Wii U Forum

Topic: What does Nintendo have to lose by making the gamepad "optional"?

Showing 201 to 220 of 724

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

201. Posted:

We've now entered bizarro land. Where Nintendo saying they're actively making games that rely on the GamePad is somehow supporting evidence to a SKU that doesn't include the GamePad. That they're also going to retroactively patch games to make them work without the GamePad and have third parties and indies do the same. All so they can make a cheaper SKU built with the intent of getting people to get the GamePad anyway so they can buy those new games that require it.

And everyone against this idea is being paranoid because it's abundantly clear that Nintendo are not abandoning it.................................................................................. which is not going to impact negatively on the people who don't have the GamePad because they'll both patch support for not having it in and those people will buy the GamePad anyway.

Edited on by skywake

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Birthday_Boy

202. Posted:

Wait...wasn't this thread supposed to end 100 posts ago? That's why I refrained from posting.

Past Names: Koops3, Klyo, Whirlpool, Titanics
If you're looking for a good Miiverse profile, do I have one for you!

3DS Friend Code: 4897-5952-1236 | Nintendo Network ID: Kyloctopus | Twitter: Kyloctopus

AuthorMessage
Avatar

CanisWolfred

203. Posted:

I don't even know what's going on here, honestly. Nor do I see why there's anything to argue. They'd screw over early adopters, lose the single defining feature of the Wii U, and lose their reputation. It's like if they stopped bundling the Wii with motion controllers in favor of the Classic Controller Pro. What would be the point of buying the Wii? It'd just be a PS2, except more expensive. It certainly wouldn't be as impressive as the PS3 and 360. They'd also be admitting that Motion controls were a failure, and look like fools for ever including them in the first place. They'd lose consumer trust, and less people would be willing to invest in later platforms. It would be a SEGA level mistake, like when they released the Sega CD, then ended support in a year.

The Wii U would be in that very position, and honestly, I think all it would do is hurt people's trust in them. Consumer trust is not something they want to lose, especially since their loyal fanbase is the biggest part of their console install base right now.

To answer the question: They could potentially lose everything.
/thread

Edited on by CanisWolfred

Mecha Wolf Prime

Avid Fan of Anime, Webcomics, and Wolves
My Den - My door is always open....Too bad it's an empty closet.
My DeviantArt - I like to call it "the blank wall"

Wolfrun
Wolfrun Chibi
Scary Wolfrun...
...Scared Wolfrun

Arooo~

AuthorMessage
AvatarStaff

WaLzgi

204. Posted:

Kyloctopus wrote:

Wait...wasn't this thread supposed to end 100 posts ago? That's why I refrained from posting.

Threads can continue as long as they don't degenerate to flaming comments. With that said, don't start just because I said this :O

Edited on by WaLzgi

If you care so much for your privacy, what are you hiding?

Nintendo Life moderator and duck.

My BUY_A_WII_U_loggery

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

AuthorMessage
Avatar

AJ_Lethal

205. Posted:

blaisedinsd wrote:

Increasing sales is 100% indisputably and factually good. What possible issue could anyone have with this statement?

Not if they plummet shortly afterwards. The "quick buck" thinking is rather detrimental in the long run.

deviantART

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Super_Gravy

206. Posted:

Unca_Lz wrote:

Kyloctopus wrote:

Wait...wasn't this thread supposed to end 100 posts ago? That's why I refrained from posting.

Threads can continue as long as they don't degenerate to flaming comments. With that said, don't start just because I said this :O

Aww… :(

Maybe selling extra gamepad in the store for people who lost or broke it. Maybe the solution was to add another gamepad so that customers can buy another gamepad just for spit-screen multiplayers including Zelda Four Sword style games? This will avoid "screen-watch" in FPS games and "wall of text" in RPG games.

Umm… Care to have some gravy?

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

207. Posted:

Alright guys, when do you think there will be a 2 GamePad SKU? 2016?

