Topic: Wii U to Have $300 Price Tag, Simultaneous Tablet Play?

[Uncle_Optimus]

Ya pretty much nailed it...using the tab as a controller to browse Netflix or view movie info while the movie continues uninterrupted on the main screen; watching baseball while viewing auxiliary information on the tab screen (I hear sports venues give ticket purchasers this ability on their mobiles as well).
I don't really believe the value proposition of offering multi-tablet streaming is high enough to overcome cost barrier for a large percentage of the market...and admittedly I feel actual gameplay Usage would be relegated to small side tasks, again a cool extra feature but perhaps not worth that cost (preliminary estimates place tablet production around $60...factor in gross margin for both Nintendo and retailer...not to mention the cost of creating retail skus for a relatively expensive risky item) and forking of the system's rendering capabilities.


But ya know what, the outcry for this feature has been quite loud and of course in a vacuum we would rather have the ability than not. Coupled with stories describing the ATi graphics card as being able to support the additional stream(s) I actually expect Nintendo to cave on this!

[oohhboy]

Nintendo "Caving in" wouldn't be the words I would use. It's more of a "No Brainer". It made too much sense not to have the feature. This no doubt has paralleled the Wii Motion+ which should have have been there day one, but was cut for monetary, non-gameplay reasons when there was still space in the costings for the feature, which is pretty much the story for the Wii. Penny Pinching.

[Adrock]

The irony is that penny-pinching has probably cost Nintendo more money in the long run. When the newness of the Wii Remote wore off, Nintendo was left with a controller that was severely limiting creatively. It just couldn't do the things everyone wanted it to do. Motion Plus, however, could. However, its reach was limited considering it was not only an extra cost but it was introduced 3 years too late.

One has to wonder if Nintendo has learned from this. Go big or go home.

[house3136]

 I think $300 is Nintendo’s sweet spot. One tablet and one RemotePlus right out of the box, that way developers don’t have to worry about making a game that requires an add-on. I could see a bundle with two tablet controllers approaching $400 that would also sell well. The biggest question is, even if the system can handle two controllers, will Nintendo sell them separately, and for what cost?

[UncleBob]

Food for thought - Will the Wii U support regular Wii Remotes without Motion Plus?

[Bman87301]

Even assuming that is a second tablet (even though it looks like a remote to me) it actually doesn't change anything since the possibility of will simultaneous tablet play was never ruled out by Nintendo. All they said was that additional tablets wouldn't be sold separately. There was always the possibility that the system could support two at once if someone brought over the one from their own system.

[BlackNMild2k1]

I think that should Nintendo allow multi uMote play, and these tablets cost around $79.99 retail, then they should give you a rebate on price if you bought the 2nd uMote at launch and on the same receipt as your system (and possibly with a multi-player game).
A sort of Manufacturers bundle.

The reason for this is it will put multi uMotes capability into as many homes as possible on day1 by encouraging consumers to purchase that extra controller on day1, then there will be no reason for devs to not support Wii U with more TuMote games outside the initial launch window. We want a high adoption rate right from the start.
This will avoid the scenario that Adrock was referring to where it's too little too late and then we end up with too many games that don't support TuMote properly if at all.

p.s. tuMote^®/TuMote^® is a registered trademark of BNM Inc.

[Bman87301]

Food for thought - Will the Wii U support regular Wii Remotes without Motion Plus?

No doubt it still will during backward compatibility with Wii software. It's not as likely for Wii U-specific software, though it definitely would be possible if the specific game didn't use any MotionPlus features.

Since it would appear that a Wii Remote Plus will come included with the system, MotionPlus will be a standard feature all Wii U owners will be expected to have access to. It will probably just depend on the specific developer of the game if they bother specifically supporting older Wii Remotes without dongles attached or not. After all, pretty much any Wii game that supported the Classic Controller, could have also supported the GameCube controller, yet not all did.

[Bman87301]

yes, you are the only one.

No, he's not. I'm not only with him, but I even predicted it might only support a single tablet even before they revealed it last year (I'm pretty sure you're the one I had a big debate over it with).

Frankly, I think most people are needlessly getting bent-out-of-shape over how many uTablets will be supported largely because they're just misinterpreting Nintendo's intentions with the Wii U's controls in the first place.
 
The way I see it, Nintendo isn't planning on making the system focused primarily around the tablet (though I'm sure a lot of games will focus around it, particularly 3rd party ones). I'm quite certain Nintendo intends to equally incorporate continued use of the Wii Remotes and in many instances the uTablet will largely serve auxiliary purposes-- such as being propped up and used as a DS-styled map screen for all to see, or directly attaching to the remote during single-player games (both of which were demonstrated in videos at last year's E3).

The way I'm picturing it, most games will be designed in a way in which you won't need more than one tablet anyway, so it won't be an issue.

[famicomplicated]

Remember people, games that use 2 tablets simultaneously, will be displaying a lot less processor-intensive stuff on the controller screens.


