Iwata: Our games, our console.

[Guild McCommunist]

Like really if you think the Wii U has 20 really solid must-haves then like you're really deluding yourself.

As for the multiplats they're nice games and they're good to consider but most of them are months late ports that you can get on cheaper consoles with better libraries. And their upsides are like... hamfisted GamePad features that no one really wants? Yay?

 

[EzekielRage]

I really suffer under the heat, that much is true. And my computer is dying. And then of course my health condition. Did I mention that I am hungry as fuck? And hate dumb people? So guess who I consider dumb now. I give you a hint, it's not you

Anyways I can assure you I am not angry about this thread. Not in a good mood generally, I am annoyed actually but not about this thread. In fact I find it quite amusing because I know come fall, come Christmas and come next year all the naysayers will be proven wrong and I am laughing about that already.

also:
more expensive than the competition: not in terms of next gen competition, no. in terms of current gen competition yes but also better value with the gamepad and nintendo exclusives.
I agree with the suspect online activities. they really suck...
about the exclusives, yes and no. nintendoland actually is quite fun, zombiu is cool if you like SURVIVAL games and mario is mario. otherwise, pikmin, wonderful 101 and zelda are around the corner so that's a good thing.
third parties don't count, as established in this thread by the idiot himself. they do, but then they don't. people can't make up their mind. to be fair, there are some very good third party titles out there even though you can buy them on other systems that's why they don't count. but they do. whatever
yeah the wii is cheap but that's not to say that people won't upgrade. I mean you buy a wii game now with a wiiu you can play it. you can remove your wii from the living room because wiiu does that as well. so it's a big bonus, really, especially with so many good wii games out there.

as for modern console gamers, that's a point I am trying to make for weeks now: fuck them seriously. fuck the modern gamer because the modern gamer is a dumb twat who has no idea, really. and analysts and publishers listen to those fuckheads instead of doing a simple research into people's buying and gaming habits. EA is very much to blame for that. Ubisoft and activison not so much bit still a little bit. It is the infamous coffee/spaghetti sauce principle. read up on that some times^^

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

Man I love reading Nintenyearold posts


On topic, Nintendo is doing real shit this generation console wise and releasing their little exclusives won't do much to sell it otherwise. Wii U is going the Gamecube route this gen.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

Exactly what I was talking about, thanks.

 

[FAST6191]

Anyways I can assure you I am not angry about this thread. Not in a good mood generally, I am annoyed actually but not about this thread. In fact I find it quite amusing because I know come fall, come Christmas and come next year all the naysayers will be proven wrong and I am laughing about that already.

also:
more expensive than the competition: not in terms of next gen competition, no. in terms of current gen competition yes but also better value with the gamepad and nintendo exclusives.
I agree with the suspect online activities. they really suck...
about the exclusives, yes and no. nintendoland actually is quite fun, zombiu is cool if you like SURVIVAL games and mario is mario. otherwise, pikmin, wonderful 101 and zelda are around the corner so that's a good thing.
third parties don't count, as established in this thread by the idiot himself. they do, but then they don't. people can't make up their mind. to be fair, there are some very good third party titles out there even though you can buy them on other systems that's why they don't count. but they do. whatever
yeah the wii is cheap but that's not to say that people won't upgrade. I mean you buy a wii game now with a wiiu you can play it. you can remove your wii from the living room because wiiu does that as well. so it's a big bonus, really, especially with so many good wii games out there.

as for modern console gamers, that's a point I am trying to make for weeks now: fuck them seriously. fuck the modern gamer because the modern gamer is a dumb twat who has no idea, really. and analysts and publishers listen to those fuckheads instead of doing a simple research into people's buying and gaming habits. EA is very much to blame for that. Ubisoft and activison not so much bit still a little bit. It is the infamous coffee/spaghetti sauce principle. read up on that some times^^

Fall and Christmas... I have watched E3 and kept abreast of the upcoming games. I am not expecting earth shattering changes there, even among those that might be considered Nintendo stalwarts. If the upcoming consoles do even moderately well for games (and given the option to probably just press a slightly different compile button I am not expecting them to do badly) then "uphill" does not even begin to cover it. Also if it suddenly does generate some games of note and enough to get it some consideration what would be the problem in picking one up at that point in time and dismissing it until then?

