Nintendo Is Wii U worth Buying?

[Shu]

We have a previous thread for the general pricing, but just wanted to get a new aspect as far as the Wii gaming community comes.

1) Do you believe the console is worth it despite the price? If so what urges you to buy it?

2) Is this really that much different than a smaller TV + motion movement from the wii?

I will take the con approach.

I see this is far to much of a gimic this time around. I'm not sure if this is technically a Wii two, because honestly all they did for me was put the game on a game-boy-esc system, that you can port over to the big screen at anytime.

First off, I wasn't a huge fan of the Wii in the first place. The games themselves were decent, though after 20+ years of playing the same 2d/3d mario games and Zeldas, I kind of got tired of the entire concept in itself. The only thing I used my Wii was for Sports and for the Resident evil 4 factor, which to me wasn't that much better than duck hunt from back in the day.

Smash brothers? No. Gamecube concept recycled. Mario Kart? Recycled from the SNES era. Games themselves were pretty average with low replayability. The sales was huge all the way around, because at the time of release, there wasn't really that much comepition aside from halo and a few others from xbox360. Yes stats say one thing, but most of the stats come from Asia in the first place, so people might buy, but I wonder how many people kept playing the games after they were done. It's great for when you are alone, if you don't mind the juvenile games they hold.

Now Wii U, I was hoping Nintendo would be smart and start releasing new titles like a new Contra-esc game, and put the player in control of more of the game, but instead I hear all the did was add a mini screen in which acts as either an additional off screen inventory.. or a drawing pad.. or just a plain ole TV/Game console all in one. Yes they finally did something about an HD port over, but did you see the games? I'm very skeptical again about the system as a whole, due to Kinect is already lighting them up, and who cares about the PS3 move, we already had a control concept done by Wii.

Or maybe go back to the roots again with it and connect back with SE and start maybe revolutionizing the Jrpg market. All it really needs is a decent story line, where maybe you can be in control of the characters magic ability or summons or whatever else one can think of. I mean just take FFXIII for example, just imagine if you could of casted/hit/whatever else in order to play the Jaction rpg. I'm expecting a evolution, not the same crap as we've had for the same past two decades.

When E3 came out, I literally was like.. hmm look at that .. It looks like a Gameboy but... wait.. not.

 

[Terra Branford]

I wasn't aware the price was official. I think its worth buying if you have cash to burn.

Personally, I like that they are keeping the old games alive. That was the day when games were really fun, new, had great story and gameplay. And the new Mario and Zelda games are fantastic, so I don't mind it. It would be different if they were constantly rehashing the same exact game, but they aren't so as long as they continue to make good games I'll buy their consoles.

But for now, as I just got a Wii and managed to get 2 games, I won't be buying it, especially if the price is real. It took me forever to get a Wii and I don't feel like paying 350+ for this system until I know more about it. Currently, all it has is a name, determined specs and some new titles under its belt, I need more.

I like that it will hard core games now that emulate near PS3/Xbox graphics, that's a big step that really interests me. The controller, not so much. I'm not that big of a fan for motion control unless its done really well (sorry Kinect and some PS3 games ), so the controller has to pull something completely new and refreshing to convince me otherwise.

But I have never been disappointed with a Nintendo system, so I know I won't be even if I don't buy it.

 

[Channizard]

I probably won't be buying it. Unless they come out with a Pokemon Console game (proper, with RPg elements and story, GoD/XD was shit) or Pokemon MMO incorporated with Wifi, it's not worth my cash. I bought into the hype of the Wii, I'll admit, I blindly thrust my money into it. But I like it, I use it for my nes/snes classics that I can't otherwise play. It has some good party games on it, so why should I upgrade now?

With the way Nintendo just shovels out a new console or handheld so fast before the current one even comes to fruition, this isn't any surprise. But I'm a firm believer in using what I have until it dies. My DS lite (no i, no xl, no 3, just a regular DS lite) is perfectly capable of playing games, as is my PSP and my Wii.

Maybe if you have the money to just throw away on anything, then sure, go buy this. But for people who actually earn their hard buck, no point in having a go at it until it's 2 years old (and by then, the NEWER console will be ready, so may as well just wait for that then).

