The Secret Developers: Wii U - the inside story

[Lil Frier]

ah, nostalgia blinders i see.

http://kotaku.com/the-ps3-had-12-games-at-launch-heres-what-they-looked-513396910

i'd say other than N64 this is actually the largest jump in visuals at launch.

I think he meant more from the end of one generation to the start of the next. I mean, part of that MASSIVE leap from the start of the PS3 to the PS4 is that you were talking about 4-5 years for most generations, but you had this most-recent one last 6-8 years (depending on which console you're talking about). That, and since we're actually at a point where graphics have SOME level of realism to them (as opposed to everything being blocky before, if not 2-D), graphical improvements matter now. We expect realism now, so we put more weight into the visual quality of games.

 

[purbeast0]

I think he meant more from the end of one generation to the start of the next. I mean, part of that MASSIVE leap from the start of the PS3 to the PS4 is that you were talking about 4-5 years for most generations, but you had this most-recent one last 6-8 years (depending on which console you're talking about). That, and since we're actually at a point where graphics have SOME level of realism to them (as opposed to everything being blocky before, if not 2-D), graphical improvements matter now. We expect realism now, so we put more weight into the visual quality of games.

here is god of war 2 on ps2.

http://s.pro-gmedia.com/videogamer/media/images/ps2/god_of_war_2/screens/god_of_war_2_6.jpg

i'd argue that game has better graphics than some of those launch ps3 titles i linked to.

a game like ryse is a massive jump in graphics over what the ps3 and 360 were doing at the end of 2013.

 

[exdeath]

I, among others, am perfectly content not having EA and Activision on the Wii U. May they both rot in hell.

 

[Lil Frier]

That link won't load, for whatever reason. I don't agree or disagree with your point though, I was just trying to help clarify what he was saying.

 

[Lil Frier]

I, among others, am perfectly content not having EA and Activision on the Wii U. May they both rot in hell.

Psst...Activision's on the Wii U.

 

[TheAdvocate]

What does "economical" mean

It has like a 32W total power draw at load (and its quiet). I have basically quit using the roku - I just stream through the WiiU.

I think my xbox360 draws like 180W or maybe that was the XBone and the 360 was about 100W. It adds up on extended use.

The little thing never gets hot in my entertaiment center and the only time I ever hear it is spin up on initial disc loads. Thats it. There's no fan noise at all.

I used to have a SFF media center box in there. My wife always hated the heat & fan noise.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Not terribly concerned with anecdotal dev complaining. Big companies are always a hassle. The spec argument is pointless. Consoles long ago hit a huge diminishing returns roadblock; 10 times graphical power makes games look ~10% better nowadays. The One and PS4 are the most underwhelming generational leap in visuals in console game history. Art style and not number of polygons is what makes a game look good or bad today. Mario 3D World and Windwaker HD look good compared to anything on the PS4.

Wii U sales have been increasing by pretty sizable percentages just about every single month this year and continued to increase during the Xbone and PS4 launches. The next gen console life cycle is just now starting.

There are plenty of games for just about every type of gamer. Anyone who says the Wii U only caters to kids is either a troll or horrendously misinformed. Call of Duty Black Ops 2, Call of Duty Ghosts, Assassin's Creed 3 and 4, Deus Ex, Resident Evil, Splinter Cell, Mass Effect, Batman, Tekken, Injustice, I could go on and on and on. There's a very strong list of sweet games coming out in 2014 and includes big name 3rd party games like Watch Dogs.

By not going with a Wii U you inevitably miss out on Mario, Star Fox, Metroid, Zelda, Mario Kart, Donkey Kong, Pikmin, Bayonetta, Smash Bros. and a lot more. Not to mention the virtual console. By skipping PS4 or Xbone you miss out on *random exclusive #5 nobody ever heard of* or Halo and paying for online play.

All the games you mentioned including Call of Duty are vastly inferior to any other platform. They don't have a robust online network to let you play those games against people. For some games that is an absolute necessity. I guarantee you nobody is buying a WiiU saying "Wow I can play CoD Ghosts".

For the record, this new generation of consoles (XB1 and PS4) is the single biggest leap ever for graphics. Comparing Mario 3D World to Ryse and Killzone is utter fail.

 

[smackababy]

here is god of war 2 on ps2.

http://s.pro-gmedia.com/videogamer/media/images/ps2/god_of_war_2/screens/god_of_war_2_6.jpg

i'd argue that game has better graphics than some of those launch ps3 titles i linked to.

a game like ryse is a massive jump in graphics over what the ps3 and 360 were doing at the end of 2013.

Take a look at MGS3 then compare that to ANY PS3 launch title. Um, improved graphics not found.

People arguing otherwise are morons. Let's take any Xbox 360 game and compare it to DR3. Sure, the textures and IQ are the same, but DR3 has a heck of a lot more going on than anything previous.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Take a look at MGS3 then compare that to ANY PS3 launch title. Um, improved graphics not found.

