The Wii U is dead in its current form, admits Nintendo. But what now?

[Lil Frier]

Same type of person who scoffs at "plastic" but who will proudly buy it if it's called "super advanced molecular space age elastopolymer composites".

That already exists with the iPhone..."polycarbonate."

It's actually the same thing my 920's body is made out of, and I love it.

 

[mmntech]

Just to point out, PowerVR (dreamcast,saturn) used to make PC GPU's to compete as well.

They're still kicking around too. They made the GPUs for the Vita and every single iOS device.

It makes sense to use PC hardware more from a development perspective. Games are developed on x86 PCs, then have to be compiled in PowerPC. Which is a step that takes time and costs money. I'm surprised the industry didn't switch years ago, back when the original Xbox came out. Could have used the Athlon 64 for the 7th gen systems. Core 2 Conroe came out a bit too late.

I'm sort of wondering, more thinking out loud, whether Nintendo should change their launch strategy. Instead of releasing their new system at the same time as Microsoft and Sony, release it mid-generation. Much like they did with the SNES. It would allow them to use more powerful hardware as their contemporaries at the same cost.

 

[ImpulsE69]

I'm sort of wondering, more thinking out loud, whether Nintendo should change their launch strategy. Instead of releasing their new system at the same time as Microsoft and Sony, release it mid-generation. Much like they did with the SNES. It would allow them to use more powerful hardware as their contemporaries at the same cost.

It didn't work out very well for Sega....

 

[shortylickens]

L O F'ing L @ saying mario kart on wii feels like SNES version.

if that is the case to you, come drive to rockville md and i'll show you how to play mario kart on SNES. you either have the worst memory in the world or have no clue how SNES mario kart feels.

SNES mario kart has a place in my heart.

I just played it in a manner we cannot discuss on this forum.

It feels the same. Almost exactly.
Again the only real difference is the move to 3D graphics. The gameplay hasnt changed much at all, certainly not by leaps and bounds.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I just played it in a manner we cannot discuss on this forum.

It feels the same. Almost exactly.
Again the only real difference is the move to 3D graphics. The gameplay hasnt changed much at all, certainly not by leaps and bounds.

The original has much tighter controls, is harder, has a better mix of items, and has a more balanced battle mode than any other Mario Kart.

Kind of like a fine wine, it takes an experienced and sophisticated Mario Kart palette to notice but the OG version is way better than any that came after it.

Oh and unlike the later ones (especially N64) the AI doesn't cheat....

 

[mmntech]

It didn't work out very well for Sega....

Sega was in a whole host of trouble by that time though, because they completely bungled the Saturn. Launched it too early then discontinued it after only three years on the market. Cheesed off a lot of fans in the process. Sega's financial problems from that flop are what ultimately sank the Dreamcast.

I think a lot of the previous Sega fanboys from the 16-bit generation jumped over to Sony. PlayStation's momentum from that era was unstoppable. I didn't know a single person that had a Saturn or a Dreamcast. Sony Computer Entertainment has never had a TV top console flop, despite being around as long as they have. Handhelds are a different story, though that's mainly due to poor marketing and those unreasonably expensive memory cards.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Sega's problem was the fighting between US and Japanese divisions for life after the Genesis (32x vs Saturn). Neither were executed well and they never recovered.

 

[Ichinisan]

The original has much tighter controls, is harder, has a better mix of items, and has a more balanced battle mode than any other Mario Kart.

Kind of like a fine wine, it takes an experienced and sophisticated Mario Kart palette to notice but the OG version is way better than any that came after it.

Oh and unlike the later ones (especially N64) the AI doesn't cheat....

Gotta disagree on the battle mode. Nothing comes close to Mario Kart 64 in Block Fort.

I played SMK competitively on XBAND and loved it, but the N64 battle mode in Block Fort is all I'll ever need.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Sega was in a whole host of trouble by that time though, because they completely bungled the Saturn. Launched it too early then discontinued it after only three years on the market. Cheesed off a lot of fans in the process. Sega's financial problems from that flop are what ultimately sank the Dreamcast.

