Wii U

[Thursday Next]

On the plus side, the U controller will be with every system, so everyone making nintendo games will (probably) support it. Unlike the Kinect and Move, that see sporadic, or superficial support from third parties.

 

On the minus side, unless PS Vita does pretty much what the U controller does then U will be the only system of its kind. Third parties are going to be reluctant to focus on U controller development if it means branching off from their established big consoles. It'll be relegated to an inventory or map screen at best, if it's supported at all.

 

It'll be the usual Nintendo show of lots of well received 1st party titles and bugger all third party support. I can see this one being a GameCube. Technically a good system, just lacking dev support.

[TCP]

Am I the only one who doesn't care how many Wii U controllers it can use? I mean any sort of local multiplayer is probably going to be a party game or something like Mario Kart, which works fine with a classic controller. Does anyone who's not a child actually get 4 friends and game in a room together?

[Thursday Next]

Am I the only one who doesn't care how many Wii U controllers it can use? I mean any sort of local multiplayer is probably going to be a party game or something like Mario Kart, which works fine with a classic controller. Does anyone who's not a child actually get 4 friends and game in a room together?

 

Yup. You're the only one. Out of ~7 billion people you are utterly unique.

 

I could see your point if this was a new controller for the Wii, which has an established stable of low fidelity party games and some higher quality single player titles, but it's not, it's for an HD console. PS3 and Xbox games such as Portal 2, Left 4 Dead, FIFA, the upcoming Resistance 3, some racing titles, Resi 5 and so forth support local multiplayer.

 

It's bad enough when you do some multiplayer Left 4 Dead and get stiffed with the MadCatz controller with the massive dead zone and spongey triggers, let alone if your buddy has the U controller with all the additional features it brings and you're left painfully clutching a thoroughly unergonomic Wiimote.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Thursday Next

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

It's not that classic or Wiimote controls wouldn't work, but it's just that the potential is more limited with only one. Man, it'd be so awesome to have 4-way Goldeneye on four different controllers, no more splitscreen. Big screen could be used for killcams, a map, or a scoreboard. There's just tons you could do...

 

Heck, even with the one controller, with the right development effort I see some potential. I just fear it will be ignored.

[staySICK]

I wonder. If there is wiimote support, is there by extension the wii mote add ons, namely the classic controller? One WiiU controller and 3 classics wouldn't be that bad, I'd probably opt for the classic over the wii-u, myself.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Yes. That Alien game made by Ubi even talked about a 2 player mode where one player used a classic while the other used the Wii U controller.

[RockyRan]

Am I the only one who doesn't care how many Wii U controllers it can use? I mean any sort of local multiplayer is probably going to be a party game or something like Mario Kart, which works fine with a classic controller. Does anyone who's not a child actually get 4 friends and game in a room together?

 

That's not the issue. It's the issue that the capabilities of the Wii U are going to be castrated by this very obvious limitation. And it's not even something we're all crazily expecting out of nowhere. We've already had the ability to play games on the GameCube with each player having their own screen. It's obvious that I see a Wii U controller and I think "Zelda: Four Swords for the GC". It's counter intuitive to say "yeah, well, that experience you could play in 2004 you won't be able to play in 2012 out of this arbitrary limitation". Yes each player needed his/her own GBA for Four Swords but come on. This is 2012. There NEEDS to be a solution for this.

 

If it came down to it I would've VERY well preferred a lower resolution and screen size on each Wii U controller. It just makes no sense in any way to rave about the controller so much (talking so much about it that they were CONFUSING people as to whether or not it was actually part of a new console during their presser) then say "yeah, only 1". Really? They don't see that as a bad thing in any way possible? Nintendo, who are the people most concerned with local multiplayer? They're obviously spinning into a "asymmetrical multiplayer!" excuse, but no matter which way they try to spin it, it just screams "limitation" at the end of the day. If they could, they would enable 4 players, period. The fact that they're not doing it means a failure on their part, and that's the only thing I'm going to be hearing until they fix it.

[Yantelope]

This is just sad.

 

http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/14/wii-u-has-last-gen-radeon-inside-still-more-powerful-than-ps3-a/

 

We're talking about a chip that's what, 2-3 years old in a system that's not due until next year? Pathetic. It's not even DX11 compliant.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Yantelope

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

It's a closed console system though, so the R770 may be fine. You can't equate it with PC hardware in any way. That's also just the chip. It's two generations of graphics cards more advanced than a 360, and assuming they modify the specs enough, should be significantly more powerful.

