Google+

Topics

E3 Nintendo

40 comments

  • 435 - June 10, 2011 12:49 p.m.

    "We assume you'll probably be able to get a spare controller direct from NIntendo if you smash yours up or something." I'm sorry, if something happens to a controller of mine, I'd want to go out immediately and replace it. I don't want to wait 6-10 business days for a replacement to arrive via Fed Ex... and then find out that they dropped it off the back of the truck and it's cracked already. It's a bad business idea that could be fatal to the system's market viability.
  • Crimmy - June 9, 2011 11:44 p.m.

    There should be multiple controllers, but only one with the screen on/ no-screened controllers that can be used at the same time (eg one with the controller screen, another using the TV with screen off or a screenless controller).
  • UnfitParrot - June 9, 2011 10:41 p.m.

    So no split screen at all? Now i'm defiantly not getting it, do they expect me to buy a new console for every person in my house? The only way i could see this working would be if they sold controllers without the screen
  • Darkwun - June 9, 2011 9:54 p.m.

    agreed. nintendo may be trying to prove themselves in the online market, but people still need good split screen games. i dont want a classic controller with less buttons, and i might wanna play on a level playing field when against a friend-nintendo need to release official updated classic controllers that dont need the wii remote to connect and can charge by usb
  • Acerlux - June 9, 2011 9:33 p.m.

    Here's what you do Nintendo. You remake the Wavebird and sell it for the Wii U. You release a new Smash Bros. Then you enjoy massive profit.
  • gazsumz - June 9, 2011 7:53 p.m.

    as good as it will be will that take away from my first idea when i heard about Wii U, i thought it will mean i could play an fps against a friend in the same room but we cant screen peak cause of different screens on each controller
  • JustJoe - June 9, 2011 7:28 p.m.

    http://www.news.com.au/technology/gaming/nintendos-shigeru-miyamoto-explains-the-new-wii-u/story-e6frfrt9-1226071923070 This interview with Miyamoto regarding the controllers: "Our basic premise is that you can use one with a system. If we got to an idea of having multiple (controllers) it might be just more convenient for people to use their Nintendo 3DS and have a way to connect that. That being said, we are doing research about if someone brings their controller to their friends house and they want to play together on Wii U to whether or not something like that would be possible."
  • tomasspipass - June 9, 2011 6:30 p.m.

    I really hope the reason we can only use one screen controller is not due to technical limitations. Instead, I think Nintendo are being smart about the way they release information. If nintendo did allow consumers to buy sperate screen controllers the first thing people would ask is what is the cost? They are going to be expensive regardless and i cannot see people forking out the money. A main reason the wii did so well was because it was cheap and i think nintendo want to follow that. However, the stance of "never going to release separate screen controllers" seems extreme, things change. When the Wii-U is in households and is accepted by the public, and new games show the potential of multiple screen controllers then nintendo will put them on the market. Also I expect they will integrate the 3DS as a screen controller which will help boost sales of their portable device. Now someone make a HeroQuest game for this machine! :D
  • StuntzMcKenzy - June 9, 2011 5:55 p.m.

    What if you break it?
  • FlyinHawaiian13 - June 9, 2011 5:12 p.m.

    I could care less about this screen and the other gimmicks. Just get the damn online right this time Nintendo
  • justinbanda - June 9, 2011 4:49 p.m.

    This is very off-putting news, if it's to be believed. Some of the most lucrative applications of the WiiU tablet controller involve having 4-6 players play on their own screen, with a magnified screen on the TV. For instance, imagine Pokemon HD. (Incidentally, this is the 100th time I've mentioned it.) Each player would have a WiiU controller, which would display a trainer's items, Pokemon, Pokedex, and HP levels, thus freeing up the television screen for a streamlined, battle-only display. In other words, all the techy info is confined to the controller, much the same way it is in DS Pokemon battles, or how Link's inventory was displayed in the Zelda HD tech demo. One controller per console isn't gonna cut it. Plus, imagine the fights that would erupt over the controller in 'casual' households.
  • QWERTYCommander - June 9, 2011 3:08 p.m.

    Wait, Youtube's extended screen isn't 640x480, it's 876x480. Whoops.
  • QWERTYCommander - June 9, 2011 3:05 p.m.

    I don't know if I should be glad or sad about this. If they were going to advertise it as a new gaming experience, then they should make it so that other people can enjoy said "new gaming experience". But on the other hand, it would reduce costs dramatically to not have to buy new, expensive controllers. But here are some ways to reduce costs of the controller: If you really need a screen on a controller, then for fuck's sake, make it smaller! 6 inches is overkill. That's about the size of Youtube's 640x480 mode. The size of the DSi XL's screen is about 3 inches I think? Or maybe a bit less than that? That is the perfect size for it. Take out the front-facing camera. No one needs to do video chat on a controller. No one will do video chat on a controller. Doing video chat on a controller would make iPad 2 and Macbook Air owners point and say "Man, what a tool!" Put the analog sticks BELOW the buttons. Seriously. You had the mind to put the Gamecube's second analog stick below the buttons; why not do it here? Putting it above the buttons looks uncomfortable. Put some grips on the thing. The little groove on the back is nice and sure makes the controller look a hell of a lot more comfortable, but some grips would be amazing. Ok, now envisioning that in my head, it makes my version of the controller look like a Wavebird with a screen. Which sounds likke it would be a lot more comfortable.
  • dsvip - June 9, 2011 2:58 p.m.

