Why is the Wii U not succeeding?

[CloudAtlas]

And sometimes it might not even be desirable. Call of Duty is hated by many, but its core gameplay would work well for such a wide range of titles - everything with guns in it and a "realistic" feel to it, if you want - without major changes. Hell, I would have loved it if the combat of, say, Mass Effect or Fallout 3 felt more like good old CoD or Battlefield.

So the games industry, which is already becoming rather conservative in testing new gameplay concepts in favour of just sticking to already determined templates, would be even better if more games played exactly like each other? I thought one of the major criticisms of Battlefield 3 and Medal Of Honour was that they tried too hard to play like COD, rather than having their own identity?

That's rather off topic, but: Yes, I do think so - to some degree. Cover shooters are hated by many because they're "all the same", but that's just, at its core, pretty much what real combat is like. So every combat in every game with guns aiming for a realistic feeling should be, at its core, a cover shooter. Since CoD is, mechanically, a very good cover shooter, that would mean that such games would feel more like CoD, yes. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't add anything to the experience, that you shouldn't try to improve upon the formula, or differ in details, or anything like that, but, you know, at its core. And, yea, I think games like, say, the Mass Effects or Fallout 3 would have definitely been better if they did. This is not to say, I want to stress, that every game with guns should be like this, but every game that aims for a certain combat feeling.

And, in case of doubt, yes, I would prefer being conservative with gameplay concepts to being conservative with storytelling. But this is just my personal preference. And, don't worry, if both gameplay and story is pretty much same old same old, as with CoD, I'm not happy either.

 

[80sboy]

I think the name isn't doing it any favours.

If they called it the Wii 2 or something I reckon it would be doing better. Calling it the Wii U makes it seem like the Wii's equivalent of a DSi or GBA SP, so people who already have a Wii aren't going to buy one.

But you don't understand, it's an awesome name.

It's saying, it's not just about we (wii) anymore, we also want you (u) to play. U to be a part of Wii. It's poetic - don't you see! Reggie Fils-Aime has fought tooth and nail to prove this through all the skeptics that it's brilliant - BRILLIANT!

lol

Back to the OT, it's because there's no games. And the name is also a piece of shit.

 

[vIRL Nightmare]

*Flexes fingers*

It's been too long. Once more unto the breach dear friends, once more!

Also in terms of power, it isn't a secret that generally Nintendo products are not par with their competitors. This is important to quite a few people.

The PS4 and Xbox One are both using a rather average CPU designed for tablets. If you really give a damn about tech specs, PC is really the only way to go. Neither of the new-HD twins are offering anything remotely close to what high end PC gaming can currently do.

Hopefully I cut this right, new to this forum and all. I agree completely, people that care about specs should be considering PCs. However there are those that do "care" about specs but only look at consoles. Generally speaking in my case I prefer PC gaming for what I can get on the PC, but there are a lot of exclusives on the consoles, so generally I pick up my preferred console of the group, whatever that may be at the time. That and some games I simply prefer on a console.

 

[Lightknight]

All those creative IP's have come from studios that are not part of Sony and Microsoft making games for their platforms.

? The following is a very quick list I threw together of just games I recognized from the list of good exclusives. Not racing games which would certainly extend the list.

Sony Exclusives where they're at least the publisher
Heavy Rain
Beyond Two Souls
Flower
Heavenly Sword
inFamous
Journey
Killzone
Last of Us
Little Big Planet
Resistance
Uncharted

Note that in most of the above, they're technically the developers too because they own the developers (like Naughty Dog, Media Molecule, Guerilla Games, and Sucker Punch to name a few)

Sony Exclusives where they're the/a Developer and Publisher
Demon's Souls
God of War series
Starhawk
Tokyo Jungle

Microsoft in turn had much fewer exclusive titles but they were generally heavier hitters. That's because their bigger titles were generally also made available on the pc.

