@LDXD @SirMario Thanks guys for the laugh!

And which game(s) is it that are going to start the console selling?

I actually beat this game - I nearly had a nervous breakdown from frustration, but yeah, I beat it.

The 3DS is rapidly becoming my favourite console of all-time.

"If anyone wonders why third-party enthusiasm and support matters, the trials and tribulations faced by Nintendo delivering system-selling games shows that the famous company can't do all of the work on its own. Modern development and consumer expectations make that task too great, and help will be needed."

Yes, this is true, but you've missed the most critical part - in the HD generation, Nintendo all but has to have the licensing and royalty fees that stem from third parties selling their games on Nintendo's platforms. This money is vital (and I dare say, "critical") with the over inflated cost of HD development. I've spoken here at NL on just this many times prior to Wii U's release - Nintendo was not prepared for the HD era. It's development teams (per team) needed to at least double in size - what 10 engineers could do in SD, it can take 20-30 in HD; this is a simple fact with the development of HD games.

This severely inflates the cost to develop a video game. The reason that Iwata stated that: "it is more challenging to sell packaged software for around $50-$60." wasn't just because it was needing to make more games to keep the platform viable in the market, it was because it isn't profiting from being a platform holder, with the all but complete loss of third party support. All of the R&D cost for the Wii U, manufacturing cost to get the console to the market (and sold at a loss) and severely inflated development cost of its HD games, there's little to no profit left, especially with less than 4 million consoles on the market.

If you understand the inner workings of the gaming industry, you would have understood that Nintendo is at a high risk of staying in the red with the Wii U, unless it either develops major landmark titles that sells the console by the tens of millions, or the third party support returns in mass. Otherwise, Nintendo's investors will most likely make sure that this is Nintendo's final foray in the HD home console market. This is also why Nintendo's current strategy of playing it "safe" isn't a financially sound thing to do.

Time has a good point - Nintendo has done little to nothing to show-off the potential of the GamePad. If consumers are going to pay a premium price for this underpowered console (that's only $50 less than the PS4) then Nintendo absolutely needs to give them a reason to do so.

So far, Nintendo has done nothing to prove that the GamePad is an essential gaming peripheral. Until it does so, the Wii U will continue to lose the mainstream audience.

@Rafie Absolutely not. Nintendo absolutely doesn't need to even touch cloud-based gaming. Sony alone spent $380 million USD to acquire Gaikai for its cloud-based sector of its industry, and that was just in acquisition. I'm sure it spent another $300 million thereafter to implement the service. This is not something that Nintendo wants to dabble in - it doesn't even have a full digital service yet, and Nintendo gamers refuse to buy third party titles. I don't see how this would be profitable for Nintendo.

In regards to the Wii U - it all comes down to the hardware. Yes, Mario Kart 8 looks absolutely fantastic, but this is because Mario Kart doesn't utilize a physics engine, like most modern day racers (Gran Turismo 6, GRID 2 and Forza 5). Mario Kart 8 can indeed looks absolutely amazing - also remember that we haven't seen this run in real-time yet - but the majority of the CPU and GPU's power is pushing graphics, where in other titles the majority of the power consumption would be allocated to the physics engine (tyre grip, weight ratio management, aerodynamics, braking bias, etc., etc., which is all being rendered in real-time via user input). If you added an advanced physics engine to Mario Kart 8, either it wouldn't run on the Wii U, or the graphics would take a significant hit. The art of designing video games is literally a ballet dance of power management. When you compare the hardware specifications of the next generation consoles to the Wii U - the Wii U doesn't even come close to standing with them. Both the Xbox One and PS4 double current generation consoles power and the Wii U is literally right above average with the current generation.

With that said, Nintendo is no longer competing with these two consoles with the Wii U, which is why it didn't have an E3 presentation. The Wii U cannot run next generation games without major sacrifices, especially once the second/final waves of games that push these immensely powerful consoles' limits come into fruition. The Wii U titles would only be gimped and there's no sense in that - Nintendo is better off doing its own thing and hopefully third parties will show a little support going forward (original titles).

@Rafie I'll put it to you straight up - from a technical standpoint, the Wii U is about half the specs of the Xbox 720 and PS4. Another thing that gets little to no talk here at Nintendo Life and is a major selling point for both of the upcoming consoles is cloud gaming. This will play a major role in the next generation and Nintendo hasn't even caught up with the current generation in regards to online gaming.

I absolutely disagree with this sentiment. E3 has shown that Nintendo is practically own its own to sell this console, with third party support falling beyond low. Nintendo played it safe with New Super Mario Bros. U and it didn't sell the console. Why would playing is safe with Super Mario 3D World be any different?

