Oh, they did show the guy flinging shurikens at trees using his hands, so maybe capacitive.
Engadget, in their hands-on with the controller, said the stylus was plain plastic, which means we're dealing with a resistive display. Another dead giveaway is that all displayed uses, even the ones based on CONCEPTS, involve one point of contact. Basically: No Multitouch for Nintendo. Joystiq did a hands-on with the unit that showed these limitations as well.
Engadget, in their hands-on with the controller, said the stylus was plain plastic, which means we're dealing with a resistive display. Another dead giveaway is that all displayed uses, even the ones based on CONCEPTS, involve one point of contact. Basically: No Multitouch for Nintendo. Joystiq did a hands-on with the unit that showed these limitations as well.
It will do though, for the sorts of applications that Nintendo have in mind.
Yeah, it places restrictions, but Ninty are really good at creating hardware that's just good enough, and still fun in new ways. And they make a profit on every piece of hardware they sell.
It will do though, for the sorts of applications that Nintendo have in mind.
...but will it "do" for the sorts of applications DEVELOPERS have in mind? Will it "do" for applications that are actually innovative? Will it "do" even for the concept video shuriken flinging? For that last one, you can definitely say "no".
Ninty are really good at creating hardware that's just good enough, and still fun in new ways. And they make a profit on every piece of hardware they sell.
How New Ways to Play are Made at Nintendo: Wii U edition
1. Take old, outdated hardware and concepts that have lasted for years
...dammit, there goes my money. Though, I have no doubt though it'll go back up when the thing actually releases. Their stock was at $75 after the Wii released.
...dammit, there goes my money. Though, I have no doubt though it'll go back up when the thing actually releases. Their stock was at $75 after the Wii released.
Miyamoto says the demand for multiple screentrollers to be used for multiplayer is big and he says they're trying to make friends' screentrollers compatible with the Wii U so you can use more, while apparently per console there is still only going to be one (due to the price maybe, but that's just my speculation).
Miyamoto says the demand for multiple screentrollers to be used for multiplayer is big and he says they're trying to make friends' screentrollers compatible with the Wii U so you can use more, while apparently per console there is still only going to be one (due to the price maybe, but that's just my speculation).
It won't happen unless they greatly increase the power of the hardware. Being able to render a game on up to 5 screens at once over wifi is not going to be possible without either making monstrously expensive hardware, or completely awful visuals.
It won't happen unless they greatly increase the power of the hardware. Being able to render a game on up to 5 screens at once over wifi is not going to be possible without either making monstrously expensive hardware, or completely awful visuals.
I got the impression that it wasn't WiFi, but a proprietary wireless connection of some sort. Of course, we won't know until either Nintendo themselves
My guess is that it's a technical hurdle that they'll try and do some software wizardry to fix. I could see them trying to switch the majority of active output to one screen for turn-based games, greatly reducing the graphics for multiplayer titles, finding some means of optimization, or using higher-level hardware. We can't really know what's "possible" since, frankly, damn near every aspect of the device is in flux at this point in time. But I also wouldn't particularly count on it, either.
It won't happen unless they greatly increase the power of the hardware. Being able to render a game on up to 5 screens at once over wifi is not going to be possible without either making monstrously expensive hardware, or completely awful visuals.
It would easily be possible to support two screens if you halve the FPS from 60 to 30 and give one image to one controller at a time.
If the problem is the transfer time, split the resolution in half. So you could stream to four controllers at the same speed as with 1.
And with neither of those methods I think that the visuals will look "completely awful".
Another option could be to just stream the image material to one controller at the time while the others get blank images. That would of course work for games where the role of the different player changes.
For selecting strategies/players before a football match or displaying inventory screens, I could easily see any of those methods applied without a big drawback on graphical quality.
If i would life in Japan i would more care about getting rid of the nuclear power plants, establishing some serious alternatives with perspectives and maybe then once some of the more important things are done, return to inventing really interesting gaming hardware.