 

[JWick]

For the most part the information available on this console for the moment is too limited for me to come to a conclusion either way on whether it's worth it. You could argue that you can never rule out that it will be 'worth it', since regardless of what you think of initial line ups, you can never rule out the possibility of more preferable games being announced at any point. As to whether it's worth paying the full price for the console at launch, the full launch title list is still unknown, and many of the confirmed games have next to no information available. For that reason, there's no reliable way to address question 1), seeing as my answer is liable to change multiple times prior to launch.

The second point, however, being whether or not it is really more than a glorified version of a pre existing console, I would have to disagree. The new features are indeed gimmicky as opposed to significant steps forward in the actual design of the console,but that doesn't mean it isn't a notable advancement from the Wii. The Playstation 2, for example, didn't revolutionise the way PS games were played, the only new feature as such was DVD compatibility. A similar example would be the Xbox and Xbox 360 transition. The reason these consoles were considered 'more' than their predecessors lies in the fact they were incremental upgrades, in the same manner the Wii to the Wii U is (the concerns you raise about how the games looked is something of a moot point seeing as all the gameplay shown was emulated from other consoles, no actual Wii-U gameplay has been shown as of yet, it's fairly normal seeing as development on the console is still ongoing). Also, much in the same vein as the Sony and Microsoft transitions, rumour at the moment suggests that the upgrade to Wii u will facilitate a re design of the Nintendo Wifi network, specifically ditching the old friend code system in exchange for a gamertag model, along the lines of Live and PSN. To that extent I would say it absolutely classifies itself as a 'Wii 2'.

Moving onto the concerns with the Nintendo franchises themselves. This is, as always, a preference thing, there is no real way to say whether these games have universal appeal or not. Mario Kart is from the SNES era, true enough, but personally I find that for the most part the game evolves enough throughout each incarnation to keep me interested, by adding stuff such as online multiplayer etc. Final Fantasy is from the NES era, but that fact on it's own doesn't stop the series being 'worth' investment. Same goes for Smash Bros (which is actually an N64 concept ), purists will always prefer the retro versions, but for me at least I find that for the most part both the MK and SB series have got better as far as playing with friends is concerned, which is enough of an incentive for me at least. There have been more versions of Halo or CoD than there have been Smash Bros, and arguably they've recycled just as much in those games, so I don't think it's a problem with Nintendo's grand design of retaining old franchises, so much as it is someone just not liking said series out of preference.

I do sympathise somewhat with the desire for a JRPG revolution of sorts, but if you want evolution, it's honestly hard at the moment to suggest if there is actually a good alternative to Nintendo at the moment. The Kinnect in itself is hugely gimmicky, and Microsoft failed to demonstrate that it has potential as a way of evolving gaming. As for the Vita from Sony, it is simply yet another incremental upgrade, with the addition of a touch screen, which has been around since 1997 with the Game Com and later popularized by the DS.

 

[Squid]

Well I'll definitely be buying it no matter the price.

I'm one of those pathetic wii fans that everyone makes fun of because my console doesn't have HD, etc
Well now the Wii U has added HD and it looks utterly amazing.
Sure, the new controller is a bit of a Gimmick, but you know what? Everyone said that about the Wii's motion controller. "Oh it's just a stupid gimmick, it'll get old, blah blah" and even today the Wii is still outselling the PS3 and Xbox and those two consoles have even copied the wii's wiimote. So that says something.

The new controller looks like it'll work. Now the screen is going to be less cluttered with world maps, health bars etc. It sounds awesome that when you're playing a two player game, if your friend goes off the screen, instead of the screen stretching annoyingly far away, their character moves into their little controller screen until the get closer again.

Blah blah blah, nintendo recycle games blah blah. Well firstly, at least the recycled games are fun. Secondly XBOX and PS3 are recycling games all over the place!! 4 new halo's??? Remaking halo 1. New Uncharted, New Cod, etc. They're all remade games. I can't even remember if they mentioned any new titles. At least the wii has Pandora's Tower which is a new title coming out. Also it's getting some games for the 'hardcore gamer' like assassins creed.

They're even fixing the online so it's not complete shit like the Original Wii.

