.
Rhetorical question, of course.
-
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.
Rumor: New Wii U controller (analog sticks)?
- Thread starter AceBandage
- Start date
Rhetorical question, of course.
Refreshment.01
Member
I don't know why some guys have a hard time grassping this. Arguing this is an ever losing battle... they just refuse to listen. The only strong argument is the one regarding precision but there are several examples related to console gaming in which presicion is sacrified with convinience or user experience in mind.
Btw, what concerns me more than anything is the abscense of multi touch, not so much if the screen is capacitive or resistive. Although capacitive works wonderfully with fingers.
That's the screen i want there or at least with those features. Multi touch resistive in this case, right? It seems to work wonderfully even with fingers.
That was Proto DS, actually.
This is DS Phat.
Still ugly.
APZonerunner
Member
I got some hands-on time with the original (E3 2011 build) controller on a few occasions and it was incredibly comfortable, so if they've made it better it should be great.
I wouldn't hold my breath. But this was about the misconceptions about resistive technology in general, not specifically about the Wii U. Unlike what most people seem to believe these days, the best resistive screens currently available are better than the best capacitive screens, and that's unlikely to change. In fact, the next generation of resistive touchscreens is even better than that.
Exterminieren
Banned
Make something quick and dirty for E3 and sort it out later.
Much like with the original DS.
I still want to own one of these.
Fair point, but I expect the Wii U touch screen will be less precise than a standard tablet capacitive screen when used without a stylus.
Refreshment.01
Member
Yes, but since we are not getting it in the WiiU and for what i understand they are even more expensive than a similar sized capacitive, we are screwed still with the single touch resistive
Femmeworth
Banned
At least it had a good d-pad.
lunchwithyuzo
Banned
Nintendo can't really do much about people gaming the retail system without also penalizing legitimate customers within that window. You still got 20 free games, most of which new 3DS can't even get if they want to pay for them.
Again, how many companies have done this sort of thing before?
GeneralManager
Member
The WiiU screen resolution is poor compared to anything released recently. Theres no way around it. The iPad 2 will no longer be for sale in a couple months. For a device that'll be active and sold for until at least 2017, its disappointing.
Don't insult everyone here while making excuses.
"Why nitpik?"
"Why you need billion ppi?"
"Less than 1 percent will notice."
Its not the end of the WiiU. However there is nothing wrong with critiquing Nintendo. You're allowed to do it and still look forward to the next 3d Mario, Zelda, or Retros new title.
Besides the spec bump, which goes hand in hand, isn't the screen the selling. To the point where Nintendo E3 reveal last year was entirely centered around it. Won't it also be used as a standalone device sometimes?
The resolution is poor considering its expected release date.
Its not going to look horrible and unusable. Its not going drastically if at all affect sales. Its part of whats going to possibly allow Nintendo to sell the WiiU at a relatively low price while still making a small gain.
However, you can't defend the fact that the screen will worse than other devices released at the same time or even slightly earlier. People have the right to be both dissapointed with. Just as anyone has the right to be okay with it. They're not all just Nintendo haters looking for whatever defect to attack Nintendo and the WiiU with. Maybe they really big Nintendo fans and that's why details about the WiiU like the screen, bug them so much.
Don't insult everyone here while making excuses.
"Why nitpik?"
"Why you need billion ppi?"
"Less than 1 percent will notice."
Its not the end of the WiiU. However there is nothing wrong with critiquing Nintendo. You're allowed to do it and still look forward to the next 3d Mario, Zelda, or Retros new title.
Besides the spec bump, which goes hand in hand, isn't the screen the selling. To the point where Nintendo E3 reveal last year was entirely centered around it. Won't it also be used as a standalone device sometimes?
The resolution is poor considering its expected release date.
Its not going to look horrible and unusable. Its not going drastically if at all affect sales. Its part of whats going to possibly allow Nintendo to sell the WiiU at a relatively low price while still making a small gain.
However, you can't defend the fact that the screen will worse than other devices released at the same time or even slightly earlier. People have the right to be both dissapointed with. Just as anyone has the right to be okay with it. They're not all just Nintendo haters looking for whatever defect to attack Nintendo and the WiiU with. Maybe they really big Nintendo fans and that's why details about the WiiU like the screen, bug them so much.
I guess the misconceptions arise because these cooler screens aren't actually in use in anything that we're using at the moment. Good to see progress regardless.
