68 replies to this topic

[Colinx]

Sorry not quite sure I understand. So you think they should or shouldn't make something comparable to what Xbox and Sony are doing? Also, what do you think they can do to get gamers on their side?

 

 

It's obvious to what they can do not to fall into a ditch again, make a comparable system to the competition.

 

To get the gamers on their side is to do things like what Sony did for the PS4, being completely for the gamers. Also, if they get many games like Bayonetta 2 it will entice the hardcore even more to come over a buy games on their system.

[MarvelofMan]

As we delve deeper into this new generation I can see Xbox and PS4 gamers buying Wii Us as a secondary console due to the exclusives. It's already the most cost effective option and down the live even more so.

 

If that is the case maybe third party developers will contemplate some possibilities.

[ChrisD]

As we delve deeper into this new generation I can see Xbox and PS4 gamers buying Wii Us as a secondary console due to the exclusives. It's already the most cost effective option and down the live even more so.

 

If that is the case maybe third party developers will contemplate some possibilities.

 

Only issue there is that by then third parties would be looking forward to the next system. The Wii U has been out for almost two years now. Let's assume we're seeing a five year lifespan before things wind down for a new console the year after. Games can easily take a year to make. If people buy the system, say... one year from now, we're looking at a low ONE year of full exposure on a system that is soon to be replaced.

 

Anyone developing for the system right now is who you'll be seeing developing for the system in its final days. Nobody is going to "jump in" at this point. That's why Nintendo's floundering about in the Wii U's early days was such a poor move. And really, the mistakes were made before even then with the Wii's last year. You know, the year basically nobody developed on the system. If Nintendo had given developers even an early Wii U devkit at this time, things would be massively different right now. But instead there was an awkward lull where nothing really happened... or was happening. It was just an empty time for Nintendo's home console front.

[edu982912]

The  only way to get third parties to tha wii u is if wii u woners buy good third parties so that developers notice that if they put good games onn tha wii u people are going to buy them.

[MarvelofMan]

Only issue there is that by then third parties would be looking forward to the next system. The Wii U has been out for almost two years now. Let's assume we're seeing a five year lifespan before things wind down for a new console the year after. Games can easily take a year to make. If people buy the system, say... one year from now, we're looking at a low ONE year of full exposure on a system that is soon to be replaced.

 

Anyone developing for the system right now is who you'll be seeing developing for the system in its final days. Nobody is going to "jump in" at this point. That's why Nintendo's floundering about in the Wii U's early days was such a poor move. And really, the mistakes were made before even then with the Wii's last year. You know, the year basically nobody developed on the system. If Nintendo had given developers even an early Wii U devkit at this time, things would be massively different right now. But instead there was an awkward lull where nothing really happened... or was happening. It was just an empty time for Nintendo's home console front.

 

In essence with the Wii U having a shorter life span than the competition could lead them to Nintendo having a significant jump ahead of the competition IF they acted on the issues you mentioned. The development time is a key factor that makes the outlook somewhat bleak, it's a shame backs have been turned away from the Wii u at this stage in the game.

 

There was a period of time up until the launch of the Xbox One & PS4 where it felt the Wii U had stopped in it's tracks. As a gamer I am happy that Nintendo are supporting the Wii U with the momentum we are now witnessing. 

[MorbidGod]

So, I have went and looked at some of the replies and your replies to them, so I will try to address the problem at hand.

First, let's look at what first lead to this. Nintendo use to be top dog. They made the best selling system. They also made the best games. They have always relied on themselves. The problem is, when the person who creates the platform you work on becomes your biggest competition - that doesn't bold well for you does it? That company has no incentive to work with you, for instance, nor does answering questions about your platform really help.

Then Sony came and changed everything. Their PS1 system was easy to develop games for. Was cheaper in both format and royalties paid to Sony compared to Nintendo.

Nintendo's response? The Nintendo 64. I'm not sure if royalties went down but the development costs didn't. Nintendo once again made a choice that suited their needs first and developers needs second.

