Topic: People Need To Stop Bitching

[Sarail]

I don't think there's anything wrong with having really high expectations for the big dogs in the highly competitive video game biz. Haters are gonna hate, and as strange as it may seem, I think that is a good thing - it sends a message that Nintendo is going to have to really knock our socks off if they want our money.
 
Ergo, people need to keep bitching.

+1 to you, sir. If I could +1, that is...

I just feel like Nintendo's marketing is catered to one audience - all of those casual folks... no matter how hard it tries to go after the core gamer. Nintendo just doesn't come across as exciting like they used to in the old days. And that has nothing to do with me being a more grown up gamer either. The whole "Now you're playing with power... SUPER power!" and "Play it loud!" campaigns were fantastic... they were geared toward gamers, and they got me legitimately excited about Nintendo's games and products. Even the whole "Get N or Get Out." thing was great because it had this certain demanding attitude ... like "Yeah, we know we should have gone with CDs as our medium, but we've got the most technically capable of all the systems currently out..despite cartridges being limited... so yeah, get N or get out." And that was cool. I LOVED my N64 tons.

The problem with the Cube was that Nintendo had already lost it's 3rd party support, so it was an uphill battle from there - which is funny I say that, because I own more 3rd party games for my Cube than I do 1st party (around 40-ish games). And this is what has me so concerned for Wii U. Sure, the Wii had tons of 3rd party support...but it came in the form of loads of shovelware crap. And I just don't want that same attitude lacing Nintendo's new console this next-gen. That's why Nintendo needs to be more intensely aggressive, and it needs to develop a serious beastly attitude towards games and gamers. Show us you're not afraid, Nintendo!

But the Nintendo I see now IS NOT the same Nintendo I saw when I was younger (despite forcing Acclaim to modify Mortal Kombat on SNES). This Nintendo is afraid. It's afraid of offending even just ONE person. And it can't be that way. Not if you want to truly succeed and gain market AND mindshare back.

[Drizzt]

People have different opinions and I understand that but I feel people should look on the bright side. Are there alot of questions that have yet to be answered? yes. If you didn't like the conference thats fine but at least build a logical argument. How people on a poll I saw said Microsoft had the best conference is beyond me, I mean smartglass and like 3 decent looking games come on. Sometimes we let our inner fanboy and bias take center stage. Is criticism good? of course because it forces us to look at what is being critiqued and try to find improvement. Nintendo made some mistakes I'll acknowledge that. But it really angers me when I see people complaining for dumb reasons. Various websites as well as e3 tv shows have complained about lack of Zelda. It would be nice but Skyward is too new. If you're going to complain about lack of 1st party titles at least let them be series like star fox or f-zero who've had an ample amount of time to be developed. Nothing is perfect maybe we were expecting too much. But having watched all the conferences I am just amazed by all the bashing Nintendo is getting.

[UncleBob]

There's a fine line between bitching and constructive criticism.

Any married man knows that.

Example:

Bitching: NintendoLand is stupid!  Nintendo loses E3 for spending so much time on such a worthless title!  WiiU sucks and I'm just going to stick with my PS3.

Constrictive:  Nintendo shouldn't have spent as much time demoing NintendoLand as they did.  First, they tell us that we won't understand the game until we actually play it, then they spent 15 minutes showing us how the game works.  It would have been more worthwhile to tell us about the game, show a quick sizzle reel, then move on to something else.  Showfloor impressions would have given us a much better idea if the game is enjoyable.

[rlse9]

No. It's more likely that I like rooting for the underdog and that it takes a truly transparent person to notice the fact that while all three companies had fairly shitty conferences this year, Nintendo is the one that all internet commenters and news outlets concentrate on.

I think the reason that so many are focusing on Nintendo's poor conference is that Nintendo really needed to have a good conference.  Despite the success of the Wii, they're in the position that they need to prove, especially to gamers, that the WiiU is going to be worth purchasing.  Their E3 doesn't just impact the next year, like it does for Sony and Microsoft, but the next five years or more.  This E3 was big for Nintendo and they didn't meet the expectations of people.

But yes, it is true that people's response to things on the internet is not much of a barometer of what people in general think.  Reading comments on articles (not just on games sites but on sports, music, and basically everywhere sadly) is almost sad, there's a segment of people trying to respond to the article with good points and have a discussion that's usually overtaken by a majority of people just spewing garbage.

[Adrock]

You mean the Wii U? I'm not sure what you mean by a "lot of people"... apparently a lot of people were disappointed in what they seen of it at E3 (or more accurately what they didn't see).

