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

[Sami]

Killing the Gamepad will make the system roughly $70 cheaper to produce and could warrant another price cut. They could introduce a single SKU simply to clear their thousands of units stuck in warehouses. 

 

It'd suck that it'd make some games incompatible, but what else can they do, really? They've already more or less hit rock bottom, so making it a "kind of shittier 360" could at least move a few more units at a cheaper price, and even if the boost isn't substantial it'd still bandage the loss they're currently taking on each unit they do manage to sell.

[Conando]

It would make their flagship title incompatible. Did you even read it? The 3D World won't play Captain Toad levels without the GamePad.

[Sami]

Then patch it? Again, I ask, what else is there for them to do? Keep bleeding money on every console they manage to sell as the console fades further and further into obscurity?

[azoo]

I guess I was wrong about Zombi U and sorta about W101 (since it seems at least 90% playable except requiring seeing inside buildings). Sorry.

 

Although SM3DW doesn't require the gamepad's screen a single time. The Captain Toad missions are doable with the right stick as well; meaning the entire game is playable with the gamepad. But even then, I haven't tried the pro controller on this yet, so if that disclaimer still comes up, then there's nothing you can't do a quick patch on. I mean come on. :v

 

My point for this is pretty much that it's similar to having games on Wii featuring the Wii Motion Plus attachment. For some games it is required of you, but for others (most of them, it seems) the gamepad isn't mandatory. And if it is, then it's probably because they didn't feel like coding pro controller support in, since most games not featuring support for it (see: Sonic Lost World) don't really have a reason not to.

 

And even though I don't usually agree with Discoid on most of the Wii U stuff, I can sort of agree with this. You still keep main focus on and sell the console featuring the gamepad since that is the console's main gimmick. But you also can sell an even cheaper, "lite" version on the side that comes with just a pro controller. Sure, you could call it a "shitty Xbox 360", but taking away the screen seems to calm the minds of both gamers and developers as dumb as that is.

 

But whatever. I never even implied that the real answer to fixing everything was doing that anyways. The article I linked actually made the points I've been supporting this whole time: making a good library of games and marketing it well, but I decided to make some other points that I haven't already made too terribly much. XD

[Indigo Rush]

I literally cannot fathom why people think removing the gamepad is a sensible idea. You may as well sell the Wii without a remote and sensor bar, and tell all of the third party companies to make their games use a Gamecube controller instead. You're missing the point.

 

If Nintendo gives up on the Gamepad, they've essentially given up on what the Wii U is. The Wii U was never about making things HD with more powerful hardware, it was about the gameplay, and they promised not only consumers, but their developers and any other third parties that they would have the ability to create new and unique game experiences with it. Now we're just gonna pull the rug under everything the Wii U is about.

 

It's not about turning the Wii U into a different product. It's about marketing it better. It's about utilizing the gamepad in vital ways and selling the "experience." If Nintendo just wanted a Xbox One/PS4 - Nintendo edition, they would have done that. But clearly, their investment was on proving that the gameplay will always trump specs and pizzazz. Not that they aren't important, but that the gameplay is always at the forefront of the experience. 

 

And you know what? After a few weeks of using the gamepad, I find it to be my favorite game controller, right above the Xbox 360's. It's surprisingly light and ergonomic, the touch screen, microphone, camera, gyroscope and upper dual analogs all work together in a beautiful way. I had my misgivings about it, but after giving it enough of a chance, I have to say that I can't imagine gaming without another screen. It's far too convenient, far too great of an idea to just shove aside because "lol we're low on cash."

 

Yes, I know that the money is a serious issue, but am I seriously the only one who thinks that ripping out the biggest selling point of the console is a stupid and downright suicidal idea? We're trying to sell the Wii U, not make it less functional out of the box.

 

If every console they sell with the gamepad makes them lose money, selling the console without the titular controller will make them not only lose money, but get even less in return.

 

It'll only make things worse.

[azoo]

And I cannot fathom why everyone's assuming that I'm saying that it gets removed forever and that the entire console is changed because of it. That's not what I want at all!

