Wii U news thread

I do like that tweet's about how the Wii U is childish and that.

I like the pachman, beemoh you don't get where he is without making the right predictions. I do think his opinion has to be respected, and at a businesses stand point if Nintendo went 3rd party they more likely would make decent money as there be no R&D, ads for things (do they even have a budget for this) etc.

I'm not saying I want Nintendo to become SEGA whom are now a shell of there former self's. I want Nintendo to do great things as they now (it was SEGA) make the best games in gaming everyone should be playing them there the pixar of gaming doesn't matter if your 5 or 35 still going to have something for you. But on the console side it's not working, I would be more then happy like I said in the news thread that the next handheld is also the next console.

Yep, I agreed with some of Crossley's article. Nintendo do need to expand, get more Western studios that sort of thing. As those people that follow me on Twitter know though (especially The Jaster ), I did find the EA quote in it lol-worthy (Mass Effect 3 was never going to sell well unless the Wii U audience was made up of morons with money to burn), and the graph showing Nintendo's decline is misleading.

That quote just made me sad that EA have such influence when they're so clearly a bunch of morons! ME3 released on a console without 1 or 2...  

beemoh wrote:

Zaphod_B wrote:

His article makes sense if it was nested in a business news place like the FT, but gaming press should be about what they need to do to make great games, not appease shareholders and armchair/highchair CEOs!

Surely you can't be suggesting that the games press, simply by virtue of being such, should stick their head in the sand and ignore the outside world? Just because they're making "great games" doesn't mean that they can get away with failing to put tea on the table that Miyamoto's about to upend.

Hmmm, I suppose I was, and that is a bit dumb, it's gaming related and Nintendo need to do well to make games. And they are making mistakes, I'm not oblivious to it. But the gaming press are oblivious to everything but "OMG Nintendo, be like Sony and Microsoft or you will die, sales data, shareholder meetings, iPhones". Or it feels that way to me, I look for Nintendo related news or reviews and all I get is a different po-faced doom article. They are probably well worth doing (and not offensively wrong, if depressing), but they feel massively over done at large.

Veering off to what people were just saying, do you think a Mass Effect Trilogy would have done better? I'm not sure if it would, but I am sure someone in EA must've been switched on enough to realize the 3 alone at a console launch (whose predecessor didn't have 1 or 2 either) would flop regardless of Wii U sales or demographic!

Good article here by Chris Kohler / Wired. "Everything you're thinking about Nintendo is totally wrong"

http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2014/01/nintendo-mobile/

A couple of quotes:

Quote :

Super Mario Bros. 3 is an amazing game, but would it be as much fun on a touch screen with virtual buttons? No, it would not. And before you argue, but you can hook up a Bluetooth gamepad to your phone, think about how that changes the situation. If Nintendo is designing mobile games for the tiny number of people who go to the trouble of using an external controller with their mobile device, it’s no longer going after the millions upon millions of casual consumers that presumably are the entire reason it would go mobile in the first place.

Quote :

Nintendo has the freedom to create games unlike anything else in the world precisely because it has always controlled the entire gameplay experience from hardware to software. It doesn’t have to rely on the success or failure of another company to continue to deliver its products, which is not the case with other software makers. The idea that Nintendo could simply shift its games to another platform and we would continue enjoying the same content is magical thinking.

I think that cvg article has a lot if home truths in it, do I agree with all of it? No, however today I got tired of seeing folk focus on the wrong thing (ME3/EA. Hi Axis ) & effectively burying their head in the sand like they want to ignore the problem as if it will go away without actions.

Nintendo need to change some things massively (we all know this) but that is for them alone to decide.

Wasn't sure where to put this as it applies to 3DS too, but I thought the WiiU news section needed a boost at the moment.

New Shovel Knight trailer! W00T!

E shop thread? Also where's the trailer?

It is time for Nintendo to consider doing some new/different things, as far as I'm concerned. My preferred option is for them to make some brand new, simple games for iOS. Porting retro titles to iDevices would be a waste of time for me: experiences designed to be played with buttons do not transfer well to them (and we have the Virtual Consoles for that!). Something new, though, would get the name Nintendo out there (or maybe back out there) to some of the casual market. Let's face it, some sweet small Nintendo experiences would improve the App Store's gaming section no end.

The_Jaster wrote:

I think that cvg article has a lot if home truths in it, do I agree with all of it? No, however today I got tired of seeing folk focus on the wrong thing (ME3/EA. Hi Axis ) & effectively burying their head in the sand like they want to ignore the problem as if it will go away without actions.

