Author Topic: Miyamoto Changing His Gaming Style, Developers Have Yet to Add Uniqueness to Wii U Games  (Read 11679 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Patchkid15

  • NWR Staff
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile

Wii U is revolutionizing the way Shigeru Miyamoto plays games.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/33186

The Wii U has changed Shigeru Miyamoto's gaming style, the famed Nintendo developer declared during Nintendo's live results briefing where he and Nintendo Global President Satoru Iwata took the stage.

During the event both Iwata and Miyamoto discussed that Nintendo's newest console has changed the way they play. Iwata described the system as being a part of his life, with this being the first time that has happened to him.

In regards to games coming to the system, Miyamoto feels that developers have yet to really add any uniqueness to their titles. While asynchronous multiplayer is a big part of some of Nintendo's own games, Miyamoto believes it is not right for all games. For the games that do support the feature, Iwata feels the company needs to find a better way to communicate the gameplay variety to consumers.

Miyamoto went on to describe how smartphone gaming is functional concept that satisfies users. Nintendo's goal, with Wii U specifically, is to offer more, and be more useful in every person's life.


Offline azeke

  • He's ruining Splatfest for the rest of us
  • Score: 11
    • View Profile
Hardlocks, minute-long loading times and all games delayed to hell and back! So unique!

okay loading times aren't actually THAT long, but hardlocks do suck

Stupid jeers aside, i am still waiting for Nintendo to show innovation they say they're bringing to the table.
Winners don't hate and W101 rocks

Offline broodwars

  • Hunting for a Pineapple Salad
  • Score: -1012
    • View Profile
Miyamoto (and everyone else at Nintendo, for that matter) would be wise to not whine about what little 3rd party Wii U support they have, especially in terms of GamePad usage (considering not wanting to bother with the thing has been a cited reason why 3rd parties have ignored the Wii U).

And yeah, it's very hypocritical for anyone at Nintendo to complain about a "lack of uniqueness" with Wii U titles when Nintendo itself has yet to show compelling GamePad usage or a great deal of innovation in its own titles.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 03:25:30 AM by broodwars »
"It's time to play...JAZZ...BASKETBALL!"

Offline Adrock

  • Score: 134
    • View Profile
Miyamoto (and everyone else at Nintendo, for that matter) would be wise to not whine about what little 3rd party Wii U support they have, especially in terms of GamePad usage (considering not wanting to bother with the thing has been a cited reason why 3rd parties have ignored the Wii U).
I was about to say something similar. I also think it's important to note that no developer should feel obligated to use the GamePad either. Its features exist as there-if-you-want-it instead of use-it-or-else. Miyamoto basically saying "You're doing it wrong" is discouraging at best and insulting at worst.
Quote
And yeah, it's very hypocritical for anyone at Nintendo to complain about a "lack of uniqueness" with Wii U titles when Nintendo itself has yet to show compelling GamePad usage or a great deal of innovation in its own titles.
I'm sure Miyamoto is privy to a bunch of unannounced games. Retro Studio's new title could single-handedly justify the GamePad. Still, it's not the brightest idea to call other companies out when they're already weary of supporting the platform especially with some of the backwards reasoning they've been giving out. It would be nice if every company blew our minds with how they incorporated the GamePad, but even Miyamoto admits that not every game is suited for it. I would be happy to just get some of these games on Wii U.

Offline Caterkiller

  • Not too big for Smash Bros. after all
  • Score: 74
    • View Profile
I don't see how Nintendoland or off tv play doesn't justify the game pad 100%.
Nintendo players and One Piece readers, just better people.

RomanceDawn

Offline Adrock

  • Score: 134
    • View Profile
I can't speak for Nintendo Land because I've played so little of it. It was definitely not the reason I bought a Wii U. I was glad to get with with the Deluxe Set because for me, it was effectively a throw in.

Off TV play is a nice perk, but can't and shouldn't be the reason why a company puts a giant screen on a controller. Currently, there hasn't been a single game that made me think that console gaming is so much better with a 2nd screen. It's early so I'm not concerned. ZombiU used it effectively, but I wouldn't say it justifies the GamePad in the same way that say, Super Mario 64 justified the analog stick.

