Tweet
Originally posted by Havok
View Post
The Wii U is doomed to the same fate as the Wii for a few simple reasons.
1) Nintendo is just now finally catching up to the Xbox 360 and ps3. While the Wii U will be more powerful at launch, most estimates I've seen have the system only moderately more powerful then current hardware. With the whole system costing only $180 in parts to Manufacture (Most of which is going into the controller again) it simply isn't realistic to expect a console that's going to be able to compete with the inevitable Next Box and PS4. Could it be 300% more powerful then the Xbox 360 or Ps3? Perhaps... But consider that these systems are from 2005/2006. I wouldn't expect anything less then a 300% increase after 7 years. To put things in perspective, the Playstation Vita is technically more powerful then anything currently on the market but thus far we haven't seen anything that can really show this power off.
2) The Controller will ultimately be Nintendo's undoing. Personal feelings aside, the controller is what Nintendo is banking everything on, it's what they're touting as the next big thing and are going to use to differentiate themselves from the other systems. Never mind the fact that as of last E3 Nintendo themselves went on record and stated that only 1 controller would be connected to each console and they had no intent on selling replacement controllers in stores. Since then the Big N has been at work trying to figure out a way to use more then one controller per console, and I'm confident we'll hear that the Wii U now supports 2 touch screen controllers at this years E3, but that will come with a serious cost to the console... Reduction in quality of game design, graphics, physics, and overall support. Nintendo's own first party software will likely be good to borderline excellent, and the first 2 years MIGHT be interesting for 3rd party developed games, however in the long run Nintendo has only screwed themselves with this design decision. For starters, Developers are going to want to port their games to the most systems, meaning with the big 3 in place, only 1 currently uses a touch screen controller. So if only 1 system uses this technology, you're not going to sink the same amount of time and energy into getting the most out of it as you would if all 3 used it. At it's best, I'd expect that most 3rd party games wil use the screen as a HUD or Map... at it's worst... well... anyone remember the VMU?
3) Developers aren't going to develop for Nintendo first. As alluded to in point number 2, the controller is already going to be limited in it's touchscreen support since only one console will use it. However even more problematic is that when the inevitable successors to the ps3 and xbox launch, they're going to eclipse what Nintendo will be able to do. So what happens then to the Wii U? It gets downgraded ports of games that are designed for either the ps4 or Next Box. It happened this generation with the ps3, and it will happen again next generation to Nintendo. Now I'll admit that in theory, Nintendo could shock the industry and become the front runner, however given Nintendo's restrictive nature, abysmal online support, and archaic policies regarding many key parts of the current video game market, it's HIGHLY improbable that Nintendo will do any better next generation then it did this generation as there are plenty of accounts from developers stating their dislike for the way Nintendo does business.
4) Miyamoto. Perhaps one of the greatest minds to ever work in the video game industry, his works are the most highly regarded and memorable of all Video game legacy's. Personally, I'd place the characters he's created in such high regard that they are more like-able and memorable then even those of the Disney brand. However for as Great as Miyamoto was (in the 80's and 90's) he's now the #1 problem with the Nintendo company. Miyamoto has failed to progress beyond what he did in the mid 90's. It's as if he just gave up after Mario 64 and Ocarina of time. Zelda is still essentially the exact same experience that fans played for the first time in 1998, and even that was only moderately different from what we first played on the NES and SNES. In 1998 Ocarina of Time was a truly memorable experience, riding Epona, going fishing, and just exploring the world was new and exciting. However since then we've seen the core ideas miyamoto introduced expanded and elaborated on to such a degree that New Legend of Zelda titles seem like an outdated antique before it even hits market. If the Legend of Zelda is to survive it needs to evolve. The Elder Scrolls titles have demonstrated very clearly what is expected in an adventure title. For starters, we need a true open world. No more trying to fake it by creating a large world that a player cannot do anything in until the correct time in the game.
