The Wii U looks nothing like The Wii

Reno Takamiya

Reno Takamiya

CAGiversary!
Feedback
4 (100%)
Is what I was told on another forum. These are there reasons on why the Wii U looks nothing like it's predecessor the Wii.

Except it looks nothing like the Wii, and only a blind retarded mole would think so.

A) It's longer.
B) It's not as "box-y". It certainly has a much sleeker, rounder shape to it.
C) The whole confusion thing makes absolutely NO sense, because anyone who is remotely interested in the Wii U would have taken five seconds to Google search the goddamn thing and find out that it's a new fucking system.
Click to expand...
The way I see it, if it really was a new entire system why use the same Wii name for it? I'm guessing because it has the word U it makes it totally different. Also when you look at the both systems they also share similarities.

I myself own a Wii and I can see the similarities it has on the Wii U. I've got nothing against either console but I don't get how a person can say it looks nothing like the Wii.

This guy is also a die hard Nintendo fanboy.

What do you think? Does the Wii U share nothing with the Wii?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, I'd say your argument for the U is no different than playstation just using the same name but a different number each time. Or the Xbox with 360 or One.

That being said, the look is a little similar. And the Wii U boasts backwards compatibility with Wii games, so they share that. I can see why someone who doesn't actively game could get confused, but with the new gen systems out, that could happen much more frequently just based on names alone.

It's a completely new system whether you choose to believe it or not, though.
 
moopher said:
Well, I'd say your argument for the U is no different than playstation just using the same name but a different number each time. Or the Xbox with 360 or One.

That being said, the look is a little similar. And the Wii U boasts backwards compatibility with Wii games, so they share that. I can see why someone who doesn't actively game could get confused, but with the new gen systems out, that could happen much more frequently just based on names alone.

It's a completely new system whether you choose to believe it or not, though.
Click to expand...
Not saying it isn't a new system. I'm just saying it shares similarities with the Wii. I mean Nintendo wouldn't continue on with the Wii name unless they were planning on taking some ideas from it.

It is true the PS3 and Slims have always looked the same. Though I do see quite a difference in the Xbox 360 Slim then the original Arcade.

The One and PS4 however do share looks.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ChunLiBarbie said:
I think the topic is nonsense unless you're really bored or speaking of how some consumers could get confused.
Click to expand...
Well the idea of the topic was would people still think the same way about the Wii U even if Nintendo changed the name to Nintendo U.

I posted even if they changed the name people would still make the connection it looks like a Wii at least cosmetically.

That's when the quote I posted in the first part came up.

 
They should change the name to "Nintendo Ewe" because only sheep would buy it

^ see what I did there?

But in all serious (I have one) I can see where people get confused with Nintendo products and compatibility. Consumers are generally dumb and need to be told things. Since Nintendo did a poor job with advertising when the Wii U was launched and haven't done much since I could see Holiday shoppers not really understanding the difference.... especially those that aren't core gamers.

 
In earnest the similarities are somewhat immaterial. Under informed folks have been buying new games for old consoles for a long time.
 
It's so ugly compared to the wii lol. The wii was really nice looking in its stand. The wii u is an oddly long thing.
 
foltzie said:
I'm glad Sony and Microsoft use massively different names for their consoles
Click to expand...
I think I read sarcasm in your post....

Xbox

Xbox 360

Xbox One

Playstation

Playstation 2

Playstation 3

Wii

Wii U

Xbox 360U

Playstation 3U

If you were being sarcastic...I don't know why. The naming for the Wii U generates brand confusion in a way that Wii 2 wouldn't have.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blaster man said:
I think I read sarcasm in your post....

Xbox

Xbox 360

Xbox One

Playstation

Playstation 2

Playstation 3

Wii

Wii U

Xbox 360U

Playstation 3U

If you were being sarcastic...I don't know why. The naming for the Wii U generates brand confusion in a way that Wii 2 wouldn't have.
Click to expand...
I disagree, I worked in retail and there have been more than a few anecdotal stories about parents just not understanding that new systems exist, I personally dealt with customers not understanding new systems. Specifically I dealt with customers not understanding that PS2 games would not work in the PS1. My parents never understood why the NES, SNES, and Genesis couldnt play the same games.

