Messages

201

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Something Something Wii U Successor Somethng

« on: December 10, 2013, 11:12:31 PM »

First of all, I'm not gonna search the site for your arguments on the subject, especially when you admit that "Alot of threads degrades into portions of the same argument." which to me means it could have been in any number of threads, none of which would have been related to what I was looking for.
If you have a point to make that you already made somewhere else in a thread I've never seen during a conversation I wasn't apart of, then make it again or quote/link to yourself so I can read it.

I linked right to the page.  It's just common courtesy to review discussions before trying to turn every discussion into other things that are well represented.

How would it be killing off the handheld portion of the business when the Handheld portion on the business is still the handheld portion of the business? The handheld is still a portable handheld and would still be getting portable handheld games.

They are two different markets that want different things.  Rarely have I ever seen a device that can represent two markets well.  If you can think of one, let me know.  At best, Nintendo really is putting themselves in a position that they get the benefit of one market by consolidating since there isn't much of a hope that a hybrid would do better than the 3DS is doing now in one of the markets. 

Want to play handheld games? There is the successor to the 3DS.
want to play console games? .... oh the Wii U is dead. refer to the handheld games instead.

PS4/XBO are pretty good consoles.  Don't like the Wii U you could check those out. 

A Wii Uportable is the next step for a successor the the 3DS.

Why? 

The 3DS was basically a portable Wii/GC
It might not technically be as powerful, but it will look just as good. A PS Vita today cost $250 and is probably a small step below a Wii U... basically a PS3 portable. There is no good reason as to why Nintendo couldn't have comparable portable hardware to the Wii U in 2.5 yrs time.

Wow, you are really impressed with weak handheld hardware.  No way any of that is true, I could see why you would think a handheld has enough power to replace consoles. 

We would still get the same games as before. If someone was making a game for a portable, that wouldn't need to change. The only change would be for 3rd parties that were trying to make console style game would still be able to support Nintendo, who would likely have a very high install base, and the gamer would still be able to play said game on their TV if they chose to.

Not convinced a hybrid would have high install base since your not meeting the needs of either market and not sure third parties would care since they have a market they do really well with on the PS4/XBO and they didn't care about the large installbase of the Wii. 

Just because the handheld is capable of displaying up on the TV doesn't mean all it's games have to be geared toward the TV type of experience.

Do you make it in-compatible with TV mode so they don't see how bad your game looks?

The Wii U isn't winning any awards in design nor is it winning any races in capability. It's already designed to be low power potentially for future portable use. Wii U is under powered as a home console when sitting on a shelf inbetween the PS3 of 2006 and the PS4 of 2013. The trade off here isnt' that we are bringing you a weak ass home console that is also a portable, it is that we are bringing you a bad-ass portable that can work on your TV like a home console.

In other words, play out the Wii U low power for the future approach.  I like it. 

Well if they aren't gonna fix the most obvious problem (3rd parties) then they need address the symptoms (low console sales). If they seem to be succeeding hand over fist in the handheld sector, and failing miserably generation after generation in the console sector (Wii was a fluke, bottled lightning and Nintendo cannot recreate that or hold that audience) then the next best thing to do is leverage your strengths to make up for your weaknesses.

Your ignoring the fact that Nintendo does leverage the same business plan in both markets already.  It works in the handheld sector it doesn't in the console sector.  Because the markets are looking for two different things.   

But that's just how I see it. I see no trade off of a handheld for a console when the handheld is still a handheld, and just becomes a controller for the box hooked up to your TV when at home. The box is nothing more than a Roku like box with a HDD that interfaces with the TV. I think you never fully understood my concept for what I thought the "Hybrid" should be. My idea is more like the Wii U in reverse.

I understand it.  I just think Wii U tech in the controller is much more expensive than you think.  And when a great handheld only costs $150, what's the point of combining markets? 

202

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Something Something Wii U Successor Somethng

« on: December 10, 2013, 09:38:38 PM »

Which is why my original idea was not a hybrid system.  But two systems, that are perfectly linked...and all games are available to both...this is done by creating games that can be scalable...like most PC games are.  And since you are only scaling them to 2 standards it should be relatively easy.

Would you charge the handheld market $60 for the game since it cost the same to develop?  Maybe cross-buy for all purchases would help minimize that.  Physics would be another thing that may be difficult to scale.  Certainly a better option in my opinion than a hybrid and I could see market moving towards something like that in the future.  Sony I feel has somewhat tried that strategy with the Vita although not quite to the degree you are suggesting. 

