just consider it an extension of Mario 64 and Super Mario Sunshine. They are just top quality 3d Mario games. If you really look at Mario 3d world, its basically Mario meets gauntlet style isometric view.(which suddenly got appealing to me when you think about it that way)

I think there is room for both styles, but i want that Mario 64 style game. Actually they should do a new four swords like Mario 3d world. and river city ransom.

[NWR_insanolord]

The Galaxy games, especially the second one, were pretty far from the Mario 64 style. Galaxy 2 has a lot more in common with 3D World than it does with 64 or Sunshine.

[Evan_B]

3D World effectively makes Galaxy obsolete. I don't care if the art style was more appealing or not.

And yes, many of you may be surprised to hear that in addition to disliking 3D Land, I also have no love for Galaxy, AKA the awkward teenage years of 3D Mario where he was trying to be something different from a collect-a-thon without committing fully to a new structure.

Galaxy 2 is better. But yeah, Galaxy and 3D Land suck.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

3D World effectively makes Galaxy obsolete. I don't care if the art style was more appealing or not.

And yes, many of you may be surprised to hear that in addition to disliking 3D Land, I also have no love for Galaxy, AKA the awkward teenage years of 3D Mario where he was trying to be something different from a collect-a-thon without committing fully to a new structure.

Galaxy 2 is better. But yeah, Galaxy and 3D Land suck.

So let me understand: You didn't like  Mario Galaxy or Super Mario 3d Land but you liked 3d World?


What?

[Evan_B]

I've just accepted the fact that it takes EAD two tries to get something right.

[famicomplicated]

I'm not going to read through all the other posts, so I apologise for repeats, but here are my 2 cents:

*Should have provided devs kits earlier
*Should have made it easy to port 360 games by providing a framework to do so
*Should have courted the 3rd parties by doing the above, but also showing how cheap it would be to develop compared to next-gen
*Should have got Minecraft signed up 2 years before WiiU launch
*Should have advertised the system as brand new, not an add-on, took them over a year to realise the confusion
*Should have streamlined the interface before launch, not 2 years after
*Should have given it a better name, a name that infers it's new, HD and different
*Should have advertised it to consumers
*Should have followed through with Nintendo TVii, and in all regions, it was a good idea but they gave up
*Should have made it region free
*Should have had the full VC library form the Wii available to launch (full conversions I mean)
*Should have priced it at $350 with a game, then brought it down to $299 with a game a year later
*Should have had MK8 at launch or soon after
*Should have scrapped or reworked NintendoLand into something worthwhile and understandable to all
*Should have launched with small Amiibo range and a game, then expanded them to Smash at a later date

[BranDonk Kong]

And

*Should have made it more powerful - or launched it 2 years earlier.

[NWR_insanolord]

And

*Should have made it more powerful - or launched it 2 years earlier.

This is really the biggest thing. If it had more time when it was comparable to the other consoles, either earlier with 360 and PS3 or more powerful to match up better with early-gen PS4 and Xbox One games, it would have kept getting third party ports for longer and that might have helped it catch on.

[BranDonk Kong]

It seems the thinking was, "Wii was on par with the original Xbox, Wii U can be on par with the Xbox 360, what could go wrong?" They didn't realize that the old folks already had Wii Sports, they weren't interested in a new console and didn't make one that the true console-gaming audience wanted. I was at Target the other day and there was an older couple buying a new Wiimote: "Do you need one for the Wii U?" asked the employee? "No."

They did so much wrong with the console - I think a lot of the Nintendo fans (myself included) were excited when the first video demo was played and didn't realize everything that was already going wrong with it. I did always say that the name was a horrible idea though.

[NWR_insanolord]

Trying to be the Wii again was just an awful strategy. I get the appeal in a basic sense, but rational thinking should have easily convinced them it was a longshot. So many things had to go right for that to work the way it did, and it was incredible hubris to think they were capable of pulling that trick twice.

Even forgetting the external factors, the Wii had an unbelievably effective marketing strategy, probably the best in the history of the gaming industry. Conversely, I'm not sure they could have marketed the Wii U less effectively than they did.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

Trying to be the Wii again was just an awful strategy. I get the appeal in a basic sense, but rational thinking should have easily convinced them it was a longshot. So many things had to go right for that to work the way it did, and it was incredible hubris to think they were capable of pulling that trick twice.

Even forgetting the external factors, the Wii had an unbelievably effective marketing strategy, probably the best in the history of the gaming industry. Conversely, I'm not sure they could have marketed the Wii U less effectively than they did.

It was an almost impossible undertaking. Following up one the most successful and iconic products of the decade. The Wii branding was too strong to capitalize on. However, those things could have been overcame by not bottlenecking the technology and be not being ready for HD. That is still the worst of the egregious offenses Nintendo has put out over the last 3 years. This stinks!

[Luigi Dude]

They weren't trying to be the Wii again though.  Being the Wii again would have meant just slapping more RAM on Wii hardware and releasing a simplified controller again.  They tried to solve the issue of appealing more to traditional gamers by actually investing in more powerful hardware since the gap between the Wii and Wii U is a huge one, something you all seem to forget.  Yes it's not as powerful as the competition but it was still a full generation leap from Nintendo's previous hardware, something the Wii was not.  Not to mention they included a traditional controller into the Gamepad so traditional games could all be played by everyone right at the box, unlike the Wii which forced everyone to buy the separate Classic Controller if they wanted something like that, and many games didn't even support the thing.

