By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Could Nintendo add a capacitive touch screen in a WiiU redesign?

 

Capacitive or no?

Give me a more responsive one! 33 21.85%
 
It's fine the way it is ... 118 78.15%
 
Total:151
dahuman on 17 December 2012
Mmmfishtacos said:
I'm no artist. But I just did this in paint park using the vita and one of those 10 dollar pens from walmart. I bet someone with better skills could do a lot better than me. But i really don't see where some of you claim that resistive touch screen is better. I have both a vita and a Wii U and i far prefer the vita's screen to the Wii U. The game pad screen is not as responsive as the vita.

You not being an artist is exactly why it doesn't matter as much, the precision makes a big difference for people who are better at it, you will never catch me doing any real art on capacitive screens other than really quick sketchs because it requires too much touch up due to crappy line sensitivity even with a stylus. It's the same for audio equipment, unless you are an audiophile, you can't even hear the difference after a certain level compared to trained ears.

PS: and there are different requirements for a gaming headset vs audiophile equipment too, they are better at different things, just like resistive touch vs capacitive, it all depends on what you are doing. But the new resistive touch screen tech youtube videos I linked are superior to capacitive in pretty much everyway, it's a shame that Nintendo doesn't adopt newer tech but proven tech.



Around the Network
superchunk on 17 December 2012

Sure but why? The current screen works great with a finger and you get the preciseness of a stylus as well. I think the current choice is perfect.



BuckStud on 17 December 2012
richardhutnik said:
BuckStud said:
platformmaster918 said:

I feel like this would be a good move for a future design of the system.  They would have to continue to make sure that it wasn't multitouch because that would mean enhanced capabilities and fragmenting the fanbase if developers take advantage in future games.  However I would like it because after playing with it a little it did seem a little unresponsive compared to my phone.

 

Why do we keep getting these threads from people with no experience in the hardware engineering field second guessing the professionals? The Gamepad has 2 analog sticks, 1 d-pad and 12 buttons within reach...what would be the point to a multiple touch screen?  Could you make a game that requires it...yes, but why when you have all the other controls to utilize?...I have a touch screen phone, a 3DS, a Vita, an iPad 2, an iPod Touch and my wife has an iPhone and a Kindle Fire....the touch screen on the Gamepad is very responsive and works great ....no complaints from me at all. Why don't you go out and buy a new game to play instead of being an armchair engineer......Same goes for all the people that complain about the 3DS not having 2 circle pads.....you knew this before you bought it, so stop complaining about it and start enjoying the games. With all the crap that goes on in this world, people find the stupidest little things to complain about.

With the 3DS, Nintendo did come out with an attachment to add a second circle pad, so that isn't the best comparison.

 

Actually it is. People were expecting Nintendo to add a second circle pad to the 3DS XL and weren't happy when they didn't. Only a couple of games benefit from the add-on and the last thing I want to see is the video games companies building in anything in their revisions that fractures their user base. Microsoft could have put the HD-DVD drive in the 360 Slim, and let publishers release games on HD-DVD's, but what about the people without the drive? The video game companies have to develop for the lowest common denominator or release a game specific to an add on (Kinect, PS Move, Circle Pad Add-on etc...). I do not think that it would be a good idea not Nintendo to release a revision of the 3DS with 2nd circle pad or release a revised Wii U with multi touch screen. If they want to incorporate those features into the successor for these systems, fine but not in a revision of them.


Stop hating and start playing.

bananaking21 on 17 December 2012
gergroy said:
spurgeonryan said:
If it makes it more accurate then lets do it!


it wouldn't, capactive might make touch with your fingers slightly more responsive, but not enough to be that noticeable.  However, you would lose the very precise stylus touch.  

Capactive touch screens really only make sense if you are adding multi touch.  However, like the OP said, Nintendo can't really do that without fracturing their base.  So, basically, you would lose more than you would gain if Nintendo did this.  


slightly more responsive? no its way more responsive



Mmmfishtacos on 17 December 2012
dahuman said:
Mmmfishtacos said:
I'm no artist. But I just did this in paint park using the vita and one of those 10 dollar pens from walmart. I bet someone with better skills could do a lot better than me. But i really don't see where some of you claim that resistive touch screen is better. I have both a vita and a Wii U and i far prefer the vita's screen to the Wii U. The game pad screen is not as responsive as the vita.

You not being an artist is exactly why it doesn't matter as much, the precision makes a big difference for people who are better at it, you will never catch me doing any real art on capacitive screens other than really quick sketchs because it requires too much touch up due to crappy line sensitivity even with a stylus. It's the same for audio equipment, unless you are an audiophile, you can't even hear the difference after a certain level compared to trained ears.

