An increasing amount of content is being locked behind Amiibo paywalls in games, so you have to pay extra to unlock the content already on a disk that you already paid for. So, the same problem as locking DLC on disks. But Amiibos are notoriously difficult to find, so that content just stays locked.
No good stand-alone free download to compliment the figures.
And the unnecessary difficulty in finding many of the damn things.
Nope. This is a collectible that will not be getting any more money from me.
You're aware that Nintendo also prevented you guys from getting special editions of Mario Kart and Hyrule Warriors, right? Try to keep that in mind when you attack third parties "because third parties."
At what point did I ever say those were the only criteria necessary for success? Indeed, I never did. You made a blind assumption, and just ran with it, apparently to start an argument. This is especially odd since I said "also" indicating that there is clearly much more to a successful console than just those two things. Nintendo needs to stack the odds in their favor, and those two elements are part of that stack.
Again, even after all this, the GameCube is still a pathetic example because the Xbox had power and third party support, and outsold the GC. The SNES had power and third party support and outsold the Genesis. Clearly, there is much more to this than power and third party support alone. I'm not sure why you don't understand this, but that really is more of a "you" problem.
Because I am among the ever-growing number of people tired of Nintendo's awful hardware gimmicks, and as a Nintendo fan, I would prefer their games reach more people--and that's clearly not going to happen as long as they keep trying to make dedicated hardware. How long are they going to try to find lightning in a bottle again? The Wii showed that if Nintendo's games are on hardware that sells, the games perform well. But consumers clearly don't care for Nintendo's hardware.
The mobile plan will either support of usurp this concept later this year and early next year. We'll see how well Nintendo's software sells in a 3rd party status on other hardware, and I suspect it will sell very well. I suspect it will sell well enough that Nintendo puts more effort into mobile.
But those sales will not translate into sales of the NX. They now have 4 generations of releasing hardware that is outside industry norms, struggles for a variety of reasons (despite the sales of the Wii, it's library is 1000 games smaller than the X360 or the PS3, and made up overwhelmingly of crap), and is generally disliked or ignored by consumers. Essentially, Nintendo has spent twice as much time being largely irrelevant as they ever did being industry leaders with the NES and SNES.
I'm hardly alone in this. Lots of people want to play Nintendo games--they just no longer want to waste the money on hardware that will almost never be used or justified. Hardware that will offer next to nothing but the occasional interesting Nintendo game every 6 months or so. Hardware that does not have other uses beyond gaming.
Back when I worked at Best Buy and then GameStop, I was surprised how many people lost interest in the Wii because it couldn't play DVDs or Blu-Ray movies, and for streaming, all it had was standard-def Netflix. These extras matter to consumers.
Your childish attempt at an attack of "whut, cantcha afford a Wii U?" completely misses the point (besides which, I've had one since launch). It's about justifying the expensive hardware purchase. If a consumer doesn't feel like the price of the Nintendo hardware is justified for what little is offered, then they won't buy it. And Nintendo has been seen as less and less justifiable every generation, barring the Wii and DS flukes. Outside of those two, they continue to sell worse every generation.
No, I'm not backpedaling or adding qualifiers. I merely pointed out that there was far more to the GameCube's failure than you apparently understand. I explained reality.
The GameCube did a lot of things right, and it was a step in the right direction, but it was not a reversal of fortune. By the time the console launched, gamers largely had no interest in Nintendo--the company was an afterthought after the horrific and vacant final years of the N64. During the year the GC launched, the N64 had only 20 games released--for the whole year. The year the PS2 launched, the PS1 had 528 games released. That was a far stronger brand recognition among consumers.
On top of that, Sony correctly saw the rise of DVDs and latched onto it, making the PS2 even more appealing. The Xbox launched with a powerful marketing campaign and also included DVD playback and revolutionized FPS titles.
You are the one that lazily brought up "power only" as the reason the GameCube apparently failed, not me. So I can't backpedal on a point I didn't even bring up. I noted the importance of at least delivering powerful hardware that developers expect of the generation--hell, bringing up the GameCube actually supports my point as merely having generation-par hardware was enough to get the GameCube better support than the N64, despite lower sales.
It was Nintendo's other mistakes that prevented the GC from succeeding.
Then again, as has been pointed out numerous times, Nintendo has been on a steady decline since the NES and Game Boy/Color lines as every new generation sells worse than the generation before, barring the obvious flukes/statistical anomalies of the Wii and DS. These obviously did not reverse this trend as the Wii U and 3DS didn't just fall below sales of those two, but fell to below GC and GBA levels, perfectly in line with the gradual decline Nintendo has been experiencing since the NES.
To just run to the GameCube and say "well it was powerful and it didn't work" is laughably absurd. What's the weight of your argument then? That the GameCube failed because it was powerful? The Xbox was more powerful, and outsold the GC. Even then, you still have to explain the actual reasons the GC failed, which I did--and which you apparently found upsetting for some bizarre reason.
No, power alone won't make a console sell. But power will certainly not hurt things, as power and generation-parity technology alone helped the GC garner better 3rd party support than the N64.
So yes, you are cherry picking. The only information I provided before was, again, literally only noting that the Nintendo needs to make the next console powerful enough for 3rd parties to care. That is the only thing I said. You brought up the GameCube, cherry-picked one element about it, and then ran with it, apparently, without a valid point to back up your non-argument.
Uh, no, I read comments. Plenty of people actually "happy" that Fifa and EA aren't putting another game on the system.
That's okay, as long as Nintendo fans keep up the adversarial relationship with 3rd parties, then the company will have to go third party themselves sooner rather than later. Then everyone will be able to play Nintendo's games far easier, because they can then be on other platforms.
They're way last in sales now, and last generation, the Wii was way behind as far as 3rd party support was concerned with literally 1000 fewer released games than either the X360 or PS3. Obviously, making these absurdly backwards and underpowered consoles is not the answer. I will also remind that when they were the power-console with the SNES, they outsold the competition (the Genesis), and for a time, the powerful N64 featured many high-profile PC ports, including Starcraft, Quake, and an exclusive Doom.
Going back to "well, they were powerful with the GameCube and it didn't sell" is fallacious cherry-picking and ignoring the actual reasons the GC struggled--namely that it was also backwards in a lot of ways (inferior shoulder buttons, awkward button placement for many genres, game disks 1/4 the size of anyone else, no built-in online capabilities, etc.). Not to forget that the GC came out on the heels of the N64--a console that burned 3rd parties and was practically dead for two years before the GC even launched.
It's beginning to please me to see so many Nintendo fans happy to see yet another 3rd party game skipping the systems. Keep at it guys! The more 3rd party support lost, the sooner Nintendo will have to go 3rd party! No console maker in history has ever survived without 3rd party support!
Yeah, because Nintendo has never denied something they later did within the next year.
Like when they denied a 3DS XL would be made... Or when they denied a more powerful 3DS would arrive... Or when they denied they were going to do anything on mobile...
...Yeah, we'll see. The rumor doesn't mean anything, but neither does the denial.
I really don't care if Nintendo fans buy third party. I've noted before, I'd rather the company just go third party themselves, and the fastest way to do that would be for them to lose all third party support and the revenue from it.
What is annoying is seeing Nintendo fanboys blame third parties for everything, totally ignorant of how these things are far more frequently Nintendo's fault. The Wii U did not fix all the problems of the Wii--it just maintained them. It's still a generation behind, technologically. It still doesn't have proper user accounts. It still hast the weakest online set-up. It still has the worst storage space. It still has an off-putting controller. It still can't handle the game engines that are going to define the generation.
Very, very little of my points here have been that Nintendo fans fail to support the games. While traditionally true, I have been explaining why third party games themselves have been typically gimped since the N64 era--and that stuff is almost entirely Nintendo's fault. Hell, it has been long noted that the reason Square left Nintendo was because of their idiotic hardware decisions for the N64. That is how important third party was for Nintendo--while Nintendo fans gleefully and ignorantly pretend third parties don't matter for Nintendo. Final Fantasy VII itself helped sell the original Playstation. Personally, two of the first people I knew that bought the system bought it for Final Fantasy.
Now, third parties very much tried to give Wii U owners better experiences, but as your post blatantly illustrates (as you refuse to recognize this), Nintendo fans seemingly deliberately ignored them. The Wii U got definitive editions of Deus Ex, Arkham City, Ninja Gaiden III, and Tekken Tag 2, to name a few. That you are even sitting there acting like these games never existed at all illustrates the deliberate animosity Nintendo fans have towards third parties. Even when they are both able (technologically) and willing to deliver the very best version of their game, Nintendo fans will clearly still ignore them and pretend they got nothing. Why else would you so handily ignore those games?
Beyond these points, however, the Wii U is gimped for next-generation games. It could handle excellent and definitive versions of last-gen games, but cannot handle the new ones. It will never have an Unreal 4 game. Call of Duty will no longer grace the console. The Wii U cannot handle the graphics and processing required for the newest games. It is again gimped for it's generation, and only for that brief period between generations could it handle "definitive edition" style games--but Nintendo fans ignored them. You have fully illustrated this by refusing to acknowledge the games that the Wii U did get from third parties that did push for the best quality.
What reason do third parties have to bother with Nintendo's lame hardware when Nintendo refuses to give them the tools they need, and the fans will just ignore them anyway totally regardless of quality or effort?
Do you see where the problem is here? Or am I still banging my head against a brick wall glazed with pure kiln-fired stubbornness?
I am guessing the stubbornness if you are still trucking out a completely unrepresentative analogy about a turkey dinner.
The restaurant (the developers) are going to serve everyone the same dinner, because they are capable of doing so. However, when one customer has issues (special rules) that prevent them from delivering the same meal (game), then that person (Nintendo) gets the different, gimped meal.
So why should you support gimped games? That depends. Do you want Nintendo to keep making hardware? If so, then there's your reason. Without revenue from third party sales, Nintendo will not be able to sustain hardware development indefinitely. But, if, like me, you're fine with Nintendo going third party, then by all means, stop supporting 3rd party games.
