104 replies to this topic

[Alex Wolfers]

The 360 and PS3 were sold out for 5-6 months after their release. The reason the "launch" sales were low was because there were none to go around. The 360 was being sold on Ebay in December for 800 dollars. The Wii U on the other hand had massive overstocking in every store I went to, so the console was readily available to anyone that wanted one.

 

So to say the Wii U sold more during its launch than the 360 / PS3 is an unfair comparison for the above reason, so stop rehashing that argument because it isn't a good one.

 

And for the rest of your rant... umm, I hate to break it to you but the Wii U is ON PAR with the current gen (360 /PS3). I don't have the time nor patience to prove it to you, but it's a fact. Look it up. Not that that is necessarily a bad thing, but it will cause obvious problems in the near future with next gen games coming out that will be catered to more powerful hardware.

Like OMG pleez try to make at least some clarity to back your bullheaded point up.

[Goodtwin]

This just in, the Playstation 4 will not be getting Bayonetta 2.  Playstation 4 is obviously doomed!

 

I actually believe EA about the resources.  Its not so much that EA couldnt make it happen if they wanted to, but they would have to assign a seperate team to do the work for the Wii U build, and if sales expectations for that build are very low, they may feel that those resources would be better spent elsewhere.  I wasnt going to buy this game anyway, so its not a big deal for me.

 

EA is simply deciding where they feel their resources are best spent.  Thats what they should do, whatever is best for their company.  This actually leaves the door open for other publishers who do support the platform.  Ubisoft will most certainly benefit when its not sharing a piece of the Wii U pie with EA.   For example, if Battlefield and Assassins Creed were to release at the same time on Wii U, they are likely to split the sales, but if Assassins Creed is releasing without that competition they are likely to get nearly all those sales.  This is only true with games that have a similar demographic appeal, but I do feel that it hold some weight. 

 

EA is going to take a wait and see approach with the Wii U.  Because the PS3 and 360 are still popular in the market they arent really forced to jump in full swing with all new consoles. 

 

Nintendo needs to make sure they have a solid lineup of software coming, but just like in the past it will be the exclusives that make Nintendo's console a success.  The Xbox is the only console to really thrive on multi plat titles, but Sony and Nintendo have traditionally been driven by the exclusives.  The multi plats are just icing on the cake for Nintendo, and to a lesser extent Sony. 

[Nollog]

lol, who expected it on wii u to begin with?

Maybe the new ceo will change dice's minds.

I'm not holding my breath.

 

Also, it's a BS excuse. We'd all be 100% happy with simple off-tv play, and the same game as on pc or the old consoles.

[Zinix]

EA just let it go, already. Nintendo didn't want to use your abysmal Origin service. 

[routerbad]

Problem is.. it's not just EA.

 

Army of Two: The Devil's Cartel BioShock Infinite Crysis 3 Dead Island Riptide Dead Space 3 DmC Fuse Grand Theft Auto V Metro Last Light Remember Me South Park: The Stick of Truth Splinter Cell: Blacklist Tomb Raider

Have all skipped Wii U...

Splinter Cell is most likely coming, the others were in development for a long time before dev units for Wii U were ever available, which was only late last year, inside the launch window.  Nintendo obviously didn't handle that well, and it's coming to bite them, because there are some great IPs that didn't make it to the system.

 

Also, you can't have it both ways, when your weak install base argument doesn't work, you attack the console's capability, when that doesn't work, attack the install base.  Argue one point or the other or both simultaneously, not one when the other argument stops working in your favor.  That is impish behavior.

 

EA already had games running on the system, already spent money and time developing them, only to cancel their release.  Not because of the install base, and not because of the machine capability, but because they are incensed over a services deal that Nintendo declined to entertain.  It really is that simple, this has nothing to do with the console itself in any way, shape, or form.  This is EA vs Nintendo.

[Nollog]

Problem is.. it's not just EA.

 

Army of Two: The Devil's Cartel BioShock Infinite Crysis 3 Dead Island Riptide Dead Space 3 DmC Fuse Grand Theft Auto V Metro Last Light Remember Me South Park: The Stick of Truth Splinter Cell: Blacklist Tomb Raider

Have all skipped Wii U...

not just ea, you listed dead space 3 bro.

