Do you think the Wii U would've fared better if they had done these things?
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
- More apparent advertising.
- The system is overall stronger, but to avoid having to increase the price, the tablet controller is now sold separately.
- There's a pre-installed app on the Wii U that allows you to connect a 3DS or New 3DS to it. This allows you to use those things as a substitute tablet controller (with the caveats that it'll be smaller and more squished) if you can't or don't want to get a real one. The booter does warn, however, that the 3DS won't have full compatibility with everything unless it has a CPP stuck on it.
- Because of the app and tablet controllers being sold individually, some games may support multiple tablet controllers/[New] 3DSes.
Do you think those changes would've been significant enough to help it out, or would it have been doomed anyway?
Better marketing, clearer name and stronger components are, if you ask me, stuff that would've made the difference when it comes to the Wii U's sales performance. Specifically the CPU in the system was very poor.
Also, Nintendo should've given more documentation about the system to third party developers. That way i could've seen developing for the system being less of a pain, though it may not have eliminated the issue completely.
Rest in peace, beloved Wii Shop Channel.
All it needed was different name completely and it would have sold way better. Too many times in store i would hear parents ask for a wii or wii u. Then which ones cheaper thus the wrong console being purchased
I would have released it in 2006 in place of the Wii.
The name was the big thing I think.
Personally would've liked pro controller as standard and at least 100 GB of storage.
But yes, also the marketing just in general. For some reason it seems like Nintendo all of a sudden forgot how to market consoles after the success of the Wii and thought they could just cruise here. Obviously with the Switch Nintendo has decided that aggressive marketing is a good thing again.
The 3DS was talked about extensively as being a possible controller...I guess like how you could use the GBA on the GameCube, but definitely to another level of compatibility. Honestly don't know if this would've mattered. 3DS owners probably by and large wouldn't care.
The name was the big thing I think.
I was figuring it as a fallback option for if you want to play tablet games and already have a New 3DS, but don't want to actually get a tablet controller.
Learn the real lesson of why Wii U failed: IT DIDN'T HAVE GOOD GAMES.
At least Nintendo learned. And now we're getting Super Mario Odyssey, Kirby Star Allies, and Metroid Prime 4.
I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will fight to the death for my right to fight you to the death. -Stephen Colbert
Why are you still on this board if you hate everything about the Wii U?
3DS FC:1375-8350-6103; Switch FC: 5454-0571-3814; NNID: MARIOS_BRO123
"Mario and Luigi Paper Jam is better then Paper Mario TTYD" -SeamusOHassey
The branding and advertising were problems but are grossly overstated. Fixing them would have meant that more people were aware of the Wii U, and some of them would have bought it, but most would still have been turned off by one or more of the multitude of other problems that the system had.
Most of your other suggestions are just messing around with the way that Nintendo sold the GamePad. You're trying to turn a flawed idea into a good one. The way to fix the GamePad wasn't to make it optional, or allow a 3DS to act like a substitute GamePad with a uselessly low resolution - the solution was to ditch the GamePad entirely, as a device and as a concept.
There were probably only two potentially feasible options for Nintendo last generation - a cheap, Xbox 360-beating machine in 2011, or a more expensive, more powerful machine that grabbed a headstart over Sony and Microsoft. Either of those machines might still have failed, but at least they wouldn't have been manifestations of a complete misunderstanding of the market at the time.
- Different name. - Yes. The Wii 2 would have been an infinitely better name
- More apparent advertising. - Yes. No one really knew this thing existed and all of the ads seemed to focus on kids.
- The system is overall stronger, but to avoid having to increase the price, the tablet controller is now sold separately. -Maybe. Most wouldn't buy the game pad if this were the case. It'd essentially be another PS4 / Xbone system. It'd probably do as well as the GameCube; the last time Nintendo tried to release a comparable system to its competitors.
- There's a pre-installed app on the Wii U that allows you to connect a 3DS or New 3DS to it. This allows you to use those things as a substitute tablet controller (with the caveats that it'll be smaller and more squished) if you can't or don't want to get a real one. The booter does warn, however, that the 3DS won't have full compatibility with everything unless it has a CPP stuck on it. - No, I don't think this would have much of an impact. Allowing the Wii U to play physical DS / 3DS carts would have been huge though.
- Because of the app and tablet controllers being sold individually, some games may support multiple tablet controllers/[New] 3DSes. Apparently, the Wii U has always been able to support multiple game pads. Nintendo simply never sold the game pad seperately or allowed developers to use this feature; likely due to lackluster sales.
Add user to Ignore List after reporting