# Wii U Rant - is the Name to Blame?



## T3GZdev (Aug 6, 2014)

i posted this somewhere but im going to repost here to see what you guys think.

this was in response to this post tho, not against the post but againt the thought that the wiiu's name has anything to do with sales.
http://nintendoenthusiast.com/news/dan-adelman-wii-u-deserves-sell-better-name-abysmal/




> i personally don't think the name has anything to do with sales.
> (xbox vs xbox one), (iphone vs 3gs, 4g, 4gs, 5g, 5gs).
> the primary problem with wiiu is the games people think are on it.
> sure it has 1st parties & more are coming but, we rarely see any footage of 3rd party games even the few that are coming, where's project cars wiiu footage? watch dogs wiiu? they never show any call of duty wiiu footage when the games are coming they don't even announce them. the way 3rd parties treat wiiu & wiiu customers is hurting the console & its customers.
> ...









> continueing that last comment tho, if i were to go right now, & go hmm what should i buy wiiu, xbone, or ps4.
> from all of the commercials & trailers i see now my assumption would be games like call of duty, need for speed, assassin's creed, splintercell, watch dogs, project cars comes to everything but wiiu(when in fact they do come to wiiu), & games like destiny, battlefield, crysis, tomb raider, gta dont come to wiiu because of developer/publisher logic. & the only thing thats on wiiu is mariokart 8, & the games on the rack.
> 
> that has nothing to do with the name. games sell a console not its name. & knowing that those games exist on that console sells those games also. these game trailers, commercials, game ads of today only cater to px/xbox users, & the only thing nintendo can advertise are there own 1st party games & the games that they fund like bayonetta & devils third. 3rd parties need to open up their advertising beyond just ps & xbox, then the market can be more like console equality & not just 2 out of 3.


 
edit: i do agree that nintendo could have named the wiiu something else, but its out & its been out long enough, if everyone doesn't know what it is then newsflash there are people today that still don't know how to use iphones or computers. just saying lol
#wiiu #nintendo


----------



## WulfyStylez (Aug 6, 2014)

This isn't really hacking, nor homebrew-related...


----------



## T3GZdev (Aug 6, 2014)

WulfyStylez said:


> This isn't really hacking, nor homebrew-related...


 
oh crap someone move this thread?


----------



## GorTesK (Aug 6, 2014)

stupid video, the end was funny though (dont forget the last 3 seconds after the credits)


----------



## Taleweaver (Aug 6, 2014)

_(i'm sharing the video below because i want nintendo & 3rd parties to see how there hurting the wiiu & wiiu customers)_

Wait...you mean you think nintendo or those 3rd parties don't already know this? I admit I fell for that line when they first announced the wiiu. That "better 3rd party support" that was supposedly because the wii was too underpowered to be worth the port. As it turned out, the real reason it's not getting ports is because nintendo barely cares about third party support. If it was just EA, then I would understand it, but ubisoft is releasing their multiplatforms later as well (first Rayman legends, now watch_dogs) or not at all (far cry, anyone?). Heck...even indies barely show interest in it (here's an incident, as described by one of the developers...ninty's spokesman for indies just left his job the other day).


----------



## T3GZdev (Aug 6, 2014)

Taleweaver said:


> _(i'm sharing the video below because i want nintendo & 3rd parties to see how there hurting the wiiu & wiiu customers)_
> 
> Wait...you mean you think nintendo or those 3rd parties don't already know this? I admit I fell for that line when they first announced the wiiu. That "better 3rd party support" that was supposedly because the wii was too underpowered to be worth the port. As it turned out, the real reason it's not getting ports is because nintendo barely cares about third party support. If it was just EA, then I would understand it, but ubisoft is releasing their multiplatforms later as well (first Rayman legends, now watch_dogs) or not at all (far cry, anyone?). Heck...even indies barely show interest in it (here's an incident, as described by one of the developers...ninty's spokesman for indies just left his job the other day).


 
i really did want some farcry u :/
& i heard about that. i hear hes doing some business indie thing.  


Spoiler



im going into indie development soon, so kinda had to do some research on this guy.


not saying nintendo & 3rd parties don't know this but do they see how it's impacting their customers? not everyone owns more than 1 current gen console. nintendo is my primary pick because its the only place i can get my favorite 1st parties & 3rd parties, but 3rd parties are making that hard.


----------



## endoverend (Aug 6, 2014)

I totally agree with this. Why is "Wii U" a worse name than "PS4" and "Xbox One"? Hell, the Xbox One is a _terrible_ name. Why not call it the 720 like everyone expected? When I hear "Xbox One" I think of the original Xbox.

I can recall Nintendo's E3 presentations featuring Wii U. They showed off more 3rd party Wii U games than you could imagine. Nintendo seemed to be so _proud_ of the support that they got. And they had good reason to. But 3rd party devs didn't seem to notice. Everyone makes the assumption that for some odd reason the Wii U was a failure off the bat because the name was bad.

However, it is easy to assume that the name caused sales drops considering nintendo's console history. 

--Nintendo Consoles--
NES -> *Super NES* -> Nintendo 64 -> Gamecube -> Wii -> *Wii U*

The Super NES had a similar name to the NES but it was a huge success. But when Nintendo tried the slight name change again with the Wii U the console was (not to say there's no hope for a turnaround, but there's not) a failure.
There has to be a reason the Wii U failed _other_ than its naming. Like you said, it has to do with developers and their nearsightedness when it comes to Nintendo products.


----------



## Foxi4 (Aug 6, 2014)

*EDIT:* Thread re-opened as long as you guys keep it civil and stick to the topic. The Wii U situation has been discussed through and through again, so this is specifically about the name and why it is or isn't to blame for the system's current situation. In my opinion it isn't - there are many more important things that were botched even before the launch - the line-up wasn't all that great, the marketing department dropped the ball and there just weren't any killer apps released for it until much later when Mario Kart and came along.

Have fun, guys!


----------



## Gahars (Aug 7, 2014)

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet, sure, but if you called roses "shitcunglers," people would probably be a bit more hesitant to stick them near their noses.