Relative expense. This is always an interesting question. Going for the market research thing you mentioned though if my console is to be a games playing machine then it not doing a stellar job versus the other options. Maybe again future potential counts but in terms of things I can whack money down on now....

Third parties. What Gahars was trying to get at is they are important, doubly so at this point in time, but can have their efforts rendered pointless by various factors, some of which may even be somewhat outside their area of control. You need the volume of games and such tricks can only be pulled off with third parties but if their efforts are for naught (say by having just as functional or more functional (say by having superior online) versions on more established platforms) then you can reasonably ignore them or at least heavily downplay their importance when it comes to discussing the merits of a system.

"remove my wii from the living room". I am not entirely sure that is as great a selling point as it might be -- "ooh I can remove a tiny box and gain a socket and a legacy port on my TV". I am not entirely sold on the merits of the Wii library either, if it still had some gamecube there might be more to speak of.

"because the modern gamer is a dumb twat who has no idea, really"
The logical conclusion of/counter to this is they are the ones that vote with their money and you have to play to them -- though we still have mods few have taken up the open source gaming idea like those doing audio, video, written word and such like. I am quite familiar with the marketing exercise too (it is one of the better recent examples of Edward Bernays style marketing in effect).
Similarly I am sure EA and co do masses of marketing and given between them all they are buying up, courting and copying every indy, mobile and other small dev going that probably counts for the diversifying their market part of that example.

 

[PolloDiablo]

duh.

 

[EzekielRage]

Guild McCommunist And you are off the mark again? ShallI inform you or do you want me to laugh about you longer?
Nah, i am a nice guy, here is the scoop:
The term Nintenyearold stems from the thread where a guy walks in and says only ten year olds play nintendo. so another guy calls them nintendoyearolds.
so in this context it is to be assumed that when somebody uses this phrase he or she but probably he without a penis means that i play nintendo therefore i am ten or at least very young.

now not only does this person ignore/dont know the fact that i do in fact play sony, nintendo and PC but also he is wrong because i am far older than ten, the exact number specified by telling him i am eleven years older than him. since he is 18 that makes me 29. so i am far older than ten and he is an idiot for not thinking a second calling me a nintenyearold. those are 87%. and the remaining 13% is exactly because he is young but not because i am oldits just that i already was so young and i know that your are dumb when youre still 18 because thats what 18 year olds are, dumb. they cant hafe life experience at this point, how could tehy? if they ahd tehy live in a country where there is no internet to post here in the first place.

and thats why you are 100% wrong.
chocolate?

as for fast:
i dont doubt that there are various factors that could tip the scales in either way. also i agree some points i amde were vague at best. but i stand by my "gamers are dumb" opinion simply because you see it everywhere. most gamers are dumb. and young.

there are adult gamers but those usually dont act as dumb as the young ones. at least not where i live, cant speak for other coutnries of course. and i have to add i know a little bit about psychology and i know how people in general tick so i am fairly sure that the wii u will be doing fine this season and if the stream of games doesnt break up it will also do fine when the big twins arrive. as said, i say it again, probably not wii fine but very solid indeed.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Nintenyearolds is a joke because lel kiddies play nintendo consoles double lel

But good to see that joke was lobbed far over your head.

 

[EzekielRage]

Yes, far over my head thats why i had explain ONE SENTENCE to you and you still didnt udnerstand it...
remarkable...

edit: i dont usually think in terms like this but you sir are the perfect example of why everybody thinks americans are dense, intolerant and ignorant and uneducated bozos...

