Basileus777
Member
It was nice on the DS, the 3DS killed off a lot of its use with 3D only being on the top screen and hence reducing the bottom screen to just being UI elements. The WiiU never did much with it outside of Mario Maker.
-
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.
Now second screen gaming is dead, can we agree it was a bad idea in the first place?
- Thread starter oni-link
- Start date
Zen_Arcade
Banned
It works well for portables but was pretty poor on the Wii U because of how far away the screens were from each other.
BrightLightLava
Unconfirmed Member
A bunch of people in here never played Nintendoland, it seems.
Multiplayer games where the person with the gamepad is doing different stuff than the people with the controllers were awesome. I wanted more to be done with it but nothing really did.
It is why I'm excited for Playlink, though. Hidden Agenda is one of the games that I'm most excited about coming out of E3.
Multiplayer games where the person with the gamepad is doing different stuff than the people with the controllers were awesome. I wanted more to be done with it but nothing really did.
It is why I'm excited for Playlink, though. Hidden Agenda is one of the games that I'm most excited about coming out of E3.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
OP, on some level, you must have known this was gonna be a thread-backfire.
Yeah Nintendoland nailed it.
Yeah Nintendoland nailed it.
Jon of the Wired
Member
I loved The World Ends With You, but the dual screen battle mechanics were by far the weakest part of that game. I could only get through it because the game was easy enough that it didn't really force you to engage with them much.
First of all, second screen gaming ain't dead. 3DS is alive and well and Nintendo still plans to support it.
Regardless, no it wasn't a terrible bad idea. You only mention the Wii U in the OP, which for the most part was a bad idea, although it had it's perks. It did work well for stuff like inventory management in Twilight Princess HD and Wind Waker HD, but a lot of the other stuff it was used for (other than off-TV play) felt pretty unnecessary. It had it's occasional minor conveniences, but they were still things that could be displayed on the main screen just fine. Example would be Tokyo Mirage Sessions, how during battle you could enemy stats without cluttering the main screen, but again that wouldn't add that much clutter to the main screen.
As for the DS and 3DS, it was a great idea there. Both of those systems brought us so many great games that utilized dual screens well. One of the best (avatar quote), was The World Ends With You. Also 999: 9 Hours 9 Persons 9 Doors is a great example.
Regardless, no it wasn't a terrible bad idea. You only mention the Wii U in the OP, which for the most part was a bad idea, although it had it's perks. It did work well for stuff like inventory management in Twilight Princess HD and Wind Waker HD, but a lot of the other stuff it was used for (other than off-TV play) felt pretty unnecessary. It had it's occasional minor conveniences, but they were still things that could be displayed on the main screen just fine. Example would be Tokyo Mirage Sessions, how during battle you could enemy stats without cluttering the main screen, but again that wouldn't add that much clutter to the main screen.
As for the DS and 3DS, it was a great idea there. Both of those systems brought us so many great games that utilized dual screens well. One of the best (avatar quote), was The World Ends With You. Also 999: 9 Hours 9 Persons 9 Doors is a great example.
It is, although wasn't it one of the games affected by the iOS update.
However that version is with a very gimped battle system. I don't really recommend it.
SomedayTheFire
Member
Agreed. Terrible idea. 3/DS had great games in spite of the dual screens, not because of them.
more asymmetrical games were what the Wii U needed. Only really saw those at launch.
Imagine Dead By Daylight with the survivors playing on splitscreen while the killer has their own view on the Wii U Pad. Shit like that would have made for some great local multiplayer experiences.
Imagine Dead By Daylight with the survivors playing on splitscreen while the killer has their own view on the Wii U Pad. Shit like that would have made for some great local multiplayer experiences.
I didn't think it worked well on WiiU, but loved it when the screens are next to each other on DS/3DS.
Hotel Dusk/Last Window in book mode was cool.
Etrian Odyssey was probably my favourite new IP last gen.
It put a lot of the supporting info in Fire Emblem (and loads of other RPGs) immediately accessible without crowding the HUD.
All in all I think the dual screen clamshell concept on portables has been fantastic, but if WiiU was a necessary step to reach the Switch, it failed to prove that off-tv play on a screen you need to look down at provided much. It was nice to play console games in bed, but I basically treated it as a portable tethered to the base unit rather than ever really playing with both screens at once.
Hotel Dusk/Last Window in book mode was cool.
Etrian Odyssey was probably my favourite new IP last gen.
It put a lot of the supporting info in Fire Emblem (and loads of other RPGs) immediately accessible without crowding the HUD.
All in all I think the dual screen clamshell concept on portables has been fantastic, but if WiiU was a necessary step to reach the Switch, it failed to prove that off-tv play on a screen you need to look down at provided much. It was nice to play console games in bed, but I basically treated it as a portable tethered to the base unit rather than ever really playing with both screens at once.
