Nintendo Wii U

[Dandy_Sephy]

Kid Icarus is an original title though, it's just using an IP Nintendo forgot about for 20 years. Mario 3D is also an original title that uses a established IP. Original titles don't boil down to how old the IP is, it's what you do with it. Resi 4 was an original title, in a established franchise that redefined an entire series. Oh and that was originally Wii exclusive.

[Guest]

They provide the best games and the best controller. Now Sony might provide the best gpu and MS might bring the best online. Weighing all that up Nintendo are probably the best choice for the discerning gamer.

Leaving the controller argument aside, I want all that rolled into one. Hence my original reasons for wanting Nintendo to go software. I honestly think it'd be best for everyone. We'd inevitably get more of the amazing Nintendo games you want, plus they'd have more grunt allowing new experiences and they'd have the best online infrastructure. I don't see why anyone would be against that.

[Revival]

Because thats exactly what happened to Sega and their output and quality took a massive hit and they still haven't recaptured the creativity and quality they once had.

Sega without hardware development are a shadow of their former selves.

[Hewson]

Leaving the controller argument aside, I want all that rolled into one. Hence my original reasons for wanting Nintendo to go software. I honestly think it'd be best for everyone. We'd inevitably get more of the amazing Nintendo games you want, plus they'd have more grunt allowing new experiences and they'd have the best online infrastructure. I don't see why anyone would be against that.

Usually it's the people who don't really like Nintendo's output who say things like this. They're also the types who say things like "why can't Zelda be more like Skyrim?". It ignores Nintendo's long history of hardware amd controller innovation (and reliability) and the fact that so many of their great games are designed wth that hardware in mind. So it's basically a call for homogeneity. And that's just odd.

[Guest]

Because thats exactly what happened to Sega and their output and quality took a massive hit and they still haven't recaptured the creativity and quality they once had.

Sega without hardware development are a shadow of their former selves.

Nintendo aren't Sega though, so there's no evidence they'd go the same way.

[Guest]

Usually it's the people who don't really like Nintendo's output who say things like this. They're also the types who say things like "why can't Zelda be more like Skyrim?". It ignores Nintendo's long history of hardware amd controller innovation (and reliability) and the fact that so many of their great games are designed wth that hardware in mind. So it's basically a call for homogeneity. And that's just odd.

It's not homogeneity I want, it's more of Nintendo's games. I just think they're spreading theirselves too thinly to do anything real justice. If they focussed wholly on software I'm sure we'd see more and better games than we get now. I'd be willing to sacrifice any Nintendo hardware innovation (their last two generation's efforts have done nothing for me) for better software output.

[squirtle]

The Vita may have a fair few games, but it clearly doesn't have any games that many people actually want. If it did, it would be selling more. Listing all the games for it is a pointless exercise because clearly none of those games had driven sales very much.

The Wii U is suffering the same fate at the moment, but as Pauly pointed out, the Wii U had the benefit of all the big hitters from Nintendo still to come. The Vita does not have that luxury.

[Cthulhu Steev]

Because thats exactly what happened to Sega and their output and quality took a massive hit and they still haven't recaptured the creativity and quality they once had.

Sega without hardware development are a shadow of their former selves.

We lost Sonic, but gained this:

[squirtle]

A Shinji Mikami title that they happened to publish?

[Cthulhu Steev]

The Vita may have a fair few games, but it clearly doesn't have any games that many people actually want. If it did, it would be selling more. Listing all the games for it is a pointless exercise because clearly none of those games had driven sales very much.

The Wii U is suffering the same fate at the moment, but as Pauly pointed out, the Wii U had the benefit of all the big hitters from Nintendo still to come. The Vita does not have that luxury.

I'm buying one next week for Velocity Ultra, and that wasn't even in his list (should've been at the top)

[squirtle]

Well that's Sony sorted then!

[Revival]

Nintendo aren't Sega though, so there's no evidence they go the same way.

You know I almost wrote in that reply that someone is guaranteed to write exactly that: Nintendo aren't Sega though' word for word.

There's no evidence they won't go the same way especially if the gamers asking for the change don't have a vested interest in what Nintendo have represented over the last 30 years.

Making a compromise that big would most probably change that company to the core.

We lost Sonic, but gained this:

That was developed by Platinum games by an ex Capcom employee, Sega had nothing to do with it.

[Hewson]

It's not homogeneity I want, it's more of Nintendo's games. I just think they're spreading theirselves too thinly to do anything real justice. If they focussed wholly on software I'm sure we'd see more and better games than we get now. I'd be willing to sacrifice any Nintendo hardware innovation (their last two generation's efforts have done nothing for me) for better software output.

That first bit about Nintendo spreading themselves too thinly is a red herring. The second bit is what you really mean - you'd sacrifice their innovation for what you automatically assume would be better software. My point is that those things are intrinsically linked. You're arguing to kill innovation and make all things more in line with your taste. I understand that but it misses the point. I'd rather the difference was there - you can simply choose to buy the kind of games you enjoy. After all, the other two platforms pursue that avenue. Then we're all happy.

[Yiggy]

The vita is a good machine with good games.

The 3DS is a good machine with good games that I actually want to play on a handheld.

On vita, motorstorm, velocity and gravity rush were the key titles for me. The 3DS has a list as long as my arm.

[Cthulhu Steev]

Well that's Sony sorted then!

It's me sorted! I'll have Velocity Ultra to play

[Rain Birds]

Usually it's the people who don't really like Nintendo's output who say things like this. They're also the types who say things like "why can't Zelda be more like Skyrim?". It ignores Nintendo's long history of hardware amd controller innovation (and reliability) and the fact that so many of their great games are designed wth that hardware in mind. So it's basically a call for homogeneity. And that's just odd.