Every Legend of Zelda game has followed the same pattern: Find sword, Purchase Shield, Find Heart Container, Fight Boss, Find Heart, Find Boomerang, Find Heart Container, Find Better Sword, Fight Boss, Find Bombs, Find Heart container, Fight Boss, Find Hookshot, Find Heart Container, Find Magic, Find Heart Container, Fight Boss, Find Bow & Arrow, Fight Boss, Find Master Sword, Find Heart COntainer, Fight Gannon/Final Boss.
The Legend of Zelda needs to take a page from the Elder scrolls, we need true open world go anywhere environments that don't restrict the player until they've acquired a specific item, there needs to be NPC's that people actually care about, and as startling as it may be, characters MUST speak. Following in this example, Miyamoto needs to hand the reins of Mario over to someone else. I think it's extremely well documented that People want a true sequel to Super Mario World. The Mario games have always been fantastic (I own every one and in many cases multiple versions of each one) however the past several (yes even Mario galaxy) have lacked the creativeness of the games from the 80's and 90's. I've seen AMAZING custom levels online and fantastic ideas through a variety of communities, but these thoughts and ideas fall on deaf ears as Miyamoto feels he still knows what people want, and to be blunt he doesn't. For anyone doubting my thoughts on Miyamoto I only need to point to Miyamoto's last 3 "original" ideas...
Wii Fit Anyone?
or Maybe Wii Music?
or Better yet, the Wii Vitality Sensor
It's obvious even to the most ridiculous of fanboy's that Miyamoto's time has past, and it's time for him to take on a different role at Nintendo and hand creative control over to younger artists.
The Wii U certainly has potential, and it's undoubtedly going to be a success (though I doubt it will come anywhere near the total number of sold units that the Wii did), however it's basic premise and design is flawed to the point that it can't possibly hope to be the "it" console. Will I purchase it? Of course, I own every mainstream console since 1981, however that doesn't mean it will get a lot of use. I've owned my Wii since April 2006 yet only play it a handful of times per year, and even then it's only for the latest Mario Game. Meanwhile My Xbox 360 see's weekly if not daily use and my game library for that system alone is pushing 200 games. The wii has proven that there is a casual market of video game fans, however it's also proven that this market alone cannot sustain your profits/console. Nintendo need's the core gaming market and until they recognize that and stop catering to 5 year old and 85 year old's, they will never be anything other then 3rd in the console race.
1) Nintendo is just now finally catching up to the Xbox 360 and ps3. While the Wii U will be more powerful at launch, most estimates I've seen have the system only moderately more powerful then current hardware. With the whole system costing only $180 in parts to Manufacture (Most of which is going into the controller again) it simply isn't realistic to expect a console that's going to be able to compete with the inevitable Next Box and PS4. Could it be 300% more powerful then the Xbox 360 or Ps3? Perhaps... But consider that these systems are from 2005/2006. I wouldn't expect anything less then a 300% increase after 7 years. To put things in perspective, the Playstation Vita is technically more powerful then anything currently on the market but thus far we haven't seen anything that can really show this power off.
2) The Controller will ultimately be Nintendo's undoing. Personal feelings aside, the controller is what Nintendo is banking everything on, it's what they're touting as the next big thing and are going to use to differentiate themselves from the other systems. Never mind the fact that as of last E3 Nintendo themselves went on record and stated that only 1 controller would be connected to each console and they had no intent on selling replacement controllers in stores. Since then the Big N has been at work trying to figure out a way to use more then one controller per console, and I'm confident we'll hear that the Wii U now supports 2 touch screen controllers at this years E3, but that will come with a serious cost to the console... Reduction in quality of game design, graphics, physics, and overall support. Nintendo's own first party software will likely be good to borderline excellent, and the first 2 years MIGHT be interesting for 3rd party developed games, however in the long run Nintendo has only screwed themselves with this design decision. For starters, Developers are going to want to port their games to the most systems, meaning with the big 3 in place, only 1 currently uses a touch screen controller. So if only 1 system uses this technology, you're not going to sink the same amount of time and energy into getting the most out of it as you would if all 3 used it. At it's best, I'd expect that most 3rd party games wil use the screen as a HUD or Map... at it's worst... well... anyone remember the VMU?
