Topic: Wii U - e3 is over... now what?

[oohhboy]

They only have to look to China to see censorship on that scale doesn't work. Miiverse stinks of corporate group think that forgot to do a feasibility study or even a thought experiment. Yeah, the internet can be full of cocks and dongs, but if if it is 24/7, you need new friends. John Cheese normally writes articles based on his own life experience and makes it funny, but that article is unfunny open bashing of something he doesn't understand. He has finally hoisted himself on his own petard. Only his first point has any real merit, the rest is some rage drug addled incoherent garbage of a rant. Reeks of get off my lawn.

If you want some proper social gaming, I have to point you to Steam. If you want, you can look up what ever achievements your other friends had done, but it doesn't push this on you. When you first play a game, you play on public servers. If someone is enough of a dick and gets enough reports they get banned. Friends list filter out people in server agonistic games like L4D2. This forum is a friends list filter when playing Mario Kart 7 and so far it has been some excellent MK gaming. The point is that no matter what social system you use, you have to work to get friends whether it's to talk to or play games. If you're getting dicks, you're doing it wrong.

Catterkiller, ignore tendoboi1984, he is some kind of idiot who doesn't believe in magic. He barely finishes writing his first post be fore writing the next and more often than not double posts when on post is enough.

[tendoboy1984]

Catterkiller, ignore tendoboy1984, he is some kind of idiot who doesn't believe in magic. He barely finishes writing his first post be fore writing the next and more often than not double posts when on post is enough.

You know, you could get banned for calling people idiots...   And what does magic have to do with any of this?

[Ian Sane]

I get pissed when the phone rings while I'm playing a game

Then don't play games on your phone. That's what an iPod Touch, DS, 3DS, PSP, and Vita are for.

Actually I mean when my cellphone or house phone rings while I'm playing a console game in the living room.

[tendoboy1984]

I get pissed when the phone rings while I'm playing a game

Then don't play games on your phone. That's what an iPod Touch, DS, 3DS, PSP, and Vita are for.

Actually I mean when my cellphone or house phone rings while I'm playing a console game in the living room.

Then put your cellphone on silent. Who has time for the outside world when we're playing games? 

[Chozo Ghost]

You know, you could get banned for calling people idiots...

I doubt that, considering even the moderators on here like to insult people (mainly by giving them offensive titles under their name).

[oohhboy]

Maybe I should have posted pictures of dicks instead? I hear that is all the rage these days.

[nickmitch]

Going back to the Cracked.com article, I honestly think John is wrong about the controller and ZombiU. In a real zombie apocalypse, you'd be panicked and and fumbling around you jacket pockets for the right weapon. Having to use the touch screen on the controller while there is a zombie banging down a down makes the experience more intense. He calls it a "false difficulty," but switching between items at the drop of a hat is just the same thing in the other direction. I don't think it would break the immersion as he says, but make the game that much more exciting.

[oohhboy]

He is pretty much wrong with most of the article. As far as his articles go, he is swinging very, very low, no doubt the lowest quality bit of writing he has ever done. He has really lost the plot with this, reveling he has no idea about game design, it's rushed for E3, it has none of his usual wit, filled with nothing by his revelation that, yes the internet is filled with porn. When I was watching the ZombieU gameplay from the floor, even though I couldn't see the gamepad, it really rasied the tension in a very real way even when there weren't any zombies on screen.

When you have two streams of information, it is very easy to fixate on one of them when the other is far more important. Like driving when people fixate on the speedo instead of looking outside. This is where accidents happen.

In all likelihood, Ubisoft will give you a quick switch slot or 2 where you can organize some item before hand by giving you some sort of hoister slot upgrade mechanic. You start with no slots and later you get a handgun/melee hoister, some sort of rifle/long gun sling, grenade/quick item. For other items you will have to use the inventory like if you pull out a really big gun of some sort or healing item. It would give a sense good of progression of the avatars and the player. However, no doubt some idiots would scream why they don't give you that for free like every other game and misconstrue it as "False difficulty".

[noname2200]

You know, you could get banned for calling people idiots...

I doubt that, considering even the moderators on here like to insult people (mainly by giving them offensive titles under their name).

Offensive? That's how they show affection!

[Chozo Ghost]

You know, you could get banned for calling people idiots...

