Wii U Forum

Topic: Why does the Wii U get so much hate?

Showing 101 to 120 of 202

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SuperWiiU

101. Posted:

kyuubikid213 wrote:

If you've never owned a PS3 or 360, I can only understand a little bit why one would go for the One or PS4 as opposed to their older siblings which are $200 cheaper and have more games as well as the same games for the next year or two with a few exceptions.

Because the PS3 & 360 games are often inferior versions(often outsourced) without the polish the PS4 and Xbone versions are getting. And that's probably only getting worse in 2015.

SuperWiiU

AuthorMessage
Avatar

mamp

102. Posted:

Because Nintendo's milkshakes ain't bringing anyone to the yard.

The cat's the only cat who knows where it's at.
NNID: Muffin-Gun

3DS Friend Code: 3136-6586-7657

AuthorMessage
Avatar

TheRealThanos

103. Posted:

I want to make sure before I start that everyone that takes the time to read my comment has to realize I'm not trying to bash or insult anyone, but if there is BS in a thread, I certainly WILL address it. But it isn't personal, just so you know.

FRIENDLY WARNING: It is also going to be quite a long comment so if you dare to jump in with me, take a deep breath because here we go:

After having read all pages of comments I could easily say how many of you are wrong, DEAD wrong, and I have the facts to support that. But it isn't as black and white as that. First of, most comments are (obviously) based on opinions and those can't be debated since it is your own opinion and you are allowed to have one and should have one as far as I'm concerned. Secondly, I need to consider what the OP actually meant: the hate from gamers, the hate from the industry or the hate in general?

Those all require different answers. And based off of that some responses are wrong by definition and some other answers are wrong because they don't answer the question but instead start to give reasons/examples that have more to do with why the Wii U is doing so bad or why THEY don't like it, and that in and of itself has NOTHING to do with the Wii U getting all the hate. Yes, Nintendo fakked up the marketing and maybe should have distanced their new platform from the family-loving Wii by giving it another name, but that is NOT the point here. If there is any individual anywhere out there that takes offense to these actions from Nintendo to such an extent that they feel Nintendo deserves their hate, then I all I can do is laugh in this person's face because he/she is truly a pathetic excuse for a human being.

I personally feel that the question is about the industry, so I will try to answer it from that perspective. If that is incorrect then I'll gladly hear @GamingSince64 opinion on that and will add another comment to give my 2 cents from the correct perspective.

As for Nintendo's position in the industry, here's a bunch of historical facts and technical insights, combined with the likely reasons for the hate. Hope it helps:

The strict business rules that Nintendo applies go way back, and did NOT start with the SNES, but already in the 8 bit era, with the NES. Nintendo has laid down the foundations of their policy and rules that are somewhat milder nowadays, but still more strict and traditional than the other two companies. A lot of that has to do with their Asian background, that already has some pretty strict rules and some definite values embedded in the culture so it is no more than natural that you take and incorporate these values into your place of work.
For Western society this is sometimes very hard to understand. I know for example the utter astonishment of quite a lot of people in the West when back in the early eighties they learned that employees of Toyota car manufacturing not only worked in the plant, but also lived there, sometimes with their entire family. Such a thing is to this day still not seen as the standard thing to do in Western society. And that is only one example.

Then there is the age difference: Nintendo has been with us two generations more than Sony and three generations more than Microsoft, so when these two jumped in, the times were a' changing and they could adjust to that far easier because they didn't have that older foundation upon which all of their business strategies and development plans were based. Just take a look at other older companies for comparison: they too have more trouble to adapt/change than new companies that rise up in today's world because they have to change MORE than companies that start later in a more modern age because they already have a foundation upon which they are based.

Also, what a lot of us Western people see as being arrogant or even dumb is tied to these values and the pride that Asian people have in their efforts and work. (and life) And let me add "justified" to the pride, otherwise we Western people will change pride into something negative, because truly, in general we do like to have something to complain about, don't we?

