Wii U sales are still awful

[zerocool84]

People forget that the Nintendo isn't making money on every WiiU sold like they were with the Wii. Nintendo made money even if all you played was Wii Sports, now you have to buy a game for them to make any money on the WiiU. Entirely different than before


http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multim...ndo_It_Is_Not_Easy_to_Cut_Price_of_Wii_U.html

Also this is not the same as the 3DS as the competition isn't the same as consoles, phones/tablets which yes do pose a threat but most kids don't have a smartphone, and Vita is not even close. They have the current consoles which they are losing to already and new consoles later this year.

Nintendo waited too long to release their good games. They had a head start and should have had a few killer titles to get us to spend our money on it before the new systems came out, but they didn't and now it's too late.

 

[Silver Prime]

Well then here's my question:

Where does the WiiU need to be priced for each sold to remain profitable? I don't think anybody but Nintendo knows, but you're talking about generating sales by slashing the price by~60%! While that would undoubtedly increase sales, what is the profit margin on selling a console you originally priced at $350, now for $150-$170?

The ONLY way I see Nintendo catching a break this year is with
A) At LEAST one or two "must have, AAA" titles by Christmas.
B) A price drop
B) Xbox1 and PS4 shortages spur conciliatory WiiU sales

That's essentially what happened when the Playstation 2 launched; it was such a disaster with hardware shortages, it actually HELPED the Dreamcast, and Sega's sales boomed.
The problem is, the Dreamcast actually had a NUMBER of very good, very popular titles at that point. The WiiU, doesn't.

Then thats all its missing...Titles.

Nintendo is the dominant figure when talking about there own brand games, thats why they will always have a say, because at any moment the third party support can pull the plug, hop sides, or tank/retire them selves.

If Ps4 and X1 dont have any good games either, at launch; they will be in the same boat as Nintendo, but fortunetly they do, and hopefuly nintendo can have a good line up by the end of the year.

nintendo still can match them regaurdless; all you see now days is people comparing last gen to wii u, when they havent even beatin there last gen competitor yet or comparing Ps vita to wii u when the vita is getting demolished by the 3ds. We will see at the end of the year, and most likely any lead from all three companys will be medicore in sales, game play and graphics.

 

[ImpulsE69]

I disagree. They ARE competing. That is why they released it so early. Why release a console with no games? They wanted to get a jump on the competition.

Otherwise whats the point of releasing it then saying "we'll have our good games out in 2 years"? They are competing or they are really bad planners. You have the games ready first...not after.

That being said, it is indeed possible they will sell many consoles once the more hignly anticipated games arrive, until then they will be dead in the water. Thing is, even with those games, I don't think the system appeals to too many.

 

[Silver Prime]

I disagree. They ARE competing. That is why they released it so early. Why release a console with no games? They wanted to get a jump on the competition.

Otherwise whats the point of releasing it then saying "we'll have our good games out in 2 years"? They are competing or they are really bad planners. You have the games ready first...not after.

That being said, it is indeed possible they will sell many consoles once the more hignly anticipated games arrive, until then they will be dead in the water. Thing is, even with those games, I don't think the system appeals to too many.

How can they be dead in the water? Dident they already make there money back? How in any way is that dead??? That alone shows the fan base is crazy strong, since when the games come out, it will double to triple and possibly quadruple...since as most already noticed not one head-liner game is playable.

They are not competeing, cross-dimensional with older gens, if so, I could say the super-nintendo is still selling like crazy on craigslist and has more sales than the Ps Vita...see how stupid that sounds, we only compare gens in there own direct competition. More so how can they be in competition since there wii sales only went down because of there next gen is already here, would more people buy a ps1, 2, 3 more than the Ps4 when it launches?

Think.

Nintedno isint doing nothing but remaining idle, nutreul; basics, nothing that jepordizes anything since they dident even top out any good games, if there hard hitter games were out and did horible, then you'd be able to say nintedno is doing shitty, other than that, nintendo is doing fine playing possum, they could have made a better impact if it was in one motion at 2014, but its too late already, so we will have to wait an see.

The ps3 did horible and was selling for a lost when they first came out, but they are doing fine now, yet wii u is and never will sell for a loss and will do more then fine later...an thats a fact.

 

[Carmen813]

I was in school when the Wii U released. I didn't use internet/TV everyday and wasn't on tech forums/websites at all.

I'm probably as close to a normal consumer as you can get back then.
Problems with the Wii U:

1. Name. I at first glance thought Wii U was simply some type of Wii upgrade. (Wii U(pgrade). It didn't really seem like a brand new product at first when I saw it/heard about it.

2. Publicity. I didn't even KNOW about the Wii U being out, until it had already been out for 2 months. No hype, nothing. Not Super Smash Bros game, or any other "OMG COOL I MUST HAVE THAT" game when it came out.