Then we were blessed with the GameCube. It was using mini DVD that was a compromise on what the developers wanted and what they wanted. Their system was just as powerful and easy-to-use. Yet, we still was not their focus.

The Wii came. It changed the industry forever. It sold a button load. Yet, it still did not have support from thirs party.

Now we are at the Wii U. Nintendo did go to third parties. Nintendo DID ask them what they wanted. They wanted an easy to develop and powerful HD system. They couldn't have known the orhers were going AMD. The developer's where under NDA not to say anything. And there wasn't really a lot of information about the PS4 and Xbox One in 2010 to 2012 where the development was being done.

So, Nintendo did everything people said they should do. They even let the third part developers take center stage and didn't release any big guns at the start of the system. What happened? Wii U died. Nintendo's big lead became the biggest failure of Nintendo's history. People lost faith in Nintendo and it's President.

So, what do they need to do to fix their problem with third party developers? No one knows. That's the truth. What they need to do is never trust third parties to sell their system. Problem is that if they do that, it doesn't bold well to fix the third party problem does it?

[Mewbot]

To get the gamers on their side is to do things like what Sony did for the PS4, being completely for the gamers. 

If you think Sony is more for the gamers than Nintendo then there's something wrong here. 

If Sony was for the gamers then they wouldn't be charging a fee for online. If Sony was for the gamers then their best PS4 game wouldn't be a remake that doesn't look better other than a resolution and framerate boost. If Sony was for the gamers then they wouldn't have to buy exclusive advertising rights to rainbow games just to make them sell better on their system. If Sony was for the gamers then they would be setting trends, creating new and interesting experiences, not giving us graphics unicorn tongue. I DON'T CARE HOW GOOD YOUR GAME LOOKS. I WANT A GAME THAT DOESN'T PLAY LIKE CRAP.

 

Sony is not for the gamers, they're not even close. They were more for the gamers with the PS3. Microsoft tho, oooh rainbow they're horsing incredibly anti-consumer. Scumbag pieces of rainbow. I hate their asses SO horsing MUCH. Like, seriously, have they ever made a good game? How do people put up with their bull horsing rainbow? It's just crazy. I hate anyone that thinks Microsoft makes a better console than Nintendo and I will happily kill them. If your opinion is different then kay but you're so horsing wrong.

If you want a console for the gamers then look no further than the Wii U.

 

There. That's my honest opinion. I'll probably buy a PS4 in the future.

 

If it ever gets any games worth playing. 

 

*end rant*

 

Now if your opinion is different then that's okay, but you're wrong.

Edited by R00bot, 29 September 2014 - 05:17 AM.

[Colinx]

If you think Sony is more for the gamers than Nintendo then there's something wrong here. 

If Sony was for the gamers then they wouldn't be charging a fee for online. If Sony was for the gamers then their best PS4 game wouldn't be a remake that doesn't look better other than a resolution and framerate boost. If Sony was for the gamers then they wouldn't have to buy exclusive advertising rights to rainbow games just to make them sell better on their system. If Sony was for the gamers then they would be setting trends, creating new and interesting experiences, not giving us graphics unicorn tongue. I DON'T CARE HOW GOOD YOUR GAME LOOKS. I WANT A GAME THAT DOESN'T PLAY LIKE CRAP.

 

Sony is not for the gamers, they're not even close. They were more for the gamers with the PS3. Microsoft tho, oooh rainbow they're horsing incredibly anti-consumer. Scumbag pieces of rainbow. I hate their asses SO horsing MUCH. Like, seriously, have they ever made a good game? How do people put up with their bull horsing rainbow? It's just crazy. I hate anyone that thinks Microsoft makes a better console than Nintendo and I will happily kill them. If your opinion is different then kay but you're so horsing wrong.

If you want a console for the gamers then look no further than the Wii U.

 

There. That's my honest opinion. I'll probably buy a PS4 in the future.

 

If it ever gets any games worth playing. 

 

*end rant*

 

Now if your opinion is different then that's okay, but you're wrong.

