Ubisoft CEO, Yves Guillemot, has come out and said that he believes the Wii U is too expensive. This has ruffled a few feathers, given that Ubisoft is perhaps the most ‘friendly’ third party publisher to the Wii U at this stage. But you know what? He has a point.
In an interview with Gamesindustry.biz, Guillemot spoke out against the Wii U’s price – which is guaranteed to be high compared to the other consoles on the market. “I’m never happy when the machines are expensive. What we have to do there is remember that compared to an iPad, it’s cheap. With what it brings [to gaming] it’s cheap. But I hope they’ll be able to drop their price in time,” Guillemot said.
The other media reports that I’ve read seem to be interpreting his comments as a complaint about the Wii U’s pricing, but I read it as a criticism of the Wii U’s price as a dedicated piece of gaming hardware. That is the actual criticism Guillemot is making here, so let’s run with it a little.
For the Wii U to really compete in the market it’s going to need to hit the kinds of sales numbers to make it worthwhile for developers to invest in it. From that perspective now is not really the ideal time for the Wii U to be launching. With the exception of that GamePad the Wii U is going to be directly competing in terms of specs with two far lower-priced consoles (the existing PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360), each with very impressive game libraries. Nintendo has to win developers away from both those consoles and their massive install bases. It’s only going to be able to do that if, over the first six months and year, the Wii U significantly outsells those consoles.
Problem is, when people look at screenshots, they’re not going to see a compelling reason to buy the Wii U over its rivals – it’s not that much more powerful than its rivals to make it stand out in static (or moving) images. Of course there are legions of people who will buy the Wii U after playing one, or because they’re a Nintendo loyalist, but I am not jealous of Nintendo’s marketing division with this task.
But Nintendo’s real challenge isn’t Sony or Microsoft. No, it’s the iPad, as Guillemot mentioned in his comment. Here the Wii U is far cheaper in terms of sticker price, but it’s also an incredibly limited product by comparison – it only plays games. The iPad does multimedia, Internet, and content generation better than the Wii U. Oh, and it has a killer line up of games itself.
Now, if you’re reading Digitally Downloaded, it’s entirely possible that you’re the kind of person that likes the idea of dedicated gaming experiences. Unfortunately for you, you belong to a relatively niche group. The numbers are the people buying iPads and playing the multitudes of cheap and free games on the iPad.
You (and I) might not like it, but guess where the developers are going when presented the option of 100 million iPad owners, or the 2-3 million Wii U owners by Christmas? The games industry is an industry of businesses, and businesses go where the numbers are.
I’m not criticising the Wii U in any way here, but Guillemot’s argument is that the Wii U is too expensive for what it needs to achive. Unless there is a price cut immediately after Christmas, than I suspect he’s right. Once the initial rush is over, and once the early adopters and Nintendo loyalists have their Wii Us, Nintendo is going to have a tough time convincing gamers to move on from their PlayStation 3s and Xbox 360s.
Nintendo is also going to have an incredibly difficult time convincing people who were considering tablets and tablet games to get a Wii U instead. The Wii U is simply not going to do the other applications that people looking at tablets would want.
If people don’t buy Wii Us then developers won’t support it. The fact that the CEO of a company the size of Ubisoft is worried about it is proof that it’s a genuine concern in the industry. Is the Wii U’s price going to be a factor in the long term? Who knows – it might just be worth remembering Guillemot’s comments when looking back at the Wii U though.
PS $300 PS 2 $300 XBOX 360 (basic) $300 PS 3 (basic) $500 & the WII U is to EXPENSIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!
He is right, the Wii U is too expensive. I'm likely to get one, but I have decided to wait, possibly a year or more until the price becomes more reasonable.
This IS a huge contradiction on his part as the company was stated as putting their full support behind the Wii U. I think its unfair to compare a new console to older consoles whos intall base peaked and needed the price cut to entice those that still hadnt gotten any of those systems.
Also. How could you suggest a price cut right after christmas when Iwata already said they will be selling the system at a loss. So they will take a double loss based on the growing concern about an alleged, high price tag?
Dont expect Nintendo to do it this time like they did 3DS. My opinion is it will sell just fine and the first 6 months of any new year is hard on console sales.
The fact that the CEO of Ubisoft is worried about it is proof that it’s a genuine concern."
Hes not worried about it, they are putting there full support behind the wii u
ipads arent game devices
"With the exception of that GamePad the Wii U is going to be directly competing in terms of specs with two far lower-priced consoles, each with very impressive game libraries."
Uh the wii u is about 3 times as powerful as the ps3. Thats fact
this article is bullshit
Hi yarinoma,
I don't see it as a contradiction at all. Ubisoft is supporting the Wii U just as it supports most console launches. It's part of Ubisoft's business strategy to release a lot of games at launch in order to capitalise on the initial rush of software sales, before there's much competition on the shelves.
That's not to say Ubisoft can't be concerned about the hardware's future. I'm sure Ubisoft is critical of the Vita's performance in the market too, and yet it fully supports the Vita.
I'm not suggesting a price cut at all. I'm suggesting the Wii U's price is too high. There's a difference there. Nintendo is stuck between a rock and a hard place, where it's already selling the hardware at a loss, and yet is still pricing it too high to be competitive in some of the markets that it needs to be. This is a problem with no easy solution.
Is it unfair to compare to older consoles? Perhaps, but it's also the reality. Consumers will be weighing up their purchasing decisions, and price is going to be a factor. The overwhelming majority of consumers will only want one console. They're going to see the Wii U on the shelf next to the cheaper (and far bigger game libraries) PS3 and Xbox 360. They're going to be able to walk across the street to the Apple store and pick up an iPad. The average consumer is going to compare the Wii U to these devices. Of course price is going to be a factor.
Thanks for your opinion though!
Pray tell where you got this fact from.
