|
Are you getting the Wii U? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
9031 | 65.25% |
| No |
|
1191 | 8.60% |
| Maybe |
|
808 | 5.84% |
| I'm an idiot |
|
460 | 3.32% |
| Waluigi |
|
1603 | 11.58% |
| Waa |
|
748 | 5.40% |
| Total: | 13841 votes | ||
|
I personally need more convincing. They can make all sorts of promises about how they're going to appeal to the "core gamer", and they've certainly gotten a couple surprise titles for the system. We'll see a year from now if they actually keep up the momentum they're trying to build.
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2012 13:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 16:31 |
|
|
Chronojam posted:It's a good idea! You're out getting herbs and GREAT JAGGI OHSHIT. One thing I like about Monster Hunter is that player skill (versus character skill/stats/equipment) is a huge part of it. Tutorial process should reflect that. Replace Jaggi with Kut-Ku because Kut-Ku has and always will be more awesome than a retarded looking Velocidrome 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2012 23:04
|
|
|
PaletteSwappedNinja posted:Dude's initial post was fairly reasonable and a hundred people jumped down his throat for it, so yeah, people are way too touchy. Then again, pre-release console thread. "But other threads/posters do it too  "MUFFlNS posted:I'll also add that like people said in the previous thread, I think that Nintendo purchasing Platinum Games would be very wise. They already appear to be quite close (Platinum is making two Wii U exclusives, and they've expressed interest in making a StarFox game) and I'm of the opinion that Nintendo simply don't have enough studios to pump out enough exclusive games for both their handheld and home console systems. If they could get Platinum Games on board, that would certainly be a big help to their sparse release schedules and make the Wii U a more attractive console to purchase in my opinion. My only real concern with them purchasing Platinum and foisting a bunch of franchises on them is that I don't want a repeat of Rare, where it gets pretty obvious near the end of their relationship that they've started to/have already lost the "thing" that makes Platinum loving rad. That said, for all my pessimism, if Platinum gives us Star Fox: Climax Assault and it's basically a seven hour on rails + all range mode shooter that's faster paced than Afterburner Climax, Nintendo wins, goddamnit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2012 02:32
|
|
|
AngryCaterpillar posted:I think the fact that big budget multiplatform games are on the thing should make it pretty obvious that it's not just a tablet. You can almost guarantee this is going to be the case in the beginning. It's all part of getting consumers used to it as a thing for the system. The DS did it, the Vita is doing. Ubi's already doing that with the new Rayman. This isn't inherently bad, though. Even I have to agree that there's plenty of potential for a second screen. I just think very few games on the DS line have ever really used it meaningfully for much more than Map/Menus.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2012 03:07
|
|
|
PonchAxis posted:I guess Ninja Gaiden died once Itagaki left Team Ninja. Or was NG2 as good as the first one? I can't remember I never played it, but I don't remember hearing it praised like the first one was. It's initial release was plagued with a number if issues. It was less forgiving than the first game in a lot of ways, which to this day staggers my mind. I recently tried to fire up the first Ninja Gaiden and I don't know how I beat that game on the original X-Box. I don't think I ever properly beat the second game. Despite that, honestly the Wii U would be better served just getting a proper port of the original Ninja Gaiden 2 minus all the slowdown, or another port of Sigma 1 and 2, rather than getting what amounts to a mea culpa for a lovely game. Maybe there's some DoA fans who are getting a Wii U and they want to see Real Doll Ayane cut poo poo up and QTE her way to victory?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2012 08:01
|
|
|
Runaway Five posted:
They held onto Kid Icarus for something like six months. Don't put it past them.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2012 01:06
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Uuuh no they didn't. It went Gold in February and came out that March, IIRC. Not to degrade this into 'But from what I was told' sorta of post, buuuuuut... from what I was told  The US guide came out late because when the game was originally shown some time last year, nobody wanted to do a guide. Nintendo, in its brilliance, didn't tell anyone there was more than nine levels to the game, so it didn't look like a good deal. You should check out the marketing of the game before release. There is nothing about it post Medusa. Nintendo not only held onto the game, but they didn't even disclose over half of the content behind the game to ANYONE. I remember being utterly blindsided by everything after the Medusa fight. There wasn't any mention of it ANYWHERE. The Hades reveal, Viridi, all the really batshit stuff was held close to their chests. Apparently, the Japanese guide book DOESN'T EVEN COVER THE WHOLE GAME. Which is kinda crazy to think about, because of how detailed the drat thing is, overall. If there's anything Nintendo does exceedingly well, its 'Keep a loving secret'. Holding onto Pikmin isn't a bad thing, it's just something Nintendo is willing to do in order to ensure a game has the right impact. MUFFlNS posted:It honestly sounds like the game you want to play is Sony's PlayStation All-Stars. No more enraging than someone posting this while pretending that that someone who wants to to play a Smash game that can cater to multiple mindsets (Like Melee) is actually someone who wants to play a game like Playstation All-Stars (which is nothing like Melee or Brawl). But you're right, it's a retarded topic mostly because people keep talking past eachother about it. fivegears4reverse fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Sep 19, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2012 01:21