 

I'm talking about the exact same console, but a different alternate SKU. Keep the gamepad and it's benefits, but if there's a player who doesn't want to use it make a lower-cost version without it. Hence the "lite".

 

I don't want to get rid of the gamepad, in fact I absolutely adore everything about it and I shouldn't have to preach that again. Because it really is the bomb diggity. I'm suggesting an option for the crowd that doesn't want to have to put up with it. An option. Not something that deteriorates the console and everything it stands for, that's just dumb.

 

It's like making an Xbox One, but a "lite" simpler package that doesn't contain the Kinect if you really don't wanna put up with it and just get to the games themselves.

[Autosaver]

If developers can barely make DLC for Wii U, I highly doubt any of them are going to rewrite portions of their game to support new versions of the Wii U. Nintendo already has enough trouble securing 3rd party devs. I'd hate for Nintendo to go "WELP. OUR SYSTEM DOESN"T COME WITH IT ANYMORE SO YOU BETTER FIX IT LEL" and piss them off.

 

The price is probably the smallest flaw in the system. Putting the system at $200 would just apply a short term band-aid and not solve any long term problems.

 

Why not fix the actual big problems?

 

Marketing.

Games.

Innovative uses of GamePad.

[azoo]

If developers can barely make DLC for Wii U, I highly doubt any of them are going to rewrite portions of their game to support new versions of the Wii U. Nintendo already has enough trouble securing 3rd party devs. I'd hate for Nintendo to go "WELP. OUR SYSTEM DOESN"T COME WITH IT ANYMORE SO YOU BETTER FIX IT LEL" and piss them off.

 

DLC is building all new content; models of environments, characters, potential music, gameplay mechanics, whatnot.

 

Patches are little fixes, little lines of code rewritten to fix some minor issues or inconveniences. If Sega out of all companies could do it for Sonic Lost World then Nintendo could certainly find the time and effort with their massive company sections.

 

 

 

 

The price is probably the smallest flaw in the system. Putting the system at $200 would just apply a short term band-aid and not solve any long term problems.

 

Why not fix the actual big problems?

 

Marketing.

Games.

Innovative uses of GamePad.

 

 

But whatever. I never even implied that the real answer to fixing everything was doing that anyways. The article I linked actually made the points I've been supporting this whole time: making a good library of games and marketing it well, but I decided to make some other points that I haven't already made too terribly much. XD

 

 

It's okay though since I know it must've not been easy to see through all the wall-o-texts I write LOL

[RK64]

I literally cannot fathom why people think removing the gamepad is a sensible idea. You may as well sell the Wii without a remote and sensor bar, and tell all of the third party companies to make their games use a Gamecube controller instead. You're missing the point.

 

If Nintendo gives up on the Gamepad, they've essentially given up on what the Wii U is. The Wii U was never about making things HD with more powerful hardware, it was about the gameplay, and they promised not only consumers, but their developers and any other third parties that they would have the ability to create new and unique game experiences with it. Now we're just gonna pull the rug under everything the Wii U is about.

 

It's not about turning the Wii U into a different product. It's about marketing it better. It's about utilizing the gamepad in vital ways and selling the "experience." If Nintendo just wanted a Xbox One/PS4 - Nintendo edition, they would have done that. But clearly, their investment was on proving that the gameplay will always trump specs and pizzazz. Not that they aren't important, but that the gameplay is always at the forefront of the experience. 

 

And you know what? After a few weeks of using the gamepad, I find it to be my favorite game controller, right above the Xbox 360's. It's surprisingly light and ergonomic, the touch screen, microphone and upper dual analogs all work together in a beautiful way. I had my misgivings about it, but after giving it enough of a chance, I have to say that I can't imagine gaming without another screen. It's far too convenient, far too great of an idea to just shove aside because "lol we're low on cash."

 

Yes, I know that the money is a serious issue, but am I seriously the only one who thinks that ripping out the biggest selling point of the console is a stupid and downright suicidal idea? We're trying to sell the Wii U, not make it less functional out of the box.

