Support NeoGAF

[Refreshment.01]

What has? I was speculating, which is what you go on to do later on in your own reply, coming to the same conclusion (second bolded part)

It has been pointed out to you that Nintendo was considering a screen on a controller for decades even before Tablets were main stream. That a fragment of my reply has an speculative part, doesn't have any bearing on what the company factually wanted for years.

Doesn't matter that they were thinking about it for decades, a bad and poorly thought out idea in 1996 is still a bad and poorly thought out idea in 2016

That's not how it works, you are ignoring technology progression and the impact it would have on a given idea. The same idea in the future could be a lot better that it once was in the past. It's basically waht happened to VR and it's cuarrent renaissance.

Parting from your comment, the functionality of a screen in a controller in 1996 would be rather limited because of size, resolution and the state of touch technology. The Wii U came to be because it was a point in which the screen size and price was in a range good enough for them to extract a variety of uses.

However, even if we narrow our minds and qualify the idea as just "bad", as time goes on, the screen in a controller makes more sense because of reduction costs and advancements in haptic technolgies. There are touch screens right now that simulate diferent surfaces and resistances with micro vibrations. Or ones that detect different preasure intensities. In the future maybe we would have a screen capable to emulate the physical feeling of a button press.

Now, one could talk about the actual Wii U implementation of the idea. And i think there's room for improvement there, i ' ve pointed this out myself for years like i already told you many many times.

 

[Sniffynose]

I have been using the Pro Controller for every game that allows it. This means all the games I own, except for Splatoon and Wind Waker.

I always thought that it was a hassle to use the Gamepad.

However, adventure/RPG games are the few instances where I think it could be very useful. Think of it as a book/codex of the world where you can check information.

Yup same, for a map or inventory it's great but otherwise I use the pro for everything, my wrists will thank me lol

 

[Ranmo]

Putting the map on the gamepad is one of the main reasons I never finished WW on Wii U. Never thought something so seemingly small can frustrate me so much.

If you ever get a pro controller give it another go! Game functions like a normal game if you use a pro controller.

 

[Antivoid]

No second screen for NX confirmed. Fingers crossed it'll still have a gyro....

NX comes with a sat nav - confirmed.

 

[Spladam]

Gives me more of a reason to just play it with my Pro controller.

I'm so glad Breath of the Wild will work with a pro controller. Finally back to a Zelda with controller gimmicks, thank God.

Yep works 100% with the Pro Controller

May be the best selling point of the game, man I'm glad they decided to go the traditional route, and shiiiiit I'm excited to get my hands on Breath of the Wild!!

Where is your god now, Nintendo apologists?

Hahahahaha

 

[oni-link]

That's not how it works, you are ignoring technology progression and the impact it would have on a given idea. The same idea in the future could be a lot better that it once was in the past. It's basically waht happened to VR and it's cuarrent renaissance.

Parting from your comment, the functionality of a screen in a controller in 1996 would be rather limited because of size, resolution and the state of touch technology. The Wii U came to be because it was a point in which the screen size and price was in a range good enough for them to extract a variety of uses.

However, even if we narrow our minds and qualify the idea as just "bad", as time goes on, the screen in a controller makes more sense because of reduction costs and advancements in haptic technolgies. There are touch screens right now that simulate diferent surfaces and resistances with micro vibrations. Or ones that detect different preasure intensities. In the future maybe we would have a screen capable to emulate the physical feeling of a button press.

Now, one could talk about the actual Wii U implementation of the idea. And i think there's room for improvement there, i ' ve pointed this out myself for years like i already told you many many times.

That is how it works in this case, objectively second screen gaming is a bad idea from a gameplay perspective, as unless you can see all your screens at once, like with a 3DS, you have to keep breaking away from whats on one screen to see whats on the other

The most that will ever be able to offer from a gameplay perspective is incredibly minor, yeah the UI on one screen will look nicer, yeah you can see your inventory/map on a second screen, but those are not game changers for gameplay, they're minor conveniences. You can't hook people with:

Features revolutionary next generation item management

The fact that outside of Nintendo no one else has tried, or even cares about second screen gaming, should highlight how poor of an idea it is. A lot of games also have companion apps but if you need them to do stuff in the game, like with Assassin's Creed Unity then people universally detest them

It's not like VR, VR is a solid idea, and more importantly, people actually want it and can envision more exciting gameplay features than "It makes the map easier to see"

 

[BGBW]

The fact that outside of Nintendo no one else has tried, or even cares about second screen gaming, should highlight how poor of an idea it is.