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:Great! The WiiU is gonna start slow, but then pick up real quick after a price drop, and it gets the new games form popular franchises while the completing systems remain too expensive and without any games? Or it could actually be the 3DS: start slow, pick up real quick after actually interesting Nintendo games show up on the platform WITH a price drop, then basically drive on based on that and that alone and have months-long droughts in between releases that are actually interesting. For the first year and a half, at least. Which isn't a fair comparison to make no matter how you want to slice it, and I don't think it's at all applicable. The 3DS literally had nothing of value for six months and plenty of people were turned off by the platform before the price drop and the arrival of actual games. The Wii U is actually launching with 3rd party support that includes games a lot of people want to play, on top of the eventuality that we'll see a big Mario game that isn't The Best Of New Super Mario Bros, we'll see a Zelda, we'll see a (possibly lovely and further character demeaning) Metroid (that will be defended for god knows why). The dudes at Platinum want to make a STAR FOX game, which has real potential to NOT SUCK. Before launch, the Wii U has more potentially going on for it for embittered assholes like myself than the 3DS has had for the last year and a half. I don't think it'll be like the 3DS. I think it'll do a lot better out the gate, barring anything dramatically stupid on Nintendo's behalf. Some people (like myself) will have a big enough bug up their rear end about region locking that they won't get the system, at least right away, but most will not care. Their online could suck again, but the customers who are going to push the console to financial success will not care.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2012 13:16
|
|
|
Blackbelt Bobman posted:Some people like that stuff, though These people are almost all universally untrustworthy when it comes to critiquing the writing found in a game and should have their opinions ignored, though
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2012 19:21
|
|
|
"there's a robot therefore its anime" Mandrel posted:I'm pretty sure any illusions of being a grounded cautionary look at war went out the window the first time we saw the scene of them dual-wielding SMGs from the back of a snowmobile in the MW2 trailer. I'm pretty sure Call of Duty has always been anything BUT a "grounded cautionary look at war". CoD, much like Medal of Honor, has been about making moments from popular war movies playable to some extent, heavily scripted set pieces, and inaccurate portrayals of any given battle they were set to, and this was before they went to the Modern Warfare series. Of course, this doesn't stop people from pretending otherwise. EDIT: Maybe it's the famous quotes that the games keep dropping? To me its like if they started throwing in famous quotes after every death in God of War: it wouldn't make the game particularly insightful about modern war or violence. This derail is honestly a whole different thread altogether though. fivegears4reverse fucked around with this message at 00:28 on Sep 29, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2012 00:21
|
|
|
Mercury Crusader posted:If Oliver North being a war criminal doesn't disuade anybody, he's also on Fox News. If anything, Oliver North's involvement will not affect the sales of the game in either direction. The only thing that can stop Black Ops 2 from being anything short of an undeniable, record-breaking success is franchise fatigue. I'm sure plenty of goons are gonna give the game a pass (at least initially) just for that alone, but because so many people play these games, at least a few will suck it up and ignore the single player BS just to play multiplayer with their friends.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2012 06:52
|
|
|
greatn posted:I really don't get the loving deal with Zombies. It's almost as ubiquitous as "BACON!" and seems like a huge in joke every one except for me is in on. Is it that people have found a fictional class of person it is morally acceptable to slaughter?  But seriously guys, nobody thinks about what the (fictional) ZOMBIES feelBobnumerotres posted:Half? The people who are advertising North as the one terrible reason you shouldn't get BO2 have decided long ago that they are not getting BO2, due to franchise fatigue. Everyone else is going "Really? Well that sucks. ZOMBIES" Some people go so far as to assume that CoD fans are somehow not actually enjoying themselves and really do hate the games, they just don't know any better and one day they'll play a real game like (insert personal favorite) and they will understand that they were always a shiteater until they saw the light~ fivegears4reverse fucked around with this message at 15:01 on Sep 30, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2012 14:56
