82 replies to this topic

[storabajskorven]

Nintendo is becoming irrelevant anyway, you can't see it.

 

Nobody is saying that Nintendo should become like Sony or Microsoft, but it needs to change. Releasing underpowerd hardware with gimmicky controllers is not what gamers want, this is evident, just look at the sales figures of the Wii U.

 

 

It's clear that you need to produce something that someone wants to buy in order to stay in business. So in that respect it's important what "gamers want". Sure, Nintendo needs to change, and that is also exactly what Iwata is saying, right? But if you do it by first research "what gamers want" and then give that to them, there's no need for your company to exist, because there are already companies doing this. For Nintendo to stay relevant, they need to do the opposite, figure out something that nobody knew they wanted and then offer that. This is what they tried to do with the Wii U, but apparently too few were interested in it. For me, there are already more good games for the Wii U than I have time to play, so I'm not complaining. I also understand that if the Wii U would sell better, Nintendo could take more risks and thereby producing better games. Also for me, the rest of the gaming industry produces even more irrelevant games. The only future "AAA" game I'm really interested in that is not coming to the Wii U is probably Dark Souls 2, because I really liked the first game. I'm sure there are other good games coming up that I don't know about, but my point is that there aren't really that much of a difference between the amount of interesting games for the Wii U and other platforms. And the reason is that the gaming companies produce games that "gamers want".

[Lightning_Ninja]

I really do like Iwata, its just that he and Nintendo as a whole need to look around sometimes.  The entire, "HD development is taking longer than we anticipated" thing should have never happened.  They should have spent the entire last console generation watching and taking notes as every other developer made HD games.  Heck, they were working on their own hardware, so it's not like they are a third party developer trying to learn someone else's hardware.  It's those kinds of things they do that bug me.  Something that every other developer can do and has been doing, and they struggle with it.  I also wish they wouldn't avoid online multiplayer like the plague.  If a game has local but doesn't have online multiplayer, I can't play it with my brother except for a few instances during the year, and that bums me out.

 

I mean, I can personally justify my ownership of a wii u with just one specific game , but I would like more variety.  And they have many franchises that they could bring out to meet that.

[Azure-Edge]

Im hoping Iwata has learned, as he admitted he 'misread the market' and 'needs to pay better attention to foreign trends'.

I dont like Nintendo screwing the pooch like they have, like for example, spend not good amounts of resources on an audience that no longer exists (how many damn 2d platformers and wii style games er there? Like you said, those people have no intention whatsoever of upgrading to a wii u, and without them, the saturation point for all those samey type games is much lower).

But, and this is important, Iwata is not a businessman. He is a game developer, which is why I find it absolutely imperative that he stays, mistakes and all. He is Honest ands transparent, to a fault, and he must show, that his way can succeed, that honestly great games, cans stand on their own merits, and make money, because they are damn good.

He is probably the only thing standing between Nintendo and becoming just another disgusting sleazy cog in the crap wheel if say, a businesman took over as ceo.

As of right now, Nintendo doesnt buy reviews, black ball reviewers, or offer 'assignments' for illegal stalth advertising via Ronku. He actually talks DIRECTLY to the consumer base, Nintendo directs have become the DE FACTO release points for new games, no exclusives from media outlets, they dont find out about it until we do. Which means Nintendo doesnt use information to leverage media perception to its advantadge. Which is something ALL of the third parties you are mentioning do, heavily. Its disgusting, and come to think of it, is probably yet another peice to the huge pile on why most third parties arent touching the system, nintendo, Iwata said 'NO' to their underhanded practices like Ronku assignemnts for wii u versions of games.

Remember, Nintendo DID have HUGE third party backing, 'UNPRECEDENTED PARTNERSHIPS' That dissolved before the system ever even released and sales became a factor.

In the current disgusting state they are in. I dont WANT most third party multiplat games on my wii u. They are bad games, that are fraudulantly advertised as functional by paid off, literally MILLIONS of shills who dont state they are shills, as bound by their contract to the third parties, and praised by bought, or bullied press, resulting in millions of people unsuspectingly buying unfinished, broken products, and turning them into huge 'hits'.

No. Going that way is the end. Even if sales improve its a hollow victory.

 

There's a lot of truth in this. Iwata knowing gaming is a big advantage for them, however I'd also say it's a weakness. I feel like Iwata needs to take a step back and seriously reevaluate how he's running his company from a business standpoint. However that doesn't mean gutting the company, nor does it mean paying for good press. Gamers with half a brain already know to take the 'media' with a grain of salt, or two, or twelve. Also when your employees know that you care about them and are looking for their best interest then they will work harder and create better results. From a moral stand point there isn't any problem with what Iwata is doing. However there are other things he needs to seriously reconsider.

