Topic: Anyone notice all of the tablet support shown at E3 this year?

[shingi_70]

So the Wii U barley got any play this E3, but did anyone notice how despite the industry ignoring the Wii U they're doubling down on tablet support, while Nintendo has downplayed it. I mean some guys have had this idea since last Gen (smartglass) but its kind of amusing to see nearly everyone else jump aboard.

(Not sure this counts as there's a also a separate tablet game)

Its funny how despite getting a ton of developers apparently not knowing what to do with the Gamepad they know what to do with a stand alone tablet. I'm expecting Madden 25/Fifa 14 to get the Gamepad functions via tablets on other consoles as well.


Not sure if i'm reading too much into it, but its odd.

[Ceric]

It is a little odd.  Back to if you know what to do with a Tablet you know with to do with the Gamepad.  Which means the concept in and of itself isn't bad.

[broodwars]

Obviously the Wii U's problem is that it doesn't have a game where you direct artillery, because that's all anyone was using tablets for this year at E3.

[Ian Sane]

A big part of Nintendo's switch to focusing on controllers has come as a result of the less obvious benefits of improved hardware.  You used to just beef up the specs and the improvements were immediately obvious.  As that diminished Nintendo figured that new fancy controllers would provide the need for a new console (without the Wii remote how would you EVER sell the Wii as a worthwhile upgrade to the Gamecube?)  The Gamepad seemed desperate to me as Nintendo seemed to feel they had to continue to use the controller as the selling point so they used a tablet because that's the "in" thing.  The problem of selling the need for a new console is shared across the entire industry so they're all jumping on the tablet for the same reason Nintendo is - tablets are popular right now so maybe they can leach off that.  Nintendo pretty much did the work for everyone else.

Microsoft's focus on all sorts of non-gaming extra functions is all related.  They find it hard to sell a new console on how it improves games (because they don't really have any ideas for doing that) so they pushed all these extra functions in hope that those will demonstrate the need for a new console.

We don't really need a new console generation aside from Nintendo entering the HD era so expect lots of smoke and mirrors to sell an unnecessary product.

[ThePerm]

I don't know about that. Of all the old interviews I read it seemed that before motion control Nintendo would go the way of a touchscreen on a controller post gamecube. I think it is only now that this technology is affordable, I also think motion control was the worthwhile direction to go at the time. Now I know you think it was gimmicky and unneccesary, but when it was used right I thought it was great.

Imagine if Nintendo had made each one of those Wii Sports games more robust and individual games. Would they have sold? I don't think I would buy a bowling game, but because Wii Sports came with the console I was able to get it. I thought Wii Sports Bowling was awesome.  Instead of releaseing sports resort Nintendo should have spun off each gameplay control style into their own standalone games.  Maybe the style for Wii Sports was not the way to go for the long run.

[Ian Sane]

I see motion control as merely a specialized controller for certain types of games, similar to a lightgun.  Building an entire console around it where it's the ONLY thing that the console truly has to distinguish itself from its predecessor was where I had a problem with it.  Nintendo's choice to market it as the "new standard" of controlling games was the problem as it is far too restrictive and imprecise to handle such responsibility.  If Wii Sports was just some game on an otherwise conventional Nintendo console that came with the optional motion control accessory I would probably appreciate it a lot more.  And don't say that it would have flopped as an optional accessory because Guitar Hero and Rock Band had the same frenzy with casual gamers and required expensive non-standard controllers.

I'm cynical about the Gamepad entirely because it's the DS.  A second screen with touchscreen capabilities?  Yeah, that's the DS and Nintendo had that concept for YEARS and never did anything worth a damn with it.  Oh but they did ruin Zelda by shoehorning in lousy controls!  If the idea is truly worthwhile there is no forced usage.  Forced usage means the company deep down KNOWS their idea is borderline worthless and goes for the hard sell.  When the idea is truly great the implementation just flows naturally.  Nintendo didn't have to find ways to shoehorn in L&R buttons or the analog stick.  The ideas just came to them and were obvious.  I know that Nintendo doesn't have this big vault of awesome touchscreen ideas that they for some reason never used on the DS or 3DS but will break out on the Wii U.  If they had good ideas for the concept they would have used them YEARS ago.  They got nothing.  The whole concept of "make a new controller idea and hope it inspires greatness" is seriously flawed because it is forced and unnatural.  The game ideas inspire the controller, not the other way around.

[MagicCow64]

Personally, I like the gamepad just fine. I've got big hands so the size is not an issue. Offscreen play is pretty sweet, and though I've yet to see a particularly compelling mechanic on the gamepad, I'm sure it will be useful down the line as an inventory screen, or map system, or binoculars, or whatever. Again, nothing huge, but it's better than not having a screen in my book, and standard controls aren't being sacrificed this time around.