|
|
|
Xavier434 posted:He has a point though. Forcing achievements has lead to a lot of games whose achievements are a bunch of boring junk. It's wasteful. Might as well just let them choose whether or not to include the achievements at all. Remind me again what resource is being wasted through "You walked into a new town! 25 Nerd Points!" If you're going to say "developer time", you're wrong. In the vast array of things that do take up precious time for a big developer, this is hardly a blip on the radar. Disc space is hardly affected. System resources are hardly affected (hell, the Wii U has more memory than the PS3 or 360, so maybe when its notifications pop up games will not stutter to accommodate this). Even where achievements are mandatory, if the developer doesn't give a poo poo they can put a bunch of generic goals in a list and be done with it. Achievements literally have no negative impact on game design unless the design of the game is already flawed and focuses entirely around said achievements. That wouldn't be a problem with the idea behind achievements themselves, but rather a problem with people behind the game. I can't think of any top tier games these days where they are a problem. It seems like most of the arguments against achievements ultimately boil down to "I think they are stupid, the people who like them/hunt for them are stupid", possibly in more flowery prose.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 19:04
|
|
|
Fergus Mac Roich posted:I think you're being too dismissive. There have been plenty of very well-reasoned arguments over the years about the way achievements gently caress with reward schedules and force designers to deal with the fact that, just by the very existence of achievements, players will play a game in a certain way(in pursuit of those achievements). These arguements have never really done anything to dissuade me from thinking that the only thing wrong about achievements honestly is that some folks just don't like them and the people who try to get them all. Despite the fact that achievements (much like playing a game in general) are optional to the player and are hardly intrusive to the overall gameplay experience. If the player wants to ignore them, they can, and typically to little detriment. If game designers have a problem with people playing their games "a certain way" just to get an achievement, the onus is on them, not the gamer, to make them interesting and require whatever gameplay ideal they think the unwashed gamer masses ought to aspire to.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 19:38
|
|
|
Fergus Mac Roich posted:I won't paste the whole thing here, but go read this. Scroll down to the part where the interviewer asks about Farmville. Blow's answer sums up a lot of what people have to say about the psychology of achievements. I'd be careful about thinking that 'a lot of people' means an imagined majority. Most people are pretty unconcerned about achievements in general, given how few people actually go out of their way to collect them all. Most people get achievements just over the course of regular gameplay, some are even surprised by them. For example, short of looking up a guide or hearing about it from someone else, most people wouldn't find 'What does it mean?!' in Borderlands 2 without some meaningful off the rails exploration. Encouraging exploration of open world environments is not inherently a bad thing! What is bad is encouraging exploration of a BORING open world environment. This is why so many people bitch about GTA 4's Liberty City, but praise San Andreas for providing more to do. The advent of achievements did not make interesting environments that encourage players an impossibility. If John Blow wants achievements to be meaningful, interesting, and challenging to actually accomplish, then he should make it happen for his respective titles. He's the game designer. I fundamentally disagree with anyone who implies it's a "bad thing" to have something extra in game that draws a (relatively small) percentage of the gaming population back to a title to keep playing. This is not bad game design, this is successful game design, particularly around multiplayer centric experiences like competitive shooters or sports titles. About the only thing I'd agree with is if you could turn off the notifications entirely, but they've been pretty easy to ignore as is. As is, it's nice that Nintendo is providing the option for them. It'd be a mistake to write them off as unimportant: the whole reason they are even offering them in any capacity whatsoever is that people like the things, regardless of whatever people like Blow have to say about them. Even Nintendo recognizes the potential gameplay value. Re: Nintendo Not Understanding This Whole Communication Thing It's always one step forward, one step backwards. Unless this is really the fault of a rep not knowing what the gently caress, this kinda hurts the connectivity and communication features they've been trying to sell on the Wii U for the past year.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 20:13
|
|
|
