Support NeoGAF

[mclem]

And then, play the damn thing again with the lights on, showing Miyamoto swapping it from day to night, camera angle to camera angle, etc. To show that yes, this is running in realtime. Would've been impressive as hell.

I wouldn't be surprised if they were afraid of future backlash when it turned out that that wasn't a real game. Think of the reactions to Wind Waker's looks after the Gamecube Zelda tech demo they had early on.

 

[Father_Brain]

They bungled the reveal, but we still have another E3 before the system launches. I've chosen to be lenient on Nintendo.

Still not convinced of this, since as far as I know, no console has been publicly playable on the E3 show floor two years in a row before launch. I think Nintendo is still aiming for a Q2 release, though I'm slightly less optimistic now that they'll actually make that window; what they do or don't show at whatever fall press event they hold will be more telling as to the specific timeframe.

And for those who cite the sparse showing as evidence that launch can't possibly be less than a year away, I don't think any console has ever been unveiled at E3 as far as ten months before its scheduled launch before (unless you count Sony's smoke-and-mirrors showing at E3 2005). 3DS ended up being shown 8 and 9 months before the US and Japanese launches (respectively), but I believe Nintendo was still aiming for a Q4 2010 launch at the time.

 

[mclem]

According to virtually everyone who's played with the controller, it's extremely comfortable and capable. So that doesn't appear to be a problem. YMMV.

Actually, on that note, I haven't actually seen any negative impressions from people who've had hands-on time with it. Has anyone?

 

[B_Rik_Schitthaus]

Seriously, who gives a shit? How many normal people know or care about E3? I't success will be based on the launch and thereafter. Impressions now are utterly meaningless.

Telling people not to talk about something that happen just because more stuff will happen some time in the future is utterly meaningless.

According to virtually everyone who's played with the controller, it's extremely comfortable and capable. So that doesn't appear to be a problem. YMMV.

For less then 10 minutes it won't be but I want to hear opinions after people have used it for longer periods

 

[Vinci]

Actually, on that note, I haven't actually seen any negative impressions from people who've had hands-on time with it. Has anyone?

Destructoid made a minor negative comment about the Circle Pads being somewhat easier to slip off of than traditional analogue sticks. That was all I've seen that's negative. Even they were mostly positive about it beyond that issue.

 

[Himself]

I was watching the conference streaming with no sound on at work and I thought it was just some new Wii peripheral. Took a while to figure it out.

 

[robor]

I've been talking to a bunch of core gamers and all of them think that so far, this new console is useless. Why do they think that? Lack of software content.

 

[Foliorum Viridum]

• Lights go out.
• Zelda HD loads up on the big screen.
• Giant spider HD battle!
• Lights come back on with Miyamoto at center stage, yells "Welcome to [console name that isn't Wii U]!"
• Console, controller, and logo display on the big screen.

That's how I would have started their conference.

You're hired.

It took shaky cam footage of random people playing that Zelda tech demo on Youtube to get me excited about the console. How retarded is that?

 

[mclem]

Destructoid made a minor negative comment about the Circle Pads being somewhat easier to slip off of than traditional analogue sticks. That was all I've seen that's negative. Even they were mostly positive about it beyond that issue.

That does bother me a little. I've noticed recently that I tend to use analogue sticks not by putting my thumb on top and moving it but instead by pushing the side. That's just not going to be possible with this arrangement.

Still, I'd already seen that one, and that was the only negative (and not exactly resoundingly so) I had seen, too.

 

[Windom Earle]

The Wii U presentation was a horrible trainwreck, but the backlash is certainly delicious.

 

[Deku]

Vinci's analysis is spot on.

Though i'm a bit surprised the nongames press coverage is deferential if not glowing.

Here's a sampling of the NYT report

 

[Vinci]

For less then 10 minutes it won't be but I want to hear opinions after people have used it for longer periods

I think I've seen people compare its weight to handhelds. Shouldn't be an issue, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[schuelma]

Vinci's analysis is spot on.