 

I think the larger issue is less that the gamepad isn't a great idea but that it really isn't used the way other Nintendo controllers were uses. The Wiimote and Motion Plus had some great games that took advantage of the controller (Wii Sports Series, Red Steel 2, Mario Galaxy, Zelda Skyward Sword, RE Cronicles Series, Zack and Wiki, ect). Same thing with the DS with many games using the touch screen in unique ways (Trama Center, Kirby's Canvas Curse, Star Fox Command) or using the second screen in a cool way (Sonic Rush). The Gamepads issue is that many games on Wii U don't use in a unique way. Sure off TV play is a very cool feature and having the innovatory screen/map on your controller is great for many games but the Wii U doesn't have its Wii Sports or Kirby's Canvas Curse that really sells the Gamepad to the causal and gamer audience.

 

Sure, there are a few games that use the Gamepad like Nintendo Land, Zombie U, Rayman Legends and Lego City, but there isn't a game from Nintendo themselves that really sell the thing. Yes Nintendo funded Lego City and made Nintendo Land, but the former isn't a large Nintendo brand and the latter doesn't have the appeal Wii Sports had, and they didn't even made Rayman or Zombie U, Ubisoft did (and they took Rayman to other systems). We need to see some huge game that uses the gamepad in a traditional game like Skyward Sword/Canvas Curse did and there are a number of games that could do that (a sequel to Canvas Curse that uses the GamePad's gyro features and buttons alongside the touch screen, a Zelda game that uses the screen for really cool features like marking your map or using the gyro to aim items, a Metriod Prime game where you scan thing with the touch screen ala Lego City, ect).

 

I don't know, but they have a device with a ton of potential but they really haven't used it yet .

 

 

If developers can barely make DLC for Wii U, I highly doubt any of them are going to rewrite portions of their game to support new versions of the Wii U. Nintendo already has enough trouble securing 3rd party devs. I'd hate for Nintendo to go "WELP. OUR SYSTEM DOESN"T COME WITH IT ANYMORE SO YOU BETTER FIX IT LEL" and piss them off.

 

The price is probably the smallest flaw in the system. Putting the system at $200 would just apply a short term band-aid and not solve any long term problems.

 

Why not fix the actual big problems?

 

Marketing.

Games.

Innovative uses of GamePad.

 

I think that would be great....but pricing really is an issue; for the price of the Wii U you could get a PS3 or 360 with a large library of game or put an extra hundred to pick up a PS4 with garentied 3rd party support alongside solid first party games. Nintendo needs to lower the Wii U to the Wii's original price point (249.99) along with a game that really shows what the gamepad could do. The games issue really can't solve it's self with such little 3rd party support but the marketing is really easy to do.

 

They could rename the system into a simpler name (Nintendo or Super Wii), have Nintendo Land AND Mario 3d World be pack in games with every system (to see how the GamePad could work with casual and traditional games), and have this launch alongside Mario Kart 8 and Smash U. From that point, maybe they could fund some of the larger 3rd party ports (getting a version of GTA V, Destiny and Kingdom Hearts 3 could be a start ) and bring in outside teams to make some Nintendo licensed games (the Skyrum team making Zelda, Relic making Pikmen, Platuem making Star Fox, Level 5 making Earthbound, Insomniac or Treasure making Kid Icarus, ect) could be some good moves for them to make .

[Indigo Rush]

DLC is building all new content; models of environments, characters, potential music, gameplay mechanics, whatnot.

 

Patches are little fixes, little lines of code rewritten to fix some minor issues or inconveniences. If Sega out of all companies could do it for Sonic Lost World then Nintendo could certainly find the time and effort with their massive company sections.

 

 

 

 

 

It's okay though since I know it must've not been easy to see through all the wall-o-texts I write LOL

 

Hey, Azoo

 

buddy

 

I was kind of directing that towards Discoid. 

 

Not you

 

 

For the record, I'm in at least half agreement with you, but I still think the Wii U "Lite" is not a good idea. 

[Sami]

It'll only make things worse.