Don't expect simultaneous multiplayer CoD Black Ops 2 only using the controller screens to play. Think more along the lines of touch screen menu's when playing a split screen game or a fighting game.
In fact I'd be surprised if some games didn't allow for more tablets if they're just displaying super basic stuff, or maybe just mirroring stuff on the other controllers.


I'd fully expect most 4-player games to support Wiimotes and CC Pro in addition to the tablet, no one should worry about that.

[Bman87301]

I think that should Nintendo allow multi uMote play, and these tablets cost around $79.99 retail, then they should give you a rebate on price if you bought the 2nd uMote at launch and on the same receipt as your system (and possibly with a multi-player game).
A sort of Manufacturers bundle.

The reason for this is it will put multi uMotes capability into as many homes as possible on day1 by encouraging consumers to purchase that extra controller on day1, then there will be no reason for devs to not support Wii U with more TuMote games outside the initial launch window. We want a high adoption rate right from the start.
This will avoid the scenario that Adrock was referring to where it's too little too late and then we end up with too many games that don't support TuMote properly if at all.

p.s. tuMote^®/TuMote^® is a registered trademark of BNM Inc.

Wha??

Am I the only one who found this incomprehensible? What are uMotes and TuMotes supposed to be? Are they the same thing or two different things? Are you referring to the tablet or the Wii Remote? I can't tell what you're trying to refer to.

A "uMote" sounds like it would be a Wii U-specific remote. Perhaps things will have since changed from last year, and the WiiMotePlus will be replaced with a new Wii U-specific remote, but as of what we know at this point, the Wii U's standard controls will consist of the uTablet and the WiimotePlus.

Do us all a favor and try speaking the same language as the rest of us so we can all understand you.

[Adrock]

Food for thought - Will the Wii U support regular Wii Remotes without Motion Plus?

I thought someone from Nintendo said it wouldn't. In any case, Wii U will probably support regular Wii Remotes for backwards compatibility. Weighing the pros and cons, I still think it would be better if Nintendo didn't support past peripherals even for backwards compatibility. Cost for consumers is an issue but I feel like confusion is a bigger issue. This would be Nintendo basically saying, "Use these controllers for everything" instead of trying to explain that this works with that and that works with this. It's a major inconvenience for backwards compatibility but it significantly simplifies how people view Wii U. However, Nintendo should be looking forward and, despite some cons, it's for the best.

I don't expect this to be a popular opinion. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE saving money and I already have 2 Wii Remote Plus controllers so this would only cost me money. Objectively speaking, this is a simplier option. Of course, this is assuming they improve the Wii Remote Plus in some way which is likely at least in terms of adding a rechargeable battery. I just think that having 2 main controllers (Wii U Plus Remote/Nunchuck and Tablet Controller) saves a lot of people a lot of headaches.

Don't expect simultaneous multiplayer CoD Black Ops 2 only using the controller screens to play.

The way I expected this to work would be the controllers would act in place of split-screen and the TV would display support info like who has the most kills, time left etc.

[Ceric]

...

Don't expect simultaneous multiplayer CoD Black Ops 2 only using the controller screens to play.

The way I expected this to work would be the controllers would act in place of split-screen and the TV would display support info like who has the most kills, time left etc.

Beat me too it.  Though in multiplayer like CoD would you really want anything else on the main screen?

[BlackNMild2k1]

Wha??

Am I the only one who found this incomprehensible?

I'm going to go ahead and say yes.

Maybe if you read more than just talkback, you would know the language and terms used on the forums.
I've been referring to the Wii U remotes as the uMote since day one...or day two, but who's keeping track.

tuMote would just be my new way of saying 2 uMotes. So now that you are all caught up...

Remember people, games that use 2 tablets simultaneously, will be displaying a lot less processor-intensive stuff on the controller screens.


Don't expect simultaneous multiplayer CoD Black Ops 2 only using the controller screens to play. Think more along the lines of touch screen menu's when playing a split screen game or a fighting game.
In fact I'd be surprised if some games didn't allow for more tablets if they're just displaying super basic stuff, or maybe just mirroring stuff on the other controllers.


I'd fully expect most 4-player games to support Wiimotes and CC Pro in addition to the tablet, no one should worry about that.

I would expect simultaneous multi only using the controllers if the TV was used to show stats, maps, online player info or objectives.
What we shouldn't expect is some crazy 3d graphical display on the TV and some different yet equally complex 3d Graphical stuff to also be happening on both remotes at the same time too.

[Bman87301]

Maybe if you read more than just talkback, you would know the language and terms used on the forums.
I've been referring to the Wii U remotes as the uMote since day one...or day two, but who's keeping track.

tuMote would just be my new way of saying 2 uMotes. So now that you are all caught up...

Again, that's still needlessly confusing since there is no Wii U-specific remote. While it's certainly subject to change, as of now, the Wii U will use the same WiiMotes as Wii does. Everyone knows what "WiiMote" means and that Wii U will be using it so there's no reason to call it anything else. Maybe if you didn't expect everyone else to adapt to you, you'd get your points across clearer.