But it's time to grow the hell up when we complain about them. If we don't want the games gimped, then we should stop pretending Nintendo is magically without fault. It's their decisions about their hardware that either prevent third party games completely or gimp them. The icing on the cake that drives them away, is your lack of support.
That's the reality. And if you want to blame someone for your gimped game, maybe you should be writing to Nintendo to ask them why they didn't give developers the tools they need that are supported everywhere else.
No, I didn't ignore how MS and Sony have done remasters, because it is irrelevant. It was, however, relevant to point out that Nintendo is guilty of these things because of your special pleading while you were trying to pretend they were somehow different or better than any other game company.
Your argument is based extensively on special pleading where you want Nintendo considered differently "because Nintendo." "They're doing freemium, but not as bad," for instance. Your basic point was that "third parties are bad for doing these things" while ignoring that Nintendo also does them.
Special pleading, through and through.
No, the "problem" people have with my posts is that I don't waddle up to Nintendo, lips puckered, and glued to their Mario-funded ass. I don't give the company special treatment, but equal treatment with other game companies. They are ultimately no different, and I recognize that, while the blind refuse to admit it. But then, attempting to turn this into an ad hominem of "this is why preening fanboys don't like you" is a lazy dodge to not address my points and to drive further away from the original point, which was that the quality and number of third party games is gimped on Nintendo systems precisely because of the poor choices of Nintendo themselves.
Going for the "remakes vs remasters" point is just lazy, pointless semantics. Nintendo still spent considerable time re-crafting old Zelda games to sell again for full price to an audience that had already played and had access to these games.
Now, if you are indeed buying your third party games elsewhere--as you pretty much have to at this point--then why do you even care if Nintendo continues to make hardware? Would it not then be far better for Nintendo to just go third party themselves, then you can get all of those games in one place? Of course it would. If you aren't buying Nintendo consoles as game consoles, where you get first and third party equally, and are just buying them for Nintendo Boxes, then they might as well be on other hardware.
I never said the Lego games will sell poorly on the Wii U, only that they will not do as well as on the other systems, particularly the XBO and PS4 as their sales and popularity continue to grow, while the Wii U continues to stagnate. And yes, you're right, that Warner did try with DLC on the Wii U and the fans failed them. However, when pressed for why the Wii U was getting Injustice DLC later, they indicated the problem was on Nintendo's end.
Surprisingly, I once asked them about Injustice DLC on the Wii U on their Facebook page and they actually responded to me. However, I no longer remember if it was in their response, or if I read it elsewhere about the difficulties stemming from Nintendo's end. Either way, low sales, limited storage space, and difficulty in getting the DLC out at the same time as other systems were the catalysts for Batman's Season Pass being yanked, and the last two Injustice characters skipping the platform.
Sales of XBO, X360, PS3, and PS4 are higher than the Wii U, and third party games sell better on all of those machines. This isn't rocket science, to coin a cliche'. The games will sell better there. They sold well on the Wii, because the Wii had sales. The Wii U does not have the sales.
I didn't say anything about "Nintendo systems or non-Nintendo systems." I said the other versions will sell better than the Wii U version. And they likely will.
When it comes to things like gimped online, gimped graphics, lost Achievements features, or not having the game at all because Nintendo does not support the game's engine, no, you absolutely cannot lay any blame on the 3rd parties unless you're an insane fanboy.
You are basically holding 3rd parties accountable for the faults of Nintendo.
Indie devs can port games more easily--sometimes, if they have a large enough staff and enough money--because their games are more limited. For instance, indies are more likely to use Unity, which works on a massive variety of platforms. But you want to blame third parties for not rewriting their entire game for Nintendo, just because Nintendo wasn't smart enough to make hardware that could handle the engine? That's completely absurd.
Yes, every game developer wants people to play their game. They also are creative types who don't want to have to compromise their visions for hardware that can't handle them, and they are also corporations that need to factor in cost-vs-profits, which is another problem from Nintendo. They have to spend more time and money recrafting a game to work on a Nintendo system--for an audience that's going to get pissy because the game is gimped (because it has to be) or aren't going to support it anyway. This is apparently something you simply do not understand.
These companies only want to maximize profits? Yet again another charge you levy against third parties that totally also describes Nintendo. Quit with the special pleading and fallacy-laden defenses of Nintendo. This is a company locking content on games behind an expensive paywall, where you have to spend at least $13 on plastic figures that are frequently impossible to find. Nintendo's bottom line is profits every bit as much as any corporation, if not occasionally more so. Nintendo is going to be charging $4 for clone characters that were cut from Smash Bros and should have been in there in the first place.
This is again dragging out the "developers are lazy" argument that they should just work harder to put games on Nintendo systems. By all means, explain why developers should work harder, on more limited hardware, for a smaller audience, and potential losses over any profits? Why should developers want to do that? Is that what you'd do? Would you work harder for less? Would you quit your job at an upscale restaurant to work for McDonald's for less money and appreciation? After all, you want people to eat the food you make, right? So you should be fine with that.
That is the argument you are making. Third party developers should work extra hard for less money, because Nintendo.
As noted, third party games will frequently be gimped or non-existent on Nintendo systems so long as Nintendo refuses to make the hardware or offer the abilities and capabilities that those developers are working on. And that Nintendo fans fail to understand they "why" in this, or that it is a failure starting with Nintendo, while blaming third parties, will continue to drive them away.
Keep making these excuses, though. Because the less you support 3rd parties on Nintendo platforms, the faster the company will go 3rd party.
That some developers or publishers have made poor decisions or said regrettable things does not matter here. After all, so has Nintendo, unless you haven't heard of, say, their "yes-no-yes-maybe" stance on Smash Bros in tournaments, and their completely idiotic handling of YouTube videos, and their notion that "Twitch isn't fun," when millions apparently are fine thinking so. Nintendo has said every bit as many stupid things as anyone else, if not a few more. So this is a completely moot point in this conversation. It has no bearing.
You make it sound bad to dare to cater to the development community who will support your console. No, that's not bad at all, it's very clearly smart business. Instead, this catering to the development community is loading the XBO and PS4 with games, support, and great experiences. Both the XBO and PS4 have a higher number of higher rated games than the Wii U already precisely because of this mentality--and so many more on the way.
Your other point on how Third Parties behave is also completely not the point of this. You have offered two red herrings, and have not addressed that dismal third party support is, by and large, Nintendo's fault. Instead, you have fallen prey to fan/fanboy apologetics where "Nintendo can do no wrong" but "all third parties are wrong all the time, here look how wrong they are and have been on completely unrelated topics."
And again, Nintendo is also ridiculously guilty of the charges you stake on third parties. Nintendo is abusing DLC and freemium models. Nintendo is ignoring many beloved franchises while milking a few to death. (Do I really need to point out, yet again, that they delivered 3 Zelda remakes in 4 years?) Nintendo is patching games after launch--including Codename STEAM, Mario Kart, and Smash Bros. Hell, one of the biggest complaints about Splatoon is that it feels like half a game with more content promised later. And Nintendo has also made potentially questionable (we'll find out later) moves into mobile.
Literally every single complaint you have against Third Partiescan be levied against Nintendo.
You have done a truly remarkable job of backing up my point that Nintendo fans have an adversarial and unrealistic view of third parties, while ignoring those very same issues in Nintendo, "because Nintendo."
I'm not at all surprised by all the Wii games that got canned. I was waiting for many of them--notably Project HAMMER and Fatal Frame (which was canned outside Japan). The Wii's problem wasn't just getting swamped with shovelware, it was also--as noted--horribly gimped for what 3rd party developers and publishers were used to and expecting of the generation. As I've noted before, it was the only home console that couldn't handle Unreal. Now, the Wii U is the only new-gen console that can't handle Unreal 4. That automatically makes porting many games an unnecessary hassle.
Yeah, the Wii U is more capable than the X360 or the PS3, but it's not even close to the XBO or PS4. Remember, the Wii U's processor is basically equivalent to the 10-year-old X360 processor. It just has 4 times the RAM of the X360. The PS4 and XBO have 16x the RAM of the X360. It is barely more capable than the last gen, and not even close to this one.
This is about my only major gripe about the new generation, thus far. The storage space gets devoured extremely quickly. I've had my PS4 since November. It was full last month. I uninstalled two games so I could install Mortal Kombat.
Also, a 1TB XBO was already released. Don't know if it was a holiday bundle or not, but it was the Call of Duty XBO last winter. At least in the States.
It's not really a chicken or egg question. If that was true, Nintendo would still be reigning supreme by way of being the first of the contemporary companies.
No, Sony offered tools and opportunities that appealed to developers and publishers, while Nintendo strictly did not. This is why Sony has been able to build such a strong and lasting relationship with third party developers. Microsoft came along, took what Sony did right, and added to it, improving some things, which Sony later adopted--like clickable sticks, triggers, robust user accounts, and an achievement system.
It's not chicken or egg. It's who bothered to appeal to the third parties with the tools they both wanted and needed. Sony and MS have done this. Nintendo refuses to.
Oh, I agree it was comfortable. But I can't deny that there are serious problems with it. For one, aside from Smash (and for some reason, Soulcalibur), it was very unfriendly towards fighting games. The C-stick was not comfortable compared to a normal stick (remember, it was a bump, without a comfortable pad on top). The L & R buttons were a squishy mess with double-uses. I think the vast majority of development on them just used the single click feature, and not the analog squish part. Finally, the D-pad was obnoxiously small and borderline useless.
Overall, sure it was comfortable to hold, but it was not particularly friendly for a wide variety of games or designs. This was in the same era where Microsoft introduced clickable sticks and triggers instead of just duplicate shoulder buttons, and these things have adopted as industry norms.
On the upside, the GC made the first truly legitimate wireless controllers. Again, super comfortable to hold. Super backwards and limited in it's functionality.
As a reminder, that gimping is not really the fault of the 3rd party devs. Nintendo fans love to cast blame and abject hatred toward 3rd parties, but the fault lies with Nintendo first and foremost for not giving them the tools and options they need to create parity.
But, an example I have long used is the GameCube, which was as close to parity as Nintendo has been since the beginning of the N64 era, as the GC was technically well within the standards of it's generation, gimped only in the burgeoning online options and disk size, neither of which were as big a deal at the time.