I think a lot of the previous Sega fanboys from the 16-bit generation jumped over to Sony. PlayStation's momentum from that era was unstoppable. I didn't know a single person that had a Saturn or a Dreamcast. Sony Computer Entertainment has never had a TV top console flop, despite being around as long as they have. Handhelds are a different story, though that's mainly due to poor marketing and those unreasonably expensive memory cards.

I think the ungodly $70 million dollar budget to make Shenmue on the Dreamcast didn't help matters any either. The game would have to be purchased twice by every single Dreamcast owner to make a profit on it. That didn't happen.

 

[HeXen]

They're still kicking around too. They made the GPUs for the Vita and every single iOS device.

It makes sense to use PC hardware more from a development perspective. Games are developed on x86 PCs, then have to be compiled in PowerPC. Which is a step that takes time and costs money. I'm surprised the industry didn't switch years ago, back when the original Xbox came out. Could have used the Athlon 64 for the 7th gen systems. Core 2 Conroe came out a bit too late.

I'm sort of wondering, more thinking out loud, whether Nintendo should change their launch strategy. Instead of releasing their new system at the same time as Microsoft and Sony, release it mid-generation. Much like they did with the SNES. It would allow them to use more powerful hardware as their contemporaries at the same cost.

I think Xbox used Pentium 3's. So they went from x86 to PPC and back to x86, I assume because at that point in time, PPC had multi core CPU's available for cheaper which were pretty powerful for what they were.
Seems like it would be easy to offer backwards compatability on Xbone for the Xbox original. If nothing else it might cause a surge in sales of used original Xbox games.

I still have my original Xbox, it's funny that one of the main complaints was how large it was seeing the One went back to large. It's actually a nice looking design, shame they didn't reuse it as kind of a retro'ish throwback and simply name it Xbox but I guess it would confuse older gamers.

 

[HeXen]

Sega was in a whole host of trouble by that time though, because they completely bungled the Saturn. Launched it too early then discontinued it after only three years on the market. Cheesed off a lot of fans in the process. Sega's financial problems from that flop are what ultimately sank the Dreamcast.

I think a lot of the previous Sega fanboys from the 16-bit generation jumped over to Sony. PlayStation's momentum from that era was unstoppable. I didn't know a single person that had a Saturn or a Dreamcast. Sony Computer Entertainment has never had a TV top console flop, despite being around as long as they have. Handhelds are a different story, though that's mainly due to poor marketing and those unreasonably expensive memory cards.

I had a Dreamcast . One of the most fun in general consoles I ever played. Sega got everything right and it sold pretty well, good price and performance but the looming PS 2 on the horizon and some lawsuits that they lost really made them re evaluate their position.
Sega's trouble started when they made the SegaCD along with all these "parasite" peripherals to attach to it.
Saturn had too many processors, like Jaguar, made it hard for developers so the choice was clearer which system to create for.

I think Valve has the right idea. Use open hardware and market it like a console with a simple more streamlined UI.

 

[shortylickens]

The original has much tighter controls, is harder, has a better mix of items, and has a more balanced battle mode than any other Mario Kart.

Kind of like a fine wine, it takes an experienced and sophisticated Mario Kart palette to notice but the OG version is way better than any that came after it.

Oh and unlike the later ones (especially N64) the AI doesn't cheat....

Cheating AI seems to be very popular in racing games. Too hard to program a good driver I guess.

All the Need for Speed games do it. TDU 2 does it. Kind of annoying actually.

 

[Ichinisan]

Cheating AI seems to be very popular in racing games. Too hard to program a good driver I guess.

All the Need for Speed games do it. TDU 2 does it. Kind of annoying actually.

"Mario Kart AI" is sometimes referred to as "rubber band AI."

 

[cmdrdredd]

Cheating AI seems to be very popular in racing games. Too hard to program a good driver I guess.

All the Need for Speed games do it. TDU 2 does it. Kind of annoying actually.