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

208. Posted:

First of all I need to point out that I have been trying to reply to every post in the thread basically, so my posts may be a bit behind. I am new to the forum and still getting used to it (it's a bit different than I am used to). I am barely even aware of who is who and is posting what and am just responding to the post itself and trying to get used to the formatting and all. I need to slow down, but the discussion has been enjoyable and I am not done yet ;-)

skywake wrote:

As for your most recent comparison saying that removing the GamePad is no different to Wii Motion Plus. That's again entirely mad. Motion Plus was aggressively pushed, they were giving out the Motion Plus addon for basically nothing with all of the titles that first came out with it. They then put Motion Plus into every single Wii SKU and stopped selling the non-Motion Plus. To ram my major point home even further there is also the fact that Motion Plus didn't make any older games not work for new users. It was fully backwards compatible.

I was only trying to point out that segmentation is not and has never been a problem on the Wii. The amount of software that requires a specific controller or supports some combination of controllers with varying control schemes and what not is basically part of the wii/wiiU climate. You could make an argument that the classic controller was a mistake because it encouraged abandonement of the core motion control scheme that was the core focus of the original Wii console. Please don't disect that argument, I am just pointing out the similarities to what I am hearing about the GP. The GP as an ideology that must be supported to the point that the idea of it being optional is some sort of heresy. It is not. Motion plus did not make older games not work (unless you try and play NSMBwii with the add on version ;-)) but it did make newer games not work with old hardware. Either way you have segmentation. Segmentation is not historically a concern for Nintendo.

skywake wrote:

Your point about it boosting sales is your only argument and yet you seemed to be so quick to throw away people's comments about it reducing the overall value of the product. As I've said a few times already in this thread there are a pile of extras the Wii U has that could be cut back if they wanted a cheaper SKU. The GamePad is probably the last thing they should look at getting rid of if the only benefit is cutting the price. Get rid of Wii Backwards compatibility, that alone will probably be worth as much as a GamePad removal.

I simply disagree that it devalues overall value of the product. I hear the arguments, but I don't see any substantial way it actually devalues anything. Those arguments seem to be pointing to some ideological value such as future support or whatever. I don't think backwards compatibility actually costs them anything, it is more a benefit of the similarities of the technology inside both consoles (they can't even save by not populating connectors like the did on Wii). Lowering memory or the included games or charger or HDMI cable or stands probably don't offer a way to get the SKU cheaper. Gamepad is pretty much the only thing and that only makes sense if there was a market of people who thought a cheaper version with no gamepad was more appealing. I think there is, maybe I am wrong but I know Smash and Kart fans don't care about it....they would be more excited for a device that lets them plug in there gamepad controllers. Hey there is an idea: an 8GB console packaged with Kart or Smash that comes with a gizmo to connect your gamecube controller via wiimote or USB or somehow sold at the Wii U's lowest price ever. Would that appeal to those fanbases?

skywake wrote:

At the more recent tyrade against SCAR, yet again, and your instance that he's making unsubstantiated troll bait that he must confess to. Purely because Nintendo have made a point of saying that they aren't considering a GamePad-less SKU. Well they did.

.....
edit

  • a bunch of stuff that doesn't say that *
    edit
    .....

They don't explicitly say that they're not working on a GamePad-less.

Exactly.

skywake wrote:

Even more than that though. They then go on to say that they're currently working on more games that require it. So if their plan was to make it optional they're doing it wrong. If it's optional why would they start making more games? Short of saying explicitly "blaisedinsd, you are wrong, this is a bad idea" they couldn't have said much more to rule out your GamePad-less SKU as an option.

Yeah, I am convinced its just an ideological thing. A SKU designed to appeal to a segment of Kart or Smash fans doesn't mean Nintendo would have to stop making games that require the gamepad.

If I am wrong, and this doesn't happen with Kart or Smash.....oh well, I was wrong. Its just a prediction. I think it will happen eventually and if it doesn't than I defintely think the cheapo GP others suggested will.