As I said in another comment, making a business decision to support the launch of new hardware (which Ubisoft has done with every other hardware release in recent years) is not a sign that Guillemot is unconcerned with the Wii U's future.
And whether you (or anyone else, really) likes it, people are buying iPads and people are buying games on those iPads. Plenty of people don't even feel the need to buy a dedicated console after that, because they have their iPad games, and that's enough for them. Those people may well have bought a console in the past.
Does this mean they're not "real gamers?" That's your opinion. However it means the iPad is a legitimate gaming device. That's why every developer and publisher is spending time and money developing games for it.
Are you a friend of Vampiric's, by any chance?
I'm not a very spec-focused person, but from what I've seen, the power of the Wii U compared to the other consoles depends on which metrics you look at.
Beyond that, much of the Wii U's power is taken up by the GamePad and the power required to stream to it. So the end effect (which I can verify having played most of the Wii U launch titles) is that the Wii U games don't look materially any different to the games on the PS3 and Xbox 360.
Assassin's Creed 3, Batman – these games don't look materially better on the Wii U. Super Mario Wii U looks great, but then there are 2D platformers on the other consoles that are also in HD. And so on and so forth.
So the average consumer is simply going to see a HD console, regardless of whether it's more powerful inside than its rivals. And the average consumer is going to compare the Wii U to the HD consoles in other ways. Such as price.
Thanks for your input, but please be aware that I've had to edit your comment because, as per our comments policy, we don't allow abusive language here. Please refrain from that in the future, and make your point/ disagree/ argue/ whatever you'd like to do civilly next time – thanks!
this article made me angry ebcause you went the tabloid journalism route.
wii u has launch titles running real 1080 and 60 fps.
uncharted 3 cant do that. And this is launch. Thats the gap in power.
And why are you comparing ports? those would never be different
the ps3 launch had ports of ps2 games that looked identical
Nobody buys games on ipads. Not really. Everything is free.
The fact that hardware sales are at the highest levels ever this gen means, after 1 f2p shovelware crap on ipad they run back to real systems
I agree its a complete contradiction, which basically means these statements seem doctored. Not by this site but in general.
Go game journalism, way to go
Do you think many average consumers are going to care about that, though?
Gamers need to understand that what they care about, and what the masses care about, are often very different. The PlayStation and Xbox 360 have pretty games, and a cheaper console price. The iPad is more accessible. That is ultimately what Guillemot is saying with his comments. And yes, he has a point.
Just out of interest: how much time have you spent playing games on the iPad? You'll find there's a lot more on those devices than F2P games. In fact, there's a growing group of developers and publishers (including the likes of Square Enix) doing very brisk business with premium priced content.
too much. Then I got sick of it.
the average consumer could care less about graphics or specs or power
this is why the top selling systems are 100 percent always the weakest.
"The PlayStation and Xbox 360 have pretty games, and a cheaper console price."
But it isnt new. Those will be phased out in less than a year. then what>
The ipad is more accesible? yes. Is it better for gaming? no And thats whats being lost
Here, let me give you a few suggestions: Sonic CD, Bastion, World of Goo, BIT.TRIP BEAT, Rayman Jungle Run, Final Fantasy III, Final Fantasy Dimensions and Knights of Pen and Paper. You'll have an absolute blast.
Square Enix actually has far (far) more original games than ports on iOS. Especially the iPad.
It has actually set up a division dedicated to iOS gaming. Just in the past couple of months there has been a dozen or so new Square Enix games released on to the iPad.
My mindset is right in line with Guillemot. I think Wii U is releasing at a bad time with too high of a price point.
It's not that Wii U's price is too high for what it's worth, because I've no doubt that it is – I really don't care about inflation adjustments either – the reason the price is too high is that it's not in line with current market trends in the gaming industry. When there's an install base of over 100 million iPads ( with little to no backwards compatibility issues), the install base there is so much greater and more appealing than a system that's lacking basic things that's expected from current gamers (achievements, fully open online integration, etc.).
3DS sales are in the tank, just as Sony's Vita sales are. Expensive gaming consoles aren't attractive at the moment and I can only hope that Wii U will change that, but I have my doubts that it will – I don't know one single person outside of one Nintendo loyalist that is buying a Wii U, not one.
Actually they still have more ports than new original titles. That square japan made I might add.
And those games? 1 was made by square japan.
FF III ios is the worst version of the game. I played it on ds and again on psp, much better versions. And I played ff dimensions, was absolute shovelware.
I will stick to the real ff games of this gen like ta 2, crisis core, type zero, 13-2, revant wings, ect
The last couple of months from Square Enix has either published or developed:
Quirkle, Motley Blocks, Wizardlings, Symphonica, Demon's Score, Emperor's Saga, Nirvana of Genesis, Final Fantasy Dimensions, The World Ends With You, KooZac, OTOME-Break, SolaRola.
The majority of those games are original titles. Some are not very good, some are not released worldwide, but they are largely original titles.
I wouldn't even know what Nintendo would do to address this concern, to be honest. I think they are doing the best they can. Is there actually a better time to release the Wii U than its projected release, since the iPad keeps getting more popular and the release of the other next generation consoles come closer? Also, what could they have done to make the console more attractive to the consumer without increasing the cost of the system?
These are all really good questions. I don't think there are any answers that I would feel comfortable even guessing at.
The way I see it though, Nintendo has so much to prove – that a dedicated gaming console is still something that enough people want to be financially viable, that people are still willing to pay premiums for gaming technology. I've got my fingers crossed that Nintendo will pull it off, because I see the next generation of Sony and Microsoft consoles being anything but gaming-dedicated.
But it just depends whether there's a mass market appetite for it still. If there isn't, frankly, no price point will save the Wii U.
"this is why the top selling systems are 100 percent always the weakest."
So why is the Wii is still #1 in all markets?