We could spin counterfactuals all day, but what would be preferred? I really doubt a SuperCube sans controller gimmick on par with the PS4 would have garnered significantly more support. And it's pretty clearly going to take a while for Nintendo to get up to speed with a PS3.5 hardware level.

[Stogi]

One gamepad is hard to work around. Limitations are....limitations.

But when I first heard of what the Wii U might become, I was excited for four players battling each other while not even looking at the screen. I was excited by the possibility of playing some awesome card game where you selected your cards on your gamepad, away from the prying eyes of your friend, and watch some craziness unfold on the TV.

It's sad to say, but Nintendo half-assed it again. The Wiimote had so much potential if Motion Plus was there right out of the gate. The Wii U had the same potential, but squandered it due to limitations.

So other than Zombie U, I haven't seen an awesome feature for the gamepad yet because one screen in the hands of one person really isn't that amazing.

I'm still hoping for that RTS vs. FPS game though (and actually several other ideas that people had here as well).

[Adrock]

I love the GamePad. As long as developers use it appropriately, it can only add to a game. If they're using it for the sake of using it, that's a problem. Still, that's true of a kind of innovation and it's odd that some developers don't get this. Even Nintendo is guilty of this. Shaking the Wii Remote for the spin or extra jump in New Super Mario Bros. Wii/U was something I dealt with rather than something that felt natural.

It was disheartening that Nintendo seemed surprised that people wanted multiple GamePad support. While I'm glad Nintendo got two working even at the expense of frame rate, the fact that this obviously wasn't planned meant that games don't support it.

[ThePerm]

I know the Wii U should connect to 3ds at some point, although wii never connected to ds in the way we wanted it, but maybe thats why they aren't selling standalone pads?


What if the 2nd pad had some added hardware? If the second gameplad had some added hardware then it wouldn't need to use as much bandwidth from the feed. Maybe the 2nd controller could be the wavebird and ram pack of this generation.

[SixthAngel]

A big part of Nintendo's switch to focusing on controllers has come as a result of the less obvious benefits of improved hardware.

Nintendo has always focused on controllers. The only time they didn't was the GameCube and it was HUGE mistake.
NES - dpad and the base design for modern controllers. Light gun
SNES- shoulder buttons and the 4 button layout used by everyone today while their competition released a 3 button controller.
N64- Analog sticks and rumble packs
GC- a dual shock with better placement of the left stick, terrible right stick and an analog trigger (which the competition had)
Wii- Nuff said
WiiU- Nuff said

Controllers were always a big focus of Nintendo if not the focus.

Yeah, that's the DS and Nintendo had that concept for YEARS and never did anything worth a damn with it.

I don't even know wtf is going on here. First of all you must have not played anything on the DS because I can pull out dozens of examples off the top of my head.
Secondly you have obviously not played Nintendoland which lays out nintendos ideas which are mainly a asynchronous multiplayer and not DS related at all.

[smallsharkbigbite]

The Gamepad seemed desperate to me as Nintendo seemed to feel they had to continue to use the controller as the selling point so they used a tablet because that's the "in" thing.  The problem of selling the need for a new console is shared across the entire industry so they're all jumping on the tablet for the same reason Nintendo is - tablets are popular right now so maybe they can leach off that.  Nintendo pretty much did the work for everyone else.

Microsoft's focus on all sorts of non-gaming extra functions is all related.  They find it hard to sell a new console on how it improves games (because they don't really have any ideas for doing that) so they pushed all these extra functions in hope that those will demonstrate the need for a new console.

The gamepad was desperate.  The Wii "won" sales of last gen because of the controller and the way it was implemented (mainly in wii sports). 
 
I think Sony and Microsoft are throwing in the tablets in case Nintendo finds a Wii Sports type of game for the Wii U that focuses on the tablet and starts garnering market share.  They want to have something comparable ready to combat instead of play catch up like they did last gen.  Plus, we both know that the tablet for Sony/Microsoft will be vastly underutilized except for a couple of tech demos.  It's like PSP/Vita/PS3 compatibility.  It's always been there and what do we get?  A mirror for GT5?  Nice, definately a system seller.  I expect the tablets to be the same, except this is what gets shown at E3 so some journalist geek can write about how the connectivity for next gen is amazing. 
 
