Nintendo: We have failed to establish Wii U as a "worthy" Wii successor

[bultje112]

Ok so you do not like zelda games and you dont like nintendo
Yet at the same time you like them. But no games of nintendo at all

Schyzofr..

Ok you go play parappa the rapper and bust a groove

While i enjoy good games

Im over 30 years. I might be younger then you perhaps. So at least i enjoyed my first console
The commodore 64c

I never had famic... What so ever. When sega was still there i had an oath never to touch that nin console
Honestly nes looked crap
Snes looked great but it didnt have what megadrive had not. All genres were on both systems

The old saying
Sega has what nintendont

But to talk about the present. I enjoy nintendo. And i love them being alive for their epicness

Ok did you finish parappa and bust a groove? Lol
Go play that just dance. Lol dont sweat

weren't you the guy who told us here he beat nintendo kids when they were young? how did you come around to becoming a nintendo fanboy then?

[Kamahl]

I think OoT deserves as recognition as MM because of the perfect change of the series to a 3D title

True, in fact it was a much better transition to 3D than Mario's. I gave it a good rating mostly because of how overrated it is, I was really underwhelmed when I first played it (which was long after it's release). The opposite for MM which really surprised me.

[EclecticGroove]

When the Bayonetta 2 exclusivity was announced I remember thinking that it was a nice coup for Nintendo, and that they should attempt to make more moves like it (if they are to attract gamers that arent simply fanboys). Many people were upset that it was a WiiU exclusive, and if you make enough of these types of moves, some of those upset gamers might look at the library as one that is worth owning the system for (eventually).

However, what is strange about too many Nintendo console owners is that they simply dont buy 3rd party games, no matter how good (or exclusive) they are. People that have played The Wonderful 101 and Rayman Legends (two games that certainly appear tailor made for the Nintendo audience) wont shut up about how good those games are, and suggest them at every given opportunity, yet...NOBODY BOUGHT THEM, which is odd for an install base that didnt have many more options.

It seems like WiiU owners, bought NSMBWU, Nintendo land, (and to lesser degrees) Zombie U, and Sonic Racing Transformed at launch. Lego Undercover (approx 550,000 worldwide) and Monster Hunter Tri (approx 440,000 worldwide) feel like they were the only games released in a 7 month drought (anything else released in that time frame sold in the tens of thousands, or less, worldwide). Pikmin 3 comes out in August and sells to the tune of approx. 540,000 copies. That is 3 games in an 8 month time frame that sold very well when considering the install base, BUT nothing beyond those 3 games (and I will assume, some launch games) sold much of anything in 8 months. Then Rayman Legends releases, followed closely by The Wonderful 101, and no one seems to give a damn - The Wonderful 101, in particular, has sold approx. 90,000 worldwide (not a typo). These arent garbage games, these are solid, well-reviewed games that have a heavy dose of Nintendo flavor, in the middle of a disgusting 8-9 month drought of games....and hardly anyone cares to buy them. 3rd party multi-plats arent doing so hot either: Splinter Cell Blacklist sits at approx. 30,000 worldwide (again, not a typo), Need for Speed Most Wanted sits at approx. 70,000, kid-centric, and well-reviewed, games like Skylanders SWAP and Disney Infinity are at around 100,000 each. It makes me wonder what exactly WiiU owners are waiting for. Bayonetta 2?

The way that Nintendo console owners seem to suport quality 3rd party multi-plats and exclusives, as well as some of the 1st party material, over the past 15 years, you would think they would be better served just starting over with an entirely different fan base in mind. It just doesnt look like Mario, Zelda, Mario Kart, Mario Party, Smash Bros., and Donkey Kong are enough anymore.

I'd bet this can be chalked up to their image and marketing issues.

Nintendo has turned into the company that makes a system to put gimmicky games and Nintendo exclusives on. People don't buy it for other games because the assumption is that there ARE no other games. Yes, for some that isn't the case, but by and large, look at the top sales lists on the wii and wii u... and of course the GC and N64 before it to varying degrees.

Nintendo has allowed this image to take hold, and has, in some cases actually fostered it on their own. They are complacent and more than happy to just let shit do whatever. It's like they don't want to take an active role in shaping their system anymore other than releasing the hardware and their own games.

They need to grab this issue by the neck, spend some money on people to make different kinds of games and quality ones, not shit cash grab ports. They need to spend the money to MARKET THE FUCK out of the system everywhere and show that yes, they DO have more than waggle/touch gimmick games and Nintendo franchises.

