Support NeoGAF

[GhostTrick]

eShop could be succesful if Nintendo had the right way to promote it.
Make it like appstore. Cheap price (Why do I have to pay more because it has better controls ?). Give more royalties to devs. Make a cheap licenced SDK to make sure no one use it for bad things.

 

[Gahiggidy]

I think the reason Reggie couldn't say who made the Bird demo is because he simply didn't know.

Has anyone else from Nintendo been asked this question?

 

[z0m3le]

Nintendo has some of the most creative teams in the world of video games and they have people with a very special talent: Abstract thinking. If there's someone that can come up with incredible uses for multi touch it's them. Most of the AAA devs are just good at iterating, picking stablished things and improve them.

So that argument doesn't hold much value.

It's incredible how fixated people had become with the "pinch to zoom". Multi touch allows for a vast combination of input and gestures that single touch can't match.

In general the advantages of going with a multi touch screen far out weight the disadvantages. At least the ones people defending the single touch bring up.

Adding to this, Nintendo systems have supported this type of touch screen interaction since 2004, so something more modern will be welcomed.

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/02/26/patent-application-reveals-nintendos-plan-for-multi-touch-capab/ They've been thinking about multitouch since 2004, I am sure if they come up with a useful application of it, we will get multitouch on the Upad... if they skip on it, I think that shows how much value those creative people put into it.

 

[Krev]

Maybe not revolutionary, but the team used the wiimote in very clever ways that are not easily feasible (or not possible at all) with traditional, dual analog controllers, for example Yoshi's tongue

Spoiler

especially the very last star in SMG2

In SMG2, yes, but not so much in the original.

 

[blu]

Maybe not revolutionary, but the team used the wiimote in very clever ways that are not easily feasible (or not possible at all) with traditional, dual analog controllers, for example Yoshi's tongue

Spoiler

especially the very last star in SMG2

I think that a small 3rd party developer (Frontier) showed Nintnedo a thing or two about creative use of pointer controls in a platforming game. Nintendo are not the end-all-be-all of creativity.

 

[GhostTrick]

I think the reason Reggie couldn't say who made the Bird demo is because he simply didn't know.

Has anyone else from Nintendo been asked this question?

Maybe. But I think that he should know what he's showing.

 

[frankie_baby]

I think that a small 3rd party developer (Frontier) showed Nintnedo a thing or two about creative use of pointer controls in a platforming game. Nintendo are not the end-all-be-all of creativity.

I really hope frontier make some games on wii u

 

[BurntPork]

So you are saying not a safe bet at all then

Well, if you want to look at it that way.

 

[Nibel]

Probably old, but will post for normal people

Ubisoft on Wii U: "the machine can have a great success"

 

[Refreshment.01]

Just because multi touch can support all these different gestures doesn't mean people actually use them or that they'd be particularly good for games

Yesterday i did give you some examples of what multi touch could allow, so please don't ignore them and reset the whole discussion cycle again. There are definite uses for it in the realm of videogames. A company with the creative resources and development prowess of Nintendo could exploit the tech probably more than anybody else has done before.

I think cost is the biggest and most important disadvantage in this case, at least for Nintendo.

Now this is a good argument. Yet, i'll arggue that this type of cost saving measures have hurt Nintendo in the past. Why come with a good controller concept such as this and them chose to limit it's potential because you wanna cost save early in the cycle? The screens will go down in price in the next years, so Nintendo should also think in the long term.

Do you have some examples?

Search some yesterdays posts by me. I quickly gave some examples. Plus, save for the hardcore Nintendo partisans most people with common sense see the potential for multi touch interfaces and input.

 

[BGBW]

Remember how Apple Macs required you to hold down ctrl to replicate a right click with a single button mouse?

You could replicate multifinger swipes with a stylus + holding down a button of the tablet.

 

[starmud]

Do guys think the eShop will ever be able to compete with the App Store and the Android Market?

