5 Simple Mistakes Nintendo Made with the Wii U
on Aug 07 by

5 Simple Mistakes Nintendo Made with the Wii U

Sometimes, the hardest problems to see are the ones staring us in the face. The Wii U isn’t Nintendo’s death knell, as the company has billions of dollars in reserve, but recently released sales figures show that the console is in dire straits. Owing to waning interest, the console has even been removed from the shelves of British supermarket giant Asda.

 

With only 10,000 units sold across Europe during the last fiscal quarter, Nintendo have a long road ahead of them if they want to match their previous success. So where did it all go wrong? Let’s take a look at five simple reasons Nintendo’s Wii U dream turned sour.

 

Communicating with the public

 

 

 

The Nintendo Wii sold 100 million units, despite its somewhat silly name, and was little more than a repackaged Gamecube. Nintendo delivered an excellent pitch to the consumer: the Wii was cheap and intuitive, and with Wii Sports bundled with the console itself, it had a funny way of justifying itself to anybody who spent time with one. The result? Clever marketing and clear messaging left Nintendo with huge profits on console sales during a generation where other manufacturers sold units at a loss.

 

Don’t get me wrong: there are lots of reasons to like the Wii U. I like the idea of a DS for your TV, which is effectively what the Wii U is – a console with two screens and stylus controls, backed up by an excellent series of first party games. I think if Nintendo managed to communicate this appropriately, the public would love it too. After all, they’re the same public who bought 153 million DS consoles. However, with the popular misconception that the Wii U is just an addon for the Wii – a problem made worse by its use of the Wii remote as a secondary controller – a large portion of the public have no idea what the Wii U even is.

 

Failure to Act Against Competitors

 

 

Blood was shed at this year’s E3, when Sony delivered an eviscerating conference aimed at toppling Microsoft before the Xbox One even came to market. However, the real battle begins this holiday season, as Sony and Microsoft both ramp up efforts for the release of their new hardware. So what comes between then and now? Well, nothing, really; while the end of a generation is incredibly lucrative for console manufacturers, their attention is focused on laying the groundwork for the next set of consoles.

 

By comparison, Nintendo already have their new console. They also have access to a huge amount of resources and some of the most recognisable intellectual properties in the industry, and in figurative terms, Nintendo have an opportunity to catch their competition with their pants down. However, Nintendo’s E3 presentation – delivered via a Nintendo Direct webcast – was weak; outside of Pikmin 3, which hit shelves in late July, many of Nintendo’s announcements are due towards the end of the year, when public interest in Microsoft and Sony’s new consoles is set to reach a fever pitch.

 

Missing online functionality

 

 

The Nintendo eShop is awesome. Day one digital downloads as well as a number of indie titles make it a really appealing place to seek out a new experience. In some regards, the eShop outstrips the Xbox Live Arcade and Playstation Store in terms of what’s on offer. However, even though the company are ditching friend codes, the MiiVerse and the overall online infrastructure aren’t much of a match for the Xbox Live and Playstation Network services.

 

Sure, the service is free, and drawing silly pictures on the Funky Barn MiiVerse board is hilarious. But there are games where online functionality is critical – such as Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 – that are almost totally devoid of players, and this is partly because Nintendo have shown little to no interest in bringing their online service in line with that of their competitors. I mean, no achievement tracking system on the Wii U? Really? I realise that Nintendo are about more than just Call of Duty and voice chat, but the markets show that the public aren’t. The Vita and PS3 function so well as a pair that owning both is very compelling indeed; why did Nintendo avoid the same course of action for the Wii U and 3Ds? Would it have been such a chore to create a linked account system?

 

There’s also the looming question about what happens to games when a system is lost or stolen. Nintendo of America have stated that the warranty does not cover lost or stolen consoles, and that eShop purchases are tied to the system itself. Consumers are only now beginning to adapt to digital distribution; if you lost your 3DS, would you really be willing to buy all of your games again? Nintendo seem stuck in another age, and it’s a shame, because digital distribution is highly profitable and in some respects they do it best.

 

Few games justify the controller (also, there’s far too many controllers for the system)

 

 

 

As discussed earlier in the article, Wii Sports was a great piece of software because it justified the Wii’s control paradigm immediately. If anybody wasn’t sure of how motion controls on the system were going to work, Wii Sports was there to communicate that. More importantly, though, Wii Sports is a game that you would simply be unable to play (at least in its current form) without a Wii controller. Super Mario Galaxy – one of Nintendo’s finest games – did a great job of showing how the Wii controller could be used to breathe life into old franchises without deviating too much from the gameplay.

