Metroid Hunter
Banned
Sorry I was busy with exams until this week, so I've been kind of busy. I'll update the software post tonight.
-
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.
Wii U Community Thread
- Thread starter Metroid Hunter
- Start date
- Status
Sorry I was busy with exams until this week, so I've been kind of busy. I'll update the software post tonight.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
I think the concept in practice flies in the face of those of us who like extremely tight, consistent and technical controls. As well as options in combat situations and player driven gameplay choices, so much of the gameplay (especially the combat) was so carrot and stick it ruined that aspect. TP had a better balance and toolset when it came to combat imo.
And not to mention how the entire game design of SS shattered any hope of mystery and exploration for the game. But that's another story, I guess.
Hero of Legend
Member
lostinblue
Banned
Well, technically Wiimote with motion plus is a upgraded controller, I believe it get's lost less often than the add-on does?
But yeah, I hoped for the same, the limit for wiimote pointer accuracy is 1024x768 after all, not really HD and the motion plus implementation was clearly added on top, since the camera is stuck inside a window inside the controller of course it does get lost if it's facing elsewhere by more than 30º or so for a prolonged time; they should could improve on it (and still make controllers that are compliant with the wii).
Really hard to explain what I have in mind actually, but they could do a sensor bar with camera and wiimote with camera and yet emitting IR LED as a fail safe method; if the controller get's lost the sensor bar would still know where the hell it was (would probably only work on games designed from the ground with it in mind) but it would be like combining PSMove with wiimote sans "lightining ball".
What does that even mean? And I explored a lot in SS. Is this the new "there is nothing to do in Tp's overworld because I didn't bother looking".
Yeah that sounds about right, honestly. Capcom is the real wild card IMO.
lostinblue
Banned
TP had the most fleshed out sidesteping system and combo-wise, stuff like being able to roll around enemies really makes SS seem stiff at first; oh, and running and using the sword at the same time.
The level design was fine, I mean it was metroid prime'y and that kind of level design didn't ruin the mystery and exploration for that.
It's the over-relying on assisted features that did, (was it called douse? you doused everything!) and the missed oportunities in level design, but the concept and way it was build was fine, just the streamlining that was a little on the overdone side.
I'd say it had more to do in a consistent way than, say, TP overworld did. Specially seeing they introduced overlying quests to the game that weren't last minute.
What's missing is really the whole "I blew up a rock or played a tune and here is a cave?", stuff like that. Feels somewhat empty like that, but TP already did to an extent, it was the overworld that prevented you from feeling it with terrain and exploration differences (I recall I could go to Hyrule castle taking more than one path? That's really important as a means to make you feel like you had a choice/freedom, but there wasn't enough incentive in really exploring because they left the filling the world part to the end (I recall the delay a year prior to launch that showed beta hyrule town looking very, very beta; when it's the npc's that dictate the sidequests). Of course the lack of overworld (and it's substitute) didn't really help on SS, but it was actually a step up when it comes to tight knitting a game world if only they added more stuff to discover that weren't already implied on first glance/impossible to miss (I recall some, but still; nothing compared to older 3D Zelda's).
TheExplodingHead
Banned
I guess I just felt there was no incentive beyond it being there, it wasn't a world I really had any want to explore, nor were the "rewards" very satisfying. Just me, but I didn't find the game as a whole very satisfying to go and explore and what I did discover didn't exactly wet my britches. Options in gameplay choices (i.e. how you want to approach a given directive and reward for doing so creatively and discovering more things), and options in combat that are fun and creative really require no explanation.
Fact is, I'm jaded on the OoT formula, I get nothing out of it anymore and I find it highly derivative and uninspired. In terms of how the mechanics and overall design arch goes, I've played it before, a lot. So that's just my subjective take.
That's mainly what I was referring to. But I'd say that the point-to-point design was a bit too obvious and lacked any semblance of requiring players to really explore and figure things out on their own. Over the last probably 10 years or so I'd say Nintendo's greatest downfall has been their insistence on being accessible and convenient rather than presenting the player with a game design and saying "here, now you figure it out". If we could do that as kids (when there was no internet or youtube), no reason why Nintendo has to continue down the watered down design path.
Apophis2036
Banned
Must have been someone else, it was to do with the power difference next gen being much smaller and someone said 'Wii was 20 times less powerful than PS360 but it still got CoD, PS4 / 720 will be 3/4 times the power of Wii U at max, so it's a much smaller gap.
Whoever said it made me feel better
.I literally dont understand why people say theres no exploration in SS. Did you ignore the whole find cube/go to cube in sky/explore sky islands thing? Did you ignore the whole crystal sidequests thing?
just as much if not more exploration as MM or WW. All they did was cut out the boring empty fat 99% of people found tedious in TP
just as much if not more exploration as MM or WW. All they did was cut out the boring empty fat 99% of people found tedious in TP
Must have been someone else, it was to do with the power difference next gen being much smaller and someone said 'Wii was 20 times less powerful than PS360 but it still got CoD, PS4 / 720 will be 3/4 times the power of Wii U at max, so it's a much smaller gap.
