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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Miyamoto: give the Wii U time.

Pavolink on 09 April 2013
BuckStud said:
Speaking of Reggie, he's been awfully quiet lately....


Nintendo's Ninjas cared of "that" bussiness.



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


Around the Network
curl-6 on 09 April 2013
Euphoria14 said:
sales2099 said:
Nintendo acts like MS and Sony can't release a peripheral in the future to compete......

But what they don't acknowledge is that the more time goes by, the more dated the WiiU will look by comparison. This aint like the Wii, where casuals didn;t care about graphics......WiiU is for core gamers, and in a couple years it will allready look ancient compared to PS4/Xbox

No need for peripherals. Both console(s) games with have compatibility with numerous tablets and smartphones on the market.

Who doesn't have a smartphone and/or tablet?

I don't.

Frankly I don't need either, I have a mobile and a laptop already.



oniyide on 09 April 2013
Gamerace said:
oniyide said:
Pachofilauri said:
oniyide said:
Pachofilauri said:
Max King of the Wild said:
MegaDrive08 said:
Thing is if Sony or Microsoft came out with a gamepad controller first with off screen play you know damn well the Sony and Microsoft fans would say it's amazing and the best thing since sliced bread, but its a gimmick because it's a Nintendo console, the U is a cracking console and half the people who talk crap about it haven't even touched the thing, maybe I'm old school but i couldn't care less about all these fancy features I buy a games console to play games, nothing else.



its so easy to make baseless accusations.


no its not...

what where the comments when move and kinect came out?

the comments were that they worked better than Wiimote and they did at that. YOu cant sit there and say that the wiimote was accurate cause it  wasnt. Motion+, we all know how much support that got, so much support. Should have been there day 1. Very few were praising Move or Kinect because they were from SOny or MS, they were praising it cause the damn things actually worked.

but thats not the point, the wiimote before the motion+ was worst than move. But the wiimote did well with zelda wii sports metroid and redsteel, and both sony and MS fans claim it sucked beacause its nintendo no because the wiimote was not so accurate.

No it didnt, TP was terrible with motion controls, Metroid was a FP game so that relied more on pointer controls more than motion, Red Steel was terrible. You must be thinking about the sequel which had to use motion+ and the difference is night and day. Pretty much any game that relied on a lot of movement sucked pre motion+ on Wii, I would ask you to name me some that didnt, but the fact you even brought up Red Steel 1 tells me you just had lower expectations or didnt mind. fair enough, to each his own. 

Find me a link where someone from either camp said that wiimote sucked JUST cause it was from Nintendo. That is baseless and doesnt even make any sense. They most likely said it sucked because Ninty, quite frankly made a half assed product. Not because it was JUST Nintendo.

Actually I've been playing Wii Sports and it's use of the wiimote is still remarkable good.  Godfather, Scarface, Bully all had great use of motion that enhanced gameplay.  Dewy's Adventure, Elebits, Let's Tap, Zack & Wiki, Mercury Meltdown, Mario Kart, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Tiger Woods (better with MW+).  Early FPSs were poor but starting the MoH: Heroes2 they improved dramatically.   I love how it was used in Tomb Raider: Anniversary and put to excellent use in Prince of Persia: Forgotten Sands.    There were lots, but also, lots of not-so-good use.

to each his own, i found the overall experience pretty terrible. Wii Sports was terrible, especially with boxing, you cant tell me they used that well. Tennis was overrated especially considering it was just onrails. Bully did a good job, but that game had other problems i wont get into. IMHO most of those games you mentioned didn really use the tech in that great of a way, it didnt really enchance anything, they could have been done has they have always been done with regular controls. And by the time they did improve i dont think most people cared. Thats just me most of the games i played either barely used the function(MarioGalaxy) or the tech held it back (StarWars FU)



oniyide on 09 April 2013
Max King of the Wild said:

Find me a link where someone from either camp said that wiimote sucked JUST cause it was from Nintendo. That is baseless and doesnt even make any sense. They most likely said it sucked because Ninty, quite frankly made a half assed product. Not because it was JUST Nintendo.


my first experience with wii sports i just waggled and flickd the mote while sitting down and hit homeruns almost each time or a highspeed pitch. i thought it was pretty lame. but i still bought a wii. so obviously i didnt hate it because it was nintendo. 

so obviously agree with you. 

i had the same experience. Killed it for me after about a week. People either loved it or did not care for it. I fell into the latter. My issue is with people saying that the "hate" crowd didnt like it cause Ninty made it. Knowing good well the tech just wasnt that great and knowing that what the other 2 put out was more advanced.



