What do you think of the WiiU now?
I got one before and was disappointed; I still regret my decision.
0.5% (3)
0.5% (3)
I wasn't going to get one before, and my mind hasn't been changed.
27.2% (166)
27.2% (166)
I have no strong feelings either way.
8.8% (54)
8.8% (54)
I didn't want a WiiU before, but now I want one.
16.5% (101)
16.5% (101)
I already got a WiiU, and now I'm even happier that I did.
29.5% (180)
29.5% (180)
I have other things I need to buy before I can consider a WiiU now.
10% (61)
10% (61)
I wanted one before, and I want one even more now.
7.4% (45)
7.4% (45)
I wanted one before, but I don't want one anymore.
0.2% (1)
0.2% (1)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: What do you think of the WiiU now?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

VG_Addict:

The Gamecube was their last good console.

Do you think they should go software only?

Would you say they're only good at games?

I have no interest in purchasing a WiiU but I would like to play several of their games. I would thus personally benefit. That said, if Nintendo can figure out how to sell the Wii U in significant numbers such that ports to the platform become fairly good, I'd be willing to consider getting one.

Of course it is worth noting that I have just about zero interest in the Xbox One and PS4 at this point in time.

Nintendo finnaly justified the Wii U's existence for me, The games announced are actually interesting, and not the bland mediocrity of last year. Looking foward to seeing more of Smash, Splatoon, Star Fox, Zelda, Giant Robot, Bayonetta 2, XCX, etc.

I know I am far from the first to write this but, with all of their IPs and the importance of the nostalgia factor in gaming these days, WiiU could have easily been the dominant console if they had done it right (i.e. get the same third-party games as the others).

Maybe I am naive, but I do not understand why this was so hard for them and/or why they are reluctant to commit to this strategy.

Why is it so hard for Nintendo to directly compete with Microsoft and Sony in terms of raw power and do what is necessary to attract third-party titles?

I know that they have an history of not playing nice with third-party developers and that their Internet services are lackluster, but I do not see why this can't be changed.

What would they lose by doing this?

And to answer the poll's question: I am mostly a PC gamer. I own a PS3 which serves mostly as my bluray player. I was not planning to buy a WiiU, but after E3 I could end up buying one in 2015. I will definitely look at how Zelda and Mario Maker are received.

Unspoken_Request:
I know I am far from the first to write this but, with all of their IPs and the importance of the nostalgia factor in gaming these days, WiiU could have easily been the dominant console if they had done it right (i.e. get the same third-party games as the others).

Maybe I am naive, but I do not understand why this was so hard for them and/or why they are reluctant to commit to this strategy.

Why is it so hard for Nintendo to directly compete with Microsoft and Sony in terms of raw power and do what is necessary to attract third-party titles?

I know that they have an history of not playing nice with third-party developers and that their Internet services are lackluster, but I do not see why this can't be changed.

What would they lose by doing this?

And to answer the poll's question: I am mostly a PC gamer. I own a PS3 which serves mostly as my bluray player. I was not planning to buy a WiiU, but after E3 I could end up buying one in 2015. I will definitely look at how Zelda and Mario Maker are received.

Because it's repeatedly been shown that power is nowhere near as important as craftsmanship. 3rd parties refuse to work with Nintendo not because they're hard to work with (seriously, read about any outside dev team who's worked with Nintendo recently and they sing nothing but praises for the company), or because of technical limitations (most devs never tap a console's true power). No, the reason they get pissy with Nintendo is because Nintendo refuses to SPOIL them. They help and respect 3rd parties, but Nintendo is not their nanny; they are not going to coddle them and they certainly aren't going to moneyhat them. Nintendo hasn't really done much wrong themselves they just have the unfortunate luck of having to be in an era where a vast majority of important 3rd parties are a bunch of spoiled, undisciplined brats.

I figure this is as good a place to mention this as anywhere. For the times I've seen comments about knocking off the gamepad and selling it for $200, apparently you can get a refurbished 32gb wiiu with the gamepad and nintendoland from Nintendo for $200. So that's a thing.