[Yantelope]

You can still equate a lot of things. The lack of DX11 hardware acceleration will limit the capabilities of the card. If it's similar in VRAM to cards back then (maybe 512MB) then you'd really be handicapping yourself. It's not quite like it used to be when Console hardware was totally separate from PC hardware. In fact, more and more system resources are being used to run the OS on a console.

[deanb]

I'm thinking it's main advantage will be it will probably be able to actually put out full HD unlike the other two.

But that's about it. Unless Sony n MS go a bit stupid then next gen will by moores law have quite a bit more of an increase than the current rumoured 50% or so of the WiiU

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

The article also states it should be able to push out four SD signals, so maybe 4 Wii U controller support isn't totally out of the question yet.

[deanb]

It is if Nintendo said it is. If they design the console to only use a single controller then that's all it'll be able to do. They do have a year to maybe change that, though given there will be a fair few games already in development for it I doubt there will be that drastic a change. Maybe some homebrew hacking later on, but if it's hard wired to only do1 then no matter the capability it's going to be tied down to what Nintendo dictates.

[FMW]

I think that the disappointment over only 1 Wii U pad at a time is a little bit silly. Yes, it is sad. FF Chrystal Chronicles and Four Swords are fun fun games. But just because the Wii U can't duplicate those types of experiences doesn't mean that there isn't limitless potential for other kinds of fun. The local cooperative multiplayer with screen controllers idea is only one of the thousands of possibilities this presents.

 

I mean, this is the controller that can do everything. And what it can't do, you can use your Wii controllers to fill in the gaps. Dual Analog? Check. Touch Screen? Check. Balance Board? Check. Accelerometer? Check. Microphone in Controller? Check. Wiimote/motion plus/nunchuck support? Check. Two separate simultaneous screen feeds? Check. 3DS connectivity? Check. Classic Controller? Check. 5 person local multiplayer? Check.

 

I honestly think it's hilarious that people are upset that this console won't support the four swords play method. That's just about the only thing that this console DOESN'T do.

[excel_excel]

I think that the disappointment over only 1 Wii U pad at a time is a little bit silly. Yes, it is sad. FF Chrystal Chronicles and Four Swords are fun fun games. But just because the Wii U can't duplicate those types of experiences doesn't mean that there isn't limitless potential for other kinds of fun. The local cooperative multiplayer with screen controllers idea is only one of the thousands of possibilities this presents.

 

I mean, this is the controller that can do everything. And what it can't do, you can use your Wii controllers to fill in the gaps. Dual Analog? Check. Touch Screen? Check. Balance Board? Check. Accelerometer? Check. Microphone in Controller? Check. Wiimote/motion plus/nunchuck support? Check. Two separate simultaneous screen feeds? Check. 3DS connectivity? Check. Classic Controller? Check. 5 person local multiplayer? Check.

 

I honestly think it's hilarious that people are upset that this console won't support the four swords play method. That's just about the only thing that this console DOESN'T do.

 

I do agree. I mean if your basically just staring at 4 portable screens you might as well be playing on handhelds....which Four Swords is coming out on for FREEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[RockyRan]

I think that the disappointment over only 1 Wii U pad at a time is a little bit silly. Yes, it is sad. FF Chrystal Chronicles and Four Swords are fun fun games. But just because the Wii U can't duplicate those types of experiences doesn't mean that there isn't limitless potential for other kinds of fun. The local cooperative multiplayer with screen controllers idea is only one of the thousands of possibilities this presents.

 

I mean, this is the controller that can do everything. And what it can't do, you can use your Wii controllers to fill in the gaps. Dual Analog? Check. Touch Screen? Check. Balance Board? Check. Accelerometer? Check. Microphone in Controller? Check. Wiimote/motion plus/nunchuck support? Check. Two separate simultaneous screen feeds? Check. 3DS connectivity? Check. Classic Controller? Check. 5 person local multiplayer? Check.

 

I honestly think it's hilarious that people are upset that this console won't support the four swords play method. That's just about the only thing that this console DOESN'T do.

 

Then again if that's about the only thing you want out of the console the rest of the "checks" aren't really meaningful, are they?