People arguing otherwise are morons. Let's take any Xbox 360 game and compare it to DR3. Sure, the textures and IQ are the same, but DR3 has a heck of a lot more going on than anything previous.

And there are some actual physics going on in DR3 as well.

 

[artemicion]

After reading the article, Nintendo's approach seems to make more sense. Aim small, miss small. Don't spend money developing features to try to compete with Microsoft and Sony when you're already a generation behind. Don't pour costs in supporting third party developers if there won't be any profits there.

Their market share might be small, but they're still turning a profit.

 

[Lil Frier]

Except how long can they remain profitable? Online gaming is going to become a must, and they have little infrastructure. That's going to be a BIG money sink when they finally get the lights turned on for their online gaming service, I imagine. How much are they going to have to spend to support gaming, how much will it cost users, and how long will that be a major drag on profits?

 

[Doppel]

After reading the article, Nintendo's approach seems to make more sense. Aim small, miss small. Don't spend money developing features to try to compete with Microsoft and Sony when you're already a generation behind. Don't pour costs in supporting third party developers if there won't be any profits there.

Their market share might be small, but they're still turning a profit.

surely the wii u is not yet profitable? If thy are making money on consoles it is very little--it has been reported they cannot lower price further due to production costs. But, even if each console makes money their r&d cannot have been recovered yet. Will wii u end up a success when it is all said and done?

 

[artemicion]

surely the wii u is not yet profitable? If thy are making money on consoles it is very little--it has been reported they cannot lower price further due to production costs. But, even if each console makes money their r&d cannot have been recovered yet. Will wii u end up a success when it is all said and done?

I heard that they've always sold the console for more than production cost. That probably doesn't take into account sunk R&D costs though. The company as a whole is still turning a profit, last I've heard.

Point being, I think Nintendo is content playing the low risk game and concentrating on software titles and marketing the Wii U for a smaller casual market that doesn't need online features. I doubt Nintendo will risk pouring a bunch of money in developing a network infrastructure for online gaming, catering to third party devs or in improving the Wii U OS in the hopes of recovering those costs from third party royalties or increased console sales.

 

[Lil Frier]

Then they will die. As Microsoft's borderline-acceptable digital distribution suggestions hinted, we're REALLY close to having digital sales catch up to physical ones. After that, the disc-based stuff will die off. The next console generation is probably going to be when you see GameStop lose importance, and digital sales be the norm (and expect multi-terabyte HDDs, if not SSDs).

Nintendo can't afford to wait out this generation and have no real online features. They'll be relegated to a spot worse than BlackBerry, in my opinion. If they wait until the next generation to get online going, they'll be buried by the competition well before then (who is going to buy into a new online ecosystem from Nintendo when Microsoft and Sony will have almost 20 years sunk into developing their online stuff?).

People say that a growing library will grow the Wii U, but it's just-as-likely to sink it. For every good Nintendo game that'll hit the Wii U, you'll probably have 3-5 good third-party games that won't. A new Mario might come every year, but you'll also have a lost sports game from NBA, NFL, and NHL. You'll have a missed NFS. You'll have a missed Battlefield or Battlefront. You'll have a missed another title from Telltale. You'll miss another big FPSRPG like the next Fallout or Borderlands.

Nintendo's willingness to stay in third by default WILL kill it. I mean, with the way they function now, the only reason they survive at #3 is because there are only 3 participants. The hardware's underpowered. There's no online. They can only run a 1990s business model for so long. I'd hazard a guess that if they don't have online up and running within 3 (maybe 5) years, then the next generation will be a lost cause, which would probably make them Sega.

 

[Fulle]

I'm not exactly following the portion of the discussion in regards to Nintendo digital sales. Nintendo's digital game sales are actually pretty healthy... over doubling from 2012 to 2013 in fact...

And the Wii U's sales are somewhat shadowing Gamecube sales, with some recent momentum through the Christmas season, despite the Xbox One and PS4 stealing the thunder. It's not unreasonable to assume they'll sell around 30 million on the generation, and make a decent amount of profits from the Wii U....

And the 3DS is still the top selling "console" in the world. I'm not sure why in discussions about the Wii U, people seem to forget the 3DS exists and is doing really well, and make comments on how "Nintendo is going to die" and other such nonsense.

They're not dying, it's just that Wii U sales suggest that Nintendo's home console user base has failed to grow beyond Gamecube levels, even though the videogame market has grown substantially since then, and they've picked up new users. This suggests attrition from their fanbase, while Sony and MS are adding to theirs year on year. They're speculated to sell 30 mil in a console gen where MS and Sony are expected to sell around 80 mil each. The sales are incredibly disappointing and suggest Nintendo's squandered a lot of opportunity....

But it's not like they're still not going to make money on the Wii U... because they are.

 

[Lil Frier]

We don't mention the 3DS because its success is not part of the Wii U's success or failure. Nintendo does a wretched job of isolating them from one another.

Talking up 30 million sales for the console that's the follow-up to one that sold 100 million+ units is just pitiful. You shouldn't be setting your sights on a 70% loss in volume, it's TERRIBLE. They're starting this generation predicting 100 million+ sales for Microsoft and Sony, after 80 million+ in the past generation. 30 million is not enough to be viable long-term.

