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

[BlackNMild2k1]

Just because it's possible for the WiiU to support more than one uMote does not mean that it actually will. The technical specs are not final and as far as E3 reveal was concerned, they are "looking into if that is possible".
Technically it is possible (do I really have to explain it again? I even speculated on why it might be possible before they came out and said it was possible), but that doesn't mean it will be included, nor does that mean it will work they way they want.

Until they come out and say we have multiple uMote support, then it still only a "possibility" & "technically possible". Even then it may not be exactly what we wanted.

What we want "technically possible" to mean: 2-4 players with uMotes all having their own personal view of the action. No major hit on resolution or IQ.
ex. FPS - 4 players, 4 different parts of the same map. No screen cheating by having split screen on the TV.
ex. Football - 2 players, choosing plays and drawing audibles on the fly from the uMote.

What "technically possible" could mean: 2-4 uMotes pushing out the exact same image as each other.
ex. Racing - 4 players, split screen on TV, everyone has a map on the uMote.... the exact same map.
ex. Sidescroller - 4 player (NMSBU), all on the same screen. No need for TV, but you are all on the same screen.

What "technically possible" could mean: 2-4 uMotes are possible, but each uMote needs it's own transmitter if it is to receive it's own personal screen.
ex. Each transmitter would be the equivalent of 1 of the 4 controller ports on the system, and with tech like that, it could become very expensive very quickly.

 
The fact that Nintendo, the king of local multiplayer, has only been focusing on asymmetrical multi and has completely cast aside symmetrical multi, tells us that they either didn't really plan on using it and didn't think we would ask or that they haven't worked that part out yet. Why is that?

-Is it a limitation in the streaming technology? Look up AMD WirelessTV, Intel's WiDi, and WirelessHD.
If there is a limitation, that is where it is, because we know the GPU has Eyefinity and that is not the problem.
-Is it solely because uMotes cost more than a Wiimote/chuck/M+ ever did? A full controller never cost Nintendo more than about $25, but they've been selling it for up to $70. So if it means they need to sell a certain amount of systems before the tech prices go down and then they can sell the controller at (what they feel is) a consumer friendly price and maintain a certain profit margin, then fine. Just make sure the hardware is fully capable of supporting all the controllers and you have no complaints in that department. Bundle the second controller with a game like uPlay and and then offer stand-alones on the shelf at a later date.

[MorbidGod]

"Reggie Fils-Aime had previously said that two controllers will be able to be used with the system so that laid many fears to rest but many were still scared because of Miyamoto's comments during E3. Iwata takes the sides of both of these executives. He says the system is designed for only one player and that's what Nintendo is focusing in on right now but two controllers will be able to be used. That's a good idea since the casual gamers only need one game like Wii Sports for a system to take off but hardcore gamers are the ones that keep going out and buying games. So this is probably a good idea out of Nintendo." http://www.pnosker.com/video-games/wii-games/1210-e3-2011-you-can-use-2-controllers-with-wii-u

Listen man, this is getting tiring. Yes, the hardware is not final yet. So yes, it could be changed at any rate where it would be impossible for the Wii U to have more then one controller. However, right now Nintendo is focusing on just one controller, and then 4 classic or wiimotes.

My point is they can not consider to release a game with two WiiPads unless it is going to end up with that ability. It wouldn't be in the deck of cards. They wouldn't say in the future we are looking into creating an experiance with multiple WiiPad's and researching how we can justicfiy the high price. Basically, how can we make it worth it to the consumer? They wouldn't be considering that as an option, and they wouldn't be researching that aspect, and they wouldn't be doing that "in the future", but they would be doing that right now. Unless, of course, they are planning on having the ability, but making it where at first they will focus on asymmetrical gameplay but in the future, consider symmetrical. And that should be encouraging to you that a President of Nintendo wants to give you an awesome symmetrical experiance and doesn't want to make it just normal gaming. 

[BlackNMild2k1]

Despite my efforts to explain it to you, you just don't get it. So I give up.

every thing you said in that last paragraph is confusing and makes no sense.

[ThePerm]

im not going to read this flame war, im just going to side with BlackNmild2k1 because me and him go way back.

[Adrock]

Well, I read it and it can be reduced to this:

Just because it's possible for the WiiU to support more than one uMote does not mean that it actually will.