Nintendo need to change some things massively (we all know this) but that is for them alone to decide.

And that's the crux, I think. The article may make some good points (EA passage far, far aside), but how Nintendo change things is unlikely to depend on such articles, so sticking my head in the sand is likely to have just as much effect as reading the article. Plus, while they are good points, I've seen them reiterated more times than I care to count, by varying people of varying intelligence.

I wouldn't mind too much if Nintendo brought out a couple of small new titles on iOS, so long as they're not as buggy as the Wright trilogy. But they've got their own problems to fix first/as well - marketing, the eShop, and talking to third-party developers among them.

Anyway, 'bout time Shovel Knight showed up.

The Chris Kohler article was good. I believe Nintendo needs change too. I admire their culture of not firing workers when they make losses. I remember Iwata mentioning doing so would lower employee morale, but it also makes sense from the point of view that Nintendo would also be losing a lot of skilled individuals who 'get' developing games in the company by doing so. Heck, if they even sold off studios or shut them down like Sony did (Studio Liverpool, Unit13 developers) I'd be devastated. Imagine Monolith Soft shutting down.

But back to Nintendo needing change: I think what Iwata said about evaluating whether they can still sell hardware for ~30k yen and games for a few thousand yen is telling. I'd imagine that Nintendo will be looking into new business models next generation. I don't believe supporting iOS would bring in much revenue at all, unless they know how to compete with giants such as king.com and Rovio (and even then, for the amount of downloads that Rovio's games receive, they generate a much smaller amount of revenue). And we know that's not possible without changing the way the games play for (potential) worse.

Sony did reform Studio Liverpool and others under one banner though.

What if Nintendo partnered with Samsung or something to make a phone like a experia play or ngage but actually decent.

Also Nintendo has money go to third parties and pay for exclusive even if there only timed but imagine if Nintendo went to EA and they had Titanfall as an exclusive for instance.

Also LOL at the article from a EA source saying they don't make game for kids and only kids play Wii U.

So someone high up at a UK gaming chain, has said make the Wii U under £200 officially and Mario Kart 8 will save it.

Heh, good call with EA not wanting to make games for Wii U especially they made excellent ports of the NFS franchise during the Wii's lifetime...
Regardless, a shake up of the business model is needed. It would be a lie if I said I wasn't disappointed about such a big price drop for U on Amazon in the space of a year but that's the price you pay for being an early adopter.

I honestly think the price cut and the upcoming release of Smash and 8 will really give the system a real shot in the arm.

While Crossley is fairly gloomy, the CVG weekly podcast is much more optimistic. I've linked to the appropriate place in the video, but it's all quite fun.

So, more EA drama as Peter Moore tweeted this.

Quote :

Don’t trust "anonymous sources". Nintendo's a great partner. They never have been, and never will be, ‘dead’ to EA... @EA .

I thought it was a fake account at first, but Rob Crossley responded angrily to him.

Moore replied:

Quote :

@Rob_Crossley_ I know where I, as the COO, and my company stands on this relationship, despite the comments of your anonymous source @EA

And then:

Quote :

Mario and Luigi are carrying a few extra pixels from the old days, but otherwise the three of us had a great run, as we have done for 30 yrs

I wonder if this is just PR or indicating that something's changed behind the scenes.

https://twitter.com/petermooreEA/

As far as I was aware EA never said they wouldn't ever make games for wii U just that currently it won't benifit them BUT I guess that's not how most Nintendo fans took it. *shrugs*

masofdas wrote:

What if Nintendo partnered with Samsung or something to make a phone like a experia play or ngage but actually decent.

That is a very interesting idea and why don't we explore and expand on that.

If Nintendo was to sign up for an exclusive phone/tablet deal with just one phone maker, they could charge a significant amount to get that agreement. Forget the idea of it being available on Google Play, as they would just diminish the equity involved, but rather tie the games directly to a phone/tablet maker, such as you mentioned, Samsung, as they are the biggest player in the market, but also consider the possibility of Apple. Apple or Samsung would be able to use the ability to exclusively play Nintendo games as a massive marketing campaign and would need to pay Nintendo accordingly for that right. Perhaps the phone could even be co-branded as a Nintendo-iPhone/Galaxy?

In return, Nintendo would only put games on after they have been properly remastered to work without buttons, whichever games they choose and they have a long list of games they could work on, but not new games, except new IP specifically designed for phones. This would then give them the exposure they need to keep their brand in the faces of a big audience and a major income stream to continue supporting their preferred console business model.