 

All those games have been in development before the console was launched out of iwata's brain-hole.

That's not to say developers can't add wii u to their platforms, ubisoft are willing to do just that with the game they've been working on for 3 years now, watch dogs.

Expecting a tomb raider port when it launched in under a year was silly of anyone, and that was the most likely imo.

 

Business decisions are made at these companies that we can all disagree on.

Check your list, squeenix, ea, getting new ceos, expected to post financial losses, thq, gone.

[routerbad]

This just in, the Playstation 4 will not be getting Bayonetta 2.  Playstation 4 is obviously doomed!

 

I actually believe EA about the resources.  Its not so much that EA couldnt make it happen if they wanted to, but they would have to assign a seperate team to do the work for the Wii U build, and if sales expectations for that build are very low, they may feel that those resources would be better spent elsewhere.  I wasnt going to buy this game anyway, so its not a big deal for me.

 

EA is simply deciding where they feel their resources are best spent.  Thats what they should do, whatever is best for their company.  This actually leaves the door open for other publishers who do support the platform.  Ubisoft will most certainly benefit when its not sharing a piece of the Wii U pie with EA.   For example, if Battlefield and Assassins Creed were to release at the same time on Wii U, they are likely to split the sales, but if Assassins Creed is releasing without that competition they are likely to get nearly all those sales.  This is only true with games that have a similar demographic appeal, but I do feel that it hold some weight. 

 

EA is going to take a wait and see approach with the Wii U.  Because the PS3 and 360 are still popular in the market they arent really forced to jump in full swing with all new consoles. 

 

Nintendo needs to make sure they have a solid lineup of software coming, but just like in the past it will be the exclusives that make Nintendo's console a success.  The Xbox is the only console to really thrive on multi plat titles, but Sony and Nintendo have traditionally been driven by the exclusives.  The multi plats are just icing on the cake for Nintendo, and to a lesser extent Sony. 

I don't believe the resources schtick for one minute.  It has nothing to do with that, and if they were so worried about resources they might have released games that were already developed and ready for release for the platform but got cancelled to recoup some of the resources they spent there.  This has nothing to do with resources at all.  The same team could build a Wii U version then downport to the other consoles like what is being done with Black flag, watch dogs, etc.

 

I do believe that Ubisoft loves this little blood feud, because it means less competition for them on the Wii U.  This could be why we've been seeing more push from them to promote the Wii U and the games coming for it from them.

not just ea, you listed dead space 3 bro.

 

All those games have been in development before the console was launched out of iwata's brain-hole.

That's not to say developers can't add wii u to their platforms, ubisoft are willing to do just that with the game they've been working on for 3 years now, watch dogs.

Expecting a tomb raider port when it launched in under a year was silly of anyone, and that was the most likely imo.

 

Business decisions are made at these companies that we can all disagree on.

Check your list, squeenix, ea, getting new ceos, expected to post financial losses, thq, gone.

He also listed Crysis 3, another EA title, that was actually ready for release on the console, meaning resources were already poured into it, but will never be recouped by EA.  Some of these publishers are starting to circle the drain, and itll be interesting to see which ones come out stronger because of it.

[routerbad]

lol, who expected it on wii u to begin with?

Maybe the new ceo will change dice's minds.

I'm not holding my breath.

 

Also, it's a BS excuse. We'd all be 100% happy with simple off-tv play, and the same game as on pc or the old consoles.

They are already adding touchscreen features to smartglass anyway.  This wouldnt have been a stretch.  What it means is they don't want to take a risk on developing it and have EA can it at the last minute like they did with BF3 and Crysis.

Edited by routerbad, 27 March 2013 - 06:52 AM.

[Colinx]

I would have bought it just to support 3rd party, but I guess now I'm not. Didn't really care for the game anyway, FPS are so over done, its so annoying. 

[Cyanotic]

Yeah, no.  There were never any stock shortages of the PS3 or the 360, only the Wii experienced serious shortages.  It is actually a good argument, because the PS3 and the 360 were always in stock on shelves when they came out, the Wii had to be hunted for.

