Microsoft to sell Xbox One without Kinect. Removes requirement for gold on apps

[Dat Matt]

Nintendoomed is a favorite of mine in regards to the Wii U. The issue with the Wii U is that is isn't as well advertised as the Wii was to draw in the casual market, and it doesn't have the games for the Hardcore market to get interested. Mario Kart and Smash are the first port of call for the latter. and perhaps dome of the "E3" Games due to be announced such as Zelda: Shards of Nightmare, Xenoworld etc.

Not heard any big news from Microsoft other than Halo 5: Guardians, or FFXV from Sony.

[Skyblade]

Nintendoomed is a favorite of mine in regards to the Wii U. The issue with the Wii U is that is isn't as well advertised as the Wii was to draw in the casual market, and it doesn't have the games for the Hardcore market to get interested. Mario Kart and Smash are the first port of call for the latter. and perhaps dome of the "E3" Games due to be announced such as Zelda: Shards of Nightmare, Xenoworld etc.

Not heard any big news from Microsoft other than Halo 5: Guardians, or FFXV from Sony.

Mario Kart is a game for the "hardcore" now?

I understand what you're saying. But that's my point. Everyone is harping about how poorly the Wii U is doing. But apparently the Xbone is doing even worse, and no one mentions it.

[Jiro]

I'm not sure why the PS4 is winning because they are offering just as little as the XBOX ONE. Certainly, the PS4 owns a lot to the late success of its predecessor, but I expect them all to flounder until they actually deliver something. I cannot think of an appropriate metaphor, but this generation of consoles is incredibly lacklustre so far and not a one of them deserves to win. It's simply a matter of which one deserves to lose less.

[Bolivar]

When you think about all the biggest games that have dominated in the last few years - Battlefield, Assassin's Creed, FIFA, Call of Duty, Need for Speed - all those games have released on next gen consoles. I know those games probably don't appeal to EoFF that much but they do to the broader demographic. Those are the games that sell systems, more than any exclusive that either Microsoft or Sony has. And as I bring up in other threads, PS4 has had a free game on PlayStation Plus every month since launch, in addition to an already strong offering of high quality free to play titles. Again, those games might not be appealing to EoFF but they do make a very overall enticing platform for people like me and that's why the system has been sold out until only very recently.

For context, Microsoft isn't doing bad by any measure - they're outpacing the 360 launch year and are #2 every month. The only problem with not being #1 is that USA and UK are their biggest fans, they don't have the same global appeal as Sony or Nintendo. So they can't afford to fall behind in those markets or they'll have a very mediocre worldwide presence. That said, those are very big markets and they likely will continue to do very well there.

I also wouldn't worry about PC harming them too much. I know the year I played Call of Duty on Steam, the daily player count was approximately 1% of what it is on PSN, much less Xbox Live. There are a few PC centric franchises that do well on there but it's still very niche.

[Dat Matt]

Mario Kart is a game for the "hardcore" now?

I consider it "hardcore" in the sense that it's a major Game for the Wii U as a central franchise. Not so much in the sense that only true fans will pick it up, like Bravely Default. Can't think of a better word for it than "Hardcore" though. Popular, probably

For context, Microsoft isn't doing bad by any measure - they're outpacing the 360 launch year and are #2 every month. The only problem with not being #1 is that USA and UK are their biggest fans, they don't have the same global appeal as Sony or Nintendo. So they can't afford to fall behind in those markets or they'll have a very mediocre worldwide presence. That said, those are very big markets and they likely will continue to do very well there.

Isn't this because they staggered the release of the Xbox One? The only released in 13 markets at launchAustralia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Mexico, New Zealand, Spain, UK, and USA. It is due to release in 26 more in September, but this is still not worldwide. Perhaps these more niche markets is why it's the lowest selling of the three.

I also wouldn't worry about PC harming them too much. I know the year I played Call of Duty on Steam, the daily player count was approximately 1% of what it is on PSN, much less Xbox Live. There are a few PC centric franchises that do well on there but it's still very niche.