*******************************************************************************************************************************
As a quick side note, before anyone tries to one-up me on that: NO, Sony is NOT the same sort of "Asian values and traditions" company as Nintendo. One only has to take a look at their worldwide operations and departments to see that they are way, WAY more Westernized than Nintendo, so the same does not apply to them. They are, for all intent and purposes, the same sort of company as Microsoft, at least as far as their console business is concerned.
*******************************************************************************************************************************

Now because of their Asian ideas and traditions/values, they are very much the company that they are today and up until recently it is what has made them strong. Consider this: how soon would you change your own methods if they have worked for you for almost 30 years just because you hit a big bump in the road? You probably won't or, if you do and results don't appear soon enough, you will go back to what worked for you. This is a fact in 90% of all cases and the reasons are apparent.

In Nintendo's case, change happened with the GameCube: they made a powerful system, that was better than PS2 overall and even outgunned the original Xbox in some areas (transparencies and lighting to name but a few). Of course they did have to make some proprietary changes, because Nintendo will always do that, so they came up with these funny little DVD's. Other than that it was a console on par with the competition. It didn't work for them to just go along the same path as the other two, so they reverted to their old ways and did not go along with all the HD hype and gave us the Wii. It was a big gamble but luckily for them it worked out just fine. They have an inherent need to always be different, to be innovative or create different ways of playing, instead of just copy pasting the same machine with more power and better graphics. People thinking that they could win or be equal by doing the exact same thing as the other two are delusional, because history has already proven them wrong.

Now allow me to take a few steps back so I can explain some aspects of the relationship between third parties and Nintendo:

In the 8 and 16 bit era, Nintendo, under Yamauchi's reign, had literally blindsided the competition and more or less tricked third parties into making games exclusively for them by drawing up very constrictive contracts that were basically near impossible to get out of without suffering some nasty consequences. I could go into more detail, but that is what it boiled down to and it keeps things a bit easier to understand.
Then there was of course the Nintendo Seal of Quality, something that has certainly degraded since the SNES days, considering all the shovelware we've seen on Nintendo consoles since the N64, but back in the day, it really meant something.
They did uphold these rules for the Wii's eShop initially, which is what rubbed a lot of smaller developers the wrong way and has made it necessary for Nintendo to court these indies once again when the Wii U was released.

Finally, because of Nintendo's background/methods they would and probably never will do what the industry wants, because they feel that outsiders should NOT dictate what hardware they make as a company since it is THEIR core business. And to a certain point I wholeheartedly agree with them.
It would be the same for any other company: car companies do NOT make the cars that we ask them to, THEY decide and if it doesn't sell, the model gets discontinued. (the only obvious exception being companies like Ferrari and such that customize vehicles as long as the customer is willing to pay) The same goes for almost every other commodity whether it's food, appliances, services or real estate so why should it be different for console builders?

And of course, Nintendo is the only true console giant left, because even though the other two also build their own consoles, it is not their CORE business, so they could always fall back on their other divisions if for some reason or other they would have to retreat from the console business. Nintendo does not have that luxury (not going into the Quality of Life debate since that is far from being conclusive as we speak) but it also brings with it the good thing that because they only have to focus on one business type, they can give it more attention. That does not mean that they will never make mistakes, if you believe that then you might just as well believe in fairy tales, because it's just not how the business world works. However, for the most part it is the very reason for their past successes.

So they will always plot their own course and not with the idea of "my way or the highway" as so many people seem to think, but coming from the whole cultural and traditional way of things that has been their foundation for so long and their true belief that innovation is key, constantly striving to bring something new instead of just going for raw power and concurrent upgrades of existing templates.

I would also hope that Western people would gain some more insight into companies like this, ESPECIALLY if they feel the need to criticize them, since it CANNOT be done with the short-sightedness of a Western-only point of view. There needs to be some middle ground to gain understanding and from there on out things could become more clear to all of us. Might also make some of us more sympathetic to the (way too) often ridiculed "please understand"... (if you would openly express such sentiments in their country or presence, it would be seen as highly disrespectful, and rightfully so)