Your analogy doesn't work, because there's no valid reason for the restaurant to give you something different when the ability to deliver the same food as everyone else is there. Third party developers do not have the same abilities on Nintendo hardware. A better analogy would be you and 4 friends sitting at a table in a restaurant, but you're allergic to 60% of the food out there, which means the restaurant no longer has the ability to give you the same Ultimate Bacon Jucy Lucy as everyone else. So your food will be "gimped."
Here is what hurt them over the last three generations, and here is why multi-platform games are likely to be gimped on Nintendo systems:
N64: Limited storage space, expensive cartridges, far more limited texture memory for some reason. GameCube: Smaller disk size (1.35GB vs 4~8GB), extremely limited online options, noticeably different controller. Wii: Vastly weaker hardware, vastly slower and weaker online options, extremely limited storage space for downloadable content, slower overall machine, awkward controller. Also, not HD. Wii U: Vastly weaker hardware, still slower and weaker online, no robust user accounts, still extremely limited storage space, and yet again, a controller that--while it finally has standard features--is still considered awkward.
If Nintendo fans really want equal third party games, clearly, the way to get them is to buy them on Playstation or Xbox or PC or to tell Nintendo to get with the program. The anger against the 3rd parties is almost constantly and totally misplaced as they are limited by what Nintendo offers.
The icing on the cake is that the third party games--even when there is relative parity, as on the GameCube, still almost always sell noticeably worse on the Nintendo hardware.
Your beef isn't with third parties. It's with Nintendo. Nintendo fans need to stop this adversarial nonsense against Third Parties. All you're doing is further convincing them to walk away. Which will ultimately help Nintendo to go Third Party. That's fine by me at this point, but for some reason, many of you guys still want to buy that gimped Nintendo hardware that doesn't offer equivalent options to other hardware, and if you want to keep buying that hardware, then you need to support even those gimped games. Or there's no reason for the hardware to exist.
To be fair, the dedicated Nintendo fanbase is notorious for not supporting 3rd party games, regardless of quality. Imagine if you were selling something, and you had 5 outlets. On four of them, you are generally well supported. On the fifth, the audience is difficult to appeal to and they generally don't support you. How much extra effort are you going to want to give to that fifth group?
That's Nintendo fans to every third party, except in rare instances when both the third party and Nintendo are directly pandering to the fanbase, as they did with Soulcalibur II and Monster Hunter 4.
This really isn't a surprise. I seem to recall the folks over at Warner noting that issues with pre-order DLC on the Wii U were a problem caused by Nintendo. At the same time, though, the game will sell far better on all those other systems than the Wii U, anyway.
None of these things are as regional as they used to be. Be it E3, Tokyo Game Show, or European Gamescom. They are used by global audiences for information and game news.
Nintendo should know better, so this Direct this close to E3 is confusing. I don't expect any big reveals or anything for it, otherwise they'd completely upend any impact E3 would have. They're probably just taking time to hand out some Japanese release dates of a few titles and oodles of DLC that they don't want to do at E3.
I really don't know how long you've been reading comments from gamers online, but I've been on here for the better part of a year now and on GameInformer since 2006 or something. Nintendo fans have long made a very clear distinction--they will buy "anything MZP" first and foremost, over anything else.
When 3rd parties do not make games for Nintendo systems, Nintendo fans have a long history of attacking those third parties. Nintendo fans do make this distinction. And they have for years.
What a coincidence, I don't name call either. I do, however, address post content for what it is. For instance, comparing the Wii U to the Ouya and saying that "relatively speaking, it's a big success" is incredibly ridiculous. The Ouya bombed hard, unfortunately, after launch. That's like saying the Atari Lynx was a great success compared to, say, the Virtual Boy--one of the most ill-conceived game systems ever made. Surely, that is trolling. I refuse to believe anyone is so daft as to think that was an intelligent thing to say. I have a little more confidence in humanity than that.
Frankly, if you can only call the Wii U a "success" by comparing it to a major flop, then the Wii U itself is a major flop. That's like saying a rock-solid, ant-covered donut I find in a dumpster is "pretty good food" compared to the maggot-infested raccoon carcass lying next to it. Relatively speaking, sure, that donut is still pretty good food. But in reality, no, that's not what I would call good food.
"The Wii U is a success relatively compared to the Ouya." Okay. So is the Saturn.
Everything in this first post, about Nintendo doing software only is blind assumption based on nothing. The Wii proves that if Nintendo's games are on popular hardware, they will have sales. Well, Nintendo's hardware isn't popular, but Microsoft's and Sony's are. They would make a fortune on those machines. You're basically saying Nintendo will somehow do better selling games on the Wii U, with an audience of less than 10 million, than they would on the PS4, which looks very likely to easily top 100 million. That consoles don't make a profit is pointless in this, unless you want to recall that Nintendo has been losing money on the Wii U--while Sony has been profiting on the PS4. Which is another good reason for Nintendo to go third party.
As per gaming preferences, yes, Nintendo fans are still doing things very differently. Nintendo fans are the only group that has a clear and ever-present adversarial relationship towards third parties, frequently taking personal offense to the decisions of game corporations. Nintendo fans also notably ignore 3rd party games, which is not something you find with MS or Sony fans. Their buying habits are very different. If you look at the top selling games on any console, you'll find a mix of first and third party on MS and Sony machines, but almost only Nintendo titles on Nintendo machines. Regardless of quality, third party games are seemingly deliberately not supported by the influential majority of Nintendo fans.
Per the fans, actually, yes they are doing something different concerning how they buy games. Sony and Microsoft fans actually buy 3rd party games. That's why they have them.
That you refuse to believe something does not change the facts or reality or the statistical understanding of the systems.
The Wii and DS were the right systems at the right time. They found an audience that was ready for them. But they had no longevity, and they pandered to people following trends or fads--which means they pandered to a temporary audience, and the evidence is in the Wii U and 3DS, which--yet again--fell to below pre-Wii/DS sales levels. Which means the Wii and DS were, in fact, flukes.
Nintendo has not had "fluctuating" hardware sales over the years unless you have no idea what the word "fluctuating" means. Fluctuating would be more along the lines of sales that go up and down and are different every generation. This has not been the case. Instead of actually fluctuating, they have been dropping, and you can believe foolishness all you want, but the numbers will prove you wrong. Nintendo's hardware has been on a downward trend since the NES and Game Boy--and it has never fluctuated, it has always gone down--with the exception of the two anomalies.
The rest of your post is absurdly sad special pleading. You again pull the old Nintendo fanboy rant of "Vita failure" while magically calling the Wii U "not a failure." Again, the Vita has sold better than the Wii U and has more games coming to it in 2015. There is also no news at all for Sony discontinuing the Vita, which is a lie you have just completely made up. If you have to invent things to back up your point, your point was wrong to begin with.
"Relatively speaking, the Wii U is a big success.... compared to Ouya."
This is the dumbest thing I've read online in a long time--and again, this is the internet. Nice try, kid, but you should've quit while you were ahead. You stepped over a line: Obvious troll is obvious.
The preferences of Nintendo fans are one of the reasons Nintendo is in the situation is is in today. How you spend your money matters, and when you spend your money on Zelda remakes while ignoring new games or 3rd party titles, you create an environment where Nintendo has now churned out 3 Zelda remakes in 4 years.
It's less about "blame" as it is a causal relationship. And how Nintendo fans choose to spend or not spend their money greatly affects the hardware and the bottom line of the company as a whole. It can be said that since the general Nintendo consumer wants nothing but a few primary franchise games and little else, they want Nintendo to just make Mario-Zelda-Pokemon games, and to stop making hardware.
I laugh at his sentiment of it being "real world." No sir, everything that has been shown for that game is the exact opposite of anything in the "real world." Ha ha ha! Oh my... Diplomacy, huh? Actually that does exist in quite a few other games. Like Fallout.
I'm sure they're in a tough spot. They don't want to just have to scrap all the hard work they've put into the Wii U version, but at the same time, it may not be financially feasible to continue. It's probably a tug-of-war in that office of "do we just drop this or not?"
While Nintendo stated "No NX at E3," I think these guys are still waiting for either E3 or TGS to see if NX information arrives, and if it doesn't, they'll pull the plug completely. I think they're sincere in that they don't want to give up on the Wii U, but this is a company with lots of employees that they need to pay and care for. They may have to make a tough decision to save the company over delivering to a small group of people.
We forget as gamers how big this industry really is now. How much money and expense and time is involved. When I tested games for Activision, I worked 72-hour weeks for the bulk of that time. There's so much to consider in these things. And the decisions cannot be made quickly or easily.
I don't lump all Nintendo fans together--as you said, there are those of us who do buy 3rd party. I didn't play Call of Duty until I bought the Wii U. After three years with the series, though, I recognize whey they're popular, but I want something different (hooray for Bloodborne!) to me. But I recognize the general Nintendo audience and the over-arching trends. When I generalize that "Nintendo fans don't buy 3rd party," I am noting the wider market trends, which completely support this statement. For every one of us that buys a 3rd party game, there's a couple thousand who don't. Third parties are profitable on other consoles, but not on Nintendo.
Nintendo fans love to cast the blame to the 3rd parties, but the problem is actually from Nintendo and the fans. Nintendo's gimped hardware prevents 3rd parties from getting the most out of the system. Would you want to sell gigabytes of DLC on a console that has almost no storage space? No, that's a huge freaking gamble. Then the fans naturally ignore games that aren't from a few key Nintendo franchises--a behavior found only in Nintendo fans, and not in Sony or Microsoft fans, who are just as likely to buy 3rd party as 1st.
While I note that Nintendo should be repairing those 3rd party relationships now, I do agree with you that there may be no way to do that with the Wii U. At this point, I think the longer the Wii U is out, the worse things are going to be for Nintendo.
I use the PS3 analogy because it was Sony's major misstep. Kind of like the Saturn was for Sega. Nintendo's decisions now are critical--the NX can either be their PS4 (a return to form) or their Dreamcast (their last hurrah). Going by what we know, I expect it will be the latter. And I've reached a point now where I'm starting to prefer that.
