Ubisoft Says Gamers Just Don't Understand The Wii U

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5
 

"The whole idea of the asymmetrical gameplay and using two screens to do two very different things is not simple to explain to people."

Only if you're explaining it to a fucking idiot. People asking "What's the point?" is not necessarily a sign that they've misunderstood, but also a sign that perhaps it really is just pointless.

It's not doing well because of a) the Wii, and b) most people recognise that switching between two screens is a detracting gimmick.

The Dept of what you can do with it. Yes I get it, it is an tablet so you can combine television with tablet. You can do allot more with it even.

But I am going to be quite simple about this, it is the games that need to show the dept. If the tablet is mere an inventory that is always there while the real game plays on the television screen it is hardly to be called "dept." Smart use? Yes but you can do more with it

To do more with it game developers need to do more with it. Just like as with the second screen on the DS some games make genius use from it others..others use it as Menu/Inventory area.

So show us what you can, show us what you can do with it. It might take a few failed attempts and ideas. So maybe bring out some smaller games that allow you to put less money into each game but to use them as breeding ground for ideas. Think as an Indie there.. some games might indeed fail and their ideas proven not working. Other ideas might lead to using said methods in bigger games.

In short bring out an "small game package" with a number of test games. See how people react, allow them to vote on what game they liked the most. And see what method works! Gamers buy the whole deal, the whole package of games and you find out what actually works.

Price it decently and it will work. That and like those "one month game" projects. Keep development of these test cases short.. sell it as an experiment. You say to the buying it "these games are made in one month and have each different methods of gameplay. Please vote on what one you like the most and tell us why"

Then later you always can take the winning games and sell it for a $5 each to those who just want to play said game.

The whole "you have to try it before you understand" angle would hold more water if there was any way for me to play it before I bought it.

umm probably cuz "Wii" is a part of its name lol

The title's a bit poorly worded, isn't it? As much as I'd love to smear shit over Ubisoft, all they're really saying is don't knock it 'til you've tried it.

But yeah, I have tried the Wii U, and I didn't like it at all. So I suppose I can't agree with them either way. I'd add in a lengthy paragraph about unhelpful gimmicks and ergonomics but I don't think it needs to be done.

Lets just say I've chosen to put my limited time and money into other things, namely my PC. What more is there that is needed to be understood?

Eh, that might be a reason. I dunno. I'm not an expert.

In MY case, the reason I have yet to buy a Wii U is because I do not have 5000 swedish crowns kicking around, and I was right in my assumption that I would not be able to ask for something that pricey for christmas.

But if I had money... I would probably buy a PlayStation 3. That I at least have some games for (me and my brothers got one for christmas a few years back, they kept it when I moved away from home).

Once you reveal the next Zelda/Super Smash Bros., though...

Here is where Nintendo have got their logic backwards.

Wii was much less powerful for about 50% less than Sony/Microsoft offerings

WiiU is only a little bit more powerful to cost 50% more than Sony/Microsoft offerings

Doesn't really work both ways.

And I'm going to head off the nintendo-defence-force right now, I don't care if Nintenodo declared this is an 8th gen console or even if they declare it's a 99th gen console, the fact is the actual performance demonstrated is not the huge leap in graphical performance you typically expect with being "a generation ahead of Xbox 360 or PS3". So in conclusion citing a console as next-gen is utterly pointless. Don't ever say next-gen graphics as Nintendo could simply re-release the NES as their 9th gen system and it can't even do 3D rendering.

PGR3, a launch titles for Xbox 360 right out the gate showed the greater capability of Xbox 360 hardware.

WiiU has nothing even in the pipeline that can demonstrate such a leap in capability, from all appearances it's simply on par with Xbox 360 and PS3, yet much more expensive.

Why are we still bumping this thread since it's been going on for 6 days already and all discussion values have pretty much been discussed and met.

Some people like nintendo and will most likely buy the Wii U(including myself with it being my first proper Nitendo home console) and some people who just plain dislike it and somehow need to put down the other crowd.

On the surface it also seems very much like just a periphial for the Wii, except it has limited titles and you have to buy an entire new console...

Not to mention, lots of us have learnt our lesson about the console rush and arent eager to get things immediately, especially not the first one out the gate. PS4 and Xbox 720 are looking to be expensive, so lots of buyers are waiting for all of them to be on the market and see where to put their money.

The Dept of what you can do with it. Yes I get it, it is an tablet so you can combine television with tablet.

Well... such a combination may be the intention but it's not quite the result.

A tablet is more than just "a touchscreen".

Tablets have existed since the early 90's but no one cared about them for their bulk, weight, and poor battery life. People only care about tablets today for how the attributes they have today. Attributes that don't apply to the WiiU.

+People go crazy about the compactness and lightweight iPad and other tablets
-yet for a 7inch screen the WiiU controller is very bulky and quite a bit heavier. In fact very heavy for what's supposed to be hand held for extended periods.

+They marvel at the long battery life and portability of tablets
-yet WiiU is bound within the range of the WiiU console and has very poor battery life for a tablet and especially for a console controller.

