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

Forums - Nintendo - Miyamoto Plans on Making Games Until He Dies

Gugerface said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
Gugerface said:

You probably felt exactly the same way when you used wiimote, right? Did you also tell that everyone who would try the wiimote would love it, perhaps?


I hated the Wii remote from start.

But the traditional controllers must have felt limited, because they lacked something which wiimote had. I can't see anyone enjoying gaming without an option which some people may or may not like ie. motion controls/secondary screen.


The Wii remote had no dual analogue sticks, three shoulder buttons and only one reachable face button (A) during fast-paced gameplay. Heck, that single stick wasn't even clickable. Motion controls did not fill up the massive void that those missing features created.

The Wii U GamePad is a whole different story. It sacrificed nothing for a big touch screen, motion controls and TV remote capabilities. Not to mention the enjoyment of playing games while in bed, far away from the console and the TV.



Around the Network
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
Gugerface said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
Gugerface said:

You probably felt exactly the same way when you used wiimote, right? Did you also tell that everyone who would try the wiimote would love it, perhaps?


I hated the Wii remote from start.

But the traditional controllers must have felt limited, because they lacked something which wiimote had. I can't see anyone enjoying gaming without an option which some people may or may not like ie. motion controls/secondary screen.


The Wii remote had no dual analogue sticks, three shoulder buttons and only one reachable face button (A) during fast-paced gameplay. Heck, that single stick wasn't even clickable. Motion controls did not fill up the massive void that those missing features created.

The Wii U GamePad is a whole different story. It sacrificed nothing for a big touch screen, motion controls and TV remote capabilities. Not to mention the enjoyment of playing games while in bed, far away from the console and the TV.


Motion controls replaced the tedious button push with glorious waggle. I can't see how anyone would not feel limited if they could not waggle their controller to open a door.

Tablet controller adds nothing to gameplay. I'd rather press a button to get the menu/map/whatever is there to a bigger screen than start looking for it from a tablet screen. Also the tablet is awful as a controller, I don't want to play with that. Does that thing even play all games remotely?

But guess what, I have a tv and a console in my bedroom. I guess without Wii U, I can't play while in bed anymore. Damn you.

Moderated,

-Mr Khan



didn't he say he was planning on making smaller games? I wonder what they will play like



 

Gugerface said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
The Wii remote had no dual analogue sticks, three shoulder buttons and only one reachable face button (A) during fast-paced gameplay. Heck, that single stick wasn't even clickable. Motion controls did not fill up the massive void that those missing features created.

The Wii U GamePad is a whole different story. It sacrificed nothing for a big touch screen, motion controls and TV remote capabilities. Not to mention the enjoyment of playing games while in bed, far away from the console and the TV.

 

1) Motion controls replaced the tedious button push with glorious waggle. I can't see how anyone would not feel limited if they could not waggle their controller to open a door.

 

2) Tablet controller adds nothing to gameplay. I'd rather press a button to get the menu/map/whatever is there to a bigger screen than start looking for it from a tablet screen. Also the tablet is awful as a controller, I don't want to play with that. Does that thing even play all games remotely?

3) But guess what, I have a tv and a console in my bedroom. I guess without Wii U, I can't play while in bed anymore. Damn you.


1) I take it that's a joke? Swinging your arms to open a door lock might be fun to experience a first time, but after a while it becomes nothing but a redundant feature. It's neither challenging nor rewarding. Unless you desperately want to get in shape while gaming.

2) There is still a start/select button that takes you to the menu where you can find your map. Nothing has changed. What the additional screen does is to remove the need to press those buttons as frequently as before. By displaying the map and weapon/ability options on the lower screen the game becomes more fluid as opposed to pausing the game every time you need to look at the map or change your equipment. The bottom line is though that the option to press start is still there in any case for those who prefer them, so there's no reason for anyone to complain.

Does it play all games remotely? No. But most games, yes. Nintendo Land is one example where having the TV nearby is necessary since the game is supposed to show what the GamePad and assymetric multiplayer has to offer. Which is a lot by the way. Other games like New Super Mario Bros., Mass Effect 3 and Batman: Archam City are fully playable without the TV. Third party titles in particular tend to have this ability since many of them are designed, originally, to be played without any extra features.

3) The extra features will still be there though. You won't get away from them that easily.



Glad to hear that. I enjoy his games.



 

Playstation = The Beast from the East

Sony + Nintendo = WIN! PS3 + PSV + PS4 + Wii U + 3DS


Around the Network
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
Gugerface said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
The Wii remote had no dual analogue sticks, three shoulder buttons and only one reachable face button (A) during fast-paced gameplay. Heck, that single stick wasn't even clickable. Motion controls did not fill up the massive void that those missing features created.

The Wii U GamePad is a whole different story. It sacrificed nothing for a big touch screen, motion controls and TV remote capabilities. Not to mention the enjoyment of playing games while in bed, far away from the console and the TV.