Offline Razorkid

  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
As far as I'm concerned, the Gamepad has been justified in spades.  ZombieU would not be as immersive or fun to play without the GamePad implementation for me.  Off-Tv play is a huge deal in my house hold and playing NSMBU. Asymmetrical multiplayer has been a lot of fun in both Nintendoland and  the Rayman Legends demo.   


Why does the Gamepad have to revolutionize gaming like the analog stick? It's pretty much has been demonstrated before how useful a second screen is with the DS.  Why does it have to be proven all over again with the WiiU (which has already showed a significant use case with the examples above)?  Sure those games could be made to just use a regular controller, but it wouldn't be as fun nor nearly as interesting to me. 


Also, I don't know why 3rd parties and even some people on the boards think it's so hard to incorporate the Gamepad in a game.  The easiest and most useful ways I can think of are:
  • Off-TV Play-This a feature that I hear a lot of WiiU owners (including myself) love and is a perfect thing to incorporate into multi-platform games if you have no other ideas.
  • UI Enhancement- It can allow your tv to be HUD-less, add hot keys, maps, easier inventory access, or ways of accessing extra info from the game like lore, codex, etc.
  • Co-op or same room multiplayer for the games that have it and pretty much all multiplatform games do.
These are just a few really useful ways to make a multiplatform game unique on WiiU while being useful and not gimmicky at the same time.  Many multplatform games use the features mentioned above already (Assassins Creed 3, Mass Effect 3, The Cave, Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate to name a few) to the point people really prefer to experience the games this way than without.

I think people are over thinking the Gamepad.  If you want a truly unique experience, you craft a new IP around it(like Zombie U) or take an existing franchise and make the experience brand new through the GamePad (sorta like Wimmote+nunchuk with Metroid Prime 3).  Otherwise, using those examples above are both useful and will set a game apart from it's other multiplatform iterations.

It's like the DS all over again when people thought that if they aren't doing something wacky with the second screen, nothing else is acceptable or wanted.  If graphical disparity is with in reason, The WiiU version of multiplatform games would be my preferred choice easily if any of the above was implemented in a game.  3rd parties have little excuse in my book.
"All the world is blind to my passing..."

Offline Adrock

  • Score: 134
    • View Profile
Why does the Gamepad have to revolutionize gaming like the analog stick?
Because the entire console revolves around the GamePad's existence and Nintendo made it that way. They're the ones telling the world that the GamePad is the reason to go out and buy the Wii U. Without the GamePad, there is no Wii U so if they're going to have it and push it as the next big thing in gaming then they better damn we have something (at least in the works) that really changes the way people view and play video games. Right now, Nintendo is selling Wii U primarily to their own fans which is all well and good for a console that's 2 months old, but if they can't convince an audience (outside of the one that buys Nintendo because it's Nintendo) to buy into the GamePad as something more than a passing distraction, the experiment failed. The GamePad absolutely has to be the difference maker. Not every game has to change the world, but Wii U is still waiting on a game that makes non-Nintendo fans say, "Okay, now I want one." It's probably going to have to be one that uses the GamePad in a way that's not simply better because of the GamePad, but something no one has ever seen before. Is that fair? Yes and no. It's not easy coming up with a game that revolutionary. However, Nintendo did put themselves in that position by making the GamePad the entire point of the console.

This isn't like the DS or 3DS; they're already successful. The verdict is out on Wii U.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 12:17:30 PM by Adrock »

Offline JasonMaivia

  • On the ShyGuy list.
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Dear Atlus,


New Trauma Center/Team sequels for Wii U.
HD visuals.
Awesome story and characters.
Groovy music with DAT BASS.

Multiplayer gameplay that combines Wii and DS controls, with one player with the GamePad touch screen and other player with the Wii Remote & Nunchuck.
Single player can play with either controller option.


Offline Ian Sane

  • Champion for Urban Champion
  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
The Gamepad is effectively no different then the DS touchscreen.  It isn't anything new so it isn't like that idea is going to suddenly inspire all these amazing ideas.  Everyone struggled to come up with decent touchscreen ideas on the DS and that struggle will continue.  The concept is just not that interesting.