I think the Classic control Pro for Wii U is a perfect controller, and as such from here on out should be the standard controller Nintendo uses and should be 100% future forwards for all Nintendo systems.  Nintendo should advertise this fact NOW.

Can you take Reggie's place?  I don't know if there is a vote for something like that, but I would vote for you.

203

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Something Something Wii U Successor Somethng

« on: December 10, 2013, 09:14:01 PM »

My thoughts:  Nintendo CAN NOT Dreamcast themselves.  If Nintendo prematurely ends the Wii U then they are signaling their weakness in the console market completely.  The Wii U will be viewed as a failure and anything Nintendo tries to do will be viewed as a risk.  It will basically KILL their console market completely.

I'd rather Nintendo not Dreamcast themselves, but the market is painting a pretty grim picture right now.  The Wii U is already viewed as weak in the market by the competitors and third parties and generally most analysts rip it daily.  I don't think it's makes Nintendo weak to come out with a better product that meets consumer demand.  Nintendo did make the virtual boy.  They moved on and now completely own the handheld market.  And I say that as someone who owns a Wii U and would be a little ticked if they killed it. 

204

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Something Something Wii U Successor Somethng

« on: December 10, 2013, 09:08:11 PM »

Steam integration is a unique feature, but I don't see Steam going for it without maintaining all the profits.  It would be Steam's store and their servers.  They already have the infrastructure in place and they don't really need Nintendo.  Steam is growing in size each year and basically owns the PC market.  If Nintendo allowed Steam, no-one would license with them directly.  They would just create Steam games and advertise that it was playable through a Nintendo console.  I don't see how this wouldn't negatively affect Nintendo profits more than just paying third parties to develop for their system.  It's like if Nintendo would have given up their on-line to EA except with less control and less profits. 

205

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Something Something Wii U Successor Somethng

« on: December 10, 2013, 09:03:05 PM »

First I'm talking about 3 years from now. Shrinking the Wii U with maybe a bump in processor speed or/RAM. Never said anything about doubling the specs. I called it a Wii U++ (streamlined and refined) in portable form. If Sony can get the Vita out at a reasonable price with multi-touch now w/o taking a loss, then there is no reason Nintendo shouldn't be able to do the same with a WiiUportable in 2016.

So I'm not sure what other arguments you made that debunk the validity of such an idea in other threads, but the ones you've made here don't really seem like they would put the idea off the table.
I really don't see how leveraging the success of the handheld into the long time failing home console market is "destroying their most successful part" Especially since it doesn't rule out the release of a real home console to replace the "TVbox" portion of the hybrid (or did you just skim my version of the hybrid handheld/console? it's a 2 part piece of machinery).

There's a search portion on this site.  Check it out sometime.  Alot of threads degrades into portions of the same argument.  http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/forums/index.php?topic=42455.50

I don't see it as leveraging at all.  I see it as killing off the handheld portion of the business and hoping that your console portion becomes successes.  I like Adrock's idea of being able having saves transfer and having the portable buy a game and having it auto download for the main console.  That's a neat idea. 

I just don't see a hybrid as innovative.  It's a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.  Want to play handheld games?  There's a 3DS.  Want to play console games, there's a Wii U.  They are different because the markets for those items want different things.  A 3DS meets the demands of the market perfectly.  To shrink hardware you always pay a premium.  To develop a game for a 50" 4K 3D TV (where the console market is going) you are always going to have too much power in a handheld.  Parents have proven they won't spend $250 en mass to fit their children each with their own game system.  You are pushing things on the handheld market they do not want.  $150 for a 3DS is perfect for what the market expects.  The handheld market doesn't want to pay $60 for 4K games when they were happy with their $30 games.  And I don't know how the console market benefits either.  PS4/XBO owners aren't clamoring for ports of those titles or they'd likely get them.  I don't see $60 copies of Layton moving Wii U's. 

Technology in general will get cheaper, but I don't think we are 3 years away.  Processors aren't increasing at the rate they used to and we are reaching the points of economical feasibility to keep shrinking them.  The Vita is certainly no home console.  I do think it's funny though, one of the biggest knocks on the Wii U is it is under-powered.  But we expect people to accept limited handheld power as a trade off of a hybrid system when the console market has never asked for less power? 

