Only if you actually try and convince people.
11 pages and counting.
Only if you actually try and convince people.
No, it's not a "gimmicky controller" because it's the same dual analog pad that's everywhere else with the same sticks and buttons. It just has an (optional-to-use) touch screen in the middle.
No, it's not a "gimmicky controller" because it's the same dual analog pad that's everywhere else with the same sticks and buttons. It just has an (optional-to-use) touch screen in the middle.
err, optional to use how? I'm 100% sure nintendo mandates the shit out of it to developers. considering it's basically the lynchpin of their console.
With four times the memory, a more versatile CPU, discrete audio DSP/IO controller and a GPU 1.5 gens newer?Not really, if anything the latest spec leak from here says its going to be ps2, xbox, gamecube spec wise all over again
that's sort of my point, from earlier. These threads are like arguing over who has more pennies in their pocket when you know two of the three parties are actually hiding a roll of hundreds just out of sight. Soon, on a relative scale, it will just be a pocketful of change.
Just the clock speed according to 1 dev whose comments may or may not be mistranslated. He said he hadnt handled the new architectural aspects yet
Wasn't that quote taken out of context?
Yes, as it will impact how good and comparable those ports will be.
What if WI iu is the lead platform?
With four times the memory, a more versatile CPU, discrete audio DSP/IO controller and a GPU 1.5 gens newer?
More like Dreamcast to Xbox.
it's not just that dev who said it.
someone even went as far as saying that the WiiU CPU is weaker than the Vita CPU this was way before the Tekken Dev said anything.
Will developers care? At the moment, most seem to concentrate on 360/PS3. In one year, they'll probably concentrate on 720/PS4. In either case, the Wii U would only receive ports.
err, optional to use how? I'm 100% sure nintendo mandates the shit out of it to developers. considering it's basically the lynchpin of their console.
err, optional to use how? I'm 100% sure nintendo mandates the shit out of it to developers. considering it's basically the lynchpin of their console.
Nintendo doesnt mandate anything.
Look at the DS, some games had nothing touch or very minimal
dont generalize
I don't even like the Wii U but yikes you guys are a negative bunch. "Oh my god there's a screen in the middle, aaahhhhh!!!".
Katsuya Eguchi, the system's producer and head of EAD Group 2, has said they are not mandating its use, and in fact hopes developers would only use it if it makes sense.
Color me skeptical. That's not how these things work.
Haha hey guys look, I'm a Nintendo apologist because
I enjoy their games, in addition to PC gaming, and the occasional Sony venture.
I can call people on bull whenever I want man, doesn't make me any less of a person.
But what do I know, I'm a hardcore Ninty defender. Excuse me while I walk blindly into another "trap".
Nintendo doesnt mandate anything.
Look at the DS, some games had nothing touch or very minimal
err, optional to use how? I'm 100% sure nintendo mandates the shit out of it to developers. considering it's basically the lynchpin of their console.
they may, very likely will, change this philosophy after wii u flops, in a desperation move, but by then it wont matter.
And once again, I'll point out we have a busy thread over what Iwata says is increasingly irrelevant. Graphics and power.
If Sweeney is right and 5000 t-flops is needed to simulate reality, and he says until then advances in computer graphics will be fast and constant, it wont be irrelevant for decades
I have retold this story a hundred times, but I distinctly remember back in the SNES days, a VG&CE (old magazine) editor stating that TV's cannot handle graphics much better than the SNES. That was what, 1992? The old diminishing returns thing has been around a long time, and so far has a 100% fail rate imo.
Oh right, because it has dual analog it doesn't matter that there's a huge, unmissable touch screen right in the middle.
It's the touch screen that's gimmicky and I doubt that use of it is optional, what part of that is confusing?
They are 100% not mandating the use of touch controls on any similar "gimmickry"any more than they're mandaing the use of the various other tools in the controller (gyros, magnetometers, nfc, what have you). You can display a map or some other useless GUI element and nobody at Nintendo would blink, as evidenced by what they've actually said in public (as one example in the previous post pointed out).
And honestly, after some of the best games in decades have appeared on the DS, the competitor has a handheld that closely mirrors the setup of the gamepad, and the #1 mobile platform right now is a fully touch-based smartphone I don't see how one can consider the inclusion of a touch screen as "gimmicky".
Specialguy, how bout you wait until the console "flops hard" before beating that drum so consistently?
I doubt this. You give platform holders, all of them, way too much credit.
Unless some dev comes out and says Ninty doesn't mandate touchscreen use, I will believe that they do (based on common sense, and the fact there arent any games I know of that dont use it!).
I'm willing to bet it goes farther than that, not only do I bet they mandate it, but I bet they mandate a "novel", "creative" use of it (hard to define standards, of course) and hassle devs over it. I am sure you cannot just stick some mostly static screen down there and the like in an attempt to effectively ignore it.