"But it isnt new. Those will be phased out in less than a year."
However, if Sony and Microsoft start marketing the PS3 and Xbox 360 heavily as soon as the Wii U launches consumers will believe there is an even playing field between the three, despite the Wii U just launching.
And they won't be phased out within a year, if anything a new console may be announced at E3 next year but there'll be nothing until 2014 at the very least.
I get that. But I just don't see the point in complaining. I think as any CEO or developer talent, rather than show concern right before the launch, you would be investing that time you took to do media statements in making sure you put out as many killer apps to give customers a reason to wanna invest in the system.
Thinking about it. Yet again, your getting way more with the Wii U than you were given with the Vita. And you know as well as I that even with the 2 different sku's your estimated cost was around 400 dollars ( thats if you had enough money to buy a game.)
I understand more than ever what Iwata was saying about the mobile game market deteriorating the gaming industry as a whole. It has made consumers expect more for less.
I'm not sure how much time you've spent with mobile gaming over the past few months, but it's truly shaping up. Titles like Horn, Dead Space, Real Racing 2, Fifa 13, Cytus, Lili, Orc Vengance, etc. are among a few games that are really standing out in the mobile industry and have created full (mobile) gaming experiences, instead of the usual pick up and play gameplay style. I'll be publishing a review here in a day or two for a newly released mobile game that I'm absolutely having a blast with and will rate very highly.
Yes, mobile gaming has had a negative impact on the industry. But, it's also have a positive effect on it too. These devices are starting to put great gaming experiences in consumers hands for far less cost to them than on other consoles – an HD version of these games is usually $4.99 USD.
The wii was number 1 until the wii u got announced. Thats normal
Consumers arent that stupid. Wii u systems are beyond sold out, and will remain that way.
Exclusives sell systems
This is why the 360 is 5th globally and the ps3 is 4th
"The wii was number 1 until the wii u got announced"
How has the Wii U sold nearly 100 million units if the console isn't out yet?
"Consumers arent that stupid. Wii u systems are beyond sold out, and will remain that way."
The console isn't out yet – just because pre-orders have sold out means nothing. Most consoles are always sold out at launch due to pre-orders.
"Exclusives sell systems. This is why the 360 is 5th globally and the ps3 is 4th"
How is the 360 5th and the PS3 4th? There's only three consoles out – the Wii, with the most amount of sales, the Xbox 360 with the second most amount and the PlayStation 3 with the third amount of sales. How do you get 5th and 4th from?
I suspect that you aren't a troll but someone who doesn't get the wider picture – we don't know how the Wii U is going to sell, so just wait.
I was under the impression that globally the PS3 was ahead of the Xbox. It certainly outsells it in Japan and Europe – Australia, too, I think.
it isnt. Globally the ps3 is ahead this year but the last 7 years of the gen were all 360
All youve done is try to rationalize things away……….
I am including the ds, psp, ios, ect…………
I get the wider picture, you obviously dont.
Wiiu is priced, as low as it can go.
http://www.vgchartz.com/ says otherwise
"All youve done is try to rationalize things away'
While all you've done is changed your point from "wii u has launch titles running real 1080 and 60 fps." to "Wiiu is priced, as low as it can go.". If you're trying to argue a point, be consistant.
"I am including the ds, psp, ios, ect………… I get the wider picture, you obviously dont."
I get that more people are buying Android tablets and iOS devices to play games, but they aren't the same as dedicated consoles.
vgfake is fake
"3DS sales are in the tank…"
Not true. The 3DS sales are ahead of the DS sales for the same time on market. Sure, the U.S. and European markets for the 3DS aren't doing as well, but the Japanese market is really strong for the 3DS.
"I don't know one single person outside of one Nintendo loyalist that is buying a Wii U, not one."
Meet one right here. Not a loyalist at all. I haven't owned every single Nintendo system, and played the Xbox more than my GameCube (and PS2). I can point out issues with Nintendo that I don't like, BUT that being said, I would imagine most early adopters will be Nintendo fans for sure…like the Apple fans that lineup for the new iPhones and iPads.
I think you missed the point of his statement. This has nothing to do with the iPad, Xbox 360, PS3, or even PC gaming…this is simply a developer saying a lower priced console, even free, is what they would prefer if possible. A lower price usually equals more sales, and more sales of the console is a bigger audience to buy their games.
"But Nintendo’s real challenge isn’t Sony or Microsoft. No, it’s the iPad, as Guillemot mentioned in his comment. Here the Wii U is far cheaper, but it’s also an incredibly limited product by comparison – it only plays games. The iPad is all-but guaranteed to do multimedia, Internet, and content generation better than the Wii U. Oh, and it has a killer line up of games itself."
No. No. No. Nintendo TVii is not "it only plays games." It is exactly the next line of being "multimedia", and I'm not sure if you are talking about the Wii U really, or perhaps the GameCube. Even the Wii has Netflix (now even YouTube), and a browser for those who want to use it (some do). The Wii U will have the browser, video services, Nintendo TVii, video chat, and I'm not sure what you mean by "content generation better than the Wii U", because that would be preference really…wouldn't it? Again, I look at the tablet market as a "tablet vs. laptop" market, not vs. video game console, because the Marios, Halos, God of Wars, and other console exclusives will likely remain where they are, as a reason to buy those consoles.
"Nintendo is also going to have an incredibly difficult time convincing people who were considering tablets and tablet games to get a Wii U instead. The Wii U is just not going to do the other applications that people looking at tablets would want."
If the tablet market is already so established, Nintendo might be able to pull in some that are used to the tablets, so I don't think it's a either/or market…the established tablet market could be the ones that Nintendo targets, once (if) they get the Miiverse functional on other devices.