I dont think that calling the system the Wii U was any more confusing that the announcement of a new product in Playstation or the Xbox line, outside of the fact that the NES and Wii sold extremely broadly and may have more customers not used to the usual upgrade cycle.

Note, that I dont think that Wii U is a great name, but I find your other usual points are much more salient.

It was priced $100 too high for the kind of market Nintendo was seemingly targeting, offered nothing for online playing 13-30 somethings (ie fans of sports, FPS, ect games), had anemic Virtual Console support, and generally had awful advertising (ie nothing like the "Wii would like to play" spots).

The name is the least of its concerns.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The only thing I can add to this story is that I sold a new copy of New Super Mario Bros U last xmas and the buyer returned it because it didn't work on his son's Wii when they opened it at Xmas and they were very disappointed. They were disappointed. I got screwed with a now no longer sealed copy of the game that was worth less.

 
Oh, of course it looks similar. I mean, look, here: 
wii-u-vs-wii.jpg


That guy is just an idiot fanboy. And yes, if they had named it Wii 2, there would definitely be less confusion. No one confuses the iPhone 5 with the iPhone 4. Why? Because people know how to count. Do people mix up the iPhone5 and the iPhone 5S? Of course they do. Justifiably so, since there is almost no difference between them, but....

 
Yes - they do look quite a bit alike.

I'd say that the Wii U, to most people, probably sounds like what the iPhone 5s is to the iPhone line: Basically the same and it has a faster processor or something.

I think a good part of the population (except for people over 45-50 at this point) get the different consoles playing different games and that there are different generations of consoles and sometimes they are backwards compatible.

I think that these same people understand the differences between the Xbox, Xbox 360, and the Xbox one as well as the Playstation line. I think they even understood it with the Nintendo line up until the Wii U.

I think that with the Wii U it wasn't really marketed correctly from Nintendo and basically what folks heard was:

- Plays Wii games

- Has HDMI (1080P) out

- Has more memory

... and then it gets fuzzy from there.

I like my Wii U and bought it because I saw a string of games coming out for it and I understood what it is. Having said that, and I'll try to phrase this the best way I can but, even then, I can think of any number of arguments against this, it doesn't feel like a next generation console, but, instead, feels like Wii v2.0.

It feels a bit like going from Windows 95 to Windows 98 instead of something like going from DOS to Win 3.1 or Win 3.1 to Windows 95.

It's nice and I like a lot of things about it but it really doesn't feel like a great leap.

In console terms you could see the difference from NES -> SNES -> N64 -> Game Cube -> Wii on any number of different levels (specs, graphics, sound, the look of the console, controllers, etc.)

You could do the same with PS -> PS2 -> PS3 -> PS4 (though PS3 -> PS4, at least from what I've seen, starts to get a little murky - we're approaching the limits of our TVs - same holds true for the Xbox line).

Wii -> Wii U really doesn't really have the same feeling. In a way it's good. It's nice that it plays Wii games and that the old controllers work on the new system. The Game Pad is there and that, too, is kind of different, but even then, I don't think people really "get" the Game Pad. I'm looking at it and I see potential in what it could do in a game but, with my first two games I'm looking at it like, "I wonder if I could just shove this away somewhere and just use the normal Pro Controller for the Wii U interface and games.."

 
foltzie said:
I disagree, I worked in retail and there have been more than a few anecdotal stories about parents just not understanding that new systems exist, I personally dealt with customers not understanding new systems. Specifically I dealt with customers not understanding that PS2 games would not work in the PS1. My parents never understood why the NES, SNES, and Genesis couldnt play the same games.

I dont think that calling the system the Wii U was any more confusing that the announcement of a new product in Playstation or the Xbox line, outside of the fact that the NES and Wii sold extremely broadly and may have more customers not used to the usual upgrade cycle.

Note, that I dont think that Wii U is a great name, but I find your other usual points are much more salient.

It was priced $100 too high for the kind of market Nintendo was seemingly targeting, offered nothing for online playing 13-30 somethings (ie fans of sports, FPS, ect games), had anemic Virtual Console support, and generally had awful advertising (ie nothing like the "Wii would like to play" spots).

