Activision CEO Worried NextBox, PS4 May Have "Slow Start"

[RicoADF]

Hey bobbie, the lack of fames is why the WiiU flopped rather than splashed. Make the games at a fair price and the players will come

The WiiU had a strong launch lineup, despite peoples insistence to the contrary. People just have very short-term memory when it comes to console launches, which is why with every single one I get to read endless complaints from gamers about how there are "no games!"

The WiiU, of course, also had a very strong initial sales push, that died off after the first month. It didn't beat the Wii sales record, but people forget that the Wii did amazingly well. Maybe it was marketing, or perhaps the shabby financial times we live in, maybe it was a sign of the new market where tablets and smartphones are a factor and the PC is currently at its pinnacle, very likely a combination of them all.

I kept a close eye on the Wii U and it's lineup was terrible. Other than the same Mario +1 etc games (which I have no interest in), most of it's games were a year + old games ported to the Wii U. Zombie U was the only new game that I saw and it looked great, but I couldn't get a $300-400 system for just 1 game. So as I said, more games (and not just another bloody Zelda) wouldn't go amiss for the Wii U. This is coming from someone that has 2x gaming PC's, PS3, PS2, PS1, PSP, PS Vita, XBOX360, Wii etc etc, so I'm not afraid to buy another system as I have the money as long as it offers SOMETHING to want to play on the thing. Honestly the Vita looks better
-_-

P.S. If there is more then please point it out, but all I've seen are the same old boring Nintendo games I played as a kid and outgrew many years ago, I'm not 10 anymore.

 

[Gunner 51]

@Zachary Amaranth - I wouldn't quite dismiss it as baseless rumours just yet. Games journalism as rotten as it is, is slightly better than hearsay. Though perhaps I should use more sources.

Except they're rumours without base, so they're baseless. Also, most of your sources involve stories that originate with Paul Thurott (one even names him in the headline), who has been consistently wrong up to this point. He's even undercut his own rumours, which were supposedly confirmed by insiders and documents until suddenly they weren't.

This is rumour mongering for the sake of rumour mongering.

Ah, I didn't know that most of it started with Paul Thurott. It'd seem that I've been trolled like a good 'un. I think I'll be on the lookout for him from now on. Ta very much for that snippet of rather useful information.

 

[Lightknight]

But honestly, I'm a little confused by your post. Why would the transfer or slow start mean that they're hypocrites for making games for them?

WiiU-> relative slow start -> publishers almost gleefully announcing they won't make games for the system with most citing the slow sales as a reason.

PS4 ->projected slow start -> same publishers still more than willing to create several titles for the system despite no guarantee of high sales figures.

It's odd really. Nintendo has to make their system a blazing success story before publishers will even look at it while Sony and Microsoft can get the same publishers practically begging to jump on their systems despite having nothing more than some concept art and a basic spec sheet. The double standard is fascinating.

The WiiU has a lot going against it.

1. It's a machine that's powered somewhere between current gen and what we think of regarding next gen technology. That doesn't mean it isn't next gen anymore than the Wii wasn't a current gen machine despite being underpowered, just that the WiiU will be the bottom of the rung technologically depending on what Microsoft announces but definitely based on what the ps4 has announced. This means it's only the top dog for about a year and then it will suddenly get huge competition. People in the know are waiting to see what the competition will look like.

2. The Wii is viewed, whether correctly or not, as a casual gaming machine. This mindset is a market perception of Nintendo now and will impact the WiiU's sales. The WiiU's ability to play AAA games like Assassin's Creed III and Mass Effect 3 benefits Nintendo hardcore gamers greatly but may not be enough to draw in a new crowd that already has a ps3 or 360 that have already been playing those games all along and wouldn't particularly see a need to make such a minor hardware upgrade with the next gen versions of their consoles right around the corner.