PS: and there are different requirements for a gaming headset vs audiophile equipment too, they are better at different things, just like resistive touch vs capacitive, it all depends on what you are doing. But the new resistive touch screen tech youtube videos I linked are superior to capacitive in pretty much everyway, it's a shame that Nintendo doesn't adopt newer tech but proven tech.

check out this video. It shows that someone with skill can produce nice art work with a captive screen. http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/bcwdag/paint-park-tgs-2012--trailer--japanese-

Besides captive is better for gaming than a resistive screen and anyone who's played littlebigplanet vita would know that. I find in frustrating in NSMBU that i have to press on the power up icon several times for it to give it to me some times.



Around the Network
dahuman on 17 December 2012
HappySqurriel said:
dahuman said:

Seriously guys, some of you just don't read my posts from above so here are some demo videos from like 2009:

 


That's impressive ...

As I said in my post my information was a couple years old. From what I remember, there were no hard technical limitations to either technology doing anything it was just more complicate/expensive to do certain things with each technology.

Capacitive screens are usually more expensive because they require metal with higher conductivity properties like silver, gold, copper, etc where resistive can work on material as simple as carbon.



Mmmfishtacos on 17 December 2012
bananaking21 said:
gergroy said:
spurgeonryan said:
If it makes it more accurate then lets do it!


it wouldn't, capactive might make touch with your fingers slightly more responsive, but not enough to be that noticeable.  However, you would lose the very precise stylus touch.  

Capactive touch screens really only make sense if you are adding multi touch.  However, like the OP said, Nintendo can't really do that without fracturing their base.  So, basically, you would lose more than you would gain if Nintendo did this.  


slightly more responsive? no its way more responsive


It is more responsive and noticeably.



dahuman on 17 December 2012
Mmmfishtacos said:
dahuman said:
Mmmfishtacos said:
I'm no artist. But I just did this in paint park using the vita and one of those 10 dollar pens from walmart. I bet someone with better skills could do a lot better than me. But i really don't see where some of you claim that resistive touch screen is better. I have both a vita and a Wii U and i far prefer the vita's screen to the Wii U. The game pad screen is not as responsive as the vita.

You not being an artist is exactly why it doesn't matter as much, the precision makes a big difference for people who are better at it, you will never catch me doing any real art on capacitive screens other than really quick sketchs because it requires too much touch up due to crappy line sensitivity even with a stylus. It's the same for audio equipment, unless you are an audiophile, you can't even hear the difference after a certain level compared to trained ears.

PS: and there are different requirements for a gaming headset vs audiophile equipment too, they are better at different things, just like resistive touch vs capacitive, it all depends on what you are doing. But the new resistive touch screen tech youtube videos I linked are superior to capacitive in pretty much everyway, it's a shame that Nintendo doesn't adopt newer tech but proven tech.

check out this video. It shows that someone with skill can produce nice art work with a captive screen. http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/bcwdag/paint-park-tgs-2012--trailer--japanese-

Besides captive is better for gaming than a resistive screen and anyone who's played littlebigplanet vita would know that. I find in frustrating in NSMBU that i have to press on the power up icon several times for it to give it to me some times.

It doesn't matter, resistive is still better for drawing, that video you showed is exactly what I'm talking about, you either spend a lot of time fixing the lines, or leave it as a sketch like that video, the lines look like shit dood. The topic at hand is "is Wii U fine the way it is?", not if it's a piece of shit which it's not. Again, read carefully, the multi touch resistive tech videos I linked in 2009 is pretty much better than capacitive on all fronts, and read my PS again.



dahuman on 17 December 2012
Mmmfishtacos said:
bananaking21 said:
gergroy said:
spurgeonryan said:
If it makes it more accurate then lets do it!


it wouldn't, capactive might make touch with your fingers slightly more responsive, but not enough to be that noticeable.  However, you would lose the very precise stylus touch.  

Capactive touch screens really only make sense if you are adding multi touch.  However, like the OP said, Nintendo can't really do that without fracturing their base.  So, basically, you would lose more than you would gain if Nintendo did this.  


slightly more responsive? no its way more responsive


It is more responsive and noticeably.


Responsiveness depends on the sensitivity dial and the amount of processor power used to register that touch. I've seen plenty of shitty capacitive touch devices just as I've seen a lot of shitty resistive, saying one is more responsive than another is kinda weak since you are not supposed to use them the same way.



gergroy on 17 December 2012
bananaking21 said:
gergroy said:
spurgeonryan said:
If it makes it more accurate then lets do it!


it wouldn't, capactive might make touch with your fingers slightly more responsive, but not enough to be that noticeable.  However, you would lose the very precise stylus touch.  

Capactive touch screens really only make sense if you are adding multi touch.  However, like the OP said, Nintendo can't really do that without fracturing their base.  So, basically, you would lose more than you would gain if Nintendo did this.  


slightly more responsive? no its way more responsive


No, it really isnt.  It really comes down to the software being used here.  The actual touch capabilities are pretty close to the same.  It comes down the software and the way the programmers use the hardware that really determines how responsive it is.