Of course we still have the issue of how that would affect Nintendo's own handheld market, but I am sure a balance can be struck that would avoid too much conflict, especially as all new games are designed specifically with their own hardware in mind.

Anyone got some additional thoughts on masofdas' musings?

I can't comment on the 'phone idea, I'm afraid. I would buy one if it came out, probably; but aside from visual novels, 'phone games are just not to my taste.

To continue my role as harbinger of positives, Mr. Scram Kitty says that any complaints about working with Nintendo are all wrong.

Balladeer wrote:

I can't comment on the 'phone idea, I'm afraid.  I would buy one if it came out, probably; but aside from visual novels, 'phone games are just not to my taste.  

I am very much like you in that respect Balla, well the phone games not being my thing. I go further and that is smartphones are not my thing, or mobile phones full stop. I have a small and cheap Samsung phone, only because in this day and age I need a phone and I didn't want a button one. I barely ever use the damn thing and even when I had an iPhone for work, I had no interest in games on it. I did download Angry Birds for the work tablet, but I was bored with that very quickly. Trouble with all of that though is that I am more the anomaly on this and not representative of the market.

Nobody says that any Nintendphone has to be a buttonless slate- there's nothing stopping Nintendo from bringing out a "3DSp" which is a 3DS with a SIM slot, aside from the fact that it'd be terrible.

beemoh wrote:

Nobody says that any Nintendphone has to be a buttonless slate- there's nothing stopping Nintendo from bringing out a "3DSp" which is a 3DS with a SIM slot, aside from the fact that it'd be terrible.

The trouble with custom designed mobile phones, with games as a major function, is that they will only ever be niche and therefore, not a big, mainstream seller. Consumers will always seek a phone that is primarily a phone. A Nintendophone would be a marginal seller at best. Only mainstream phone game incorporation can work in the mass market. Even a very good game cradle that a phone could go into, will still only have a relatively small market.

In Chandra Nair's last "Big Story" raises the best point I've heard in a while: When you were a kid, did you care about sales figures? And what other industry does this anyway?

It seems to me that, for the first generation of "proper gamers", when they were kids this whole discussion revolved around "ha ha ur consols crap". Now they've grown up and become journalists, I'd hope that they'd leave the illogical tribal attachment to a particular plastic and metal box behind. Actually what's happened is that these people haven't been able to let go of the "law of the playground" to pick a winning side, and now they have access to statistical information, it gives them a misguided prompt to carry on in this matter.

Jimbob wrote:

In Chandra Nair's last "Big Story" raises the best point I've heard in a while: When you were a kid, did you care about sales figures? And what other industry does this anyway?

I wouldn't have been able to understand them! I think there's some ground for caring about sales figures: we all want Nintendo to develop more of the games we like, and if they go bankrupt or start developing mobile games they're less likely to do that. The playground-esque mud-slinging is another matter entirely though.

Yup, Nintendo needs to make some big changes. I've been thinking about this, and I think it needs to stop putting all its eggs into one basket with huge, massive budget first-party titles. Case in point: Super Mario 3D World. Must've cost a shitload to make, and so far it's not performed as a standalone seller or a system seller.

I'd like to see Nintendo take a bit more of a risk on less-costly ventures, maybe resurrecting an old IP or developing some smaller-scale new IPs. They did a lot of this 'testing the market' in the GameCube era to varying success, and what's not to like for the gamer? They need to advertise the hell out of everything, and most of all they need to start surprising folk again. Nintendo's home console efforts are still high quality as always, but it feels to me like they're stuck in a bit of a rut diminishing returns.

As for mobile gaming, they could easily push a few high quality puzzlers or minigame compilations onto, say, iOS; but in such a crowded, turd-filled market, would even a freebie download make the tiniest splash?

Nintendo aren't going bankrupt anytime soon balla they've got $11,000,000,000 or 1,125,410,000,000¥ or £6,664,240,000 or €8,042,694,000 in the bank.

And worth at the moment $14b, EA is worth about $7.7b and Activision-Blizzard is worth about $11.59 and Sony are worth $17.6b.

So doesn't look that bleak as Nintendo is just a gaming company unlike Sony but if you take the $11b they have in the bank of the market value of $14b. Means Nintendo assets are worth only $3b. Compare that to Activision Blizzard, whom of what I can find have about $4b in the bank are valued at $11.5b means there assets are worth $7b. So Mario & co is worth $3b, COD & Spyro is worth $7b.