Yes, the name is related... but it's also not the whole issue. Like you said, the Xbox One is also a pretty shitty name and it's having a much better go at the things. The difference is, however, Microsoft knew how to effective market the device and make sure that consumers absolutely knew the Xbox One was a brand new machine. Nintendo's marketing department is either hilariously inept or just asleep at the wheel.

The name isn't helped by the fact that Nintendo tried to put all the emphasis on the new controller, something that a) consumers in general don't care about ("A tablet? I already got one of those, I don't need another!"), and b) makes the Wii U seem more like a peripheral than a new console. Considering how many peripherals the Wii had, it's easy for Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public to not make the distinction. Shit, even retailers have made mistakes in this regard. The unclear name made this confusion all the worse.

There's a whole lot of other factors at play, too, but Nintendo still fumbled out of the starting gate with their poor choice of name.


----------



## Deleted User (Aug 7, 2014)

Is it too late to rename anyway ?


----------



## emigre (Aug 7, 2014)

Let's think of issues with the Wii U:

1) small library of gaems
2) near non existant 3rd party support
3) unattractive price point
4) no conventional account system
5) complete lack of functionality of the Wii U's features
6) small amount of storage

IMO these are bigger problems than the name. At least MK8 is good.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Aug 7, 2014)

I think this whole "It's the name's fault!" is just some shit Nintenyearolds tell themselves to avoid the real reason it doesn't sell: it's a bad console.

I mean sure there's some minor confusion with the name but that's not why people won't buy it. People won't buy it because it sucks.


----------



## p1ngpong (Aug 7, 2014)

The Wii U is doing badly because console gamers are not interested in Nintendo first party games and haven't been interested in them for almost 20 years. The GameCube and N64 flopped because of that reason and before people cry Wii 100 million sales that console only succeeded because it was the right price, with the right gimmick at the right time and didn't succeed because of the games it offered up.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Aug 7, 2014)

p1ngpong said:


> The Wii U is doing badly because console gamers are not interested in Nintendo first party games and haven't been interested in them for almost 20 years. The GameCube and N64 flopped because of that reason and before people cry Wii 100 million sales that console only succeeded because it was the right price, with the right gimmick at the right time and didn't succeed because of the games it offered up.


 
Pretty much this.

It's definitely not the name that's the problem. People keep blowing Nin10doh as if their home consoles are infallible, when in reality they haven't done well since the SNES age, with the Wii being some fluke thanks to the millions of casual users which affordable smartphones and tablets now attract. The only thing they've consistently done well with is portable handhelds, and even then it only seems to be because of Pokemon and Mario with the occasional RPG (go look at the top 10 selling DS games, it's Mario, Nintendogs, Mario, Pokemon, Pokemon, Pokemon, Mario, Mario, Pokemon etc etc). They aren't going to survive on a few successful IPs, despite what all the Nin10yearolds seem to fap to.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Aug 7, 2014)

Today I went around gaming shops and I remembered one specific had Xbox one games which led to

Me: Do you have Xbox one games?
Employee: Yeah Xbox One games are there
Me: No I meant the old Xbox

The "old Xbox" is pretty vague because that could mean Xbox 360 too. Microsoft didn't do much better naming their current-gen console "Xbox One" as there was already an Xbox one.

So in Wii U's case I'd say it's more to do with Nintendo's lack of advertisement and support than the name itself.


----------



## endoverend (Aug 7, 2014)

p1ngpong said:


> The Wii U is doing badly because console gamers are not interested in Nintendo first party games and haven't been interested in them for almost 20 years. The GameCube and N64 flopped because of that reason and before people cry Wii 100 million sales that console only succeeded because it was the right price, with the right gimmick at the right time and didn't succeed because of the games it offered up.


 
I almost entirely agree, except I think that relating the Wii U to the Gamecube and 64 is not really accurate since the Wii U's flop was much more significant than those two.


emigre said:


> *snip*
> 3) unattractive price point
> *snip*


 
There's no reason to blame the Wii U's price. It's a next gen console that now costs as much as the Wii did at launch. Makes sense, right?

Nintendo made an amazing series of good decisions that caused the Wii to soar beyond reasonable expectations in terms of sales. The Wii U, however, had a gimmick that was nowhere near as innovative as the Wii remote, and failed to make up for that with third or first party games at launch.


----------



## goober (Aug 7, 2014)

Names don't mean a damn thing. I mean, yes, the Wii-U is a very dumb name and it explicitly causes confusion to the totally uneducated consumer, but that's not the source of the problem. Apple's name used to be synonymous with antiquated terribleness reserved for school systems. Then Jobs came back, updated the lines AND the marketing behind it. People actually made fun of the names, iPod and iPhone at first.

The Wii was a very stupid name to begin with but Nintendo followed that up with SEVERAL clever and successful ad campaigns. Brilliant ones, really. And their hardware was technically gimmicky enough to get people to pay attention moreso. When Nintendo dumped the Gameboy name and said their new handheld would be called simply, Nintendo DS, everyone -including me at the time- cried foul. Turns out, after a redesign and better ad campaigns, it wasn't a big deal in the end.

The Wii-U is failing because there hasn't been a good ad campaign for it. I mean, there's other things that take it a step back as well, but that's truly the main problem. It's why there's so much money in advertising. It works.


----------



## endoverend (Aug 7, 2014)

goober said:


> Names don't mean a damn thing. I mean, yes, the Wii-U is a very dumb name and it explicitly causes confusion to the totally uneducated consumer, but that's not the source of the problem. Apple's name used to be synonymous with antiquated terribleness reserved for school systems. Then Jobs came back, updated the lines AND the marketing behind it. People actually made fun of the names, iPod and iPhone at first.
> 
> The Wii was a very stupid name to begin with but Nintendo followed that up with SEVERAL clever and successful ad campaigns. Brilliant ones, really. And their hardware was technically gimmicky enough to get people to pay attention moreso. When Nintendo dumped the Gameboy name and said their new handheld would be called simply, Nintendo DS, everyone -including me at the time- cried foul. Turns out, after a redesign and better ad campaigns, it wasn't a big deal in the end.
> 
> The Wii-U is failing because there hasn't been a good ad campaign for it. I mean, there's other things that take it a step back as well, but that's truly the main problem. It's why there's so much money in advertising. It works.