3. Games.
Where are the games? Seriously? I just don't see any "I should get a Wii U to play that!"

4. Tablet.
This threw me off. I saw that I could buy a Wii U, and saw it had an additional tablet thing. I don't want a controller that is a tablet! What if I drop that, or my child cousin gets at it and smashes it?

These are just 4 simple things that were extremely wrong with the Wii U launch. IMO, there are probably a lot more. But when I heard about the Wii U, I was unimpressed, and went back to my Xbox 360.

The controller is pretty nifty in what it can allow for game play. Sadly it hasn't been utilized well by most games. Remote play is cool, but that is only one of the options it offers.

 

[Sulaco]

I disagree. They ARE competing. That is why they released it so early. Why release a console with no games? They wanted to get a jump on the competition.

Otherwise whats the point of releasing it then saying "we'll have our good games out in 2 years"? They are competing or they are really bad planners. You have the games ready first...not after.

That being said, it is indeed possible they will sell many consoles once the more hignly anticipated games arrive, until then they will be dead in the water. Thing is, even with those games, I don't think the system appeals to too many.

I agree.

Companies don't decide who they're competing with. Consumers do. Companies can only respond to and plan for that competition.

If Nintendo has a $350 game console, and another company releases a $400 game console, pure and simple, they're competing. They're in the same market, trying to attract the same consumer, at very similar price points. In the minds of consumers, and retail outlets, that's competition.
I'm sure there will be less direct competition if/when this price cut happens (down to $150ish?), but there's simply no way to rationally say that a $350 Nintendo game console is not in direct competition with a $400 game console from Sony and Microsoft.

 

[ImpulsE69]

How can they be dead in the water? Dident they already make there money back? How in any way is that dead??? That alone shows the fan base is crazy strong, since when the games come out, it will double to triple and possibly quadruple...since as most already noticed not one head-liner game is playable.

They are not competeing, cross-dimensional with older gens, if so, I could say the super-nintendo is still selling like crazy on craigslist and has more sales than the Ps Vita...see how stupid that sounds, we only compare gens in there own direct competition. More so how can they be in competition since there wii sales only went down because of there next gen is already here, would more people buy a ps1, 2, 3 more than the Ps4 when it launches?

Think.

Nintedno isint doing nothing but remaining idle, nutreul; basics, nothing that jepordizes anything since they dident even top out any good games, if there hard hitter games were out and did horible, then you'd be able to say nintedno is doing shitty, other than that, nintendo is doing fine playing possum, they could have made a better impact if it was in one motion at 2014, but its too late already, so we will have to wait an see.

The ps3 did horible and was selling for a lost when they first came out, but they are doing fine now, yet wii u is and never will sell for a loss and will do more then fine later...an thats a fact.

I think you are blindly giving them too much credit. They thought the Wii-U could ride the coat tales of the Wii. It didn't. Even if it could have, they still have no games to show for it, and THAT is the issue. I'm not really sure how you say they've broken even. Are they only making consoles as they are asked for? Because I see a LOT of them sitting on shelves and that is lost money each day they sit there.

 

[chalmers]

I read somewhere today that Nintendo has $5B+ in liquid cash and 2012 was the only year in their history they posted a loss. Pretty sure they're fine. Perhaps they released their system too early but who cares...don't buy it until there are games you want to play on it. Then it'll be cheaper anyway. That's a win for consumers.

 

[Silver Prime]

I think you are blindly giving them too much credit. They thought the Wii-U could ride the coat tales of the Wii. It didn't. Even if it could have, they still have no games to show for it, and THAT is the issue. I'm not really sure how you say they've broken even. Are they only making consoles as they are asked for? Because I see a LOT of them sitting on shelves and that is lost money each day they sit there.

I give them credit because unlike microsoft and sony, the specify in making games (Some what only) and there games is what branches out to other stuff, with the other two its vice versa, they rely on there gimmicks to increase sales, sony has there hands in basicaly every sound and entertainment system known to man, so no matter what things should sell with relative ease.

All day long when I look up Nintendo I hear idiotic bias fan boys comparing Vita or Ps3 to the wii u as if its in the same gen, if so I can just say the game boy color back in 1998 sold 100,000% more Units then what the vita has curently at a lousy 2 million and insulting them by saying I just walked into game stop and there already is mold and fungus on some of the boxes and sony thought the ps3 at there start could ride the succses of the ps2, but you dont see me playing that silly game.

So what are you saying other than what I already stated my self of Nintendo has no Games?

Its known, so what; once they come up with there line up, they will be stale mated when the next gen S and M comes out, I hope your not going to tell me the next gen will blow away the comp, socioty dosent even have the type of cash of 350-500 dollar type systems any more to put any single gaming company in a far lead from there competitors.

End of story.

 

[zerocool84]

I give them credit because unlike microsoft and sony, the specify in making games (Some what only) and there games is what branches out to other stuff, with the other two its vice versa, they rely on there gimmicks to increase sales, sony has there hands in basicaly every sound and entertainment system known to man, so no matter what things should sell with relative ease.