The need for a new system is always game based.  The PS4 is basically a PS3 with slightly better hardware and most people think they are winning next gen.  There will be better lighting, better physics, 1080p 60 fps standard next gen.  Those aren't the huge jumps that consoles have typically seen but it's still better than current gen.  It's like the TV.  Blu Ray is the only 1080p source material for most TV owners as almost everything else is broadcast in 1080i which is essentially 720p.  But people don't buy 720p tvs do they?  People will want the PS4 version of GT6 because it will be the premier version even if it's only slightly better. 
 
Microsoft is arrogant and I think it will cost them.  Sony was riding high after the PS2, then they brought a $600 machine that only does everything.  They looked at the PS3 as the way to take over the living room and added a bunch of features that few people wanted and thought people would buy in because they are Sony and they have the most popular games from the last gen.  PS3 eventually turned out okay, but it was a bloodbath early.  Sony appears to be focused by releasing a gaming machine this gen with a reasonable $400 price tag.  Microsoft is trying the overpriced, it does everything model this gen.  Now everything may not be used games, but they are certainly pushing features that the market didn't ask for.
 

Nintendo has always focused on controllers. The only time they didn't was the GameCube and it was HUGE mistake.

I love the Gamecube controller.  The only thing I'd change is use 4 front face buttons like the SNES rather than have the big A button and I think the Gamecube controller is much better than the mess the N64 controller was.  The Gamecube controller was at least on par with the competition for the period and people didn't buy a PS2 or Xbox 1 for their controller so I fail to see how it was a huge mistake. 

[EasyCure]

While it didn't work with certain games, the GCN button layout was pretty good. Your thumb could easily hit all the buttons and the shape of each made it easy to find the button you need in a hectic blink of an eye moment where, and I'd hate to admit, I might miss on a SNES, PSX, Xbox, DS and Gamepad controller. Sure, it doesn't happen often, but there have been those rare occasions where for whatever reason I take my right hand off the pad, have to go back and hit a button and miss because my placement was off.

Still, if it had the SNES lay-out and a better c-stick, it would of been THE perfect controller and I doubt anyone would doubt that.

[Ian Sane]

I think Sony and Microsoft are throwing in the tablets in case Nintendo finds a Wii Sports type of game for the Wii U that focuses on the tablet and starts garnering market share.  They want to have something comparable ready to combat instead of play catch up like they did last gen.  Plus, we both know that the tablet for Sony/Microsoft will be vastly underutilized except for a couple of tech demos.  It's like PSP/Vita/PS3 compatibility.  It's always been there and what do we get?  A mirror for GT5?  Nice, definately a system seller.  I expect the tablets to be the same, except this is what gets shown at E3 so some journalist geek can write about how the connectivity for next gen is amazing. 

Who are the bigger fools?  Nintendo for thinking that a tablet controller is going to sell systems or Sony and MS for thinking that they need to copy this idea?

As for the Gamecube controller, Nintendo made a big stink about their new button layout and the clicky triggers and such.  They always love to "innovate" with their controllers and especially love to pat themselves on the back for it (even if the innovations amount to nothing; not everything is essential as the d-pad).  They sure didn't see themselves as making a generic controller at the time.  My point is that prior to the Wii they never said "here's are new take on the controller and... that's it.  That's the whole point of this new system."  The SNES wasn't just a glorified NES with L&R buttons.  The N64 wasn't just a SNES with an analog stick.

[Nemo]

Who are the bigger fools?  Nintendo for thinking that a tablet controller is going to sell systems or Sony and MS for thinking that they need to copy this idea?

So, I brought my recently purchased Wii U and Nintendo Land to friend's bachelor party the other night (Saturday). I thought maybe it would be kind of fun. Damn. It was SO MUCH FUN! We were all screaming and laughing and (due to laughter) crying. Mario Chase and Luigi's Ghost Mansion were the most fun of the games we played [Metroid Blast and Zelda Battle Quest were just okay]. Those two fun games, though, were only possible due to the GamePad and its second screen. And it was very convenient to pass the GamePad to the next person so they can be Mario or the Ghost in each respective game. (There were about 8-10 people in the room watching and/or playing these 5-player games.) It was also a nice touch that the camera  on the GamePad captures the face of the GamePad player and it shows it on the TV screen (at least for Mario Chase); It's fun to see how stressed they look or how devious, etc.

I guess this type of game of game could work on PS4 with a Vita. But I couldn't see this working with an XBone and a tablet so well. And most certainly, this wouldn't work on the Wii at all.

Also, one of the guys at the party said he's seriously considering getting a Wii U for this game now (and others - Pikmin was a name drop). And I'm seriously considering having more Nintendo Land parties.