You are solving a problem that doesn't exist.  The problem is and always has been Nintendo's interactions with third parties.   Can they salvage that?  Yes, they can.  Will they?  Probably not because Japanese companies are very stubborn. 

206

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Something Something Wii U Successor Somethng

« on: December 10, 2013, 01:48:14 PM »

I knew I shouldn't respond because this would digress into another handheld argument that has been beat to death.

I really couldn't disagree more with pretty much every thing you think will happen with a handheld/hybrid. But I've already responded in other threads to those as have others about the serious shortcomings so i'll not add them here. Lets just stay realistic. Wii U loses money now. You want to double the specs and shrink it into a handheld?  You want to bump the tablet to HD and add multi touch?  Lets talk about a $700 hybrid /console  not a $200 console. I cant be the only one who knows the Wii U is more powerful than an ipad. Also take the # of 3DS Nintendo games divide by 4 because console development is much more resource intensive than handheld. Might as well forget about handheld third party support being a bonus because it sucks compared to PS3/Xbox360 support.

Ian - it's not only current Wii U owners. People that would consider their next console will probably think maybe I should wait 2 years to make sure they don't dump this console as well. But things are pretty bad with the Wii U so they may feel they have no choice to move on. The greater problem still would exist. How do you get people that won't buy a Wii U to buy the next one. It's not an easy answer.

207

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Something Something Wii U Successor Somethng

« on: December 10, 2013, 12:50:48 PM »

We'll see.  I think Nintendo is uncharted territory with a very unpopular console and operating losses.  I think they are going to do something drastic.  I don't think that means moving towards third party yet, but we'll see.


Why would they want to destroy their most successful part?  Everything they touch in the handheld arena turns to gold.  I'm just not sure why they'd want to do that and there is no reason to believe that getting 3DS games onto the Wii U would solve the Wii U's problems (in fact many of those games are already there).  Plus, I don't see the market moving that direction.  Microsoft isn't interested in handhelds and they are trying to get everything connected to the cloud so they don't need a future of handheld machines to make that happen.  Sony tried and will probably not make another handheld after the Vita failed to reproduce the sales of the PSP. 

208

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Something Something Wii U Successor Somethng

« on: December 10, 2013, 11:34:03 AM »

I don't think most consumers consider accessory price when they come to consoles. The 360 had Live at 50 required for multiplayer games. Assuming you want that (most gamers would) that became an 800 console. But that sold like hotcakes over the ps3 because people saw 600 > 400. I wish we would go back to packing 2 controllers with a system though. That would be good enough for most people.

Yeah I don't think the hybrid is where it's going and that's been discussed at great lengths before. I see the long term console future moving to cheap streaming boxes like on-live and not being able to provide enough power for mobile gaming without the cloud. Obviously we are not there yet.

I am starting to think though that Nintendo is prepping to replace the Wii U. Not changing obviously flawed targets indicates to me they are going to do something. My guess is they are prepping a console replacement either this holiday or for spring of 2015. I think they'll try to sell it a two pronged strategy where the Wii U is tablet gaming and the successor if for traditional gaming and they'll both coexist. Not that they will coexist, but I think they have to try to appease Wii U owners that it wasn't a wasted purchase. I think their first party titles will get released for both the Wii U and the new machine for at least a year before they let the Wii U die.

I think it's best to keep expectations low for changes that Nintendo will make. I also think that all the changes to hardware won't matter if they dont work hard to get third parties on board.

209

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Nintendo Optimism

« on: December 06, 2013, 06:19:40 PM »

Nintendo will be that eventually they will make a new console thus finally putting the Wii U out of its misery at some point and whatever that console is, it surely will be better than this one.

I'm a Browns fan.  What I've learned from being a Browns fan is it can always get worse. 


Back to the topic though.  The 3DS is all kinds of awesome and could break into my top 3 consoles of all time by the end of this gen.  Others have pointed that out though.  The Wii U is the first HD Nintendo console and their games look really good on it.  I like the Gamepad and offscreen play more than I thought I would.  As long as MK8, DKC, SSB, and a Zelda get released on the Wii U I'll be happy with my purchase of it. 

210

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 06, 2013, 11:12:38 AM »

I guess I give Sony more credit because they made lots of money on PS1 and PS2. With PS3 they made 2 incorrect assumptions that led to them losing money. 1 They thought blu ray playing ability would drive consumers to their product despite its high cost. It did not. 2 They thought people would pay 600 for a box with playstation on it.

