Forums - Nintendo Discussion - If console sales are about software, then........

what's the point of dual analogs, shoulder buttons, and everything else we see on today's traditional controller? This is in response to the "what the uses of the pad" thread.



Around the Network
The point of those is to play the software.

"Necessity is the mother of invention." Things like the D-pad and analog sticks were needed to offer new ways to play games. The D-pad's existence is fairly self-explanatory. To make the kind of games found on the SNES, more buttons were needed than just A & B. To have 3D platformers like Mario 64, analog sticks were needed. There's no guarantee that they would have become standards, but they did, and the modern gamepad has pretty much settled into a sort of steady state. From the year 2000 on, every system has a gamepad with a D-pad, shoulder buttons/triggers, dual analog sticks, and the diamond-shape arrangement of face buttons, all of which proved necessary at some point and are still necessary today. As for the Wii U gamepad's touchscreen, it too has some practical benefits that offer new ways of playing. The most obvious application of second screens is that they allow off-screen play, can display inventory, maps, and the like without needing to pause the game, and can allow for new types of asynchronous multiplayer. Whether it becomes standard like analog sticks, etc., have remains to be seen. Sony and MS are making at least token efforts towards second-screen tech as well with PS4/Vita integration and SmartGlass tech, respectively.



Visit http://shadowofthevoid.wordpress.com

XBL Gamertag: ShadowOfTheVoid
PSN ID: ShadowOfTheVoid_  (dont' forget the underscore)
Nintendo Network ID: ShadowOfTheVoid
3DS Friend Code: 3368-2897-1364

2014 Predictions

PS4: 13-14M. XBO: 6-7M. WiiU: 4-5M

Holiday 2013 (Nov.+Dec.) Predictions

PS4: 3M (Actual: 4.2M). XBO: 2.5M (Actual: 3M). WiiU: 2M (Actual: 1.4M).

Anfebious said:
The point of those is to play the software.

The same as the pad.



Shadow1980 said:

"Necessity is the mother of invention." Things like the D-pad and analog sticks were needed to offer new ways to play games. The D-pad's existence is fairly self-explanatory. To make the kind of games found on the SNES, more buttons were needed than just A & B. To have 3D platformers like Mario 64, analog sticks were needed. There's no guarantee that they would have become standards, but they did, and the modern gamepad has pretty much settled into a sort of steady state. From the year 2000 on, every system has a gamepad with a D-pad, shoulder buttons/triggers, dual analog sticks, and the diamond-shape arrangement of face buttons, all of which proved necessary at some point and are still necessary today. As for the Wii U gamepad's touchscreen, it too has some practical benefits that offer new ways of playing. The most obvious application of second screens is that they allow off-screen play, can display inventory, maps, and the like without needing to pause the game, and can allow for new types of asynchronous multiplayer. Whether it becomes standard like analog sticks, etc., have remains to be seen. Sony and MS are making at least token efforts towards second-screen tech as well with PS4/Vita integration and SmartGlass tech, respectively.

Very little of that needs the gamepad, though.  A few of those uses are slight improvements, yes, but they're mostly side-grades.  Toggling a button to see a map isn't really that much worse than refocusing between two different screens at different distances.  Asynchronous multiplayer isn't really a unique feature as much as it is a limitation--other systems can do that if they want but the Wii U has no choice without another gamepad.  The gamepad in no way has reached the level of necessity.

That's not to say it can't, however.  Before the Wii U even came out, I was saying that the gamepad represents all kinds of possibilities in terms of strategic and tactical games and, especially, in terms of adding selectable options.  A game like WoW, for instance, can't be replicated on a home console because it requires as many hotkeys as you can possibly program.  A standard controller completely fails at that but what about the gamepad?  What if the touchscreen was actually used for something game-changing, like adding more rows of virtual hotkeys?  Dragon Age is probably the same--though I haven't played it on console, I can't imagine it being close to the PC in terms of ability control.  Functions like this aren't flashy, they aren't gimmicky, but they are possibly very useful.  Which is why they will probably be ignored by Nintendo.

Just assigning standard features to the gamepad screen won't make it a necessity.  Just adding gimmicky controls for no real reason won't make it a necessity.  Re-thinking what a controller can offer and using it to solve real controller/gameplay interface problems ... that's another story.  I won't hold my breath, though, as third parties aren't going to take the risk and Nintendo probably won't develop an IP so complex that it inherently needs the gamepad.



Around the Network
They have it to make the software gameplay more diverse.

