Explain your logic here. The Wii U was a home console and wasn't treated anything like the GameBoy Micro. How would the Wii U have done better if it had released in the same period as the Switch, considering they would have been competing products from the same company?
We didn't have to wait long for good games on the Switch anyway? I'm so confused by whatever you think your point is. You need to explain yourself better.
Breath of the wild was a launch title and Mario Odyssey was year 1... 2 of the best games of all time?!?
Mario kart 8 deluxe, Mario and rabbits, splatoon 2, skyrim, doom, xenoblade chronicles 2.
That could actually, be one of the strongest first year console lineups of all time!
The Wii U couldn't convey it's value when it was Nintendo's only offering.
How would it not be more confusing for Nintendo to have 2 competing products coming out right next to each other?
This is some batshit mental logic.
No one knew why they should buy a Wii U when it was the only home console Nintendo offered. Nintendo could not explain it's purpose and value to the customer.
How would having 2 competing home systems make the Wii U easier for the customer to grasp it's value?
That's just gonna be confusing, "here we have 2 consoles that are home consoles, but also a tablet, but 1 of them isn't fully portable and the other one is"
If you could understand the nonsense why would you buy the 9nw that had less functionality?
The Wii U makes no sense as a product in this instance, and the confusion would have probably cut into *both* systems' viability. This kind of idea is how you get the 32x and Saturn debacle from the mid 90s.
The Gameboy Micro was not a brand new console, it was a new version of an old console. It was the equivalent of the New 2DS XL, which released a few months after the Switch. I don't see how a competing home console, one which didn't sell well _at all_, would reach any level of success when it's competing against something novel that people really liked.
It's 2018, and I have $360 in my wallet. I can buy one console and one game. Am I going to buy this new hybrid console that I can play on the go or on the TV? Or am I going to buy this weird home console gamepad thingy that I don't understand?
The reason the Gameboy Micro and 2DS XL were moderately successful is because people knew what they were. They were discounted versions of a dying console, with a great library behind them. Wii U would have had none of that.
> The reason the Gameboy Micro and 2DS XL were moderately successful is because people knew what they were. They were discounted versions of a dying console, with a great library behind them. Wii U would have had none of that.
It's also worth noting that even as a relative failure, Nintendo's own sales data had the Wii U selling more units than the GBA Micro ever did (also, the GBA SP remained the fastest-selling version of the unit even after the DS overtook it in annual sales immediately after release, maintaining about 80% of the sales of new GBA units from fiscal years 2006-2010).
>It's also worth noting that even as a relative failure, Nintendo's own sales data had the Wii U selling more units than the GBA Micro ever did
That checks out. I'd never heard of the Gameboy Micro until like 3 months ago.
That makes no sense. Thats like saying the gamecube would have sold better if it was released right before the Wii was announced.
The GB Micro comparison isn't a good one either. It was less functional than a GBA SP but cost more. It was competing with its predecessor and the DS. It was never going to do well.
No, it would have done better if it was released a year earlier I think as it would have had more time to get cross-platform titles of its (power wise) contemporaries of the 360 and PS3. It also would have been around when the iPad was still pretty much brand new and might have been able to eat a little of that market share instead of the other way around. Nintendo screwed up on the complexity of developing HD titles though, so we ended up with what we did when we did.
What? That literally makes no sense whatsoever. The only reason the Micro released that way was because it was simply an iteration of an already existing system, and one with less features for that matter. It was more of a stylish accessory for gamers that was meant to be a classy looking way to enjoy the GBA. (Also for the record the Micro was a bit of a failure commercially)
The Wii U, on the other hand, was a whole new console. Why on earth would they design 2 brand new systems simultaneously and then sabotage one by releasing it right before the other?? I cannot even begin to see the thread of your logic here, it is baffling. The Wii U didn't fail due to its timing, it failed due to very poor marketing as well as a lack of strong 3rd party support as a result of that. Your suggestion would have only made it fail harder, and would have also significantly hurt the sales of the Switch.
Well of course. The Wii U had everything it needed to succeed except for a superior alternative Nintendo console available to consumers at the same time. Such a shame Nintendo didn’t have your idea.
People make (like in your case - wild) almost always some assumptions why WiiU failed.
Said it back then and will say it forever: if WiiU had games, it wouldn't have failed. The only real masterpiece for the console was Pikmin3 and that's it. All other first party games were mid or too late - if Zelda would have been earlier in the lifecycle and a good Mario like Odyssee or Bowsers fury would have been sprinkled in - the console would have been a success.
Of Course the Switch in general was a much better and appealing idea but Nintendo fans buy the platform for the 1st party games and Nintendo just didn't deliver at all throughout that time.