Microsoft as publisher
Banjo-Kazooie
Crackdown
DanceCentral
Fable II
Gears of War
Halo

Microsoft Studio as publisher and developer
Some of the above may have been Microsoft owned developers. Not as sure who they own nowadays.

 

[spartan231490]

The Wii sucked, and the Wii U offers no fixes to that suckage.

 

[CloudAtlas]

That doesn't mean that they shouldn't add anything to the experience, that you shouldn't try to improve upon the formula, or differ in details, or anything like that, but, you know, at its core. And, yea, I think games like, say, the Mass Effects or Fallout 3 would have definitely been better if they did.

Fallout 3 had a unique combat system that, for all its flaws, gave it a unique identity. You can point to the V.A.T.S system and say 'That's Fallout 3', which is the most important thing when trying to make your game unique and stand out.

I found VATS to be really stupid, and consequently didn't use it. It turns what could have been an intensive, real-time action experience into nothing more than a video sequence of someone shooting a few bullets at something. I have a strong preference for not being able to pause combat anyway, but VATS does that to take even more away from my experience: If I hold a gun (or a bow, for that matter), I want to aim for myself, and not have some mechanic determine whether I hit or not.
I would argue that what gives Fallout its identity is rather its world, and the stories you find there. I sure didn't play it because of its combat mechanics.

Developers have nothing to gain by aping COD. People who want COD's mechanics already play COD. You're not going to convince them that your game is a better COD than COD. We've already seen games, and even developers, go under by trying to ape COD too much- Homefront and Medal Of Honour Warfighter are probably the best examples.

If you want to tell both the same story and use the same gameplay, sure, you gonna have problems. I totally agree with you there. But they have a lot to gain from using what's good there for their own stories. And if you do aim for a certain type of realistic combat feeling, yes, I do want to feel it to some degree like CoD, Battlefield & Co., because those games simply have refined this formula very far over the years, they simply get a lot of things very right. Now if you can do things even better, but experience shows that most firms that come from a different place can't. The two examples I cited, Bethesda and BioWare with Fallout 3 and Mass Effect, certainly couldn't, as much as I love their games for other reasons.

Personally, I'm getting more and more jaded of 'storytelling attempts' in gaming. I play games for gameplay. A game with a shit story but great mechanics is still a great game. A game with a great story but shitty mechanics is not. Ninja Gaiden Black may have the most basic of hackneyed plots, but it's still the greatest hack-and-slash game ever created. Storytelling is in many respects ancillary to the purpose of games: to be played.

I sometimes play for gameplay, I sometimes play for story. And games with a great story can still be great games, in my eyes, even if their actual gameplay is just servicable.

 

[Dragonbums]

All those creative IP's have come from studios that are not part of Sony and Microsoft making games for their platforms.

? The following is a very quick list I threw together of just games I recognized from the list of good exclusives. Not racing games which would certainly extend the list.

Sony Exclusives where they're at least the publisher
Heavy Rain
Beyond Two Souls
Flower
Heavenly Sword
inFamous
Journey
Killzone
Last of Us
Little Big Planet
Resistance
Uncharted

Note that in most of the above, they're technically the developers too because they own the developers (like Naughty Dog, Media Molecule, Guerilla Games, and Sucker Punch to name a few)

Sony Exclusives where they're the/a Developer and Publisher
Demon's Souls
God of War series
Starhawk
Tokyo Jungle

Microsoft in turn had much fewer exclusive titles but they were generally heavier hitters. That's because their bigger titles were generally also made available on the pc.

Microsoft as publisher
Banjo-Kazooie
Crackdown
DanceCentral
Fable II
Gears of War
Halo

Microsoft Studio as publisher and developer
Some of the above may have been Microsoft owned developers. Not as sure who they own nowadays.