 

The first being that I think he lets his own devs have a bit too much input in to their console design whereas third parties have too little. It seems to me that Iwata looks at hardware as something that would be made that THEIR devs would like instead of building a platform that for the gaming community as a whole. Take for example the one slide pad on the 3DS. Now I personally don't think there is much use for a second one, however there are third parties who would think differently. I can almost guarantee you that Miyamoto said no to a second analogue stick because he wouldn't need it for one of his games and that was that.

 

Same with the Wii U. Someone like Miyamoto probably said it would be cool to have a giant screen in a controller and they went with it without considering specs that third parties would want. A console is simply the means to play software and the less amount of good software a console has, the less incentive there is to buy it. I say they should work towards building a good all around console that third parties want to work on and then they can innovate through software like they used to. 

 

Secondly Iwata needs to realize that Nintendo isn't in a bubble, they are in a business and therefore they have competition. What that competition does is important and they would go far by learning from it but doing it better. You can't have a non-competitive attitude in business if you want to survive. Trying to do things your own way is all well and good but if you're falling behind then it's not working. This goes hand in hand with Nintendo's slow adoption of HD. They had an entire generation to learn about what it would take to produce HD games in terms of time, budget, and manpower. There's really no excuse on their part, they should have been ready. 

 

All in all I think Iwata can turn things around but he really REALLY needs to actually LEARN from his mistakes. He always talks about how he's learned from mistakes, but he needs to show it and not say it.

[SailtheSeas]

This weeks Media create sales are 11k and will drop again next week so let's hope Nintendo has a plan.

 

I'm not even sure they have a plan in total honesty. I think they're pinning their hopes on their AAA games really pulling in the install base and I hope it works. There's nothing I'd like to see more than the Wii U really pick up steam and generate Nintendo an overall net profit.

It's clear that you need to produce something that someone wants to buy in order to stay in business. So in that respect it's important what "gamers want". Sure, Nintendo needs to change, and that is also exactly what Iwata is saying, right? But if you do it by first research "what gamers want" and then give that to them, there's no need for your company to exist, because there are already companies doing this. For Nintendo to stay relevant, they need to do the opposite, figure out something that nobody knew they wanted and then offer that. This is what they tried to do with the Wii U, but apparently too few were interested in it. For me, there are already more good games for the Wii U than I have time to play, so I'm not complaining. I also understand that if the Wii U would sell better, Nintendo could take more risks and thereby producing better games. Also for me, the rest of the gaming industry produces even more irrelevant games. The only future "AAA" game I'm really interested in that is not coming to the Wii U is probably Dark Souls 2, because I really liked the first game. I'm sure there are other good games coming up that I don't know about, but my point is that there aren't really that much of a difference between the amount of interesting games for the Wii U and other platforms. And the reason is that the gaming companies produce games that "gamers want".

 

So in your opinion because other companies i.e. Sony and Microsoft are giving gamers what they want, Nintendo should give gamers what they don't want? Nintendo should spend a tonne of money creating hardware and controllers that gamers don't want just to be different? Right...

 

With all due respect I'm looking at the wider issues, there are many games I am not interested in, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't want those games to be on Nintendo systems.

 

Unfortunately the days of Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft forcing stuff onto consumers is coming to an end. Nintendo can continue to innovate in terms of hardware, they can continue to push stuff onto consumers all they want, but if the consumer doesn't want it, it will sit on shelves. It's not like the old days and Sony have realised exactly what their consumers want and have given them exactly what they want just like they did with the PS1 and PS2 and that's why I think the PS4 will be the runaway winner in this generation.

[MorbidGod]

Well Nintendo needs to do something because they're fast becoming irrelevant in the home console market.

The fact remains the Wii U's tablet controller and lower specifications is not what a majority of consumers appear to want.

The fact remains that gamers want a wide variety of games and the Wii U doesn't offer them the wide variety they want.

Nintendo hasn't marketed the system well enough, hasn't educated the consumer on why they should go out and buy one and hasn't put up a single argument as to why the Wii U would be a better choice for the consumer then either the Xbox One or the PS4.

Nintendo has done virtually nothing to change the fortunes of the Wii U. Yes, they've released an AAA title, but unfortunately that hasn't had a massive impact on sales of the Wii U. It's selling well and sales of SKU's have increased, but it's very minimal compared to sales of its competitors consoles which are soon to pass the Wii U sales total (if they haven't already).