Either you weren't born in 2005 or you are completely daft. If the 360 was always on store shelves, then why couldn't I find one in a 3 state radius for months after release?

 

You are 100% wrong and I stopped reading anything you wrote after that. I think you got it confused with the Wii U which had 30-40 brand new consoles behind every Wal-Mart and K-Mart counter in the country.

 

Which leads to my first argument; you cannot compare launch sales of a console that was in abundance to a console that was sold out for months.

 

As far as the "EA" argument... I know I listed EA games as well. My point was, it's not just EA that isn't developing games to the Wii U... it's everyone. Sure, most games were in development for a while... but the Wii U has had their development kits out for years and could of easily of been ported over (if it was profitable or even possible)

 

The Wii U has missed it's mark no matter how you look at it. The "U" should of been released 3 years ago and Nintendo should of had a brand new console ready to go this year with comparable specs that would compete with the 720 / PS4.

 

The Wii U missed the Core market and the casual market. Core market is waiting for the PS4 / 720 and the casual market thinks the Wii U is an add-on to the Wii.

 

Like OMG pleez try to make at least some clarity to back your bullheaded point up.

 

To quote yourself "Blind fanboyism (be it of Nintendo or any other company) will not be tolerated, either".

 

Watch it.

Edited by Cyanotic, 27 March 2013 - 07:27 AM.

[PyroKinesis]

Well, it's probably because they know people are more likely to buy this game on the NextBox/PS4 than the Wii U, so...

[Goodtwin]

The majority of consumers dont buy consoles within the first year of release.  Most wait for a console to drop in price, and the mass market price seems to be $250 or less.  What is a core gamer anyway?  The majority of 360 and PS3 gamers are playing Call of Duty every year.  Gamers that care mostly about graphics and specs have already moved on to PC.  Nintendo has the best exclusives in my opinion, so if I want the best of all worlds I will just buy a gaming PC that cruches the PS4 and 720 in terms of graphics, and play the great exclusive Nintendo content on my Wii U.  Microsofts number one "exclusive" isnt even really exclusive, I can get Halo on PC.  PC gamers laugh at console gamers that like to rank consoles based on specs. 

[Cyanotic]

The majority of consumers dont buy consoles within the first year of release.  Most wait for a console to drop in price, and the mass market price seems to be $250 or less.  What is a core gamer anyway?  The majority of 360 and PS3 gamers are playing Call of Duty every year.  Gamers that care mostly about graphics and specs have already moved on to PC.  Nintendo has the best exclusives in my opinion, so if I want the best of all worlds I will just buy a gaming PC that cruches the PS4 and 720 in terms of graphics, and play the great exclusive Nintendo content on my Wii U.  Microsofts number one "exclusive" isnt even really exclusive, I can get Halo on PC.  PC gamers laugh at console gamers that like to rank consoles based on specs. 

 

You are actually 100% right in everything you said.

[Phanto]

I wasn't going to buy it anyway.

 

It's not that I don't enjoy a good shooter, it's just that these all feel like the same game over and over again. I want a 3rd person shooter that actually feels new and innovative. I want something that will stand out. I supported games like Red Steel, Conduit, and Red Steel 2 because I felt they brought something different to the table. So, where are the game like that for the Wii U?

[routerbad]

Either you weren't born in 2005 or you are completely daft. If the 360 was always on store shelves, then why couldn't I find one in a 3 state radius for months after release?

 

You are 100% wrong and I stopped reading anything you wrote after that. I think you got it confused with the Wii U which had 30-40 brand new consoles behind every Wal-Mart and K-Mart counter in the country.

 

Which leads to my first argument; you cannot compare launch sales of a console that was in abundance to a console that was sold out for months.

 

As far as the "EA" argument... I know I listed EA games as well. My point was, it's not just EA that isn't developing games to the Wii U... it's everyone. Sure, most games were in development for a while... but the Wii U has had their development kits out for years and could of easily of been ported over (if it was profitable or even possible)

 

The Wii U has missed it's mark no matter how you look at it. The "U" should of been released 3 years ago and Nintendo should of had a brand new console ready to go this year with comparable specs that would compete with the 720 / PS4.

