Wii U Forum

Topic: What does Nintendo have to lose by making the gamepad "optional"?

Showing 321 to 340 of 724

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

321. Posted:

@Howard24U
1. You didn't respond, I glad you now agree
2. I disagree with your maths. The Pro Controller isn't that cheap to make and the GamePad isn't that expensive
3. Removing the GamePad doesn't make it a better product
4. Again, I know. What does this have to do with anything? There is more than one game on the Wii U
5. If it's just "an opinion" that it wouldn't help sales much then it's equally "just your opinion" that it will

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Howard24U

322. Posted:

DefHalan wrote:

@Howard24U
Without GamePad
1. The difference is that the Kinect, PS Move, and Motion Plus were released after a secure install base was achieved. There are more that two games that couldn't be played or wouldn't give the same experience.
2. A Split install base is bad for a console this early in.
3. A $179 SKU is way lower than is currently possible. If a GamePad SKU was released we would be looking at $250 or $230. From the numbers we have it shows that a price drop is not enough to make the system successful. The 3DS had a price drop along with some killer games released at the same time.
4. DKTF has been in development for a long time, recently Nintendo stated how they were going to focus on the GamePad more.
5. Not irrelevant, it is a current problem that the new SKU would not help but possibly make worst.
6. How often do you buy a year-old game new? How long do Call of Duty or Assassin's Creed games last on the Market? By the time the new SKU is introduced 3rd Parties are focused on newer games not games already on the Market. What would help ZombiU become a success? A patch released that fixes the problems now, after all the reviews are out and people's opinions are set, or with a sequel?

With the GamePad.
1. We agree.
2. Not sure what you mean. With everyone having a GamePad Nintendo doesn't need to satisfy people that have the GamePad and people that don't. They can focus on other things as well as the GamePad.
3. If there were two different SKUs and two install bases then companies would have to worry about cutting a group out of their target. (If a company makes a GamePad game they can't sell it to GamePad-less people)
4. The evidence shows architecture of the hardware and install base to be the problem, not the GamePad.
5. Correct but they don't want to cut off their nose in spite of their face (damage relations with customer and threaten their next system's success to make the Wii U profitable) Nintendo isn't in so much trouble that the Wii U has to be a success or they shut down. The 3DS and savings from the Wii will keep them alive for the next round

W/O
Not to comment on everything here, but selling a SKU w/o a Gamepad should not affect current owners like you and I, UNLESS Nintendo gets rid of the requirement that developers have to do something with it. I'm sure they wouldn't ever do this, thus the only people who are affected are the people who knowingly chose the cheaper option. You can't purchase the cheap model and expect all the benefits of the full price one.

3. $179.99 USD is perfectly doable - see my previous post.

6. I purchase older games new all the time. In fact that's my preference. I'm not big into online multiplayer games, so buying a game like Assasin's Creed a year after it came out doesn't effect me in any way (except that it saves me like $30). Only with games like COD does it make a difference buying into it late, because you won't have people to play against.

W/
2. I couldn't think of a good way to explain this one, so I think it came off as confusing. I understood your comment as saying "Have a single install base (SKU's with gamepads) to develop for is easier and thus a benefit". What I was trying to say is that for most games, it's the gamepad itself that adds incremental development costs. Thus ensuring the game can be played without the gamepad shouldn't make development any more difficult. Think of Rayman legends for instance. The Wii U experience utilizes the gamepad, but it's just as playable on the X360. I'm sure the gamepad functions were secondary in the development process.

Edited on by Howard24U

Howard24U

AuthorMessage
Avatar

DefHalan

323. Posted:

@blaisedinsd
People have explained to you why they don't like this plan and why they think Nintendo won't go through with it. If you want to make a new question of "at this point I'm only asking if the fear of losing gamepad support is a well founded reason for the move to upset customers." I suggest you read back through some people's replies to your original question.

