Fun Club Every once in a while I try to comprehend what Nintendo thought they were cooking with the Wii U reveal

[YolkFolk]

When there were rumours the controller would have a screen, I imagined this really sleek looking device and so my first impression of the gamepad was just how bulky and unappealing it looked. It actually felt decent to hold but as a visual it was terrible.

 

[Branduil]

It was truly nuts. It’s also wild they revealed this thing 18 months before it launched. That would never happen these days. Imagine if Nintendo suddenly released a Switch 2 trailer today and said “it’s coming February 2025.”

This such an interesting contrast to compare this to the Switch trailer. This one was so lifeless and sterile while the Switch trailer was brimming with energy and excitement.

I did find it funny that in the Iwata Asks interview he’s reading, it’s about Steel Diver. Two whiffs for the price of one.

The lesson is not to underestimate the power of Nintendo Switch Karen and her love of rooftop Mario Odyssey co-op.

 

[Dekuman]

Scott the Woz's Wii U video summarizes a lot of the issues brought up in this thread.

If they had executives/consultants who signed off on the reveal strategy, I really want to kno whow they justified it after it was clear it was a disaster

 

[ziggyrivers]

Scott the Woz's Wii U video summarizes a lot of the issues brought up in this thread.

If they had executives/consultants who signed off on the reveal strategy, I really want to kno whow they justified it after it was clear it was a disaster

I presume their internal Marketing Department or PR/Marketing Firm presented a convincing argument that:
• The Wii brand carries itself
• Wii brand + mobile phone apps = bigger success

But ended up being a flop. It wouldn’t surprise me if they honestly believed the idea was good, bit it’s possible that the analyzes made were superficial, and not as detailed as they should have been

 

[Regulus Tera]

I agree that the reveal and subsequent marketing severely hindered the Wii U’s appeal, but I’m going to be honest, I don’t think they could have done much more either to help. Nintendo misunderstood the appeal of the Wii as being “look you can do wacky things in front of the TV” instead of Wii games being just more intuitive to play. It’s a fundamental design flaw.

They really should have just made a Super Wii.

 

[VolcanicDynamo]

I remember watching this trailer live all those years ago. I was a starstruck teenager. An HD Nintendo console? Off TV play and dual screen games coming to the living room? This had so much potential! And the key is that, even during that first trailer, I knew that it was a new console without question. It seemed obvious to me at the time.

Cut to a few years later. The system was out for a few months now and I was showing it to my partner. Now, my partner wasn't tuned into games coverage at the time, but they were a pretty big Nintendo fan. And despite all that, they had no idea the Wii U was a new console and not some accessory for the Wii.

I think that says enough about how unclear the marketing was for the system. If only the most observant and most hardcore fans even realized that the Wii U wasn't an accessory, what about everyone else? What about the casual audience who loved their Wii or DS? What about big Nintendo fans who simply weren't online enough to be getting all of the coverage? Let alone selling it to new consumers. It was a mess of a concept that was not communicated clearly at all.

 

[touchfuzzy]

Even as a lifelong gamer and hardcore Nintendo fan, I was confused by this reveal and thought it was an accessory for Wii until they showed the actual box. Even then it was like "Ohhhh so it is a new console... right...?"

 

[Instro]

Very clear that they had no clue how to follow-up on the Wii/DS generation, were unprepared to do so, and were probably panicking because the Wii cratered in 2010 and beyond. But yeah that first E3 for the WiiU was wild. What's fascinating is that they were in the midst of a very bad start for the 3DS, and apparently didn't see how not making a clear distinction on the branding, and that it was a new console, would be a problem.

 

[Sumio Mondo]

The amount of times I had to tell my friends/family at the time that it was actually "Wii 2" in all but name since they owned a Wii, when they thought it was a new controller/add-on for the Wii was crazy lol. Love the system but the marketing was bad in this era for Nintendo.

Even with 3DS, I still saw Amazon UK reviews condemning certain 3DS games for not working on their DS systems during the early days of the 3DS as well lol.

 

[Dekuman]

Very clear that they had no clue how to follow-up on the Wii/DS generation, were unprepared to do so, and were probably panicking because the Wii cratered in 2010 and beyond. But yeah that first E3 for the WiiU was wild. What's fascinating is that they were in the midst of a very bad start for the 3DS, and apparently didn't see how not making a clear distinction on the branding, and that it was a new console, would be a problem.

Honestly something as simple as branding it Wii 2 or Wii Advanced would have helped a ton

That was another criticism originating from the fan base

 

[Joe]

Not only was their reveal absurdly bad, their attempts at damage control were even worse.

This ad was in 2013 and attempted to clarify that the Wii U was not a Wii:



Putting aside the multiple questionable decisions made in this ad, my biggest concern is how they refer to the Wii U as an "upgrade". This is not the only time they referred to it as such in a way to differentiate it from Wii. Calling it an "upgrade" instead of plainly, "a new console", is probably one of the worst attempts at damage control I've ever seen and I'm surprised more people don't bring it up. It just made matters more confusing and I can't possibly fathom why they insisted on that terminology.

 

[Boyfriend]

i feel like a lot of the "nobody knew it was a new console" rhetoric ignores a lot of the real issue with the product

like yeah they revealed it poorly and it wasn't immediately obvious that it was a whole new system, but also that shouldn't have mattered if they were making something people actually wanted. had the idea been popular the thing would have caught on, the zeitgeist would have known what gamepad actually was and retailers would have known how to sell the console.

the real issue was that nobody liked the core conceit of the product in the first place. smart devices were well entrenched by this point and everyone was familiar with the function of a tablet. even sony and microsoft were experimenting with second screen stuff that they almost immediately dropped because nobody actually cared about it. had people actually liked the idea, they would have figured out what it was.