I don't think NX is years away. I expect to see it launch next year. However, I agree--this game isn't coming to it. They're not going to sit on this game for another 6~10 months waiting for Nintendo to get the necessary information on NX out and then hope to release it again in late 2016 or early 2017.
Right now, they're trying to do some damage control, but I think they should just cut their losses.
Aw cripes, if you aren't going to pay attention, what's the damn point? I and another poster here have both gone to great lengths to illustrate how, why, and indeed that the Wii and DS were statistical anomalies. Since the NES and Game Boy, Nintendo has been on a gradual sales decline only broken by the Wii and DS, and immediately after the Wii and DS, their hardware continued on the exact same downward trajectory.
These numbers are extraordinarily easy to look up.
The GameCube, by the way, had better 3rd party support than the N64 precisely because for once, Nintendo delivered hardware on-par with the standards of the generation, which you'll note is exactly the opposite of the N64, Wii, and Wii U. However, even Nintendo largely considers the GC a failure, as Iwata very clearly stated that selling less than the GC would be considered such--a failure.
The GC was ultimately profitable, but it was not a success, and to pretend it was is borderline delusional. It sold worse than the Xbox and way worse than the PS2. Nintendo even resorted to trying to sell the GameCube as a companion console to the PS2 or XB rather than a competitive machine on it's own.
However, the GameCube did manage far better third party support than the N64 and the Wii U. But again, it was because it was the only post-SNES hardware Nintendo made that was actually, largely, equivalent to the generational norms of the time.
Is the 3DS a statistical anomaly? Hell no, because it falls right back into the trend that was moving before the DS launched. The GBA/Micro line sold worse than the Game Boy/Color line, and the 3DS is selling worse than the GBA/Micro line. It is continuing the downward trend.
It makes perfect sense that the Wii and DS would be anomalies at the same time. One helped boost popularity of the other, and they shared similar design sentiments that got lucky and struck a chord with consumers at that time. After that, though, the evidence that they were nothing but anomalies, fads, or trends is that--as has been painstakingly noted by more than just me on this site--the 3DS and Wii U returned to the downward trend.
By sales:
NES > SNES > N64 > GC < Wii > Wii U
GB/Color > GBA/Micro < DS > 3DS
The Wii and DS were anomalies. The pattern is still one of ever-decreasing market share and hardware sales numbers, and the Wii U and 3DS continue the trend that was followed by the previous generations. Because the Wii U and 3DS didn't just fall to "below Wii and DS" numbers, they actually fall below pre-Wii and DS numbers.
It is actually like this:
NES > SNES > N64 > GC > Wii U
GB/Color > GBA/Micro > 3DS/New
In every way, the Wii and DS were anomalies. Flukes. Fads. Trends. A temporary lucky strike. After which, Nintendo returned to their "normal" which is, unfortunately, a lengthy history of gradually becoming irrelevant.
And the point about the games on the N64 box was to directly address the deliberate stupidity that Nintendo "never relied on 3rd parties." Yes, yes they totally did. They relied on 3rd parties to the point of promoting the games on the damn box for the console. Without revenue from sales of 3rd party games, Nintendo's strength and reach is severely hampered.
Since the PS4 doesn't make use of the Construc2 Engine, it completely avoids having these bottom-dollar, no-quality games slapped together based on a tutorial from a website and sold to consumers who don't know any better.
The PS4 indie situation is actually quite good thus far, and while the Wii U is getting games apparently intent on bottoming-out the concept of quality, the PS4 is getting things like Never Alone, Mercenary Kings, and the like. All the best indies on the Wii U are also on PS4/PS3/Vita. It just doesn't have the Construct2-helmed crap.
Which is a pity. That engine has potential. But apparently not in the hands of most of these Wii U indies. As I noted before, Rcmadiax literally took a Construct2 tutorial, and sold it to Wii U owners.
He basically admitted as much earlier this year, on this very site. He noted that Nintendo gamers bought crap for a laugh (The Letter), so he was just going to keep making more crap.
His games are the definition of shovelware. If this is what the eShop is going to continue receiving, I'm glad I bought a PS4.
I agree that the Wii U is done by 2017 regardless. But given the slimming support, even from Nintendo, I would expect it in 2016--to be replaced the same way the GBA was.
Nintendo is at a point where it could deliver 5 of the best games ever made over the next year and a half, and the system would still be dragging it's ass to the grave. It's done. Nobody wants this thing. Not outside of hyper-dedicated Nintendo fanboys and those of us lingering fans hoping something good will happen.
Even when 3rd party games do arrive, they sell terribly. Nintendo fans do not even want to support this thing, or they'd buy a damn 3rd party game or two every now and then. Instead, they bitch and moan about $20 for a game while buying another 3DS or 20 more Amiibo to add to the pile.
Nintendo fanboys are very, painfully, clearly blind to not realize this. Outside of sites like this that deal exclusively in Nintendo and articles on more games skipping the console, everyone else considers it dead. The system is a tired has-been, and that's not exactly easy for me to say, as I defended it adamantly for that first year and a half. But it is getting easier to say, as I am not blind to reality. Because eventually reality sets in. It's not selling. It won't sell. Hell, HD remakes of GameCube games are not even coming to it. Nintendo fans adamantly call the Vita a failure--and it's still sold better than the Wii U, and has way more games coming to it.
Nintendo, it seems, is a company that has passed beyond irrelevance, and now stands on the brink of total obsolescence. They are outside the curve, and outside the industry, and outside the norms. Boring as norms can be, it's how you appeal to a mass audience. Ironically, this is always Nintendo's goal, but they are frighteningly bad at doing it. But Sony did it. They delivered exactly the game console people wanted. No crazy gimmicks, streamlined, yet familiar. User friendly and robust.
I've explained my reasoning a dozen times at least. So I'll just make this reminder: I expect NX to launch in 2016, and I would not be surprised to see Zelda U become Zelda NX. This follows the way Nintendo has done things before. Project Cars for Wii U will be canceled, and there will be no title that causes a new, notable reversal in sales for the console.
I think it's fairly safe to say that NX probably doesn't have 3rd party support lined up for the following reasons:
1. Third parties have largely abandoned both the Wii U and 3DS. 2. Nintendo is still terrible at dealing with them. 3. Even after the "success" of the Wii, Nintendo could barely get 3rd parties on board the Wii U. 4. In order to build confidence in the new hardware, Nintendo should be building confidence now on the Wii U--the way Sony did after the disastrous launch of the PS3. They worked so hard to get 3rd parties back on their side that the PS4 launched like a greyhound in it's prime at the track.
I don't think the support is going to be there. There will be kiddie games from Activision, a couple ports of PS4/XBO games to test the water (that Nintendo fans will, as usual, ignore) but that'll be about it.
I don't have confidence in the NX at this point, based largely on how Nintendo is attempting to do things now.
Uh no, gamers--particularly Nintendo fans for some reason--take these things overwhelmingly personally and get butthurt over relatively minor things. Why do you think EA tops "worst companies" lists in the face of corporations who are doing actual harm to people and/or the environment and/or the economy?
It's because gamers apparently, by and large, have no understanding of the world outside of gaming, and go out of their way to be whiny crybabies about way too many things. EA is far from the worst company out there. But that's all gamers understand.
Again, a lot of you guys here are getting personally offended by a company that has to reverse a position on the Wii U. Maybe try not being emotionally invested in a game console.
Each of Nintendo's systems has sold worse than the one before, sans the flukes of the Wii and DS, which are quite clearly statistical anomalies in all of this. Nintendo has always needed 3rd parties--as has every successful console maker since the NES. A big part of the diminishing sales can be lumped directly onto the lacking 3rd party support and sales.
And funny that you should name the N64, since it had 3rd party games on the damn box:
Or do you think Nintendo owns Star Wars?
By the way, being generally profitable is not the same thing as being successful. After all, the PS2 was also profitable--and successful.
The Wii U doesn't even have the minimum RAM necessary according to those requirements. The Wii U has 2 GB total, but only 1GB of RAM is used for gaming. The rest is OS.
Calling them liars and thieves borders on slander, particularly when you are going to also sit there and adamantly refuse to bother to understand the situation.
That's like me seeing you pick up a $10 bill from the ground and put it in your pocket, and then I rush over and call you a thief, and when you deny it, a liar--even though you dropped the money yourself and I didn't see it. You have chosen to be ignorant of the situation, but are still being judgmental. There is not an ounce of maturity in that scenario.
Comments 2,916
Re: Poll: We Need to Talk About amiibo - Where Do You Stand?
I'm done with these stupid things.
An increasing amount of content is being locked behind Amiibo paywalls in games, so you have to pay extra to unlock the content already on a disk that you already paid for. So, the same problem as locking DLC on disks. But Amiibos are notoriously difficult to find, so that content just stays locked.
No good stand-alone free download to compliment the figures.
And the unnecessary difficulty in finding many of the damn things.
Nope. This is a collectible that will not be getting any more money from me.
Re: Mighty No. 9 Signature Edition Will Not Be Available For Wii U
@AugustusOxy
You're aware that Nintendo also prevented you guys from getting special editions of Mario Kart and Hyrule Warriors, right? Try to keep that in mind when you attack third parties "because third parties."
Re: Despite the Rumours, Nintendo NX Will Not be Android Based
@Project_Dolphin
At what point did I ever say those were the only criteria necessary for success? Indeed, I never did. You made a blind assumption, and just ran with it, apparently to start an argument. This is especially odd since I said "also" indicating that there is clearly much more to a successful console than just those two things. Nintendo needs to stack the odds in their favor, and those two elements are part of that stack.
Again, even after all this, the GameCube is still a pathetic example because the Xbox had power and third party support, and outsold the GC. The SNES had power and third party support and outsold the Genesis. Clearly, there is much more to this than power and third party support alone. I'm not sure why you don't understand this, but that really is more of a "you" problem.
Re: Despite the Rumours, Nintendo NX Will Not be Android Based
@Superryanworld
That's a good reason for Nintendo to just go 3rd party themselves.
