What does a screen on the controller use, I mean everyone has more than one TV at home. So there´s no problem if someone want to watch TV. And nobody wants to play with that big and unhandy controller. The buttons are very small and all doesn't look very harmonic to a normal controller.
The best controller from Nintendo was the Gamecube controller, also the Wii mote was good if it was a game, which doesn´t overused the motion feature, like Mario Kart Wii. But I also enjoy sometimes games like Wii Sports.
All in all this crap failed. Nintendo tried to make a console for causal and core gamers. It´s not for causals, ´cause to many features of new pointless technology, many causals would be confused with all those stuff. And the core gamers only wanted to sit on the sofa with a normal, handy controller and see into the TV.
Nintendo must change this shit controller!
Everyone's taste is different. Also I lol'd @ sgrunt's post. Sometimes I would really speak with some game developers whose product has been glitched up like hell and hear their reactions (I'm speaking about TASes).
PhD in TASing 🎓 speedrun enthusiast ❤🚷🔥 white hat hacker ▓ black box tester ░ censorships and rules...
All in all this crap failed. Nintendo tried to make a console for causal and core gamers. It´s not for causals, ´cause to many features of new pointless technology, many causals would be confused with all those stuff. And the core gamers only wanted to sit on the sofa with a normal, handy controller and see into the TV.
Nintendo must change this shit controller!
Uh...the console hasn't even been released. >.> How would you know that its going to be competing for the "Worst looking controller of 2011" Award?
What does a screen on the controller use, I mean everyone has more than one TV at home.
Have you never noticed how split screen multiplayer doesn't always work too well because everybody else can see exactly what you're doing? This controller solves that problem. Also, it'll be way healthier to your bladder to use the Wii U than any other console.
Edit: Actually no, it seems the console was designed to only support one controller (+4 Wiimotes) at a time. Now that actually surprises me, given that the code name for the project was "Cafe", which to me seemed to imply more than one person using the new controller.
Shigeru Miyamoto wrote:
Q: Will players use two touchscreen controllers or will they use just one new controller and the original Wii controls with the new console?
Our basic premise is that you can use one with a system. If we got to an idea of having multiple (controllers) it might be just more convenient for people to use their Nintendo 3DS and have a way to connect that.
That being said, we are doing research about if someone brings their controller to their friends house and they want to play together on Wii U to whether or not something like that would be possible.
Wow, biased much?
Given that the system will sell with the controller, I'd expect that most singleplayer games (or games that only do networked multiplayer) will use the new controller. As for the Wiimote itself being outdated, I wouldn't be remotely surprised to see Nintendo update their motion control system mid-generation, just as Sony and Microsoft did the last time around.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Wow, TASEditor is really biased against Nintendo, isn't he?
He's going to pan the Wii U before it's even launched.
Sure am glad Nintendo's future doesn't rest in his hands.
The article itself has made me even more excited about getting the Wii U when it launches, and I'm not going to let someone or anything discourage me from doing so.
Obviously, most people who tried the hands on display at E3 really like the system and the new controller.
Nintendo finally struck gold here. And looking at the controller, the buttons aren't an unreasonable length away from each other.
I think it's going to be a blast.
Joined: 6/11/2006
Posts: 818
Location: Arboga, Sweden
Ok to be fair, we've seen like, 2 minutes of gameplay and a few pictures, if even that? The console is due to be released when, 2012? It's a bit too early to say "OMG IT WILL ROCK" or "lulz it will suck". Really guys. To make up one's mind before really knowing... anything is a bit, well, you know. Lame?
Warp wrote:
omg lol this is so fake!!!1 the nes cant produce music like this!
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
I hope it has the innovation of the Wii, the games of the SNES, and the wow factor of the N64. Or at the very least, I hope it doesn't have the innovation of the virtual boy, the games of the Wii, and the wow factor of the N64 DD
I am not against Nintendo.I play mostly Nintendo games. But since the wii I have less fun with their games.
Seriously they should make a whole new console, not a second wii with hd and a new controller. And they should make more big games and not all this 1 minute-of-fun dsi and wii ware, they a very big number of causal download games.
They said at the convention after the Wii U was displayed, that what they showed graphically, is only a small part of what the Wii U is capable of.
I think the console is at least as powerful as the PS3, if not more so.
And as far as affordability, I know no price has been mentioned yet, but I don't think it'll be more than $500 at the most on launch, if even that.
Nintendo likes to keep their consoles and games affordable. Unlike Sony and Microsoft who seem to think people will buy their consoles no matter what they charge for them.
Mark my words, the 720 and PS4 are going to be far more expensive at launch.
I'm not particularly pro- or anti- any company in particular, but I indeed had high expectations of Wii, and Nintendo made a good job of ruining it with:
— horrendously poor game selection and release schedule;
— not making the controller proper until after three years (and selling it separately as a special fuck-you to those who expected the functionality from the start);
— not using the full potential of the control scheme aside from singular titles, as well as not being able to handle games that could do that (like Bionic Commando).
That's not to say others did particularly better, but hey, at least X360 has a number of decent shmups, so if not for that I wouldn't even consider purchasing it, let alone importing it all the way from Japan. If we were to go by retail exclusives only, all three current-gen consoles even combined can barely compare with, say, PS2's game library.
After all that I'm not holding any breath for the new controller's "potential"; potential is ephemeral while the controller's characteristics — like size and the fact that a six inch screen has to draw power from something — are already quite real. In short, I prefer controls that are simple, precise, and immediately responsive. I prefer not ever thinking about the controller — not feeling its weight, not feeling pain or fatigue from it, not having to change its batteries — let alone looking at it. All the three major console manufacturers, however, seem to be going the opposite direction these days, so there's little I can do.