You know what? Its funny how big of a hypocrite you actually are. Because for a short time, Wii U's best game was Windwaker HD. It's quite clear and oblivious that when Sony was putting the PS4 out there, it was far more for a gamer than the Wii U and XBOX One. I can't believe how undeniably ignorant you are. Let's see, Sing Party U, Wii Fit U, Nintendoland, Wii Party U?? All of these development studios could have been put to far better use than just making party casual games. Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze? While Nintendo gamers wanted a Metroid Prime on Wii U so bad? 

 

Some of the stuff you've listed is so irrelevant, Sony is a business and they will do whatever they can to shut out the competition and the reason they have is because they are the most gamer friendly ie. making sure their system actually has multiplats, exclusive content/advertisement rights. Honestly, who cares if you pay for online on the PS4 especially when it's good, unlike the Wii U's online system.

 

If Nintendo was mostly for the gamers, then why the hell didn't they pay to get 3rd party games on their system. Let's be clear, with Wii U.. Nintendo hasn't set any trends, its evident in the sales for the console. It's quite obvious how immature and biased you are and it became obvious when you said "If it ever gets any games worth playing."

Edited by Colinx, 29 September 2014 - 08:46 AM.

[Atticus]

Yeah but the Wii was something NO ONE saw coming i would say not even Nintendo. its a once in a lifetime type of situation.They go aginst the grain by not even releasing a HD system like competitors and score big. That will never happen again it was a fluke.

 

...Unless Nintendo puts out another system in the Wii's price range. That was likely the Wii's strongest selling point. And if you could afford more than one console the Wii sold well as a "complimentary" system of sorts.

[Colinx]

...Unless Nintendo puts out another system in the Wii's price range. That was likely the Wii's strongest selling point. And if you could afford more than one console the Wii sold well as a "complimentary" system of sorts.

I disagree, the strongest selling point of the Wii was most definitely it's motion control gimmick. As we see with the Wii U, being the cheapest system on the market clearly doesn't mean anything if you're product isn't good/enticing. 

[Atticus]

I disagree, the strongest selling point of the Wii was most definitely it's motion control gimmick. As we see with the Wii U, being the cheapest system on the market clearly doesn't mean anything if you're product isn't good/enticing. 

 

It's arguable for sure but we'll agree to disagree. I might be wrong in my figures but I think Wii started at $100 cheaper at least than the Wii U? I obviously don't speak for the world but every gamer I know that had a Wii always had either a PS3 or Xbox 360 as well, never just a Wii. Even if the Wii U was $100 cheaper I'll agree it wouldn't have had the same effect anyway because there was/is too much going against it since launch. Price was definitely a HUGE factor though for the Wii and was arguably it's strongest selling point.

[Colinx]

It's arguable for sure but we'll agree to disagree. I might be wrong in my figures but I think Wii started at $100 cheaper at least than the Wii U? I obviously don't speak for the world but every gamer I know that had a Wii always had either a PS3 or Xbox 360 as well, never just a Wii. Even if the Wii U was $100 cheaper I'll agree it wouldn't have had the same effect anyway because there was/is too much going against it since launch. Price was definitely a HUGE factor though for the Wii and was arguably it's strongest selling point.

The only thing that separated the Wii from a Gamecube was the controller, just keep that in mind. Wasn't the Gamecube like $100 at a time? Still sold poorly. 

[Scumbag]

90% of third party games are garbage so the question is, does Nintendo NEED 3rd party?

[Azure-Edge]

90% of third party games are garbage so the question is, does Nintendo NEED 3rd party?

90% of everything is crap, but most people will eat it up regardless.

[Mewbot]

You know what? Its funny how big of a hypocrite you actually are. Because for a short time, Wii U's best game was Windwaker HD. It's quite clear and oblivious that when Sony was putting the PS4 out there, it was far more for a gamer than the Wii U and XBOX One. I can't believe how undeniably ignorant you are. Let's see, Sing Party U, Wii Fit U, Nintendoland, Wii Party U?? All of these development studios could have been put to far better use than just making party casual games. Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze? While Nintendo gamers wanted a Metroid Prime on Wii U so bad?