The name is the least of its concerns.
Click to expand...
This cracked me up. Don't tell me your dad tried to shove a record into a CD player or a betamax into a VCR?

 
Blaster man said:
This cracked me up. Don't tell me your dad tried to shove a record into a CD player or a betamax into a VCR?
Click to expand...
I have to assume the latter happened more often than people would care to admit. The former. . . not so likely since cassettes, or rather 8-tracks, were fundamentally different from records. I have to imagine though some folks somewhere were complaining about not understanding the difference between 8-tracks and compact cassettes.

Edit: I started in retail after CDs started to gain popularity so I never saw anyone confused as to formats, but I did have a customer who demanded I accept a return because his CD didnt have a "hidden track". It did, he just didnt understand how those tracks worked.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
foltzie said:
I have to assume the latter happened more often than people would care to admit. The former. . . not so likely since cassettes, or rather 8-tracks, were fundamentally different from records. I have to imagine though some folks somewhere were complaining about not understanding the difference between 8-tracks and compact cassettes.

Edit: I started in retail after CDs started to gain popularity so I never saw anyone confused as to formats, but I did have a customer who demanded I accept a return because his CD didnt have a "hidden track". It did, he just didnt understand how those tracks worked.
Click to expand...
Okay so you think Wii and Wii U is just as confusing as Wii and Wii 2?

 
I think there are people, I'd probably put the age over 50 but it may be younger than that, who just don't get it. Years back my daughter asked for a Wii. She had a PS2. Her grandmother didn't understand the difference and why she couldn't just put the Wii game into the PS2? It's all just discs, after all...

Then as my daughter tried to explain that it was different and what she was suggesting wouldn't work, her grandmother just became upset and made some statement like, "Well, it won't work because they WANT you to buy too different systems - it really COULD work!" Meaning that everything inside each of the machines were exactly the same but, somehow, each company and placed a lock-out chip in it.

In her mind it was like having audio CDs and the companies just colluded and only Sony audio CDs would play in a Sony CD Player so you always had to buy Sony audio CDs..

 
Blaster man said:
Okay so you think Wii and Wii U is just as confusing as Wii and Wii 2?
Click to expand...
I dont think either is confusing enough to a large enough segment of the population to matter*, in so much as I dont believe calling it Wii 2 would have magically made the system move more units.

Ultimately I dont think any appreciable amount of the Wii Us problems are name related, especially since its other problems are legion.

*Beyond fun anecdotal stories about individuals less than aware. Oh, that reminds me of the time my father in law put gasoline in his diesel engine. Turns out, that doesnt work so well.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it's kind of funny that it was such a big deal that Wii U vs. Wii was so confusing and Nintendo were idiots for naming it that way but it's not a problem for Microsoft to call their system the X-Box One, which is equally as confusing for consumers if you ask me.

Some people are going to get confused no matter what.  Every time you rent a Blu-Ray at Red Box it has to ask "Are you sure?  This disc won't play in a regular DVD player."  At the local rental place, all of the 3D Blu-Rays have basically the entire front of the disc covered with a label that says "Only plays in 3D Blu-Ray players" in massive print.

 
foltzie said:
Ultimately I dont think any appreciable amount of the Wii Us problems are name related, especially since its other problems are legion.
Click to expand...
I think one could make an argument that there's some confusion based on the name. Look at the lineage:

Nintendo (NES - everyone called it a Nintendo back in the day) - starting point

Super Nintendo (SNES - again, everyone called it a Super Nintendo) - Sounds like something better than a Nintendo

Nintendo 64 - With everyone going nuts about how many bits a system had without understanding what bits were they were on board with the N64 being 64 bit and thus better.

Game Cube - The name is noticeably different. It must be the next Nintendo system. I think this is where they started with the different console colors which, I think, muddies the waters later.

Wii - definitely different than the Game Cube. It's white, which was definitely different, and it had motion controls. They eventually released some different colored units.

Ok.. So up until this point all the consoles have been named something different enough to distinguish themselves and they all look noticeably different. Also, for the last 2 generations, and it may have even started with the N64, you've had some color variation.

Then they introduce the Wii Mini.. Now, they had done a model change on the NES (the top loader) back in the day but it was still apparent that it was an NES. The Wii Mini.. What's that? Just a small Wii?