Though i'm a bit surprised the nongames press coverage is deferential if not glowing.

Here's a sampling of the NYT report

Well, again, that report is based on a private viewing of the console/controller. Not the presentation. Like others have said, I don't think I've read a negative impression from people that actually tried the system.

 

[Wolves Evolve]

Wow. Whoever posted that they should have just called it "Nintendo U" is bang on. That would have been the perfect name for what they were going for.

Nintendo Wii: We all play together.
Nintendo Mii: This is a cute version of me.
Nintendo U: Its all about you.

The logo is great by itself too - but next to Wii it looks confused. People who say you need to keep the name Wii aren't convincing me you can't transfer the name's trust easily to 'U'. I think the positives outweigh the negatives. Nintendo U is more inviting to people who didn't dig the Wii and markets better. It also simplifies the naming for future devices + addons.

 

[TL4E]

I've been talking to a bunch of core gamers and all of them think that so far, this new console is useless. Why do they think that? Lack of software content.

Lack of software 12+ months before release? Really?

 

[Interfectum]

I'm intrigued by the Wii U but I really think they need to change the name. It's horrible and potentially confusing for the mainstream audience.

Personally, I know a name is meaningless in the grand scheme of things but it's pretty hard for me to get past the Wii U name. Some of it could stem from the fact that I have negative connotations with the "Wii" name and what it represents so it's hard for me to get behind a product that still carries that banner.

 

[Bradlums]

I don't even know what the fuck the name is supposed to mean

We + You

 

[fates]

They definitely should have. IMO the entire Nintendo press conference was confusing save for the 3DS game roll. Still wondering whose idea it was to have Iwata come out, mention the new system, only to bring Reggie out for 3DS games, and THEN Iwata comes back to talk about the WiiU.

Until I noticed the unit under the TV, I too thought this was a new attachment or something, akin to the 32X. Very badly presented.

Really, I think they just should have waited until TGS where they could have had something more solid to show the public. I think they rolled it out a bit too early.

 

[Deku]

Well, again, that report is based on a private viewing of the console/controller. Not the presentation. Like others have said, I don't think I've read a negative impression from people that actually tried the system.

You're right, though I picked this piece in particlar as it is an opinion piece. There's a companion newsy piece on the reveal, though that one was also positive.

 

[robor]

Lack of software 12+ months before release? Really?

Lack of software content to competently showcase the main experience yes.

 

[mclem]

I think I've seen people compare its weight to handhelds. Shouldn't be an issue, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

As an aside, I suspect that'll be a big negative with the mumbled-about "Can't Vita+PS3 also do this?"

(and on that note, could that do the pointer functionality? I'm not sure the setup quite has the required spatial awareness... unless you stick a big pink ball on the Vita)

 

[140.85]

WiiHD is still the best IMO.

There should have been a shot in the presentation video with the console and controller together.

 

[mclem]

Nintendo Wii: We all play together.
Nintendo Mii: This is a cute version of me.
Nintendo U: Its all about you.

The logo is great by itself too - but next to Wii it looks confused. People who say you need to keep the name Wii aren't convincing me you can't transfer the name's trust easily to 'U'. I think the positives outweigh the negatives. Nintendo U is more inviting to people who didn't dig the Wii and markets better. It also simplifies the naming for future devices + addons.

It's a shame Sony beat them to a product named "Eye".

 

[mclem]

Lack of software content to competently showcase the main experience yes.

How much software did we see for the Wii in 2005? The PS3 in 2005? The 360 in 2004?

(I'm not presenting these as counterexamples; I genuinely don't recall the PS3 and 360 blowouts, although I know the Wii was only a glimpse of the hardware and nothing much else)

 

[richiek]

Personally, I know a name is meaningless in the grand scheme of things but it's pretty hard for me to get past the Wii U name. Some of it could stem from the fact that I have negative connotations with the "Wii" name and what it represents so it's hard for me to get behind a product that still carries that banner.

Wow, people STILL have problems with the Wii name??