Will that "fix" the wii u? Probably not, but it should help them get more sales. And if they have a decent price drop at some point (likely with a hardware revision to make it all cheaper for them to produce) they might pick up some more sales.

And then I would hope to goddamn hell they give consumers a REAL system that they actually want next time. Something that isn't just attractive to Nintendo to shovel out it's franchises on, but actually appealing to 3rd parties to put 1:1 multiplat releases on as well as exclusives.

[Yharnamresident]

And this is relevant to the Wii U because?

I could probably dig up some hilarious things Sony and Microsoft have said in the past too. That doesn't mean it's still true.

It isn't relevant to the Wii U because gamevet isn't talking about the Wii U. Hes saying Nintendo is stuck in the past, and has had half-assed online services for the last 10 years.

[TrekkiesUnite118]

A Link Between Worlds was A Link to the Past copy pasta, with all weapons cheats turned on, the map filled out, and a bunch of tiny dungeons. More about fan service than breaking new ground.

The game was stated to be a direct sequel from it's announcement. Of course it's going to have similarities with a Link to the Past. That doesn't mean it's a copy pasta. As for having all the weapons at your disposal from the start, it's kind of funny to see you dissing one of the new things to does when you're also accusing it of not doing new things. This game was one of the first completley non-linear Zelda games in a years. It pretty much breaks the traditional Zelda formula in this sense because now instead of having the game hold your hand in a fixed linear path to the next Temple/Power Up, you can now pick what power up you want to take with you and go where ever you want to go.

So in the non-linearity aspect, it's pretty different from the more recent Zelda games (even Link to the Past for that matter). Sure the world map is the same and filled out, but the dungeons are pretty different.

It isn't relevant to the Wii U because gamevet isn't talking about the Wii U. Hes saying Nintendo is stuck in the past, and has had half-assed online services for the last 10 years.

He specifically said this:

Nintendo has done nothing to establish its console as place to play online games. Their friends code crap is a happy friendly blanket to protect its users from the ugly side of online gaming.

This is a present tense complaint, not a past tense one. It's complaining about things how they are now. The problem with it is it's complaining about things that are no longer true as if they still are true.

The first part of the complaint, that Nintendo has done nothing to establish it's console as an online console isn't true. There's a lot of games on the system that have free online multiplayer, including some of their own games like Wii Sports Club. They have a thriving online community with the MiiVerse where players can interact with each other for any game on their system. They have a full blown eShop that can pretty much stand toe to toe with what Microsoft and Sony have short of purchases not being tied to an account. So to say they have done nothing isn't just inaccurate, it's just plain wrong.

The second part of the complaint about friend codes is just outdated and irrelevant. The Wii U doesn't even have those, you have a Nintendo Network ID just like you have an Xbox Live ID. Through MiiVerse you can create a friend list just like you can on Xbox Live. So you can see how complaining about friend codes as if they still exist when they don't is just plain silly.

[maxi]

True, in fact it was a much better transition to 3D than Mario's. I gave it a good rating mostly because of how overrated it is, I was really underwhelmed when I first played it (which was long after it's release). The opposite for MM which really surprised me.

I never liked the 3D Marios. When Mario 64 was released I was so disappointed that it was nothing like the older games that made me decided to get the Saturn instead of the N64.
Funny that Megaman Legends also does not look like the normal MM games and I still liked it. Maybe because other MM games were beign released along it, and it was the closest that someone reached from Zelda OoT on the PSX.

[Knuckle Duster]

The game was stated to be a direct sequel from it's announcement. Of course it's going to have similarities with a Link to the Past. That doesn't mean it's a copy pasta. As for having all the weapons at your disposal from the start, it's kind of funny to see you dissing one of the new things to does when you're also accusing it of not doing new things. This game was one of the first completley non-linear Zelda games in a years. It pretty much breaks the traditional Zelda formula in this sense because now instead of having the game hold your hand in a fixed linear path to the next Temple/Power Up, you can now pick what power up you want to take with you and go where ever you want to go.

So in the non-linearity aspect, it's pretty different from the more recent Zelda games (even Link to the Past for that matter). Sure the world map is the same and filled out, but the dungeons are pretty different.

And it didn't feel like a sequel. It's like a remake rather than a continuation of events just because of the generational gap. The "New" thing it does is rely on old conventions and the freedom of choice, which would be great, if they weren't saddled with having everything given to you right away, a filled out map with nothing new to expand it, short dungeons, and shortcuts for everything. They took a step in the right direction by losing the handholding, but that in no way gives them a pass for recycling everything so blatantly while breaking the direction of the game.