@Howard24U
2. The Basic set isn't being made anymore(as far as I know) and according to the GameStop website they don't sell the Basic set. http://www.gamestop.com/browse/nintendo-wii-u/consoles?nav=13... so I am guessing any Basic sets you see are people empting out the stock. Heck Nintendo doesn't even sell Basic Sets through their online store. http://www.nintendo.com/wiiu/buynow/
3. Or it all comes down to Games. PS4 has a lot of games out and announced. They are also paying companies for exclusive content. Plus the evidence of the last price drop shows people won't be satisfied with another Price drop. The Xbox One is equal difference from the PS4 as the PS4 is to the Wii U but the PS4 is the one getting most sales currently. So the other factor is the Games.
4. Ok, how does that change the fact that Nintendo recently stated how they are going to use the GamePad more in future titles?
5. Part of the reasoning for the GamePad-less SKU is that it would attract 3rd Party developers but the GamePad isn't what holds back the developers, it is the architecture and install base, which a split install base would not help.

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/44243746261/nickels-dimes-and-quarters
http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/why-console-specs-dont-matter
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/200271/Video_Don_Daglow_on_nextgen_transition_traps_and_treasures.php

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

324. Posted:

skywake wrote:

@blaisedinsd
People who got the GamePad would be left with a piece of hardware that's effectively useless if support was dropped. If it was still pushed and there was this GamePad-less SKU then those people would feel like they'd been had. I think it's pretty clear how that's a confused message. I'm not suggesting fear or panic, I'm saying that I don't think Nintendo can maintain two different images for the Wii U. It's hard enough explaining what the Wii U is to the market without having to also explain that it's now two things.

As for your anecdotal evidence of people who don't care about the GamePad. I question the validity of that, I knew of plenty of people who didn't care about a lot of things that ended up being indisputably net-positive features. Often people who aren't invested in a platform try to find a reason why they're not into it. As I've said before I could say that I'm not at all interested some of the features of the XBOne and PS4 but that doesn't mean that the removal of those features would mean I get up and buy it.

The one and only reason someone doesn't buy a console is price and games. If you feel that the Wii U needs those things then my argument would be that it can do them without removing the GamePad.

I see that as a total over reaction. How would the gamepad become effectively useless? Features are not going to taken away. These are the features that will continue to sell the gamepad. They don't have to abandon the gamepad if they do this and they shouldn't. What's actually at stake for future support? We seen their best ideas already. They said they are going to keep trying more ideas and they will do that whether or not a gamepad ever sells again just for their 6 million most loyal users. No one else is going to be supporting it either unless it becomes more popular.

Their is not actually any gamepad support that is reasonably at stake that would be lost if they offered this sku.

Whether or not by anecdotal evidence is relevant and whether it not the new sku is popular or not, it costs them almost nothing to do this. It's basically some rebranding and repackaging and maybe some game patches if you want to beef up the appeal of the sub-library if games. It doesn't need to be very successful at all to make it worth it. I am not saying it fixes the consoles problems I am just saying it doesn't really cause any and it's a low risk high reward proposition basically.

Edited on by blaisedinsd

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

325. Posted:

blaisedinsd wrote:

I see that as a total over reaction. How would the gamepad become effectively useless? Features are not going to taken away. These are the features that will continue to sell the gamepad. They don't have to abandon the gamepad if they do this and they shouldn't. What's actually at stake for future support? We seen their best ideas already. They said they are going to keep trying more ideas and they will do that whether or not a gamepad ever sells again just for their 6 million most loyal users. No one else is going to be supporting it either unless it becomes more popular.

Their is not actually any gamepad support that is reasonably at stake that would be lost if they offered this sku.

Then that's the second scenario. They keep pushing the GamePad as a feature and the people who buy this SKU feel like they've been had. The new games come out that require it as a feature and those people who thought they got a bargain now have to buy another controller to play it. If people see this before it happens then the cheaper SKU doesn't sell. As I was saying in the whole post, they can't do both at once. Someone is going to be screwed over by this.

