|
|
|
|
|
by PH95VuimJjqBqy
844 days ago
|
|
What started all of this is the observation that they've been successful over the last 3 console generations by not trying to compete directly with Sony and MS but instead to try and innovate and make great games people want to play (game console vs entertainment center). This doesn't stop being true because you want to label the Wii U as a failure. Many will tell you the Wii itself was a failure. Many don't consider the Wii U a failure. Who cares, my point stands. |
|
The WiiU doesn’t reflect that trend. It was sold at a loss. It was initially sold as a machine that would have strong third-party support, unlike the Wii. Ubisoft and EA were presented front-and-center as supporting it. That only lasted for a year because the WiiU was able to compete with 360/PS3 on power, but the investment was no longer worth it for third parties to do multi-platform releases once new consoles were out. Nintendo did incorporate Xbox One-like TV control mechanisms into the WiiU.
Ultimately the issue of whether or not it was a failure is again something you can take a personal feeling about but statements made by Nintendos leadership in their official capacity are hardly shy about how much it did not meet their own expectations in the marketplace. They wanted to sell at least as many units as the Wii and sold more like 1/8th as many units.
I agree Nintendo has done well by not competing to be the third horse in a two horse race. I don’t agree that the Wii U reflected a good execution of that strategy.