 

The Wii U missed the Core market and the casual market. Core market is waiting for the PS4 / 720 and the casual market thinks the Wii U is an add-on to the Wii.

 

 

To quote yourself "Blind fanboyism (be it of Nintendo or any other company) will not be tolerated, either".

 

Watch it.

Nope, try again.

 

I worked next door to a gamestop in 2005 and was best friends with the manager.  They had issues initially getting them off store shelves, but shortly after the launch window sales picked up a little, though there was still always stock.  This was in North Carolina.  The Wii I had to hunt for, and ended up asking my friend to hold onto one for me when he got a shipment, which was difficult for him to do because he was still trying to fulfill preorders.  If the XBOX or PS3 was dealing with hardware shortages they would have had lower initial sales predictions and wouldn't have had to lower them as Nintendo has done now.  

 

The Wii U I spent two weeks looking for, because no one in San Diego County, Orange County, or LA County had them directly after launch until mid December.  They are well stocked now.  The 360, on the other hand, I walked into Gamestop the day after launch, with no preorder, and bought.  My wife (girlfriend at the time) bought one two months later without knowing I already had one, I returned that one.  There have never been stock shortages of the 360.  There have never been issues finding them on store shelves.  At the time I was an Xbox fan first, thanks to Halo.  I ended up getting all three systems.

 

The Wii U development kits were not out for years.  A select few companies were given target hardware to develop for, but not dev units.  The actual final dev kits didn't start getting out there until mid 2012, and most developers didn't have them until after launch.  It is very clear Nintendo launched before they were ready to.

 

Each platform has their "core" markets.  Those are fans of particular platforms.  Up until 2012 I was part of the XBOX "core" market.  I always owned and enjoyed Nintendo products, but the Wii left me unimpressed and I sold it after a year of owning it.  That was a mistake on my part, because there were some brilliant games on the Wii that are very hard to find now.  I still like Microsoft as a company, and I will still look forward to their console reveal to see what they are offering, but Wii U is my primary console.  That "gimmicky" controller is absolutely brilliant and I've had nothing but fun with it since I got it.  Also, SmartGlass and Vita integration are direct answers to that "gimmick" so it's Nintendo once again leading the pack as far as innovation is concerned.  PS4 isn't innovative, its iterative, and the only things they added to the console that differentiate it from the PS3 feature wise have nothing to do with gaming.

 

So none of your arguments hold water, they are all based in whatever fantasy world you live in where you can distort facts to support your argument.

 

Also, I wasn't the one who quoted the forum rules, Saturn did, and I didn't bash any console, nor did I bash you, just your garbage argument.

[Happy Monk]

EA is making absolutely no fans, with everything they say. As long as FIFA World Cup 2014 comes out on the Wii U, I'll be happy with regards to EA. But hey, they might not even make it, if so, EA is as good as dead in my opinion!

[routerbad]

The majority of consumers dont buy consoles within the first year of release.  Most wait for a console to drop in price, and the mass market price seems to be $250 or less.  What is a core gamer anyway?  The majority of 360 and PS3 gamers are playing Call of Duty every year.  Gamers that care mostly about graphics and specs have already moved on to PC.  Nintendo has the best exclusives in my opinion, so if I want the best of all worlds I will just buy a gaming PC that cruches the PS4 and 720 in terms of graphics, and play the great exclusive Nintendo content on my Wii U.  Microsofts number one "exclusive" isnt even really exclusive, I can get Halo on PC.  PC gamers laugh at console gamers that like to rank consoles based on specs. 

I'm a PC gamer, and while I think it's silly to rank consoles based on specs, it is interesting and fun to learn about the specifications of competing hardware.  None of it really matters in the long run, because the games, not the hardware, will determine the success or failure of a platform.  What I can't stand for is people using flawed logic and a distorted recollection of the industry's history to call one platform or another dead.