OneTwoThree on 09 April 2013

Well sure I "give the Wii U time" - which means I postpone my purchase until the big games are here. Just like everybody else.

Nintendo's head start could have been really useful, if they had brought their biggest games in the first year. Then they would have had a fairly big install base by the time PS460 are released, and could have been the platform of choice for studios who eventually have to move on from PS360, but fear even bigger development budgets.

But with nothing meaningful on the horizon, there's no way sales will look healthy before the holidays.



Around the Network
curl-6 on 09 April 2013
oniyide said:
Gamerace said:
oniyide said:
Pachofilauri said:
oniyide said:
Pachofilauri said:
Max King of the Wild said:
MegaDrive08 said:
Thing is if Sony or Microsoft came out with a gamepad controller first with off screen play you know damn well the Sony and Microsoft fans would say it's amazing and the best thing since sliced bread, but its a gimmick because it's a Nintendo console, the U is a cracking console and half the people who talk crap about it haven't even touched the thing, maybe I'm old school but i couldn't care less about all these fancy features I buy a games console to play games, nothing else.



its so easy to make baseless accusations.


no its not...

what where the comments when move and kinect came out?

the comments were that they worked better than Wiimote and they did at that. YOu cant sit there and say that the wiimote was accurate cause it  wasnt. Motion+, we all know how much support that got, so much support. Should have been there day 1. Very few were praising Move or Kinect because they were from SOny or MS, they were praising it cause the damn things actually worked.

but thats not the point, the wiimote before the motion+ was worst than move. But the wiimote did well with zelda wii sports metroid and redsteel, and both sony and MS fans claim it sucked beacause its nintendo no because the wiimote was not so accurate.

No it didnt, TP was terrible with motion controls, Metroid was a FP game so that relied more on pointer controls more than motion, Red Steel was terrible. You must be thinking about the sequel which had to use motion+ and the difference is night and day. Pretty much any game that relied on a lot of movement sucked pre motion+ on Wii, I would ask you to name me some that didnt, but the fact you even brought up Red Steel 1 tells me you just had lower expectations or didnt mind. fair enough, to each his own. 

Find me a link where someone from either camp said that wiimote sucked JUST cause it was from Nintendo. That is baseless and doesnt even make any sense. They most likely said it sucked because Ninty, quite frankly made a half assed product. Not because it was JUST Nintendo.

Actually I've been playing Wii Sports and it's use of the wiimote is still remarkable good.  Godfather, Scarface, Bully all had great use of motion that enhanced gameplay.  Dewy's Adventure, Elebits, Let's Tap, Zack & Wiki, Mercury Meltdown, Mario Kart, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Tiger Woods (better with MW+).  Early FPSs were poor but starting the MoH: Heroes2 they improved dramatically.   I love how it was used in Tomb Raider: Anniversary and put to excellent use in Prince of Persia: Forgotten Sands.    There were lots, but also, lots of not-so-good use.

to each his own, i found the overall experience pretty terrible. Wii Sports was terrible, especially with boxing, you cant tell me they used that well. Tennis was overrated especially considering it was just onrails. Bully did a good job, but that game had other problems i wont get into. IMHO most of those games you mentioned didn really use the tech in that great of a way, it didnt really enchance anything, they could have been done has they have always been done with regular controls. And by the time they did improve i dont think most people cared. Thats just me most of the games i played either barely used the function(MarioGalaxy) or the tech held it back (StarWars FU)

For me, most of the top Wii games, (Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, Zelda Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword, Metroid Prime 3) would not have been as great without motion controls. It also allowed for games like Wii Sports Resort and Red Steel 2, which were uniquely invigorating and satisfying thanks to the intense motion control. 



oniyide on 10 April 2013
curl-6 said:
oniyide said:
Gamerace said:
oniyide said:
Pachofilauri said:
oniyide said:
Pachofilauri said:
Max King of the Wild said:
MegaDrive08 said:
Thing is if Sony or Microsoft came out with a gamepad controller first with off screen play you know damn well the Sony and Microsoft fans would say it's amazing and the best thing since sliced bread, but its a gimmick because it's a Nintendo console, the U is a cracking console and half the people who talk crap about it haven't even touched the thing, maybe I'm old school but i couldn't care less about all these fancy features I buy a games console to play games, nothing else.



its so easy to make baseless accusations.


no its not...

what where the comments when move and kinect came out?

the comments were that they worked better than Wiimote and they did at that. YOu cant sit there and say that the wiimote was accurate cause it  wasnt. Motion+, we all know how much support that got, so much support. Should have been there day 1. Very few were praising Move or Kinect because they were from SOny or MS, they were praising it cause the damn things actually worked.

but thats not the point, the wiimote before the motion+ was worst than move. But the wiimote did well with zelda wii sports metroid and redsteel, and both sony and MS fans claim it sucked beacause its nintendo no because the wiimote was not so accurate.