 

[Clydefrosch]

man, just stop it. in arguing like this, you make yourself seem like a ten year old more and more. regardless of your actual age, you act like a kid right now.

 

[GameWinner]

how many times do I have to say this:
NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF VIDEO GAMES HAS THE STRONGEST SYSTEM WON!

Well this gen is about to go down in history.

 

[EzekielRage]

Well this gen is about to go down in history.

To quote the great Nick Fury: Ten bucks says you're wrong

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Just a side note, especially nowadays, console sales aren't everything.

Like Nintendo sold a shitload of Wii's but Sony and Microsoft are still raking in consistent dough from Xbox Live and Playstation Plus every year. And software is a much larger factor as consoles are going towards the trend of selling on a loss.

So I think "winner" is not a defined line. Was it who sold more consoles? Who had better games? Who made the most money?

 

[EzekielRage]

You want me to fact check that or are you of the Romney ideal where facts dont matter as long as it sounds god? Because I have seen a nice pic that just debunks this earlier today. Not sure which thread but I can surely find it again I haven't been around the boards today as much as I hoped. too many boring threads. Thats why you are lucky and still able to discuss those oh so important matters with me^^

Edit:
Found it, first page:

edit: anotehr graph:

now i know its only up to 2011 but it shows a clear pattern, really. also, consider that 2011 was a poor year for Nintendo because the 3DS was DOOMED back then. if i find a new one, there ya go. PS:: this is not only hardware sales but total income that also means licenses...

edit:
i found some numbers from 2012, let me just write that down here (Microsoft is missing)

Note that even though nintendo had a bad year and LOST a lot of money, so did sony as the yen did not help at all. So I feel like this pretty much seals this debate, no?

 

[mightymuffy]

Just a side note, especially nowadays, console sales aren't everything.

Like Nintendo sold a shitload of Wii's but Sony and Microsoft are still raking in consistent dough from Xbox Live and Playstation Plus every year. And software is a much larger factor as consoles are going towards the trend of selling on a loss.

So I think "winner" is not a defined line. Was it who sold more consoles? Who had better games? Who made the most money?

I think a quick look at total profits should give the only answer that counts from a business perspective, and while the figure on page 1 of this thread may not be accurate (Nin & Sony also in the handheld market), it's a good indication viewing from the console release dates... Remember the Wii was sold at a profit whereas both PS3 & 360 were sold at a loss. Big first party Wii games passed 20mill copies sold in certain cases.
Nintendo made a killing with the Wii, whereas PS3 should just about break even for Sony, and 360 marginally better for MS.
So from a business point of view, Wii was clearly the winner.

However, Nintendo aren't making a penny/cent on Wii U console sales. Bad start right there!

All that said, part of the quote reads "and if I was not concerned about the long-term future of Nintendo at all" - so, er, what's the point of this topic again? Oh and Ezekiel, you're 29.... tha's still a baby! (38 here! ) Guild's nearly 10 years younger than you, but he's at least making a fair argument with his posts....

 

[retKHAAAN]

What they should have done is sell a 250GB console for $299 and offer the tablet as a separate peripheral. Then devs wouldn't feel obligated to use the tablet in some hokey way and more games could fully utilize the streaming... Meanwhile, the tablets would still sell because parents are suckers and because kids want to play their console games in their laps...because they can...

 

[Qtis]

You want me to fact check that or are you of the Romney ideal where facts dont matter as long as it sounds god? Because I have seen a nice pic that just debunks this earlier today. Not sure which thread but I can surely find it again I haven't been around the boards today as much as I hoped. too many boring threads. Thats why you are lucky and still able to discuss those oh so important matters with me^^

Edit:
Found it, first page:-snip-
Note that even though nintendo had a bad year and LOST a lot of money, so did sony as the yen did not help at all. So I feel like this pretty much seals this debate, no?