All day long when I look up Nintendo I hear idiotic bias fan boys comparing Vita or Ps3 to the wii u as if its in the same gen, if so I can just say the game boy color back in 1998 sold 100,000% more Units then what the vita has curently at a lousy 2 million and insulting them by saying I just walked into game stop and there already is mold and fungus on some of the boxes and sony thought the ps3 at there start could ride the succses of the ps2, but you dont see me playing that silly game.

So what are you saying other than what I already stated my self of Nintendo has no Games?

Its known, so what; once they come up with there line up, they will be stale mated when the next gen S and M comes out, I hope your not going to tell me the next gen will blow away the comp, socioty dosent even have the type of cash of 350-500 dollar type systems any more to put any single gaming company in a far lead from there competitors.

End of story.

Society DOES have the money for those systems, it's just if they want to spend it because society spends millions of dollars on expensive phones and tablets that are even more expensive than the gaming systems. They just don't want to spend it on something that has no future.


Another day, another story of a multi platform game either not coming to the WiiU or getting neutered.

http://www.polygon.com/2013/7/31/4575566/batman-arkham-origins-multiplayer-skipping-wii-u

 

[Silver Prime]

Society DOES have the money for those systems, it's just if they want to spend it because society spends millions of dollars on expensive phones and tablets that are even more expensive than the gaming systems. They just don't want to spend it on something that has no future.

Where do you live, beverly hills? If its not worth the weight, its not worth the cash, no parent now days is going to shell out 500 bucks for there whining kids, they'd rather go to the next best thing, the 100-200 dollar range hand me down or older gen, unless your a adult buying it for your self, true gamer that has senimental values on the brand, no average person is going to throw that type of cash away for a video game experince, and did you just comapre a smart phone and tablet to a system?

Now days tablets can do everything, and is on the go, I'd rather buy 5 cheap ass tablets for my family then buy a ps4, since emulators can basicaly down load every game from nintendo, supernintendo, n64, game cube, ps1, 2, sega, dream cast and more, have connectivity like cell phone calls, text or skype, the ower of the internet on the go, movies and more...all on tablets...there was just a super sale at blazedell where they were selling Ipad and other tablet brands for 120 bucks a peice and later I'm sure the next sale will be even cheaper kinda like how mp3 players are only 10 bucks in the store form its formal 100$...I'd rather get that than any of the next gen systems if I'm only on the basis of a regular 10 dollar an hour job, most of socity cant even bank 20 grand a year now days.

So speak for your self when you say socioty can afford such abserd prices like how the ps3 was first sold for, lol thats why they were selling it for a lost, because no one had 600 bucks for a medicore game experince short of a PC.

 

[Arkaign]

while all of this is good information, me as a gamer, doesn't give 2 shits about how much money nintendo is making/losing.

at the end of the day if they don't have any games to play on their console, it is 100% useless to me. i don't care what they "may" have in the future either. i care what they "will" have in the future and when. you are talking about vaporware with your games you are hoping for in 2014.

they fooled me with the gamecube, and gimmicked me into the wii purchase, both at launch. i actually had a japanese gamecube before the us ones were out. but no way i will be purchasing a wii-u any time soon. i'll have to at least wait for even just 1 decent game to come out on it that is "must have".

i did pick up a wii for the 2nd time like 2 years back, used at gamestop for $80, so at least i'm glad nintendo made no money off of my purchase, and i guess in this instance i DO care that nintendo didn't make money off of me. but in reality it has no effect on me whether they did or not. then all of my games i got were used at that point as well.

Well yeah, that's what I'm saying. Why buy now? Why honestly buy any launch console unless there are several major titles you can immediately play that you really want? In all of gaming history, getting a console at launch has been a terrible idea with very very few exceptions.

Most of the titles I mentioned are in the roadmaps already, I wouldn't consider them vaporware any more than other sure titles coming for PS4/XB1. Unless something goes wrong, WiiU should become a decent also-ran cheap option by next year.

 

[Arkaign]

Well then here's my question:

Where does the WiiU need to be priced for each sold to remain profitable? I don't think anybody but Nintendo knows, but you're talking about generating sales by slashing the price by~60%! While that would undoubtedly increase sales, what is the profit margin on selling a console you originally priced at $350, now for $150-$170?

The ONLY way I see Nintendo catching a break this year is with
A) At LEAST one or two "must have, AAA" titles by Christmas.
B) A price drop
B) Xbox1 and PS4 shortages spur conciliatory WiiU sales

That's essentially what happened when the Playstation 2 launched; it was such a disaster with hardware shortages, it actually HELPED the Dreamcast, and Sega's sales boomed.
The problem is, the Dreamcast actually had a NUMBER of very good, very popular titles at that point. The WiiU, doesn't.

