Oh god, now the thread has actually been LINKED to. HELP US ALL. THEY'VE UNLEASHED THE KRACKEN!!
Did the people pushing the no-gamepad thing ever consider that they were actually wrong? Maybe? And that everyone else was just sick of the argument? Seriously, go read through that thread of tens of pages before you post another thing about getting rid of the GamePad. Read every single page every time you think of bringing this up again. Then you'll remember why everyone on this forum is rolling their eyes at the thought.
People who are 'pro-gamepad" will generally only talk about a Wii U without a gamepad when the topic of an article or forum thread is something about a Wii U without a gamepad...and even then they are almost always speaking in the purely hypothetical, or adamantly stating they DON'T want a Wii U without the gamepad.
You responded:
Here's a thread where many Nintendo fans share the same viewpoint I mentioned before.
Title of the thread:
What does Nintendo have to lose by making the gamepad "optional"?
Again, here's what I said:
People who are 'pro-gamepad" will generally only talk about a Wii U without a gamepad when the topic of an article or forum thread is something about a Wii U without a gamepad...and even then they are almost always speaking in the purely hypothetical, or adamantly stating they DON'T want a Wii U without the gamepad.
PS2 is all about DVD playback, XBox pushes media centre stuffs
PS3 is going to be all about BluRay, XBox unveils HD-DVD player
Wii is a smash hit, PS3 gets Move and 360 gets Kinect
Kids are into tablets, Nintendo puts a tablet in their controller
Wii U has Off-TV play, Sony puts a lot of effort talking about PS4 -> Vita streaming
Backlash against XBOne DRM, it dies a bit and Sony pretends they were never interested in that
XBOne is all about the Kinect, Sony pushes their optional camera accessory
Kinect push fails, Microsoft makes Kinect also optional
If the Wii U was in first place right now they'd all be talking GamePad and MiiVerse competitors
If the XBOne was in the lead everyone would have Kinect competitors bundled and the PS4 would've also had heavy DRM on day 1
The Kinect bundle was an SKU built with extras intended to appeal to the more casual consumer. It was also priced aggressively even though it had that extra hardware. A casual consumer entering the market would get the Kinect bundle because it was cheap. If the Kinect is like the GamePad in any way it's the fact the GamePad enables games that might not be as "traditional". If anyone is interested in the GamePad it's the consumers at the lower end of the market.
Making the cheaper SKU ignore the GamePad fails to recognise that fact. The person who is wanting the cheaper SKU is more likely to want the GamePad-centric games, the cheaper SKU therefore needs the GamePad more than the others do. The sort of gamer who's not sold on the idea is more than happy to pay more, they don't care about the price anywhere near as much. The people who rage about how bad the GamePad is are the same people who buy a game every single month of the year. So if there is to be an SKU that appeals to the gamer not sold on the GamePad it should be an SKU that comes at a premium but includes more than one controller.
How hard is it to understand that the GPGPU and GamePad are basically tied, which is why they can't get rid of it? Like I said in the other thread, it would literally the equivalent of selling a DS(which wouldn't even be a DS, anymore) with only the top screen. The only difference is that your screens are separate.
Off-TV play is a decent and welcome feature, but the system is designed to have 2 screens, similarly to the DS line of products.
There are already tons of games that use it. They can't just go and exclude it. Color Zen just came out last Thursday. It needs the f***ing touch screen. Discussion over.
Qwest
3DS Friend Code: 4253-3737-8064 | Nintendo Network ID: Children
People who are 'pro-gamepad" will generally only talk about a Wii U without a gamepad when the topic of an article or forum thread is something about a Wii U without a gamepad...and even then they are almost always speaking in the purely hypothetical, or adamantly stating they DON'T want a Wii U without the gamepad.
You responded:
Here's a thread where many Nintendo fans share the same viewpoint I mentioned before.
Title of the thread:
What does Nintendo have to lose by making the gamepad "optional"?
Again, here's what I said:
People who are 'pro-gamepad" will generally only talk about a Wii U without a gamepad when the topic of an article or forum thread is something about a Wii U without a gamepad...and even then they are almost always speaking in the purely hypothetical, or adamantly stating they DON'T want a Wii U without the gamepad.
So...what I was saying then?
Nah.
I made a comment that several people on this website who love Nintendo say that without the gamepad the Wii-U is worthless, which is a sad belief.
You replied saying I made up these "mythical" people, and that they do not exist. You then went on to take my quote and say it was a "troll statement".
I then directed you to at least four separate posts showing well known members here saying the same thing you said was a "troll statement".
You then try to argue semantics because you were proven wrong in your attempt to call me a liar. You and I both know full well what you were trying to do.
It's too bad you weren't the OP of this thread, as then you could delete it in shame again!