 
A thousand times yes. If Nintendo maybe put out a price dropped smash bros bundle and had a good ad campaign to go with it, sales would shoot up. I've seen one ad for the wii u, and it was just for MK8.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 7, 2014)

I am going to be honest, I spent a half-an-hour with a parent arguing over the Wii U vs Wii. They were trying to tell me all you needed was the gamepad and the games will work on their Wii because the Wii U is just the same as the Wii.
Now of course this seems isolated, expect this happens all the time at the WalMart I work in and even the Gamestop that I hunt.
People are stupid, naming things too similar just results in stupid effects.


----------



## Qtis (Aug 7, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> Today I went around gaming shops and I remembered one specific had Xbox one games which led to
> 
> Me: Do you have Xbox one games?
> Employee: Yeah Xbox One games are there
> ...


 
I agree with the Xbox vs Xbox One naming oddity, but then again, I tend to speak of the Xbox as the original Xbox and the Xbox One as the Xbox One. The original Xbox was never named or talked about as the Xbox one, so it's understandable. Alas, for the Wii U and its naming, I'd say Wii U is far less descriptive than Super NES was at its time not to mention the SNES looks nothing like the NES. The Wii on the other hand had a ton of peripherals (including motion controls), so the idea of Wii U = new tablet controller for Wii is not that far fetched (especially with Nintendo's huge marketing going on with the Wii U!).

The Wii U has a huge problem with the lack of games. It has quite a few good titles, but the releases come every 4 months or so.. 2014 has pretty much been Mario Kart 8 and nothing else from Nintendo themselves with a few interesting indie games here and there. Otherwise, nada, nil, nothing. The future is also a bit the same with a few games here and there compared to the ever growing list of PS4/Xbox One games (even though quite a few are multi-platform).



goober said:


> Names don't mean a damn thing. I mean, yes, the Wii-U is a very dumb name and it explicitly causes confusion to the totally uneducated consumer, but that's not the source of the problem. Apple's name used to be synonymous with antiquated terribleness reserved for school systems. Then Jobs came back, updated the lines AND the marketing behind it. People actually made fun of the names, iPod and iPhone at first.
> 
> The Wii was a very stupid name to begin with but Nintendo followed that up with SEVERAL clever and successful ad campaigns. Brilliant ones, really. And their hardware was technically gimmicky enough to get people to pay attention moreso. When Nintendo dumped the Gameboy name and said their new handheld would be called simply, Nintendo DS, everyone -including me at the time- cried foul. Turns out, after a redesign and better ad campaigns, it wasn't a big deal in the end.
> 
> The Wii-U is failing because there hasn't been a good ad campaign for it. I mean, there's other things that take it a step back as well, but that's truly the main problem. It's why there's so much money in advertising. It works.


 
Comparing Apple to Nintendo is a bit far fetched in the case of the Wii U. The Wii would be accurate, but the rest, not so much. The iPods, iPhones and iPads all were revolutionary products entering the market at the right time with a good enough solution (especially compared to competition). The Wii was revolutionary with motion controlling and a very attractive price point. No one had (and in general has even now) a fully integrated motion control scheme and platform. A tablet on the other hand.. Everyone and their kitchen sink has one or can buy one for a fraction of the price of a Wii U. (something, something, console exclusives, something, something, iOS/Android/WP exclusives).


----------



## Foxi4 (Aug 7, 2014)

Another reason why it doesn't do well is because of the Wii, I believe. People bought the 100-million-selling dust collector, missed out on huge releases like Skyrim, Fallout, GTA, Final Fantasy (main entries) etc. and don't want seconds. The fact that the Wii U does miss releases *again* doesn't help. The "Wii" in "Wii U" is a stigma. Soccer moms won't upgrade - they already have a Wii.


----------



## endoverend (Aug 7, 2014)

The Wii U has gotten to a point where it's a system that only hardcore Nintendo fans would want/pay for. It's a novelty for those who like Nintendo and want to play new Nintendo games, and it costs 300$.

The Wii was a short-sighted success. Its launch was very successful and made 3rd party developers want to make quality games after their half-assed launch games. The Wii had a golden age between 2007-2009. The Wii slowly declined, and so did its third party support, but it still was a major success compared to the other 2 consoles of the generation.

Fast forward to 2014. The Wii has stopped production in Europe and Japan and the Wii U is selling terribly. The Wii U just failed to have the runaway success the Wii had, and couldn't even come close to follow the Wii up with good Nintendo games. However, the PS3 and Xbox 360 are selling great right alongside their next gen counterparts. See the problem here?


----------



## kristianity77 (Aug 7, 2014)

p1ngpong said:


> The Wii U is doing badly because console gamers are not interested in Nintendo first party games and haven't been interested in them for almost 20 years. The GameCube and N64 flopped because of that reason and before people cry Wii 100 million sales that console only succeeded because it was the right price, with the right gimmick at the right time and didn't succeed because of the games it offered up.


 

I dont think thats true. As a console gamer I AM interested in Nintendo first party titles. The problem is forking out hundreds of pounds to do just that and only that! Because every other title on the Wii U more or less is available on the much cheaper and frankly better PS3 or 360.

The days are gone (were they ever here?) where people will spend a couple of hundred pounds to play a handful of Nintendo titles spanned out over a 5 year period etc. Unless of course, they begin to price it accordingly.


----------



## duffmmann (Aug 7, 2014)

I always thought it was a terrible idea for a name.  Nintendo never continued system names before, unless you count the Super NES as an extension of the NES name, which it kind of is, but there is a whole other word in there, adding a U at the end of Wii is a very bad call, worse than just calling it the Wii 2 even.  Because to the uneducated consumer, it will just seem like some sort of weird extension of the outdated Wii.  At least if they put a number at the end it would be a clear indication that this is something new.  Even still, I think the Wii branding should be dropped.  However, I get why the Wii branding is there, you can still use all of your old Wiimotes and classic controllers, plus it has a fully integrated Wii in it, so there is a certain logic to me of keeping the Wii branding, but Wii U is such a poor choice for a name, and I have a feeling there were a lot of arguments over the name, hell when it was announced as the Wii U, they said the name wasn't finalized.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Aug 7, 2014)

In terms of quantity of quality games the Wii U doesn't have that many.

This list will include exclusives and multiplatforms (already released & yet to come out) in alphabetical order.

