I just assumed that you could because of the sensor bar along the top. I'm hoping that there will be some sort of dock that comes with the u-pad for easy charging and also to prop it on a surface while using the wii remote
-
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.
Is Wii U tablet resolution too low?
- Thread starter Fredrik
- Start date
I just assumed that you could because of the sensor bar along the top. I'm hoping that there will be some sort of dock that comes with the u-pad for easy charging and also to prop it on a surface while using the wii remote
Fredrik
Member
Me? Hardware costs is usually low for me compared to the total software costs for a whole generation, paying $100 or $150 for a Wii U hires controller that can compete with iPad games when it comes to smaller eshop games would be no problem at all for me.
Spieler Eins
Member
The console looks completely unremarkable. Needs to be redesigned badly.
H_Prestige
Banned
It also looks ugly in white. Nintendo needs to get the memo that white isn't in anymore. Even Apple has moved on from it.
It should also be noted that your Cut the Rope example in the main post, is a DSiWare game; not an eShop game.
DSiWare on the 3DS (like Plants vs Zombies) look worse when stretched on the 3DS; but quite sharp scaled down on the 3DS or at the native-res on the DSlite/i/XL screen.
Not "as sharp" as iDevices/Androids/etc. but not horrible or even bad. Heck, many still prefer playing the DS/DSiWare games on the respective handhelds because of that.
And so far, from what it is known all games have to be done at whatever resolution they want it on Wii U (up to 1080p); and that's what will be scaled down on the 640x480; which will still make for a nice image.
It is also known that when making games that use heavily the controller, it takes resources from the hardware.
DSiWare on the 3DS (like Plants vs Zombies) look worse when stretched on the 3DS; but quite sharp scaled down on the 3DS or at the native-res on the DSlite/i/XL screen.
Not "as sharp" as iDevices/Androids/etc. but not horrible or even bad. Heck, many still prefer playing the DS/DSiWare games on the respective handhelds because of that.
Keep in mind that the controller is not just a screen. Even Sony is losing money with the $250 Vita; so is not like the Wii U controller with everything it has and a higher-res screen will make it on the $100/$150. Even more when accessories are also marked up in prices for the sake of profits.
And so far, from what it is known all games have to be done at whatever resolution they want it on Wii U (up to 1080p); and that's what will be scaled down on the 640x480; which will still make for a nice image.
It is also known that when making games that use heavily the controller, it takes resources from the hardware.
1080p at 60": 37 (not meant to be viewed up close obviously!)
DSi XL: 76
Game Boy: 83
DSi: 98
1080p at 21.5": 102 (my monitor)
DS & DS lite: 107
3DS bottom screen: 128
PSP: 128
3DS top screen: 236 (because of the insane horizontal pixel density)
iPad 2: 132
PSP Go: 145
Wii U controller: 158 (assuming it's 854x480 at 6.2")
iPhone: 163
Vita: 221
iPhone 4: 326
Oh... this is about the Wii-U... Well I'm an advocate of resistive touch screens. Super accurate 1:1 control scheme which emulates mouse controls very well.
DSi XL: 76
Game Boy: 83
DSi: 98
1080p at 21.5": 102 (my monitor)
DS & DS lite: 107
3DS bottom screen: 128
PSP: 128
3DS top screen: 236 (because of the insane horizontal pixel density)
iPad 2: 132
PSP Go: 145
Wii U controller: 158 (assuming it's 854x480 at 6.2")
iPhone: 163
Vita: 221
iPhone 4: 326
Oh... this is about the Wii-U... Well I'm an advocate of resistive touch screens. Super accurate 1:1 control scheme which emulates mouse controls very well.
EatinOlives
Member
So just kill the feature before the console even releases? The DS had absolutely awful touchscreen implementations when it launched, but as time went on developers got comfortable and eventually started using it in amazing ways.
To say with 100% certainty that multitouch in no way can ever be a worthwhile addition to the tablet controller is laughably baseless. It's no different than the people insisting that the entire console is shit without it.
No lol it looks so generic. It basically looks like a fat Wii.
Who the fuck is saying THAT? Look, if you want to discuss the capacitive versus resistive, go ahead and do it. In fact many of us have laid out all the pros and cons of both technologies, and asked some really good questions.