 

With the Wii U, Nintendo have produced Nintendo Land, which is an enjoyable game. However, it doesn’t come bundled with the system, and isn’t nearly as natural a fit to the Wii U controller as Wii Sports was to the Wii controller. Asymmetric multiplayer is an excellent idea and great fun, especially with people you know very well – a recent Penny Arcade comic posited the idea of a Dungeons and Dragons style game with the Wii U Gamepad offering dungeon master functionality, which practically markets itself. The trouble is, most third party developers have only really used the second screen for menus, inventory management and maps, and those are problems that have been sold in the past without a second screen (the Start button says hello).

 

 

The sheer volume of controllers is also absurd. The Wii U Gamepad, Wii U Pro Controller and the Wii remote are available for consumers to use, but only flanking some usable controllers with “Wii U” and giving the compatible WiiMote standard Wii branding is confusing for those who exist outside of the video games media and enthusiast crowd. The Wii Classic Controller is also compatible, but this information is not provided on Nintendo’s website. The Wii remote, which is practically required for some games, is also not bundled with the console. The sheer number of peripherals available for use with the Wii U is ridiculous, with Nintendo having created layers and layers of hardware which are basically impenetrable without having Google close to hand. It’s difficult to understand why Nintendo would go down that path; after all, wasn’t one of the reasons the Wii sold so well that it was simple?

 

Lack of third party support

 

 

Sure, Nintendo don’t have complete control over whether or not third party developers want to work with their system, but relationships of any kind – including business – are a two way street. When EA announced a partnership with Nintendo to bring their properties to the system, I cheered; Sure, EA aren’t the greatest company in the world, but the Wii really petered out towards the end of its shelf life. Two years on, EA have effectively abandoned the system. So what changed?

 

It’s hard to say without sitting on the board of EA or any other major third publisher, but it all comes down to system sales. The Wii U simply isn’t selling, and a narrow install base means even narrower sales numbers – even if everybody bought an EA game and a console last quarter, that would only translate to 10,000 copies shifted for the publishing giant. Considering Fifa 13 sold over 10 million units worldwide, ten thousand is a drop in the ocean. Why devote resources to a system where your sales potential is so low when there’s so much business to be had elsewhere?

 

Conclusion

 

 

Let me be clear – I love Nintendo. They’ve developed some of my favourite games, and my first console was a Nintendo 64. I wouldn’t wish anything bad on them at all, as tempting as it is to give into the tribalistic ‘console war’ mentality. As Giant Bomb’s Brad Shoemaker has said in the past, you shouldn’t approach video games jeering at console manufacturers and hoping one will fail, because ultimately, it isn’t us vs them – it’s us. If one console flops, it’s terrible for the industry at large, because competition in consumer electronics has proven to be a good thing. I understand that consoles are hefty purchases, though, and that people want to defend their spending habits. People really care about the money in their bank account – and that’s the problem. The Wii U, as it stands, is a difficult product to justify. It’s expensive and doesn’t offer much value for money.

 

It might do in the future, of course, but this creates a vicious cycle. People waiting for the Wii U’s golden era are only delaying its onset; for Nintendo and other companies who need to begin pouring resources into the console, the install base is the only thing that matters to them. Units sold shows just how many people care enough to support a console at release, because those are the people who care enough to buy games at full retail. Those are the people who will readily buy peripherals, and who will act as Nintendo’s spokespeople among their friends and relatives. Nintendo have given surprisingly little to early adopters in response, which can only be a bad thing.

 

Of course, Nintendo are rich, and they have some great software in the pipeline. They’ve also done a great deal to salvage the 3DS, which is looking more and more impressive by the day. One day the Wii U may be one of the most appealing purchases to gamers of the future, but right now, the Wii U is looking unhealthy. To them, we only have one message – get well soon.



  • Aiddon

    1. It still amazes me at how even when Nintendo spells things out as simply as possible people still go “ha-dur!” when it comes to the Wii U. I just can’t believe the general public is this dumb.

    2.The Direct was completely fine. Furthermore, nothing is guaranteed for the PS4 or XB1, especially the latter. More than likely those two will struggle just as much as the Wii U initially due to the historical pattern of first-year doldrums

    3. Perhaps, but it’s nowhere near as bad as people like to pretend.

    4. Then that’s the fault of 3rd parties being lazy, not with Nintendo. I mean, for crying out loud, the DS line is a decade old, it should NOT be that difficult to think of SOMETHING for the Wii U.

    5. A lot of people try to do system sales, but I don’t buy that. For instance, EA vehemently ignore the 3DS, which is by far the highest-selling system worldwide right now. And yet they haven’t made a single game for it in nearly two years. So I can’t help but wonder if their attitude towards Nintendo has something else involved. Secondly, this does seem to be a habit 3rd parties never, ever get: if you want to sell product, you HAVE to make an effort. Let’s face it, most 3rd parties lazily threw their games on the Wii U and then threw a tantrum when people called them out on their sub-par efforts by not buying their product and passed it up for Nintendo’s far superior titles. And don’t even get me started on their halfassed advertising. 3rd parties thought they could be lazy and reality slapped them hard. But instead of being adults and actually more effort into it, they just made lazy, childish excuses and went to sulk in a corner. It’s pathetic. And people wonder why Nintendo dominates on Nintendo systems.