 

Eh. I'm pretty much just parroting what I've been saying for ages. Sorry. If you wanna read the post's down there, but I don't want to bother anyone so whatever.

 

How is that even possible?

 

They lose money on every unit they sell

They have literally hundreds of thousands of units sitting in storage, unable to be sold

Nobody is not enough people are interested in buying a Wii U (edit - this was a bit harsher than I intended)

Nobody is interested in making games for the Wii U

They can't cut the price without taking an even bigger loss on the system

 

They've hit rock bottom. The only way to go up is to swallow their fucking bountiful pride and do some damage control. 

 

What boggles my mind is that people are still insisting that games and marketing are going to somehow "save" the Wii U. The game just got a new mainline Mario game, and that did absolutely nothing. Mario. Their number one, flagship, most profitable franchise in company history has done nothing to turn the system's fortunes. The time when we can just say "oh they'll surely turn around when games come out" is over, because games have come out. Hell, it's very fairly arguable that the Wii U has a lineup exponentially better than that of the PS4 and Xbox One (even I would agree to this), and that still did nothing. 

 

It's time to bandage up and do damage control. Cutting out the gamepad will prevent even more millions of dollars worth of losses and boost sales for a little while. That's all they can do.

[azoo]

Hey, Azoo

 

buddy

 

I was kind of directing that towards Discoid. 

 

Not you

 

 

For the record, I'm in at least half agreement with you, but I still think the Wii U "Lite" is not a good idea.

Alright. It was just hard to understand whenever everyone is trying to make a big deal out of the Wii U without the gamepad while that was part of the main point I was making. 8V

Its not like I'd ever want a Wii U without the gamepad (heck no mang), but I'm one of those people who really wouldn't want to have a Kinect with their Xbox One if they got one, so I can understand the appeal of a simplified bundle for other gamers, even if it'd nerf some of the games' functionality.

I guess the real reason I liked the idea so much was that it'd require a retool of the OS/menu/dashboard system.. which regardless of a "lite" bundle it should be done anyways. The fact that its basically impossible to traverse the menus with just the pro controller is a shame, let alone the fact that the 3DS-esque "block" menu style is really ugly on a home console.

[Candescence]

There is actually a level in Mario 3D World that DOES require the gamepad. Yeah, remember that level with the bits of terrain that poke out when touched with the touch screen? That would be completely unplayable without it. And I'm sure that's probably not the only one.

 

 

Edit: And I personally consider the Wii U's interface to be leagues better than the XBone's (Metro interface, UGH) and the shitty XMB interface Sony's been using for ages, dunno if they changed it with the PS4, but...

[RK64]

How is that even possible?

 

They lose money on every unit they sell

They have literally hundreds of thousands of units sitting in storage, unable to be sold

Nobody is interested in buying a Wii U

Nobody is interested in making games for the Wii U

They can't cut the price without taking an even bigger loss on the system

 

They've hit rock bottom. The only way to go up is to swallow their fucking bountiful pride and do some damage control. 

 

What boggles my mind is that people are still insisting that games and marketing are going to somehow "save" the Wii U. The game just got a new mainline Mario game, and that did absolutely nothing. Mario. Their number one, flagship, most profitable franchise in company history has done nothing to turn the system's fortunes. The time when we can just say "oh they'll surely turn around when games come out" is over, because games have come out. Hell, it's very fairly arguable that the Wii U has a lineup exponentially better than that of the PS4 and Xbox One (even I would agree to this), and that still did nothing. 

 

It's time to bandage up and do damage control. Cutting out the gamepad will prevent even more millions of dollars worth of losses and boost sales for a little while. That's all they can do.

 

I have to say I agree with you; if they really wanted to push the gamepad in a big way, they would of had a game out that used the dam thing at this point (Kirby Canvas Curse came out within the first six months of the DS launch, the Wii continued to get games that used the controller for years). The gamepad is cool, but if they don't care for the device....then gut the darn thing to make the Wii U cheaper and to lose less money.