 I think its false to assume they aimed to go into that generation to subsidize the PS3. It turns out they did but it appears they've immediately corrected those issues with the PS4 and want to get profitable. There is no trojan horse in the PS4 the way blu ray was. The 400 is reasonable and where the 360 started last gen. PS4 is much more diversified and set up to do well this gen.

I feel Sony made some bad decisions that hurt them in short term profits but they are set up well long term. I feel like Nintendo did the opposite. They made decisions with the Wii that made them tons of $ in the short term. But essentially saying screw you to third parties has put them in a tough long term situation. It's cliche at this point, but if you don't like Zelda, Mario, Metroid it's hard to recommend a Wii U.

211

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 06, 2013, 10:12:26 AM »

Magic Cow - Discussing business and playing armchair CEO can be fun and I think should be part of this site. Part of the problem with the Wii U stagnating is criticising Nintendo is like shooting fish in a barrell. Sometimes criticism overtakes the board because there are wide gaps in the release schedule and we don't have much to talk about on the game front.

Most people here are Nintendo biased and enjoy Nintendo titles best and couldn't care if Killzone comes to a Nintendo console. Where my concern lies is whether or not Nintendo will continue to come out with high quality software I enjoy. I'm not naive enough to think that Nintendo will keep status quo with their current results. After decades of profits they've are going on their 4th straight year of operating loss. I think they are going to do something drastic after their fiscal year ends.

Will Iwata get fired?  Will they have mass layoffs?  Will they go third party or develop a new console to replace the Wii U?  Maybe not any of those things. But I think drastic changes are coming for Nintendo and that it will affect the games they develop. The Wii U has not brought profit to Nintendo so it is no Gamecube in that respect.

212

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 06, 2013, 12:17:26 AM »

The point wasn't that it was all encompassing. Its impossible for us to know all those costs. The point is Sony/Microsoft came with an economical box this time because they are ready to make $ on consoles. Both actually need it as Windows and offuce software is tanking and Sonys electronics division is tanking. They no longer can afford to subsidize consoles so not competing on that ground doesn't make sense anymore.

I'll find the Iwata quote when I get home. 10/31 he admitted Wii U was still a financial drain. That may be because its not selling enough to cover r&d, overheads ect.  But that just means they've made mistakes and the Wii U is thus far a failure.

Psn and live are now mandatory and will be cash cows too.

Windows and Office are tanking. Reality says differently. I'm not sure about Sony but I must question a statement about Microsoft not being able subsidize consoles.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/25/technology/microsoft-reports-higher-sales-and-profit.html?_r=0

There are rumors Microsoft is looking to sell the console business and the hardware teardown costs suggest that Microsoft is not looking to subsidize the XBO but rather get it in a gain position. 

I'm not going to get in a big argument about Microsoft because that will mostly derail this thread.  They had a good quarter that wasn't expected driven by their business services.  They have been struggling with consumers moving from PCs into apple tablets and the loss of Windows revenue associated with that movement.  They have been losing additional office software volume as business workers choose ipads and apple has aggessively been including free software that can view and edit spreadsheets.  That article you posted indicated as much that they are really struggling in the consumer markets and they don't really seem to have an answer there so I think they'll need help to continue that trend.  It's also one good quarter after several disappointing quarters for them. 

213

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 06, 2013, 12:08:23 AM »

I couldn't find the exact quote I thought about before but here is their third quarter investor update. 

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/131031/index.html

2nd paragraph:

For the six-month period ended this September, ordinary income was in the black for the first time in four years. However, in connection with the price reduction of the Wii U hardware in the overseas markets, the effects of absorbing the inventory markdown at retail, revaluating the hardware as finished goods, and loss arising from the hardware for production in the second half of the fiscal year, led to an operating loss situation.

Nintendo is still in an operating loss position.  All the reasons they gave are because of the Wii U.  Heck, who are we kidding, we know the 3DS is insanely profitable.

I remember Iwata saying that the Wii U is profitable after selling a single Wii U game.

See B-dogs comment.  There are several manufacturing costs and overheads associated with selling hardware.  My guess is if they would have hit their targets, those overheads would be spread over a greater number of consoles and they could have gained profitability with just one game sold.  Clearly they are still losing money on the Wii U business as indicated in their quarterly financial information.  This means that due to lower console sales and the corresponding lower than expected software sales, the entire Wii U business is in a loss position right now (which includes software). 

