Can Nintendo Court the Casuals Again?
An anonymous reader sends this quote from Eurogamer:
"Do you remember the last time? When the Wii launched at the tail end of 2006, it was to an air of excited curiosity that went well beyond the borders of core gamers, with Nintendo conjuring what ran close to a full-blown phenomenon. ... Nintendo's masterstroke, of course, has been resurrecting the ultimate hardcore poster girl with the announcement that Bayonetta 2 is heading exclusively to the Wii U. There's something slightly incongruous about an over-sexed, incredibly violent action game rubbing shoulders with Mario and co., but then again that's exactly what makes the proposition so very exciting. ... There's still one very important section of the market that may prove a little tougher to persuade. Right now it's harder to see the broader appeal of the Wii U, and it's not simply a case of fearing that it'll fail to replicate the success of its predecessor — there's every chance that it could endure the same rocky start that plagued Nintendo's 3DS."
Nintendo jumped the shark a long time ago. Only a tiny subset of their game library is aimed towards casual gamers. The rest of it is bizarre, Japanese, anime-based titles that are completely incomprehensible to anybody outside of relevant cultural circles. Sure, they'll always have their obsessed fans, but they'd have to make some radical management and cultural shifts to be able to ever appeal to mainstream, casual gamers again.
I don't respond to AC's.
have you seen the TVii? i watched a trailer on my 3ds last night, it has ABC(ESPN) sports, for streaming, finally I can say f the cable bill!
The iPhone and iPad hadn't been introduced yet. The casual gamers have already moved on to other things.
We had the Wii - managed to score one the weekend it came out. But after about 18 months it became apparent this was going to have some real dumbed-down titles. A few stick out in my mind, most notably the Endless Ocean and Endless Ocean 2 games. I miss those enough I've been thinking of picking up a Wii after the Wii U comes out to replay them, when the price drops.
As for the Atari 2600 I had as a kid - I recall that having a greater variety of games that were almost more challenging. I don't miss it enough to buy the controller/ROM combination, but I distinctly remember titles we traded with friends and played for years. Maybe some of that is nostalgia for long summers and the lack of overall console variety then, but I was distinctly unimpressed with the Wii; with the notable exception the two titles I mentioned above.
When our Wii gave up the ghost I relented and bought an XBox for my son and that's been a great console - a good variety of games and ab online game store worth dropping some dough on. There will have to be something extraordinary for my generally Nintendo-friendly family to even consider by a Wii U. They lost us with the terribly poor game selection on the Wii and DS systems.
The Luddites were ahead of their time.
or are they going to be stuck releasing updates of Super Mario and Zelda for the next 60 years?
As far as I can tell, the definition of a "casual" gamer is "anybody who isn't a 15-30 year old male". I mean, I still hear of puzzle adventure players (who tended to be middle-aged women) being seen as casual gamers, while the people who play really quite simple hack-and-slash games (which appeal more to younger men) are considered hardcore. The mistakes, I think, are:
1. to aim most video games at a particular demographic and then wonder why nobody else is getting interested in them, and
2. hire young male game designers and wonder why they can't write a great game that appeals to older people or women.
It definitely has nothing to do with the difficulty or intracacy of the game.
I am officially gone from
Why yes, yes of course. But I play the doctor. And I don't wear gloves.
Best Buy and Target have already stopped taking orders for both the deluxe and regular systems, and Gamestop has sold out of the deluxe systems. So it's already eerily similar to the Wii's pre-launch situation, and that console was very hard to find for months.
So no, there's little evidence that a rocky start is in store.
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
...with lots of automated violence. It's more casual than something like Pikmin by miles.
Seriously, folks have been saying Nintendo will put itself out of business for how long now? And it has yet to happen. Don't hold your breath, you'll just be disappointed.
This is the absolute least interested in a Nintendo product. It's shown me nothing interesting or worthwhile yet. I'm still not entirely sure if this is a a revamped Wii or the proper successor. The Nintendo I knew fell sick with the N64, got a little better with the Gamecube and then suddenly died with the Wii.
