Wii U Controller Limitations to Save on Costs, Says Nintendo

[JoJo]

Just because the Gameboy and it's subsequent generations were a hit doesn't mean that all of the things Xanthious said aren't relevant. Nintendo has a history of failed gimmicks and silly notions that can't be ignored.

Of course Nintendo have failures, which company doesn't (PSmove anyone?), but what the poster was claiming was that the Wii was their only success which isn't true.

Those are all your typical portable consoles with fairly straight forward controls. Not a whole load of gimmicks there with the exception of the DS's two screens. Even with the two screens the DS still has pretty standard controls.

My point was that every time right up until the Wii came out that they attempted some stupid ass gimmick it, without fail, blew up in their face or fizzled quietly away without much notice. The Wii's motion controls were the first big handful of shit that stuck when they threw it at the wall in 21 years of throwing shit at the wall.

As for why they haven't gone bust yet, who the hell knows. However, I would really be curious to see just how tight things were at Nintendo HQ at the tail end of the Gamecube's life cycle before the Wii was released. I'd bet they were pretty damn close to going the Sega route had the Wii not taken off.

I'd argue that the touchscreen of the DS is certainly no less of a gimmick than the motion controls of the Wii, many analysts thought that the DS would easily lose out to the PSP. The reason Nintendo haven't gone bust can be found right on this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_game_consoles

3 in the top 5 (and 5 in the top 10) best selling consoles & handhelds, not too shabby.

[/QUOTE]

This has to be the most flawed diagram I've ever seen, Just had to point that out.[/quote]

I agree on that one, the first "question" seems especially biased in favour of one particular crowd.

 

[oppp7]

...So it's an upgraded Wii? Not buying this trash.

Also I'm back.

 

[archabaddon]

...So it's an upgraded Wii?

That's all I'm seeing, a Wii that supports one (and only one) fancy new controller. It might have better graphics and processing tech, but you'll only be able to use it on single player or online games.

Don't get me wrong - if they Wii U had the option of adding more controllers - even through add-on hardware - I wouldn't be so critical. But when manufacturers or developers act they're doing me a favor by taking away features, that's laughable :/

WB, BTW

 

[Treblaine]

"The Wii U controller has all the buttons and analog sticks you'd expect to find on a console controller"

Nope.

It only has nub-sliders like the PSP or 3DS. They are cheaper but also much worse, they also cannot do the "click-down" function like RS-to-melee.

Also lacks analogue triggers so no more variable breaking and acceleration.

Overall this controller falls far short of a proper Xbox 360 or PS3 controller, more like the middle ground between a six-axis and a PSP.

In fact even the PSVita is objectively better to control than the Wii U! That's down to:
-true analogue sticks
-multi-touch screen (only 1.2 inch smaller)
-rear camera
-rear touch pad
-lighter/smaller (apparently)

Yeah I have really gone off the WiiU the more I've found out about the controls, it's just not good and anything it can do PSV can probably do as well. And for those with a PS3 already I think getting a PSV is the more economical option than a whole Nintendo Wii U (even on balance with PSV's library vs Wii U's likely library)

 

[shrekfan246]

...and here we go with the Nintendo hate again ...

They had to decide either.. they support the touchscreen for all players, but then they couldn't use the old Wii-motes or they decided on only one touchscreen and the Wii-motes...

In my eyes they made the right decision, especially if they improve the online part, in which case everyone will play with the touchscreen, but for local multiplayer the Wii-motes/classic-controller should be enough.

This might be a businesses decision, but a decision that doesn't put the customer in a disadvantage... the new controller will probably make up a big slice of the price of the WiiU and this way you don't need to spent any more money.. especially if you already have the Wii and 4 Wii-motes...

All this irrational whining about the WiiU really gets on my nerve... I need to avoid these WiiU/Nintendo threads for my own goodwill

The problem is more the implications that this decision is bringing. They haven't released actual tech details, and so stating that it won't support more than one very-high-tech controller comes across to many as showing that it doesn't have quite as new hardware as they were led to believe.

Also, Nintendo's "online" offerings have notoriously been terrible, and I'm not even kidding. I think the PSN is better, and it was hacked and down for a month. The whole point is that Nintendo spent an entire generation of gaming building up "Family-Fun" and local co-op as selling points for their sub-par console, and now they're bringing out a console with hardware specs up to snuff with the other two (Meaning it's on par with six-seven year old tech), but limiting the only gimmick of it and saying nothing about how the online may or may not be improved. So if you want to play local co-op? Well hell, actually, I could see another announcement being made in the future that says the Wii U won't support Local Co-Op. Calling it now.

EDIT: Also, they didn't need to decide between what controllers it would support. Controllers aren't a terribly difficult thing to make backwards compatible in this day and age where everything is wireless. Even wired controllers were compatible with the Wii.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well someone just took a shotgun to their legs.
Atleast support connecting multiple fancy controllers, people buying extra controllers is on them but if you put a hardware limit on that you just fucked the console for it's entire lifespan, you can't really be that oblivious to this.

