JaylisJayP

This is why i'm glad Iwata is becoming CEO of NOA, by the end of the Wii U's lifespan Nintendo should have a good insight of the west and it's gaming trends and build the Wii U's successor to accommodate these trends.

 

Is it really that difficult to pinpoint the trends that sell in the West?  Large libraries of good, easily accesible games.  Competetive graphics.  Value for the money. 

 

For better or worse that's all gamers care about.  I own and (kinda) enjoy my Wii U still, but they basically screwed the pooch on all 3 of those requirements with it.  And like the article says, at this point I completely agree that a couple blockbuster titles aren't going to move units.  Especially with PS4 and 720 about to take everyone's money for the forseeable future. 

I wonder if this guy thinks EA is "butthurt"

I continue to be glad I'm getting this title Day 1.

1. Altered Beast

2. Golden Axe but good

3-5,000: ETERNAL CHAMPIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Interesting that they're showing the white unit instead of the black one.

If there are a dozen games I really want to play that I haven't yet bought after 1 year, that's all I can ask for.

I will preface my comment by saying I am getting the Deluxe Day 1, so I'm certainly not down on Nintendo.

That said, I really don't believe the power debate has to do with disrespect (who is Nintendo...CM Punk?).  I think it's just a matter of people wanting to know if their investment is going to be worth it.  While so many people point to gameplay over graphics, graphics ultimately do play a huge part in the VIDEO game industry.  People have a very sour taste in their mouth from the last 2 years or so of the Wii's lifecycle, and I admit the graphics gap ultimately got to me, as well, and I rarely play it.  (On a side note, I'll be keeping it since I can't see trading it in for like $50 especially since I'd have to buy another WiiMote plus again for the WiiU, which would essentially negate anything I'd get on the Wii).

I also would imagine and agree the graphics gap won't be as severe as last gen, but you'd have to speculate Nintendo will, in fact, be bringing up the rear.  All companies change over time, especially in a heated world of tablet/smartphone competition, and if Nintendo really had amazing tech to boast, I have to believe they would've done so at least a little bit.

Sorry, I have to...

Eurogamer is the grumpy old man of the gaming world...and they're arrogant.  I rarely read anything they put out.

Damn, it's taken over the whole store, lol.

You are 100% on those 3 points. Those 3 great things will probably outshine any of the flaws in the game. I guess the main thing I've been worried about it if the game is too short. I don't wanna pay $60 for a game that might only take 8 hours to beat. Then again the length of a game has always been a factor for me since I grew up playing such huge and lengthy games like Ocarina of Time and Mario 64

I have it pre-ordered and mostly paid off but I'm with you on the length...if it's not at least 10 hours I'll put my money toward Rayman Legends instead.  It's not that I don't think it'll be fun, but if there's no replay value and it's short, I'll wait until it's $30 or so.  NSMBU and Nintendo Land will keep me busy, and there's Lego City, Wonderful 101, Monster Hunter and Bayonetta right on the horizon.

Nintendo created the Wii U Pro Controller for those FPS COD baboons. They said we arent playing COD on your system with that Tablet controller. So Nintendo gave them the cough "Pro" cough controller. But those individuals still wont play the Wii U cause they just hate Nintendo.Simply put Nintendo listened to the whiners.

There's a lot more than the "COD baboons" (one of which I am not) who would much prefer the comfortable feel of a regular controller than holding a tablet with buttons for hours.  Nintendo must have had some concern about this themselves to even think about the idea not to mention actually go through and produce them.

I have very little interest in having to look in two different places to access a map or fast travel or whatever other gimmick 90% of the games are going to throw on this thing (please save this quote and we'll see if I'm right in a year).  The idea of a scope is kinda cool, but then I won't be holding the gamepad in that instance.

I consider myself a standard "hardcore" gamer.  I love all genres and all difficulties.  I own all 3 current gen systems and can appreciate motion controls when they're fun.  And I can at least speak for myself (which is all anyone who posts in these threads is doing anyway) when I say if I do buy a Wii U it'll probably be mostly because I can play the Nintendo first-party games with a Pro Controller.

I'd love to see the attach rate for the Pro Controller if it's not bundled in with the system, too.  I imagine it'll be fairly high, just a guess.

Man, Nintendo fanboys hate being stereotyped by other gamers out there but evidently don't have much trouble doing the same thing to others.  Why does every gamer "have" to like the idea of a tablet?  Maybe there's a large group of gamers out there who do enjoy playing COD, yet are still interested in the Wii U for games like Mario, Zelda, Metroid...but they'd rather just play them old-school and not have to deal with gripping a gamepad for hours on end.  It's just their preference.

I still want to be excited, but it's hard.  My question would be WHY didn't Nintendo even try to "wow" us?  They knew darn well what the hype was, fair or not, and it really appeared they didn't even attempt to appeal to hardcore gamers or those DYING for something to cling to when looking forward to the console's release.

I said it on another thread, but since I have a ton of gamestop credit I'll still probably pre-order it just in case Nintendo does turn it around and show off something impressive and "must have" before the launch, but if I was 90% buying it on launch day yesterday, that's dropped to 30% today...a generous 30%.  I'm not into Pikman so basically all I really saw that I wanted was New Super Mario Bros. U, but I cant see myself buying a console for that.  I have a 360 and PS3 already so it'll be hard to justify buying multi-platform games for the Wii U, especially ones that have been out for almost a year by that time and likely will be a fraction of the price of what the Wii U ones will cost.

My love for Nintendo wants me to buy it on launch day, but logic and the Wii's track record on a lot of things are strongly pulling me away.  E3 could've at least taken ONE more step toward giving people a reason to buy at launch, but I'd imagine for the vast majority of gamers it just pushed them further away.

I don't get what Nintendo did or what they were thinking.  Will or do investors still see this as a sure thing?  Given what the Wii has done in the last couple years, how underpowered it will be against the next-gen consoles, etc...?  Who were they trying to appeal to?  Or did they just not care about living up to any standard at E3 for whatever reason?  If that's the case, that shows some interesting audacity on Nintendo's part.  I would not automatically count on this thing flying off the shelves just because it's going to say Wii on it, especially if the $350 price rumors are true.