Re: No FIFA For Nintendo Fans This Year, States EA
@Project_Dolphin
Because I am among the ever-growing number of people tired of Nintendo's awful hardware gimmicks, and as a Nintendo fan, I would prefer their games reach more people--and that's clearly not going to happen as long as they keep trying to make dedicated hardware. How long are they going to try to find lightning in a bottle again? The Wii showed that if Nintendo's games are on hardware that sells, the games perform well. But consumers clearly don't care for Nintendo's hardware.
The mobile plan will either support of usurp this concept later this year and early next year. We'll see how well Nintendo's software sells in a 3rd party status on other hardware, and I suspect it will sell very well. I suspect it will sell well enough that Nintendo puts more effort into mobile.
But those sales will not translate into sales of the NX. They now have 4 generations of releasing hardware that is outside industry norms, struggles for a variety of reasons (despite the sales of the Wii, it's library is 1000 games smaller than the X360 or the PS3, and made up overwhelmingly of crap), and is generally disliked or ignored by consumers. Essentially, Nintendo has spent twice as much time being largely irrelevant as they ever did being industry leaders with the NES and SNES.
I'm hardly alone in this. Lots of people want to play Nintendo games--they just no longer want to waste the money on hardware that will almost never be used or justified. Hardware that will offer next to nothing but the occasional interesting Nintendo game every 6 months or so. Hardware that does not have other uses beyond gaming.
Back when I worked at Best Buy and then GameStop, I was surprised how many people lost interest in the Wii because it couldn't play DVDs or Blu-Ray movies, and for streaming, all it had was standard-def Netflix. These extras matter to consumers.
Your childish attempt at an attack of "whut, cantcha afford a Wii U?" completely misses the point (besides which, I've had one since launch). It's about justifying the expensive hardware purchase. If a consumer doesn't feel like the price of the Nintendo hardware is justified for what little is offered, then they won't buy it. And Nintendo has been seen as less and less justifiable every generation, barring the Wii and DS flukes. Outside of those two, they continue to sell worse every generation.
Re: Despite the Rumours, Nintendo NX Will Not be Android Based
@Project_Dolphin
No, I'm not backpedaling or adding qualifiers. I merely pointed out that there was far more to the GameCube's failure than you apparently understand. I explained reality.
The GameCube did a lot of things right, and it was a step in the right direction, but it was not a reversal of fortune. By the time the console launched, gamers largely had no interest in Nintendo--the company was an afterthought after the horrific and vacant final years of the N64. During the year the GC launched, the N64 had only 20 games released--for the whole year. The year the PS2 launched, the PS1 had 528 games released. That was a far stronger brand recognition among consumers.
On top of that, Sony correctly saw the rise of DVDs and latched onto it, making the PS2 even more appealing. The Xbox launched with a powerful marketing campaign and also included DVD playback and revolutionized FPS titles.
You are the one that lazily brought up "power only" as the reason the GameCube apparently failed, not me. So I can't backpedal on a point I didn't even bring up. I noted the importance of at least delivering powerful hardware that developers expect of the generation--hell, bringing up the GameCube actually supports my point as merely having generation-par hardware was enough to get the GameCube better support than the N64, despite lower sales.
It was Nintendo's other mistakes that prevented the GC from succeeding.
Then again, as has been pointed out numerous times, Nintendo has been on a steady decline since the NES and Game Boy/Color lines as every new generation sells worse than the generation before, barring the obvious flukes/statistical anomalies of the Wii and DS. These obviously did not reverse this trend as the Wii U and 3DS didn't just fall below sales of those two, but fell to below GC and GBA levels, perfectly in line with the gradual decline Nintendo has been experiencing since the NES.
To just run to the GameCube and say "well it was powerful and it didn't work" is laughably absurd. What's the weight of your argument then? That the GameCube failed because it was powerful? The Xbox was more powerful, and outsold the GC. Even then, you still have to explain the actual reasons the GC failed, which I did--and which you apparently found upsetting for some bizarre reason.
No, power alone won't make a console sell. But power will certainly not hurt things, as power and generation-parity technology alone helped the GC garner better 3rd party support than the N64.
So yes, you are cherry picking. The only information I provided before was, again, literally only noting that the Nintendo needs to make the next console powerful enough for 3rd parties to care. That is the only thing I said. You brought up the GameCube, cherry-picked one element about it, and then ran with it, apparently, without a valid point to back up your non-argument.
shrug
Re: No FIFA For Nintendo Fans This Year, States EA
@Project_Dolphin
Uh, no, I read comments. Plenty of people actually "happy" that Fifa and EA aren't putting another game on the system.
That's okay, as long as Nintendo fans keep up the adversarial relationship with 3rd parties, then the company will have to go third party themselves sooner rather than later. Then everyone will be able to play Nintendo's games far easier, because they can then be on other platforms.
Re: Despite the Rumours, Nintendo NX Will Not be Android Based
@Project_Dolphin
They're way last in sales now, and last generation, the Wii was way behind as far as 3rd party support was concerned with literally 1000 fewer released games than either the X360 or PS3. Obviously, making these absurdly backwards and underpowered consoles is not the answer. I will also remind that when they were the power-console with the SNES, they outsold the competition (the Genesis), and for a time, the powerful N64 featured many high-profile PC ports, including Starcraft, Quake, and an exclusive Doom.
Going back to "well, they were powerful with the GameCube and it didn't sell" is fallacious cherry-picking and ignoring the actual reasons the GC struggled--namely that it was also backwards in a lot of ways (inferior shoulder buttons, awkward button placement for many genres, game disks 1/4 the size of anyone else, no built-in online capabilities, etc.). Not to forget that the GC came out on the heels of the N64--a console that burned 3rd parties and was practically dead for two years before the GC even launched.
Re: No FIFA For Nintendo Fans This Year, States EA
It's beginning to please me to see so many Nintendo fans happy to see yet another 3rd party game skipping the systems. Keep at it guys! The more 3rd party support lost, the sooner Nintendo will have to go 3rd party! No console maker in history has ever survived without 3rd party support!
Re: No FIFA For Nintendo Fans This Year, States EA
@CTs_Lieutenant
Hyperbole, much?
Re: Despite the Rumours, Nintendo NX Will Not be Android Based
@Vineleaf
Yeah, but do they understand that said hardware must also be substantially powerful and feature strong 3rd party support?
Re: Despite the Rumours, Nintendo NX Will Not be Android Based
Yeah, because Nintendo has never denied something they later did within the next year.
Like when they denied a 3DS XL would be made...
Or when they denied a more powerful 3DS would arrive...
Or when they denied they were going to do anything on mobile...
...Yeah, we'll see. The rumor doesn't mean anything, but neither does the denial.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@ikki5
I really don't care if Nintendo fans buy third party. I've noted before, I'd rather the company just go third party themselves, and the fastest way to do that would be for them to lose all third party support and the revenue from it.
What is annoying is seeing Nintendo fanboys blame third parties for everything, totally ignorant of how these things are far more frequently Nintendo's fault. The Wii U did not fix all the problems of the Wii--it just maintained them. It's still a generation behind, technologically. It still doesn't have proper user accounts. It still hast the weakest online set-up. It still has the worst storage space. It still has an off-putting controller. It still can't handle the game engines that are going to define the generation.
Very, very little of my points here have been that Nintendo fans fail to support the games. While traditionally true, I have been explaining why third party games themselves have been typically gimped since the N64 era--and that stuff is almost entirely Nintendo's fault. Hell, it has been long noted that the reason Square left Nintendo was because of their idiotic hardware decisions for the N64. That is how important third party was for Nintendo--while Nintendo fans gleefully and ignorantly pretend third parties don't matter for Nintendo. Final Fantasy VII itself helped sell the original Playstation. Personally, two of the first people I knew that bought the system bought it for Final Fantasy.
Now, third parties very much tried to give Wii U owners better experiences, but as your post blatantly illustrates (as you refuse to recognize this), Nintendo fans seemingly deliberately ignored them. The Wii U got definitive editions of Deus Ex, Arkham City, Ninja Gaiden III, and Tekken Tag 2, to name a few. That you are even sitting there acting like these games never existed at all illustrates the deliberate animosity Nintendo fans have towards third parties. Even when they are both able (technologically) and willing to deliver the very best version of their game, Nintendo fans will clearly still ignore them and pretend they got nothing. Why else would you so handily ignore those games?
Beyond these points, however, the Wii U is gimped for next-generation games. It could handle excellent and definitive versions of last-gen games, but cannot handle the new ones. It will never have an Unreal 4 game. Call of Duty will no longer grace the console. The Wii U cannot handle the graphics and processing required for the newest games. It is again gimped for it's generation, and only for that brief period between generations could it handle "definitive edition" style games--but Nintendo fans ignored them. You have fully illustrated this by refusing to acknowledge the games that the Wii U did get from third parties that did push for the best quality.
What reason do third parties have to bother with Nintendo's lame hardware when Nintendo refuses to give them the tools they need, and the fans will just ignore them anyway totally regardless of quality or effort?
Do you see where the problem is here? Or am I still banging my head against a brick wall glazed with pure kiln-fired stubbornness?
I am guessing the stubbornness if you are still trucking out a completely unrepresentative analogy about a turkey dinner.
The restaurant (the developers) are going to serve everyone the same dinner, because they are capable of doing so. However, when one customer has issues (special rules) that prevent them from delivering the same meal (game), then that person (Nintendo) gets the different, gimped meal.
So why should you support gimped games? That depends. Do you want Nintendo to keep making hardware? If so, then there's your reason. Without revenue from third party sales, Nintendo will not be able to sustain hardware development indefinitely. But, if, like me, you're fine with Nintendo going third party, then by all means, stop supporting 3rd party games.
But it's time to grow the hell up when we complain about them. If we don't want the games gimped, then we should stop pretending Nintendo is magically without fault. It's their decisions about their hardware that either prevent third party games completely or gimp them. The icing on the cake that drives them away, is your lack of support.