 

I'm looking at base features because let's be real, Nintendo never really goes beyond using a console's base features. They're notorious for releasing new peripherals and never using them. I thought exactly the way you did when the Wii was coming out (OMG LOOK AT ALL THE NEW WAYS OF PLAYING GAMES IT'S GOING TO BE SO VARIED) and look how that turned out. Either gimmicky motion crap or games that pretty much controlled traditionally. Even Nintendo didn't give a shit about the Balance Board, Wii wheel, Zapper, or WiiSpeak. Thank god the Vitality Sensor is all but dead or else that'd be another thing to add to that list of neglected plastic.

 

Attempting to downplay the importance of not having 4 of these controllers doesn't really make much sense to me. This controller is the MAIN selling point of the system, and limiting the amount of controllers to anything less than the industry standard (yes, 4) is nothing short of a failure of design, no matter which way anyone tries to cut it. Trying to divert attention from this by pointing to other peripherals that everyone here knows will almost never get used (balance board? Really?) doesn't magically make this particular fundamental problem any less disappointing.

 

That is, of course, if it does turn out that only 1 controller can be used.

Edited June 14, 2011 by RockyRan

[Yantelope]

Yeah, it's about the fact that you're putting limitation on a system that's supposed to be breaking limitations. It seems like they could have found a way of making it work with 4 screens if they really wanted to. My guess is that they don't want to tell you that those controllers cost $150 each to make (just a guess). There is going to be a ton of arguing about how cool this system is and how many possibilities there are but frankly I don't see how the Wii U solves the fundamental problem currently plaguing motion control which is: How do you actually move in the game world? The best way to move around in a game world is still an analog stick. Until that changes, motion control continues to be tied to a traditional controller.

 

Let's say for argument that the new controller is cool and it lets you do some cool new things in games you already love. Okay, that's fine but the console is still going to be a full generation behind the new PS4 and XBox720 and that's a deal breaker for me.

[RockyRan]

There's reports that it's about 50% more powerful than the PS3 (or was it 360?), with a graphics card that's two card generations ahead of the 360's. Based on what I'm reading it does seem to be more significantly powerful, but not really "next generation" powerful.

 

Graphically I'm not totally concerned about the power. Whatever Nintendo's going to put out with the Wii U is going to be outdated by the time the PS4/720 release anyway. My hope was that Nintendo was at least going to make something significantly powerful than current-gen consoles, even if not as powerful as top-of-the-line PCs of today, which it looks like it is so I'm satisfied there.

 

It all goes back to the 1 controller limitation for me. That shit needs to be fixed ASAP.

[FMW]

Hang on, let me just make sure I read that right. You say that "about the only thing you want out of the console" is 4 player local coop using Wii U pads to give separate displays?

 

Well, I guess that's unfortunate for you then. I am sorry. Nintendo offers a ridiculous number of play options with this new device and it's really sad that you only want one very specific method of interaction that isn't available.

 

Out of curiosity, have you have an overwhelming affection for this style of play for a long time? Have you considered hand held gaming? You can get this same fix on your Wii using DS connectivity in FF Crystal Chronicles: Echoes of Time. If the central TV screen isn't key to what you're wanting to play, then even more options open up. There are a TON of PSP and DS games that have fun local multiplayer. Every person has a separate screen, but they all exist in the same virtual space. That's the same thing, minus the TV screen in the middle. Have you dabbled in that at all?

 

Oh yes and there's also a camera in the controller. I forgot that one.

[deanb]

Mini-wheats there wasn't really a need to get that sarcastic. Given that the Wii U controller isn't jsut a simple case of splitting off this

 

 

 

into 4 different screens but adding extra functionality, such as the silent scope game they had going on which would be pretty much limited to only one person since the controller in that used the screen. Any multiplayer game is pretty much going to be Wii-like. What is the point of adding in this new controller if the majority of multi-player is going to be done with the old Wiimotes? I think there was one game shown off where in the conference it was pretty much said whoever had the Wii U controller controlled the multi-player/had an advantage through it by having the extra information on their screen. It would be like you having a dualshock and then anyone playing alongside in multiplayer has to use the DDR pad or DVD remote(that's an anecdote, we thought we'd try it. People on non-dulashock failed miserably)

 

And they don't offer a bunch of play options. They offer all the play options the Wii already had, or a singleplayer/lopside MP experience, with the Wii U pad. Dev's are going to have to be really creative with multi-player to take into account that the main player won't have the same controller as everyone else, and most likely will just treat it as if the Wii U is a Classic Controller. In which case what's the damn point in it?