Thanks for your thoughtful rebuttal! It's so nice to have an insightful debate! 🙂
My references to the 3DS aren't scaled to the DS, or any other system either. My basis comes off of the fact that even Nintendo has been worried by the severe drop off in sales for the system over the past few months – they can't afford to drop the price again. Overall, yes, the 3DS's sales have been strong and I'm very pleased to see it, seeing how it's a fantastic system (I've even upgraded to the 3DS XL!).
My comment towards the Wii U were in the line of people that I know in my local area (friends, family, co-workers, etc.). Here, we're all gamers, but for a system to truly sell well, it has to have the extra spunk that attracts more than just the core gamers, and I work in a place with a mix of thousands of gamers and non-gamers alike, and I've not heard one single mention of the Wii U. It's releasing this Sunday and not one single person has said a word about it. People know that I'm an editor/review here and people are constantly asking me about games/systems – either for them or their children – but not one single word!
What does this tell me? It tells me that for the most part, only the Nintendo loyalist are interested right now, along with some core gamers. Another thing that I've not heard before, but is something that I've realised more quite lately, is that the Wii U GamePad looks like a toy. I guess it's being used to the streamlined tablets and portables, but the Wii U looks like an oversized LeapFrog peripheral. I'm actually being very serious too, and I'm wondering if it's going to be an issue from the majority of core male gamers.
I very much hope that I'm wrong, but I see too many issues with Wii U. I think it will sale well, but I just don't see it becoming the "next" home console – it's lacking too many features.
I know that you're likely not going to agree with me here and it's going to seem that I'm just some anti-Nintendo ranter, but I actually adore the company, which is why I spent two years writing for the Nintendo Life Network, but the main reason that I think Wii U will fail to attract core gamers, is because of Miiverse.
I have extensive knowledge of what's on offer and there's nothing there that's truly ground breaking. In fact, it's aesthetics alone are overly childish and there's absolutely nothing there that makes me want to even remotely try it. It's not an open network – I'm a 30 year old man, I don't need a someone babysitting my comments – and social minigames are free to play everywhere you look these days. If Nintendo wants their system to be a core gamers' console of choice, then they've got to open their networks to the older audience and then simply restrict them for their younger ones – not force us to use Miiverse!
I'm sorry, I'm just not buying the hype this time around. People were fed up with the restrictions on the Wii and with the cost associated with this console, along with it's restrictions/aesthetics (physically and digitally), I see sales dropping off in six month's time.
"My basis comes off of the fact that even Nintendo has been worried by the severe drop off in sales for the system over the past few months – they can't afford to drop the price again."
They are concerned with the U.S. and European markets, not the Japanese market. As for a price drop, I would almost guarantee they can take another $20 off both the base and XL models, and probably will after the first of the year. Right now you can already find the base model for $150 at many stores in the US on a week-to-week basis.
If your comment isn't scaled to the facts, then there really is no basis for it. There needs to be a foundation for a statement such as "3DS sales are in the tank…" if you clarified that for certain markets, then perhaps so…but again, even that would ignore the overall sales numbers of the 3DS console worldwide, being more than the DS was.
On the Wii U side of things, I don't think we'll know for sure how the console is doing for another 6 months (maybe less, if they aren't selling at all and just sitting on shelves like what happened with the PS3 originally), but then you want to bring up how the GamePad looks like a LeapFrog peripheral? What LeapFrog peripheral are you talking about, as we have a young bean, and he is getting one of those devices here soon…and I'm not even sure what that argument has to do with anything. Especially having seen and held the GamePad in person, I don't see the connection with anything LeapFrog…perhaps you can provide a picture of a LeapFrog device like the GamePad and a display like the GamePad?
It seems that you are wanting to associate this either with an iPad type device, or with a learning device, but not as a game console which is what it is first….which is very odd to me.
Again, can you name me any console that "loyalist" and "core gamers" aren't the initial early adopters on? If not, I don't see the point in even mentioning it. Of course early adopters will be Nintendo fans, and "core gamers" perhaps looking for a new console…but the majority will be Nintendo fans, and if they are impressed with the Wii U as they were with the Wii initially, then word-of-mouth may kick-in over the holidays and help the Wii U gain more market recognition (I sure don't think the NoA commercials will help do it!).
When you say things like, "I see too many issues" but don't name them, and things like, "lacking too many features" but don't name them, I can't really follow the argument there, because I don't know what you're talking about/comparing it with.
I run a mainly Nintendo based site (data stories on Wii games), but that doesn't mean I'm a fanboy of Nintendo. I just found that the stories I have done for the last 3+ years aren't done by other sites, and they provide coverage of random Wii games from time-to-time that might have been passed over.
I said yesterday when they announced that Nintendo TVii wouldn't make US launch it reeked of LAZINESS, and that there is really no excuse for it not to be at launch when Nintendo spent nearly 20 minutes of their North America Wii U conference in September talking about Nintendo TVii.
I also have called them out on their apparent inability to get bad news out, months before a system launches, and not a few days before; such as them detailing the storage capacity of the Wii U systems right before launch, and showing how truly pathetic the base model is for doing anything outside of basic save files in games, and downloading A FEW eShop titles at best, without having to buy an external HDD.
I also said that Nintendo of Japan should just sell Nintendo of America's office space, and let Reggie "work" from home and do conference calls on Skype, since NoA either can't/won't communicate with consumers about the Wii U on a basic level, and get some money for a building that isn't apparently used for a whole lot other than getting Bill Trinen and Reggie to do videos and translations of what Mr. Iwata has already said in Japan.
There is less than 24 hours left, and I'm not exactly happy with how Nintendo of America has said basically NOTHING about the eShop.
I HOPE that Miiverse is continuously improved upon, but like you in some areas, I have my doubts because of Nintendo's record so far in the console generation with providing useful/timely updates. Now, that being said, I have seen some sparks of hope, with news of NIntendo creating the new "network" or online division…some new position a few months back and they brought in some new network/online/infrastructure guy…but again, that was within the last 6 months, and makes me wonder why they didn't do this over a year ago to get everything ready for LAUNCH.