Yes, but when I list exclusive for the WiiU, Wii, and DS family that are exclusives to Nintendo and not Mario and Zelda people love to chop down the list by saying "well those are developed by other studios so they don't count." Like how people wrote off X as a new IP because it's developed by Monolith Software- a company that is owned by Nintendo.
So narrowing down that list Sony and Microsoft have about the same amount of IP's that are used as Nintendo. Everything else they have is only beefed up because of exclusive deals with third party developers.

I'm pretty sure I saw jeffers give you a list of IP's they have made- new IP's I should emphasize and it is quite a hefty list.
Of course just because it's not up to your tastes doesn't mean it can't be discounted. We are talking about new IP's in it's basic definition.

 

[Mirrorknight]

A: No 3rd party games lead to low system sales. Low system sales leads to no 3rd party games. Vicious circle they can't seem to break out of.

B: Poor naming choice. A lot of folks that don't follow video game news think the thing is either just a fancy controller for the Wii, or think it's just a new version of the Wii, not a new system.

C: Piss poor marketing (which is mostly why B is happening). I'm guessing they got a big ego from the Wii's popularity, and just assumed that if they stamp Wii on it, it'll sell without spending money on silly marketing.

 

[Lightknight]

Things Nintendo hasn't stated:

1. The price point is pretty darn close to the competitors. $350 for the 32GB version compared to $400 for a ps4 that has a 500GB HDD and is significantly more powerful? That's silly.

I kind of feel that this argument is somewhat unfair, given that for the money, you're also getting a bundled copy of Nintendo Land and that online Deluxe thingy which gives you extra credit (10% I believe) on digital purchases. Whereas the PS4 comes with no bundled games for the money, and requires an extra $60 a year for online multiplayer, something Nintendo offers for free.

When you factor in all the associated costs, the gap is larger than Sony would perhaps care to admit. It's also worth pointing out that internal flash memory is far more expensive dollar-to-gigabyte than regular internal memory, and that the Wii U lets you attach any external hard-drive to act as extra storage space. Perhaps that sounds like a cop-out to some, but to me its an adequate explanation for the smaller hard-drive space.

Not that you don't otherwise make good points, but that point is one I've always disagreed with.

The thing is, you can't buy the WiiU without it. I agree that the game should be considered as part of it and that does help defray the cost, but perception wise you're looking at $350 vs $400 and that's how most people actually view it. At the end of the day, it isn't always what the exact specifics are so much as what consumers think. You and many of the people on this site actually care about gaming to strongly research all the options.

But please note that Nintendo Land is $17 on amazon, first source I looked at, new:

http://www.amazon.com/Nintendo-Land-wii-u/dp/B002I0K3M0

Not that big of a difference.

Sony and Microsoft have been relatively MUCH more productive where new IPs are concerned. This is mostly the nature of them being new consoles but Sony in particular has pumped out a lot. Nintendo has put out very few new IPs that I haven't already been playing since the 80's and 90's and it's part of their business model to do it that (aka, it's intentional because existing IPs will make more money and are less risky than new ones).

I think we may have debated this before, but I'll say it again: Wii Sports, Wii Fit, Xenoblade, Endless Ocean, Nintendogs, Pushmo, Crashmo, Sakura Samurai, Dillon's Rolling Western, The Last Story, Nintendogs, Brain Age were all original IP developed and/or published by Nintendo this generation. They may not have been to your taste, or struck you as particularly 'hardcore', but that doesn't discount them as original titles.

As for new IP for the Wii U, they're already publishing The Wonderful 101, and Miyamoto has said he's got an original IP in the works for next year. If Monolith's X isn't a Xenoblade 2, then that will likely be a new IP (I can't see Nintendo buying the Xenogears license from Namco). They've only got so many development teams, and can only work on a finite number of games at once, so I'm willing to wait and see what the Pikmin 3 and NSMBU guys come up with now they're both free.

We have indeed discussed this at length and I'll say the same thing I did before. I'm not referring to their handheld division. Nintendo is remarkably keen on that side of things and is damn near perfect where it comes to supplying an endless stream of joy on that front. Even if this was their last home console release I'd just expect even more out of their handheld division.