 

[wiersmaster]

This decision is actually pretty logical. The costs they are cutting isn't in the order of $20-30. Think closer to $100+. The reason for this is VERY simple: the controllers only draw the image, probably to save both (significant) costs and weight. This means that the WiiU has to do all the heavy lifting: every controller with screen you add increases the requirements for your videocard (rendering of the screen), processing power (compressing the image) and console-controller connection (sending specific information to each controller). Add to that that you want a good response time and framerate, and costs can increase immensely with each extra controller.

Nintendo wants to recreate the Wii's success with this thing. Part of that was "cheap, but with a profit". If you want to be able to have a screen on your controller AND use multiple controllers, you'll either loose cheap or the profit, and most likely both.

 

[Xman490]

I can understand how Nintendo felt the need to "innovate", but maybe it shouldn't have just mixed every old innovation together and see if they stick! Now Nintendo is slipping on heavy costs and has to resort to Wii support, which is perfectly fine, but it downplays the innovation if either only one person in the family can have the fancy controller or everyone just has to stay with Wii controllers when they could just get a Wii with Mario Kart for a much cheaper price!

 

[Treblaine]

You know what would have saved the most money?

If they didn't go for this screen-controller thing as clearly they have been forced to make too many compromises to make it worth it.

They should have just gone for a "Super Wii" as in something that is the same architecture as Wii but just more powerful, give it the ability to play Wii games and render them in HD* - just like the dolphin emulator does.

Stick with the same Wii-Nunchuk and phase in more support for the Wii gamepad.

Here's hoping they sell a console sans-screened-controller for a lower price-point. Because come late Holiday 2012 Xbox and PS3 are going to be very competitively priced and probably trying to make big on their motion controls.

(*HD being just a 720p or 1080p native resolution plus some anti-aliasing.)

 

[Doti]

... like hell if I'm gonna play Smash bros. on Wiimotes.

Actually, I happen to play SBB much better on a sideways wiimote, NES style. Could be just because I never got Melee, though.

...and here we go with the Nintendo hate again ...

They had to decide either.. they support the touchscreen for all players, but then they couldn't use the old Wii-motes or they decided on only one touchscreen and the Wii-motes...

In my eyes they made the right decision, especially if they improve the online part, in which case everyone will play with the touchscreen, but for local multiplayer the Wii-motes/classic-controller should be enough.

This might be a businesses decision, but a decision that doesn't put the customer in a disadvantage... the new controller will probably make up a big slice of the price of the WiiU and this way you don't need to spent any more money.. especially if you already have the Wii and 4 Wii-motes...

All this irrational whining about the WiiU really gets on my nerve... I need to avoid these WiiU/Nintendo threads for my own goodwill

I disagree. I'm usually the first to jump in to defend the Wii, being my main gaming console, but I just can't get behind this one.

I'll accept that Nintendo will always (not that it SHOULD, but that's a different topic) lag behind Microsoft and Sony in terms of graphical power, so while current gen graphics on a next-gen console is a bit frustrating, I'm not that upset about it.

No DVD/Blu-Ray support? Fine. I don't want those in my gaming console anyway. Waste of space.

But this? You can argue about Online play, but quite frankly, I don't give a damn. The only multiplayer I'm interested in is local, and it's saddening to see consoles moving away from that (yeah, I know it's more profitable to sell 4 games to 4 different people than enabling decent local multiplayer). Plus, if the only way I can play local multiplayer is with Wiimotes, then I ask: What's the actual innovation there? None.

It really is just an updated Wii, coupled with the cover-gimmick of the new controller.

PS: Lack of backwards compatibility is what caused me to buy a PS2 instead of a PS3, and I'm disappointed to see Nintendo abandon the Gamecube completely. They'll still have compatibility with the Wii, because it's essentially and HD version of it.

 

[GideonB]

So they are doing a Betson?
Thanks Nintendo and I thought you still had some sense in you.

(For those who don't know Betson basically ruined the DDR arcade scene, and made everyone move to Pump It Up because Betson cutting costs basically meant nothing worked right.)

 

[Casual Shinji]

This fucking thing is getting more convoluted the more I hear about. Wave of the future, indeed.

 

[JediMB]

Personally I'm just curious at how developers are going to approach multiplayer and singlepayer on the WiiU, since singleplayer has the option of being focused around this controller whilst the multiplayer doesn't.

I assume we're going to see some "Pac-Man VS"-style split-screen modes.

Regardless, I don't think I'll mind using the Wiimote + nunchuck or Classic Controller for multiplayer. They're convenient enough, and as far as the Wii U controller goes I'm mostly excited about how it's used in singleplayer or online multiplayer.

 

[Saikonate]

Oh, Nintendo.

I defended the Wii to the last. Said it was awesome, it was a great idea, people would do some really cool things with it - then Nintendo made me waggle the stupid controller to make Link swing his sword, and I realized the love affair was over. Then I realized that 99% of the "amazing innovative controls" in place for the Wii amounted to "waggle the stupid controller".