The Kinect bundle was an SKU built with extras intended to appeal to the more casual consumer. It was also priced aggressively even though it had that extra hardware. A casual consumer entering the market would get the Kinect bundle because it was cheap. If the Kinect is like the GamePad in any way it's the fact the GamePad enables games that might not be as "traditional". If anyone is interested in the GamePad it's the consumers at the lower end of the market.
Making the cheaper SKU ignore the GamePad fails to recognise that fact. The person who is wanting the cheaper SKU is more likely to want the GamePad-centric games, the cheaper SKU therefore needs the GamePad more than the others do. The sort of gamer who's not sold on the idea is more than happy to pay more, they don't care about the price anywhere near as much. The people who rage about how bad the GamePad is are the same people who buy a game every single month of the year. So if there is to be an SKU that appeals to the gamer not sold on the GamePad it should be an SKU that comes at a premium but includes more than one controller.
So because you think the gamepad is more essential to casuals and a lower cost SKU would be targeting casuals you think that the concept of this sku defeats it's purpose.
Except everyone basically knows casuals are gone from the system and get there gaming elsewhere. They are not coming back.
The budget SKU would actually target people who are interested in Nintendo games but think the Wii U costs too much to justify picking one up just for those games. Your circular argument has many holes and does not have much substance to it.
How hard is it to understand that the GPGPU and GamePad are basically tied, which is why they can't get rid of it? Like I said in the other thread, it would literally the equivalent of selling a DS(which wouldn't even be a DS, anymore) with only the top screen. The only difference is that your screens are separate.
Off-TV play is a decent and welcome feature, but the system is designed to have 2 screens, similarly to the DS line of products.
There are already tons of games that use it. They can't just go and exclude it. Color Zen just came out last Thursday. It needs the f***ing touch screen. Discussion over.
It's pretty easy to understand but it is entirely irrelevant because we are not talking about a hardware revision. We are talking about existing hardware in a new SKU with a software update.
The system was conceived of as a 2 screen system but the software has failed to sell that concept and the concept itself has proven to be something that was not desired by console gamers. It is in no way the same thing as taking away the second screen on a DS.
Do you own a pro controller? Have you ever used the system or played games with a pro controller?
The Kinect bundle was an SKU built with extras intended to appeal to the more casual consumer. It was also priced aggressively even though it had that extra hardware. A casual consumer entering the market would get the Kinect bundle because it was cheap. If the Kinect is like the GamePad in any way it's the fact the GamePad enables games that might not be as "traditional". If anyone is interested in the GamePad it's the consumers at the lower end of the market.
Making the cheaper SKU ignore the GamePad fails to recognise that fact. The person who is wanting the cheaper SKU is more likely to want the GamePad-centric games, the cheaper SKU therefore needs the GamePad more than the others do. The sort of gamer who's not sold on the idea is more than happy to pay more, they don't care about the price anywhere near as much. The people who rage about how bad the GamePad is are the same people who buy a game every single month of the year. So if there is to be an SKU that appeals to the gamer not sold on the GamePad it should be an SKU that comes at a premium but includes more than one controller.
So because you think the gamepad is more essential to casuals and a lower cost SKU would be targeting casuals you think that the concept of this sku defeats it's purpose.
Except everyone basically knows casuals are gone from the system and get there gaming elsewhere. They are not coming back.
The budget SKU would actually target people who are interested in Nintendo games but think the Wii U costs too much to justify picking one up just for those games. Your circular argument has many holes and does not have much substance to it.
If the budget SKU is for people interested in Nintendo games but think the Wii U costs too much and Nintendo is focusing on using the GamePad then doesn't that defeat the purpose?
People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...
3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan
How hard is it to understand that the GPGPU and GamePad are basically tied, which is why they can't get rid of it? Like I said in the other thread, it would literally the equivalent of selling a DS(which wouldn't even be a DS, anymore) with only the top screen. The only difference is that your screens are separate.
Off-TV play is a decent and welcome feature, but the system is designed to have 2 screens, similarly to the DS line of products.
There are already tons of games that use it. They can't just go and exclude it. Color Zen just came out last Thursday. It needs the f***ing touch screen. Discussion over.
It's pretty easy to understand but it is entirely irrelevant because we are not talking about a hardware revision. We are talking about existing hardware in a new SKU with a software update.
The system was conceived of as a 2 screen system but the software has failed to sell that concept and the concept itself has proven to be something that was not desired by console gamers. It is in no way the same thing as taking away the second screen on a DS.
Do you own a pro controller? Have you ever used the system or played games with a pro controller?
Dude, a software update isn't gong to magically change what hardware is inside Wii U. The software has failed, not the hardware.
Yes, I have a pro controller, but someone is always using the GamePad during that time. In CoD Black Ops II, I play on the GamePad, and same for Sonic Racing, for example. I play with the GamePad wherever I can.
Qwest
3DS Friend Code: 4253-3737-8064 | Nintendo Network ID: Children
No, because Nintendo plans on actually using it's gimmick more. Pay attention kids.
'Kids' is the key word, as the NFC toys and figurines they intend to implement appeal to nobody but them.
