AHC: Save the Wii U

We probably shouldn’t. While the Wii U could use a bit more oomph to it, we should focus on what it does have.

After all, games are what make a console. So we give more games to the Wii U, especially in the beginning, to help. That and renaming it.
If Color Splash didn't use the system it used and returned to a classic Paper Mario style, it would've gained way better reception and possibly sales.
 
Not gonna lie, it needs a minor hardware bump if they insist on a controller that streams the imagery. The controller whilst a decent idea was just terribly executed throughout its lifetime. I personally loved using that controller but the screenside of things I often found it lacking. For third parties who had to transfer games over having to then do additional work on the controller I can understand why third parties didn’t want to work with it.

The name was a mistake, a mistake that could have been easily resolved calling it the Wii 2. The name generated nothing but confusion that Nintendo didn’t resolve through discussing this properly with retailers or its marketing campaign. By making the controller the sole focus of the marketing, people genuinely thought the Wii U was a controller for the Wii at $299. They were very very hesitant to put the actual console on show due to the fact it would have been steamrolled but at least people would know it was a console.

Otherwise Nintendo’s throughput needs to be improved and fast. The major problem with the initial games were simply Nintendo were not ready for the HD era and were having to reallocate staff from other projects to bridge the manpower gap hence the spotty release schedule in the first 18 months.

The initial games are problematic as well. Super Mario World whilst one of my favourite games on the system was a poor choice, compare it to Mario Galaxy or Odyssey which had excellent receptions. The Wii U needed that kind of Mario title, not what was essentially a 3D New Mario Bros. The same with Zelda, after Skyward Sword the next mainline title was seven years later, granted it was one of the best Zelda titles of all time perhaps but that’s an entire generation gone without it.

The Wii U was a poor decision truth be told in many regards, name, games it’s entire premise was simply poorly executed. Although the Wii U got some excellent games it was too little too late and many of its past decisions just over shadowed everything.
 
Not gonna lie, it needs a minor hardware bump if they insist on a controller that streams the imagery. The controller whilst a decent idea was just terribly executed throughout its lifetime. I personally loved using that controller but the screenside of things I often found it lacking. For third parties who had to transfer games over having to then do additional work on the controller I can understand why third parties didn’t want to work with it.

The name was a mistake, a mistake that could have been easily resolved calling it the Wii 2. The name generated nothing but confusion that Nintendo didn’t resolve through discussing this properly with retailers or its marketing campaign. By making the controller the sole focus of the marketing, people genuinely thought the Wii U was a controller for the Wii at $299. They were very very hesitant to put the actual console on show due to the fact it would have been steamrolled but at least people would know it was a console.

Otherwise Nintendo’s throughput needs to be improved and fast. The major problem with the initial games were simply Nintendo were not ready for the HD era and were having to reallocate staff from other projects to bridge the manpower gap hence the spotty release schedule in the first 18 months.

The initial games are problematic as well. Super Mario World whilst one of my favourite games on the system was a poor choice, compare it to Mario Galaxy or Odyssey which had excellent receptions. The Wii U needed that kind of Mario title, not what was essentially a 3D New Mario Bros. The same with Zelda, after Skyward Sword the next mainline title was seven years later, granted it was one of the best Zelda titles of all time perhaps but that’s an entire generation gone without it.

The Wii U was a poor decision truth be told in many regards, name, games it’s entire premise was simply poorly executed. Although the Wii U got some excellent games it was too little too late and many of its past decisions just over shadowed everything.

Well, what sort of games would you have come up with for it and how would you utilize it?
 
Well, what sort of games would you have come up with for it and how would you utilize it?

An interesting question but I am no UI designer. Truth be told I was quite optimistic about the controller but as time went on and it simply didn’t seem to be utilised well I gave up. I don’t think it was a good idea other than when I didn’t have the TV. Like I said, good idea terrible execution.
 
They had a video game console released in 2012 that couldn't play Skyrim. What more needs to be said?

I was a Nintendo die hard for nearly two decades. Then my brother got an Xbox, and I saw all the cool games he got, from KOTOR to Obkivion, while the Wii had... what? No More Heroes and Smash bros, and a shit ton of shovelware.

I got ax Xbox 360 and Fallout 3 and never looked back. Only Nintendo things I get now are Fire Emblem and Pokemon games for thr handheld.
 
To this day I can never understand why Pokemon remains so popular with "hardcore" gamers.

It's a social experience.

Here in Virginia there's a big gaming convention next weekend mag fest. 30000 people about half of them play pokemon. They have an impromptu arena where people watch people dual to see who's the best fighter. Do you have any idea how awesome it is to battle it out with somebody with a 1000 people watching?
 
I personally would have tried to get games like Victoria 2 or Total War on the Wii U, just to tap a new market.

Problem is they're too niche.