That's a bunch of separate issues

Okay, without going into excruciating detail, the basics is that pricing on the manufacture of a particular item like a console can come down absolutely massively over time, even a short amount of time, if you plan well. Looking at WiiU specs, it should be possible within a relatively short time to both drop the price hugely as well as beef up the SKUs, and perhaps/probably improve quality as well. You can bookmark this post, because I'm hazarding a guess that an improved tablet will hit perhaps by Xmas '14.

The launch is always most expensive because you have to source all this stuff, get the assembly lines up and running, and so on, on a tight timeframe. Once that's up and running smoothly, you can apply improved logistics as things become available. Just looking at the history of consoles like the PS1/PS2/PS3/360, you can see the revisions and cost-cutting/feature-adding (with some exceptions) over time.

So yes, I do believe that somewhere between $149-$179 will be possible by holidays of 2014, and perhaps $229-$249 for a good SKU this holiday season. Maybe they'll surprise us with a $199 figure. Whatever happens, they will keep a lid on it until the last possible moment.

Moving on to titles. Many people will be thrilled with the combo of Super Mario 3d World and Donkey Kong Country, and some will even be thrilled with Wind Walker HD, even though I think it's super lame. Yes, it's pretty thin outside of that this year, but those are two massive 1st-party titles that will sell a decent number of systems this year. Going through what 2014 should offer, I think things will start to warm up then.

All that said, I'm not going to get one until I see more than 1 or 2 or even 3 or 4 major 1st-party titles. I want to see a great bundle with one of those major titles AND 5+ awesome games. I also know that WiiU is never going to amount to more than an interesting 3rd-place console. But if Nintendo plays their limited cards well, they will keep making money even without directly taking on Sony/Microsoft. In fact, I think it's actually silly to even consider cross-platform titles for the WiiU at all. The console is too weak to do them justice, development will be expensive and troublesome due to no x86 and very weak CPU/GPU/RAM specs. 1st-party and a select number of 3rd party titles created exclusively for WiiU will be the only reason to own the system. CoD/Creed/Madden/Tiger/etc honestly shouldn't even be attempted on WiiU. Everyone on earth already has either a PS3 and/or 360. Why play those titles on a system that isn't suited for them? Nothing will change moving forward either.

WiiU will bet the system you possibly have in ADDITION to PS4 or XB1. Not the system you have INSTEAD of a PS4/XB1.

 

[Silver Prime]

That's a bunch of separate issues

Okay, without going into excruciating detail, the basics is that pricing on the manufacture of a particular item like a console can come down absolutely massively over time, even a short amount of time, if you plan well. Looking at WiiU specs, it should be possible within a relatively short time to both drop the price hugely as well as beef up the SKUs, and perhaps/probably improve quality as well. You can bookmark this post, because I'm hazarding a guess that an improved tablet will hit perhaps by Xmas '14.

The launch is always most expensive because you have to source all this stuff, get the assembly lines up and running, and so on, on a tight timeframe. Once that's up and running smoothly, you can apply improved logistics as things become available. Just looking at the history of consoles like the PS1/PS2/PS3/360, you can see the revisions and cost-cutting/feature-adding (with some exceptions) over time.

So yes, I do believe that somewhere between $149-$179 will be possible by holidays of 2014, and perhaps $229-$249 for a good SKU this holiday season. Maybe they'll surprise us with a $199 figure. Whatever happens, they will keep a lid on it until the last possible moment.

Moving on to titles. Many people will be thrilled with the combo of Super Mario 3d World and Donkey Kong Country, and some will even be thrilled with Wind Walker HD, even though I think it's super lame. Yes, it's pretty thin outside of that this year, but those are two massive 1st-party titles that will sell a decent number of systems this year. Going through what 2014 should offer, I think things will start to warm up then.

All that said, I'm not going to get one until I see more than 1 or 2 or even 3 or 4 major 1st-party titles. I want to see a great bundle with one of those major titles AND 5+ awesome games. I also know that WiiU is never going to amount to more than an interesting 3rd-place console. But if Nintendo plays their limited cards well, they will keep making money even without directly taking on Sony/Microsoft. In fact, I think it's actually silly to even consider cross-platform titles for the WiiU at all. The console is too weak to do them justice, development will be expensive and troublesome due to no x86 and very weak CPU/GPU/RAM specs. 1st-party and a select number of 3rd party titles created exclusively for WiiU will be the only reason to own the system. CoD/Creed/Madden/Tiger/etc honestly shouldn't even be attempted on WiiU. Everyone on earth already has either a PS3 and/or 360. Why play those titles on a system that isn't suited for them? Nothing will change moving forward either.

WiiU will bet the system you possibly have in ADDITION to PS4 or XB1. Not the system you have INSTEAD of a PS4/XB1.

I have to completely disagree with everything you just said.

1.) As much as I love saving money, I dont want Nintendo to have anymore price drops for the Wii u, they would be literaly ripping them selves off, the Ps3 sold for 600 bucks at launch, you want a superior system in all of its aspects to be sold for 2/6th its price? C'mon thats bullshit and you know it. They diserve more buck for there bang, Nintendo in the past had swept away the competition in there own leading games more then any 1st party platform ever.