Except for say Sony and Microsoft…

 

[Shaanyboi]

Except for say Sony and Microsoft…

Do they still care? I don't recall any second screen stuff being talked about at E3 beyond Minecraft co-op on a tablet or something of the sort...

 

[BGBW]

Do they still care? I don't recall any second screen stuff being talked about at E3 beyond Minecraft co-op on a tablet or something of the sort...

Well "tried" seemed to imply any period in the past. Didn't realise I was limited to the last week.


Also I re-reading some earlier posts. Find it weird people didn't think Pro Controller support was possible. WWHD and TPHD supported the Pro Controller while also supported the GamePad with second screen functionality.

 

[oni-link]

Except for say Sony and Microsoft…

Please detail all the upcoming and/or successful Sony and MS games that use a second screen

 

[PKrockin]

Please detail all the upcoming and/or successful Sony and MS games that use a second screen

Are Madden, Battlefield 4, Fallout 4, and Call of Duty Ghosts successful enough for you?

 

[erpg]

Shame nobody at Nintendo took a cursory glance at just about any HCI research over the last 30 years on attention and multiple screens.

Could've saved them a lot of time and effort.

 

[oni-link]

Are Madden, Battlefield 4, Fallout 4, and Call of Duty Ghosts successful enough for you?

Do they require mandatory use of the second screen?

How many people used those features?

Were they forced on players? Where they integral to the experience?

 

[PKrockin]

Do they require mandatory use of the second screen?

How many people used those features?

Were they forced on players? Where they integral to the experience?

Dunno. Just pointing out "it's so bad nobody else tried it" is forgetting that over the past 3 years everyone has tried it. lol

 

[BGBW]

Please detail all the upcoming and/or successful Sony and MS games that use a second screen

You simply said tried, so the future doesn't matter and that has nothing to do with success. Just, did Sony and MS look into second screen gaming and yes they did. They even made a song and dance about it at previous E3s.

 

[Refreshment.01]

That is how it works in this case, objectively second screen gaming is a bad idea from a gameplay perspective, as unless you can see all your screens at once, like with a 3DS, you have to keep breaking away from whats on one screen to see whats on the other

The most that will ever be able to offer from a gameplay perspective is incredibly minor, yeah the UI on one screen will look nicer, yeah you can see your inventory/map on a second screen, but those are not game changers for gameplay, they're minor conveniences. You can't hook people with:

First thing i would say to you is that Nintendo ditching the 2nd screen idea is not necessarily tied to how much of a failure the Wii U is. After all, the Wii was their biggest home console success and they abandoned their unique and revolutionary controller the next generation as a main feature. Do you remember what i' ve been saying to you at all? That's because they have been dead set in having a screen in there for years.

Now, claiming it doesn't have gameplay applications is downright ignoring reality.

• Local multiplayer is really important for Nintendo and the second screen did open new possibilites for asynchronus multiplayer. Just by this virtue alone your assesment is debunked and how popular Wii U was or wasn't doesn't have any bearing on the fact.
  
• A touch screen can also be used as a trackpad, which is a very precise control method in certain games. And doesn't demand from the user to be changing his eye sight.
  
• Content Creation. A touch screen is more intutive, precise and flexible way for users to generate content since they can draw more complex shapes, select and drag/drop features, than with today's standard thumbsticks and buttons.
  
• Wireless Streaming. Back at the conception stages upwards the Wii U's unveiling, seemless wireless streaming wasn't a widespread feature in console gaming, to the point some people were questioning if they could delivere a lag free experience. im not claiming by any means that this was a Nintendo first thing, but they were the first among the 3 to make the feature central to the experience. That's a consequence on wanting a screen in the controller.
  

Bare in mind that of the list above there's at least one Nintendo property that did good use of a given feature. They even have games and concepts that integrate the "shift of the player's attention" into gameplay and have inmersion purposes.

The fact that outside of Nintendo no one else has tried, or even cares about second screen gaming, should highlight how poor of an idea it is. A lot of games also have companion apps but if you need them to do stuff in the game, like with Assassin's Creed Unity then people universally detest them

Factually wrong. Both Sony and MS (and some 3rd parties) had parts of an E3 dedicated to second screen gaming. It did not catch on but they "tried". Also game wireless streaming, now with far better solutions than the Wii U, have a place in the market. Clarification: Not because of the Wii U but it is proof at the least that Nintendo was aiming for something worthwhile.

It's not like VR, VR is a solid idea, and more importantly, people actually want it and can envision more exciting gameplay features than "It makes the map easier to see"

i never claimed a screen in a controller is like VR. This is your invention. What i clearly said is that VR, is an example of an idea that is significantly impacted by advancements in technology. So something that may seem impractical or "bad" at one stage in time could change in the future.