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

209. Posted:

DefHalan wrote:

@blaisedinsd

You are not here to have a discussion about this idea. You are here to tell people why Nintendo should do this. It is a bad idea as I and many others explained before. If you want to stick to your guns and fight that your idea is the best plan then make a blog. When you are ready to have a discussion about it then come back. Making the GamePad optional is a quick and rash decision that has more negatives than positives. Making more games that utilize the GamePad in unique ways is what will sell the system. Sure upgrading some of their other features (unifying accounts and fast VC releases) will help but what sells systems, what has always determined who "wins" the "console wars" has been the games.

Developers don't have a problem with the controller, they have a problem with the architecture. Customers don't have a problem with the controller, they don't see many good games for the system. Analyst don't have a issue with the GamePad they have an issue Nintendo's online services. So what problems does making the GamePad optional fix?

Actually the purpose of the thread was to ask: Does Nintendo have anything to lose by doing this. I still haven't seen anything substantial that would make me say yes to that question.

Lots of opinions of why people think it would be a bad idea that all seem more about ideals. I am talking about business reasons, not that fluffy stuff saying its just bad dude.

YES! making more games that utilize the gamepad in unique ways can help sell the system....do that!

YES! VC and accounts will help sell systems....do that!

Games "win" "console wars".....yes they do, but um Nintendo can't make enough games to trump basically all of gaming outside of Nintendo can they? No. No they can't....

But you know what? "console wars" don't actually mean jack squat either! For N64 and Gamecube, resounding defeats for Nintendo in this fictional war, they made more money selling video games and hardware than their competition that won all that meaningless glory in that fictional war. (yes handhelds helped plenty, but N64 and the cube were both in the black while only Microsoft was deeply in the red)

Anyway, why does this all have to be about a problem that needs fixing? I am just saying it makes business sense. Attempting to maximize the positive effect these huge franchises and their fan bases will have on your consoles business is pretty important in my estimation.

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

210. Posted:

Unca_Lz wrote:

And how exactly is it beneficial? If they made it optional, then there would be even less support for it, making its existence pointless

If they made it optional why would there be even less support for it?

Has requiring it been working really well? I enjoy it, but I am not offended that a game uses it minimally. I think those minimal uses are still great features that

I personally love. I don't think all possible customers of the console see the gamepad the same way. Maybe I am totally wrong about Smash and Kart fanbases. Maybe

they all already have a Wii U awaiting the launch of the game. Maybe they are concerned these games are going to suck because of no gamecube controllers and that

silly gamepad. I don't claim to know but I hear plenty of times that people don't like the Wii U because of the gamepad. Making it optional eliminates that problem

and allows people who love the GP and people who don't like the GP to both enjoy the Wii U just the same.

And now after these last 3 posts I need to take a break....I am going to get that bizarro land post soon......

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

211. Posted:

Ok, I will skip the bizarro land post. I think its already been addressed but this one gets me to the finish line for tonight.

CanisWolfred wrote:

I don't even know what's going on here, honestly. Nor do I see why there's anything to argue. They'd screw over early adopters, lose the single defining feature of the Wii U, and lose their reputation. It's like if they stopped bundling the Wii with motion controllers in favor of the Classic Controller Pro. What would be the point of buying the Wii? It'd just be a PS2, except more expensive. It certainly wouldn't be as impressive as the PS3 and 360. They'd also be admitting that Motion controls were a failure, and look like fools for ever including them in the first place. They'd lose consumer trust, and less people would be willing to invest in later platforms. It would be a SEGA level mistake, like when they released the Sega CD, then ended support in a year.

The Wii U would be in that very position, and honestly, I think all it would do is hurt people's trust in them. Consumer trust is not something they want to lose, especially since their loyal fanbase is the biggest part of their console install base right now.

To answer the question: They could potentially lose everything.
/thread

Actually this is just talking about the other topic of killing the gamepad and is not even relevant to my topic.

Making it optional does not kill it. The nunchuck is optional and no one worries about how much it is supported or required or properly utilized.

Motion control sold the Wii (Well Wii Sports the game did), but no one worried about motion control being abandoned or anything.

I understand its difficult to quite grasp the concept I am trying to get across, but if they announce a Smash bundle that has no gamepad and dodhicky to plug in a cube controller it will all suddenly make sense.....or you might lose your mind with NINTENDO IS DOOOOOMED!

