JoeTheBro said:
Veknoid_Outcast said: I'm a little confused about your OP, Joe. Is it just to prove that no game idea necessitates the Gamepad? That may be true, but the GamePad allows a lot of cool functions: five-player local multiplayer, asymmetrical multiplayer, off-screen play, plus a bunch of other features that haven't been presented yet. But, again, the OP is strange to me. Super Mario 64 doesn't NEED an analog stick, but it sure makes the game a whole lot better. |
It's not to prove a point. It's actually just research really into the viability of asymmetrical tv-gamepad functionality.
Super Mario didn't need an analog stick, which is why there were 3D platformers on the original PlayStation. The d-pad was an ok substitute. Same as the DS3 is an ok substitute for the majority of wii u games. It's worse, but still a substitute.
What I'm interested are the gameplay possibilities that only a wii u type setup can offer. For example ZombiU having zombies on the tv and the backpack on the gamepad/gamer in game&wario. This experience is just impossible unless you have two screens a fair distance apart hindering your ability to look at both simultaneously.
|
Fair enough. Personally, I think Nintendo Land alone proves the usefulness of the GamePad, even if some of the mini-games could be reproduced with a somewhat dizzying and expensive alternative, e.g., four 3DS units.
Is the GamePad necessary? Again, no. But many of the things that have become commonplace in the industry were once inessential.
In any event, I'm hopeful Nintendo and some third-party developers will surprise us in the coming years with some truly special ideas for the GamePad.