Aquietguy said:

what's the point of dual analogs, shoulder buttons, and everything else we see on today's traditional controller? This is in response to the "what the uses of the pad" thread.

You mean THIS thread I created?

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=169093&page=1#

And you are asking about the more general features of it, or just trying to play cute and make a point about my thread?

Historically, the videogame market drove to have all the standard features added over time.  When doing polygon and 3D movement, Nintendo and others decided to add what they had to it.  As time went on, more and more was added.  Even now, you see with the PS4, that they added a touch pad in front to enable mouse controls.  Desire to have more stuff, as seen during play added this, and the features have become standard and expected.  You saw Nintendo added dual analog sticks (rather than the disks) on the Wii U controller, because the market demanded it, brought up by third party to Nintendo.

As far as the second screen goes, Nintendo added it to the Wii U and pushed it hard as a differentiator.  There wasn't a strong call for a second screen being added to a home console, but Nintendo did it anyway and added somewhere between $50 to $100 to the cost of the Wii U.  Nintendo must of had something in mind when they did it, and it wasn't just about the software.

In keeping with this thread though, maybe you can explain what the heck is the point of THIS controller:

Or this one:



richardhutnik said:
Aquietguy said:

what's the point of dual analogs, shoulder buttons, and everything else we see on today's traditional controller? This is in response to the "what the uses of the pad" thread.

You mean THIS thread I created?

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=169093&page=1#

And you are asking about the more general features of it, or just trying to play cute and make a point about my thread?

Historically, the videogame market drove to have all the standard features added over time.  When doing polygon and 3D movement, Nintendo and others decided to add what they had to it.  As time went on, more and more was added.  Even now, you see with the PS4, that they added a touch pad in front to enable mouse controls.  Desire to have more stuff, as seen during play added this, and the features have become standard and expected.  You saw Nintendo added dual analog sticks (rather than the disks) on the Wii U controller, because the market demanded it, brought up by third party to Nintendo.

As far as the second screen goes, Nintendo added it to the Wii U and pushed it hard as a differentiator.  There wasn't a strong call for a second screen being added to a home console, but Nintendo did it anyway and added somewhere between $50 to $100 to the cost of the Wii U.  Nintendo must of had something in mind when they did it, and it wasn't just about the software.

In keeping with this thread though, maybe you can explain what the heck is the point of THIS controller:

Or this one:

The purpose is an added touch screen which allows for inovative ways to interface. Many people have already given examples of those inovative ways. If it hasn't sunken in by now it never will. The screen is just another evolution of the tridtional controller. As long as gaming exist this will happen.



Aquietguy said:
richardhutnik said:
Aquietguy said:

what's the point of dual analogs, shoulder buttons, and everything else we see on today's traditional controller? This is in response to the "what the uses of the pad" thread.

You mean THIS thread I created?

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=169093&page=1#

And you are asking about the more general features of it, or just trying to play cute and make a point about my thread?

Historically, the videogame market drove to have all the standard features added over time.  When doing polygon and 3D movement, Nintendo and others decided to add what they had to it.  As time went on, more and more was added.  Even now, you see with the PS4, that they added a touch pad in front to enable mouse controls.  Desire to have more stuff, as seen during play added this, and the features have become standard and expected.  You saw Nintendo added dual analog sticks (rather than the disks) on the Wii U controller, because the market demanded it, brought up by third party to Nintendo.

As far as the second screen goes, Nintendo added it to the Wii U and pushed it hard as a differentiator.  There wasn't a strong call for a second screen being added to a home console, but Nintendo did it anyway and added somewhere between $50 to $100 to the cost of the Wii U.  Nintendo must of had something in mind when they did it, and it wasn't just about the software.

In keeping with this thread though, maybe you can explain what the heck is the point of THIS controller:

Or this one:

The purpose is an added touch screen which allows for inovative ways to interface. Many people have already given examples of those inovative ways. If it hasn't sunken in by now it never will. The screen is just another evolution of the tridtional controller. As long as gaming exist this will happen.

Name 10 things console games don't do now that call for the second (touch) screen.  You just don't roll out features, at an added cost, without sane reasons for doing so, and expect it to be so.

Also, you must of missed the point of my original post, asking what I did.  I asked, because Nintendo MUST have ideas in mind, or why would they of added the second screen?  Something new, without sound reasons for being there, is merely an attention grabbing gimmick.



Around the Network
I still love how everybody says "What's the point of the Gamepad?" and now every controller besides Xbox One has a touch device on the front.