I am just trying to prepare you people.

I am a Nintendo secret agent......haha just kidding....um how to I delete that before I get in to trouble?

Edited on by blaisedinsd

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

DefHalan

212. Posted:

@blaisedinsd
Wii-remote and Nunchuck were included with every Wii, that is why no one was worried about them dropping support. Again you need to look at the long term. If making the GamePad optional doesn't solve their problems then why would they?It is optional for some games and people are able to buy a pro controller if they want.

Why would Nintendo make a SKU without the GamePad so early in the console lifecycle? It serves no point other than short gain.

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/44243746261/nickels-dimes-and-quarters
http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/why-console-specs-dont-matter
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/200271/Video_Don_Daglow_on_nextgen_transition_traps_and_treasures.php

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

213. Posted:

I know the nunchuck was included with the wii , but it wasn't included with every wiimote. It doesn't change the point.

A tv only bundle targeted at smash or kart fans may give them short term gain. Whatever gain. Gain is gain.

Since doing this doesn't threaten the gamepad in any actual way. It doesn't matter if every single wii u has a gamepad in any actual way. It doesn't mean the gamepad can't continue to be nintendos focus because Nintendo can still focus on the gamepad. There is not some mystical narnian deep magic that will spite them for offending the gamepad concept.

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

CureDolly

214. Posted:

A gamepad-less WiiU would be a wonderful idea. The gamepad was intended to be the next gaming-revolution after motion control (which was wildly successful and everyone else had to copy). It didn't work out that way and it is now making a very fine (but not super-powerful, and it doesn't need to be) console unnecessarily expensive.

Without the gamepad WiiU can hit the price sweet-spot and become a family impulse buy. I think that will be the point at which its fortunes turn positive.

Edited on by CureDolly

Discover the mysteries of Japanese Pokemon Names - they're weirder than you think!

The doll likes Kawaii Culture and Japanese. Oh yes, and Nintendo games.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

215. Posted:

blaisedinsd wrote:

I was only trying to point out that segmentation is not and has never been a problem on the Wii. The amount of software that requires a specific controller or supports some combination of controllers with varying control schemes and what not is basically part of the wii/wiiU climate. You could make an argument that the classic controller was a mistake because it encouraged abandonement of the core motion control scheme that was the core focus of the original Wii console. Please don't disect that argument

Why not? You don't want me to consider your comparisons for what they are? Are you that unsure about your argument that you think it won't hold? If you were so sure about your view then you would be jumping up and down demanding that your opponents try to tear your argument appart. That's what I ask you to do of mine and so far you've failed.

As for my dissection which I must do out of respect for you. The fact is that no retail game on the Wii required the Classic Controller. Even the games that we're almost easier to get with a CCPro bundle still worked with the WiiMote. Then there's also the fact that every single Wii sold still had a WiiMote and Nun-chuck in the box. Your comparisons are becoming so weak that they don't even pass the first hurdle. What you're suggesting is again nothing like anything Nintendo or anyone else has done before and survived.

blaisedinsd wrote:

I simply disagree that it devalues overall value of the product. I hear the arguments, but I don't see any substantial way it actually devalues anything. Those arguments seem to be pointing to some ideological value such as future support or whatever. I don't think backwards compatibility actually costs them anything, it is more a benefit of the similarities of the technology inside both consoles (they can't even save by not populating connectors like the did on Wii). Lowering memory or the included games or charger or HDMI cable or stands probably don't offer a way to get the SKU cheaper.

Except for the multiple points where you have talked about how it is a good feature. Plus it's not just future support for people who do have the GamePad which is why I disagree with your suggestion. It's also the fact that new users wouldn't be able to play both existing games and the games that support it in the future. If it's not an issue for them because it's not supported then people with the GamePad have a device that's not supported. Both can't win.

