darkgamer001

Give me a non-butchered 3rd party game were Nintendo fans are treated equally, and chances are I'll buy it and encourage others to do so. But I will boycott anything that comes with gimped features. If 3rd parties can't understand that people will be put off if you don't treat them equally....well, maybe we're just better off without most of them.

As for EA, Nintendo sites should learn from them and do the same. Not mention them. It's not Nintendo news anymore.

It was pretty good, I actually laughed at the Mum- Triforce of Power bit. But then they used the term 'upgrade'. Why on earth are they using the term upgrade? Is "a new console" that difficult to use in an ad?

Yes, technically a new console is an upgrade to the previous one, I can see some people looking at it that way...but it just invites consumer confusion who think that it just adds something to the previous console

"Although you'll need to go to Japan if you want one"

Erm....they're currently available in my country (Malta)....and if they're available in a tiny island in the Mediterranean, I can bet they're available elsewhere too.

@Linkstrikesback

Outright proving it is difficult, but it would be quite naive to think that MS was stupid enough to try to enforce those DRM policies without very clear indications that their direct competition was going to do the same.

That's why I found all the Sony white-knighting to be ridiculous. Sony just let MS go first with the announcement....that's not being "on the gamer's side" or whatnot. That's just being cunning.

@DarkKirby then how do you explain the sales spike caused by Wii Party U?

"Did people think the 3DS was a DS with a third screen?"
If I recall correctly, people thought the 3DS was a DS with 3D, it was creating confusion, had bad sales and some were calling for a name change. Sound familiar?

I don't agree with Iwata on everything...coughregionlockcough....but I love how so many people think they know better than the man who spearheaded the astronomical sales figures of the Wii, DS and now the 3DS.
But hang on, Wii U is not doing so hot in it's FIRST year?
Better fire Iwata, give up on the Wii U and maybe go third party. Yup. Pure genius.

Can we get that flamer off this site? I mean, I don't want to tell the admins what to do, nor do I have any right to do so.
But I genuinely think the community here is much, much better than, say, mynintendonews and I really hope it stays that way.

And again, we have people thinking power would result in better 3rd party support. When will you realize, if ever, that these 3rd parties would, in that scenario, just pull the other excuse - 'the audience isn't there'

Stop gimping if you want us to buy your games! It's that flippin' simple!

@MrMario02
1. Gamefreak, not Nintendo...
2. If they favour Fire Types so much...why would they have made the move Stealth Rock?

Anyone have a link pls? (no, the one in my display pic doesn't count )

Add local co-op via an update and maybe you'll get a few more sales Ubisoft...

Why is their 'campaign' against piracy ridiculous? I smell a pirate...

Skyrim Legendary Edition on the Wii U would probably have sold quite well. But surprise surprise, they didn't even try...

Fair enough, Nintendo don't own the Bayonetta IP. BUT....why would they spend money on a game like that if they were so concerned with games being 'not niche' and 'family friendly'?

I like how some people are taking it for granted that Nintendo would make Atlus tone down their franchises for a broader audience or some other reason. Sure, and Bayonetta 2 will be rated 3+ right?

I wish they could have pressed on that offline co-op part, asking if there's any possibility of it getting patched in later on for the Wii U version. It might seem like a small thing (and it definitely is minor next to Batman Origins no online) but I really don't want Wii U versions of games missing features becoming some kind of trend.

Hi Capcom, this is Europe calling...

There are multiple holes when you present an argument implying that a new console would be the best strategy, to the point that said argument starts looking like a kitchen sieve.
1. The Wii U is actually a good console as it is, lack of software and marketing is what is hurting it right now, both of which can be tackled.
2. It also implies that lack of third parties are what is hurting the system. They are, but from the N64 onwards Nintendo has relied mostly on first party.
3. What exactly would a more powerful system achieve? More third party support? If power was an issue, why aren't they putting their 360/PS3 games on the Wii U?
4. Brand reliability would take a hit, as many people have already pointed out
5. The 'weakest' hardware often triumphs in hardware sales, and the most expensive ones usually don't. If any system is in trouble right now, I'd say it's the Xbox One.
6. Game development costs are already sky high as they are. When several other companies go bankrupt in pursuit of 'ultra HD' or whatever the so-called 'next gen' visuals are going to be called, maybe people will realize that Nintendo did make the right call. That maybe, you know, getting a game out knowing that it'll need to sell 10 million copies just to break even might not be such a viable strategy after all.

And that's just off the top of my head. I could probably think of more reasons, but I'm pretty sure that will suffice.

Because every game on the console needs to be a 'system seller' right?
-___-

Again people who misread the article....he's referring to the development of games mostly! Obviously more people will buy the system if it has more games for it. They focused more internal teams on the 3DS to regain momentum, leading to a lesser amount of teams developing for the Wii U, and now obviously it has less games and in turn, less sales.

It's incredible how people still find ways to bring specs and power into the equation when we're talking about a PS2/GC HD REMAKE!! If anything, this proves that 3rd parties not supporting the Wii U is not down to power.

Yet more examples of developer laziness...

This whole approach is based on the assumption that both the Xbox One and PS4 will take off in sales and leave the Wii U behind. I will laugh when that assumption blows up in many third party developers' faces

Yeah and at most toss us Europeans a retail download version only. At most.

I love how pre-orders are taken as an indication for the success of the Xbox One and PS4, yet they were dismissed for the Wii U.
Also, if I recall correctly, the Dreamcast broke pre-order records in NA in its time. Just putting it out there...