Developers on the other hand have largely gotten lazy (I don't want to judge them all, since there are still quite a few good ones left as well) and because of them being driven by their employers who are only driven by money and don't give a damn about the public or games, they demand a cozy hardware environment that has more than enough space and power for them to dump their program in, straight from the workstations they developed it on without a lot of optimization or adjustments. But I largely blame the employers for this, not the programmers themselves, because we can be sure that they possess the skills to do what would be necessary, they just don't get the time and money to do it.
This simply cannot be done when you have to deal with x86 environments on one side and PowerPC based environments on the other side.
For the more tech savvy amongst you: it's RISC vs CISC instruction sets and they are not mutually interchangeable, but both have their pro's and cons.
The first is based on raw power, but is far from efficient as far as energy and compatibility are concerned (larger instruction set, more options, not always good). Only recently, since the introduction of AMD Jaguar have x86 structures started to become less power hungry. The second is based on optimizing performance and effectivity so it has a higher performance vs power consumption ratio (i.e. needing less power to do the same things). One of the main reasons why Power/RISC architectures are still used in certain servers today. But where consoles are concerned, optimization and maximizing effectiveness take time (= money) so with the current standings as far as possible return on investments & profits are concerned, the choice is obvious.

And one thing to get out of the way once and for all: The Wii U is NOT difficult to develop for. ALL previous consoles were Power/RISC based to some extent, including the PS3, so if they could make games on those, then they can easily make games on Wii U.

Therefore, the correct thing to say is that the x86 architectures of the Xbox One/PS4 require very little optimization/changes, so it's quicker and easIER to develop for. That does NOT make the Wii U hard to develop for, just less easy because it needs more time for optimization and such, but any self respecting developer that already has a lot of experience with all the previous consoles shouldn't even break into a sweat making something for Wii U, provided he/she would get the time to make the most of it from the publisher they're working for. Full fledged titles are a definite possibility, and publishers should know full well that we do not need the half-baked, full-priced but gimped ports we've seen so often of late.

The final verdict is that if all consoles had started off equally, then the difference would only be noted in the later generations of games and in the exclusive titles, because if the Wii U had sold equally well as the competing consoles then all or most of the third parties would all of a sudden fall over each other in their rush to develop for Wii U because money could then be made and certainly, multi-platform titles would show little to no difference when a bit more time, care and money would have been put into it. It is also interesting to note that all three parties have chosen to go with a General Purpose GPU structure, so Nintendo must have been on to something with that...

Hardware wise, x86 will always win in the end, because it's the dominant architecture and you can throw just about anything at it as long as you provide it with enough RAM and graphics CPU, whereas the standard PowerPC chip has a somewhat limited instruction set. But remember, the one in the Wii U is heavily modified...
I believe that Nintendo chose to once again go with this architecture because they wanted to have a console with a small energy footprint that could still provide them with enough power to make the software that they wanted to bring. But they alone have the luxury of taking the time to use this environment to the fullest, which is what third parties can't do currently, mainly because of the huge imbalance in investment vs revenue with the current market share of the Wii U. They did achieve it though, because the Wii U is way more energy efficient than the Wii while still being able to do so much more. Go figure...

Nintendo has also already proven multiple times that great looking games can be created with this hardware so the whole power debate is too ridiculous for words. Yes, the other two are more powerful, and in the second and third generation of games this is going to become more apparent, but the difference is NOWHERE near that of the last generation (obviously, since that was SD vs HD).

Also, the other two need to multitask so if you take that into account, the difference in memory available for games is also quite a bit smaller than most of you will think. The Wii U has 2GB: 1GB for the OS and 1GB for games, the other two have 8GB, but because of them doing all these different things with it, like playing Blurays, live game video streaming/recording, OS, and so on almost two thirds of that is reserved, leaving only 2,6GB on average for games. To some extent the same also goes for the CPU, since that also has to handle more in the other two consoles, so it being "way" more powerful doesn't mean all that much in the larger picture. Mainly because the architectures are so different you can't just do a one on one comparison of the CPU/GPU/RAM. It just doesn't work that way. And don't get me started on all the "don't know what to do with or how to implement the GamePad" BS...

But I'm drifting off course because this was about why there's hate, not about how powerful the Wii U actually is or not...