1. Assassin's Creed 3
2. Assassin's Creed 4
3. Batman: Arkham City (Armoured Edition)
4. Bayonetta: The Complete Universe
5. Darksiders II
6. Deus Ex: Human Revolution - Director's Cut
7. Devil's Third
8. Donkey Kong: Tropical Freeze
9. Injustice: Gods Among Us
10. Lego City Undercover
11. Mario Kart 8
12. Mass Effect 3 - Special Edition
13. Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate
14. Need for Speed: Most Wanted
15. New Super Mario Bros. U
16. Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge
17. Nintendo Land
18. One Piece: Unlimited World Red
19. Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures
20. Pikmin 3
21. Rayman Legends
22. Scribblenauts Unlimited
23. Shin Megami X Fire Emblem
24. Sniper Elite 2
25. Sonic & All-Stars Racing Transformed
26. Sonic Boom: Ryse of Lyric
27. Sonic: Lost World
28. Splatoon
29. Star Fox
30. Super Mario 3D World
31. Super Smash Bros.
32. Tekken Tag Tournament 2 - Wii U Edition
33. The Amazing Spider-Man: Ultimate Edition
34. The Legend of Zelda: 2015
35. The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker HD
36. The Wonderful 101
37. Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Blacklist
38. Watch Dogs
39.Xenoblade Chronicles X
40. Yoshi's Wooly World

Wow, it came exactly to 40 games.


----------



## goober (Aug 7, 2014)

Qtis said:


> Comparing Apple to Nintendo is a bit far fetched in the case of the Wii U. The Wii would be accurate, but the rest, not so much. The iPods, iPhones and iPads all were revolutionary products entering the market at the right time with a good enough solution (especially compared to competition). The Wii was revolutionary with motion controlling and a very attractive price point. No one had (and in general has even now) a fully integrated motion control scheme and platform. A tablet on the other hand.. Everyone and their kitchen sink has one or can buy one for a fraction of the price of a Wii U. (something, something, console exclusives, something, something, iOS/Android/WP exclusives).


 
How in Zeus' beard was the iPad revolutionary? It totally was not and really never has been. Evolutionary, sure. The iPod actually wasn't that good or revolutionary. iTunes was the true driving force behind the iPod's "revolution". It was a competent media player that was somewhat more polished compared to the competition. It definitely upped the specs and storage, (mainly storage) making it cheaper all around, but the true revolution came from the iTunes storefront, which before was hard to come by a reliable and trusted digital storefront with legal competitive prices. (Pretty funny that that wouldn't be used to describe iTunes now). It wasn't the iPod hardware that pushed sales, it was the marketing. Period. The fact that it wasn't a terrible product definitely helped, though.

iPhone? Ok, one legitimate revolution in most aspects, not so much hardware alone but more of a hardware AND software package that worked well together. That made it successful, but the marketing is definitely what made it mass appealing Super #1 successful and it's silly to say otherwise because sales data linked to before and after the ad campaigns explicitly link a huge upturn in sales after each successful campaign, remember some were actually not that great until they hit the sweet spot. Ditto for the Mac vs PC spots. Massive sale increases explicitly tied to advertising. Again, being able to back that up with quality hardware definitely helps.

If you can call the iPad revolutionary you can say the same about the Wii-U's gamepad. Only it actually is somewhat revolutionary in how well it handles sending video to the tablet and the distance it can transmit it given the technologies it uses to do so. And really, it could have easily captivated consumers just as well as the Wii and DS did if they had proper campaigns and software to back it up. After all, you could say the Wii-U combines two of the most successful platforms from Nintendo, the DS and Wii only "it can do so much more". Because what campaign doesn't fib or stretch the truth?

No, software is always secondary when it comes to mass consumer appeal. If it's trendy they want it. The software attachment rates to the Wii were absolutely, relatively, abysmal but because so many were sold, it didn't hurt the bottom line too much. Let's also not forget how if you keep it trendy with ad campaigns you can easily sell the successor without much fuss regardless of whether it's an worthy update. Again, look at iphones for that. Them and their half updates between true successors.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Aug 7, 2014)

goober said:


> How in Zeus' beard was the iPad revolutionary? It totally was not and really never has been. Evolutionary, sure. The iPod actually wasn't that good or revolutionary. iTunes was the true driving force behind the iPod's "revolution". It was a competent media player that was somewhat more polished compared to the competition. It definitely upped the specs and storage, (mainly storage) making it cheaper all around, but the true revolution came from the iTunes storefront, which before was hard to come by a reliable and trusted digital storefront with legal competitive prices. (Pretty funny that that wouldn't be used to describe iTunes now). It wasn't the iPod hardware that pushed sales, it was the marketing. Period. The fact that it wasn't a terrible product definitely helped, though.
> 
> iPhone? Ok, one legitimate revolution in most aspects, not so much hardware alone but more of a hardware AND software package that worked well. That made it successful, but the marketing is definitely what made it mass appealing Super #1 successful and it's silly to say otherwise because sales data linked to before and after the ad campaigns explicitly link a huge upturn in sales after each successful campaign, remember some were actually not that great until they hit the sweet spot. Ditto for the Mac vs PC spots. Massive sale increases explicitly tied to advertising. Again, being able to back that up with quality hardware definitely helps.
> 
> ...


 

Holy shit I'm not big on Apple products but they changed the fucking world. Maybe it was just the "marketing" but that marketing created fads and trends. They marketed MP3 players and they became huge. They marketed smartphones and they became huge. They marketed tablets and they became huge. It's not like the tech was "revolutionary" but most radical changes in industry are hardly just from technology.

To put the Wii U's GamePad, which came out years after the iPad, just as "revolutionary" is a complete joke. The iPad _made_ the tablet market. The Wii U just followed it, and poorly at that.


----------



## goober (Aug 7, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Holy shit I'm not big on Apple products but they changed the fucking world. Maybe it was just the "marketing" but that marketing created fads and trends. They marketed MP3 players and they became huge. They marketed smartphones and they became huge. They marketed tablets and they became huge. It's not like the tech was "revolutionary" but most radical changes in industry are hardly just from technology.
> 
> To put the Wii U's GamePad, which came out years after the iPad, just as "revolutionary" is a complete joke. The iPad _made_ the tablet market. The Wii U just followed it, and poorly at that.


