ToastiestZombie said:
The Diabolical Biz said:
Reading some of the criticisms in this thread I have no idea what people want from Nintendo. It seems like they'd rather have them stop producing consoles entirely than try something new and interesting. Either that or just make the NintendoBox3, and try and be like Sony and Microsoft.
I'm not saying that the WiiU is a guaranteed day one purchase for me, but I think it has a lot of potential. The amount of stick Nintendo get for trying to innovate - seriously, say gimmick one more time, I dare you, I double dare you mother-fucker - simply beggars belief.
I agree with this too. The word "Gimmick" is holding back the whole industry. Nintendo tries to do something new, and change the way we play games and everyone shouts "GIMMICKY SHIT I GO BACK TO XBOX NOW!". Then they don't buy it, and because of that other companies see making innovative stuff like the Wii U as too risky and will just make the Xbox or the PS3 with better graphical power. Then people complain there's not enough innovation in the industry...
Seriously gamers, get your shit together and stop calling ANY new innovation a "Gimmick", it just makes you look like whiney douches who don't want change.
I hate to break it to you, but the Wii U is by all rights a gimmick, and this is from a purely technical standpoint.
I mean look at it:
First of all, the controller is the size of a decently long novel. It's big, it's clunky, it's buttons are all over the place, and it's not going to be comfortable to hold even with the grips. This is inexcusable by modern standards of controllers because it's going to continuously get in the of comfortable play.
Then there is the touchscreen, which simply clashes with the functionality of the controller. You see, most modern tablets use the touchscreen exclusively for interaction, which means that users will perpetually have a hand hovering over the screen for seamless and easy control. Controller's do the same thing by having all of its functions in small groups that are easily accessible by certain specific fingers. However, the Wii U has both a touchscreen and the controller. Your hands will have to constantly swap between the two, so some level of the device's capability will be inaccessible depending on what is currently occurring.
More damningly about the controller though is the fact that one has to concentrate between two different screens spaced widely apart.
Now I want you to do a little experiment with me. First focus on something in the room you're in, approximately 5 or more feet away. Now, turn back to face your screen and look at these words. You'll find that it takes roughly a second give or take to fully focus on your computer screen. Now imagine having to do that regularly for half an hour or more. That's going to cause two major problems.
First is that you're going to get major eyestrain because you're using muscles that weren't designed for constant repetition, potentially causing various levels eye damage depending on the level of use. This rapid eye movement will also cause headaches as those muscles require far more blood flow that usual and will increase pressure in the cranium which can lead to some of the most infernal migraines.
Then there is the simple fact that the simple act of swapping your view between screens is going to screw over your reaction time on whatever you're doing, which most hardcore games need in order to play well. And seeing as Shigeru Miyamoto specifically stated that the Wii U is meant to recapture the hardcore fanbase this design feature is in direct conflict with it's intended goals.
And of course there are the system capabilities. Now while the Wii U may have technically better visual capabilities than the current generation, it will still be comparable to them. Now I have a Jasper-powered X-box 360 which is one of the newest versions of the system, and despite that modernity it still chugs when certain games like Skyrim or Rage are played. That means the Wii will suffer from those same deficiencies which the next-gen Xbox and Playstation will most likely reduce if not remove. That means that within roughly 2 years of it's release it is most likely going to be out of date as a product.
So to reiterate, the Wii U is by all accounts a gimmick. It adds nothing new to consoles or gaming in general. If I wanted a touchscreen for playing games then I can just use my iPhone, which would not only be more convenient and better implemented but can be played practically anywhere and has way more features and uses for the same or lower price as the Wii U.
ToastiestZombie said:
Yep, it sure does seem like Yahtzee's opinion is the one the Escapist has overall. He says "Nintendo's not innovative!" and even after the fact that he's wrong the Escapist just follows him and thinks they're not innovative. Just an example I thought up.
Ok it seems that people need a reminder for what the word "innovate" means, so lets go look at the textbook definition of it shall we?
From the Now Oxford American Dictionary:
innovate
verb [ intrans. ]
make changes in something established, esp. by introducing new methods, ideas, or products
eg. the company's failure to diversify and innovate competitively.
Now the Wii's supposed innovation was motion controls. However, motion controls have existed since the invention of the light gun, which occurred back in the 1930s after the development of light-sensing vacuum tubes,though it wasn't until the 1980's the the light gun was used in games, which is still decades before the Wii used it. Heck, there are arcades both past and present that have machines that have sword swinging and gun shooting just like the Wii does and they existed years before I was even born.
So by the actual definition of "innovate" the Wii did nothing of the sort. It did not create a new product or introduce a new idea into the fold. All it was is the branding of an already existent product as "new". So please, don't use any permutations of the word innovate for the Wii, because it really doesn't exist. The term is being abused as a catchword to lure in potential customers.