If Mario Kart 8 and Super Smash Bros fail to bring in the gamers this year and sales don't improve drastically then that should tell Nintendo everything they need to know, because if sales of the Wii U don't pick up this year then it could be a real possibility that the Wii U will sell less units than the Gamecube.

I hope Iwata is able to adapt, change and get Nintendo back competiting.

http://www.vgchartz....sales-gamecube/

Look at the top ten selling games for the GCN. Only one third party managed to make the list. Sega with Sonic.

Resident Evil, Unisoft with Splinter Cell and Prince of Persia, EA it any one else. These games weren't crap. They were good. I enjoyed Splinter Cell. But it didn't sell in the GCN.

http://www.vgchartz....0-in-sales-wii/

Again, only one third party managed to make the list. This time Ubisoft.

Even back on the SNES days, only one third party managed to make the top ten list (with two games).

http://www.listal.co...ling-snes-games

The point is, Nintendo has always been the key to their success. I'm not saying they would be better without third party developers, but Nintendo had never been dependant on other companies to survive. They need to release their games and make them great.

[KeptMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

As I say I want to proven wrong as I want Nintendo to be successful and I want the Wii U to be successful, but the fact remains the majority of the games industry and consumers don't want anything to do with Nintendo or their hardware and that should send alarm bells ringing in Nintendo HQ.

 Just saying, it doesn't sound like you want Nintendo to be successful at being Nintendo, but that you want Nintendo to turn in to Sony or Microsoft.

 

I'm with 3Dude. I would rather see Nintendo get into financial trouble, and have people look back and say "Wow, we missed out on one of the last game systems that was truly about trying to push gaming" than to have Nintendo be filled with ignorant, obnoxious 13 year-olds screaming about who's mothers they supposedly had intercourse with and how manly they are for liking blood splattered gory games.

[Azure-Edge]

 Just saying, it doesn't sound like you want Nintendo to be successful at being Nintendo, but that you want Nintendo to turn in to Sony or Microsoft.

 

I'm with 3Dude. I would rather see Nintendo get into financial trouble, and have people look back and say "Wow, we missed out on one of the last game systems that was truly about trying to push gaming" than to have Nintendo be filled with ignorant, obnoxious 13 year-olds screaming about who's mothers they supposedly had intercourse with and how manly they are for liking blood splattered gory games.

 

Well just set the record straight. Neil Patrick Harris has had intercourse with everybody's mother, and their fathers. 

[MorbidGod]

Just saying, it doesn't sound like you want Nintendo to be successful at being Nintendo, but that you want Nintendo to turn in to Sony or Microsoft.

I'm with 3Dude. I would rather see Nintendo get into financial trouble, and have people look back and say "Wow, we missed out on one of the last game systems that was truly about trying to push gaming" than to have Nintendo be filled with ignorant, obnoxious 13 year-olds screaming about who's mothers they supposedly had intercourse with and how manly they are for liking blood splattered gory games.

Had to post this. http://m.youtube.com...h?v=kuxW7buyyNA watch and see a kid screaming because his GTA V was taken away. I can't believe he owns GTA V.

I'm not even sure they have a plan in total honesty. I think they're pinning their hopes on their AAA games really pulling in the install base and I hope it works. There's nothing I'd like to see more than the Wii U really pick up steam and generate Nintendo an overall net profit.



So in your opinion because other companies i.e. Sony and Microsoft are giving gamers what they want, Nintendo should give gamers what they don't want? Nintendo should spend a tonne of money creating hardware and controllers that gamers don't want just to be different? Right...

With all due respect I'm looking at the wider issues, there are many games I am not interested in, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't want those games to be on Nintendo systems.

Unfortunately the days of Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft forcing stuff onto consumers is coming to an end. Nintendo can continue to innovate in terms of hardware, they can continue to push stuff onto consumers all they want, but if the consumer doesn't want it, it will sit on shelves. It's not like the old days and Sony have realised exactly what their consumers want and have given them exactly what they want just like they did with the PS1 and PS2 and that's why I think the PS4 will be the runaway winner in this generation.

I don't think you understand Nintendo at the core. Nintendo isn't a company that walks the path well traveled, and that's what makes them great. They are like the Disney of video games. Everyone has this kid image of them, but they have several non kid titles too.

