General Nintendo sales/business discussion topic (previously: The Wii U Thread)

[Salamander]

Is it partly that achievements have been devalued because so many of them are given for completing standard parts of the game, as they're actually being used by the developers to measure how far people progressed in the game before giving up?

[Dejimon11]

The only wii u game that im aware of that has the equivalent of a achievements is sonic lost world. Me personally I don't see tge appeal of the achievements and trophies they just come off as " show your friends you have no life by 100% video games"

[Chronozoah]

The only wii u game that im aware of that has the equivalent of a achievements is sonic lost world. Me personally I don't see tge appeal of the achievements and trophies they just come off as " show your friends you have no life by 100% video games"

I doubt anyone would expect you to see the appeal of them with such a narrow-minded view on the concept.

[MegasonicZX]

What is the appeal then? I mean sure there are bragging rights but besides that what is the point of having them at all when they don't give you anything besides something to look at and say "hey I did that", now if they gave you something like how some games give you costumes for your avatar or a special theme then I can understand but a vast majority of them really don't get you anything and unless its a game that I can really dig into (without said trophy requirements being too annoying or just flat out long) then there really is no point in trying to do them.

 

Personally I don't mind in game achievements that much since on some occasions you actually do get rewarded for completing them.

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

Ya, instead of those boring Nintendo still has this great old thing calle "Unlockables" that actualy add to the experience

[Chronozoah]

Some people seek them because they are completionists, some for bragging rights / validation, others simply to extend the life of any given game. Then, of course, there are some achievements like you mentioned which give some form of reward incentive (such as challenges on Xbox One). Ultimately, the reasons are variable and you'd have to ask the people who actually hunt them actively what their reasons are, I was simply bringing a more open-minded approach to the subject.

 

My God, unlockables? Are you serious?!

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

Actualy, truth be told I do prefer crazy over the top unlockable modes and bonuses that give you something fun and wacky to do over empty acheivements anytime, why do you think I love the N64 Rare games

[Kaabiitorori]

I always believed Achievements can add a certain degree of challenge and longevity to the games as long as these are engaging and rewarding to the player. While Xbox Live and PS Network have their own systems (as well as being accountable for each game), I don't mind Nintendo's approach of implementing an unique list on certain games as well as unlockables. Also, there's actually a tag on Miiverse called Achievement, which I use only when I complete the main game and any extras such as collectables: just post whatever I have completed in the game right on Miiverse et voilà.

 

Either way, I still try to complete my games as much as possible regardless of the presence of any Achievements list.

[buba]

For starters, producers often use trophies/achievements to see how far people get in games and stuff like that.

They are also a way to encourage players to do shit they usually wouldn't or even expand the game time by doing stuff after the main campaign where most of the people abandon the game.

 

 

Ya, instead of those boring Nintendo still has this great old thing calle "Unlockables" that actualy add to the experience

 

That's bullshit and you know it.

If a producer wants to put unlockable shit in the game it will, trophies/achievements don't have anything to do with it. Most of the times you get a trophie/achievement for unlocking the said stuff.

That's like saying that a game doesn't have cutscenes thanks to the trophies/achievements.

[Chronozoah]

Actualy, truth be told I do prefer crazy over the top unlockable modes and bonuses that give you something fun and wacky to do over empty acheivements anytime, why do you think I love the N64 Rare games

Please fix your sarcasm detector, and then elaborate.

 

Game-by-game unlockables and global achievement systems are not the same thing. Don't even pretend that they are and then somehow conclude that Nintendo titles have some inherent superiority in terms of fun factor for only supporting one of these concepts consistently.

[Autosaver]

"You beat the tutorial!"

 

HELL YEAH I DID

[Chronozoah]

Even better.

 

"You loaded the game for the first time!"

 

Fuck yeah!

[MegasonicZX]

Fair point on the achievements and I do have to admit that for the games that I do care to do them in they are something to keep me occupied if I have nothing else to do so theres that.