For all those asking NLife to stop posting Pachter articles, I agree, but...this article currently has 176 comments. There's your reason why Nintendo sites keep posting whatever this 'analyst' says. Ofc, I'm sort of contributing to the problem by commenting here, but it needed to be said.
You want NLife to start ignoring him? Then ignore the Pachter articles. It's that simple.

Already sent an email to [email protected] with a link to the site that these pirates are using. Bricking their 3DS would be amazing...and if it's possible, then yes, Nintendo should put their foot down and stomp them. Short of that, firmware updates to block the flashcart should be possible.

@gspro15198 - they'd play games from rival companies, and that's what Nintendo is (unwillingly I suppose) steering them to.
Nintendo are already profiting from Let's Plays. It's FREE ADVERTISING by the Let's Player. Taking the ad revenue is just plain greedy

Nintendo doesn't seem to understand that Let's Players are probably doing a better job of marketing than they will ever do. They are effectively steering established LPers as well as up and coming ones to LP (and thus 'market') games from rival companies in the future.
And what most people here don't seem to understand is that a Let's Play takes a lot of dedication, time and effort. But please, continue to enlighten me with your uninformed comments on how it's a lazy way of profiting...

I just don't really get the big deal about why the game must be from Nintendo EAD and not a sister company. What's the point? It's a Nintendo IP either way. I highly doubt people go into this much scrutiny for the other two hardware companies.

You should really update that image with the reply he tweeted afterwards, especially if you're using that subtitle

Sometimes a radical and even divisive change in a franchise is better than it turning stale and dying slowly.
In Mega Man's case it would have definitely been better than just simply cancelling one game after another.

Am I the only PS3 owner that dislikes PS+? I'm not saying it's not a good deal, cause it can be, but I want to own my games, not pay a subscription service to loan them

Even as a Wii U owner with a copy of MH Tri Ultimate, I feel that this is an extremely greedy decision by Capcom. Not everyone can update now, you know...

For those who haven't yet experience MiiVerse...it's kind of hard to explain without actually trying it out yourself, but in some ways, think of it as a social network for gamers

I think if Nintendo wanted to F-Zero and Starfox "extinct franchises", we wouldn't have gotten an F-Zero game in Nintendo Land (my 2nd favourite attraction after Metroid) and a 3DS remake for the latter. PATIENCE. I have a sneaking suspicion we'll have some E3 news for at least one of these franchises. I'm guessing it's gonna be Starfox

All this hate....because they're developing a Wii U title too? If they were developing it for PSN/Live, would anyone have piped up? I doubt it. The arrogance and hatred of some fanboys never ceases to amaze me.

And yet to build a fanbase, you need to support a system from the get go...it's not like Namco doesn't have the resources to do, say, a Wii U port of Tales of Xilia. Heck, they supported a console with an almost insignificant fanbase in Japan, why not the Wii U?

Look as much as I want the R/S/E remakes that everyone drones on about, I understand why they're releasing X and Y first. Would you want the R/S/E remakes to be outdated after a few years? Or completely compatible with the new pokemon too?

$40 after leaving it so late?
The idea interests me, but again...$40 for something I use much less frequently not that I have the Wii U is stretching it

Although I disagree with the headline, this article presents some very valid points. As such, I feel compelled to present mine in order to argue from a different perspective.
Let's make it clear. Working to mend things with EA might be important, but I don't feel it should be a priority. EA needs Nintendo more than the other way round, and this is demonstrated by EA's disastrous financials and the destruction of their reputation amongst gamers (although this was also due to issues beyond the EA-Nintendo feud).
As for EA's IPs, the importance of these IPs will be reduced if rival companies are offering experiences in the same genre on the Wii U. For example, Nintendo can work to get Konami's PES on board for the Wii U annually like on other platforms. Same goes for Activision's CoD. I'm personally not a fan of either series, but they would help the Wii U, and force EA to reconsider if they see these franchises making money, especially in the absence of their IPs.
EA have also arguably massacred the reputation of series like Mass Effect, Sim City, and Dead Space, meaning the lack of their franchises isn't as damaging as it would have been in the past.

tl;dr - EA is important for Nintendo, but NOT a priority. Plenty of other companies can take advantage of their absence, whilst EA continues to suffer financial losses and having to cope with distrust amongst gamers as a result of their negative attitude. Any attempts at reconciliation should start from EA themselves.

I don't see anything wrong with selling tablets per se, but if GAME is prioritizing this over selling 'dedicated' gaming consoles/handhelds, then you can easily see how they ended up in bankruptcy

Having an opinion is one thing, derisively laughing at it just because it doesn't fit with your "MOAR POWAR" motto is another, and smacks of fanboyism - a level of fanboyism which, imo, shouldn't be present at the top echelons of game development
Is that too much to understand?

@LzQuacker...well played, a fair argument. Though I only follow the gaming industry this closely and thus can't comment much on what happens in other sectors

What an idiotic little fanboy. The fact that people like these occupy these important positions, instead of just at the bottom of some Nintendo-hating internet thread were they belong, is disturbing to say the least.

Nintendo use their own graphical engines. They certainly don't need an engine from this stuck up dude's company. Besides, with the rise of propriety engines and Unity, as well as the increased costs of developing with UE4, Rein would do well to remember that he who laughs last, laughs the hardest

Actually, a lot of ppl can't afford to pay $40-60 for games on a regular basis, which is why they wait for price drops on games and game systems. These people have every right to be gamers just like you and me.
Let's not make this hobby any more elitist than it already is

Just like what I said about the Vita, the thing now will be consistency. i.e whether these sales figures will drop (obviously) but remain consistently higher than the pre-MH sales numbers, or whether they'll fall back to the same level.