Current Events > Why did the Wii U Flop while the Switch did great?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I truly dont get it.

What sold me on the switch was quite frivolous: the 2d Mario segments in oddisey and the coolness of its form factor.

But they cant have swayed so many people

Apparently a ton of people didn't even know it was a new console, or something along those lines. Like they thought the big tablet/controller was the Wii U itself.
---

Terrible marketing, no third party support.
---

Nintendo failed to properly market the Wii U, and many of the casual market who latched onto the Wii were not even aware of its existence, or if they were, they thought it was just a tablet add-on.

Plus, in the years since the Wii's release, smartphones with cheap/free games became widely available, so said casual audience moved onto those, choosing to game on a device they more than likely already own than dropping $300+ on one that they won't get much mileage out of in the long run.

Thus, Nintendo's intention of continuing the "Blue Ocean" strategy that the Wii started failed, and once the third parties abandoned them (lack of sales plus the Wii U being difficult to develop for), they were left with a platform that was almost solely being supported by them, with huge droughts between major releases.
---

Marketing.

Nintendo is stupid. There are people to this day that think the Wii U is just a 200 tablet controller for the Wii
---

The Wii released so many peripherals that had the name "Wii" attached that a lot of casuals thought it was just a tablet for the Wii.

On top of that, the PS4 and Xbox One were just around the corner.

I'd also wager that some people were still a bit peeved that Wii became a shovelware magnet.

It also never really had a good killer game until like two or so years into the system.

Zelda and/or 3D Mario go a long fucking way to getting people hyped.
---

I blame the stupid name

"Wii" was pretty dumb to begin with, then they made it rhyme with pee-yew
>_>
---

As already mentioned, the Wii U had absolutely awful marketing and was too casual

The Switch had the much cooler gimmick of being both a home console and a handheld and was marketed way better, and also has already seen better third party support
---

With the Wii U it seemed like Nintendo felt they could just cruise by with an interesting gimmick. Their problem is nobody cared about the Wii U's gimmick. They needed a legit Mario/Zelda game at or shortly after release. The Switch offered that plus a more useful gimmick.
---

The marketing was a disaster from the getgo
---

HylianFox posted...

I blame the stupid name

This also didn't help.

Naming it the "Wii 2" (because that's essentially what it was, especially early on) would have gotten the point across much better.
---

People stopped giving a shit about yearly "New Super Mario Bros." games, and that was all it felt like the Wii U had for the longest time.

For real, Wii U had a horrible games lineup. And I owned the damned thing.
---

Because all the grandmas and soccer moms who bought the original Wii couldn't be bothered for what they considered to be an add-on peripheral.
---

I remember Nintendo saying that they didn't know tablets were going to be so popular too so their big hook of streaming gameplay to the Gamepad wasn't impressive lol. They probably started working on the concept years before it released.
---

I dont see the Switch as a gimmick..

3D on the 3DS was a gimmick. So were the dual screens on the 1st DS at first, but devs figured it out.
---

Solar_Crimson posted...

Nintendo failed to properly market the Wii U, and many of the casual market who latched onto the Wii were not even aware of its existence, or if they were, they thought it was just a tablet add-on.

Plus, in the years since the Wii's release, smartphones with cheap/free games became widely available, so said casual audience moved onto those, choosing to game on a device they more than likely already own than dropping $300+ on one that they won't get much mileage out of in the long run.

Thus, Nintendo's intention of continuing the "Blue Ocean" strategy that the Wii started failed, and once the third parties abandoned them (lack of sales plus the Wii U being difficult to develop for), they were left with a platform that was almost solely being supported by them, with huge droughts between major releases.

And how did the switch overcome all these?

Marketing, hype, paying off reviewers etc
---

Spam_n_eggs posted...

And how did the switch overcome all these?

It's "gimmick" was interesting and catered to people that like to play on the go (as you do with phones/tablets)

It had a Zelda title at launch

It had a decent name

The marketing wasn't dog shit
---

Let's not forget that it has no real Mario or Zelda game to call it's own.
---

wii u had no gaemz

AvantgardeAClue posted...