That's the reality. And if you want to blame someone for your gimped game, maybe you should be writing to Nintendo to ask them why they didn't give developers the tools they need that are supported everywhere else.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@Wolfgabe
No, I didn't ignore how MS and Sony have done remasters, because it is irrelevant. It was, however, relevant to point out that Nintendo is guilty of these things because of your special pleading while you were trying to pretend they were somehow different or better than any other game company.
Your argument is based extensively on special pleading where you want Nintendo considered differently "because Nintendo." "They're doing freemium, but not as bad," for instance. Your basic point was that "third parties are bad for doing these things" while ignoring that Nintendo also does them.
Special pleading, through and through.
No, the "problem" people have with my posts is that I don't waddle up to Nintendo, lips puckered, and glued to their Mario-funded ass. I don't give the company special treatment, but equal treatment with other game companies. They are ultimately no different, and I recognize that, while the blind refuse to admit it. But then, attempting to turn this into an ad hominem of "this is why preening fanboys don't like you" is a lazy dodge to not address my points and to drive further away from the original point, which was that the quality and number of third party games is gimped on Nintendo systems precisely because of the poor choices of Nintendo themselves.
Going for the "remakes vs remasters" point is just lazy, pointless semantics. Nintendo still spent considerable time re-crafting old Zelda games to sell again for full price to an audience that had already played and had access to these games.
Now, if you are indeed buying your third party games elsewhere--as you pretty much have to at this point--then why do you even care if Nintendo continues to make hardware? Would it not then be far better for Nintendo to just go third party themselves, then you can get all of those games in one place? Of course it would. If you aren't buying Nintendo consoles as game consoles, where you get first and third party equally, and are just buying them for Nintendo Boxes, then they might as well be on other hardware.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@Goemonmaru
I never said the Lego games will sell poorly on the Wii U, only that they will not do as well as on the other systems, particularly the XBO and PS4 as their sales and popularity continue to grow, while the Wii U continues to stagnate. And yes, you're right, that Warner did try with DLC on the Wii U and the fans failed them. However, when pressed for why the Wii U was getting Injustice DLC later, they indicated the problem was on Nintendo's end.
Surprisingly, I once asked them about Injustice DLC on the Wii U on their Facebook page and they actually responded to me. However, I no longer remember if it was in their response, or if I read it elsewhere about the difficulties stemming from Nintendo's end. Either way, low sales, limited storage space, and difficulty in getting the DLC out at the same time as other systems were the catalysts for Batman's Season Pass being yanked, and the last two Injustice characters skipping the platform.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@ricklongo
Sales of XBO, X360, PS3, and PS4 are higher than the Wii U, and third party games sell better on all of those machines. This isn't rocket science, to coin a cliche'. The games will sell better there. They sold well on the Wii, because the Wii had sales. The Wii U does not have the sales.
I didn't say anything about "Nintendo systems or non-Nintendo systems." I said the other versions will sell better than the Wii U version. And they likely will.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@MrGuinea
When it comes to things like gimped online, gimped graphics, lost Achievements features, or not having the game at all because Nintendo does not support the game's engine, no, you absolutely cannot lay any blame on the 3rd parties unless you're an insane fanboy.
You are basically holding 3rd parties accountable for the faults of Nintendo.
Indie devs can port games more easily--sometimes, if they have a large enough staff and enough money--because their games are more limited. For instance, indies are more likely to use Unity, which works on a massive variety of platforms. But you want to blame third parties for not rewriting their entire game for Nintendo, just because Nintendo wasn't smart enough to make hardware that could handle the engine? That's completely absurd.
Yes, every game developer wants people to play their game. They also are creative types who don't want to have to compromise their visions for hardware that can't handle them, and they are also corporations that need to factor in cost-vs-profits, which is another problem from Nintendo. They have to spend more time and money recrafting a game to work on a Nintendo system--for an audience that's going to get pissy because the game is gimped (because it has to be) or aren't going to support it anyway. This is apparently something you simply do not understand.
These companies only want to maximize profits? Yet again another charge you levy against third parties that totally also describes Nintendo. Quit with the special pleading and fallacy-laden defenses of Nintendo. This is a company locking content on games behind an expensive paywall, where you have to spend at least $13 on plastic figures that are frequently impossible to find. Nintendo's bottom line is profits every bit as much as any corporation, if not occasionally more so. Nintendo is going to be charging $4 for clone characters that were cut from Smash Bros and should have been in there in the first place.
This is again dragging out the "developers are lazy" argument that they should just work harder to put games on Nintendo systems. By all means, explain why developers should work harder, on more limited hardware, for a smaller audience, and potential losses over any profits? Why should developers want to do that? Is that what you'd do? Would you work harder for less? Would you quit your job at an upscale restaurant to work for McDonald's for less money and appreciation? After all, you want people to eat the food you make, right? So you should be fine with that.
That is the argument you are making. Third party developers should work extra hard for less money, because Nintendo.
As noted, third party games will frequently be gimped or non-existent on Nintendo systems so long as Nintendo refuses to make the hardware or offer the abilities and capabilities that those developers are working on. And that Nintendo fans fail to understand they "why" in this, or that it is a failure starting with Nintendo, while blaming third parties, will continue to drive them away.
Keep making these excuses, though. Because the less you support 3rd parties on Nintendo platforms, the faster the company will go 3rd party.
Re: Video: Obsession, Violence And Shameless Scalping - amiibo: The Movie Has It All
@wisdomsprince
Yeah, this and the absurd challenges in even trying to get the things are why my interest in them has vanished. I'm not getting this stuff.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@Tazcat2011
Yeah, that's kind of what I thought. I would just like the PS4 to be able to take external drives.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@Wolfgabe
That some developers or publishers have made poor decisions or said regrettable things does not matter here. After all, so has Nintendo, unless you haven't heard of, say, their "yes-no-yes-maybe" stance on Smash Bros in tournaments, and their completely idiotic handling of YouTube videos, and their notion that "Twitch isn't fun," when millions apparently are fine thinking so. Nintendo has said every bit as many stupid things as anyone else, if not a few more. So this is a completely moot point in this conversation. It has no bearing.
You make it sound bad to dare to cater to the development community who will support your console. No, that's not bad at all, it's very clearly smart business. Instead, this catering to the development community is loading the XBO and PS4 with games, support, and great experiences. Both the XBO and PS4 have a higher number of higher rated games than the Wii U already precisely because of this mentality--and so many more on the way.
Your other point on how Third Parties behave is also completely not the point of this. You have offered two red herrings, and have not addressed that dismal third party support is, by and large, Nintendo's fault. Instead, you have fallen prey to fan/fanboy apologetics where "Nintendo can do no wrong" but "all third parties are wrong all the time, here look how wrong they are and have been on completely unrelated topics."
And again, Nintendo is also ridiculously guilty of the charges you stake on third parties. Nintendo is abusing DLC and freemium models. Nintendo is ignoring many beloved franchises while milking a few to death. (Do I really need to point out, yet again, that they delivered 3 Zelda remakes in 4 years?) Nintendo is patching games after launch--including Codename STEAM, Mario Kart, and Smash Bros. Hell, one of the biggest complaints about Splatoon is that it feels like half a game with more content promised later. And Nintendo has also made potentially questionable (we'll find out later) moves into mobile.
Literally every single complaint you have against Third Parties can be levied against Nintendo.
You have done a truly remarkable job of backing up my point that Nintendo fans have an adversarial and unrealistic view of third parties, while ignoring those very same issues in Nintendo, "because Nintendo."
Thank you for adding evidence to my points.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@Wolfgabe
I'm not at all surprised by all the Wii games that got canned. I was waiting for many of them--notably Project HAMMER and Fatal Frame (which was canned outside Japan). The Wii's problem wasn't just getting swamped with shovelware, it was also--as noted--horribly gimped for what 3rd party developers and publishers were used to and expecting of the generation. As I've noted before, it was the only home console that couldn't handle Unreal. Now, the Wii U is the only new-gen console that can't handle Unreal 4. That automatically makes porting many games an unnecessary hassle.
Yeah, the Wii U is more capable than the X360 or the PS3, but it's not even close to the XBO or PS4. Remember, the Wii U's processor is basically equivalent to the 10-year-old X360 processor. It just has 4 times the RAM of the X360. The PS4 and XBO have 16x the RAM of the X360. It is barely more capable than the last gen, and not even close to this one.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@Tazcat2011
This is about my only major gripe about the new generation, thus far. The storage space gets devoured extremely quickly. I've had my PS4 since November. It was full last month. I uninstalled two games so I could install Mortal Kombat.
Also, a 1TB XBO was already released. Don't know if it was a holiday bundle or not, but it was the Call of Duty XBO last winter. At least in the States.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@mike_intv
It's not really a chicken or egg question. If that was true, Nintendo would still be reigning supreme by way of being the first of the contemporary companies.
No, Sony offered tools and opportunities that appealed to developers and publishers, while Nintendo strictly did not. This is why Sony has been able to build such a strong and lasting relationship with third party developers. Microsoft came along, took what Sony did right, and added to it, improving some things, which Sony later adopted--like clickable sticks, triggers, robust user accounts, and an achievement system.
It's not chicken or egg. It's who bothered to appeal to the third parties with the tools they both wanted and needed. Sony and MS have done this. Nintendo refuses to.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@MrGuinea
Read my point in #20.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@No-longer-postin
Oh, I agree it was comfortable. But I can't deny that there are serious problems with it. For one, aside from Smash (and for some reason, Soulcalibur), it was very unfriendly towards fighting games. The C-stick was not comfortable compared to a normal stick (remember, it was a bump, without a comfortable pad on top). The L & R buttons were a squishy mess with double-uses. I think the vast majority of development on them just used the single click feature, and not the analog squish part. Finally, the D-pad was obnoxiously small and borderline useless.
Overall, sure it was comfortable to hold, but it was not particularly friendly for a wide variety of games or designs. This was in the same era where Microsoft introduced clickable sticks and triggers instead of just duplicate shoulder buttons, and these things have adopted as industry norms.
On the upside, the GC made the first truly legitimate wireless controllers. Again, super comfortable to hold. Super backwards and limited in it's functionality.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@ikki5
As a reminder, that gimping is not really the fault of the 3rd party devs. Nintendo fans love to cast blame and abject hatred toward 3rd parties, but the fault lies with Nintendo first and foremost for not giving them the tools and options they need to create parity.