In a few years they could amass a pretty respectable library, right?

if they can build the shop out to be more supportive of small developers/user friendly/payment friendly.

it wouldn't take much on any of the console makers part to make a system competent enough to piggy back on the success of the app store. you only need to make a platform thats somewhat attractive and get the better developers to bring ios projects/releases over to your system. its all upside as long as its somewhat cost friendly.

to some degree, its going to happen eventually either way. theres no way the content dosent begin to crossover in someway down the line. looking at the growth many of the popular publishers/studios from iOS are seeing, they'll increasingly have the ability to make moves into additional platforms. mobile developers are in large, supportive of other platforms to stream their product too, if possible. theres no reason not to with f2p games if the system supports your business model.

whatever console holders cook up, it wont be the app store... but it dosent have to be. they only have to compete for gaming time.

i've been harping about it for sometime, if nintendo considers itself in any form of a "battle" against apple, it would have to consider the app store and its game publishers as 3rd parties. theres no reason why nintendo can't get some of the larger IP's on the app store to jump onto a nintendo system. its just providing the framework/commitment to get it going.

 

[DrWong]

Search some yesterdays posts by me. I quickly gave some examples. Plus, save for the hardcore Nintendo partisans most people with common sense see the potential for multi touch interfaces and input.

Cool. I don't use smartphones or tablets, it's why I asked.
Ok, got it.

 

[BurntPork]

Nintendo has some of the most creative teams in the world of video games and they have people with a very special talent: Abstract thinking. If there's someone that can come up with incredible uses for multi touch it's them. Most of the AAA devs are just good at iterating, picking stablished things and improve them.

So that argument doesn't hold much value.

It's incredible how fixated people had become with the "pinch to zoom". Multi touch allows for a vast combination of input and gestures that single touch can't match.

In general the advantages of going with a multi touch screen far out weight the disadvantages. At least the ones people defending the single touch bring up.

Adding to this, Nintendo systems have supported this type of touch screen interaction since 2004, so something more modern will be welcomed.

This is one of the laziest arguments I've ever heard. "I can't come up with anything but Nintendo can because they're Nintendo so the extra expense is justified." You might as well argue that they need to literally put in a coffee maker. The fact that you can't come up with even one idea probably means that there aren't enough useful ones to justify the extra cost.

 

[frankie_baby]

Yesterday i did give you some examples of what multi touch could allow, so please don't ignore them and reset the whole discussion cycle again. There are definite uses for it in the realm of videogames. A company with the creative resources and development prowess of Nintendo could exploit the tech probably more than anybody else has done before.

Now this is a good argument. Yet, i'll arggue that this type of cost saving measures have hurt Nintendo in the past. Why come with a good controller concept such as this and them chose to limit it's potential because you wanna cost save early in the cycle? The screens will go down in price in the next years, so Nintendo should also think in the long term.

Search some yesterdays posts by me. I quickly gave some examples. Plus, save for the hardcore Nintendo partisans most people with common sense see the potential for multi touch interfaces and input.

I know you did but for the most part you just listed off gestures, the only practical use of which you suggested was musical instruments which I did agree with you on

 

[frankie_baby]

This is one of the laziest arguments I've ever heard. "I can't come up with anything but Nintendo can because they're Nintendo so the extra expense is justified." You might as well argue that they need to literally put in a coffee maker. The fact that you can't come up with even one idea probably means that there aren't enough useful ones to justify the extra cost.

Oh my god, have we actually got you in your 7% being sane time on here, well said

 

[Conor 419]

Just had to put down my dog because it was getting old, it was requiring a lot of attention and I cba looking after it during E3.

Anyway, in other news, my E3 speech is coming along great! Nearing 10k words now, I need to get it proofread, draw up some graphs and also work on trimming down redundant/excess words, also the conclusion needs work. It gets a bit emotional at times so I'm going to have to practice my delivery too, all in all though, looking good chums.

 

[GhostTrick]

The problem is that people think that capacitive screens are high end tech while resistive is cheap tech.
Both tech has their pros and cons.
For gaming Resistive screens are better because of the accuracy. I just can imagine Trauma Center on a capacitive screen.

 

[Krev]

Just had to put down my dog because it was getting old, it was requiring a lot of attention and I cba looking after it during E3.

Anyway, in other news, my E3 speech is coming along great! Nearing 10k words now, I need to get it proofread, draw up some graphs and also work on trimming down redundant/excess words, also the conclusion needs work. It gets a bit emotional at times so I'm going to have to practice my delivery too, all in all though, looking good chums.

