Nintendo Wii U controller thoughts

[Dervacumen]

It's pretty much what I expected, so no surprises there.  I sure hope there's typical controller as an option, though.  I can see where this thing could really enhance game play, for instance football games where you want to call plays and don't want your opponent to see them and maybe a couple other things, but forcing every game to utilize this when a regular controller would suffice is just brutal.  Look at all the Wii games that were forced to use motion control thereby hampering an otherwise decent experience.

[Howard_Casto]

Check out my e3 thread I just posted.

[Donkbaca]

its WAY too big.  They are not targeting the hardcore gamer, if they are, they totally missed the mark.  If there is a 6.2 inch screen in it that means the controller is what, 8 inches across by 5 inches high?  Its too big to play for an extended period of time.  That screen on it will suck power like nobody's business, meaning you will get what, 4- 5 hours of gameplay before it needs to be charged?  Not to mention the cost.  This might be the first 100 dollar controller, I imagine the system will be 300 bucks, another hundred for the controller, too expensive.

[Ginsu Victim]

This might be the first 100 dollar controller, I imagine the system will be 300 bucks, another hundred for the controller, too expensive.

That was the first thing I thought when I saw the controller. I hope this thing flops hard. Unfortunately, it won't.

[Howard_Casto]

This might be the first 100 dollar controller, I imagine the system will be 300 bucks, another hundred for the controller, too expensive.

That was the first thing I thought when I saw the controller. I hope this thing flops hard. Unfortunately, it won't.

Ditto.  I mean a 360/ps3 controller is around 50 now right?  The wiimote/nunchuck combo is around 60.  So I can only think that a controller with a excessivley huge lcd screen, two cameras and a gyroscope is going to cost some serious change. 

Then again if it DOESN'T cost a lot then it could be a runaway success like the wii.  Although I'm not fond of the tablet controller at all (as you both said, too damn big) it is an impressive piece of hardware and I do like the idea of being able to play my games without a tv... I just can't see myself playing a traditional "multi console port" on that thing. 

Also while we are on the subject... I almost laughed ---my bottom--- off when they showed the new wii zapper.  It really empahsizes the problem with the controller, namely the large screen.  If the controller would have had a dreamcast, vmu sized screen that would have been the coolest idea ever, but as-is it looked like those poorly crafted fps hacks you see on slashdot all the time.

Which brings up the point.... do you think there will be third party controllers for this thing?  Like maybe a version with a sanely-sized screen?  A 4-inch screen I think might work better.

[Donkbaca]

I doubt it, too much going on with that controller. I see a flop with this thing, it's GOING to be expensive, Nintendos philosophy is to make money on consoles. I am thinking at LEAST 300 bucks for console, one controller and a game. Another hundred bucks for the controller, that is 400 bucks right there, to play what?   Legos?  They need to launch with a zelda or Mario game, otherwise there is no reason for anyone to drop that kind of coin on something like this

[Howard_Casto]

400 bucks right there, to play what?   Legos?  They need to launch with a zelda or Mario game, otherwise there is no reason for anyone to drop that kind of coin on something like this

Well I think that's a given.  Remember the first teaser for the Wii?  We had Mr. M and a bunch of bad actors flailing around with a wiimote and nothing else... no demos or nothing.  When it finally came out the launch lineup was pretty great, including TP and the sleeper hit Wii Sports.  I'm sure that they will release at least one of the key titles at launch time.  My guess is a mario game considering the last few mario titles have been built on existing engines and thus didn't take much time to develop.  If they were smart they would launch with a GOOD metroid title though.  If metroid was in HD, had the superior MP3 motion control option (enhanced with motion plus) and had a decent multiplayer campaign it would blow Halo out of the water easily, and that would win over the fps crowd.

Then again the fact that Mr. M and others have essentially stated that they haven't started development on Wii U titles yet worries me.  Doesn't it take 2-3 years to make a Mario or a Zelda?  Metroid typically takes even longer.

[Corbo]

I too worry about the cost of the controllers.  But it does open up a whole world of augmented reality party games using the cameras and screen on the controller.

It has the potential to be massive with its audience off the back of the Wii, but also to turn out to be an overpriced gimmick trying to compensate for an underpowered console.  I'll watch with interest.