I was specifically referring to the Wii which a lot of people, including myself, liked even if you didn't like it. The verdict is still out on Wii U.

There are facts and there are opinions. Dissenters of Nintendo's current policies are voicing opinions, just like how people who are praising Nintendo are voicing opinions. In neither case are they fact. But what is a fact is that what was shown at E3 was a huge disappointment to many people. It is also a fact that the Wii is pretty much dead, and has been that way for quite some time. These are facts..... how you interpret them may be opinion.

What? No. That's not a fact, not phrased like that anyway. How are you defining "dead"? In this instance, that's a matter of perspecti... how are you not getting this? And yes, a lot of people thought E3 was a huge disappointment. That is fact (depending on how one defines "a lot"). It is also fact that a lot of people did not think E3 was a huge disappointment. How did you begin you paragraph defining facts and opinions and end the paragraph without understanding it at all?

I just want to know when the non-dissenters think about the declining sales and market share of the Wii and the lackluster performance (in the opinion of many) of E3? What is their answer? Should Nintendo "stay the course" despite all this and make no change in policy whatsoever?

What do you want to know about it?

To me, "staying the course" and "making no change in policy whatsoever" are 2 entirely different things. The latter seems so absolute and again, only a Sith deals in absolutes. By "staying the course," I think Nintendo should continue to attempt to reach as many people as they can. Perhaps they didn't do a good enough job of that with the Wii, but that doesn't mean they didn't try. They're a business; they want everyone's money. From what I understand, you and others are essentially saying "**** the casuals" and go all in with the core. I don't agree with that because Nintendo would potentially be leaving billions on the table and there's no guarantee that these so-called "dissenters" would even be pleased with the results of that complete shift in strategy. And yes, there's no guarantee that continuing to appeal to "non-dissenters" will continue to work. However, why break something just so you have more things to fix? Nintendo stands to alienate everyone. How do you reconcile this? I'm not sure that's even possible. Unless you believe in absolute universal agreement (which I don't), someone somewhere somehow will be disappointed. I think adjusting the current strategy is better and safer than abandoning it altogether. Nintendo shouldn't potentially risk pushing the people who like what their doing away in favor of people who need convincing. That's seems counterproductive to me.

Again, how do they reconcile this? I don't know. I have thoughts, suggestions and opinions, but it relies on things beyond Nintendo's control. Nintendo can't force 3rd parties to support Wii U. Nintendo can't just make a game that absolutely resonates with the core because resonance is at the mercy of public opinion. Nintendo can try; that doesn't mean it's going to happen.

This is how it SHOULD BE.

According to your standards. Let's not do this again.

[Kairon]

I don't think there's anything wrong with having really high expectations for the big dogs in the highly competitive video game biz. Haters are gonna hate, and as strange as it may seem, I think that is a good thing - it sends a message that Nintendo is going to have to really knock our socks off if they want our money.
 
Ergo, people need to keep bitching.

Haha. I like that argument. We need the extremes to keep Nintendo from deluding themselves that they've got 100% acceptance! They're a safeguard, a very important minority report!

[house3136]

 What if Nintendo hadn’t announced Luigi’s Mansion and Paper Mario last year? What if nobody was expecting Pikmin 3, NSMB 2, and NSMBU? Do you think this year’s conference would have been better accepted? Yeah, last year’s Nintendo conference would have sucked without some of these 3DS titles or a SSB tease, but it wouldn’t have hurt SMB3DL, MK7, or Skyward Sword sales. The main problem is Nintendo announced these titles too early and now people are just underwhelmed because they already knew about these games; which is exactly what Nintendo didn’t do this year. They could have shown a huge sizzle reel of upcoming games that won’t be out for another year or two, but then nobody will give a **** when the game is officially shown and dated for release; which is exactly what happed this year. Personally, I don’t want to be teased with “Preorder the game now so you can play in holiday 2013!” Almost everything shown this year will be out this year or very soon following, I like that method. Aliens won’t be out until February anyway, a lot of games are being pushed out, so to expect huge devotion from 3^rd party months before the Wii U launch, like Ubisoft is doing, is unrealistic considering finalized dev-kits have only been available for a few months.