Their milking of characters is no longer a funny joke, but a sad reality. I never look at the Wii catalog and see anything that peeks my interest. I still believe the motion controls to be a silly idea (except once, ONCE, where I enjoyed using it as the gun in Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles). Their targeting of only children and families leaves me feeling cold and unwanted in their vast wasteland of crap.
I've probably just grown up and out of their demographic, but I still have their previous iterations to enjoy, but this one has absolute no redeeming qualities to me and seems like a bigger waste of money and time then the Wii before it.
it's harder to see the broader appeal of the Wii U
The broader appeal of the Wii U is that it is no longer just a video game/fitness machine, it is now a TV set-top box and an intelligent TV remote as well. It is an aggregator of multiple internet-driven entertainment choices. The opportunity for Nintendo to may serious money is immense. I can sense the determined hand of Reggie Fils-aime ( Nintendo US CEO) behind Nintendo's newest push.
No. But it goes beyond just the law, for a number of reasons:
Wii was introduced before the housing bubble burst and long before the global economic recession. People had the idea that they had money to spare, whether or not they actually did. This helped fuel generic consumer interest along with the "newness" that is motion controls. In addition, the new price points puts Nintendo out of that "sweet number" they had in 2006. The $250 price point for the Wii at release in 2012 dollars is $285; the cheapest model is $299, and wages haven't kept up with inflation.
Motion controlling was a big thing when the Wii released--while it was not exactly new tech, Nintendo managed to mainstream it and make it work (sort of, the Wiimote Plus greatly improved this but still had issues.) Furthermore, the controllers for other consoles were seen as "intimidating" to your average consumer due to the myriad of buttons and inputs on them (whether or not this is true I don't know, but it was common thought both then and now). The Wiimote was extremely simple and could be used as a controller harking back to the NES days.
The Gamepad doesn't offer anything in the "wow-factor" to pull consumers in. Touch-screens have been around for quite some time (the original DS had a touch screen, after all) and everyone is tablet-crazy these days so it acts like a me-too. In addition, it integrates all those scary buttons. Furthermore, at least to someone like myself who is a regular gamer, the controller looks horribly clunky (my understanding from reading testimonials of those who have been able to hands-on is that it actually works decently, but that's not going to stop perception of those on the outside.)
The Wii U is, from my understanding, about as powerful as the 360. While I can understand that Nintendo wants to focus on user interface, they can't ignore that having a lower-powered system hurt them greatly this last gen. It wasn't the controller, it was the system processing power that kept a lot of otherwise-multi-console games from coming to the Wii (and when they did they were relatively bad). Nintendo has caught up, but as soon as the PS4 and XBox720 come out (supposedly in the next 18 months), they'll be lagging behind once again. Furthermore, by tipping their hand this early, it gives Microsoft and Sony a chance to integrate whatever features into their next system and likely do it better (the Kinect and Move have their own issues that will likely be firmed up and integrated better for the next console cycle).
A big selling point for the Wii was that it came with Wii Sports. The Basic (read: cheap) version of the Wii U comes with no games (except whatever demos or utilities they have on the system, like TVii), which only intensifies the economic issue. This may be intentional, though, as the tie-in (how many game were sold per console) for the Wii is extremely low, especially compared to the other consoles. By forcing "casual" consumers to buy games off the bat they can increase that number this time around; many bought the wii, played Wii Sports, and then never bought another game.
Nintendo also has a lot of uphill battles with 'core' gamers, too:
--Their online capabilities seem to still lag entire generations behind the competition (those horrible friend codes will apparently make an appearance on Wii U)
--Aforementioned power
--A number of AAA games they have announced are mere ports of games have been out for some time
--Internal Storage is limited to a max of 32GB, important as digital sales increase; however, this can be expanded (supposedly easily)
--Games, games, games, games. Nintendo didn't learn from the 3DS, apparently--the launch window library is fairly "meh", and we don't even know launch titles except for NSMBU
I've been a devout Nintendork for my life, fighting many a troll online for the Gamecube
I think the main thing that disappoints me about the Wii U is the way it completely abandons motion control. I bought a Wii for Wii Sports. I had minimal interest in classic Nintendo titles, and absolutely no interest Xbox/PS3-style games. Then there was MotionPlus and Tiger Woods Golf, and that was fun for a long time. EA makes the same game on other platforms, but I have zero interest in mashing buttons together in order to simulate a golf game.
