Wii U Forum

Topic: The depressing state of the WiiU release schedule

Showing 261 to 280 of 374

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

261. Posted:

@gage_wolf
What do you mean? I was making a point that Sony doesn't have any motion controlled sports games in 8th gen, while Nintendo and Microsoft do.

Madden 13, gameplay wise, is even a downgrade from Madden 06 on Wii, IMO. The motion controls are what made the Wii games different, but they only focused on the GamePad in Madden 13. You can still play with the Wii remote, but motion controls are excluded. Just think more along the lines of the PGA Tour game on Wii that used motion plus.

Edited on by SCAR392

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

shingi_70

262. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

@gage_wolf
What do you mean? I was making a point that Sony doesn't have any motion controlled sports games in 8th gen, while Nintendo and Microsoft do.

Madden 13, gameplay wise, is even a downgrade from Madden 06 on Wii, IMO. The motion controls are what made the Wii games different, but they only focused on the GamePad in Madden 13. You can still play with the Wii remote, but motion controls are excluded. Just think more along the lines of the PGA Tour game on Wii that used motion plus.

Who know's if one is in the works or not. I mean we still haven't seen a hot shots golf or tennis game and thats a series that been on every playstation platform.

As per motion controls I for the most part disliked them in everything but PGA Tour. I find that sim games don't need it for the type of they are. I did like the inclusion of the gamepad though

WAT!

Hey check out my awesome new youtube channel shingi70 where I update weekly on the latest gaming and comic news form a level headed perspective.

3DS Friend Code: 3093-7342-3454 | Nintendo Network ID: shingi70

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

263. Posted:

@shingi_70
I still think it should be an option. Granted Wii remotes and PS Move/PS Eye don't come with the consoles, but they are still controllers that should be supported if they make sense.

If a sports game doesn't have motion controller support, I might as well play on a portable console. Even those still have touch screens.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

gage_wolf

264. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

@shingi_70
I still think it should be an option. Granted Wii remotes and PS Move/PS Eye don't come with the consoles, but they are still controllers that should be supported if they make sense.

If a sports game doesn't have motion controller support, I might as well play on a portable console. Even those still have touch screens.

That's part of the identity crisis of the Wii U.Should games support motion controls or the gamepad? or both? I appreciate when devs go to the trouble to support both, but sometimes that gets out of hand. Look at Pikmin 3, the optimal control style as stated by Miyamoto himself was Wii mote + nunchuck + gamepad. I played it that way and it was kind of a mess.

Nintendo has overcrowded their system with controller options.

Edited on by gage_wolf

gage_wolf

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

265. Posted:

@gage_wolf
It needs to support both. That's a no brainer. That's why people don't care about Move or PS Eye that much, in the first place. Sony doesn't support it, so neither will consumers. Wii Party U, Nintendo Land, Pikmin 3, Wii Fit U, and Wii Sports Club are the best example I can think of that support Wii remotes. Super Mario 3D World doesn't use the motion, as far as I'm aware, but it's still nice to have as an option.

If motion controls make sense, they need to do it. If they don't then perhaps they should map regular controls to a Wii remote and nunchuck.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

gage_wolf

266. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

@gage_wolf
It needs to support both. That's a no brainer. That's why people don't care about Move or PS Eye that much, in the first place. Sony doesn't support it, so neither will consumers. Wii Party U, Nintendo Land, Pikmin 3, Wii Fit U, and Wii Sports Club are the best example I can think of that support Wii remotes. Super Mario 3D World doesn't use the motion, as far as I'm aware, but it's still nice to have as an option.

If motion controls make sense, they need to do it. If they don't then perhaps they should map regular controls to a Wii remote and nunchuck.

So what's the point in the gamepad then?

Edited on by gage_wolf

gage_wolf

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

267. Posted:

@gage_wolf
Are you... serious?

Just because the Wii remote should have a larger role, doesn't automatically mean the GamePad's should be questionable.
It's more control schemes, and possibly combinations of those control schemes(asymmetric).