+Tablet has had major appeal with a huge market of cheap-to-free apps from such a wide variety of developers.
-WiiU has essentially the same software model as all prior consoles, $60 per games and sparse developer support.

+Apple set the standard with capacitive touchscreen with multi touch using pinch to zoom, rotate, and precision even with a fingertip
-WiiU has a cheap resistive touchscreen which cannot handle multi-touch and needs a stylus for precision

And not forgetting how tablets existed in the niche of portability while WiiU controller is of course wireless but you can't exactly take it on the road.

To do more with it game developers need to do more with it. Just like as with the second screen on the DS some games make genius use from it others..others use it as Menu/Inventory area.

Well DS didn't try to be "oh, were a handheld console, and.." it was just a DS, it was it's own thing. It had a touchscreen, not a design concept of a whole separate device bolted on.

I can see the market for DS and subsequent 3DS, they are cheap and low risk for parents to get their kids. Not like a smartphone which has a bit too much adult stuff or worry about communication.

But WiiU cannot be targeted as much for kids. For one I doubt a smaller kid could even USE the huge WiiU controller with any utility and the living room space tends to be dominated by the more grown ups, Wii-1 had obvious family friendly entertainment appeal that WiiU's singular touchscreen controller seems contradictory with.

There is also a confused message, is this WiiU for someone who may be banished by low household status from using the TV so they can just use the controller screen and console? Or is it something where games NEED both screens. DS never had the problem where the top screen might not be used at any time.

And of course, how many actually care about a second touchcreen when the huge HD screen is hardly lacking in ability to transfer information. And is a touchcreen actually greater facility for things like inventory selection? Many games (like Arkham Asylum) have shown how useful the D-pad is for such things, for one you don't have to look at a D-pad, you can feel if you are pushing the right parts unlike a touchcreen where any section feels identical to any other. That's more efficient use of your different senses rather than overloading just visual.

Twin thumbsticks and shoulder buttons are a pretty damn good way of interacting with a game, augmented with D-pad and face buttons. A touchscreen in the middle is less of an addition to that and more of a side-show where you have to move hand position and where you are looking to use properly.

Live inventory screens have been mentioned but you don't need a separate screen for that, just off the top of my head, Minecraft.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7aAmL1_MGWE/UKU_e1g7c_I/AAAAAAAAAKQ/Gv8L7Apn7Us/s1600/inventory.jpg

When you spend years and years jerking off to the fucking Rabbids instead of making a proper fucking Rayman game, you've pretty much lost the right to having an opinion or authority on anything.

So... I ignored this topic for a while, because the main point is... Meh.

But anyone else find it ironic that it's ubisoft saying this?

The same Ubisoft that decided they wouldn't release the Wii U 'exclusive' of Rayman Legends, in favour of making it multi-platform...

Then announces that not only is it no longer exclusive, but it will now be delayed 7 months even though you already had it finished?!

Tell you what ubisoft.

If you're so concerned about people not understanding the Wii U, how about you put your money where your mouth is, and NOT SCREW OVER YOUR FANS THAT ACTUALLY OWN ONE!

Seriously. What the hell.

You know Gamers are the same
No matter time nor place
They don't understand that us pubss
Are going to make some mistakes
So to you, publishers all across the land
There's no need to argue
Gamers just don't understand

...I'm sorry for that.

Treblaine:

+People go crazy about the compactness and lightweight iPad and other tablets
-yet for a 7inch screen the WiiU controller is very bulky and quite a bit heavier. In fact very heavy for what's supposed to be hand held for extended periods.

Really? Where are you getting this from? The common consensus on the Gamepad is that it's surprisingly light given its heft. Having tried one at the local HMV, I concur with this.

-WiiU has essentially the same software model as all prior consoles, $60 per games and sparse developer support.

It's also got the most indie-friendly market place out of all the consoles, and new indie games are being announced for it on a seemingly daily basis.

+Apple set the standard with capacitive touchscreen with multi touch using pinch to zoom, rotate, and precision even with a fingertip
-WiiU has a cheap resistive touchscreen which cannot handle multi-touch and needs a stylus for precision

Multi-touch is great if you want to browse the internet, or update your Facebook status on the go. It's crap if you want to use a stylus for anything. I've got a Galaxy Note, and while it's a great phone, the stylus works like crap with it. Nintendo thinks a stylus works better for most of the games on their systems, like Brain Age or Professor Layton, so a resistive touchscreen is therefore the better otpion.

And not forgetting how tablets existed in the niche of portability while WiiU controller is of course wireless but you can't exactly take it on the road.

You can, however, take it to the toilet.

There is also a confused message, is this WiiU for someone who may be banished by low household status from using the TV so they can just use the controller screen and console? Or is it something where games NEED both screens.

Perhaps, just perhaps, Nintendo have left that up to the discretion of the developers? Because if they were mandating that developers must use the touchscreen in one particular way, I'm sure you'd be in total support of that as a better option, right?

And of course, how many actually care about a second touchcreen when the huge HD screen is hardly lacking in ability to transfer information. And is a touchcreen actually greater facility for things like inventory selection? Many games (like Arkham Asylum) have shown how useful the D-pad is for such things, for one you don't have to look at a D-pad, you can feel if you are pushing the right parts unlike a touchcreen where any section feels identical to any other. That's more efficient use of your different senses rather than overloading just visual.