An easy example is software.  Let's say for instance, Pikmin 3 cost $20M to make and we'll assume Nintendo gets the full $60 for simplicity sake.  Let's say they expected to sell 1 million copies.  Then the cost per game is $20 and every game adds $40 to their margin.  What if they only sell 0.5 million copies?  Then their cost per game is $40 and every game adds $20 to their margin.  There's a similar calculation with consoles.  It's easier to pick apart the component costs, harder to determine the overheads.  Missed sales means each console and software title picks up more overhead and they are losing money in total now although each Wii U has probably sold more than one software title. 

214

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 05, 2013, 09:42:51 PM »

The point wasn't that it was all encompassing. Its impossible for us to know all those costs. The point is Sony/Microsoft came with an economical box this time because they are ready to make $ on consoles. Both actually need it as Windows and offuce software is tanking and Sonys electronics division is tanking. They no longer can afford to subsidize consoles so not competing on that ground doesn't make sense anymore.

I'll find the Iwata quote when I get home. 10/31 he admitted Wii U was still a financial drain. That may be because its not selling enough to cover r&d, overheads ect.  But that just means they've made mistakes and the Wii U is thus far a failure.

Psn and live are now mandatory and will be cash cows too.

215

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 05, 2013, 08:52:24 PM »

Sony tried launching with cutting edge technology and they lost like $300 per unit. Wii is only an exception in that it still would have been underpowered even if Sony and Microsoft had not forced the HD era. Nintendo aimed really low while the other two aimed really high.

That's not a fair determination.  Sony lost tons of money to push Blu-Ray.  As the price of blu dropped, the price of the PS3 dropped and they were eventually able to make a profit on it. 


The past really is irrelevant though.  Look at current gen.  By Nintendo's account they have sold the Wii U at a loss and are still selling it at a loss.  Sony/Microsoft haven't officially commented, but according to tear downs they are both making a day 1 profit.  Price isn't as important as meeting consumer demands.  Hardware alone isn't the reason Sony/Microsoft are winning, but they are clearing meeting consumer demand better at this point and it will likely be a big bump to their financials. 

216

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 04, 2013, 10:05:54 PM »

Ian, certainly the Wii U is not perfect from a hardware perspective.  But's its much closer than the Wii was and a good looking game on the Wii U will look comparable enough to most people.  That and the Gamepad is so much better than the Wiimote for most traditional games so I think it is much better than a Wii-redux.  Yes, they tried to sell a gimmick, but Madden on the Wii U is awesome unlike Madden on the Wii because you can easily get around the gimmick. 


I think the key is, if the Wii U was the PS4 (better tech, no gamepad), except priced at $300 does it make a difference?  In my mind no.  I don't think third parties flock to the Wii U (PS4), I don't think consumers flock to it.  Marginally more sales from techies but most consumers pick a console based on games and the Wii U in my opinion would be as lacking as it is now. 


It does make me wonder though.  I'm not big into "mature games" for the sake of mature games, but clearly the demographics for gaming have increased and mature games lead the market in sales (other than Nintendo games).  I wouldn't want a mature Mario/Zelda/Metroid, but what if Nintendo were to release a Watchdogs or Uncharted or some new mature series that would knock peoples socks off?  I think if they were to come out with a AAA mature series that was exclusive, that may get more people to consider buying a Wii U even if it's just in additional to a PS4/XBO.

217

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 04, 2013, 05:24:55 PM »

To say that Nintendo's developers have been hamstrung by the requirement to use hardware features anytime recently is insane. That was a valid criticism on the Wii but if anything they're not doing enough to showcase the Wii U functionality.

I stand by my criticism that they are forcing it in games where it doesn't make sense. With the Wii, it made games worse at times. With the Wii U it doesn't make things worse. It's just annoying and doesn't make them better. Another example is Pikmin 3. I plop down with my pro controller to play since I preferred the smaller Gamecube-like controller. I wasn't 5 min into the game when I got a message. Well okay how do I answer it?  Oh, I can't get a gamestopping message to show on the tv?  I have to go pick up the gamepad sitting in the cradle?  That was stupid and I felt like I was forced to use the gamepad and the pro controller was useless except for multiplayer. Now did using the gamepad to play the game make the game substantially worse the way motion controls did in making me spin jump to my death in NSMB?  No they didn't and that's not my argument. My point is it was forced and added nothing to the game.