The Wii U looks like a not this well thought through short to mid term hybrid. Good processing power, soso gfx, good enough for some conventional HD eye candy but also not good enough for some real changes, actually it's outdated already. Memory and storage is a joke again. Input possibilities are known from other hardware platforms already, this time they are combineable.
It's just not exciting. The best you can hope for is that it's cheap, silent, resource friendly and if you can't wait for an emulator, that you will be able to play Pikmin 3 on it.
But for a controller focused console, it's just not exciting enough. The way you steer a game can influence a design a lot and can be a important part of the fun as well but the options more or less already exist, sometimes they are misused (fancy input whilst there is no substance in the game) or often are ignored due to cross release issues - did anyone say least common denominator?!
Of course you can use the controller for cool stuff as well but once you got used to it, it comes down to the core, the soul of a game again all these possibilities can get superfluous pretty fast again. Beside of this quite some developers, for some strange reasons, don't invest enough resources into tweaking the input for traditional input possibilities properly already.
If you give all these possibilities into the hand of lazy, unmotivated, time pressured productions then it can end up in a input/interface mess as well. Simplicity and perfection is best achieved with some reasonable borders because it hopefully forces you thinking about the best solutions. You normally take things away from something until it's perfect and not the other way around.
The way you steer a game can influence a design a lot and can be a important part of the fun as well but the options more or less already exist, sometimes they are misused (fancy input whilst there is no substance in the game) or often are ignored due to cross release issues - did anyone say least common denominator?!
As I recall, the original Sixaxis controller for the PS3 had motion controls, but developers didn't utilize them because they were clunky. I forget which game it was, but I read somewhere that some game actually paid the price in sales and playability because the developer insisted on utilizing it despite fans insisting having control with the thumbstick.
EDIT: I've been trying to figure out where I read that, but I believe the game was Lair.
I think the best method is still to use a 3DS as the other three controllers. That way you can retain the high quality screen of the Wii U controller while having lower graphic versions on the 3DS screens. This can be easily achieved by just uploading a 3DS image with all the data required as a Download Play thing. That way the only thing that is required to be streamed to the 3DS is control input, entity locations and other stuff that's dynamic.
I think the best method is still to use a 3DS as the other three controllers. That way you can retain the high quality screen of the Wii U controller while having lower graphic versions on the 3DS screens. This can be easily achieved by just uploading a 3DS image with all the data required as a Download Play thing. That way the only thing that is required to be streamed to the 3DS is control input, entity locations and other stuff that's dynamic.
To be honest, $250 a pop for new controllers isn't very appealing.
The console isn't going to be able to effectively and efficiently stream video wirelessly to four external devices without latency. The bandwidth and video processing required would be huge. It's hard enough to get a PC to run multiple cabled monitors with separate video output at a reasonable detail level without creating lag on the monitor that isn't in primary focus, unless you invest a significant amount of money in an effort to do so. To have video (and audio, given that it has a speaker) stream to 2, 3 or 4 screens separately, wirelessly, and latency-free would not only be too much to hope for, but also prohibitively expensive.
Also, to use a 3DS or DSi as an alternative to an additional controller would not only be expensive, but also limiting on controls and screen size. Any iteration of the DS's screen size is significantly smaller than the WiiU controller, and the DS doesn't even have 2 analog sticks.
So now I feel like thinking of ways on how 2 controllers would be good.
A mixture of the E3 shield game and the shuriken game where one person flings shurkiens, the other uses a shield.
Hey that could work for the NGP actually, doesnt that thing have a gyroscope?
Or AR. Oh lord I need to right this stuff down and send it to Sony.
So now I feel like thinking of ways on how 2 controllers would be good.
A mixture of the E3 shield game and the shuriken game where one person flings shurkiens, the other uses a shield.
How could that possibly work? The controllers can't tell their relative positions to each other, so you can't use them pointing at each other, and wouldn't it be awkward as a splitscreen experience? And that's if they even CAN pull off something like this with the technology they're using for the Wii U controller!
Or AR. Oh lord I need to right this stuff down and send it to Sony.
Sony actually has done 3DS-style AR in the past(they had an AR game for the PSP), and the NGP has far more advanced AR built into it.