    • Martin Brentnall

      Sorry, but shifting blame for Nintendo’s failings towards third-parties doesn’t fly in the face of logic and rationality.

      If third-parties don’t want to develop 3DS or Wii U games, then it’s simply because they believe that doing so would not be in their best interests with regards to profit. You can argue until you’re blue in the face about installed base figures, but it’s been shown time and time again that chasing raw numbers is not the way to succeed.

      The Wii vastly outsold the PS3 and 360, and yet a game like Black Ops still sold almost TEN TIMES as many on the PS3 as it did on the Wii. The figures don’t lie, and the figures are shouting out in no uncertain terms that it’s much wiser to invest in a Sony or Microsoft platform than it is in a Nintendo one, even when the Nintendo platform is the vastly more popular one.

      • Magnumsally

        actually its COMPLETELY third parties fault.

        Japanese devs are KILLING IT on 3ds. western companies are stupid

        • Martin Brentnall

          Here are some facts for you:
          Biggest selling third-party 3DS games (according to Wikipedia):

          – Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate: 2.2 million
          – Dragon Warrior VII: 1.2 million
          – Super Street Fighter IV: 1.1 million

          I’m sure all the big western developers will just throw in the towel on PS3 and 360 development in light of this data and make emergency plans to shift projects straight over to Nintendo’s platforms. Someone needs to alert EA and Activision quick!

          I mean, why bother making games that potentially sell 5-10 million on the PS3 + 360 when you can struggle to reach 1 million on the 3DS?

          And let’s not forget that we’re discussing the Wii U here, not the 3DS, which isn’t going to do potential figures any favours. I mean, what kind of figures are you expecting out of a third party Wii U game?

          Well, here’s a hint for you: Black Ops II Sales figures per platform:

          – 360: 12.6 million
          – PS3: 10.6 million
          – Wii U. 0.2 million

          One of the BIGGEST SELLING VIDEOGAME FRANCHISE OF ALL TIME struggles to even meet 200,000 sales on the Wii U, and yet you’re asserting that it’s the fault of third-party developers for not sinking money into the Wii U monetary black hole?

          You didn’t think this through at all did you?

          • Aiddon

            congratulations, you found VGChartz; ya mind getting numbers from someplace that ISN’T unreliable?

          • Martin Brentnall

            Have you got a better source of data?

            Didn’t think so. :)

          • Magnumsally

            You basically made my point using vg chartz

          • EgoistisFilanthropos

            Funny thing how PS3/360 games cost much more to make than 3DS games… Sure they are comparable…

          • Martin Brentnall

            The cost of game development depends mainly on the scope of the game as opposed to the system it’s being developed for – a factor that’s entirely in the hands of developers.

            Not sure what your point is.

          • EgoistisFilanthropos

            It is really simple: 3DS games need a much smaller budget to make, so they need to sell less units to be profitable.

            Also, since handheld games use technology one or two generations behind from home consoles, they can use assets from their older games or simply port them, like they do quite often.

            So, while no one will switch his focus from PS3 to the 3DS, the 3DS can be a nice side way to make a profit. So your earlier point is invalid.

          • Martin Brentnall

            Do I need to repeat myself?

            The cost of game development depends mainly on the scope of the game as opposed to the system it’s being developed for – a factor that’s entirely in the hands of developers.

            How much cheaper would it have been to develop Tomb Raider, Bioshock Infinite or TLOU on the 3DS or Vita? The cost difference would likely be negligible in the end.

            And handhelds are not the exclusive domain of small budget projects either. Such games exist on PS3 and 360 too, and will continue to exist on the PS4 and X1 into the foreseeable future.

          • EgoistisFilanthropos

            You don’t know what you are talking about… Negligible difference? You wish…

            HD graphics require much more both in terms of art as well as code. Plus, when you design a game from scratch, you need to invest more. When you are reusing assets or port games your investement is much smaller…

            The 3DS is portable GC/WIi, and is in the same league with the PSP. That is why you see games like Tekken 3DS which is really just Tekken 6 from the PSP, slightly improved and with AA etc. They cost almost nothing to make…

      • Aiddon

        Except how many people actually TRIED with 3rd party titles on the Wii? How many actually put forth the effort to advertise their products on Nintendo systems or just make a good game on them?Surprisingly few, isn’t it? Especially from the West. For every No More Heroes, Zack and Wiki, Rune Factory Frontier, Muramasa: The Demon Blade, or Little King’s Story you had FIVE badly made pieces of junk that publishers thought were going to sell just because it was on the Wii. It’s the definition of stupid business decisions.