I understand things like Call of Duty are pretty Niche on PC. Games like Battlefield 4 though are played most on PS4 -> PS3 -> PC -> Xbox 360 -> Xbox One based on the most recent details from BF4stats.com . The Xbox 360 + Xbox One combined don't even match that of PC players.

[Loony BoB]

I wonder if the problem the Wii U has goes back to the Wii. I mean, I never saw the Wii as competition for the PC, PS3 or 360. Why is that? I just see it as this "other thing" that exists outside of my general gaming nature. There could be a lot of things that build up to this. I've outlined some I feel personally affect my interest in a Nintendo console.

The Wii targeted a casual demographic. Do you really expect a casual market to buy a new console at every turn? Do you expect the Wii U's second console to be something that realistically caters to a casual market when compared to the high success of the extremely basic Wii controller?

Nintendo refuse to put their games on anything but Nintendo products. Most young gamers I know don't know Nintendo stuff nearly as well as older generations did. It's like SEGA all over again. At some point you need to grab a new audience with new games, and I feel that Pokémon in particular has not aged well, let alone Mario and co. I know they still sell well and that's great, but I feel they are not competition because they live in their own little Nintendo bubble. I want a console that does more than Mario, Pokémon and comic-y sports games. I want more than little cartoony characters. I want gritty with my whimsy. Nintendo won't market this at all, and therefore they alienate a large audience. They rarely market third party products, if ever. The things that most made me want to buy a Nintendo console were all non-Nintendo products... Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles, Last Story and a potential Timesplitters sequel.

Essentially Nintendo live off Nintendo fans more than anything else. If that works for them, great, but I simply don't look at Nintendo as a valid competitor for my interests because of all the Nintendo in their Nintendo while Nintendo Nintendos Nintendo.

Consider that the biggest thing for Nintendo to happen in recent years to get them new long term, spending fans is not the Nintendo Wii picking up lots of casuals who won't buy a new game, but rather the Pokémon TV series. By putting their product outside of a Nintendo console, they gained floods upon floods of fans. Why not put a Mario game onto PC/360/PS3? People like me might actually bother to get it, get caught up in the Mario frenzy that apparently exists and they will get new fans. Instead I haven't played a Mario game since I can remember. Seriously, I think the last Mario game I played was Mario Kart and I think that was... what... 14 years ago?

[Shauna]

Your entire post is why Nintendo (specifically the WiiU) is floundering, and everyone knows it. Except Nintendo, probably.

[Loony BoB]

Someday they will release a PC-based Pokémon MMO in which you can capture every Pokémon without the need to attend special events and the entire world will go smurfing mental for Nintendo all over again.

[Dat Matt]

I mean, I never saw the Wii as competition for the PC, PS3 or 360. Why is that? I just see it as this "other thing" that exists outside of my general gaming nature.

I understand what you mean here. Nintendo seems to do what Nintendo does, and has removed itself from the "Console wars" so to speak. When I commented to someone I liked games, he asked me if I rallied for Sony or Microsoft. I said Nintendo and retorted "Oh yeah, those guys". They tend to just do their own thing these days which is pushing attempting to do what the others don't.

The Wii targeted a casual demographic. Do you really expect a casual market to buy a new console at every turn?

To be fair, the Casual market was never Nintendo's origonal focus. They saw motion controls, a market that had never been introduced to a home sitting, and ate it up. When they saw "I can play bowling in my own home by using this machine, it's like the real thing" it went from there. It's one of the reasons there are so many crap games of "50 in 1 party games" for the Wii. The issue is, the Casual market turned to the next big thing, which was games like Clash of Clans and Candy crush. Many of the "casual" people I know that bought Wii units haven't used them in 2+ years.

I want more than little cartoony characters. I want gritty with my whimsy.The things that most made me want to buy a Nintendo console were all non-Nintendo products... Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles, Last Story and a potential Timesplitters sequel.