None of you seem to want to address them directly, and you ALL keep popping in this thread and dropping pinch to zoom based statements and bailing out. Either contribute, or just troll and be on your way. Stop making up shit and effectively arguing with yourself.
Oh so your problem isnt the resistive versus capacitive, but that you don't feel the controller is innovative enough? Thats interesting, will be nice to hear from you after E3, in terms of what you think of the other consoles.
I don't think Nintendo understand that touchscreens/LCD tech has moved.
The Touch screen and the screens in general on the 3DS seem like 5 year old tech (in terms of brightness/resolution/touch). Such a let down and I've been used to the iPhone 4 for so long.
I similar experience with the WiiU is going to be a let down. Really really needs multi touch at the very least.
Hopefully as the WiiU went back to the drawing board, Nintendo we're smart...
The Touch screen and the screens in general on the 3DS seem like 5 year old tech (in terms of brightness/resolution/touch). Such a let down and I've been used to the iPhone 4 for so long.
I similar experience with the WiiU is going to be a let down. Really really needs multi touch at the very least.
Hopefully as the WiiU went back to the drawing board, Nintendo we're smart...
Something similar happened at a recent thread discussing resistive vs. capactive.
Aside chubigans, and even giving examples on how to implement it on games (and a few other posters) nearly evey other post was basically:
Resistive: *List of reasons and examples*
Capacitive: The future (and pinch to zoom) *no reasons or examples*
EatinOlives
Member
Who the fuck is saying THAT? I never once said anything about pinch to zoom based statements or any kind of pro-multitouch stance. I'm merely pointing out that the silly, baseless conclusions as to what is and isn't "necessary" by complete arbitrary measures is highly evident on both sides. Hell, we even got people posting shitty off-screen, poorly-lit pictures of the Wii U controller as if it were some kind of proof regarding the image quality of the screen itself. There's plenty of stupidity on both sides of the argument, I'm afraid. There's really no point in trying to paint any one side as unreasonable.
Fredrik
Member
That last thing is my wish too. There has to be some reason for the complete silence. I'm hoping for a specs bump as the e3 bomb. Still want a resistive screen though just for the pen precision.
It's actually a really slick design, love all the stuff packed into the controller yet seems more simple than a 360/PS3 controller.
Incredible..... especially at the bolded. I knew I had seen this before. I even posted in that thread. And Ill agree with myself. It depends on the device and what it is used for.
For gaming? I want the possibility of Styli based input, and most importantly I want accuracy. It matters a LOT for gaming. And it outweighs multi-touch capacitive screens benefits which can be designed around. But if you go capacitive and sacrifice that accuracy, you can't get it back, its just gone unless you price the controllers out of reach by including a Wacom digitizer.
For tablet PC's and Phones, capacitive all the way, theres no slight pressure needed, and these devices have no other forms of input increasing the value of multitouch exponentially.
I'm not really a Nintendo advocate and i have no interest in buying the Wii U but some people in this thread are forgetting something very important. IT'S A CONTROLLER! I don't know about you guys but i don't want to pay $300+ on a controller and with the amount of technology some of you are asking for you'd think you were discussing a dedicated tablet. It's a controller that comes with a console.
Thinking about it, maybe Nintendo could make a premium model.
Thinking about it, maybe Nintendo could make a premium model.
The vast majority of the defenders here wouldn't be upset if it switched. They are debating the idea that being resistive and single-touch is going to be a huge issue. It's not. It's much more important on iDevices because it is their only form of input, vs. a supplementary input to a large array of other controls.
I would actually prefer the controller to be much smaller and have a 3.5" screen instead.
I'm fine with the controller. I just wished Nintendo wouldn't have gone with the analog "nub". It works great for my 3DS but I actually prefer joysticks. I took me a while to get used to the Vita joysticks but after two weeks, it feels very good. Before it would feel weird because it couldn't give more movement but then you get used to it and works just as good as a gamepad joystick. Personally though, I've never really liked Nintendo's choice for joysticks, with theN64 being the exception. My current favorite is the 360 one.
