Geoff Keighley confirms Wii U won


Recommended Posts

Not being as casual as kids games and party games doesn't make them core games. There are degrees of casual, and you can't call a game not casual because it isn't wii sports.

That's like saying an FPS game isn't a core game unless it's ARMA./Flashpoint.

If you still think Metroid Prime 3 and Xenoblade are for the casuals, I still suggest you re-examine your outlook on the industry.

While I agree with you, MP3 and -definitely- Xenoblade are not casual at all, I can't even begin to think how you think they are. Nintendo have a more healthier line up of casual games compared to the rest, but they still have a diverse portfolio and likewise, while there are degrees of casual, you can't call a game "not core" because it isn't Disgaea or Metal Gear Solid. There are also varying degrees of core - SMG2 is a game that appeals to the core platforming fans while still being an attractive game to the casual audience.

  • 3 months later...

Specs and performance are great and everything, but the following sentence is going to hurt Nintendo the very most.. and it's all due to timing.. that sentence is..

"I'm not getting the Wii-U because I'm going to buy the Playstation 4 when it comes out."

Or.. even more damaging...

"I'm not getting the Wii-U because I'm going to buy the Xbox 720 when it comes out next year."

Sega did EXACTLY the same thing Nintendo is doing when Sega released the Dreamcast, everyone liked it, but the PS2 blew it away. So I honestly think it's going to come down to this...

Everyone is going to like the Nintendo Wii-U, but the PS4/Xbox 720 is going to blow it away, and steal sales.

Everyone is going to like the Nintendo Wii-U, but the PS4/Xbox 720 is going to blow it away, and steal sales.

So? In this day and age, how many console users don't buy multiple systems?

As for ZombiU, it does look good...it's a shame that it's by Ubisoft.

Specs and performance are great and everything, but the following sentence is going to hurt Nintendo the very most.. and it's all due to timing.. that sentence is..

"I'm not getting the Wii-U because I'm going to buy the Playstation 4 when it comes out."

Or.. even more damaging...

"I'm not getting the Wii-U because I'm going to buy the Xbox 720 when it comes out next year."

Sega did EXACTLY the same thing Nintendo is doing when Sega released the Dreamcast, everyone liked it, but the PS2 blew it away. So I honestly think it's going to come down to this...

Everyone is going to like the Nintendo Wii-U, but the PS4/Xbox 720 is going to blow it away, and steal sales.

Microsoft did it too with the 360, and it worked out brilliantly. Sega's failure was due to a number of factors. They panicked when Sony announced the PlayStation, and its price, and totally screwed up the Saturn, instead of just sticking to what they had designed. They then abandoned it way too quickly. The Dreamcast was good, but they bailed out too quickly there as well (the PS2 actually wasn't doing all that well for the first couple years on the market). Had they not screwed the pooch with the Saturn, and/or not given up so quickly on the Dreamcast, they'd have been fine.

Nintendo also has plenty of cash reserves, and they don't sell anything as a loss leader. They might not dominate the market ever again, but that doesn't mean they won't continue to turn a profit more often than not, even if it means having to cut their profit margins by implementing a price cut like with the 3DS.

So? In this day and age, how many console users don't buy multiple systems?

As for ZombiU, it does look good...it's a shame that it's by Ubisoft.

That's a good point, and is also relevant in the smartphone and tablet wars.

I quite agree. I saw the price and thought WTF Ninendo? Didn't you learn from the 3DS. On the other hand, I won't wait for the 720 or PS4 either, as I fully expect them to be more expensive.

the price is rather good for the systems $299 for the 8gb basic set why is that good wel the fact you cad 32gb more storage via SD card then top it off with 4x any size external usb HDDs so 4x 3TB HDDs ad-ons so yea it is good priced .

It's Epic. I would not take anything from those guys seriously. Just remember when Mark Rein acted as a xbox 360 salesman in an interview a couple of years ago. He was doing the interview with 2 other guys from the video game market. There was a guy from Obsidian i think and another one from a company i can't remember. The guy from obsidian was clearly not confortable with the way Mark Rein acted lol.

Like SkyDX said a good engine is supposed to scale. There's not doubt in my mind that the Wii U will be les powerful than the next XBox and PS. It will probably be somewhere between a PS3/360 and the next gen. But a good next gen engine should be able to scale to Wii U level of power.

Specs and performance are great and everything, but the following sentence is going to hurt Nintendo the very most.. and it's all due to timing.. that sentence is..

"I'm not getting the Wii-U because I'm going to buy the Playstation 4 when it comes out."

Or.. even more damaging...

"I'm not getting the Wii-U because I'm going to buy the Xbox 720 when it comes out next year."

Sega did EXACTLY the same thing Nintendo is doing when Sega released the Dreamcast, everyone liked it, but the PS2 blew it away. So I honestly think it's going to come down to this...

Everyone is going to like the Nintendo Wii-U, but the PS4/Xbox 720 is going to blow it away, and steal sales.

Current consoles have been around for a long time. Nintendo will benefit from the need for new hardware up until the release of the PS4 and next-gen Xbox. I'm sure people will continue to buy the Wii U well after the release of Sony and Microsoft's next-gen consoles.

It's Epic. I would not take anything from those guys seriously. Just remember when Mark Rein acted as a xbox 360 salesman in an interview a couple of years ago. He was doing the interview with 2 other guys from the video game market. There was a guy from Obsidian i think and another one from a company i can't remember. The guy from obsidian was clearly not confortable with the way Mark Rein acted lol.