Aiddon:

Because it's repeatedly been shown that power is nowhere near as important as craftsmanship. 3rd parties refuse to work with Nintendo not because they're hard to work with (seriously, read about any outside dev team who's worked with Nintendo recently and they sing nothing but praises for the company), or because of technical limitations (most devs never tap a console's true power). No, the reason they get pissy with Nintendo is because Nintendo refuses to SPOIL them. They help and respect 3rd parties, but Nintendo is not their nanny; they are not going to coddle them and they certainly aren't going to moneyhat them. Nintendo hasn't really done much wrong themselves they just have the unfortunate luck of having to be in an era where a vast majority of important 3rd parties are a bunch of spoiled, undisciplined brats.

The line between "working well with others" and actually "spoiling" is not as clear as you make it out to be. It might be spoiling from the point of view of Nintendo, but it might just be normal support from the point of view of third party devs...

On that issue, what do you make of the eurogamer article written by an anonymous third party developer who made a game on the Wii U? Is it just false?
The author seemed to have legitimate criticisms of Nintendo's approach with third-party devs. His expectations of support from Nintendo seemed very sensible to me.

The most important thing I think for you to consider is that you play the game as it is, not as you would want it to be. It is a conscious choice: either Nintendo wants the big third party games or they don't.
If they do, they need to be as supportive of third-party as their competitors. Failure to do so just means that they don't really care about it.

On power, I agree that craftsmanship is more important, but it really depends on the types of games. Also, it is much harder for a third party dev to develop a game for a console if that console is in a different league compared to the other two consoles(and compared to PC) for which the game is being developped.

They are finally starting to build up a list of games I want, so I'm actually considering getting one now.

Unspoken_Request:

The line between "working well with others" and actually "spoiling" is not as clear as you make it out to be. It might be spoiling from the point of view of Nintendo, but it might just be normal support from the point of view of third party devs...

On that issue, what do you make of the eurogamer article written by an anonymous third party developer who made a game on the Wii U? Is it just false?
The author seemed to have legitimate criticisms of Nintendo's approach with third-party devs. His expectations of support from Nintendo seemed very sensible to me.

The most important thing I think for you to consider is that you play the game as it is, not as you would want it to be. It is a conscious choice: either Nintendo wants the big third party games or they don't.
If they do, they need to be as supportive of third-party as their competitors. Failure to do so just means that they don't really care about it.

On power, I agree that craftsmanship is more important, but it really depends on the types of games. Also, it is much harder for a third party dev to develop a game for a console if that console is in a different league compared to the other two consoles(and compared to PC) for which the game is being developped.

I think about it this way: an anecdote from ONE anonymous guy or the DOZENS of people giving their praise openly, including people from small indie studios. When smalltime devs like Yacht Club Games, Wayforward, Eden Industries, etc are able to get support from Nintendo with no issue I very much doubt far larger companies would have trouble getting Nintendo's attention.

You're not talking about some starving artists here, you're talking about HUGE companies worth hundreds of millions if not outright BILLIONS of dollars. And these guys expect a handout? No, that is NOT how things are supposed to work in the real world. If that is how the game is played then don't play it. In fact, burn it to the ground while you're at it considering how rotten and rigged that is. They care about 3rd parties, but they are NOT going to be their dogs.

I'm going to tell you EXACTLY what's going to happen with Nintendo and 3rd parties: 3rd parties will just keep holding out, thinking that they can get Nintendo to give them some of that enormous war chest. But Nintendo won't. Instead they're going to learn how to become more self-sufficient. They're just going to expand, start filling in other niches they haven't really messed with before, making their 1st party lineup even more diverse, and thus becoming even stronger as a brand with it ending with 3rd parties being STUNNED that Nintendo did that. How do I know this? History. The N64, the Gamecube, the Wii, even their handhelds made them utilize that kind of strategy. If 3rd parties are going to act like assholes then screw 'em, make up their lack of effort by redoubling their own. You'd think that 3rd parties would recognize the pattern by now, but it seems that no matter how many times it repeats itself they're still shocked by it.

Well, it went from "not buying it" to "might buy it if I come across a crazy special", its got a pretty great lineup going for it.