I agree with you on that fact that nintendo is first and foremost a family console, and they could use a bit more "Gritty" content. At the same time though, when I'm plaything through a Gears of War game on my Xbox with is super manly filled with blood, guts and heartbreak I need the fallback of family friendly Nintendo to counterbalance. I associate Xbox with "Western Games" filled with space marines and guns and swearing, but Nintendo with Light hearted games that I enjoy playing more than shooters.

Truth betold, I wish Nintendo would push games like Metroid and F-Zero more, because I am bored as all hell of Mario games. I still enjoy them when I play them, but I dislike that it's a annual franchise (if not bi-annual). Nintendo has lost the support of a lot of 3rd party developers, and I don't thing Monolith Software, Retro Games and Platinum Games are going to be enough for them to keep the attention of players.

Essentially Nintendo live off Nintendo fans more than anything else. If that works for them, great, but I simply don't look at Nintendo as a valid competitor for my interests because of all the Nintendo in their Nintendo while Nintendo Nintendos Nintendo.

Entirely true. The issue with Nintendo while it has strong franchises you can't get elsewhere like Zelda, Metriod, Kirby etc many of these have not even been discussed for next gen. If a new Metriod game came out multiplatform, it would be superior on Xbox one, but the loss of sales of the Wii U hardware would be a bigger loss to Nintendo overall despite the increase sales.



Honestly, I don't think Nintendo are doing too hot just now. They've released 3 Mario Games on the Wii U, 1 Pikmin and one Donkey Kong game. That's there input from the franchises they've built up these years. They just aren't pushing out the variety of the full nintedo Catalogue. I would love to see Nintendo hit a new markets, but all the "Casual Market" are playing Madden, Call of Duty or Candy Crush. They need to win back people that drifted off in previous generations to Sony/Microsoft by offering something that they don't.

They've got 3 advantages right now against the PS4 and Xbox one right now:

1. It's the cheapest console of the three
2. It's currently got the most exclusives of the three (as a result of being out a year early)
3. It has a tablet interface that the other two systems do not.

They've very poorly utilised the year they had prior to the release of their competitors, but by offering something that the competitors do not as well as having a strong library is all that the consoles need to sell. That's the reason the 3DS and Wii have done so well.

[Loony BoB]

Many of the "casual" people I know that bought Wii units haven't used them in 2+ years.

Ditto, but for basically everyone I know that had a Wii. The fact that I hear more about the Wii from my 50-something year old mother in law than I do from people my age sums it up. What sums it up even more so is that my 50-something year old mother in law does not play it very often and I would not be surprised if she hasn't played it in the past year.

I agree with you on that fact that nintendo is first and foremost a family console, and they could use a bit more "Gritty" content. At the same time though, when I'm plaything through a Gears of War game on my Xbox with is super manly filled with blood, guts and heartbreak I need the fallback of family friendly Nintendo to counterbalance. I associate Xbox with "Western Games" filled with space marines and guns and swearing, but Nintendo with Light hearted games that I enjoy playing more than shooters.

This is why I find the PC and PS3 have been the highlight for me - they offer variety without the need to switch consoles. I can switch from gritty and dark to cartoony and whimsical by switching between games and they are all good, numerous and popular.

Truth betold, I wish Nintendo would push games like Metroid and F-Zero more, because I am bored as all hell of Mario games. I still enjoy them when I play them, but I dislike that it's a annual franchise (if not bi-annual). Nintendo has lost the support of a lot of 3rd party developers, and I don't thing Monolith Software, Retro Games and Platinum Games are going to be enough for them to keep the attention of players.