The thread premise is "can we agree" and it seems that we can't
But you must have never seen a thread backfire before you if think this is one, there are lots of people on both sides, and most of the people who say they disagree with the premise are not giving many good examples of what gameplay innovations the concept offers
Though I accept people can still like it if only for the smoother experience it offers in terms of map screen etc
D
Deleted member 752119
Unconfirmed Member
I was never a big fan. Sure it was handy for inventory, maps etc., but not worth the tradeoff of having garbage tier low res screens to keep the price affordable. Much prefer the Switch (and the Vita before it) with having one nice screen. Graphic/image quality is more important to me than the few second screen conveniences I liked, or paying way more to have two high quality screens (or even one with a shitty second screen).
There weren't any gameplay innovations I liked, but I hate touch screen shit so none of it was for me. I guess the 2nd screen stuff on Wii U had some options some liked for local MP, but I never do local MP so moot for me. Hated it for stuff like Star Fox Zero.
There weren't any gameplay innovations I liked, but I hate touch screen shit so none of it was for me. I guess the 2nd screen stuff on Wii U had some options some liked for local MP, but I never do local MP so moot for me. Hated it for stuff like Star Fox Zero.
1st Course
Member
Yes. Waste of space and lead to inferior screens.
Glad that the Switch is back to the superior single screen form.
Glad that the Switch is back to the superior single screen form.
redmetal86
Member
Not dead until the last 3DS/2DS rolls off the line.
Ahh Wii U focused. Hmmm. Scratch that. It had it's moments, could have been better.
Shame there was never a port of Baby Pacman for the Wii U, because it would have done the maze/pinball combo perfectly.
Ahh Wii U focused. Hmmm. Scratch that. It had it's moments, could have been better.
Shame there was never a port of Baby Pacman for the Wii U, because it would have done the maze/pinball combo perfectly.
Giolon
Member
I have to disagree with the OP on Splatoon 2 working fine without the 2nd screen map. I hate it. I no longer have a good sense of the state of the game or location of my team available at a glance. Now in order to get that info I have to essentially pause...in a multiplayer online game and lose control and awareness of my character in order to glean that information.
It's inferior to how it was on the original. They should give an option for a minimal or something at least.
It's inferior to how it was on the original. They should give an option for a minimal or something at least.
chrisPjelly
Member
It was great for cleaning up the UI on many 3/ds games, especially RPGs. Buuuut, you could also argue that just compensated for the puny screen size, which no one should have a problem with nowadays with TVs and even the Switch screen. Still, I'll miss the unique opportunities it provided, like book mode and using the touch screen without obscuring the screen itself, but I can live without it.
Paltheos
Member
What? No. 2 screen gaming is great, especially for portables. The small screen sizes mean you can't clutter up a primary screen with additional info (maps, menus, etc.) without hurting the experience. And I mean, you could pause to stop the whole experience, but the convenience of a second screen, especially for those maps, streamlines the whole experience.
SkylineRKR
Member
It was a bad idea. I am focused on the actual gameplay. I don't have issues with bringing up a menu on the same screen.
I agree with the OP, it was not as big of a deal as having a touch screen. That's what was really innovative on the DS. All you need to know about the lasting legacy of the second screen is how poorly it was used on the 3DS and the Wii U. Nintendo themselves couldn't come up with interesting ideas to use the second screen for and that's what they're known for.
It wasn't a terrible idea but it just wasn't good enough to really change the game going forward. Plus it was a huge contributing factor to why the Wii U bombed.
It wasn't a terrible idea but it just wasn't good enough to really change the game going forward. Plus it was a huge contributing factor to why the Wii U bombed.
RPG_Fanatic
Member
What, no. The DS and 3DS created some amazing experiences only possible with two screens. Even just having the map on the second screen was a game changer.
QuixoticNeutral
Member
The important thing is that the dual-screen era won't be passing us by without a Metroid to call its own.
If anything, the Splatoon 2 Testfire showed me how dropping the second screen could be a strict downgrade for certain games. I love the Switch conceptually, top to bottom, but if market circumstances were different and the Wii U were somehow implausibly a success, I would have been happy to ride out the Wii U for another few years. It's just that the concept was unfinished in so many ways, most notably in the GamePad's lack of full portability for single-screen off-TV, and the paradigm shift in mass consumer computing towards capacitive multi-touch made precision stylus play look passé to the point that the Wii U accommodated or even encouraged blocky finger input in many of its games.
The DS family was a better execution of the concept in most respects, though, with the bottom screen serving as a versatile extension of the UI. I just know I'll miss it in the next Fire Emblem.
As with playing Four Swords Adventures with four GBAs and a GameCube, what is excellent for game design is not necessarily what is good, convenient, or desirable for consumers. That is very much how I continue to perceive the Wii U. It had a lot of virtues that won't be replicated anytime soon and a ton of design potential that didn't get properly explored because the system foundered too quickly for that to happen.
If anything, the Splatoon 2 Testfire showed me how dropping the second screen could be a strict downgrade for certain games. I love the Switch conceptually, top to bottom, but if market circumstances were different and the Wii U were somehow implausibly a success, I would have been happy to ride out the Wii U for another few years. It's just that the concept was unfinished in so many ways, most notably in the GamePad's lack of full portability for single-screen off-TV, and the paradigm shift in mass consumer computing towards capacitive multi-touch made precision stylus play look passé to the point that the Wii U accommodated or even encouraged blocky finger input in many of its games.