Nintendo, at the core of its being, has been great because they have been able to deliver something we didn't know we wanted. Look at the NES. The market crashed. No one in America wanted a video game console. So Nintendo changed the name from Famicon to NES. Change the look from something that looks odd and a video game system to something that looked like it belonged in your living room. They delivered what no one in America knew they wanted.

Look at the SNES. Everyone was focused on hardware and making better graphics but Nintendo focused on games. Everyone wanted better graphics, but we didn't know we wanted the games Nintendo made instead.

Nintendo also innovates where others copy. Nintendo was the first to have shoulder buttons. The first to have a joystick on your controller. First to have rumble. Not the first to bring motion controls to games but the first to make it relevant. Constantly, they bring stuff to the marker that no one asked for. We didn't know we wanted more buttons. We didn't know we wanted our controller to rumble. We didn't know waving our hands would be so much fun.

And you want Nintendo to stop making gimmicks? Then go back in time and tell them that. We'd probably still won't have rumble in our controller. Hell, we may not have a home console market at all.

The problem with the Wii U isn't that Nintendo made a huge tablet controller. The problem is they haven't made a game that shows how awesome it can be. They showed concepts that sounded awesome. Being able to move the controller so you can see more of what's going on but still have the TV on one character. That really would be cool.

But they didn't do that. Or anything. It's like they forgot that the reason all the other gimmicks worked was because they showed why it was awesome.

And going back in time, Nintendo's worst system - the GameCube - they didn't innovate. It was all about graphics. That was the problem then.

So no, Nintendo should get their act together. They have made mistakes but all of them correctable.

Also, note I have never said Nintendo will be number one. But I don't believe they need to always be number one. They just need to make a profit.

[SailtheSeas]

The point is, Nintendo has always been the key to their success. I'm not saying they would be better without third party developers, but Nintendo had never been dependant on other companies to survive. They need to release their games and make them great.

 

I accept this but there are a lot of gamers who won't buy Nintendo consoles purely for this reason. Their first party games aren't enough, these gamers want the best of both worlds. Great first party games and third party games.

 Just saying, it doesn't sound like you want Nintendo to be successful at being Nintendo, but that you want Nintendo to turn in to Sony or Microsoft.

 

I'm with 3Dude. I would rather see Nintendo get into financial trouble, and have people look back and say "Wow, we missed out on one of the last game systems that was truly about trying to push gaming" than to have Nintendo be filled with ignorant, obnoxious 13 year-olds screaming about who's mothers they supposedly had intercourse with and how manly they are for liking blood splattered gory games.

 

You want to see Nintendo get into financial trouble? Why would you want that?

 

I want Nintendo to be successful, but the fact is sweeping changes are needed to how Nintendo approaches the industry and how they conduct. The old approach just isn't working anymore.

 

This should be evident to see with just how many units the Wii U has shifted.

 

The fact is that the Wii U has been handled poorly by Nintendo. You have to ask yourself just how competent are a company that releases a product onto the market with very limited marketing and no AAA games to drive up the install base and then even more strangely predicts the console to shift 9 million units in its first fiscal year on sale? 

 

If Nintendo aren't going to change how they function, then that's fine, but they're on the highway to irrelevancy. Also maybe just maybe it would be better for Nintendo to focus on their handheld system? Who knows, but I hope Iwata turns things around.

So no, Nintendo should get their act together. They have made mistakes but all of them correctable.

Also, note I have never said Nintendo will be number one. But I don't believe they need to always be number one. They just need to make a profit.

 

Yes they should get their act together.

 

The mistakes are correctable, but I don't believe Nintendo will try to correct any of them. I think Nintendo will release their AAA titles and hope that these games are enough to entice more consumers on board to really drive up the install base.

 

They do need to make a profit which they haven't done for the past two fiscal years and more than likely won't at the end of this current fiscal year (according to what I've read).

 

Also I understand what Nintendo means, but the fact remains that Nintendo is a business first and foremost. Nintendo is in the business of making money and the most successful companies in the World are those who learn to adapt and change to meet the needs and expectations of their consumer base. Nintendo should use their creativity to conjure up some more diverse and compelling software and just focus on creating the most developer friendly console they can.

 

Sony with the PS4 has shown it is possible to have a console comprised of off-the-shelf PC parts which offer a more powerful gaming experience which doesn't cost the consumer an arm and a leg and now this is what a majority of console gamers will want in future consoles.

 

Gamers have spoken in their numbers, they don't want underpowered hardware and gimmicky controllers. They want a standard controller and they want a powerful machine with great first and third party games.

[grahamf]

 

You want to see Nintendo get into financial trouble? Why would you want that?