Arkham Asylum only ever offers you about half a dozen items at most to choose from. Hardly the most exhaustive inventory, is it? Show me an in-depth RPG that uses the D-pad to select between items, and I'll show you one clunky-ass game.

Twin thumbsticks and shoulder buttons are a pretty damn good way of interacting with a game, augmented with D-pad and face buttons. A touchscreen in the middle is less of an addition to that and more of a side-show where you have to move hand position and where you are looking to use properly.

Right here is where you lost me.

Twin thumbsticks and shoulder buttons are ok, as long as you're not into real-time strategy games, godsims, flightsims, MMOs, or any of the other genres that have long remained nigh-PC exclusive because of how limited controllers are.

And even the genres that do work on consoles with controllers have to make use of massive handicaps to do so. The only reason FPS games are so popular on PS360 is because developers have developed about a hundred and one hand-holding techniques to make aiming and moving less cumbersome, most notably aim assist/auto-aim. Compared to PC shooters, consoles games are embarrassingly cumbersome, due to how unintuitive controllers are for fine control.

When a developer manages to release a full-blown RTS on consoles that isn't gimped in any way at all, plays as well as any PC RTS and is actually fun, then I'll concede that controllers are pretty damn good. As it is, they're nothing more than an acceptable method of input for certain genres, a preferred method of input for a select few (fighting games), and downright terrible for many more. If we want to get RTS games, Sim games and real, proper MMOs to work on consoles, then we need to move beyond this idea that controllers are in any way perfect. They're not. If they were, aim-assist wouldn't be a thing.

1) Wii U is only marginally more powerful than XBox 360 / PS3. People didn't wait 7 goddamn years for the next generation of consoles to see this piddly excuse of a toaster that costs $350-400+, for which you could easily build a PC that is 5x better, has 1000x more games, allows ALL control input types, etc.

2) A lot of games on Wii U are simply XBox/PS3 ports, consoles which people already own. Why should any sane gamer invest in a Wii U?

3) At this point everyone knows that Nintendo consoles are nothing more than boxes which "allow" them to play Nintendo exclusives, i.e. Mario/Zelda/etc titles which have added nothing valuable to the gaming industry in recent times.

4) Basically the only people interested in buying a Wii U are people who want to play Super Mario Quantum Nebula 3, or Zelda: OMG A Boomerang Remake. Loyal fans so incredibly dedicated to their beloved IP's that they will continue allowing Nintendo to keep profitably beat a horse that has been dead for years.

5) First Wii had the motion control gimmick, and now Wii U has the multiple-screen gimmick. Gimmicks will be gimmicks, marketing stuff which adds little or nothing to the overall quality or advancement of gaming. It is called "innovation for the sake of innovation". If you think that justifies making pointless gimmicky bullshit (typically saying stuff like "well at least Nintendo are trying something new!") then feel free to innovate a submarine made out of bread (shameless Yahtzee quote).
As a hardcore gamer once said: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

I understand it just fine.

I just don't want it.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
You can, however, take it to the toilet.

You're failing to convince and things like this are doing the precise opposite.

I get it that SOMEONE has to defend the WiiU (who else will, seriously you alone come up over and over again) but it always seems to wander well away from the actual point. All you said about console limitation with RTS, doesn't defend WiiU, it advocates PC over ANY console.

And you just don't seem to know much about console gaming, you cite Arkham Asylum as an example of the limitations of D-pad inventory, when Arkham City handily had no less than 12 gadgets on the D-pad at once, any one at any time smartly selected with one thumb. It worked very well as with a D-pad you have tactile feedback which part you are about to press and whether you pressed it or not, without any need for visual feedback.

A separate touchscreen quick gadget selection is a step down in efficiency.

D-pad is eminently suited to selection with intelligent design interface rather than a lazy attempt like simply slapping the inventory onto a touchscreen. This isn't about what's easy for casual to get started with who don't care about an efficient interface, these games are hard enough anyway that if you can't figure out an 8-direction d-pad then you won't be able to overcome the challenges in game.

Aaron Sylvester:

3) At this point everyone knows that Nintendo consoles are nothing more than boxes which "allow" them to play Nintendo exclusives, i.e. Mario/Zelda/etc titles which have added nothing valuable to the gaming industry in recent times.

Ahh, if only Nintendo could go the way of Sega, utterly failing and being forced to give up the hardware business and free their IPs, free them onto any platform.

Oh, one can dream.

I can't use the big ass gamepad because of my disability. As I predicted. Don't expect support from me.

Shadow-Phoenix:

AzrealMaximillion:
If gamers "don't get" the console, its the fault of the company that made the console. But I'm not going to take the words of Ubisoft seriously. They were one of the major sources of shovelware on the Wii.

What isn't shovelware these days?.

When did the bar for a piece of hardware get so high it reaches into space?.

No seriously how?.

I'd like to know the answers to both. May I have citations of the aforementioned shovelware games and shit?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here