 

Besides, all of their upcoming line up looks to barely use the device at all; DKC Tropical Freeze supports everything but plays best with button controls, Smash U doesn't need the gamepad at all (just look at Brawl; the best way to play that was to use a controller from a generation ago), X must use the gamepad in a way similar to how the Wii U port of Darksiders used it, Bayonetta must control best with the Pro Controller....and the list goes on.

 

I would love to see a game like Kirby's Canvas Curse that pushes the Wii U's GamePad into "I get it, this is really adds something" grove, but I don't see that happening .

 

 

There is actually a level in Mario 3D World that DOES require the gamepad. Yeah, remember that level with the bits of terrain that poke out when touched with the touch screen? That would be completely unplayable without it. And I'm sure that's probably not the only one.

 

 

Edit: And I personally consider the Wii U's interface to be leagues better than the XBone's (Metro interface, UGH) and the shitty XMB interface Sony's been using for ages, dunno if they changed it with the PS4, but...

 

Well, at least some Wii U game uses the gamepad well . But still, its the Wii U's flagship Mario game so of course its going to have small but interesting uses of the systems hardware (like how Mario Sunshine used the GameCubes pressure triggers or how Galaxy used the Wiimote in many cool ways).

[Solkia]

Killing the Gamepad will make the system roughly $70 cheaper to produce and could warrant another price cut. They could introduce a single SKU simply to clear their thousands of units stuck in warehouses. 

 

It'd suck that it'd make some games incompatible, but what else can they do, really? They've already more or less hit rock bottom, so making it a "kind of shittier 360" could at least move a few more units at a cheaper price, and even if the boost isn't substantial it'd still bandage the loss they're currently taking on each unit they do manage to sell.

 

Well, not making some of the few games it already has incompatible is a start.

 

Reminding people that some of these games exist is another.

 

And finally assuring that most of the games they announced still exist.

 

What info do we even have on SMT x FE or Bayonetta 2, or Yarn Yoshi beyond "they exist"? SMT x FE alone would be a big help

[RK64]

Well, not making some of the few games it already has incompatible is a start.

 

Reminding people that some of these games exist is another.

 

And finally assuring that most of the games they announced still exist.

 

What info do we even have on SMT x FE or Bayonetta 2, or Yarn Yoshi beyond "they exist"? SMT x FE alone would be a big help

 

Common, those games still exist...they were just announced too early in Nintendo's "Panic" mode. I'm sure this year we will get Bayonetta and SMT x FE. Yarn Yoshi may be moved to the Wii U's successor (if they are smart considering the Wii U is on all accounts a failure sales wise), but they still exist.

 

Besides, can Nintendo just make the patches themselves for the third party games? They own the platform and there really isn't that many games on Wii U (maybe...around under 100?), so if they patch all of those and tell their internal teams/remaining third party supporters they are dropping the gamepad and mandating the Pro Controller, then the transition into this new Wii U could work. Just look at Sony's transition into a better PSN and Trophy's, it took them a few months to patch a handful of games (with the latest one being MGS IV) with trophy's and quickly made PSN a much better service (just look at PS+ for example...though that took a while for it to be as great as it is now).

[Zaysho]

There is actually a level in Mario 3D World that DOES require the gamepad. Yeah, remember that level with the bits of terrain that poke out when touched with the touch screen? That would be completely unplayable without it. And I'm sure that's probably not the only one.

 

 

Edit: And I personally consider the Wii U's interface to be leagues better than the XBone's (Metro interface, UGH) and the shitty XMB interface Sony's been using for ages, dunno if they changed it with the PS4, but...

 

With regards to 3D World, there are a couple levels that NEED the Gamepad to progress. There's one in one of the early worlds that requires the microphone and the touchscreen to move about. You can't get any further in the game without completing that level. And there's another level that takes place in a Chinese-style tower that requires the gamepad to open doors and so on. There MIGHT be one more, but these levels in particular need to be completed to progress on the world map. Admittedly, 3D World doesn't make very much use of the Gamepad, so it's kind of frustrating that they made arbitrary levels that require it at all.

