Topic: Wii U gamepad, Pros and Cons

Switching controllers...? @blaisedinsd Is that really such a hassle? I play Call of Duty with the Pro Controller every now and then and it's as simple as pushing a button on the Pro Controller and then playing the game. Same with VC titles. Same with Assassin's Creed. Switching controllers isn't an issue...at all.

And I can't buy into you thinking being able to use a touchscreen keyboard is such an awful thing. You can use the controller to type on the keyboard if you really want to take an extra 5 minutes typing something. Same with the Netflix menu. The GamePad makes it WAY easier to navigate ANY menu. Having a controller input wouldn't be bad, but I don't understand complaints for it. It seems like you're looking for a problem where a solution already exists.

Seriously... I have a 360 and it's a pain when I have to type anything on there because I have to scroll through each letter whereas I could just tap on the letter with the GamePad.

@Dkkid Just look at what @skywake said for my thoughts on Off TV Play. Sure, no one asked for it, but I'm not going to say it's useless when I actually use it more often than other features.

@Dreamz The GamePad is a little bulky, but not uncomfortably so. It was a big factor in whether or not I was going to buy a Wii U and, after playing with a demo unit, I was surprised at how light it was. Since then, I've swapped between the GamePad, Wiimote, Pro Controller, GameCube Controller, and 360 Controller without the "bulk" of the GamePad ever bothering me. Of course, that's just me. Dropping it off of the couch would upset me, too, but I don't put any controller in a position where it could even accidentally get broken.

i notice on nes games the gamepad screen has brighter better colors verses the actual tv. i dunno if that has anything to do with the settings of the gamepad or not, but i noticed, hmmm...thoughts?
let me rephrase that...thoughts without complication or rocket science?

1. You just said it again. Shield doesn't require Quadros it's GTX650+. Quadros aren't even supported AFAIK
2. $300 is hardly "next to nothing" especially when there is very little actual processing happening client side
3. Gamestream IS coming to tablets... just only ones with Tegra processors
4. Valve IS doing this for free already just not on portable devices... officially...

I never said Shield needed it. The point is they stand to lose miles more money if somebody (Like Parallels) manages to get something working with a Geforce that currently needs a Quadro.

It is relevant because Nvidia will never do something like that. (Or put in loads of effort for not much reward).

And it is nice hardware (Nice hardware is nice to have wish Nintendo felt the same way about it - instead of giving cheap and nasty hardware for a high cost).

Right. Nintendo products are overpriced. Good day to you, sir. Have fun under your bridge.

Mentioning Quadro at all in this discussion makes you look like an idiot. They litterally have nothing to do with each other. The Quadro uses better binned chips for lower power consumption and better efficiency (which you need in a GPU farm) and they are built to prioritise accuracy over speed. Things which people doing CAD/CG/Mining work want and will happily pay a premium for but which have absolutely zero benefit to gamers.

Shield is entirely different. It's a purely consumer grade product and idea so comparing it to Quadro makes no sense. Yes Nvidia's GameStream solution is locked to their cards and their mobile processors but the same is true of the Wii U and PS4 -> Vita. Valve is also doing a similar thing even if it is still in Beta. They're all heading in the same direction so there's no skin of their nose if someone pushes it more aggressively. "Unlocking" it by allowing it on a cheaper portable? That won't hurt. Nvidia have even being deals (US only) where they basically give it away with a new GPU. So what you're saying doesn't even run true with what Nvidia is actually doing here.

IMO the reason they haven't done it yet is purely because the market for this isn't big enough yet. When there's only a small market you're not going to make multiple SKUs. And frankly I'm into the idea.... I'm just not going to pay $300AU+ plus the cost of shipping to get a Shield. Especially when they could and might even end up doing it for half the price.

If it's overpriced, then how come Nintendo has been losing money with each Wii U sale up until a month ago?

I've always liked the Gamepad. Idk, I'm just that kind of person that always applauds game companies for trying different things and breaking out of the traditional shell, which is something Nintendo does with its hardware. But yeah, there are some definite cons with it.

I've always just like the unique controls and features of the Gamepad. OffTV play, easier to type...I also like the mechanics that some games have with the Gamepad. The battery life sucks though, and having to play it with the cord plugged in all the time is a pain to me since I like to move the Gamepad a lot. I also never liked the big size of it. Just a personal preference of mine.

All in all, I really like the Gamepad. I think it would be a good idea to maybe have different controller options available? Just so people can choose which kind of controller they want. Some people like the more traditional ones, like the GameCube. Or maybe a Wiimote option for those who like that.

Don't know about that. Maybe stuff like a screen that is not commonly used so it costs more. (They should have just used a 720p IPS panel or someething). A custom drive instead of just a standard blu ray one. Not sure but the second tier phone manufacturers almost certainly have less volume yet manage to use nice materials. They could offer a nicer gamepad at the replacement price + the costs of the nicer materials and I would take it.

Apple offers the tacky iphone and the nice one. Nintendo could do the same with a markup like that and make more money from me doing so.

I think especially now, it's a good value with the MK8 bundle, wii mote and free game. That said, I bought my Wii U last April and thought I got good value out of it at $350. Probably got 300 hours out of it from April through Sept., when the price dropped down $50.

While I know you get more versatility out of a phone, laptop or tablet in terms of functionality, I am pleased with what I have gotten out of my Wii U, which now has over 1000 hours on it if you count surfing and Netflix.

Cons: Digital triggers and battery life.
Pros: Everything else, plus it's potential.