When Nintendo revealed the Wii U GamePad originally at E3 2011, I thought the use of Circle Pads on it was a STUPID idea, and had a guy that demoed it at that E3 say it was a very odd choice…fortunately they changed that (still, makes me wonder how in the world that EVER passed the basic controller test and was approved for a rough draft model).
I just posted up my thoughts on the GamePad my brief hands-on time with the demo unit this last week, and posted what I found to be uncomfortable about it. It was the first place I had seen it mentioned out of all the "hands-on" impressions I had read/skimmed before, but I thought others might find the same thing uncomfortable about the controller that I did, and thought it should be mentioned.
Again, I'm not a fanboy either, and I'm probably more of a critic than I should be at times with all the companies, but I do believe that you can criticize it just needs to be grounded and make sense.
We'll just have to give Nintendo's online platform some time to mature. I couldn't expect it to be up to par with PSN and Xbox LIVE at the time it gets released. That will probably have an impact on sales, but that's just reality from how I see it.
More importantly, I get the feeling that Nintendo's goals with the service don't align with the other 2 online platforms, and that they are instead going for a riskier path. If that is the case, they'd have to trail this new path with bare basic stuff.
What exactly this new path would be, I don't know. One good guess I'll take is that it reflects Nintendo's conception of Wii U as a family-friendly, social-oriented device. It definitely wouldn't deviate too far from the competitor's path, as consumers would find it foreign at that point. Whether this path exists or not, and whether or not it's successful (if it does exist) will be determined as time does its job.
But hasn't Nintendo had plenty of time to get their online service up to par?
From the looks of things, the Wii U eShop does look much better than anything we've seen before it, but I'm still absolutely dumbfounded that they've refused to integrate an achievements system. For all their talk of "social integration" – why would they refuse this? Achievements go far beyond the system with Raptr and connect you further than just the console your playing on.
My apologies for not coming off clear, I'm actually not feeling well and have come down with flu-like symptoms, so I'll try to be brief and direct in my responses here.
I should have stated that "3DS sales are 'tanking'" instead, because Nintendo did indeed last month have to dramatically revise its revenue projects, because of a steep drop off in sales for the 3DS. And while it continues to sell very well in Japan, the rapid decline in the Japanese yen is keeping them from seeing viable profits from those sales.
Also on the 3DS front – of which I'm a huge fan of the system – we've seen that outside of Japan, the system is only willing to sell in great numbers when it's associated with a major Nintendo title releasing, which is worrying. Even Capcom's fantastic Resident Evil: Revelations has only shifted 0.63m copies worldwide, when it should very much be a system seller, especially seeing how it rivals Resident Evil 6, which has sold over 4.5m copies worldwide, regardless of all the negative criticism.
My other complaint was that the Wii U Gamepad looks like a toy. I wan't saying it was copying or extremely similar to a LeapFrog, yet that the thick outer plastic shell makes it look more like a toy, than a high-tech gaming peripheral in comparison to, say the iPad or Nexus 7. Aesthetics are a big factor in today's markets and I don't think Wii U has that "I've got to have this hardware" appeal to attract tech savvy gamers who don't already have their eye on Wii U. Instead, I actually find it aesthetically unappealing, especially in the white colouration.
It's common sense that hardware launches will always have a hardware and core gamer turnout – only showing the real strength in its sales months later and Wii U is no different. But just as with Vita and the 3DS before it, nobody was talking about them in my very large circle of (offline) gaming friends. This is where I find my real facts, because these are typical everyday people that play, talk about and buy games for themselves, as well as their children. These are people that are influenced by word-of-mouth (e.g. television advertisements, in-store displays, etc.), not gaming websites. These are the people that will make the system sells explode if they're turned on to it, because they have the iPads and HD consoles, and can easily afford a new console, but instead they're all talking about Call of Duty: Black Ops II and Halo 4 right now, not Wii U. They're also not talking about the 3DS or the Vita either, and both of them continue to struggle outside of Japan.
As for the issues I see with Wii U, if you've followed Nintendo Life over the past few years, I've stated over and again in the Round Tables that I think that Nintendo going after core gamers with Wii U is a mistake. They've built this amazing group of casual gamers with Wii and yet, they go running to the core gamers, who already have their HD consoles and are laughing at Nintendo for bragging about Wii U being HD – it's old news. You've got millions of gamers right now playing Black Ops II and Halo 4 online with all of their friends and are completely complacent right where they are – why would they transition over to Wii U? Why should they spend $400 to buy a new console to keep playing the same games they are already playing? Chances are, they're not going to.
I'm going to jump back in to this discussion tomorrow – I've been away all weekend, Butgood to see some great ideas flowing through.
I just wanted to clarify one thing that immediately jumped out at me – the problem for the yen for Nintendo is that it is actually too strong these days. Nintendo needs a low yen value because it is a export-driven business. You're right that the Japanese market is no longer as valuable for Nintendo as it has been in the past, it's just for the opposite reason for what you think 😛
I'm not sure how much time Nintendo had to develop their online infrastructure, and I'd like to know when Nintendo started on it. Maybe 2009?
Even if they did have plenty of time, there is the issue of testing the service to ensure reliability. The way I look at these kinds of situation is this: simple projects are more reliable and less error-prone while complex projects will increase the chances of something going wrong ten fold. This project could be a programming project, a hard math equation done by hand, a large event like a fancy wedding, or other similar phenomenon. If Nintendo had decided to work hard to develop their infrastructure further, it would require more testing and more time.