The problem is that people think that capacitive screens are high end tech while resistive is cheap tech.
Both tech has their pros and cons.
For gaming Resistive screens are better because of the accuracy.

Not really, since you need to dedicate one hand to stylus use if you want to take advantage of the increased accuracy. It's great for certain games, like your Trauma Center example, but overall the gaming applications are much more limited than with capacitive.

 

[BGBW]

But you don't have to use the stylus. OoT3D and MK7 are perfectly usable with just fingers.

So resistive allows for both fingers and stylus but capacitive only allows for fingers and sausages (doubt they'd throw in a deluxe capacitive stylus to go along side the extra cost of the screen).

 

[Krev]

But you don't have to use the stylus. OoT3D and MK7 are perfectly usable with just fingers.

The accuracy advantage of resistive only applies if you're using a stylus.

 

[Refreshment.01]

Remember how Apple Macs required you to hold down ctrl to replicate a right click with a single button mouse?

You could replicate multifinger swipes with a stylus + holding down a button of the tablet.

It's not just about what is possible to replicate with what. Remeber we had full featured Zelda game in a console with 2 buttons and a cross pad, yet it was a pain in the ass the excessive item switching. It's about what's more natural and convenient. Plus occupying one entire hand with a stylus has been an issue of hot debates and complains since the DS in 2004. The stylus occupied hand can for example drag and touch, yet you can get more input varieties doing the same motions in a multi touch screen and have your hand free to quickly operate the buttons. So there's a good case to defend a screen MORE oriented to finger use.

This is one of the laziest arguments I've ever heard. "I can't come up with anything but Nintendo can because they're Nintendo so the extra expense is justified." You might as well argue that they need to literally put in a coffee maker. The fact that you can't come up with even one idea probably means that there aren't enough useful ones to justify the extra cost.

Withotu any animosity towards you BurntPork, thats a double standard on your part. My argument who has been backed up by examples in numerous thread is lazy because it's not aligned with your view point, yet something like this argument which could be considered as vague if not more as mine gets a pass from you:

Just because multi touch can support all these different gestures doesn't mean people actually use them or that they'd be particularly good for games

Look at least DrWong , even if not in agreement, he had the manners to dig up the post and try to understand what is my view point, instead of making out of place comments:

Cool. I don't use smartphones or tablets, it's why I asked.
Ok, got it.

 

[frankie_baby]

The accuracy advantage of resistive only applies if you're using a stylus.

But then on a capacitive you can't ever really have accuracy

 

[GhostTrick]

The accuracy advantage of resistive only applies if you're using a stylus.

Yes but in the case of UPad, there are buttons. So I don't see the use of capacitive here.

 

[frankie_baby]

It's not just about what is possible to replicate with what. Remeber we had full featured Zelda game in a console with 2 buttons and a cross pad, yet it was a pain in the ass the excessive item switching. It's about what's more natural and convenient. Plus occupying one entire hand with a stylus has been an issue of hot debates and complains since the DS in 2004. The stylus occupied hand can for example drag and touch, yet you can get more input varieties doing the same motions in a multi touch screen and have your hand free to quickly operate the buttons. So there's a good case to defend a screen MORE oriented to finger use.

Withotu any animosity towards you BurntPork, thats a double standard on your part. My argument who has been backed up by examples in numerous thread is lazy because it's not aligned with your view point, yet something like this argument which could be considered as vague if not more as mine gets a pass from you:


Look at least DrWong , even if not in agreement, he had the manners to dig up the post and try to understand what is my view point, instead of making out of place comments:

Sorry but I'm on my capacitive screen phone so digging up the post would be a pain in the ass, perhaps there could be some sort of device that'd make it more precise, perhaps we could call it a stylus

 

[Mithos]

I would love some requirement of pressure on my Xperia Arc S screen, it is WAY to sensitive.

 

[BGBW]

With the tablet you have two shoulder buttons, an analogue slider and four buttons accessible by one hand. If the game requires more than that and the use of the stylus for accurate touch controls then obviously something went wrong during the game's design stage.

