Nintendo is to blame for poor Wii U sales, says Iwata

[KingVamp]

I'm kinda suprise Sony and Microsoft is using HDD's vs SSD's.

 

[the_randomizer]

Good luck overwriting a BluRay disc.

Thanks! I've already installed all my games on my SDXC cards, it took quite a while, but I can't complain.

 

[Foxi4]

I'm kinda suprise Sony and Microsoft is using HDD's vs SSD's.

I'm kinda surprised you'd expect them to use SSD's when a 500GB SSD costs more than a PS4.

Nintendo isn't using SSD either - they're using NAND Flash modules which are Cheaptendo - last time I checked, a batch of 32GB ones costs approx. $3 a piece.

 

[JoostinOnline]

Contemporary games "weigh" anywhere between 25GB and 50GB, that's the today's standard.

That's including garbage data, which isn't part of downloads/installs. Most games are nowhere near that big.

But really, if they had upped the price $50 for a decent sized HDD, they would have lost way more money per sale, and nobody would buy one after the PS4 was announced.

 

[the_randomizer]

That's including garbage data, which isn't part of downloads/installs. Most games are nowhere near that big.

But really, if they had upped the price $50 for a decent sized HDD, they would have lost way more money per sale, and nobody would buy one after the PS4 was announced.

True, true, but like I said, people are too self-entitled and like to get hypertension all because the Wii U doesn't fit their needs. The day people stop bitching about the Wii U's imperfections and how godlike the PS4 and Xbox One are is the day hell freezes over.

 

[Foxi4]

That's including garbage data, which isn't part of downloads/installs. Most games are nowhere near that big.

This generation? Or the previous one? Not to look too far, "The Last of Us" weighs a humble 33GB, and games are only going to get bigger and bigger this generation.

But really, if they had upped the price $50 for a decent sized HDD, they would have lost way more money per sale, and nobody would buy one after the PS4 was announced.

Nintendo's profit margin is already ridiculous - the console shouldn't cost more than $280 for the 32GB model. If they want to stay afloat, they should slash the price and release proprietary Nintendo-branded external drives because the average Joe simply doesn't know a whole lot about those and would rather buy a branded product that's going to work 100% as intended. Additionally they should prepare a revision of the hardware with a built-in drive to release it somewhere down the line, say, in 2015-2016.

 

[JoostinOnline]

This generation? Or the previous one? Not to look too far, "The Last of Us" weighs a humble 33GB, and games are only going to get bigger and bigger this generation.

Most games aren't that big.

Nintendo's profit margin is already ridiculous - the console shouldn't cost more than $280 for the 32GB model. If they want to stay afloat, they should slash the price and release proprietary Nintendo-branded external drives because the average Joe simply doesn't know a whole lot about those and would rather buy a branded product that's going to work 100% as intended. Additionally they should prepare a revision of the hardware with a built-in drive to release it somewhere down the line, say, in 2015-2016.

So what, they are just going to somehow make the Wii U cost less to manufacture? You should call up Nintendo and tell them how that's done, I'm sure they'd love to hear it. Hell, I'm sure Microsoft and Sony would love to hear it too!

 

[KingVamp]

I'm kinda surprised you'd expect them to use SSD's when a 500GB SSD costs more than a PS4.

Nintendo isn't using SSD either - they're using NAND Flash modules which are Cheaptendo - last time I checked, a batch of 32GB ones costs approx. $3 a piece.

I meant SSD in general. Not 500GB. Sounds like something crazy they would pull.
"Cheaptendo" So stupid.


Do you mind if I ask for a source?

 

[Foxi4]

Do you mind if I ask for a source?

I don't, in fact I edited the post and added a link to average/low/high prices on NAND Flash when bought in bulk.

Most games aren't that big.

Most games from the last generation aren't that big, most from the new generation will.

So what, they are just going to somehow make the Wii U cost less to manufacture? You should call up Nintendo and tell them how that's done, I'm sure they'd love to hear it. Hell, I'm sure Microsoft and Sony would love to hear it too!

Any interesting tidbits you'd like to share about how high the WiiU manufacturing costs are? Because I bet you a hundred bucks this is another 3DS situation where the profit margin is insane and once the competition releases their systems, Nintendo will take a broadsword to the price tag because that's how they operate. This is not expensive hardware and you won't convince me otherwise.

 

[JoostinOnline]

Any interesting tidbits you'd like to share about how high the WiiU manufacturing costs are? Because I bet you a hundred bucks this is another 3DS situation where the profit margin is insane and once the competition releases their systems, Nintendo will take a broadsword to the price tag because that's how they operate. This is not expensive hardware and you won't convince me otherwise.

I don't know if you've ever heard of him, but a guy named Reggie Fils-Aime said it here: http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_22013695

 

[KingVamp]

I don't, in fact I edited the post and added a link to average/low/high prices on NAND Flash when bought in bulk.

I meant them using NAND Flash vs SSD.

Nintendo's profit margin is already ridiculous - the console shouldn't cost more than $280 for the 32GB model. If they want to stay afloat, they should slash the price and release proprietary Nintendo-branded external drives because the average Joe simply doesn't know a whole lot about those and would rather buy a branded product that's going to work 100% as intended.

Except they are already selling at a lost so...