This is the same bullshit as the Wii.  On the Wii if you didn't use motion control your game did not stand out at all because it would just be some PS2/Cube/Xbox game then.  So now Nintendo potentially has five year old hardware AGAIN with just some lame gimmick controller and they expect something different?  The only way to encourage innovation in game design is to give developers a big sandbox to play in as they see fit.  Iwata-era Nintendo's attitude is that you give them some very specific feature and say "this is what you innovate with".  It didn't work on the DS or the Wii and isn't working yet on the 3DS or Wii U.  ****, even NINTENDO sucks at innovating within these parameters and gets like a small handful of creative games out of it and whole bunch of the same old **** with forced gimmick controls.  Nintendo's best work was made when their approach to videogame systems was to merely increase the specs each time.

I loved Miyamoto the videogame designer but cannot STAND Miyamoto the executive.  They seem like completely different people.

Offline Stogi

  • The Stratos You Should All Try To Be Like
  • Score: 18
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 07:41:33 PM by Stogi »
black fairy tales are better at sports

Offline JasonMaivia

  • On the ShyGuy list.
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
A lot of western developers ignored the Wii and DS, and probably didn't work phones and Vita, so it's all new to them.  Until they can get out the the same old routine that that they're used to on Sony/Microsoft consoles and PC, there's not going to be much from most of them...except lots of excuses for the lack of support.

Offline Pixelated Pixies

  • Just call me PixPix™
  • Score: -178
    • View Profile
The reason the Gampad has not appealed to me thus far (I'm open to the possibility that it might be used to create interesting gameplay in the future) is that it's been employed up until now for two features that don't really apply to me.
 
Firstly, it offers the ability to play off-screen. This does not appeal to me for two reasons. Sharing a TV is simply not a problem for me, and I would prefer to play consoles on a big screen rather than small one.
 
The second feature that the Gamepad has brought to the table thus far has been asynchronous gameplay. Once again, however, the opportunity for me to get a bunch of friends round who are willing to actually play Nintendoland is pretty much non-existent.
 
Removing the Gamepad from the equation, therefore, I'm left to look at the games themselves. I'm sorry to say there's nothing out on Wii U at the moment that appeals to me. Pikmin 3 and Rayman Legends are definite contenders, but at this point I'm inclined to just wait and see what Sony and Microsoft are up to before taking the plunge.
Gouge away.

Offline LittleIrves

  • Title = Ha.
  • Score: 5
    • View Profile
    • Kill Screen
Iwata-era Nintendo's attitude is that you give them some very specific feature and say "this is what you innovate with".  It didn't work on the DS or the Wii and isn't working yet on the 3DS or Wii U.

I guess "didn't work" is a subjective term. For me, the Wii and DS re-energized my interest in gaming. For the 100+ million people that bought each system, I imagine a fair ratio of them thought it was okay. While I'm not blind to the possibility of Wii U faltering in the market, I'm fine with being patient and seeing how inventive devs see fit to use the tools given.

Anyway, the touchscreen aspect is way less interesting to me than the integrated gyro, making possible the kind of 360 degree game-world as seen flying Samus' ship in Metroid Blast and the scanner in ZombiU. Maybe once the panorama view thing gets out there, people will understand the utility of viewing a game environment beyond the confines of the TV screen.
Contributing writer at killscreendaily.com

Offline Fjurbanski

  • Score: 14
    • View Profile
I'm tired of hearing people complaining about the Gamepad, so this is gonna be a long one. Feel free to ignore, and have a nice day. : )


The problem with the Gamepad or the Wii U has nothing to do with the Gamepad or the Wii U themselves (one could argue that the Wii U isn't powerful enough, but that's an argument for another day). Aside from the lack of analog triggers (which honestly is not a big deal as far as I'm concerned), the Gamepad is empirically the best controller ever made. People are obviously going to want to argue with this. People are going to say that it's just my opinion, etc., but it's a provable fact. It has more features than any other controller ever made, and it didn't take away any features to accomplish this (once again, except for the odd exclusion of analog triggers). In a pure comparison of what a controller can and cannot do, the Wii U Gamepad wins hands down. The only reason anyone should consider it a lesser controller than what we've been given so far is that they find it uncomfortable. That's a possibility for sure, and I won't say that everyonewho finds it uncomfortable is lying (of which I've only seen a small few, by the way), but gamers will whine about the most minute things that any cries of extreme discomfort or a horrible, unusable button layout will obvious be met by skepticism by me. But I digress.