Even the drivatars in Forza 5 suffer from something like this on harder difficulties. It's seemingly impossible to run them down but when you get up front they pass you with ease.

 

[ViRGE]

Cheating AI seems to be very popular in racing games. Too hard to program a good driver I guess.

All the Need for Speed games do it. TDU 2 does it. Kind of annoying actually.

Since the courses are fixed, a perfect AI is going to win every time. It's right up there with a human beating a computer at chess; computers are good enough that it just doesn't happen anymore.

So the art of making an AI racer is the art of finding ways to make it screw up in fun manner. You don't want the AI to get too far ahead or too far behind, otherwise the player doesn't feel challenged.

 

[Lil Frier]

Even the drivatars in Forza 5 suffer from something like this on harder difficulties. It's seemingly impossible to run them down but when you get up front they pass you with ease.

That isn't AT ALL the issue with Drivatars. The main issue is the same that exists in the whole series--A.I. vehicles are nearly-impossible to wreck. When you add that to the fact that most Drivatars are overly-aggressive morons, you have hell on Earth. I've been trying for a LONG time to beat the Long Beach even in my career, but the fact that the track is super narrow, everyone drives like it's a demolition derby, and the invincibility of the opposing vehicles is a nightmare.

 

[Dumac]

"Mario Kart AI" is sometimes referred to as "rubber band AI."

What? Mario Kart doesn't have any sort of rubber band AI as far as I know.

If you just sit at the beginning of the lap, the AI will go ahead and finish it. Not to mention, each AI player is given a static amount of 'skill' that is permanent through all 4 races of a cup, meaning that the scores naturally seperate the better AI from the worse.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Gotta disagree on the battle mode. Nothing comes close to Mario Kart 64 in Block Fort.

I played SMK competitively on XBAND and loved it, but the N64 battle mode in Block Fort is all I'll ever need.

Block Fort is the king of four-player Mario Kart Battle Mode, I cannot deny that. But it is too large for two player.

For two player, nothing beats stage 4 of the original Mario Kart. Once you get really good at that game, like can hop a red shell every time without a feather good, the matches can last hours....

I don't expect the Wii U version to match that gameplay. Just improve what the Gamecube one gave us and I will be happy.

 

[Ichinisan]

What? Mario Kart doesn't have any sort of rubber band AI as far as I know.

If you just sit at the beginning of the lap, the AI will go ahead and finish it. Not to mention, each AI player is given a static amount of 'skill' that is permanent through all 4 races of a cup, meaning that the scores naturally seperate the better AI from the worse.

You're kidding...right? Have you ever paid very much attention to your map?

Take the huge shortcuts in Mario Kart 64 (Wario Stadium or Rainbow Road) and watch the CPU players' dots on the map. They start to move MUCH faster.

...there are lots of fudge factors. In Mario Kart 64, I've noticed how it favors certain CPU opponents (specific characters) in certain relative positions. I've also noticed how if you interfere with that tendency in the first race or two, the AI uses their current rankings to set their relative positions. That means your strongest rivals are always the CPU opponents that have the most points from their previous races.

 

[purbeast0]

I just played it in a manner we cannot discuss on this forum.

It feels the same. Almost exactly.
Again the only real difference is the move to 3D graphics. The gameplay hasnt changed much at all, certainly not by leaps and bounds.

seeing someone say this, and now someone saying that mario kart has no rubber banding AI in it really makes me question if some of you have actually even played the series lol.

 

[purbeast0]

The original has much tighter controls, is harder, has a better mix of items, and has a more balanced battle mode than any other Mario Kart.

Kind of like a fine wine, it takes an experienced and sophisticated Mario Kart palette to notice but the OG version is way better than any that came after it.

Oh and unlike the later ones (especially N64) the AI doesn't cheat....

oh the AI did "cheat" in the SNES one for sure. they all had their own "special" weapons. also, the player order behind you was always designated in a very specific order. if you knocked the 2nd place guy out on right before the last lap. if you looked at the mini-map, you would see his icon go flying by everyone and he would have super speed to catch up to you. but once he was right behind you, he wouldn't continue to speed up past you, he'd be back to "normal" and be right on your tail.