Likewise, I don't care anything for games that haven't been released yet. I have no idea how good they may be but Wonderful 101 does look like it'll be fun and Miyamoto working on a new IP sounds promising. However, I am skeptical when Nintendo states that they'll use the free to play model to introduce new IPs that need to gain gamer's trust.

But what you have to admit is that Nintendo doesn't respond to claims that they make too few new IPs with dismissal or listing games. They agree with and explain why. They (Miyamoto) say that they don't believe new characters make a new game. They believe that new gameplay makes a new game. So whenever they develop new gameplay they go through their list of existing characters and only pursue making a new one if no existing character matches the game's style (Miyamoto lists Pikiman as an example of one that was not suited to existing ones).

http://www.destructoid.com/miyamoto-on-why-nintendo-is-slow-to-create-new-characters-257750.phtml

So what we end up seeing is a bunch of new games lining up under existing IPs rather than branching out into other ones. While this isn't necessarily so bad as existing IPs mean reliability and higher visibility, it also means that consumers begin to feel like they've been playing as an Italian plumber for 30-fucking-years and they aren't wrong.

As to the games in particular Wii-x is all one IP and the other consoles have their own version. Kinect x being microsoft's and whatever the hell Sony's failure of peripheral gaming is called. Endless Ocean is quite clearly Everblue's IP rebranding (same dev company and everything). I think you mean Xenoblade Chronicles (they're leaning on the Xenogears frachise here, even if only in name).

In any event, the vast majority of new IPs are generally just filler. Nothing that stands out. Again, the handheld games are really where it's at but the home console is mostly more of the same.

I would most strongly mention Pikimin, Wii-x titles, and the Last Story. Not many big names.

 

[BloodSquirrel]

A: No 3rd party games lead to low system sales. Low system sales leads to no 3rd party games. Vicious circle they can't seem to break out of.

It's less "viscous cycle" and more that they're a generation behind hardware-wise. There's not much incentive to spin up WiiU development when the PS4 and Xbox180 are dropping later this year, and both are powerful enough to bring us a retread of the PC-Xbox-PS trifecta that ruled this gen. Third party developers just aren't interested in supporting an odd-man-out console when they've already got a three-platform ecosystem (soon to be a five-platform ecosystem during the transition period between this gen and next) that's perfectly functional and profitable.

 

[Roxas1359]

Tokyo Jungle

I'll give you that one. But still. Sony's own internal development outings are far less frequent than Nintendo's own internally developed games. And while Sony Japan has made original games like Rain, Nintendo EAd has matched that with games like Endless Ocean and Nintendogs.

Sony Computer Entertainment for Japan is actually Japan Studios, which gets confusing sometimes, and a lot of the development team from Japan Studios actually are also part of Team Ico. Then Europe's is Sony Computer Entertainment Cambridge, then the US one is just Sony Computer Entertainment America. Japan Studios will release some games from time to time, but a lot of games like some of the Ape Escape ones tend to not be released out in the west anymore since Ape Escape 3. Took a while for us to get Ape Quest and I didn't like Move, but we never got Million Monkeys or Big Mission sadly. I actually know people who think Ubisoft developed the games when all they did was just localize some of the Ape Escape games in the west.

 

[lapan]

It's less "viscous cycle" and more that they're a generation behind hardware-wise. There's not much incentive to spin up WiiU development when the PS4 and Xbox180 are dropping later this year, and both are powerful enough to bring us a retread of the PC-Xbox-PS trifecta that ruled this gen. Third party developers just aren't interested in supporting an odd-man-out console when they've already got a three-platform ecosystem (soon to be a five-platform ecosystem during the transition period between this gen and next) that's perfectly functional and profitable.