As for why Nintendo hasn't implemented a social-friendly award system, I have no idea. Maybe they're still trying to find a place for it in MiiVerse and validating whether or not it will, at the very least, fit in with their goals. Maybe they didn't have enough time to implement it, as silly as that may sound. Or, maybe they haven't comprehend the the importance of the feature in the respective gaming crowd. On the brighter side, they didn't say that it's completely out of their plan.
Yep. You're indeed correct. Let's just say that I was told that I'm on the verge of pneumonia a few hours ago – my brain isn't working that way it should, not that it ever really does.
Thanks for the correction though. 🙂
Judging from what many people are saying today, aside from the 10 second lag issue between some menus, the overwhelming notion is that the online structure for Wii U is very good, which I'm glad to see.
Nintendo has had since the Wii launched to develop an online infrastructure – about as long as Sony and Microsoft. There is no reason, for the record, that Nintendo could not have had a great online service with the Wii via firmware updates.
The problem is that Nintendo for years denied that online play was important. In fact back in the day Nintendo expected that experience to just fade out of popularity – I read interviews to that effect. Nintendo got it wrong, and now it's playing catchup to the other two (three if you include Apple), and it's catching up slower than the competition is getting away.
From what I've seen and read about the Wii U experience, sadly that trend seems to be continuing. The Wii U might be better than the 3DS and Wii, but it's still not up to the standards of the PSN and XBLA. And "they'll get better at it," isn't really an argument, since Sony and Microsoft are not exactly sitting on their hands with this either.
Nintendo TVii is not even ready at launch, is not even launching in most places around the world (just the US. I don't live in the US) and on top of that, it's not doing anything that the other consoles aren't already doing. The problem is that the other consoles are also doing more than TV support. Nintendo… isn't. When I say "it only plays games," what I mean is "that's all it's good for." Being dead last in the field in terms of multimedia is not something I would suggest counters the point I was making there.
As for the content generation bit, the iPad is factually superior to the Wii U there. Last I checked you can't do art, make music, write documents and presentations, create spreadsheets, draw animations, build websites, code games and so on and so forth using the Wii U. Of course that goes back to the point that the Wii U is nothing more than a game playing device, but believe it or not "what it does" is an important consideration for your average Joe in a shop making a purchasing decision. And when it comes down to a fun device that does a bit of everything, and a fun device that just plays games, there are a lot of average Joes that are going to pick the former.
Once again it's important to differentiate ourselves, as gamers, and the average public. WE would buy a console for its killer exclusive games. WE are happy to own multiple consoles. WE know what the technology is and isn't good at. WE are the minority, and that's the core concern for Guillemot, as the CEO of a publisher that would clearly like to support the Wii U, but won't if the sales figures are not there to justify it.
And some of your criticisms are amusingly enough ones I don't agree with 😛
"I said yesterday when they announced that Nintendo TVii wouldn't make US launch it reeked of LAZINESS, and that there is really no excuse for it not to be at launch when Nintendo spent nearly 20 minutes of their North America Wii U conference in September talking about Nintendo TVii."
Global corporations are never lazy. Fact. TVii isn't launching with the Wii U because it is not a global feature. The Wii U is being launched earlier than it probably should be to capitalise on Christmas, and so the features that make the initial launch are the global features."
"I also said that Nintendo of Japan should just sell Nintendo of America's office space, and let Reggie "work" from home and do conference calls on Skype, since NoA either can't/won't communicate with consumers about the Wii U on a basic level, and get some money for a building that isn't apparently used for a whole lot other than getting Bill Trinen and Reggie to do videos and translations of what Mr. Iwata has already said in Japan."
Communicating to consumers is, like, five per cent of the work that NoA does. Dealing with distributors, repairs, content partnerships, accounting – Having worked in big corporations I know how much time is dedicated to media work amongst the execs, and it's tiny.
"Global corporations are never lazy. Fact."
Depends on your definition of lazy. Not using cash-on-hand to make sure every feature is ready at launch, is laziness to me. Instead of paying more programmers to make sure it was done, they are now making excuses, instead of leading by example.
NoA apparently doesn't deal with distributors very well (unless you're meaning the mailing guys), because Amazon.com isn't even selling the Wii U or 3DS systems. The largest online retailer in the world and U.S., not carrying Nintendo's newest products during the holiday season.
The repairs are now outsourced to third party repair shops, or at least were for the Wii and I imagine will continue with the Wii U. So, that doesn't require a building. Accounting can be done from laptops/PCs in a small office (or home), especially with most things being electronic these days.
*It should be noted, all of my comments are now being made as a Wii U owner…the system is currently "updating".
"Nintendo has had since the Wii launched to develop an online infrastructure – about as long as Sony and Microsoft."
See, you're more positive than me in this aspect. I would like to know what they were doing for the last 10+ years when the Sega Dreamcast, PS2, and original Xbox really got the "online gaming" going.
I agree, there is no reason the Wii U should not be as good as the 360 and PS3 at the very least, and better than what they offer really since it is a "next gen" console.
Funnily enough, I liked the initial idea behind WiiWare, because it should have been a playground for indie developers who would never be able to produce a retail game.
Unfortunately Nintendo had no idea how to develop the experience into something that most people would want to use, and so instead it was left to rot. Really unfortunate.
"Depends on your definition of lazy. Not using cash-on-hand to make sure every feature is ready at launch, is laziness to me. Instead of paying more programmers to make sure it was done, they are now making excuses, instead of leading by example."
Nintendo would have carefully weighted how much it has spent on the Wii U, with how much it can expect to make off it in the immediate term. It's already a loss-leading exercise, and so I don't think a feature that will be exclusive to the US market is especially important right now.
"NoA apparently doesn't deal with distributors very well (unless you're meaning the mailing guys), because Amazon.com isn't even selling the Wii U or 3DS systems. The largest online retailer in the world and U.S., not carrying Nintendo's newest products during the holiday season.