No one at Nintendo has confirmed that WiiU WILL without question support more than a single tablet controller. Period. In fact, they've been dodging the question by saying that it CAN.  Well, great, but is it going to? Nintendo's most familiar faces are being extremely careful about what they say. Iwata brought up cost. Miyamoto brought up 3DS. Even Reggie, the only one of the 3 who speaks English fluently, has only gone as far as to tell Michael Pachter that WiiU CAN support 2 controllers. No real confirmation, only misdirection. Considering every tech and games website is reporting something different, you would think Nintendo would do some damage control and flatly say, "Yes, WiiU can and will support more than a single tablet controller." No such luck so far.

If you sift through all of the cryptic PR bullshit, the most logical conclusion is that no one at Nintendo knows for sure yet.

[NWR_insanolord]

I agree that the most likely explanation is that they haven't yet decided whether they're going to support it or not. If that is the case, they really should have known going into E3 that people would ask about it, and have had a better PR answer to it.

[ThePerm]

yeah thats one thing....they never seem as prepared as possible at e3. I kinda miss Parin Kapplan. She had Jedi deflection skills. The only problem was you could tell they don't keep her in the loop, which sucks..cus she was PR.

[Adrock]

It seemed to me that Nintendo didn't even want to show WiiU to the public at E3, having been practically forced to due to leaks similar to the 3DS. That said, they probably knew people were going to ask and just hoped they wouldn't. I don't work in public relations so I claim no expertise on the matter. I don't know how else you can address that issue. They've all basically said "I don't know" in not so many words and they've tried to draw attention away from it by bringing up cost or 3DS. However, anyone can point out the logical fallacies of those explanations. They only need to stall long enough to move onto the next question. I feel like we got the best answer since "Yes!" wasn't an option... even if the answer wasn't a good one.

[mac<censored>]

yeah thats one thing....they never seem as prepared as possible at e3.

But isn't that kinda good in a way?  Personally I find it refreshing when you get a ... kinda more direct, honest, feed from the people who are actually working to make the thing, even if they're clumsy in some ways.  The more PR runs things, the more banal and content-free they tend to be ...

[mac<censored>]

I feel like we got the best answer since "Yes!" wasn't an option... even if the answer wasn't a good one.

Wait, why wasn't the answer a good one...?  If they haven't decided yet, then they haven't decided... shouldn't they say that...?

After all the thing still won't be a reality for a long time, so it's not like people need to make their buying decision based on that answer...

[ThePerm]

BnM, could you edit the console to be black?

No. my skillz are really limited. sorry. maybe The Perm can do it though.
I might give it a try later. I'm still teaching myself the program.

@Morbid
these are the numbers I said you had wrong

If they only make 20 dollars per WiiPad they would make $20,000 per 10,000 WiiPad's sold.

$20 x 10,000 = $200,000.


Also the numbers I had for the uMote were over $40 manufactuing. I expect them to sell it for anywhere between $65-$80 should they sell them separately.

And my point was that a profit is a profit. You're not gonna make any profit if you don't sell extra controllers. So not selling any controllers is just bad business when we know for a fact that lots of them could be sold at a profit provided compelling software is there to make use of them.

you point

Enough value of something they do not sell? How can they consider having games that require you to play with a friend that has a WiiPad when they do not sell WiiPad's. This implies they plan on selling WiiPads. Sure, it does not go out and state it -- but they do plan on selling it. They just don't plan on games making your spend 541.991 dollars within the launch windows to enjoy the games you want to play.

So thats been my point all along. Nintendo should keep the profit they enjoy.

They don't sell but they plan on selling....? ok.
You keep saying they don't sell and not gonna sell but then say they plan on selling.... make up your mind.
I never said anything about the launch window. I'm talking about Nintendo not gimping their machine because they didn't plan on games using a 2nd, 3rd or 4th uMote from the beginning and therefore not having functionality when those games do come around.
You also said no one would buy extra controllers. I countered that with WiiFit and uPlay. So I don't know what kinda point you are trying to argue, but as long as the controllers don't cost over $100 (which I don't think they will...) then software is all they need to sell extra's. Wiimote w/ nunchuck + Motion Plus has been costing upwards of $60 since birth of the Wii, charging an extra $20 on top of that(gotta preserve those profit margins) for a uMote is not too much to ask.


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?

hmmm hard to make it really black







also helps to have decent sampled images

and cause i know youll ask
i went and found a better sampled image, and did other colors...Gamecube indigo!

[NWR_insanolord]

yeah thats one thing....they never seem as prepared as possible at e3.

But isn't that kinda good in a way?  Personally I find it refreshing when you get a ... kinda more direct, honest, feed from the people who are actually working to make the thing, even if they're clumsy in some ways.  The more PR runs things, the more banal and content-free they tend to be ...