As for your dismissal of my other suggestions to cut costs. Well the fact is that those parts do cost money just as a controller that's an alternative to the GamePad will also cost money. It's not just a $80 cut in price by killing the GamePad and $0 change from doing anything else. Every component costs money. I listed the components that they have inside of the Wii U physically to allow backwards compatibility, that isn't free. They'll kill that before they kill the GamePad because the GamePad allows compatibility with current games rather than compatibility with legacy content. Just saying.

blaisedinsd wrote:

skywake wrote:

At the more recent tyrade against SCAR, yet again, and your instance that he's making unsubstantiated troll bait that he must confess to. Purely because Nintendo have made a point of saying that they aren't considering a GamePad-less SKU. Well they did.
.....
edit

  • a bunch of stuff that doesn't say that *
    edit
    .....
    They don't explicitly say that they're not working on a GamePad-less.

Exactly.

In the quote you killed they said that
1. They thought that the GamePad was a central/essential feature of the Wii U
2. They said that they had no intention of reducing the price
3. They said that their solution to the Wii U's problem was to rely the GamePad more

As I said, they didn't explicitly say "no, we're not making a GamePad-less SKU" but they did say everything but. The fact that they didn't say it explicitly in that particular more recent meeting was probably mostly due to the fact that they weren't asked that question specifically and repeatedly. I said this in my post and I find it interesting that you chose to cut-off that part when you quoted me.

blaisedinsd wrote:

Yeah, I am convinced its just an ideological thing. A SKU designed to appeal to a segment of Kart or Smash fans doesn't mean Nintendo would have to stop making games that require the gamepad. If I am wrong, and this doesn't happen with Kart or Smash.....oh well, I was wrong. Its just a prediction. I think it will happen eventually and if it doesn't than I defintely think the cheapo GP others suggested will.

How is it an ideological thing? My belief that a GamePad-less SKU would be a bad idea is based on a rational argument as I have presented it here. It could easily be swayed by an argument that made sense just as I have been about other all tech. I look at reviews, I see benchmarks, I examine the benefits that it would bring and the associated cost. Using that sort of mindset I considered your suggestion of a GamePad-less SKU and came to the conclusion that it's a less compelling buy because of it. It also fails to adress the main problem that the Wii U faces and goes against everything Nintendo has been saying about how they'll solve their problems. That's why I disagree.

As for the cheap GamePad SKU I think you'll find that it was actually me who suggested it as an idea. If others have also then they did it independent of me. I suggested it alongside other suggestions to cut the price which I talked about above. Things you think would do nothing. If they were to make a Mario Kart or Smash SKU then I'd say the best option would be to keep the GamePad because it is an important feature. Then just "give" the game for a huge discount when bundled or make it in a limited edition colour.

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

216. Posted:

I'll try another analogy.

The gamepad is the hook for the wii u.
Motioncontrol, or the wii-mote, was the hook for the wii.

Mario Kart Wii is designed around this motion control concept with the wii wheel.

All the arguments I am hearing against this optional gamepad idea are basically saying its bad because the gamepad is the core concept and is an integrated part of the system. Promoting it is a priority and making it optional flies in the face of that.

Ok, so Mario Kart Wii and it's motion controls man, they are what make this game great. If people try them they are going to love them and this motion control concept will propel us to greatness. Giving people the option of using a nunchuck will ruin it, that's a bad idea. A gamecube controller? That's crazy, we don't even make those anymore so we don't make money off selling them. Gamecube was a failure anyway, no body wants that. Hopefully some one steps in and realizes that the motion control is great, let's promote that, but it may be good to add other controller support to give the customers a choice.

Didn't kart on wii benefit from giving choice to its potential buyers? What benefit is ramming the concept on to everyone? Did kart on wii sell more or less because it supported gamecube controllers?

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

217. Posted:

CureDolly wrote:

A gamepad-less WiiU would be a wonderful idea. The gamepad was intended to be the next gaming-revolution after motion control (which was wildly successful and everyone else had to copy). It didn't work out that way and it is now making a very fine (but not super-powerful, and it doesn't need to be) console unnecessarily expensive.

Without the gamepad WiiU can hit the price sweet-spot and become a family impulse buy. I think that will be the point at which its fortunes turn positive.