Aiddon:

Unspoken_Request:
Snip

I think about it this way: an anecdote from ONE anonymous guy or the DOZENS of people giving their praise openly, including people from small indie studios. When smalltime devs like Yacht Club Games, Wayforward, Eden Industries, etc are able to get support from Nintendo with no issue I very much doubt far larger companies would have trouble getting Nintendo's attention.

You're not talking about some starving artists here, you're talking about HUGE companies worth hundreds of millions if not outright BILLIONS of dollars. And these guys expect a handout? No, that is NOT how things are supposed to work in the real world. If that is how the game is played then don't play it. In fact, burn it to the ground while you're at it considering how rotten and rigged that is. They care about 3rd parties, but they are NOT going to be their dogs.

I'm going to tell you EXACTLY what's going to happen with Nintendo and 3rd parties: 3rd parties will just keep holding out, thinking that they can get Nintendo to give them some of that enormous war chest. But Nintendo won't. Instead they're going to learn how to become more self-sufficient. They're just going to expand, start filling in other niches they haven't really messed with before, making their 1st party lineup even more diverse, and thus becoming even stronger as a brand with it ending with 3rd parties being STUNNED that Nintendo did that. How do I know this? History. The N64, the Gamecube, the Wii, even their handhelds made them utilize that kind of strategy. If 3rd parties are going to act like assholes then screw 'em, make up their lack of effort by redoubling their own. You'd think that 3rd parties would recognize the pattern by now, but it seems that no matter how many times it repeats itself they're still shocked by it.

You're framing this situation as adversarial in nature, but it really isn't. Third party companies are not expecting Nintendo to give them some sort of financial incentive to gain their support, they are put off either by the number of consoles existing to reasonably gain sales on and/or the relation Nintendo typically carries with third party groups that wish to develop for their console.

To put it in simplified terms, Nintendo and EA are not partners. EA is a potential customer of Nintendo, and it is up to Nintendo to attract EA to want to be a customer of Nintendo. Neither group owes the other anything, and if EA feels that Nintendo cannot offer it a good reason to become a customer, then it simply won't. Since in this type of relationship "a good reason" would equal "enough sales to offset the drawbacks to working with Nintendo", EA in no way suffers for choosing not to become a customer of Nintendo. It doesn't matter what those drawbacks actually are, just that they exist and are factored in to a spreadsheet.

If anything EA choosing to develop for Nintendo right now, when they feel that the negatives outweigh the positives, would be doing Nintendo a favor. EA would be endangering its own profits and tying up its own resources to produce a product that would benefit Nintendo (by potentially attracting people to its system) while likely doing nothing for the actual creators.

I do love their attitude with this thing. Nintendo's gaming philosophy is a wonderful thing.

That said, I still despise the hardware. Nothing will ever make me accept touchscreens for any reason outside of those awkward checkout kiosks... and the occasional modernized ATM.

At least it's still a game console, PowerPC architecture and all. This little white box can run things that my PC would require massive emulation backflips to match, so I guess it's fair to say that the WiiU can do things my recently-upgraded (for just under $400) PC can't... which is a lot more than the PS4 or Xbone can claim.

Might buy one for my nephews, but I can't see myself using it.

Aiddon:

Unspoken_Request:
I know I am far from the first to write this but, with all of their IPs and the importance of the nostalgia factor in gaming these days, WiiU could have easily been the dominant console if they had done it right (i.e. get the same third-party games as the others).

Maybe I am naive, but I do not understand why this was so hard for them and/or why they are reluctant to commit to this strategy.

Why is it so hard for Nintendo to directly compete with Microsoft and Sony in terms of raw power and do what is necessary to attract third-party titles?

I know that they have an history of not playing nice with third-party developers and that their Internet services are lackluster, but I do not see why this can't be changed.

What would they lose by doing this?

And to answer the poll's question: I am mostly a PC gamer. I own a PS3 which serves mostly as my bluray player. I was not planning to buy a WiiU, but after E3 I could end up buying one in 2015. I will definitely look at how Zelda and Mario Maker are received.

