Topic: Zelda's Wii U-Turn to NX

@DefHalan: Sure, it makes sense. I see what you are saying.

I never said you were and if you read it that way I can understand why but that wasn't my intent. This is a forum, there are more than two people in the discussion.

Admitting is a strong and pointed word. Frankly if I come across as acting like I think I know more about some things it's because sometimes I do. There's no avoiding that. If that offends you then tough. But I like to think that I try to provide a balanced point of view and I like to play devil's advocate. If a particular rumour or theory can't handle me poking at it from the sides? Well then it's not a good theory! And I've done us all a favour revealing it as such

@skywake: Man, you really are full of yourself. Notice you never even bothered to ask anyone else what they know and where they are coming from, so how could you possibly know you "know more" than me? The least intelligent people are the ones who refuse to take stock of those around them.

To use your own words, "If that offends you then tough."

@rallydefault:
Again, there are more than two people on the forums. What makes you think I was talking about you? I wasn't and neither was @DefHalan. There were two discussions going on before you started asking for people's CVs. Both of them were about the theory that the NX was a hybrid.

The first one being an idea that the NX would be more powerful than the Wii U but pocketable. I don't need a degree in hardware engineering to know that's a fantasy. I didn't need to ask what their qualifications were, that theory is one that kills itself. The second theory is that it's literally two pieces of hardware in the box. Literally the Wii U again but with the GamePad being a full portable console. Same deal again. Both of these ideas would be far too expensive.

Now if you want to act as if all of these theories are equal? That these two theories are equally as possible as mine that they're doing the same two tier model again. Or @DefHalan's theory that it's more of a PSTV like product. Two types of approaches that are already exist on the market? Then you can do that if you want. But I won't pretend that BS theories are just as valid as sensible ones.

I'd also point out that I strongly disagree with @DefHalan's theory but I've never said it was impossible. I've only ever said that I don't see a market for it. That I wouldn't buy it and I don't know of anyone else who would. As I said, I'm even handed. If I think something is a reasonable idea I'll say it's a reasonable idea. Just like how when that NX Controller hoax came up and I said that it was a horrible design... while people were trying to defend it because they all thought it was real.

@DefHalan: i am not able to check this forum enough to respond as much as i would like to. But to again respond to you saying i go back and forth on if it is a hybrid and i avoid questions, i will simply say the same thing i have said many times.

I believe 3 things without fail. The NX is 1 a home console, 2 releasing in 2016, and 3 Zelda will be on it.

I have told you many, many times that I am not sure if it is a hybrid, or how a "hybrid" will be accomplished if it is one. If this makes it difficult for you to have a discussion with me about it, then I guess you should stop.

You've complained about this 3 times now despite me responding with this very fact, and id be willing to bet within the next few pages you say it again. I am not going to ever have a solid opinion on if it is a hybrid or how it would be technologically achieved until it is revealed.

@skywake: Boy, you come off as "pretentious when he really shouldn't be. Like, bad! But, keep on keeping on!

Dude's pretentious, there's no doubt about it. At least the persona he projects on this forum. To each his own, really. It just annoys me when, quite clearly, he has no more knowledge of the area/industry than I or many other people around here do. And he doesn't even bother to ask people why they think certain things - he just ridicules them. When I got frustrated with @DefHalan, I asked him what he did that allowed him to make such grand claims. He answered me, and I was satisfied with that. This guy has never given anybody else that simple courtesy. Maybe because if he did, he'd realize he's amongst people even more educated than him in this field.

But moving away from just attacking the person, I still don't think the controller fakes were that crazy. Yea, they were fake. But I said then, and I'll say again: I think it's a cool idea. And I bet we're going to see something with that full-screen technology in the NX WITH physical buttons. As much as I would love a "simple," powerful Nintendo console, their pedigree just doesn't point toward them doing something mundane, especially in this coming wave of VR and the ultimate success of 3D on their handheld.

@rallydefault: Steve Jobs did ok without buttons...

@GrailUK: Absolutely. With a certain market. And with a device whose primary function was not to play games.

When I type it's not in an Australian accent and I can edit myself

Frankly I think it's rude to ask and it's literally a logical fallacy. Everyone has their own areas where they're more capable of commenting. I like to think that people's arguments can stand. If you are capable enough to defend your position then it's a position worth defending. If I think someone has a better point than mine I'll back down. If it's a topic I'm not familiar with I won't comment. If you think I'm always a **** it's because on this forum I've only been commenting on the NX sub-forum lately where there are a lot of things to disagree with.

Even the person who made them said they were uncomfortable to hold. I thought they were fake for the simple reason that I couldn't see myself playing Smash Bros on them. I'm not opposed to the idea of a screen that extends beyond the main display I just don't see it as a game changer. Especially if you're removing buttons to do it.

Again, I'm fine with the idea of a novel concept. But I'm not going to praise everyone's novel concept just because its novel. I'll also add that the discussion in this thread you are having a go at me for? It wasn't about the controller. People were talking about various hybrid concepts in this thread.

Yes in other threads I was one of only a few saying that the fake controller was fake. In this thread I was saying the hybrid concept was a dumb idea. The theory about putting whole thing in the portable? That's a dumb idea because you can't beat the Wii U's spec with a portable. The one where you have a portable console as the controller and put that in the box? Well I'm sorry but, the Wii U failed and so they're doubling down? How much is this hybrid going to cost exactly?

You say I'm a pretentious **** because I ridicule people. I wasn't ridiculing people. I was saying their ideas were dumb. And if you were honest with yourself instead of just wanting to have a go at me? I'd be willing to bet that you also think those ideas are dumb.

@rallydefault:
It's like on another forum I frequent where someone asked a question about their WiFi. They wanted to know the best way to control the speed of users. Purely because they had guests who were hammering their 8Mbps connection making it impossible for them to use the internet.

Immediately the dumb responses came out. Someone said they should get a powerline adapter. Someone said they should get a second router and set it on a timer so that they're always disconnecting. I said they were all dumb ideas and pointed to an access point that allows you to control the speed of users.

.... which was obviously a better idea. But guess what? People didn't like someone suggesting a good idea. They wanted to be the ones to answer the question.

What Apple did was giving it the perception of simplicity, which attracts non-technical people. I think Nintendo is on to something with their free-form patent. Let's say we get twin sticks, 2 face buttons, 2 shoulder buttons, an haptic screen and gyroscope. This would mean we would have 4 buttons for reflex-based action. The rest of the functions could be mapped contextually to the screen (map, menus, etc). This would make the controller able to scale functions according to need. I think it could work and it would make it more accessible outside of "hardcore gamers".

@Therad:
The difference is that smartphones and tablets are multi-function devices. Before the iPhone every device had buttons but they changed depending on what it specialised in. Game devices had their D-Pad, A/B/X/Y and triggers. Music devices had a way to scroll through songs alongside play/pause, skip and back. Text friendly mobile devices had a full qwerty keyboard, more standard ones had a numpad. Having just a touch-screen didn't make the iPhone better at anything, it made the iPhone good enough at a range of things.

When you look at a game controller though, that's a single function device. That's a device built for playing games on. Even the Wii default controller had more accessible buttons than what you're suggesting. Is it unreasonable to say that at a minimum there should be a D-Pad, left stick, A/B/X/Y and 2x triggers? Because I'm not going to be typing up an email on this or checking my facebook status. I'm going to press a couple of buttons and play a bit of Smash Bros or Zelda.

@skywake: Not unreasonable at all Mr Wake.

@skywake: A game which used the Wii controller side-ways really only had 2 accessible buttons to use. Sure, you can say you also had a, b, + and - buttons, but they are not particularly accessible. So my proposed controller would actually have more usable control options. And if you used the wand + nunchuck, you basically have 4 usable buttons (a,b,c,z), an analog and pointer functionality. Any other button (such as d-pad and +, -) is practically useless, since you can't reach them quickly.

What games do you think couldn't run in my proposed scheme? What functions are so fundamental that they must be mapped to a fifth button instead of the screen?

And typing messages requires more buttons if you want to be efficient.

@Therad:
When I said "default Wii controller" I meant the WiiMote + Nunchuck just to be clear. And in that configuration I'd argue that the +, - and D-Pad were all very easily accessible. I'm not counting the home button and it's still more buttons. Because the Wii was so limited in terms of buttons you did get games regularly using +, - and the D-Pad. And quite often actions were mapped to shaking the WiiMote so much so that that was almost another button.

Yes there are 2D platformers that can be played with just A/B and a D-Pad. But that's just one genre. If you're going to have one controller it better be good at all genres.

edit: and yes, buttons make typing more efficient. Which is why I said the iPhone wasn't better at anything. It was just that everything else was very good at particular things. The iPhone was a revelation for being good enough at a lot of things.

@skywake: Do you have any examples of games which used the +, - and D-pad in vertical mode and would be impossible to map to a touch screen?

I'd say Metroid Prime Trilogy. Selecting between 4 different weapon, 4 different visors and shooting missiles would be a pain on a touch screen (just finished Corruption, so it's fresh in my mind).

I haven't played Prime (mostly because I don't like first person games on consoles). But how about something like this:
L = fire
R = missile

L-Analog = move
R-Analog = look around

B = switch weapon
A = Jump

Morph-ball = virtual toggle button
Visor = Virtual Toggle button

I skipped Z-targeting, since I see it as a crutch of sorts since nintendo didn't have twin sticks.

@Therad:
As mentioned Metroid Prime is the big one where every single button was used. The same was true of other shooters on the Wii. Looking at a few manuals Goldeneye had quite a few basic functions like cycling weapons and using grenades mapped to the d-Pad and +/-. Less so with some of the more arcade ones like Red Steel 2. Adventure games like Okami and Zelda tended to use those buttons so you could easily access items. Skyward Sword changed it up by using a gyro-controlled radial menu.

Then there's Smash Bros which I keep bringing up. If you played with the WiiMote + Nunchuk it was interesting. By default grab was A + B and not a specific button. Then your taunts were on 1 & 2. I was fine with that setup but I wouldn't want less than that. I also never really used taunts much even though I played Luigi a lot on Brawl. Which is a real shame.

Again, for platformers and racing games? You could easily get away with far less buttons. For adventure games? The buttons are handy even if some of them could in some instances be replaced by a virtual button. Fighting games? It's a bit rough but you can get away with 4 buttons and a stick, 5 or 6 would be better though. Shooters? You'll use every button....

The Prime series aren't really games where you want to be cycling through to get the right visor and weapon. Also, by removing z-targeting, scanning becomes much more difficult; you'll have to either add a new button (making that another virtual button) or use the fire button to scan (disabling the quick switch from scan to regular visor).