Warp wrote:
Edit: I think I understand now: It's my avatar, isn't it? It makes me look angry.
I'm not particularly pro- or anti- any company in particular, but I indeed had high expectations of Wii, and Nintendo made a good job of ruining it with:
— horrendously poor game selection and release schedule;
— not making the controller proper until after three years (and selling it separately as a special fuck-you to those who expected the functionality from the start);
— not using the full potential of the control scheme aside from singular titles, as well as not being able to handle games that could do that (like Bionic Commando).
That's not to say others did particularly better, but hey, at least X360 has a number of decent shmups, so if not for that I wouldn't even consider purchasing it, let alone importing it all the way from Japan. If we were to go by retail exclusives only, all three current-gen consoles even combined can barely compare with, say, PS2's game library.
After all that I'm not holding any breath for the new controller's "potential"; potential is ephemeral while the controller's characteristics — like size and the fact that a six inch screen has to draw power from something — are already quite real. In short, I prefer controls that are simple, precise, and immediately responsive. I prefer not ever thinking about the controller — not feeling its weight, not feeling pain or fatigue from it, not having to change its batteries — let alone looking at it. All the three major console manufacturers, however, seem to be going the opposite direction these days, so there's little I can do.
Personally, I didn't think the Wii's game selection was that bad. I mean, it has a lot of good games. Except for Super Paper Mario! That's a bad, bad game!
I mean, other than that, New Super Mario Bros. Wii, Super Mario Galaxy 1 and 2, Donkey Kong Country Returns, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Epic Mickey and Mario Kart Wii are all good games.
Don't pan the console until you've given it a try. The controller has already gotten a ton of good feedback with very little negative. I'm going to remain optimistic.
So do none of you care about the fact that you'll probably only be able to use one of those controllers at a time? That was a very big shock to me. I was expecting at least two and maybe four with dumbed down graphics.
I think Nintendo should definitely fix that and maybe consider selling the controllers or the system at a slight loss.
If the limitation on controllers is from the console streaming the pixels to display to the controller, then the only way dumbing down graphics would get you more controllers is by reducing the resolution for each controller, which would look terrible. The controllers are evidently not smart (or else they alone would cost as much as a DS).
I do agree that it's disappointing that they're saying only one controller per system. Asymmetrical information display can make for much more interesting gaming, but it'd be better if everyone had access to the "same" asymmetrical information -- as it is, this seems more limited to one player in a special super-informed role, and everyone else working against or under the guidance of that one player.
As for selling the system or controllers at a loss, I'd be very surprised if they did that, since they never have before.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Joined: 11/18/2006
Posts: 2426
Location: Back where I belong
Warp wrote:
The games of Sega CD, the success of Sega DreamCast and the technical prowess of Sega Saturn.
:) I like this one better
EDIT:
Kitsune wrote:
Personally, I didn't think the Wii's game selection was that bad.
Granted, all systems have a lot more bad games than good games, but the Wii takes the prized Golden Turd for pure amount of shovelware, followed oh so closely by the DS. Casual games are one thing, but both systems have so many truly bad games it's not even funny.
If the limitation on controllers is from the console streaming the pixels to display to the controller, then the only way dumbing down graphics would get you more controllers is by reducing the resolution for each controller, which would look terrible. The controllers are evidently not smart (or else they alone would cost as much as a DS).
I do agree that it's disappointing that they're saying only one controller per system. Asymmetrical information display can make for much more interesting gaming, but it'd be better if everyone had access to the "same" asymmetrical information -- as it is, this seems more limited to one player in a special super-informed role, and everyone else working against or under the guidance of that one player.
As for selling the system or controllers at a loss, I'd be very surprised if they did that, since they never have before.
Only being able to use one controller at a time isn't a big deal for me. I'm the only Gamer in my house. Only game my Brother ever plays is Guild Wars.
So...Yea. I don't really have other people to play with at home. So this System is good for me.
Granted, all systems have a lot more bad games than good games, but the Wii takes the prized Golden Turd for pure amount of shovelware, followed oh so closely by the DS. Casual games are one thing, but both systems have so many truly bad games it's not even funny.
I wouldn't really know. I've never had what people could call an extensive game library.
Honestly, between all of my PC and Console Games, I'm lucky if I have over 100 games in the last 20 years.
I have to save up for everything I want. And I only make $190 a month. Add that up and I can't afford much.
Joined: 6/11/2006
Posts: 818
Location: Arboga, Sweden
Now the main issue is that I've heard a lot about the Wii U being "more powerful than the PS3 and 360", which is ok, it should be as it is a new console, but the point is that Wii-owners have been telling PS3- and 360-owners to go fuck themselves because "all they care about is graphics". Now when the tide's turning, graphics are suddenly ey-okay? I mean personally I don't give much shit, as far as making the characters "feel alive", voice acting is so much more important than graphics etc. I'd rather play Super Mario World with a controller I know works perfectly (tm) than play Mario 971 on some kind of ungodly abomination which Nintendo likes to call "controller", and people seem to accept, despite said controller sucking (see moozooh's point).
However, Nintendo no longer encouraging casual shit games and instead creating a new era of hardcore games? Yes please. Then again, what is this I am hearing about releasing Resident Evil 4 for the Wii U? Unfortunately, despite RE4 being one of the best games ever, such an action further enhances the feeling of this being yet another Gamecube. Plus as we all know, buying first-gen of any console means getting fucked badly, and taking such a risk with this entirely new console is daring.
Most importantly, when will this be TASable?
Warp wrote:
omg lol this is so fake!!!1 the nes cant produce music like this!
