Topic: Is the Wii U a failure?

I was just providing a resource so people can know what they're talking about. And that page literally says nothing of quality, any qualitative difference is down to subjective preference, obviously.

New Super Mario Bros. U – Nothing special
New Super Luigi U – Same as the last one, only with Luigi
Pikmin 3 – First Pikmin since GameCube!
The Wonderful 101 – Ok I guess...
The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker HD – Just a remaster
Super Mario 3D World – Good game, but not the same wow-factor as Galaxy
Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate – Good, but still just a upscale from the 3DS
Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze – New DK-game is always welcome.
Hyrule Warriors – Good
Bayonetta 2 - Good
Bayonetta - Good
Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker - Good puzzle game
Kirby and the Rainbow Curse – Not as good as Epic Yarn

I wouldn't say the Wii U libary beats it's predecessors.
The Wii U game doesn't really do a homerun when it comes to revolutionary new gameplay.

Is the World of Warcraft factor similar to the LoL coefficient? How about the DOTA denominator? The HoN numerator? The Quantum Break quadratic? etc, etc, etc.

LoL

Well I was all about retro content and Nintendo didn't get a fraction of the classic arcade stuff that Playstation did or the quirky stuff like Parappa. To this day I find the N64 has the least interesting library of any Nintendo system. I was never a big fan of early 3D games and Nintendo put all their effort into that.

Nevertheless I can respect the fact that for Nintendo fans it was a satisfying system; I certainly wouldn't denigrate anyone who had that as their sole system if it met their gaming needs. Nintendo did do some crazy stuff with different cases and colours that were enviable, though I think the iconic look of the original Playstation hasn't been met by its successors - the GameCube comes close.

Short answer, though I'm still not a huge fan of the library I think it would be unfair to call the N64 a failure - Nintendo probably wouldn't have been able to carry on with the GameCube if so.

Focusing only on 1st party titles, I think it only fair you mention the two biggest hitters, Mario Kart 8 and Super Smash Bros - which (in my honest opinion) both far surpass their Wii predecessors and are the definitive titles in their respective franchises.

I agree that Galaxy was more impressive than 3DLand, but other than Warioware, i cannot think of another 1st party franchise out now on both consoles where the Wii game was indisputably better...? It's too early to write off Wii U before an original Zelda, Metroid or Fire Emblem game is released on the platform to compare to Skyward Sword, Prime 3 Corruption and Radiant Dawn whilst in Pikmin 3 and (imminent) Starfox, Wii U will already have 2 original titles from Nintendo's top franchises missing from the Wii library. And if F-Zero is announced at E3 it would only be the icing on the cake!...

To this day, a lot people refer to game machines (what ever make) as PlayStations exactly the same way people refer to vacuum cleaners as Hoovers.

I don't know what's going on with the Mario Kart argument but it is essentially the same game as the original with a new coat of paint on each new console. It is what it is. People don't need to over hype innovation in Mario Kart. It's a fun game but about the only thing you can do to make it different is to make it a free roam driver/racer in the Mushroom Kingdom in MK9. But I'd much rather see a free roam Mario adventure title in the Mushroom Kingdom.

The VB wasn't even given a chance. They produced the first 700k and pulled the plug. I think that should sour consumers more. The point of the comparison is that VB was for a different consumer than the N64, and the WiiU is for a different consumer than the NX.

This is what it means to attack the messenger rather than accept that they are right. There are over 90 million Wii owners and 10 million GameCube owners that havn't bought a WiiU. Those people havn't bought WiiU because of the product, not because of their biases. And that's a lot of potential customers that are sitting out there, waiting.

The Wii wasn't a freak of nature-- it was a cleverly designed product. In retrospect, if Nintendo had to choose during R&D between the IR tracking and the gyroscope, they should have gone with the gyro at launch. The lack of a gyro at the beginning really was the root of the jingling/waggling issues that came up in games. It still wouldn't have delivered the 1:1 3D tracking they promised but having the gyro would have made racing and platforming titles more interesting. Look at how well the beetle flew in LoZ-- that mechanic didn't see the light of day until the system's twilight and it should have been the defining control advancement for the console at launch (controlling the avatar with the controller).

You disproved nothing of my argument that the hardware is the product. The console not only drives advancement in games, it is the platform which enables publishers to target and reach consumers. Mario Kart on Wii sold 30 million+ copies because the Wii had a large user base. The Wii did not have a large user base because of Mario Kart.

Fair enough! I think the N64 will always be judged (somewhat unfairly) against the lofty bar set by PS1, much like the Wii U is being judged against the PS4.

On your point, it's true that Nintendo barely touched the retro/arcade genre on the N64, and traditional offerings were way down their list of priorities with 3D being all the Sony led rage. Limited 3rd party support from companies with retro/arcade heritage like Namco and Taito also didn't help in that department (but that again can be attributed to Sony's unprecedented userbase and headstart during that generation which caused all the 3rd party support to abandon the competition and boost that PS1 library you spoke of). In my opinion, this should really be seen as a PS1 success and not an N64 failure...

I think overall the N64 is widely judged to be a failure when compared to the PS1 fiscally - in units sold - and not usually on the quality of their respective software - which is daft coming from us as consumers of software and not the ones enjoying the fiscal profits!

I played Wipeout again recently - it sold 1.5m copies worldwide on PS1 - but is barely playable by today's standards compared to, for example, F-Zero X (of a similar genre that sold less than 500,000 copies). Can Wipeout honestly ever be considered to be three times the better game?

Of that vast PS1 library, what percentage would you imagine has stood the test of time when played today when compared to the modestly sized N64 library?