2.) I have to agree with most, even the ones who hate nintendos guts; the drones, that nintendo missed there shot, they do beat to there own drum, but they completely missed out on the wow factor, bundles are wow factors, but they dident incooperate anything wow, so they are stuck with the true gamers not wanting to give in to temptation.

As much as most don't want to shell out ludacris cash, game play is still a major factor, look at the Vita who is in direct competition with the 3Ds, it dosen't get more direct than that, last time I checked they were getting demolished big time in the multi millions uints=Billions of dollars wise.
What? Like 30 million units vs 2 million units.

Please explain in your own words why the 3ds is in God mode against the Vita???

 

[insertcarehere]

1.) As much as I love saving money, I dont want Nintendo to have anymore price drops for the Wii u, they would be literaly ripping them selves off, the Ps3 sold for 600 bucks at launch, you want a superior system in all of its aspects to be sold for 2/6th its price?

Tech of similar power gets exponentially cheaper to produce over time, and the tech with the power level of the Wii-U should be absolutely dirt-cheap to produce. At-least, that's what would've happened had Nintendo not decided to retain backwards compatibility, which made a relatively expensive multi-chip design necessary instead of the APUs in the xbone/PS4. Apparently this costs even more to produce than those APUs

 

[Arkaign]

I have to completely disagree with everything you just said.

1.) As much as I love saving money, I dont want Nintendo to have anymore price drops for the Wii u, they would be literaly ripping them selves off, the Ps3 sold for 600 bucks at launch, you want a superior system in all of its aspects to be sold for 2/6th its price? C'mon thats bullshit and you know it. They diserve more buck for there bang, Nintendo in the past had swept away the competition in there own leading games more then any 1st party platform ever.

2.) I have to agree with most, even the ones who hate nintendos guts; the drones, that nintendo missed there shot, they do beat to there own drum, but they completely missed out on the wow factor, bundles are wow factors, but they dident incooperate anything wow, so they are stuck with the true gamers not wanting to give in to temptation.

As much as most don't want to shell out ludacris cash, game play is still a major factor, look at the Vita who is in direct competition with the 3Ds, it dosen't get more direct than that, last time I checked they were getting demolished big time in the multi millions uints=Billions of dollars wise.
What? Like 30 million units vs 2 million units.

Please explain in your own words why the 3ds is in God mode against the Vita???

Huh?

This is 2013, not 2006. The PS3 launched at $599 with 60GB and no game in '06, now you can get a 500GB PS3 bundle for $269 at Best Buy.

The WiiU's specs are only marginally better in a few respects compared to 360/PS3, and actually worse in some. 1.24Ghz CPU? 550Mhz GPU? Shared DDR3 for both CPU/GPU? No BluRay or legit home theatre support? This is not a recipe for cutting-edge performance at all, and cutting the price to $199 will be necessary in reaching the goal of becoming more widely successful.

The 3DS is an UTTERLY different scenario by now. Let's count the ways :

#1 - It took a long time to gather steam. Part of this was due to :
#2 - It launched with a weak library and an arguably high price for a handheld
#3 - Now that so much time has passed, 3DS is now more affordable AND has a large library
#4 - Vita launched with a high price and weak library as well, but has been much slower to build steam. A lot of this is due to the fact that the target market for the Vita mostly doesn't care to attempt playing PS franchises on a tiny screen. Games typically seen as AAA titles on PS3 don't translate to the small format near as well as the Nintendo franchises. To boot, to many Xbox/PS gamers, getting a Vita probably seems somewhat redundant when you can already play all those franchises on their existing consoles in better versions. Conversely, a 3DS opens up dramatically different options for those who already have a PS3 and/or 360.

But mainly, it comes down to : big library and a sub-$200 entry price.

 

[Silver Prime]

Tech of similar power gets exponentially cheaper to produce over time, and the tech with the power level of the Wii-U should be absolutely dirt-cheap to produce. At-least, that's what would've happened had Nintendo not decided to retain backwards compatibility, which made a relatively expensive multi-chip design necessary instead of the APUs in the xbone/PS4. Apparently this costs even more to produce than those APUs

Dosen't matter, the gaming experince and quality its self is worth more then that, I mean I under stand why alot of smart phone an Ipod games are free, they suck ass; let alone they are deceptive, because they charge cash for in-play comadities... nintendo is so generous, I remember a year or so back they were giving away tons of free games they could have charged for on there Nintendo e wii shop, unlike Sony who charges highway robery for some of there games on there PSN which I could get for dirt cheap if I just bought there kin from even places like K'mart let alone basicaly free from garage sales lol.