And I would again note how far from your original posts you have now come. To the point where now you're almost not saying anything like what you originally suggested.

[edit for extra replyage]

blaisedinsd wrote:

[Whether or not by anecdotal evidence is relevant and whether it not the new sku is popular or not, it costs them almost nothing to do this. It's basically some rebranding and repackaging and maybe some game patches if you want to beef up the appeal of the sub-library if games. It doesn't need to be very successful at all to make it worth it. I am not saying it fixes the consoles problems I am just saying it doesn't really cause any and it's a low risk high reward proposition basically.

I was just saying it's not worth basing a whole change in strategy on the opinions of some randoms who could have any number of reasons for saying those things. The general thought, even by your own admittance, is that it's a good feature that has been underutilised and poorly marketed. I'm glad that we agree that it doesn't solve any of the Wii U's current problems. That precise reason is why I think they would be better off trying to solve those problems rather than doing something like this. The GamePad isn't the reason the Wii U isn't selling, the Wii U isn't selling because it doesn't have the games people want on it.

Edited on by skywake

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

326. Posted:

DefHalan wrote:

@blaisedinsd
People have explained to you why they don't like this plan and why they think Nintendo won't go through with it. If you want to make a new question of "at this point I'm only asking if the fear of losing gamepad support is a well founded reason for the move to upset customers." I suggest you read back through some people's replies to your original question.

The only actual answer to the original question we have discovered as far as I can tell is this fear and panic that people would lose faith in Nintendo or it would be seen as abondoning the gamepad.

That's why that should now be the discussion unless we can figure out something that doesn't fall under that umbrella.

No one has effectively explained how splitting the user saw is actually bad in itself. It's kinect in reverse, the new sku is attractive based on its sub library of games. The split user base is not a bad thing.

Edited on by blaisedinsd

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Howard24U

327. Posted:

DefHalan wrote:

@Howard24U
2. The Basic set isn't being made anymore(as far as I know) and according to the GameStop website they don't sell the Basic set. http://www.gamestop.com/browse/nintendo-wii-u/consoles?nav=13... so I am guessing any Basic sets you see are people empting out the stock. Heck Nintendo doesn't even sell Basic Sets through their online store. http://www.nintendo.com/wiiu/buynow/
3. Or it all comes down to Games. PS4 has a lot of games out and announced. They are also paying companies for exclusive content. Plus the evidence of the last price drop shows people won't be satisfied with another Price drop. The Xbox One is equal difference from the PS4 as the PS4 is to the Wii U but the PS4 is the one getting most sales currently. So the other factor is the Games.
4. Ok, how does that change the fact that Nintendo recently stated how they are going to use the GamePad more in future titles?
5. Part of the reasoning for the GamePad-less SKU is that it would attract 3rd Party developers but the GamePad isn't what holds back the developers, it is the architecture and install base, which a split install base would not help.

2. Yes the product on gamestop was actually the skylanders basic bundle which includes far more than the original basic SKU did. (Nintendoland, Skylanders Game, Skylanders Figures). And even if they don't make it anymore - the price difference was always $50USD. The deluxe sold for $350 and the basic for $300 without the Gamepad dock and Nintendoland and smaller storage. So there's no reason to think that if they did continue making it it wouldn't be priced $50 less than the deluxe is today, hence $250 (which is what all the retailers that have them are selling them for)

3. Still comes down to price. If your argument is that there are more games on the way for PS4, then that only drives the perceived value of the Wii U down even more. Supply and demand curves are governed by price. Eventually you can lower the price enough to get people to buy your product. I'm arguing that $179.99 does that, $300 does not.

4. This has yet to be seen, and using NFC doesn't really use the key feature of the gamepad, its touchscreen.

Edited on by Howard24U

Howard24U

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

328. Posted:

blaisedinsd wrote:

The only actual answer to the original question we have discovered as far as I can tell is this fear and panic that people would lose faith in Nintendo or it would be seen as abondoning the gamepad.