Since then, I've bought a handful of different games, some of them with pretty traditional controls (with lame waggle "enhancements") (e.g., Galaxy), and that's been fun, and I love Nintendo's creativity in a lot of their titles, but, still, the motion controls in something like Skyward Sword are far more interesting to me than anything else.
Enter Wii U. Doesn't do anything to push the motion control technology forward. Doesn't even ship with motion-sensitive controllers or a sensor bar. All that is abandoned in favor of a touchscreen melded with traditional gaming controls. I have a hard time seeing how new games (the next Zelda, for example) are going to improve on the experience I enjoyed the last time around -- because now Nintendo's going to be all about producing games that take advantage of the new controller. How do they even release a new Sports for the Wii U? Seems like that title is just put on hold...
I will gladly give my money to Nintendo for the Wii U. I am a gamer, with a huge passion for games. Finally Nintendo will provide next-gen gaming on their consoles. Nintendo, compared to Sony and Microsoft, is a company for gamers.
They dont charge you for online play (Looking at you M$), they dont charge you for additional storage by selling you some proprietary hdd. They dont remove features after the sale ( install other OS??) and they dont go in rage mode and start suing their customers. They also did not have any security breaches...
For me it is quite clear, if there will be a game which comes to all consoles, Ill be getting the Wii U version (unless there is a PC version ofc)
What Nintendo really needs to do is make a family of kick-ass high-powered Android phones with proper game controls, then make them usable as game controls for the Wii-U.
it has ABC(ESPN) sports, for streaming, finally I can say f the cable bill!
Are you sure it doesn't A. require a name and password issued by a pay TV provider, or B. query your cable ISP's database to see whether the current DHCP lessee of a given IP address also has a cable TV subscription that includes ESPN?
The one big advantage of the Wii U over is that the tablet isn't the only controller. The Wii U GamePad also has physical buttons, which work better than an on-screen gamepad in some genres for reasons I've described before. Furthermore, extra controllers for players 2, 3, and 4 will be available in stores, unlike tablet computers whose iCade and iControlPad controllers are available only through mail order.
is playing Angry Birds
No.
Casual gamers are playing games on their phones. NIntendo fucked themselves over by not bothering to put out any titles at all for the Wii during its entire run.
Oh sure, you had a couple of Mario games, one Zelda, and... No More Heroes? I think that was about it. The rest were junk, they never released a "greatest hits" $20 version of any titles until early in 2012, and there's nothing compelling in the library.
Jerk off over the hardware all you want. No games -- no sales.
And again, people who want to play a game casually for five minutes at a time are going to whip out their phone and play a $1 game.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Or perhaps you were thinking of Stargate
SG-1 or Atlantis?
Star Fox
Could players do a barrel roll?
The Gamepad doesn't offer anything in the "wow-factor" to pull consumers in. Touch-screens have been around for quite some time (the original DS had a touch screen, after all) and everyone is tablet-crazy these days so it acts like a me-too. In addition, it integrates all those scary buttons.
So for a touch-screen-only device, how would you recommend making effective control for a platformer without scary physical buttons? I tried playing a game using the on-screen gamepad paradigm on a tablet, and I kept missing the buttons because I couldn't feel where my thumbs were relative to the buttons. That frustration is part of why the Wii U GamePad still has buttons instead of relying on a single flat surface with a capacitive sensor.
people who want to play a game casually for five minutes at a time are going to whip out their phone and play a $1 game.
Provided they have a phone. True, a grown-up interested in video games can almost be assumed to own a smartphone nowadays. But any game rated E or E10+ includes kids as part of its intended audience. A phone capable of gaming costs well over $1,000 once you factor in an iControlPad and the cost of cellular voice and data service for two years. I'm under the impression that a lot of parents can't afford this for their kids, so they buy each kid a flip phone on a $80/year prepaid carrier as a pay phone replacement ("this is for getting a ride home; use the land line at home for long calls") and a DS/3DS for gaming.