 

You're basically agreeing with me in a very obtuse and backwards way by conceding the very thing I said. Marketing won the battle for them and drove the change. NOT the hardware and software alone (with the only exception possibly being given to the iPhone). There have been plenty of great products that failed solely because it wasn't marketed properly.

The iPad was literally phone guts on a big screen. They later upped the ante a little bit in every aspect, but please. What the Wii U does to transmit video to the tablet is very intuitive and not seen before in a consumer setting. I loathe just about everything with the Wii-U but it's rather stupid to ignore the tech behind some of its features.


----------



## Foxi4 (Aug 7, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> To put the Wii U's GamePad, which came out years after the iPad, just as "revolutionary" is a complete joke. The iPad _made_ the tablet market. The Wii U just followed it, and poorly at that.


To be fair, Apple made the tablet market _twice_ if you also count the Newton which was shortly followed by numerous copycats.


----------



## chavosaur (Aug 7, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> In terms of quantity of quality games the Wii U doesn't have that many.
> 
> This list will include exclusives and multiplatforms (already released & yet to come out) in alphabetical order.
> 
> ...


I ammended your list to further reflect everything. Needless to say, it lost all credibility when you threw fucking Pacman on there.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Aug 7, 2014)

chavosaur said:


> I ammended your list to further reflect everything. Needless to say, it lost all credibility when you threw fucking Pacman on there.


 

I threw it out the window when I saw Sonic Boom. It's gotten some really shit previews.


----------



## yuyuyup (Aug 7, 2014)

It's not to blame for EVERYTHING, but they would have probably sold twice the systems by now if it was the Wii 2.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Aug 7, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> I threw it out the window when I saw Sonic Boom. It's gotten some really shit previews.


 
I've too seen the gameplay and it isn't traditional Sonic but I like that kind of genre so if Nintendo releases a demo, I'll try it out and then see about buying it early.


----------



## tbb043 (Aug 7, 2014)

endoverend said:


> --Nintendo Consoles--
> NES -> *Super NES* -> Nintendo 64 -> Gamecube -> Wii -> *Wii U*
> 
> The Super NES had a similar name to the NES but it was a huge success. But when Nintendo tried the slight name change again with the Wii U the console was (not to say there's no hope for a turnaround, but there's not) a failure.


 


There you go, they should have called it the Super Wii. Adding Super to the name tells people it's something new, the next thing. Adding a random letter at the end is ambiguous, confusing, makes it sound like maybe it's just a variation of the previous unit. 

Not that it's the only problem, but the name certainly hasn't helped.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Aug 7, 2014)

A few days ago the ex-Indie guy from Nintendo said the same thing as if we already didn't know. I guess he was angry at Nintendo and this was his way of getting revenge.


----------



## Joe88 (Aug 7, 2014)

It wouldn't matter, they lost the casual market to smart phones and tablets, they have no third party support or when they do it usually bad ports or delayed
All they have left now is first party games which good ones are few and far inbetween and are mainly markted towards children both in game difficulty and content


----------



## endoverend (Aug 7, 2014)

Joe88 said:


> It wouldn't matter, they lost the casual market to smart phones and tablets, they have no third party support or when they do it usually bad ports or delayed
> All they have left now is first party games which good ones are few and far inbetween and are mainly markted towards children both in game difficulty and content


 
You know I'm strating to realize this is entirely true :/ poor ninty...


----------



## mightymuffy (Aug 7, 2014)

Don't forget it also LOOKS the same, especially at first glance. The difference between the Xbox 360 and Xbox One is yer senile old granny, who's been blind in both eyes for 20 years, can still tell that's a new games machine... even after a second look, 'little Johnny's mother' will just think it's a slightly sleeker Wii "...and they're trying to sell it for loads extra just because the controller has a tablet like screen?!" - - Piss poor marketing hasn't helped convince them otherwise I might add.

The marketing has been baffling for Wii U: it's like they thought 'right, we'll release it as promised, but we already know it's a bit shit, so let's not waste any money whatsoever advertising and just hope our fanboys carry it through', and, judging by sales, it looks like they're leaving in their droves too.

Anyway yeah, Wii 2 would've been far better, but really it doesn't matter what they called it, it'd have still bombed. Shame too, coz I like the thing...


----------



## stefer (Aug 7, 2014)

I saw a kid and his mom look at the wii games once, at walmart.  He pointed at the Wii U and asked his mom : mom what is that?  Mom said : that's a wii, just like you have at home.

Kid was 13-14.


They would have more chance with Wii 2 than Wii u ....  Highlight the 2 in big bold red letters.


----------



## Qtis (Aug 7, 2014)

goober said:


> How in Zeus' beard was the iPad revolutionary? It totally was not and really never has been. Evolutionary, sure. The iPod actually wasn't that good or revolutionary. iTunes was the true driving force behind the iPod's "revolution". It was a competent media player that was somewhat more polished compared to the competition. It definitely upped the specs and storage, (mainly storage) making it cheaper all around, but the true revolution came from the iTunes storefront, which before was hard to come by a reliable and trusted digital storefront with legal competitive prices. (Pretty funny that that wouldn't be used to describe iTunes now). It wasn't the iPod hardware that pushed sales, it was the marketing. Period. The fact that it wasn't a terrible product definitely helped, though.
> 
> iPhone? Ok, one legitimate revolution in most aspects, not so much hardware alone but more of a hardware AND software package that worked well together. That made it successful, but the marketing is definitely what made it mass appealing Super #1 successful and it's silly to say otherwise because sales data linked to before and after the ad campaigns explicitly link a huge upturn in sales after each successful campaign, remember some were actually not that great until they hit the sweet spot. Ditto for the Mac vs PC spots. Massive sale increases explicitly tied to advertising. Again, being able to back that up with quality hardware definitely helps.
> 
> ...


As mentioned already previously by Guild, Apple did a lot. As you say, iTunes was a huge part of the drive for the iPods, but if the iPod was a shit product, the sales would have been lacking. A buggy software on good hardware would have been just as bad. As for Macs, OS X (and Mac OS before it) has been a popular platform for the people dealing with video, audio and photography. Also doesn't hurt for the tech industry wanting lightweight products with good batteries. If you're not gaming or 3D modelling on a laptop, OS X recovers quite a bit from its caveats. 