Again with this ey?

blaisedinsd wrote:

That's why that should now be the discussion unless we can figure out something that doesn't fall under that umbrella.

i.e. "I've lost this argument so instead I want to argue this other thing"

blaisedinsd wrote:

No one has effectively explained how splitting the user saw is actually bad in itself. It's kinect in reverse, the new sku is attractive based on its sub library of games. The split user base is not a bad thing.

You been listening at all? I'd argue that you haven't effectively explained what problem you're trying to solve that couldn't equally be solved by a straight price cut or an attractive bundle with Mario Kart. As I've said a few times already, their main problem is lack of games.

Edited on by skywake

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

DefHalan

329. Posted:

blaisedinsd wrote:

I see that as a total over reaction. How would the gamepad become effectively useless? Features are not going to taken away. These are the features that will continue to sell the gamepad. They don't have to abandon the gamepad if they do this and they shouldn't. What's actually at stake for future support?

To reach the maximum amount of their customers they would have to drop GamePad support in order to reach those with the GamePad-less SKU.

blaisedinsd wrote:

We seen their best ideas already.

Because people's best idea is always their first? False.

blaisedinsd wrote:

They said they are going to keep trying more ideas and they will do that whether or not a gamepad ever sells again just for their 6 million most loyal users. No one else is going to be supporting it either unless it becomes more popular.

How does Nintendo make the GamePad more popular? By making Killer Apps that utilize the GamePad in unique ways. Killer Apps (not all of them have to use the GamePad) will drive system sales. So why split the install base thus killing any support for the GamePad?

blaisedinsd wrote:

Their is not actually any gamepad support that is reasonably at stake that would be lost if they offered this sku.

We can see the future now? Do you think Nintendo and other companies have shown all their cards for what is in store for the GamePad?

blaisedinsd wrote:

Whether or not by anecdotal evidence is relevant and whether it not the new sku is popular or not, it costs them almost nothing to do this. It's basically some rebranding and repackaging and maybe some game patches if you want to beef up the appeal of the sub-library if games.

Rebranding, repackaging, and game patches all cost money. Then you need new marketing strategies and other things I can't think of because I feel like we are stuck in a loop of "that doesn't matter this does, no you need to look at like this. repeat"

blaisedinsd wrote:

It doesn't need to be very successful at all to make it worth it. I am not saying it fixes the consoles problems I am just saying it doesn't really cause any and it's a low risk high reward proposition basically.

It is actually high risk, low reward. They risk killing off GamePad support, games that support the GamePad from selling well, Nintendo looking like a company that doesn't/can't support its systems, and this back-pedling following them into the next-gen console era where people will again wait for the re-launch of their system costing Nintendo more money. their reward is some extra money... possibly a slightly larger install base.

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/44243746261/nickels-dimes-and-quarters
http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/why-console-specs-dont-matter
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/200271/Video_Don_Daglow_on_nextgen_transition_traps_and_treasures.php

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

330. Posted:

skywake wrote:

Then that's the second scenario. They keep pushing the GamePad as a feature and the people who buy this SKU feel like they've been had. The new games come out that require it as a feature and those people who thought they got a bargain now have to buy another controller to play it. If people see this before it happens then the cheaper SKU doesn't sell. As I was saying in the whole post, they can't do both at once. Someone is going to be screwed over by this.

And I would again note how far from your original posts you have now come. To the point where now you're almost not saying anything like what you originally suggested.

I totally disagree. How would people who bought a cheaper sku sold as a one screen experience that only has access to a sub-library of games be any more upset they can't play the hot new 2 screen experience game? How would they be anymore angry than some one who didn't get kinect with their 360 is mad about not being able to play a hot new kinect game? Why would they be mad when they can just buy a gamepad to get access to that game?

