Wii-U thoughts so far

[Flake]

I think it goes without saying that Nintendo is the one platform holder for whom exclusives are not really a worry.

Dsh, I gotta ask: Could you please contrast your view on Sony's Vita with your view on Nintendo's WiiU?

[dsheinem]

Dsh, I gotta ask: Could you please contrast your view on Sony's Vita with your view on Nintendo's WiiU?

In what sense?

[Flake]

You're so outspoken on the doom and gloom of Nintendo's WiiU but then I look at a system like the PS Vita that exemplifies the problems you outline for the WiiU and I don't see much criticism at all.

I think the Vita is much more of a commercial failure than the WiiU (which is not a commercial failure in the strictest sense of the word).

[AppleQueso]

Nintendo considers the Gamecube a failure, and the Wii U is trailing behind that. It's a failure by Nintendo's own standards, and they're just basically trying to keep the boat afloat until they can get something else rolling.

[fastbilly1]

He could, but it will have to wait a few days, he has to read a book today.

[dsheinem]

You're so outspoken on the doom and gloom of Nintendo's WiiU but then I look at a system like the PS Vita that exemplifies the problems you outline for the WiiU and I don't see much criticism at all.

I think the Vita is much more of a commercial failure than the WiiU (which is not a commercial failure in the strictest sense of the word).

I've chimed in on this point before, a few weeks ago: http://racketboy.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 75#p876475

[isiolia]

Nintendo, on the other hand, mostly wants to sell games and - specifically - its games. Accordingly - and while it is interested in third-party games to the extent that they move systems and allow it to sell more first-party games - Nintendo's business model probably does not encourage third-party games to the same extent as Microsoft and Sony.

I think if that were the case, Nintendo would be talking about getting out of the hardware game, if they hadn't already done so.

Third party sales mean licensing fees, which to my understanding, are the reason to be in the costly business of creating and maintaining a hardware platform. At one point in time, there wouldn't have been hardware on the market for Nintendo to publish to, necessitating they release something of their own. That's no longer really the case.

That they've continued to create their own platforms says to me that they still hope to generate revenue via licensing. Maybe not through all the different ways that MS and Sony are building in (or maybe they would if they could), but otherwise, what's the point?

[BogusMeatFactory]

Nintendo, on the other hand, mostly wants to sell games and - specifically - its games. Accordingly - and while it is interested in third-party games to the extent that they move systems and allow it to sell more first-party games - Nintendo's business model probably does not encourage third-party games to the same extent as Microsoft and Sony.

I think if that were the case, Nintendo would be talking about getting out of the hardware game, if they hadn't already done so.

Third party sales mean licensing fees, which to my understanding, are the reason to be in the costly business of creating and maintaining a hardware platform. At one point in time, there wouldn't have been hardware on the market for Nintendo to publish to, necessitating they release something of their own. That's no longer really the case.

That they've continued to create their own platforms says to me that they still hope to generate revenue via licensing. Maybe not through all the different ways that MS and Sony are building in (or maybe they would if they could), but otherwise, what's the point?

I wouldn't necesarilly say that prfsnl_gmr's statement correlates to Nintendo's desire to get out of the hardware game. Nintendo does want to make their games their way and what they want to do is utilize unique and interesting ways. Miiverse is very much it's own thing and the Gamepad can be utilized in awesome ways. What sucks is that the market says, "We don't want that," and Nintendo has to do what the market says, even though, I feel, the gamepad should be utilized more often.

They are stuck in a position where they are given lemons and they have to make lemonaid. The Miiverse was embraced and the pad was not. Why? I don't really know.

[Flake]

Probably because the MiiVerse is supported well and the gamepad never got passed being an extra screen for a map.

[isiolia]

I wouldn't necesarilly say that prfsnl_gmr's statement correlates to Nintendo's desire to get out of the hardware game. Nintendo does want to make their games their way and what they want to do is utilize unique and interesting ways. Miiverse is very much it's own thing and the Gamepad can be utilized in awesome ways. What sucks is that the market says, "We don't want that," and Nintendo has to do what the market says, even though, I feel, the gamepad should be utilized more often.

They are stuck in a position where they are given lemons and they have to make lemonaid. The Miiverse was embraced and the pad was not. Why? I don't really know.

They can do most/all of what they've been doing there without making the console.

Wiimotes or the Gamepad could be accessories, like light guns, steering wheels, plastic instruments, DDR pads, or whatever else before them.

Setting aside that Miiverse was probably implemented, at least in part, to replicate functionality that the 360 and PS3 already had...it doesn't require control of the platform to do. Not that I particularly want to see them (or care at all about Miiverse myself, for that matter), but uPlay and the occasional Facebook integration demonstrate that it could be done.

I'm not trying to turn things into a "Nintendo should get out of hardware" argument though. My point was that I think they're continuing to make consoles because they want to be collecting licensing fees, not paying them. The more, and more successful third party games, the better.
If they had a great third party lineup, they'd be highlighting it. They don't, so they're pushing first-party. It's PR spin.