Play Super Meat Boy without a d-pad. Come back to me.
-
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.
XBW Rumor: The Next Xbox Has A Wii U Like Tablet Controller With HD Screen, Buttons
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Play Super Meat Boy without a d-pad. Come back to me.
Dion Blaster
Member
I have Super Meat Boy on my computer. I have played it with both my dual shock 3 and wii classic controller pro. Classic controller pro all the way. NOTHING beats a good dpad for platformers. Sticks are great for games designed for analog movement, not 2D platformers.
So? People thought the Wii was going to crash and burn when it was announced.
Dion Blaster
Member
If this rumor is true, Sony's next console has to have a tablet controller right? if they don't it would be like the Wii not having HD, but without the system seller software as well.
Someone told me they did a few days ago ;_;
This news hurts my soul.
Sigh, the D-pad is an AWFUL control device. A stick will always have greater sensitivitywnd precision. That is simple physics. I am not talking about analog here. A 2600 stick would dominate any dpad in existence.
Sans analog joysticks have a gigantic dead spot because you only read 0 or 1 (or in most modern cases 0-0.5 or 0.5 to 1). The sensitivity you speak of actually hinders it in many control scenarios.
Nobody has ever claimed Mario would play better with a joystick, have they?
thomasmahler
Member
You played Super Meat Boy using the Xbox360 D-pad? Kudos to you, I can only play it using the analog stick, cause the X360 D-Pad is far from ideal.
It's on PC...
Agent X
Member
That's partially true. On the other hand, there are many examples of multi-touch gestures that have been mentioned earlier, which can be more accessible and more intuitive than using some "not so obvious" combination of buttons and/or joypad movements.
This is like saying the Atari 2600 has never felt lacking without having multiple buttons on its joystick. No one fathomed the possibility of ever playing games with 6 or 8 buttons when the "cutting edge" games of the day were Combat, Outlaw, and Sky Diver.
As stated above, there are many uses for multi-touch for easy-to-use gestures and stuff like that.
By your logic, if the Wii U doesn't need multi-touch (because it has buttons), then why does it even need any form of touch at all?
Nintendo could easily cut costs by utilizing an ordinary LCD screen without touch input. Touch isn't needed at all for a device like this. After all, it's got multiple buttons and analog sticks, which should be useful for doing anything you could ever want to do in a video game, right? Besides, if someone wanted to tap on the screen, then he'd have to take his finger off the buttons to do so...which would suddenly render the buttons useless. PARADOX!
In that case, that would be a great argument for including multi-touch on something like the Wii U controller. Fans of Nintendo often talk about taking the game experience off of the TV, or even not needing to use the TV--well, then they'd have to use the screen on the controller as the primary display. Nintendo is held to high regard as being "innovative", so this would be a great way for them to showcase innovation in gameplay. After all, if everyone else is doing it wrong, then Nintendo should have the opportunity to demonstrate how to do it right.
I played maybe 50-50 d-pad and analog stick Super Meat Boy (Sixaxis controller). Most levels don't really require d-pad precision...
Late to this thread but I don't doubt it's true. In fact, I'm sure both MS and Sony ramped up development of such a controller the second word hit about what Nintendo was up to. Both Sony and MS saw what happened when they got caught with their pants down this gen and you know they weren't going to let it happen again.
Why do I get the feeling you wouldn't have a problem with Sony making just another Dual Shock controller for the next PlayStation. You can call this many things but what Nintendo (and potentially MS) are doing is hardly complacency in industry terms.
2 points:
1. I would never waste my time on a nintendo game
2. mario might actually be tolerable with a stick. It would definitely control vastly better.
So basically you don't actually know anything about what's being discussed?
Agent X
Member
That's nice.
How would you know, if you would never waste your time with it?
No it means that I am one of the few people that can be rational about the topic.
More to the point of the topic. On of the great things about the touch screen would be the ability to eliminate the dpad entirely, not that they would do something that awesome.
Saying you would never play the cornerstone franchise of a genre and then talking from a position of authority isn't very rational.
I would consider it unwise to ignore a franchise for 20+ years and then make statements on it.
Perhaps because it is the same game as the eighties?
If this is true a think it is a bad move by MS. If the Wii U is successful Microsoft's tablet will not slow it down and the next box will be getting year old Wii U ports.
Kinect worked because it was different enough, but also because Nintendo and third parties had moved on the 3DS and Wii U. This could play out move like the PS Move did.
Kinect worked because it was different enough, but also because Nintendo and third parties had moved on the 3DS and Wii U. This could play out move like the PS Move did.
Platformers are irrelevant to my thesis.
It's nice to talk about things one knows nothing about.
For instance, needlecraft. Who needs needlecraft?