3. Nintendo dropped the marketing ball horribly. As I have stated regularly in the past, I know people who honestly think that the WiiU is just a kind of tablet peripheral for the Wii and not a new console. This is a significant problem, especially when it's priced like the console it is ($255-$300 for basic 8GB system without a game and a backlog still mostly limited to Wii games while you can pay $268-$300 for a 500GB PS3 with Assassin's Creed III and a HUGE AAA quality backlog: This was just from a cursory look at Amazon's new console pricing. Had I included used pricing it would have benefited the PS3 even more. I did not see a basic WiiU with a bundle and the advanced one only has 32GB and NintendoLand for $338-$370). It just isn't competitive for what it's trying to accomplish and I don't think they can afford to make it competitive. Even the games they're putting out for it that have been out for other systems for months are more expensive on the WiiU than on the other systems.

I don't see Sony or Microsoft having the same problem. There is no doubt that they'll be technological powerhouses. There is no doubt that they'll cater heavily to the hardcore gaming demographic and still have some stuff for casual gamers (not as much as Nintendo, I assume). There is also absolutely no doubt that they're new systems. Say what you will about Sony's simplistic numbering system but it's hard to confuse the ps4 as a ps3 peripheral. Assuming that the WiiU sales pick up enough to make it a legitimate target market (and this may be too big an assumption), I anticipate that we'll see ports to the system this year and maybe next year but as the adoption of the ps4 and 720 pick up and the ps3 and 360 get phased out we will see the ports stopping and will start seeing games that take advantage of advanced processing not available in the WiiU.

Did Nintendo make a good choice releasing the WiiU here? I think this was the best choice they had. For several reasons, they can't compete with the other two players in the hardware market. Nintendo doesn't have giant departments doing entirely different things that will keep them afloat while they take losses in the first few years of console sales. They have a really good finance department that helps them through rough times where they invest their money wisely but that hardly matters to the gaming division. If the WiiU flops like the Sega Saturn did, I anticipate that they'll have another shot at reintroducing themselves if they want to risk it. Otherwise we may start seeing Mario on ps4's and 720's. In any event, their handheld market is remarkable. I don't see that falling away, regardless. Though they honestly may make more money if they started seeling iOS versions of their games.

The biggest boon to Nintendo right now is that they are an absolutely beloved brand. I don't know what that'll mean in terms of sales, but I think even those of us who prefer the other systems because of their games have a soft spot for them and want to see them do well.

But all that aside, here's the biggest difference between the systems: WiiU = having poor sales, PS4 and 720 = not having good or poor performance yet. May do well, may do poorly, but will be the next generation for sure.

 

[Zeckt]

This reminds me of when Pachter called everybody who will only buy a console with backwards compatibility stupid. If he's so smart then why does he seem to be so blind to the fact that I won't give up a MASSIVE library of games for a handful of crappy launch titles?

 

[Lightknight]

This reminds me of when Pachter called everybody who will only buy a console with backwards compatibility stupid. If he's so smart then why does he seem to be so blind to the fact that I won't give up a MASSIVE library of games for a handful of crappy launch titles?

Do you honestly have a choice?

The 720 will not be backwards compatible to disks because they bet on HD-DVD and lost. I anticipate that digitally purchased games should be compatible. At least, there's no reason for them not to be.

The ps4 will not be backwards compatible because they used a weird proprietary hardware configuration that doesn't translate into standard tech and is incredibly difficult to manage. Emulation of the ps3 would also be pretty darn difficult.

The WiiU is backwards compatible but may reach a wall when newer AAA games are created to utilize the more powerful systems microsoft and sony are putting out (I'm assuming on the 360, I could be wrong about them) like what happened with our current generation and the Wii.

So, there really isn't a ton of choices. You aren't being "stupid" in wanting backwards compatibility. But you would be significantly missing out on new games if that was the line you wouldn't cross. Going foward, it looks like backwards compatibility will be much more readily available with this being the main point of transition.

I will say this, you've never been more justified in wanting backwards compatibility than now. Games from 2005+ are very playable today whereas a game from the Playstation era may be eye gouging even if it was considered pretty back then. It's your prerogative to make this the hard line in the sand, but it's also out of your control. I'll point out that I can still buy a replacement for any system that has ever been popular. Your library will likely not ever be unplayable but will not be playable on the next gen of systems.