The PS3 was one of the factors that almost killed Sony and the Wii was one of the most successfull consoles last gen

 

[BloodSquirrel]

The PS3 was one of the factors that almost killed Sony and the Wii was one of the most successfull consoles last gen

Not successful at selling third party games, which is what third party developers actually care about. The Wii sold mostly to people who either didn't play a whole lot of video games or who also owned a PS3/360/PC. Third party games sold poorly on the system, so why make games for it when the other three platforms were easier to port between and you could sell more copies on each individually?

Also, the PS3 was fast catching up to the Wii. The Wii's sales fell off massively during the 2nd half of this gen.

 

[Malfy]

*No Zelda, Metroid, Starfox, or Smash Bros...yet.
*The Wii was a great idea for its simplistic controls and welcoming ideas (TV Remote with few buttons and motion controls, now go play bowling without leaving the house), so non-gamers had no problem picking it up and playing. Those same non-gaming people have little interest in a more traditional gaming pad with a touchscreen in the middle. How can you play Wii Sports on it?
*Smartphone gaming has become more popular. This will be a problem for all consoles.
*Nintendo has a stronger focus on the 3DS, with its dominating market share.
*Upcoming releases of PS4 and Xbox One

Making a Wii 2 with much better hardware probably would have sold like hotcakes, but the Wii U is vying for the same space that MS and Sony has battled each other for throughout the last generation, and no longer look like the innovators in the console market.

 

[dscross]

Personally, I'm getting more and more jaded of 'storytelling attempts' in gaming. I play games for gameplay. A game with a shit story but great mechanics is still a great game. A game with a great story but shitty mechanics is not. Ninja Gaiden Black may have the most basic of hackneyed plots, but it's still the greatest hack-and-slash game ever created. Storytelling is in many respects ancillary to the purpose of games: to be played.

So true. I still hark back to the genesis days for just that reason. Less stories, more gameplay...Praise be to the arcade era!

 

[MaximumTheHormone]

It falls just outside the mainstream with its awkward controller (similar to the original Wii), but it not affordably priced like its predecessor so it lacks the accessibility. The main reason the Wii took off like it did was that it was affordable at launch. Both the Wii and WiiU had a similar quantity of 'good' games [good being subjective] with the successful libraries of both consoles so far being very almost identical, a few hardcore hits, ninty staples ect. The real differentiator was that the Wii was priced cheap enough to be bought out of sheer curiosity. It could be bought with the comfort that it wouldn't completely break the bank and stats (dont ask me to produce them, google it, i cbf atm) show that many people who owned a Wii also owned another console showing that it completely usurped the usual generational console hierarchy of one console per gen.

 

[Soxafloppin]

Developers don't want to develop for the WiiU because not enough people are buying them.

Not enough people are buying the WiiU because developers aren't developing for it.

Kind of a never ending cycle!

 

[Lightknight]

It wasn't happenstance that I said exclusives where they're the/a developer and publisher.

Sony Exclusives where they're the/a Developer and Publisher
Demon's Souls

Actually developed by FROM Software.

Combination, developed by FROM software AND SCE Japan Studio (SCE meaning Sony Computer Entertainment). [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon's_Souls]

God of War series

Santa Monica Studios.

Actually, the name of the studio is SCE Santa Monica Studios or Sony Santa Monica. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCE_Santa_Monica_Studio] It was founded in 1999 by Sony in Santa Monica, hence the most creative studio naming we've ever seen. It also has quite a pedigree of other excellent IPs with a LOT of collaboration projects. Sony is really quite friendly with other companies as far as incubation and collaboration. That's actually why Sony gets so many exclusives. In fact, one such collaboration is up next:

Starhawk

LightBox Entertainment.

That was LightBox AND SCE Santa Monica Studio. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starhawk_(2012_video_game)] Note that Sony Santa Monica also worked on the 2007 Warhawk alongside Incognito Entertainment which may explain why Starhawk had so many similarities with Warhawk despite being considered a different IP.

Tokyo Jungle

I'll give you that one. But still. Sony's own internal development outings are far less frequent than Nintendo's own internally developed games. And while Sony Japan has made original games like Rain, Nintendo EAd has matched that with games like Endless Ocean and Nintendogs.