You can't blame me for feeling burned. Like I said, they could have done the price cut the same day it was announced. In fact, I wouldn't have even cared if the people within those 30 days return to get their $80 back because I know they bought the console at $250 without knowing about the price cut, it's the thought that counts.
What gaming company has slashed off the price of their console in just under 4 months of being released?
test_account
XP-39C²
If there is no plan for it whatsoever, then i agree. But that is not the case with the Vita. Games are running in native resolution as well. It is the same with iPad 3 (although i dont know how big the selection of apps is, that supports native iPad 3 resolution).
For the WiiU controller, i think that the picture will look just fine. I'm really not sensitive about this stuff at all though. For example, i recently played through Larry 5 in fullscreen, and the screen i used supports far higher resolution than Larry 5's native resolution (not sure what it is, but i believe it is lower than 640x480). Still, i loved every minute of it. Not just the gameplay, but also the graphics and how everything looked
Unlikely. Any Nintendo device so far has used high quality resistive touchscreens - 4096 x 4096 resolution, very high sampling rate.
Actually, reading more about Stantum's technology, the touchscreen itself is a regular mass market element not unlike those Nintendo uses, and those get cheaper the bigger the screen is (compared to capacitive, of course). The main difference is the controller chip. So who knows. It's certainly unlikely, but not entirely impossible.Yes, but since we are not getting it in the WiiU and for what i understand they are even more expensive than a similar sized capacitive, we are screwed still with the single touch resistive
test_account
XP-39C²
I tried to take a screenshot from Uncharted that i thought looked great on the screen. But when i transfered the picture to PC, then it looked pretty bad (looking at the picture in full size). If you scale the picture, then you might get a better representation.
But i'm sure that runing in native resolution will make the image quality better. But that doesnt mean that everything else will look horrible. The size of the screen and distance from it matters. Just like on 1080p TVs when pretty much every console game is running at 720p or less. If that looks horrible, then i dont think that WiiU will be a good system for them.
Jesus christ....the other devices arent a console and a tablet like device at the same time.....
I've said it before.
The Wii U controller screen (assuming it's 854x480 at 6.2") will be about 158 ppi.
That's likely way better compared to the monitor most people are CURRENTLY reading NeoGAF on right now.
A 19" 1080p monitor is about 115 ppi
a 24" 1080p monitor is about 91 ppi
test_account
XP-39C²
Speaking about scaling and image quality, how will it be when you want to play/stream a game on the WiiU controller. If a WiiU game is 1080p (1920x1080), how will that look at a screen with max resolution of 854x480?
Jaded Alyx
Member
I don't see it being an issue given the size of the screen.
No, it's nothing wrong in criticising Nintendo, but you have to look at the context. The screen is probably allready pretty demanding for the system to run, and upping the resolution would bring down the rendering performance(not to mention higher costs). The Wii U is allready rendering one 720p TV image as well as up to two(if the system now suppoerts two controllsers as rumored) 480p images. And it that allready brings down the overall performance, think about what happens with a 720p display on the controller.
Of course, you could just use the controller as a map/menu screen, but I think it would limit some gameplay possibilities.
mdtauk
Member
Perhaps the Wii U will switch to rendering the game at the smaller resolution when the Tablet is the primary display, rather than taking the 1080p image and re-sizing.
Two apparently.
If Nintendo were lazy they'd be using off-the-shelf parts.
Or diversify multiplayer by making the gameplay different depending on whether you have the wii mote / WiiU controller....
Fredrik
Member
If there is a scaler built in it could look like playing 360 on SDTV. Nice, but the devs need to think about the scaling when choosing font size. Remember Dead Rising?
JimboJones
Member
Microsoft did with the orginal Xbox after about a month or so on sale in Europe.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1936791.stm
Nintendo then had to reduce the price of the Gamecube before it was even released.
test_account
XP-39C²
Probably not, i agree. But it wont be native resolution then, which should affect the image quality.
How does this work? Do they need to make the game with different assets for different resolutions?
Hehe true. I dont remember Dead Rising specifically, but i did notice that some text was hard to read on a SDTV for some games.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
There are three possible levels.KillGore said:
1) Output games in original resolution.
2) Take final image, resize this image before outputting it to television. It's possible for filters to be applied.
3) Render the game at a higher resolution to begin with.
#2 is upscaling, but people often use it for both #2 or #3. #2 is what PS3 does for PS2, and what X360 does for any game that's below the resolution of your screen. We don't know if Wii U will do #2, but we're pretty positive it won't do #3.