They let you sandbox the whole thing, but the whole thing is just a nerfed A Link to the Past with nothing new to find. How fucking sad it is that this game is praised so highly. It just stresses how far off the mark Nintendo has been since Wind Waker dropped the ball in favor of graphics.

It's not a bad game. It's in no way exceptional or a high mark for the series.

Link's Awakening is the only A Link to the Past sequel that matters.

[grieverr]

He specifically said this:

"Originally Posted by azonicrider View Post
It isn't relevant to the Wii U because gamevet isn't talking about the Wii U. Hes saying Nintendo is stuck in the past, and has had half-assed online services for the last 10 years."


This is a present tense complaint, not a past tense one. It's complaining about things how they are now. The problem with it is it's complaining about things that are no longer true as if they still are true.

The relevance I see is the same person that said online was not important (Iwata), is the same person that's still running the show today. As such, you can't help but feel that the Nintendo online component could have been so much better and robust had someone else been in charge.
I've worked on projects where the team lead wanted to do the project, and others where the team lead was doing it because he had to. And believe me, the one who wanted to get it done had much more success in the project.

Iwata is that guy that is implementing online in the Wii-U because he knows he has to. Not because he sees it as the reigning standard. That lack of attention shows in the separation between the 3DS online and Wii-U online. Right now, I have a $4 balance on my 3DS and $30 on the Wii-U. I'd LOVE to buy some 3DS eshop games, but I'd really prefer to use the money I've already spent on the Nintendo store than to put even more money on the 3DS shop while those $30 just sit idle in the Wii-U.


That said, I do love Nintendo and always will. I agree with their sentiment that games can/should be accessible by everyone of all ages. But Nintendo also has to accept that there are gamers that prefer "mature" games, just there are people that prefer mature books/movies. And as much as I love Mario and Pikmin, I certainly also love Gears of War and Gran Turismo. If the PS4 can have Knack and Battlefield, I don't see why the Wii-U can't. And yes, I know they do, but you'd never know based on their advertising.

[Semmie]

And it didn't feel like a sequel. It's like a remake rather than a continuation of events just because of the generational gap. The "New" thing it does is rely on old conventions and the freedom of choice, which would be great, if they weren't saddled with having everything given to you right away, a filled out map with nothing new to expand it, short dungeons, and shortcuts for everything. They took a step in the right direction by losing the handholding, but that in no way gives them a pass for recycling everything so blatantly while breaking the direction of the game.

They let you sandbox the whole thing, but the whole thing is just a nerfed A Link to the Past with nothing new to find. How fucking sad it is that this game is praised so highly. It just stresses how far off the mark Nintendo has been since Wind Waker dropped the ball in favor of graphics.

It's not a bad game. It's in no way exceptional or a high mark for the series.

Link's Awakening is the only A Link to the Past sequel that matters.

Your opinion is pretty much void. Cause most lttp fans actually enjoyed this to the fullest.
But i respect your opinion ofcourse. But i just dont agree with that knuckles


just to edit


knuckles we know your opinion
summary
you hate nintendo
you dont like nintendo games
you want it to fail
and you know it will fail
and if it didnt fail you would still say it will fail

like i said its trolling what you do. perhaps you didnt notice yourself

[Knuckle Duster]

Your opinion is pretty much void. Cause most lttp fans actually enjoyed this to the fullest.
But i respect your opinion ofcourse. But i just dont agree with that knuckles

Your opinion doesn't matter because it is contrarian to popular opinion, but I respect it of course.
I don't agree with it.

Sincerely,
The guy who argues about bad relationships with corporations.

New Zelda is a good game. It's nowhere near the earth shattering good time it's being praised as, and there's obviously a heavy amount of recycled shit in it.

[Semmie]

New Zelda is a good game. It's nowhere near the earth shattering good time it's being praised as, and there's obviously a heavy amount of recycled shit in it.

you might as well jerk of and say that it is the same again but with a different bitch on your mobile

its for laughs but when you think of it

zelda lttp and lbw maybe slightly different yet the same but people will like it.

sorry for using this example but i have to use this kind of examples cause the other one i wanted to give was to advanced for that small narrow skull of yours

[Gogogadget]

ALBW is meh, LTTP isn't meh. I know which one i'd rather play.

[EclecticGroove]

knuckles we know your opinion
summary
you hate nintendo
you dont like nintendo games
you want it to fail
and you know it will fail
and if it didnt fail you would still say it will fail

like i said its trolling what you do. perhaps you didnt notice yourself

I just want to point out that not everyone that is disliking what Nintendo fits in with hating them.