 

[forrest]

I really don't get the confusion here. I thought the conference was pretty straight forward and I had no issue understanding that nintendo was pitching a console that streamed video to a multi-function controller.

Reading some comments about the name. I too think Nintendo U would have been sufficient, though I would have pitched Nintendo Yuu or Yu instead of the singular letter U.

 

[mclem]

Wow, people STILL have problems with the Wii name??

"Negative connotations" doesn't necessarily mean "It sounds like urine". He could simply mean that he associates it with casual games which don't interest him.

 

[Vinci]

Wow, people STILL have problems with the Wii name??

Many 'hardcore' do, yes. I don't really know why, as they could easily have ignored the system if they wanted to. But I'm not prepared to judge people who have negative connotations about this or that.

 

[Deku]

It's a shame Sony beat them to a product named "Eye".

If they wanted to use "I" they would just use "i" though "Wii I" doesn't roll off the tongue and would be simplified to W3i

 

[Doc Holliday]

Only reason most of us are excited about it at all at this point is based on what sites have dug up about it and revealed about the controller and console. And that's insane.



You know the only reason anybody cares about this system at this point is because of that 'stupid screen on the gamepad,' right? Yes, there are some who are thrilled to see Nintendo move into HD, but most conversation and interest about the system comes from that controller. So it's not stupid.

Because that is where they put the emphasis on. What else are we gonna talk about? The specs? what specs? The games? What games? Online? nope

Could you imagine if they had announced a beast of a machine with real 3rd party support and "classic" gamepad in addition to having Wii motion compatibility. If they would have assured 3rd parties that they were serious about changing their image, they have jumped aboard with better shit.

PS the controller is pretty nice to hold and looks pretty sweet. I just think Nintendo blew a chance to really set themselves up nicely for the next few years. This is the first Nintendo system i'm going to take a wait and see approach. Shit, I've imported half of my nintendo systems lol

 

[Vinci]

Because that is where they put the emphasis on. What else are we gonna talk about? The specs? what specs? The games? What games? Online? nope

That's because the controller is the system's USP [Unique Selling Proposition]. It's what is meant to help distinguish the system from others, while hopefully providing aspects that appeal to a wide audience irrespective of its competitors. Wii controls, in and of themselves, have been done. People are familiar with them, and each other company has released an extension of those. The screen is meant to provide a new experience that, Nintendo hopes, is also very compelling - not only to the 'hardcore' but to the existing Wii audience.

Could you imagine if they had announced a beast of a machine with real 3rd party support and "classic" gamepad in addition to having Wii motion compatibility. If they would have assured 3rd parties that they were serious about changing their image, they have jumped aboard with better shit.

I think it's a bit early to say whether 3rd parties are falling over themselves to develop on this machine at this stage, and those who have professed hesitation have done so due to Nintendo's history and not the controller or its screen.

 

[civilstrife]

Calling it wii U was a mistake. The name brand gets them nothing. it's toxic to hardcore gamers and Mom and Dad aren't going to upgrade from their Wii anyway for the next 10 years. And they're certainly not going to do it for a mostly traditional controller or better graphics.

 

[mclem]

Because that is where they put the emphasis on. What else are we gonna talk about? The specs? what specs? The games? What games? Online? nope

Nintendo's POV, for better or for worse, is that they want you to associate the system with the things that might make games *different*, not the more of the same dickwar that goes on.

Could you imagine if they had announced a beast of a machine with real 3rd party support and "classic" gamepad in addition to having Wii motion compatibility. If they would have assured 3rd parties that they were serious about changing their image, they have jumped aboard with better shit.

But they *did* announce a beast of a machine with real 3rd party support and "classic" gamepad in addition to having Wii motion compatability. I mean, if you'd mentioned online, then yes, there's holes there, but every one of the boxes you'd listed, they'd ticked.

 

[InsaneZero]

I think that the biggest problem with Nintendo's presentation of the Wii U for me was that they held a reveal for a console that nowhere near ready for one.