Some of the stuff you've listed is so irrelevant, Sony is a business and they will do whatever they can to shut out the competition and the reason they have is because they are the most gamer friendly ie. making sure their system actually has multiplats, exclusive content/advertisement rights. Honestly, who cares if you pay for online on the PS4 especially when it's good, unlike the Wii U's online system.

If Nintendo was mostly for the gamers, then why the hell didn't they pay to get 3rd party games on their system. Let's be clear, with Wii U.. Nintendo hasn't set any trends, its evident in the sales for the console. It's quite obvious how immature and biased you are and it became obvious when you said "If it ever gets any games worth playing."

Windwaker HD was never the Wii U's best game. Lego City, NintendoLand and New Super Mario Bros. U were all better, and launch titles at that (my opinion, if you want to go on Metacritic then Rayman was better 18 days before Wind Waker).


I agree, Sing is a bad game, same with Wii Fit, and Wii Party. NintendoLand is a good game tho. Don't diss. Let's look at PS4's bad games shall we? How about Knack? What about that Destiny game that Sony spent millions getting exclusive advertising for? How about that Killzone game that was somehow a lot worse than Ghosts (the worst CoD game so far)?
I could easily argue that the party games on the Wii U are more fun than those I just listed.
Don't even get me started on Donkey Kong Country, if you think Retro's time was wasted making that game then there's something wrong. For the record I would have rather had Retro make a Metroid game, but I'm not going to act like an entitled twelve year old complaining that they made incredible game x instead of y.
I don't even need to give an argument on 3rd parties for the Wii U. You know Nintendo tried. 3rd parties are the ones that screwed it up.

It's true, I don't think the PS4 has any games worth buying the system for, especially when it's top 7 games are available on other systems. Name me some if you want.

Finally, I don't appreciate you calling me immature, biased, ignorant or a hypocrite. Name-calling is not a proper argument.

Edited by R00bot, 30 September 2014 - 12:51 AM.

[Atticus]

The only thing that separated the Wii from a Gamecube was the controller, just keep that in mind. Wasn't the Gamecube like $100 at a time? Still sold poorly. 

 

$100? I think eventually but it started at like $199. Indeed a fairly cheaper price rangei. If there was a glaring issue(s) working against the GC at the time I just can't remember

 

But also consider the PS2 and Xbox vs. GC price difference. I'm certain it was a much shorter gap than the PS3 and Xbox 360 vs. Wii price difference. I think the PS3 started at like $599? ...I stand by my point. 

[Colinx]

Windwaker HD was never the Wii U's best game. Lego City, NintendoLand and New Super Mario Bros. U were all better, and launch titles at that (my opinion, if you want to go on Metacritic then Rayman was better 18 days before Wind Waker).


I agree, Sing is a bad game, same with Wii Fit, and Wii Party. NintendoLand is a good game tho. Don't diss. Let's look at PS4's bad games shall we? How about Knack? What about that Destiny game that Sony spent millions getting exclusive advertising for? How about that Killzone game that was somehow a lot worse than Ghosts (the worst CoD game so far)?
I could easily argue that the party games on the Wii U are more fun than those I just listed.
Don't even get me started on Donkey Kong Country, if you think Retro's time was wasted making that game then there's something wrong. For the record I would have rather had Retro make a Metroid game, but I'm not going to act like an entitled twelve year old complaining that they made incredible game x instead of y.
I don't even need to give an argument on 3rd parties for the Wii U. You know Nintendo tried. 3rd parties are the ones that screwed it up.

It's true, I don't think the PS4 has any games worth buying the system for, especially when it's top 7 games are available on other systems. Name me some if you want.

Finally, I don't appreciate you calling me immature, biased, ignorant or a hypocrite. Name-calling is not a proper argument.

If you honestly think any of those games were better than Windwaker, you're kidding yourself because I know you do not think that. You honestly think any of those games(especially Nintendo Land) are better than what some consider the best Zelda game of all time? I don't think you do.

 

Rayman was a good game, but it was not an exclusive. Too be quite frank, Rayman Legends was pretty irrelevant and was not a big game sales wise. Also, the original Windwaker has a higher Metacritic score than Rayman Legends and considering there has only been improvements to the game I fail to see how the remake could get a lower score. 