For me personally? (Using your list for KD)
I don't hate Nintendo, but I think they are not doing anywhere near as much as they need to in the console market.
I like many Nintendo games, but I don't like them because they are Nintendo games. Slapping a title on it isn't going to make me like it just because.
I may not like the wii u from a hardware standpoint, but I don't want it to fail. That said, it also doesn't deserve to do well.
I know you know it will do horribly unless Nintendo really makes an effort to turn it around. If they don't, then it deserves to sell horribly.
The wii was a resounding sales success. The wii u is not. If Nintendo can put in the effort to get people interested in buying the system en masse, then there is no way anyone can say it failed. If they don't? Then it will be a sales failure even if the system itself doesn't get cancelled and "fail" like the DC did.

[TrekkiesUnite118]

And it didn't feel like a sequel. It's like a remake rather than a continuation of events just because of the generational gap. The "New" thing it does is rely on old conventions and the freedom of choice, which would be great, if they weren't saddled with having everything given to you right away, a filled out map with nothing new to expand it, short dungeons, and shortcuts for everything. They took a step in the right direction by losing the handholding, but that in no way gives them a pass for recycling everything so blatantly while breaking the direction of the game.

They let you sandbox the whole thing, but the whole thing is just a nerfed A Link to the Past with nothing new to find. How fucking sad it is that this game is praised so highly. It just stresses how far off the mark Nintendo has been since Wind Waker dropped the ball in favor of graphics.

It's not a bad game. It's in no way exceptional or a high mark for the series.

Link's Awakening is the only A Link to the Past sequel that matters.

Everything isn't given to you right away though. You have to earn it by getting enough money to buy it from the shop. So you have to choose what items are more important to you early on. Sure you could farm a lot of Rupee's to buy everything right away, but you can do that in any other RPG with a similar system.

The new things to find for those who played a Link to the Past are the bits that have changed. For example the Tower of Gales wasn't there in a Link to the Past. There was just a small island with nothing on it. Death Mountain also made a few changes with some larger mini dungeons and puzzles in it. Misery Mire no longer exists as a dungeon, so instead you guy back to the normal world and go through the Desert Palace which was quite a different twist. In fact the desert was pretty much blocked off for a good portion of the game, so that's new and different from a Link to the Past. Also the Ice Palace and Turtle Rock swapped places on the map, which was rather different too. The dungeons are all radically different too. And for those who haven't played a Link to the Past, it's a new world for them to explore.

As for the dungeons being short, I didn't find them that much shorter than the ones in a Link to the past. They could take anywhere from 10-30 minutes to get through for the easy early ones, the later ones like the Ice Palace and Desert Palace could take a little longer to figure out. Link to the Pasts Dungeons don't take that long to breeze through either.

As for the map being filled out, again what were you expecting when it was stated that it was a sequel to a Link to the Past taking place in the same world? Sure it's not a sequel of a year later with the same events, it's a sequel that's a few generations into the future where a Link to the Past is now a legend. So yes, there are some similarities, there's also some major differences too.

Iwata is that guy that is implementing online in the Wii-U because he knows he has to. Not because he sees it as the reigning standard. That lack of attention shows in the separation between the 3DS online and Wii-U online. Right now, I have a $4 balance on my 3DS and $30 on the Wii-U. I'd LOVE to buy some 3DS eshop games, but I'd really prefer to use the money I've already spent on the Nintendo store than to put even more money on the 3DS shop while those $30 just sit idle in the Wii-U.

They're merging the two systems supposedly this month. So eShop balances will be the same between systems.

[gamevet]

This is a present tense complaint, not a past tense one. It's complaining about things how they are now. The problem with it is it's complaining about things that are no longer true as if they still are true.

My friends code comment had just as much to do with the past, as it did with the present. Even without that stupid feature, their online offerings (appear) are worse than the original Xbox.

Nintendo has done nothing to show that they are serious about online gaming with the Wii U, just like they didn't do with their previous consoles. Black Ops II didn't have the DLC that was available to the PS3 and 360 users. Nintendo's own 1st party titles lack online play and their excuse for titles like Pikman 3 not having online play is latency; and that's a bunch of BS, when a game like StarCraft II operates just fine online.

You can keep believing, but Nintendo is not going to ever take online gaming seriously. They are pretty much the Disney of videogames and that's how they'll stay until being completely pushed out of the console market.