I remember that in the Wii U presentation there was a video of Miyamoto saying that the console presented so many different possibilities that they were having trouble managing all these unique ideas. I don't have a problem with them talking about possibilities, but the key problem that really bothered me was that second point, where they were referring to this issue in the current tense. They had ideas, but not games present on the show floor.

In other words, there was no proof of concept ready.

The existence of the "Experiences" were a way to hide this fact, but even trying to hide it was only more evidence that they didn't have something like a "Wii Sports" to show. Nothing on stage demonstrated a clear reason why this controller had to exist and why people needed one. With the Wii and Wii Sports, they were able to demonstrate that the controller was able to make the movements of the avatar more intuitive and subsequently increase its accessibility.

But there was nothing of the sort for that in the Wii U's reveal. Most of the unique content showcased for the controller wasn't something that readily demonstrated some kind of apparent improvement. We have a bunch of games that had its HUD moved to the controller. That adds convenience, but for people that didn't understand what it did it before it means nothing.

I'm sure that we'll get a better understanding of what this thing will do eventually, but for all the talk about what this device will do there was no demonstration of how it'd do it.

 

[mclem]

Calling it wii U was a mistake. The name brand gets them nothing. it's toxic to hardcore gamers and Mom and Dad aren't going to upgrade from their Wii anyway for the next 10 years. And they're certainly not going to do it for a mostly traditional controller.

My Mum probably will. But she's a Mario Kart junkie. She didn't like the steering wheel control for Mario Kart Wii, but perked up when I got the Classic Controller out.

 

[evolution]

One problem i had with their showing was the lack of new games. It doesn't really show a strong commitment from 3rd parties when their just porting old games. They should have waited until next E3 to announce the system

 

[Vinci]

Calling it wii U was a mistake. The name brand gets them nothing. it's toxic to hardcore gamers and Mom and Dad aren't going to upgrade from their Wii anyway for the next 10 years. And they're certainly not going to do it for a mostly traditional controller.

I think you're underestimating the controller, but I guess we'll see in a year or so from now. I know that the Chase Mii game alone got my wife excited, and she only likes the Wii and Tetris.

One problem i had with their showing was the lack of new games. It doesn't really show a strong commitment from 3rd parties when their just porting old games. They should have waited until next E3 to announce the system

Considering they had jack-shit to show for the Wii, that would have killed their stock price even more. "We got nothing coming" is not a good comment to make for those determined to see potential growth in your company's market.

 

[revolverjgw]

Should have called it this (this is from my dumbass local paper way back in the year of our lord 2006). Think about it! They could have used Ric Flair to promote it!

 

[mclem]

One problem i had with their showing was the lack of new games. It doesn't really show a strong commitment from 3rd parties when their just porting old games. They should have waited until next E3 to announce the system

I agree that this would have been best if you're talking about creating the best possible impression, but there's more to corporate strategy than that; I'm not sure they were in a position to wait with the Wii being where it is at the moment.

 

[robor]

How much software did we see for the Wii in 2005? The PS3 in 2005? The 360 in 2004?

(I'm not presenting these as counterexamples; I genuinely don't recall the PS3 and 360 blowouts, although I know the Wii was only a glimpse of the hardware and nothing much else)

I'm not talking about a blowout. I'm talking about showing SOMETHING that can get us excited about the system. I found that everyone I talked to about this console found the presentation severely underwhelming compared to Wii's presentation.

 

[Vinci]

I'm not talking about a blowout. I'm talking about showing SOMETHING that can get us excited about the system. I found that everyone I talked to about this console found the presentation severely underwhelming compared to Wii's presentation.

They should've shown Ghost Recon Online's trailer, as well as Zelda HD. Period. It was foolish not to.

 

[Barrett2]

If they had cut short the Zelda bullshit at the beginning and instead had Miyamoto talk through the full Zelda Wii U demo, lighting switches and all, as a tech demo of Wii U, it would have been a fucking winner.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTkCIJGTe_U

THAT is an impressive tech demo to me. Now it might not be the mightiest graphics ever, but I think in terms of getting great shaders and reflections to ramp up a scene, real-time full scene light changes and very smooth framerate, I'm impressed. Its obviously got more to give, too, because we can't see any moments with less than smooth gameplay.

