IrishNinja
Member
to be fair, both AR and madden games on dreamcast were both simply awful
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
XBW Rumor: The Next Xbox Has A Wii U Like Tablet Controller With HD Screen, Buttons
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
disappeared
Banned
That's not the point.
We're acting so wide-eyed and bushy-tailed like this shit is somehow new and industry-changing.
It ain't.
It's going to be some flash-in-the-pan that we'll look back on and say, "huh, well that was kind of neat."
We're not even trying anymore. We are already to a point where we are trying to convince ourselves that technology that existed over a decade ago will somehow change the way we play games. Nobody gave a fuck then, and we won't now.
Why is it that we're relying so much on hardware to motivate change in gaming, when - at the end of the day - it's the software that dictates the direction? We've had a ridiculous number of great, industry-shaping software titles that didn't need an etch-a-sketch to prove their point.
If there wasn't a reason to laugh at this industry yet, there is now. We have been utterly bamboozled.
Pulling these shit gimmicks out is not the answer. Creative games is.
We were talking about robots in the home years ago too... and oh wait give me a second my roomba just bumped into me.
Talking about tech is one thing realizing it is another.
I love how you are on this ragefit about gimmicks when this industry has had them from the start. If we relied solely on creative software and not the hardware, we should all still be playing our Atari's and Coleco's
I don't understand, what about touchscreens are a flash in the pan at this point?
Nobody cared back then because the technology simply wasn't functionally ready. Touchscreens are now built into everything, they have been proven to be functionally useful in other gaming machines, as has having a secondary screen.
Why should hardware remain stagnant? More importantly, why would this have an adverse effect on software. Ignoring that though, I just don't understand your argument here. I did not claim that a screen in a controller will be something earth shattering, but it clearly can have many useful applications to a gaming console as well as many non-gaming applications. What are the downsides to this?
disappeared
Banned
And Microsoft will ape Nintendo and Sony will ape Microsoft and Nintendo will ape itself and everybody will ape everybody and we'll just keep spiraling into gimmick after gimmick.
I can't even understand how this shit gets tolerated anymore. It's the sheer and utter complacency of the lowest-common-denominator market. The idiots who will buy anything because it's new and shiny.
Unless the Wii U manages to somehow shatter this industry into a million pieces and says, "what now, motherfuckers?" I will continue to be less and less enthusiastic about this console industry. Waggle until the cows come home. It won't change the fact that you're using suped-up Power Gloves to play your games. Fucking exciting.
I can't even understand how this shit gets tolerated anymore. It's the sheer and utter complacency of the lowest-common-denominator market. The idiots who will buy anything because it's new and shiny.
Unless the Wii U manages to somehow shatter this industry into a million pieces and says, "what now, motherfuckers?" I will continue to be less and less enthusiastic about this console industry. Waggle until the cows come home. It won't change the fact that you're using suped-up Power Gloves to play your games. Fucking exciting.
Scuba Steve
Member
I encourage all the semi innovations to the consoles. It'll help differentiate consoles from the PC.
IrishNinja
Member
maaaan, you're looking at it way too hard. let's just use nintendo here.
-dual screens = gimmick: until i played hotel dusk and other visual novel games with it, and was all about it. even the majority of games that just put maps/logos and shit? it didnt interfere with my playing.
-motion controls = gimmick: when it's tacked on, sure. when i played mario galaxy, or even prime trilogy with a better control setup, it wasn't. also, plenty of games let me just turn it sideways or use classic controller pro (granted, i wish more did sometimes).
-3D = gimmick: okay, but Mario, Star Fox, and RE look nice with it on my 3DS, and if i dont want it? boom, i turn that shit off and get more battery life.
