Wii U Catch-All

I guess we'll see soon. I'm confidant the opposite is true, at least in the case of the PS4, because that's precisely what Sony did with the PS3 and PS2 (supporting 480p and 1080p long before they were even available, let alone the standard).

I mean, sure. Sony thought we'd get a second job for the PS3, why not mortgage the house for a $25,000 TV?

That's a bit flip of me, but I'm not really kidding. The PS3 suffered for its first three years, til they made the price realistic. It still costs Sony a lot to produce because of their most-power approach, and what good has it done them? Very few PS3 games look *that* much better than 360 games. The Vita's performance should also be a lesson to them about consumer behavior. How many times does "being the BMW" have to burn them before they learn?

I just don't see 4k happening this time around. If the TVs were to drop below $2000 for a 47" before 2015, I'd be happy to see it, but it really seems too early to me.

ahrezmendi wrote:

I guess we'll see soon. I'm confidant the opposite is true, at least in the case of the PS4, because that's precisely what Sony did with the PS3 and PS2 (supporting 480p and 1080p long before they were even available, let alone the standard).

But most PS3 games are actually 720p upscaled. Really, it's incapable of pushing 1080p with full effects. Even the average mid range PC can push many more effects at 1080p than a 360 or PS3. What we should be hoping for is graphics that actually reach the potential of our 1080p screens along with improved AI, more open areas, and all the other good things that come with more processing power and memory. 4x is just a pipe dream. Of course, that's not to say that these new consoles won't look fantastic upscaled on 4x screens.

Man, I want to continue this discussion, it's interesting, but I don't want to derail the thread. Is there a Xbox 720 or PS4 thread sitting around here somewhere?

Yeah, the predominant Xbox thread is called "Nextbox rumors..." and the PS4 one is "Playstation 4".

Cool, I'll take it over there. Back to the Wii U, that I don't own yet.

I think there was also some chit chat about 4K TV down in Tech & Help in the CES topic that languished. I think it's going to be about 3-4 years (or more) before 4K is affordable to the end consumer. That's incredibly late into the next console generation, and not worth putting the extra hardware in right now. The thing with the current generation, is that by the time they were on the scene HDTV was just starting to become affordable. Like, MS handed out about 100 or so low to mid-range 25" or 27" (I forget the exact specs) Samsung TVs at GDC 2005 which were valued at about $1,000 each and I think only went up to 720p or 1080i. You can get quadruple the screen size (ie. double the diagonal lenght) LED TVs for that price now.

I'm also not 100% sure Sony wants to take another big gamble like they did with Blu-Ray. I think Blu-Ray took significantly longer for mass adoption (and it still hasn't supplanted DVD) and content streaming has become a viable option. With 4K content, there's no media format big enough to contain a full video. Sony and other 4K manufacturers are providing hard drives with 4K content on them because you can't fit that on an optical disc right now. You also can't stream it easily in the US because the bandwidth just isn't there for the home consumer. Plus, most TV shows are still being broadcast in 720p due to things like bandwidth concerns. Even if you do get a 4K TV, there's very little out there to take advantage of it.

That said, Wii U definitely won't get it patched in. There's probably not enough video RAM to hold a frame buffer that big.

ahrezmendi wrote:

Back to the Wii U, that I don't own yet. :(

+1

And so I give you a random 'news' bit. It seems Retro has been leeching talent from other studios, including a few from Vigil (which is now closed due to the THQ debacle). This comes via a neogaf forum thread, so I didn't look to close at it, but GoNintendo posted a blurb on it. Retro picking up Vigil people sounds good to me.

Bunch of headlines I'm reading this morning are of the "Wii U sales start a bit weak, is it already too late?" variety, as if something not being a runaway hit out of the gate means it can't possible succeed. Gods I hate the "enthusiast" press sometimes...

Early 3DS sales were weak too and we all know how that went.

Oh wait...

Demyx wrote:

Early 3DS sales were weak too and we all know how that went.

Oh wait...