Whoever said it made me feel better
Just one small thing to keep in mind. Graphics are not the only reason why 3rd parties abandoned nintendo. Afterall the GC was a fully capable machine but was still largely ignored by third parties. Nintendo has to convince them that their efforts will no go in vein, that they won't have the extra hurdle of competing with first party titles all the time in Wii U's market. If Nintendo can manage this while also enjoying strong sales you can bet third parties will show support.
The reason why I'm saying this is because you need to be realistic, what I said may seem simple but it is a very tough challenge for Nintendo to overcome. Just don't be disappointed if the support is less than adequate, graphics are not the end all be all.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Yeah, but how fun and or engaging was that? Was that any less tedious than TP's overworld? Did you feel awesome for finding X cube and opening X chest in sky, or do you wish there was more substantial and engaging types of exploration and rewards? That was my takeaway.
Adventure-type exploration and quasi-collect-ta-thons are two very different things.
DeviousAngel
Member
I partially agree. SS did a lot of things right and world density is one of them. The sky, however, kinda ruined the mood. Had I been able to travel seamlessly between the three main areas on foot, the game would have felt less segmented and more conducive to sidetracking and exploration (a lot like TLoZ, LttP or LA).
For what it's worth, I think the tech on the WiiU will allow Nintendo to go bigger and denser when it comes to Zelda.
bgassassin
Member
We need to find that hardcore logo someone made a year ago.
Sister?
I see the flop/flipper/jigawatt discussions and begin to doze-off. Not good for when I'm trying to stay awake at work.
Well, that, and I've rekindled something of a love affair with Super Mario Galaxy as of late.
When we get more on games (silly me, eh, bg?) or those third parties and their interesting judgement, I'll have more to say, haha..
Well apparently others besides you and Aostia want to discuss these game thingies so hopefully you'll get to start back posting. Also it seems I lead the slow versions of WUSTs.
Oh it's not that it would be based on that GPU, just that Wii U's GPU design would be similar. And with the GPU being embedded I though it was interesting that you suggested an OS that's being used for a GPU we've looked at as a possible "twin". Although with that GPU they could have the memory in clamshell mode and could then have 2GB of GDDR5 using the same 128-bit bus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiahMrRM39g
John Carmack >>>>>>>>>> x 198790786876 Stevie doesn't understand technology P
Lol really john carmack doesn't have a clue, right? Haha too funny.
nordique
Member
lostinblue
Banned
That is pretty funny. People hating on carmack...
Wiimotes don't require you to stand up.
If you're unhappy with the state of software discussion in this thread, you certain can.
Now, I'm certainly not telling people to do this, but if you want to make a new Community thread, it would be my personal suggestion that you talk for a bit in this thread and decide on what you want the rules to be in the Wii U Software Discussion thread.
I would suggest one of the following three options:
1.) Only announced games.
2.) Only announced and potential games, but not specifically deconfirmed games.
3.) Any announced or potential Wii U game at all, even if it is deconfirmed.
I would think that option 2 is the best, since I feel discussing the next Zelda or a Wii U version of Watch Dogs would be a lot more fun than discussing only what is announced, and also feel that discussing those would be a lot more fun than debating if Crystal Dynamics is dumb or not.
However, if you want to pick another option instead or make an entirely different rule altogether, or even no rules at all, by all means feel free.
You can also feel free to make any other (reasonable) rules that you want. For example, whether or not you want to debate if (insert third party) is supporting the platform, and if so, how much they are. You can also continue discussing software in this thread after the new one is made, since inherently hardware is most important in terms of what it does for software.
You also don't need to make a new thread at all if you would prefer to just keep all the discussion in this thread, but I just wanted people to know that they had the option available if they feel the amount of hardware discussion in here was making it hard to discuss games.
Since these are community etiquette rules, you won't get banned for breaking them, but you may feel free to PM a mod to have any hardware based derails deleted or moved back into this thread, depending on which you feel is more appropriate. PMing either EatChildren or myself would likely be the most prudent choice, since I can't guarantee other mods will actually come by and delete or move the posts.
Since I might not be back here anytime soon, feel free to go ahead and just make the thread in Community if you feel it is appropriate, and if it gets locked by someone else while I'm gone, simply PM me and I will go talk to them and tell them why I approved it, at which point it will presumably be unlocked.
bgassassin
Member
Option 4. We kick USC out of the thread.
Lol
Sounds good. It'd be nice to have separate threads as opposed to a mish mash.
bgassassin
Member
Or make it non-hardware. Online, gameplay ideas, etc. should be included if the idea goes forward.
lostinblue
Banned
Him AND Carmack.Option 4. We kick USC out of the thread.
Hardware is fun if there's new data/good points being thrown around, and we're always prone to find or uncover more data regarding it the closer to launch we get.
Going in circles is not fun though.
bgassassin
Member
Haha. Sounds like all the other threads though.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Crazy idea here:
What if you could place 4 different wiimotes around in your room, and use them as surround speakers while you're playing on the tablet?