 

I'm not dissing Nintendo Land, it was an adequate party game. I'm just saying that the team that made all of those games(The Animal Crossing/Splatoon team developed Nintendo Land) could have been put to more core Nintendo games for Wii U rather than party games. As for you saying that the PS4 games are all bad is incredibly dumb for the sheer fact that you've admitted you don't own a PS4 and therefore are going off of opinions from the masses. You're subjective opinions are irrelevant to the fact that Destiny and Killzone are way gamer-focused games than any of the Nintendo party games.

 

I don't think Retro wasted their time with DK, I was using it as a precedent to say that while the Nintendo gamers/many multi-platform gamers wanted a Metroid game, Nintendo more than likely chose DK for the sole fact that it would sell better than a Metroid game. Read between the lines. 

 

I'm not going to argue with you about 3rd parties. I'll leave at this, the initial games from 3rd parties were good, it wasn't until after Wii U sales tanked that 3rd parties started gimping their Wii U versions. If Nintendo didn't release a weak system, with an atrocious name.. maybe the third party games would've sold better.  

 

I'm not naming you any games because what I'd expect to receive is some opinion by the masses/reviewers, meanwhile if I were to critique a game like ZombiU which was received poorly you would've probably told me to play the game for myself only because it is a Wii U exclusive.

 

Name-calling isn't the basis of my argument, its facts unlike yours which is 90% subjectivity.

Edited by Colinx, 30 September 2014 - 08:51 AM.

[Raiden]

 

I'm not going to argue with you about 3rd parties. I'll leave at this, the initial games from 3rd parties were good, it wasn't until after Wii U sales tanked that 3rd parties started gimping their Wii U versions. If Nintendo didn't release a weak system, with an atrocious name.. maybe the third party games would've sold better.  

Dead flat line wrong. So wrong if you had a pulse you'd be flat lining right now. Dr Cox must diagnose you with the

 

Mass Effect 3 was a lazy port. They ported it to Wii U a year nearly after release when the ME trilogy was out. They didn't try. Madden 13 was gimped on Wii U. Many 3rd parties did half assed ports then. Many left out DLC even then. The system isn't weak and when you say that you sound like any ignorant troll. Darksiders II while had the DLC was missing many textures trees and graphical effects that the 360 version I own has. Even Warriors Orochi 3 Tecmo who like Nintendo but a visual downgrade from the PS360 versions. Rayman Legends was announced as a Wii U exclusive and a launch game. Then qas quickly delayed pissing off the creator of Rayman himself and before Wii U sales are bad was a thing announced it's multiplat. The only 3rd party games that had any effort in them Nintendo either published or had a hand in marketing and some deal with them. Other than that it was lack of effort. Day 1.

 

Broken Record here we go again. Nintendo did the same thing on Wii U they did on 3DS. At launch they released few 1st party games to allow 3rd parties to have a window to sell and succeed. 3rd parties have every opportunity to take this chance and make definitive editions and good releases. The dropped the ball and on purpose.

 

So that left it up to Nintendo to pick the ball back up on 3DS was OoT 3D. Wii U was a bunch of games from Lego City to W101 to 3D world and WW but took MK8 to pick things up. Nintendo can't cure stupid. Nintendo can't cure lazy. Nintendo can't fix on the outside what 3rd parties need to fix themselves from the inside.

Edited by Ryudo, 30 September 2014 - 09:09 AM.

[KeptMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

If you honestly think any of those games were better than Windwaker, you're kidding yourself because I know you do not think that. You honestly think any of those games(especially Nintendo Land) are better than what some consider the best Zelda game of all time? I don't think you do.

 

Rayman was a good game, but it was not an exclusive. Too be quite frank, Rayman Legends was pretty irrelevant and was not a big game sales wise. Also, the original Windwaker has a higher Metacritic score than Rayman Legends and considering there has only been improvements to the game I fail to see how the remake could get a lower score. 