Why not show this fully? Why not have Miyamoto on stage showing "look, we're not ready to show you all our games yet, but this is the sort of tech it has. But next, look at all the amazing gameplay things we can do with this screen. Look at what the developers are saying."

Until I read this post, I honestly didn't know they had a Zelda HD demo on the floor to interact with. That looks gorgeous on the controller screen! Why in god's name did they spend their presentation showing low resolution Mii minigame crap on the controller screen instead of this?

Remember that mini game where you used the controller screen to shoot Miis in a building window? That looks like some plug-and-play crap you would buy at the mall for $15, compared to this stunning Zelda footage.

Scanning through the other threads about Weeiiuu news, I am stunned at what a bad presentation they had. The more I think about it, I don't think they could have done a worse job of introducing the damn thing.

Instead of showcasing this gorgeous HD Zelda game, they focused so much on crappy Mii-focused mini games, that vague Lego announcement, and the Super Mario game which looked basically like a Wii game.

 

[Guerrillas in the Mist]

The Wii U presentation was a horrible trainwreck, but the backlash is certainly delicious.

The quotes about the games in the third party reel looking worse than the PS360 versions prior to the reveal that they were the PS360 versions, that was awesome.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

The quotes about the games in the third party reel looking worse than the PS360 versions prior to the reveal that they were the PS360 versions, that was awesome.

Giant Bomb's off the cuff reaction to the demo reel in their post-conference video had them saying that they looked like "first run" 360 games or "when we were transitioning from Xbox to 360," as they all nodded in agreement.

 

[Angry Fork]

To be quite honest, I think they showed it off way too soon.

Same, they should've focused this E3 on Wii and 3DS games, and then announce the console but don't show anything or talk about it. Then next E3 they could've came in like a storm, shown some games and real trailers for it, and have it release that same year in the fall. It would've been received much better and would have tons of hype.

 

[FoneBone]

Giant Bomb's off the cuff reaction to the demo reel in their post-conference video had them saying that they looked like "first run" 360 games or "when we were transitioning from Xbox to 360," as they all nodded in agreement.

Have any of the sites that said things like that issued some sort of (informal) retraction?

 

[JWong]

WiiHD is still the best IMO.

There should have been a shot in the presentation video with the console and controller together.

HD is as popular as putting 'i' in front of the word.

Even Trucks are getting named HD. Nintendo should have done it, agreed.

 

[robor]

They should've shown Ghost Recon Online's trailer, as well as Zelda HD. Period. It was foolish not to.

Can't tell if this is sarcasm but I don't think it needed to have those to woo us, but rather a piece of software that capitalizes on the reason WHY this device needs to be in a our homes. WHY the screen is there and WHY it should become a permanent apparatus in gaming.

It could be just one piece of software, that's all it needed but it didn't have any.

It seems wii have a problem on our hands Nintendo...

 

[Father_Brain]

Same, they should've focused this E3 on Wii and 3DS games, and then announce the console but don't show anything or talk about it. Then next E3 they could've came in like a storm, shown some games and real trailers for it, and have it release that same year in the fall. It would've been received much better and would have tons of hype.

Waiting until next E3 would only make sense if Nintendo is aiming for a Q4 launch, which I'm far from convinced is the case.

 

[hamchan]

Nintendo Wii: We all play together.
Nintendo Mii: This is a cute version of me.
Nintendo U: Its all about you.

The logo is great by itself too - but next to Wii it looks confused. People who say you need to keep the name Wii aren't convincing me you can't transfer the name's trust easily to 'U'. I think the positives outweigh the negatives. Nintendo U is more inviting to people who didn't dig the Wii and markets better. It also simplifies the naming for future devices + addons.

Wow, the Nintendo U is a much better name than Wii U. It's not too late for Nintendo to rename the thing, is it?