[Wraith]

Ya, instead of those boring Nintendo still has this great old thing calle "Unlockables" that actualy add to the experience

 

You act like it's a one or the other situation when in reality achievements don't even get considered until the actual game is complete. If the developers want an unlockable in a game, they add it. In the end, it's just another feature a Nintendo console is missing. If it doesn't bother you, then fine, but don't try to imply they're somehow superior for it.

 

 

Hell, unlockables aren't even a very big thing in Nintendo's own games anymore.

[Autosaver]

Mando is probably just confusing the unlockables vs on disc DLC argument. The former that Nintendo goes with.

[azoo]

http://www.gamnesia.com/articles/top-10-predictions-for-wii-u-in-2014
 
So I was reading this and I had to bring it up because I thought #10 was one that'd really help make a difference, and is also one I brought up before.
 

 

10. A New Wii U SKU Appears Without a GamePad

Personally, the idea of using a Wii U without its main defining feature seems ludicrous, but assuming sales continue to flounder there is a chance they may try to release a budget version of the console to spur sales – one that comes without the GamePad. This would allow for a cool $200 price tag, which would likely make the system a bit more competitive.

Of course, doing this means a few other changes would occur as well. GamePads would no longer be required for the eShop and would not automatically turn on when you boot up a console. In addition, this would mean GamePads would finally be released at retail.

 
I still don't see this as a bad idea at all. Cheaper, easier to maneuver, and without a gimmick.. I mean why not? Out of the 30 or so games that have been released for the U so far, only 3 or 4 require the game pad anyways. It should be there simply as an ease-of-access controller.

 

I mean you oughta know a $200-250 'Wii U Lite' bundled with Smash Bros U would sell like hotcakes. That's like, maximum profit waiting to happen.

 

Oh yeah, also this one.

 

 

07. We Finally See GameCube Games on the eShop
 

Nintendo has stuck to their guns when releasing the new eShop on Wii U, retconning all of the advancement on the Wii to start trickling out many of the same games all over again. This would be forgivable if new games came out for a platform that wasn’t previously available on the eShop, and that platform is the GCN.

 

While I don’t feel every game will find its way to the eShop (Nintendo will assuredly want to do more HD remastering), this will really make the perfect year to release $10 or so GameCube games to help fill in content voids.

 

Although personally I'd believe GC games would sell around $15/$20/$30 instead.

[Kaabiitorori]

http://www.gamnesia.com/articles/top-10-predictions-for-wii-u-in-2014

 

So I was reading this and I had to bring it up because I thought #10 was one that'd really help make a difference, and is also one I brought up before.

 

 

I still don't see this as a bad idea at all. Cheaper, easier to maneuver, and without a gimmick.. I mean why not? Out of the 30 or so games that have been released for the U so far, only 3 or 4 require the game pad anyways. It should be there simply as an ease-of-access controller.

 

I mean you oughta know a $200-250 'Wii U Lite' bundled with Smash Bros U would sell like hotcakes. That's like, maximum profit waiting to happen.

 

IMHO, #10 is something extremely unlikely to happen. The Gamepad is the unique feature of the Wii U: removing it will not only cause to lose the differentiation factor against its competitors, but it also may compromise those games that make full utilisation of the asymmetric gameplay elements. I cannot see some current games like Nintendo Land, Zombi U or The Wonderful 101 playable without the Gamepad, let alone whatever Nintendo may have in the works that will feature partial to full asymmetric gameplay elements.

 

Don't get me wrong, I see what you mean by removing the Gamepad in order to make a more affordable SKU to the general consumer. Just something I see very difficult for Nintendo to pull at this point: it would mean changing completely one of the core values of the console. It would be better if they stick to their guns while develop more games that feature asymmetric gameplay elements so the Gamepad keeps making sense as part of the console.