I doubt that, considering even the moderators on here like to insult people (mainly by giving them offensive titles under their name).

Offensive? That's how they show affection!

Why haven't they given you your own title yet?

[Tamazoid]

Do people actually remember the Gamecube and Wii Launches?


It's not like the Gamecube got boat loads of third party PS2 games at launch. Though I must say the Gamecube launch was worth it due to Rogue Squadron

[ThePerm]

@LuigiDude
I'd take Twilight Princess over nsmbU, mainly because i own nsmb and it isn't doing **** for me. Here we have 2 systems with the same games rereleased from the last system, only Twilight Princess has the illusion of newness. I think Ian was saying it "where is the ambition?"

it doesnt take much effort to punch out 2d games, we live in a weird era where the console is getting the 2d games and the handheld is getting the 3d games. Speaking of solid launch buzz 3DS did everything right, i know people bitched it wasnt selling enough the 2nd day it was out, but it had IMO the right stuff. Proper buzz, proper 1st and 3rd party support.

[SixthAngel]

I am fairly certain the miiverse posts he is talking about are the messages that get sent to everyone.  These aren't a back and forth communication in anyway shape or form.  These are messages that would pop up on your homescreen or on the level selection screen of the game that would say something like "This is awesome." "Link rules." "I just got the fastest time of 1.00 minute." "The fire level is amazing!"  You cannot respond to these messages.

Your system would not even receive most of these messages because everyone with a Wii could be posting them and they will only load up when you reboot the system.  All messages to other people and friends will go there immediately.  All it is going to do is stop people lfrom spamming penis/spoiler to your homescreen and slow down general messages to everyone that have no immediacy and basically just show what is "trending."  Your post of "I just beat Ganon! In your face!" They will be there for the people who happen to start their Wiiu in thirty minutes instead of the peope who start it in 30 seconds before they are quickly replaced by the next group of general messages like "This level is really hard!" "I love the ice beam!" etc.

[Adrock]

I don't want a Nintendo 360, I want like the modern equivalent of a Super Nintendo.  I want a Nintendo system that offers great ambitious first party games that push the standards of videogame design forward, with healthy third party support where you just assume any new game is coming to the system unless stated otherwise, and industry standard features and options that one would expect from a modern console.  Nintendo drifted away from that with the N64 and seemingly gave up any interest in pursuing this with the Wii.

What you just described is an Xbox 360 with Nintendo branding.

Nintendo didn't drift away from being Nintendo. They always went their own way. The industry drifted away from letting Nintendo dictate how the industry should do things. Nintendo mandated the standard because no one was able to challenge them. When companies like Sony and Microsoft did, Nintendo still continued to march to the beat of their own drummer. Nothing new there. That's the industry changing and you changing along with it. You accepted the standards that Microsoft and Sony set and follow.
 

If I changed it suggests that I would have loved Wii Sports in the past but only don't now.

Wait, what? People don't change on a set path. You keep saying Nintendo changed. They have in some ways because everything changes even a little bit but they're pretty consistent in their philosophy. Nintendo has always trumpeted simplicity. They make games that are extremely simple like Wii Sports and games that are deceptively simple like Smash Bros. Really, think about how simple a game like Super Mario Bros. is. You move left to right and try not to die. You've clearly evolved past that even if you can still appreciate games you loved as a kid. That's called nostalgia which I believe you even mentioned. What you actually seem upset about is that Nintendo haven't changed, especially to your liking.

A lot of the things you've suggested over the years is for Nintendo to act decidedly not like Nintendo. That may be better but that's not the point. Nintendo is Nintendo because, like it or not, they operate the way they operate. You want an online structure similar or better than Xbox Live. That's understandable because it works and who wouln't want something equal or better? My question to you is: When has it ever been Nintendo's policy to just copy another company's ideas? I'm sorry to shatter your fond memories of a Nintendo that once was, but really, they're the same Nintendo. Had online gaming existed when you were a child, something quite similar to Friend Codes and Nintendo Wi-Fi is what you would have gotten except you'd have no Xbox Live to compare it to. You would have accepted it because that would have been the standard. So, you did change. You want something more and different than Nintendo offers. That, I get. What I don't get is how you seem completely flabbergasted that Nintendo isn't giving you exactly what you want.