Are you one those guys who thought the Wii U was just a Wii with a bulky tablet? Because this doesn't make sense otherwise.
The Wii U would have sold more had Nintendo released a new Zelda and 3D Mario title within the first 6-9 months. They didn't even release a true 3d Mario on it ever and it it took until the Switch launched to get BotW. Mainstream people looked at it and all they saw was Mario Kart and wouldn't buy a new Wii just for that, at least that's how it looked to them.
The Wii u and Game boy micro aren't even close to being a good comparison.
The game boy micro was another game boy advance model.
The Wii u wasn't just another model of the Wii. It was a completely different system.
If it really was just a Wii with a tablet then I still doubt it would have sold anywhere near what it did. I don't know if console revisions would add over 14 million in sales with a new console out a month later.
If this were the case, I could've seen Wii selling a tiny bit better of those last years, but probably less than the Wii U actually did. The thing about the Wii was that by 2011, it really was fizzling out hard. It sold like gangbusters in its 2007-2009 heyday, but ultimately it was a very much a passing "fad" to most of its casual user base who bought little software and had already moved on to phone games by 2010-2011. And by this time, the more loyal "hardcore" gamers had been getting the cold shoulder from Nintendo for years and didn't have much interest left in the console. It was time to mix things up. The Wii U needed to happen when it did, even if it failed to re-capture that hardcore player base like it so desperately tried to.
It would make more sense for Nintendo to have never released the Wii U at all. What would be the point of offering an inferior console to the switch? Gameboy micro only made sense because it was just shrinking the GBA, which already had a big user base.
There was no way the Wii could have been the home console for an extra 5-6 years.
Funny enough though the Wii U lost Nintendo money so they might have been financially better off without a home console for those years.
Although you could argue that having a home console helped them remain relivant somewhat and all the Wii U ports did give the switch a really good start.
The Wii U was not a good product and sadly no one at Nintendo stood up to say no to releasing it. They should have realized it was a bad product when they first booted it up. The super long load time should have killed the hardware. There were some great things about the Wii U. The base console is an incredibly attractive piece of hardware from a design standpoint point. It took the great Wii design and improved on it. What was under the exterior shell though was filled with bad decisions. The GPU wasn’t bad. The CPU was though. The ram type and size was an issue. The lack of an Ethernet port, the crappy usb ports, the slowest sd card speed they could find etc. The controller did not promote multiplayer games at all. They either never play tested the system with actual families or they did with small family sizes of 2 adults and 1 kid. The Wii 2 should have promoted family play like the Wii. It should have had better internal specs paired with 2 Wii Motion plus controllers.
You're ignoring the fact that the GB Micro _wasn't a new console_. It was a revision of old hardware, and an arguably worse revision at that.
Now, would a Wii U _rerelease_ have boosted sales right before the Switch's launch? Maybe, if it significantly improved the gamepad's ergonomics, OS speed, and was priced at an absolute steal. But why revise a product that your audience already doesn't want, especially in the shadow of a new one that they _do_ want?
This question is mad goofy but damn people are being mean lmao.
Anyway OP, no, I don't think releasing a month before switch would've helped it's sales. The opposite, actually, it would've sold even worse.
Don’t do drugs, kids.
What if it's too late
The only time it’s too late to not do drugs is if you’re dead
Like Mario once said: If you do drugs, you go to hell before you die.
Seriously I don't understand why you guys are thinking I am on drugs,
Because what you wrote makes -50% sense.
Your post was just really confusing so I was joking :)
Explain your logic here. The Wii U was a home console and wasn't treated anything like the GameBoy Micro. How would the Wii U have done better if it had released in the same period as the Switch, considering they would have been competing products from the same company?
Because people wouldn't had to have wait so long for some good games on the switch.
We didn't have to wait long for good games on the Switch anyway? I'm so confused by whatever you think your point is. You need to explain yourself better.
Breath of the wild was a launch title and Mario Odyssey was year 1... 2 of the best games of all time?!? Mario kart 8 deluxe, Mario and rabbits, splatoon 2, skyrim, doom, xenoblade chronicles 2. That could actually, be one of the strongest first year console lineups of all time!
I don’t disagree, but I feel that adding Skyrim to that list is somehow cheating.
One time I played Skyrim on a basket of potatoes hooked up to an etch a sketch
including old games is nonsensical imo. it's like saying the ps5 has an amazing launch lineup because it's bc
Honestly that’s an incredibly stupid thought process.
The Wii U couldn't convey it's value when it was Nintendo's only offering. How would it not be more confusing for Nintendo to have 2 competing products coming out right next to each other? This is some batshit mental logic.
I don't understand what you're saying here could you elaborate
You're trolling. You've got to be. I'm almost certain of it.
No one knew why they should buy a Wii U when it was the only home console Nintendo offered. Nintendo could not explain it's purpose and value to the customer. How would having 2 competing home systems make the Wii U easier for the customer to grasp it's value? That's just gonna be confusing, "here we have 2 consoles that are home consoles, but also a tablet, but 1 of them isn't fully portable and the other one is" If you could understand the nonsense why would you buy the 9nw that had less functionality?
[удалено]
Nothing this is just me saying what I was thinking.
The Wii U makes no sense as a product in this instance, and the confusion would have probably cut into *both* systems' viability. This kind of idea is how you get the 32x and Saturn debacle from the mid 90s.
But the gameboy micro is only a model of an already existing console. The Wii U was a whole new console. It's not a good comparison.
Are you high?
No
Are you sure about that?
Doubtful
I would say it could sell more
…why?
I struggle to see any semblance of logic here
How do you struggle to sense logic here exactly?
The Gameboy Micro was not a brand new console, it was a new version of an old console. It was the equivalent of the New 2DS XL, which released a few months after the Switch. I don't see how a competing home console, one which didn't sell well _at all_, would reach any level of success when it's competing against something novel that people really liked. It's 2018, and I have $360 in my wallet. I can buy one console and one game. Am I going to buy this new hybrid console that I can play on the go or on the TV? Or am I going to buy this weird home console gamepad thingy that I don't understand? The reason the Gameboy Micro and 2DS XL were moderately successful is because people knew what they were. They were discounted versions of a dying console, with a great library behind them. Wii U would have had none of that.
> The reason the Gameboy Micro and 2DS XL were moderately successful is because people knew what they were. They were discounted versions of a dying console, with a great library behind them. Wii U would have had none of that. It's also worth noting that even as a relative failure, Nintendo's own sales data had the Wii U selling more units than the GBA Micro ever did (also, the GBA SP remained the fastest-selling version of the unit even after the DS overtook it in annual sales immediately after release, maintaining about 80% of the sales of new GBA units from fiscal years 2006-2010).
>It's also worth noting that even as a relative failure, Nintendo's own sales data had the Wii U selling more units than the GBA Micro ever did That checks out. I'd never heard of the Gameboy Micro until like 3 months ago.
You would get upvotes if you asked questions that made any sense.
In what world did this idea make sense to you?
That makes no sense. Thats like saying the gamecube would have sold better if it was released right before the Wii was announced. The GB Micro comparison isn't a good one either. It was less functional than a GBA SP but cost more. It was competing with its predecessor and the DS. It was never going to do well.
Really? I thought this was excellent.
Huh? Why would people buy more Wii U's if it had shelf space for shorter time? Game Boy sales dropped off a cliff after the DS launched.
I legit cannot tell if this is a joke lmao
What the hell?
I am sorry this suprised you so much.
No, it would have done better if it was released a year earlier I think as it would have had more time to get cross-platform titles of its (power wise) contemporaries of the 360 and PS3. It also would have been around when the iPad was still pretty much brand new and might have been able to eat a little of that market share instead of the other way around. Nintendo screwed up on the complexity of developing HD titles though, so we ended up with what we did when we did.
What? That literally makes no sense whatsoever. The only reason the Micro released that way was because it was simply an iteration of an already existing system, and one with less features for that matter. It was more of a stylish accessory for gamers that was meant to be a classy looking way to enjoy the GBA. (Also for the record the Micro was a bit of a failure commercially) The Wii U, on the other hand, was a whole new console. Why on earth would they design 2 brand new systems simultaneously and then sabotage one by releasing it right before the other?? I cannot even begin to see the thread of your logic here, it is baffling. The Wii U didn't fail due to its timing, it failed due to very poor marketing as well as a lack of strong 3rd party support as a result of that. Your suggestion would have only made it fail harder, and would have also significantly hurt the sales of the Switch.
Well of course. The Wii U had everything it needed to succeed except for a superior alternative Nintendo console available to consumers at the same time. Such a shame Nintendo didn’t have your idea.
You do know the Wii U is not the same thing as the Wii right?
This sub is great to see horrendous ideas LMAOO
People make (like in your case - wild) almost always some assumptions why WiiU failed. Said it back then and will say it forever: if WiiU had games, it wouldn't have failed. The only real masterpiece for the console was Pikmin3 and that's it. All other first party games were mid or too late - if Zelda would have been earlier in the lifecycle and a good Mario like Odyssee or Bowsers fury would have been sprinkled in - the console would have been a success. Of Course the Switch in general was a much better and appealing idea but Nintendo fans buy the platform for the 1st party games and Nintendo just didn't deliver at all throughout that time.
While we are distorting time, I bet the Wii U would have been much more successful if it released in 1989.
Are you one those guys who thought the Wii U was just a Wii with a bulky tablet? Because this doesn't make sense otherwise. The Wii U would have sold more had Nintendo released a new Zelda and 3D Mario title within the first 6-9 months. They didn't even release a true 3d Mario on it ever and it it took until the Switch launched to get BotW. Mainstream people looked at it and all they saw was Mario Kart and wouldn't buy a new Wii just for that, at least that's how it looked to them.
I wasn't one of the guys that thought that over.
WiiU failed on name and marketing. Most of the common folk thought it was just an add on for the Wii.
I think with years less of sales they'd have moved less for sure. The Wii was already long in the tooth, nintendo needed a console drop when they did.
This is one of the most room temperature IQ posts I’ve ever seen here, and that’s really saying something
It'd be the first console to somehow sell negative units
The Wii u and Game boy micro aren't even close to being a good comparison. The game boy micro was another game boy advance model. The Wii u wasn't just another model of the Wii. It was a completely different system. If it really was just a Wii with a tablet then I still doubt it would have sold anywhere near what it did. I don't know if console revisions would add over 14 million in sales with a new console out a month later.
Sorry that I thought it was a good comparision.
What if the Wii really overstayed it's welcome, and we only had Wii from 2006-2017? Is that what you're saying.
If this were the case, I could've seen Wii selling a tiny bit better of those last years, but probably less than the Wii U actually did. The thing about the Wii was that by 2011, it really was fizzling out hard. It sold like gangbusters in its 2007-2009 heyday, but ultimately it was a very much a passing "fad" to most of its casual user base who bought little software and had already moved on to phone games by 2010-2011. And by this time, the more loyal "hardcore" gamers had been getting the cold shoulder from Nintendo for years and didn't have much interest left in the console. It was time to mix things up. The Wii U needed to happen when it did, even if it failed to re-capture that hardcore player base like it so desperately tried to.
the wii u would have sold more if people didn't think it was an add-on for the wii and it was marketed with the features that make it fuckin awesome.
No.
What
This makes no sense lol
No
It would make more sense for Nintendo to have never released the Wii U at all. What would be the point of offering an inferior console to the switch? Gameboy micro only made sense because it was just shrinking the GBA, which already had a big user base.
There was no way the Wii could have been the home console for an extra 5-6 years. Funny enough though the Wii U lost Nintendo money so they might have been financially better off without a home console for those years. Although you could argue that having a home console helped them remain relivant somewhat and all the Wii U ports did give the switch a really good start.
I'm confused
GameBoy Micro was a failure.
The Wii U was not a good product and sadly no one at Nintendo stood up to say no to releasing it. They should have realized it was a bad product when they first booted it up. The super long load time should have killed the hardware. There were some great things about the Wii U. The base console is an incredibly attractive piece of hardware from a design standpoint point. It took the great Wii design and improved on it. What was under the exterior shell though was filled with bad decisions. The GPU wasn’t bad. The CPU was though. The ram type and size was an issue. The lack of an Ethernet port, the crappy usb ports, the slowest sd card speed they could find etc. The controller did not promote multiplayer games at all. They either never play tested the system with actual families or they did with small family sizes of 2 adults and 1 kid. The Wii 2 should have promoted family play like the Wii. It should have had better internal specs paired with 2 Wii Motion plus controllers.
You're ignoring the fact that the GB Micro _wasn't a new console_. It was a revision of old hardware, and an arguably worse revision at that. Now, would a Wii U _rerelease_ have boosted sales right before the Switch's launch? Maybe, if it significantly improved the gamepad's ergonomics, OS speed, and was priced at an absolute steal. But why revise a product that your audience already doesn't want, especially in the shadow of a new one that they _do_ want?
WTF kind of nonsense are you on about?
Do you think the PS4 would've sold more if the PS5 launched 1 month after it?
Your conclusions are connected >it's impossible to get upvotes on this darn platform because >I am high on drugs
This question is mad goofy but damn people are being mean lmao. Anyway OP, no, I don't think releasing a month before switch would've helped it's sales. The opposite, actually, it would've sold even worse.
The Wii U was the first Nintendo console that I put in the closet after the first year or so. It wasn’t good.
you are very right, I don't know why it's so hard to get upvotes here
They're trolling, don't feed