Shy - You're missunderstanding me. I don't hate the gamepad and games that take advantage of it like Nintendoland are welcome to use it. My problem is when they force it into traditional games where it doesn't make sense like the two examples I've given where it clearly adds nothing to the game.

Luigi - I'm not really going to get in a big argument because I feel that's offtrack and goes back into the history and decisions of each console to know if Nintendo's riskier or more adverse to risk at this time. I feel Nintendo has been safe and I don't recall a time when they've gone to the well this much with their main franchises. I also think Nintendo thought the Wii U would sell much more making those choices less risky st the time. For instance, I don't think Nintendo would greenlight Pikmin 3 today knowing what they know about the Wii U and in general Nintendo has filled their schedule with delayed titles rather than announce anything new and exciting recently.

218

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 04, 2013, 03:31:55 PM »

Phil - I think you have it backwards. Nintendo has totally refused risk and instead become a Mario factory. 3 core Mario games in year 1 of  the.Wii U?  This right after NSMB 2 and 3D Land were pumped out to save the 3DS. Titles like Fire Emblem Wii U publically spurned because they don't sell enough. Wii U product line is still not profitable per 10/31 reports. Iwata has spurned layoffs thus far. It's easy to do when you project 9 million units sold in 5 months or whatever their target is. When Nintendo misses that target (and they will)  Iwata is going to have a lot of pressure to do something. That could be to lay off or start supporting tablets or to have a plan to move away from the Wii U.

Either way there is no reason to believe Nintendo would have to lay off or wouldn't be able to optimize hardware they didn't create. Actually I think it would be great that software developers could focus on developing quality software and not be forced to use hardware features. Latest example being the tablet only 3D World levels. Does that really make the game better?

219

TalkBack / Re: Super Mario 3D World Review

« on: December 04, 2013, 10:01:02 AM »

I don't know if this would help you, but I like to do this with some games I have initial dissapointment with.

Sometimes I've found I don't like a game because of the mood I'm in or because I had expectations and the game wasn't what I expected.  I will try to put the game down for a few weeks and then go back with no expectatikns and make sure I put in some time with it. There are several games I've done this with and came really enjoying the experience.

I've not playef multiplayer with this title. My guess is its not much different than single player but others could talk to that. I'm not sure what levels you played. Like most Marios this game starts blander with less exploration and then builds up.

I think you should hook up with your friend around Christmas and at least get through the first three worlds before writing it off. Maybe that won't change your opinion. Not everyone will like this game. If I had to rate it, I'd rate it 8-9. I think it oozes quality that you should see if you make it that far. But maybe not, either way I don't think its worth arguing that somebodies opinion that the game is great is worth arguing.

220

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 03, 2013, 11:13:16 PM »

Certainly Darksiders lost money and certainly business plans don't support most third parties developing for the Wii U. 


Maybe it's semantics, but I'd argue it's a cause and effect thing and the Wii U poor sales are the effect while previous generations of poor third party relations are the cause.  Some 3rd parties left during the Gamecube era.  Most left during the Wii era.  Now there are only a few left on the Wii U.  Because the third parties already left, people that are buying a Wii U are buying with the intent of using it for Nintendo games or family centric games. 


The Wii U needs a bunch of third party games to get people to consider it a competitor to Sony/Microsoft.  I'm largely pleased with the Wii U, but I have a PS3 for third party games (and maybe eventually a PS4) and I knew exactly what I was getting with the Wii U.  It's frustrating to watch Nintendo fall like this, but it was pretty obvious that their previous generations third party losses were going to hurt their console viability in the future.   

221

General Gaming / Re: Retron 5 - ???

« on: December 03, 2013, 10:43:31 PM »

The Retron 5 got delayed until 1st Q of 2014.  So I guess I'll be waiting for my hands on for a little longer. 


I did read a couple of bad things from hands on.  Obviously the graphics look amazing.  There were a couple of reviews that said that there was input lag.  Supposedly Hyperkin will have this corrected in the final version but I'd be upset if it had lag since that will suck in most twitch games.  But I've decided at $99 I'll bite the bullet and hold my pre-order for now. 

222

Nintendo Gaming / Re: Wii U is the new PS3?

« on: December 03, 2013, 10:30:47 PM »

They have to bring their teams up to speed on the Wii U in order to do a port.  The Wii U was going to be on par with the other major consoles for literally only one year.  So you go to all the trouble to get your teams familiar enough with the Wii U to include it in multiplatform development that will only work for a year?  Why bother?