 

[abasm]

Would a capacitive screen really cost more, though? You'd think that, with the gangantuan demand by manufacturers for capacitive tech, the channels for buying these things would be extremely inexpensive.

I'm fairly certain Nintendo is going resistive because they're building up suites of apps that favor the technology. Drawing is a breeze on 3DS, and a nightmare on a smartphone. Puzzle games like Sudoku and Picross need precision, or else you have to implement half-assed zooming solutions to compensate. Multi-touch gestures offer an untapped gold-mine of gameplay possibilities, but even if Nintendo figures it out first, they would just be copied on tablets. Single-touch keeps their ideas exclusive to the platform.

 

[Turrican3]

In SMG2, yes, but not so much in the original.

I think the sections where Mario is free-floating in space and has to "anchor" itself are really good, too (and quite difficult to do without a pointer-like device)

Nintendo are not the end-all-be-all of creativity.

Absolutely!
(that wasn't my point, though)

 

[Conor 419]

I think resistive makes more sense for the U pad. I think they work better for video games.

 

[DragonSworne]

Nice cycle guys

 

[Aostia]

I need some gif or mockup to re-hype me! please gaffers don't let me down!

 

[BurntPork]

Big posts stand out more. Plus, your point was just silly.

Besides that, I actually agree that capacitive would be better overall, but it's so marginal that I don't care either way. I'd like capacitive, but it's something I can live without. I don't need the newest tech for the sake of having that tech. The advantage is negligible for games.

 

[BD1]

Would a capacitive screen really cost more, though? You'd think that, with the gangantuan demand by manufacturers for capacitive tech, the channels for buying these things would be extremely inexpensive.

I'm fairly certain Nintendo is going resistive because they're building up suites of apps that favor the technology. Drawing is a breeze on 3DS, and a nightmare on a smartphone. Puzzle games like Sudoku and Picross need precision, or else you have to implement half-assed zooming solutions to compensate. Multi-touch gestures offer an untapped gold-mine of gameplay possibilities, but even if Nintendo figures it out first, they would just be copied on tablets. Single-touch keeps their ideas exclusive to the platform.

This.

Wii U isn't a tablet. For games and applications Nintendo is planning for Wii U, a resistive screen's pros outweigh its cons.

 

[I Stalk Alone]

Dragging on screen elements, compass gesture clockwise and counter clock wise (pivoting thumb and rotating index), 1 finger touch, 2 finger touch, 3 finger touch, 1 finger swipe, 2 finger swipe (etc), 5 finger grab, pinch contract, pinch expand. Some of them.

Simulating devices that require multiple contact points: PC keyboard, piano, DJ mixer, bongos, air hockey game. Musical instruments, etc.

There's plenty more and leaving outside very abstract stuff like kirky mini games, which Nintendo is relly good at (see Wario Ware series)

Those movements are all well and good if the multitouch algorithms used were flawless and I have played many touch games which use all the above examples and every single one of them has bad controls. Every single one. Maybe one day multi touch controls will have some precision but not today and not until the technology becomes better and way cheaper. I find myself wishing for a control pad to play games on android and ipad and basically it makes the whole idea of the tablet stupid if I end up having to use extra controllers because the basic control set is useless. Resistive until capacitive screens become better and cheaper for the consumer. I would much rather have haptics than capacitive at this moment in time if we had a choice.

Single touch is fine, but even that has its limitations in precision. No I don't want an algorithm that predicts my actions and please no input lag I hate that shit.

Multitouch is useless if it will not be used for core mechanics that single touch can already do well enough. iOS and Android games are full of C64 era clones with a photoshop smile that use bad multitouch and I don't understand why the proponents of such platforms tout the control methods as some kind of standard when it is cumbersome and downright relies on chance to get anything right. I would like WiiU to have multitouch when multitouch is good enough. I want precision comfort and great controls out of a controller, not premature technology.

 

[EatChildren]

I prefer resistive with a stylus, capacitive with a finger. What suits the Wii U pad will depend on what Nintendo is doing.