[danny_galaga]

I doubt it, too much going on with that controller. I see a flop with this thing, it's GOING to be expensive, Nintendos philosophy is to make money on consoles. I am thinking at LEAST 300 bucks for console, one controller and a game. Another hundred bucks for the controller, that is 400 bucks right there, to play what?   Legos?  They need to launch with a zelda or Mario game, otherwise there is no reason for anyone to drop that kind of coin on something like this

That HAS been true, but seeing this controller makes me think Nintendo are now willing to sell systems at cost. And you can be sure they will launch with something compelling, like they have for the last 20 years or so...

[Dervacumen]

Interesting that the Wii U seems to have more in common with tablet computing than really being a solitary console system.
Imagine a not too distant future where I have a tablet computer, not a laptop.  I also have a smartphone and a console gaming system.  Not too far off, right?  Aren't some of us there now?

Nintendo's future:
I have a Nintendo tablet computer - the Wii U controller.
I have a Nintendo smartphone - not announced, but just imagine how quickly they could get to market with one.
I have a Nintendo gaming console - The Wii U base system.

The games and applications are all cross-compatible, with each piece of hardware having particular features that make it a core part of the entire experience.  For instance you want to have the smartphone for transportability.  You need to tablet for typical computer tasks and you can take it with you to class, vacation, work, whatever.  You need the gaming system for the high def augmented reality game experience.
Take your casual game with you all over the place.  Plug it in to your friend's base system and take your avatar or credentials to compete on the game field.  Play Second Life, like, all the time and video chat with your parent (or kid) while you're in the next room or on the other side of the couch.  You don't even need to interact with people anymore.  You can just ping them via video chat, text, phone, email, whatever.

I dunno.  It all seems reasonable, so I wonder if this is Nintendo jumping in and creating that space.  If not, they or someone else should and probably will.  Nintendo just seems to be positioned at least as well as Microsoft or Sony to pull it off.

[Howard_Casto]

It has the potential to be massive with its audience off the back of the Wii, but also to turn out to be an overpriced gimmick trying to compensate for an underpowered console.  I'll watch with interest.

Wii U is not underpowered.  It has already been confirmed by a few third party developers that the Wii U is significantly more powerflul than the ps3.  And before you mention it, M$ and Sony aren't in a position to release a new console anytime soon.  M$ keeps making revisions of the 360 and that costs money and boht M$ and Sony have invested a lot of time and money on their motion controllers.  To release a console within the next year or even the next two or three years would essentially kill any sales they are making off of their new accessories.

[Necro]

Unlike the Wii, I don't see this as a 'get on day 1' type of console...more a wait and see thing.  For the controllers, my impression is you only use a maximum of ONE of those things at a time...so...it's a single purchase. 

I'm very VERY on the fence with this.  I like the Wii, but feel Nintendo dropped the ball and there's a complete lack of good games recently...they also dropped the ball on internet gameplay potential.

I guess I'll just wait and see overall.  Nothing really grabs me, console wise, at this point. 

[DaveMMR]

I skimmed through the news this morning on the Wii U's controller and saw something mentioned that you will be unable to buy more of those tablet controllers as it only supports one (everything else is controlled by the same Wiimotes, etc. that currently exist).   I can't cite any references right now, but if true, it would definitely save me money on peripherals (having to buy three additional controllers every time I get a new system). 

I apologize in advance if I misread; again I only skimmed through the announcements this morning before work.

[elkameleon]

I dunno, the trouser mouse isn't stirring on anything this generation and that's a sad commentary.   

Battlefield 3, F**K YEAH!

[Corbo]

It has the potential to be massive with its audience off the back of the Wii, but also to turn out to be an overpriced gimmick trying to compensate for an underpowered console.  I'll watch with interest.

Wii U is not underpowered.

Not underpowered compared to the current generation, but this is next gen.  Nintendo may get to the party first but Sony and MS won't be far behind (and maybe Sega if old rumours are true).  And when they do, they will be much more powerful than Nintendo's offerings.  N64, GC, Wii, all under powered compared to the same gen competition, I don't see this trend changing.

[Bootay]

I highly doubt any rumors of Sega hopping back on the console hardware wagon again are true. If they do it would be interesting. But I highly doubt we will see that again.

[Corbo]

True, the rumours are pretty old now, I think any chance of it happening has probably passed.

