Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3910111213
Results 301 to 322 of 322

Thread: Slow Wii U sales?

  1. #301
    Kirby (Level 13) Tanooki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    5,896

    Default

    I said Nintendo fan/fanboy (either or.) And I know what a modern console costs, but the point was Nintendo said one thing, then blew it so badly that the price of entry into it isn't worth it given the long hauls between anything worth buying since third parties made a run for it. I agree it's a quality system and I personally really enjoyed the controller, but nice hardware aesthetics don't make up for a lack of things to enjoy using it. And you're right about waiting for years, but even now years into it, there's not much to show for the system which is very unfortunate outside of Nintendo games, and some of those are even misses.
    Last edited by Tanooki; 05-02-2016 at 08:28 AM.

  2. #302

    Default

    The final curtain has dropped for the Wii U. Production ended January 31, 2017. It was Nintendo's Sega Saturn. The Switch is selling very well early on, just like the Dreamcast did. Let's hope this isn't Nintendo's last home console, because they seem to have fixed their mistakes. Limited mainstream appeal killed the Saturn and the Wii U; consumer stupidity killed the Dreamcast. I'm glad Nintendo still has a good reputation so that the consumers don't fuck them over like they did with the Dreamcast.
    Real collectors drive Hondas, Toyotas, Chevys, Fords, etc... not Rolls Royces.

  3. #303
    Crono (Level 14) Custom rank graphic
    Gameguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Richmond Hill, Ontario (Canada)
    Posts
    6,810

    Default

    I personally hate the Dreamcast, there's nothing on it worth playing that isn't also on another platform. They were mostly just arcade games which got boring after 10-20 minutes, awful 3D fighters or platformers, or Shenmue which was slow and boring with horrid voice acting. I really hate this system, though I would say it's on par with the N64 overall.

  4. #304
    Peach (Level 3) PreZZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    629
    Xbox LIVE
    PreZZ
    PSN
    PreZZ

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gameguy View Post
    I personally hate the Dreamcast, there's nothing on it worth playing that isn't also on another platform. They were mostly just arcade games which got boring after 10-20 minutes, awful 3D fighters or platformers, or Shenmue which was slow and boring with horrid voice acting. I really hate this system, though I would say it's on par with the N64 overall.
    You are going to gaming hell, to say such profanity!!
    Dreamcast is my favorite game of all time, BITD it was the best thing ever, playing quake 3 and pso online was mind blowing in 99-2000!! True that a lot of ports were made after it died, but they all sucked IMO compared to DC. N64 sucks now, this I agree. Maybe you got too late on DC to witness the magic

  5. #305
    ServeBot (Lɘvel 11) RP2A03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    59 6F 75 72 20 48 44 44 20 61 64 64 69 6E 67 20 65 6D 62 61 72 72 61 73 73 69 6E 67 20 64 61 74 61
    Posts
    3,515

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PreZZ View Post
    You are going to gaming hell, to say such profanity!!
    I know, right? How can anyone compare the Dreamcast to the N64?




    I mean, the N64 is way better. Everyone knows this.
    Mario says "... if you do drugs, you go to hell before you die."

  6. #306
    Banned

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WelcomeToTheNextLevel View Post
    The final curtain has dropped for the Wii U. Production ended January 31, 2017. It was Nintendo's Sega Saturn. The Switch is selling very well early on, just like the Dreamcast did. Let's hope this isn't Nintendo's last home console, because they seem to have fixed their mistakes. Limited mainstream appeal killed the Saturn and the Wii U; consumer stupidity killed the Dreamcast. I'm glad Nintendo still has a good reputation so that the consumers don't fuck them over like they did with the Dreamcast.
    This made me laugh. Let's just blame the consumer now.

  7. #307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FieryReign View Post
    This made me laugh. Let's just blame the consumer now.
    It was cynicism about Sega that killed the Dreamcast, both on consumers' and developers' parts. Sega had failed with the Saturn and 32X, and some dumbasses saw "Sega" and thought "Oh the Saturn and 32X failed, this will too" even after seeing that it had solid 3rd party support early on. Some developers also eschewed the Dreamcast ONLY BECAUSE it had Sega on it. EA Sports was a big one. If Madden was on the Dreamcast it would have probably gotten the system another million or two in sales from Sept 1999 to Mar 2001, potentially lengthening the system's life. But no, some consumers and developers thumbed their noses up at Sega, even if the Dreamcast was a good product.