And I hope they're doing stuff that really requires the precision and benefit of a stylus on a resistive screen, because I do feel that, on paper, capacitive might be the better option. Unlike the 3DS, the Wii U pad is quite large, and thus more roomy and free for finger use versus a stylus. Additionally, I feel if Nintendo is trying to steal some of the iOS/mobile market by saying "all your favourite games can be played on our brand new, better looking console! how cool is that!", not appealing to the familiar technology of capacitive is a risky move. These games are largely built around multi touch (which is important, yes), and heavy finger use versus a stylus. It also, quite frankly, looks a lot nicer. I don't know if Nintendo is going to be able to sell that experience on a single touch capacitive screen, one that is better suited to a stylus, a stylus is may not need due to how big the screen actually is.

But yeah, it will depend on the applications and games Nintendo demos with the pad. If it's all finger use and no real need for a stylus at all, then I think they'll have made a poor decision.

 

[Krev]

What EatChildren said.

I think the sections where Mario is free-floating in space and has to "anchor" itself are really good, too (and quite difficult to do without a pointer-like device)

You're right, it's fun, but not revolutionary, nor a key part of the game's overall design, which was the original point I was originally making.

 

[wsippel]

Would a capacitive screen really cost more, though? You'd think that, with the gangantuan demand by manufacturers for capacitive tech, the channels for buying these things would be extremely inexpensive.

I think it's more about reliability. At least that's how Nintendo explained it. Capacitive and resistive can offer the same precision (though equally precise capacitive screens are most likely more expensive), but capacitive screens depend on conductivity - they simply don't work very well with cold, dry or sweaty hands. And there's nothing worse than an unreliable game controller. Resistive screens are more reliable and behave more predictable.

 

[Gravijah]

who is wii u?

 

[Conor 419]

I prefer resistive with a stylus, capacitive with a finger. What suits the Wii U pad will depend on what Nintendo is doing.

And I hope they're doing stuff that really requires the precision and benefit of a stylus on a resistive screen, because I do feel that, on paper, capacitive might be the better option. Unlike the 3DS, the Wii U pad is quite large, and thus more roomy and free for finger use versus a stylus. Additionally, I feel if Nintendo is trying to steal some of the iOS/mobile market by saying "all your favourite games can be played on our brand new, better looking console! how cool is that!", not appealing to the familiar technology of capacitive is a risky move. These games are largely built around multi touch (which is important, yes), and heavy finger use versus a stylus. It also, quite frankly, looks a lot nicer. I don't know if Nintendo is going to be able to sell that experience on a single touch capacitive screen, one that is better suited to a stylus, a stylus is may not need due to how big the screen actually is.

But yeah, it will depend on the applications and games Nintendo demos with the pad. If it's all finger use and no real need for a stylus at all, then I think they'll have made a poor decision.

I imagine developers will utilise a resistive screen to allow players to communicate with eachother pictochat style? Also, I don't think the drawing application would really work without resistive.

Overall though, I agree.

 

[Krev]

who is wii u?

U Mii?

 

[BurntPork]

I prefer resistive with a stylus, capacitive with a finger. What suits the Wii U pad will depend on what Nintendo is doing.

And I hope they're doing stuff that really requires the precision and benefit of a stylus on a resistive screen, because I do feel that, on paper, capacitive might be the better option. Unlike the 3DS, the Wii U pad is quite large, and thus more roomy and free for finger use versus a stylus. Additionally, I feel if Nintendo is trying to steal some of the iOS/mobile market by saying "all your favourite games can be played on our brand new, better looking console! how cool is that!", not appealing to the familiar technology of capacitive is a risky move. These games are largely built around multi touch (which is important, yes), and heavy finger use versus a stylus. It also, quite frankly, looks a lot nicer. I don't know if Nintendo is going to be able to sell that experience on a single touch capacitive screen, one that is better suited to a stylus, a stylus is may not need due to how big the screen actually is.

But yeah, it will depend on the applications and games Nintendo demos with the pad. If it's all finger use and no real need for a stylus at all, then I think they'll have made a poor decision.

But then it eats even more of the BOM.

 

[frankie_baby]

I think it's more about reliability. At least that's how Nintendo explained it. Capacitive and resistive can offer the same precision (though equally precise capacitive screens are most likely more expensive), but capacitive screens depend on conductivity - they simply don't work very well with cold, dry or sweaty hands. And there's nothing worse than an unreliable game controller. Resistive screens are more reliable and behave more predictable.

