90 percent of all Nintendo Wii U consoles sold in the UK during the console's launch week were the Premium model, meaning that only 10 percent of consumers picked up the 8GB Basic pack.
Breaking this down, Chart-Track said the ZombiU Pack, which bundled together the third-party Ubisoft title with a Wii U Premium model, made up 30 percent of all Wii U hardware sales while the Premium console on its own had a 60 percent share of total sales.
The Basic offering comes with a GamePad and 8 GB of storage space, while the Premium model includes the game collection Nintendo Land, 32 GB of storage and a discount that gives shoppers a "Deluxe Digital" 10 percent discount on certain downloadable titles until 2014.
Despite the launch of the new Nintendo console, the top 10 had no Wii U exclusive games, with Call of Duty: Black Ops II once again taking the top spot, even with a 35 percent drop in sales. Newcomer and critically acclaimed Far Cry 3 entered the charts at number two, according to Chart-Track.
The highest-charting Wii U exclusive title was Nintendo Land, coming in just outside the top 10 at number 11 -- it's notable that copies of the game bundled with the Wii U Premium console were counted towards the game's position in the charts. Meanwhile New Super Mario Bros. U managed number 14.
Ubisoft's ZombiU was the best-selling third party exclusive game for the Wii U, entering the charts at number 17. Other than these three titles, no other Wii U games featured in the UK top 40.
"Despite the launch of the new Nintendo console, the top 10 had no Wii U games, with Call of Duty: Black Ops II once again taking the top spot, even with a 35 percent drop in sales."
Shouldn't it be "no Wii U exclusive games"? Out of this weeks Top10 five games are available for the Wii U. Besides, it is notable, that these charts only include 2 days of Wii U availability in the UK, because the tracking ended on 1st of december.
The Basic model is pretty worthless next to the Deluxe model... which also comes with stands for both the console and gamepad as well as a charging cradle for the gamepad. The only good thing about the Basic model is the color. I really wish there was a White Deluxe Set.
But the basic model's not a bad deal if Nintendoland weren't the main attraction. I'm sure the remark that they only need to sell one game to turn a profit is based around the deluxe version (in the US - the argument in the UK is totally moot- it's all gravy at these prices) and so I wonder how much they lose on the basic model? Was it really so much that bundling Nintendoland would really sour their financials so badly?
I think they made the basic model in case parents wanted to buy the system for a younger demographic. However because It has no game in the box I would suspect a parent would just buy the deluxe because of the game packed in.
Also, it can be an option to have a planned upsell, as well as a fallback for those unhappy with the release pricing.
This way they can provide a $300 Wii U, advertise the Wii U as 'From $300' to attract customers to the store, but easily upsell you on the $350 edition, since it's simply a better deal. And for those who bristle at the $350 price tag, they can always say 'We offer a cheaper option if you like', to be able to properly satisfy more customers.
I really figured it the other way around. I figured that Nintendo figured that being naturally techy, the core gamer would always have a million external hard drives and SD cards around and 32GB would never cover their needs in any case. Therefore for these gamers a stripped down model is more affordable and suits their actual needs better. Add into this that the core gamer now typically owns multiple consoles, and it was important for them to get the machine down as inexpensive as possible for the machine to sit as a comfortable diversion besides your durango and/or orbis.
I don't know maybe they don't, or maybe it was PR not knowing what to do, or maybe just maybe decisions where made at the last min of productions and this is what resulted. I been gaming for a long time myself so maybe that makes me a "core" gamer. I bought the deluxe because it had more gigs of storage, was black, and came with a game. Now the core gamer may not have in Nintendo's PR mindset wanted to have NintendoLand as one of the titles with their Wii, and they may have considered that the gamer had multiple HDD and SD and would only purchase the smaller model over the larger. I would go on to also speculate that Orbis or Durango wasn't even considered with this move.
So I concluded that Nintendo has proof that they had messed up with the 3DS price, and decided to offer two models to see which one the consumer would want to purchase rather than going with one model like thier history suggested they would do. They added incentives to the more expensive model as a trick to get the consumer to feel that they where getting more for their dollar, and maybe it seems the trick paid off. I think more "core" gamers want the black model over the white for much of the same reasons I stated above, but as time goes on they may just offer the white model as a premium and offer more colors as they get their game tie ins going.
Anyone know why the "new" wii u is so pokey downloading and installing things it feels like it running wireless b @ 11mbps but claims to support 802:11 n which maxes @ 900 mbps.
I've downloaded sizable games on both 360 and ps3 faster.
Anyone else having dl woes on wii u?
Come Christmas kids silver dollar sized eyes will glaze over as morning turns to night and worst case the next day.
Max speed for 802.11n theoretically is 300m bit/s. Haven't looked in the antenna specifications for the Wii U but I would be really surprised if there were more than 3 antennas which means stuck at 2 spatial streams (150m bit/s).
However, even if its 54m bit/s if your internet is a not even remotely running that speed there in lies one major bottle neck.
The file system might be "kludgey" too resulting in an impact.