Thing is, I don't know what Metroid and F-Zero are because I didn't grow up on Nintendo. What Nintendo needs is not One More Game Featuring Your Favourite Thirty Year Old Character, but A Group Of New IP's and Multiple Exclusives By World Famous, Massive and Highly Respected Third Party Developers. Nintendo needs to un-Nintendo it's Nintendo. As someone who has rarely touched Nintendo products, I can say that I don't give a rat's arse about Metroid or Mario. If they want to grab me, they need to get TimeSplitters, Last Story, Final Fantasy and (of course) a Pokémon MMO mixed in with a game titled Badass Mothertruckers. They need to shake the impression that they are nothing but whimsical, they need to have titles that carry the interest of non-Nintendo fans. They need hooks. Right now, they have no hooks for new fans, they are simply fishing in their own bucket of fanfish.

Until they do so, I will see them as stuck in the past and living on past ventures. You said in your post that what Nintendo's thing is "pushing attempting to do what the other's dont." The only thing they are pushing is exactly what they have been pushing since the 70's.

Now, I love M*A*S*H, but I don't watch the reruns and I would have no interest in a sequel nor would I have any interest in the M*A*S*H 3D.

EDIT: Oh, and regarding the second advantage - the exclusive titles mean little to someone who a) hasn't heard of them and b) has no Nintendo fanboy blood... exclusives are only good when you also have the games that are released on the other consoles, otherwise you're not so much a console of exclusives, more so an excluded console...

[Dat Matt]

Only 2 things I want to comment on, I hate long posts xD

You said in your post that what Nintendo's thing is "pushing attempting to do what the other's dont." The only thing they are pushing is exactly what they have been pushing since the 70's.

What I intended by this post was that Nintendo pushes for innovation where the others don't. The last console, the Wii offered motion controls, and both the PS3 and Xbox 360 adopted similar practices. Motion controls are not interesting anymore, so Nintendo moved to having a tablet interface on top of games. They've yet to do anything interesting with this hardware yet, but I am interested to see what the tablet inface will hold. If it turns into just another party game gimmick then I'll renounce the Wii U as a console. (from what I know, the only function the Wii U controller functions as in Mario Kart 8 is a horn. That could have been assigned to any button and provided the player with a map or something). The DS was also an innovation by offering a 2 screens, as well as a touch screen. 3DS updates the top screen to have a 3D effect. Nintendo pushes for innovated changes in the hardware. Nintendo do rely on a few franchise to be cash cows, which is why they can take risks and try and offer Variety. It is however, why they are miles behind the other hardware. That being said though, people are debating the other two next gen consoles abilites when Mario Kart is 1080p 60fps, while watchdogs is only 792p 30fps on Xbox One.

Hell even things like the Gameboy and Virtual boy were innovative. Virtual boy flopped hard but at least they attempted something weird and new. They are doing the same thing with the Wii U, which is also failing consider Wii U units are still selling at a loss per unit sold.

Regarding the second advantage - the exclusive titles mean little to someone who a) hasn't heard of them and b) has no Nintendo fanboy blood... exclusives are only good when you also have the games that are released on the other consoles, otherwise you're not so much a console of exclusives, more so an excluded console...

They could do much better with the promotion of their games. It's strange to me that someone does not know What Metroid and F-Zero is in 2014, but it's understandable as Nintendo have done nothing to advertise them in recent years (to my understanding. I tend to ignore advertisements anyway). Funny thing is, Nintendo have gone and released one new IP for the Wii U so far, called "The Wonderful 101". Only thing I know about it is that you control 101 superheroes to fight for justice and each member of your team has special unique abilites that when combined can turn into things like giant swords controlled on the touch screen. I seem to have missed all if any advertising for this game, so I cannot actually comment if it looks good or not before playing it. Suppose that's another issue with Nintendo's Draconian polices.

[Loony BoB]

I agree that they innovate when you look at hardware. Unfortunately with hardware innovation you need software innovation to back it up. Nintendo lack in a massive way any real software innovation. I mean, I can't say for certain as I don't play on them much, but Pokémon and Mario Kart are both excellent examples of how to release the same game over and over and over and over and over again. Sony may not have much hardware innovation by comparison, but what they do have is Flower, Journey and Final Fantasy. These games innovate because they do things differently each time. I don't know how much Metroid or Super Mario Brothers innovate, but... yeah. Zelda, perhaps?

