Gamepad is not a gimmick. It can be used in gimmicky ways but in itself is not a gimmick. DS has already proved this.
Vickman178
My thoughts exactly. [QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] 1. "...in his day" says it all. In my mind, he's about on the level of Tim Schaefer- Schaefer's had some hits and misses, but none of them have ever really taken off beyond 'cult classic' status. Molyneux was big ten and twenty years ago, but he hasn't achieved anything great since then. Frankly, the world has moved on, and he's been left behind, so it irks me spouts off (and is treated) like his opinion is more relevant than others'. 2. By all accounts, Ninja Gaiden 3 is a superior product than it's PS360 counterpart. I haven't read any reviews of AC3 or Batman that've drawn any real parallels between the PS360 versions and the Wii U versions(though I haven't checked Metacritic in about a week), so I don't know how inferior they are supposed to be. I call it a new kind of Nintendo console because the launch window is packed with real games like the ones I mentioned above, rather than the likes of Carnival Games and Nickelodeon licences. And when I think about the future(and the power) of the console, I look at the first year of the 360 and the PS3- ports like GUN and launch titles like Kameo. They all started out looking not much better than their predecessors by the end of their lifecycles, but look at what they've become with games like Red Dead and Arkham City. The heavy hitters at the end of the current generation are the launch titles of the next. It's a familiar story. I believe that the Wii U will have proper multiplats when the next generation rolls around(which I doubt very much will be next year). 3. I didn't deny that touch screen devices were around before the DS, I asserted that the DS is what brought them into the consumer spotlight. That the DS was to touchscreens as you claim the iPad was to tablets. Anybody feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here, but the DS was around long before the iPhone and Android smartphones were. You claim the Wii U controller is trying to ape the tablet craze. Would you still say so if the console were DS branded rather than Wii branded? I try to avoid using the word "innovation." Frankly I think it's pretentious in the extreme for someone(or a company) to use it to describe themselves or their work, and I think it's bandied about too frequently in relation to videogames and game makers for it to really mean anything anymore. I believe that there isn't anything new, just ideas reused, refined and combined until they look too different to be classified as the same. That being said, I do credit Nintendo for the current wide spread use of the analog stick. The Atari patent amounted to nothing. But when Nintendo slapped one on their new controller and then Sony ran with the idea and instituted the dual stick control scheme, the way we played videogames changed forever. If Nintendo hadn't slapped a touchscreen on their latest handheld, would we have touchscreens on our telephones today? Probably, but I doubt it would have happened so swiftly, and I doubt the advent of the appstore and thus the rise of casual gaming would be as huge as it is now. 4. You say it's equal-at-best to '06 hardware, but you completely disregard the disparity between the titles available in 2006 vs the Wii U launch titles. The launch lineup will always consist of the roughest-hewn software that will ever hit a system. I have a hard time believing MS and Sony will be able to deliver either a graphical or technological leap the gaming community will accept and still keep the cost under $400. Time will have to tell, I suppose, and if it ends up telling me I'm wrong, I won't worry about it too much until 2016 or '17 when I finally shell out for a new Playstation/Xbox. (Of course, there is one game that will convince me to buy one before then, and if it does come out, I'm screwed.)Grammaton-Cleric
I'm going to respond to your points using your numbers as the header for each rebuttal.
1. I think Molyneux developing games like Syndicate and Populous places him on a god-tier. I also think most of his contemporary games are pretty damn good, even if they fall short of his stated ambitions. I guess in one sense my reverence for men like him and Schaefer is rooted firmly in the past but I could also say the same of people's lingering respect for Nintendo given how far removed from their glory days they really are.
2. Ninja Gaiden 3 is a crap game, period. The Wii U version is marginally better because of some additional content but the game is actually, technically, inferior to the PS3/XB360 versions. Other games like Arkham City run far worse according to reports and that strikes me as pitiful, especially with new revelations about the Wii Us architecture being far weaker than initially thought coming to light.
And it doesn't matter that the XB360 and PS3 had weak-looking and technically drab ports and games in 2006 because that was the legitimate cusp of the new generation. The Wii U isn't starting a new hardware cycle but rather continuing one that will soon be abandoned by MS and Sony. The Wii U isn't running ports of GUN or Perfect Dark Zero, it is running graphically demanding top tier titles like Mass Effect 3, Arkham City, and ACIII. You are quite literally talking about a growth cycle that cannot happen because the full measure of graphical fidelity has already been mined by the current gen systems.
And make no mistake about it: MS and Sony are coming with next generation machines and most analysts believe well have them by next year.