Nintendo lost me, a hardcore gamer due to only releasing "kiddie" games. I waited and waited and waited for decent adult games and Nintendo never delivered. FAIL.
I should also point out that I hate motion controllers.
We're a family of casual gamers. We don't game a lot, and when we do they tend to be games many can play together (Rock Band, Glee, etc.). We also play more traditional head-to-head games, but all gaming comes in spurts, days/weeks where we do it a lot followed by months where we don't. The Wii worked for us.
But that was then.
Since then, we've slowly gotten tired of more and more remotes, more and more devices, and we've slowly discovered more and more on-line distractions. Hey, we just finally signed up for Netflix a few weeks ago, partly because we didn't have a decent device for it - we don't enjoy being our own tech support anymore. What changed is that we got Apple TV to make it easier to show pictures to friends, and Apple TV is a bit of a gateway device....
Which brings us to the Wii U. I want something more than the Wii, something more than Apple TV, and I want fewer remotes and few devices in my living room. Recent announcements of the Wii U having universal remote capabilities and integrated media streaming capabilities made me very excited!
But guess what? The lack of DVD and Blue Ray capabilities is a deal-breaker.
My living room is cluttered. The tech is good enough that one device can do it all. So I ain't buying a device that doesn't. If I add one device (a U) I want to remove two (the old Wii and my DVD player).
People are calling the Wii U the first eighth generation console. Nope. It's the last seventh. Or the only 7.5. To be next-gen, you have to raise the bar, and the Wii U doesn't: it has some cool features, but it doesn't come close to being truly new, a true replacement for what we have, a new way of doing anything.
Universal remote? Been there, done that.
Touch screen? Ditto. Game transfer? Yup. Networking? Social? DVD? Streaming? Motion control? Yup, yup, yup, yup.
You want to get "the casual gamer", the folks like us and many like us? You give us one device that does all of the above, and more, without being intrusive, without binding us to you (like Apple does - hey, we've already got iTunes, like Google wants to, etc.). I'd buy that. And if you can throw in something really mind blowing, many more would buy it.
But the U is just "meh" enough for me to wait to see what's next.
I'm probably not the only one.
I'm here EdgeKeep Inc.
And that is dangerous.
The motion control on the Wii was largely a gimmick. While there were a few games that made really effective use of it or could be made well without it, most didn't. They just translated certain gross motion in to the equivalent of a button press, they didn't really do much special. However for all that, it intrigued may people and they wished to have it. The gimmick worked.
Ok fair enough, but that kind of stuff tends to be very hit or miss. People can see a gimmick and say "meh" even if it is new and original. It is rather impossible to predict to what level people will care. However as you say if they've seen it before, then they are less likely to be interested as with touch screens.
So I don't think it is a good idea on Nintendo's part or likely to do well for them. People just won't care, the gimmick won't sell. It'll be left to perform on its own merits and as you say, those are a bit lacking.
I think a better idea would be a cheaper system (those tablets cost a non-trivial amount), better online service, and better launch titles. The power/graphics issue isn't a big deal so long as the games are good and the online service is good, particularly if the price is right which wouldn't be hard to do with lower spec hardware and no silly tablet.
We'll see. I was wrong on the Wii, I didn't think it would catch on like it did, so I've certainly been wrong before. However it is less likely lighting strikes a second time, particularly since tablets are nothing new.
I believe we rate console generation by hardware capabilities. The hardware in the wii u is very capable and it is a true eight generation console; however all those extra features are not related to the core task of playing games. Guess what, those extra feature cost alot to license. In fact, you will have to at least 10-20 dollars per device to support those features.
From what you just said, supporting the casual gamer is not worth it. They do not buy games. Third party publisher will be unhappy that their games do not sell. Nintendo will have to beg Sony or other license committee to support those things which will raise cost making their hardware crappier that will otherwise buy better parts. Nintendo will die as a company if it continue to support causals, since they already left.
How did having a lower power machine help Nintendo in the last console generation?
Will Microsoft and Sony bring 500-700 dollar machines to market this time?
Will concentrating on the user interface pay off like it did last time for Nintendo?