Because it's repeatedly been shown that power is nowhere near as important as craftsmanship. 3rd parties refuse to work with Nintendo not because they're hard to work with (seriously, read about any outside dev team who's worked with Nintendo recently and they sing nothing but praises for the company), or because of technical limitations (most devs never tap a console's true power). No, the reason they get pissy with Nintendo is because Nintendo refuses to SPOIL them. They help and respect 3rd parties, but Nintendo is not their nanny; they are not going to coddle them and they certainly aren't going to moneyhat them. Nintendo hasn't really done much wrong themselves they just have the unfortunate luck of having to be in an era where a vast majority of important 3rd parties are a bunch of spoiled, undisciplined brats.

To be fair, Nintendo is still, whether wrongly or not, suffering from their horrible third party practices they held during the NES - SNES days. That reputation still leaves many developers with sour tastes in their mouths. Add to the fact that the other companies DO spoil those companies when it comes to policies and whatnot, and it is easy to see why getting big AAA third-party to play ball with Nintendo is so hard.

TheKasp:
In general?

The Wii U, for all the failures, tries to be a game console first and not a shoddy PC. This is also reflected in some games that, for me, bring a unique kind of joy.

Exactly this. I have a gaming PC so there's no reason for me to spend money on an xbox one or ps4 because I'd just be buying something that wants to be my pc. On the other hand, Nintendo is delivering fun, unique experiences through their first party franchises that I can't get on my PC. I got to play Mario Kart 8 at a buddy's place and it pretty much sold me on the idea of getting a Wii U. Now with Zelda and Starfox announced I'm even more into the idea. I'll probably trade in all my old 360 games and take the plunge fairly soon.

So I bought a Wii U a while back on sale and had ZERO reason to buy it. There wasnt any other console or game I wanted it just was an opportunity. I am not a nintendo fan boy, and I like to think I have a pretty good grasp on a game that works vs one that doesn't. Example: Mario and Luigi: Dream Team = Good / Partners in Time = Bad. Almost the same game but one is very punitive and time consuming for no payoff and the other is a normal, have fun kind of game.

SO of that list you mentioned:

Mario Kart 8 - Terrible
Super Mario 3D World - Nothing new
New Super Mario WiiU - HORRIBLE
Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze - Didn't play so can't say.
Sonic Lost World - Not great
Wonderful 101 - HORRIBLE
Pikmin 3 - Good!
ZombiU - Bad

Nintendo really could have released the Wii U now, think about it, everyone is so drained over the "more of teh same" console disappointments, If it came out with the new mentions and this pathetic showing of games now then it would have sold amazingly. It would undercut the cost problems, entice people with it's outside-the-box style and people could legitimately point to interesting games.

BTW that amigo thing is satan incarnate. How can anyone not connected to their parents purse strings actually get excited for figurines (that will absolutely have rarity and eventually be hard to find, just like they did with the pokemon rumble U fiasco) that you need for your sleek new console. I hate DVD's for taking up space, I don't have room for a fucking box of toys nintendo. Shame on OP for getting excited about that.

xaszatm:

To be fair, Nintendo is still, whether wrongly or not, suffering from their horrible third party practices they held during the NES - SNES days. That reputation still leaves many developers with sour tastes in their mouths. Add to the fact that the other companies DO spoil those companies when it comes to policies and whatnot, and it is easy to see why getting big AAA third-party to play ball with Nintendo is so hard.

Except I can't really count that that because that was twenty years ago at the most recent. And if companies or even individuals are STILL thinking that's relevant, that's not rational, in fact that's borderline sociopathic. That's a REALLY disturbing idea if you think about it; that would be like me getting flak for stuff my great, great grandfather did. I guess there IS a sort of logic with it, but it's completely STUPID and out of date.

Of course, even with their policies, they made complete SENSE. 3rd parties had proven that they couldn't be trusted. They crashed the gaming industry of the West so they relinquished any right to be treated as equals or even adults. Nintendo gave them the gaming equivalent of a government bailout, so of course they were going to be hardasses and make those idiots exhibit some discipline. That wasn't Nintendo oppressing minority, they were disciplining a bunch of spoiled brats who were allowed to run rampant for too long. And considering how 3rd parties have begun to display that very undisciplined, sloppy, entitled attitude again lately it looks like Nintendo and Yamauchi freaking called it all those years ago.