Chronojam posted:That's going to bite them in the rear end when people just download the game instead. Woe to anyone with terrible internet speeds though. It's not as though games like Mass Effect 3 (who is really going to buy this on the Wii U) or Arkham City are going to be small downloads. The convenience of having it digital may not be enough to dissuade the impatient from just sucking up the additional cost of a physical copy, and its what these jerks are counting on. Aren't GAME going out of business or something like that? I feel bad for gamers in that region, always getting screwed really badly in pricing. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2012 20:25
|
|
|
So I just back from trying out Rayman Legends at a Gamestop. Game looks amazing. A shame that the gamepad is basically the least comfortable controller I have held that isn't some sort of third party monstrosity. Maybe if I could spend more than 15 minutes with it I could get used to it? At this point I feel I should avoid playing games that require it. The 3ds and the XL are uncomfortable enough for me to hold after an hour or so. I can't see myself wanting the gamepad for extended play sessions.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2012 00:31
|
|
|
Bobnumerotres posted:Did the kiosk have several demos you could try? I'd love to sample zombiu. The kiosk only had Rayman playable. Everything else was a video. I am not sure if that is how it is at every store, or if multiple demos are enabled elsewhere.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2012 02:03
|
|
|
Neddy Seagoon posted:That's an odd choice, given Rayman Legends was pushed off of the launch list and back to 2013. I guess they just had the demo ready and ran with it. It's probably the best choice they could have done. The level I played on the demo was a mad dash over a castle rampart/bridge thing with lots of stuff flying all over the screen. The music was like a mix of rock and heavy medal and some happier sounding stuff, and it was all timed to stuff happening in the game, so it sounded as awesome as it looked. Combined with the kiosk screen, it's a great intro to the new system. Everyone I saw trying it had a big ol' smile on their face. I don't think I've seen anyone look that happy playing a Mario game or a Zelda game in years. I don't think it NEEDS to be said, but I'll say it anyway: Rayman Legends is a beautiful game. I don't dig the Wii U gamepad at all, but this game to me will be the best platformer on the system assuming they don't force the touchscreen gimmick poo poo to a stupid degree.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2012 02:51
|
|
|
greatn posted:That could just be the first level, and increase in difficulty and complexity. Even if it gets 'harder', it'll still be whatever the hell that video was supposed to be, which is "a worse looking game than the proper F-Zero game that came out on the Gamecube." I have a feeling that after F-Zero GX, most people don't want the game to get 'harder' (you big babies )The video made this mini-game look like it was a harder to control Mario Kart that happened to include cars from F-Zero as unlocks or something. I think what was really throwing me off was that the camera didn't even follow the car properly through the turns.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
Chronojam posted:Any NES racing game would do Basically if Nintendo brings back a proper revival of RC Pro Am, I'll forgive roughly 50% of any of their (real or imagined) transgressions and probably end up getting a Wii U.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2012 22:10
|
|
|
Chaltab posted:Nintendo's hesitancy for online play may be related to the desire/necessity for monetization. You think the Smash Tourney scene complains a lot about Brawl: just wait until you can micro-transact to get a +5 Hat of Meteor Smash Radius. (I hope I didn't just curse this into existence.) This still doesn't make any sense. They literally do not care what those dirty evil nerd super bad tourney players have to say about anything regarding Smash Bros. If Nintendo wants more money, there's no reason for them to NOT turn Smash Bros into a microtransaction carnival. So you lose the "hardcore" that they already mostly disregarded in the first place, they still would make truckloads of money off of people who just want a new hat for Link. People will bitch about DLC no matter what it is regardless of quality or size, because some people don't like to spend extra money on a game they already own. Nintendo could easily ignore the whiners (like they have regarding other aspects of their business) and do just fine.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2012 20:22
|
|
|
Chaltab posted:New Super Mario Bros U needs a central server because lag is killer in a fast paced platformer, but that's extra cost for something Nintendo's not inclined to do anyway. You might be able to make this argument seriously for a game like Rayman Legends/Origins, which are fast paced games with much more capable of happening on screen at once at any time. The New Super Mario Bros series is not known for being "fast-paced". Little in the games move at a speed beyond "pedestrian", and it's a deliberate design choice that the games do this. It's the style of the series. Would it take time to make work well? Absolutely. It's just time Nintendo isn't willing to spend because of their own conservative mindset. They also don't need to really make a Mario game with online co-op, because the people who buy these games will make even more excuses than Nintendo will to try and justify why it "can't work". Lots of hardcore fighting gamers will tell you that playing a fighter online is a bad idea and it sucks to do so, but thousands of people still do it all the time because it is fun. I can't think of anything any single Mario game that places anywhere near the sort of demand on player reflexes compared to a fighting game. Literally the best argument Nintendo can come up with against co-op online play in a Mario game is that they don't want their players to experience the game that way. That's fine, but there is literally nothing bad about providing the option to do so in the first place. People like options. It's kinda why Smash Bros is fun for so many different types of gamers, you have options that they can all make use of to play the games the way THEY want to.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2012 21:55