 

I'm not dissing Nintendo Land, it was an adequate party game. I'm just saying that the team that made all of those games(The Animal Crossing/Splatoon team developed Nintendo Land) could have been put to more core Nintendo games for Wii U rather than party games. As for you saying that the PS4 games are all bad is incredibly dumb for the sheer fact that you've admitted you don't own a PS4 and therefore are going off of opinions from the masses. You're subjective opinions are irrelevant to the fact that Destiny and Killzone are way gamer-focused games than any of the Nintendo party games.

 

I don't think Retro wasted their time with DK, I was using it as a precedent to say that while the Nintendo gamers/many multi-platform gamers wanted a Metroid game, Nintendo more than likely chose DK for the sole fact that it would sell better than a Metroid game. Read between the lines. 

 

I'm not going to argue with you about 3rd parties. I'll leave at this, the initial games from 3rd parties were good, it wasn't until after Wii U sales tanked that 3rd parties started gimping their Wii U versions. If Nintendo didn't release a weak system, with an atrocious name.. maybe the third party games would've sold better.  

 

I'm not naming you any games because what I'd expect to receive is some opinion by the masses/reviewers, meanwhile if I were to critique a game like ZombiU which was received poorly you would've probably told me to play the game for myself only because it is a Wii U exclusive.

 

Name-calling isn't the basis of my argument, its facts unlike yours which is 90% subjectivity.

I promised myself I wouldn't jump on anyone's opinions in this thread, no matter how wrong I think they are. You are making this incredibly hard for me :/

[Colinx]

Dead flat line wrong. So wrong if you had a pulse you'd be flat lining right now. Dr Cox must diagnose you with the

 

Mass Effect 3 was a lazy port. They ported it to Wii U a year nearly after release when the ME trilogy was out. They didn't try. Madden 13 was gimped on Wii U. Many 3rd parties did half assed ports then. Many left out DLC even then. The system isn't weak and when you say that you sound like any ignorant troll. Darksiders II while had the DLC was missing many textures trees and graphical effects that the 360 version I own has. Even Warriors Orochi 3 Tecmo who like Nintendo but a visual downgrade from the PS360 versions. Rayman Legends was announced as a Wii U exclusive and a launch game. Then qas quickly delayed pissing off the creator of Rayman himself and before Wii U sales are bad was a thing announced it's multiplat. The only 3rd party games that had any effort in them Nintendo either published or had a hand in marketing and some deal with them. Other than that it was lack of effort. Day 1.

 

Broken Record here we go again. Nintendo did the same thing on Wii U they did on 3DS. At launch they released few 1st party games to allow 3rd parties to have a window to sell and succeed. 3rd parties have every opportunity to take this chance and make definitive editions and good releases. The dropped the ball and on purpose.

 

So that left it up to Nintendo to pick the ball back up on 3DS was OoT 3D. Wii U was a bunch of games from Lego City to W101 to 3D world and WW but took MK8 to pick things up. Nintendo can't cure stupid. Nintendo can't cure lazy. Nintendo can't fix on the outside what 3rd parties need to fix themselves from the inside.

I said good, not great. There were some ports that weren't as good but there were some that were a good like AC3, BO2, Batman game, Tekken.

 

When I reference the Wii U being weak, I'm clearly referring to it in the placement of it's power behind its eight-gen counterparts. 

 

I don't need your broken record, I'm well informed of the gaming industry just as you are. I feel as putting all of the blame on the third parties a weak argument. The developers that did put effort into making good ports still did not see good sales for their games so lets not pretend like the only reason third party games don't sell is because they're gimped? Maybe they would sell more if they were on a console that wasn't named after an extension of a fad from last generation that died out after 2010.

 

Nintendo was the only one who was gonna pick up the ball because nobody else is going to do it where their games wont sell. It just comes down to Nintendo gamers not liking other games, it's only the die hard Nintendo fans who will pick up third party games on Wii U either to support the third party or genuinely play the games.

I promised myself I wouldn't jump on anyone's opinions in this thread, no matter how wrong I think they are. You are making this incredibly hard for me :/

If you've got something to say, then just post it. I like debating, as I'm sure you can tell.