It's not the kind of thing that would break compatibility; it's like how 3DS can display original DS games larger and blurrier.BurntPork said:
Assuming it was 1080p with no AA and scaled down, that would essentially make it 5x super-sampled anti-aliasing. Unless the game switches to some alternate rendering mode, then all bets are off.test_account said:
No, it'd just be like switching the resolution on a PC game.test_account said:
Completely disagree. On the Vita, they don't look native-res suddenly or anything, but they look way better than the direct feed shots do.
But on point, I think this PPI thing for the screen is being blown out of proportion. And about the analog sticks, it makes me happy. The controller looks worse, though, now. Much less symmetrical.
This is the sort of thing that gets me excited about this system, but you might as well save your time - some people just don't get this.
lunchwithyuzo
Banned
I'm not blaming you for feeling burned, I'm just saying at least Nintendo actually did something to try and soften the blow. The cut was instrumental for the future health of the platform and given it's urgency it seems like the decision came pretty quick before announcement. Maybe Nintendo could've timed it better, maybe they couldn't, I don't think we really have enough working knowledge of the internal factors to say for sure.
As for comparable price cuts with their competitors, the 3DS cut was $80 and 4.5 months out from US launch. The quickest US cuts from competitors "game" platforms were 7 months / $100 on Xbox for Microsoft, 8 months / $100 on PlayStation or 2 months / $100 on Xperia Play for Sony and 2 months / $100 on iPhone for Apple. Only Nintendo and Apple compensated their early adopters.
ecosse_011172
Junior Member
The new sticks look great to me as well as the additional buttons.
However the 4 face buttons still look far too small :-(
However the 4 face buttons still look far too small :-(
To be fair 7-8+ months is reasonable and Xperia play is from a different branch from Sony, not SCE. All I'm saying is that SCE and Microsoft gaming division hasn't pulled this bullshit move.
The most important and advertised feature of the console is playing games.
It's not a tablet, so stop treating it like one.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
You're not paying for a $300-$350 tablet or screen and to treat it as such is mind bogglingly inaccurate.
When presented with something that seems illogical to you, ask this question:
"Is ____________ different from similar controllers/accessories/games/settings/etc. in some fashion?" If yes, people will bitch about it and/or imagine it to be sub-par in some way. You'll get used to it.
I'm still mad that the bitching made Nintendo abandon the split wand controller type. Finally a controller that makes FPSes not suck and when Nintendo makes a console that has a chance of getting 3rd party support they abandon it. I highly doubt the Wiimote will be used much in future games, especially with devs saying stuff like "the WiiU controller is the best FPS controller ever!!! (from Nintendo)."
ViperVisor
Member
I did a real world guesstimate by holding a VHS tape sideways and wider is better.
Problem with some older controllers is shoulders elbows and wrists being confined in an unnatural position. Putting handles and bending them out have helped things a lot. Having a wider controller should help ergonomics.
Well, we are looking the direct feeds on different screens to begin with. But my main point is that graphical faults doesn't magical disappear on the Vita screen. They are still evident and the game visual appeal suffers because of them. In this case, the games are being hurt by Vita's (relative) high resolution instead of being benefited by it.
Downsizing increases IQ,
.
Oppo
Member
Wow, man. you are just a big ball of cognitive dissonance.
The screen tech is what it is, there is no reason to pretend that it's some magical choice that is technically superior. That is simply not Nintendo's strategy.
4k digitising rez.... on all products... I mean... that doesn't take any sense!
I've played Smash Bros with a PS3, 360, CCP and Wiimote/Nunchuck which none of them have even compared to how optimal using the GC controller with it is. Smash Bros is a pretty big title for Nintendo and I'd rather not use something that gimps in comparison for controls for it.
What makes this controller so different that it'll be an improvement over the controllers listed above? People do not stop using Arcade Sticks when the next gen of fighting games come out, and they don't stop selling them either. Of course Nintendo makes these controllers, however that doesn't mean it's not a wise solution to release a modernized one when not everyone in the world wants to use a touch screen controller.
They wouldn't have released a Classic Controller/Pro for the Wii if this was the case. It's not about "Oh because it's Nintendo new that makes it better, move on!" it's more about people have a good idea how controllers feel, especially since people have been gaming for over 20 years or more and have used all types of controllers. Just because something is older doesn't mean it's not better.