They could do much better with the promotion of their games. It's strange to me that someone does not know What Metroid and F-Zero is in 2014

I've heard of the former, absolutely, and seen some pics. It looks old and archaic from what I've seen. I'm guessing there are more modern variations. Are they more innovative and new, or more remakes of the older games?

but it's understandable as Nintendo have done nothing to advertise them in recent years (to my understanding. I tend to ignore advertisements anyway). Funny thing is, Nintendo have gone and released one new IP for the Wii U so far, called "The Wonderful 101". Only thing I know about it is that you control 101 superheroes to fight for justice and each member of your team has special unique abilites that when combined can turn into things like giant swords controlled on the touch screen. I seem to have missed all if any advertising for this game, so I cannot actually comment if it looks good or not before playing it. Suppose that's another issue with Nintendo's Draconian polices.

Yeah, you're right. It's no good if nobody knows about it. You need hype. Sony hypes even third party games, so I don't see why Nintendo can't but then again, it's Nintendo, and Nintendo only Nintendos Nintendo. I just searched for "The Wonderful 101" and the reviews seem pretty good, particularly user reviews. Although apparently it's the kind of game that you have to play over and over again and hone skills and improve scores and that isn't really my bag. :S

EDIT: Wait, I'm sure I've seen something about that ages ago, looking at the images. It looks like it would be fun for co-op.

[Dat Matt]

I agree that they innovate when you look at hardware. Unfortunately with hardware innovation you need software innovation to back it up. Nintendo lack in a massive way any real software innovation. I mean, I can't say for certain as I don't play on them much, but Pokémon and Mario Kart are both excellent examples of how to release the same game over and over and over and over and over again. Sony may not have much hardware innovation by comparison, but what they do have is Flower, Journey and Final Fantasy. These games innovate because they do things differently each time. I don't know how much Metroid or Super Mario Brothers innovate, but... yeah. Zelda, perhaps?

Mario Games tend to follow the same sort of Format - Run though a level, Collect a Star/Run into a flagpole/beat a boss. No real variation there with the exception of new level design from game to game. Mario Kart is a standard racing game at it's core, what makes it different from the competition what it does differently from iteration to iteration.

Double Dash - Allowed for 2 riders at one time,
Wii - Bikes as well as Karts
Mario Kart 7 - offers vehicle customisation and a flying mechanic and underwater racing
Mario Kart 8 - Is dabbling with anti-gravity.

Each adds something new each time. Pokemon doesn't change much from game to game, but it does expand itself with each generation. Each is a "New" with new pokemon, new regions, new updates to pokemon (Most notability to Mega-evolve Pokemon in this generation) game with all the content of the last.

I've heard of the former, absolutely, and seen some pics. It looks old and archaic from what I've seen. I'm guessing there are more modern variations. Are they more innovative and new, or more remakes of the older games?

Metriod is separated into 2D Sidescollers, and 3D FPS games. Each use the same sort of mechanics (Samus has a gun, she shoots aliens) she gets powerups as the game progresses. The last game they released was their Second Wii Game "Other M" which apparently was terrible.

[Loony BoB]

While the changes you mentioned are indeed changes, I wouldn't call them innovation on the level seen amongst other consoles. This is just throwing something in so it isn't exactly the same. Admittedly a lot of other series do this as well, but with Sony & MS they can rely on a variety of developers to crack out new and innovative IPs that are promoted almost equally to that of their in-house products, while Nintendo's big lists are essentially "The Same Games You Saw Last Generation... With An Extra Minigame!" or something. =/

Again, though, the Wonderful 101 sounds cool. It's a shame they don't do the smart thing and plug this. If you think about it, the last two times Nintendo marketed fantastically were both to do with new things - the DS sold big when Nintendogs came out and the Wii sold big when they advertised a number of Wii Sport/Fit kind of things. Neither were Nintendo, Zelda or anything. Perhaps they'll learn eventually!