Like SkyDX said a good engine is supposed to scale. There's not doubt in my mind that the Wii U will be les powerful than the next XBox and PS. It will probably be somewhere between a PS3/360 and the next gen. But a good next gen engine should be able to scale to Wii U level of power.

Unreal Engine 4 will be able to scale to low-end PC hardware so there's no doubt it can run on Wii U hardware. It's not a question of capability but one of portability. It's up to Epic Games to port Unreal Engine 4 to the Wii U.

Sega did EXACTLY the same thing Nintendo is doing when Sega released the Dreamcast, everyone liked it, but the PS2 blew it away. So I honestly think it's going to come down to this...

Sega failed mainly cause they did not support their hardwares long enough. Notably the Saturn. The reason why i did not buy a Dreamcast when it came out was not because of the Playstation 2 or Gamecube (both was close to 2 years away from release or maybe more) It's because i was affraid Sega would not support it properly like they did with the Saturn.

Nintendo had and still has a reputation for supporting its hardware.

Personally i think NIntendo should come back to what it used to be and makes games with outstading gfx. But i can't blame them to not fight Microsoft in a gfx quality war. Cause at this war Nintendo will lose. Microsoft will always invest a little bit more to have the best gfx. And nintendo can't really afford to lose much money on every consoles sold. They don't have a cash cow like Windows.

the price is rather good for the systems $299 for the 8gb basic set why is that good wel the fact you cad 32gb more storage via SD card then top it off with 4x any size external usb HDDs so 4x 3TB HDDs ad-ons so yea it is good priced .

Not really. When the Wii came out it was $250, up against a $600 PS3 and a $400 basic Xbox 360 (there they benefitted from not being first to market with that generation).

When the Wii U comes out, it'll be $300, up against $250 for the PS3 and $200 for the Xbox 360 ($300 for the Kinect Bundle). And both the PS3 and 360 have way more titles than the Wii U will at launch, and tons of games at less than $10.

If you're someone who just has a PS2 and/or a Wii, the Wii U doesn't make much sense to buy. If you're in the US you could get a Kindle Fire HD for cheaper, and a bunch of games at sub-$10 prices.

If you don't have a PS3 or 360, either makes more sense to buy than the Wii U right now. If you do have a PS3 or 360, then it makes sense to keep using it until the Wii U is cheaper (or see what Sony and Microsoft have in store for the next generation).

The only person the Wii U makes sense for is someone who has significant disposable income (in this economy, not likely) and absolutely must have all the newest toys. That's a different situation from the Wii, which offered something new and interesting AND was cheaper. So if you were on a budget, the Wii was the system to buy. If you're on a budget now, the 360 is the system to buy.

Not really. When the Wii came out it was $250, up against a $600 PS3 and a $400 basic Xbox 360 (there they benefitted from not being first to market with that generation).

When the Wii U comes out, it'll be $300, up against $250 for the PS3 and $200 for the Xbox 360 ($300 for the Kinect Bundle). And both the PS3 and 360 have way more titles than the Wii U will at launch, and tons of games at less than $10.

Back then you could have said the Wii was also competing with the PS2 which had pretty much the same power and was selling for a lot cheaper. Yet the Wii sold a lot of units (and I'm pretty sure a lot of people will be picking up WiiUs over PS3s and 360s)

It's easy to compare the timing this console is being released to the Dreamcast's, but it's hard to make predictions out of it, even with the price being announced.

At the same time this console is not quite a Wii because it does not offer mechanics that ate truly unique anymore compared to its other 2 competitors.

But it's not a Dreamcast either simply because it is Nintendo and that no matter what, they will still attract a certain playerbase, especially since this time they're gambling with their home console and not a handheld.

I think for sure Nintendo will sell less than they did the Wii. There's a definite potential that they come in 3rd again, as Sony's PS4 strategy seems to have learned from what they did wrong with the PS3 and they're actually going back to what they had for the PS1, and MS will probably keep doing what they did well.

There's a definite potential that they come in 3rd again

In WHAT world did Nintendo come in third this generation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Console_wars#Worldwide_sales_figures_6

In WHAT world did Nintendo come in third this generation?

http://en.wikipedia....sales_figures_6

software sales most probably. IIRC they had the lowest attachment rates.

Nintendo will always have a special place in my heart. I remember holding my moms hand and looking at the stacked boxed of 'Nintendo Entertainment System" in the isle; and as kids do, I asked for one. Before I know it I was back home running Mario through various landscapes and shooting Ducks from the sky as my loyal companion retrieved them.

As far as modern consoles, they are but glorified PCs. Internet connection, Hard Drive, DLC -- sorry, I just want to pop my game in and play what I bought, I want a real console; I already own a PC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wii#System_Sales

No that is unit sales that is the console itself not software but that is how many they have sold

What are you replying to? He already said it had the highest system sales, BUT it also had by far the lowest attach rate.

What are you replying to? He already said it had the highest system sales, BUT it also had by far the lowest attach rate.

true still tho the Wii is one of Nintendos most successful systems and i think the Wii U will as well. i do feel that there will be some people who may just buy it just for Nintendo TVii assuming Nintendo properly adverts it

If the Wii U is more powerful than the 360/PS3 now, is that not what is expected? It's going to be released at least a year before the next generation of MS/Sony console is released, so I would expect it to be less powerful than them due to the timing differences.

It's expected to be released a year before, yes. But, the WiiU has 2gb of ram, Durango has 8gb of ram...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!