I think WII U (although it's name is fucked) is going to be an amazing console for everyone. The only issue I have with it is they didn't include a Hard Drive... WTF

 

[Shu]

The Kinnect in itself is hugely gimmicky, and Microsoft failed to demonstrate that it has potential as a way of evolving gaming.

This I'll hugely disagree with actually, since it is heavily opinionated. The reason being is because the ladies around here (4-6 or so) flock towards Kinect Dance Central.

It registers full body movements, which is the first of it's kind. It blew Wii out of the water on this one.

I'm no Xbox360 fan boy, due to I have owned all three at one point and though the Wii was the only system I sold due to it accumulating dust. As for casual games, it did have it's fun in the sun though, so I'm not entirely disregarding it, though these days do you really play by yourself as much? Xbox360 and PS3 cornered and strangled the online market, but now a days even PS3 and XBox360 have brought some innovation to the casual games.

Fable Franchise
God of War Franchise
Xbox Arcade games
Ps3 store with alot of the old Jrgs

The call of duty franchises at least focus on different eras, and with each but a lot of goodies to shower the ADD online players.

I'm not trying to discourage the Wii players, because like I said there were quite a few "fun" games. Though from the E3 videos for this system sounds still very inferior and largely again.. gimmicky. I was hoping, seriously, hoping for a big boom, since I was a huge NES/N64/SNES fan. I would buy a Wii U, if it is able to reestablish credibility as a modern next gen console. Though since I'm fighting the Con, I'll have to keep saying I'm very skeptical based on the performance it has shown thus far.

 

[Terra Branford]

I'm a lady and I hate Kinect. Its too slow (as in you wave your hands and its delayed), the graphics look like Sega Dreamcast for most Kinect games and its just boring. I don't like dance games either, but that's just me because my sisters and brothers love them. xD

You can really see some delay (some small and some huge) in Kinect, in most games. Personally, I think Kinect is absolutely boring. The point of video game is that, a video game. You want to play a dancing game? Great, that's great. Just put in some music on your radio and dance. A video game is suppose to be through controllers, with the exception of some motion control, not some weird gimmicky device that just looks terrible most of the time.

*Kinect and Xbox is also stealing Nintendo's "Hard core and more casual (and child games) games" idea, as they usually steal ideas. >.>*

 

[Shaissa]

Getting off the Kinnect and back onto the WII-U

I am going say, that I MIGHT get it if, A. It can still play Wii games, B. It is a reasonable price, (I'd say $400 range.) and C. They release games for it that aren't on the PS3 and Xbox 360... (those were the only games I saw announced, minus the obvious Super Smash Brothers...)

But honestly, I don't think the using the controller as a system deal is that great of an Idea, you have to stay in range of the console, and well I can't even tell who they are trying to attract with this system... at least with the WII you knew they were going after a new group of gamers, this system I just can't tell, soo I am very skeptic of it right now.

 

[Tucker]

Come on I JUST got Wii motion plus. Way to make me feel behind.

 

[Terra Branford]

The Wii U will be completely backwards compatible
Price is said to be 350 maybe 400 dollars right now.

I don't think you have to use that controller. It will still use the motion controllers from Wii.

marlena:

I know, right?

 

[JWick]

This I'll hugely disagree with actually, since it is heavily opinionated. The reason being is because the ladies around here (4-6 or so) flock towards Kinect Dance Central.

It registers full body movements, which is the first of it's kind. It blew Wii out of the water on this one.

Of course, I was only stating my opinion. Nearly all of what I say here is subjective and is basically just the premise that I'm using to decide whether a Wii-U is worth buying for myself I do still stand by my opinion of the Kinect though. I'm not denying that it is capable of introducing original games, but I don't necessarily see that as being a way of evolving gaming. Being purely speculative here, Dance Central looks more inclined towards social party gaming. I don't think it will ever have the very serious following that other dance games have had, such as the DDR series. My reasoning behind this is due to hardware limitations, since there is a noticeable delay in the Kinect, which can be caused by multiple things.

Now, the Wii is as guilty of this as Kinect is, the Wiimote was of course equally as gimmicky. The differentiation here, in my opinion, is that the Wii, and indeed the Wii-U are proven to have games that aren't dependent on ultra-precise real life actions, and even games that don't require it full stop. Because of this I feel that there are more things that the Wii can do, and a greater amount of games that can be evolved through it. For example, games like Mario Galaxy, or Twilight Princess worked seamlessly on the Wii due to the nature of the controller design. The Kinect, however, is less convincing to me. I'm not saying for one moment that it doesn't have the potential to evolve gaming, I'm merely saying that Microsoft haven't been convincing in demonstrating this. Take the Star Wars Kinect game that was featured. The ideas behind it are smart, and it probably got a lot of people's hopes up. Based on reports from E3 attendees, common complaints are bad response times, extremely limited movement commands, no way to alter camera views etc. It's almost as though the Kinect doesn't have enough ways currently to input commands into it, character and camera control are either heavily limited or non-existent, which was stuff that was supposed to be completely cracked by 5th gen. For that reason, I just can't accept it as a step forward.

At the time when Wii-U is released, I just can't see Kinect being competitive with it based on Microsoft's preview this year, and for that reason, I think Wii-U will be the better choice at initial release, anyhow. As for re-establishing credibility as a next gen console, I don't see how it's lost it. We haven't even seen any actual Wii-U gameplay yet, as I mentioned previously, all the gameplay at E3 was from other consoles, including 3DS, Xbox360 and PS3 for demonstrative purposes. I remember when the GC and DS were early in development, the games looked horrible, and Nintendo got a lot of bad press because of it. The final games looked so gorgeous in comparison, so it makes sense they'd keep the games hidden until they're properly presentable. Considering neither Sony nor MS are planning any next gen home consoles that anyone is aware of, the choice on what you spend your money on will come down to Wii-U, Vita or Kinect. As things stand right now, I personally would pick the Wii-U, the Kinect doesn't appear to have the versatility the Wii does, and the Vita doesn't feel like as large a step forward for me.

 

[Martel]

I think it remains to be seen as to whether or not Wii-U is worth buying, to be honest.

Nintendo, in my opinion, have the potential to be the best of the trio they form with Microsoft and Sony; the problem is not with their consoles, it is with the games on them. Third party developers flock to Nintendo, and they release all kinds of bullshit. I mean, just look at the Wii - maybe three or four games outside of Japan that are worth playing that are exclusive to the system. The Wii caters to a very different group than the 360 and PS3, and I think that the question is, to what extent will Wii-U be the same? Will we see a return to catering for what you'd call "real" gamers, or will Nintendo continue to focus on the "casual" gamer market?

If Wii-U is exactly the same sort of thing as the Wii - i.e. the gaming library will be made up almost entirely of 3rd party bullcrap designed to be played by families who have never played video games before - then my answer would be no, for people like me (and, I would guess, most people reading this thread) the answer will be no, it is definetely not worth buying. How innovative or not the console is doesn't matter, what matters is how good the games on it are. Backwards compatibility makes it worth buying if you don't have a Wii, to be sure, but really that only applies if it'll be backwards compatible with Gamecube games as well, because the Wii's gaming library for the "real" gamer is far, far too small and, whilst it looks set to get bigger soon, its been a long time coming.

If Nintendo release their heavy-hitters - Mario, Zelda, Smash Bros and Metroid, to name but four - early, and release more than one game in that series, the Wii-U will more than be worth buying; it'll absolutely dominate the competition. We'll ignore my hatred of how samey the games are for the sake of argument, because I'd still buy the bloody things. Nintendo have more popular, exclusive franchises to fall back on than Microsoft and Sony combined, the problem is that they don't take advantage of this. Excluding Twilight Princess, as it was developed to be a Gamecube game, the Wii has ONE Zelda game, Skyward Sword, which is coming out as the Wii nears the end of its life. How is this a good strategy to sell consoles and games? One game of their popular series per console just isn't good enough and, when you consider the competition, it definetely isn't enough to make the console worthwhile.