[Donkbaca]

I hate to take a ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- on your roses, but the thought of this being some sort of tablet pc for a controller is just got to be wrong for the following reasons:
1) Nintendo is always a 1 trick pony when it comes to gimmicks. When the wii was coming out we all thought it was going to be a Xb 360 with motion controls. Turns out it was a game cube with subpar motion controls. There is no media center, it's next to impossible to play online and the wii ware turned out to be mostly a venue for them to resell copies of old games.  People are thinking tablet pc, I am thinking this is a rehash of the game cube connecting to the gameboy advance, except now the GBA is touchscreen and connects wirelessly.
2) find me a tablet pc with gyro controls, two cameras and a nice screen for anything less than 200 bucks. Anyone willing to shell out that kind of dough for a white one that says Nintendo on it?  

Nintendo is just not that ambitious, especially the last several iterations of their hardware, which have been essentially, previous generation +1: wii is game cube plus motion control; all the iterations of the Ds, the 3rd is just the Ds with crappy 3d. Given all these, I just don't expect Nintendo to do something that is ground up revolutionary. Honestly I think it's just going to be an hd wii with a touchscreen on the controller. I am not expecting
1 - a cloud based system
2- portable gaming; if the controller is q standalone portable, it would kill the 3ds a year after it's launch
3- any sort of xboxnlive experience

That is what I think

[Dervacumen]

Unlike the Wii, I don't see this as a 'get on day 1' type of console...more a wait and see thing.

At this point, I see it as a "never gonna get it" kinda thing.  And I really enjoy my Wii and use it often.

I hate to take a ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- on your roses, but the thought of this being some sort of tablet pc for a controller is just got to be wrong for the following reasons:

I don't have roses and I don't care if Nintendo succeeds or fails with this.  But if some enterprising company isn't considering this approach (hey Microsoft, you're essentially there now, wink wink) I would be surprised.  This just seems to be a good way to put a toe in the water to check the temperature.
IMO we're not ready to embrace that concept yet, but we will get there.

Anyway, I enjoy my Wii and 3DS and unless the price is right for this new thing (which I can't imagine it will be), I'm not interested. 

[Donkbaca]

I actually also think the concept of a tablet controller is a bad one. I think in general, most people woul agree that what makes a good controller is one that is comfortable to hold for long periods of time, and is intuitive to use.  The problem with a touchscreen on a controller is that you have to look at it to use it, and that means you aren't lookin at the screen you are playing on. People hate interacting with devices without tactile feedback, and it's impossible to do so without looking at the device.  Sure it would be cool to have a private screen to call plays on in madden, but thats one of only a few situations where thy would make sense. The whole "it would be cool o have a screen for inventory in RPGs/action adventure games" doesn't make sense to me.  Since you have to look at the screen to interface with it, you are going to have to pause the game, and if you are pausing the game anyway, what difference does it make if you are pulling your backpack up on your big screen or your hand held screen?

It's like they are combining the crappy aspects of portable gaming - small screen, uncomfortable controls, without the advantage of portability

[shmokes]

N64, GC, Wii, all under powered compared to the same gen competition, I don't see this trend changing.

That's simply not true.  The N64 was superior to the PlayStation in a number of ways, and inferior in others (especially storage).  The Gamecube was superior to the Playstation 2 in almost every way, but slightly inferior to the Xbox.  The Wii, well . . . it's clearly inferior to all its competition.

Frankly, I'm not all that on board with most of what I've been hearing here.  I think that there are all kinds of great things that could be done with a big touch screen on the controller, and anyone who has picked up a Kindle (or has read any hands-on impressions of the Wii U controller) should know that a 6" screen is not heavy, and certainly not heavy enough to matter in a two-handed gamepad.  Where I think this device utterly fails is its use of resistive touch technology instead of capacitive.  Clearly Nintendo (smartly) sees iOS and Android as major market disrupters and is positioning itself to fend off these new competitors.  But I question whether that can be done with a stylus.  Obviously the problem is one of cost, but that doesn't make the problem go away.  Apple didn't invent the tablet after all.  MS did that many years before.  Apple just made the tablet useable.  Nobody wants to use a stylus on a tablet.

[Mikezilla]

I actually also think the concept of a tablet controller is a bad one. I think in general, most people woul agree that what makes a good controller is one that is comfortable to hold for long periods of time, and is intuitive to use.  The problem with a touchscreen on a controller is that you have to look at it to use it, and that means you aren't lookin at the screen you are playing on. People hate interacting with devices without tactile feedback, and it's impossible to do so without looking at the device.  Sure it would be cool to have a private screen to call plays on in madden, but thats one of only a few situations where thy would make sense. The whole "it would be cool o have a screen for inventory in RPGs/action adventure games" doesn't make sense to me.  Since you have to look at the screen to interface with it, you are going to have to pause the game, and if you are pausing the game anyway, what difference does it make if you are pulling your backpack up on your big screen or your hand held screen?