People didn't have a problem with the Wiimote because it had motion controls, people had a problem with it because it added motion controls and took away many of the things we were used to, and in many cases, needed. It didn't have two analog sticks, it didn't have 4 face buttons, it didn't have 4 shoulder buttons. Because of these limitations, games had to work around them using motion controls in bad ways, rather than enhancing games by using motion controls only when they're useful. If, somehow, the Wiimote had added motion controls while preserving all the tried and true controls we knew before, then developers wouldn't be limited like they were. They would have motion controls AND everything else (Once again, there was also the problem with the Wii's power, but I'm only taking about controls right now). So now we have the Gamepad. It corrects these problems. Just like older controllers added without taking away, so does the Gamepad. The SNES controller added extra face buttons and shoulder buttons without taking away, and now those things are standards in the industry. If that wasn't a bad thing to do then, how could adding a touchscreen (without taking things away) be a bad thing now? How could this be anything other than the natural evolution of the standard controller? Gamer's perception, that's how.


The bad thing is only (ONLY) in how Nintendo has marketed it, and how that type of marketing affects the mindset of developers and gamers. Because that's the "hook" of the console, developers are going to feel like they have to utilize the touchscreen in every game, even when it doesn't make sense. And gamers will feel cheated if the touchscreen isn't utilized in interesting and useful ways. If it doesn't revolutionize, people will look at it and say "What's the pont?" It's a lose, lose simply because of people's attitudes surrounding it.


The solution? As obvious and clichéd as it is to say... it's the games! (I know, crazy, right?) When the 3DS came out, the fact that it did glasses free 3D was supposed to be a big deal. Just like people are saying that the second screen is the reason to buy a Wii U, 3D was supposed to be the reason to buy a 3DS. That was the only thing that made it stand out when it was released. Look how completely untrue that is now. Whenever people talk about the 3DS, the 3D is hardly mentioned. Why? One, because the 3D added without taking away (the slider made it optional). Two, because they just started putting out lots of great games for it. Must buy games sold the system, and helped people stop thinking of it as a gimmick machine. People still mention the 3D in reviews and such, just to cover all the bases, but no game gets a bad score because it didn't implement the 3D well. And no game sells less because it didn't revolutionize 3D gaming. So now (most) people perceive the 3DS as just the next gen DS with loads of good games now and on the horizon. The 3D stopped being a gimmick and simply became an added feature. That's what needs to happen with the Wii U. Nintendo and others just need to pump out good, must have games. Easier said than done, I know, but that's the only solution. Then we'll see the controller and system really shine. More so than any system could have possibly done before. Definitely more so than the Wii could have ever done. Revolutionize? No, only a handful of titles will do that. Just simple, logical evolution. Which is just what we need, I think.


Will it happen, though? Well... who knows.

Add me on Wii U. : ) --> FJUrban

Offline Stogi

  • The Stratos You Should All Try To Be Like
  • Score: 18
    • View Profile
black fairy tales are better at sports

Offline EasyCure

  • wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle, yeah!
  • Score: 75
    • View Profile
I, for one, personally hate the feel of 4 shoulder triggers. They're just not comfortable to me, no matter which controller I'm holding.
February 07, 2003, 02:35:52 PM
EASYCURE: I remember thinking(don't ask me why) this was a blond haired, blue eyed, chiseled athlete. Like he looked like Seigfried before he became Nightmare.

Offline Stogi

  • The Stratos You Should All Try To Be Like
  • Score: 18
    • View Profile
black fairy tales are better at sports

Offline Ian Sane

  • Champion for Urban Champion
  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
I think as a controller the Gamepad is fine.  Unlike the Wii controller is does not remove a bunch of expected functionality.  If you want to you can use all of it's fancy features or just make something very simple that only uses part of it.  That's flexibility and that's good controller design.  You got the screen, the sticks, the triggers, the face buttons and a developer can use or not use any part of it they wish.