Wii U isn’t even for sale yet, you can’t even buy it for months, but let’s all be pissed off now about a lack of games. Because, of course, what was shown at E3 is the definitive game announcement for the next 6 years of the console. When I own a Wii U in five months, I’ll play it, than wait another 6 months for E3 2013. If they don’t have anything to blow me away (everything they didn’t show this year); then I can legitimately say Nintendo has underperformed. I believe disagreement is healthy, but let’s not judge Nintendo too harshly, prematurely.
f

[Snake-Arms]

Sorry ol' chap, but I'm going to bitch all I want.  This year's E3 was terrible all around I just think Nintendo's was the most disappointing.  They let me down (yeah, I know, they aren't putting on a show just for little ol' me) with a lackluster line-up for the Wii U's launch window.  As of right now I have to plans to purchase one but I certainly see the potential of the controller...I just want to see a game that really blows my mind in it's implementation, which is something I never experienced with the Wii.

[shingi_70]

Eh I did my fair share of bitching. Though that was mostly for not having ghost recon online and showing a port as a marque title.

I do agree that a lot Gaf has a Sony slate. I mean I see nintendo and Microsoft threads get trolled hard but Sony threads are safe from harm. That and there are a lot of freaking jaded people there and popular opinion is usually wrong there.

[Chozo Ghost]

Adrock, there is a saying that "if you chase two rabbits you will lose both of them". Nintendo can go full force after the core market, or they could go full force after the casual market and in either way they would probably succeed. But the problem is they are taking "middle of the road" path and trying to pursue both at the same time. When you split yourself apart that means you aren't giving 100% in any particular direction and there is the danger you will fail in every way. True, its also possible to succeed in every way by pursuing everything, but its just far less likely than if you just gave 100% to one thing in particular.

Take that "NintendoLand" game for example. Here is a game that epitomizes Nintendo's divided focus between the casual and core markets. Who exactly does this game appeal to? It has core franchises like Mario and Zelda fused with casual mini game gameplay. Does this actually please both markets? Or does it actually piss off both?

Have you ever seen the show Firefly? It fused together the western and science fiction genres into this weird hybrid. I loved the show, and I though it was great... I'm sure if more people had given it a chance it would have had better ratings and wouldn't have been cancelled, but I think because the show was "chasing two rabbits" it ended up alienating everyone. People who like Westerns tend to not like Science Fiction, and vice versa. Yes, there are certainly exceptions... but those exceptions weren't enough to keep the show afloat.

So when I hear about this weird NintendoLand thing and it being a hybrid between casual and core, it reminds me a lot of the show Firefly... maybe it will be a great game, who knows? But the problem is the core characters and stuff might scare away the soccer moms and grandparents, while on the other hand the casual mini game gameplay might scare away the core gamers who hate that stuff. So there's a danger it will alienate both markets and as a result Nintendo may lose both.

I know NintendoLand is just one game, but its a launch title and may well be the system's pack in, so it really matters alot for being just a single game. Plus as I said this is just the epitome of Nintendo's strategy of targeting both markets simultaneously. The entire Wii U system and its weird hybrid controller also show this hybrid divided focus mentality.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Nintendoland is to Wii U as Wii Play was to Wii.

A fusion is exactly what it's meant to be. Using core franchises to draw in everybody to fun local multiplayer gaming that even the casuals can join in on.

[DonnyKD]

I wholeheartedly agree with this thread.

There's a fine line between bitching and constructive criticism.

Any married man knows that.

Example:

Bitching: NintendoLand is stupid!  Nintendo loses E3 for spending so much time on such a worthless title!  WiiU sucks and I'm just going to stick with my PS3.

Constrictive:  Nintendo shouldn't have spent as much time demoing NintendoLand as they did.  First, they tell us that we won't understand the game until we actually play it, then they spent 15 minutes showing us how the game works.  It would have been more worthwhile to tell us about the game, show a quick sizzle reel, then move on to something else.  Showfloor impressions would have given us a much better idea if the game is enjoyable.

Too bad the latter is almost never heard of.

It's mostly just crying about how "THEY DIDN'T SHOW ZELDA OR METROID OR SSB OR EARTHBOUND OR STAR FOX OR F-ZERO AND BLAH BLAH BLAH..." and people blame NINTENDO for not living up to their unfulfillable expectations.

I was satisfied with Nintendo's E3 because I saw what I wanted to see.

I wanted to know if they're going to announce Pikmin 3. They did that. I wanted to see more about NSMBU. They showed. I wanted to see what other games the Wii U had. And I'm excited for a bunch of them. Sure, I'm sad that the Kirby collection wasn't talked about, or if Animal Crossing wasn't shown, but I'm not bitching about it.