Apple literally created touch screen smartphones as we know them and the iPad was a completely new target group. Why else does everyone compare all tablets to the iPads and their hardware? They created a market segment for consumer tablets here, which can be said for the Wii too (motion control gaming). You can call the iPad evolutionary, but then the Wii U should not be considered much more than that.. If even evolutionary. The main feature of the Wii U is the tablet controller, not the video transfer method. The video transfer technology is just that, a video transfer technology. Currently the software on the device takes very little use of the tablet controller other than the odd map or inventory.

It's interesting to read and debate on the subject (sorry for going a bit off topic here), since the discussion is very much relative. It's far from beating a dead horse, since the Wii U is the thing Nintendo should turn around to keep going. The 3DS has had its good time, but will not float Nintendo for much longer (market saturation in this case, similar to the Wii during the last few years). Personally I like the Wii U and am not thinking of selling it, but the future doesn't look very promising apart from the odd Nintendo game here and there.

Bringing more and more 3rd party devs, a better marketing campaign (I haven't seen a Wii U add in ages, contrary to PS4/Xbox One/PSVita/3DS ads), force the console down the consumers throat and make it relevant. Simple sport and dance games saved the Wii for the average Joe (Nintendo first party Mario, etc. titles boosted a lot of course too), something similar would be needed for the Wii U too.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Aug 7, 2014)

"Wii 2" is a fucking stupid name.

They should've either went with "Super Wii" or "Wii HD", because calling it "Wii HD" would meant for customers that the Wii is now in HD.


----------



## p1ngpong (Aug 7, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> "Wii 2" is a fucking stupid name.
> 
> They should've either went with "Super Wii" or "Wii HD", because calling it "Wii HD" would meant for customers that the Wii is now in HD.


 
Super Wii and Wii HD are far more retarded than Wii 2. At least Wii 2 implies it is a new console, your names are just as vague as Wii U if not more. Wii HD could be a regular wii with a hdmi port for all people would know and assume. And super wii sounds like something a five year old came up with.


----------



## Foxi4 (Aug 7, 2014)

They should've dropped the _"Wii"_ part altogether. People got excited for Nintendo's _"return to the mainstream gamer"_, but the console was named after a casual jukebox.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Aug 7, 2014)

p1ngpong said:


> Super Wii and Wii HD are far more retarded than Wii 2. At least Wii 2 implies it is a new console, your names are just as vague as Wii U if not more. Wii HD could be a regular wii with a hdmi port for all people would know and assume. And super wii sounds like something a five year old came up with.


 
"Wii 2" is also a very idiotic name because no one in their right mind would name it this atrocity, which is why Nintendo went with something else instead, even if it wasn't ideal.

Nintendo just needs to drop "Wii" completely and go with a different name on the 9th gen.


----------



## Gahars (Aug 7, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> "Wii 2" is also a very idiotic name because no one in their right mind would name it this atrocity, which is why Nintendo went with something else instead, even if it wasn't ideal.


 
I fail to see how "Wii 2" is any more of an "atrocity" than Wii U. Wii 2 effectively communicates that the console is the successor to the previous console by only using a single extra digit.

There's a reason numbered ordering is popular, you know.


----------



## Veho (Aug 7, 2014)

Super Wii?


----------



## T3GZdev (Aug 8, 2014)

Veho said:


> Super Wii?


 
super wii sounds like a drug hahhaha

i think although the wii was selling great vs ps3/360 & they were past due to upgrade.
they released wiiu to early..
they began the wiiu boasting about the gamepad alone & 1080p/60fps, with only 2gb of ram & a tri-core processor. (gpu seems good)
then suddenly the ps4/xbone were announced with 8gb of ram & 8 core processors.

if they waited the wiiu probably would have at least 5gb-6gb of ram, a quad core processor, more internal memory, a better name. nintendo network & miiverse would be more structured. they probably could have even added all of this & made it cheaper.
they really should have announced the console 1st with nintendo network, 2nd then gamepad & pro controller. not the reverse order. & that should have happened after ps4/xbone announcement not before.
some say the 1st impression mostly sticks. the 1st impression of wiiu was the gamepad. now everyone thinks its a gamepad.


----------



## Foxi4 (Aug 8, 2014)

Veho said:


> Super Wii?


That usually happens after drinking large amounts of lager.


----------



## Drink the Bleach (Aug 8, 2014)

Not even commenting if your argument is right or wrong, but using sequential iPhone models isn't a great example to compare Wii's.

1st off, not all the people are going to know 3Gs is a successor to 3G, they're just going to think the S is a premium model of the 3G, and in alot of cases, they're not wrong.
2nd off, something like Xbox or even Playstation is far more easier to figure out, because to non-Nintendo owners, a new name generally means new system.

With Nintendo, they take one system, and give that system several revisions, but is still the same system.
Gameboy, Gameboy Pocket, Gameboy Color
Gameboy Advance, Gameboy Advance SP, Gameboy Advance Micro
Nintendo DS, Nintendo DS Lite, Nintendo DSi, Nintendo DSi XL
Nintendo 3DS, Nintendo 3DS XL, Nintendo 2DS.

To anyone familiar with the name Nintendo, but not the system could just assume all the Gameboy and Gameboy Advance brand are all one in the same and NDS and 3DS are all one in the same.
They just might assume Wii U is just a revision of Wii if they don't understand that sequential systems are described as generations.

Meanwhile to people that don't game can use common sense that Playstation and Playstation 2, or Roku and Roku 2 are different things.

Its safe to assume that the Wii was the 1st and only console to be owned by alot of people that don't normally play games, but were impressed by a modest tech demo. My father bought a Wii after playing one at a mall and for 7 fucking years all he had/owned was Wii Sports. Its that kind of person right there that made the Wii sell like hottcakes in its 1st 3 years. So when the Wii U comes out, that section of Wii owners aren't going to know what the F is a Wii U, and would likely not be interested. A large portion of Wii owners weren't gamers, and aren't going to be impressed or curious about new gaming technologies.