Wii-U also needs to get in on the better 3rd party developer games, as well. Although I believe that they'll be getting Arkham City (can't remember where I read this...) which is a good start. If they offer a more normal way of playing with the Wii-U controller, then developers will be more willing to put their games on the console, and it'll be much better because of it. In fact, it'd have the edge. Buy Arkham City on PS3, 360, or Wii-U? Well, Wii-U would be the logical choice, because you could play it on the controller if someone else was watching TV. If there is no real difference between the performance of consoles, and they have the same games, I'm willing to bet a lot of people would choose Wii-U, because of that feature. It has tremendous potential...but then, the Wii also had tremendous potential, and look how that turned out.

If Nintendo get the same games that Microsoft do - the likes of BioShock, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, and Dragon Age - then I would be more than motivated to buy one; I could have the console downstairs and, when mother wanted to watch TV in the evenings, I could just play them on the controller, which I would prefer anyway because it'd feel like a handheld, and I'm primarily a handheld gamer. If not, well...its just another Wii. I'd buy one, but not if it was above £200.

If there is one thing the Wii and DS have taught us, its that Nintendo are more than capable of beating their competitors in terms of innovation and just plain fun...and sales. I'll be taking the "wait and see" approach until a few months after the console's release, when I can see what games it has out now, and what is on the short-term horizon.

 

[Shu]

After reading Martel's opinion I guess what I really wanted to hit on.. is the amount of systems nintendo comes out with these days. DS Lite/3DS/Wii/Wii attachments (Wii fit)/etc... is there anything about the Wii U that impresses you right now (only after seeing the E3) enough to make you want to make a 300+ dollar purchase?

Granted I think right now they are only showing a few features, but none of them hardly look to impressive as of yet. I think the only cool things I saw was 1) The golf game 2) Carry the game around as a portable device.. (though I'm not too sure how far the reach is from the cd rom)

Granted again, it might be too soon, but this is speculation right now. The only real appeal to me right now Wii U has is I don't have 50,000 buttons like PS3 and Xbox360. (X[A] Triangle[Y] Square[X] Circle R1 [Right Bumper] L1 [Left Bumper] R2[Right Trigger] L2 [Left Trigger] R3 [Right Analog] L3 [Left Analog] D Pad) It's great for casual gaming I can see, though still not to sure what "type" of games this system will choose for off the bat.

 

[Kalythe]

Is the price really up and set in stone? There hasn't been any concrete price listing. I did go around trying to find some price and a store had it's pre-order as $399 with rumors hitting the $300-$400.

Pricing aside, I really don't see myself buying this system. Nothing really jumps out at saying ," BUY ME PLEASE." The drawing tablet is a nice feature but it just feels like it's trying to be everything at once. I know for a fact I'm not going to use everything to its potential. Another problem is this device will seem to have difficulty finding it's core audience. Is it for grandma, the kids, friends? The Wii U controller looks like something I wouldn't want people touching for the fear it might break or become damaged.

I look at my Wii now and I haven't bought any new games in years. I do disagree on you with Mario Kart/Super Smash Bros. series replayibility, if it wasn't for Brawl I would not be touching my Wii one bit. But I do agree that games nowadays are getting stale and losing that spark they had, not all but most, especially within Nintendo's current home console 1st party development. If that trend continues and only Mario/Zelda/Pokemon continue to push the system, it's going to be exactly like the previous Wii only with a $100 more cost. And I do not want.

If anything I'm wanting to buy the N3DS soon. My fun game time changed from consoles to handhelds after getting hooked on my NDS. There are just so many games to play on the DS still .

OK, I ranted a bit but I'm not buying it unless this supposedly 3rd party support boosts Nintendo's catalog in a good way, not with shovelware. It's still a bit far off, so here's hoping Nintendo takes this chance.

 

[Moogles]

There isn't enough information out yet for me to decide whether or not I'll be buying the Wii U. To my knowledge, no hardware specifications have been released. That said, my current impression of the console isn't good. I'm tired of these lame gimmicks that are constantly getting crapped out by Nintendo. I'm sure they think they're super creative and innoventive, but I'm not buying into it. I could maybe get around the gimmick if the console could get some solid game support, but I'm sure 75-80% of its game library will consist of Disney Channel based crapfest games. I know I'M dying to play the next Hannah Montana game. This time in a whole new way!