Consoles sold from last generation:
Wii 96 million, XBox360 68 million, PS3 66 million.
A lot of non-gamers bought wiis!, and everyone took that as proof to how broad the gamer market could be!
Except that they didn't buy anything more. Okay, maybe they upgraded from Wii Sports to Wii Sports Resort, but that's about it. The great gaming revolution never came.
Of course, to try and create a great gaming revolution, they had to completely abandon the gamers, you know, the ones who made video games a success to begin with. Even their direct reproductions have gotten worse and worse. Let's take Donkey Kong Country, there were two things to do in the game, Jump and Roll. However, with these two things they made an incredibly beautiful, fluid, fun game. What did they do for the remake?, instead of having a simple button to roll, you have to press down and shake the controller, taking a simple, elegant move into something extremely annoying to do with absolutely horrible precision.
Let's take smash brothers, another shinning light, but when using the wii-mote and nunchuk, it's really easy to turn your hands in, making the analog controller very inprecise, simply because you have nothing to compare the directions with. My solution was to buy the "classic" controller, so I could use the d-pad: there is no way to make the "classic" controller use the d-pad as it's movement control, leaving you with the same imprecise analog stick. Nevermind that half of the characters work nothing like they did in their own games.
Twilight Princess was very, very similar to the the (much better) Ocarina of Time, the major difference was to make room for the imprecision of shaking your controller to attack, the combat of the game, (one of the core gameplay elements), is no where near as fun or challenging as it was in Ocarina of Time. The game wouldn't be playable if they did.
They are adding things like Bayonetta, (nevermind the fact that switching between consoles for a direct sequel is a way to lose all of the fans the game had to begin with), but keeping their marque games as childish as ever. Bayonetta isn't out of place on the PS3, because while they have cartoonish games, many of the cartoonish games take themselves seriously. They understand that people want old-school gameplay, but have grown up since they first place SMB way back in the day. They want to take the characters seriously, (as newgrounds and youtube mario parody's should prove). But no, Mario is just as vapid as ever, and adding Bayonetta is basically like adding pornography to a kids' channel, (if you've played Bayonetta, you'll know how close to being literal that is).
The Wii has essentially become the joke among consoles. No one is going to believe the Wii-U surpasses current generation consoles until they see Nintendo make one that is at least close to par. The only thing keeping Nintendo afloat is Pokemon, (which in all honesty has barely changed since they were first invented).
In short, why don't you try going pg before jumping to xxx, and why don't you try making half-decent games instead of making a hardware revolution; in all honest, you have a lot of catching up to do until you are even considered viable, so do that first.
Take a note from Sony: the SIXAXIS turned out to be pretty imprecise. It didn't work out the way they thought it would, and so instead of forcing it on everyone, they let them use it if they want, (there have been some great uses out of it, but because there is no requirement to, they can make sure it actually fits in with the game).
Court people who actually buy games, (you know, GAMERS).
Don't force people to come over to your console, i.e. by taking a PS3 game and making it's sequel a Wii-U only game, instead start with some ports so people actually have a choice. Once people consider your console viable as an actual gaming platform, then buy out the games and make them Wii-U exclusives.
I'd like Nintendo a whole lot more if I didn't hate the Mario world so much, and it's all about the fucking, boring, racist and campy mascot everywhere on every title in every iteration. It's not funny. It's not sexy. It's not cute. As a pop culture icon, it's just as dull as it's always been and the only reason left to insist on it (in the US) is to pander to Generation Xs and Generation Ys who think they're Generation Xs.
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
Agreed.
Wii Sports Resort, Red Steel 2, and Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword are the most amazing electronic home entertainment experiences I've had thus far --- I just wish the latter two were longer or extensible via DLC.
Wish Pandora's Tower would come to NA and hope that someone will make a motion controlled RPG.
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
"Core" gamer, "hardcore" gamer... I'm going to take my own stab at defining these lame-brained terms.