I had to re-read it a few times myself, but he's saying that it'd be better for Nintendo to do what they do best regardless of their profit margin then to be indistinguishable from Microsoft or Sony.

 

Honestly? I hope Nintendo's next system is relatively inexpensive (like the Wii was), because many people bought either a PS3 or Xbox 360 and also bought the Wii as a secondary system.

 

But Nintendo really does need a really good gimmick for the next console instead of focusing on graphics, because otherwise Nintendo would have more success with a re-release of the Wii U at a much lower cost (and online, accounts, and virtual console improved)

Edited by grahamf, 23 January 2014 - 01:26 AM.

[SailtheSeas]

I had to re-read it a few times myself, but he's saying that it'd be better for Nintendo to do what they do best regardless of their profit margin then to be indistinguishable from Microsoft or Sony.

 

Honestly? I hope Nintendo's next system is relatively inexpensive (like the Wii was), because many people bought either a PS3 or Xbox 360 and also bought the Wii as a secondary system.

 

But Nintendo really does need a really good gimmick for the next console instead of focusing on graphics, because otherwise Nintendo would have more success with a re-release of the Wii U at a much lower cost (and online, accounts, and virtual console improved)

 

Nintendo changing doesn't mean that they have to be indistinguishable from Microsoft or Sony. That's just being melodramatic. However Nintendo does need to offer up a console that will rival Sony and Microsoft. Offering up an unpowered system with a mandatory gimmicky controller which serves no real purpose other than offering off-TV play hasn't gone down well with consumers.

 

Nintendo can carry on making gimmicky controllers or whatever else they want, but they shouldn't force those gimmicks onto consumers, many of who don't want motion controllers, or tablet controller or cameras that can see in the dark. These should all be optional accessories. I like the Gamepad, but it has been poorly executed by Nintendo. You cannot turn it off when using the Pro Controller because if you turn it off the entire system shuts down. The battery life is horrendous, really bad and apart from two games I've played, nobody, not even Nintendo seem to know how to best utilise the second screen.

 

Apparently Mario Kart 8 will use the tablet controller screen as a 'horn'. If true that just goes to reinforce my point further.

Edited by SailtheSeas, 23 January 2014 - 01:51 AM.

[AndyG]

Firing Iwata isn't the solution, what they really need to do is rethink their direction.

[grahamf]

Nintendo changing doesn't mean that they have to be indistinguishable from Microsoft or Sony. That's just being melodramatic. However Nintendo does need to offer up a console that will rival Sony and Microsoft. Offering up an unpowered system with a mandatory gimmicky controller which serves no real purpose other than offering off-TV play hasn't gone down well with consumers.

 

Nintendo can carry on making gimmicky controllers or whatever else they want, but they shouldn't force those gimmicks onto consumers, many of who don't want motion controllers, or tablet controller or cameras that can see in the dark. These should all be optional accessories. I like the Gamepad, but it has been poorly executed by Nintendo. You cannot turn it off when using the Pro Controller because if you turn it off the entire system shuts down. The battery life is horrendous, really bad and apart from two games I've played, nobody, not even Nintendo seem to know how to best utilise the second screen.

 

Apparently Mario Kart 8 will use the tablet controller screen as a 'horn'. If true that just goes to reinforce my point further.

Last time Nintendo really competed was the Gamecube. Heck, they even caved and went with cheap optical media. Didn't help.

 

Gamers aren't forced to use the gamepad; unless the game is designed to make extensive use of the touchpad usually you can just tuck it away and use a Pro controller or wiimote.

[Raiden]

Unlike Wii using the gamepad isn't a hindrance. Just a normal controller with a screen. A big one but holding it is not like holding the duke. Rather comfy.

Wii remote often got in the way. Gamepad does not IMO.

Edited by Ryudo, 23 January 2014 - 03:11 AM.

[storabajskorven]

 

 

So in your opinion because other companies i.e. Sony and Microsoft are giving gamers what they want, Nintendo should give gamers what they don't want? Nintendo should spend a tonne of money creating hardware and controllers that gamers don't want just to be different? Right...

 

No. What I said was that Nintendo shouldn't give gamers what they think they want, but what they never imagined they wanted.

[SailtheSeas]

No. What I said was that Nintendo shouldn't give gamers what they think they want, but what they never imagined they wanted.

 

It doesn't work like that. They've tried this with the N64 and it didn't work, they then tried it with the Gamecube and guess what? It didn't work. They were successful with the Wii, extremely so, they read the market better than their competition and their innovation really did pay off. However they've again tried it with the Wii U and it's not working. The consumers know what they want and they don't want Nintendo is offering with the Wii U. That's evident.