    Couple of things i want to say. Firstly, to those who think its like a PSP2, the controller is nothing like a PSP2 because it ISNT a portable device. It cant run without streaming off the wiiU, so it must be in range. And the screen just has cheap single-touch, it has no memory, no power, no media, no wifi/3g (just bluetooth i think to connect to the wiiU console only), and in the end shouldnt cost anything near a PSP2/ipad2. I think the controller should cost around £70, and thats no reason to abandon selling more of them. Secondly, this is not a good thing, not a good thing at all, but can be fixed in many ways other than things like using 3DS's, or classic controllers. Even that would be terrible. The other solutions: Weve been told you can only connect one wiiU controller, and cannot purchase it on its own, its probably integrated into the console and cannot be neutral. So far ,we know that multiplayer would be using wii remotes, but that could mean you can use nun chuck and classic controller too. Furthermore, they may release a contrller without a scren that CAN be purchased, for use in multiplayer games. This makes sense as only one controller can be streamed into, and the screen isnt compulsary for games, so screenless controller can still play single player. This is also good news because the screenless controlelr can be a proper controller rather than a bulky tablet, so it will suit a lot more players. And because you can connect one wiiU controller and 4 other ones without screens, that means 5 player: the screen is split 4 ways, and one player has a screen on his controller. This is possible as only one controller is still being streamed into. This also means 2 player doesnt have to be split screen at all. Though the above is what i think everybody wants, and it will solve many issues, i still think it would be better to have multiple screen controllers, all of which can be streamed into at once, so that each player can now actually make use of 2 screens in multiplayer, to fulfill the capabilities of the console. Assuming now that 4 controllers can be streamed into at once, it will be 8 player max: 4 people can use their screen, and 4 people can use the 4 way split with the controller with no screens. So either this way or that, we definitely need to see a release of a screenless controller. And what i want even more than that, is a fully portable controller which can take in the GC, wii and wiiU discs, so you can play it anywhere and play local multiplayer against other people. This is perfect, but one downside is that each player would need their own copy of the game, in order to play multiplayer from one disc, you would need to put it in the console and have it stream to everyone from there. Oh, and it should have its own online too. Pls develop any one of these three technologies, and youre in for the win, i think it will convince people to spend a lot of money. Price for the three controllers: Screen free: £30 screen: £70 Fully portable:£180 (would be more if the touch screen was multitouch, then youre looking at an ipad/psp2 here) Personally i would try and get 1 fully portable, 3 screen ones and 1 screenless. Or maybe 2,2,1. Point is I will at least buy one of each, so not being able to buy the one with a screen is utter nonsense.
  • FoxdenRacing - June 9, 2011 2:55 p.m.

    I'm actually a bit heartbroken to hear this. I was really hoping for Mario Kart Firetruck [Wii-u-wii-u] to end up with a Party mode; 4 drivers, their own point of view on the new controller...no screen-watching, no guessing how far out a blue shell is by watching it whiz by other players...and the TV itself being used as a normal telecast, camera changing to get the best action, ala the 4th screen in a 3-player Double Dash game.
  • iFeastOnAntista - June 9, 2011 2:49 p.m.

    Also, I think the "classic controller" sucks butt. I can't imagine playing a "real" FPS with either the Wii classic controller or the new Wii U controller. It seems like the new controller doesn't have sticks, but rather has nubby circle things. I DON'T LIKE CHANGE. I'M USED TO PLAYING WITH A 360 CONTROLLER AND I CAN'T CONCEPTUALIZE HAVING FUN ON AN FPS WITH ANYTHING ELSE. Eh, we'll see.
  • iFeastOnAntista - June 9, 2011 2:43 p.m.

    No. No no no. My expectation was that four players would all be able to have high quality, streaming digital experiences separate and apart from each other, or have four players work toward a unified or competitive goal on the big screen while having private gaming experiences on the controller. If there is only one tablet, then all my crazy fantasies go right out the window. In my fantasy, one could have had multiplayer in the room with no disadvantages from screen looking; four people could have browsed the internet and shared cool content on the big screen; two people could watch two different movies sitting on the couch together; and more in that vein. My anticipation for this machine was not high before, but it's significantly lower now. There should at least be two tablets available for one system...
  • Lionzest7 - June 9, 2011 2:41 p.m.

    kind of a pathetic console when I hear more and more about it. The functionality seems to imply it should be doing more. The extra screen seems like it can be justified but most games will never feel like they actually need this feature. I'm sure this will be like VMU or serve like the DS's extra screen. Serve as a screen for the gui and information/map. Now you have only one of these gimmicks running a muck in your house. I guess its good if you're a little kid and your parents kick you off the TV to watch their shows. I don't really need this though. The fact that only one can be used sounds terrible and good at the same time. Yes it will save money on the controller, but what if you break this? God Forbid you might need another one of these honking things to play games. The wii controller is also bad, and no one actually desires to use the wiimote for classic gaming. So you're basically stuck with a bunch of unoptimal peripherals and are irreplacable? I guess if you don't mind shoveling out MORE money to nintendo buy the new rendition of a classic controller.
  • richlush - June 9, 2011 2:34 p.m.

    Interesting. Although financially this is a good thing, it really does seem to emphasize the gimmick nature of the device. The one big advantage I was thinking about with it were particularly sports games in multiplayer (in fact the EA boss even mentioned this, though he may not have been talking directly about multiplayer) where you can select strategies and plays without the other being able to see. It just seems that actually that would be one area it would be useful and ironically now it won't be able to do it! Then from the casual market you've got the family playing and the kids fighting over who get's the "cool" controller. Interesting. It's exciting that Nintendo are coming back to the mainstream, but if the Wii U is more gimmick then integral then you've got to wonder why would core gamers want to switch? Mario and Zelda are really the only reason I could think of.
  • Syncmaster - June 9, 2011 1:41 p.m.

    how do you play a local multiplayer FPS with a U pad and a wiimote that lacks buttons? certainly more controllers will come... nintendo is the champ on selling MUST HAVE periferals, not because they are good, but because you need it or wont play it..

Showing 1-20 of 40 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.