-tablet on mah controller = gimmick: honestly, ima give EAD/similar teams benefit of the doubt on this one.
rear view in mario kart, pan around the room looking for ghosts in certain areas of fatal frame etc, and hopefully more ideas because of innovation we don't possess. but if it's all just logos, maps and inventory screens? again, we play our games and go about our business.
tl;dr - did the VMU fuck you up in the dreamcast days? i bet when it beeped you ignored that chao and just kept playing. personally, im down for the industry to try for more stuff than just photorealism and sequels, and even if most companies don't seem to know what the fuck to do with these setups to separate them from gimmicks, as long as nintendo and a few good devs do, i'm cool.
Cygnus X-1
Member
Nintendo innovate. Microsoft and Sony follows. Nothing changed.
disappeared
Banned
because they're limited to casual games and a few smatterings of multi-media. In the next few years Apple or whomever will come out with the next-best-thing and Nintendo and Microsoft and Sony will be playing catch-up all over again. Consoles are in a dire state of identity crisis. They don't know if they want to be a game device or a toaster oven with a car-starter.
Other game machines, meaning iPads and the like? Sure, absolutely. I'm not discounting those products because they are successful at what they do. They aren't out to swindle anyone. We know they act as portable devices that serve as multi-media interfaces. But their core design is not based around video games. They never were and they likely never will be. Games like Uncharted 3 or Skyrim or Team Fortress 2 are completely different than Angry Birds or whatever else the touch-screen OS machines champion.
Why do newspapers still exist? Why is the bicycle still around? How come cars still run on four wheels? Because they're good at what they do, and they're functional. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you necessarily should. Gaming has had a rich and proud history with an arcade stick and buttons. Why the need to change it just because Apple got popular? I go back to what I said about consoles and their identity crisis. Do they really need adapt to whatever touch-based OS is the current top-seller? If that's the case then gaming will have given up its history in an effort to pander to the treat-du-jour.
disappeared
Banned
Nintendo just said, was it last year?, that their number one concern right now is Apple.
They aren't innovating anymore. They're treading water, trying to keep up with the new swim team.
Hellraizah
Member
I agree so much with you that I feel the pain you feel.
I've not seen ANY evidence that a second screen or touch screen can really enhance the experience that much. Ok, people will say "You don't know shit, haven't you played the DS?". Yes, I have. It was neat to have a permanent map in Castlevania, but I had as much fun with the games on GBA where I had to pause the game to see the map.
About the touch functions, well, let's just say about all the games I played on DS that had touch functions, I wished for normal controls instead.
In the demos that Nintendo showed of the WiiU, there was nothing that I saw and thought "Wow, I have to play a game that way." Even though hate motin controls too, at least I can see the possibilities of what it can bring to the table.
Oh wait, I forgot, you could choose your play in local multiplayer Madden, that is something useful in my opinion (for gameplay). Now, how many WiiU tablets can be connected to a console at one time?
disappeared
Banned
Agreed. However, I don't think that change needs to always come in the form of hardware. Like I said, true innovation doesn't come in the form of hardware. It's first and third-party developers, and their software. And it always will be. What good is the Wii U screen if all it's going to serve as is a map or an inventory screen?
Look at the guys who got Doom running on the old TI graph-calculator. That shit is phenomenal. Did they need cutting edge gimmick-hardware to do that? It's all about the developers and what they can do to push software and innovative ideas forward.
Duxxy3
Member
All i want from a controller is to not get in the damn way. Precise movement and a standard layout, that's about all that's required.
Arcade sticks, K&M and control pad - they are the standard because of their precision.
If the Wii U controller has all of the elements of a great controller pad plus a touch screen then i'm fine with it... as long as the price of the controller isn't ridiculous.
If microsoft wants to copy that design, that's fine. I only care when they start making imprecise input devices (kinect, move, wiimote, u force, powerglove etc) a requirement to play a game.
Arcade sticks, K&M and control pad - they are the standard because of their precision.
If the Wii U controller has all of the elements of a great controller pad plus a touch screen then i'm fine with it... as long as the price of the controller isn't ridiculous.