And I got even more over it when I learned that the Wii U conference was for launch and launch window games.

[NWR_insanolord]

You must be new here. You'll see a ton of fair, even-handed constructive criticism aimed at Nintendo on these forums. Outside here is probably a different story altogether.

There are very valid reasons to be upset with the Nintendo press conference. Nintendo had an opportunity to wow a collection of gaming media representatives, and by extension the people who read their sites. They kind of wasted that.

I played all five Nintendo Land games at the show, and they were by and large very good, but it really shouldn't have been the focus of the conference that it was. Yes, if you look at it as them only announcing stuff in the launch window it's less disappointing, but Nintendo had to realize that that context was going to be lost on a lot of people. A Smash Bros. CG trailer or a look at what Retro's doing would have gone a long way, and while there may be valid reasons for their absence it doesn't change the fact that Nintendo had the opportunity to blow everyone away and instead put forth a very meager, by the numbers show.

[Ian Sane]

My Mom sometimes gets mad at me for swearing too much.  My response is that life should stop giving me so much incentive to swear.  So I guess Nintendo shouldn't give me so much to bitch about.

If NWR was just a bunch of people talking about how awesome Nintendo is and patting each other on the back for their good decision to be a fan, it would be really boring (and rather embarassing).  No one really wants that.  Even if Nintendo was really firing on all cylinders there would be still disagreement and different opinions.  Even with a game almost everyone likes there is still difference in opinion on how it compares to other Nintendo titles or other games in the same series.

I don't think anybody on here is bitching about the Wii U out of some pre-determined general hatred towards it or Nintendo.  Everyone here wants the Wii U to be the best system Nintendo's ever made.  It is that desire that ultimately causes the bitching.  We want Nintendo systems and games to be great and if we think things are not going that way we justifiably get upset.

Even talk about the hope of the Wii U failing comes from the fan perspective of such a thing being for the greater good of Nintendo becoming a better videogame developer .  We all like Nintendo and want Nintendo to be the best videogame developer in the world and if we think things are going in a direction that will move them away from that, we start bitching.

[Stogi]

So I've mostly stayed away from this conversation and this part of the forums simply because I didn't want to get dragged into the arguments within it, but let me see if I got this right.

Timeline:

Before E3, everyone was either a mix of excitement and hype or waiting to be disappointed. The main argument that persisted was the rumors of how weak the Wii U might be despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

During E3, Nintendo confirmed a lot of things that if absent could have potentially thrown off its own base, mainly two gamepad play. They also showed a game that people thought they were going to hate because it looked creatively dull, but ended up loving - New Super Mario Bros. U. But that wasn't enough because there wasn't a title aimed at gamers supposedly, even though Pikmin 3 was also announced. The main disappointment is that Nintendo's new system simply didn't have enough. I think what people are really disappointed about is no announcement of what Retro is doing. Which is fine, but this argument of Nintendo's policy to NOT announce titles not coming out this year is at the core of the issue.

Now that E3 is over, I hear one big argument and that's "Nintendo hasn't sold me a Wii U. I needed more." And that's perfectly legitimate if that were true. But it's not. You know why? Because your goal posts have moved.

Nintendo is giving you an HD internet-ready system with what looks like the most significant pack-in title since Super Mario Bros., a gamepad controller with support for two, a wireless controller that is more conventional, at least two big launch titles - one of which is Miyamoto's baby, and third-party support from the biggest names in the business.

And you need more? Since when.

[NWR_Neal]

I'll repeat this until I'm blue in the face: Nintendo's E3 showing failed because there was no surprise. There were unrealistic expectations by many people, but even still, there was very little we didn't previously know about in some capacity. Actually, I'd Project P-100 was the only surprise at Nintendo's booth. Nintendo Land wasn't a shock, since we knew they would do something with those mini-games from E3 2011.

After playing everything that was offered for Nintendo systems at E3, I have this to say: I'm psyched, and I cannot wait for Wii U, both from its launch and its potential. Still, I'm long walk off a short cliff away from being a big-time Nintendo fanboy (if I'm not already). Where Nintendo failed was impressing anyone outside of Nintendo fans.

Get ready for another generation of mainstream sites not giving a ****. It sucks, but it's sadly true.

[ThePerm]

im broke for time so i only read the first post, but isn't the motto of the forum "where nintendo fans go to bitch about everything?"

[Ian Sane]

Nintendo is giving you an HD internet-ready system with what looks like the most significant pack-in title since Super Mario Bros.

