Ah, sarcasm. The thing that relies in large part on tone of voice and context for it's effect. There's no reason at all it doesn't work so well in text now is there? ;pFrizzle said:someone forgot their /sarcasm tagCrystalShadow said:
Wii U Might Support Two Tablet Controllers After All
- Thread starter Mike Kayatta
- Start date
Recommended Videos
ryo02 said:
The last time Nintendo released a console with a "normal" controller, it was the Gamecube. Now, I don't know how well everyone else recalls history, but the Gamecube was absolutely crushed in sales by the Xbox (which had a terrible controller when it was first released) and the PS2 (which was actually inferior as far as hardware was concerned). Nintendo has been ostracizing third-party developers for close to ten years now, it didn't start with the Wii. The Gamecube had a decent game library, sure, but it was nothing compared to the PS2, and it had none of the functionality either of the other two systems had.Shoggoth2588 said:
To put it simply: If Nintendo were to simply develop a "normal" console with a "normal" controller, everyone would shrug and ask why they should buy it over a PS3, Xbox 360, or the newest iterations of both that will be surfacing in the next few years. Nintendo is a very solid first-party game developer, but all appearances say that they know they can't compete directly with Sony and Microsoft, and really they shouldn't. We don't need three separate companies vying to be the top dog. Nintendo has been the only large company in the last six years that wasn't afraid to actually try something new (questionable practices of Nintendo of America aside) and seeing them crumble because they tried directly entering the war Sony and Microsoft have already been in for ten years would be a sad day for the gaming industry, no matter what the vocal minority of gamers on The Escapist might think of the company.
Unless someone replaced all of Nintendo's CEOs brains with wheels of cheese when we weren't looking, I'm sure the final design will support multiple controllers.
Oh, they certainly did win in the beginning; I'm not contesting that. And for the record, in my own home games are played on the Wii and the PC. But it's arguable that that argues against hardware as a selling point; the Wii was unquestionably less powerful than either of its HD rivals. It cleaned their clock for a number of reasons: it had the lowest selling point, it advertised itself as family friendly, and it expressed that it was offering a new and different experience than its rivals; one that would have people moving around their living rooms imitating real-world motions, rather than sitting in a stupor in front of a television committing tawdry acts of violence with their thumbs. That was partly about hardware innovation, yes, but only partly.CriticKitten said:
If we move into the present day, part of what has hastened Nintendo into the next hardware cycle is that Wii sales have fallen sharply while the 360 and PS3 have finally started to come into their own. To a great extent, Nintendo has carried the Wii on first-party titles; the developers who have tried to make AAA Wii games have most frequently been punished for their efforts, and around the edges, the Wii software shelves have been allowed to overflow with binware. The Kinect has undoubtedly moved some 360s, but much of that has, again, been about impressing on people the experiences they could have with the hardware. Titles like Dance Central and Kinectimals have helped move the Kinect, while Sony's Move, to my eye, has been kind of buried in the background... in part because Sony didn't have a strong idea what they wanted to do with the new hardware, other than show their investors that they were taking Nintendo's past successes into account.
What I said was
I'd stick by that. The Virtual Boy, the Sega Saturn, the N-Gage- they were all new hardware. But without a strong vision of what you plan to do with your hardware, what you want your customers to do with the hardware and what they will want to do with it, you fail. And I honestly hope that Nintendo fully recognizes that. You could have Star Trek: The Next Generation's holodeck, but if the only program that came with it was solitaire, it wouldn't be long before you decided to just go back to playing with real-world cards.
When i saw the Wii U for the first time, the silliest thing about it seemed to be the fact that the sqeul station to the Wii was not going to be able to have these neat controllers for four people. I mean, This is Nintendo we are talking about. They are all about the party games for many people to play at once. I think i saw a demo for a chase game for the Wii U, but as far as four player games go it seems you would have to use four wiimotes. So what's the point of having this 'awesome' looking controller if all your buddies can't use it when you do? surely some people will play the Wii U alone, but i'm talking about in the room multiplayer. To me, two tablet controllers still isn't enough. they shouldn't have come up some such a gimmicky system.
So in other words, thanks to all the QQers, it's practically guaranteed that their developer emphasis is going to be on casual games. Oh, the irony.
I have high hopes for the Wii U - it seems to be the underdog, but with no next-gen competitors in sight, it might actually do well. So far it only has Nintendo flagships and ports, but I'm sure it'll pick up some support along the way.