All those games I mentioned still use the GamePad.

Edited on by SCAR392

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

OptometristLime

268. Posted:

gage_wolf wrote:

SCAR392 wrote:

@shingi_70
I still think it should be an option. Granted Wii remotes and PS Move/PS Eye don't come with the consoles, but they are still controllers that should be supported if they make sense.

If a sports game doesn't have motion controller support, I might as well play on a portable console. Even those still have touch screens.

That's part of the identity crisis of the Wii U.Should games support motion controls or the gamepad? or both? I appreciate when devs go to the trouble to support both, but sometimes that gets out of hand. Look at Pikmin 3, the optimal control style as stated by Miyamoto himself was Wii mote + nunchuck + gamepad. I played it that way and it was kind of a mess.

Nintendo has overcrowded their system with controller options.

The only evidence you cite, is a controller preference you happen not to share with Miyamoto.

Doesn't that suggest a multitude of control options, allowing for user preference, is a good thing?

Edited on by OptometristLime

You are what you eat from your head to your feet.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

gage_wolf

269. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

@gage_wolf
Are you... serious?

Just because the Wii remote should have a larger role, doesn't automatically mean the GamePad's should be questionable.
It's more control schemes, and possibly combinations of those control schemes(asymmetric).

All those games I mentioned still use the GamePad.

So you want devs to implement a whole new asymmetrical mode for the U versions of sports titles? Sounds great, too bad no one is going to go to that trouble. We can barely get straight ports at this point.

gage_wolf

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

270. Posted:

gage_wolf wrote:

SCAR392 wrote:

@gage_wolf
Are you... serious?

Just because the Wii remote should have a larger role, doesn't automatically mean the GamePad's should be questionable.
It's more control schemes, and possibly combinations of those control schemes(asymmetric).

All those games I mentioned still use the GamePad.

So you want devs to implement a whole new asymmetrical mode for the U versions of sports titles? Sounds great, too bad no one is going to go to that trouble. We can barely get straight ports at this point.

It's not even tbat difficult. Once they utilize the GamePad, all they have to do is what they have done in the past for Wii titles.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

gage_wolf

271. Posted:

OptometristLime wrote:

gage_wolf wrote:

SCAR392 wrote:

@shingi_70
I still think it should be an option. Granted Wii remotes and PS Move/PS Eye don't come with the consoles, but they are still controllers that should be supported if they make sense.

If a sports game doesn't have motion controller support, I might as well play on a portable console. Even those still have touch screens.

That's part of the identity crisis of the Wii U.Should games support motion controls or the gamepad? or both? I appreciate when devs go to the trouble to support both, but sometimes that gets out of hand. Look at Pikmin 3, the optimal control style as stated by Miyamoto himself was Wii mote + nunchuck + gamepad. I played it that way and it was kind of a mess.

Nintendo has overcrowded their system with controller options.

The only evidence you cite, is a controller preference you happen not to share with Miyamoto.

Doesn't that suggest a multitude of control options, allowing for user preference, is a good thing?

If it were well thought out and elegant, than sure. But so far that is not the case. Having a pile of multiple plastic objects on my lap in order to "optimally" play a rather simple game, ala Pikmin 3, seems less like innovation and more like Nintendo trying to shoehorn ideas that aren't cohesive.

Edit: plus it just looks silly. My roommate walked in and literally laughed out loud at the convoluted controller setup I had before me while playing Pikmin 3.

Edited on by gage_wolf

gage_wolf

AuthorMessage
Avatar

OptometristLime

272. Posted:

gage_wolf wrote:

If it were well thought out and elegant, than sure. But so far that is not the case. Having a pile of multiple plastic objects on my lap in order to "optimally" play a rather simple game, ala Pikmin 3, seems less like innovation and more like Nintendo trying to shoehorn ideas that aren't cohesive.