I was pretty skeptical about Nintendo Land before playing it and maybe it'll be like Wii Sports, where its feature (asymmetrical play or motion control) isn't really used as well ever again but I had so much fun playing this. And I still have 8 more of the games/Nintendo Land attractions to try out.

[Ceric]

...
The only time they didn't was the GameCube and it was HUGE mistake.
...

What are you smoking and can I have some?  The GameCube Controller is commonly held as one of the BEST controllers ever made.  It was a big selling point the GameCube at the time.  Especially when we got the Wavebird upgrade.

You might not remember that gen but GameCube was in the upper 2 of Hardware and Playstation was easily the lowest player.  Nintendo probably should have went with Standard DVD and Supported Playing DVD because much like the PS3 the PS2 was bought as a DVD player first by a lot of people at the time.

Still the GCN Controller was definitely not an after thought.  Unlike every Playstation controller up to the PS4s.

Now with Nemo experience with Nintendo Land, the Hide and go Seek style games are the best in the collection.  Their simple enough for a 4 year old to pick up and enjoy but, have enough their for adults to get some fun out of.  Considering most people are probably getting w/ their system anyways its great to have around for when a buddy comes along.  Though if you don't get why Off-Screen play is a big deal then your not in a situation to understand Nintendo Land either more than likely.

[Ian Sane]

You can rave about Nintendo Land all you want but what is the point of making a very expensive controller a mandatory purchase for ONE GAME?  Nintendo themselves pretty much ignored the touchscreen with their E3 showing.  Are they going to sell Wii U's on Mario Kart 8's horn?  Is the tablet going to be a selling point when it is all but ignored in games like SSB and Super Mario 3D Land?  For all the hubaloo about this being the big selling point of the Wii U it was pretty much completely absent from Nintendo's E3 presentation.  So they sacrifice the hardware for this fancy controller and abandon it less than a year in?

[Ceric]

...
making a very expensive controller a mandatory purchase for ONE GAME?
...

For one its not a very expensive controller.  It easily cost less then Kinect to make and its a controller.  Nintendo charging $80 to replace and standard First Party Controller is $55-60 from Microsoft and Sony.  So $20-25 bucks for the screen, Mic, and Speakers.

Your forgetting about Off-TV play, yet again.  I am positive that every single one of the games you mention will support Off-TV Play which for an extra $20-25 is a steal compared to the competitors solution.  You have your choice of a Vita or a Tablet that will probably cost you more without good controls.

Mario Kart 8 is 2014.  I be somewhat surprised to not see a track editor and I wouldn't be surprised to see a mode where someone actually makes the track as the others drive on it to a certain length.

Super Mario 3D Land.  Its a platformer.  How would you use it?

Super Smash Brothers.  Its a Fighter.  How would you use it?

On Smash stats, cheat sheet, selections, etc.  As an info screen would be the best use.  Why do you think Fighting fans are so stuck on Custom Sticks?

They had Wonderful 101 being shown and that has some good uses for the controller.  Looks like the botched the obvious with Pikmin which would be RTS style controls like they already had in Nintendo Land if memory serves.  Bayonetta 2 is totally controllable from the touchpad I'm told which makes no real sense when you think about.

In the end if the only thing the Gamepad was was an accessory that was a remote screen and another controller for my Wii U for $80 and the Pro Controller was the standard I would pony up the $80 for it because for me it is an excellent deal.  Just for Off-TV Play.

[pokepal148]

You can rave about Nintendo Land all you want but what is the point of making a very expensive controller a mandatory purchase for ONE GAME?  Nintendo themselves pretty much ignored the touchscreen with their E3 showing.  Are they going to sell Wii U's on Mario Kart 8's horn?  Is the tablet going to be a selling point when it is all but ignored in games like SSB and Super Mario 3D Land?  For all the hubaloo about this being the big selling point of the Wii U it was pretty much completely absent from Nintendo's E3 presentation.  So they sacrifice the hardware for this fancy controller and abandon it less than a year in?

they just announced those games. honestly...
and mario kart is (along with alot of other things they showed) a multiplayer focused game, you can't do much without putting those not using the gamepad at a disadvantage.

[Adrock]

Again, Nintendo wants people to think the GamePad is an expensive controller so they can charge a premium for replacements, but look at the components. If Wii U still sells at a loss, you're getting the GamePad for the absolute lowest you can get it. If you still feel like that's egregious, please consider that Microsoft's MSRP for a wireless 360 controller is still $49.99... nearly eight years later. Please stop complaining about this if you aren't going to apply Economics 101 and basic common sense to it.