    The Switch is a good product, there's already something like 40 games out for it and the specs look quite promising. The difference is that even after the failure of the Wii U, consumers and developers haven't developed the same cynicism about Nintendo as they did about Sega some 20 years ago. Maybe the consumers and developers have gotten smarter since then.
    Real collectors drive Hondas, Toyotas, Chevys, Fords, etc... not Rolls Royces.

  8. #308
    Banned

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    755

    Default

    ^That's utter nonsense. Blame the consumer and developer. Because Sega and Nintendo did nothing wrong? Cool.

    Switch is a good product, don't make me laugh. Why, because you bought one? 40 games? You counting digital downloads too? How many of those are exclusive to the thing and how many are worth playing?
    Last edited by FieryReign; 03-30-2017 at 03:07 PM.

  9. #309

    Default

    For one, EA deserves a lot of the blame. EA said they wouldn't support the Dreamcast until it sold a million units. Fair enough. Well it hit that mark quickly. Then EA fucked out and didn't give the Dreamcast shit. I think that if the Dreamcast had Madden (and the other EA Sports games) it would have hit that tipping point where it would have been reasonably successful (think Gamecube-level) and warranted a successor. The Sega NFL series was just as good, but it didn't matter. Even back then people went straight for Madden.

    Luckily Nintendo has a stronger first-party lineup than did 1999 Sega. I hope they succeed, and don't pull out of the console market. They're the only hardware manufacturer that was making consoles when I was born (Dec. 25, 1992) that still makes them to this day. The market leader on that day 8,862 days ago, Sega, is no longer making consoles.
    Real collectors drive Hondas, Toyotas, Chevys, Fords, etc... not Rolls Royces.

  10. #310
    Banned

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Yo, just stop. It's all EAs fault now? Not their responsibility to make a console successful. Sega and Nintendo made their own beds. Get over it.

    Nintendo treats their fanbase as retards and never listens. I hope they do pull out of making hardware. That's what they get for being stubborn and putting out faulty machines with a weakass software lineup.

  11. #311

    Default

    All I'm asking is that consumers and developers judge the Switch on its own merits, rather than judging it on Nintendo's past. That's what killed the Dreamcast. Too many consumers and developers (especially EA, but also others) saw Sega's mistakes of 1994-1997 and held it against them in 1999 and later.

    The Saturn made a lot of mistakes. 2D prioritizing hardware that was hard to program for. Bernie Stolar. Surprise launch. The 32X was a mistake. But these mistakes were 3-6 years in the past by 2000. Why did Sega of the early 2000s have to pay for the mistakes of Sega of the mid 1990s? The Dreamcast had GOOD hardware, in fact Dreamcast games look and play about as well as pre-2003 PS2 games. Bernie Stolar was out by 1999. Sega said 9/9/99, and they stuck to it. And it seemed to be going well early on. But a lot of people and developers saw "SEGA" and thought "I'm not buying this. What if it's Saturn 2.0?" even though Sega had turned over a new leaf. And when you learn from your mistakes and put out a good console, you should sell. Of course the Dreamcast wasn't going to outsell the PS2, or make it to 2013 like the PS2 did. But it certainly could have been a viable competitor to the Xbox and Gamecube.

    I don't yet have a Switch but I will by December 31, 2017. Will probably get one for my 25th birthday.

    Nintendo seems to have done the same thing Sega did in 1999. Make competitive hardware. Court third-party developers. The Switch shouldn't have to pay for the Wii U's downfalls. Nintendo screwed up. But that's in the past. Luckily Nintendo has much deeper pockets than Sega did in the early 2000s, and a very robust handheld division. If the Switch screws up, then maybe Nintendo needs to hang up the console gaming division. But not yet.
    Real collectors drive Hondas, Toyotas, Chevys, Fords, etc... not Rolls Royces.