        It’s the same thing with the Wii U. 3rd parties were LAZY in their efforts and yet they expected to kill it on the Wii U. Doesn’t work that way. You wanna get an A+ on a paper, you put forth the effort, you don’t do less than the minimum required to pass. And that is what 3rd parties (especially Western ones) do. They do less than the minimum required and yet expect to sell millions automatically. That’s neither professional nor intelligent, that’s stupid, entitled thinking.

        And the reason I bring up the 3DS is because, let’s face it, install base is the go-to excuse 3rd parties use time and time again with the Wii U. Okay, you can use that excuse for the Wii U, but the 3DS proves they’re lying through their teeth. Especially when A) it wouldn’t cost that much to make a game for it and B) the install base is enormous. But they don’t actually want to put forth the effort, do they? They’re scared crapless of having to compete with Nintendo’s vast array of IPs AND the insane amount of Japanese companies that have set up shop on the system. Quite frankly, it’s pathetic on 3rd parties’ part

        • Bob

          Aiddon, I hope you are not a Nintendo executive, becuase your lack in business sense is even worse than Nintendo’s. You insist that 3rd parties are lazy, you know who is the lazy one here? is Nintendo!!! The Wii U has almost no games from Nintendo and is almost a year old!!! Doesn’t matter who you are, if you launch a console it is your responsibility to make sure it has games available, forget the 3rd parties, they will come later. But if you are hoping that 3rd parties will do your work, then you will have the same situation the Wii U has right now. THINK!!!

          • Aiddon

            Ya wanna know WHY Nintendo held back? To give 3rd parties a chance. The exact same thing happened with the 3DS. 3rd parties wanted a chance to shine on it and Nintendo gave them six months to do so.

            But said 3rd parties then wasted that six months and Nintendo had to come in ANYWAY. Nintendo COULD have gone all guns blazing on the Wii U’s first year, but 3rd parties would have just thrown a hissy fit and cried about how they can’t sell anything on Nintendo systems because of Mario, Zelda, Pikmin, Metroid, etc. The only mistake Nintendo made was trusting 3rd parties to keep up their end of the bargain and actually do their jobs properly. Turns out that 3rd parties are really just a bunch of lazy hacks who suffer panic attacks when they actually have to put forth effort.

          • Martin Brentnall

            Aiddon, I’m not going to sugar coat this: You’re severely delusional and people shouldn’t waste any more time arguing with you.

            I highly recommend that you go seek a doctor or a psychiatrist.

          • Aiddon

            says the asshole who just resorted to insults like a five-year-old, which is what those who have no actual arguments use when they’ve been backed into a corner. you’re pathetic

          • Martin Brentnall

            Aiddon, I’ve given you arguments based on facts, reality, logic and rationality, and you chose to disregard them in favour of your own false view of reality for which you offer no supporting evidence whatsoever.

            Believing something in face of evidence to the contrary is the very definition of delusional. Calling you delusion is not an insult, it’s an accurate observation of your behaviour.

          • Aiddon

            except I never denied the numbers, which were the only facts you ever gave out (though to call VGChartz numbers “facts” is being generous). I just said 3rd parties were lazy and for them to complain about sales numbers despite never putting any real effort into their Wii U titles was nothing more then them trying to have their cake and eat it. You can’t expect an A+ on an assignment when you did C- work.

          • Martin Brentnall

            Was Need for Speed: Most Wanted “C- work” then?

            The Wii U had the best version. By all accounts it wasn’t a lazy port and yet it still only sold 30,000 units – less than 1% of the overall figure across all platforms.

            Since you seem to think that you know everything, please do enlighten us as to what EA did wrong.

          • Aiddon

            simple: advertising. The team did a fine job with the game, but the publisher didn’t give it jack squat in terms of actually making people aware of it. A game won’t sell if nobody is aware it exists.

            And again, stop pulling VG Chartz numbers. Either get ACTUAL sales data and financial reports or just STOP IT. Quoting a dubious source over and over again won’t make it more valid.

          • Martin Brentnall

            Your argument is invalidated by the fact that the game DID SELL! Look at PS3 and 360 figures. The game was by all accounts successful. Only the Wii U version failed. Even the Vita version vastly outsold it.

            And whilst the VG Chartz numbers are only estimates, they’re still GOOD ENOUGH for the illustrative context in which I’m using them, so just shut the fuck up about it unless you’ve got something better (you haven’t).

          • Aiddon

            Except I never denied that it sold elsewhere. I just denied that the Wii U version was badly advertised thus leading to it selling badly. A C- effort by the marketing team. Can’t blame Nintendo or the install base for that, you can only blame EA’s advertising. Not telling people the game exists is a bad way to get the word out.

          • Martin Brentnall

            They DID advertise it, otherwise no-one would’ve known about the PS3 and 360 versions either. It’s not like they were singling out those versions in the ads. They even had a special Wii U trailer for the game! The PS3 and 360 versions didn’t get any special treatment like that.