So then you get the Wii U. It looks, at passing glance like the Wii. It seems to use the same controllers. I could easily see a parent, who's not paying attention to video games because they have better things to do, saying, "Oh, that's just a Wii with a tablet thing. We don't have any games that'd use that, anyway." I could easily see a parent thinking this.

I could see a kid paying attention the the video game industry as seeing it as something like a "Wii +" instead of a whole next-gen console. It really is kind of like a "Wii +".

If you look at the Playstation line it's fairly clear as they established a naming system: PS, PS2, PS3, PS4. They have changed the consoles over time making the same generation smaller, more efficient, but it's pretty clear what you're buying and the consoles all look different.

Microsoft has done much the same. Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One. While there's no clear numbering scheme it's pretty clear you're getting an Xbox of whatever generation. The consoles look different enough.

I think Nintendo goofed with the name, the hardware (really just the shell - they could have beefed up the insides a bit but they've established that they're not going to compete with MS and Sony on that level), and the marketing. If they were going to call it the Wii U then the message should have been, "This is our next awesome video game system that you'll wish you had bought yesterday!" Instead it feels like, "Hey.. If you want to play the next version of Mario you're going to need to fork over $300 to get our new box.. You knew we had a new box, right?"

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brad Bishop said:
I think one could make an argument that there's some confusion based on the name. Look at the lineage:

Nintendo (NES - everyone called it a Nintendo back in the day) - starting point

Super Nintendo (SNES - again, everyone called it a Super Nintendo) - Sounds like something better than a Nintendo

Nintendo 64 - With everyone going nuts about how many bits a system had without understanding what bits were they were on board with the N64 being 64 bit and thus better.

Game Cube - The name is noticeably different. It must be the next Nintendo system. I think this is where they started with the different console colors which, I think, muddies the waters later.

Wii - definitely different than the Game Cube. It's white, which was definitely different, and it had motion controls. They eventually released some different colored units.

Ok.. So up until this point all the consoles have been named something different enough to distinguish themselves and they all look noticeably different. Also, for the last 2 generations, and it may have even started with the N64, you've had some color variation.

Then they introduce the Wii Mini.. Now, they had done a model change on the NES (the top loader) back in the day but it was still apparent that it was an NES. The Wii Mini.. What's that? Just a small Wii?

So then you get the Wii U. It looks, at passing glance like the Wii. It seems to use the same controllers. I could easily see a parent, who's not paying attention to video games because they have better things to do, saying, "Oh, that's just a Wii with a tablet thing. We don't have any games that'd use that, anyway." I could easily see a parent thinking this.

I could see a kid paying attention the the video game industry as seeing it as something like a "Wii +" instead of a whole next-gen console. It really is kind of like a "Wii +".

If you look at the Playstation line it's fairly clear as they established a naming system: PS, PS2, PS3, PS4. They have changed the consoles over time making the same generation smaller, more efficient, but it's pretty clear what you're buying and the consoles all look different.

Microsoft has done much the same. Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One. While there's no clear numbering scheme it's pretty clear you're getting an Xbox of whatever generation. The consoles look different enough.

I think Nintendo goofed with the name, the hardware (really just the shell - they could have beefed up the insides a bit but they've established that they're not going to compete with MS and Sony on that level), and the marketing. If they were going to call it the Wii U then the message should have been, "This is our next awesome video game system that you'll wish you had bought yesterday!" Instead it feels like, "Hey.. If you want to play the next version of Mario you're going to need to fork over $300 to get our new box.. You knew we had a new box, right?"
Click to expand...
I agree. Anyone that's paying attention can tell the name is a problem. Hell, we've been saying that in this very forum since before the thing's launch. It's not like this is a new thought. Nintendo has released the Nintendo DS, Nintendo DS Lite, Nintendo DSi. They're all essentially the same thing. To any casual observer, this is exactly what the Wii U sounds like, "Oh it must be "U" because it's a tablet for just "you" ". The Wii U sounds exactly like what the did with the DS, append a letter to the end of it to denote a hardware revision.

http://www.amazon.com/review/RNFM3571QP66O/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B002I0K3CK&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag=

http://www.amazon.com/review/RCT3NCVY0PYO8/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B002I0K3CK&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag=

Until very recently they never really explained what the Wii U is on their commercials and to someone that doesn't know any better, they think it's a tablet attachment for the original Wii.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dbGJieRaH0

Then of course there's this. Hell, you can look at the comments below the article from June of 2012 and see that it was already in discussion. There is simply no debate that the Wii U's name is a part of the problem. Is it the only problem the console has? No but it is a part of it.

http://kotaku.com/5918946/jimmy-fallon-thought-the-wii-u-was-a-wii-peripheral

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blaster man said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dbGJieRaH0
Click to expand...
Can you tell me where I can get that Wii tablet so I can start playing Wii U games on my Wii?