In conclusion, with all that in mind, here are some possible reasons why the industry or third party developers (or rather publishers) would "hate" the Wii U or Nintendo: (I say "hate" because it is for the largest part simply a business decision based on money instead of an emotional one)

  • Nintendo makes the hardware that it wants, not giving third parties their way in giving them a platform to make easy money on.
  • The bigger companies still remember the stranglehold Nintendo had on them in the old days and may still feel some resentment
  • Because of Nintendo's marketing failure, the Wii U platform is too small to make a decent profit on, making development too costly
  • Self-fulfilling prophecy behavior by delivering inferior versions of their own software for full price to "prove" it doesn't sell on Wii U

It is NOT about power, the GamePad, region locking, different chip sets and it's DEFINITELY not about Iwata, that one is too ridiculous to even consider being worth mentioning. Simply put: if the Wii U's market share was large enough, then most of these games WOULD be coming to Wii U, there's no doubt about that, not even a millisecond. Why else did the Wii get so many of these games, practically the whole COD series included, even though the graphic fidelity was WAY lower? Because of money, THAT'S why...
(and Nintendo's marketing is largely at fault for that this time around)

Well, those were my 2(000) cents. Thanks for reading it all if you did.

P.S.

I'd like to compliment a couple of people on their comments because they were intelligent and for the larger part well thought out:

@JaxonH - some thoughtful comments, and a nice read as almost always
@Ootfan98 - Your first couple of comments: nail on the head my friend. Nail on the head...
@Nintenjoe64 - constructive and positive comments but without the rosy colored fanboy BS. Cheers...
@sub12 - Even though we don't agree on all points (opinions and such, what can you do?) your comments come across as well thought out
@Ralek85 - same goes for you
@SCAR392 - To the point, as always
@kkslider5552000 - you brought up some nice reality checks... ;)

Edited on by TheRealThanos

'The console wars are like boobs. Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'

Nintendo Network ID: TheRealThanos

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

104. Posted:

@arnoldlayne83
He's right, though. The biggest 3rd party games PS4 and Xbox One are mainly getting enhanced 8th generation versions of 7th generation games. There is a difference, but not much. I bought an Xbox One, but I'm not one the people complaining about which console has the most games or anything. The only reason why we're talking about this, is because Wii U got a ton of crap for getting games that didn't look that much better than last gen(ZombiU, Pikmin 3, Super Mario 3D World, etc), but now Xbox One and PS4 are getting basically the same games as last gen and people are ok with that, but they aren't with essentially the same situation on Wii U, 3rd parties excluded. All that tells anyone is that those people that were complaining about the Wii U were going to buy Xbox One or PS4, regardless. People are complaining about something that wouldn't have changed their opinion.

@PilksUK
Ya, except today is today, and today the Wii U has more games. It easier to admit that you just want to buy PS4, because of the graphics, instead of making up this more games bullcrap that didn't change your opinion last year. We're beating a dead horse here by talking about what system has the most games, because it won't change anyone's opinion and they'll go buy Xbox One or PS4 anyway. It would be like if I told you I would buy PS4 if a new Crash Bandicoot came out exclusively to it, then it actually happens, and I'm like "Well, it's still not enough". My words are considered bullcrap at that point. Saying that PS4 will have more games by nect year is a cop-out, because next year is not today.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

mamp

105. Posted:

@TheRealThanos Ain't nobody got time for that. Condense my friend, condense.

The cat's the only cat who knows where it's at.
NNID: Muffin-Gun

3DS Friend Code: 3136-6586-7657

AuthorMessage
Avatar

arnoldlayne83

106. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

@arnoldlayne83
He's right, though. The biggest 3rd party games PS4 and Xbox One are mainly getting enhanced 8th generation versions of 7th generation games. There is a difference, but not much. I bought an Xbox One, but I'm not one the people complaining about which console has the most games or anything. The only reason why we're talking about this, is because Wii U got a ton of crap for getting games that didn't look that much better than last gen(ZombiU, Pikmin 3, Super Mario 3D World, etc), but now Xbox One and PS4 are getting basically the same games as last gen and people are ok with that, but they aren't with essentially the same situation on Wii U, 3rd parties excluded. All that tells anyone is that those people that were complaining about the Wii U were going to buy Xbox One or PS4, regardless. People are complaining about something that wouldn't have changed their opinion.