What if you could place 4 different wiimotes around in your room, and use them as surround speakers while you're playing on the tablet?
I don't think its going to work. Simply put, people are here to discuss the WiiU in general and the community chose to focus on the specs for now. This is not exclusive to this thread, but literally every single Wii U thread since E3 (maybe even before that).
I'll be more than happy if such a threads stays active for long, but really the majority of the people are concerned with the power for now, I have a feeling that the other hypothetical thread will either die quickly or become exactly like this one.
Wiimote speakers are too shitty for that
Nah it all my fault.
But the funny thing is the Nintendo doesn't focused on specs and I think the specs really don't matter. It really only matters to the hard core gamers but people on here act likes its doom if I can't run ps470 games.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Aww.
I thought it could add to the suspense in a horror game, especially if you have them randomly vibrate as well.
There's so much you could do with a set of wiimotes and a tablet that would enhance the immersion.
bgassassin
Member
This is my actual view. Things have always gone in cycles with these threads. It would be nice to see the title changed back.
Yeah it struck me as weird that the title changed, given the variety of discussions that go on here.
I do like the thought of a thread for hardware vs other things though. So much easier to follow.
I think Nintendo can afford to make a very accurate Wiimote AND nunchuck (Do not underestimate the power of dual motion controls) if they are actually thinking about putting a freaking screen on the controller. If they both can be very responsive to speed and precision then it would be heaven.
I don't know, for me the Wiimote is still not fleshed out it seems. I always compared it not to the current generation controllers, but to the NES one. It completely restructured how a controller should look and behave like so it was obvious they were going to run into issues. Then the WM+ came and it started be more N64 controller, advanced, but still upgradable.
Motion controls still haven't been put to their true potential yet, even after all these years. It's like they are still using it for 2D control in 3D space more than anything. And a lot of developers are still hung up on the Wiimote imitating objects when that shouldn't be the only option.
I just have so many ideas and so far only a select few have seen fruition. That's why I really wanted a next gen Wiimote (and your idea is very close to what I had in mind) and that's why I still hold am not really that thrilled about the Upad (Even though it can bring up really creative and substantial ideas.. Its not to the extent of what they already have).
metalslimer
Member
Really? What percent of the population even gives a shit? On the other hand, the lack of an ethernet port is a huge omission forcing people to buy an adapter.
lordfroakie
Member
metalslimer
Member
Well first off I meant what percent of the population plays games with surround sound that needs and optical port to begin with? Probably a very small portion. It sucks, but it's not a huge mistake. On the other hand, there are many people on college campuses with shitty wifi connections that don't allow for online gaming without constant interruption and many others without wireless internet at all.
From what we've seen on the unit there is NO optical port and so I imagine that if you want true surround you'll need HDMI. The might support component/AV out and therefore Dolby Pro Logic II which is something at least.
This really fucking sucks arse for me because my receiver is not HDMI. No way am I throwing down another bunch of cash to upgrade that.
EDIT:
Ahh OK, gotchya. Still sucks for me.
You know what I mean, casual gaming, like a classic controller.
Fourth Storm
Member
I'd rather not split the community. I know I'm one of the guys that usually chimes in on hardware speculation, but I have a feeling that topic will have run its course very soon. The realistic range of performance is getting narrower and narrower as time goes by. At the same time, there's not much new info concerning games either. Hopefully, this changes come August/September, and when it does, I expect the conversation will naturally shift to that area.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Isn't it a bit ironic how in both their game design trends and most software trends Nintendo attempts to appeal to the everyman and mass consumer. Yet, they exclude the ethernet port (and optical out) that requires a sizable portion of "mass consumers" to pony up more cash to enjoy... I'm mainly a wireless gamer, but the lack of a ethernet port is just dumb.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Optical is a very common solution for surround sound, both home theatre and headphone/stereo mixamps. It its a high quality solution they predates HDMI compatible mixers. Anybody who does not use a HDMI mixer for both the image and audio signal will thus be unable to use surround sound.
Fourth Storm
Member
It's penny pinching, which is vintage Nintendo. I really don't think it's as important as you think, though. Maybe to hardcore gamers, who are concerned about absolute optimal performance. I think the mass market is moving more towards laptops, tablets, etc anyway. I don't know about other cable companies, but I've got FIOS and they provide me w/ a wireless router. If not, the dongle is what, 20 bones?
Optical out I would've hoped they'd do like MS and had it on the actual wire. Is that possible, or is that audio output strictly analog on the normal AV port?
Yeah for ethernet there's not much point, the majority probably doesn't care enough to run wires around when they can do it (and are already doing it) wirelessly.
For optical it can be done on output with HDMI audio splitter thingys. One issue (that was brought up before last time) might be the apparent lack of Dolby Digital, can't say I know enough about audio to say much on it though. Like receivers might only accept DD over optical or something, in which case there would need to be DD encoding on the splitter, which presumably would add to the costs.
- Status