[azoo]

The Gamepad may be a unique feature of the Wii U, but it should be able to advertise itself nicely without one. Its not like you just stop selling the ones with Gamepads as much as it is just making two models: one with the Gamepad, and the other with a pro controller as the "lite" cheaper alternative. 

 

Also, you can play Zombi U and Wonderful 101 without the Gamepad, they both have full Pro Controller support apparently. 

 

What I'm saying is that the Wii U's Gamepad has its benefits that obviously give the highest quality experience, such as apps, drawing on Miiverse or the art tool, webcam, and the like. But for the people who don't want that and just want to jump into the games, they can get the cheaper bundle. And if they change their mind and want to reap all of the benefits behind the U, then they can buy a retail Gamepad.

[Solkia]

The gamepad is literally the only selling point of the Wii U at the moment. If they exclude it it's basically a shittier version of an Xbox 360.

 

What they really need to do is reduce the cost of it. An SD screen on the tablet would be a good start.

[Indigo Rush]

The gamepad is literally the only selling point of the Wii U at the moment. If they exclude it it's basically a shittier version of an Xbox 360.

 

What they really need to do is reduce the cost of it. An SD screen on the tablet would be a good start.

 

1) I agree with your first point wholeheartedly.

 

2) The tablet doesn't use an HD screen to begin with, so that won't work.

 

Not sure why we need to keep considering price cuts, anyway. $300 is a fair enough price, I would think (with a bundled game, no less). Most of Ninty's problems are due to piss-poor marketing and a rather unfocused demographic. Refine the mindset, market the Wii U as an actual next gen console and parade it as if it's the hottest stuff since the SNES and showcase their best looking games alongside it. 

 

Also, putting out some more hardcore Nintendo IPs such as Metroid and showcasing the upcoming new Zelda game (the one that isn't Dynasty Warriors) would help.

[azoo]

Well of course that's the main thing they should do, it was just an idea though.

[Solkia]

I didn't say they need to drop the price again. I said they need to cut the production costs.

[Blacklightning]

Also, you can play Zombi U and Wonderful 101 without the Gamepad, they both have full Pro Controller support apparently. 

No you can't. In ZombiU one player uses a Pro Controller in multiplayer, but even then he still needs another player with a Gamepad to spawn zombies for him.

 

W101 I'm less sure about because I haven't gotten around to playing it yet, but it sounds to me as though you still need the Gamepad for seeing inside buildings or something?

[Kaabiitorori]

The thing is, to make the non-Gamepad SKU possible as Azookara suggested, current and future games that utilise the Gamepad to a bigger or lesser extent need to be reworked around to make them Gamepadless, which in itself can alter the experience of some of these games. It's like if we picked the DS or 3DS and we made a SKU with no dual screen, without the touch screen in fact: I cannot see many games that make use of the dual screen (to a bigger or lesser extent) possible without its second screen. Then there's the potential risk of alienating the user base, as they may feel the investment done on the Gamepad pointless.

 

In pretty much every game released on the Wii U the Gamepad is required to play the game. Yes, there are multiple controller inputs of choice, but the Gamepad must be operative regardless of whether you use a Pro Controller or a Wii Remote to complement the experience. The only slight exception I can think of is Super Mario 3D World: the game can be played without the Gamepad since most of the levels don't use any of its capabilities, but others like Captain Toad's levels need the Gamepad in order to get access to them. You have to play these levels if you want to 100% complete the game, so this can be an issue for those who opted for the hypothetical non-Gamepad SKU.

 

Still, I see what Azookara posted is indeed a suggestion, but I highly doubt it's something as easy to pull as we may think of, that's all. On the other hand, as Indigo Rush mentioned, Nintendo's problem with the Wii U is the lack of marketing and demographic focus, and therefore they must address these pronto. The concept behind the Wii U is great as it is and therefore I don't feel it should be changed at all at this point.

[Autosaver]

We get rid of the Gamepad, make almost 90% of our library unplayable, and still don't solve any of the problems of the Wii U! Sounds brilliant!