            And the Vita version that sold ten times more… I suppose that was just better advertising too? ’cause we all know how much effort gets put into promoting Vita games. :p

          • Aiddon

            Actually yes, the Vita version WAS better advertised than the Wii U version. Furthermore, the Wii U version actually came out roughly five months after the other versions. And EA never bothered to properly advertise that version despite it being called Need for Speed: Most Wanted U as well as the team giving it tons of the unique features. The game was fine, but EA botched any attempt to let the consumer know about it or any of the features it had that were exclusive to the Wii U.

            If you want something to sell you have to make people aware it’s on the system in the first place. EA failed to do that and thus the game was left to die on the Wii U due to EA’s ineptitude. This isn’t complicated.

          • Martin Brentnall

            OK, fair point in regards to different launch date.

            Would you care to explain the poor Black Ops 2 Wii U sales then? The game launched on the Wii U at the same time as the other versions and it didn’t do well either, and was by no accounts a bad version. Again, the estimate is less than 1% in comparison to sales across all platforms.

            So what did Activision do wrong with Black Ops 2 on the Wii U?

          • wampdog29

            About time someone says it… it’s a known fact Nintendo tried to give 3rd parties their spotlight and nobody came through for them. Instead, they release half-assed, 2 year old ports. Need 4 Speed Most Wanted U is PROOF that when time and money is spent on a port, it can be BETTER than PS3 and Xbox 360 versions and in fact rival the PC version.

          • Martin Brentnall

            You’re arguing a case for third-party Wii U development based on Need for Speed: Most Wanted?

            You DO realise that the game sold only 30,000 units on the Wii U right?

            The Wii U sales amount to less than 1% of total sales for the game across all platforms.

            Even the Vita version outsold the Wii U version by more than TEN TIMES!

            Who cares if the Wii U version is better if no-ones buying it?

            The sales figure is laughable and does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to support a case for third-party investment in Wii U development.

  • Aiddon

    1. It still amazes me at how even when Nintendo spells things out as simply as possible people still go “ha-dur!” when it comes to the Wii U

    2.The Direct was completely fine. Furthermore, nothing is guaranteed for the PS4 or XB1, especially the latter. More than likely those two will struggle just as much as the Wii U initially due to the historical pattern of first-year doldrums

    3. Perhaps, but it’s nowhere near as bad as people like to pretend.

    4. Then that’s the fault of 3rd parties being lazy, not with Nintendo. I mean, for crying out loud, the DS line is a decade old, it should NOT be that difficult to think of SOMETHING for the Wii U.

    5. A lot of people try to do system sales, but I don’t buy that. For instance, EA vehemently ignore the 3DS, which is by far the highest-selling system worldwide right now. And yet they haven’t made a single game for it in nearly two years. So I can’t help but wonder if their attitude towards Nintendo has something else involved. Secondly, this does seem to be a habit 3rd parties never, ever get: if you want to sell product, you HAVE to make an effort. Let’s face it, most 3rd parties lazily threw their games on the Wii U and then threw a tantrum when people called them out on their sub-par efforts by not buying their product and passed it up for Nintendo’s far superior titles. And don’t even get me started on their halfassed advertising. 3rd parties thought they could be lazy and reality slapped them hard. But instead of being adults and actually more effort into it, they just made lazy, childish excuses and went to sulk in a corner. It’s pathetic. And people wonder why Nintendo dominates on Nintendo systems.

    • Martin Brentnall

      Sorry, but shifting blame for Nintendo’s failings towards third-parties doesn’t fly in the face of logic and rationality.

      If third-parties don’t want to develop 3DS or Wii U games, then it’s simply because they believe that doing so would not be in their best interests with regards to profit. You can argue until you’re blue in the face about installed base figures, but it’s been shown time and time again that chasing raw numbers is not the way to succeed.

      The Wii vastly outsold the PS3 and 360, and yet a game like Black Ops still sold almost TEN TIMES as many on the PS3 as it did on the Wii. The figures don’t lie, and the figures are shouting out in no uncertain terms that it’s much wiser to invest in a Sony or Microsoft platform than it is in a Nintendo one, even when the Nintendo platform is the vastly more popular one.

      • Magnumsally

        actually its COMPLETELY third parties fault.

        Japanese devs are KILLING IT on 3ds. western companies are stupid

        • Martin Brentnall

          Here are some facts for you:
          Biggest selling third-party 3DS games (according to Wikipedia):

          – Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate: 2.2 million
          – Dragon Warrior VII: 1.2 million
          – Super Street Fighter IV: 1.1 million

          I’m sure all the big western developers will just throw in the towel on PS3 and 360 development in light of this data and make emergency plans to shift projects straight over to Nintendo’s platforms. Someone needs to alert EA and Activision quick!

          I mean, why bother making games that potentially sell 5-10 million on the PS3 + 360 when you can struggle to reach 1 million on the 3DS?