See that's the problem with the Wii U, Nintendo thought they could have a nice middle ground but they ended up making something that appealed to neither.  The more powerful gap and improved HD visuals the Wii U games offered over their Wii counterparts wasn't going to sway the casuals since they were never concerned about graphics in the first place but it wasn't powerful enough for traditionals since they had seen similar graphics already and wasn't powerful enough for PS4/One games to be ported.  Then the controller ended up being too complicated for casuals while not offering anything compelling enough to really make traditionals go for it.  So in the end Nintendo was left with a system that didn't appeal to anyone expect for their existing fanbase which they managed to mess up since most of the Wii U's biggest games that appeal to that fanbase had similar titles released on the much cheaper 3DS earlier.

Actually going the real Wii route would have probably helped Nintendo since releasing a modified Wii with a simpler controller that blatantly aimed at one audience would have allowed them to advertise the system much better with a lower price and the ability to get more games out faster during the first year which would have been a huge boast.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

True, its a generational leap above the Wii but in specs only. Nintendo themselves didn't build/design the system with enough leeway or learning curve for themselves and it took them far too long to come to market. This is not based only on graphics per se but software wise. NintendoLand, while a great party game didn't shine as well as it could. There was nothing to prove out the "Next_Geness" of the system. They could have had a more powerful system and the potential for the future would sell the system (ala PS4) or g the they could have had the software ready to show what the system is truly capable of and not make us wait for the gems. Mind you they are getting a ton of excellent software out on the system but having a better launch lineup would have...hell I don't know looked better from a future standpoint.

[Ian Sane]

They weren't trying to be the Wii again though.  Being the Wii again would have meant just slapping more RAM on Wii hardware and releasing a simplified controller again.

What is the theoretical appeal of such a product?  What does a Wii with more RAM provide to the customer that makes it a worthwhile purchase?  Keep in mind also that the Wii barely made it within the timeframe where SD only was acceptable.  At the very least anything that connects to a TV in 2012 needed to support HDTV.  They don't even sell any other type of TV these days.

To me the Wii U is the Wii again.  It's a Wii successor from the perspective of a company that didn't really understand why they had such a successful product in the first place.  They thought outdated hardware + wacky controller + dumb name = $$$.  They launched the Wii without a new Wii Sports and I don't mean a literal Wii Sports sequel I mean a game with the selling power of Wii Sports.  Wii Sports was a dream game.  You wave this wand thing and the guy on the screen does the same thing!  WOW!  Everyone I know fantasized about such a game since the first day they found out videogames were a thing.  The Wii U had nothing like that.  So you've have a console that superficially follows the Wii template but it missing the one element that made the Wii successful in the first place and on top of that the audience has left for smartphones.  It was over before it began.

[Luigi Dude]

Doesn't matter what some of you think, to Nintendo the Wii U was different from the Wii.  They released a more powerful and expensive HD system, with a controller that aimed more at the traditional audience then the Wii did.  They also created entirely new engines for all their franchises unlike the Wii where they were able to easily reuse all their Gamecube engines for cheaper and quicker support, which is why the Wii had an amazing 1st year software wise.  Even the flagship of the Gamepad, Nintendo Land was a game designed to appeal to both casuals and traditional, which is why as a game it's a lot more complex then Wii Sports ever was.

This is why don't be surprised if the next home console is a REAL Wii over again, where they just upgrade the Wii U's hardware and give it a simpler more unique controller so they can sell it at a cheaper price, easier to advertise and the ability to easily reuse all those new Wii U engines for quicker development so it has a stronger 1st year lineup.  Anyone expecting Nintendo to suddenly go all out in power for their next home console is just setting themselves up for disappointment since to Nintendo, the Wii U was the more powerful and expensive option and it failed.

[Ian Sane]

Doesn't matter what some of you think, to Nintendo the Wii U was different from the Wii.  They released a more powerful and expensive HD system, with a controller that aimed more at the traditional audience then the Wii did.  They also created entirely new engines for all their franchises unlike the Wii where they were able to easily reuse all their Gamecube engines for cheaper and quicker support, which is why the Wii had an amazing 1st year software wise.  Even the flagship of the Gamepad, Nintendo Land was a game designed to appeal to both casuals and traditional, which is why as a game it's a lot more complex then Wii Sports ever was.

This is why don't be surprised if the next home console is a REAL Wii over again, where they just upgrade the Wii U's hardware and give it a simpler more unique controller so they can sell it at a cheaper price, easier to advertise and the ability to easily reuse all those new Wii U engines for quicker development so it has a stronger 1st year lineup.  Anyone expecting Nintendo to suddenly go all out in power for their next home console is just setting themselves up for disappointment since to Nintendo, the Wii U was the more powerful and expensive option and it failed.

I'm sure "to Nintendo" the Wii U was the greatest idea in the universe but they have to make their decisions based on actual reality, not their own warped view of it.  Do I expect them to do that?  Well, no.  But I'm thinking about what they should do, not what they will.

But what OTHER product could even have been made in the same style as the Wii?  If you don't update the specs or change the controller in some way what is the selling point?  The reason the Wii didn't really up the specs much is because the controller made it different than the Cube.  There was a selling point.  If it was just the conventional controller with the slightly updated specs the Wii would have been a massive bomb because it would have been a pointless product.  Where else could another Wii go?  Make Motion+ the standard and slightly up the specs?  What noticeable advantage to the consumer is there in that?  Nintendo certainly bungled the Wii U marketing since a common misconception was that it was an add-on but assuming they didn't screw that up it's easy to show the differences.  The graphics are better and there's a new screen controller.  Maybe they could have just updated the controller or just updated the specs but they had to do at least one of those.  Otherwise it is practically the same thing as before.

To me the Wii U is pretty much the bare minimum that the Wii successor had to be.  I can't think of how a product with even lesser specs could establish itself as a necessary upgrade.

[BranDonk Kong]

Yes it was a generational leap, but it was a leap from two generations behind to one generation behind.

[Nile Boogie Returns]

Yes it was a generational leap, but it was a leap from two generations behind to one generation behind.

Yup.