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

[Chozo Ghost]

Should we fit with with an avatar of the Joker?

The Joker has to be flipping the bird, though. That would make it the opposite of Ian's avatar where Batman is giving a peace sign.

[Chocobo_Rider]

haha, those last few messages are pretty funny!

Unfortunately, Halbred mistakes my desire for equality as one-sided positivity.  I emphasize the positive and challenge the negative, yes, but only because the negative usually makes up about 90% of all gamer communication.  I've explained this many times but people would rather write me off as a blind fanboy.  Thus, the illusion of irony.

I participated in Operation Rainfall rather heavily... I just didn't go around b*tching about it.
I even penned this (rather unflattering to Reggie) comic strip about it: http://www.nintemple.com/images/comics/HighDem-006.png

I am still wondering WHY THE F*CK Club Nintendo hasn't restocked their 3DS Game Case since I've been wanting to buy it for months(?) now!! I just don't go around b*tching about it.

I think multi-tablet support would ultimately be a lose-lose for gamers and developers.  But possibly a win for Nintendo because ANY additional tablet sales would obviously be more profitable than no additional tablet sales.  So, again, I don't comment with Nintendo's interests in mind, just ours.  A gaming community that spends more time enjoying games than griping about them is in our best interests.

But now I'm just repeating what I've said again and again ... who will choose to listen this time?  Will it be ... you!?

PS - The positive/negative balance on the front page has been stellar lately.  I've tried to stick a supportive word in when I can but between a dissertation defense, 48 hours to make corrections, and yesterday's commencement, party, and late-night Mario Kart tourney on Negative World? There has been no time ... I'll play catch up this week!!

PPS - Speaking of catch up: Greg's leaving? 

[Adrock]

I think multi-tablet support would ultimately be a lose-lose for gamers and developers.

I've read your past posts and no offense, I still cannot for the life of me understand how anyone can think this is true. I don't like paying for things either but that's the nature of consumerism.

I don't really see how this could possibly be bad for developers. They could choose to ignore the tablet controller. Your assertion that developers didn't support Motion Plus due to limited market saturation is only half true. Motion Plus wasn't the standard. The tablet controller is. It's the entire point of the Wii U. Had Motion Plus been available from launch, no one would be wishing it wasn't there due to the extra cost because ultimately, it's better technology and provided more options.

At least in the beginning, if simultaneous tablet controller play is available, I doubt any 3rd parties will require the tablet controller for multiplayer. The Classic Controller affords them that option. They could, in theory, port games as is from 360/PS3 though let's certainly hope not since that misses the point of the new hardware entirely. Additionally, that still requires that consumers to spend at least $60 (if prices today hold) or to have spent $60 at some point. It's important to give people options. I like options. You're basically supporting a No-Soup-For-You mentality.

[Chocobo_Rider]

@Adrock

It's a simple difference of opinion.  I see multiple tablet support as creating a fragmented market that will be difficult for both users and developers to navigate.  While others (like yourself) don't think it will be hard to navigate and thus see no need for unnecessary limits.

None of us can predict the future, so right now I doubt anyone can convince anyone else that their opinion is right or wrong, correct?

[BlackNMild2k1]

When the time is right, Nintendo will bundle the next Wii Play with a tablet and then all will be good.
Everyone will buy it, just like Wii fit before it, and then adoption rate won't be an issue. hopefully that time is at launch and it's the only way to buy a 2nd tablet for the first few months.

[broodwars]

I'm always in favor of gamers having as many options as possible for how they want to play their games.  I personally wouldn't have use for a second tablet controller since I rarely play multiplayer games anymore (most online multiplayer games just aren't that fun to me, and Smash Bros. is boring without local multiplayer friends), but other gamers do want to play multi with a second tablet controller and it's good that we could both be accommodated.

Nintendo's big problem with the Wii wasn't that they fragmented the market with accessories like the Classic Controllers or the Motion+.  Their problem was that they fragmented the market and then rarely supported these additional controller options.  And because they didn't support them as the platform holder and the one making the games most gamers bought, 3rd parties rarely supported them as well.  Had Nintendo actually supported the Motion+ (outside of what...3 games?  Skyward Sword, Wii Sports Resort, and Zangeki no Reginleiv?), we probably would have seen a much wider adoption rate for it both by gamers and developers.  And you could say that for most of the Wii's accessories.

[Adrock]

It's a simple difference of opinion...