          And let’s not forget that we’re discussing the Wii U here, not the 3DS, which isn’t going to do potential figures any favours. I mean, what kind of figures are you expecting out of a third party Wii U game?

          Well, here’s a hint for you: Black Ops II Sales figures per platform:

          – 360: 12.6 million
          – PS3: 10.6 million
          – Wii U. 0.2 million

          One of the BIGGEST SELLING VIDEOGAME FRANCHISE OF ALL TIME struggles to even meet 200,000 sales on the Wii U, and yet you’re asserting that it’s the fault of third-party developers for not sinking money into the Wii U monetary black hole?

          You didn’t think this through at all did you?

          • Aiddon

            congratulations, you found VGChartz; ya mind getting numbers from someplace that ISN’T unreliable?

          • Martin Brentnall

            Have you got a better source of data?

            Didn’t think so. :)

          • Magnumsally

            You basically made my point using vg chartz

          • EgoistisFilanthropos

            Funny thing how PS3/360 games cost much more to make than 3DS games… Sure they are comparable…

          • Martin Brentnall

            The cost of game development depends mainly on the scope of the game as opposed to the system it’s being developed for – a factor that’s entirely in the hands of developers.

            Not sure what your point is.

          • EgoistisFilanthropos

            It is really simple: 3DS games need a much smaller budget to make, so they need to sell less units to be profitable.

            Also, since handheld games use technology one or two generations behind from home consoles, they can use assets from their older games or simply port them, like they do quite often.

            So, while no one will switch his focus from PS3 to the 3DS, the 3DS can be a nice side way to make a profit. So your earlier point is invalid.

          • Martin Brentnall

            Do I need to repeat myself?

            The cost of game development depends mainly on the scope of the game as opposed to the system it’s being developed for – a factor that’s entirely in the hands of developers.

            How much cheaper would it have been to develop Tomb Raider, Bioshock Infinite or TLOU on the 3DS or Vita? The cost difference would likely be negligible in the end.

            And handhelds are not the exclusive domain of small budget projects either. Such games exist on PS3 and 360 too, and will continue to exist on the PS4 and X1 into the foreseeable future.

          • EgoistisFilanthropos

            You don’t know what you are talking about… Negligible difference? You wish…

            HD graphics require much more both in terms of art as well as code. Plus, when you design a game from scratch, you need to invest more. When you are reusing assets or port games your investement is much smaller…

            The 3DS is portable GC/WIi, and is in the same league with the PSP. That is why you see games like Tekken 3DS which is really just Tekken 6 etc. They cost almost nothing to make…

      • Aiddon

        Except how many people actually TRIED with 3rd party titles on the Wii? How many actually put forth the effort to advertise their products on Nintendo systems or just make a good game on them?Surprisingly few, isn’t it? Especially from the West. For every No More Heroes, Zack and Wiki, Rune Factory Frontier, Muramasa: The Demon Blade, or Little King’s Story you had FIVE badly made pieces of junk that publishers thought were going to sell just because it was on the Wii. It’s the definition of stupid business decisions.

        It’s the same thing with the Wii U. 3rd parties were LAZY in their efforts and yet they expected to kill it on the Wii U. Doesn’t work that way. You wanna get an A+ on a paper, you put forth the effort, you don’t do less than the minimum required to pass. And that is what 3rd parties (especially Western ones) do. They do less than the minimum required and yet expect to sell millions automatically. That’s neither professional nor intelligent, that’s stupid, entitled thinking.

        And the reason I bring up the 3DS is because, let’s face it, install base is the go-to excuse 3rd parties use time and time again with the Wii U. Okay, you can use that excuse for the Wii U, but the 3DS proves they’re lying through their teeth. Especially when A) it wouldn’t cost that much to make a game for it and B) the install base is enormous. But they don’t actually want to put forth the effort, do they? They’re scared crapless of having to compete with Nintendo’s vast array of IPs AND the insane amount of Japanese companies that have set up shop on the system. Quite frankly, it’s pathetic on 3rd parties’ part

        • Bob

          Aiddon, I hope you are not a Nintendo executive, becuase your lack in business sense is even worse than Nintendo’s. You insist that 3rd parties are lazy, you know who is the lazy one here? is Nintendo!!! The Wii U has almost no games from Nintendo and is almost a year old!!! Doesn’t matter who you are, if you launch a console it is your responsibility to make sure it has games available, forget the 3rd parties, they will come later. But if you are hoping that 3rd parties will do your work, then you will have the same situation the Wii U has right now. THINK!!!

          • Aiddon

            Ya wanna know WHY Nintendo held back? To give 3rd parties a chance. The exact same thing happened with the 3DS. 3rd parties wanted a chance to shine on it and Nintendo gave them six months to do so.