Then I heard about Project Cafe' and I was cautiously optimistic. The rumor mill's "controllers with screens" sounded like a cool idea. Literally every single news bite I have heard since then has disappointed me. Stupid name, one real controller per system, continuing to use garbage like Wiimotes, no DVD/Blu-Ray playback. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they announced they were still using those ridiculous friend codes, and had no plans for a centralized online component.

At this point, I don't think there's any chance I'd want to buy a WiiU. Nintendo's got a whole fucking load of work to do if they want to win me back. Shame, too, because I was a goddamn zealot before the Wii.

 

[Micalas]

In my eyes they made the right decision, especially if they improve the online part, in which case everyone will play with the touchscreen, but for local multiplayer the Wii-motes/classic-controller should be enough.

The problem with this logic is that I can guarantee that most gamers over 16 were playing Wii games (except Wii Sports) with a gamecube control. It's not irrational whining when we're getting pigeon-holed into using the wii-mote for local multi-player.

 

[Mr. Omega]

Dear Nintendo,

Don't worry about the price. If people are willing to buy the PS3 for (everyone together now) FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY-NINE US DOLLARS, and over a thousand dollars on a PC specifically made for gaming, they'll buy the WiiU for whatever price it takes. I can understand (and in fact support) the lack of DVD or Blu-Ray. But those were a nice little extra. This is about the controller. A very important part of the console. Perhaps the most important part besides the games. Don't cut corners on the concept of local muliplayer, that's your strength. Exploit the fact that nobody beats Nintendo at real-life, friends-coming-over, everyone-together multiplayer. You made the controller with the standard button layout that everyone's been asking for, and you added your own personal innovation. Don't shoot yourself in the foot by limiting them.

 

[Toriver]

Now, I'm not one of those people that will be all like, "WAAAAH, it's different from the standard controller and console, it scares me." I do like the Wii and the WiiU's controller does look like something very interesting and fun to try. But why, oh why, Nintendo, are you telling us all these downsides to your console lately? This is a PR nightmare, especially among the nerd community, which is so much like Anonymous, which "never forgives and never forgets". If it's not *PERFECT*, the wolves in sheep's clothing known as "fans" will slaughter your reputation before you even have the chance to compete. And if you only include the capability to allow one WiiU controller to function per console, regardless of the source, that's game-breakingly bad right there. That, I may even say, is indefensible. And the reasoning behind it sounds incredibly dubious, too. Price as your reasoning? Really, Nintendo? Somehow, I don't believe that, and yet I still don't understand this decision. Why wouldn't you at least offer the option to allow multiple WiiU controllers to work with one console, even if you only decide to pack one with each new console sold? That would allow friends to bring controllers over so multiple people can play in the same room together. Isn't that what you want, Nintendo? Isn't that what you specifically marketed the original Wii to be able to do? Now, you decide to only allow one person the ability to have this intriguing new controller technology while others are left with Wii remotes to compete against that one person? What are you thinking? Are you still trying to push Wii-style motion controls on a "hardcore" audience that has given up on them years ago (despite the benefits of motion control)? Honestly, do you not see the potential for awesomeness that in gaming that comes from multiple players being able to manipulate the game, each using one of these devices? Or is this somehow some elaborate trolling mechanism to show us the downside of allowing only one person per console in this day and age to have full access to an account when going online to play multiplayer with friends over playing the game as well (which is BS, at least on the Xbox, that nobody will talk about because it's a "hardcore" console)? Nintendo has done so many things right so far with this new console, why should they ruin that hard work with this crippling hindrance to multiplayer enjoyment? Seriously, what are they thinking?

 

[JohnDoey]

Nintendo wasn't planning to ask its customers to ask customers to buy more than one controller anyway, Iwata added.

That's good. I wasn't going to ask random fellow customers to buy another controller regardless.

OT: This shouldn't be too bad if the other four players can use classic controllers.

That's what I was thinking. Being able to use the Classic Pro, or a gamecube controller.

I bought a Classic Pro to play NHL 2k11 (not so good), but if I can use it to play NHL 12 or 13, or whatever number is out when the WiiU debuts, I'll be happy.

I think i read they are dropping gc support and you can use any controller that worked with the Wii except the GC.

 

[mjc0961]

Brian Ashcraft? Isn't he the Nintendo hating troll who compared the DS running NSMB to a 3DS running NSMB without actually having one of them running the game and not actually playing the game on the other?

...

Yes. Yes he is the Nintendo hating troll. [http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/02/lets-see-if-ds-games-look-better-on-the-3ds/] And since all the other articles seem to link back to his translation, you'll forgive me if I'm skeptical of all this.

But let's assume that we don't know that the guy isn't a Nintendo hater and that this is real. Oh well. Doesn't bother me. I can't remember the last time I needed more than one controller to play any console. I see why other people are upset, but it doesn't bother me at all.

Also, assuming this has any basis in fact (and again, considering the source hates Nintendo, I'm very skeptical), the WiiU doesn't come out until next year. Plenty of time for them to change their minds if backlash is strong enough.