Oh come on!  How could you possibly make such an over-the-top assumption at this point?
 
My goalposts didn't move.  There wasn't anything before E3 to convince me and, as Neal said, E3 had no surprises.  So nothing's changed.  What I know about the Wii U post-E3 is hardly any different than it was before so if it wasn't enough to get a purchase out of me then, it isn't going to now.

[broodwars]

Fair or not, Nintendo always has the greatest expectations on them going into their annual press conference, because they're the only company that doesn't (intentionally or unintentionally) leak their games to the press.  So I do think there's a lot of truth in us being disappointed because Nintendo showed nothing new.

However, there were three things I wanted to see going into this press conference:

1.  I wanted to see Nintendo make a strong case for why I would want to play games using the Wii U GamePad, so much that I would buy the Wii U versions of 3rd party games over just their PS3 or 360 verisons.

I owned a DS once upon a time, and (outside of maybe The World Ends With You) I never found the 2nd screen to be altogether useful.  Hooray, I can look at lazily-implemented maps and sub-screens!  I couldn't do that before just by pausing my game!  Nintendo didn't sell me on that GamePad, and without that the Wii U is a hard sell for me.

2. After 6 years of casual-oriented shovelware on Wii, I wanted to see a sign from Nintendo that they were ready to actually live up to their promises last year and cater to us more, the people who stayed even when the casuals abandoned the Wii.  Now, I don't mean that they should exclude the casuals.  I'm happy there were games for them at that press conference.  After all, the casuals were the life of the Wii for the first 2-3 years of the Wii, but they were also the downfall of the Wii for the rest of its lifespan when they left for mobile phones and Kinect.

I suppose after years of Nintendo being probably a 30/70 split core vs. casuals in their lineup, I was hoping (especially after their comments last year) that maybe that split might get evened up to something like 60/40 in our favor.  The casuals are not going to buy this system, at least not to the degree that they bought the Wii (really, what could?).  Most of that market has been lost to other devices, and a weak touchscreen controller isn't going to bring them back.

3.  I really wanted Nintendo to show me something exciting at that press conference, something that would make me say "**** YES!  I am buying that DAY ONE!"  And Retro's game would probably have done that, since they are Nintendo's best studio IMO.  As much as I liked the original Pikmin, I was very lukewarm on Pikmin 2 and Pikmin 3 seemed like more of the same.  It looked cool, but not exciting.  Something exciting would be a reveal like the one for Metroid Other M a few years back, which looked so new and different from Nintendo and really got me hopeful for 2D Metroid actually appealing to me for once.  Instead, this year Nintendo revealed...Nintendoland, a mini-game collection.  Because we didn't get enough of that **** on the Wii.  Lame.

I really wanted to be excited for the Wii U after this press conference, especially after how mediocre E3 in general has been this year.  But I just saw nothing worth getting excited about at that press conference, and I don't care if a game that would do that wouldn't be ready at launch.  Nintendo needed to show awesome software regardless of how far off their release date was.  System launches are all about potential, the future of the device.  I didn't see a future for the Wii at the press conference, just an incredibly lame present.  The Wii U just looked like more of the Wii years, but in HD, and I didn't like the Wii years.

[Stogi]

I wasn't saying Nintendo Land is better than Super Mario Bros. I'm saying that could be the most significant pack-in since then. Basically, I'm saying more significant than Wii-sports and less significant than Super Mario Bros. Can that be agreed on?

And no, Ian. Your goal posts have moved. Your favorite new franchise is on the system in HD with traditional controls, yet that doesn't excite you anymore. How jaded can you be?

And since when do you guys NEED a surprise. I bet you are not like this with any other media. I bet with movies, if you see an awesome trailer, you are going to be excited learning more about that movie than watching another trailer. Or a band releases an awesome single. Again, I bet you are going to be excited hearing more about that album than listening to another band's single. So why is it so different with video games? Because you have to buy a product to enjoy it. Welcome to the world of multimedia.

So jaded.

[ejamer]

...
Now that E3 is over, I hear one big argument and that's "Nintendo hasn't sold me a Wii U. I needed more." And that's perfectly legitimate if that were true. But it's not. You know why? Because your goal posts have moved.
...

My goalposts haven't moved.  Maybe yours have, or maybe you just assumed that my goalposts were the same as yours to start with... but mine haven't moved an inch.  I went in hoping for something - anything - that would really excite me about Wii U and/or 3DS.  I was hoping for at least one surprise that made me sit up, circle a date on my calendar, and start saving pennies for a game/system/whatever.  When E3 ended I was left disappointed because there was nothing shown that I care about enough to follow between now and release.