...None of us can predict the future, so right now I doubt anyone can convince anyone else that their opinion is right or wrong, correct?

Clearly. Pointing that out is superfluous. However, I'm not trying to convince you that you are right or wrong. I just legitimately don't understand your opinion. I may not agree but I can still understand where you're coming from. As it stands, I don't.

[Chocobo_Rider]

@broodwars

We both see WM+ and the Balance Board as being under-supported and fragmenting the market.  That we agree on.  Fragmenting the market is unavoidable since some people will have these devices and some won't.

The only part where we differ is feeling anyone deserves blame.  You place it on Nintendo saying they did not support these items properly, while I believe they did the best they could and undersupport is just the nature of the beast in a fragmented market.

Look at the PERCENTAGE of first party games that supported WM+ and the BB.  Now what games from the remaining percentage would you like to have seen Nintendo use those accessories with?

WM+ for Kirby's Epic Yarn? for DKCR? for NSMBWii?
BB for Other M? SMG2? Skyward Sword?

What the heck else were they supposed to do to support these? Create another franchise with sword-play just to have an excuse for another game with a sword slash mechanic?  Make a THIRD installment in the Wii Fit franchise for the BB?

I would have loved to see more games like Red Steel 2 and Horizon Riders from third parties.  But it's risky for them and they want to minimize risk.

Also, as much as I love Horizon Riders and its concept, the balance board is really best suited as a fitness device.  And plenty of first and third party games took advantage of that.  There just weren't many developers taking a risk on a traditional game style with that device.

@Adrock

Yea, and I'm not trying to convince you. I just legitimately don't understand your opinion.  I can see how it would make sense given certain assumptions.  I just believe those assumptions to be false.

So, I offered that we just agree to disagree and to just see what plays out in the future, right? =)

[NWR_insanolord]

Well only some people will have multiple Wii Remotes, or Classic Controllers; should Nintendo not support those either because of the fragmented market?

[broodwars]

WM+ for Kirby's Epic Yarn? for DKCR? for NSMBWii?
BB for Other M? SMG2? Skyward Sword?

No, the Classic Controller (+ Pro) should have been supported in Kirby's Epic Yarn, DKCR, and New Super Mario Bros. Wii.  Sakamoto's maternal fanfic (Other M) and the Mario Galaxy $50 Expansion Pack (I liked it, but it was so unnecessary IMO) shouldn't have existed.       But if those games just had to exist, they should have supported the Classic Controller as well, especially the Galaxy series with that godawful tacked-on motion control spin attack that should have been a button to begin with.

What the heck else were they supposed to do to support these? Create another franchise with sword-play just to have an excuse for another game with a sword slash mechanic?

YES.  For the love of all that is good and holy, YES.  By all means I'd love to see Nintendo actually create a new IP based around more involved (and realistic, which Zelda certainly wasn't) sword combat (whereas Zelda is more of a puzzle game these days than straight-out action), rather than some of these other games they made for Wii.  From what I've heard, that's sort of what Zangeki no Reginleiv was like, but we never got that here in the States.

And Nintendo wouldn't have to make a sword-based game, either.  From my own experience with the Tiger Woods series on Wii, the difference between the Motion+ controls and the Wiimote-only controls is staggering.  The fact that Nintendo only created it for swordplay and Wii Sports mini-games shows just how little imagination they have.  If they never intended to support Motion+ with actual games, we'd almost be better off if it never existed.  As it stands it barely exists now.

[NWR_insanolord]

Resurrect Project H.A.M.M.E.R. with Motion+ controls!

Also, Galaxy 2 is an amazing game, and I don't care how unnecessary something is, if you can pull it off that well you get a pass on it. Apart from that I'm with you, broodwars.

[Halbred]

Mario Golf. With Wii Motion +. 'Nuff said.

There's no excuse for DKCR, Kirby, and Other M not having at least the OPTION of Classic Controller support. It must not be hard to do, because virtually every VC game supports it.

[Mop it up]

Skyward Sword, Wii Sports Resort, and Zangeki no Reginleiv?

There was also FlingSmash and Wii Play Motion. Yes, I realize these don't help at all, but they exist.

[NWR_Neal]

I brought it up earlier in the thread, but by the logic of multiple controller fragmenting the market, why would any developer ever make a local multiplayer game? After all, not everyone will have four controllers. And why would anyone do multiplayer games that include the Nunchuk. I mean, that's like $180 more to play four-player multiplayer.