:)
They have nothing to do with violent games, time spent playing, or anything else I've seen mentioned so far. What they are is euphemisms for "PC gamers". And this is true regardless of platform - PC=Xbox and Playstation is a bite off of that market. So what defines them? THEY ALWAYS WANT MORE OF THE SAME, but bigger, faster, and flashier. Minimal to no fucus on innovation or fun. We've been living their dream since the early 90's! (Anyone check out the cost of developing a new PC/XBox/PS game? Glitz doesn't add fun to a game, but at least it costs a lot!! How about the number of original titles in their Top 10? Hahahah.)
Wii was (and I'm hoping just a little here) the beginning of a revolution against that whole way of thinking. There is almost no reflection of "hardcore" in their game library. I and the rest of the people still enjoying their Wii's LIKE THAT.
What there is in the Wii equation, is a less ridiculously priced console, better prices on games, tons of classic console and arcade games and some decent new ones on Wii Online Store, and games that are establishing new dynamics in gaming. Personally, I still dig Wii Sports, as well as the Sports and Play sequells and Wii Fit+. Those and associated titles have alone more than justified the cost of the console (and two ROM drive repairs). The fact that I've gotten a great darts game for $5 as well as a dozen or more classic console and arcade games from the online store is just a huge bonus! I do watch Netflix on it, and the seperate Netflix-kids app is a really nice touch.
I will add that the 90/10 rule of computer games still applies, even on the Wii - only about 10% of the games on any platform are really all that good/worth playing. A Gamefly account (or generally renting vs buying) is the best thing you can do for a new console. I have many good games as a result of that.
As to the f'ing article, it sounds like a puff piece for whatever software they mentioned. People (within the industry and without) pretty soundly laughed at the prospect of the Wii. In spite of the success of the Wii, some people are still trying to laugh at Nintendo and their strategy. The magazine's failure to see potential of the Wii U isn't interesting for the same reason, IMO.
If Nintendo can maintain their price point against the other consoles and deliver the new feautres and experience as promised, I see no reason that Nintendo will do any worse than the trajectory they are on - selling more consoles and more games than their competitors. And with those new features, it seems there should be a lot of new potential as well.
The hard part for Nintendo (due to their being the pioneer) is getting a third party who can - after pouring money down the "hardcore" rathole - still afford to develop a new kind of game. Their catalog of super-fun games is growing, but it will take some time given the momentum third parties have in the style of games you find duplicated across all the other platforms.
-Matt
Apple stole the "adult" casual gamer market and pretty much assured that any child of these adults are also highly invested in games on the Apple platform. I can't get my niece and nephew off my iPad or iPod touch when they come to visit. When you have a platform of Free to $4.99 games that keep children interested for hours, what is the point of the Wii U?
Nintendo is trying to mimic Apple's success my mashing (more like mangling) a touch pad with a game platform, and I think this is ill conceived. Its coming off as a cheap novelty act. The fact they are not supporting multi-player games on release speaks to fact that WiiPad is a cheap gimmick rather then a fully vested feature of the new WiiU. Why wouldn't Nintendo WANT people to buy multiple expensive controllers to support multi-player games? Nintendo just didn't figure out how to use the WiiPad properly for games and so never bothered to develop multi-player games. Also Nintendo forgot to make it a "next" generation game console. They finally add yesterday's features, such as HDMI port and 1080p support, but what about 4K displays? And I doubt they will offer 3D gaming in spite of speculation.
The Wii U seems like it was quickly drafted up to try and stave off the loss of revenue from lackluster Wii and 3DS sales and I don't think this console will do much to bring casual gamers back to the Wii platform that are happily entrenched in the world if iOS. I think Nintendo did more to turn people off the Wii then it did to lock them in. I don't care how many consoles you sell, if you can't find a market of people willing to buy your games, then you failed, period. I have friends that never played anything more then Wii Sports.
Its going to be a tough next couple of years for Nintendo because I think the Wii U will suck money away from them as they try to promote and sell it. They will probably have to sell it at a loss in the very near future to boost sales, and I think a $250 Xbox 360 with Kinect bundle and Second Screen features is a hell of a lot better deal then the Wii U.
Also Wii U the dumbest name for a game console in the history of game consoles. Nintendo couldn't even come up with an inspirational new name for their next-generation game console and I think that speaks gobs about the lack of innovation and enthusiasm Nintendo has (not) invested into this thing.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.