"In the future, we may look at what other opportunities there are for gameplay and, how having two of those controllers might create fun or interesting new styles of play, but of course in doing that, it would require a consumer to purchase an additional controller. Therefore, we would need to carefully consider how we could create such an experience and, potentially, how we could ensure that there would be enough value within that experience for the consumer to accept that cost and make that purchase." http://wii.ign.com/articles/117/1177013p1.html
This is what the President of Nintendo said. And I was asking you a question, let me ask you again: How can they consider in the future to require you to buy more then one WiiPads if they are not selling them? Is that possible? Your point seems to be, or one of them, that Nintendo is "gimping" themselves by not allowing it -- and Nintendo in that interview (for the first time, I might add) clearly states it is possible and that in the future games will be made BY NINTENDO that requires multiple WiiPads for multiplayer gameplay. I believe third party developers -- such as, you know, EA Sports -- will develop games requiring multiple WiiPads. I think that because if they want you to choose your plays with the WiiPad, then you can't do that without multiple WiiPad with local multiplayer gaming (one console, multiple people).
First of all, you can quit reposting the same quote over and over again. I'm sure I saw it the first time it was posted in this thread, which I'm pretty sure wasn't by you. Looking at future opportunities does not mean that they are going to include the functionality or even support it. The console has not been finalized and "technically possible" does not equal "actually included/feature supported" in the final hardware.
And still hung up on those numbers, are ya?
I simply corrected your math. I'm not sure what you are arguing.
Wii = $250, WiiPlay = $50, WiiFit = $100, Nunchuck = $20 , WiiSports Resort w/ MP = $50, extra Motion Plus = $20 / total = $490
Yay more numbers!!! Wait... Nintendo expects me spend how much to enjoy games on my Wii? And I have to buy it all on DAY 1!!!? Oh Noes!!!
For reference, I will show you the specific post I was replying to.
Good post from Adrock....
And I know you didn't say anything about the launch window, never said you did. I did, however, quote a President of a company called Nintendo who talked about the future in terms of Wii U2. I assume when he said in the future, he was not talking about in 2012 Nintendo will require you to buy more than one WiiPad to play a game. And I assume when he was talking present tense he was not talking about now, considering no one has the option to buy Wii U or a WiiPad right now since ... you know ... Nintendo has not released it yet. I could be mistaken, of course.
In the future means in the future. It could mean next year, next week, 6 months from now.
If they are gonna look into it in the future then that means that they didn't have any plans for it in the present, which means that the hardware may not be currently setup to support 2-4 uMote controllers.
Look at some of my previous post where I detail out some of the possible tech that they are using. The wireless TV tech from AMD and similar tech from other companies all can stream to around 6 or so other devices, but they are designed to stream the same media to all those same devices. Nintendo needs to stream different media to all the controllers and display something completely different from all of that on the TV at the same time.
"Technically" being able to support the 4 controllers is because the GPU has Eyefinity tech which can support up to 6 separate screens. The X factor is can their custom version of the streaming tech pump independent media out to the individual screens. or do they need a single transmitter per controller which might increase cost of the console itself.
Now finally ...
and once again, I'm not saying that 2nd uMotes need to be out at launch, but the option to use them needs to be there from the get-go and selling them bundled or stand-alone will obviously be at a profit, so why not do it?
I never said the option wouldn't be there, and I never said they shouldn't, so why ask me something we obviously agree on?
Because your argument makes no sense. You assume that when Iwata says the future, that he's not talking about next year, but instead (I think)many years in the future. He never came out and said that the WiiU can support 4 players with individual uMotes, he said that technically the WiiU can support multiple uMotes. Well technically the WiiU could probably re-render Wii games in HD resolutions, but that doesn't mean it's gonna support the feature.
My whole argument is that Nintendo needs to make sure that the WiiU can support the extra controllers now even if they don't plan to sell them separately till some later date.
Just like Adrock said, at some point before Wii release, Nintendo was looking into the gameplay usefulness of a nunchuck, but only after if was requested by one of their own. Well, now we are all requesting multiple uMote support built in, even if that means only 2 can be supported.
The most intriguing use of having a personal screen on your game controller is local multiplayer where you opponent in the same room can see what you are doing. It's quite obvious that that would be a major feature to show off and there has to be a reason that Nintendo didn't even mention it until asked.
Asymmetrical local multiplayer sounds fine and all, but I'm not gonna trust that symmetrical multi will automatically be included because "technically" the GPU is capable of handling multiple screens or that Nintendo is "looking into it" or maybe will plan for games that support multiple uMotes. You make that assumption if you want, but Nintendo is known to get some of the most obvious things to get right very wrong and I really don't want this to be that thing.
Now maybe they come out in October with a definitive statement and a demonstration of multiple uMotes working in tandem in a single game, but until then my argument stands.