Edit: plus it just looks silly. My roommate walked in and literally laughed out loud at the convoluted controller setup I had before me while playing Pikmin 3.

This is actually a pretty good example, your friend's perception of what are more standard controls versus the current Nintendo approach which does seem to favor numerous peripherals.

I don't find Nintendo's decision making to be too suprising here coming off of the Wii generation, but I still get what you're saying. There's little hope of Nintendo making new converts when their controllers have been written off as kiddy or "gimmicks".

Edited on by OptometristLime

You are what you eat from your head to your feet.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Zombie_Barioth

273. Posted:

skywake wrote:

Zombie_Barioth wrote:

The point isn't so much that they've been around for 25 years, its that people have had far longer to get tired of them. Which is more likely, COD fans getting tired of COD, or long-time Nintendo fans getting tired of Mario? Looking at how things have been I'd say there's some truth to it between the sales and comments like "they're all the same".

Top 10 best selling Zelda games:
1 The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
2 The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
3 The Legend of Zelda
4 The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass
5 The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past
6 The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
7 Zelda II: The Adventure of Link
8 The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening
9 The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword
10 The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask

If it was about time wouldn't there have been a slow decline? Like the rise and fall of Guitar Hero?
1. Guitar Hero 3
2. Guitar Hero 2
3 Guitar Hero 4
4. Guitar Hero
5. Guitar Hero 5

With Zelda it's not even directly correlated to the size of the install base. Ocarina of Time is the best selling one and the N64 install base was smaller than Wii, DS, SNES and NES. Also of note is the fact that Ocarina of Time only sold about 2x as many copies of Majora's Mask and Skyward Sword as opposed to Guitar Hero where by #5 they were at 1/5th of the peak. So there ain't that much in it, it's a slow born over a long period of time. The data really doesn't support the "well people have had more time to get bored of it" argument.

I wasn't talking specifically about Zelda. I do however think it says something that Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess are the top sellers, and the only ones to top the original. The Wii is actually a big headache here due to the insane amount of copies their games sold. What keeps 3D world from being as alluring as Mario Galaxy? Is it too in-between styles? Is it a realistic Zelda that most people want or that Twilight Princess was practically Ocarina of Time 2? It doesn't help that even when Nintendo's games sell "bad" they still sell really well. This is a fickle industry, for all we know people just got "bored" with Nintendo now, we did just end a 7-8 year cycle. Or it really is just that people want the games but not the Hardware and would rather wait and buy it on the cheap than fork over $300 for it. I don't know if anyone is really fussed about missing Miiverse, thats the only 'major' online their games have right now.

Zombie_Barioth

AuthorMessage
Avatar

kkslider5552000

274. Posted:

OOT is the most popular because it was a really innovative game that grabbed everyone's attention and was probably the most impressive looking console game at the time. Twilight Princess is for being the big hardcore launch title on the Wii, trying to be OOT2 and some bonus sales for being the last BIG release on GCN.

Wind Waker I assume is for the amazing pre-order deal of literally getting OOT/Master Quest just for pre-ordering a game (cough do this for Bayonetta 1/2 cough)

3DS friend code: 2878 - 9709 - 5054
Nintendo Network ID: SliderGamer55

I have a Let's Play channel? How?!: https://www.youtube.com/user/SliderGamer55/videos

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

275. Posted:

gage_wolf wrote:

I'm pretty sure no one is tired of Zelda. I could do with less Mario for a bit.

The same is true of Mario even moreso. We might rant about how we're over New SMB U but even that sold decently. Plus we're also talking about how Super Mario Galaxy was the height of creativity. How does that stack up when it came out some 20 years after SMB? Plus if it's not true of Zelda why is the whine that they milk both Mario and Zelda?

OptometristLime wrote:

The data would suggest a number of caveats to your argument, IMO:

Guitar Hero may have declined, but it's not evident from the ordering.
(In fact the 4th game in the series outsold the first entry.)

Zelda has seen an increase in popularity over time, so do you claim Skyward Sword's low placement to be anomalous?

