Wii U

I'm kinda glad to see smart forum members who actually notices the CONSOLE itself, lol...Seriously, I go to other forums and they're all like "this is stoopid, i wanted a new console!!1!1 n0t anoother contoler!" (...yeah I suck at n00b typing. >_>)

The direction Nintendo's trying to go in here worries me, to be honest.  The controllers will be expensive as heck, and they're trying to move into a market that's already well-occupied while risking losing their current market, especially what with the price this will have.  The idea may appeal to "intense gamers", but it'll take more than "just as good" to get the mass market to buy one. 

Personally, I'm burned out on everything that has to do with touch screens.  For instance, why does the Vita feel the need to have something as useless as a touch screen on the back?

Also, responding to a particular point:

Appeals to casual players: Nintendo demonstrated a Wii Sports game where you would set the controller on the floor, and the screen would display the lie of the golf ball, and you'd hit the ball using the Wii remote. There's still the casual appeal of the Wii, enhanced by new features.

To me, that sounds like more of a pain in the butt, to be honest.  I doubt the casual market would consider this kind of complexity to be fun.  The fun of Wii Sports was in its straightforwardness and its party appeal, and this kind of thing sounds like it goes against that. 

I'm not sure how placing a controller on the floor is a pain in the butt, but okay.

I'm not sure how placing a controller on the floor is a pain in the butt, but okay.

Maybe if you're really old and bending over causes debilitating pain?

I'm not sure how placing a controller on the floor is a pain in the butt, but okay.

I guess what I mean is that more complexity and more peripheral-based immersion doesn't necessarily make it more fun, especially for an audience who bought the Wii because it was cheap and accessible.  Additionally, I'd be worried about someone stepping on it and damaging the screen.  I guess what I mean is thinking from the mindset of a consumer instead of a heavy gamer, the idea doesn't do much for me, if anything at all.  It's a unique way to play, but is it really more fun? 

Maybe if you're really old and bending over causes debilitating pain?

Hey, that *was* part of the Wii's audience.   

Personally I think the whole placing the controller on the floor thing was just to show how the Wiimote and the new control system can work in tandem. It's not really practical and this application I don't think would enhance gameplay at all really.

 Also, as most of my my info comes form posts on TIGS and nobody here has mentioned it yet, you can only have one of these screen things, and everybody else has to use Wiimote/Nunchuk combos for their controls. I'm not sure how I feel about this. I understand the technical limitations of streaming content to more than one device at a time, but unless they present a screenless new controller the new control system (aside from the touch/camera elements) would be rather underutilised in local multiplayer. I don't know. It's probably fine.

you can only have one of these screen things

That actually makes me feel a little better about it, because then you'd only have to buy one of those expensive screens. 

I think the Classic Controller has the same button setup without the screen anyways, so that wouldn't get in the way of multiplayer stuff unless they needed to use the touch screen. 

I find it interesting for three reasons:

- Various innovation can could prove themselves useful in the future (or not, depends on how the devs will use that)
- Playing without a TV.
- You can draw on the screen. (Graphic tablet with screens are excessively expensive.)

But I'm  "meh" for one reason.

- The games. I don't have a Wii because it had a grand total of 0 games I was interested in. I'm not saying they were bad, it's just that it wasn't my cup of tea.


I probably won't buy it just after the release, I'll wait for the game catalog to grow up a bit and show me if the games will be interesting for me or not.
I'm also curious about the price... because if you're a casual player* like me you don't want to spend a fluffton of money on these fancy things...


* Casual like "not playing a lot" heh, not casual like "buying a €500+ tablet to play backgammon, nintendogs or tennis."

If it's true that you can only use one screened controller, I think Nintendo majorly dropped the ball.  They should have stuck with something like the Wiimote+Nunchuck.  Split-screen multiplayer would be a complete mess if one player is forced to use a completely different type of controller; best-case scenario is that all players can use W+N combo (or classic controller), and then the new controller is completely wasted.

I've owned every Nintendo console since the SNES and every major Nintendo handheld ever (still not a 3DS, though I plan to), but Nintendo has some convincing to do.

Last minute addendum: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-06-09-only-one-wii-u-controller-per-console
Crap.

I expect it will vary from game to game. With the advent of online multiplayer that actually works, split screen gaming will become less necessary. Also I expect you wouldn't be forced to use the controller for multiplayer, unless the game was utilising it in some special way. I'm quite a fan of asymmetrical multiplayer so this isn't necessarily a problem. It's just a shame you can't have lots of them to have local multiplayer without screen watching for example.

At least it sounds like the pricing will be reasonable.

If it's true that you can only use one screened controller, I think Nintendo majorly dropped the ball.  They should have stuck with something like the Wiimote+Nunchuck.  Split-screen multiplayer would be a complete mess if one player is forced to use a completely different type of controller; best-case scenario is that all players can use W+N combo (or classic controller), and then the new controller is completely wasted.

I've owned every Nintendo console since the SNES and every major Nintendo handheld ever (still not a 3DS, though I plan to), but Nintendo has some convincing to do.

Last minute addendum: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-06-09-only-one-wii-u-controller-per-console
Crap.

Well, they're thinking about using 3DSes as controllers as well...so, I'm still hoping for Four Swords. xD

I would prefer a straight Four Swords 3DS than a Four Swords for Wii U where the other three players need a 3DS anyways.

Also I expect you wouldn't be forced to use the controller for multiplayer, unless the game was utilising it in some special way.

That's probably true, but then you'd have even less use for the expensive-looking new controller.

I heard Nintendo will put out a Pikmin game for Wii U. That sounds neat.

Smash Brothers, although still being planned, sounds like the best game for Wii U. I'm just glad the console is getting 3rd party support.

Only one Wii U controller per console...

http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/220292/e3-2011-only-one-touchscreen-controller-per-wii-u/

Wow, that is amazing. I cant wait to get it when it comes out. The one thing that l think lets it down is the thickness. If you look at the image of the side it is as big as a normal Wii console. Also, You cant play it without connecting to a TV which is quite bad. I would still give it 4 stars.