But, an example I have long used is the GameCube, which was as close to parity as Nintendo has been since the beginning of the N64 era, as the GC was technically well within the standards of it's generation, gimped only in the burgeoning online options and disk size, neither of which were as big a deal at the time.
Your analogy doesn't work, because there's no valid reason for the restaurant to give you something different when the ability to deliver the same food as everyone else is there. Third party developers do not have the same abilities on Nintendo hardware. A better analogy would be you and 4 friends sitting at a table in a restaurant, but you're allergic to 60% of the food out there, which means the restaurant no longer has the ability to give you the same Ultimate Bacon Jucy Lucy as everyone else. So your food will be "gimped."
Here is what hurt them over the last three generations, and here is why multi-platform games are likely to be gimped on Nintendo systems:
N64: Limited storage space, expensive cartridges, far more limited texture memory for some reason.
GameCube: Smaller disk size (1.35GB vs 4~8GB), extremely limited online options, noticeably different controller.
Wii: Vastly weaker hardware, vastly slower and weaker online options, extremely limited storage space for downloadable content, slower overall machine, awkward controller. Also, not HD.
Wii U: Vastly weaker hardware, still slower and weaker online, no robust user accounts, still extremely limited storage space, and yet again, a controller that--while it finally has standard features--is still considered awkward.
If Nintendo fans really want equal third party games, clearly, the way to get them is to buy them on Playstation or Xbox or PC or to tell Nintendo to get with the program. The anger against the 3rd parties is almost constantly and totally misplaced as they are limited by what Nintendo offers.
The icing on the cake is that the third party games--even when there is relative parity, as on the GameCube, still almost always sell noticeably worse on the Nintendo hardware.
Your beef isn't with third parties. It's with Nintendo. Nintendo fans need to stop this adversarial nonsense against Third Parties. All you're doing is further convincing them to walk away. Which will ultimately help Nintendo to go Third Party. That's fine by me at this point, but for some reason, many of you guys still want to buy that gimped Nintendo hardware that doesn't offer equivalent options to other hardware, and if you want to keep buying that hardware, then you need to support even those gimped games. Or there's no reason for the hardware to exist.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
@mike_intv
To be fair, the dedicated Nintendo fanbase is notorious for not supporting 3rd party games, regardless of quality. Imagine if you were selling something, and you had 5 outlets. On four of them, you are generally well supported. On the fifth, the audience is difficult to appeal to and they generally don't support you. How much extra effort are you going to want to give to that fifth group?
That's Nintendo fans to every third party, except in rare instances when both the third party and Nintendo are directly pandering to the fanbase, as they did with Soulcalibur II and Monster Hunter 4.
Re: Lego Jurassic World Pre-Order Freebies Coming To PlayStation and Xbox, But Not Wii U
This really isn't a surprise. I seem to recall the folks over at Warner noting that issues with pre-order DLC on the Wii U were a problem caused by Nintendo. At the same time, though, the game will sell far better on all those other systems than the Wii U, anyway.
Re: Japanese Nintendo Direct Coming May 31st
@ikki5
None of these things are as regional as they used to be. Be it E3, Tokyo Game Show, or European Gamescom. They are used by global audiences for information and game news.
Nintendo should know better, so this Direct this close to E3 is confusing. I don't expect any big reveals or anything for it, otherwise they'd completely upend any impact E3 would have. They're probably just taking time to hand out some Japanese release dates of a few titles and oodles of DLC that they don't want to do at E3.
Re: Japanese Nintendo Direct Coming May 31st
Why would they do this so close to E3?
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@Project_Dolphin
I really don't know how long you've been reading comments from gamers online, but I've been on here for the better part of a year now and on GameInformer since 2006 or something. Nintendo fans have long made a very clear distinction--they will buy "anything MZP" first and foremost, over anything else.
When 3rd parties do not make games for Nintendo systems, Nintendo fans have a long history of attacking those third parties. Nintendo fans do make this distinction. And they have for years.
And I used to be one of that crowd.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@hobthebob
What a coincidence, I don't name call either. I do, however, address post content for what it is. For instance, comparing the Wii U to the Ouya and saying that "relatively speaking, it's a big success" is incredibly ridiculous. The Ouya bombed hard, unfortunately, after launch. That's like saying the Atari Lynx was a great success compared to, say, the Virtual Boy--one of the most ill-conceived game systems ever made. Surely, that is trolling. I refuse to believe anyone is so daft as to think that was an intelligent thing to say. I have a little more confidence in humanity than that.
Frankly, if you can only call the Wii U a "success" by comparing it to a major flop, then the Wii U itself is a major flop. That's like saying a rock-solid, ant-covered donut I find in a dumpster is "pretty good food" compared to the maggot-infested raccoon carcass lying next to it. Relatively speaking, sure, that donut is still pretty good food. But in reality, no, that's not what I would call good food.
"The Wii U is a success relatively compared to the Ouya." Okay. So is the Saturn.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@Project_Dolphin
Everything in this first post, about Nintendo doing software only is blind assumption based on nothing. The Wii proves that if Nintendo's games are on popular hardware, they will have sales. Well, Nintendo's hardware isn't popular, but Microsoft's and Sony's are. They would make a fortune on those machines. You're basically saying Nintendo will somehow do better selling games on the Wii U, with an audience of less than 10 million, than they would on the PS4, which looks very likely to easily top 100 million. That consoles don't make a profit is pointless in this, unless you want to recall that Nintendo has been losing money on the Wii U--while Sony has been profiting on the PS4. Which is another good reason for Nintendo to go third party.
As per gaming preferences, yes, Nintendo fans are still doing things very differently. Nintendo fans are the only group that has a clear and ever-present adversarial relationship towards third parties, frequently taking personal offense to the decisions of game corporations. Nintendo fans also notably ignore 3rd party games, which is not something you find with MS or Sony fans. Their buying habits are very different. If you look at the top selling games on any console, you'll find a mix of first and third party on MS and Sony machines, but almost only Nintendo titles on Nintendo machines. Regardless of quality, third party games are seemingly deliberately not supported by the influential majority of Nintendo fans.
@Superryanworld
Gotcha.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@Project_Dolphin
Per the fans, actually, yes they are doing something different concerning how they buy games. Sony and Microsoft fans actually buy 3rd party games. That's why they have them.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@Superryanworld
You just said they should appeal to the casual audience, then explained why they shouldn't.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@hobthebob
That you refuse to believe something does not change the facts or reality or the statistical understanding of the systems.
The Wii and DS were the right systems at the right time. They found an audience that was ready for them. But they had no longevity, and they pandered to people following trends or fads--which means they pandered to a temporary audience, and the evidence is in the Wii U and 3DS, which--yet again--fell to below pre-Wii/DS sales levels. Which means the Wii and DS were, in fact, flukes.
Nintendo has not had "fluctuating" hardware sales over the years unless you have no idea what the word "fluctuating" means. Fluctuating would be more along the lines of sales that go up and down and are different every generation. This has not been the case. Instead of actually fluctuating, they have been dropping, and you can believe foolishness all you want, but the numbers will prove you wrong. Nintendo's hardware has been on a downward trend since the NES and Game Boy--and it has never fluctuated, it has always gone down--with the exception of the two anomalies.
The rest of your post is absurdly sad special pleading. You again pull the old Nintendo fanboy rant of "Vita failure" while magically calling the Wii U "not a failure." Again, the Vita has sold better than the Wii U and has more games coming to it in 2015. There is also no news at all for Sony discontinuing the Vita, which is a lie you have just completely made up. If you have to invent things to back up your point, your point was wrong to begin with.
"Relatively speaking, the Wii U is a big success.... compared to Ouya."
This is the dumbest thing I've read online in a long time--and again, this is the internet. Nice try, kid, but you should've quit while you were ahead. You stepped over a line: Obvious troll is obvious.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@Project_Dolphin
The preferences of Nintendo fans are one of the reasons Nintendo is in the situation is is in today. How you spend your money matters, and when you spend your money on Zelda remakes while ignoring new games or 3rd party titles, you create an environment where Nintendo has now churned out 3 Zelda remakes in 4 years.
It's less about "blame" as it is a causal relationship. And how Nintendo fans choose to spend or not spend their money greatly affects the hardware and the bottom line of the company as a whole. It can be said that since the general Nintendo consumer wants nothing but a few primary franchise games and little else, they want Nintendo to just make Mario-Zelda-Pokemon games, and to stop making hardware.
Re: Devil's Third Will Be Much More Than Just Another Shooter, According To Creator Tomonobu Itagaki
I laugh at his sentiment of it being "real world." No sir, everything that has been shown for that game is the exact opposite of anything in the "real world." Ha ha ha! Oh my... Diplomacy, huh? Actually that does exist in quite a few other games. Like Fallout.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@JaxonH
I'm sure they're in a tough spot. They don't want to just have to scrap all the hard work they've put into the Wii U version, but at the same time, it may not be financially feasible to continue. It's probably a tug-of-war in that office of "do we just drop this or not?"
While Nintendo stated "No NX at E3," I think these guys are still waiting for either E3 or TGS to see if NX information arrives, and if it doesn't, they'll pull the plug completely. I think they're sincere in that they don't want to give up on the Wii U, but this is a company with lots of employees that they need to pay and care for. They may have to make a tough decision to save the company over delivering to a small group of people.
We forget as gamers how big this industry really is now. How much money and expense and time is involved. When I tested games for Activision, I worked 72-hour weeks for the bulk of that time. There's so much to consider in these things. And the decisions cannot be made quickly or easily.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@Sir_JBizzle
I don't lump all Nintendo fans together--as you said, there are those of us who do buy 3rd party. I didn't play Call of Duty until I bought the Wii U. After three years with the series, though, I recognize whey they're popular, but I want something different (hooray for Bloodborne!) to me. But I recognize the general Nintendo audience and the over-arching trends. When I generalize that "Nintendo fans don't buy 3rd party," I am noting the wider market trends, which completely support this statement. For every one of us that buys a 3rd party game, there's a couple thousand who don't. Third parties are profitable on other consoles, but not on Nintendo.