 

While I get the argument of a cheaper SKU and making the Gamepad more optional than it already is (I've been using it for the majority of my Wii U games, and I've grown to enjoy using it--especially on Wind Waker HD--and when I want to play Wii games late at night without disturbing the rest of the house), I'm a little confused by this. Are we selling the Wii-U without a controller now? Or would the Pro Controller just become the "default" controller? I also have to agree with Indigo Rush's argument that the Gamepad is essentially part of the console's identity (which actually makes its limited use in the few games I've played a little baffling), and I'm not sure how that would go over with consumers or developers. Maybe developers wouldn't care that much, but then the rest of us that actually bought the damned system are basically stuck with a controller that's become a paper weight, essentially (and have to shell out an extra $50 for another one). Nintendo in particular, if they're going to go this generation mostly only backed by SEGA, Capcom, some indie cats, and perhaps a couple other third parties, need to step up and make people see just why the hell they need to be playing with the thing. They managed to justify the 3DS after its poor initial showing (isn't it one of their best systems with the strongest library currently?), they should put some effort into turning their main console around.

 

Has the Gamepad even been mentioned extensively in marketing? I remember those stupid commercials from Christmas time in which Nintendo finally told people "It's a whole new system! Really!" but they didn't even push the machine's big selling point: The Gamepad. Some games can make use of it in very practical ways, some try to put a unique spin on what it's capable of, others... are just there. Granted, I've only played a handful of Wii-U titles, both in demos and complete games, but I haven't seen many that really try to do much with the controller. Some gyroscope and touchscreen action, perhaps, maybe some map/inventory displays, but that's about it.

 

Wonderful 101 at least tries to do something interesting; I remember in the demo (this is how far behind I am in terms of gaming) the Gamepad was used to display two different parts of the level so you can solve a larger puzzle. Granted, it would have been nice to use the touchscreen for the Wonder powers (unless that's there in the final game), I think that was a pretty cool way of making use of the second display. It's relatively simple and not overly gimmicky. Come on, son. It can't possibly be that hard to actually experiment and develop some new ideas with the damn thing. Platinum did it and made use of it, why in the world can't Nintendo? Or any other developer? It shouldn't be seen as a limitation.

 

Of course, Discoid has a point too (I can't say I agree with everything he's written, but I can't ignore Nintendo's got some problems), and even as someone who supports the console and Nintendo, they just didn't do a good job initially selling the thing. And now they're struggling because the PS4 and Xbone had stronger marketing arms and moved units ridiculously quickly (though I understand the library isn't much better than Wii-U currently). And I have to admit you're doing pretty bad if Jimmy Fallon can get a shot in. And hell, I sorta smirked at that bit, and I hate Jimmy Fallon. I personally don't want Nintendo gutting the system or giving up on it altogether (an argument I've observed being thrown around), because I'd feel cheated personally, and because it's fucking lazy. I don't care about console wars or who's on top (I'm too old for that playground nonsense), but I want to see Nintendo actually step up and start showing the rest of the world why people should be playing on their system. 2014 will hopefully see a stronger library, so now they need to pump some marketing iron to get people to take notice of them (they've got some big titles on the way but hardly anyone knows about them it seems), and they need to start talking about the Gamepad and do some new and interesting things with it.

 

Disclaimer: I don't know a damn thing about marketing, but I feel that's Nintendo's biggest issue right now. I don't know what's doable in the grand scheme, but I want to see Nintendo maybe pull a "Genesis" by letting people know they do what the competition doesn't and really make the system look cool.

 

Now I'll just post this like an idiot and let everyone who knows more pick this apart...

[Solkia]

wait back up

 

There is actually a level in Mario 3D World that DOES require the gamepad. Yeah, remember that level with the bits of terrain that poke out when touched with the touch screen? That would be completely unplayable without it. And I'm sure that's probably not the only one.
 
 
Edit: And I personally consider the Wii U's interface to be leagues better than the XBone's (Metro interface, UGH) and the shitty XMB interface Sony's been using for ages, dunno if they changed it with the PS4, but...

XMB is simplistic and great wtf are you talking about.