|
|
|
katkillad2 posted:So they are going the Microsoft route I guess. Media center first and games second! The best way to "win" at advertising is to not be amazingly bad at it. The dubstep commercial you described is JUST AS BAD as the one we actually got. The focus isn't the real issue here. The advertising should be able to build hype about the system and the games and features it will have. This does nothing for anyone. People who are buying the system at launch were going to buy it REGARDLESS of the advertising. Reggie could appear on TV shouting "And for the first time ever: gently caress YOU" on constant repeat for a minute straight and those people will still buy it. Nothing in the full ad shows this renewed focus on recapturing gamers who fell off the bus. It does, however, have really bad music.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2012 23:36
|
|
|
TaurusOxford posted:Here's what we want: A highly challenging, satisfyingly competitive high speed racing game with great online, a deep car/track customizer, and some bitchin' tunes to listen to while I spin attack my opponent to death while going 2000km/h. People don't actually want this, if the wailing and gnashing about GX's difficulty around these parts is the majority opinion. But I'd be one of the five people who buy this theoretical new F-Zero alongside of you.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2012 03:58
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:I tried playing F-Zero GX's story mode on normal difficulty. I didn't have a problem with it the first time they put me in a race against twenty-four mathematically perfect racing robots who were all faster and heavier than me and had better handling. Nor did I give up the second time, when they also had a head start. But the third time, when I had all of two laps on the shortest track in the game to catch up to and destroy all of them - that's what broke me. I didn't want to have to start taking hypertension medication so I stopped playing it. I simply gave away my copy of the game rather than sell it, because any money I would have received from that transaction would have carried some remnant of my impotent rage. Quit getting mad at videogames.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2012 04:45
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:Yeah, maddening. It's not like the original sold or anything. It probably will not right away. Unless millions of people up and buy games for a system they aren't going to have for weeks/months. If the supply for the console is as limited as retailers are making it out to be.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2012 02:05
|
|
|
Toady posted:Dismissing what the next Xbox and Playstation will be capable of falls into the trap of assuming current technology is as good as it gets or that today's gameplay wouldn't benefit from additional processing power, which is an assumption that typically comes off as amusingly naive in retrospect. Lets not kid ourselves. Nintendo isn't really struggling that much for market mindshare. They did kinda sorta sell a hundred million Gamecube 1.5's despite not having the greatest third party support ever. It's a bit early into the Wii U's life to predict whether or not the system has legs. I fell into the same trap regarding the 3DS after it had a rough start, and now it's running circles around everything ever despite, once again, not really having the third party games I want to play and my own personal preferences shifting farther away from the Nintendo staples of Mario and Zelda (and then Metroid Other M doesn't give me faith that they are going to fix that franchise to my liking any time soon). All Nintendo has to do is release a fresh Zelda/Mario/Kirby/Metroid/Smash, and that's practically money in the bank guaranteed. Millions will buy the Wii U because these games will EVENTUALLY make an appearance. Millions more will buy the system the moment these games release. No other company in the market today, not ONE, has that sort of power over gamers. It's quite impressive.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2012 00:51
|
|
|
Some good news for people still hunting down a Wii U: apparently Fry's all over the country got a shipment of Wii U's, both the standard and deluxe editions. I learned about this when I visited one of their stores tonight, saw them taking literally a hundred Wii U boxes and putting them into secure cages. There's apparently some sort of caveat: they must be purchased as part of a bundle that costs $450+, part of some contract with Nintendo that apparently guarantees Fry's will be recieving shipments throughout the holiday season. I almost considered getting a deluxe one because hell it was right there in front of me, but ended up passing. Monster Hunter isn't until next year, and I'm pretty sure there will be plenty of systems around by then.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2012 10:45
|
|
|
Teenage Fansub posted:I wouldn't be afraid if there's games you totally want to play. In my experience you should expect systems to die at least once during their time with you. I kinda miss the days where Nintendo hardware lived up to the reputation of being nigh unbreakable. Every other Nintendo product (outside of the Wii) I've ever purchased has survived poo poo that would most likely kill other consoles. I had a DS go through a washer and dryer and the damned thing started up just fine after I made sure it was totally dried out (the L button didn't work initially, but the Nintendo's repair service took care of that). I dropped a Gamecube down a flight of stairs during a move, and it worked just fine up until the day I gave it to a friend, at most has a smattering of dents all over the system. He still plays Melee and Double Dash on it. On the other hand, I've had PS2s and Dreamcasts die from just regular usage well before any other piece of consumer electronics I've owned. I once dropped a PSP a couple feet onto soft carpet and ended up with a dead UMD drive. I used to have to turn by PSOne upside down just to get it to read discs after the first year of owning it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2012 13:50
|
|
|
Darko posted:Are they, though? Maybe on blacks, but stores around here are starting to overstock on white ones, Ebay is averaging at selling for a loss, and craigslist is unsellable to the point where people have stopped trying. When I returned mine, there were a couple of returns sitting there as well - possibly from people who couldn't sell them That's SE Michigan - is it different elsewhere? Wii U's are definitely not selling out. Fry's in particular are receiving regular shipments of regular and deluxe systems and are selling them in bundles with two or three games, depending on your choice of system. The reason they're getting the regular shipments is due to an agreement with Nintendo to sell them in those bundles. The two Fry's in my area literally have had stacks of both models pretty much every day since launch. I'm pretty sure part of it is the price on top being in a forced bundle. That's a lot of dough to spend on a new system, especially if you're still on the fence.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2012 22:39
|
|
|
katkillad2 posted:you can't make Mario carry a machine gun and whatnot so that takes some of the fun out of it. I'd love to see it myself, because characters acting out of character is pretty amusing to me. Nintendo (and any company with a mascot really, unless you're Sega) are incredibly militant about how their characters are portrayed in anything though. Just working in art assets on strat guides from them involves lots going back to them for approvals (and then getting rejected because you put Shy Guy in a position they feel is more prominent on the page than Mario is).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2012 01:07
|
|
|
Quest For Glory II posted:Out of curiosity why do people say the Wii U launch is lukewarm? Questionable 3rd party/first party launch titles, surprisingly common reports of hard locks, occasional reports of bricks-out-of-the-box, and yes, the "slow" sales. I think the Wii U is selling fine. It's not selling out, but there's good reasons for it. Part of that is due to their heavy shipments (they plan to have like 5.5 million consoles shipped worldwide by the end of December or something like that). Part of it is probably due to the price. Part it might be the library, there is literally nothing on it right now that I NEED to play right now, and I'm sure I'm not alone in that assessment. Given that there's apparently going to be these systems in abundance, why rush and pay NOW when I'm likely to pay the same amount later when there's games I want? It's kinda pointless to compare launch number performance. The PS3 debuted at a stupid price point (and still sold well enough despite that), and the 360 was a successor to a console that really was only successful because of Halo getting it in the door.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2012 23:45
|
|
|
Katana Gomai posted:I hope I'm wrong but I think it will bomb on account of being an MMO. The Wii sales have been seriously terrible for a DQ game already, though if you want to keep an optimistic view, maybe everyone is waiting for the Wii U version. I don't think so, though. There's really a lot of cool stuff they could probably do to integrate the GamePad, I'm sure. I'm pessimistic mostly because Square Enix doesn't exactly have a good track record with MMOs. FF11 and FF14 only appealed to a very special type of  . While they are making an effort to try fix FF14, DQX being an MMO doesn't exactly fill me with great confidence.There's also the real possibility that we just may not get to see it outside of Japan.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2012 12:53
|
|
|
Seaniqua posted:With or Without U Hire this goon, Ubi. You don't know what you are missing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 00:15
|
|
|