People are not ok with that either, a lot of complains about lack of "true" next gen.... only few games already started to show some new features and graphical improvement, but overall the current gen (ps4,xbox1) is very unripe

And about "which has more games" is not so much about numbers, it is more about variety, if I like football games or fps, or even rpg, on wiiU at the moment I have nothing to play with.... and nothing to play with even in future.... of course, if I was a platform freak, with wiiU I'll be ok for the rest of my life....

Concerning total numbers, make a projection to end 2015, you will see.... WiiU got a title/month from now (ehm, from september) to end 2015 (to be positive).... Xbox1 and PS4 got at least 4/5 titles a month....

Edited on by arnoldlayne83

psn: markthesovver83 ; Nnid: arnoldlayne83

Nintendo Network ID: arnoldlayne83

AuthorMessage
Avatar

TheRealThanos

107. Posted:

mamp wrote:

@TheRealThanos Ain't nobody got time for that. Condense my friend, condense.

If one wants to know the whole story, one cannot condense...
Didn't put the warning before the story for nothing; it's up to the reader if he wants to pick my brain or not. ;)

'The console wars are like boobs. Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'

Nintendo Network ID: TheRealThanos

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Jazzer94

108. Posted:

@TheRealThanos I keep seeing comments along the lines of publishers/developers should stop being lazy whenever a game isn't announced for Wii U but why should they have to jump through hoops bring games to the system that will struggle to even reach 400k, these are businesses who's primary goal is to make money just like Nintendo are so I can't understand how trying to make things easier like less optimization on games from having all consoles using the same architecture is seen as bad, honestly there is to much of an entitled attitude with gamers in general.

PSN: mangaJman
SSBB FC: 1204-1132-2888
The Jazzloggery
Once you see you can never unsee Everyone's favorite videogame character
I keep getting this feeling that I should write something down here........................

3DS Friend Code: 5155-3100-6367 | Nintendo Network ID: Justinius94

AuthorMessage
Avatar

kkslider5552000

109. Posted:

TheRealThanos put things in perspective quite well.

The reality is, for as many mistakes as Nintendo has made...can we really say a lot of these 3rd party publishers have given us any reason to believe they know what they're doing or have an understanding other than their own? Do we trust EA when it spends months trying to fix servers for their own games, to the point that they get lawsuits over it? Can we trust WB, that cared more about DLC than fixing Arkham Origins? Can we trust Capcom, who made ONE OF THEIR TOP GUYS WORK THROUGH A SEVERE ILLNESS? Can we trust Square Enix, who originally couldn't make a profit out of the Tomb Raider reboot despite being one of the best selling games of that year? Can we trust those people to understand how to make a game anyone would play on a different console with a different audience? Nintendo could help, but it's apparent that the price to make this work on a Nintendo console (even ignoring the Wii U sales fails) would be absolutely insane and not justifiable to any company.

If Nintendo and Wii U are to be criticized, it should be for three main reasons as far as I can. (we'll ignore marketing and advertising)
1. For letting the Wii die a year and a half early and utterly failing to keep up momentum.
2. For their one major attempt to focus on 3rd parties being a cluster**** launch with games you could buy on other systems. The fact that something as Japanese as Monster Hunter is Wii U's big 3rd party success says a lot to me.
3. Going their different direction, and not doing enough to attract developers. Considering how Nintendo is already publishing games that wouldn't exist if Nintendo wasn't publishing them, I could probably name a lot of developers and games that were screwed over by AAA publishers and could use this opportunity. There's probably enough games that fit that category that would do ANYTHING for a second chance to fill in that 3rd party void. Or they could just take my advice and make a small part of their company exist solely to publish other people's games.

3DS friend code: 2878 - 9709 - 5054
Nintendo Network ID: SliderGamer55

I have a Let's Play channel? How?!

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Sleepingmudkip

110. Posted:

Or maybe cause the Wii U came out first so all the fanboys and critics gave it all the hate.