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

DefHalan

331. Posted:

@skywake
I am going to leave this to you. I have explained things as best I can and you always seem to do the better job (plus I don't think @blaisedinsd or @Howard24U are listening) I wish you the best of luck. I will keep watching so if you need a break feel free to tag me in lol.

Edited on by DefHalan

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/44243746261/nickels-dimes-and-quarters
http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/why-console-specs-dont-matter
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/200271/Video_Don_Daglow_on_nextgen_transition_traps_and_treasures.php

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

332. Posted:

blaisedinsd wrote:

I totally disagree. How would people who bought a cheaper sku sold as a one screen experience that only has access to a sub-library of games be any more upset they can't play the hot new 2 screen experience game? How would they be anymore angry than some one who didn't get kinect with their 360 is mad about not being able to play a hot new kinect game? Why would they be mad when they can just buy a gamepad to get access to that game?

Because the games that required Kinect were things like Kinect Sports, Just Dance and various kids games. When I say GamePad support I'm thinking more along the lines of Zelda, Mario, Metroid. The person who got a 360 for Halo and Gears probably isn't that annoyed that Kinect exsits because they're not into Kinect games. A person who got a GamePad-less SKU for Mario Kart and Smash is probably going to feel forced into buying the GamePad anyway for Zelda, Mario or Metroid.

And if those games don't get support then we're back to the other scenario. If those games ignore it entirely then people with the GamePad are left wondering what the point of it was.

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

333. Posted:

I think it just comes down to how much faith we have in Nintendo to hit a home run with a future application of the gamepad a unique features. If it is integral to a huge game like motion plus with skyward sword I see validity in the opposition of the idea. If it is Nintendoland 2 or game and Wario 2 or wii party u or something similar I don't see the validity. I definitely think we can expect the later.

I am plenty happy with the features myself, I have not come a long way on this as was claimed. The only thing that's come a long way is the understanding of what I have been trying to get across.

Edited on by blaisedinsd

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

shingi_70

334. Posted:

A big difference between Kinect and the Gamepad is that the Wii U was designed around the use of the Gamepad.

The Xbox 360 Kinect was an Add On a la Wii Fit board that was later bundled into the cheaper version of the 360 in place of a hard drive. The Kinect was never aimed at the core Xbox player and most core Kinect games could still use the controller. And even the cote games that used kinect never needed expect for that on rails fable game.

The gamepad is even worse since most of the games that use it, while not taking a direct advantge of it, still really upon it in some way or form.

shingi_70

3DS Friend Code: 3093-7342-3454 | Nintendo Network ID: shingi70

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

335. Posted:

@shingi_70
Most Kinect games actually required it. The Xbox 360 games with the big Kinect logo on top, required it. The only games where it was optional, had the Kinect lettering on the box art, but not at the top.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Howard24U

336. Posted:

skywake wrote:

@Howard24U
1. You didn't respond, I glad you now agree
2. I disagree with your maths. The Pro Controller isn't that cheap to make and the GamePad isn't that expensive
3. Removing the GamePad doesn't make it a better product
4. Again, I know. What does this have to do with anything? There is more than one game on the Wii U
5. If it's just "an opinion" that it wouldn't help sales much then it's equally "just your opinion" that it will

Some comments are simply not worth wasting my time on. As an example, I won't try and argue with a stubborn child who insists that a picture of a square is in fact a circle. If that child refuses to believe that it's a square, when it is, what use is there to discuss it any more??

You can't disagree with math. Math is not an opinion. My math was clearly spelled out, using real prices in the explanation. Are you trying to suggest that US retailers are selling the pro controller at a loss and that it really costs around $100 to make? I can assure you they are not and it does not.