 

[Shadow]

Honestly, I doubt even Nintendo knew what they were cooking...

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I assume arrogance got to their had and they thought people would keep eating shit like Wii Sports and Wii Music, they wanted easy money.

Ehh, if they thought that, they sure didn't act on it by continuing to make many more of them. After 2009 there was nothing but versions of Sports and Fit for Wii U.

 

[GPKs3]

The first 30 seconds of that Wii U E3 trailer is evidence enough that the system was a rough concept/prototype for Switch, whether Nintendo knew it at the time or not. The Wii U walked so the Switch could run.

 

[Joe]

Honestly, I doubt even Nintendo knew what they were cooking...

 

[Hermii]

The first 30 seconds of that Wii U E3 trailer is evidence enough that the system was a rough concept/prototype for Switch, whether Nintendo knew it at the time or not. The Wii U walked so the Switch could run.

I dont agree. They took the one thing that worked (off tv play) and discarded everything else.

 

[GPKs3]

I dont agree. They took the one thing that worked (off tv play) and discarded everything else.

Hence why I pointed to the first 30 seconds of the video(off tv play) and nothing else.

 

[freedomseekr]

I remember calling the Wii U a "transitional console" after this reveal and got so much flack for it.

It was clear to some degree that Nintendo was aiming for another Wii (hence keeping the name) but Nintendo had ignored that the Wii - and to an extent also the DS - came out at the right point in time in 2005 and 2006, shortly before smartphones and tablets captured the "casual gamer" market by just sheer force of convenience.

 

[Reinhard Schneider]

I remember watching this at my best friend's house (watching the E3 keynote together was tradition for us) and there were three distinctive reactions:

Me: Oh neat! The Wii successor! Nintendo in HD is going to be so dope
Friend: Looks like it, but why are they using Wii games to showcase it?
Sis: [Calls hysterically] REINHARDT WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT? WHY ARE THEY LAUNCHING A SCREEN CONTROLLER FOR THE WII!?

They're both as much of a nerd as myself, but when it comes to tech they're way too literal. The focus on the controller + Wii style games poisoned the message from the start and, in my opinion, keeping the aesthetic didn't do the console any favors either, none of the big players have ever done that when switching generations precisely because it confuses the consumer.

One of the reasons why the Switch was such a success from day one was, precisely, that Nintendo made a clean cut from the Wii era. The reveal had Skyrim - a game not possible on Wii and that was never released on Wii U - as a prominent part of its video, and featured specifically both Breath of the Wild and a new 3D Mario. Wii U should have done the same.

Neither the PS2 or PS3 look like their predecessor AT ALL despite BC being a prominent feature, none of the Xbox consoles do, either. Even with the mess that is the PS5, the different SKUs are different enough in their packaging (black=digital only, white=good stuff)

 

[Lord Azrael]

i feel like a lot of the "nobody knew it was a new console" rhetoric ignores a lot of the real issue with the product

like yeah they revealed it poorly and it wasn't immediately obvious that it was a whole new system, but also that shouldn't have mattered if they were making something people actually wanted. had the idea been popular the thing would have caught on, the zeitgeist would have known what gamepad actually was and retailers would have known how to sell the console.

the real issue was that nobody liked the core conceit of the product in the first place. smart devices were well entrenched by this point and everyone was familiar with the function of a tablet. even sony and microsoft were experimenting with second screen stuff that they almost immediately dropped because nobody actually cared about it. had people actually liked the idea, they would have figured out what it was.

I don't know. All my friends I showed Nintendo Land to loved it. And there were some other ingenious usages of the gamepad too, like Splatoon. Maybe people would've liked the idea if they tried it, but it was really difficult to convey the appeal or something? I'm not really sure

 

[The Captain]

It was such a good thing for Nintendo to experience. They needed the reality check that they aren’t immune to failure just because the wii was so successful. Wii U crawled so Switch could not only run but freakin sprint.

 

[Jersh]

I don't know. All my friends I showed Nintendo Land to loved it. And there were some other ingenious usages of the gamepad too, like Splatoon. Maybe people would've liked the idea if they tried it, but it was really difficult to convey the appeal or something? I'm not really sure

It's definitely harder to convey why it works by looking at it compared to the Wii. Additionally, the game shines brightest with 4-5 players. It's hard to actually get the right scenario where people get why it works. (Though man, I swear Animal Crossing Sweet Day is peak gaming with the right people.)

But there's also the fact the cheapest way to get Nintendo Land was the $349.99 Deluxe Set, priced $100 higher than what the Wii launched at. If you wanted the $299.99 Wii U, you didn't get Nintendo Land with it.

And there was also just... nothing else like it, no games leaning on the asymmetric multiplayer. No equivalent to Wii Play, or new breakthrough like Wii Fit, or a rejuvenation like Wii Sports Resort. There was basically Nintendo Land, and then games that either used the Game Pad in neat at best ways for single player (Pikmin 3, Splatoon) or lackluster ways in multiplayer (pretty much anything Mario on the system qualifies here).

To be clear, good games should sell hardware of their own accord. But the Wii U just lacked that hook for its entire lifespan, and I say this as someone that adored the thing and feels my time with it is among my favorite of Nintendo's consoles. I don't think any reveal strategy was going to make this thing remotely successful; the price point and quantity of software (and possibly direction of said software) needed to be more attractive.

 

[Rampo360]

Another huge mistake imo is that they thought the wii brand was still strong.
At that time wii, within general audience, was synonymous with "underpowered", "waggle" and "shovelware".
They were totally out of touch, thinking their brand was still the cool and hot thing.

And basically people didn't want more of Wii. Which is not a case with Switch so I hope they didn't get the wrong message there. We do want the next console to be related to Switch brand.