Think how different it would of been if WiiU came out with the other consoles or if the ps4 or Xbox1 came out over a year before the other consoles.

idk if anyone already said this

Deluxe WII U

Limited Edition Pikachu 3DS

The Final 2 Great Turn-Base RPGs Pokemon and Fire Emblem

3DS Friend Code: 3136-7674-9891 | Nintendo Network ID: lionel1 | Twitter: JohnGreenGod

AuthorMessage
Avatar

TheRealThanos

111. Posted:

@Hernandez There was a friendly warning at the beginning, so you could have known. But 30 minutes? That's slow reading bro, it took me less than that to type it... ;)

Jazzer94 wrote:

@TheRealThanos I keep seeing comments along the lines of publishers/developers should stop being lazy whenever a game isn't announced for Wii U but why should they have to jump through hoops bring games to the system that will struggle to even reach 400k, these are businesses who's primary goal is to make money just like Nintendo are so I can't understand how trying to make things easier like less optimization on games from having all consoles using the same architecture is seen as bad, honestly there is to much of an entitled attitude with gamers in general.

If you read the whole piece, then you could have seen that I said not ALL developers and I also explained it is mainly a money issue and not a skill issue because most of them are VERY familiar with architectures such as used in the Wii U, and if their employer had given them enough time, they could have made some truly decent ports, that could also have looked quite a bit better than last gen's console versions.

And they DID have more than enough time to properly develop in the beginning of the Wii U's life cycle, when the whole money vs installed base thing wasn't even an issue yet, but even then they didn't optimize their CPU based games towards the Wii U's GPGPU based structure, which they COULD have done. (Criterion at least made an effort with the distinctly better looking NFS: Most Wanted)

Shoddy ports ended up being the result, and the Wii U, already being marketed poorly by Nintendo suffered a lot of bad reviews as a result, and all that combined resulted in an ever increasing spiral of poor sales.
Third parties ran for no other reason than not being able to earn enough money off of Wii U/Nintendo. Understandable from a business point of view, but they need to say as much and not come up with all these BS reasons and they should have at least made a complete effort. Only a few developers did, but by then it was already to late: the damage was done. All other games/gimped ports fulfilled their own destiny by not selling well for the obvious reasons: no multiplayer/online, no current/future DLC, no optimization and let's not forget still asking for full price, like in the case of Mass Effect where other platforms got the whole trilogy for less.

EDIT: forgot the worst offender: delayed releases...

Edited on by TheRealThanos

'The console wars are like boobs. Sony and Microsoft fight over which ones look the nicest and Nintendo's are the most fun to play with.'

Nintendo Network ID: TheRealThanos

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

112. Posted:

@arnoldlayne83
Ya, and Wii U is even less ripe than Xbox One and PS4, because they never put in as much effort into their games for Wii U as they did for those consoles. Consumers are just as much part of why Wii U is the way it is. It's that whole "vicious cycle" thing, and there is no way to end it. Relatively speaking, people SHOULD have bought the Wii U for games like CoD Black Ops II, considering they bought Xbox One and PS4 for Ghosts. So it doesn't make sense why people would complain about the lack of 3rd party titles when they didn't buy them anyway.

I bought CoD on Wii U. Xbox One and PS4 weren't even out yet, and that means people didn't want to buy CoD on Wii U. They wanted to buy CoD on Xbox and PS, instead.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

mamp

113. Posted:

@TheRealThanos Can't believe I actually read through it but I found time :) For sure I know of some companies that hold a grudge against Nintendo due to their old business practices.

Also I recently saw this video post. While I do believe image plays some factor I don't believe image is everything.

Edited on by mamp

The cat's the only cat who knows where it's at.
NNID: Muffin-Gun

3DS Friend Code: 3136-6586-7657

AuthorMessage
Avatar

DefHalan

114. Posted:

@mamp

That was the most convincing argument for a price drop I have seen. Also it is just a great video.