            But said 3rd parties then wasted that six months and Nintendo had to come in ANYWAY. Nintendo COULD have gone all guns blazing on the Wii U’s first year, but 3rd parties would have just thrown a hissy fit and cried about how they can’t sell anything on Nintendo systems because of Mario, Zelda, Pikmin, Metroid, etc. The only mistake Nintendo made was trusting 3rd parties to keep up their end of the bargain and actually do their jobs properly. Turns out that 3rd parties are really just a bunch of lazy hacks who suffer panic attacks when they actually have to put forth effort.

          • Martin Brentnall

            Aiddon, I’m not going to sugar coat this: You’re severely delusional and people shouldn’t waste any more time arguing with you.

            I highly recommend that you go seek a doctor or a psychiatrist.

          • Aiddon

            says the asshole who just resorted to insults like a five-year-old, which is what those who have no actual arguments use when they’ve been backed into a corner. you’re pathetic

          • Martin Brentnall

            Aiddon, I’ve given you arguments based on facts, reality, logic and rationality, and you chose to disregard them in favour of your own false view of reality for which you offer no supporting evidence whatsoever.

            Believing something in face of evidence to the contrary is the very definition of delusional. Calling you delusion is not an insult, it’s an accurate observation of your behaviour.

          • Aiddon

            except I never denied the numbers, which were the only facts you ever gave out (though to call VGChartz numbers “facts” is being generous). I just said 3rd parties were lazy and for them to complain about sales numbers despite never putting any real effort into their Wii U titles was nothing more then them trying to have their cake and eat it. You can’t expect an A+ on an assignment when you did C- work.

          • Martin Brentnall

            Was Need for Speed: Most Wanted “C- work” then?

            The Wii U had the best version. By all accounts it wasn’t a lazy port and yet it still only sold 30,000 units – less than 1% of the overall figure across all platforms.

            Since you seem to think that you know everything, please do enlighten us as to what EA did wrong.

          • Aiddon

            simple: advertising. The team did a fine job with the game, but the publisher didn’t give it jack squat in terms of actually making people aware of it. A game won’t sell if nobody is aware it exists.

            And again, stop pulling VG Chartz numbers. Either get ACTUAL sales data and financial reports or just STOP IT. Quoting a dubious source over and over again won’t make it more valid.

          • Martin Brentnall

            Your argument is invalidated by the fact that the game DID SELL! Look at PS3 and 360 figures. The game was by all accounts successful. Only the Wii U version failed. Even the Vita version vastly outsold it.

            And whilst the VG Chartz numbers may not be 100% accurate, they’re GOOD ENOUGH for the illustrative context in which I’m using them, so just shut the fuck up about it unless you’ve got something better (you haven’t).

          • Aiddon

            Except I never denied that it sold elsewhere. I just denied that the Wii U version was badly advertised thus leading to it selling badly. A C- effort by the marketing team. Can’t blame Nintendo or the install base for that, you can only blame EA’s advertising. Not telling people the game exists is a bad way to get the word out.

          • Martin Brentnall

            They DID advertise it, otherwise no-one would’ve known about the PS3 and 360 versions either. It’s not like they were singling out those versions in the ads!

          • Aiddon

            Actually yes, the Vita version WAS better advertised than the Wii U version. Furthermore, the Wii U version actually came out roughly five months after the other versions. And EA never bothered to properly advertise that version despite it being called Need for Speed: Most Wanted U as well as the team giving it tons of the unique features. The game was fine, but EA botched any attempt to let the consumer know about it or any of the features it had that were exclusive to the Wii U.

            If you want something to sell you have to make people aware it’s on the system in the first place. EA failed to do that and thus the game was left to die on the Wii U due to EA’s ineptitude. This isn’t complicated.

          • Martin Brentnall

            Just so we’re clear, how many extra sales would you expect to achieve from your hypothetical Wii U specific marketing campaign?

            Black Ops 2 launched on the Wii U around the same time as the other versions and it didn’t do well either, and it’s by no accounts a bad version. Again, the estimate is less than 1% in comparison to sales across all platforms.

            So what did Activision do wrong with Black Ops 2 on the Wii U?

          • wampdog29

            About time someone says it… it’s a known fact Nintendo tried to give 3rd parties their spotlight and nobody came through for them. Instead, they release half-assed, 2 year old ports. Need 4 Speed Most Wanted U is PROOF that when time and money is spent on a port, it can be BETTER than PS3 and Xbox 360 versions and in fact rival the PC version.

          • Martin Brentnall

            You’re arguing a case for third-party Wii U development based on Need for Speed: Most Wanted?

            You DO realise that the game sold only 30,000 units on the Wii U right?

            The Wii U sales amount to less than 1% of total sales for the game across all platforms.

            Even the Vita version outsold the Wii U version by more than TEN TIMES!

            Who cares if the Wii U version is better if no-ones buying it?

            The sales figure is laughable and does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to support a case for third-party investment in Wii U development.