Sony actually has done 3DS-style AR in the past(they had an AR game for the PSP), and the NGP has far more advanced AR built into it.
Yeah I know. Invisimals looks really good among other games. I know Sony's AR skills are more advanced than Nintendo's, which is why I can see Sony doing that idea much better than Nintendo.
Now, there're some rumors that: Wii U 50% More Powerful Than PS3!! mh... If this is true (and this would be typical for Nintendo in the last Years, to not boost Specs, but use some kind Innovation) its technically not really good news, but oh well, its around the same boost as from Gamecube to Wii(50%), which was not bad.
So, this thing is like combining a PS3 and a Wii? Maybe even better? sounds good enough.
According to the popular rumor, the Wii U has a card similar to those found in the ATI Radeon HD 4000 series(while most gaming cards now are in the 5000 series, and you can get the 6000 series if you're Daddy Warbucks). The direct sources for this info seem to be interviews with AMD by people I don't know, so it's possible this isn't true, but if it is then that means we're looking at DirectX 10.1(as opposed to 11). It's definitely more powerful than what we have in the 360 and PS3(and better damn well be, that's 7 year-old tech!), but it should be fairly trivial for Sony and Microsoft to outpace it(and some gaming PCs already do).
According to the popular rumor, the Wii U has a card similar to those found in the ATI Radeon HD 4000 series(while most gaming cards now are in the 5000 series, and you can get the 6000 series if you're Daddy Warbucks). The direct sources for this info seem to be interviews with AMD by people I don't know, so it's possible this isn't true, but if it is then that means we're looking at DirectX 10.1(as opposed to 11). It's definitely more powerful than what we have in the 360 and PS3(and better damn well be, that's 7 year-old tech!), but it should be fairly trivial for Sony and Microsoft to outpace it(and some gaming PCs already do).
The thing about consoles though is that after a while of developing for them, as is my understanding software houses can cut out the API and just write direct to metal, something that can't be done on PC because of the number of possible hardware configurations. This gives more efficent results than PC's using the DirectX API, so we shouldn't compare the cards to to what they can do on PC necessarily.
As for the consoles that come after it being more powerful, that's just how gaming works. Depending on how wide a gap there is between Xbox 3 and PS4 and Wii U's release hopefully they can stay in the game, albeit with slightly tattered graphics.
While the console's exciting and interesting i'm still not sold on it as yet, it looks prohibitively expensive, but we shall see.
Comments
This applies again.
It will do though, for the sorts of applications that Nintendo have in mind.
Yeah, it places restrictions, but Ninty are really good at creating hardware that's just good enough, and still fun in new ways. And they make a profit on every piece of hardware they sell.
How New Ways to Play are Made at Nintendo: Wii U edition
1. Take old, outdated hardware and concepts that have lasted for years
2.
3. Make it Bigger
http://e3.gamespot.com/story/6318760/e3-2011-wii-u-tablet-limited-to-one-per-console/?tag=updates%3Beditor%3Ball%3Btitle%3B5
So I could play Brain Age on my TV? How my wildest dream will have come true.
...dammit, there goes my money. Though, I have no doubt though it'll go back up when the thing actually releases. Their stock was at $75 after the Wii released.
Buy high, sell low, eh?
Nah, I haven't lost too much yet (only a few hundred) so I'll wait it out and hope the Wii U is at least somewhat successful.
Miyamoto says the demand for multiple screentrollers to be used for multiplayer is big and he says they're trying to make friends' screentrollers compatible with the Wii U so you can use more, while apparently per console there is still only going to be one (due to the price maybe, but that's just my speculation).
In any case, I'm still looking forward to it.
It won't happen unless they greatly increase the power of the hardware. Being able to render a game on up to 5 screens at once over wifi is not going to be possible without either making monstrously expensive hardware, or completely awful visuals.
My guess is that it's a technical hurdle that they'll try and do some software wizardry to fix. I could see them trying to switch the majority of active output to one screen for turn-based games, greatly reducing the graphics for multiplayer titles, finding some means of optimization, or using higher-level hardware. We can't really know what's "possible" since, frankly, damn near every aspect of the device is in flux at this point in time. But I also wouldn't particularly count on it, either.