 

Nintendo and Sony have the best exclusives, but Sony has decided not to develop for their best IP's.  Something I hope for their sake they fix this gen.  I'm a huge fan of Halo, but didn't have a gaming PC back in 2005, it was too expensive at the time.  So I got a 360, played all the Halo franchises, plus the multiplats I wanted.  In 2007 I actually started building my first gaming rig, spent $2500+ on it, and stopped using my xbox for anything other than Halo.  Got a PS3 to play Heavy Rain and some other exclusives.  Played my PC heavily, getting all of the multiplats I wanted, even sports titles, on PC.  The 360 and the PS3 got no use, so I ended up selling them to save space in my media center.

 

Got a Wii U, haven't put it down since.  I've been playing through some of the Wii games I missed out on, and got several of the launch titles.  It is a fun system, and the more people try it the more they will realize that.

[NintendoReport]

Installed base definitely factors into the developers plans to see if it's a worthwhile investment. The problem is, I honestly don't see the Wii U selling that many more units once these "world saving first party titles" are released.

 

The fact is, the people who want a Wii U already have a Wii U. This next holiday season will see the 720 and PS4 released. Those are the consoles the kids want... not the Wii U. So even if a new Zelda is released... it won't be enough.

Thank you Nostradamous for giving us facts based your mind blowing predictions. 

[Goodtwin]

I'm a PC gamer, and while I think it's silly to rank consoles based on specs, it is interesting and fun to learn about the specifications of competing hardware.  None of it really matters in the long run, because the games, not the hardware, will determine the success or failure of a platform.  What I can't stand for is people using flawed logic and a distorted recollection of the industry's history to call one platform or another dead.

 

Nintendo and Sony have the best exclusives, but Sony has decided not to develop for their best IP's.  Something I hope for their sake they fix this gen.  I'm a huge fan of Halo, but didn't have a gaming PC back in 2005, it was too expensive at the time.  So I got a 360, played all the Halo franchises, plus the multiplats I wanted.  In 2007 I actually started building my first gaming rig, spent $2500+ on it, and stopped using my xbox for anything other than Halo.  Got a PS3 to play Heavy Rain and some other exclusives.  Played my PC heavily, getting all of the multiplats I wanted, even sports titles, on PC.  The 360 and the PS3 got no use, so I ended up selling them to save space in my media center.

 

Got a Wii U, haven't put it down since.  I've been playing through some of the Wii games I missed out on, and got several of the launch titles.  It is a fun system, and the more people try it the more they will realize that.

 

For sure, as you may have noticed I enjoy disscussing hardware specs and performance as well.  Its just when people make rediculous claims that everyone will want the PS4/720 simply because the specs are more imperssive.  Its crazy to define a console based on its a specs alone.  For those people that want to make backhanded remarks about the Wii U based on its specs, go to any PC gaming forum and start talking about how "powerful" the PS4 is.  Nintendo will fight for consumers support the way they always have, with great first party software.   

[routerbad]

For sure, as you may have noticed I enjoy disscussing hardware specs and performance as well.  Its just when people make rediculous claims that everyone will want the PS4/720 simply because the specs are more imperssive.  Its crazy to define a console based on its a specs alone.  For those people that want to make backhanded remarks about the Wii U based on its specs, go to any PC gaming forum and start talking about how "powerful" the PS4 is.  Nintendo will fight for consumers support the way they always have, with great first party software.   

100% agreed.

 

Also, the most powerful system has never come in first in terms of sales in this industry.  Genesis, Jaguar, DreamCast(in between gen 5 and 6) Gamecube, PS3, and for mobile, Gamegear, PSP, none of them won their generation.  Console gamers have never made purchase decisions on power alone.  Nintendo has been in the hardware race before, they were dragged into it by Sega, then by Sony, it didn't work out for them, so they went to making systems based on the games they wanted to make.  There are positive and negative points to this, but the Wii U is competitive graphically, while not actually being a powerhouse.  It will still be the least powerful system overall this gen, but their system will still sell well, because they make great games, and now they've given third parties the ability to make great games on their system as well.

 

Sony has had an advantage the last three generations because they used the consoles as a proxy for their format war.  CD for PS1, DVD for PS2, BR for PS3, they don't have a new format this time, so it will be interesting to see how they change their focus and marketing.  I'm still interested because Sony has some really outstanding exclusives, but they need to show the ones we are all looking for, and not more QTE games and shooters.

Edited by routerbad, 27 March 2013 - 09:32 AM.