Hopefully you'll give me all of them once you see the information. I give no quarter here, good sir. (hah).

FYI, I also forgot to mention one of my favorite titles, Shadow of the Colossus. Developed by Team ICO which is in-turn a division of SCE Japan Studios. My list really was a quick once-over. There are likely a ton I have forgotten and that amount is already FAR more new IPs than Nintendo produced in the last 20 years. But again, that's because Nintendo's strategy specifically lends itself to reusing old IPs if they can. Hence paper mario and such. You've got to decide whether or not you have a personal problem with that strategy. Either way, it looks like Nintendo has recognized that a lot of gamers are experiencing at least some plumber fatigue which is why they're working on new IPs right now after having interviews explaining why they don't make a ton of new IPs.

 

[Lightknight]

Tokyo Jungle

I'll give you that one. But still. Sony's own internal development outings are far less frequent than Nintendo's own internally developed games. And while Sony Japan has made original games like Rain, Nintendo EAd has matched that with games like Endless Ocean and Nintendogs.

Sony Computer Entertainment for Japan is actually Japan Studios, which gets confusing sometimes, and a lot of the development team from Japan Studios actually are also part of Team Ico. Then Europe's is Sony Computer Entertainment Cambridge, then the US one is just Sony Computer Entertainment America. Japan Studios will release some games from time to time, but a lot of games like some of the Ape Escape ones tend to not be released out in the west anymore since Ape Escape 3. Took a while for us to get Ape Quest and I didn't like Move, but we never got Million Monkeys or Big Mission sadly. I actually know people who think Ubisoft developed the games when all they did was just localize some of the Ape Escape games in the west.

To make things even more confusing, Sony owns a ton of smaller developers and does a lot of collaboration like with the Sony Santa Monica example I mentioned above. People often just call it Santa Monica and I think that Sony has made a conscious decision to make these studios look like distinct entities which they kind of are even though they were founded/purchased by Sony.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment#Software_development_studios

Asia
SCE Japan Studio - Ape Escape, LocoRoco, Patapon, Knack
--Team ICO - Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, The Last Guardian
--Project Siren - Siren series, Gravity Rush
Polyphony Digital - Gran Turismo series, Tourist Trophy

North America
Naughty Dog - Crash Bandicoot series, Jak and Daxter series, Uncharted series, The Last of Us
--ICE Team

SCE Santa Monica Studio - Kinetica, God of War series, PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale
SCE San Diego Studio - MLB: The Show, ModNation Racers
SCE Bend Studio - Syphon Filter, Resistance: Retribution, Uncharted: Golden Abyss
SCE Foster City Studio - supported studio for SCE Worldwide Studios
Sucker Punch Productions - Sly Cooper series, Infamous series

Europe
SCE London Studio - SingStar, EyeToy, PlayStation Home
Evolution Studios - World Rally Championship, MotorStorm series
Guerrilla Games - Killzone series
--Guerrilla Cambridge - MediEvil, Killzone: Mercenary
Media Molecule - LittleBigPlanet series
--Xdev - External Dev Studio

*Studios with "--" in front of them are divisions within the studio immediately above them.

Their third party studios are even larger and listed next.

Developers don't want to develop for the WiiU because not enough people are buying them.

Not enough people are buying the WiiU because developers aren't developing for it.

Kind of a never ending cycle!

That really is the heart of the issue. You can't sell 10 million copies of a game on a console that hasn't even sold that many units even if you got 100% of the console owners to purchase it (which never happens). As you said, not getting games because of not enough purchasing it likewise means less motivation to purchase it and so even less games being made for it. Snake eating itself.

 

[dscross]

Developers don't want to develop for the WiiU because not enough people are buying them.

Not enough people are buying the WiiU because developers aren't developing for it.

Kind of a never ending cycle!

I think developers should act first then since they are the ones that want them sold!