Nintendo President Says Competitors Must Respond to Wii U

[Fluffythepoo]

Am i wrong in thinking that smartglass and crossplay vita were the responses to wiiu?

 

[Azuaron]

So with all of those sold out pre-order the new Wii U sold 200,000 less than the Wii in week one?

Yeah, this basically confirms that Nintendo is limiting the supply to create demand once again. There's no other reason for the sales to be one third less than its predecessor when they were touting sold out pre-orders so hard.

Yep. 475,000 [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/120789-Nintendo-Shifts-400-000-Wii-Us-in-a-Week] - 400,000 = 200,000. Math sure looks like that.

Conflicts with this link kind of [link]http://www.flesheatingzipper.com/gaming/2012/11/wii-u-first-week-sales-on-the-light-side-down-33-from-wii-launch/[/link]

So either the Wii, on its 8th day after launch sold an additional 125,000 units (which would mean that 1 sixth of its launch sales came in the 8th day after launch, which would be odd), or one of the articles is wrong. Judging by the fact that your link goes to an Escapist article that throws the 475,000 Wii launch number out of nowhere (with the CNET link in that very article not mentioning that the Wii's launch sold 475,000 at all) I'd say that the 475,000 number is wrong considering there is no source for it for some reason.

So my point still stands.


EDIT:This link also shows that the original sales launch number of the Wii was 600,000 and not 475,000
[link]http://www.joystiq.com/2012/11/26/wii-u-sells-400-000-units-in-first-week/[/link]

in its first seven days [http://techland.time.com/2012/11/27/nintendo-says-more-than-400000-wii-us-sold-in-u-s/].

So, what we have is the difference between a company bragging about how well their product is doing immediately after launch vs. an independent entity researching what actually happened after enough time had passed to be sure.

I'm sticking with the independent entity.

 

[DrunkOnEstus]

Basically, these ports aren't telling us all that much at all, but note this: Even if they look slightly worse now, or run slightly worse, the 360 and PS3 versions can't mirror the freaking game inside of the controller or send UI elements to it. This is the hand they're dealing.

Oh hai Vita and Ps3 Combo that was showing off these ideas six months before Nintendo unveiled the WiiU.

Yeah, claiming Nintendo innovated with this is just full of crap. They're acting pretentious and hoping fanboys won't call their bluff.

I never said Nintendo thought of this concept first. I didn't say that it was innovating anything. The gamepad is capable of more than the Vita/PS3 situation can, and the system comes built and ready to take advantage of it full-on out of the box. If you want to do this with the PS3 you have to buy a Vita, and remote play isn't even close to as simple or featured as what Nintendo is doing.

I guess I need to make this clear: I'm not in a "war". "console wars" only benefit the multi-national corporations who love to watch it happen. I don't give a shit what systems you or anyone has, but I do give a shit when a product or it's mouthpiece is being judged on merits that it never claimed to have or want. I'm starting to wonder why I even do care. There will always be people who take their purchase and decide to make it an ingrained part of their identity, and defend it to the death and attack the "opposition". Since trying to clarify Reggie's job and the purpose of his statements has apparently led to me appearing as "on the Nintendo side", I want no part of that. I'm on the side of gaming itself. I am on the side of new ideas, and the maximizing of what the medium is capable of.

 

[medv4380]

The Wii U is barely even a next-gen console. Eurogamer analyzed the performance of games like BLOPS2, Mass Effect 3, and Arkham City and found that more often than not the Wii U performed WORSE than the 360. Once Sony and Microsoft bring out their next-gen consoles, the Wii U will occupy the same space the Wii did -- an underpowered console with a gimmicky control system that's fun for casual gamers but useless to hardcore gamers, except for maybe some Nintendo first-party games.

I won't be surprised if third party developers refrain from putting true next-gen games on the Wii U. If not, I expect the Wii U to hold back third party game development. POS can barely play current gen games as is.

And if I ported Quake to the WiiU it would have the exact same slowdowns and glitches as it does on the PC. Just as it has the same slow downs in the same places regardless of the speed or power of the machine. Ported code rarely shows any real improvement, and Parallel code usually requires a complete rewrite to show any improvement. I've also read the article you're referring to about Arkham City and they do not say it's "WORSE". They say it preforms about the same as it does on the 360, and the improvements like the FXAA are a double edged sword helping it in some places and not so much in others. They also pointed out that the screen shots of the Trailers that everyone was upset about where PRE RENDERED CUT SCENES.

Those low-res shadowmaps from the now infamous screenshot? They appear to be confined to a pre-rendered video sequence, presumably dumped from the Unreal Engine editor, and are nothing more than an oversight.

It runs almost identically to the 360 probably because the 360 is a 3 core design and the WiiU is a 3 core design and thus it would port easier from the 360 code to the Wii U. Clearly they didn't optimize for Quad threads per core and just used the same duel threaded core strategy that is on the 360. Rewriting the entire game that most of the fanbase already has is a foolish expense since you're only going to sell to a few fans that didn't pick it up originally, or crazy collectors. You're entire argument also can be put against the PS3. Final Fantasy 13, horrid game, was designed and optimized for the PS2, and was only PORTED to the PS3. The PS3 didn't add anything to it they just did a quick and dirty port and it worked just fine, except for its failing as an actual game. Does that mean the PS3 is as weak as the PS2. NO, it means that the game really wasn't designed to use newer architecture.

 

[Warachia]

Except, as I said....he said NOTHING that could be remotely construed as throwing down a challenge gauntlet. He basically just said "here's what we have to offer, and we're pretty confident in our product".

Did you read his actual statements, or just fall for the headline as the Escapist's writers hoped you would?

Sometimes, ignorance is not bliss, people.

Don't talk shit when you didn't read the source article: "In the end, our competitors need to react to what we're doing in the marketplace and need to figure out what their innovation will be".
How is that not a challenge? This statement goes on by the way: "It's likely that faster processors and pretty pictures won't be enough to motivate consumers. They need to react to what we've done and we need to continue innovating with the Wii U and we will."

 

[Aglynugga]

Wii-U? More like Pwee-U, 'cause I smell a stinker!
Y cry? Let nintenduh make there money now 'cause in 2 yrs m$ and $ony will maike there millions of dollars with the ps360 and they will all laugh to the bank then while we pay $80 for mario 5 and black ops 4 and halo 7. lol

 

[Vie]

Sony & Microsoft: "We already did."