[Skyblade]

Nintendo releasing their games on multiple consoles would be the worst thing they could do. It would absolutely destroy them as a hardware producer. As soon as they made that shift, they would basically never sell another console.

Nintendo's problems are fairly complex right now. Their first problem is actually the tablet controller. It's innovative from a hardware stance, but it requires innovation from a software stance to be back it up. If you want to program a game for the Wii U, you need to program for the GamePad. This means a lot of extra programming for your game, and it makes it more difficult to port it to other consoles, because it would lack the GamePad features. A few companies may be willing to risk this, but not many. This makes it harder for Nintendo to pull in third party publishers, and that is where their major flaws lie.

You talk about Sony being innovative. It isn't, at all. What it has is a system that caters enough to third party and indie devs that it allows them to be innovative with its system. Flower, Journey, and Final Fantasy aren't Sony products (and Final Fantasy is hardly selling because of "innovation", just an FYI), they're third party products that have done incredibly well on Sony consoles.

Nintendo lacks this on the Wii U. They have it in spades on the 3DS. There are a host of

Also, Nintendo does innovate in software, even on its major franchises. If you take a look at The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds, at first glance it will seem like just a High Definition version of Link to the Past. But it is actually is one of the most innovative games in the franchise, serving up a huge amount of changes to the series formula (all of which works brilliantly).

Then too, innovation is not everything. Hell, Game Theory said it far better than I ever could:

But let's take the recently released Yoshi's New Island. This game has been blasted by critics for bringing nothing new to the series, for being a stale copy of the original. The thing is, I never got to play the original, and after I saw it speedrun in AGDQ2014, I wanted to try it. So I bought the new one, and it has fulfilled my expectations brilliantly. It wasn't new, but I don't get games just because they're new. Sometimes, when you have something that works, iteration on the concept and basis is all you need. There are a ton of older, Nintendo era games that I would happily play today. There are tons more which are new to me, which I would probably enjoy if I got around to playing them. Releasing these old classics is not itself a problem. Nor is releasing iterative sequels to them (again, just look at any First Person Shooter series).


Nintendo has two major problems that I see right now. The first is lack of third party support. They aren't pulling in enough third-party developers to get a good game library on the Wii U, and they don't seem to understand the importance of doing so.

The second is lack of advertising. They either don't advertise well, or they don't know how to properly advertise their games and systems. The 3DS has actually been marketed really successfully, but the Wii U hasn't been supported nearly as well by adds. The Wii was promoted incredibly successfully because the promotion style they went with appealed to the casual market brilliantly. I don't even see promotions for the Wii U, though. Let alone promotions for any of the games. I can't watch a video online without seeing an ad for Titanfall for the 360 (even though you could get a better version of the game with better controls on the PC), yet I can't remember ever seeing an ad for Nintendo's big games.

Proper marketing could also solve their "oh, they're just a kiddy company" image. They have darker games for their systems. The 3DS has things like Bravely Default, Fire Emblem Awakening, and Shin Megami Tensei IV. Professor Layton vs Ace Attorney is another darker title that I can't wait to play. Heck, even Link Between Worlds is darker than most of the Zelda series. On the Wii U, we have titles like Bayonetta 2 and Shin Megami Tensei X Fire Emblem coming out for the Wii U. We could see some marketing on the scale of the other consoles, an actual attempt to push the Wii U as a console for another market of gamers. But we probably aren't going to. Nintendo needs to learn how to market.

There's also the fact that they aren't properly utilizing their IP. We get three new Mario games in a year. Whoop de doo. I've never really liked Mario games either, BoB. But they aren't releasing new games for about 9/10ths of the great properties that they hold.

If they could fix these problems, they could begin to absolutely dominate the console market again. They still release fantastic games. They just don't have enough of them, they don't have the variety they'd get if they were better at attracting third party help, and they don't market them well.