 

[cmdrdredd]

That isn't AT ALL the issue with Drivatars. The main issue is the same that exists in the whole series--A.I. vehicles are nearly-impossible to wreck. When you add that to the fact that most Drivatars are overly-aggressive morons, you have hell on Earth. I've been trying for a LONG time to beat the Long Beach even in my career, but the fact that the track is super narrow, everyone drives like it's a demolition derby, and the invincibility of the opposing vehicles is a nightmare.

OK but that is totally irrelevant to the context of this conversation.

Unwreckable opponents isn't the topic at hand, rubberbanding and locked in positioning is.

 

[Dumac]

You're kidding...right? Have you ever paid very much attention to your map?

Take the huge shortcuts in Mario Kart 64 (Wario Stadium or Rainbow Road) and watch the CPU players' dots on the map. They start to move MUCH faster.

...there are lots of fudge factors. In Mario Kart 64, I've noticed how it favors certain CPU opponents (specific characters) in certain relative positions. I've also noticed how if you interfere with that tendency in the first race or two, the AI uses their current rankings to set their relative positions. That means your strongest rivals are always the CPU opponents that have the most points from their previous races.

I'm talking about the latest console iteration, Mario Kart Wii. None of the above happens.

 

[CZroe]

I never said Halo innovated. I said it didn't stagnate. I didn't call Halo Wars innovation, just giving the franchise something different. Thing is, your Mario defense is basically comparing games from 10-20 years ago, while I'm speaking of their actions in the present, so I can't even comment on it. What Nintendo did in the '80s and '90s isn't relevant to my point, meaning that of the games you mentioned, only Galaxy and Super Paper Mario (which isn't even a new series) apply.

I don't even know what you're talking about though, to be honest. I'm not even attempting to compare Halo and Mario. I'm comparing Nintendo as a whole to the FPS genre as a whole, while simply using Halo as one example of how a SINGLE series has managed to provide something different every time. An apt comparison isn't every freaking Mario to Halo, but rather Halo to the Super Smash Bros. series or the Mario Kart series. I'm moving a total of 0 goalposts, you're just trying to take all of my discussions and treat them as a single one.

And yet you included Halo Wars in your list while limiting Mario titles that you will compare to those within a particular genre series (Smash Bros. or Mario Kart).
:awe:

News Flash: We don't get a new Mario game in each series every couple years like Halo particularly because they DO innovate between iterations. I'm completely surprised that Mario Galaxy 2 even exists because they've never done anything like that before (5 years between Super Mario World and Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island, which aren't even remotely similar to each other) and yet here you are demanding more of that just because Halo does.

Saying that Nintendo doesn't innovate within their IP series' and then using a game series with so few changes between releases as an example of what they should be doing is arguing against yourself. Original is nothing like SMB3 is nothing like SM World, is nothing like SMW2:Yoshi's Island, is nothing like SM64, is nothing like SM Sunshine, is nothing like SM Galaxy. If you look at the spread of those games over the last 30 years, you will see why I didn't list SMG2, which was a quick follow-up to SMG. We are due for another sometime in this generation, but until we get our next Mario game and it looks exactly like SMG2, then the problem you are arguing about doesn't yet exist.

On the whole, Nintendo's not releasing successful IPs right now. The stuff that folks are clamoring for is new forms of Donkey Kong and Mario Kart. Meanwhile, Microsoft's at least offering new IPs in the forms of Quantum Break, D4 and Titanfall, even if they're essentially buying the works of others for their platform to make it happen.

What this really boils down to is that I was saying that folks are calling FPS games iterative, but Nintendo's stuff really is the same way. I'm not saying Nintendo's individual franchises are stagnating, but Nintendo as a whole is. I'm sure the new Mario Kart is going to be fun for many, but I don't see why THAT is an acceptable iteration, while the next Call of Duty isn't.