They work well on tablet for example because yes the UI can be transported the major issues arise with a home console when you consider. Well why? Controls rarely transport over and the Wii U will manage it, but the CPU on the Wii U wasn't amazing so it'll have to be older titles or severely downgraded modern titles.

And the other issue of course is audience. Most people who would play this type of game will do so on a computer, I can't see the potential customer base for these games on the Wii U.
 
Problem is they're too niche.

They work well on tablet for example because yes the UI can be transported the major issues arise with a home console when you consider. Well why? Controls rarely transport over and the Wii U will manage it, but the CPU on the Wii U wasn't amazing so it'll have to be older titles or severely downgraded modern titles.

And the other issue of course is audience. Most people who would play this type of game will do so on a computer, I can't see the potential customer base for these games on the Wii U.
Well you can play indies on PC, but they're on the Switch too - if these versions offered a new experience, they may eventually grow a decently sized base.
 
Well you can play indies on PC, but they're on the Switch too - if these versions offered a new experience, they may eventually grow a decently sized base.

On the Switch the situation is healthier though, in a world where over 6000 games are released in 2017 on Steam, the Switch is thriving as a new console offering these indie makers taking the risk some good marketing by sheer ability to get out there.

Nintendo tried this with the Wii U as well but that was a disaster to the point the head of the department walked away from Nintendo. The Switch was a fresh start and Nintendo offered a lot more help and support than last time as they coalesced around first party and indie games. They could have tried investing in concepts like Cross-Buy, and the virtual console too but that didn't work out too well.

Issue is simply, indie titles work excellently on consoles. But full blown strategy titles like Victoria 2 and Total War, they'd work on the Wii U I just don't think they'd be a market worth such games ever getting ported. Victoria 2 and Total War aren't indie either. They're made by two of the biggest publishers in the world.
 
On the Switch the situation is healthier though, in a world where over 6000 games are released in 2017 on Steam, the Switch is thriving as a new console offering these indie makers taking the risk some good marketing by sheer ability to get out there.

Nintendo tried this with the Wii U as well but that was a disaster to the point the head of the department walked away from Nintendo. The Switch was a fresh start and Nintendo offered a lot more help and support than last time as they coalesced around first party and indie games. They could have tried investing in concepts like Cross-Buy, and the virtual console too but that didn't work out too well.

Issue is simply, indie titles work excellently on consoles. But full blown strategy titles like Victoria 2 and Total War, they'd work on the Wii U I just don't think they'd be a market worth such games ever getting ported. Victoria 2 and Total War aren't indie either. They're made by two of the biggest publishers in the world.

I don't think that Vic 2 or Total War would be pushed big on the console but it would be good to get titles like that on the Wii U to show that the console is capable of all kinds of games. In other words you need variety on a console; hence why I through those games out there as suggestions for games to be released on the Wii U.
 
Yet the x-box and PS3 found need to include their own motion controls, so clearly something was working.
Not really. They tried to cash in on the fad which died shortly thereafter. It's like I told everyone, if I wanted gaming to be so physical, I'd actually go out rather than stay in.
 
Not really. They tried to cash in on the fad which died shortly thereafter. It's like I told everyone, if I wanted gaming to be so physical, I'd actually go out rather than stay in.

Better use of internet. Nintendo, EVEN NOW, still doesn't understand online co-op, streaming, etc.

I'll be honest, I think had the Wii U been bundled with a Wii Mote it would have done better. Less cost on an expensive under utilized controller and they could carry a lot over.

Online side, absolutely. To this day the idea of needing a phone to do online talk in Splatoon 2 is simply mind boggling.
 
I'll be honest, I think had the Wii U been bundled with a Wii Mote it would have done better. Less cost on an expensive under utilized controller and they could carry a lot over.

Online side, absolutely. To this day the idea of needing a phone to do online talk in Splatoon 2 is simply mind boggling.
Though given how online chat is with the rampant screams of disgruntled opponents or teammates in this sort of stuff, I can see why it’d be a problem
 
Number one, don't call it the Wii U. That marketing decision had to have cost easy a million sales since it just sounds like another model of Wii. Second, the highly successful Switch seems to me what Nintendo wanted to do with the Wii U, but is the tech in 2012 even available to acceptably make something like the Switch?

Issue is simply, indie titles work excellently on consoles. But full blown strategy titles like Victoria 2 and Total War, they'd work on the Wii U I just don't think they'd be a market worth such games ever getting ported. Victoria 2 and Total War aren't indie either. They're made by two of the biggest publishers in the world.

Has there ever been a real market for strategy games on consoles? Especially for something like Paradox games. Strategy games just seem like one of those genres where the majority of people will rather play the PC version (although I suppose SRPGs are different for some reason where SRPG titles can be exclusively for consoles and still sell acceptably well). Plus they're in general niche games and thus wouldn't be system sellers.
 
Top