3. I still don't see any evidence that the DS has had any direct influence on the devices you mention but regardless, the Wii U is predicated on tablet gaming and is a direct aping of the tablet fad. You also seem to ignore the glaring fact that Nintendo's console design is a direct rip-off of Apples sublime simplicity in terms of product aesthetics and branding. Nintendo is doing their best to mimic, in both content and design, the look and feel of Apple products and the tablet controller is by far their most transparent offering in this regard.
And truly, it was Sonys DUAL ANALOG that revolutionized the analog stick, not Nintendos horrifically limited N64 controller. Sony was working on their own analog pad at roughly the same time the N64 released and it happened to be a superior design that has become the industry standard so again, I really don't see an overt Nintendo influence save forcing Sony to play that particular hand a bit earlier than they might have otherwise.
And I cannot find a single article or source that attributes the DS as having any real influence on the touch screen phenomenon. The DS first launched in 2004 and by then Smartphones were already readily available and in wide use so regarding this matter I cannot see any clear evidence that Nintendo was anything more than a trend-hopper, as they've been so many times. To be fair it was a clever and broadly functional addition but I think its influence, however pronounced, was felt mostly within the game industry.
4. I have no idea what the final price point will be but given history it seems reasonable that both MS and Sony will try to keep the price at 400 dollars even if that means taking a loss on each console for the first year or two. Regardless, you must remember that HALF the Wii U cost comes directly from the controller, which is why they apparently went with so many underpowered technical decisions inside the actual box. If MS and Sony allot their full resources to architecture then both the XB3 and PS3 would be far more powerful by default, even at a similar price point.
And let me ask you something: Why would you be willing to shell out 350-400 dollars on something as clearly underpowered as the Wii U and yet be hesitant to spend 500 dollars on a console that is infinitely more powerful?
That's only a hundred dollar differential (less when you consider that the Wii U forces the consumer to purchase an external hard drive) and yet you act as if that price is a significant barrier. I could understand that rationale when the Wii was selling for 250 dollars versus the PS3 selling for between 500-600 dollars but even if the next XB or PS3 sold at 500 bucks, the difference between that price and the Wii U price is much smaller.
As usual in any kind of argument where both sides are set in their beliefs, an impasse is reached, so I'll address a few of your points and we can leave it at that. 1. You make a good point with your Molyneux/Nintendo comparison. It was apt, I think, during the Wii's time, and only time will tell if it holds true with the Wii U. 2. "The Wii U isn't running ports of GUN or Perfect Dark Zero..." That is exactly my point. It is running ports of games that came out this year and last. Knowing full well how games develop both graphically and mechanically throughout a console's lifespan, I don't understand how this isn't encouraging to gamers. The beginning of Wii U's development- the roughest, most unpolished software it will ever see- is Arkham City. I can't help but look from Perfect Dark Zero to Arkham City and then imagine in 7 years what we'll be looking at on Wii U. You say it can't be done because the current gen has been stretched as far as possible. I choose to hope otherwise(and even if I'm wrong, which is certainly possible, I'm okay with that because I'm not ready for this generation to end). 3. From the beginning, this assertion was based on my own observations rather than any research or news articles, but I'm interested in finding out what passed for a smartphone back in 2004. Hell, in 2008 I was working a steady job and living with few demands on my paycheck, and this was the smartest phone I could afford. The only way to credit Sony without crediting Nintendo would be to show the patent date on the original dual analog controller was before the patent date on the N64 controller. Showing that Sony was working on an analog control scheme before they got the idea from Nintendo's new controller. I can't find either one, so maybe someone knows a better way to search than Google. And finally on this point: you said the touchscreen on the DS was "a clever and broadly functional addition," so why are you so opposed to the touchscreen on the Gamepad? 4. You seem to be a pretty savvy fellow when the tech question is raised, so do you think the leap the nextbox/PS4 will make would be sufficient to create a game this technically demanding? If I was going to invest in the next gen early, I would have to see this kind of development- people willing to create more technically demanding titles, since I'm no longer impressed by graphically demanding titles. Graphics don't make a game interesting, and at this point, fun = an interesting experience over a pretty one. As far as the price question, I suffer from what I like to call ".99 syndrome." At a certain point, a number crosses a line in my head where I can't bring myself to part with that kind of money. For a handheld, that number was 250- which was handy because I really wanted a 3DS, but was also kind of a bummer because I also really wanted a Vita. Regardless of the fact it might only be 50 bucks difference, I just couldn't bring myself to spring for it. 400 is about the max I could bring myself to spend on a new console, and that only if I felt like I had to have it.
Log in to comment