The DS family was a better execution of the concept in most respects, though, with the bottom screen serving as a versatile extension of the UI. I just know I'll miss it in the next Fire Emblem.
As with playing Four Swords Adventures with four GBAs and a GameCube, what is excellent for game design is not necessarily what is good, convenient, or desirable for consumers. That is very much how I continue to perceive the Wii U. It had a lot of virtues that won't be replicated anytime soon and a ton of design potential that didn't get properly explored because the system foundered too quickly for that to happen.
Version 3.0
Member
It wasn't the worst idea for portables, though there's really nothing you can do with 2 screens that you can't also do with just one larger screen (a la 2DS).
But it was the worst idea on the Wii U. On a portable, those 2 little screens are both in your field of view. On a console, that's not true, and looking back and forth is stupid. How Nintendo didn't realize this the first time they programmed one of the screens to say "Look at the other screen now" is beyond me.
But it was the worst idea on the Wii U. On a portable, those 2 little screens are both in your field of view. On a console, that's not true, and looking back and forth is stupid. How Nintendo didn't realize this the first time they programmed one of the screens to say "Look at the other screen now" is beyond me.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
Liked the idea on DS and 3DS, and think it works really great with the clamshell design - which is also good for a rugged portable device.
Wii U had many issues, but I feel one of the big ones wasn't so much the basic concept, as clunky execution. The gamepad casing was too big and heavy, the screen too small and low resolution. There are still Wii U games I play like Nintendoland and Zombi U that wouldn't be the same on any other piece of hardware.
It's one of those situations where a concept may not be that great for a generic, general purpose device; yet is not simply bad in and of itself.
Wii U had many issues, but I feel one of the big ones wasn't so much the basic concept, as clunky execution. The gamepad casing was too big and heavy, the screen too small and low resolution. There are still Wii U games I play like Nintendoland and Zombi U that wouldn't be the same on any other piece of hardware.
It's one of those situations where a concept may not be that great for a generic, general purpose device; yet is not simply bad in and of itself.
CamHostage
Member
Every game controller should have had a map and an offscreen means of making choices in a multiplayer game.
The Dreamcast should have opened eyes, even with its rudimentary technology, to what could be done with a screen device built into the game pad. And the Wii U should have been proof positive that games are better without pause menu inventory screens. Only Nintendo DS really capitalized on the potential there, and even that massively successful platform has been largely slighted for the convenience and versatility it brought to gaming, and that's a shame. We have the technology, but because we've underutilized it, we've dismissed it as a "bad idea."
Every time we griped, "The second screen is just a map," we marginalized the enormous value that having a map in our hands gave us.
The Dreamcast should have opened eyes, even with its rudimentary technology, to what could be done with a screen device built into the game pad. And the Wii U should have been proof positive that games are better without pause menu inventory screens. Only Nintendo DS really capitalized on the potential there, and even that massively successful platform has been largely slighted for the convenience and versatility it brought to gaming, and that's a shame. We have the technology, but because we've underutilized it, we've dismissed it as a "bad idea."
Every time we griped, "The second screen is just a map," we marginalized the enormous value that having a map in our hands gave us.
family_guy
Member
But you need a second screen for your Switch voice chat.
SapphiCine
Member
Nothing inherently wrong with it. Nintendo's implementation was flawed. Didn't stop some developers from working well within the limitations.
FantasticMrFoxdie
Mumber
"I've got good news for you Switch owners who miss your second screen...Pull out your phones*..."
Dinky Dino
Member
I personally hated it. You can have 1 quality screen or 2 sub par screens where 1 isn't even utilized properly most of the time or outright ignored.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
Second screen gaming is hot garbage. Huge drain on battery resources for stupid crap that can be better displayed through UI tweaks. Just allocate a button, or place on a touch screen for quick reference to UI or map functions.
Any time you're looking at another screen, you're not focused on the primary, which is wasted design.
In the case of the 3ds, the second screen wasn't 3d.
Games like Zombi U while not as intuitive, are still totally playable with the world not pausing while looking through your bag.
In my opinion, two screen gaming is a huge mess, I'm so glad it's gone.
Any time you're looking at another screen, you're not focused on the primary, which is wasted design.
In the case of the 3ds, the second screen wasn't 3d.
Games like Zombi U while not as intuitive, are still totally playable with the world not pausing while looking through your bag.
In my opinion, two screen gaming is a huge mess, I'm so glad it's gone.
There are quite a few games I can think of in my library, ranging from lower key/cult classics stuff like the TWEWY, EO, EBA and Knights in the Nightmare, to bigger hits like Pokemon/Splatoon/Mario Maker, in which the game lacking dual screen will be an objective downgrade and inferior to the dual screen version.
So I very much disagree with the OP. Even if quite a few games.ports will adapt without it (Pokemon at least should be just fine), that doesn't stop the superior versions from retaining their status.
So I very much disagree with the OP. Even if quite a few games.ports will adapt without it (Pokemon at least should be just fine), that doesn't stop the superior versions from retaining their status.
Spiritwalker
Member
It was cool on the DS but 3DS games didn't really utilize it properly.