The repairs are now outsourced to third party repair shops, or at least were for the Wii and I imagine will continue with the Wii U. So, that doesn't require a building. Accounting can be done from laptops/PCs in a small office (or home), especially with most things being electronic these days.
*It should be noted, all of my comments are now being made as a Wii U owner…the system is currently "updating"."
For a guy who's all about data, you're making a lot of assumptions here 😛 It's likely that Nintendo formed some kind of business partnership with the speciality retailers. Those guys are important for a vendor like Nintendo to support. Given the Wii U sold out through the US it was unnecessary to have Amazon stocking the Wii U immediately.
A large number of people working at Nintendo US would be account managers, handling relationships with the retailers, the third party repair guys, the distributors, the marketing firms, the PR company and so on and so forth. These people are highly mobile and do spend a lot of time out of the office, yes, but then it's important that Nintendo has an office for internal meetings, as well as a showcase for external meetings. There's something reassuring about doing business with a big business with an office when you're a potential new partner. And there's something reassuring about working for a big business with an office. That's another significant reason to maintain office space.
But it really boils down to this – you don't really know what goes on in the NoA offices, I suspect if you were a fly on the wall there you would see a far busier place than you imagine. 🙂
"For a guy who's all about data, you're making a lot of assumptions here…"
Not assumptions. They did outsource the Wii repairs to shops, and didn't do those in house. Amazon.com has not carried the 3DS in over a year now basically, and it is sold on the site through 3rd parties…not directly from Amazon.
As for it selling out, it's kind of interesting, as some stores in our area reportedly have some of the Basic Sets still available.
As for PR in the U.S., Nintendo has that outsourced as well…
Saying one doesn't know what goes on at a company, doesn't change that repairs, PR, and probably commercials are all outsourced…I don't see why Reggie, Moffitt, Trinen couldn't work from home for NoJ.
What assumptions did I make?
The Wii's online infrastructure uses Nintendo Wifi, not Nintendo Network or MiiVerse. I believe that they are nearly different infrastructures. One of the biggest limitations that could have prevented Nintendo from improving Nintendo Wifi or testing Nintendo Network with the Wii was the Wii's limited memory of 512 MB. Any feature-rich operating system won't have much room in the memory their firmware was in, so they have to rely upon secondary storage in a device, such as a hard-drive or flash memory. Wii U's OS storage requirements had risen exponentially to around 4-5 GB after today's system update.
Do keep in mind that the reason why Microsoft and Sony have a comprehensive online infrastructure was because they improved upon it as time goes by. Heck, Microsoft developed Xbox LIVE before the Xbox 360 came out, and Sony didn't implemented features like trophies and Home until 2008. And they knew that the internet would revolutionize the console-based industry. Nintendo Wifi, in my opinion, reflects Nintendo's initial indifference to online gaming. Seriously, the darn thing hadn't improved for a while now (perhaps the weak memory is the limitation).
Now, I believe that Nintendo recognizes the significance of the internet in video games, and that it's inevitable for them to go with the market trends. However, their detailing of the eShop and the Nintendo Network implies to me that it isn't built upon Nintendo Wifi. Instead, it looks to be a newly developed service, like they are starting new. If they are starting new, they have to have a good foundation to lay this service upon. Hence, they are trailing a different path, and so they have to go with the bare essentials. It seems a bit silly to have to invest in more supplies and packings for their new journey if it is in an unfamiliar territory.
That's horrible. Be sure to have plenty of rest and lots of water…and try not to wonder on the internet for too long. Hope you get better soon D:
If indeed the Nintendo Network is a wholly different architecture to Nintendo WiFi, then while you have a point that Nintendo itself is going about it the right way (ie, get the basics down, then add to the service), from the customer end this still appears painfully backwards.
Nintendo is trying to sell the Wii U to people, and people sadly don't care what is going on behind the scenes – and equally sadly it seems unlikely that Nintendo will ever catch up to Sony or Microsoft in terms of online offerings. As that's becoming more and more central to people's experience in gaming, this is going to be a bigger and bigger problem for Nintendo.
How many years is it before Nintendo offers Cloud services? Five? Quite possibly. I don't like not having Cloud storage *now* – I get it from Sony, Apple and Microsoft, and that makes those three platform holders immediately more compelling for me than Nintendo.
And then there is the simply realistic limitation that it takes time for things to develop and mature, like my programming homeworks. I can't just rush to develop my code, and not test until I've finished it. An artist can't just work on the details immediately and expect it to be what they envisioned it to be (maybe except for Japanese manga artists). Nintendo made the mistake of dismissing the internet back in the days, and are paying the consequences. They can't do anything about, nor can we. So, theoretically speaking, they can never catch up to Playstation Network and Xbox LIVE. Rather than trying to emulate those services or toss in features without any direction, they could just start fresh.
I can absolutely agree with that – but the question is, is the average consumer going to simply ignore the fact that there are two, arguably three, online services out there that are better for gaming that what Nintendo is offering? My believe is no – Nintendo really needed to nail this online service from the outset, and I'm not sold on the idea that they have.
I guess we'll just have to see how it all develos from here!
Haha. Thanks man. I've got good antibiotics and a couple of extra days off my day job, so I'll be up to shape in no time at all. 🙂
Huh? How could you hope (or point out if you're realistic) that Nintendo would have such a complex service from the get go when things take time to mature? I know they are a company, but I wouldn't know what'd be more problematic for Nintendo: releasing a fairly polished online platform that's okay at best with respect to the competition, or implementing everything the competition offers and risk making the service broken in so many ways. Either way, I'm sure Nintendo is doing what they can to strive for the best outcome, both in the short-term and the long-term.
Ok, let's try and think about it this way – it might give you a better perspective on where I'm coming from:
Let's say you're in the hunt for a new console, and you have the choice between a Wii U, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. Assuming for a moment that each console has games that you're interested in, you start talking to the shop keeper about each console and what it offers.