I don't generalise, I am realistic when it comes to 3rd party support for Nintendo platforms. As if they cared about Wii, DS or 3DS.
...and some games required it. So much for the optional part.
Sure, you could optionally not play the next Zelda or Mario game but then again, you could optionally leave the WiiU on the shelf at Wal Mart.
Nope, you're a Nintendo apologist because you blindly defend them, no matter what, just because I don't post often doesn't mean I don't read the threads. Every nintendo related thread, you just defend them regardless of what the thread is about. And just because you love Nintendo games and systems, does not mean everyone should share your opinion. The Nintendo trap isn't bull, how many times has Nintendo promised better 3rd party support? How many times have they delivered?
Most of these threads boil down to one simple question for most, (why should I buy a nintendo system over the others?). I had every Nintendo console up until the gamecube, my kids have DS's, it's not like I hate Nintendo. You just come across and someone who thinks Nintendo is infallible. And refuse to acknowledge that other people can have different views on the company. I don't care how many copies mario were sold, I am only 1 person, once I finish that game what will I play next. Anyway this is getting way OT so I will leave it alone. Maybe I should have done what I usually do and just read the thread and laugh.
It isnt mandated. There are ds titles with just a picture on the bottom screen......thats it
special said:How about this, why is there no game that uses only the Pro-controller?
special said:That's DS.
I'd like to see such a game on Wii U.
That's DS.
I'd like to see such a game on Wii U.
Even then, wouldn't refreshing a still 30 times a second take some resources (Wii U)? Better yet, a game that turns it off or uses the pro controller. I'm sure all Wii U fans want at least a few games to do this anyway, since it will be the only way to max the system's graphics.
While the DS didn't have the texture filtering of the N64 it could handle many more polygons at a solid 60fps though lower resolution (256x192 vs 320x240) and with free AA.The DS was really not that powerful at all. It was displaying sub-N64 visuals in 2004...
I try not too beat it too consistently.
How about this, why is there no game that uses only the Pro-controller?
If I was Assassins Creed 3, that would seem to be a pretty smart thing to do. Or at least some game, try to stretch the Wii U's graphical muscle (which is probably more than PS3/360), and to best do that set aside the 2nd screen. Then you could lay claim to the best console version and whatnot, would probably help your sales.
I would like to see what that alleged 1.5GB RAM (after subtracting OS) can do.
You're right, I will go away, but you still can't answer the question.This is priceless.
Honestly, just go away. What have you contributed to the "discussion" besides attacking me?
There could be though. Hell, there were Wii games that could only use a CC/CCPro.How about this, why is there no game that uses only the Pro-controller?
It's now 2GB evidently, with 512MB reserved for OS/functions.I would like to see what that alleged 1.5GB RAM (after subtracting OS) can do.
They don't want it to be embarrassed by how weak it is!
i wouldnt go that far
anonymous cowards no doubt
dont generalize
You're right, I will go away, but you still can't answer the question.
How many times has Nintendo promised better 3rd party support? How many times have they delivered?
WTH would a launch title use only the pro controller when there are a small unknown quantity of those sold?
It would limit the amount of potential customers they can sell the game to.
It's now 2GB evidently, with 512MB reserved for OS/functions.
Iwata alluded to a weaker CPU as well. What weaker means(weaker than PS3/360 or weaker than cutting edge CPUs), who knows, but its not the first time I have heard about CPU concerns with the WiiU.
You're right, I will go away, but you still can't answer the question.
How many times has Nintendo promised better 3rd party support? How many times have they delivered?
Third Party support is one of Nintendo's weaknesses. Why anybody invests in their recent consoles expecting a drastic difference is beyond me.
A lot of companies make promises they sometimes don't honor. Nintendo is of em.
The whole "trap" angle is just baseless drivel, yo.
Well yeah, I don't think there ever were any reasonable people doubting that it's more powerful than those 7 year old systems overall.
The recent doubts are about the CPU only, which this doesn't address.
So by that logic the pro controller is completely pointless and should not exist.
That's why I said 1.5GB after OS functions.
I'm a little skeptical of that large a number, my guess is more like 1.5GB with .5 taken by OS, or perhaps even less than 1.5GB. But I understand it's the prevailing thought so I reference it.
Only nintendo ones most of the time, but even then especially in the mario's touch screen stuff was minimal
err, optional to use how? I'm 100% sure nintendo mandates the shit out of it to developers. considering it's basically the lynchpin of their console.
The wii had improved 3rd party support from n64 to gamecube to wii, so I dont see why it would continue to improve.
The ds had the best third party support of the entire gen.
So nintendo is trying
Yea they are, but people expecting HD Twin levels of TP support need a reality check for the time being.
Yea they are, but people expecting HD Twin levels of TP support need a reality check for the time being.
Zelda Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks used only stylus controls.
Yea they are, but people expecting HD Twin levels of TP support need a reality check for the time being.