PaletteSwappedNinja posted:1ups are still an effective incentive for exploring or successfully negotiating difficult obstacles, even in spite of how unimportant they are functionally. This is arguable. If you aren't concerned with lives because you have so damned many of them, why bother exploring for more of them? At least Star Coins in SMB3DL act as a sort of barrier that you must surpass to access more content, until you reach the extra levels, lives are effectively meaningless, especially if they're being passed out like candy or can be easily acquired during the course of regular gameplay. At some point, I'd take a random route in 3D Land and be disappointed by finding a 1-up. I stopped caring about them. I only gave a poo poo about the star coins. 1-ups stopped being meaningful as early as Mario 3, when Nintendo started introducing so many additional ways to get more of them.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2012 01:46
|
|
|
Iacen posted:Source This is a pretty amazing example of why Nintendo's current account set up is a joke. I'm sure there's probably an easy fix for it, but I don't see it getting taken care of right away since this will have a negligible effect at best on digital sales.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2013 11:41
|
|
|
What has probably happened to the relationship between EA and Nintendo is the fact that there is going to be new console hardware officially announced fairly soon, the console market itself is in a bit of a weird spot, and probably more important that this so-called relationship is the history that EA has had of making ports their primary product at console launches. There's also Nintendo's history of being laughably inept at courting major third-party efforts to their hardware since the N64 years. Large bags of money were probably also involved in some fashion. For some reason, EA is still treated like a kingmaker in the gaming industry. You might have been able to say this during the Dreamcast-era (and some folks like to erroneously blame the Dreamcast dying primarily on a lack of EA's support as opposed to Sega's incredibly bad finances), but it's not nearly the case today. They'll come to the WiiU if/when it's a move that benefits them financially. They have no reason to abandon current relationships now based on the "potential" a new system has to offer. Crowbear posted:Has there been any actual proof about this whole EA being mad at Nintendo thing? I feel like it's just Nintendo fans trying to rationalize EA half assing a console launch. It's a console thread on a discussion forum during the launch window of said console. Also EA is the evil empire that is easy to hate (and they've certainly made it easy to hate them). You could blame anything on them at this point and someone somewhere will parrot a conspiracy theory they read about on Kotaku of how it all went down.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2013 02:59
|
|
|
I'm almost certain the Wii U will see ports of the last set of current gen multiplats found on other systems, but they'll probably come too late for it to matter to those developers (unless Nintendo pays the money that is not-so-subtly being asked for to guarantee those games actually show up on the system sooner rather than later). People who already own a PS3 or 360 and are already committed to those platforms by virtue of their game collections (physical or digital, the latter of which is being done better by Sony and MS) and DLC, are not all excited to spend another 300-350 bucks for a new console that MIGHT let the ports run smoother/look nicer (assuming the developers put the required effort behind them), ports that may/may not be of games they could get on the thing they already own and will be serviceable enough for them. Like Chronojam said, people are willing to buy games like Skyrim on console, despite there being a definitive version found on PC. Of course, to get that version to run decently, you probably have to spend more money before you even get the game in the first place (unless you're fortunate to already own a good enough PC). Or you could just snag a 360 copy and know that it's going to work as well on your console as it will on every other 360, and still look good enough on a big screen for the average person. That's exactly where the Wii U is at right now. It's hard to take their push towards digital with the system seriously, given the onboard storage that is available on the Wii U (and given that their online efforts with the Wii and the 3DS are butt of jokes for plenty of reasons). Yeah, everyone posting here is smart enough to know they can buy a wide variety of external drives to enhance their storage, and we all laugh at those who aren't/don't want to do this. To the average consumer this is just another peripheral they have to buy so they can make total use of the online store, without having to worry about what games they can or can't download because of space constraints.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 16:31 |
|
|
deadwing posted:Why the hell would I watch someone play through it, taking up the same amount of time, when I can actually play through it myself? No, not even G suffered as much as anyone who played Other M at full price. Godspeed, for what it's worth. Other M is so terrible that it's not even fun to watch others play. It really is the worst "worst game" of any given franchise I could think of. It is that irredeemable. At least Sonic 2006 has a better than "forgettable garbage" level soundtrack, with glitches so terrible it borders on unintentionally hilarious, and it didn't really do more to ruin the character of Sonic or his franchise compared to what Other M did to Samus.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2013 02:32
|
|