Gamepad CONSUMER PRICE = $140
Pro Controller CONSUMER PRICE = $45.
$140-$45 = $95 difference

Wii Basic CONSUMER PRICE = $250
Wii Basic with Pro Controller instead of gamepad ESTIMATED CONSUMER PRICE = $250 - $95 = $155

If anything I was being very conservative by suggesting that they could sell it for a retail price of $180. And there's no reason to try and bring in estimated manufacturing costs and component costs into this discussion, because that's all pure speculation. What I provided here is real data for what these things sell for today.

Edited on by Howard24U

Howard24U

AuthorMessage
Avatar

shingi_70

337. Posted:

@SCAR392

True DAT. Even the arcade only kinext games have a different header.

shingi_70

3DS Friend Code: 3093-7342-3454 | Nintendo Network ID: shingi70

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

338. Posted:

Howard24U wrote:

skywake wrote:

@Howard24U
1. You didn't respond, I glad you now agree
2. I disagree with your maths. The Pro Controller isn't that cheap to make and the GamePad isn't that expensive
3. Removing the GamePad doesn't make it a better product
4. Again, I know. What does this have to do with anything? There is more than one game on the Wii U
5. If it's just "an opinion" that it wouldn't help sales much then it's equally "just your opinion" that it will

Some comments are simply not worth wasting my time on. As an example, I won't try and argue with a stubborn child who insists that a picture of a square is in fact a circle. If that child refuses to believe that it's a square, when it is, what use is there to discuss it any more??

You can't disagree with math. Math is not an opinion. My math was clearly spelled out, using real prices in the explanation. Are you trying to suggest that US retailers are selling the pro controller at a loss and that it really costs around $100 to make? I can assure you they are not.

Gamepad CONSUMER PRICE = $140
Pro Controller CONSUMER PRICE = $45.
$140-$45 = $95 difference

Wii Basic CONSUMER PRICE = $250
Wii Basic with Pro Controller instead of gamepad ESTIMATED CONSUMER PRICE = $250 - $95 = $155

If anything I was being very conservative by suggesting that they could sell it for a retail price of $180. And there's no reason to try and bring in estimated manufacturing costs and component costs into this discussion, because that's all pure speculation. What I provided here is real data for what these things sell for today.

It's an excellent point. I thought it was a bit deep for a price cut but it makes sense if your numbers are right. They can always build in a profit with the price as well. There may be more 8 gba models they need to move than what they put in the sku landers bundle as well. The inflated sales forecast probably means huge inventory that they need to move. They will have to take steps to do this, eventually cutting the price to take a big loss. A one screen sku is a reasonable idea as a plan to execute before making painful price cuts.

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

339. Posted:

@Howard24U
The only reason why a GamePad costs that much, is because they have to specifically grap a GamePad and sell it individually. That doesn't have anything to do with the the cost of making the actual GamePad. When they sell it at retail, I can assure you that it won't cost that much, unless they make some sort of demand for people to want 2 GamePads.

The $250 price is already technically excluding most of the GamePad as part of the original price, that's why excluding it wouldn't really save consumers anymore money than they alreasy have. Even with your -$95 on a hypothetical Pro controller bundle, you're ignoring that that costs money to make, as well.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

340. Posted:

shingi_70 wrote:

A big difference between Kinect and the Gamepad is that the Wii U was designed around the use of the Gamepad.

The Xbox 360 Kinect was an Add On a la Wii Fit board that was later bundled into the cheaper version of the 360 in place of a hard drive. The Kinect was never aimed at the core Xbox player and most core Kinect games could still use the controller. And even the cote games that used kinect never needed expect for that on rails fable game.

The gamepad is even worse since most of the games that use it, while not taking a direct advantge of it, still really upon it in some way or form.

But one screen compatible games are more compelling with a gamepad enhancing than 360 games that are better with kinect. This is just a strength of the appeal of the gamepad and a mark against the attractiveness of a one screen sku. But if this marketed as an idea that also has some benefit of having two consoles and one gamepad they could maybe do something with that. Maybe im just dreaming

blaisedinsd

Sorry, this topic has been locked.