3) Developers aren't going to develop for Nintendo first. As alluded to in point number 2, the controller is already going to be limited in it's touchscreen support since only one console will use it. However even more problematic is that when the inevitable successors to the ps3 and xbox launch, they're going to eclipse what Nintendo will be able to do. So what happens then to the Wii U? It gets downgraded ports of games that are designed for either the ps4 or Next Box. It happened this generation with the ps3, and it will happen again next generation to Nintendo. Now I'll admit that in theory, Nintendo could shock the industry and become the front runner, however given Nintendo's restrictive nature, abysmal online support, and archaic policies regarding many key parts of the current video game market, it's HIGHLY improbable that Nintendo will do any better next generation then it did this generation as there are plenty of accounts from developers stating their dislike for the way Nintendo does business.
4) Miyamoto. Perhaps one of the greatest minds to ever work in the video game industry, his works are the most highly regarded and memorable of all Video game legacy's. Personally, I'd place the characters he's created in such high regard that they are more like-able and memorable then even those of the Disney brand. However for as Great as Miyamoto was (in the 80's and 90's) he's now the #1 problem with the Nintendo company. Miyamoto has failed to progress beyond what he did in the mid 90's. It's as if he just gave up after Mario 64 and Ocarina of time. Zelda is still essentially the exact same experience that fans played for the first time in 1998, and even that was only moderately different from what we first played on the NES and SNES. In 1998 Ocarina of Time was a truly memorable experience, riding Epona, going fishing, and just exploring the world was new and exciting. However since then we've seen the core ideas miyamoto introduced expanded and elaborated on to such a degree that New Legend of Zelda titles seem like an outdated antique before it even hits market. If the Legend of Zelda is to survive it needs to evolve. The Elder Scrolls titles have demonstrated very clearly what is expected in an adventure title. For starters, we need a true open world. No more trying to fake it by creating a large world that a player cannot do anything in until the correct time in the game.
Every Legend of Zelda game has followed the same pattern: Find sword, Purchase Shield, Find Heart Container, Fight Boss, Find Heart, Find Boomerang, Find Heart Container, Find Better Sword, Fight Boss, Find Bombs, Find Heart container, Fight Boss, Find Hookshot, Find Heart Container, Find Magic, Find Heart Container, Fight Boss, Find Bow & Arrow, Fight Boss, Find Master Sword, Find Heart COntainer, Fight Gannon/Final Boss.
The Legend of Zelda needs to take a page from the Elder scrolls, we need true open world go anywhere environments that don't restrict the player until they've acquired a specific item, there needs to be NPC's that people actually care about, and as startling as it may be, characters MUST speak. Following in this example, Miyamoto needs to hand the reins of Mario over to someone else. I think it's extremely well documented that People want a true sequel to Super Mario World. The Mario games have always been fantastic (I own every one and in many cases multiple versions of each one) however the past several (yes even Mario galaxy) have lacked the creativeness of the games from the 80's and 90's. I've seen AMAZING custom levels online and fantastic ideas through a variety of communities, but these thoughts and ideas fall on deaf ears as Miyamoto feels he still knows what people want, and to be blunt he doesn't. For anyone doubting my thoughts on Miyamoto I only need to point to Miyamoto's last 3 "original" ideas...
Wii Fit Anyone?
or Maybe Wii Music?
or Better yet, the Wii Vitality Sensor
It's obvious even to the most ridiculous of fanboy's that Miyamoto's time has past, and it's time for him to take on a different role at Nintendo and hand creative control over to younger artists.
The Wii U certainly has potential, and it's undoubtedly going to be a success (though I doubt it will come anywhere near the total number of sold units that the Wii did), however it's basic premise and design is flawed to the point that it can't possibly hope to be the "it" console. Will I purchase it? Of course, I own every mainstream console since 1981, however that doesn't mean it will get a lot of use. I've owned my Wii since April 2006 yet only play it a handful of times per year, and even then it's only for the latest Mario Game. Meanwhile My Xbox 360 see's weekly if not daily use and my game library for that system alone is pushing 200 games. The wii has proven that there is a casual market of video game fans, however it's also proven that this market alone cannot sustain your profits/console. Nintendo need's the core gaming market and until they recognize that and stop catering to 5 year old and 85 year old's, they will never be anything other then 3rd in the console race.