[nickmitch]

@LuigiDude
I'd take Twilight Princess over nsmbU, mainly because i own nsmb and it isn't doing **** for me. Here we have 2 systems with the same games rereleased from the last system, only Twilight Princess has the illusion of newness. I think Ian was saying it "where is the ambition?"

it doesnt take much effort to punch out 2d games, we live in a weird era where the console is getting the 2d games and the handheld is getting the 3d games. Speaking of solid launch buzz 3DS did everything right, i know people bitched it wasnt selling enough the 2nd day it was out, but it had IMO the right stuff. Proper buzz, proper 1st and 3rd party support.

The 3DS had good buzz leading up to the release until we found out what the launch games were and that there'd be no eShop. And it was just people bitching about it not selling enough the 2nd day, sales were so slow that Nintendo had to cut the price. The Wii U doesn't really have the buzz the 3DS had months before its release, but I think it can change for the better if the 3DS's could change for the worse.

[Ian Sane]

Nintendo has always trumpeted simplicity. They make games that are extremely simple like Wii Sports and games that are deceptively simple like Smash Bros. Really, think about how simple a game like Super Mario Bros. is. You move left to right and try not to die. You've clearly evolved past that even if you can still appreciate games you loved as a kid. That's called nostalgia which I believe you even mentioned. What you actually seem upset about is that Nintendo haven't changed, especially to your liking.

Nintendo has trumpted simplicitiy since they started selling scam mini-games like Wario Ware and Wii Sports.  This is revisionist history.  Super Mario Bros is only simple without historic context.  When it came out almost every game was restricted to one screen, almost none of them had scrolling, and most of them were based on around playing the same thing as it got harder and harder to earn a high score.  SMB was one of the most ambitious and advanced games of all time when it was released.  It had gameplay that was easy to learn (I've never said Nintendo shouldn't do that) but it was not some dumbed-down simple game.  It was complicated and HUGE for its time.  Look at Metroid and Zelda.  Those games were also incredibly ambitious, complicated and deep for their time.  Nintendo would make sure their controls were intuitive and not convoluted and the game was easy to learn, and that went along with depth and complexity.  OoT was arguably the most ambitious game ever made when it came out.  Part of the design was that they found a way to make a huge game with tons of complexity and depth and make the controls not overwhelming (ie: auto-jump and context sensitive A button).  Back then Nintendo wasn't notoriously afraid of beginners being intimidated by the conplexity of it.  They just went out there and made the best game they could.  I can't think of ANY pre-Iwata Nintendo game (except maybe Yoshi's Story which was crapped on for this very reason) that was INTENTIONALLY scaled back or dumbed down for fear of casuals or beginners finding it intimidating.  Nintendo's attitude was less about simplicity and more about not making gameplay needlessly complicated or confusing if it didn't need to be.  They didn't make "simple" games, they made complex ambitious games that were simple for the player to learn.  When you can't even field the baseball in Wii Sports or the game practically plays itself like Wii Music, you're just making something simple with no depth or ambition.
 
Did Nintendo ever intentionally release a glorified last-gen console before the Wii?  No.  Did they ever launch a sytem where the only defining characteristic between it and its predecessor was a novelty controller?  No.  Hell the only time I can think where Nintendo felt that marketing a gimmick was more important than having responsive controls was R.O.B. which thankfully had only two games for it and was promptly forgotten about.
 
To me nostalgia is when you think Transformers is a good show until you actually go back a watch it as an adult and realize it sucked.  If something holds up as an adult then nostalgia is not affecting you.  If you want videogame examples of nostalgia for me I used to think Mortal Kombat was legitimatelly cool and now see it as embarrasingly stupid and immature (though in a funny way).  I used to think Goldeneye was an amazing game but now realize it's too dated, while Super Mario 64 looks terrible but is still good.

[tendoboy1984]

Nintendo didn't drift away from being Nintendo. They always went their own way. The industry drifted away from letting Nintendo dictate how the industry should do things. Nintendo mandated the standard because no one was able to challenge them. When companies like Sony and Microsoft did, Nintendo still continued to march to the beat of their own drummer. Nothing new there. That's the industry changing and you changing along with it. You accepted the standards that Microsoft and Sony set and follow.
 
