The major problem with the ONE controller per console thing.

Posted by DekuSword (27 posts) -

When Nintendo released the Wii with motion controls they could not simply be beat by Sony introducing the same concept only improved upon slightly; Nintendo had bundled the new motion controls with their new hardware and therefore already had years of software specifically developed for motion controls. The Wii also had the image with the general public of being *the* motion console.

However, if Nintendo is going to release a console with such an amazing IDEA but severely limits it by only allowing one screen pad controller to be used per console they will be leaving too much room for improvement which Sony and Microsoft can use without much effort.

Using the new controller the Wii U will be able to unleash an amazing potential for single-player games but not for multi-player games. So only 50% of the potential will be realized. The only thing Sony and Microsoft will need to do is make it possible for multiple of these types of controllers to be used on their next consoles to pretty much have the upper hand in every single aspect.

I'm not a fanboy and I want Nintendo to do the right thing, but this is an incredibly stupid move. Look the Wii U is sure to have great graphics and expectedly better than the PS3 and Xbox360's, but I don't think many people can argue that the next Playstation and Xbox will be stronger than the Wii U even though the difference may not be as great as it was this gen.

Let's assume that when the next Playstation and Xbox consoles launch they have: better graphics + 4 player controller screen pads + motion controls. What does Nintendo have to differentiate themselves now? Nintendo will have inferior graphics and inferior screen pad support. Perhaps price will be their differentiating point, but I can guarantee you that price will not enable them to succeed in their goal of appealing to core gamers (casual gamers are much more price sensitive than core gamers are) and gaining a lot of third party support.

Look I know they will have great first party games (which I too love), but we can expect less consoles to be sold than the Wii did; because the Wii had something others didn't and did it right (Motion+ is a small improvement in the entire picture). As a consequence third party support may plunge once again after the initial start of the console and it may start to look a lot like the Gamecube (which I love, but it's not good for us gamers when we want 3rd party games, and it's not good for Nintendo).

#1 Posted by DekuSword (27 posts) -

When Nintendo released the Wii with motion controls they could not simply be beat by Sony introducing the same concept only improved upon slightly; Nintendo had bundled the new motion controls with their new hardware and therefore already had years of software specifically developed for motion controls. The Wii also had the image with the general public of being *the* motion console.

However, if Nintendo is going to release a console with such an amazing IDEA but severely limits it by only allowing one screen pad controller to be used per console they will be leaving too much room for improvement which Sony and Microsoft can use without much effort.

Using the new controller the Wii U will be able to unleash an amazing potential for single-player games but not for multi-player games. So only 50% of the potential will be realized. The only thing Sony and Microsoft will need to do is make it possible for multiple of these types of controllers to be used on their next consoles to pretty much have the upper hand in every single aspect.

I'm not a fanboy and I want Nintendo to do the right thing, but this is an incredibly stupid move. Look the Wii U is sure to have great graphics and expectedly better than the PS3 and Xbox360's, but I don't think many people can argue that the next Playstation and Xbox will be stronger than the Wii U even though the difference may not be as great as it was this gen.

Let's assume that when the next Playstation and Xbox consoles launch they have: better graphics + 4 player controller screen pads + motion controls. What does Nintendo have to differentiate themselves now? Nintendo will have inferior graphics and inferior screen pad support. Perhaps price will be their differentiating point, but I can guarantee you that price will not enable them to succeed in their goal of appealing to core gamers (casual gamers are much more price sensitive than core gamers are) and gaining a lot of third party support.

Look I know they will have great first party games (which I too love), but we can expect less consoles to be sold than the Wii did; because the Wii had something others didn't and did it right (Motion+ is a small improvement in the entire picture). As a consequence third party support may plunge once again after the initial start of the console and it may start to look a lot like the Gamecube (which I love, but it's not good for us gamers when we want 3rd party games, and it's not good for Nintendo).

#2 Posted by Quipido (658 posts) -

I agree that one controller per device sucks, but I don't think next-gen consoles from Microsoft and Sony will go exatly the same road...
 
Nintendo proved that there is a big market for this motion-based stuff, but that doesn't mean that they will be the only one to inovate in this area.
 
 Also, I higly doubt that Wii U will be more powerfull than X360/PS3, but we will have to wait for actual system specs.

#3 Posted by Rhaknar (5939 posts) -

is this confirmed? its absolutely INSANE to cut local multi player... and im a 32 year old guy that never plays locally (well rarely) but still... damn, it really is a different time isnt it :(

#4 Posted by Kandycane2029 (511 posts) -

It all comes down to brand recognition and customer loyalty. Let's face it: More people own a Wii than PS3/360. That's great. As much as many of us hate the "casual gamer", they're here to stay, and they more than likely own a Wii. They'll see the Wii U on the shelves and learn that their Wii accessories and  games are compatible. Boom. Plus another sale. The hardcore market is severely different form the target demographic of the modern Nintendo audience (Is it weird that spellcheck recognizes "Nintendo" now?)  No one should complain. As long as people are experiencing gaming, we have no room to bitch. It cuts down on the "Vidja games maed them do it" bullshit. 
 