This is not the first time we've been over this. Support for PS3/360 didn't stop abruptly when PS4/One came out. And please stop ignoring the fact that Vigil Games ported the assets for Darksiders 2 in a matter of weeks.

Yeah, I think that the reason Wii U isn't getting games is because Nintendo has driven 3rd parties away with policies.  Most 3rd parties can easily port from one system to another with assets.  The first thing they would do is downgrade assets to 720p.  If that's not enough they could reduce frame rate to 30 FPS.  That should be enough for 95% of the games that don't have some ridiculous physics engine.  Otherwise physics tweaks may be necessary but not impossible. 


PS3 had third parties because Sony catered to the market they were catering too.  Nintendo has largely ignored the dominant FPS market and mature horror/adventure market.  It's not enough to get one game like a Darksiders too.  You need to get all the games that most people are interested for them to take notice of Wii U as a platform that they should consider purchasing. 


The only way for Nintendo to get third parties back is to pull an MS (with the first xbox) and commit to losing money to drive third parties to the Wii U.  We all know this won't happen, but Nintendo has been ignored so long by third parties that something drastic like that is the only way to pull them back.  I'm convinced that if Wii U was more powerful or if say Nintendo drops the Wii U and comes out with a new mid-life console that is more powerful than the PS4/Xbox1 that third parties will still ignore them.  They have a business model that says they can't make money on a Nintendo platform.  And if we are realistic we have to agree.  How often has Nintendo had the worse selling version of COD or Madden or some of the games that sell boatloads now a days. 

223

TalkBack / Re: Super Mario 3D World Suffers Low Sales in Japan

« on: November 30, 2013, 03:08:08 PM »

I guess I was thinking complexity from a pure control basis.  Mario is basically run, jump, direction pad.  Difficulty is another thing entirely. 

224

TalkBack / Re: Super Mario 3D World Suffers Low Sales in Japan

« on: November 29, 2013, 09:47:55 PM »

Why can't the assumption be that 2D Mario is awesome, 3D Mario is awesome, so a hybrid Mario would be awesome.  I'm sure we could argue whether 3D Mario is more complex, but platforming is platforming.  No Mario has ever been as complex as 80% of the games released now-a-days. 


Plus, I don't know what you are looking for anymore.  They release a hybrid Mario that many people love and gets almost all 9-10 reviews and you say they dumb it down.  If they'd have released a direct sequel to M64 you would say they've ran out of ideas and just release the same old crap you played years ago.  What would make you happy?  A gory FPS like everyone else comes out with?  If you know someone with a Wii U try the game before you dismiss it. 


M64 was amazing and worth all the 10's it got for the time it was released and I'm sure Nintendo will go back to that style at some point.  3D World impresses me with the way it changes up the level design and really keeps things interesting.  I think the cat suit is the best powerup since the cape.  They can do alot with the fixed camera perspective.  Sometimes a level is more like M64 and other times it is more like NSMB.  They put alot of work into this title.  The fixed perspective leads to better platforming than M64 and allows them to hide items better in my opinion.  I like this title.  They might make 1 more or they might move on but I'm glad they made this.  And I'm glad I've bought a Wii U even if it doesn't get all the games the other consoles get. 

225

TalkBack / Re: What's Old Is New - The GameCube

« on: November 25, 2013, 09:14:32 PM »

"We've more than doubled the number of people."


Like I said all games are given deadlines.  They had a tighter deadline and it appears they staffed at what they felt was an appropriate level to make that deadline happen.  It's not like they picked these people off the street, these people were probably taken off of other Nintendo teams and those projects put on hold meaning there was probably not actual any more games developed with this approach.  It just got Zelda done faster in leui of another project.  And the tight deadline for Zelda isn't too unbelievable because that was released before Christmas a crucial time period for games. 


They didn't have to add those other two dungeons but they could have added more content if they thought it was lacking in content.  A $50 rerelease isn't exactly a bargain and they only spent 6 months on it.  Plus I'm more than sure those dungeons were tweaked in future releases and they might have been able to make minimal tweaks on them to seem different enough that the released editions. 


Your opinion is this era was rushed.  I'm fine with your opinion and I'm not trying to change it.  I just don't like the indication that the entire generation is obviously rushed because I believe that to be false.  I liked Mario 64 better than Sunshine and I'd put Ocarina and Windwaker equal.  Other than that my opinion is the Gamecube era was better than the 64 era.  But that's just my opinion.