To be fair, it did take a huge price cut to spur sales of that but yeah, a lot of press outlets still dump on the 3DS as a relic of a by-gone era and that the portable market has moved on to mobile lock, stock and barrel. Maybe it's retaliation for the legions of insufferable Nintendo fanboys over the years (most of which have become even more insufferable Apple fanboys now) but the press just seems to be finding reasons to dump on Nintendo lately. I've seen more than a few people comment that Nintendo's going to fail because the Wii U won't sell as well as the Wii. Even Nintendo was shocked by how well the Wii sold, that's really the bar people are going to hold them to?

Oh, it's true. The same was also true of the PS3 which had (I think) an even slower start than the Wii U.

Nintendo will probably be fine.

How did the original Nintendo DS sell? I feel like no one saw the success of that device coming, or if they did it was mostly a "well, it's a Nintendo handheld, of course it wins" (even though I also recall people claiming the PSP might make it out-dated in terms of graphics).

ccesarano wrote:

How did the original Nintendo DS sell? I feel like no one saw the success of that device coming, or if they did it was mostly a "well, it's a Nintendo handheld, of course it wins" (even though I also recall people claiming the PSP might make it out-dated in terms of graphics).

IIRC, it was written off as "a gimmick that will never catch on". Just like the Wii. And then the 3DS. And people are still saying it about the Wii U.

What's that definition of insanity, again?

Minarchist wrote:
ccesarano wrote:

How did the original Nintendo DS sell? I feel like no one saw the success of that device coming, or if they did it was mostly a "well, it's a Nintendo handheld, of course it wins" (even though I also recall people claiming the PSP might make it out-dated in terms of graphics).

IIRC, it was written off as "a gimmick that will never catch on". Just like the Wii. And then the 3DS. And people are still saying it about the Wii U.

What's that definition of insanity, again?

DAMN YOU

Parallax Abstraction wrote:

Bunch of headlines I'm reading this morning are of the "Wii U sales start a bit weak, is it already too late?" variety, as if something not being a runaway hit out of the gate means it can't possible succeed. Gods I hate the "enthusiast" press sometimes...

Well here's something that you might like: "Developers, what's your issue with the Wii U Gamepad?" by Chris Carter over at Destructoid.

Basically he's taking issue with the statement made recently by Crystal Dynamics' Noah Hughes, where he stated that the reason Tomb Raider wasn't coming to the Wii U was because they wouldn't be able to do something unique with the experience on the Wii U. Carter calls BS, and rightly so. There's no reason a port can't simply use the Gamepad as a controller, with minimal use of the screen. Heck, you could just have the Gamepad mirror the TV. Just port the game already.

Could you imagine how maddening it would be to hear that a developer couldn't figure out how to shoehorn Kinect into an in-demand port, and thus gave up on bringing it to the Xbox 360 entirely? Then blamed the entire ordeal on the Kinect?

Does that make much sense to you? Then why does the exact same thing happen to the Wii U?

Hear, hear.

ccesarano wrote:

How did the original Nintendo DS sell?

The Nintendo DS sold better than the PS2 (in a lot less time) and it's either the most successful video game system ever made or like second-most successful.

Parallax Abstraction wrote:
ccesarano wrote:

How did the original Nintendo DS sell?

The Nintendo DS sold better than the PS2 (in a lot less time) and it's either the most successful video game system ever made or like second-most successful.

I think the question was how did it sell in the first year or two? Did it take a while before it took off as a huge success. Can you look at the Wii U's sales right now and declare it dead?

SixteenBlue wrote:
Parallax Abstraction wrote:
ccesarano wrote:

How did the original Nintendo DS sell?

The Nintendo DS sold better than the PS2 (in a lot less time) and it's either the most successful video game system ever made or like second-most successful.

I think the question was how did it sell in the first year or two? Did it take a while before it took off as a huge success. Can you look at the Wii U's sales right now and declare it dead?

The original DS didn't really take off until the DS Lite and the expanded audience games hit. Really, anything that happens the first year can be wiped away with big titles. I think we'll see a big price drop this Spring/Summer and I'm okay with that. I think they'll axe the basic bundle and cut the price of the deluxe bundle by $100.