Besides, let's face it: For many of us older gamers, Nintendo brought the experience in the day. We gotta believe in them to an extent... (And No, and I am NOT a fanboy. But I know my roots.)

#5 Posted by Meowayne (6084 posts) -
But Sony, Microsoft and the rest of the industry have stopped caring about singleplayer and local multiplayer years ago. Thats not where the money is. Nintendis decision to not put the money into making the View powerful enough to stream/eender more than one game world is interedting, but certainly has good reasons. Besides, we still dint know the details. It might very well be that the console is only limited to one controller as tv replacement, while having multiple HUDlike controllers registered is possible. They might also change that. The console is still a year away.
#6 Posted by clstirens (847 posts) -
@Rhaknar: Right now they're saying only one screen controller. One game at e3 even had 5-person local multiplayer, 1 Wii U controller, 4 wiimotes
#7 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2699 posts) -

The multi-controller argument is really exclusive to Nintendo's consoles. It's only a small niche of Xbox/PS3 gamers that ever use multiple controllers. They're playing online multiplayer, not couch. This is why there are always like three guys that bitch when a new game comes out without local coop, but largely no one else gives a shit.

That said, I hope MS and Sony don't bother improving upon Nintendo's crap this time. I still may or may not buy a Wii U, but don't spoil real consoles by adding in gimmicky shit.

#8 Posted by PenguinDust (12629 posts) -
@Rhaknar said:
is this confirmed? its absolutely INSANE to cut local multi player... and im a 32 year old guy that never plays locally (well rarely) but still... damn, it really is a different time isnt it :(
Yeah, I'm not exactly sure if this is a hardware issue or if Nintendo is just choosing to focus on 1 controller per console at this time.  If they have the ability to utilize more than one controller, then people start doing the math and that can make consumers pretty sour to the potential cost.  If you remember when the Playstation Move announced its price per unit, suddenly everyone was figuring out that the peripherals for a family of 4 could cost more than the PS3 itself.  That's not a way to assure your customer base that you're making a product with their needs in mind.  I'm not going to say the rumors aren't true, but Nintendo has been too cagey on the details for me to trust every criticism I've heard on the subject.  It makes sense to me that they'd want to limit all conversation to the gaming experience people can have with the Wii U out of the box, especially Wii owners looking to upgrade. 
#9 Edited by AndrewB (7689 posts) -

The screen controller isn't the revelation that motion controls could have been/will be some day, so I'd say that Sony and Microsoft won't even touch it and the argument is moot. It's not like the system can only use one controller period, just one separate screened one. There are already plenty of things they've shown that look interesting, and some of them *because* only one player has the extra screen to work with. 
 
I'd also be willing to be it's a hardware limitation. No currently available consumer wireless technology could push gameplay wirelessly to multiple screens without a ton of lag issues.

#10 Posted by Kjellm87 (1722 posts) -

It will be fine, chill "hardcorez" ಠ_ಠ

#11 Posted by VilhelmNielsen (1743 posts) -

Probably comes down to hardware. If the thing has to render 4 separate images, it would probably dumb down the quality significantly.

#12 Posted by Creamypies (4091 posts) -

Why's everyone freaking out? The console allows 5 player local multiplayer.

Just means that only one person uses the new controller, everyone else just uses Wii remotes.

#13 Posted by JoeyRavn (4983 posts) -

@VilhelmNielsen said:

Probably comes down to hardware. If the thing has to render 4 separate images, it would probably dumb down the quality significantly.

Seems like a perfectly reasonable and logical explanation, if you ask me.

#14 Posted by Law313 (110 posts) -
@creamypies said:

Why's everyone freaking out? The console allows 5 player local multiplayer.

Just means that only one person uses the new controller, everyone else just uses Wii remotes.

From what I can tell the system can recognize any combination of Wii-motes and Touch-Screen controllers. (Since each developer can use any combination for their game)
#15 Posted by Creamypies (4091 posts) -
@Law313 said:
@creamypies said:

Why's everyone freaking out? The console allows 5 player local multiplayer.

Just means that only one person uses the new controller, everyone else just uses Wii remotes.

From what I can tell the system can recognize any combination of Wii-motes and Touch-Screen controllers. (Since each developer can use any combination for their game)
This story suggests differently.
#16 Posted by blueduck (964 posts) -
@Kandycane2029 said:
It all comes down to brand recognition and customer loyalty. Let's face it: More people own a Wii than PS3/360. That's great. As much as many of us hate the "casual gamer", they're here to stay, and they more than likely own a Wii. They'll see the Wii U on the shelves and learn that their Wii accessories and  games are compatible. Boom. Plus another sale. The hardcore market is severely different form the target demographic of the modern Nintendo audience (Is it weird that spellcheck recognizes "Nintendo" now?)  No one should complain. As long as people are experiencing gaming, we have no room to bitch. It cuts down on the "Vidja games maed them do it" bullshit.   Besides, let's face it: For many of us older gamers, Nintendo brought the experience in the day. We gotta believe in them to an extent... (And No, and I am NOT a fanboy. But I know my roots.)
So what you're saying is that the people who were responsible for the Wii selling so much (women, older men, parents of little children) will see this 300-400 dollar system that uses the same stuff they already bought just a little  bit ago and automatically want to buy it? The Wii sold so well because it became the new tickle me elmo for awhile or the it toy to have and unless the Wii U gets lucky enough to become that again it won't sell nearly as much. They're trying to sell it on two things. The first thing is it has better graphics which won't matter to anyone really and the second and major thing is the tablet controller. If you want to know how well this thing is going to sell all you have to do is answer this question would a non-gamer you know who bought a Wii spend 300-400 dollars on this tablet and better graphics when they're still playing the same games with the same controllers on it?
#17 Posted by DekuSword (27 posts) -

Like some people already suggested I can completely understand the hardware limiting streaming 4 high graphic images to 4 different controllers.
However, I do at least expect to be able to use 4 of these new pads with at least some kind of mini-map or equipment screen on them even if they are made up of just sprites. By allowing this I do believe a lot of concern would disappear.
 
I also agree with the fact that casual Wii owners are not just going to buy a Wii U; In fact I believe Nintendo is going to have a very difficult time selling any new console to the casual crowd for quite a while. Nintendo knows this and this is precisely the reason why they are trying to cater to the "hardcore" again, without their loyal fan-base they are lost. The grannies and grandpas, the house-wives, and young families have a Wii with some fun multi-player games, and I see absolutely no reason for them to dish out a lot of money to buy this thing.

#18 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
@Kjellm87 said:

It will be fine, chill "hardcorez" ಠ_ಠ

#19 Posted by DefaultProphet (551 posts) -

Do you really believe that the WiiU controller concept will catch on to that extent? I can't see it at all.

#20 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
@DefaultProphet said:

Do you really believe that the WiiU controller concept will catch on to that extent? I can't see it at all.

Im sure you didn't see it for Kinect or the original Wii or the DS, either. Most "real gamers" have a dismal track record of "expert opinions".
#21 Posted by sarahsdad (1121 posts) -
@Rolyatkcinmai said:

It's only a small niche of Xbox/PS3 gamers that ever use multiple controllers. They're playing online multiplayer, not couch. This is why there are always like three guys that bitch when a new game comes out without local coop, but largely no one else gives a shit.

This is my impression as well.
Also, true or not, Nintendo seems to feel that there's nothing inherently wrong with the Wiimote/nunchuck combo for controlling games. Seems they felt the main issue was the power of the current system.
#22 Posted by phish09 (1110 posts) -

It's not "one controller per console" actually, based on the demos they were showing it looks like it allows 5 controllers per console and I think that's a step up from what Sony and Microsoft are offering right now.  Sure, you can only use one of the WiiU screen controllers at a time, but I'm  it won't affect how you play those games in a negative way since their design will be based. 

#23 Posted by Law313 (110 posts) -
@sarahsdad said:
@Rolyatkcinmai said:

It's only a small niche of Xbox/PS3 gamers that ever use multiple controllers. They're playing online multiplayer, not couch. This is why there are always like three guys that bitch when a new game comes out without local coop, but largely no one else gives a shit.

This is my impression as well. Also, true or not, Nintendo seems to feel that there's nothing inherently wrong with the Wiimote/nunchuck combo for controlling games. Seems they felt the main issue was the power of the current system.
My problem with that is what happens to the gamer that doesnt already own a Wii(like myself). So when I pick up my Wii U at launch, I have to buy a few Wii-motes just to play the games I want? Insane Nintendo.
#24 Edited by Law313 (110 posts) -
@ryanwho said:

@DefaultProphet said:

Do you really believe that the WiiU controller concept will catch on to that extent? I can't see it at all.

Im sure you didn't see it for Kinect or the original Wii or the DS, either. Most "real gamers" have a dismal track record of "expert opinions".
My arguement for that is this:
1. Kincet: Sure it sold well, but have failed to deliver any revolutionary game experience or enhance existing ones.(I dont need Kinect to modify my guns on Ghost Recon or dance the night away in DC)
2. Wii: Same as above. it sold well but was based solely on gimmicks.
3. DS: Again, the system launched with impressive never-before-seen tech, only to have it be wasted on gimmicks. 
I will even add the 3DS to this list: Gaming journalists and fans alike were stunned at 3Dglassesless tech, only to have NO games available
 
I love how Nintendo can deliver new experiences, but just like the DS and Wii, I can see the Wii U controller being nothing more than a mini-map or an inventory screen. 
You can talk about sells all you want but as a gamer Im worried about game play improvements, new tech, and a great experience-not how much Reggie has in his bank account.
#25 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2699 posts) -

@Law313: I bet it will come with one or two Wii Remotes. Those things must cost Nintendo about fifty cents to make.

However, if they want it to catch on for third party support in real games, they'll have to release a real controller of some type. Playing, for instance, Call of Duty on that new controller would be hell (only two top buttons, the analog sticks are directly above the buttons and dpad).

#26 Posted by Law313 (110 posts) -
@Rolyatkcinmai said:

@Law313: I bet it will come with one or two Wii Remotes. Those things must cost Nintendo about fifty cents to make.

However, if they want it to catch on for third party support in real games, they'll have to release a real controller of some type. Playing, for instance, Call of Duty on that new controller would be hell (only two top buttons, the analog sticks are directly above the buttons and dpad).

Thats the thing Im most worried about. Especially since its suppose to cater to the hardcore. Another problem is price. The Wii U CANNOT launch above $300. It wouldn't be worth it. Especially if you think about the price drop thats GOING TO HAPPEN leading up to the Wii U launch. With the 360 and PS3 @ $250-300, whats the appeal of this console? Using your example, does Infinity Ward have to design the game around multiple controllers? Not to mention the analogs don't click in.(I never understood why Nintendo refuse to add that.)
#27 Posted by HatKing (6108 posts) -
@Rolyatkcinmai said:

The multi-controller argument is really exclusive to Nintendo's consoles. It's only a small niche of Xbox/PS3 gamers that ever use multiple controllers. They're playing online multiplayer, not couch. This is why there are always like three guys that bitch when a new game comes out without local coop, but largely no one else gives a shit.

That said, I hope MS and Sony don't bother improving upon Nintendo's crap this time. I still may or may not buy a Wii U, but don't spoil real consoles by adding in gimmicky shit.

You do realize that there is a very significant portion of people who never connect their consoles to the internet, right?  There is also a significant portion who do not subscribe to Xbox Live Gold and therefore are restricted to playing local games.  Here is and article that shows a little more than half of the 360 owners are Xbox Live members (it's unclear if they're counting Silver and Gold membership, but I'd assume so).  Granted that article is a little dated, but I doubt the statistics have changed too wildly.  My point is that calling local multiplayer irrelevant or restricted to a small niche is incredibly... wrong.    

Besides, if I have a friend, a roommate or a girlfriend who wants to sit down next to me and join in on the experience I'm having they should be allowed to.  That has nothing to do with me playing games online or not, the two are far from mutually exclusive.
#28 Posted by DeeGee (2140 posts) -

In reality, it supports five controllers, so local multiplayer is better then ever.

#29 Posted by sarahsdad (1121 posts) -
@Law313 said:
@sarahsdad said:
@Rolyatkcinmai said:

It's only a small niche of Xbox/PS3 gamers that ever use multiple controllers. They're playing online multiplayer, not couch. This is why there are always like three guys that bitch when a new game comes out without local coop, but largely no one else gives a shit.

This is my impression as well. Also, true or not, Nintendo seems to feel that there's nothing inherently wrong with the Wiimote/nunchuck combo for controlling games. Seems they felt the main issue was the power of the current system.
My problem with that is what happens to the gamer that doesnt already own a Wii(like myself). So when I pick up my Wii U at launch, I have to buy a few Wii-motes just to play the games I want? Insane Nintendo.
The same thing could be said for almost any console. If you only own a PS3, and your buddy wants to invite you over for a round of split-screen Halo, one of you needs to buy a spare controller. Not saying that having two controllers bundled in with a console wouldn't be nice, but like Rolyatkcinmai said, how often does it happen that you get to that rock and a hard place?
#30 Posted by LiquidPrince (16175 posts) -

Am I the only one thinking the graphics on the Wii U won't be much better then current 360.PS3's based on the trailers they showed at E3?

#31 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2699 posts) -

@LiquidPrince said:

Am I the only one thinking the graphics on the Wii U won't be much better then current 360.PS3's based on the trailers they showed at E3?

Everyone knows and has been thinking that for the last few weeks.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.