The fact that Super Mario 3D Land is largely a multiplayer title, shows just how out of touch Nintendo has been with the Wii U, because tablets are not commonly seen as something used for local multiplayer experiences by the mainstream audience. Nintendo fans have always looked to Mario's 3D outings for a large and robust single player experience - something that the Wii U is in dire need of - and this simply isn't it.

The Wii U absolutely needs ground breaking first party titles, not "safe" games. How anyone can think that Nintendo playing "safe" with a severely struggling system is a commercially smart move for Nintendo to make is beyond me. Sony has been playing it "safe" with the Vita - it is failing on the market!

Super Smash Bros. and Mario Kart 8, however, both look absolutely incredible and I've no doubt that both of these titles will move units off of store shelves. The only issue with these, is that Super Smash Bros. will be available on the 3DS, which is how I'll be purchasing it - I would have bought a Wii U just for SSB, had it not been developed for the 3DS.

I was dead-set on buying a Wii U before E3 later this year, but after seeing what Sony is doing/providing with the PS4, I preordered the upcoming console within mere minutes of Sony's conference ending.

This looks incredible!

Wouldn't the 4 player game have been better suited for the Wii, and not a single screen console?

@Rafie No apologies needed at all, my friend. I was merely letting you in on why you at times come across comments such as the ones you were mentioning here at NL. There are also a lot of younger readers here and if you were anything like me when I was an adolescent, the games I owned were the BEST, and the competition was nowhere near as good. Haha

You probably don't want to see my PSN gamer card, it's absurdly filled with trophies. And on that front, that is another thing that I think Nintendo is missing out on with the Wii U - it absolutely should have implemented trophies with the Wii U, seeing how it could have been further integrated into Miiverse; 1-up on the competition.

@Adam If it wasn't for Uncharted's character development, narratives, high production values and cinematic flare, I wouldn't care for it either. The climbing segments have gotten old and the repetitive shooting elements are wearing thin for me too, but I love the characters (the most), and that is what keeps me coming back to the series.

@Rafie I think one thing you might be missing is that many readers here at NL don't have experience with games like Uncharted, Tomb Raider (newest) and many other of these big budget high profile titles. It is hard for these readers to comprehend the difference(s) between a game like this and The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, which is a poor comparison in itself - no offence to this article's writer.

Also, don't think that people that play Battlefield and Call of Duty don't play other types of games, because many of them most certainly do.

You don't just simply "develop" a game like The Last of Us. Naughty Dog and Insomniac Studios - both studios worked within the same building that Sony built specially for the two teams to work within/together - have worked together for decades to learn how to develop a game of this calibre. The difference between the original Uncharted and the third entry in the series is astounding, alone.

Nintendo doesn't simply put a team together to develop these types of titles. It would have to build a team that has a lot of experience developing games such as this - entirely possible with all of the failing companies - and then start from scratch. If Nintendo started this right now, we would not likely see a title like The Last of Us for another 4-6 years on the Wii U.

Nintendo should have done this 5 years ago and had a title such as this ready for the launch of the Wii U.

The wait is KILLING me!

Speaking of Deus Ex: Human Revolution - that is this month's freebie on PS+. I've got to download that one today.

@Damo I would never expect any fan site to do a "in-depth company profile" for a news piece - this audience simply isn't looking for this kind of information here.

We will have to agree to disagree on the "newbie/veteran" debate - I personally wouldn't consider a company that has been in business for 15 years a "newbie."

In short, I just felt that the article should have stated that GungHo was quite a large publisher and not a one-trick pony (a quick Google search is all that is needed to research this). Because when it seems that this publisher/developer is just that, then (to me) the article came off like it was intentionally designed to smear GungHo and its CEO for his statement.

I'm not, and wasn't, trying to attack you for your writing style - this wasn't the only article that was written in this manner on this very topic - I just don't like to see a publisher/developer not given the credit that it deserves.

@ramstrong You have a fantastic knowledge of the English language, as you write better than most native to it - I applaud you for that. In regards to your comment, that is the very reason that I stated what I did.

Underestimating Nintendo is one thing that nobody in the industry should ever do!

@Damo "A" title. GungHo is a major publisher in Japan and if you read some of the above comments, it appears that your readers might have been misinformed - it seems that a some of them think that GungHo only owns one IP, which if true, would make this guy look near insane to voice accisations such as this. Not only does GungHo have large, successful MMO's published, but it also owns Grasshopper, which your readers are very likely to be extremely familiar with, because of its success with its niche titles on Nintendo's platforms: Killer7, No More Heroes and Contact.