Except I don't think I'd consider it Nintendo being honest. It seems pretty clear that they're trying to be secretive and/or deceptive, and failing.

[Adrock]

Wait, why wasn't the answer a good one...?  If they haven't decided yet, then they haven't decided... shouldn't they say that...?

Let me put it this way: A man asks his longtime girlfriend to marry him and she says, "I don't know." Would you call that a "good" answer? If I were him, I'd certainly expect the worst.

What essentially boils down to "Guh, I don't know..." doesn't exactly inspire confidence to me. That means there's some kind of an issue with supporting multiple tablet controllers (which literally could be anything at this point) otherwise, the answer would be "yes." At the very least, it's better than a flat "no." However, Nintendo is being coy. They've offered no real explanation. If Nintendo isn't willing to elaborate, then we got the best possible answer from them. I wouldn't call it a "good" answer though.

And Nintendo isn't even doing a very good job of not explaining what the hold up is because they insist on misdirecting the real problem. It suggests that they don't have good news. It's a lot different than saying, "We cannot confirm that WiiU will support multiple [tablet controllers] at this time. There are currently issues with steaming content to more than one controller due to [explanation]. However, we are hopeful that these issues will be resolved." I can see why Nintendo wouldn't want to come out and say this because they would be admitting there is a problem. It also puts Nintendo in a more awkward position should they fail to deliver.  At the same time, deflecting the question may actually be worse. The media is reporting conflicting information. There are pros and cons to both approaches. Personally, I'd prefer the truth.

[MorbidGod]

Well, I read it and it can be reduced to this:

Just because it's possible for the WiiU to support more than one uMote does not mean that it actually will.

No one at Nintendo has confirmed that WiiU WILL without question support more than a single tablet controller. Period. In fact, they've been dodging the question by saying that it CAN.  Well, great, but is it going to? Nintendo's most familiar faces are being extremely careful about what they say. Iwata brought up cost. Miyamoto brought up 3DS. Even Reggie, the only one of the 3 who speaks English fluently, has only gone as far as to tell Michael Pachter that WiiU CAN support 2 controllers. No real confirmation, only misdirection. Considering every tech and games website is reporting something different, you would think Nintendo would do some damage control and flatly say, "Yes, WiiU can and will support more than a single tablet controller." No such luck so far.

If you sift through all of the cryptic PR bullshit, the most logical conclusion is that no one at Nintendo knows for sure yet.

Exactly.

[ThePerm]

There's a difference about Ability and Support. Nintendo has said it has the ability, but said they aren't sure they'll support it due to cost. Also, keep in mind Nintendo does not want to make promises to consumers it can't keep. Making a promise that has to be retracted creates an unnecessary news bump that is negative months from now. People have to remember that the Engineers are not Management, and Management doesn't have all the details because they can't.

[mac<censored>]

Wait, why wasn't the answer a good one...?  If they haven't decided yet, then they haven't decided... shouldn't they say that...?

Let me put it this way: A man asks his longtime girlfriend to marry him and she says, "I don't know." Would you call that a "good" answer? If I were him, I'd certainly expect the worst.

Yeah, but (1) "will you marry me" is an important question that essentially determines the future of their relationship and (2) the girl answering "I don't know" essentially says something about her feelings towards him that's fairly unlikely to change; even though the form of the answer is indeterminate, what it implies is not.

The situation with controllers, on the other can easily change in either direction ("will support" or "won't support"), as they get a better grasp on the technical details (e.g., will reserving enough GPU power for additional controllers have too large an impact on games), and consumer demand for the feature.

In other words, Nintendo's "I don't know" is likely to mean they really don't know yet, rather than being a weasel-worded way of saying "no."  I think it's a perfectly honorable and respectable answer.

[ThePerm]

i dont know means give it a couple months and we'lll see

[BlackNMild2k1]

It took me far too long to do that shitty LED Disc Slot last time, so I didn't even attempt it this time.
But this is the one for me right here.


or in black....

Well, I read it and it can be reduced to this:

Just because it's possible for the WiiU to support more than one uMote does not mean that it actually will.

Summary of entire BNM argument...

If you sift through all of the cryptic PR bullshit, the most logical conclusion is that no one at Nintendo knows for sure yet.

Exactly.

....lol?

[Adrock]

There's a difference about Ability and Support. Nintendo has said it has the ability, but said they aren't sure they'll support it due to cost. Also, keep in mind Nintendo does not want to make promises to consumers it can't keep.