----------



## vayanui8 (Aug 8, 2014)

p1ngpong said:


> Super Wii and Wii HD are far more retarded than Wii 2. At least Wii 2 implies it is a new console, your names are just as vague as Wii U if not more. Wii HD could be a regular wii with a hdmi port for all people would know and assume. And super wii sounds like something a five year old came up with.


To be fair a good deal of the people stupid enough to not figure out its something different probably don't know shit about hdmi ports


----------



## trumpet-205 (Aug 8, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> "Wii 2" is also a very idiotic name because no one in their right mind would name it this atrocity, which is why Nintendo went with something else instead, even if it wasn't ideal.


 
Wii 2 is hardly an atrocity. In fact it would have make it very clear that it is a different console. On the other hand Wii HD would have repeat the misconception surrounding 3DS (3D version of DS). Calling it Wii HD would have create the confusion that is simply is Wii in HD graphics.


----------



## endoverend (Aug 8, 2014)

No matter what words or letters or numbers you add to it, the name "Wii" was definitely stuck in everyone's mind by 2012, and everyone has their own impression of it. Adding a letter to it for a new console went against Nintendo's typically innovative ideas. Hell, the Wii was originally called "Revolution". The Wii U is nothing revolutionary.


----------



## Foxi4 (Aug 8, 2014)

endoverend said:


> No matter what words or letters or numbers you add to it, the name "Wii" was definitely stuck in everyone's mind by 2012, and everyone has their own impression of it. Adding a letter to it for a new console went against Nintendo's typically innovative ideas. Hell, the Wii was originally called "Revolution". The Wii U is nothing revolutionary.


Pretty much. If you want to attract a new demographic, you need a new name. The Wii demographic is _*gone*_, they have smartphones now for their casual gaming.


----------



## endoverend (Aug 8, 2014)

It's funny how Nintendo was so blissfully unaware of the gaming market at the time. They totally expected a success as big as the Wii with a product that the average consumer thinks is an accessory.


----------



## Foxi4 (Aug 8, 2014)

endoverend said:


> It's funny how Nintendo was so blissfully unaware of the gaming market at the time. They totally expected a success as big as the Wii with a product that the average consumer thinks is an accessory.


Nintendo always disregards trends and does their own thing. It has its benefits - sometimes you start a new trend and you're a pioneer... sometimes you don't.


----------



## matpower (Aug 8, 2014)

Well, I will give my 2 cents on that "Name the thing Wii 2 and call a day!", Nintendo NEVER named a new console in such way, the SNES wasn't called "NES 2", neither was the Nintendo 64 called "Super NES 2", that will never happen since they always change their console's name, if the N64 was called Hyper NES, they could keep a trend and calling the newer consoles "Ultra", "Omega", "Advanced" or anything like that(Even like that, it would be a weird name as hell, who would buy a console called _*Omega** Nintendo Entertainment System*_?).
Well, I would drop the name "Wii" in the Wii U's name, the Wii name is linked with "Casual Gamers" nowadays and they moved to smartphone. Also some devs won't develop games because the Wii U is a bit underpowered comparated with the other consoles too, which is a sad excuse IMO, you don't need a lot of power for good games, but whatever. IMO the Wii U is a good console, it got potential, but I don't think I will ever see that potential being used.


----------



## T3GZdev (Aug 8, 2014)

nintendo has a way to directly talk to us with nintendo directs. but i think nintendo needs a way for their fans to directly talk to them.


----------



## trumpet-205 (Aug 8, 2014)

Poor naming definitely did a big blow on Wii U sales figure, though there are other factors to consider,

* Poor design. It was obvious that Nintendo wanted to ride on the success of Wii
* Poor launch line-up and subsequent game library
* Poor online platform, both online gaming and eShop
* Poor advertisement and failure to listen to fan complains.


----------



## Taleweaver (Aug 8, 2014)

Can we just conclude that nintendo's marketing department was terrible from the moment the wiiu was announced? Yes, the name is terrible, but it certainly isn't the only one (xbone actually has a worse name). At the very least, MS followed it up with decent media coverage to increase brand awareness. And while I'm sure there are people roaming the supermarkets thinking that these "xbox one"'s are rebrands of an old console, the people interested damn sure know what it is.

Meanwhile, I know plenty of people who bought a wii "just because". Either for simple platformer games (of which the wii is perfectly capable) or for fitness purposes (which explains why it is collecting dust with them  ). They already have a smartphone and tablet (if not many) and more free games than they can throw a stick at. You can say that gamers are polarizing: either they flock to the newest-of-the-newest expensive games, for which they follow their loyal brand...or they want things to be casual and on the go. Nintendo is in the awkward and relatively empty middle ground. They could've catered to the high end by making better deals with 3rd party developers, and they could have catered to the other end by keeping good relations with indies. They did neither and are hoping that their mascots and quality games are going to save them. Which, I have to say, isn't as unlikely as doom scenarios tend to predict (you can say what you want, but they haven't failed THAT). But on the long run...this may very well be ninty's last traditional console.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Aug 8, 2014)

WiiCube_2013 said:


> "Wii 2" is also a very idiotic name because no one in their right mind would name it this atrocity, which is why Nintendo went with something else instead, even if it wasn't ideal.
> 
> Nintendo just needs to drop "Wii" completely and go with a different name on the 9th gen.


 

Because putting a "2" after the name is stupid right guys?







...Right guys?


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Aug 8, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Because putting a "2" after the name is stupid right guys?
> 
> 
> ...Right guys?


 
The name "Wii" is the awkward part, but making it even worse would be adding a numerical addition to it.

"PlayStation" is fitting because it's about games.

Nintendo shouldn't have named their 8th gen console the "Wii U" because it's an awful name and the "Wii" isn't exactly a sign of quality anyway.


----------



## trumpet-205 (Aug 8, 2014)

Taleweaver said:


> Can we just conclude that nintendo's marketing department was terrible from the moment the wiiu was announced? Yes, the name is terrible, but it certainly isn't the only one (xbone actually has a worse name). At the very least, MS followed it up with decent media coverage to increase brand awareness. And while I'm sure there are people roaming the supermarkets thinking that these "xbox one"'s are rebrands of an old console, the people interested damn sure know what it is.