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

sub12

115. Posted:

@mamp

Good video, and I do agree that Rare helped give Nintendo that cool factor in the 5th gen, I almost wonder if Nintendo will keep on coming back to Platinum Games to help provide that mature edge...........one thing Platinum has more so than Rare is that the titles appeal to both Japanese and Western gamers, although admittedly, despite being highly praised they rarely set the world on fire sales wise............unless Nintendo allows them to work with some of there IP's, that's what made Rare explode, right? Rare was already know for Battletoads and pushing the hardware of the NES, but it was the Donkey Kong IP and DKC that allowed the company to explode.

sub12

AuthorMessage
Avatar

kereke12

116. Posted:

gage_wolf wrote:

kereke12 wrote:

& the reason why Nintendo is being hated so much is because of one person — Mr. Satora Iwata. I'm going to be honest here, I Love Nintendo, big diehard ever since i was a kid and still am but Mr. Iwata doesn't seem to be doing his job very good job at the matter of 3rd parties support. That's the way I feel, he's not doing his job. Its his fault that us Nintendo owners don't see 3rd-parties games that we have to result to other platforms. I stand by on what I just said. HE'S NOT DOING HIS JOB!!!

You get a Wii U yet?

No because its a console not worth getting even though what types of games it has & it hurts me to even say that.

LONG LIVE NINTENDO

Nintendo Network ID: Kereke12

AuthorMessage
Avatar

kereke12

117. Posted:

I'm sorry but I just had to say it, its not worth getting. Because If Nintendo is not going to put effort into the console then why should I? That's the way I see it, there not putting enough effort in the console. Again I'm going to say it again it hurts me to even say it & I'm a hardcore Nintendo fan...

LONG LIVE NINTENDO

Nintendo Network ID: Kereke12

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

118. Posted:

I can't be bothered reading the whole thread................ but in general the answer to these things is:
1. People only go on the internet to vent and whine. When something's great you won't bother talking about it
2. Everyone loves jumping on their soapbox. You think it's bad for the Wii U? Turn on the news
3. People have invested hundreds on their new gaming platform. Some feel the need to defend their choice
4. The average performance of the Wii U early on gave people ammo

But at the end of the day if you're a user who's happy with your choice? Bugger them. Who are they to say what sort of content you should or shouldn't enjoy? Equally if they're enjoying the XBOne right now? More power to them. People get so worked up over this crap. Imagine if there were endless threads about what brand TV is the best and the different sized market share. This is just as stupid as that.

Edited on by skywake

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

jariw

119. Posted:

kereke12 wrote:

I'm sorry but I just had to say it, its not worth getting. Because If Nintendo is not going to put effort into the console then why should I? That's the way I see it, there not putting enough effort in the console. Again I'm going to say it again it hurts me to even say it & I'm a hardcore Nintendo fan...

I don't consider myself a hardcore Nintendo fan, but I do think Nintendo puts lots of efforts into the Wii U and its games. We get a great value from the Wii U, and the OS updates have added excellent features, such as the Quick Start. The main trouble is that we already have far more great games to play now that we will ever complete. However, if you're going to a forum just to discuss a machine you aren't interested to use, there will not be much to discuss really.

Current Top 10: DK:TF, Pikmin 3, MK8, Stealth Inc. 2, Scram Kitty, SM3DW, LEGO City: Undercover, Bayonetta 1+2, SSB U, Rayman Legends
Looking forward to:
Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker, Affordable Space Adventures, X, Hex Heroes, Yoshi's Wooly World, Splatoon, and more

AuthorMessage
Avatar

kereke12

120. Posted:

jariw wrote:

kereke12 wrote:

I'm sorry but I just had to say it, its not worth getting. Because If Nintendo is not going to put effort into the console then why should I? That's the way I see it, there not putting enough effort in the console. Again I'm going to say it again it hurts me to even say it & I'm a hardcore Nintendo fan...

I don't consider myself a hardcore Nintendo fan, but I do think Nintendo puts lots of efforts into the Wii U and its games. We get a great value from the Wii U, and the OS updates have added excellent features, such as the Quick Start. The main trouble is that we already have far more great games to play now that we will ever complete. However, if you're going to a forum just to discuss a machine you aren't interested to use, there will not be much to discuss really.

Not enough to get third-parties but that's not the problem with why some people hate the Wii U...As for me I don't hate the Wii U, I see a lot of great potential in the console. Its just at the moment I'm not convinced into getting one as of right now...

LONG LIVE NINTENDO

Nintendo Network ID: Kereke12