Does that mean Nintendo should only make Mario Kart and Smash Bros a one-player game, because not everyone will have four controllers. Obviously there is a single-player component to those games, but I would assume Wii U games that would support two tablet controllers (props to Carmine and co.) would likely have a single-player aspect that supports one.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the logic of one controller being positive and okay, but all it does to me is cut down a lot of possibilities. I think the confirmation of one tablet controller support at E3 would go right alongside Nintendo saying you can't bring your WiiWare/VC with you to Wii U as one of the announcements that would have me supremely doubting Nintendo and Wii U.

[Chocobo_Rider]

Well now those last few posts were quite frustrating.  It's ok if folks gang up on me for differences of opinion.  But it's not cool for people to do so without bothering to understand what I'm saying.

Let's take a look at a line I should apparently have bolded from my second post in this thread ...

Now, IF the tablet controllers were each, say, $40 bucks??? Sure, tablets for everybody!! But I don't see that happening... do you?

THAT is why I think in THIS case the fragmentation would be problematic.

So ...

I brought it up earlier in the thread, but by the logic of multiple controller fragmenting the market, why would any developer ever make a local multiplayer game? After all, not everyone will have four controllers. And why would anyone do multiplayer games that include the Nunchuk. I mean, that's like $180 more to play four-player multiplayer.

Does that mean Nintendo should only make Mario Kart and Smash Bros a one-player game, because not everyone will have four controllers. Obviously there is a single-player component to those games, but I would assume Wii U games that would support two tablet controllers (props to Carmine and co.) would likely have a single-player aspect that supports one.

Well only some people will have multiple Wii Remotes, or Classic Controllers; should Nintendo not support those either because of the fragmented market?

Can we imagine these posts never happened?

@broodwars

You made some good points.  I'm half watching a movie with some friends now but I would like to address them when I have some more time either later tonight or tomorrow.

One thing first though, I AGREE that that there is no excuse for not having CC(P) support for a whole host of games (first party and otherwise).  Let me say that again, I completely agree with you on that and I can't fathom why more developers (1st + 3rd) have not included CC(P) support!!

But we really have to leave the CC(P) out of this conversation because it is not different enough as an INPUT DEVICE that it would NECESSITATE a fragmentation in design.  Know what I mean?  For the sake of keeping this conversation clear in focus we should keep it to peripherals that truly have unique inputs.

The CC(P) is basically a WM+NC that is not being shaken.  Agreed?

[broodwars]

But we really have to leave the CC(P) out of this conversation because it is not different enough as an INPUT DEVICE that it would NECESSITATE a fragmentation in design.  Know what I mean?  For the sake of keeping this conversation clear in focus we should keep it to peripherals that truly have unique inputs.

The CC(P) is basically a WM+NC that is not being shaken.  Agreed?

No, it is a completely different input device from a Wiimote + Nunchuk.  There are more buttons (and an extra stick, which sane developers use for the camera in modern games and Nintendo used for attacks in Smash Bros. as well), they are in a completely different layout, and they are differently named.  The CC and it's CCP successor offer a completely different playing experience from merely the Wiimote and the Nunchuk.  Nintendo's lack of support for the CCP is completely relevant to this discussion since it's a device that outside of the Virtual Console and some WiiWare has barely been supported by Nintendo (Smash Bros. Brawl and Xenoblade being the two most notable exceptions I can think of).

By your logic, it would be Motion+ that would be completely irrelevant here since all it does is merely make the Wiimote do what Nintendo promised it would at launch.

[Chocobo_Rider]

But we really have to leave the CC(P) out of this conversation because it is not different enough as an INPUT DEVICE that it would NECESSITATE a fragmentation in design.  Know what I mean?  For the sake of keeping this conversation clear in focus we should keep it to peripherals that truly have unique inputs.

The CC(P) is basically a WM+NC that is not being shaken.  Agreed?

No, it is a completely different input device from a Wiimote + Nunchuk.  There are more buttons (and an extra stick, which sane developers use for the camera in modern games and Nintendo used for attacks in Smash Bros. as well), they are in a completely different layout, and they are differently named.  The CC and it's CCP successor offer a completely different playing experience from merely the Wiimote and the Nunchuk.  Nintendo's lack of support for the CCP is completely relevant to this discussion since it's a device that outside of the Virtual Console and some WiiWare has barely been supported by Nintendo (Smash Bros. Brawl and Xenoblade being the two most notable exceptions I can think of).