Except I showed you the exact opposite and yet here you are repeating that claim. Get this straight: SMG2 is the only Mario game ever released worldwide that was remotely as similar to its predecessor as any two sequential Halo FPS releases and that was doing exactly as you want (more iterative releases with iterative improvements). Your complaint is that we aren't on SMG 4 after SMG Reach and SMG ODST in the same amount of time. Unlike you, I'm done with Galaxy and can't wait for the next one in the Mario flagship platformer series. Rather than wasting their time on another Galaxy game, I'm glad that they are, assumedly, working on a totally new Mario platformer like they are historically known for delivering instead of another Galaxy game. You probably want Valve to keep making Left 4 Dead because it keeps making them money when what everyone really wants is the next awesome step up in the Half-Life series (Episode 3, where are you?!).

Do you know WHY I say that? Because I've tried for a long while now to get someone with first-hand experience with Nintendo's stuff to inform me of how their online play is, and no one ever gives me any information. I've tried to find it, but no one's exactly answering my questions on it. When I say it's nonexistent, no Nintendo console user corrects me. So, while I might be wrong, it's not for lack of trying to find counterarguments, it's that no one will give a straight answer on the matter.

Everyone assumes you are exaggerating because it's so distant from XBL and PSN in use and acceptance, but everyone knows that Nintendo has had online play all along. You couldn't possibly think that they took a step backwards from the Wii, did you?

Until this generation they made sure that you could not communicate with random opponents that you had not exchanged Friend Codes with outside of their services (legal reasons) but developers were free to do things the PS2 way in the GameCube generation (few chose to) and they allowed third party online services before that (first played Killer Instinct over dial-up on my SNES against NOAKITeam1 in 1995). They are finally running a moderated service that allows communication like other services but it may be too little, too late.

The first two are handheld IPs, which I'm not really addressing because Nintendo's doing handhelds just fine. Wii Sports and Wii Fit, I didn't realize did as well as they did. Well, I didn't realize Resort did well, but I ignored the "success" of the first because it was given away for free, thus not generating much revenue (if any) for the company. That, and I HATED Wii Sports.

They've introduced some IPs, but my idea of success here is a monetary one. I suppose it IS rather silly of me to take that stance, since I'm the last one to like something based on its popularity, but for the sake of Nintendo's future, seeing something like Wonderful 101 become a long-lasting IP would be a nice thing, and the fact that so many attempts at IP have fallen flat keeps them from my idea of a "successful" IP, in this case.

You can't dismiss the handhelds that easily because the IPs are cross-platform. For example, there is a Big Brain Academy title on Wii as well. Brain Age, begat Brain Age 2, begat Big Brain Academy, begat Big Brain Academy: Wii Degree in the same way that New Super Mario Bros. begat New Super Mario Bros. Wii which begat New Super Mario Bros. U (and New Super Luigi U) which begat Super Mario 3D Land which begat Super Mario 3D World. Of course, you specifically excluded NSMB/SM3D series because they rely on existing IP in a new series.

If your idea of success is a monetary one then they fit even your definition because almost all of those titles are multi-million-sellers. Lots of new IP has fallen flat on the competition as well but I don't see you using Blinx the Time Sweeper and Grabbed by the Ghoulies against Microsoft or Sports Champions and Heavy Rain against Sony.

That's the thing, they aren't exactly releasing low-quality IPs, but they're just not selling. I'm not sure if people just ignore non-Mario stuff from Nintendo or what. As I've said before, they do software well, and even the hardware CONCEPTS are good, it's just the execution of that hardware that is killing them. If they were willing to take short-term losses on hardware, it'd probably do them a lot of long-term good, particularly from the third-party point of view.

And, once again you argue against yourself. You say that they aren't releasing enough new IP because you are ignoring new titles in alternate genres with existing characters and yet then you say that title released without those characters just don't do well and people just ignore non-Mario stuff. Well: DUH. Why do you think they do it? Why are you saying that they should adopt a different tactic which even you agree doesn't work? Saying that they fail because they aren't releasing enough new IP is entirely different from saying that they are failing because people don't buy new IP without Mario. You can't argue both.