Other than online, what are Nintendo behind on?

Even regarding online, they've at least taken steps in the right direction with voice chat and the ability to upload on YouTube on MK8.

VG_Addict:
Other than online, what are Nintendo behind on?

Even regarding online, they've at least taken steps in the right direction with voice chat and the ability to upload on YouTube on MK8.

Their digital prices are fairly absurd; but could you call that being behind, really?

Pink Gregory:

VG_Addict:
Other than online, what are Nintendo behind on?

Even regarding online, they've at least taken steps in the right direction with voice chat and the ability to upload on YouTube on MK8.

Their digital prices are fairly absurd; but could you call that being behind, really?

You know what's odd? Nintendo can be really forward thinking at times (Treehouse stream, Directs, and Miiverse), but still behind on online.

Still don't feel all that strongly one way or the other, though I will say it looks like Nintendo might be able to pull the WiiU up out of the slump it's in after all.

Some of the games look like fun. Heck, Splatoon even made me laugh a bit just looking at it. There are definitely some system sellers in the works, but not necessarily for me. Sure, I like Zelda and wouldn't mind playing that. However, I've played Mario Kart, Mario Party, SSB before and I just don't really care to upgrade to newer versions, especially as the old ones are just sitting around, unplayed, collecting dust. I tried out some of the newer Super Mario Bros games and just lost interest very quickly. I think platformers just don't do it for me anymore. New Starfox would be cool though.

If the WiiU is still kicking in a few more years, I may pick one up for my kids, as I MIGHT be able to trust them with a controller at that point :) But I don't think the system is really something I want.

Well looking at VGCharts the WiiU is actually outselling the Xbox by a couple thousand per month.
Anybody else weirded out by this?

This E3 seems to be won by Nintendo (even though many refuse to admit it) but I'm looking at the sales data and wondering if the WiiU could legitimately be in a solid 2nd place for this generation.

To the posters above talking about 3rd party incentives, I seem to recall E3 2012 Nintendo announcing 3rd party support from the likes of EA and Ubisoft, with talks of ports of some games and even exclusives, but those plans fell through, with the devs abandoning nintendo for the Xbox and PS4.
Hell, Ubisoft has even straight up said that they have had a WiiU game ready to ship for months, but are holding off release until hardware sales pick up.
Not to mention a rumour going round that EA apparently tried to pressure Nintendo to let them handle the WiiU online functions (Google it, it may not be real, but given EA's ambitions with Origin I wouldn't be surprised), that didn't happen, and EA's had this weird embargo go on ever since.

As for the poll, no I don't own a WiiU, but Smash bros and Hyrule warriors are certainly tempting, and if it weren't for the great lineup of 3DS games the WiiU would be top priority for me.

a lot of those are a nope for me....Yoshi and starfox....maaaabye but honestly Nostalgia is NOT a good reason to get into a game as far as I'm concerned

I still don't understand why anyone decides to buy a WiiU.. that thing doesn't even qualify as a console in my book.

If we imagine that the PS4 and Xbox One are cars.. then the WiiU is from my perspective a scooter.

The only "console" that interests me is the Steam Machine.

I went C64-NES-SNES-PlayStation growing up. I had come to view Nintendo as the second system I would get at the end of the console cycle when it was cheap, and I felt like mixing it up. Until the Wii, which caused me to break up with them entirely. Only now am I starting to look at Nintendo as a realistic "sidekick" console again. I may get one in 2 or 3 years.

Still can't stand Smash Bros though, just can't figure out that game's appeal at all.

I don't want one but I do think it is a very good console.

It serves it's purpose very well which is to provide Nintendo a platform to put their games on.
They design it for their games in the foreseeable future and don't really need to do much more than that.
If I was a fan of Nintendo games I would be buying one.

