It's simple, it's not a Playstation or an Xbox. People will look at the nintendo and thin it's just a bunch of kiddy games and ignore it. It also has games that support local multiplayer and, for what ever reason, people hate local multiplayer these days. Also it's the lack of big name franchises like Kingdom Hearts, Final Fantasy, Halo, etc. Once the new Zelda is announced i know for a fact that the sales will sky rocket.
Why is the Wii U not succeeding?
- Thread starter dscross
- Start date
Recommended Videos
If Nintendo's exclusives are "Small", then Microsoft's and Sony's exclusives are completely barren. And these really old franchises at least are kept fresh and to a minimum, unlike some other, shorter running Franchises *Cough* *Cough* Guitar Hero *Cough* *Cough* Call of Duty *Cough* I could list. You don't see 7 Mario 3D Platformers on the Wii, or 4 Legend of Zelda's on the Gamecube, or 3 Smash Bros on the N64. Super Mario 64 is different from Sunshine, which is different from the Galaxy games, which is different from the 3D Land/World games. I bought mine around Christmas, because I want new Nintendo games, something that I couldn't get on the Wii. It's the same reason I bought the 3DS.CloudAtlas said:
OT: Lack of Games. I don't expect the WiiU to start selling really well until Super Mario 3D World comes out Near Christmas. But after that, I think it'll do fine.
It's a sad day when one game franchise is enough to keep an entire console brand afloat. You know that's a sure sign that it has no place in the industry.SerithVC said:
Nintendo has admitted to the following mistakes:
1. Marketing: They failed to market the WiiU as a new console. A significant number of people think it's just a tablet peripheral at a high price (though not too high for a tablet). That's a huge marketing failure.
2. Games: There is a lack of Nintendo and 3rd party games out right now. They need a break through title and perhaps even new IPs for at least once this decade.
3. Experience: Nintendo Execs have stated that they really haven't given consumers a reason why they need this new console. Why is it worth getting? What new thing does it bring to the table? Nintendo has to figure out ways to make it a new experience.
Things Nintendo hasn't stated:
1. The price point is pretty darn close to the competitors. $350 for the 32GB version compared to $400 for a ps4 that has a 500GB HDD and is significantly more powerful? That's silly. This is also the price point for more hardcore gamers than for the casual gamers that flocked to the system this past generation. That's not to say hardcore gamers don't own a wii, just that there's a non-trivial number of casual gamers that make up the customer base of the Wii. These are individuals who may not be willing to spend over $300 for a new console, especially with no present reason to. While hardcore gamers are quick to try and dismiss casual gamers, they are still a legitimate demographic and certainly a source of revenue for such companies.
2. The 3rd party developers are currently divided on whether or not they're going to even support the console. This does not give confidence in the future of the product. Who is going to pay next gen money for a new console that offers no new experiences (currently) and is likely to be short on 3rd party development for the third generation in a row? (Gamecube, Wii, WiiU). I've literally come to consider the price of a Nintendo console as my Nintendo Software tax. A fee I pay to be able to purchase nintendo games.
3. There was a significant earthquake that forbes magazine seemed to indicate could have impacted sales.
1. Marketing: They failed to market the WiiU as a new console. A significant number of people think it's just a tablet peripheral at a high price (though not too high for a tablet). That's a huge marketing failure.
2. Games: There is a lack of Nintendo and 3rd party games out right now. They need a break through title and perhaps even new IPs for at least once this decade.
3. Experience: Nintendo Execs have stated that they really haven't given consumers a reason why they need this new console. Why is it worth getting? What new thing does it bring to the table? Nintendo has to figure out ways to make it a new experience.
Things Nintendo hasn't stated:
1. The price point is pretty darn close to the competitors. $350 for the 32GB version compared to $400 for a ps4 that has a 500GB HDD and is significantly more powerful? That's silly. This is also the price point for more hardcore gamers than for the casual gamers that flocked to the system this past generation. That's not to say hardcore gamers don't own a wii, just that there's a non-trivial number of casual gamers that make up the customer base of the Wii. These are individuals who may not be willing to spend over $300 for a new console, especially with no present reason to. While hardcore gamers are quick to try and dismiss casual gamers, they are still a legitimate demographic and certainly a source of revenue for such companies.
2. The 3rd party developers are currently divided on whether or not they're going to even support the console. This does not give confidence in the future of the product. Who is going to pay next gen money for a new console that offers no new experiences (currently) and is likely to be short on 3rd party development for the third generation in a row? (Gamecube, Wii, WiiU). I've literally come to consider the price of a Nintendo console as my Nintendo Software tax. A fee I pay to be able to purchase nintendo games.