Note that I said the rise and fall of Guitar Hero. The game gained traction going upto the third game and then they overdid it. Hence the sharp fall. So 4, 2, 1, 3, 5, dead. Rise and fall. Are you trying to argue that Guitar Hero didn't die because they pushed it too hard? It's also a 5x gap between top and bottom. Guitar Hero is the Poster Child for the game that's been milked too hard.

As for Skyward Sword yeah, there is a thing with the first Zelda on a new console generally doing better. It's a bit of a 'I have a Zelda for this console already' thing. I'd note that if 'most recent Zelda sold worse' was enough then you would have said that in 1987, 1992, 2000, 2009 and 2011. You'd probably also try to argue that A Link Between Worlds is further proof of it. Are we already predicting that the first Zelda on Wii U won't push past 4 mill units? Is that what's happening here?

Edited on by skywake

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

gage_wolf

276. Posted:

gage_wolf wrote:

Bolt_Strike wrote:

My personal feeling on the Wii U's lineup is not that it has no games, but it has no INTERESTING games. There's far too many rehashy games like NSMBU, 3D World, and Tropical Freeze out there that neither demonstrate next gen gameplay with the Gamepad, or any new, interesting gameplay mechanic whatsoever. When I see more games like say, Sunshine and Galaxy (note, I do not mean make Sunshine 2 and Galaxy 3, I mean make an original game concept that shows the unique, innovative gameplay for the Wii U in the same way that Sunshine and Galaxy did for the Gamecube and Wii respectively) over NSMBU and 3D World, then I'd be willing to buy a Wii U.

I think you nailed it. For all the hype Reggie and Co. spewed about the game pad revolutionizing the way we play games, I'm still yet to see it. I've said it many times... Nintendo Land showed signs of awesome possibilities, and then... nothing. Standard remakes of games we've already all seen and played over the last ten years. Plus, it's kind of sad that the two games this system's life is basically swiveling on at this point, SSB and MK8 are going to be standard iterations of Nintendo franchises we've seen for almost twenty years. I'm sure they will be great fun, but how much can either of those titles really utilize the game pad?

My suspicions were just confirmed in the Mario Kart 8 preview article. The gamepad utilization = a horn. That's right, the giant touch-screen controller Nintendo claimed would be "revolutionary" for gaming... It's only real purpose in Mario Kart 8 is to honk the horn.

gage_wolf

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Ryno

277. Posted:

gage_wolf wrote:

My suspicions were just confirmed in the Mario Kart 8 preview article. The gamepad utilization = a horn. That's right, the giant touch-screen controller Nintendo claimed would be "revolutionary" for gaming... It's only real purpose in Mario Kart 8 is to honk the horn.

What were you hoping for, a cigarette lighter?

I miss Japanese games, the good stuff... Games that are imaginative, have good and unique gameplay, a great soundtrack, and replay value.
What Would Duane Do?
Rynoggery

Nintendo Network ID: Choryzo

AuthorMessage
AvatarStaff

WaLzgi

278. Posted:

You say that like horn honking is a bad thing. I wanna honk my horn! :)

Nintendo Life moderator and duck.

My BUY_A_WII_U_loggery

3DS Friend Code: 2234-7139-4188 | Nintendo Network ID: LzWinky

AuthorMessage
Avatar

AbsolutSnake

279. Posted:

Untitled :P

AbsolutSnake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

faint

280. Posted:

Ryno wrote:

gage_wolf wrote:

My suspicions were just confirmed in the Mario Kart 8 preview article. The gamepad utilization = a horn. That's right, the giant touch-screen controller Nintendo claimed would be "revolutionary" for gaming... It's only real purpose in Mario Kart 8 is to honk the horn.

What were you hoping for, a cigarette lighter?

i bet cash monney you can use the pad just like a steering wheel. the horns going to be irritating tho. can you imagine the trolls online

friend code: 0103-9004-2456