Yep. It would be a more contstrained (and much, much more conservative) Nintendo. If it all lives or dies on your games, you'd better make sure they're cheap or certain to be a hit with then 360 boys. That means an FPS, licensed sport or third person action / horror game. There would have to be a significant reshuffle, you couldn't green light big budget, HD versions of games as odd as Skyward Sword (even with its familiar Zelda mechanics) or Mario Galaxy.

I suppose a true collaboration could work on an artistic level, even if there's not much in it for anyone financially. Say if they teamed up with Microsoft and were allowed to design the controller and collaborate on the interface with MS's involvement being more behind the scenes, making sure it doesn't run like a crippled elephant while Nintendo found a place for MiiVerse, a useable start screen and took MS's avatars, sense mangling store interface and endless dashboard ads out the back and executed them.

[ras el hanout]

You guys are crazy. The best thing about the WiiU is the gamepad. I fucking love it. It wouldn't exist if Nintendo didn't make hardware.

[Rain Birds]

You guys are crazy. The best thing about the WiiU is the gamepad. I fucking love it. It wouldn't exist if Nintendo didn't make hardware.

But you would be able to play Dark Zelda with voice acting and a balls to the wall Metroid FPS. Instead of offering the frame work for the sort of game Bioshock Infinite should have been, Metroid can become the game BI was forced to by its audience / publisher focus groups!

[Revival]

You guys are crazy. The best thing about the WiiU is the gamepad. I fucking love it. It wouldn't exist if Nintendo didn't make hardware.

The irony is it would probably have existed 8 years ago if people had bothered to support Sega

[Guest]

Making a compromise that big would most probably change that company to the core.

Undoubtedly. I just think it would (or at least could) be for the better.

That first bit about Nintendo spreading themselves too thinly is a red herring. The second bit is what you really mean - you'd sacrifice their innovation for what you automatically assume would be better software. My point is that those things are intrinsically linked. You're arguing to kill innovation and make all things more in line with your taste. I understand that but it misses the point. I'd rather the difference was there - you can simply choose to buy the kind of games you enjoy. After all, the other two platforms pursue that avenue. Then we're all happy.

I'm not happy because it means I have to buy two consoles. Exactly what I said in my first post this morning.

[cavalcade]

The vita is a good machine with good games.

The 3DS is a good machine with good games that I actually want to play on a handheld.

On vita, motorstorm, velocity and gravity rush were the key titles for me. The 3DS has a list as long as my arm.

The 3DS has 24 games with a Metacritic rating of 80 or above, the Vita has 19, and a clearly stronger release schedule for 2013. Neither machine has a massive quality advantage over the other. Browsing through the titles in that list, both systems feature console ports, indie titles, old IP and derivative games - neither has a monopoly on titles designed from the ground up for a handheld. The 3DS sells better because it's cheaper, because Mario, because it's aimed at a younger demographic and because of the Nintendo brand. It's not really rocket science.

I'm still excited to buy a Wii-U - I'll probably dip in for one of the younglings birthdays. To be honest, the fact it doesn't support Unreal 4, CryEngine and SuperBaldShooterMenEngine is a plus point.

[squirtle]

I'm not happy because it means I have to buy two consoles. Exactly what I said in my first post this morning.

Which is just what Sony would have you do to get the same experience.

[Hewson]

I'm not happy because it means I have to buy two consoles. Exactly what I said in my first post this morning.

Indeed. And I'm saying that, while I appreciate you'd like things to be more convenient for you personally, I'd rather that consideration of your convenience didn't lead one of the most innovative, generally profitable and well-loved platform makers to go software only.

[scottcr]

People complaining about *having* to buy a WiiU but will happily "DAY ONE!1!1" both the PS4 and Xbox.

IDGI

Wonder what's going to happen when, inevitably, one of the next big two starts to flounder... As they are both chasing the exact same market

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

The next Xbox and Playstation will have more than 6 worthwhile games during its lifespan, I think that's the whole point. It'll have the exclusives AND third party must haves instead of just a handful of Sony or Microsoft games.

[Yiggy]

The 3DS has 24 games with a Metacritic rating of 80 or above, the Vita has 19, and a clearly stronger release schedule for 2013. Neither machine has a massive quality advantage over the other

I don't give a damn about Metacritic.

On the whole the two systems deliver a massively different experience and the 3DS is one which I just prefer, along with many others. This comes from owning both machines but now only owning a 3DS. I will buy a vita again when it hits £100 new thanks to PSN+.

[joffocakes]

The Vita has a stronger release schedule for 2013 than the 3DS? What?

Also, I wouldn't say the other next gen consoles will flounder due to chasing the same market as Wii U; Wii U doesn't offer what a lot of that "core" market want* while the PS4 promises it will.

*As many pixels showing muscles and explosions as possible.

[kensei]

Who's said anything about it being a singular Sony future?

I just want both hardware and software devs to push things to the limits. It could be any company that does it and I'd be equally as happy. MS, Sony, Valve, Apple, Nintendo or another party. I don't care. I just want the best games on the best hardware with the best online systems, the best graphics and the best innovations.

Ah. You see you are talking to people who want hardware and software makers to push in different directions.

[moosegrinder]

I honestly didn't think this thread could get any more tedious, but the whole Vita/3DS thing has proved me wrong, so well done all.

[Guest]

People complaining about *having* to buy a WiiU but will happily "DAY ONE!1!1" both the PS4 and Xbox.

IDGI

Wonder what's going to happen when, inevitably, one of the next big two starts to flounder... As they are both chasing the exact same market

Who's said that? I want one console that has everything.

Whether that be the PS4, new Xbox, Steambox or whatever, I'm easy.

I'll still have to buy a WiiU to sit next to it if I want to play the handful of Nintendo's AAA games though and that's what bothers me.