It's like they are combining the crappy aspects of portable gaming - small screen, uncomfortable controls, without the advantage of portability

I was thinking all of the same stuff. Mostly regarding having to look at the screen in the heat of battle and then end up dying. I personally like Microsofts and Sony's stance in not releasing a new console any time soon. I hate having to shell out money every few years just to get the "next gen" in gaming because support/new games for the older systems cease to exist. I kinda want this new Nintendo thing to fail just for that reason. I paid good money for those consoles, and I want them to last a little longer. Besides, what other games besides mario, zelda, and metroid are even worth playing anymore on Nintendo?

[versapak]

N64, GC, Wii, all under powered compared to the same gen competition, I don't see this trend changing.

That's simply not true.  The N64 was superior to the PlayStation in a number of ways, and inferior in others (especially storage).  The Gamecube was superior to the Playstation 2 in almost every way, but slightly inferior to the Xbox.  The Wii, well . . . it's clearly inferior to all its competition.

Frankly, I'm not all that on board with most of what I've been hearing here.  I think that there are all kinds of great things that could be done with a big touch screen on the controller, and anyone who has picked up a Kindle (or has read any hands-on impressions of the Wii U controller) should know that a 6" screen is not heavy, and certainly not heavy enough to matter in a two-handed gamepad.  Where I think this device utterly fails is its use of resistive touch technology instead of capacitive.  Clearly Nintendo (smartly) sees iOS and Android as major market disrupters and is positioning itself to fend off these new competitors.  But I question whether that can be done with a stylus.  Obviously the problem is one of cost, but that doesn't make the problem go away.  Apple didn't invent the tablet after all.  MS did that many years before.  Apple just made the tablet useable.  Nobody wants to use a stylus on a tablet.

Does it not do both?

I have seen video it being used with fingers and video of it being used with a stylus.

For the record I very much do use a stylus on a tablet. My iPad is an essential part of my school kit, and I do all my note taking on it with a stylus.

The Wii-U at least doesn't have to use the big fat tipped stylus that I have to use on the iPad though. Not that it is going to be at all as useful as the iPad either, but that is a different subject.



I am looking forward to the unique gaming experiences it will bring, and will definitely be buying one. I will most definitely ---smurfette--- about how little it is used later, but that is just how it goes with any Nintendo console anymore.

[shmokes]

Yeah, resistive touch screens can be used with a finger.  They're just not very responsive.  The DS screen is a good example.  I know that some people want to use a stylus with their tablet.  When I said "nobody" I meant it colloquially, not literally.  In the context of a gaming device, capacitive is much better.  Again, the DS is a good example.  Just compare what its touch screen can do gaming-wise with an i-phone.  Essentially, nobody wants to take notes on their Wii U controller.   

[Donkbaca]

Pick up a ruler. You figure with a six inch screen and controls
That thing is at least 8 inches wide by about 5 inches tall. That is ginormous. A big controller has always been a negative in console sales.  The thickness doesn't bother me, it should be a couple of inches thick for it to be comfortable to hold. That is one of the things I hate about the psp. It's too thin to play comfortably for any period of time.

Base on what we know of Nintendo it's not going to be any sort of tablet, unless Rey think people will shell out 200 bucks for a controller. In reality it's a big touch screen GBA that doesn't play games on it's own

[versapak]

Yeah, resistive touch screens can be used with a finger.  They're just not very responsive.  The DS screen is a good example.  I know that some people want to use a stylus with their tablet.  When I said "nobody" I meant it colloquially, not literally.  In the context of a gaming device, capacitive is much better.  Again, the DS is a good example.  Just compare what its touch screen can do gaming-wise with an i-phone.  Essentially, nobody wants to take notes on their Wii U controller.   

Yeah, I hear ya.

I am a big fan of gaming on my iPad, and the screen is definitely a million times better to touch than the DS screen. I figure some of the games they are doing for this Wii-U could also be done on an iPad 2 with HDMI out. Maybe it'll get some ports, and I won't have to buy the Wii-U. heh

[DaveMMR]

Finally watched the videos, read the reports, etc.  I can't deny that I am intrigued at the possibilities but I'm not terribly excited about it either.   Will games do a lot with it - enough that you'll miss it when you're playing a different console?  Will it be a needless gimmick added to games?  I haven't seen enough to make up my mind just yet. 