If microsoft wants to copy that design, that's fine. I only care when they start making imprecise input devices (kinect, move, wiimote, u force, powerglove etc) a requirement to play a game.
eso76
Member
unfortunately it worked, for MS especially.
people (casuals
) buy this stuff for the 'novelty' and devs get away with much cheaper-to-make games.disappeared
Banned
Excellent point. And it's another testament to how we're being sold something we don't even necessarily need. How much is the Wii U's or Xbox 720's touch screens going to alter precision in the way we control our games? Probably not a fuck of a lot. It's an excuse for hardware developers to say, "Hey, you need this now!" to play games. When in reality the regular ole' 360 gamepad or keyboard and mouse would serve just as fine.
Cygnus X-1
Member
Price of the controller.
Why bother with the 360 pad, it's just a step ahead of the N64 pad, why even bother with that we have a Snes pad or a Nes pad or an Atari joystick.
Your logic is flawed.
Shogmaster
Member
You believe wrong. Electro Magnetic Resonance screens. Much more expensive than resistive. Allows hovering, which is impossible on both resistive and capacitive.
IrishNinja
Member
i get what you're saying, but hardware does shape the scene. if WU offers motion control, tablet options, and more CCpro support (again, i hope so) i like that devs can go with a wider array of visions.
but again, we're talking about nintendo, a company who builds its hardware around their own personal software ideas...you played any fighting game on GC that wasn't Smash Bros, you gotta know this. same deal in my mind: they've prolly got some great ideas for said tablet, whereas the majority of the rest of 3rd party stuff/ports, yeah, id bet you're not far off the mark in expecting inventories and maps. and again, i'm alright with it since it shouldn't get in the way.
the real concern i personally have (hoping final revision @ E3 fixed) is digital shoulder buttons. fuck, those things need to be analog.
no more than 32.
And hardware limitations like only one screen-controller per system (EDIT: it appears there's support for two now with Wii-u, I'm out of touch with this stuff), and if not that something else will arise with technology as delicate as this.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
MS can't ruin the SNES controller.
disappeared
Banned
Remind me, how long has the keyboard been a success? Typewriters have existed since the 1800s. Their design has been changed only slightly over the last ~150 years.
If it ain't broke...
My argument is that touch-based systems and gimmick-control-screen pads should be allowed to exist mutually with what has already been established as a functional controller-based system.
We're so quick to adapt the next-big-thing because it's shiny and we're told it will make our games better.
Hellraizah
Member
Your logic is, too.
Nobody said the 360 controller was revolutionnary. It justs works well and there's nothing on it that you wish was different or that you simply wish wasn't there (ok, except the control pad, I wish it was different).
Now companies are focusing on gimmicks that is useless for no reason (because the optin is there, they feel they have to use it).
One good example of using something for no reason was the barrel roll in Donkey Kong for Wii. I didn't buy the game because a friend warned me about it. The game might be good, but why the hell do I have to shake the controller to do something thatcould be mapped to a button for precise use?
I agree. What's this analog stick bullshit Nintendo's trying to pull with the N64? Atari tried that over a decade ago with the 5200. It was shit then and didn't change anything. This will be shit too and nobody will care in 15 years.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Everything is a gimmick until it works.
Uh the typewriter's design fluctuated greatly during much of its life until the early-mid 1900's. Hell the Hansen Ball was used for like 30-40 years, and was considered extremely ergonomic 100 years ago. Gaming hasn't been around long enough to say we have reached the pinnacle of what a controller can be, particularly considering it lacks the functionality and input to make it useful in certain genres like real time strategy.
If Microsoft learned anything this generation, they´ll do exactly that. There is so much money to be made in the accessory trade - and it helps to keep the console base price down.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
I hope it won't be expensive.
If they will utilize a tablet controller, then it better be optional to save costs or else we might end up with a 499/599 dollar monster.
If they will utilize a tablet controller, then it better be optional to save costs or else we might end up with a 499/599 dollar monster.