[Conando]

I think XMB is fine. I don't like the Vita's interface, but Sony got it right with PS3 and PSP at least.

[Marcello]

XMB on the PS3 was ugly and slow. The 360 had the best even with the ads.

[Salamander]

I don't have a Wii U, but I've also noticed what seems to be a lack of commitment to the console's key gimmick.  Nintendo hasn't really sold the GamePad to consumers in the sense of showing what it's possible for it to do, and it feels like they don't really have any big ideas that involve it.  Off-TV play is courteous but it's not really what people buy a console for, to be able to not play it on their TV.  If they wanted that they'd buy a handheld system.  Nintendo really should've come in at the ground floor with a whole load of games that use the GamePad in innovative ways rather than just tacking on the need to tap it occasionally to achieve something.  Similarly, there should've been more games to make the case for asymmetrical multiplayer.  As far as I can tell only Nintendo Land really does either of these, which is a good start, but only a start.  I've said this before, but while the DS and the Wii really seemed to be backed by original ideas, the 3DS and the Wii U just look like bandwagoning - 3D is popular so let's make a 3D DS, tablets are popular so let's make a Wii with a tablet.  The difference is that you can ignore the 3D on the 3DS (which is basically a token extra feature anyway, and one that is literally impossible to make meaningful for gameplay purposes), but you can't ignore the GamePad.

 

I guess you can say that the DS was essentially the same, where there were loads of early games which just used the second screen for a map or inventory or for arbitrary touch-controlled interludes - I'm thinking of Castlevania: Dawn Of Sorrow here, where you played the whole game using the buttons but had to finish the bosses with the touch screen, and developers still make the mistake of thinking that it's convenient to get the stylus out for thirty seconds of every half-hour of gameplay (you should either be using it all the time, or never).  But the DS and indeed the 3DS had the advantage of not really having any competition, so it didn't matter that the gimmick took a while to take off.  But...

 

...The Wii U, though, has stacks of competition, and at the moment, its problem isn't really that it's different, it's that it's not different enough.  It doesn't have its own identity, it's just a downgraded version of the real next-gen consoles with a weird extra control system that developers have to go the extra mile to port to (or that's the perception, at least).  And as a full console, it's more expensive to gamble on with original games, too.  So the really ambitious mainstream developers will always sink their money into the most powerful console rather than going for half-measures, the ones who know they can't do that will develop for something way cheaper, and nobody wants to do the extra work that's required to make or bring something over to the Wii U.  It's kind of a victim of the increasing power of consoles, really - games can be so much more powerful, so much more graphically intensive now, but that requires more money and more time and there isn't really a place for anything remotely risky.

 

Which brings me back to the option that people brought up maybe last year or so when we first got into this mess, but which I haven't heard so much lately: Could Nintendo go handheld-only?  Perhaps even only temporarily?  It has a number of advantages - considerably reduced development costs, for instance, and its market rivals aren't quite directly competing in that none of them are doing quite the same thing (smartphones seem to offer mostly social games and quick timewasters, the Vita seems to be catering more for a niche audience).  They've got a strong heritage and back catalogue from the DS and 3DS.  If Nintendo's next handheld was to essentialy be a more ambitious, more refined, more powerful 3DS - maybe even a kind of 3DS-GamePad hybrid! - then that might be a relatively safe proposition because everyone involved, marketing, developers, consumers, would know exactly what they were dealing with.  Make it backwards-compatible with the 3DS so that there are effectively loads of games for it already, sync it with the present eShop system to make sure, launch it at an accessible price point, market it very clearly as the next 3DS rather than muddying the waters with any suggestion that it's just the same thing with an optional new feature by not having significant new features, just better ones.  And make sure that it's actually treated as a replacement in shops - once it's out, you don't want people to still be buying 3DSs and 2DSs.  This is one of the Wii U's problems, I'm sure, the fact that people can still buy the Wii and even new Wii variants in shops!  There wouldn't be any confusion if the only thing they could get was the Wii U - heck, they could capitalise on people's ignorance that way by selling them a Wii U when they think they're getting a Wii, and what would be the difference save that they're getting a better Wii?  So you've got something that's significantly cheaper than consoles, both to buy and to develop for, and which already has its own niche among the rival handheld gaming options rather than hamfistedly attempting to do the same things they are.

 

I'm sure there are a million problems with this idea - they'd have to learn the lessons from the 3DS's slow start (which they didn't do at all for the Wii U), and it'd be a critical loss of pride for Nintendo and its consumers to cut its main console arm even if it was just for a few years.  But it would allow them to focus their efforts, and focus them on an area where the conditions for success aren't quite so demanding.

 

It seems like their only other option in the short term, maybe the long one - and it's one they're taking with the eShop on both consoles, and would do well to learn - is to bow out of the graphics race and embrace the viewpoint that you don't need to have the best graphics to have the best games.  Take the philosophical position that graphics are simply a matter of style and unleash an immensely diverse library of game visuals and lengths.  This is basically the indie and retro boom in a nutshell - games don't have to be hyper-realistic, hyper-powerful, hyper-complicated.  We're still in need of shorter experiences, there's nothing wrong with simpler and more distinctive graphics, and we can all use the extra money in our pockets from not having to pay an increasingly large chunk of £/$100 for every game.  Give us a Virtual Console with stacks of different games stratified according to the console they were originally on, have a navigable eShop dividing games very clearly according to price (and therefore ambition), show us the full range of what gaming can be.  Don't go for power, go for variety.  You can even make that your slogan - "Be anything, do anything."  Which would also be an impetus for Nintendo itself to start making visually distinct games rather than relying too much on established and traditional looks like they are at the moment.

 

...So yeah, that's my two cents added to the "this is the idea that will save Nintendo's bacon, for sure!" pile.  Sure is easy when you're not actually in charge of a huge global business, huh?

[SuperLink]

Two cents

 

What the Wii U needs isn't to lose its sellpoint (it worked for the 3DS eventually but only after it had already established a market presence as its own machine, which the Wii U has yet to do)

 

If the Wii U lost its gamepad it would vanish from the market because people wouldn't know what to look for, the Wii U has no market presence as it is, people don't know what it is, getting rid of the gamepad now means even less sales.

 

What the Wii U needs is a console-focused redesign and more noticeable first-party hits. And I'm sure they can develop it more efficiently so they're spending less on materials and whatnot. Now the Wii U looks like the most boring DVD player you've ever seen, it's going to catch literally no one's eye as it is, it doesn't look like it's going to deliver da high quality visual enertainment esperinses.

 

That article pointed out that Nintendo's biggest successes ran on the backs of new games, and while yea that may be true, they were games that made the system unique for the most part, more recently they were games not possible on other systems at that time. Wii Sports was nothin without the Wiimote. Personally I don't think Nintendo can repeat that success again with the Wii U's own gimmick but they can at least try, the Wii and DS had success after success with new game ideas, I'm sure the new Tetris will come along eventually.

 

Also Nintendo will have to deal with losses, cutting manufacturing costs, keeping their losses low as much as they can in other areas, but I think they really need to give the Wii U a more noticeable market presence. If it gets noticed enough to have a small steady but reliable stream of sales based on what it is, then I think offering a model without the Gamepad becomes more viable later down the line, but for now it just offers more market confusion and completely disperses what little identity the Wii U actually has.

 

Like a console's identity is super important and I don't think ya'll realise how vital it is for the Wii U to actually have one at this point.

[Milo]

the Wii U looks like the most boring DVD player you've ever seen

 

Except it doesn't play DVDs, or even Blu-Ray discs.

 

So it's just the most boring game console you've ever seen. :v

[Autosaver]

"Most expensive Netflix player"

[Chooch]

It's a pretty shallow reason, but I can't get behind Nintendo ditching the GamePad because I love off-TV play way too much.

 

Also these laughable generalizations about trophies and achievements are exactly why Nintendo was able to get away with their absolutely fucking awful online infrastructure for an entire console generation. Why is everything done by the competition always labeled as something negative or meaningless to Nintendo die hards?