[AtomSmasher]

After holding it in my hands I was surprised that it was lighter then expected, and the button placement does feel really good, although this was just from holding it for a moment, not playing any games with it (didn't want to wait 3 hours to do so).  Easily the worst part of the controller is the slide/analog nub things.  They feel really cheap and are worse then the ones on the 3DS.  I hope they buckle under some criticism and change them for real analog sticks.

Also, the graphics on the video they were showing seemed to look slightly worse then current gen PS3.  Granted I'm sure they are in very early stage development and are first gen titles, but it seems it's not head and shoulders over current gen systems since they can't make amazing tech demos.

[Howard_Casto]

It has the potential to be massive with its audience off the back of the Wii, but also to turn out to be an overpriced gimmick trying to compensate for an underpowered console.  I'll watch with interest.

Wii U is not underpowered.

Not underpowered compared to the current generation, but this is next gen.  Nintendo may get to the party first but Sony and MS won't be far behind (and maybe Sega if old rumours are true).  And when they do, they will be much more powerful than Nintendo's offerings.  N64, GC, Wii, all under powered compared to the same gen competition, I don't see this trend changing.

Well that's not a problem.... the first console out of the gate is always the one that gets the "main" port with all of the others being slightly adapated.  Can you honestly say that the average ps3 game looks significantly better than the average 360 game?  Especially on cross-platform ports. 

People keep thinking of this as Nintendo's console that was late to release this gen, but they've got it backwards, it's the first console to be released of the next gen. 

Alo read what I said about possible new console releases... M$ and Sony most likely WILL be far behind. They have too much new tech invested in this gen to jump ship yet.  I'm thinking 2 to 3 years for a new M$ console and maybe more for a new Sony one.  And let me tell you, 2 to 3 years stuck on a aging console is going to get people to flock to nintendo's new one, even if they aren't nintendo fans. 

The console itself will be successful, I just have fears about the new controller and it's usefulness.

Read what schmokes said about the previous nintendo consoles btw... you are dead wrong on those, the only issues the GC and n64 had were storage, and many people (myself included) think that the carts on the n64 merely saved us from the crappy fmv games on the psx. 

[Howard_Casto]

I skimmed through the news this morning on the Wii U's controller and saw something mentioned that you will be unable to buy more of those tablet controllers as it only supports one (everything else is controlled by the same Wiimotes, etc. that currently exist).   I can't cite any references right now, but if true, it would definitely save me money on peripherals (having to buy three additional controllers every time I get a new system). 

I apologize in advance if I misread; again I only skimmed through the announcements this morning before work.

Well that's correct and incorrect.  In terms of transferring the game to the tablet controller that is one player only.  AFAIK though using multiple tablets at once with the main game on the big screen works.  The reason is fairly obvious... it would take a ton of horsepower, even on a next gen system, to display full "game graphics" on 4  independant displays.  Then again these are the specs right now.  From what I understand the current model is slightly in flux.... for example they haven't decided if it'll have a ethernet port, or just wifi. 


Also a couple of misconceptions we might as well clear up while we are at it (this stuff comes straight from blogs and press conferences).

The controller isn't a game system by itself.  The wii u wirelessly streams the video to the screen (although I'm sure there is a buffer or something).  Without the wii u powered up it can't play anything... or at least nothing complex. 

This is undoubtedly to keep the cost down.  This is why I've said the wii u *could* end up being a lot cheap than it is, and if that is the case then it will be another runaway hit.

In a recent "Iwata Asks"  Miyamoto inferred that they are still working on the design of the controller.  Many of his collegues want to make the thing slimmer and lighter, he wants to make it more modular.  +1 for Mr. M!  If they would make the device as a stand-alone touchscreen with bolt on control modules then I could see it becomeing infinately more useful.  It already has an accessory port btw. 


So my "ugh this is horrible" has slowly, over the course of the week, turned into a "I'm still confused and I need more info"


The slider sticks definately need to go though.  I'm not sure how they would fix that problem without a major re-design though as the classic controller taught me that analog sticks on a flat controller are VERY akward to use as well.

[lcddream]

I think the controller will open up many many possibilities, and I'm pretty damn excited about it 

[Dervacumen]

You know what would really open up the industry in terms of accessibility?  I wish my controller understood voice commands, so I could just yell at the damn thing and see it perform.  "Jump!  Jump far!  Watch out!  Land on it!  Get it, shoot!"  Much easier than fighting these tired reflexes.

[DaveMMR]

One thing I'm hating about controllers lately: they're getting too expensive/fragile to throw in anger anymore.  I won't be throwing the Wii U's pad any time soon...

[hypernova]

The console itself will be successful, I just have fears about the new controller and it's usefulness.

I'm actually a bit skeptical about this.

There's the basic main reason that the Wii was such a runaway hit.  EVERYONE had to have one.  Even non-gamers.  It brought families, including parents and even grandparents into the gaming fold.

My questions are as such:  What is this console going to bring to the table for all of these people to have to have it again?  Just as importantly, what are they going to offer to all of those people (more hardcore style gamers) who rushed out to buy the Wii, only to express buyer's remorse shortly thereafter, who've either sold it or acknowledges it has gathered an inch of dust?  Surely they feel jilted from that experience, and will be more hesitant this time around.  I know some of you have tread this path.  And I'm definitely seeing some apprehension so far in here.  Though it looks like the feeling is starting to wane just a bit.

[shmokes]

It does seem a bit hard to imagine the lighting striking twice.  Everyone bought the Wii and eventually became totally disenchanted with it.  It seems . . . risky to bring out a Wii 1.5.  I see what they're doing.  It's the Wii U because the Wii was a casual platform that made games accessible to everyone, but often forgot the individual gamer looking for hardcore experiences.  Now it's still the Wii, but can do the U stuff too.  It's got a full-fledged controller with dual analog, 4 face and 4 shoulder buttons.  But all that does is finally put it on a technical par with PS3 and Xbox 360.  But par isn't nearly good enough because those systems have enormous libraries of compelling software to go along with their hardware.

So they added the touch screen which can maybe add a little depth and also allow it to fend off the iPad (as well as get ports from it), but that's botched too for a couple of reasons.  They used a resistive screen, so games are not going to play nearly as well.  Not even close.  But, more importantly, it can't begin to be an iPad replacement because the iPad is a full-fledged computer in its own right.  So while the Wii U controller is vastly underperforming the iPad, chances are most Wii U owners will probably also have an iPad in the house.  So why would someone choose to play a game on an underperforming 6" resistive screen when they already have a 10" capacitive screen to play the game on - especially considering the fact that the iPad game probably cost $3 while the Wii U version was $30-60?

I can't help but think that Microsoft is going to wipe the floor with the 360 successor.  They've laid a potentially great groundwork with the Kinect.  Their next system will (presumably) have a higher-res Kinect with on-board processing to get rid of lag, and controllers that can be properly used in conjunction with the camera.  Plus they're gonna have Windows 8 tablets out by then.  They'll probably have Windows 8 tablet integration with the next Xbox that makes the Wii U controllers seem like toys.  

The more I think about it, the less impressed I am.  As always with things like this, hopefully I'm wrong.  I've got a soft spot in my heart for Nintendo.

[Howard_Casto]

Well let's put thing into perspective a bit guys.  Nintendo has only had one flop in it's history.  (Virtual Boy)  So could the system not be the dominate brand this go around?  Or course..... there's always that chance.  Could it be a legitmate flop?  Impossible.  If the GameCube (which imho and according to sales figures was their weakest outing) has taught me anything, it's that all nintedo has to do is release one Mario game and one Zelda game to break even.  Release a Metroid or another one of their key franchises and they make a profit. 

If the controller is a complete dud and the sales of the console begin to fall, all they have to do is release a wii sports-like title on it and it'll sell enough copies to save the thing.  Mind you we will all swarp and and complain about how they've went all "casual" again and stuff, but it doesn't matter.  Big sellers anymore are "lighter" games like wii sports, nintendogs and ect....

So again,  I have serious issues in terms of the controller, but the console itself will do just fine. 

The fact that Ubi has pledged to do an AC game on the thing helps tremendously.  EA (blah!!) and Ubi are the two major third party developers at this point.  If they actually release HD games on the system then that will bring enough of the "core" demo back even if some of the "casual" ones decide not to upgrade to the wii u.

[danny_galaga]

Investors hate it, the stock is tanking.
 

Shares go up, shares go down 

World wide, markets are pretty soft, so people are jumpier than usual. Now would be a good time to buy Nintendo shares it would seem. you can bet they'll surge on launch day. Before then, they most likely will slowly climb as the lemmings decide it's safe after all...

It does seem a bit hard to imagine the lighting striking twice.  Everyone bought the Wii and eventually became totally disenchanted with it.  It seems . . . risky to bring out a Wii 1.5.  I see what they're doing.  It's the Wii U because the Wii was a casual platform that made games accessible to everyone, but often forgot the individual gamer looking for hardcore experiences.  Now it's still the Wii, but can do the U stuff too.  It's got a full-fledged controller with dual analog, 4 face and 4 shoulder buttons.  But all that does is finally put it on a technical par with PS3 and Xbox 360.  But par isn't nearly good enough because those systems have enormous libraries of compelling software to go along with their hardware.

So they added the touch screen which can maybe add a little depth and also allow it to fend off the iPad (as well as get ports from it), but that's botched too for a couple of reasons.  They used a resistive screen, so games are not going to play nearly as well.  Not even close.  But, more importantly, it can't begin to be an iPad replacement because the iPad is a full-fledged computer in its own right.  So while the Wii U controller is vastly underperforming the iPad, chances are most Wii U owners will probably also have an iPad in the house.  So why would someone choose to play a game on an underperforming 6" resistive screen when they already have a 10" capacitive screen to play the game on - especially considering the fact that the iPad game probably cost $3 while the Wii U version was $30-60?

I can't help but think that Microsoft is going to wipe the floor with the 360 successor.  They've laid a potentially great groundwork with the Kinect.  Their next system will (presumably) have a higher-res Kinect with on-board processing to get rid of lag, and controllers that can be properly used in conjunction with the camera.  Plus they're gonna have Windows 8 tablets out by then.  They'll probably have Windows 8 tablet integration with the next Xbox that makes the Wii U controllers seem like toys.  

The more I think about it, the less impressed I am.  As always with things like this, hopefully I'm wrong.  I've got a soft spot in my heart for Nintendo.

1) Why a Wii U over an iPad? How much power does an iPad have? Can you play a game on an iPad where your friends are, for example, soldiers on a battle field on the TV, while you fly overhead of them, viewing them on your controller?

2) As a couple of people have pointed out, WiiU (is that name really going to stay? I hope not) more than likely will have a head start of a couple of years for the next gen. First in, best dressed and all that. Didn't work for Dreamcast mind you, but then Sega was broke. I figure first year or so, it will sell on the strength of a good pack in game. Next year or so, I reckon some great 3rd party games will come along and sell more consoles.

I won't be buying one myself, I'm still happy with my Wii and the 5 other classic consoles I have. But it sounds like Nintendo have a good plan...

[Malenko]

Well, I'll ignore all the crystal ball predictions and just say this:

I don't like it, it looks really awkward. I didn't like the Wii but after enough begging from my girlfriend we finally broke down and got one. And we played it for umm... a week? Waste of time and money. I wont let lightning strike my wallet again, I'm lookin at you Wii and GameCube

[Corbo]

N64, GC, Wii, all under powered compared to the same gen competition, I don't see this trend changing.

That's simply not true.  The N64 was superior to the PlayStation in a number of ways, and inferior in others (especially storage).  The Gamecube was superior to the Playstation 2 in almost every way, but slightly inferior to the Xbox.  The Wii, well . . . it's clearly inferior to all its competition.
 

I did a bit of reading and I’m quite surprised at how good the specs are, you’re right.  Perhaps the lack of FMV on the N64 and the 3rd party developer restrictions Nintendo are famous for gave the perception that the console was inferior technically.  To me anyway.

The N64 was superior to the PlayStation in a number of ways, and inferior in others

It arrived 2 years after the Playstation, it should have been superior in every way.

The Gamecube was superior to the Playstation 2 in almost every way, but slightly inferior to the Xbox

GC arrived 1.5 years after the PS2 and nearly a year after the Xbox, again too little too late.
Nintendo will be the first to the party this time around, will that be on their side, or will we have another Sega Saturn/Playstation situation.  Yeah the Wii U is nice, but look what Sony and Microsoft have coming out soon *swoon*.

[Donkbaca]

Nobody will buy it unless there is a compelling reason too. They are saying next gen, but nobody will care about unless it offers up something you can't get on the PS3/360.  Right now there is nothing that compelling about it to me