While I will agree that it is only here recently we are hearing of "GungHo" outside of Japan, that doesn't negate this company's successes in its native country, where it is a major publisher.

Great job at making GungHo Online Entertainment sound like a minor start-up company!

GungHo has been in business since 1998 and the company has developed titles (primarily Japanese) for the PlayStation 2, PSP, DS, Vita, Mobile and PC. The company runs multiple major MMOs: Ragnarok Online, Shin Megami Tensei: Imagine, Grandia Online and Ragnarok DS.

Yes, Puzzle Dragons is doing very well for GungHo, but it is the Ragnarok series that has boosted GungHo into its position in the Japanese market.

I completely forgot that GungHo Online Entertainment owns Grasshopper Manufacture.

The 3DS has quickly become my primary gaming console here lately.

This is one of the most unprofessional things I've seen from a senior level employee for one of the major companies in the gaming industry. If I was his superior, Mr. Summerwill would be without a job right now.

@banacheck I think Indie games have a fantastic chance to shine on the Wii U, actually. The Wii U eShop isn't flooded with shovel-ware like the iOS Marketplace and direct ripoff software like what is found on the Google Play store. Also, the Wii U has so many unique control options and features, that it allows the Indies to be overly creative with its games; in short, I think the Wii U is a perfect place for the Indies to shift over too.

For Nintendo-only fans, this might be controversial, but with the Wii U and the Vita being so similar technology wise, and Sony's massive push for Indies as well, I think (hope) that we are going to see a lot of Indie games being in development for both the Vita and the Wii U. This doubles the chances for the Indies to make more money on marketplaces that are desperate for games and gives a better chance of finding them making enough money to develop another title thereafter. But with that said, I do not think that the Indies alone can "save" - that's not a word I'm accustomed to using - neither the Wii U or the Vita.

@theadrock13 Ah! But it is pretty clear that Nintendo greatly leveraged on the third parties offering large support for the Wii U in its early life cycle. But, it is also not like Nintendo hasn't supported the console too - New Super Mario Bros. U is indeed a new core entry in the "Mario" franchise, but it isn't shifting consoles.

One thing I'm hearing a lot of, is "when the "core" games come to the Wii U it will start selling." While this is certainly true, to an extent, remember that the top selling Zelda title, Ocarina of Time, shifted 7.6 million copies worldwide. It was the casual gamers who bought the Wii consoles like hotcakes at IHOP - Twilight Princess shifted 5.8 million units, compared to Wii Fit's 22.6 million and Wii Fit Plus's 20 million. The only core titles that topped the 20 million mark - which is outrageously high numbers! - is Mario Kart Wii, which sold because of the wheel attachment and New Super Mario Bros. Wii, which was a packed in game late in the console's lifespan.

Nintendo walked away from the casual gamers with the Wii U - that was its mistake with the Wii U, in my opinion.

Nintendo's biggest hurdle, in my opinion, is the other side of its own sword: 3DS. The 3DS is absolutely phenomenal and doing incredibly well in the market right now. The upcoming release line-up for the handheld is so good, in fact, that I have no reason to invest in a Wii U. It's only been a few hours since I walked out of Gamestop to reserve my copies of Donkey Kong Country Returns 3D and Animal Crossing: New Leaf. The 3DS is more than enough to satisfy my "Nintendo" needs.

This can also be said for the Vita as well. The Vita offers much of the same thing that the PS3 already has - just as the Wii U does for the 3DS - so why should consumers spend more money to play either the same or similar titles on the systems they already own? They likely won't and the sales are the proof for both the Vita and the Wii U.

@ramstrong The link to Digitally Downloaded is "my" link - I'm the editor for the website.

FUSE is releasing on the Xbox 360 and PS3 on May 28th. That is the only two systems that the game is currently releasing on. Yes, Insomniac Games did release Outernauts on Facebook, but that is only one part of the company. Outernauts looks to be coming to mobile platforms in the future, as well too, so that is most likely what that sector of the company is currently working on, as it has said that the Outernauts IP is not going anywhere any time soon and that the team is heavily invested into it.

To the best of my knowledge, FUSE does not look to be in development for the PS4 or Xbox 720.

@ramstrong I think you should read our interview with Price.

@odd69 Sony owns the Resistance IP, so it will never see the light of day on any console that isn't owned by Sony.