And so if what your saying; that the tech is cheaper, then whats the whole commotion about the graphics will be the defining features that seperates the lead in sales this gen? Certanly (my own opinion) I dont see no leap like ps2 to ps3 type let alone a leap from ps1-ps3 (Huge amounts) in fact, I dont even think the ps6 will have extrodinary leaps in graphics alone compared to the ps3's best capabilitys, since we are moving into avatar type graphics. Not to mention sprites still require no high tech an thats the basic princible of the 3ds over the Vita...its more understandable especaily to kids and adults alike, then playing and or whining about 60 Fps and ultra HD 4k graphics type.

Why the huge amount of talk if the Ps4 is only going to be slightly more powerful then the wii; when artistic value is what makes a game like Mario compared to God of war the factors, not the graphical out-put power, what will get the Ps4 to strive in sales over the wii u if not the line up?

 

[Silver Prime]

Huh?

This is 2013, not 2006. The PS3 launched at $599 with 60GB and no game in '06, now you can get a 500GB PS3 bundle for $269 at Best Buy.

The WiiU's specs are only marginally better in a few respects compared to 360/PS3, and actually worse in some. 1.24Ghz CPU? 550Mhz GPU? Shared DDR3 for both CPU/GPU? No BluRay or legit home theatre support? This is not a recipe for cutting-edge performance at all, and cutting the price to $199 will be necessary in reaching the goal of becoming more widely successful.

The 3DS is an UTTERLY different scenario by now. Let's count the ways :

#1 - It took a long time to gather steam. Part of this was due to :
#2 - It launched with a weak library and an arguably high price for a handheld
#3 - Now that so much time has passed, 3DS is now more affordable AND has a large library
#4 - Vita launched with a high price and weak library as well, but has been much slower to build steam. A lot of this is due to the fact that the target market for the Vita mostly doesn't care to attempt playing PS franchises on a tiny screen. Games typically seen as AAA titles on PS3 don't translate to the small format near as well as the Nintendo franchises. To boot, to many Xbox/PS gamers, getting a Vita probably seems somewhat redundant when you can already play all those franchises on their existing consoles in better versions. Conversely, a 3DS opens up dramatically different options for those who already have a PS3 and/or 360.

But mainly, it comes down to : big library and a sub-$200 entry price.

What? Thats because the game itself is build from the ground up to be that way, even if you port a final fantasy 2 for the Nes to the ps4; it wont look better on the Ps4 so what are you talking about, that some games look worse on the wii u, thats because its not made specifically for the wii u I would've thunk.

You want a 06 system thats still at what you stated 269$, to be sold higher than the latest and greatest Nintendo high power (Hp) Power house, and the wii u to be sold less then a system of 6 years ago? Huh! Fuck that, tell sony to sell there system the Ps4 for 200 bucks just to increase there failure with the vita, Sony would; literaly higher a hit man to take you out talking that type of garbage.

Vita and 3ds...???...Steam my ass, there games suck; I've played some, 3ds is creaming the numbers because the games are top tier, the Vita had all the steam from there predasesor the original Psp.

 

[Arkaign]

What? Thats because the game itself is build from the ground up to be that way, even if you port a final fantasy 2 for the Nes to the ps4; it wont look better on the Ps4 so what are you talking about, that some games look worse on the wii u, thats because its not made specificaly for the wii u I would've thunk.

You want a 06 system thats still at what you stated 269, to be sold higher than the latest and greatest Nintendo high power (Hp) Power house, and the wii u to be sold less then a system of 6 years ago? Huh! Fuck that, tell sony to sell there system the Ps4 for 200 bucks just to inrease there failure with the vita, they'd literaly higher a hit man to take you out talking that type of garbage.

Vita and 3ds...???...Steam my ass, there games suck; I've played some, 3ds is creaming the numbers because the games are top tier, the Vita had all the steam form there predasesor the original Psp.

First off : no cussing in the console forums unless you want to get the wrath of the powers that be.

That '06 system' is still more powerful than the WiiU. I'm sorry, but that's just a fact. That's not the end of the world for Nintendo by any means, they don't NEED to have a high-power console to play their first-party titles, they just need something 'good enough' with 1080p.

Currently the WiiU price is just way too high. I'm sorry you can't see that, but it's the truth. The mass market has moved from Mario/Sonic to Madden/CoD/Halo, and that's not going to change any time soon, if ever. The WiiU is just not going to be able to play reasonable versions of the major cross-platform titles, it's far, FAR too weak to do so. Again, this doesn't matter, because Super Mario 3d World / etc don't and won't exist on Sony/Microsoft systems.

PSP was basically a dead system already, the Vita is kind of a mystery to me in terms of why they even bothered. Nintendo had the momentum with portables all the way back to Gameboy. It's been hit after hit for Nintendo portables. In fact the 3ds was the first slow start they've ever had with one. Quick : can you name a SINGLE portable game system in the entire history of gaming that wasn't a Nintendo product that was a huge success? I'll save you the trouble : zero, unless you count phone/tablet 'pretend' gaming.

But cut the prices and give people a library to work with and bam : success.

That's what it's going to take for WiiU to get it's solid 3rd-place footing, price cut + more games.