DS sales were average to slow until the DS Lite and some of the mainstream hits arrived (Brain Age, Nintendogs, Pokemon, NSMB).

So like usual games are what mattered.

Ulairi wrote:

I think we'll see a big price drop this Spring/Summer and I'm okay with that. I think they'll axe the basic bundle and cut the price of the deluxe bundle by $100.

I'd almost certainly pick one up at that price, but I think the cut will be $50 around the holidays. Agree that they'll axe the basic, though. That thing seems like a non-starter.

I don't think we'll see any of the next gen platforms do gang busters right out of the gate. The last console cycle started in 2005 and 2006 and we're in a very different market. I think Nintendo is going to find success with the Wii U by force of will. They'll bundle/price cut their way to 50 million units sold. I think the smartest thing for Nintendo would be to get on a 4 year cycle at a lower price point and make it easier to move from one platform to another by having all the stuff work from one system to another.

Speaking of which: next month we get Rayman and I assume everyone is picking it up or they'll get a visit from some muscle to make you buy it.

No Rayman for me. I will still be playing Ni No Kuni and ZombiU, and buying Crysis 3 and Fire Emblem. Plus I still have Rayman Origins, completely untouched.

Rayman's pre-ordered already. My girlfriend and I will be co-opping that front to back like we did with Origins. Can't wait!

Blind_Evil wrote:

DS sales were average to slow until the DS Lite and some of the mainstream hits arrived (Brain Age, Nintendogs, Pokemon, NSMB).

So like usual games are what mattered.

By the end of 2004, they sold close to 3 million units (Worldwide).

By the end of 2005, the total was about 14 million (+11 million).

By the end of 2006, the total was about 35 million (+21 million).

Is that too slow?

If I had one cent per unit, I would be doing great.

Parallax Abstraction wrote:

My girlfriend and I will be co-opping that front to back like we did with Origins. Can't wait!

Woah, I love co-opping front to back! I didn't think they made video games about it though.

Fire Emblem!!! I just finished the demo last night, I can't wait for the full version.

PRG013 wrote:
Blind_Evil wrote:

DS sales were average to slow until the DS Lite and some of the mainstream hits arrived (Brain Age, Nintendogs, Pokemon, NSMB).

So like usual games are what mattered.

By the end of 2004, they sold close to 3 million units (Worldwide).

By the end of 2005, the total was about 14 million (+11 million).

By the end of 2006, the total was about 35 million (+21 million).

Is that too slow?

If I had one cent per unit, I would be doing great.

For those of you keeping track at home, the 3DS was introduced in early 2011.

By the end of 2011, they sold 13.25 million units worldwide.

By the end of 2012, the total was 27.24 million.

Poor, failed console. (And for the record, it has already sold nearly 1 million units globally this month.)

Bringing this back to the thread topic: in its first year (2006), the Wii sold 2.9 million units worldwide. In its first year (2012), the Wii U sold 2.2 million. The Wii U certainly isn't on track to beat the Wii's 16 million units in its second year, but it's not so astronomically behind where the Wii was after its first holiday season in terms of raw numbers.

I'm sure someone will come along to correct my reasoning, but I wouldn't call the Wii U dead on arrival just yet.

PRG013 wrote:
Blind_Evil wrote:

DS sales were average to slow until the DS Lite and some of the mainstream hits arrived (Brain Age, Nintendogs, Pokemon, NSMB).

So like usual games are what mattered.

By the end of 2004, they sold close to 3 million units (Worldwide).

By the end of 2005, the total was about 14 million (+11 million).

By the end of 2006, the total was about 35 million (+21 million).

Is that too slow?

If I had one cent per unit, I would be doing great.

Hrm. 3 million slow...?

In comparison with the rest of the sales numbers maybe. But at the same time, when did the DS release? Either way, it doesn't seem like the DS was slow at all when it first came out.

That's the point. The Wii U sales are also not slow. They're perfectly fine.