- that's what that ad looked like to me.

EDIT: Just saw the Jimmy Fallon video - looks like he got the same impression.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brad Bishop said:
Can you tell me where I can get that Wii tablet so I can start playing Wii U games on my Wii?
- that's what that ad looked like to me.

EDIT: Just saw the Jimmy Fallon video - looks like he got the same impression.
Click to expand...
This has been the way they've advertised until maybe 4-6 weeks ago.
 
I really didn't pay attention to Nintendo for a few years up until about 6 months ago when my daughter convinced me to get a 3DS. At the time I was reluctant because I thought, "Yeah.. 3DS.. I get to re-purchase all of my DS games now in 3D.."

She bought one and showed it to me. I was kind of impressed with how well the 3D worked although, after getting one I rarely turn it on. It doesn't work well with your hands not being pretty stationary. Still, I bought a 3DS and started playing the games and I've enjoyed it quite a bit.

The Wii U just caught my attention in the last month or so with the latest slew of games and upcoming games. I knew enough that it was another console and almost forgotten by most but, man, the games looked really polished and fun. I remember that ad shown above form sometime back but it didn't phase me. I hadn't played my Wii in the longest time..

Anyway, all that being said, I'm pretty happy with the Wii U and I'm only have SM3DW and NSMBU right now but the just look great and play great. It's like someone actually took time to think really think through the game play.

 
Brad Bishop said:
I really didn't pay attention to Nintendo for a few years up until about 6 months ago when my daughter convinced me to get a 3DS. At the time I was reluctant because I thought, "Yeah.. 3DS.. I get to re-purchase all of my DS games now in 3D.."

She bought one and showed it to me. I was kind of impressed with how well the 3D worked although, after getting one I rarely turn it on. It doesn't work well with your hands not being pretty stationary. Still, I bought a 3DS and started playing the games and I've enjoyed it quite a bit.

The Wii U just caught my attention in the last month or so with the latest slew of games and upcoming games. I knew enough that it was another console and almost forgotten by most but, man, the games looked really polished and fun. I remember that ad shown above form sometime back but it didn't phase me. I hadn't played my Wii in the longest time..

Anyway, all that being said, I'm pretty happy with the Wii U and I'm only have SM3DW and NSMBU right now but the just look great and play great. It's like someone actually took time to think really think through the game play.
Click to expand...
Nintendo really does put some thought into the game engines and how they play, its a shame they dont put the same care or thought into the other parts of the OS, though it appears they are trying...

 
While I agree with Blaster Man that Wii U is too confusing a name, I do NOT agree that Wii 2 would be noticeably better. For those already familiar with video games, the precedent set by other systems would make the distinction obvious. For those who don't follow the industry as closely, there would still be a significant amount of confusion.

If they had really wanted to differentiate the Wii U, they would have named it something completely different from "Wii." The fact that they stuck with "Wii" in the title shows that they wanted to capitalize on the branding strength of the original Wii. This may end up being remembered as a significant mistake in marketing. The Wii's brand had already declined to the point where it's former strength was not nearly enough to bolster the Wii U in its early days. Positioning the Wii U as a new system to stand on its own would have probably been a wiser move.

And the exterior appearance of the Wii U is also at fault. While the two systems can be easily distinguished when placed right next to each other, all it takes is a few steps back for those differences to become harder to spot. Same color options, same general shape, same general size, same orientation, same general location and layout of buttons, it's easy to see why there was confusion over whether it was a new system or not.