 

Now Nintendo can continue to offer underpowered hardware and gimmicky controllers and other peripherals and hope that they can recruit the types of numbers that they saw with the Wii, but what happens if their next console is another abject failure? What then for Nintendo? Do they create another underpowered gimmicky console for the consumer?

 

The problem I think for Nintendo is that they are being creative in the wrong area. They're creative genius lies not in their hardware, but in their software and Nintendo really could do with some fresh IP's. All they are really producing at the moment is Mario and Zelda games, great games, but a little stale all the same.

 

Bring back some of the older IP's laying dormant, create new IP's, get Sega and Atlus to help develop some of their dormant IP's and offer hardware that is on par with their competition. A simple box, full of power that is easy for third party developers to develop for and open up to the industry. Invite third parties on board. If Nintendo want to then add creative, gimmicky peripherals, then offer them as optional accessories.

 

I have a 3DS XL and I love it, it's a great little console because it doesn't force the 3D on the consumer. If you don't want 3D, you can switch off. The Wii U would have benefitted greatly from making the tablet controller an optional accessory. They've pushed this tablet controller onto the consumer and yet it serves no real purpose. It's not a game changer, it hasn't revolutionised the way I play games, it hasn't really served much of a purpose and as much as I like it for its off-TV functionality, it's a peripheral I could well live without.

 

It's just a poorly executed concept, it hasn't taken off and it probably never will.

Edited by SailtheSeas, 23 January 2014 - 05:32 AM.

[MorbidGod]

I accept this but there are a lot of gamers who won't buy Nintendo consoles purely for this reason. Their first party games aren't enough, these gamers want the best of both worlds. Great first party games and third party games.



You want to see Nintendo get into financial trouble? Why would you want that?

I want Nintendo to be successful, but the fact is sweeping changes are needed to how Nintendo approaches the industry and how they conduct. The old approach just isn't working anymore.

This should be evident to see with just how many units the Wii U has shifted.

The fact is that the Wii U has been handled poorly by Nintendo. You have to ask yourself just how competent are a company that releases a product onto the market with very limited marketing and no AAA games to drive up the install base and then even more strangely predicts the console to shift 9 million units in its first fiscal year on sale?

If Nintendo aren't going to change how they function, then that's fine, but they're on the highway to irrelevancy. Also maybe just maybe it would be better for Nintendo to focus on their handheld system? Who knows, but I hope Iwata turns things around.



Yes they should get their act together.

The mistakes are correctable, but I don't believe Nintendo will try to correct any of them. I think Nintendo will release their AAA titles and hope that these games are enough to entice more consumers on board to really drive up the install base.

They do need to make a profit which they haven't done for the past two fiscal years and more than likely won't at the end of this current fiscal year (according to what I've read).

Also I understand what Nintendo means, but the fact remains that Nintendo is a business first and foremost. Nintendo is in the business of making money and the most successful companies in the World are those who learn to adapt and change to meet the needs and expectations of their consumer base. Nintendo should use their creativity to conjure up some more diverse and compelling software and just focus on creating the most developer friendly console they can.

Sony with the PS4 has shown it is possible to have a console comprised of off-the-shelf PC parts which offer a more powerful gaming experience which doesn't cost the consumer an arm and a leg and now this is what a majority of console gamers will want in future consoles.

Gamers have spoken in their numbers, they don't want underpowered hardware and gimmicky controllers. They want a standard controller and they want a powerful machine with great first and third party games.

You can't really say that. One, I wouldn't count out Xbox One yet. Microsoft will push that system and it has some great games. I personally wouldn't buy one, but that's because I'm a privacy nut and I don't like having a way for the NSA to spy on me and watch what I'm doing.

However, on the subject of gamers don't want gimmicky controllers and underpowered systems ... How can you say that? The reason the Wii U isn't selling is because there aren't games to buy. It won't take one game, but multiple games for Nintendo to see success. Once Mario, Donkey Kong, Mario Kart, Super Smash Bros have been releases that is enough reason for people to buy the Wii U. Then, at E3, we'll hear about more games Nintendo has up its sleeve.

And I forgot about Sonic Worlds. Sonic has always done well on Nintendo consoles.

And finally, Nintendos mistake was releasing a console with none of their AAA games. So, releasing those games in a timely manor this year will fix that mistake. And Nintendo has all ready said they are paying attention to foreign trends and will change. So the other mistakes they have made in my mind will possibly be changed.