  12. #312
    Banned

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    755

    Default

    You're not making any sense. I'm a consumer. If I bought 3 pairs of Nikes and they all sucked, you think I'm going to give them more of my money?

    People are judging the Switch on it's own merits. It's an expensive, weak, and faulty piece of trash with a pathetic game lineup. There's literally no reason to own one, it's nothing but ports.

    At least the other guys can meet supply and demand. With that fakeass shortage nonsense. There's nothing competitive about the Switch, weak 3rd party support, so where are you pulling that crap from? The thing will fail, there's nothing portable about it and the controller things were designed by retards. Who the hell has hands that tiny?

  13. #313
    Crono (Level 14) Custom rank graphic
    Gameguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Richmond Hill, Ontario (Canada)
    Posts
    6,810

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WelcomeToTheNextLevel View Post
    That's what killed the Dreamcast. Too many consumers and developers (especially EA, but also others) saw Sega's mistakes of 1994-1997 and held it against them in 1999 and later.
    It would have helped if they included a DVD drive in it, that's a main reason why the Gamecube did so bad back then(along with the whole Barney purple kids image). Having a DVD player back then was a really big deal and a lot of people chose the PS2 just because it could play them, I'm remembering what I thought at the time too. The Dreamcast also focused on bringing arcade games home at a time when most people stopped caring about arcade games, besides that were the weird art film like games such as Seaman or Shenmue, more experimental pretentiousness than fun. Really obvious why nothing sold that well.

    Quote Originally Posted by FieryReign View Post
    Who the hell has hands that tiny?
    Maybe they were designed with Donald Trump's hands in mind?

  14. #314
    Crono (Level 14) Custom rank graphic

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    6,322

    Default

    I'm with FeiryReign with the Switch. It's sold over 2 million so far and for what? What are people honestly buying to play on the Switch that you can't play on anything else at this time? 1-2 Switch? Because everything else released so far can be played on either the Wii U or another console. I understand the people who want to just own everything, but the people backing the system are doing nothing more than trying to make their decision seem like it was the right one. Most people who purchased this were die hard Nintendo fanboys who had enough saved up money because there was literally nothing to buy on the Wii U. It's pretty hypocritical when those fanboys bashed the Xbox One and PS4 for most games being either ports or being able to play on last gen consoles, while they're praising the Switch for games that can be played on last gen consoles or are ports, or indie titles that can be played on every other console. Is it really worth paying $360 for the Switch and the pretty much required Pro controller for either ports or indies?

    For these same people who try to defend that the Switch has to cost $300 or Nintendo would lose money on it. These are the same people that would say the Wii U is as cheap as Nintendo could make it, despite that right at launch, the parts were being calculated to around $228, less than $100 less than the Wii U was being sold for. If you look at the cost of the Shield TV, a product that is identical in specs just about, it costs $199 and includes a 500GB hdd, something that is more expensive to produce than a replacement LCD screen which is probably a couple dollars each in bulk. Then there's the cost of the Pro controller, and I will say Nintendo's Pro controllers(I own one for the Wii U) and their 80 hour battery life is far better than what you can get for the PS4 and XBO, but you're also paying double the cost as you can regularly find a sale for a PS4 or XBO controller for $35-$40. 80 hours also doesn't matter when you'll never have the need to recharge the thing because you only own like two games for the system in a span of six years because the system has only ever had three releases(exaggeration, but not that far off honestly.)

    That being said I will state that the Switch has atleast one good indie title. The fact that it's on the PS4 and XBO as well doesn't make things any better, but a good game nonetheless, and that's Has Been Heroes. Premise is incredibly stupid, graphics look really cheesy and with the amount of backgrounds, character and enemy portraits, etc, looks like this might be a $1 mobile phone game, but this game is actually very good and very addicting. Definitely worth owning. So you have your three characters each on one of three lanes with enemies randomly coming down each lane. Each character either attacks once, twice, or three times, with different attack power for each, while each hit will either remove a stamina bar, or remove HP if they have no stamina. If the exact amount of stamina is removed, the enemy will be stunned and after getting hit, they'll receive full damage and reduce their maximum stamina by one, but the rest will be restored. Each character has a cooldown to be able to attack again(ATB basically,) and each character starts with a single spell but can learn four more, all with their own cool downs. Additionally each character can equip 12 accessories which give them stat bonuses, cooldown reduction, attack speed increases, immunities, etc. These and spells can be purchased from vendors on the randomized maps that you'll be moving along on your way to fight the boss. Extremely simple procedurally generated game by design, but there's a lot of strategy and depth to the gameplay which makes it such an enjoyable game. All of that being said, the game is actually really difficult, and each time you finish the game the difficulty permanently increases(with no way to reduce difficulty but by deleting your save data.) Because of its difficulty I'm actually really surprised it's on the Switch anyways. This isn't back in the 80s and the 90s, but in the 2000s where it's commonly known that Nintendo fans are notoriously bad at video games.
    Everything in the above post is opinion unless stated otherwise.