By your logic, it would be Motion+ that would be completely irrelevant here since all it does is merely make the Wiimote do what Nintendo promised it would at launch.

... the layout and naming of the buttons make ergonomic difference but not much game design difference.  My bottom line is that there aren't too many things you can do with a CCP that you can't do with a wm+nc.

And no, my logic doesn't say that AT ALL.  The WM+ can do things the WM literally cannot.  The 2nd stick on the CCP is snazzy, but you can still use the wiimote dpad for very similar functions.  Extra buttons? Yea, that WOULD be an issue if said game REQUIRED that many buttons, but, quite plainly, not many games on Nintendo platforms do - and that's by design.

So, it's gonna keep this conversation leaning more towards cluster eff levels of included variables, but, if you insist....

Also, can you stop saying Nintendo when you talk about support? The third parties make games too.  Assuming these peripherals are worth using (which is the assumption you would have to make if you're arguing for MORE support), don't act like the third parties shouldn't try to deliver better play experiences too.

For anyone licking their chops at my admission of a Nintendo shortcoming, let me remind you again about my above statements regarding finding fault in Nintendo and overall CC support.

[broodwars]

Also, can you stop saying Nintendo when you talk about support? The third parties make games too.  Assuming these peripherals are worth using (which is the assumption you would have to make if you're arguing for MORE support), don't act like the third parties shouldn't try to deliver better play experiences too.

3rd parties don't make Nintendo's peripherals, so it's not their responsibility to support them when Nintendo does not.  And on Nintendo consoles, how Nintendo drives up interest in their peripherals with their games determines whether 3rd parties think it's worth their time to support them as well.  Nintendo's responsible for the things they make, not 3rd parties.  If Nintendo was supporting the Classic Controller/Wii Motion+/etc. in their games and 3rd parties weren't you'd have a point.  But more often than not it's the other way around.

[NWR_Neal]

$180 is required to get three Wii Remotes and Nunchuks. I would assume that an additional tablet would be less than that total. The tablet controller might not be $40, but it's not going to be $180.

I did see your earlier point, but since it's not feasible for that thing to be $40, it didn't factor into that my posts.


Also, I agree that four tablet controllers would fragment the market, because let's face it, we're looking at like $70-$100 for each tablet. That's a huge barrier for entry. I'm not arguing for four, though. I'm arguing for two.


So yea, I'd like to pretend my posts happen, thankyouverymuch.

Side note: I don't say those things about you say, whether you meant that to be harsh or not, it came off like my opinion didn't matter. You do that often to people, and then rage when people do it to you. Remember that.

[UncleBob]

Why develop a game for the Wii U at all?

You're going to fragment your market place between those who have a Wii U and those who only have a Wii.  Wouldn't it be better to make a single player Wii game, then all Wii and Wii U owners could play - it'd have lower development costs, lower costs to the consumer (used Wiis are like $75!) and no market fragmentation!  Win-win-win for all around!

[Chocobo_Rider]

@broodwars

So you only care about peripheral support from the sales perspective? See, I thought you cared because you felt the right peripheral added to the game experience - the responsibility of the developer.  Now I see your point, why would third parties want to give a better experience if its not their wallet getting lined, right? 

Again, if you want to work out that percentage of 1st party games and prove that Nintendo doesn't support their stuff, go on ahead.  I believe Nintendo does support their peripherals... in fact, haven't people complained over this past generation that Nintendo focused too much on games that used peripherals?

And hey, I'd love it too if they could just keep making new IPs and more and more types of games (as long as they kept the same level of quality).  But Nintendo does not have infinite time or staff and it does try not to spread itself too thin for the sake of quantity over quality.  So, what we get is what we get ... it's funny to hear someone say Nintendo isn't imaginative  : : haha 

@Neal

You are mistaken if you thought my point was guessing the price of the tablet at $40, and thus ignored it.  My point was the EXPENSE of the controller being a unique barrier in this circumstance.
 
 Then you compare the cost of 1 extra tablet to 3 sets of WM+NC and you don't think that's apples and oranges?  You admit the total cost of 3 tablets would cost more, so, what's your point in bringing up that price?

People keep going using extreme examples (why even have controllers at all, NinSage!?).  We have to be reasonable to have a reasonable discussion.