@ramstrong I think you are quite far off base, to be perfectly honest. Insomniac Games is a third party developer that has been exclusively developing first party quality titles for Sony for nearly two decades. Now that the company has recently decided to release its titles on multiple platforms, it chose the platforms (PS3 and Xbox 360) with the highest install base, in the hopes of a maximum profit return. The Wii U only has 3 million consoles on the market, the chances for Insomniac Games to make a profit on the console with a title like FUSE is questionable, seeing how Call of Duty: Black Ops II didn't fare too well on the console.

@Tony_342 Yes, Ted Price is indeed a great guy. Personally, I'm a big fan of the team's Ratchet and Clank titles and it is certainly clear that Super Mario Bros. is a large inspiration for the series.

Yes, it does seem that the team is spread too thin at the moment. The transition from an exclusive third party developer to a multiplatform third party developer isn't as simple as some might think it to be. Tackling the new Wii U and all of its features would be a time consuming ordeal for the team.

Seeing what all Insomniac Games has done in the past on Sony's consoles, it is extremely exciting to imagine the possibilities of what the team could do on Nintendo's hardware in the future.

@K1LLEGAL Just a quick heads-up on one quick thing - Insomniac Games has always been a third party developer. It started developing games for the PlayStation One with Disruptor and then found massive success with Spyro the Dragon. Its success and great working relationship with Sony - it shared an office space with Naughty Dog (Crash Bandicoot, Jak and Daxter, Uncharted and The Last of US) - and had a great working relationship with Sony, which kept them singly developing for Sony.

Sometimes developers get tired of sticking with the same series for too long. Insomniac Games needed a change and it moved into multiplatform development. It's already published Outernaughts for the PC (Facebook) and FUSE is coming to both the PS3 and the 360. Oh, and its CEO Ted Price is a really cool guy too!

@Philip_J_Reed Ticket to Ride is flipping awesome!

Glad to see Riptide GP on the list.

Cannot wait to get my hands on this!

I've got the Champions Pack and love it, but I'll wait until the rest are discounted at some point to invest in the others - the prices are a bit too high for the content available.

Just for you Phil.

@Zaphod_Beeblebrox I was being facetious.

I'm offended by the complete lack of feet in Fire Emblem: Awakening. What the heck does Nintendo have against people having feet anyway?

I have an absolute ton of respect for the Unity team and what they are doing for indie developers.

With that said, you don't build The Legend of Zelda and other triple-A titles on the Unity Engine. It's the triple-A titles that sell dedicated gaming consoles, so banking on the Unity Engine is not the answer to selling the Wii U for Nintendo. I've always said that Unity + Wii U's numerous control options will blossom fantastic indie titles though.

If only Nintendo could patch in some actual feet! Haha

And @rjejr hits the nail that it seems nearly every journalist is missing right on the flipping head.

For Nintendo fans, sure, this is a good thing. For all those Microsoft and Sony fans who might end up on the fence if those consoles end up being quite expensive - do you think they will even think about the Wii U that they won't be seeing at E3 this year?

The fact that Nintendo is making the Wii U look like a family/casual system isn't helping it either.

@SCAR392 Okay, you're on the right track here, but let me get you locked on. Think of it this way, Nintendo is bringing a new Smash Bros. to the Wii U, and it is and has been funding the entire project since day one, and will continue to do so all the way up until it launches. It's paying salaries, insurance and retirement for employees, rent (and accommodations) for the buildings they work in, not to mention the high-end computers and equipment to build the game on. When the game releases and starts selling, it doesn't make one cent until the millions of dollars that it cost to produce the games is covered.

But, let's say Tiger Woods PGA Tour 14 did just release on the Wii U, Nintendo would have charged EA both licensing and royalty fees to put its game on the Wii U. This is a lot of money - and it would have came at no risk or financial output to Nintendo. In short, Nintendo just lost millions of dollars, because Tiger Woods PGA Tour 14 didn't release on the Wii U.

What is happening right now, is that EA seems to not think that it will make money once it pays these fees - plus recovering the cost to develop/port these titles to the Wii U on top of them. EA will pay these expensive fees - it doesn't have a console of its own - but it has to recover a lot more than a first party developer, making a console with a low install base an extremely high risk of taking a significant loss on.

Nintendo does indeed need these licensing and royalty fees, because this is how it recovers the huge amounts of capital it sinks into developing its hardware. Hardware sales only bring in pennies to the overall cost to develop and produce these consoles. When Nintendo developed the Wii U, it actually invested into itself, by spending tens/hundreds of millions of dollars to produce the system - it's return (or profit) if found in these licensing fees and royalties that come from the third parties.