Maybe that's not quite true.  Rayman Legends does look really cool.  But not "system selling" cool.

[Kairon]

My Mom sometimes gets mad at me for swearing too much.

I think you're onto something Ian. I don't think anyone here has a problem with dissent, reasoned complaints, or even critical views. I think my problem with the "bitching" is like your mother's problem with "swearing", possibly a communication breakdown due to the use of pointed emotionally-charged vitriol.

My brother swears a lot playing certain games and that really throws me off emotionally/mentally. I personally have difficulty fathoming why he would let himself/choose to put himself in such a stressful situation that he needs to vent in such an explicit way. However, that may be fine for him, he may be comfortable with a higher level of stress in his life, may revel in the emotional highs and lows that I try to avoid, and be more personally comfortable with language that I find offensive.

This may just be a difference in emotional communication styles between people. I think strong emotionally-charged language should be saved for extreme situations, like when experiencing intense physical pain. Others might think it's perfectly acceptable language to express their otherwise rational disappointment when their favorite sports team, or videogame company, don't win a game.

[Ian Sane]

I wasn't saying Nintendo Land is better than Super Mario Bros. I'm saying that could be the most significant pack-in since then. Basically, I'm saying more significant than Wii-sports and less significant than Super Mario Bros. Can that be agreed on?

And no, Ian. Your goal posts have moved. Your favorite new franchise is on the system in HD with traditional controls, yet that doesn't excite you anymore. How jaded can you be?

I don't see Nintendo Land being more significant than Wii Sports.  Wii Sports started an absolute frenzy.  The Wii was sold out for THREE YEARS.  I can't see Nintendo Land topping THAT.  Wii Sports and Super Mario Bros are probably the two most significant pack-in games in videogame history.  To suggest that any new game will compare to those is a bold statement.

I knew for a long time that my "favourite franchise" was on the Wii U in HD.  And it actually DOESN'T have traditional controls as it plays like the NPC Pikmin games.  But, anyway, I already knew about it and it wasn't enough then so, no the goal posts didn't move at all.

For a while I thought Nintendo's plan to cater to both the casual and the core was impossible as they just can't possibly serve one master without neglecting the other (prior to the Wii, core gamers got nearly 100% of Nintendo's attention.  How could they possibly have matched that?)  But the Xbox 360 is kind of doing it now with Kinect.  No core gamer considers the Xbox 360 to be a casual system but Kinect certainly is a casual peripheral and it's quite successful.  So cores and casuals are both owning the Xbox 360 and are both enjoying it.  But then Microsoft's post-Kinect E3 presentations have not gone over well with core gamers, suggesting that perhaps their focus on casuals is resulting in neglect of the core.

Still pleasing both could be doable if Nintendo really saw them as seperate entities and did not try to make crossover titles that appeal to both.  They also need to essentially double their size to provide twice the output so that both groups get a healthy amount of releases aimed at them.  But Nintendo acts like something like Wii Music "counts" just as much as a new release as a Zelda game.  They don't take into account that many core gamers have no interest in such a title and essentially treat it as a "blank" in the release lineup.  So, no, to do this effectively they can't throw out one title to be the big game for the Christmas season and expect BOTH groups to like it.  They need TWO Christmas games, one that appeals to each.  It's very hard to make a game appeal to both that core gamers won't consider compromised for the lowest common denominator.

Let's say Nintendo routine makes ten games a year.  Prior to the Wii that was ten games for core gamers each year.  Now they have two groups to cater to, but release the same amount of games.  So that's now three casual games and seven core games.  So now core gamers only get seven games a year?  We used to get ten!  See, it doesn't even matter if the majority still favours the core.  The output has decreased and we get less games than we used to get.  For Nintendo to have any chance of pleasing the core they would have to increase their size to increase their output to get ten core games a year again.

[broodwars]

I knew for a long time that my "favourite franchise" was on the Wii U in HD.  And it actually DOESN'T have traditional controls as it plays like the NPC Pikmin games.

I thought that Pikmin 3 only played like the NPC Pikmin games if you're using a Wiimote as your controller, with traditional GameCube-style controls available if you use the GamePad?

[NWR_insanolord]

Nope. It still uses the pointer with the GamePad, which is pretty hard to use properly. The Wii remote controls work fantastically, though; it's a game that really benefits from the pointer, and what I saw didn't use motion at all, just the pointer.