 

[insertcarehere]

What? Thats because the game itself is build from the ground up to be that way, even if you port a final fantasy 2 for the Nes to the ps4; it wont look better on the Ps4 so what are you talking about, that some games look worse on the wii u, thats because its not made specifically for the wii u I would've thunk.

Super Mario Galaxy HD on Dolphin disagrees with your statement outright, not to mention all the "Console Ports" that nevertheless run and look significantly better on PCs.

You want a 06 system thats still at what you stated 269$, to be sold higher than the latest and greatest Nintendo high power (Hp) Power house, and the wii u to be sold less then a system of 6 years ago? Huh! Fuck that, tell sony to sell there system the Ps4 for 200 bucks just to increase there failure with the vita, Sony; literaly higher a hit man to take you out talking that type of garbage.

If I was in the market for a relatively cheap console right now (I am not), I could definitely more easily justify buying a PS3 for $269 than a Wii U at $299/$349, or even $249. Discounting preferences for games (inherently subjective), I could see that the PS3 as a much bigger backlog of decent quality games than the Wii U, the way Sony handles online accounts is also miles better than how Nintendo does it. The Wii-U gamepad seems like a nice concept, but it is marred by lackluster execution, both in hardware, and software (Nintendo themselves don't have any ideas for it). Coupled with the fact that there is no noticeable increase in graphical power (like it or not, this is how console gens have usually been defined as).

You seem to be emotionally attached to the well being of Nintendo as a company in some way, it would do you some good to let that sentiment slide.

 

[Silver Prime]

First off : no cussing in the console forums unless you want to get the wrath of the powers that be.

That '06 system' is still more powerful than the WiiU. I'm sorry, but that's just a fact. That's not the end of the world for Nintendo by any means, they don't NEED to have a high-power console to play their first-party titles, they just need something 'good enough' with 1080p.

Currently the WiiU price is just way too high. I'm sorry you can't see that, but it's the truth. The mass market has moved from Mario/Sonic to Madden/CoD/Halo, and that's not going to change any time soon, if ever. The WiiU is just not going to be able to play reasonable versions of the major cross-platform titles, it's far, FAR too weak to do so. Again, this doesn't matter, because Super Mario 3d World / etc don't and won't exist on Sony/Microsoft systems.

PSP was basically a dead system already, the Vita is kind of a mystery to me in terms of why they even bothered. Nintendo had the momentum with portables all the way back to Gameboy. It's been hit after hit for Nintendo portables. In fact the 3ds was the first slow start they've ever had with one. Quick : can you name a SINGLE portable game system in the entire history of gaming that wasn't a Nintendo product that was a huge success? I'll save you the trouble : zero, unless you count phone/tablet 'pretend' gaming.

But cut the prices and give people a library to work with and bam : success.

That's what it's going to take for WiiU to get it's solid 3rd-place footing, price cut + more games.

For your Cussing request: Okay

For your opinion of the price cut: No.

Mario games on M and S? How, they are strictly owned by nintendo, cant say the same about some of the highest grossing games M and S have had, like Final fantasy and sims, they are 3rd party games, that can pull the plug at any moment.

Quite intresting to see your post and previous post, you seem to be a fan boy S's wolf; in N's sheeps clothing, but you're not fooling me.

 

[Sulaco]

For your Cussing request: Okay

For your opinion of the price cut: No.

Mario games on M and S? How, they are strictly owned by nintendo, cant say the same about some of the highest grossing games M and S have had, like Final fantasy and sims, they are 3rd party games, that can pull the plug at any moment.

Quite intresting to see your post and previous post, you seem to be a fan boy S's wolf; in N's sheeps clothing, but you're not fooling me.

Exclusivity isn't NEARLY as all-important when you have stellar 3rd party support, as Sony and Microsoft do. It's nice to have an ace once in awhile, but the big bucks are usually made on multi-platform games
Nintendo's, in comparison, is abysmal. Their first party is their life blood. That, and now ultra-casual games (Wii Fit, Just Dance, etc)

 

[Arkaign]

For your Cussing request: Okay

For your opinion of the price cut: No.

Mario games on M and S? How, they are strictly owned by nintendo, cant say the same about some of the highest grossing games M and S have had, like Final fantasy and sims, they are 3rd party games, that can pull the plug at any moment.

Quite intresting to see your post and previous post, you seem to be a fan boy S's wolf; in N's sheeps clothing, but you're not fooling me.

What? You don't seem to make coherent posts, and respond with nonsensical connections. I quite clearly said that you CANNOT play Mario/etc on Sony and Microsoft systems, and that is exactly the reason that Nintendo can afford to play the long game in combination with their non-loss-leader pricing structure.

I'm not a fanboy of any company, not in the least. What have they ever done for me besides take my money for a particular product, and when I spend that money I had better be prepared and educated for what I'm buying. In point of fact I detest fanboys from the core of my being. I don't care one crap about any of these companies beyond if they offer something that I want to buy.