I wouldn't predict this but it's a possibility unlocked only by making it optional.

I think if it helps the console on any level it's a good idea from a business standpoint.

Since I don't see how doing it actually harms the effectiveness or ability to execute a strategy to make the gamepad more compelling in order to promote the console at the same time. An attractive game pad feature is an attractive gamepad feature, it will sell and appeal to consumers on its own merit. The gamepad is still only on the wii u. Requiring the gamepad on every console at this very point in time in the consoles life will not increase or decrease the effectiveness of that gamepad centered strategy.

Either way I think they have nothing to lose at this point. The console is sort of desperate. From a business standpoint I don't think it changes the console drastically in the console war but I don't see why they shouldn't do it this year. I predict it because I hope they do this and I will still love my gamepad. I may need to buy extra consoles, this thing could become a collectors item.

Edited on by blaisedinsd

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

218. Posted:

@blaisedinsd
They still bundled the WiiMote + Nunchuck with every single Wii sold. I don't have a problem with a developer making a game that doesn't use the GamePad's features. Frankly I would rather that developers have the freedom to decide which control options suit their game the best. The requirement though should be that games that don't support the hardware in every single box should be the very, very rare. What I have a problem with is this suggestion that Nintendo should make a large fraction of their games incompatible with a new major SKU.

Edited on by skywake

NNID: skywake

AuthorMessage
Avatar

blaisedinsd

219. Posted:

skywake wrote:

@blaisedinsd
They still bundled the WiiMote + Nunchuck with every single Wii sold. I don't have a problem with a developer making a game that doesn't use the GamePad's features. Frankly I would rather that developers have the freedom to decide which control options suit their game the best. The requirement though should be that games that don't support the hardware in every single box should be the very, very rare. What I have a problem with is this suggestion that Nintendo should make a large fraction of their games incompatible with a new major SKU.

It seems like you are almost agreeing with me here...

The games that simply could not work are rare now. Nintendo is the only one who would make more like that. Shovel ware dual screen games unfortunately are not coming.

It's no different than kinect on 360 as far as sku. There are a number of kinect only games. Most games don't use kinect even if there is a kinect sku.

Well the difference is kinect was added later. It's also different because the entire wii u library will be enhanced by the "add on". That makes the gamepad more compelling than kinect in one way.

And yet another difference is the success of kinect helped promote 360. In this case the "success" of the wii u helped "promote" the gamepad. I don't see eithe as a problem. For me I am just glad for the gamepad and I would probably never had if it wasn't for Nintendo making it a universal feature at launch. I am genuinely grateful for them doing that no matter how well the gamepad or the console perform in the console war or for nintendos bottom line. I will always think of it as a success and be slightly offended on an internal level whenever I hear it called a failure.

I also think xbone is going to go through this with kinect2.0.
The difference is I think their users will be rejoicing when it goes optional and praising it as the move to change their fortunes.

Edited on by blaisedinsd

blaisedinsd

AuthorMessage
Avatar

skywake

220. Posted:

@blaisedinsd
No, I'm not agreeing with you and if you think I am you misread. I was talking about your statement about Mario Kart Wii being somehow equivalent to this GamePad-less SKU. My point was that Mario Kart Wii allowing more traditional controls didn't suddenly make Wii Sports unplayable for any new Wii owners. Every single Wii still came with a WiiMote + Nunchuck in the box. The same was true of the Kinect on 360, people who got the Kinect bundle could still grab Halo 3 and any number of non-Kinect games and play them because it still came with a 360 controller in the box.

If they made a SKU without the GamePad then the people who brought it would quickly find that a number of Wii U games couldn't be played. That they'd have to go out and get another accessory. That's confusing, entirely unnecessary and quite unprecedented. If you think it's not then you're not really considering what you're actually suggesting here.

As for your last bit (edit: or at least it was before you edited your post) it's nice to hear you say that you do now agree that the GamePad is a valuable extra. Now that you've come that far please explain why someone would buy this cheaper SKU given how much they lose.

Edited on by skywake

NNID: skywake

Sorry, this topic has been locked.