My problem with the Gamepad is this attitude like it's going to inspire all these new game ideas, which seems delusional at best.  It puts too much pressure on something that realistically doesn't offer anything that the Wii or the DS didn't already have in some capacity.  It's really just an evolution of the GBA connectivity on the Gamecube.  Nintendo talks big about asymetrical multiplayer.  Uh, yeah, that's what Pac-Man Vs. was and the gaming world gave so little a **** about that that Nintendo had to give it away as a bonus with other games.

Offline broodwars

  • Hunting for a Pineapple Salad
  • Score: -1012
    • View Profile
I'm tired of hearing people complaining about the Gamepad, so this is gonna be a long one. Feel free to ignore, and have a nice day. : )


The problem with the Gamepad or the Wii U has nothing to do with the Gamepad or the Wii U themselves (one could argue that the Wii U isn't powerful enough, but that's an argument for another day). Aside from the lack of analog triggers (which honestly is not a big deal as far as I'm concerned), the Gamepad is empirically the best controller ever made. People are obviously going to want to argue with this. People are going to say that it's just my opinion, etc., but it's a provable fact. It has more features than any other controller ever made, and it didn't take away any features to accomplish this (once again, except for the odd exclusion of analog triggers). In a pure comparison of what a controller can and cannot do, the Wii U Gamepad wins hands down.

Obviously someone here doesn't know what a "fact" is, as well as what an "opinion" is. It can't be "empirically the best controller ever made" in my view if I want nothing to do with most of what that controller offers. The DS showed me that a second screen is pretty meaningless, as no one on the DS ever did anything particularly compelling with 2 screens.  Plus, at best the human eye can only track one screen at a time, so anything relegated to two screens could easily go on a pause menu while losing nothing (and I don't mind pausing my games).  And the same goes for touch capability, something I've only found any use for in rhythm games.

I don't care about Near Field Communication, as at best right now it looks to be merely a meaningless marketing gimmick to sell Skylanders-style crap.  As for Off-TV play, it's a feature I haven't had much use for yet, as no one fights with me for control of my TV.  And when I'm home playing a console game, I don't want to look at a stupid little Standard Definition screen on my controller. I want to look at my nice, expensive HD TV with all the trimmings.  I also haven't had a situation yet where I care about a Wii U game so much that I just have to play it while I'm also watching a Blu Ray.  And it really says something about both the quality of the games and the Wii U experience if one of its best features is the ability to play something not particularly interesting while you do something else you'd much rather be doing.  :P: : : :

I don't hate the GamePad.  It's too big for my hands, the triggers don't feel right to me, and the screen's distracting as **** since you can't turn it off, but it's capable enough for certain games (though I prefer the Pro Controller).  I'll only have a problem with nothing interesting ever being done with it if Nintendo keeps focusing on the GamePad as the reason to own a Wii U, because right now it sure as hell isn't.

I do find it hilarious, though, that people keep saying the GamePad doesn't need to do anything innovative when Miyamoto in this very article is bitching that he hasn't seen innovative uses of the Gamepad in Wii U games.  Either it's a big deal Nintendo needs to justify, or it's a pointless gimmick no one should have to care about (see the 3DS and its 3DS display).
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 08:04:41 PM by broodwars »
"It's time to play...JAZZ...BASKETBALL!"

Offline Stogi

  • The Stratos You Should All Try To Be Like
  • Score: 18
    • View Profile
I do find it hilarious, though, that people keep saying the GamePad doesn't need to do anything innovative when Miyamoto in this very article is bitching that he hasn't seen innovative uses of the Gamepad in Wii U games.  Either it's a big deal Nintendo needs to justify, or it's a pointless gimmick no one should have to care about (see the 3DS and its 3DS display).


black fairy tales are better at sports

Offline Adrock

  • Score: 134
    • View Profile
There have been many games that have used the 2nd screen on the DS/3DS effectively. I still maintain, for example, that Ocarina of Time is a much better game with the touch screen. I wouldn't say that necessarily justifies the 2nd screen on 3DS because Ocarina of Time was perfectly playable without it. Still, it is a bit easier to justify having the extra screen on a handheld because portability and screen real estate are important considerations. Neither are issues on a home console. They're also not inherently gameplay related which is what I'm most concerned about.