 
"One" in Xbox One actually symbolize an "all-in-_*one*_" entertainment device. In that you can do gaming, watch Blu-ray, serve as a DVR, etc.

I'm not sure what "U" is suppose to symbolize for Wii U.


----------



## Taleweaver (Aug 8, 2014)

trumpet-205 said:


> "One" in Xbox One actually symbolize an "all-in-_*one*_" entertainment device. In that you can do gaming, watch Blu-ray, serve as a DVR, etc.
> 
> I'm not sure what "U" is suppose to symbolize for Wii U.


 
Yeah, I know. It doesn't make it less of a retarded name.

The 'U' in wiiu is supposed to showcase that it's about (local) multiplayer. 'Wii' means 'we', 'u' means 'you'. So 'you' and 'me' can play. Hence the name umii. I mean wiiu.


----------



## matpower (Aug 8, 2014)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Because putting a "2" after the name is stupid right guys?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The problem is the "Wii" part of the "Wii 2", it would read as "We too" too. 
Also again, Nintendo never numbered their sequel consoles, there is no NES 2, Super NES 2, Nintendo 64 2, GameCube 2 or Wii 2, Ninty usually stick an adjective(NES -> Super NES) or name them after their gimmick(Nintendo 64 got 64bits, GameCube looks like a cube, Wii was made to play with family and that casual crap and Wii U was made to link Nintendo(We) with the player(You) with mainstream stuff again), these are their name system, and the adjective one died with the N64, after Ninty decided to rename it from "Ultra Nintendo 64" to "Nintendo 64".


----------



## T3GZdev (Aug 8, 2014)

i think the names a missed swing but nothing that can't be fixed with a great lineup, the design is ok but i would prefer matte, online is far better than wii so im not complaining it has improved since launch, advertisement... they need serious help with that, i think they need to add more features via update that take use of gamepad, like update the wiiu chat app, make calls from friend list or multi chat support, option for voice chat, cross game voice chat, being back the media app from wii (pics, movies, music, locally)


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Aug 8, 2014)

matpower said:


> The problem is the "Wii" part of the "Wii 2", it would read as "We too" too.
> Also again, Nintendo never numbered their sequel consoles, there is no NES 2, Super NES 2, Nintendo 64 2, GameCube 2 or Wii 2, Ninty usually stick an adjective(NES -> Super NES) or name them after their gimmick(Nintendo 64 got 64bits, GameCube looks like a cube, Wii was made to play with family and that casual crap and Wii U was made to link Nintendo(We) with the player(You) with mainstream stuff again), these are their name system, and the adjective one died with the N64, after Ninty decided to rename it from "Ultra Nintendo 64" to "Nintendo 64".


 
Bem dito!

*Guild McCommunist *simply didn't get it because he was too focused on the numerical part rather than the console's name.

Wii 2 = We too
Wii U = We and you

The Wii name only made sense for the original name and after that it broke (Wii U).


----------



## Foxi4 (Aug 8, 2014)

Just my two cents again, the whole shtick with "Wii" being "We" and "U" being "You" is retarded to begin with. Poor literacy isn't cool, the name is blearght and wears the stigma of the Wii. The system should've been stylized differently and Nintendo should've severed any connections to the Wii, as it is the Wii U just feels like a successor to the Wii's herritage, and people don't want another casual jukebox next to the one they already have... in the closet... somewhere.


----------



## WiiCube_2013 (Aug 8, 2014)

Foxi4 said:


> Just my two cents again, the whole shtick with "Wii" being "We" and "U" being "You" is retarded to begin with. Poor literacy isn't cool, the name is blearght and wears the stigma of the Wii. The system should've been stylized differently and Nintendo should've severed any connections to the Wii, as it is the Wii U just feels like a successor to the Wii's herritage, and people don't want another casual jukebox next to the one they already have... in the closet... somewhere.


 
Apple bought Beats... Apple Beats? Terrible name too.

Now costs $100 and probably will increase to $700 'cause that's the Apple way.


----------



## BrightNeko (Aug 9, 2014)

I think debating the name is something that should have been long stopped by now, it isn't going to change anything. An will only provide speculation about how things may or may not have changed. I do think the name isn't good but marketing is a strange beast. The U at the end could have proved just as powerful as whatever word was good in the past under the right hands. The best current example being apple with its S products which while providing much power aren't a major step to something new and a past example being Nintendo's own Gameboy Color which many people believe is just a gameboy with color, while it actually provided a more 16 bit experience than the standard GB.

The problem if any with the name would come from nintendo's horrible habit since the gameboy advance days, releasing tons of variations on handhelds. SP, Lite, i, LL, XL, and 2D could have very well been the real lead up of the U's name. Along with any cause of confusion towards it being a new console, as well as this being their second time at naming a follow up console.

That said the problem isn't just its name, at this point the name is only a small portion of the problem which is easy to explain away. The most obvious one is the exact opposite of the xbone's problem, that the wii u is to game focused for a game system that has hardly any games on it. An this was something I was thinking about a bit ago, what if the wii u worked like the xbone? Let you plug another console into it if you really wanted to, functioning as a little TV for when people want the bigger one. That would have been clever use of old technology with their low latency wifi stuff.

If you speculate on anything why not speculate on how the gamepad could have been used,  or if nintendo is up for it how it might be used in the next console?


----------



## dario14 (Aug 9, 2014)

I thought this was a good article: http://www.wired.com/2014/08/wii-u-name/

The author argues that besides the name, the Wii U hardware itself is simply not something consumers want to own. The ps4 launched with few AAA games but people still bought it because the hardware itself was worth it.


----------



## T3GZdev (Aug 10, 2014)




----------



## Social_Outlaw (Aug 10, 2014)

Well where I'm from, when the Wii U was released, people thought that was the Wii, so I had to clarify the differences. Idk but it seems that Sony and Microsoft are the powerhouses of being known when coming to consoles. Nintendo are more known for their handhelds than console, so I think people was not ready for the Wii U.


----------



## lagaremondays (Aug 10, 2014)

Some believe that as long as the product is popular, the name will catch on. It's like you just get used to it. And now we went full circle on product naming.
Calling it Wii U seems a misstep for me though. People may and will treat it like a rehash of the Wii with a few tweaks and that's it.


----------

