It's got twin sticks, the 4 face buttons, shoulder buttons, and triggers, all in the standard layout. It was definitely designed to be traditional as Nintendo was trying to appease third partys. The aforementioned features also changed the look of the controller when they were first introduced, and obviously the feel/shape/size are going to be different between controllers because they're different controllers. PS4 and XBO controllers aren't exactly the same either, but that doesn't mean one of them isn't traditional.

It may seem the same, but it's not. That screen in the middle makes a world of difference. If people ragged on the PS3 controller for not being as comfortable as the Xbox 360 controller, why would you think that the gamepad should get a free pass. Sure it's more of a middle ground compared to the wii remotes, but it's far from traditional and Nintendo knows it

So whether or not a controller is traditional has to do with how comfortable it is (subjective) and thus the PS3 controller isn't traditional either... what lol? I'm not giving anyone a free pass, I've only been talking about function. If you wanna debate quality well I'm not the right guy, as long as the controllers are good enough and don't interfere with my gaming then I don't care if one controller is slighty better than another.

Oh man, this is what happens when I type while gaming lol.

Let me clarify. Having the traditional layout does not mean the controller is traditional (weight, shape, and size must also match). The giant screen in the middle is the offender. Having a traditional layout is not enough for some gamers (which is where the PS3 remote came in). The majority of gamers want comfort, not the added screen. Nintendo should make the next gimmick an add on, not the default controller

As I've repeatedly said, the only thing that matters is how it plays games. The Wii U gamepad can play games exactly like PS4/XBO/GCN/etc, controllers can, the touchscreen does not change this fact. Weight/shape/size/comfort are irrelevant to function and only apply to quality which you seem to be confusing. The gamepad could be as big as the moon and it'd still be a traditional controller, just a terrible one.

Meh. I've never bought the idea of that motion controls that made a game more immersive or fun to play. I want to play games as comfortably as possible and not be moving around excessively. Motion controls seem like something that was meant to be used with tech like VR and not by itself. I want a controller that's intuitive to use and comfortable, not "innovative".

The winner of this debate all draws upon what we define as traditional. Since we have different ideas on the concept, there won't be a clear cut winner. Therefore we should agree to disagree

You don't need to elevate your arm to use the Wii remote, you can aim the pointer while resting it on your leg like so:

Wind Waker HD, Twilight Princess HD, Breath of the Wild, Mario 3D World, and Tropical Freeze all feature motion controls.

Wii U gamepad is perfect for gaming. Additional touchscreen and gyros make it way better than any other devices.

I can see only kids and womens complaining about size and weight of U pad.

Where are motion controls now? exactly, im seeing a lot of "the controls are good if they were implemented right" That was the problem alot of them were NOT implemented right. Hell IMHO the wiimote itself wasnt implemented right.