It would easily be possible to support two screens if you halve the FPS from 60 to 30 and give one image to one controller at a time.
If the problem is the transfer time, split the resolution in half. So you could stream to four controllers at the same speed as with 1.
And with neither of those methods I think that the visuals will look "completely awful".
Another option could be to just stream the image material to one controller at the time while the others get blank images. That would of course work for games where the role of the different player changes.
For selecting strategies/players before a football match or displaying inventory screens, I could easily see any of those methods applied without a big drawback on graphical quality.
The Wii U looks like a not this well thought through short to mid term hybrid. Good processing power, soso gfx, good enough for some conventional HD eye candy but also not good enough for some real changes, actually it's outdated already. Memory and storage is a joke again. Input possibilities are known from other hardware platforms already, this time they are combineable.
It's just not exciting. The best you can hope for is that it's cheap, silent, resource friendly and if you can't wait for an emulator, that you will be able to play Pikmin 3 on it.
But for a controller focused console, it's just not exciting enough. The way you steer a game can influence a design a lot and can be a important part of the fun as well but the options more or less already exist, sometimes they are misused (fancy input whilst there is no substance in the game) or often are ignored due to cross release issues - did anyone say least common denominator?!
Of course you can use the controller for cool stuff as well but once you got used to it, it comes down to the core, the soul of a game again all these possibilities can get superfluous pretty fast again. Beside of this quite some developers, for some strange reasons, don't invest enough resources into tweaking the input for traditional input possibilities properly already.
If you give all these possibilities into the hand of lazy, unmotivated, time pressured productions then it can end up in a input/interface mess as well. Simplicity and perfection is best achieved with some reasonable borders because it hopefully forces you thinking about the best solutions. You normally take things away from something until it's perfect and not the other way around.
Nope, my dream console looks different.
As I recall, the original Sixaxis controller for the PS3 had motion controls, but developers didn't utilize them because they were clunky. I forget which game it was, but I read somewhere that some game actually paid the price in sales and playability because the developer insisted on utilizing it despite fans insisting having control with the thumbstick.
EDIT: I've been trying to figure out where I read that, but I believe the game was Lair.
To be honest, $250 a pop for new controllers isn't very appealing.
You want to have a console that does local multiplayer with four people?
$690, just for three extra controllers.
No game developer is going to support an option that requires $690 of extra investment on top of the console itself.
Also, to use a 3DS or DSi as an alternative to an additional controller would not only be expensive, but also limiting on controls and screen size. Any iteration of the DS's screen size is significantly smaller than the WiiU controller, and the DS doesn't even have 2 analog sticks.
A mixture of the E3 shield game and the shuriken game where one person flings shurkiens, the other uses a shield.
Hey that could work for the NGP actually, doesnt that thing have a gyroscope?
Or AR. Oh lord I need to right this stuff down and send it to Sony.
Sony actually has done 3DS-style AR in the past(they had an AR game for the PSP), and the NGP has far more advanced AR built into it.
Yeah I know. Invisimals looks really good among other games. I know Sony's AR skills are more advanced than Nintendo's, which is why I can see Sony doing that idea much better than Nintendo.
Fixed.
I meant power-wise, but yes, it's definitely like a DS.
The thing about consoles though is that after a while of developing for them, as is my understanding software houses can cut out the API and just write direct to metal, something that can't be done on PC because of the number of possible hardware configurations. This gives more efficent results than PC's using the DirectX API, so we shouldn't compare the cards to to what they can do on PC necessarily.
As for the consoles that come after it being more powerful, that's just how gaming works. Depending on how wide a gap there is between Xbox 3 and PS4 and Wii U's release hopefully they can stay in the game, albeit with slightly tattered graphics.
While the console's exciting and interesting i'm still not sold on it as yet, it looks prohibitively expensive, but we shall see.
Course not, but the DirectX version the hardware is known to run on is all we have to go on for now so we look to it as a point of reference.