Where the card falls into Nintendo's hand, is that it has to give these big publishers a reason that they should put their games on its system that it has spent so much money to produce. Nintendo isn't going to pay anyone to get third party games on the Wii U - that would defeat the purpose - but it could partner in advertising campaigns or special media related events to make these games get a lot of additional exposure prior to released. There are things that can be done, that are profitable to both parties and I'm sure these things are happening behind the scenes.

Where 'gamers' make a difference, is in how they spend their money. Time and again, we see that gamers who own Nintendo's home console simply don't want to buy third party games, even when the install base for the consoles is extremely high. When you have around 70 million Wii units sold worldwide and Madden 11 only sell .7 million copies on the system - it isn't hard to see that these console owners aren't interested in these games on Nintendo's systems.

The majority of these gamers own multiple systems and they are buying EA's games on their other systems. So what you have now is the Nintendo loyal that only own the Wii U simply isn't enough to support these games.

And that's pretty much the sum of it, really. I hope that helps clarify things a bit more for you.

@SCAR392 It's simple, if you don't like what EA is doing, then don't buy its games. I'm not defending anyone, I'm just putting it out there just like it is.

Yes. There are things that I don't like in EA's games. I'm a big fan of the Dead Space franchise, but even I had had enough of Dead Space 3 after about 8 hours of it. I also don't like how the Origin implementation slows down Tiger Woods PGA Tour 14 either, but the exceptional Country Club offerings keep me playing it over and again, not to mention the excellent new control scheme that was further refined off of last year's game.

EA is trying new things. It is trying to find new ways to pull in the needed revenue to make larger risk in a shaky business going forward. No. I do not like everything that EA does, but I cannot deny that it makes fantastic games that are desired my by millions of gamers each and every year.

If EA thinks the Wii U isn't a viable platform to make a profit with any of its games, that's not EA's problem - it is Nintendo's.

@DePapier You obviously have no idea how the gaming industry actually functions and your rants show it. Eidos Montreal is nothing on it own, it can't fully fund triple-A games, which is why its games are published by Square Enix. Criterion is the exact same, a game developer, who is funded by EA to develop its triple-A games. You take away Square Enix and EA and you lose both of these studios, unless another publisher buys them.

And no, Nintendo cannot compete in today's gaming industry without the likes of EA, Activision and Ubisoft, regardless if you like them or not. The licensing fees and royalties from these companies' games bring in tremendous amounts of revenue for Nintendo, at absolutely zero cost to it.

Nintendo doesn't have enough developers to keep its consoles as viable products in the industry without third party support. If Nintendo was to lose complete third party support, its only option would be to become a third party developer or to be acquired by a larger parent company (e.g. Apple, Samsung).

@Lionsgate You're exactly right mate. It's nice to see someone else here who understands how these publishers' function.

@Five-seveN Ha! Yeah, there was one point in that game that I just had to set my controller down and walk away for a few hours. It was one of those rare moments in gaming where I actually questioned my morality, because the unintentional end result of my choices was so terrible that it made me sick to my stomach. Very rare moment indeed.

@aaronsullivan The price develop triple-A titles for next generation isn't actually much higher than the current generation consoles. The PS4's architecture is so developer friendly that not only are many developers showing commitments to it - many are showing real excitement to develop for it.

Yet, there are still those who are still taking risk out there. 2K Games took a massive risk last year with the absolutely stomach-churning storyline it chose to use in its title, Spec Ops: The Line, which literally gave the finger to the vast majority of modern shooters stereotypical cast and narratives. Instead, it opted to bring the realities of war to a videogame format - it worked, in an way that will give you nightmares for a few weeks.

BioShock Infinite takes an even higher risk by challenging many of the societal issues that plagued modern society for centuries: racism, oppression and glamorization to name a few.

I do agree that the vast majority of big budget titles are going the route of least resistance, but it is just as you stated: the home console market is losing its share to other/newer forms of virtual entertainment. Those who take risk and fail are severely punished. This isn't because of the developers and it most certainly isn't because developers want it to be this way - it is this way because this is how consumers are choosing to spend their money.

Nintendo played a major hand in these changes. It got non-gamers and casual gamers hooked on cheaper titles that are pick up and play friendly hooked, and then the mobile market rushed in to take absolute advantage of this new trend. Nintendo, on the other hand, failed to captivate these new gamers with the Wii U and lost many of its core gamers in the process of acquiring the casuals with the Wii.

New Super Mario Bros. U played it safe, but it isn't selling consoles either - showing that this method doesn't always work too.