[FMW]

Honestly, I agree with you regarding local multiplayer. There is some potential for asymmetrical play, but that's going to require a ton of creativity and "out of the box" thinking. I'm not looking forward to the Wii U for it's local multiplayer potential. I'm sure it will be available for Smash Bros or whatever, but I don't see the Wii U pad adding too significantly to those designs.

 

Single Player games experiences, on the other hand, excite me greatly. Imagine Metroid Prime where you have the scan log at your fingertips constantly. Or where you hold up the controller when using a special visor, and the controller screen provides the visor overlay. What if the map was always up on the controller screen so you didn't need to swap to it constantly, and it could just be spun around using the touch controls? What if sound effects used the mic in the pad?

 

I mean, that's just off the top of my head for a single game. The same sorts of possibilities are open for Zelda, Starfox, Fire Emblem...

 

Actually, Fire Emblem doesn't need any motion or anything. Just make the controller a constant character statistics database and you'll have drastically improved the game already.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

I think Nintendo looked at it like this:

 

"We already do multiplayer great, but our single player is lacking, so we need to keep one while improving the other."

 

And bam, there we have it, keep the old controllers, but add a new one that's awesome for single player.

[RockyRan]

Hang on, let me just make sure I read that right. You say that "about the only thing you want out of the console" is 4 player local coop using Wii U pads to give separate displays?

 

Well, I guess that's unfortunate for you then. I am sorry. Nintendo offers a ridiculous number of play options with this new device and it's really sad that you only want one very specific method of interaction that isn't available.

 

Out of curiosity, have you have an overwhelming affection for this style of play for a long time? Have you considered hand held gaming? You can get this same fix on your Wii using DS connectivity in FF Crystal Chronicles: Echoes of Time. If the central TV screen isn't key to what you're wanting to play, then even more options open up. There are a TON of PSP and DS games that have fun local multiplayer. Every person has a separate screen, but they all exist in the same virtual space. That's the same thing, minus the TV screen in the middle. Have you dabbled in that at all?

 

Oh yes and there's also a camera in the controller. I forgot that one.

 

No, what I want out of the console is a robust implementation of their controller. Using only 1 controller per console isn't a robust implementation of this, I'm sorry to say.

 

Again, the "ridiculous number of play options" argument doesn't work with me. It did in 2006 when I thought exactly the same way you did, cooking up all kinds of different methods of control for Nintendo franchises using the zany Wii Remote. Turns out pretty much everything worth a damn coming from Nintendo barely used motion controls, and once you take motion controls out of the Wii you're simply left with a ridiculously underpowered controller. Yes, I can think of a very large amount of games that can use the Wii Remote with Motion plus, Wii Speak and the Balance Board at the same time, but my fantasies aren't the reality and the reality is that we don't see any significant implementation.

 

What I'm most concerned about isn't just multiplayer. I'm most concerned about the most robust implementation of their basic concept, which is the only thing Nintendo bothers to actually work with. What your concerns are are all the doodads that Nintendo puts into their consoles, (think the two cameras on the DSi). What I'm most concerned about are the basic features and I want to make sure that they work properly, (think accurate touch controls and good, durable buttons on the DSi). I know Nintendo all to well and I know they don't expand much beyond the basics for their consoles. They always begin each new console generation with a myriad of promises and "Think of the Possibilities!" ad campaigns, then a few years into their consoles said possibilities don't go at all with the fruition.

 

My stance is simple. If they want to rave about the controller so much, and if they want that to be the focal point of their next console, they damn well better make that basic implementation work. A 1-controller limitation is NOT a robust implementation, and saying "BUT IT'S GOT A CAMERA!!" doesn't at all alleviate those concerns.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

So you don't count Wiimotes and the like as "basic features" when from the start it's been mentioned that they work with the console and game devs will be developing things for the console with motion controls in mind? It still has "Wii" in the name.

[RockyRan]

So you don't count Wiimotes and the like as "basic features" when from the start it's been mentioned that they work with the console and game devs will be developing things for the console with motion controls in mind? It still has "Wii" in the name.

 

No, Wiimote don't count as basic features. That little thing they raved about for nearly an hour, ranting about it so much that it got people confused as to whether or not it was standalone or part of an actual console, I KIND OF consider that the basic feature.