People don't change on a set path. You keep saying Nintendo changed. They have in some ways because everything changes even a little bit but they're pretty consistent in their philosophy. Nintendo has always trumpeted simplicity. They make games that are extremely simple like Wii Sports and games that are deceptively simple like Smash Bros. Really, think about how simple a game like Super Mario Bros. is. You move left to right and try not to die. You've clearly evolved past that even if you can still appreciate games you loved as a kid. That's called nostalgia which I believe you even mentioned. What you actually seem upset about is that Nintendo haven't changed, especially to your liking.

A lot of the things you've suggested over the years is for Nintendo to act decidedly not like Nintendo. That may be better but that's not the point. Nintendo is Nintendo because, like it or not, they operate the way they operate. You want an online structure similar or better than Xbox Live. That's understandable because it works and who wouln't want something equal or better? My question to you is: When has it ever been Nintendo's policy to just copy another company's ideas? I'm sorry to shatter your fond memories of a Nintendo that once was, but really, they're the same Nintendo. Had online gaming existed when you were a child, something quite similar to Friend Codes and Nintendo Wi-Fi is what you would have gotten except you'd have no Xbox Live to compare it to. You would have accepted it because that would have been the standard. So, you did change. You want something more and different than Nintendo offers. That, I get. What I don't get is how you seem completely flabbergasted that Nintendo isn't giving you exactly what you want.

I love this post.

[tendoboy1984]

Did Nintendo ever intentionally release a glorified last-gen console before the Wii?  No.  Did they ever launch a sytem where the only defining characteristic between it and its predecessor was a novelty controller?  No.  Hell the only time I can think where Nintendo felt that marketing a gimmick was more important than having responsive controls was R.O.B. which thankfully had only two games for it and was promptly forgotten about.

Pretty much every game system had a unique controller. The N64 controller defined the system.

The standard for modern controllers was established by Sony's DualShock, which took its inspiration from the Super NES controller. Prior to that, every game system had a differently designed controller.

I'm sick of seeing the same boring dual analog controllers from Sony and Microsoft. The only thing that differentiates them is their shape. At least Nintendo tries to be unique with their controller designs.

[marty]

  I used to think Goldeneye was an amazing game but now realize it's too dated, while Super Mario 64 looks terrible but is still good.

I've always felt the exact opposite of this.  I sold SM64 in 1998, shortly after getting all the stars because it was such an uninteresting game once you get all the stars.  I'll still break out GE every once in a while because of how much fun it is.

[Kairon]

Nintendo's released "Last-Gen" hardware before. It was called the GameBoy, (Compare: Lynx, GameGear) arguably one of their biggest successes.

Nintendo's also trumpted simplicity before. It was called "Kirby", basically envisioned as a beginner's platformer.

You have to realize that a lot of what Nintendo does today, and what they're exploring, is stuff they've been toying around with for a long time. I mean, just look at Mii's, last-gen simplified avatars which have their genesis not in the Wii, but in some Nintendo projects for the Famicom disk drive. You can't just pick and choose what parts of the past you think "make up" Nintendo, they've been a very complex company from the start.

[Ian Sane]

The Game Boy isn't "last gen" because it was the first handheld video system.  It isn't like the Game Gear and Lynx were already out and Nintendo thought "hey, we'll make a black and white system!"  They started the whole damn thing!  Next you'll point out that the NES is technologically inferior to the Sega Master System.  Well yeah!  It came out FIRST!

But did Nintendo ever release a console prior to the Wii that was intentionally "last gen" compared to systems that had already come out?  No.  No one had ever done that.  Prior to that Nintendo had always kept up with the rest of the industry in this regard.  They had goofed up stuff like the N64 cartridge thing but aside from that the system was cutting edge.  It wasn't just a Super Nintendo with an analog stick.  Hell, regarding consoles the Gamecube was the only Nintendo console that was not the most powerful console on the market when it was released and that was only because it and the Xbox came out around the same time (and it was more powerful than the Dreamcast and PS2).