I was not trying to dismiss what you said.  I was trying to save face for some folks by "pretending it didn't happen" that you ignored my point.  Also, you talk about rage... look around the threads.  Am I really being more impolite? Or does it just seem that way when my opinions differ from everyone else's (who is talking).

@UncleBob

Well that didn't help the discussion any but it was funny! So, thanks for contributing comedy.  That has its place here too.

Seriously though, what you said is actually true and all companies would love to do that.  Consumers might also enjoy not spending top dollar.  However, the reason that doesn't happen is simply because of competition.  Some company blinks first and once that happens consumers have a taste for something new, the old stuff becomes less desirable by comparison and everyone has to move on.

[broodwars]

@broodwars

So you only care about peripheral support from the sales perspective? See, I thought you cared because you felt the right peripheral added to the game experience - the responsibility of the developer.  Now I see your point, why would third parties want to give a better experience if its not their wallet getting lined, right? 

That's not what I said.  At all.  I said that Nintendo has to establish an environment where these peripherals are supported, and it is their responsibility to do so with their own games because these are their peripherals.  And if Nintendo can't be bothered to support their own peripherals, why should 3rd parties do their work for them?  I'm happy when they do use controllers like the Classic Controller Pro while Nintendo is busy forcing less-optimal control methods into their games, but from an objective standpoint I can't blame them if they don't when Nintendo ensures that their audience don't use certain hardware by not supporting it.

Again, if you want to work out that percentage of 1st party games and prove that Nintendo doesn't support their stuff, go on ahead.

No.  I'm not playing your little game and wasting time I'd much rather be putting into Starhawk right now (yes, yes...I know.  Irony.  I'm playing a multiplayer-centric game when I just said I rarely play multiplayer games.  What can I say?  Starhawk is the best non-Robotech Robotech game I've ever played, and I do love my Robotech.    )  You want to justify your point with "proof" rather than just acting like your opinion is a truism?  Go right ahead.

in fact, haven't people complained over this past generation that Nintendo focused too much on games that used peripherals?

Not quite.  The complaint is that Nintendo has focused on making 1 or 2 peripheral-focused games for a single peripheral and then summarily abandoning it, which is pretty much what Nintendo has done since at least the N64 era.

[Kairon]

The complaint is that Nintendo has focused on making 1 or 2 peripheral-focused games for a single peripheral and then summarily abandoning it, which is pretty much what Nintendo has done since at least the N64 era.

I am a proud owner of a Super Scope. And a Mario Paint Mouse Pad.

[broodwars]

The complaint is that Nintendo has focused on making 1 or 2 peripheral-focused games for a single peripheral and then summarily abandoning it, which is pretty much what Nintendo has done since at least the N64 era.

I am a proud owner of a Super Scope. And a Mario Paint Mouse Pad.

As I said, "since at least the N64 era." 

[Chocobo_Rider]

It's not my "little game" to have a discussion based on evidence.  I provide links and data whenever people want.  It's not an insult to go do some research to augment our points, right?

I'll gladly provide that percentage withing 24 hours if it means you'll stop thinking I'm overly demanding in the future when I request the same level of fact-based arguments.  Do we have a deal?

My argument is that, yes, Nintendo makes a few games showing off what a peripheral can do, but then they make OTHER games.  Again, they don't have infinite resources.  They can't supply a library of games for each peripheral.  Especially since you are also complaining that they don't branch out enough with new ideas.  I mean, I like Nintendo, but they aren't gods. 

So, while you see making 1 or 2 games and then "abandoning," I see ... sensible game design.  NSMBWii doesn't need to use a balance board or WM+.  Should it use the CC? Yes, but we've been over that.  So, I for one am glad they made that game instead of Wii Fit 3 or a third Wii Sports game.

They showed off what their devices can do which opens the door for future first AND third parties to make enticing products.  I don't see what's so bad about that.

~~~

Yay, Robotech!  I played that PS2 game, BattleCry was it? It was ok.  I also modded my PSX back in the day so I could play an import copy of some Macross game.  It was also pretty good but I couldn't understand a lot of what I was being told to do  : :

Honest to god, I met a guy named Rick Hunter a few weeks ago.  He is in to gaming, which means he runs in circles that include geeks, so he says he's had the conversation about his name and Robotech several times and has a veritech (sp?) on his desk at home.  I told him I had the Skull One on mine