I think the Wii U too is being judged on sales against the market leading PS4 on not on the critically better received quality of its software.

@BlueSkies The Wii had a huge userbase because of Wii Sports. Games (and loyalty) sell hardware, hardware itself doesn't.

The vast majority of the 90+ million Wii owners that haven't bought a Wii U aren't coming back either, no matter what Nintendo, or any other gaming company, tries to sell them. It was a one time wonder for the casual market.

Mario Kart 8 and Super Smash Bros. U is great games and is arguably better then their predecessors.
On the other hand, it's given that they should be better. These games are running the same formula as before and there aren't much that is changing from game to game. They might add some new feature which somehow makes it unique in it's own way, but the fact is Mario Kart is Still Mario kart.

That's why I didn't include those games.

The Wii U has some really good games and there are more on the way.
To say it outshines it's predecessors when it comes to quality games is to exaggerate.

Wait, you're saying that they should have given the VB a chance but in an earlier statement said they should have killed the Wii U within 6 weeks of launch? Also you don't know what the NX is or who it is aimed at

@BlueSkies My point was, is it fair for someone who has not played a game, to give judgement on that game, or whether that game (or games) are worth owning that particular hardware? If I didn't own, or had not played a Wii U, how could I come into this discussion and say the Wii U is not worth owning? I consider that to be trolling.

@BlueSkies:

Where do I even begin?

I agree, yet don't think it's totally reasonable to lower in your estimation the WII U versions of established Nintendo franchises due to them displaying an apparent lack of original gameplay or ideas...afterall, how much of the "success" of the market leading PS4 and its software is down to its array of established titles and sequels and how much to new IPs and innovation? Your impression of the Wii U is a reflection of the industry as a whole, rife with long since established franchises and status quos that keep consumers coming back - the very same yardstick that sees the Playstation 4 considered successful.

And to add to your point -

The Wii U has some really good games and there are more on the way

- bringing things nicely back to the OP/topic - the Wii U is therefore IMO not to be judged (at this stage) a failure.

I would play a Mario Kart: Horizons so fast lol.

I think I just realized why the Wii U isn't doing as well as it should.

1) For single player games, HD has made development of longer titles with more content difficult and slow, and Nintendo is doing a horrible job coping. Unfortunately, longer games with lots of content like Zelda, Metroid, Pokemon, and Fire Emblem are exactly the types of single player games complex enough that putting additional information on a second screen would actually be beneficial. Mario, Donkey Kong, and Smash Bros are just too simple to really get much use out of it, and they're so fast paced that taking your eyes off of the primary screen for any reason just breaks the immersion. What the Wii U needs is the type of game the takes things like inventory, swappable visors, maps, and tactical information in a reasonably slow but dense game like the aforementioned adventure and rpg titles, but they're just not getting them due to how slow Nintendo is adjusting to HD game development and their reluctance to make longer, development intensive titles. Not to mention so many wasted opportunities with how to use the gamepad in general. How come my gamepad in Mario Kart isn't a rearview mirror?

2) The other type of game that would benefit from a second screen is multiplayer. It's awesome that I can play certain games that would normally be split screen and have one person using the whole TV and the other using the gamepad. It's not awesome that if I'm using the gamepad I have a tactical advantage as I can screen peek while my opponent cannot. Using two gamepads would solve this, but they are not sold separately, nor are there any games that support that type of play despite Nintendo explicitely stating that the Wii U can handle at least 2 of them. Even if there's nothing displayed on the TV screen, that would still be amazing. Even a Nintendo 3DS could be used as a supplementary screen, but the only title I've seen that does anything close to that is Smash Bros, which allows you to use it as a controller. Not only would first person shooters benefit from a second gamepad, but racing games as well, and also 3D fighting games, which are still as yet to take off in the west. Would you like a four swords game that plays like Ocarina of Time? So would I, but split screen makes that impractical and Nintendo's not utilizing what it has. I would even go so far as to say that only two gamepads would have been too little, as people expect 4 player games from Nintendo. Even if it was for something as simple as go-fish, being able to hide information from the other players in the room is a valuable asset that should not be ignored, and as for asymmetrical multiplayer? Nintendo hasn't capitalized on that concept either for whatever reason. We got Bowser Party and Nintendoland, but that's about it. How about a Dungeons and Dragons style game where one guy is the game master?

I'm not saying the Wii U is failing, but it's certainly not doing as well as it should.

Hello. I don't have time to spend an hour reading through everyone's ramblings thus far, so to answer the thread title: Yes and No (leaning more toward NO every day). AT FIRST, the Wii U was a commercial failure, but for my part, I think it was a gamer's success from day one. I'm sorry, but I own every current-gen console, and the WiI U's games rock hard... and there are MORE of them that rock hard than the PS4/Xbox One exclusives currently. That's an opinion, yes, but a pretty darn honest one that I'm sure a lot of objective perspectives would agree with.

On top of that, it seems Nintendo as a whole is doing A LOT better financially recently, and Splatoon sure is gathering a bunch of steam behind it. By the end of its life, the Wii U may even turn from commercial failure to at least break even or perhaps make the company a bit of money. But again, no matter what, the games are awesome and are in no way failures.

Yeah, Ocarina of Time sure was crap, it then magically became good on 3DS because of the dinky touchscreen.

Honestly the only thing that the second screen is really good for is moving UI off of the main display. An advantage that, to my knowledge, only Capcom has really taken advantage of in Monster Hunter. Because Nintendo supports the fatwa on options menus.

I swear this is just a troll bait thread.