  • Martin Brentnall

    I’m surprised that the two most severe mistakes aren’t covered here:

    1. Lack of first-party games.

    Seriously. What have Nintendo been doing since Skyward Sword came out in 2011? The Wii gaming landscape had been drying up ever since Super Mario Galaxy 2 came out in mid-2010, so what have they been messing about at? There’s no excuse for not having far more games ready by now.

    I placed my faith in unannounced and upcoming Wii U games when I preordered mine, and yet I still haven’t actually bought any games for it. I own three Wii U games, comprised of NintendoLand that came with the console and NSMBU and Game & Wario that were both bought for me as gifts.

    2. Overpricing and Greed.

    I’m not just talking about the cost of the console itself (which is a problem by itself for a lot of people), but also the Total Cost of Ownership for Nintendo systems in general, including all the peripherals and games. I’m seriously starting to hate Nintendo for this.

    I actually hesitated on preordering my Wii U purely on the basis of how high the total cost of the Wii was by the end. If Nintendo are so stubborn as to refuse to lower their game prices even in the face of defeat, then I won’t be buying any more Nintendo hardware in the future.

    There’s absolutely no reason that New Super Mario Bros U should still cost £40 whilst games like Tomb Raider and Bioshock Infinite were discounted long ago. And that’s without even factoring in the vast difference in production values between those games (Aside from being a 2D platformer, NSMBU is a festival of recycled assets).

    It’s funny how people complain about other developers and publishers for nickel and diming with DLC and other methods and yet Nintendo gets a free pass to overcharge on games like Earthbound (because hey, it’s Nintendo and it’s only $10 right? Yeah, no one would say that when it’s EA or Capcom) and the travesty that was the Super Mario All-Stars SNES ROM burned to a Wii disc for $30.

    SEGA and Midway got my money by offering great value Genesis and Arcade collections respectively. Even Sony do much better with their $4 PS1 games, whilst Nintendo don’t even have sales. And the less said about the $60 Wind Waker HD rumours the better. As far as Nintendo classics go, I’ll stick with my emulators and ROM’s.

    I seriously hope Nintendo’s greed blows up in their face, because Nintendo deserve every bit of failure that they get right now. As much as I love Nintendo’s games, there’s no way I’m buying their next console unless they seriously change their ways.

  • Martin Brentnall

    I’m surprised that the two most severe mistakes aren’t covered here:

    1. Lack of first-party games.

    Seriously. What have Nintendo been doing since Skyward Sword came out in 2011? The Wii gaming landscape had been drying up ever since Super Mario Galaxy 2 came out in mid-2010, so what have they been messing about at? There’s no excuse for not having far more games ready by now.

    I placed my faith in unannounced and upcoming Wii U games when I preordered mine, and yet I still haven’t actually bought any games for it. I own three Wii U games, comprised of NintendoLand that came with the console and NSMBU and Game & Wario that were both bought for me as gifts.

    2. Overpricing and Greed.

    I’m not just talking about the cost of the console itself (which is a problem by itself for a lot of people), but also the Total Cost of Ownership for Nintendo systems in general, including all the peripherals and games. I’m seriously starting to hate Nintendo for this.

    I actually hesitated on preordering my Wii U purely on the basis of how high the total cost of the Wii was by the end. If Nintendo are so stubborn as to refuse to lower their game prices even in the face of defeat, then I won’t be buying any more Nintendo hardware in the future.

    There’s absolutely no reason that New Super Mario Bros U should still cost £40 whilst games like Tomb Raider and Bioshock Infinite were discounted long ago. And that’s without even factoring in the vast difference in production values between those games (Aside from being a 2D platformer, NSMBU is a festival of recycled assets).

    It’s funny how people complain about other developers and publishers for nickel and diming with DLC and other methods and yet Nintendo gets a free pass to overcharge on games like Earthbound (because hey, it’s Nintendo and it’s only $10 right? Yeah, no one would say that when it’s EA or Capcom) and the travesty that was the Super Mario All-Stars SNES ROM burned to a Wii disc for $30.

    SEGA and Midway got my money by offering great value Genesis and Arcade collections respectively. Even Sony do much better with their $4 PS1 games, whilst Nintendo don’t even have sales. And the less said about the $60 Wind Waker HD rumours the better. As far as Nintendo classics go, I’ll stick with my emulators and ROM’s.

    I seriously hope Nintendo’s greed blows up in their face, because Nintendo deserve every bit of failure that they get right now. As much as I love Nintendo’s games, there’s no way I’m buying their next console unless they seriously change their ways.

  • Magnumsally

    wii u will be fine. 3ds is the number 1 system in the world. They make profit. Thats it.

    Wii u I am having so much fun with

  • Magnumsally

    wii u will be fine. 3ds is the number 1 system in the world. They make profit. Thats it.

    Wii u I am having so much fun with

  • http://www.gam4u.info/ abology

    It is really simple: 3DS games need a much smaller budget to make, so they need to sell less units to be profitable. شركة تخزين عفش بالرياض