On most tablets nearly every move is done via gestures. On iOS: 4 finger swipe across the screen lets you flip through the apps you have open. Two finger swipe up near the bottom of the page opens the task bar. Two finger pinch = contract, Two finger expand = zoom..etc. When you just use just one finger all it does is move around the page.
Nintendo is the only tech company out there who hasn't moved on to multi-touch. It's absurd they are clinging on to that old technology.
But at the same time, how would you make a game like Zelda, better with multi-touch? Most of the examples provided are usually related to "pinch to zoom", "flick pages"; but we're talking about a gaming device and a gaming controller. Even the Vita with it's capacitive multi-touch screen; the games mostly use it for single touch options (like press here to choose this), the ones that use it are relatively simple games and the rest of the multi-media stuff (pictures). While the one feature that many constantly say that makes the games better is ? dual analog.
Then there are the games in other devices that use multi-touch, and usually use it as fake-digital controllers; rather than for unique aspects.
I'm not saying that "lol multi sucks, single is better"; but that they'll probably use/add said "feature" when they need games that actually use it. Not to mention that, multi is not unique to capacitve screens, as receptive screens are possible to have multi-touch. But as always, cost comes first.
Plus,
there's a thread already discussing advantages/disadvantages and preferences of capacitive versus resistive screens. Which this kind of topic would make better sense to discuss over there, than on a a new Xbox hardware/controller thread. Nintendo "not moving to multi-touch" is not related to the new Xbox having a tablet-like controller.