Sofus:
I still don't understand why anyone decides to buy a WiiU.. that thing doesn't even qualify as a console in my book.

If we imagine that the PS4 and Xbox One are cars.. then the WiiU is from my perspective a scooter.

The only "console" that interests me is the Steam Machine.

So basically you're mainly a PC guy and judges via specs only?, sounds about right.

Also why can't I buy or be interested in a Wii U, why do I have to be interested in what you think is interesting?, why do people always, always do this when they should know by now that everything is different, everyone thinks different.

VG_Addict:
I don't understand it. A bunch of people on Twitter say that Nintendo should go software only, even though they revealed a TON of great games today.

Why should they do that when the Wii U is getting games?

On topic, yes. I am now interested in getting a Wii U. 2015 looks to be a great year not just for the Wii U, but for gamers in general.

You just answered your own question. Nintendo can make games - some of them are even great. Nintendo's main problem is that they make inferior consoles. That's why many people would prefer to be able to play Nintendo games on a better platform.

Doom972:

VG_Addict:
I don't understand it. A bunch of people on Twitter say that Nintendo should go software only, even though they revealed a TON of great games today.

Why should they do that when the Wii U is getting games?

On topic, yes. I am now interested in getting a Wii U. 2015 looks to be a great year not just for the Wii U, but for gamers in general.

You just answered your own question. Nintendo can make games - some of them are even great. Nintendo's main problem is that they make inferior consoles. That's why many people would prefer to be able to play Nintendo games on a better platform.

But even without the limitations, Nintendo's consoles weren't bad.

Every console until the Wii was on par graphically with the competition.

Do you think they should go software only?

VG_Addict:

Doom972:

VG_Addict:
I don't understand it. A bunch of people on Twitter say that Nintendo should go software only, even though they revealed a TON of great games today.

Why should they do that when the Wii U is getting games?

On topic, yes. I am now interested in getting a Wii U. 2015 looks to be a great year not just for the Wii U, but for gamers in general.

You just answered your own question. Nintendo can make games - some of them are even great. Nintendo's main problem is that they make inferior consoles. That's why many people would prefer to be able to play Nintendo games on a better platform.

But even without the limitations, Nintendo's consoles weren't bad.

Every console until the Wii was on par graphically with the competition.

Do you think they should go software only?

I'm not saying that all Nintendo consoles are bad, just inferior (The Wii was bad though). Also, Nintendo has the worst third-party support - they don't even get feedback from developers while developing a console like MS and Sony do.

A good console should be powerful and accessible enough for developers to use. Nintendo consoles (especially the recent ones) are neither.

Doom972:

VG_Addict:

Doom972:

You just answered your own question. Nintendo can make games - some of them are even great. Nintendo's main problem is that they make inferior consoles. That's why many people would prefer to be able to play Nintendo games on a better platform.

But even without the limitations, Nintendo's consoles weren't bad.

Every console until the Wii was on par graphically with the competition.

Do you think they should go software only?

I'm not saying that all Nintendo consoles are bad, just inferior (The Wii was bad though). Also, Nintendo has the worst third-party support - they don't even get feedback from developers while developing a console like MS and Sony do.

A good console should be powerful and accessible enough for developers to use. Nintendo consoles (especially the recent ones) are neither.

Do you think that all of Nintendo's consoles have been inferior?

The Gamecube may not have been accessible for developers, but it was still powerful, and got several of the same games the XBOX and PS2 got.

VG_Addict:

Doom972:

VG_Addict:

But even without the limitations, Nintendo's consoles weren't bad.

Every console until the Wii was on par graphically with the competition.

Do you think they should go software only?

I'm not saying that all Nintendo consoles are bad, just inferior (The Wii was bad though). Also, Nintendo has the worst third-party support - they don't even get feedback from developers while developing a console like MS and Sony do.

A good console should be powerful and accessible enough for developers to use. Nintendo consoles (especially the recent ones) are neither.

Do you think that all of Nintendo's consoles have been inferior?

The Gamecube may not have been accessible for developers, but it was still powerful, and got several of the same games the XBOX and PS2 got.