[VickiL]

Support of multiple Wii U tablet controllers would be great.  I remember having a lot of fun playing Crystal Chronicles and Four Swords with friends using our GBAs back in the Cube days.

That said, to me, the picture looks like a Wii U controller and a Wii controller, not two Wii U controllers.  And it's hard to imagine a $300 machine having the power to simultaneously send decent displays to an HD TV and multiple touch screens.  But I've been wrong before, and would happily be wrong again.

[Adrock]

And it's hard to imagine a $300 machine having the power to simultaneously send decent displays to an HD TV and multiple touch screens.  But I've been wrong before, and would happily be wrong again.

I hope you're wrong too.

I think it can be done. If the main action is on the TV, the hardware isn't taxing itself sending ancillary information to 1 or more controllers. If the action is on multiple controllers, not only is the hardware not taxing itself by displaying anything major on the TV but the controller can't display in HD therefore the hardware isn't rendering in HD so shouldn't that ease the load on the hardware?

[BlackNMild2k1]

Maybe if you read more than just talkback, you would know the language and terms used on the forums.
I've been referring to the Wii U remotes as the uMote since day one...or day two, but who's keeping track.

tuMote would just be my new way of saying 2 uMotes. So now that you are all caught up...

Again, that's still needlessly confusing since there is no Wii U-specific remote. While it's certainly subject to change, as of now, the Wii U will use the same WiiMotes as Wii does. Everyone knows what "WiiMote" means and that Wii U will be using it so there's no reason to call it anything else. Maybe if you didn't expect everyone else to adapt to you, you'd get your points across clearer.

 

I'm not talking about wiimotes (why is this so difficult?).

I'm talking about The Wii U Controller aka DRC aka uMote aka uPad aka Touch Screen Controller.
you know, the Wii U specific remote that has a 6.2" touch screen in the middle of it.

[Bman87301]

I'm not talking about wiimotes (why is this so difficult?).

I'm talking about The Wii U Controller aka DRC aka uMote aka uPad aka Touch Screen Controller.
you know, the Wii U specific remote that has a 6.2" touch screen in the middle of it.

That's precisely my point. You're making it difficult because you seem intent on using your own nonsensical terminology defying own conventional logic. When people see the Wii U touch screen controller, they see either a 'tablet', 'pad', or 'screen'. When they see the Wii controller they see a remote. Few people would associate the tablet-shaped controller as a "remote". Especially considering the Wii U also supports the Wii REMOTE.

[Ceric]

I have uMote references on the forum from all the way back to June 8, 2011.  I know at one point when the Wii U was announced we had a debate on what to call the tablet and uMote had parity with a few other choices.  Its just so much faster then saying Wii U Tablet Thing (WUTT)

[Caterkiller]

I know personally I constantly shift between umote and upad and everyone knows exactly what I mean every time. I don't know where T comes in with the Tumote name, but it only takes a 5th of a second to at least know what product he is  talking about, especially considering the topic of discussion and it still doesn't have an official name.


Edit: oh tablet...

[Fatty The Hutt]

I'm not talking about wiimotes (why is this so difficult?).

I'm talking about The Wii U Controller aka DRC aka uMote aka uPad aka Touch Screen Controller.
you know, the Wii U specific remote that has a 6.2" touch screen in the middle of it.

That's precisely my point. You're making it difficult because you seem intent on using your own nonsensical terminology defying own conventional logic. When people see the Wii U touch screen controller, they see either a 'tablet', 'pad', or 'screen'. When they see the Wii controller they see a remote. Few people would associate the tablet-shaped controller as a "remote". Especially considering the Wii U also supports the Wii REMOTE.

Tempest, meet teapot
Sorry Bman, you really are the only one with the problem. "uMote" says all you need to know. Maybe read more slowly, more carefuly?
 
I would like to see:
1. A basic package with one uMote
2. An option to buy a second uMote for $80 (no more than that)
3. General support for multi uMote play.
That is all.

[Kairon]

I can't decide which is more important to me right now, multi tablet controller play or  Unreal Engine 4 support...

Heh, my personal terminology (that just hasn't caught on T-T) is "Tablet Controller".

[TJ Spyke]

I just type Wii U controller since that is the name, I have never been a fan of made-up names like Wiimote or umote or uPad or whatever.

[NWR_Neal]

I don't see what the big deal is. Two Wii U Controllers give devs more options to make more interesting games. How does that hurt anyone again?

If it's because of the added cost or it being unnecessary, then why did we ever think having four controllers on a system was a good idea? Not everyone is going to buy four Wii Remotes/four GameCube controllers/four N64 controllers.

I feel that the Wii U won't be able to live up to the full potential of that sweet little screen if it's limited to just one per console. Also, that means all local multiplayer experiences will either be exactly what was on the Wii, or stuff like Killer Freaks/Rayman Legends. Those implemantations are cool, but it's a limited focus.