You buy a PlayStation 3 and there's PlayStation Plus ("free" games!), achievements, Facebook integration, the PlayStation Network, Vita connectivity for crossplay, TV services, video editing, photo editing.
You buy a Xbox 360 and you get that wonderful SmartGlass connectivity, Pay TV (if you're in Australia, at least), cross-play chat, achievements, cloud services, Windows integration.
You buy a Wii U and… uh… you get a nice eShop, and if you're in the US you'll get TV services at some point. There's another social network to sign up for, too (because after Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Google, Raptr, another social network is precisely what you needed).
Which console do you think is the least likely purchase?
Nintendo's job is to make a compelling reason to buy its console. Yes this whole network services bit is new for Nintendo, but the consumer doesn't care – and nor should they. There's a reason that not once in the history of console marketing has an organisation come out and said "yeah, this console isn't finished yet. Stick with us and in a couple of years we might be competitive."
Nintendo fans won't care. Gamers might not care, if the GamePad tech interests them. Non-gamers and new gamers sure as hell will care.
And don't forget, this works in reverse too. For those new consumers that don't care about online services, well, that Wii console is far cheaper and has a bigger library of games. Casual gamers aren't likely to care that it's not in HD, either.
And if they do care about HD, then the PS3 and Xbox 360 are cheaper, and have more features.
There isn't really a win for Nintendo here. By missing the online rush completely Nintendo has left itself in an incredibly uncompetitive position. It is not the consumer's fault if they decide that the Wii U doesn't offer enough compared to the competition.
Let me summarize your quote in this here paragraph in hopes of verifying that I comprehended where you're getting at:
"Nintendo is in a tricky situation of having to win people's hearts to buy their console. They know that they have to let their services and products mature, but the fact is that consumers won't care that it's virtually impossible for Nintendo to cheat the universal limitations of life. What matters to them is that they get their money's worth from any console they buy. Since the Wii U is the least feature-packed console for the cost, this will deter many of them from buying it. So, in the end, Nintendo had made a huge mistake of disregarding online gaming in the past and ended up in a problem with no easy solutions."
Nintendo does have to make a good reason why I should buy their console, but you seem to be implying that it has to have more features than it currently has right at launch. It's not like Nintendo can magically add more features to the console and expect them to work in the way they should before launch. Like I have stated earlier, they have to pay the consequences for their actions, like starting with a premature service. Of course the average Joe or Sally won't care that Nintendo screwed up and are having to do what is currently being done, but Nintendo can't cheat limitations either.
I'm sorry if I'm implying that Nintendo will do perfectly fine as a company with the Wii U, but that's not where I'm getting at. What I should've stated from my last reply is that Nintendo is striving for the best outcome POSSIBLE, which doesn't equate to being most successful or fairly successful. We know that they are in a sticky situation, but something has to be done. I still believe that it's impossible for them to release Nintendo Network that is on the same level with PSN and Xbox LIVE. Thus, it seems kind of silly to stress that they need to release a full-featured online when that's almost impossible…
yet, the company has to do something to convince potential buyers.
So, instead of trying to do the impossible, they approach online gaming with a fresh new perspective. Supposedly, their philosophy of how online works is supposed to address the current issues of online gaming, serve Nintendo's philosophies of what video games are about, and serve the interests of what contemporary society needs. For example, the MiiVerse atmosphere radiates a friendly, child-like environment that will hopefully deter away people who are immature by trying to be mature (i.e. swearing, being overly competitive, etc.). Next, maybe they're afraid that an awards system will encourage heartless competition when they want gaming to be a fun activity for all. You and I may be skeptical about this new approach, but that's natural for human beings. We cautiously approach something new and unexplored. I won't guarantee that Nintendo will be successful with their console, but I'm interested in the upcoming events waiting for us.
This is one of those debates where we actually agree in a lot of ways, but one or two keywords means we're at loggerheads.
I actually agree with most everything you've said there. I agree that the Wii U needs to do online fundamentally different to PSN and XBLA, because it won't ever, in any way, compete with two very big companies that are investing a lot of money on two services that will essentially make or break both companies.
Those are the stakes at play here. What I would personally like from Nintendo was more proof that is has plans to enrich the feature set of the Wii U. That I haven't seen much of yet. That's the bit that has me worried, I guess.
There will be more features released in time – The Wii had more features built in over its lifespan, and the 3DS has as well. I think, as a gamer that cares about these things, an indication, however small, about the direction Nintendo is going this time would do a lot to put my concerns to rest.
That's perfectly understandable, and I encourage that you don't neglect your attitude of expecting empirical results. Perhaps what I should've pointed out that I'm trying to enlighten you in hopes of making you feel a little better. If something were to happen to Nintendo in a bad way, it would be a sad day and perhaps a scar for the entire industry.
However, I'm also in the revelation of realizing that if stuff happens…well, it happens. I'd make and repeat so many mistakes that I got mad over them and say stuff like, "If I wasn't so stupid to do this mistake, this consequence would've never happened." Later on, I realized that I'm using up my energy by inducing my angers so frequently, that I gotten sick of it. I should be reflecting upon my past in a positive and neutral light more frequently. I should also make the best of what I have. Hence, I'm going through some revelations.
Hope that lessens the gap :3
Nintendo will never genuinely "go away." I'm confident that it is large enough that worst case some other company acquires it for its expertise (and thus doesn't mess with it too much). That would only happen if Nintendo's share price were to crash, and I don't think anyone would predict a repeat of Zynga.
Nintendo's a bit like Facebook in the sense that while it competes in the same space as some very big corporations (Microsoft, Sony), and does so quite successfully, it lacks a business scale that always makes it a bit of an underdog. That tends to make the analysts and investors nervous, but it also means that Nintendo isn't genuinely in any risk of failure – not any more than Facebook is, even if it can never compete with Google.