[shingi_70]

You can rave about Nintendo Land all you want but what is the point of making a very expensive controller a mandatory purchase for ONE GAME?  Nintendo themselves pretty much ignored the touchscreen with their E3 showing.  Are they going to sell Wii U's on Mario Kart 8's horn?  Is the tablet going to be a selling point when it is all but ignored in games like SSB and Super Mario 3D Land?  For all the hubaloo about this being the big selling point of the Wii U it was pretty much completely absent from Nintendo's E3 presentation.  So they sacrifice the hardware for this fancy controller and abandon it less than a year in?

they just announced those games. honestly...
and mario kart is (along with alot of other things they showed) a multiplayer focused game, you can't do much without putting those not using the gamepad at a disadvantage.

But isn't nintendo's whole hook with the gamepad is how awesome asynchronous multiplayer is?

[pokepal148]

You can rave about Nintendo Land all you want but what is the point of making a very expensive controller a mandatory purchase for ONE GAME?  Nintendo themselves pretty much ignored the touchscreen with their E3 showing.  Are they going to sell Wii U's on Mario Kart 8's horn?  Is the tablet going to be a selling point when it is all but ignored in games like SSB and Super Mario 3D Land?  For all the hubaloo about this being the big selling point of the Wii U it was pretty much completely absent from Nintendo's E3 presentation.  So they sacrifice the hardware for this fancy controller and abandon it less than a year in?

they just announced those games. honestly...
and mario kart is (along with alot of other things they showed) a multiplayer focused game, you can't do much without putting those not using the gamepad at a disadvantage.

But isn't nintendo's whole hook with the gamepad is how awesome asynchronous multiplayer is?

yes and 3D world had some boost mode thing but mario kart...

i can't really think of much that would lend to that...

smash brothers you could do a neat "I AM THE ITEM GOD" type thing. its too early for us to tell how it uses the gamepad

but at the very least any game can use off Tv Play

[Nemo]

You can rave about Nintendo Land all you want but what is the point of making a very expensive controller a mandatory purchase for ONE GAME?

I only mentioned Nintendo Land as the example of something I'd never experienced before (asynchronous play).

Other things that I really like... art in Miiverse. I like drawing it and I like seeing it. I doubt that will catch on in PS4 as not everyone will have a Vita to draw with and it's extremely unlikely that people will draw on XBone (with Kinect or with a tablet?). I realize it's not a "game" but it's something that can be done for every game in its respective community on Miiverse.

There's also some challenges on the Rayman Legends App that make use of stylus controls. A character walks at a standard pace and the player has to control the environment to keep him traveling safely by moving obstacles, cutting ropes, stunning enemies, and so forth. I realize this kind of stuff is possible on the DS/3DS/Vita, but I think it works nicely. I also wonder what they'll do for these stages on PS360 versions of the game.

It also doesn't bother me when games use the second screen as a menu or map (as is the case in DS versions of Castlevania). I know that doesn't set the world on fire, but if it makes sense, I think it's fine.

And many people like the off TV play. I'm never fighting over the TV, so that feature hasn't come in handy for me yet.

However, Ian (and other skeptics), I can see your pessimism towards the controller. When I bought the Wii U, I didn't have high hopes for really liking the controller that much, either. I figured that the worst case scenario was that I would have paid an extra $50 or so for a dumb controller (or whatever the additional cost is), but that I'd still have the hardware I need to play Pikmin 3 and other Nintendo exclusives. As it turns out, I'm pretty happy with a lot of the things the controller adds (and I'll still get to play Pikmin 3!).

[EasyCure]

Just remember that we haven't seen too many details from Mario Kart yet. The gamepad might not be used extensively in single player but we don't know what they have cooking for battle mode, etc.

[EvilMario]

Nintendo had an idea when they came up with the Game Pad, but no definitive gameplay to use it with in a game. So we see a lot of mini-ideas in games like Nintendo Land and Game & Wario, but nothing that you'd want applied to a game as the base gameplay. Really, the one benefit of the Game Pad that people love is the off screen play, which I'm not sure Nintendo saw a massive selling point originally.


Sadly, off screen television play being the main feature means the Game Pad probably should have been an optional accessory. It would have allowed the Wii U to launch at a far more appealing mass market price, or to ramp up its hardware to compete for the technophiles' money next generation. Now Nintendo is stuck marketing the device that they really don't have any revolutionary ideas about.


If we look at what's coming out for holiday 2013, there's nothing to uses it in a way that changes how you play. Most games are slightly more convenient for item access and maps, that's about the jist of it. So even if something like Mario Kart does utilize it in a more clever way (don't count on it), we won't be seeing that until 2014, or nearly a year and a half after the system launched. A year and a half to finally show why they decided to go the Game Pad route and possibly much later.