This is a very well written post that I have a hard time disputing alot of what you say, however, there are a few points that I can respond against.
For your point 1, by every bit of information we have so far, the new xbox will only be 20% more powerful than the Wii-U, that is not very much at all. We don't have any solid information about the PS4 yet, but I would be willing to bet it won't be too much more. The problem is that in this day and age, the majority of people are not going to spend 500-800 dollars for simply more power on their systems. They already have systems that can do 720. Is it worth it to pay that much for true 1080? Nintendo has always innovated outside of graphics, and has done VERY well.
For point 2, everyone, and I mean everyone said this EXACT thing about the Wii controller back in 2005/2006. Look what happened? It became so wildly popular that even Sony and Microsoft tried to copy and paste it years later. Also, early report of both 720 and PS4 state it is very likely that both could have some sort of LCD screen on the controller. For PS4 at least, it will have the VITA as a controller, which could mean 2 of the 3 systems having similar set ups for games.
For point 3. Nintendo has also stated they are trying to better the mistakes of the Wii by having very strong 3rd party support. They seem to be doing just that, however I am very skeptical about it. I hope they do, because if they do, the Wii will be THE system to have, with no use for a PS4 or 720 IMO. It is also likely, maybe very likely as you said that when the other systems come out, developers will move to those systems and only port to the Wii U again, as they did the Wii. At least this time, they will have a system only 20% less powerful, than a system 200 or more % less powerful to downgrade too. You also have to think, if the Wii-U can do true full 1080 and the 720/PS4 is more powerful, what is it going to do? 2160p? I live in NOVA, in one of the major tech capitals of the US, with the highest median salaries in the entire country, and I know ONE person who has a TV supporting anything more than 1080. MS/Sony know this, and know that it will be a long time before these super powerful TV's start making their rounds. I think its very likely that the next Sony/MS consoles won't be as huge a jump as PS1>PS2 and xBox > 360 were. Multiple reports I have heard say similar.
For point 4, I do not believe it is Miyamoto who is solely to blame for Nintendo not as evolving as quickly, but I do agree there is a problem with that. Aonuma is in charge of Zelda, Miyamoto is just kind of a resource for Aonuma to ask questions. While I do agree Zelda has gotten a bit repetitive and could take a chapter from Skyrim, I also still 100% believe it to be the best series ever made. Twilight Princes was fantastic, even if it was a darker clone of OoT, and Skyward Sword was very good in itself. You can see nintendo tried to change it a bit, maybe not enough. As for Mario, I would agree on the side scrolling games, but 100% not on Mario Galaxy games. Those games were unbelievably innovative and very very well done. The use of gravity, and the level design was and is platforming perfection to me. I would put them both above Mario 64, even with how truly fantastic M64 was.
Where nintendo does need to evolve is Mario Kart, as MK Wii didnt have enough customization and online options as it should, but they seemed to have fixed and evolved with MK7 for the 3DS so I think it is safe to say MK Wii U could do the same.
For your 3 original ideas you point out from Miyamoto, yes the vitality sensor was total crap, but for Wii Music and Wii Fit, look what Sony and Microsoft did with kinect and move? Tried to copy and paste and upconvert them just like the motion controls. Now I do agree that both of them on all systems is crap, but clearly some people like it as ALL 3 major players are doing it.
Your statement on what Miyamoto needs to do is exactly what he has done btw lol. People thought he was retiring earlier but it turned out he was doing just that. Stepping down a bit so others can take over.
To close I will say that based on pure numbers, the Wii is BY FAR the FIRST in the console race of last generation, and very likely will be in this next one.
[MENTION=2415]Havok
Comment