This is EXACTLY how I feel about fanboys : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lyszauE5vI&feature=c4-overview&list=UUVtEytgcL5fZcSiKx-BjimQ

I didn't get a PSP and PS3 until I was given them for free, and I've bought exactly ONE game for the both of them the entire time I've owned them. I've bought exactly ONE game for my 360 as well. I primarily play my PC and 3DS, the lady plays the Wii, and that's about it. That said, I can see plain as day that PS4 and XB1 will be the giants of this gen, and I can also see plain as day that Nintendo is aiming for a solid but distant 3rd place, which is just fine from a business perspective as long as they play their cards right.

I also think you're the only person on planet earth who doesn't work at Nintendo that doesn't see the fact that Nintendo needs :

LOWER CONSOLE PRICE

MORE GAMES

Before they stand a chance at really achieving that valuable stable 3rd place position. It has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with liking/disliking Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft. It's just the facts.

 

[Silver Prime]

Super Mario Galaxy HD on Dolphin disagrees with your statement outright, not to mention all the "Console Ports" that nevertheless run and look significantly better on PCs.



If I was in the market for a relatively cheap console right now (I am not), I could definitely more easily justify buying a PS3 for $269 than a Wii U at $299/$349, or even $249. Discounting preferences for games (inherently subjective), I could see that the PS3 as a much bigger backlog of decent quality games than the Wii U, the way Sony handles online accounts is also miles better than how Nintendo does it. The Wii-U gamepad seems like a nice concept, but it is marred by lackluster execution, both in hardware, and software (Nintendo themselves don't have any ideas for it). Coupled with the fact that there is no noticeable increase in graphical power (like it or not, this is how console gens have usually been defined as).

You seem to be emotionally attached to the well being of Nintendo as a company in some way, it would do you some good to let that sentiment slide.

Really, I never took any notice of great margins other then tweeking color variations of the original SMG, kinda like Hd Tv does, I dont see any reason why Hd is important either compared to what 4k is doing with other super Hd blue ray type cinema, it actualy makes things difficult to follow, Kinda like from now on, instead of you wearing shades, here wear these bifocules its more cool and enhances everything.

(The basics in enhancing color variations and magnifying crisp optics in its view)

No it dosent, it should have already stoped at HD.

Senimental wise, I do understand prices at high rates dont mean that much to some, and most would happily pay 600 bucks for a ps4, but thats beside the point; which is over all tactical sales in getting more buck for your bang especially when in such heated competition.

Lack luster? We have no games to determine that, isint that the whole reason the revolutionary pad was for; the combination of there hit titles with there inovation to mesh?

You would think the motion controllers like the connect move is the most futuristic and inovative thing in gaming ever, but its not...it actually sucks in more than several ways.

 

[Arkaign]

Really, I never took any notice of great margins other then tweeking color variations of the original SMG, kinda like Hd Tv does, I dont see any reason why Hd is important either compared to what 4k is doing with other super Hd blue ray type cinema, it actualy makes things difficult to follow, Kinda like from now on, instead of you wearing shades, here wear these bifocules its more cool and enhances everything.

(The basics in enhancing color variations and magnifying crisp optics in its view)

No it dosent, it should have already stoped at HD.

Senimental wise, I do understand prices at high rates dont mean that much to some, and most would happily pay 600 bucks for a ps4, but thats beside the point; which is over all tactical sales in getting more buck for your bang especially when in such heated competition.

Lack luster? We have no games to determine that, isint that the whole reason the revolutionary pad was for; the combination of there hit titles with there inovation to mesh?

You would think the motion controllers like the connect move is the most futuristic and inovative thing in gaming ever, but its not...it actually sucks in more than several ways.

It's posts like these that make me wonder if there should be a drunk detector installed on computers similar to those interlocks to prevent habitual drunk drivers from taking off in their cars while loaded.

(1)- 1080p support is important because basically everyone now has a 1080p TV already, and running 480p on a 720 or 1080 TV looks like crap.

(2)- 4K is meaningless garbage for now, PS4/XB1 supposed '4K' support is useless, because their hardware is far FAR too slow to play at 4K with any reasonable settings. Irrelevant.

(3)- No, in point of fact : NOBODY outside of insane people would happily pay $600 for a PS3.

(4)- Over all tactical sales? What the sam?

(5)- Lackluster, yes. Every review site on earth and countless customers have noted that the tablet/controller thing is poorly implemented with current titles, and a bit clunky and obviously not the same quality as a Nexus/iPad in build/response. Do I think that matters in the long run? Not a whole lot, as prices WILL come down, and I think quality WILL get better. A lighter weight + improved capacitive touch surface would do wonders.

(6)- Do you mean 'Kinect' and 'Move'? Yes, they are both truly idiotic attempts to cash in on gimmick casual gaming, in MY opinion. Still, some people love that stuff. To each their own I suppose.