By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Aquietguy on 30 July 2013
Edit Thread
darkknightkryta said:
Aquietguy said:
darkknightkryta said:
Aquietguy said:

Piss poor camera controls or not, it was done before dual analogs. Just like dual analogs enhanced camera controls, so does the pad enhances menu navigation  as well as other functions.


But the pad DOESN'T enhance menu navigation or other functions.  Before I responded to this I went to go check out Ocarina of Time on my 3DS to compare; you have to take your eyes off the top screen to use the secondary screen for a menu.  This is no different than replacing what's currently on screen with a menu (Which is how it was originally done).  The Wii U has this same problem but worse; since the pad and T.V. aren't anywhere near each other when playing.  Though I do like being able to overlay objects with the Wii U pad, but for the budget that the pad eats up for the console's price; it just wasn't worth it.  Which goes back to being a problem conceptually.  The cost of everything for the Wii U was just too high for everything.


Based on my experience I does very much enhance menu navigation. Having your menus on the pad that's easily accessible at the touch of a screen rather than having the pause and interrupting the flow of the game. Imagine playing Zelda OOT and switching between boots and iron boots with the touch of the screen rather that constantly having to pause and switch. And that just the tip of the benefits of the pad. So concept isn't the problem. It's the lack of games. That falls under execution. Many Wii U owners, including myself, are very happy with he pad and would rather have it and a lower spec console than what will be available in the PS4 and X1.

I never said anything bad about the touch overall.  I was actually mentioning that the "stylist" gameplay is what made the DS so popular and that was perfectly replicated with the Wiimote.  The pad wasn't necessary for that, which goes back to the second screen.  Looking at the second screen at the bottom takes you away from the game just as much as replacing the existing screen with a menu.  It's not that much faster and as I've mentioned it's worse with the Wii U's pad since you actually have to move your head up and down.  This is actually slower than replacing the screen with a menu on the T.V.  Or you move the controller in front of the T.V., which again, is worse than replacing the screen.  The only plus I see, from a gameplay perspective, is the way the Wii U's pad overlays information on top of the screen.  A feature which is sadly under utilized, which is execution.  I have also mentioned before that there's a small amount of use cases for that tablet controller, which you haven't proven otherwise.  You've mentioned menus and such, but it's no better than replacing the screen and using the Wii-mote.  You can be happy with the tablet controller, which is your preference, but ultimately the Wii U is currently a flawed concept more so than execution.

There's a big difference in having to constantly pause and just simply glancing down. Plus navigating menus is faster with a pad. You touch the screen where you need to rather than having move a curser with an analog to get there. So with the pad you glance down, touch what you need to, then glance back at the screen. What a controller you have to pause, navigate the cursor which is not nearly as fast as just touching, then unpause. And you say the pad is worse.