Let's not forget that it has no real Mario or Zelda game to call it's own.

Super Mario 3D World is great and is still the only 3D Mario to have coop.

But by the time it came out it Wii U was already in a tough place.
---

Great replies ITT, thanks everyone :)

Darmik posted...

AvantgardeAClue posted...

Let's not forget that it has no real Mario or Zelda game to call it's own.

Super Mario 3D World is great and is still the only 3D Mario to have coop.

But by the time it came out it Wii U was already in a tough place.

Nobody considered that a true Mario platformer, not even Nintendo when they revealed Odyssey.

I love it for playable Rosalina though
---

Spam_n_eggs posted...

Solar_Crimson posted...

Nintendo failed to properly market the Wii U, and many of the casual market who latched onto the Wii were not even aware of its existence, or if they were, they thought it was just a tablet add-on.

Plus, in the years since the Wii's release, smartphones with cheap/free games became widely available, so said casual audience moved onto those, choosing to game on a device they more than likely already own than dropping $300+ on one that they won't get much mileage out of in the long run.

Thus, Nintendo's intention of continuing the "Blue Ocean" strategy that the Wii started failed, and once the third parties abandoned them (lack of sales plus the Wii U being difficult to develop for), they were left with a platform that was almost solely being supported by them, with huge droughts between major releases.

And how did the switch overcome all these?

Nintendo actually properly marketed the Switch as a game console, and one with a rather useful gimmick, if you could call it one. It also launched with a very strong title (Breath of the Wild), and had an overall very solid first year of first party titles almost every month (whereas the Wii U just got NSMBU and that was basically it until a year later; by then, it was too late).
---

AvantgardeAClue posted...

Darmik posted...

AvantgardeAClue posted...

Let's not forget that it has no real Mario or Zelda game to call it's own.

Super Mario 3D World is great and is still the only 3D Mario to have coop.

But by the time it came out it Wii U was already in a tough place.

Nobody considered that a true Mario platformer, not even Nintendo when they revealed Odyssey.

I love it for playable Rosalina though

Unless you think Nintendo doesn't consider the Mario Galaxy games as 'true Mario platformers' either I think you misunderstood what they were saying.
---

- Ditching the big bulky game pad for a sleek tablet with controllers that connect
- Launching with a Mario and Zelda title in the first year
- Something that clearly differentiates it from the previous console. Lots of people thought the Wii U was just a Wii add on
-Good marketing
---

Nintendo mentioned in one of their promo reveals for Odyssey that it was the first true new Mario 3D platformer since Galaxy or something along those lines. Either that or that it was the real sequel to Galaxy due to being open world.

So yes, 3D World is a footnote in the Mario series, no matter how good it may actually be.
---

AvantgardeAClue posted...

Nintendo mentioned in one of their promo reveals for Odyssey that it was the first true new Mario 3D platformer since Galaxy or something along those lines. Either that or that it was the real sequel to Galaxy due to being open world.

So yes, 3D World is a footnote in the Mario series, no matter how good it may actually be.

You're talking about this.

Odyssey is the successor to 64 and Sunshine because they have a more open design compared to Galaxy and 3D Land/World which are more like obstacle courses.
---

For me i would have bought a wii u but it just seemed like an underpowered home console the switch is portable. I play it a lot handheld but a lot of people i know got one and for playing in a group drinking it is the best system ever. Four player mario kart and tennis is a blast. Smash is great for bigger groups.

3d land and 3D world could have been DS games

System was marketed like the Wii(as in, it was hard to tell it was something new), it's gimmick controller was big and awful, no third party support, and still a complete lack of understanding how online gaming works.

More people view it as a a handheld that you can play on the TV rather than a home console that's portable.
---

Nukleen posted...

More people view it as a a handheld that you can play on the TV rather than a home console that's portable.

And this is probably Nintendos future.

Portables like the game boy were great, but they could have not been taken seriously as to get ports of console games. But the switch can

Because Nintendo are putting in effort to market and support the Switch.

Also the branding with the Switch is on point whereas nobody had any idea what the Wii U name meant.