Some of those people are going to derp regardless. What are they going to do when the HDD fills up?

"work 100% as intended"It already does.

 

[Foxi4]

I don't know if you've ever heard of him, but a guy named Reggie Fils-Aime said it here: http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_22013695

Except they are already selling at a lost so...

Some of those people are going to derp regardless. What are they going to do when the HDD fills up?

"work 100% as intended"
It already does.

Perhaps Nintendo should take a little bit more of a loss on the hardware to push more software, don't you think?

The Wii U is profitable after one sold game, correct? Make it profitable after two - that's already $40-$50 slashed and it will push units. Sold units will entice developers to make games for a system that sells.

If the WiiU fails to build a userbase, it has already failed againts the similarily-priced PS4 ($350 versus $399, not even counting the basic WiiU model because it's useless). The price needs to be slashed whether you like it or not and the R&D costs will be paid off sooner or later, nullifying the loss eventually.

 

[Nathan Drake]

Why are people fighting the idea that Nintendo went cheap on the memory for the Wii U and that including more memory at a lower overall system price would help to keep them as true competition? The difference between 8GB and 32GB, maybe $1 to a manufacturer buying in bulk, does in no way justify the current $50 price difference between the basic and the deluxe Wii U models. As well, including more memory is the only way they'll be able to manage a successful online store for their digital content on the Wii U. Retail games are big. Acting like 32GB is somehow enough for anybody who intends to buy more than one or two titles digitally is just silly. There are a number of routes Nintendo could go here, but a price cut is not some out there prospect. If Sony can market the PS4 at $400 and not take a loss, Nintendo can damn well cut the price on their less powerful system that is currently being marketed for a measly $50 less.

Edit: And do remember, certain PS3 games have taken up the full 50GB available on a blu-ray disc, and reflected this even with the digital download (see: Uncharted 3). The idea of a 50GB game, or even a game over 32GB, is no longer a very foreign concept.

 

[ggyo]

Well, you know the old saying "bros before hoes" right? If anything, I should be the one who gets more. All I'm saying is that Nintendo needs to improve their marketing strategies, but the Wii U is salvageable still. It will require tremendous effort on their part though. Nothing more The games will come, that people cannot deny. I still believe that the Wii U will be saved and that more support will come, but I won't or can't deny that it's in a pretty sticky situation, on that we can agree. I still enjoy the games (or ports like NFSMW) nonetheless.

"Bros before hoes" was invented and perpetuated by bitter dudes who ain't getting anything, just like "sloppy seconds" and all the other cock-blocking phrases used to turn a fellow males off from a woman or women.

 

[KingVamp]

does in no way justify the current $50 price difference between the basic and the deluxe Wii U models.

You do know that it comes with a game and some other stuff right?

Acting like 32GB is somehow enough for anybody who intends to buy more than one or two titles digitally is just silly.

You are forgetting about people who don't buys digital titles.

If Sony can market the PS4 at $400 and not take a loss,

Source?

 

[JoostinOnline]

If Sony can market the PS4 at $400 and not take a loss, Nintendo can damn well cut the price on their less powerful system that is currently being marketed for a measly $50 less.

I don't believe for one second that Sony isn't taking a huge loss on PS4 sales.

 

[Foxi4]

I don't believe for one second that Sony isn't taking a huge loss on PS4 sales.

The loss on hardware is compensated by PSPlus, which is why it's mandatory for multiplayer on the PS4.

 

[JoostinOnline]

The loss on hardware is compensated by PSPlus, which is why it's mandatory for multiplayer on the PS4.

1) That doesn't mean it's not sold at a loss
2) Multiplayer is not mandatory
3) Source that a few dollars a month makes up for hardware loss?

 

[Nathan Drake]

You do know that it comes with a game and some other stuff right?

The Wii always came with a game. That didn't seem to affect the price. Moot point.

You are forgetting about people who don't buys digital titles.

That in no way justifies the $350 price tag.

Source?

Sony previously stated they didn't intend to take a huge loss on the PS4 like they did with the PS3 (which I believe was a $600 loss or so per console for awhile). Even if they're taking a loss on the PS4, they still feel comfortable selling it at $400. How does Nintendo justify $350 for less expensive hardware? Taking a loss is how systems sell anymore. You have to be reasonable with how much you can minimize your loss versus how much the system will actually sell for. If Nintendo isn't willing to suffer a little to sell their system, it will not sell. Hell, if they move systems, games will make the difference anyways since they primarily market first party titles. A price cut would be smart. The loss would be nullified.

 

[ggyo]

You do know that it comes with a game and some other stuff right?

You are forgetting about people who don't buys digital titles.



Source?

Microsoft is selling Xbox 360's for $150 at a profit (2006 technology). So does the WiiU (1997 IBM-based CPU and circa 2006-some technology) cost over twice as much to manufacture in comparison?

I don't believe Nintendo. The actual hardware is barely more costly than last generation, and the only new contributing cost factor is the WiiU controller's screen... but it's a TFT, low resolution piece of crap (honestly). No capacitivity, no multitouch, non-corning glass plastic garbage. You can buy iPad Retina display replacement screens for $30-$50.

Unless the WiiU controller somehow costs a good $100+, the WiiU should not cost so much.