Last time Nintendo really competed was the Gamecube. Heck, they even caved and went with cheap optical media. Didn't help.

Gamers aren't forced to use the gamepad; unless the game is designed to make extensive use of the touchpad usually you can just tuck it away and use a Pro controller or wiimote.

Which, the problem is that Nintendo hasn't used the touch screen controller. So that means pretty much EVERY game you can use the pro controller with.

It doesn't work like that. They've tried this with the N64 and it didn't work, they then tried it with the Gamecube and guess what? It didn't work. They were successful with the Wii, extremely so, they read the market better than their competition and their innovation really did pay off. However they've again tried it with the Wii U and it's not working. The consumers know what they want and they don't want Nintendo is offering with the Wii U. That's evident.

Now Nintendo can continue to offer underpowered hardware and gimmicky controllers and other peripherals and hope that they can recruit the types of numbers that they saw with the Wii, but what happens if their next console is another abject failure? What then for Nintendo? Do they create another underpowered gimmicky console for the consumer?

The problem I think for Nintendo is that they are being creative in the wrong area. They're creative genius lies not in their hardware, but in their software and Nintendo really could do with some fresh IP's. All they are really producing at the moment is Mario and Zelda games, great games, but a little stale all the same.

Bring back some of the older IP's laying dormant, create new IP's, get Sega and Atlus to help develop some of their dormant IP's and offer hardware that is on par with their competition. A simple box, full of power that is easy for third party developers to develop for and open up to the industry. Invite third parties on board. If Nintendo want to then add creative, gimmicky peripherals, then offer them as optional accessories.

I have a 3DS XL and I love it, it's a great little console because it doesn't force the 3D on the consumer. If you don't want 3D, you can switch off. The Wii U would have benefitted greatly from making the tablet controller an optional accessory. They've pushed this tablet controller onto the consumer and yet it serves no real purpose. It's not a game changer, it hasn't revolutionised the way I play games, it hasn't really served much of a purpose and as much as I like it for its off-TV functionality, it's a peripheral I could well live without.

It's just a poorly executed concept, it hasn't taken off and it probably never will.

OMG. I can't believe what I just heard this. The Nintendo 64 was more powerful than the PlayStation and did not have a gimmick controller. They did innovate, which changed games forever in my opinion. The GCN was the second most powerful system, more powerful then the PS2 (which won that generation) and also did nit have a gimmick controller. In fact, the Wii was the first home console that was not competitive graphic wise. And I would argue the only because the Wii U has enough power to make games that look better than PS3 and current PS4 games.

(NOTE: Yes, PS4 will end up making better looking games than X and probably will be the most powerful, but I doubt you'll be able to tell the difference in the end).

[SailtheSeas]

You can't really say that. One, I wouldn't count out Xbox One yet. Microsoft will push that system and it has some great games. I personally wouldn't buy one, but that's because I'm a privacy nut and I don't like having a way for the NSA to spy on me and watch what I'm doing.

However, on the subject of gamers don't want gimmicky controllers and underpowered systems ... How can you say that? The reason the Wii U isn't selling is because there aren't games to buy. It won't take one game, but multiple games for Nintendo to see success. Once Mario, Donkey Kong, Mario Kart, Super Smash Bros have been releases that is enough reason for people to buy the Wii U. Then, at E3, we'll hear about more games Nintendo has up its sleeve.

And I forgot about Sonic Worlds. Sonic has always done well on Nintendo consoles.

And finally, Nintendos mistake was releasing a console with none of their AAA games. So, releasing those games in a timely manor this year will fix that mistake. And Nintendo has all ready said they are paying attention to foreign trends and will change. So the other mistakes they have made in my mind will possibly be changed.


Which, the problem is that Nintendo hasn't used the touch screen controller. So that means pretty much EVERY game you can use the pro controller with.

 

The Xbox One can't be counted out just yet, but the thing with the Kinect 2.0 although it is mandatory to purchase, it is not mandatory to use. You can use the standard controller to navigate through the Xbox One interface.

 

The Xbox One also has the advantage of having what looks like some amazing exclusive games and a vast array of third party games. The Xbox One is in a much better situation than the Wii U. The tablet controller is mandatory to buy and you are forced to use it. You can use the Pro Controller, the Wii motes and nunchuck, but the tablet controller has to remain on, it's connected to the Wii U permanently.

