at bolded: yeah it can, and probably even better than the wiiU tablet. because the vita has on board processing. it has a much higher resolution screen. much better touch screen technology, and more control inputs.

If Wii U had been a smash success, like wii, sony and ms would obviously have put more focus and development into their own tablet controller, right? Lets face it, vita remote is no where near the same as gamepad. Vita remote can't act as a second screen, it only mimicks the offscreen feature. And smart glass is not an xbox controller.

So if Nintendo turns the Wii U around, they will be the only ones with a true tablet controller with 100% attach rate. So if and when the competition tries to copy like they did the wii remote with move and kinect, they will still be behind.


What are your thoughts? Btw im not suggesting this was the plan all along. Do you think the fact that sony and ms didn't copy Nintendo's tablet strategy could help the house that Mario built?

Sorry it took me so long. I saw your reply and couldn't come up with a response. You misunderstood me actually. Right or wrong I was suggesting that if Wii U or 3DS had no exclusive features then they'd be crushed. Just like dreamcast, xbox, and gamecube were crushed by ps2. You are stating that 3D has nothing to do with 3DS success and touchscreen is not needed for Wii U to succeed. I'd like to get a response from you on how well they would do without those features! But if you can't answer then we have nothing left to discuss.


For pikmin 3 and mk8, probably you're right. Time will tell that's all. I really can't see it happening either. All I know is I haven't played them yet so I'm reserving my judgement and remaining hopeful.


Now, you asked why wouldn't the touchscreen be put on the backburner like the more popular motion control. I already answered that. The reason is, the touchscreen adds to the traditional dual analog controller, where as, the wii remote subracts from it. I can see if there is no demand and the expense is to high then sure, you have a point, the touchscreen could go on the backburner. My point is that having a touchscreen on your dual analog controller doesn't hinder the user who likes dual analog controls. So, I admit you have a point. It won't stay if users don't care about it because even though it all positives to the user, it's not worth to cost to the manufacturer. Ergo backburner like you said.


And for the discussion about it being silly for one person to have the 'alpha' controller while the other players are stuck with standard controllers. I see where it's a little weird. It just doesn't actually make a difference except in your head. There's no difference between using two ps3 controllers split-screen and using one gamepad and one pro controller split-screen (except that you don't have to split a screen). So, one more time, you are not subtracting anything from the dual analog experience when you add touchscreen. It's just hard for ppl to accept change. Please do address my questions from the first paragraph. Thank you.