3. There was a significant earthquake that forbes magazine seemed to indicate could have impacted sales.
what makes it sad is that people only focus on certain game franchises instead of playing a larger variety of games. Nintendo Land was a great game to ship with the Wii U. It gave everyone a taste of things they can do with the system and a taste of our old favorites. Honestly the games they have released for the Wii U have been good games, except that most of them people already played on other systems. I'm actually excited for the new Mario, the new Zelda, the new smash bros, the new Xenoblade Chronicles (or X as they are currently calling it), Super Luigi U. As well as seeing what other games they release on it. Nintendo has a lot of good games and the wii u has some nice features like having your inventory at your finger tips so you don't have to keep opening and closing menus to do shit.WhyWasThat said:
You know, some people don't find those franchises that fresh anymore. Gameplay might be neat and all, but the princess is still in another castle. They'd say that those franchises are not that different from Call of Duty, what you seem to deride: always the same stuff, but still selling like crazy.Mr.Mattress said:
Where are the new ideas? No matter how cool and fresh the gameplay might be, any title with "Mario" in its name and some combination of odd prefixes and suffixes, to name just one example, that's just not appealing to a large set of people. And I can't imagine that this number is decreasing in the future, with all the competition from mobile gaming, which I would expect to hit Nintendo the hardest, of all gaming platforms.
Wouldn't that apply to Microsoft (who owes much of their ability to continue making consoles to Halo) and to a lesser extent Sony (whose sales were helped by the exclusivity of MGS IV in much the same way, quite possibly on a similar scale to the way Zelda helps Nintendo consoles)?WhyWasThat said:
It is going the way of the Sega Dreamcast. It is a solid console, but people are waiting to see what the PS4 and XBOX1 are going to be like before making the commitment. Dreamcast was a very good console, but most people wanted to see what 360 & PS3 were going to be like first.
Yeah, I still have mine somewhere. Loved it. Wasn't a judgement, it just was the reason SEGA stopped doing consoles, because the Dreamcast did poorly for some reason. Now that WAS timing in my opinion rather than games. Maybe too ahead of its time?WhyWasThat said:
It's actually an inverse of CoD in a way: Where CoD Changes the Story but keeps the exact same gameplay, Mario has an essential story but keeps changing the gameplay. For example, In CoD 3 to CoD 4, The plot went from WWII to the Modern Era (I'm sorry I can't go further into the plots of CoD, I have forgotten their details). Meanwhile, From Super Mario 64 to Super Mario Sunshine, The Gameplay changed because of the Water Cannon/Jet Pack FLUD. From CoD 4 to CoD: BLOPS, the plot went from The Modern Era, back to World War II. However, from Super Mario Sunshine to Galaxy 1+2, the gameplay changed because of the Planetoid Platforming (Something that hadn't really been done before) and Motion Controls.CloudAtlas said:
And I understand that a lot of people don't find the franchises fresh anymore. A lot of people, however, still do, just like a lot of people think CoD is still fresh. The Difference between Cod and 3D Mario, however, is that CoD releases every year, where a 3D Mario (Usually) releases from 2-6 years after the previous one, and usually on a new Console to boot. Also, Mario doesn't have a lot of Prefixes to it (The Only games with a Prefix is the New Super Mario Bros. Series, which is not what I'm talking about).
That, I believe, is a great challenge to Nintendo, more so than to Microsoft and Sony. Why would I want to buy a 3DS or a Wii U if I can get similar experiences for my smartphone or my tablet, which I already own anyway (well, I don't, but many others do)? Sure, Mario or Link might not star in those games, but will those names continue to have the same pull on the generation growing up now?TomWiley said:
It's a fucking omnishambles. Don't get me wrong, I own a WiiU, and I think it has potential, especially considering that they ditched motion control, but they've literally just hampered all their own efforts. They didn't open with strong first party support, hell, even now you could argue they're only just getting up to par, they haven't been able to entice third party developers, their hardware is about to be almost a generation behind, they seem to be using the same marketing division that fucked the Virtual Boy up, and they called it the WiiU- that just feels like an iteration, not a new console, although I suppose that too would go under marketing. They've shot themselves in the foot, and it hasn't quite healed properly. I hope it does, though, nothing quite like good, honest competition.