The original has much tighter controls, is harder, has a better mix of items, and has a more balanced battle mode than any other Mario Kart.

Kind of like a fine wine, it takes an experienced and sophisticated Mario Kart palette to notice but the OG version is way better than any that came after it.

Oh and unlike the later ones (especially N64) the AI doesn't cheat....

Uhh, yes it does.

I've gotten 1st on every race on every cup in every displacement (difficulty) in one sitting on a real SNES and it's obvious right away. The character you chose determines who the CPU will make your strongest rival on the first race of each cup and their points at the end of each race determine who will be your strongest rival going forward. The CPU is extremely transparant in this regard. If you get lucky and take out the strongest rival they will move at an impossible speed until they regain that position. Even then they are not subject to the same item and handling characteristics as a human player. Items/abilities are specific to specific characters when the CPU plays as them and they "cheat" with these abilities all the time.

For example, if you play as Toad then Princess Toadstool will be your strongest rival. If you knock her back to last place at the start of the last lap, she will catch up unless you get really lucky with the items. The game will make sure that you only get items appropriate for your position (you will not get lightning bolts and speed boosts in first place). On the off chance that you put Princess in last place on the last lap and were close enough to last to get the items you needed to keep her there, drag everyone down, and cross the finish line in first place, she will stay in last place for the next race and whoever came in second will now be your strongest CPU rival.

It also suffers from "rubber-band" AI, where all CPU players behind you get an unnatural speed-boost as long as you are in first and do not slow down until one takes the lead (as if you were connected by an invisible elastic tether). It is easily possible to shatter a previous first place time record while coming in second, third, or worse even without considering the effect of items. Notice how you can often take the lead faster without a speed boost off the line than if you got one?

I think people just aren't as perceptive as they think they are. I recall a well-respected reviewer's review of Wipeout Pure on PSP where he specifically said that there was no "rubber band Mario Kart" AI. I played that game to death and unlocked damn near everything but the rubber banding in that game was even more obvious: You get a speed boost at the start and so does everyone else. Do everything perfectly and you'll probably still be fighting to get in the lead somewhere in lap 2. Deliberately hold back, don't get the speed boost, then aggressively catch up and you'll easily take the lead in the first half-lap if you do everything right.

And I have to disagree with you about the superior Mario Kart Battle Mode. I've played against Dr. Mario Kart and know how seriously some can play, but that's also part of the problem: Timing can net you any item you want which throws the "balance" way out of what. The skill in Mario Kart 64 is in using the random item as well as possible, be it offensively or defensively, while paying mind to your opponents and predicting what they might do and taking advantage of their vulnerabilities. I know what Dr. Mario Kart is going to do: "Damn the strategy when you can keep getting red shells faster than the other guy can hop them!"

Mario Kart 64 Block Fort is where it's at.

What? Mario Kart doesn't have any sort of rubber band AI as far as I know.

If you just sit at the beginning of the lap, the AI will go ahead and finish it. Not to mention, each AI player is given a static amount of 'skill' that is permanent through all 4 races of a cup, meaning that the scores naturally seperate the better AI from the worse.

LOL! "Permanent?" You didn't play enough!

I'm talking about the latest console iteration, Mario Kart Wii. None of the above happens.

It's done a different way in that it is "overbalanced." The items are dolled out to the characters in the rear are so vastly disproportionate to the ones dolled out to those in the lead that the last place characters are a bigger threat to first place than those in between and a more skilled player is more likely to lose due to dumb luck. It takes almost all the strategy out and makes things way too "interesting," which is a word we often use when positions change many times over the course of a race. The problem is that a player of superior skill shouldn't lose all of his or her edge just in the name of keeping it interesting. Skill should still matter.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I'm talking about the latest console iteration, Mario Kart Wii. None of the above happens.

I honestly never played that one since the controls were motion based, was there a way to turn that off?