noname2200 said:
Oh. That makes sense. It's actually kind of funny too.
There are several problems with this theory and analogy though. First, unlike the Wii's motion controls, the Gamepad has yet to demonstrate its value in any single game. By this I mean that, in nearly a year of releases, there has not been a single title that is truly only possible with the Gamepad, and none of the releases currently known seem to change that calculus at all. You correctly point out that waggle was an unnecessary feature in far too many Wii games, for example, but unlike the Gamepad we knew the value of motion controls from the very first time we saw Wii Sports. The DS' touchscreen proved its value early and often. The Gamepad? Suffice it to say we're still waiting. Second, the Gamepad is grossly inflating the price of the system while offering little of value in return. At launch, the system was the most expensive home console Nintendo's ever released: $300, no game included. Supposedly, calling Nintendo for a replacement Gamepad runs you about $150, or half the price of the console. Compare this to the unique features of the Wii and DS: neither motion controls nor the touchscreen ever inflated the console's cost by such an extravagant amount. The most comparable feature is probably the 3D in the 3DS - a feature that appears to inflate the console's cost by a notable percentage while apparently offering much less value than Nintendo initially believed, judging by the feature's decreasing emphasis and now near-absence in marketing. If the Wii or DS had omitted their new input methods it's unlikely the console would have cost much less: by contrast, we know the Gamepad is responsible for making a somewhat-stronger PS3 cost an additional $100. Next, the Gamepad hampers the system's multiplayer potential. Simply put, any game featuring local multiplayer (Nintendo's bread and butter) has to feature two potential control schemes, one for the Gamepad, one for the Wiimote. This essentially means local multiplayer games are mostly unable to take advantage of either controller's unique feature, as not every player will have access to touch or motion controls. Their proposed solution to that is the "assymetric multiplayer" I mocked earlier. And the reason for the mockery is pretty simple: it's not a concept that the public can intuitively grasp, and the fact that Nintendo's marketing harped on the term "assymetric multiplayer" (which sounds more like an obscure disease than a way to have fun) tells me that they clearly have no idea how to communicate its value. Finally, and this is often overlooked, the Gamepad is nothing more than a repetition of the very archaic and intimidating controls that Nintendo spent so much time last generation publicly repudiating and rebuking. Modern dual-analogue controllers are an intimidating-looking clusterfuck of controls. "In order to perform this action, tilt this stick this way, move the other stick that way, hold the rear-left shoulder button, then press the face button that best corresponds with the action you wish to take." A lot of folks don't want to bother with that. Even more folks look at those dual-analogue contraptions and think "pass." The attractiveness of motion and touch controls was very simple: you can now perform complex actions with simple commands, be it by touch or by simply doing what you wanted your character to do. And the masses demonstrably took to that with gusto. The Gamepad is largely a rejection of that elegant simplicity though: It IS a dual-analogue controller, but now with the added drawbacks of looking ungainly. So yes, I agree that not every game has to use every feature of the Gamepad. But that's beside my point. My point is that the Gamepad itself is an albatross around the system's neck, one that has demonstrated its value but has most definitely bared its many costs for all to see. And something to keep in mind: I'm the dude who immediately saw the potential in touch and motion controls (although not the dual screens: oops), and I still openly scorn folks who say they were blinded by the Wii's market potential. And yet nearly a year after release, and three years after its unveiling, the Gamepad continues to repel me. Now obviously not everyone will agree with me there, but I think the fact that the system is struggling to break that elusive 4 million unit mark suggests that the mass market stands more with me than against me. |
All of these points are factually incorrect. But yeah Dual analog is a clusterfuck. Thats why this thing comes with a touch screen, gyros ect.
Its built around offering options. It works very well as a system navigation device, for your livering. It doesnt hamper multiplayer either. It enhances it.
The so called costs your labeling it with is simply the issue of time with its introductory. Its not a half baked idea. You're also going off the assumption that its a 100$ controller. It is not.
Mock Assymetric multiplayer all you want, its about as difficult to grasp as any other form of gameplay. Nintendo's been experimenting with it for years now.