Just one question that hasn't seemed to have been asked in many of the discussions regarding this topic:
To what extent has the 3DS been possibly cannibalizing the Wii U's sales?
I have two nieces who both have 3DS handhelds. My sister chose them over getting a Wii or Wii U on account of the fact it was cheaper, portable, had games they both wanted and (the big one): all the other kids in school had them. Thing advertises itself in that way.
I actually wouldn't be surprised if this is the last exclusively 'home' console Nintendo releases. Considering the big draws on any nintendo console aren't exactly graphic intensive, might make sense to just have a more powerful handheld that can also be used with the TV.
Obviously the Wii U's main issues have been listed, but would be an interesting survey to see how many people (particularly in the casual/family demographic) that may have opted for the handheld instead.
To what extent has the 3DS been possibly cannibalizing the Wii U's sales?
I have two nieces who both have 3DS handhelds. My sister chose them over getting a Wii or Wii U on account of the fact it was cheaper, portable, had games they both wanted and (the big one): all the other kids in school had them. Thing advertises itself in that way.
I actually wouldn't be surprised if this is the last exclusively 'home' console Nintendo releases. Considering the big draws on any nintendo console aren't exactly graphic intensive, might make sense to just have a more powerful handheld that can also be used with the TV.
Obviously the Wii U's main issues have been listed, but would be an interesting survey to see how many people (particularly in the casual/family demographic) that may have opted for the handheld instead.
I just wonder why Nintendo, no matter how innovative their hardware or gameplay might be, is always telling the same stories. Why is there no, say, adult-rated Zelda game starring not Link but Zelda? Innovation in gameplay is not everything. And sometimes it might not even be desirable. Call of Duty is hated by many, but its core gameplay would work well for such a wide range of titles - everything with guns in it and a "realistic" feel to it, if you want - without major changes. Hell, I would have loved it if the combat of, say, Mass Effect or Fallout 3 felt more like good old CoD or Battlefield.Mr.Mattress said:
If I had to give a quick and dirty answer, it would be that motion control systems, much like 3d tvs, are gimmicky. The idea is really cool, but generally as far as I know people just want to sit down with a controller. Also in terms of power, it isn't a secret that generally Nintendo products are not par with their competitors. This is important to quite a few people.
It's not so much as them cannibalizing is that the 3DS is at the better deal.ron1n said:
Most people really have money for one handheld/console per few months.
Even though the recent Nintendo Direct showcased a lot of games for the WiiU, a fair amount are also cross platformed for the 3DS, and since most people already see the 3DS as a better Nintendo platform to get, they will opt to get those games on the handheld. Which results in them getting a WiiU later.
I mean. That's kind of a good thing for Nintendo honestly. The sales coming from the 3DS are helping to litigate the losses for the WiiU. However the 3DS is a stuffed turkey compared to the emaciated WiiU. However it is going to get it's fair share of games soon.
I felt compelled to say this as an answer: How does a vacuum cleaner work? It sucks 
Granted.. the only experience I have is what I've seen and Yahtzee. It just seems very gimmicky to me with a low battery life. Why create a new tablet thing when a lot of people already have tablets.. why not just do what BF4 is doing with the commander mode and allow people to use their existing tablets.
Nintendo for me has been stagnating for quite some time and a question of "why isn't X succeeding" is pretty much because (imo) they are all the same thing and lack titles for them.
Granted.. the only experience I have is what I've seen and Yahtzee. It just seems very gimmicky to me with a low battery life. Why create a new tablet thing when a lot of people already have tablets.. why not just do what BF4 is doing with the commander mode and allow people to use their existing tablets.
Nintendo for me has been stagnating for quite some time and a question of "why isn't X succeeding" is pretty much because (imo) they are all the same thing and lack titles for them.
It's a valid question. Many types of Nintendo titles can already be played on the DS and it is portable. I'd say for all of Nintendo's console woes that the handheld market is still very strong for them. The future of phones may have something to say about that (and is saying something now, I'm sure), but for now they're good.ron1n said:
If people are trying to decide between one or the other, they should probably go 3DS. A lot more first and third party support. It's kinda funny. Where Sony appears to be somewhat ignoring their handheld games to pay attention to the console, Nintendo is doing the opposite and honestly it's probably smart of them to do so if they aren't going to start selling software on other systems.
Whether or not this is the last one, I don't know. Nintendo has a ton of cash to try again if they want. I think they may do well to own their casual gaming branding and provide cheap wii-esque consoles for that market.