 

You're right the Wii U isn't selling because Nintendo hasn't released all of their big AAA titles, titles which move Nintendo systems, but just look back at the Gamecube days, they had great games on the system and it sold 21 million units, the N64 had great games, but still only sold 32 million units which are no poor figures until you compare those figures to the PS2 which sold 155million+ units and the PS1 sold 100million+ units.

 

The odd choices of hardware have effected third party development and ultimately have limited the variety and number of games on Nintendo platforms. This has ultimately effected the install base of their consoles.

 

The Wii U is suffering from that, there aren't enough first or third party games that appeal to a majority of consumers, factor in the underpowered hardware and the mandatory gimmicky controller, is it any wonder the Wii U is struggling?

 

Sonic has always done well on Nintendo consoles? Sonic Lost World has around 180,000 units since its launch in October. Hardly selling well is it? I do hope that Nintendo learns from its mistakes, they've made plenty of mistakes and I hope their software is able to get them back on track and well on the way to making profits on all their hardware and software currently in circulation.

OMG. I can't believe what I just heard this. The Nintendo 64 was more powerful than the PlayStation and did not have a gimmick controller. They did innovate, which changed games forever in my opinion. The GCN was the second most powerful system, more powerful then the PS2 (which won that generation) and also did nit have a gimmick controller. In fact, the Wii was the first home console that was not competitive graphic wise. And I would argue the only because the Wii U has enough power to make games that look better than PS3 and current PS4 games.

(NOTE: Yes, PS4 will end up making better looking games than X and probably will be the most powerful, but I doubt you'll be able to tell the difference in the end).

 

The N64 was more powerful than the PS1, but Nintendo decided to be different and carried on using cartridges when Sony were using discs. Where Nintendo were successful was with their software, Super Mario 64 was a massive game changer as was Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Super Smash Bros was a great new franchise and Mario Kart 64 was one of the most enjoyable games I've ever played.

 

However the N64 suffered from a lack of third party support in comparison to the PS1 which had plenty. Sony came into the market with hardware which developers wanted and also bought third parties on board. Nintendo carried on being Nintendo marching to the beat of their own drum.

 

The Gamecube was a better console than the PS2, and you're right it didn't have a gimmicky controller, it did have the mini-disc system which hurt it imo. Once again the PS2 had a standard disc based system and was very much centered around what third party developers wanted. Sony engaged with third parties and the results showed.

 

As for the Wii U being visually more impressive graphics wise than the PS4, I'm sorry but that's plain ridiculous. Killzone Shadowfall and Ryse Son of Rome have already showcased the graphical prowess of the new systems and they look better than anything on the Wii U.

 

I don't doubt the Wii U will produce some graphically great games, in fact it already has, Pikmin 3, WWHD, SM3DW and Rayman Legends show case just how good the Wii U's graphical capabilities are, I also hope that Project CARS goes one step further, but to say someone won't be able to tell the difference between Wii U graphics and PS4 graphics is just wide of the mark.

 

Have a look at AC IV comparison between all three consoles and the PS4 version looks better than the other two versions. The gap will only widen as this generation progresses.

Edited by SailtheSeas, 23 January 2014 - 07:05 AM.

[storabajskorven]

 

 

I have a 3DS XL and I love it, it's a great little console because it doesn't force the 3D on the consumer. If you don't want 3D, you can switch off. The Wii U would have benefitted greatly from making the tablet controller an optional accessory. They've pushed this tablet controller onto the consumer and yet it serves no real purpose. It's not a game changer, it hasn't revolutionised the way I play games, it hasn't really served much of a purpose and as much as I like it for its off-TV functionality, it's a peripheral I could well live without.

 

It's just a poorly executed concept, it hasn't taken off and it probably never will.

 

I disagree with your comparison with the 3DS. In both cases, you are forced to pay for the future, in both cases you don't need to use it. I think it's pretty clear by now what both our opinions are. And I agree with you that they should be more innovative with their software though. They definitely should continue making Zelda games the way they do it, the combination of adventuring and puzzle solving is great. And they need to continue making the Mario and Metroid games in order to make money.

[SailtheSeas]

I disagree with your comparison with the 3DS. In both cases, you are forced to pay for the future, in both cases you don't need to use it. I think it's pretty clear by now what both our opinions are. And I agree with you that they should be more innovative with their software though. They definitely should continue making Zelda games the way they do it, the combination of adventuring and puzzle solving is great. And they need to continue making the Mario and Metroid games in order to make money.

 

3D is not the future imo. Tablet controllers are not the future. A powerful machine with PC-esque architecture and a standard controller is the future. But yes, we shall agree to disagree.