 

1) Motion controls replaced the tedious button push with glorious waggle. I can't see how anyone would not feel limited if they could not waggle their controller to open a door.

 

2) Tablet controller adds nothing to gameplay. I'd rather press a button to get the menu/map/whatever is there to a bigger screen than start looking for it from a tablet screen. Also the tablet is awful as a controller, I don't want to play with that. Does that thing even play all games remotely?

3) But guess what, I have a tv and a console in my bedroom. I guess without Wii U, I can't play while in bed anymore. Damn you.


1) I take it that's a joke? Swinging your arms to open a door lock might be fun to experience a first time, but after a while it becomes nothing but a redundant feature. It's neither challenging nor rewarding. Unless you desperately want to get in shape while gaming.

2) There is still a start/select button that takes you to the menu where you can find your map. Nothing has changed. What the additional screen does is to remove the need to press those buttons as frequently as before. By displaying the map and weapon/ability options on the lower screen the game becomes more fluid as opposed to pausing the game every time you need to look at the map or change your equipment. The bottom line is though that the option to press start is still there in any case for those who prefer them, so there's no reason to complain.

Does it play all games remotely? No. But most games, yes. Nintendo Land is one example where having the TV nearby is necessary since the game is supposed to show what assymetric gameplay has to offer. Which is a lot by the way. Other games like New Super Mario Bros., Mass Effect 3 and Batman: Archam City are fully playable without the TV. Third party titles in particular tend to have this ability since they are designed, originally, to be played without any extra features.

3) The extra features will still be there though. You won't get away from them that easily.


1) It is as much a joke as your claim of secondary screen making traditional controllers limited. I guess you can figure that one out.

2) So, it adds nothing as I already said. I still have to take my eyes of the screen which is just a big disturbance as pausing the game.

3) Just like you won't get away from that motion controls added a lot to the gameplay!



Gugerface said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:


The Wii remote had no dual analogue sticks, three shoulder buttons and only one reachable face button (A) during fast-paced gameplay. Heck, that single stick wasn't even clickable. Motion controls did not fill up the massive void that those missing features created.

The Wii U GamePad is a whole different story. It sacrificed nothing for a big touch screen, motion controls and TV remote capabilities. Not to mention the enjoyment of playing games while in bed, far away from the console and the TV.


Motion controls replaced the tedious button push with glorious waggle. I can't see how anyone would not feel limited if they could not waggle their controller to open a door.

Tablet controller adds nothing to gameplay. I'd rather press a button to get the menu/map/whatever is there to a bigger screen than start looking for it from a tablet screen. Also the tablet is awful as a controller, I don't want to play with that. Does that thing even play all games remotely?

But guess what, I have a tv and a console in my bedroom. I guess without Wii U, I can't play while in bed anymore. Damn you.

I think if we removed all the sarcasm in that post, we wouldn't be left with much. Maybe some punctuation and a thinly disguised vendetta.

A tablet controller does not add nothing to gamplay. Even if you only play Nintendo Land, the game bundled with Wii U, you can see, quite plainly, what new mechanics the GamePad offers video game fans. Asymmetrical multiplayer is the most publicized, but hardly the only innovation.

Don't be so quick to dismiss its novelty or its utility. And don't be so willfully ignorant of a major piece of video game technology just because it's supported by a company named Nintendo.



Veknoid_Outcast said:

I think if we removed all the sarcasm in that post, we wouldn't be left with much. Maybe some punctuation and a thinly disguised vendetta.

A tablet controller does not add nothing to gamplay. Even if you only play Nintendo Land, the game bundled with Wii U, you can see, quite plainly, what new mechanics the GamePad offers video game fans. Asymmetrical multiplayer is the most publicized, but hardly the only innovation.

Don't be so quick to dismiss its novelty or its utility. And don't be so willfully ignorant of a major piece of video game technology just because it's supported by a company named Nintendo.

Yeah, you nintendo fans seem to think a lot like that. If someone does not like something what your favourite company does, he must be a hater!! There is literally no way for you guys to even consider that maybe the product is not so good as your own biased views make it to be. But whatever.



Gugerface said:

Yeah, you nintendo fans seem to think a lot like that. If someone does not like something what your favourite company does, he must be a hater!! There is literally no way for you guys to even consider that maybe the product is not so good as your own biased views make it to be. But whatever.

 


I take it you somehow forgot that I am a Nintendo fan who hate the Wii remote?



IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

Gugerface said:

Yeah, you nintendo fans seem to think a lot like that. If someone does not like something what your favourite company does, he must be a hater!! There is literally no way for you guys to even consider that maybe the product is not so good as your own biased views make it to be. But whatever.

 


I take it you somehow forgot that I am a Nintendo fan who hate the Wii remote?


I take it that you did notice that I was not quoting your post but still decided to come and post that anyway?