Plus capacitive screens are far far more likely to break when dropped, I don't think I know anyone with a smart phone that hasn't cracked or smashed the glass on at least one

 

[test_account]

Would a capacitive screen really cost more, though? You'd think that, with the gangantuan demand by manufacturers for capacitive tech, the channels for buying these things would be extremely inexpensive.

I'm fairly certain Nintendo is going resistive because they're building up suites of apps that favor the technology. Drawing is a breeze on 3DS, and a nightmare on a smartphone. Puzzle games like Sudoku and Picross need precision, or else you have to implement half-assed zooming solutions to compensate. Multi-touch gestures offer an untapped gold-mine of gameplay possibilities, but even if Nintendo figures it out first, they would just be copied on tablets. Single-touch keeps their ideas exclusive to the platform.

Every touch screen supports single touch. I cant imagine that any ideas that will arrive at WiiU will be something brand new and never-seen before thing regarding touch screen, and also require such pin point pressison that it cant be done on capacitive screens in any way.

I agree with what you say about choosing resistive screen though. It sounds plausible that this is why Nintendo chose it.

 

[EatChildren]

But then it eats even more of the BOM.

If capacitive does cost more to manufacture, then yeah . But I guess, as with all things Nintendo, I'd prefer them do it 'right' versus half arsing it or going on a whim. Personally I prefer resistive, as I feel capacitive tech is still a bit fiddly, but if there's no specific need to use a stylus on any Wii U application or game, due to the size of the screen, then they should go capacitive versus resistive. It works for the Vita, it works for iPads, and it works for smart phones.

It's kind of hard to tell people that they can play Angry Birds on their Wii U pad...but oh sorry, the grainy resistive overlay makes it look a bit worse, it doesn't feel as nice to drag your finger across, and all those multi-touch features are no longer applicable.

Assuming Nintendo want to do that, of course. They may very well have apps and games specifically built around the precision of a stylus, with no intentions of emulating the above.

 

[StreetsAhead]

Nice cycle guys

85% of these threads;
Wii U is uber powerful.
Wii U is weaksauce.
Wii U is in the middle.
This thread is moving too fast.
Why aren't there clicky sticks?
Oh! Analogue triggers too. Where are they?
Game leaks/dev comment/rumor.
How can you guys keep posting if there's no news?
Do you guys like my infos?
I don't think we can trust him!
Tech stuff. Tech stuff. Tech stuff.
Guys, who cares, games are the deciding factor.
Man, I wanna see what Retro can do.
Zelda! Star Fox! That's a waste! New IP! Metroid Prime!
I didn't like Metroid Prime 1,2, or 3.
You people are crazy.
Why aren't there more leaks?
When's e3?
LinkedIn
Random Predictions!
What would you do if Nintendo did X?
Mario will be so cool.
Sakurai sneezed. Smash Bros. related?
NFC is boring to me.
Retro should make DKCR2.
Let's talk about the 3DS for a bit!
What about online? They'll probably screw up.
No, they'll be fine. No Friend Codes.
Man, why isn't it e3 yet?
Nintendo Direct! Hype!
Hey guys, I've been away for a bit - can you tell me what's been going on.
Nintendo filed a patent/trademark.
Pokemon MMO!
Ubisoft, lol.
Multitouch is the future, down with single touch. So old fashioned.

 

[blu]

But then it eats even more of the BOM.

Ok, who are you and what did you do with BurntPork's body?

 

[z0m3le]

Refreshment#1 like I pointed out in my last post on the last page, Nintendo has had a filed patent for multitouch since july 2004, if they find a use for Wii U to have multitouch being better than having the accuracy of stylus and being able to do Virtual console DS games, then Wii U will get multitouch.

They have had the idea to do it for 8 years, and this point has been dragged on long enough, either explain a game that won't work without multitouch or just wait 3 weeks and continue complaining about stylus controls being too old.

 

[Exterminieren]

Acid Ghost is going to be this year's Weinerpoop, isn't it.