Portugeezer
Gold Member
IMO the controller is more about the functionality than the clarity of the screen. You can't expect too good, it's a controller for a console after all.
HOOK. IT. TO. MY. VEINS.
Shogmaster
Member
It's 16:9 SD resolution, which is ideal for many reasons (bandwidth, BC, etc). It's a good display for their purpose. Just be glad they didn't do a shitty TN panel.
I'll more or less agree with this. While I'm on the side that doesn't feel multi-touch adds too much to the experience when buttons are available, I'd agree that it's silly to make any blanket statements about its future functionality.
That said, I think the whole resistive vs capacitive debate has very little to do with game design. Nintendo went with resistive because the elderly can have a tougher time with capacitive. That's totally a nintendo way of thinking about it.
Shogmaster
Member
Did Nintendo confirm no multi-touch? You can do multi-touch with resistive. There were couple of UMPCs that had it IIRC.
Gamer @ Heart
Member
Im with the majority on this one. It wont be an issue. For the longest time, i thought the 3DS's resolution was too low, but then i played Revelations and realized it didnt really matter. It still looks good, and from a technical perspective, i realize why they went they way they did.
Katsuya Eguchi confirmed it in Spiegel
Spiegel Online said:
Google Translated said:
The spec sheet on the Wii U website also calls it a "touch" screen, and Nintendo is usually pretty good about wording things clearly. If the E3 model had multitouch, the spec sheet would have reflected that. It seems like Nintendo's "Ambassadors" at E3 weren't allowed to talk about details like that.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
It is supposed to be held and used unsupervised by young kids, so you wouldn't want something with higher resolution as it'd just mean an increased cost if the tablet was dropped and broke.
Most people don't just give random tablets to their kids, so you can't really compare the two.
Most people don't just give random tablets to their kids, so you can't really compare the two.
Will we? How many of us will own an iPad 3/iPhone 4 or similar by then cause that's the only thing that will give you that sort of density. Our TV's won't. Our monitors won't. Unlikely our laptops will until Apple retina-fy them.
Unless you're a pixel peeper, you probably won't even notice. I know people who upgraded from an iPhone 3GS to iPhone 4 and I asked them how nice it was to have that extra resolution and they said "Didn't really notice it".
CamHostage
Member
I'm more concerned with image quality, viewing angles and latency of touch tracking. Resolution tends to be overly glorified, a measure of quantifying "power" when so many other factors are more immediately noticeable to the human eye.
Quadrangulum
Banned
854x480 is fine for video and would even be preferable if it can display games from previous generations; it's also been pointed out that the pixel density isn't too shabby compared to many other devices. There is an unfortunate compromise if people aspire to use the pad as a web browser or as a tablet substitute but keeping in mind the primary intended usage and the fact that it's a streaming device that shares resources with the console, I don't think Nintendo can go meaningfully higher. I'll be saving my complaints for the quality of the screen.
Wii games don't actually render 854x480.
Throwaway123456789
Member
Yeah, it fakes 16:9. The output is still 640x480.
Chuckpebble
Member
I know this is kind of lame on my part, but the main draw for me is backwards compatibility making my Wii library into handheld games. So yeah, that's pretty much native resolution for Wii games, so I'm cool with it.
I already am, and that's why I think the panel is too low res. Same with 3DS. I'm sure the screens look fine if you're staring at old monitors or 480x320 phones all day but when you're used to modern displays, they look cheap and low-tech. Not good for a new console.
AceBandage
Banned
I wouldn't know, I don't own one. Nor do I own any VHS tapes.
Also, I'd have different expectations of a device that I bought 10 years ago compared to a device that hasn't even been released yet.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
It's fine, looks good in pictures and should only look better in person I would think.
I don't want the system costing 500$ and the controllers costing over 100$.
I don't want the system costing 500$ and the controllers costing over 100$.
AceBandage
Banned
You should also have different expectations for a $400+ device versus a controller...
Anasui Kishibe
Banned
I bet you ten people will all go from "Damn it's ugly" to "Damn it's ugly but absolutely comfortable" "It's not that ugly" "Best controller eva" when they try it out themselves, besides those jocks who claim they wait for a redesign for everything