A big difference between the way Nintendo presents the 2nd screen on Wii U and DS/3DS is that the GamePad is the entire point of the Wii U and the 2nd screen is merely a part of the DS/3DS (I always felt that they pushed touch more than anything else). For this reason, I think Nintendo has a bit more pressure to justify the GamePad from a gameplay standpoint. Exactly why is this thing so important to gaming? They don't have an answer to that yet, but I'm confident that they will eventually. It's not as easy to explain as motion controls which, like it or not, changed gaming, like shoulder buttons and the analog stick. Nintendo wouldn't put a screen on a controller if they didn't have big plans for it, some idea of what they want to do with it. Nintendo Land is a start, but I think the best is yet to come. Honestly, the absolute best way the GamePad is used thus far is Miiverse which would not be nearly the same without the ability to draw pictures. The only caveat is that, again, it's not gameplay related.
I do find it hilarious, though, that people keep saying the GamePad doesn't need to do anything innovative when Miyamoto in this very article is bitching that he hasn't seen innovative uses of the Gamepad in Wii U games.
It does, but not every game needs to. That would be wholly unrealistic.

Offline Fjurbanski

  • Score: 14
    • View Profile
Quote
I don't care about Near Field Communication, as at best right now it looks to be merely a meaningless marketing gimmick to sell Skylanders-style crap.  As for Off-TV play, it's a feature I haven't had much use for yet, as no one fights with me for control of my TV.  And when I'm home playing a console game, I don't want to look at a stupid little Standard Definition screen on my controller. I want to look at my nice, expensive HD TV with all the trimmings.  I also haven't had a situation yet where I care about a Wii U game so much that I just have to play it while I'm also watching a Blu Ray.  And it really says something about both the quality of the games and the Wii U experience if one of its best features is the ability to play something not particularly interesting while you do something else you'd much rather be doing.  : : : :


Yeah, I don't care about NFC either, doesn't change the fact that the Gamepad has it and other controllers don't. Doesn't change the fact that it's one more function that this controller has that other controllers don't, and it opens up options to developers. Whether you personally use features or not doesn't change the fact that the features are there, and therefore, make the controller better as a functional way to control games. It has all the functions of normal controllers and more. It has less limits. So as long as it works how it's supposed to, it is a better controller. And I have no qualms stating that as fact.


Like I said before, it's not a revolution, and Nintendo should never have pushed it as such (Although, even if they didn't, I'd expect the media and gamers to blow it out of proportion anyway). It's just the next logical step in the evolution of controller design. Almost everything has a touchscreen these days, so it's only logical that our game controllers would eventually come with a touchscreen to supplement the regular controls. Will it stick, like older controller modifications? I don't know. Apparently not, the way people are overreacting about it. Is it a good idea? Does it open up different, albeit non-revolutionary, ways to control certain aspects of games? Some that may even be better than what we've been doing? Hell yes.


So everyone, stop expecting a revolution, and just accept that certain things are gonna be a little better, and other things won't change. I mean, if you can't revolutionize, isn't it still better to move small steps forward rather than to just stay in the same place?
Add me on Wii U. : ) --> FJUrban

Offline broodwars

  • Hunting for a Pineapple Salad
  • Score: -1012
    • View Profile
Having "the most features" doesn't mean jack **** if they aren't done as well and if people don't actually want to use them.  Not to mention, when Nintendo had to supplement the GamePad with the Pro Controller because the GamePad just doesn't cut it for certain people & certain experiences, you can't call it "definitive". But by all means, continue to worship the controller for the checkboxes it ticks off the list rather than its ability to convince people to actually play games with it.  This argument is too stupid for me to waste any more time on it.
"It's time to play...JAZZ...BASKETBALL!"

Offline TJ Spyke

  • Ass
  • Score: -1350
    • View Profile
    • Spyke Shop
The Pro Controller was just made for people who like to bitch about how they prefer the Xbox 360 controller. There is nothing wrong with the GamePad, it's actually superior.
Help out a poor college student, buy video games and Blu-ray Discs at: http://astore.amazon.com/spyke-20