 

[Refreshment.01]

The problem is that people think that capacitive screens are high end tech while resistive is cheap tech.
Both tech has their pros and cons.
For gaming Resistive screens are better because of the accuracy. I just can imagine Trauma Center on a capacitive screen.

I don't view it like that GhostTrick, in fact it might not look like it but im being very pragmatic. This is not a small DS screen or even a smart phone one. Since the screen is quite big less, precision is required so finger operation becomes more practical. So probably accuracy issues are not so critical now, hell we can argue that in the world of console gaming accuracy had take a back sit to convenience and general feel of the experience. With what i do agree with is that for precision drawing resistive is superior. But on the other hand potential uses for multi touch for what i can see outweigh this. And anybody is yet to provide me with very compelling cases in which resistive ends up being far superior.

With the tablet you have two shoulder buttons, an analogue slider and four buttons accessible by one hand. If the game requires more than that and the use of the stylus for accurate touch controls then obviously something went wrong during the game's design stage.

Not to offend but that's a bit short sighted. For example, there could be multiple contexts in one game. In one the traditional controls make sense and in the other multi touch input.

Btw, Krev has done a really good job addressing your concerns.

Sorry but I'm on my capacitive screen phone so digging up the post would be a pain in the ass, perhaps there could be some sort of device that'd make it more precise, perhaps we could call it a stylus

Buy one with a bigger screen cheap ass

Big posts stand out more. Plus, your point was just silly.

Besides that, I actually agree that capacitive would be better overall, but it's so marginal that I don't care either way. I'd like capacitive, but it's something I can live without. I don't need the newest tech for the sake of having that tech. The advantage is negligible for games.

You haven't done any meaningful counter arguments either... oh wait does calling the post silly counts?

Bold part is your fabrication since that's not my line of thinking.

I'm fairly certain Nintendo is going resistive because they're building up suites of apps that favor the technology. Drawing is a breeze on 3DS, and a nightmare on a smartphone. Puzzle games like Sudoku and Picross need precision, or else you have to implement half-assed zooming solutions to compensate. Multi-touch gestures offer an untapped gold-mine of gameplay possibilities, but even if Nintendo figures it out first, they would just be copied on tablets. Single-touch keeps their ideas exclusive to the platform.

Good post absm. It's not just that they are building these suits, they had them for years already. So this speaks more about costs than what coul potentially open new possibilities.

Remember the screen dimension is substantial. For those types of game Nintendo could have explored other alternatives, maybe? A Draw Pad bundled with a suit of games for this. They were super successful selling a very expensive peripheral like the balance board.

Those movements are all well and good if the multitouch algorithms used were flawless and I have played many touch games which use all the above examples and every single one of them has bad controls.

Sound point and a genuine reason for concern. But you can't compare the output of devs making cheap ass shovel ware for apps stores with the kind of polish out of a developer like Nintendo.

I prefer resistive with a stylus, capacitive with a finger. What suits the Wii U pad will depend on what Nintendo is doing.

And I hope they're doing stuff that really requires the precision and benefit of a stylus on a resistive screen, because I do feel that, on paper, capacitive might be the better option. Unlike the 3DS, the Wii U pad is quite large, and thus more roomy and free for finger use versus a stylus. Additionally, I feel if Nintendo is trying to steal some of the iOS/mobile market by saying "all your favourite games can be played on our brand new, better looking console! how cool is that!", not appealing to the familiar technology of capacitive is a risky move. These games are largely built around multi touch (which is important, yes), and heavy finger use versus a stylus. It also, quite frankly, looks a lot nicer. I don't know if Nintendo is going to be able to sell that experience on a single touch capacitive screen, one that is better suited to a stylus, a stylus is may not need due to how big the screen actually is.

I agree with this and it's something people should consider. Regarding the bold part, it's a chicken and egg thing. Of course Nintendo will design a lot of software centered in stylus use since it takes advantage of the screens features.

But anyway ill fold back to an old argument of mine. Why have the same exact type of interaction with a touch screen that other of their very own products have given the user for years? Also orienting the subscreen for finger use makes a lot more sense since after all we will be operating a more traditional control pad.

But then it eats even more of the BOM.

Why didn't you call Eatchildren post silly? X¬) Hehehe....