Nintendo fans love to cast the blame to the 3rd parties, but the problem is actually from Nintendo and the fans. Nintendo's gimped hardware prevents 3rd parties from getting the most out of the system. Would you want to sell gigabytes of DLC on a console that has almost no storage space? No, that's a huge freaking gamble. Then the fans naturally ignore games that aren't from a few key Nintendo franchises--a behavior found only in Nintendo fans, and not in Sony or Microsoft fans, who are just as likely to buy 3rd party as 1st.
While I note that Nintendo should be repairing those 3rd party relationships now, I do agree with you that there may be no way to do that with the Wii U. At this point, I think the longer the Wii U is out, the worse things are going to be for Nintendo.
I use the PS3 analogy because it was Sony's major misstep. Kind of like the Saturn was for Sega. Nintendo's decisions now are critical--the NX can either be their PS4 (a return to form) or their Dreamcast (their last hurrah). Going by what we know, I expect it will be the latter. And I've reached a point now where I'm starting to prefer that.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@JaxonH
I don't think NX is years away. I expect to see it launch next year. However, I agree--this game isn't coming to it. They're not going to sit on this game for another 6~10 months waiting for Nintendo to get the necessary information on NX out and then hope to release it again in late 2016 or early 2017.
Right now, they're trying to do some damage control, but I think they should just cut their losses.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@hobthebob
Aw cripes, if you aren't going to pay attention, what's the damn point? I and another poster here have both gone to great lengths to illustrate how, why, and indeed that the Wii and DS were statistical anomalies. Since the NES and Game Boy, Nintendo has been on a gradual sales decline only broken by the Wii and DS, and immediately after the Wii and DS, their hardware continued on the exact same downward trajectory.
These numbers are extraordinarily easy to look up.
The GameCube, by the way, had better 3rd party support than the N64 precisely because for once, Nintendo delivered hardware on-par with the standards of the generation, which you'll note is exactly the opposite of the N64, Wii, and Wii U. However, even Nintendo largely considers the GC a failure, as Iwata very clearly stated that selling less than the GC would be considered such--a failure.
The GC was ultimately profitable, but it was not a success, and to pretend it was is borderline delusional. It sold worse than the Xbox and way worse than the PS2. Nintendo even resorted to trying to sell the GameCube as a companion console to the PS2 or XB rather than a competitive machine on it's own.
However, the GameCube did manage far better third party support than the N64 and the Wii U. But again, it was because it was the only post-SNES hardware Nintendo made that was actually, largely, equivalent to the generational norms of the time.
Is the 3DS a statistical anomaly? Hell no, because it falls right back into the trend that was moving before the DS launched. The GBA/Micro line sold worse than the Game Boy/Color line, and the 3DS is selling worse than the GBA/Micro line. It is continuing the downward trend.
It makes perfect sense that the Wii and DS would be anomalies at the same time. One helped boost popularity of the other, and they shared similar design sentiments that got lucky and struck a chord with consumers at that time. After that, though, the evidence that they were nothing but anomalies, fads, or trends is that--as has been painstakingly noted by more than just me on this site--the 3DS and Wii U returned to the downward trend.
By sales:
NES > SNES > N64 > GC < Wii > Wii U
GB/Color > GBA/Micro < DS > 3DS
The Wii and DS were anomalies. The pattern is still one of ever-decreasing market share and hardware sales numbers, and the Wii U and 3DS continue the trend that was followed by the previous generations. Because the Wii U and 3DS didn't just fall to "below Wii and DS" numbers, they actually fall below pre-Wii and DS numbers.
It is actually like this:
NES > SNES > N64 > GC > Wii U
GB/Color > GBA/Micro > 3DS/New
In every way, the Wii and DS were anomalies. Flukes. Fads. Trends. A temporary lucky strike. After which, Nintendo returned to their "normal" which is, unfortunately, a lengthy history of gradually becoming irrelevant.
And the point about the games on the N64 box was to directly address the deliberate stupidity that Nintendo "never relied on 3rd parties." Yes, yes they totally did. They relied on 3rd parties to the point of promoting the games on the damn box for the console. Without revenue from sales of 3rd party games, Nintendo's strength and reach is severely hampered.
Re: RCMADIAX Announces Three New Titles For The Wii U eShop, Arriving In North America This Summer
@kensredemption
Since the PS4 doesn't make use of the Construc2 Engine, it completely avoids having these bottom-dollar, no-quality games slapped together based on a tutorial from a website and sold to consumers who don't know any better.
The PS4 indie situation is actually quite good thus far, and while the Wii U is getting games apparently intent on bottoming-out the concept of quality, the PS4 is getting things like Never Alone, Mercenary Kings, and the like. All the best indies on the Wii U are also on PS4/PS3/Vita. It just doesn't have the Construct2-helmed crap.
Which is a pity. That engine has potential. But apparently not in the hands of most of these Wii U indies. As I noted before, Rcmadiax literally took a Construct2 tutorial, and sold it to Wii U owners.
https://www.scirra.com/tutorials/857/flappy-birds-clone-in-10-minutes
Re: RCMADIAX Announces Three New Titles For The Wii U eShop, Arriving In North America This Summer
@vitalemrecords
He basically admitted as much earlier this year, on this very site. He noted that Nintendo gamers bought crap for a laugh (The Letter), so he was just going to keep making more crap.
His games are the definition of shovelware. If this is what the eShop is going to continue receiving, I'm glad I bought a PS4.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@rjejr
I agree that the Wii U is done by 2017 regardless. But given the slimming support, even from Nintendo, I would expect it in 2016--to be replaced the same way the GBA was.
Nintendo is at a point where it could deliver 5 of the best games ever made over the next year and a half, and the system would still be dragging it's ass to the grave. It's done. Nobody wants this thing. Not outside of hyper-dedicated Nintendo fanboys and those of us lingering fans hoping something good will happen.
Even when 3rd party games do arrive, they sell terribly. Nintendo fans do not even want to support this thing, or they'd buy a damn 3rd party game or two every now and then. Instead, they bitch and moan about $20 for a game while buying another 3DS or 20 more Amiibo to add to the pile.
Nintendo fanboys are very, painfully, clearly blind to not realize this. Outside of sites like this that deal exclusively in Nintendo and articles on more games skipping the console, everyone else considers it dead. The system is a tired has-been, and that's not exactly easy for me to say, as I defended it adamantly for that first year and a half. But it is getting easier to say, as I am not blind to reality. Because eventually reality sets in. It's not selling. It won't sell. Hell, HD remakes of GameCube games are not even coming to it. Nintendo fans adamantly call the Vita a failure--and it's still sold better than the Wii U, and has way more games coming to it.
Nintendo, it seems, is a company that has passed beyond irrelevance, and now stands on the brink of total obsolescence. They are outside the curve, and outside the industry, and outside the norms. Boring as norms can be, it's how you appeal to a mass audience. Ironically, this is always Nintendo's goal, but they are frighteningly bad at doing it. But Sony did it. They delivered exactly the game console people wanted. No crazy gimmicks, streamlined, yet familiar. User friendly and robust.
I've explained my reasoning a dozen times at least. So I'll just make this reminder: I expect NX to launch in 2016, and I would not be surprised to see Zelda U become Zelda NX. This follows the way Nintendo has done things before. Project Cars for Wii U will be canceled, and there will be no title that causes a new, notable reversal in sales for the console.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@Sir_JBizzle
I think it's fairly safe to say that NX probably doesn't have 3rd party support lined up for the following reasons:
1. Third parties have largely abandoned both the Wii U and 3DS.
2. Nintendo is still terrible at dealing with them.
3. Even after the "success" of the Wii, Nintendo could barely get 3rd parties on board the Wii U.
4. In order to build confidence in the new hardware, Nintendo should be building confidence now on the Wii U--the way Sony did after the disastrous launch of the PS3. They worked so hard to get 3rd parties back on their side that the PS4 launched like a greyhound in it's prime at the track.
I don't think the support is going to be there. There will be kiddie games from Activision, a couple ports of PS4/XBO games to test the water (that Nintendo fans will, as usual, ignore) but that'll be about it.
I don't have confidence in the NX at this point, based largely on how Nintendo is attempting to do things now.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@Ernest_The_Crab
Uh no, gamers--particularly Nintendo fans for some reason--take these things overwhelmingly personally and get butthurt over relatively minor things. Why do you think EA tops "worst companies" lists in the face of corporations who are doing actual harm to people and/or the environment and/or the economy?
It's because gamers apparently, by and large, have no understanding of the world outside of gaming, and go out of their way to be whiny crybabies about way too many things. EA is far from the worst company out there. But that's all gamers understand.
Again, a lot of you guys here are getting personally offended by a company that has to reverse a position on the Wii U. Maybe try not being emotionally invested in a game console.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@hobthebob
Each of Nintendo's systems has sold worse than the one before, sans the flukes of the Wii and DS, which are quite clearly statistical anomalies in all of this. Nintendo has always needed 3rd parties--as has every successful console maker since the NES. A big part of the diminishing sales can be lumped directly onto the lacking 3rd party support and sales.
And funny that you should name the N64, since it had 3rd party games on the damn box:
Or do you think Nintendo owns Star Wars?
By the way, being generally profitable is not the same thing as being successful. After all, the PS2 was also profitable--and successful.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@Darknyht
The Wii U doesn't even have the minimum RAM necessary according to those requirements. The Wii U has 2 GB total, but only 1GB of RAM is used for gaming. The rest is OS.
Re: Exclusive: Slightly Mad Studio Head Ian Bell Sets The Record Straight On Project CARS Wii U
@Samurai_Goroh
Calling them liars and thieves borders on slander, particularly when you are going to also sit there and adamantly refuse to bother to understand the situation.
That's like me seeing you pick up a $10 bill from the ground and put it in your pocket, and then I rush over and call you a thief, and when you deny it, a liar--even though you dropped the money yourself and I didn't see it. You have chosen to be ignorant of the situation, but are still being judgmental. There is not an ounce of maturity in that scenario.