The Wii U is an example of Nintendo having to pay their dues after they pulled a technological fast one with the original Wii. The Wii did not have the hardware power to handle high-definition visuals, and was not developed with modern digital displays in mind. It was built with standard definition in mind. Nintendo got to enjoy an incredible amount of profits thanks to this decision, but they also had a hardware platform that was not future-proof, and would look more and more long in the tooth as consumers became accustomed to high-definition displays. The Wii U is the necessary hardware upgrade that will allow Nintendo to develop their games for modern screens. But the slow uptake on the Wii U is the toll Nintendo is having to pay for not preparing for the current circumstances.

 
Richard Kain said:
While I agree with Blaster Man that Wii U is too confusing a name, I do NOT agree that Wii 2 would be noticeably better. For those already familiar with video games, the precedent set by other systems would make the distinction obvious. For those who don't follow the industry as closely, there would still be a significant amount of confusion.

If they had really wanted to differentiate the Wii U, they would have named it something completely different from "Wii." The fact that they stuck with "Wii" in the title shows that they wanted to capitalize on the branding strength of the original Wii. This may end up being remembered as a significant mistake in marketing. The Wii's brand had already declined to the point where it's former strength was not nearly enough to bolster the Wii U in its early days. Positioning the Wii U as a new system to stand on its own would have probably been a wiser move.

And the exterior appearance of the Wii U is also at fault. While the two systems can be easily distinguished when placed right next to each other, all it takes is a few steps back for those differences to become harder to spot. Same color options, same general shape, same general size, same orientation, same general location and layout of buttons, it's easy to see why there was confusion over whether it was a new system or not.

The Wii U is an example of Nintendo having to pay their dues after they pulled a technological fast one with the original Wii. The Wii did not have the hardware power to handle high-definition visuals, and was not developed with modern digital displays in mind. It was built with standard definition in mind. Nintendo got to enjoy an incredible amount of profits thanks to this decision, but they also had a hardware platform that was not future-proof, and would look more and more long in the tooth as consumers became accustomed to high-definition displays. The Wii U is the necessary hardware upgrade that will allow Nintendo to develop their games for modern screens. But the slow uptake on the Wii U is the toll Nintendo is having to pay for not preparing for the current circumstances.
Click to expand...
I actually agree with you for once with most of it. I do think Wii 2 would have been much better than Wii U but "Super Wii" would have been best if they wanted to keep the Wii branding. They probably would have dropped the Wii brand altogether if they had realized that the market had shifted. Really, that's kind of their fault for not understanding why the sales for the Wii fell apart. They REALLY didn't understand that the casual market that allowed them to pull in so much cash for years was GONE. 2010 was the Wii's first failure of a year in sales and that's the year the iPad was launched. Not only did they fail to realize that iPad (and Android tablets soon after) had forever taken their mass market appeal, they literally released a console with a controller that this casual market would find redundant to the products they already like.

They should have called it Super Wii or simply rebranded and abandoned hope for the casual market. Do these guys even do market research prior to launching a big product?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blaster man said:
They REALLY didn't understand that the casual market that allowed them to pull in so much cash for years was GONE.
Click to expand...
The market that they created isn't gone. But as you point out, it has shifted, and competition in the casual market is now rampant. The big problem with the casual market that Nintendo helped to create is that they have no real brand loyalty. Part of what makes them casual is the fact that they aren't deeply invested in the experience. As such, they aren't going to establish nearly as solid a connection with a particular platform or brand. As soon as tablets started getting affordable, most of those gamers jumped ship to iOS or Android.

To be fair, Nintendo hedged their bets with the Wii U. The tablet controller is odd, yes. And it is no replacement for an actual dedicated tablet. But it is also one of the most "traditional" game controllers that Nintendo has ever released. The Wii U is quite capable as a gaming machine, and we are going to see plenty of worthwhile games come out of it. But it doesn't stand a chance of replicating the success of the Wii. And at the end of the day, that's why they should have abandoned the Wii-specific branding. The Wii was a phenomenon that has come and gone. While the industry owes it a debt of gratitude for the new players that it familiarized with this hobby, it's success cannot be aped or replicated.

Of course, for those who love their Nintendo games, it's pretty much business as usual. We might have to wait a while to see what insanity Nintendo tries next in the console space, but for the time being we will still be getting great Nintendo games. And the beat goes on...

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top