We may have different opinions on whether or not Nintendo changed (but I do have the FACT that the management changed in my favour) but I don't like people telling me that *I* changed.  I think I know myself and my opinions and thoughts better than people who have never met me.  I think Nintendo changed in the Wii/DS era and compromised important parts of their character for the worst.  Maybe your experience has not been affected in such a way for you to notice that, maybe you just disagree and think they're the same as ever, maybe you've think they have changed over the years for the better or they've changed but not in a way that compromises their core values.  People have different opinions and this is subjective.  But I'm not wrong and I'm not just "blinded by nostalgia" here.

But I didn't like the Wii and the Wii U, so far, doesn't look like any different so I'm not interested in it yet either.  And for years I called for Nintendo to make changes to address their shortcomings but the important thing was that they not compromise their games because they rarely made bad or even average games and that was what they got right.  But on the Wii and DS, I feel that changed, so realistically I don't just want them to address the problems they never fixed but to also take a step back with their game design philosophy to go back to when they had higher standards of quality.  So do they need to change everything about them?  Well pretty close because they kept the stuff I didn't like and changed the stuff I did so I guess the solution is to rewind six years and fix the stuff they were goofing up then.  Will they do that?  No, but I think that pretty much is the only way to get the core gamers back, if that actually does matter to them.

[Kairon]

The Game Boy isn't "last gen" because it was the first handheld video system.  It isn't like the Game Gear and Lynx were already out and Nintendo thought "hey, we'll make a black and white system!"  They started the whole damn thing!

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. Looking at a GB and a Lynx side-by-side Atari's handheld definitely makes the GB look "last-gen".

Besides, this is actually not about making last-gen consoles, this is bigger. This is about Gunpei Yokoi's philosophy of "Lateral Thinking With Withered Technology" which has been a part of the Nintendo mindset since at least the Game & Watch.

[Ian Sane]

The Game Boy isn't "last gen" because it was the first handheld video system.  It isn't like the Game Gear and Lynx were already out and Nintendo thought "hey, we'll make a black and white system!"  They started the whole damn thing!

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. Looking at a GB and a Lynx side-by-side Atari's handheld definitely makes the GB look "last-gen".

I agree that it makes the GB look last gen but it came out AFTER.  Nintendo didn't set out to make some archaic handheld that was in black & while while everyone else had colour.  Nintendo came first, everyone else followed with handhelds with superior specs.  That's not a conscious effort on Nintendo's part to push inferior hardware.

[Luigi Dude]

But did Nintendo ever release a console prior to the Wii that was intentionally "last gen" compared to systems that had already come out?  No.  No one had ever done that.  Prior to that Nintendo had always kept up with the rest of the industry in this regard.  They had goofed up stuff like the N64 cartridge thing but aside from that the system was cutting edge.  It wasn't just a Super Nintendo with an analog stick.  Hell, regarding consoles the Gamecube was the only Nintendo console that was not the most powerful console on the market when it was released and that was only because it and the Xbox came out around the same time (and it was more powerful than the Dreamcast and PS2).

That's because game development budgets were still very reasonable until this last gen.  Seriously, have you missed that fact that a large amount of videogame development studio's shut down this last generation because of the insane jump the 360/PS3 make development cost.  Even on the PS2/Gamecube/Xbox, the average development cost was around 3-7 million.  For the 360/PS3 the average development is estimated to be between 15-30 million.

As you can see, Nintendo didn't change, the rest of the industry did.  Never before had development cost risen so high which is why most videogame companies this last gen where either closed or severally weakened.  Microsoft and Sony war to see who could have the bigger tech wang this last gen came at a huge price.  Yeah when we look back now Nintendo could have afforded to have made a more powerful system since the Wii was a huge success, but back in 2005 when they were designing it and the Gamecube was dead and Nintendo's home console presence was fading away because of terrible Gamecube sales, it's not hard to see why they took the safer route since the route Microsoft and Sony were taking was way too expensive for a system they worried might have failed.

[Ian Sane]

The convention is to increase a console with each gen so even if the development costs increasing the rest of the industry was maintaining the status quo and Nintendo is the one who changed.  The Wii was the unexpected move, not the PS3 or Xbox 360.  Nintendo is the one that stepped off the beaten path.  Sony and MS didn't do anything unexpected or unconventional.  And there is no way the Wii was the safer route.  Give Nintendo credit for doing something insanely risky.  If the blue ocean market didn't like it, the Wii would probably have completely bombed and Nintendo would only be making handhelds, if they stayed afloat.