Nice going with the year old graphs. As for the stock prices, Sony is currently worth 20.5 billion USD and Nintendo is at 16.9 billion USD. Everything is relative. Apple was almost bankrupt in the end of the 90s and is now valued as one of the most valuable companies by stock and cash flow. Nokia was quite a valuable company in the beginning of the 2000s, but now is worth only a fraction of that. Being high or low at some point doesn't mean that they are invulnerable to customer and investor reactions.

Wait, so multiplats dont count now? But then you tell me the wiiu is bad because it has no 3rd party multiplats?
Hypocrisy everywhere. You peoply truly deserve to be treated like shit by the game companies...

edit: also, still doesnt change the fact that the average customer doesnt give a shit about graphics and tech. otherwise minecraft wouldnt sell, nobody would play slender or amnesia and people wouldnt download all those retro games and indie games with retro graphics...

As for the post, it was apparently directed at me? Quoting would help a lot :3

What I mean is a lot what FAST already said. While you may say that graphics and tech doesn't matter, that is true in one way. If all consoles receive the same titles with relatively small differences, it doesn't matter. If one receives watered down versions, it'll push people away from those titles (compare some of the multiplat games from the WiiPS360 era and you will notice this). I've never said that the WiiU is doomed or that Nintendo will stop making games. On the other hand, I have said and will say again: The WiiU doesn't have a competitive advantage at the moment since it lacks those killer games that people en masse want to buy. A Wii + PS360 is cheaper than the WiiU at the moment and offers a very close experience for most. Sometimes it offers an even better experience due to the Wii games + GC BC.

It's all about perspective and subjective opinion. But saying that people are stupid because they give relatively good and sound reasoning (which differs from yours) is just a bad way of going into a discussion. While Gahars, Guild and many others (me included) can be sarcastic and somewhat asses in the way they reply to threads, they still have their opinions. Just like you do too

 

[Foxi4]

I see that #sales have entered the thread so I'll throw in my two cents and immediately jettison myself from here.

I'll be perfectly honest - I'm a gamer. As a gamer, I don't give a flying flip about which company made more money or which console sold more units - these factors are entirely irrelevant to me, they don't influence my experience as a user.

What I care about when it comes to the system is whether it's a good, contemporary system or not. What I care about when it comes to games is whether they're fun or not. Those two factors are relevant because they concern me.

The fact that "Company X" was capable to push X units more than "Company Y" doesn't mean squat if "Company X's" system doesn't do jack for its users. The fact that it sold better or made a higher profit doesn't make it a better system.

People often forget about that and hide behind profit charts - profits don't matter unless you're a shareholder. What matters is whether the system is popular, has a contemporary design that supports contemporary titles, has the potential to support future ones and has functionality relevant to the users.

If the system matches or surpasses user expectations in terms of features, is technologically impressive and has a fun selection of games, it's a winner. If it doesn't, it's a loser.

 

[Gahars]

Since some people need this explained, I'll throw this nugget out there.

Third party support is not a selling point. It is an expectation, the absolute bare minimum. You want to have the same multiplatform titles as the other guys, of course, but that alone isn't going to move systems. Unless you're getting exclusive third party support or the third party titles on your console have some great advantage over the other versions, there's nothing to brag about.

The presence of, say, Assassin's Creed 3 on the Wii U does nothing to attract people over; fans already have a PC/PS3/360 to play the game on. However, it at least ensures that fans aren't turned away by the game's absence.

Saying "third party multiplats don't sell consoles" is not the same thing as saying "third party multiplats are bad." Just a little nuance you might want to be aware of.

 

[DSGamer64]

I couldn't care less about mobile games. I just want all of my games on one console, and not have to pay for 5 different consoles when on most of them, I'm only going to be playing a few games tops. It would be great if I could just buy the PSXBWii3DSVITA4ONEU, play the games I want, and be done with it.

If the PS and Xbox were never created, it would be happening.