  15. #315
    Pretzel (Level 4)
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Tampa Bay, Florida
    Posts
    846

    Default

    I was going to wait to purchase a Wii U after it had been discontinued, figuring a big discount on something I felt was grossly over priced to begin with. Have you seen the prices for Wii U consoles at Walmart and Amazon lately? $450 each!. Best But doesn't even list them anymore. I am so glad I didn't wait. WOW!
    I bought brand new Xbox360's and PS3's with hard drives for $130 each and without hard drives for $100 each when they were discontinued. I thought eventually I would be able to buy a new Wii U console for maybe $150. Boy, was I wrong! Nintendo makes money even when they suck!

  16. #316
    Banned

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    755

    Default

    That's just collectardism. Mostly from the likes of douchebags from neogiraffe, nintentardage, and/or cracketboy. Where all they're worried about is "value" and make shit up about "rarity". Instead of just playing fucking games.

  17. #317

    Default

    I am not paying over $100 for a Wii U. Even if everyone else is paying $300-400 because they think it's "valuable", I don't think it's worth nearly that much, so when I get a Wii U it will be under 100 bucks. The fair price for a Wii U is between $84-86. Hell I got a fucking SG-1000 for $233. Why should a Wii U, a console that was in production 3 months ago and widely available, be more exPENISive than a 27 year old (at the time) console that had to be shipped halfway across the world?
    Last edited by WelcomeToTheNextLevel; 04-04-2017 at 12:23 AM.
    Real collectors drive Hondas, Toyotas, Chevys, Fords, etc... not Rolls Royces.

  18. #318
    ServBot (Level 11) MarioMania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    3,499

    Default

    I'm looking for a cheap Wii U

  19. #319

    Default

    A lot of Nintendo stuff is really exPENISive because of people that think Nintendo = valuable. We need to tell these FUCK!FUCK!tards that just because it has the Nintendo name on it it shouldn't be two or three times more exPENISive than a similar non-Nintendo product.
    Real collectors drive Hondas, Toyotas, Chevys, Fords, etc... not Rolls Royces.

  20. #320
    Pretzel (Level 4) Gamevet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    969

    Default

    Your better off looking for a Wii U on Craigslist. You can probably get one for under $200 with a small collection of games.

  21. #321
    Insert Coin (Level 0) Jehusephat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WelcomeToTheNextLevel View Post
    A lot of Nintendo stuff is really exPENISive because of people that think Nintendo = valuable. We need to tell these FUCK!FUCK!tards that just because it has the Nintendo name on it it shouldn't be two or three times more exPENISive than a similar non-Nintendo product.
    Tell me where Shigeru Miyamoto touched you.

  22. #322
    Pretzel (Level 4) Gamevet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    969

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jehusephat View Post
    Tell me where Shigeru Miyamoto touched you.
    At Nintendo Land?

Similar Threads

  1. Xbox Live Ultimate Game Sales With Alternating 1 Day Sales
    By The 1 2 P in forum Daily Deals and Discounts
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-02-2013, 08:57 PM
  2. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-25-2009, 11:09 PM
  3. Last Week's PSP sales vs DS Sales in Japan
    By Griking in forum Classic Gaming
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-29-2005, 01:58 PM
  4. July NPD Sales Numbers (poor gamecube is losing sales)
    By musical in forum Classic Gaming
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 08-20-2004, 11:50 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •