353
submitted 1 year ago by fne8w2ah@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] iamtrashman1312@lemmy.world 122 points 1 year ago

I don't know which I love more: that there are still people maintaining support for the Nintendo motherfucking Wii News Channel, or that there are still people checking it.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 54 points 1 year ago

You know what I hate though? That Nintendo had one of the best ideas for a console ever and then said, "fuck it, we're never doing that again." I don't even get it. It was super popular.

[-] thomcat@midwest.social 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It was super popular because it was $250 cheaper than the cheapest PS3 and $150 cheaper than the Xbox 360 w/ storage at launch. It was essentially always the cheapest console you could buy.

Had some great games, the Wand/Nunchuck was cool and original, but like VR, many people played it for 6 months and then it sat collecting dust.

[-] hoodatninja@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I would be very curious to compare games sold per console (preferably year by year). I imagine the Wii had a big drop off and maybe even sold fewer games per console than 360/PS3. If for no other reason than it had a library half the size of them. Both consoles had over 2000 games IIRC and Wii had just over 1000.

[-] Cicraft@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Thing is they did do that again, they just didn't show the Wii U the same love they had for the Wii

[-] hoodatninja@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not entirely sure what this means tbh

[-] Mint_Raccoon@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

The Wii U wasn’t even remotely as financially successful as its predecessor, the Wii, so Nintendo didn’t put in as much effort. The Wii was a big hit with the casual market as well as Nintendo’s usual customers. Unfortunately, the Wii U failed to live up to expectation for a variety of reasons. One example is that much of the casual market didn’t see the need to upgrade (I suspect a lot of them, being new to gaming, didn’t really understand that the Wii U was a new console).

[-] FinalRemix@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I worked in a GameStop when the Wii and then WiiU dropped. The Wii had one fucking massive ad campaign. Info packets, demo units, etc. We had it all.

The WiiU initially showed up as a SKU under the Wii as an accessory, and then for the longest time, we couldn't get a straight answer as to whether it was its own thing or if it was like a SegaCD or 32x, or if it was just a new controller or what. When we got answers, it was already well into the preorder timeline and numbers were terrible, at least at my store.

[-] hoodatninja@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This kind of feels like a chicken/egg problem. Maybe if they put the work in it would have done better?

I mean I understand the history of the Wii-U better than you probably think, but I just find the phrasing of your statement very interesting. Because it basically says “if it wasn’t such a failure, Nintendo would have done more for it.” It kind of implies a Nintendo isn’t responsible for how it flopped and is instead a victim of it even though they’re ones who made and sold it. Like their hands were tied.

It’s very odd to me and I’m just trying to parse your real meaning, because the above sounds very silly to me.

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

What idea, exactly? Because the pointer feature was fun, but not what I'd prefer to use often. The Switch has the same motion control, plus it's portable.

[-] GrammatonCleric@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

You mean the SNES, right?

[-] vox@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

well they did release a second wii, wii u was very good (a huge upgrade with some amazing games). their marketing failed though, and it got much less casual wii-style games (also caused by said marketing fail)

[-] hoodatninja@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It wasn’t just marketing fail. They failed to get developers on board and failed to player test adequately, a mistake that Nintendo consistently makes in cycles. N64 and Gamecube should’ve taught them but finally it seems with Switch they’ve gotten the message.

The Wii-U is fine but severely underpowered and the tablet was very limited in range and capability. I have one and enjoy it but it simply wasn’t impressive from a hardware standpoint and it wasn’t clear what you were supposed to do with it as an end user. Sony & Microsoft also ironed out their online gaming experience while Nintendo continue to flounder. That was a really important market in the 2010s and they completely failed to capture any of it.

The PS4/Xbox one just blew it out of the water performance wise. The tech gap was too wide (the CPU was a serious bottleneck) and it was a pain to develop for them when you could just develop for PC and/or PS4 and/or Xbox.

[-] vox@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

to be fair wii was also serverely underpowered (it's a tiny upgrade over gamecube)

[-] hoodatninja@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah but 360/PS3 were barely pulling 720p @30fps so it wasn’t as stark. Lots of games couldn’t even 720p.

[-] joshLaserbeam@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

To me the most surprising thing is the dev of RiiConnect24 was 13 when he started coding the service and wasn't even a teenager when the original service was shutdown.

this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
353 points (91.9% liked)

News

23305 readers
3619 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS