The Wii U Controller: The Thin Client of the Future?

Posted by MrCHUP0N (244 posts) -

It's rare that I blog anywhere nowadays, but sometimes all it takes is a bombastic announcement and reveal to get me all up in arms again. Nevertheless, I'll always be late to the party, so I'm sure that my general mixed reactions to Nintendo's new Wii U interface have already been echoed elsewhere. I like the concept. I'm NOT feeling the form factor. I'm hearing the ergonomics are still great, so I'm hopeful. But I'm anxious about the price per controller. Will it be just another port machine now, except this time you get the same game... with a map? (Remember the doubts that arose during DS launch?) Will it still be able to significantly differentiate itself from its once-again competitors? Is this TOO bombastic a move on Nintendo's part? Will it part the seas and sell in droves like its predecessor?

I'll skip all of that. Instead, what's sticking out in my mind as THE intriguing aspect of this whole reveal--at least to me, personally--is the continuing maturation of the ability to stream dynamic content to a remote screen.

Let me be specific. I don't mean browsing the web and seeing your email widgets update in real time on your Xoom or iPad. I'm not talking about watching Netflix or Hulu on your iPhone. When I say "dynamic content" I'm talking about videogame graphics, which are calculated and pushed out to a display in real-time. I'm talking about calculating ginormous quantities of polygons, applying several layers of textures, and spitting that glory out at 30 frames per second (60, if you're nasty). It's a trend that started with the Playstation 3 and PSP Remote Play, when people learned how to play Lair while dropping their kids off at the pool. Now we're looking at the potential of zapping 1080p graphics over to a remote display, wirelessly, and I look forward to the trends that these capabilities could set if the Wii U succeeds in bringing it mainstream.

For us who play videogames, the benefits are obvious. Nintendo highlighted them during its press conference already: Play a game on your TV, then switch over to your controller seamlessly when your roommate, friend, significant other or family member decides she/he/it wants to watch the Lakers get smacked down on ESPN, and keep slicing up octoroks without having to wait for the big screen to be available again. Imagine PC games adopting this trend, giving you the ability to guarantee yourself (with enough cash) the luxury of the best possible visuals while lying in bed (the necessity for a viable mouse-and-keyboard combination duly noted). If you're wondering why this is such a big deal, the important thing to remember is that the set top box is the one crunching most of the numbers. Granted, the price per controller is still unknown, but this generally means that state-of-the-art visuals from anywhere in the house just became more affordable. And for as powerful as tablets are getting, you can be sure that workstation-sized tech will always be noticeably more powerful than its mobile contemporary.

Will this spur quicker research and development of high-bandwidth wireless technologies that enable this type of connection to happen over a distance greater than that between the TV stand and your couch? If OnLive stays, er, alive, long enough, could it take advantage of such wireless bandwidth if it's feasible to support such an infrastructure fiscally? As storage moves to a wireless cloud, will we return to a real age of thin-client architecture--now wireless--when it comes to processing power, but with inexpensive devices fast enough to keep up?

But I'm getting ahead of myself--that's all pie in the sky. But even within local confines, it's exciting. Right now I'm just excited about the implications of playing high-res videogames anywhere in the house OR on the TV. I'm excited about the push for acceptance of wireless connections between any display and any piece of hardware, whether it be a PC, Blu-Ray player or other videogame console with no lag to impact the interactivity. All of those crappy wires? Gone--unnecessary. For those in the 3D modeling business, imagine a Pixar office where you can design and render a character, in a meeting down the hall where you'll show it off to your fellow design teammates, on something as portable as an iPad but at one fifth the price.

At a high level, Nintendo isn't necessarily starting anything unheard of technologically. Thin client architecture is an ancient concept (in tech years). We already had Sony's Remote Play. But as it did with motion control; as Apple did with the tablet PC; as Sony did with the Walkman; Nintendo has the potential to push an idea into the mainstream where people will understand and appreciate its potency--where they will get, finally, why they should care.

#1 Posted by MrCHUP0N (244 posts) -

It's rare that I blog anywhere nowadays, but sometimes all it takes is a bombastic announcement and reveal to get me all up in arms again. Nevertheless, I'll always be late to the party, so I'm sure that my general mixed reactions to Nintendo's new Wii U interface have already been echoed elsewhere. I like the concept. I'm NOT feeling the form factor. I'm hearing the ergonomics are still great, so I'm hopeful. But I'm anxious about the price per controller. Will it be just another port machine now, except this time you get the same game... with a map? (Remember the doubts that arose during DS launch?) Will it still be able to significantly differentiate itself from its once-again competitors? Is this TOO bombastic a move on Nintendo's part? Will it part the seas and sell in droves like its predecessor?

I'll skip all of that. Instead, what's sticking out in my mind as THE intriguing aspect of this whole reveal--at least to me, personally--is the continuing maturation of the ability to stream dynamic content to a remote screen.

Let me be specific. I don't mean browsing the web and seeing your email widgets update in real time on your Xoom or iPad. I'm not talking about watching Netflix or Hulu on your iPhone. When I say "dynamic content" I'm talking about videogame graphics, which are calculated and pushed out to a display in real-time. I'm talking about calculating ginormous quantities of polygons, applying several layers of textures, and spitting that glory out at 30 frames per second (60, if you're nasty). It's a trend that started with the Playstation 3 and PSP Remote Play, when people learned how to play Lair while dropping their kids off at the pool. Now we're looking at the potential of zapping 1080p graphics over to a remote display, wirelessly, and I look forward to the trends that these capabilities could set if the Wii U succeeds in bringing it mainstream.

For us who play videogames, the benefits are obvious. Nintendo highlighted them during its press conference already: Play a game on your TV, then switch over to your controller seamlessly when your roommate, friend, significant other or family member decides she/he/it wants to watch the Lakers get smacked down on ESPN, and keep slicing up octoroks without having to wait for the big screen to be available again. Imagine PC games adopting this trend, giving you the ability to guarantee yourself (with enough cash) the luxury of the best possible visuals while lying in bed (the necessity for a viable mouse-and-keyboard combination duly noted). If you're wondering why this is such a big deal, the important thing to remember is that the set top box is the one crunching most of the numbers. Granted, the price per controller is still unknown, but this generally means that state-of-the-art visuals from anywhere in the house just became more affordable. And for as powerful as tablets are getting, you can be sure that workstation-sized tech will always be noticeably more powerful than its mobile contemporary.

Will this spur quicker research and development of high-bandwidth wireless technologies that enable this type of connection to happen over a distance greater than that between the TV stand and your couch? If OnLive stays, er, alive, long enough, could it take advantage of such wireless bandwidth if it's feasible to support such an infrastructure fiscally? As storage moves to a wireless cloud, will we return to a real age of thin-client architecture--now wireless--when it comes to processing power, but with inexpensive devices fast enough to keep up?

But I'm getting ahead of myself--that's all pie in the sky. But even within local confines, it's exciting. Right now I'm just excited about the implications of playing high-res videogames anywhere in the house OR on the TV. I'm excited about the push for acceptance of wireless connections between any display and any piece of hardware, whether it be a PC, Blu-Ray player or other videogame console with no lag to impact the interactivity. All of those crappy wires? Gone--unnecessary. For those in the 3D modeling business, imagine a Pixar office where you can design and render a character, in a meeting down the hall where you'll show it off to your fellow design teammates, on something as portable as an iPad but at one fifth the price.

At a high level, Nintendo isn't necessarily starting anything unheard of technologically. Thin client architecture is an ancient concept (in tech years). We already had Sony's Remote Play. But as it did with motion control; as Apple did with the tablet PC; as Sony did with the Walkman; Nintendo has the potential to push an idea into the mainstream where people will understand and appreciate its potency--where they will get, finally, why they should care.

#2 Posted by aspro73 (20 posts) -

Everything about the U is absurd.  Nintendo clearly was not ready to show it, had no handle on even basic questions about it.  The form factor is ludicrous, it's only slightly smaller than the original Atari Lynx.
 
By the time it comes out, Apple will be up to iPad 3 at least, and if they are selling for under $500 where's the value for Mom's (their new target audience) to shell out $300 for this (when considering a gaming interface for a child).

#3 Posted by aspro73 (20 posts) -

The iPad is not a competitor for the U for the likes of you and I, but it is for the Moms who buy this stuff for their kids.

#4 Posted by MrCHUP0N (244 posts) -

I forgot to mention that comment. How is the "mom" the "new" target audience, when that's been the original Wii's target audience for quite a while now--and the gamers they "left behind" (so to speak) is now being targeted again? Admittedly, the "hardcore" reel they threw in there was shoddy--but I think the "absurd" comment is a bit hasty and shortsighted.

Also I have no idea where my other comment went... internet FTL? :(

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.