If WiiU can support it, then it should. No exceptions. I don't believe for a second that Nintendo is so concerned over the cost to consumers. Iwata said they're "not planning on asking our customers to buy multiple Wii U Controllers." Assuming there are no translation snafus, that's total bullshit. As stated several times before, this is the same company that sold a complete additional controller for $80 and $90-$100 peripheral packaged with software that can't even be classified as a game (Wii Fit). It's further circumvented by the appalling suggestion that we all just use 3DS instead which costs more than an extra tablet controller ever would.

In other words, Nintendo's "I don't know" is likely to mean they really don't know yet, rather than being a weasel-worded way of saying "no."  I think it's a perfectly honorable and respectable answer.

By the same token, Nintendo's response could just as easily be "a weasel-worded way of saying 'no'" as well which I addressed after the part you quoted. It only implies a negative connotation without an explanation.

[Sarail]

Oh, man. Big fan of the metallic silver Wii U. I'd trade my brother and sister for that thing.

[mac<censored>]

There's a difference about Ability and Support. Nintendo has said it has the ability, but said they aren't sure they'll support it due to cost. Also, keep in mind Nintendo does not want to make promises to consumers it can't keep.

If WiiU can support it, then it should. No exceptions.
There is no  I don't believe for a second that Nintendo is so concerned over the cost to consumers.

Of course they're concerned with cost to consumers, because that directly impacts sales.

What you seem to be forgetting is that because of the architecture of display system, the cost impact is not the cost of additional controllers, it's the cost of the main unit.

Beefing up the main unit to handle potential additional controllers makes it more expensive, and that will impact sales of the base system.  Maybe they can get it down to the point where it's viable, and the additional cost will be justified by increased customer interest due to multiple controller support -- but it's not the trivial question you seem to think it is.

[MorbidGod]

It took me far too long to do that shitty LED Disc Slot last time, so I didn't even attempt it this time.
But this is the one for me right here.


or in black....

Well, I read it and it can be reduced to this:

Just because it's possible for the WiiU to support more than one uMote does not mean that it actually will.

Summary of entire BNM argument...

If you sift through all of the cryptic PR bullshit, the most logical conclusion is that no one at Nintendo knows for sure yet.

Exactly.

....lol?

I have been saying for a while now, Nintendo will be researching games that require multiple WiiPad's. And someone at another forum made a good point... that it's possible that although it's always been possible in the hardware, that Nintendo never considered making games requiring it. Because they didn't think we would want to spend money on the controllers. And then E3 happened and ... they were proven wrong. This explains the bad PR, the dodging the question. They are or will be experimenting with concepts requiring multiple controllers, now they seen we want it.

[ThePerm]

the silver one reminds me of my vcr/dvd combo..so i wouldnt sell anyone out for that one



this one however

[broodwars]

the silver one reminds me of my vcr/dvd combo..so i wouldnt sell anyone out for that one



this one however

Stamp a Triforce Logo on the front between the Power and Sync buttons and a big one on the "Top", and I'd buy that one too.

[Adrock]

Of course they're concerned with cost to consumers, because that directly impacts sales.

If WiiU can support it, then it should. No exceptions. I don't believe for a second that Nintendo is so concerned over the cost to consumers. Iwata said they're "not planning on asking our customers to buy multiple Wii U Controllers." Assuming there are no translation snafus, that's total bullshit. As stated several times before, this is the same company that sold a complete additional controller for $80 and [a] $90-$100 peripheral packaged with software that can't even be classified as a game (Wii Fit). It's further circumvented by the appalling suggestion that we all just use 3DS instead which costs more than an extra tablet controller ever would.

What you seem to be forgetting is that because of the architecture of display system, the cost impact is not the cost of additional controllers, it's the cost of the main unit.

I'm not forgetting anything. This has been brought up multiple times. This is the same Nintendo that currently charges $250 for 3DS admittedly because the E3 2010 unveiling was so strong. The raw parts come in at a little more than $100. That means, Nintendo could have launched for far less and STILL made a profit after manufacturing and recouping research and development. It's only an extra cost because Nintendo insists on selling for an egregious profit.

I'm not sure Nintendo will do the same with WiiU but all signs point to "yes." Nintendo never sells at a loss and they shouldn't. That's an awful idea, but no one is asking or expecting that from Nintendo. Rather, if they're so concerned with cost to the consumers, Nintendo should absorb the cost and take less of a profit on the console then pass the savings to the consumer, especially for something everyone already expects from every single console.

I'm baffled that this is still a point of contention. Nintendo adds a big screen to the controller. That's WiiU's biggest, most obvious, and most attractive selling point. Without the screen, WiiU is just another HD console. They should be trying to make the most of it because the possibilities are endless.