No it didnt, TP was terrible with motion controls, Metroid was a FP game so that relied more on pointer controls more than motion, Red Steel was terrible. You must be thinking about the sequel which had to use motion+ and the difference is night and day. Pretty much any game that relied on a lot of movement sucked pre motion+ on Wii, I would ask you to name me some that didnt, but the fact you even brought up Red Steel 1 tells me you just had lower expectations or didnt mind. fair enough, to each his own. 

Find me a link where someone from either camp said that wiimote sucked JUST cause it was from Nintendo. That is baseless and doesnt even make any sense. They most likely said it sucked because Ninty, quite frankly made a half assed product. Not because it was JUST Nintendo.

Actually I've been playing Wii Sports and it's use of the wiimote is still remarkable good.  Godfather, Scarface, Bully all had great use of motion that enhanced gameplay.  Dewy's Adventure, Elebits, Let's Tap, Zack & Wiki, Mercury Meltdown, Mario Kart, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Tiger Woods (better with MW+).  Early FPSs were poor but starting the MoH: Heroes2 they improved dramatically.   I love how it was used in Tomb Raider: Anniversary and put to excellent use in Prince of Persia: Forgotten Sands.    There were lots, but also, lots of not-so-good use.

to each his own, i found the overall experience pretty terrible. Wii Sports was terrible, especially with boxing, you cant tell me they used that well. Tennis was overrated especially considering it was just onrails. Bully did a good job, but that game had other problems i wont get into. IMHO most of those games you mentioned didn really use the tech in that great of a way, it didnt really enchance anything, they could have been done has they have always been done with regular controls. And by the time they did improve i dont think most people cared. Thats just me most of the games i played either barely used the function(MarioGalaxy) or the tech held it back (StarWars FU)

For me, most of the top Wii games, (Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, Zelda Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword, Metroid Prime 3) would not have been as great without motion controls. It also allowed for games like Wii Sports Resort and Red Steel 2, which were uniquely invigorating and satisfying thanks to the intense motion control. 

All Mario did was add pointer controls, that game could have easily been made without any of that stuff and still be roughly the same, i personally hate having to shake the controller to do a spin attack. That is just useless addition. TP stuff was all over the place with accuracy. SS, Resort Redsteel2...those required motion+ an addon, which is  my point why wasnt it that accurate from day 1?



curl-6 on 10 April 2013
oniyide said:
curl-6 said:

For me, most of the top Wii games, (Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, Zelda Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword, Metroid Prime 3) would not have been as great without motion controls. It also allowed for games like Wii Sports Resort and Red Steel 2, which were uniquely invigorating and satisfying thanks to the intense motion control. 

All Mario did was add pointer controls, that game could have easily been made without any of that stuff and still be roughly the same, i personally hate having to shake the controller to do a spin attack. That is just useless addition. TP stuff was all over the place with accuracy. SS, Resort Redsteel2...those required motion+ an addon, which is  my point why wasnt it that accurate from day 1?

Mario also added the rolling ball and stingray/bird segments as well as using the pointer in various ways, all of which added fun and variety that wouldn't have been there with mere buttons and sticks. Spinning with a flick of the remote felt fantastic, smashing an enemy or propelling Mario into the air with a flick of the wrist is viscerally satisfying in a way that a simple button press could never be.

Swordplay in Twilight Princess had a similar kick, (tho not as refined or immersive as Skyward Sword) and aiming with the pointer was so much faster and more immersive than analogue.



Max King of the Wild on 10 April 2013

Aiming was not faster with the mote. I didn't play Mario so I can not comment on that. Flicking your wrist wasn't the point. It was suppose to simulate actually swinging a sword or bat so flicking is a negative in my opinion



curl-6 on 10 April 2013
Max King of the Wild said:
Aiming was not faster with the mote. I didn't play Mario so I can not comment on that. Flicking your wrist wasn't the point. It was suppose to simulate actually swinging a sword or bat so flicking is a negative in my opinion

Yes it is, you can point straight to your targets instead of tracking around the screen with analogue. Flicking is still more in line with a sword swing than just tapping a button. And its the movement that feels good; it conveys connection and impact, your movement affecting the game world.