You know well enough to which consoles I'm referring to. No point in discussing the Gamecube.

loc978:

That said, I still despise the hardware. Nothing will ever make me accept touchscreens for any reason outside of those awkward checkout kiosks... and the occasional modernized ATM.

I never really liked touchscreens for gaming either until I bought Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition for Android. If that version had full mod support, I'd never touch my PC version again. It's just so natural to play by touch.

Shadow-Phoenix:

Sofus:
I still don't understand why anyone decides to buy a WiiU.. that thing doesn't even qualify as a console in my book.

If we imagine that the PS4 and Xbox One are cars.. then the WiiU is from my perspective a scooter.

The only "console" that interests me is the Steam Machine.

So basically you're mainly a PC guy and judges via specs only?, sounds about right.

Also why can't I buy or be interested in a Wii U, why do I have to be interested in what you think is interesting?, why do people always, always do this when they should know by now that everything is different, everyone thinks different.

I have never told anyone not to buy whatever they want. I just mention that I don't understand the logic behind buying something like a WiiU.

To me the WiiU seems inferior to both the other consoles and the PC in just about every single way. Not to mention how few (zero?) triple A games that are released on it.

I'm all for you throwing money at Nintendo in order to buy a WiiU. But that doesn't mean that I understand the decision.

Sofus:

Shadow-Phoenix:

Sofus:
I still don't understand why anyone decides to buy a WiiU.. that thing doesn't even qualify as a console in my book.

If we imagine that the PS4 and Xbox One are cars.. then the WiiU is from my perspective a scooter.

The only "console" that interests me is the Steam Machine.

So basically you're mainly a PC guy and judges via specs only?, sounds about right.

Also why can't I buy or be interested in a Wii U, why do I have to be interested in what you think is interesting?, why do people always, always do this when they should know by now that everything is different, everyone thinks different.

I have never told anyone not to buy whatever they want. I just mention that I don't understand the logic behind buying something like a WiiU.

To me the WiiU seems inferior to both the other consoles and the PC in just about every single way. Not to mention how few (zero?) triple A games that are released on it.

I'm all for you throwing money at Nintendo in order to buy a WiiU. But that doesn't mean that I understand the decision.

Games.

Most of the games I want to play on PS4 or XBOne are also coming out on PC, which I have. None of the games I want on Wii U are coming out on PC. Seems that if I'm buying a console, Wii U is the clear winner.

Scars Unseen:

loc978:

That said, I still despise the hardware. Nothing will ever make me accept touchscreens for any reason outside of those awkward checkout kiosks... and the occasional modernized ATM.

I never really liked touchscreens for gaming either until I bought Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition for Android. If that version had full mod support, I'd never touch my PC version again. It's just so natural to play by touch.

This is a really specific and silly thing, but I really love the idea of having inventory management on the gamepad a la ZombiU. Hell I like having the HUD and GUI elements there. But I'm entirely in a minority.

I 'unno, to me, real time inventory management adds something to immersion and yadda yadda yadda.

Scars Unseen:

loc978:

That said, I still despise the hardware. Nothing will ever make me accept touchscreens for any reason outside of those awkward checkout kiosks... and the occasional modernized ATM.

I never really liked touchscreens for gaming either until I bought Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition for Android. If that version had full mod support, I'd never touch my PC version again. It's just so natural to play by touch.

It's not just for gaming with me. Attempting to browse anything on a "smart"phone or tablet is rage-inducing for me. I hate slowing down for their input method. My reflexive "swipe" barely makes the screen twitch, because I do it too quickly (tried adjusting for it with an android phone once... doesn't go up high enough). Swiping successfully on one for me feels like "place finger. pause. drag slowly. pause. remove finger."

In addition, I've never used one that detects a tap where or when I attempt it. Probably something to do with touchscreens operating by detecting electrical fields. I don't even have to touch the damned thing for it to register a tap... usually about half the width of my finger away in a random direction. Make 'em operate on pressure and I wouldn't mind as much... but I'd still prefer a mouse. Hell, I'd prefer a thumbstick-controlled cursor, and I despise the inaccuracy of thumbsticks.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked