Topic: Nintendo Fan Stereotype

risk management is done by everyone, even by Nintendo. that's why low selling franchises haven't seen the light of day for ages.

Also Call of Duty, Assassins Creed, Pac Man and Tetris

The whole purpose of Bolt_Strike's comment is that Nintendo does stuff like CoD and AC. Pac-Man has done a lot of varied things when I really think about it, and Tetris has basically zero room to expand, as it is entirely defined by a single premise (hence why it gets new versions rather than sequels)

Tetris plus? My point is that if you want to boil it as far down as Bolt_strike has and encompass all gaming rather than his three go to titles that he hasn't played, then every gameplay style is a recycled concept.

This guy thinks SM3DW and DKC:TF lack ideas. It never stops being hilarious.

still not entirely sure what you're trying to prove by linking that article. That Nintendo is bad and should catch AIDS and die?!
WiiU had a troubled launch - fine, we know it. Developers have found hard to port games built for entirely different systems on WiiU - alright, it's understandable.

Accidentally, the few 3rd (or 2nd) party games built with the system in mind (Lego City Undercover, ZombiU, Bayonetta 2) have sold around 1 million copies each - which is still peanuts compared with last gen numbers but it's pretty good considering that there's only less than 10 millions WiiU around. It's 10%, and not many games can be sold to 10% of the instal base.
See how many games have sold to 10% of the PS3/XB360 instal base.

If third parties think they can sell as much as Mario Kart, Smash Bros or Zelda, they have to come up with good and appealing stuff. WiiU just isn't the console were you can release half-baked crap and get away with 2 millions copies sold - it's not going to happen. It doesn't surprise me that Watch Dogs sold badly. It surprises me that it sold well on other platforms.

As a WiiU owner and fan of videogames in general, I would love to buy more 3rd party titles. But I don't like to endure unfair challenges. Why would I buy a 3rd party game that costs as much as it does on Sony but comes with half the features?! Why would I buy the third or fourth chapter in a saga if I haven't played the first and second? Why would I buy a 2 year old port for full price when I can get it on another console for one sixth of that price?!

But if you think the "new" 3rd party games that were released during the console lifespan (Splinter Cell Blacklist, Batman Origins, Watch Dogs, Transformers, Assassin's Creed IV etc) were so attractive that more WiiU users should have bought them, then I assume you have bought them for your other console!? Do you have these games for Playstation or XBox?!
Because if you didn't buy them, I don't see why you blame other players for not buying them...

@spizzamarozzi: Yea, the Wii U was NOT the system to buy third-party titles on (the few we did get). I did purchase Darksiders II and Arkham City for Wii U, but Watchdogs, AC, CoD...yea, I got those on other systems because they were more supported with expansions and were more populated with other players.

On the whole third-party stuff for Nintendo, it's simple: Nintendo needs to have a "hard reset" here. The NX needs to wipe the slate clean, and launch with CURRENT third-party games alongside a VERY strong first-party lineup (Zelda being the obvious contender calendar-wise). The first-party thing can't be stressed enough. Nintendoland/NSMBU was NOT enough. In my opinion, Zelda will go along way, but even then, something else. Perhaps a surprise F-Zero or something?

Anyway, that way, you get back to the core of what makes a Nintendo console appealing as a FIRST and perhaps only console: Nintendo's brilliant games, and third-party stuff running at the same fps, same resolution, and launching at the same time as on the other consoles. That way, people like us can own ONE console and get EVERYTHING. THEN, we would buy TONS of third-party stuff. Also, people "new" to Nintendo may buy the system for the amazing Zelda launch title they keep hearing about, and then say, "Well, I use this system a lot for Zelda, and the next AC came out with the same support...might as well just buy it for this, too." It would require Nintendo to do some nice negotiating with third parties to keep them happy while the install base grows at first, obviously...but hey, new console, new opportunity. The Wii U is behind them (and hopefully the entire Wii brand), and they're ready to get back to business. That should be their message.

That way, you once again even the playing field. And Nintendo can do this: the generation is young. What do we keep saying? There are only about 30-35 million Xbox One/PS4s out there right now, and last generation 360/PS3 wound up somewhere around 150+ million install (easily)... there are LOTS of people who haven't yet made the switch. The NX CAN still be Nintendo's chance to hit that reset button and get right back in there.

@rallydefault: But the main question appears of whether the NX is designed specifically to be a secondary console or not. Wii U of course was designed to be a primary console but failed so Nintendo may go secondary route which the rumours are suggesting (less powerful than PS4 and cheap).

@Grumblevolcano: Right, yea, I definitely agree with you. We still don't know what the heck the NX is, so yea...if it's designed inherently as a "second" console, then my whole post doesn't mean much lol

Install bases aren't uniform. The initial install base of a platform is the most enthusiastic group. They are the ones who will be most driving the tie ratio. It's easier to sell to 10% of an install base when your system has only sold 10M units, because a greater percentage of that 10M will be interested than the percentage of the 360's 90M.

I agree with most of this. The trouble is execution. 3rd Parties don't trust Nintendo, so unless Nintendo moneyhats, they can't get all the major 3rd party games on their platform AND advertised as such (if no one knows Assassin's Creed is on NX, no one will buy an NX with intent to play AC). The trouble with moneyhatting is that it could put Nintendo into a state where they are at the mercy of 3rd party developers. Whatever arrangements Nintendo makes with 3rd parties, they NEED to make sure that it has a very clear end date, at which point install base can support sales alone.

Also, the people who drive platform launches have already bought a PS4 or XB1. Could Nintendo get them to switch, maybe, but it does throw a wrench into the matter.