Have you ever thought they do this because most of us that grew up with Nintendo have kids by now?
At the same time, Wii U appeals to both once you get it out of the box.
Why argue about the gamepad? In 6 month's time, we'll know the answer: If Xbox One's fly off the shelves as a result of Kinect being dropped, then the anti-gamepad party were right.
Do you own a pro controller? Have you ever used the system or played games with a pro controller?
I have a Pro Controller and I use it whenever it makes sense to use it (such as in Tropical Freeze). In GamePad-centric games (such as Pikmin 3 or Lego City: Undercover) a Pro Controller simply does not work as a GamePad replacement. In games where the added GamePad functionality is optional (such as Rayman Legends, Stick it to the Man! or Scram Kitty), using the Pro Controller reduces the gameplay experience.
Dude, a software update isn't gong to magically change what hardware is inside Wii U. The software has failed, not the hardware.
Yes, I have a pro controller, but someone is always using the GamePad during that time. In CoD Black Ops II, I play on the GamePad, and same for Sonic Racing, for example. I play with the GamePad wherever I can.
The Software update I am talking about would be something simply to enable the system to work without the gamepad. I am not sure what you are talking about. The main thing the update would need to do was free the system menu from needing the gamepad. The second thing that would solve most problems is simply a way to toggle which screen you display on your television....I am thinking simply a button when you bring up the home menu.....heck maybe it could make it display both screens on the television like a DS emulator would. This would eliminate the need for most games to be patched....I am thinking there are some early games where you may need to configure the game for Off-Tv/single screen play. Newer games all seem to simply use the minus button to toggle to off tv mode.
So if you are playing a game on the TV screen and not sharing the gamepad you still prefer to use the gamepad over the pro-controller? I just don't see the point of using a massive controller with a big screen that is simply mirroring what is on the television and has poor battery life. I find the pro controller to be better for single player experiences in general.
I did use the gamepad for windwaker HD when I had the television because I did like the convenience of the second screen. That game can be completely enjoyed with out the gamepad however. For Pikmin 3 I prefer to use wiimote and nunchuck and it is weird to also have to worry about the touchscreen at the same time I never found it intuitive....maybe I need to spend more time on that game. The Mario games don't need the gamepad even if they shoe horned some gamepad stuff in to those games. Arkham city needs it but it supports off tv play. Monster Hunter doesn't need it. Assasins Creed Doesn't need it. None of the virtual console games need it. NES remix 1 and 2 don't need it. I would think the vast majority of indie games and digital games don't need it. I don't think Wonderful 101 needs it but it would be the better way to play it. DK doesn't need it. Mario Kart 8 doesn't need it. Smash won't need it. The only games I have that do need it are mainly Nintendoland and Game and Wario and Wii Party U and Wii Fit U do use it enough where I would say they would go in the incompatible software pool for the budget SKU. Lego City and Zombi U need it, but it seems silly that those games do not have a mode where they can operate with out the gamepad.
And what the heck is up with games like blops2 and Sonic Racing allowing multi-player 2 screen gaming while Nintendos own games continue to fail to take advantage of simple things like that that the gamepad opens up? Mario Kart 8 doesn't support it. The mario games don't support it and how nice would it have been to have a multiplayer mode where the players are not contained to the same screen? Mario Kart I also here puts the track radar only on the gamepad which is useless....you can't be checking the gamepad screen while racing to see where your competition is. Nintendo has shown once again how they continue to fail to use the gamepad.
@blaisedinsd
There's software that needs the GamePad, and it's tied to the GPGPU, so that's reason enough. Like I said earlier, Xbox One can use those resources somewhere else, but GamePad functionality is probably passive. There are tons of reasons why the GamePad shouldn't be optional. If you want to ignore those reasons, then there's no point in having a discussion.
I don't know why Mario Kart 8 will not support 5 players. I think the emphasis is on motion controls, so the GamePad ensures players have a motion controller.
Qwest
3DS Friend Code: 4253-3737-8064 | Nintendo Network ID: Children
I don't know why Mario Kart 8 will not support 5 players. I think the emphasis is on motion controls, so the GamePad ensures players have a motion controller.
Probably because with 4 players the graphics take a noticible hit and the FPS drops to around 30. With 5 players it would likely be much worse.
@scar392
I still don't understand what you mean "There's software that needs the GamePad, and it's tied to the GPGPU".
There is software right now that requires a gamepad be connected to the system similarly to how wii games required the use of the nunchuck. Is that what you mean?
All the "work" is done by the console and not the gamepad in my understanding. The gamepad simply displays an image streamed from the console and sends controller input to the console. Is that what you mean?
I suppose the rendering of the second screen uses up some of the consoles resources....maybe that's why they didn't do more with the gamepad in DK and Kart.
Forums
Topic: Does the Kinect-less Xbox One mean anything for the Wii U?
Posts 121 to 140 of 250
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.