Thanks for at least being up front and honest about your agenda. It's typically more embarrassing for people to keep up their charade of impartiality.
Oh goodie, you're one of those.
EatinOlives
Member
According to who? You?
Multitouch>single touch. End of story. Again, it's not really prudent to say inferiority is better. I know a lot of people say that just to justify Nintendo's decisions, but they're big boys. They don't need defending.
boyshine
Member
For a 2D game where you control something that goes left or right a d-pad is the best thing. Any stick, digital or analog, has a travel distance that takes away the on/off control that these games need. A recent example is NSMBW which support both stick (nunchuk) and d-pad (remote), dont tell me you prefer stick control for that.
(...reads the rest of the thread...)
oh, youre just a troll.
To be fair, he was talking about digital sticks. But yeah, he's a troll.
According to who? You?
EatinOlives
Member
No, according to a simple laws of logic. Multiple points of input>one point of input.
Good god some people can be annoying. They'll argue the sky isn't blue just to get an argument going.
The argument isn't single vs multitouch. It's resistive touch screen with stylus vs capacitive touch screen with multi touch.
EatinOlives
Member
No, the argument eventually became "Who cares over multitouch? According to my completely arbitrary measures, the difference of multitouch over single touch aren't significant"
You just made a straw man argument and then preceded to complain about people making up arguments.
EatinOlives
Member
Pray tell, what "straw man" did I pull? Just plopping logical fallacy names does not a good argument make.
Nobody was arguing one point of contact is better than more than one point of contact. The core arguments are around the precision of the touch events. You substituted an argument that makes no sense and one I have yet to see made.
EatinOlives
Member
I do suggest you read the topic and what I was replying to. I was specifically replying to this post:
No mention of stylus control or precision. That was something somebody else brought up. And I never said that people were arguing to one point of contact is better, it's the failure to admit or downplay the fact that multiple points is better.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
All reports out of E3 and CES were that it's very comfortable. Nintendo doesn't make uncomfortable controllers.
So now your just going to pull things out of context? Basically he said that multi-touch isn't a big win once you have buttons and then you pulled another switcheroo by claiming that because he claims multi-touch isn't as important with buttons that this means he must also agrees that touch screens in general were unnecessary with buttons.
Uh it sounds like he was saying he'd rather have single touch and buttons over multi-touch and no buttons.... Nothing wrong with that
eddiepfund
Neo Member
I don't think I am looking forward to the next gen consoles. I think I might just be focusing on the computer...
EatinOlives
Member
*sigh*
Please, please read the topic. You're making absolutely no sense.
I pulled nothing out of context. I don't need anyone to interpret anything he said, what he said was completely clear. You're the one pulling posts out of context.
I said it's entirely subjective to believe that multitouch with buttons isn't a significant jump. That is why I said "according to who?" And that was before you came in repeating my post again trying to be clever. Essentially, you've come into the argument without understanding what either of us have said.
The whole argument capacitive vs resistive screens went down the drain in 2009.
When an amazing multi-touch resistive screen popped up.
http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/19/stantums-mind-blowing-multitouch-interface-on-video/
Resistive mult-touch is superior then anything else, if you need proof watch the videos, and its still cheaper then capacitive. Capacitive is going down the drain.
Edit: Why doesnt nintendo implement this?
When an amazing multi-touch resistive screen popped up.
http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/19/stantums-mind-blowing-multitouch-interface-on-video/
Resistive mult-touch is superior then anything else, if you need proof watch the videos, and its still cheaper then capacitive. Capacitive is going down the drain.
Edit: Why doesnt nintendo implement this?
Hold the fucking phone.
You're sitting here and arguing what the best input for a platformer is, and now you proudly proclaim that you've never played a Mario game, or any Nintendo platformer?
Look, I don't care what you think of the company. Nintendo revolutionized the genre with Super Mario Bros., basically defined the platformer as we know it today. And then they did it again with Mario 3. And again with Mario 64, but that's getting into 3D and away from the d-pad discussion. Point is, they were and have continued to be one of the, if not the, most influential publishers in the genre. If you have played a single platformer made in the last 25 years, I can pretty much guarantee that game took some cues from Mario. If you can't respect that, then why are you even discussing the genre?
It's like arguing about sci-fi for an hour before proudly proclaiming that you've never seen and never intend to see any Star Trek or Star Wars movies. Or arguing about fantasy and revealing you've never read Lord of the Rings. Or arguing about superheroes and boasting that you've never read, seen, played, or otherwise experienced any medium based on DC or Marvel characters.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
Man this latest batch of juniors sure is... interesting...
BishopLamont
Banned
Everyone knows keyboard+mouse is the real. Fuck controllers. All of em.