Nintendo, if they're going to run the home console division like this forever, needs to stick to handhelds for hardware, while publishing all of their great home console franchises on the Xbox and PlayStation platforms. They'd make MUCH more money that way, I'd imagine, than spending money on R&D on a console that'll sell them maybe 10 million copies of a game. They could double their software sales (10 million on Xbox, 10 million on PlayStation) with ease, have more features in their games, and save the hardware-related costs.

 

[cmdrdredd]

We don't mention the 3DS because its success is not part of the Wii U's success or failure. Nintendo does a wretched job of isolating them from one another.

Talking up 30 million sales for the console that's the follow-up to one that sold 100 million+ units is just pitiful. You shouldn't be setting your sights on a 70% loss in volume, it's TERRIBLE. They're starting this generation predicting 100 million+ sales for Microsoft and Sony, after 80 million+ in the past generation. 30 million is not enough to be viable long-term.

Nintendo, if they're going to run the home console division like this forever, needs to stick to handhelds for hardware, while publishing all of their great home console franchises on the Xbox and PlayStation platforms. They'd make MUCH more money that way, I'd imagine, than spending money on R&D on a console that'll sell them maybe 10 million copies of a game. They could double their software sales (10 million on Xbox, 10 million on PlayStation) with ease, have more features in their games, and save the hardware-related costs.

We already know that Nintendo doesn't understand HD so they'd have just as much trouble making games on a PS4.

 

[lamedude]

I heard that they've always sold the console for more than production cost.

As soon as we get the consumer to buy one piece of software, then that entire transaction becomes profit positive.

That was at launch so its probably worse now with the price drop.

 

[Aikouka]

I heard that they've always sold the console for more than production cost. That probably doesn't take into account sunk R&D costs though. The company as a whole is still turning a profit, last I've heard.

That's probably mostly due to the 3DS being so popular.

 

[hans030390]

I was thinking about it, and I would have been more willing to pay $500 for a Wii U that was competitive from a power, software (OS, integration, games, apps, etc.), and networking perspective than $500 for the XBOne. Gamepad > Kinect.

 

[Doppel]

We don't mention the 3DS because its success is not part of the Wii U's success or failure. Nintendo does a wretched job of isolating them from one another.

Talking up 30 million sales for the console that's the follow-up to one that sold 100 million+ units is just pitiful. You shouldn't be setting your sights on a 70% loss in volume, it's TERRIBLE. They're starting this generation predicting 100 million+ sales for Microsoft and Sony, after 80 million+ in the past generation. 30 million is not enough to be viable long-term.

Nintendo, if they're going to run the home console division like this forever, needs to stick to handhelds for hardware, while publishing all of their great home console franchises on the Xbox and PlayStation platforms. They'd make MUCH more money that way, I'd imagine, than spending money on R&D on a console that'll sell them maybe 10 million copies of a game. They could double their software sales (10 million on Xbox, 10 million on PlayStation) with ease, have more features in their games, and save the hardware-related costs.

You make a lot of valid points, although I think that the Wii was just a lucky hail mary that was caught, so 100M sales of the Wii U was never going to happen, even if it was a great console.

There is a lot of thought about Nintendo licensing its first party stuff to other consoles, but that didn't end up working for Sega. Nintendo could tuck tail and stick with the handheld market, but that seems to me it could be an even more competitive landscape in the future. Just because most mobile games suck now it doesn't mean they always will.

I agree with any sentiment that if Nintendo is content to stay as third place they will end up with no place. Apathy in a highly competitive market is a recipe for disaster.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I was thinking about it, and I would have been more willing to pay $500 for a Wii U that was competitive from a power, software (OS, integration, games, apps, etc.), and networking perspective than $500 for the XBOne. Gamepad > Kinect.

Cause every game uses kinect and there is no controller right?

 

[M0oG0oGaiPan]

they seriously need to get rid of this thing. it's horrible. also they need to make a universal account system for their eshop. Linking games to the system is horrible.

 

[tipoo]

Do you guys think they may bring back the olden style 4 year console generation for this? It may piss a few million fans off, who probably expected 6-7 years, but if it continues to post below-Gamecube numbers...I dunno.


First things first though, they need marketshare to make developers deal with it, $199 Nintendo, $199. Sure, people make the argument that price cuts didn't save the gamecube, but it sure would have been worse off without them.

 

[smackababy]

Do you guys think they may bring back the olden style 4 year console generation for this? It may piss a few million fans off, who probably expected 6-7 years, but if it continues to post below-Gamecube numbers...I dunno.


First things first though, they need marketshare to make developers deal with it, $199 Nintendo, $199. Sure, people make the argument that price cuts didn't save the gamecube, but it sure would have been worse off without them.

Even some of the saving grace games of the GC jumped ship to the PS2. Resident Evil 4 was a masterpiece and was only GC exclusive for like 9 months or so.