Knowing Nintendo's mistakes in the past I would think the updating servers are possibly not load balancing successfully and/or not optimised for the peak load.
Its sinful though that you can't just run it straight out of the box. Nintendo definitely gets a "D" for day one experience. But my new LG TV actually didn't become useful until after the 3rd software patch so maybe just a sign of the way tech companies are using the internet now to get things patched etc.
"I've downloaded sizable games on both 360 and ps3 faster."
Can't say anything about 360 or PS3 download rates, but for comparsion, I downloaded the day 1 update (1 GB) within 50 minutes on friday morning (launch day here in europe) and Trine 2 (2 GB) with little under 2 hours (yesterday). Not especially fast (50000 kbit/s connection), but also not unbearable slow.
It's about 350 KB/s, which is what I get sometimes from Steam, when a game is released, everybody's waiting for. Ususally Steam downloads are much faster, but every now and then, they go also down to such rates.
How does this compare to an average 360/PS3 download (in the launch window, because I think downloading speed currently is limited due to new users hammering the servers for the update)?
Of course i had my deluxe system day 1 stateside though i find it sad they didn't pack in 32 GB with both systems and just drop the game,promo and accessorys for the basic set.
Imo there should've been update discs @ retail or installed on launch games that didn't fill the 25 GB up.
Shouldn't it be "no Wii U exclusive games"? Out of this weeks Top10 five games are available for the Wii U. Besides, it is notable, that these charts only include 2 days of Wii U availability in the UK, because the tracking ended on 1st of december.
you are, of course, correct - I've slammed in the word "exclusive" a few times to clear it up.
But the basic model's not a bad deal if Nintendoland weren't the main attraction. I'm sure the remark that they only need to sell one game to turn a profit is based around the deluxe version (in the US - the argument in the UK is totally moot- it's all gravy at these prices) and so I wonder how much they lose on the basic model? Was it really so much that bundling Nintendoland would really sour their financials so badly?
This way they can provide a $300 Wii U, advertise the Wii U as 'From $300' to attract customers to the store, but easily upsell you on the $350 edition, since it's simply a better deal. And for those who bristle at the $350 price tag, they can always say 'We offer a cheaper option if you like', to be able to properly satisfy more customers.
I really figured it the other way around. I figured that Nintendo figured that being naturally techy, the core gamer would always have a million external hard drives and SD cards around and 32GB would never cover their needs in any case. Therefore for these gamers a stripped down model is more affordable and suits their actual needs better. Add into this that the core gamer now typically owns multiple consoles, and it was important for them to get the machine down as inexpensive as possible for the machine to sit as a comfortable diversion besides your durango and/or orbis.
I don't know maybe they don't, or maybe it was PR not knowing what to do, or maybe just maybe decisions where made at the last min of productions and this is what resulted. I been gaming for a long time myself so maybe that makes me a "core" gamer. I bought the deluxe because it had more gigs of storage, was black, and came with a game. Now the core gamer may not have in Nintendo's PR mindset wanted to have NintendoLand as one of the titles with their Wii, and they may have considered that the gamer had multiple HDD and SD and would only purchase the smaller model over the larger. I would go on to also speculate that Orbis or Durango wasn't even considered with this move.
So I concluded that Nintendo has proof that they had messed up with the 3DS price, and decided to offer two models to see which one the consumer would want to purchase rather than going with one model like thier history suggested they would do. They added incentives to the more expensive model as a trick to get the consumer to feel that they where getting more for their dollar, and maybe it seems the trick paid off. I think more "core" gamers want the black model over the white for much of the same reasons I stated above, but as time goes on they may just offer the white model as a premium and offer more colors as they get their game tie ins going.
I've downloaded sizable games on both 360 and ps3 faster.
Anyone else having dl woes on wii u?
Come Christmas kids silver dollar sized eyes will glaze over as morning turns to night and worst case the next day.
However, even if its 54m bit/s if your internet is a not even remotely running that speed there in lies one major bottle neck.
The file system might be "kludgey" too resulting in an impact.
Knowing Nintendo's mistakes in the past I would think the updating servers are possibly not load balancing successfully and/or not optimised for the peak load.
Its sinful though that you can't just run it straight out of the box. Nintendo definitely gets a "D" for day one experience. But my new LG TV actually didn't become useful until after the 3rd software patch so maybe just a sign of the way tech companies are using the internet now to get things patched etc.
Can't say anything about 360 or PS3 download rates, but for comparsion, I downloaded the day 1 update (1 GB) within 50 minutes on friday morning (launch day here in europe) and Trine 2 (2 GB) with little under 2 hours (yesterday). Not especially fast (50000 kbit/s connection), but also not unbearable slow.
It's about 350 KB/s, which is what I get sometimes from Steam, when a game is released, everybody's waiting for. Ususally Steam downloads are much faster, but every now and then, they go also down to such rates.
How does this compare to an average 360/PS3 download (in the launch window, because I think downloading speed currently is limited due to new users hammering the servers for the update)?
Imo there should've been update discs @ retail or installed on launch games that didn't fill the 25 GB up.