NewOrder79
Banned
people need to stop fighting evolution you think video games will be played with a piece of plastic with buttons on it for the next 50 years? This kind of stuff is inevitable embrace the future or become a retro gamer.
It isn't just a touch screen; you can stream your games on that display. This is why stuff like FindMii can only be found on Nintendos next console.
Play while your wife watches TV; possibly play co-op games with friends where everybody has his own screen (this would be great for shooters since there are many scumbags who look at your half of the screen in versus matches) and so on.
Stop reducing the screen to its touch-function only! If there is some company that can get out the greatest things of the weirdest systems, it's Nintendo.
Phonomezer
Banned
Yeah, haven't seen screens on a controller before.
Sega: *laughs*
Sega man. Waaaaay ahead of their time.
Garrus Vakarian
Member
Here's hoping the Wired 360 controllers still work with it, if this is indeed true.
aeroslash
Member
It's awesome to see the people in this thread crying because of evolution.
Many of you have to remember that the best selling console this gen has had a motion controller and only much later, mcsft and sony made their approach with kinect and move. It's ok if you did not like it, but many more people did and sony and microsoft want this market segment too. Just face it, we are the minority.
Next gen, they won't be late for sure, and if the new selling point for the wii u is the touch screen in the controller, microsoft and sony will have something similar. End of story.
Many of you have to remember that the best selling console this gen has had a motion controller and only much later, mcsft and sony made their approach with kinect and move. It's ok if you did not like it, but many more people did and sony and microsoft want this market segment too. Just face it, we are the minority.
Next gen, they won't be late for sure, and if the new selling point for the wii u is the touch screen in the controller, microsoft and sony will have something similar. End of story.
jono51
Banned
Am I the only one who thinks this is a good idea? I have a PC for when I want to play with "standard" controls. Consoles offering a way to differentiate themselves from PC is good, at the moment my consoles get little play time because its all on PC and is better there. It opens up a lot more options for gameplay and game genres. PC-only genres could make an appearance on consoles too and now they'd finally have enough inputs. I just hope it doesn't result in PC editions of said games being dumbed down. That's pretty much my only fear over this.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
A game doing both might be trouble outside of some WarioWare goofiness. But it'd be a shame if one man's wish to dance prevented another man's wish for precise touch controls from happening.
No, many more people thought "that looks interesting and neat, I'll give that a try" then abandoned it in the closet when they realised it was actually pretty shit for playing games with.
There were no Madden games on the Dreamcast....
Maybe you're thinking of the NFL 2K series but those were good games.
aeroslash
Member
Yeah, keep telling that to yourself. If that had been the case, the wii would have existed only for 12 months.
I agree on co-existence but I'm not sure about the rest. Keyboards for example are not actually a good design, particularly the layout of the keys for English which was chosen to actually slow up typists as early typewriters couldn't keep up.
It's been known for a long time that there are far better ways to design a keyboard and layout the keys but the problem is resistance to change.
I'd say that in most cases the majority is actually very slow to adopt change, particularly if it's become ingrained in a large way - for example imagine the cost of changing all machines to make keyboards, PC design, touch typing courses, etc. to handle a truly better device? As a whole the general view it to shrug and stick to what's familiar and known.
Tablets are gimmicks now? They are the future of the home computer. It shouldn't be any surprise they'd start influencing consoles. Tech changes, touch isn't a flash in the pan it is the new standard. Phones have touch screens, the fastest growing segment of the PC market has touch screens, 3DS has touch screens, vita has touch screens, books thanks to e-readers have touch screens now, wii u has a touch screen. It's all dominating and not just because of Apple.
It's not like MS would suddenly remove all the buttons. At this point in time it is fair to expect most tech gadgets to have some kind of touch screen.
Q
qizah
Unconfirmed Member
You need both, otherwise consoles just feel like low end PCs and they don't start to be consoles anymore.