I think people are so hung up on using the word necessity when what they really mean is compelling use. Most controller functions are not a necessity considering they can map to kb and mouse.

Anyway, the truth is Nintendo has not designed those compelling uses for Wii U yet through software, but we have seen some glimpses.

The most ironic thing is that a lot of interesting changes I have seen have been in "hardcore" games yet they get very little importance in reviews and such - map function, UI configuration, inventory management. Most of this attributes to a faster, more seamless experience, which is what the two new systems will probably be touting as the next gen advantage - less loading, faster downloading, screen snapping. Interesting to see if that will compel consumers though.

So far the best use of the Wii U Gamepad is Miiverse. The tablet and stylus make writing messages and drawing easy compared to other console experiences.

Well, I guess one out of three ain't bad!

This is twice in a row now that they've released a system that has a differentiator just for the sake of having a differentiator when its only real effect is to drive up the price of the console. Where the Wiimote was inspired, 3D and touch screens seem lazily swiped from what happened to be big at the time.

It might have been covered, but here's the gist:

It really -is- all about the games.

That doesn't mean hardware should just stay the same after a certain point though. We need to inspire the game makers to come up with new interesting things to play, or games will stagnate.

The second screen on the GamePad is much more an incentive for developers to stay creative than it is something that should in itself sell the system.

It should facilitate the envisioning of great software, that will then sell the system to consumers, so that consumers then proceed to buying more games.

As it really is all about the games from a monetary perspective as well for traditional console makers, unlike Apple, who earn most of their money selling hardware.

Makes sense?

I think its mostly the game but a console can make a difference to the quality of a game.

Its just about finding the right features for the right time at the right cost. Something which i understand is far more difficult than i make it sound.

While the lack of a flagship first party Gamepad game is problematic, I'm not quite sure where it became necessary for every game to create new and exciting uses for the Gamepad.

In this and the previous thread people have provided numerous useful and interesting uses for the Gamepad but for some reason or another all of these seem to have been dismissed. I am not going to reiterate those examples here but regardless the one thing that is clear about the WiiU design is that Nintendo wanted the thing to function as a more traditional dual analogue controller as well.

Ironically the opposing criticism was often leveled at Wii games, i.e. that 'waggle controls' were shoe-horned into games where they simply didn't belong to satisfy a popular need. Yet now it seems Nintendo has failed by not forcing Gamepad controls, asymmetric gameplay or whatever features some now deem 'mandatory' requirements, into all their Wii U games.

Miyamoto went on record many times to state he did not believe motion controls needed to be used in all games on the Wii and I'm almost certain he would hold the same position with respect to the Wii U and its Gamepad.

Nintendo may have failed to capture the imagination of the public with the Wii U, but then again few things have had the impact that Wii and Wii Sports did. In the end Nintendoland just wasn't the game they hoped it would be, but lack of instant or popular appeal does not necessarily mean that the Gamepad hasn't or won't add value to both gaming and non-gaming experiences. Having said that, not every game has to.

There will be games on the PS4 and XB1 that won't use the cloud, won't use all 8gigs of GDDR5, they will just be prettier versions of their predecessors and that too will be just fine.

Asymmetric gameplay

Just let it go. If you dont like the Wii U dont play it. But at the same time I dont want or need to know this and I doubt few others do either. Life is really not that complicated.

But if you really need others to explain to you the benefits then so be it. I can play COD on the TV while someone who is sitting next to me plays COD on the Gamepad without having any split screen degrading my experience. I can control 3 characters in Pikmin with great ease compared to using the Wiimote. In Zombi U I can easily control my inventory and do other interactions such as mini puzzles and unlocking doors on the gamepad that couldnt be done on other consoles without stopping gameplay. Which is important to maintain the atmosphere of the game.

I own all 3 consoles and despite buying The Last of Us and GOW assension have barely touched the 360 or the PS3 because the aforementioned games have been so much more enjoyable. And this is just the beginning as time goes on the GP will be used for more and more innovative things.

Or as I suspect you do, play FPS games all day long. Cause they are always bringing something new to gameing experiences lol

I get the OP. He's trying to find a rational reason to why the pad exists. The main thing companies want you to see is that it's used to create new ways to play stuff. This is true. It's there so that people can come up with new things. But it's also there to hook people.

This is how all products work: A car has this this and this feature. You save money if you do this. This TV show has CGI dragons. This show features strong women etc. Something not of the norm. There's 10 cop shows on TV. They do different things to each other. Allowing them to survive. If each one had 4 people, stereotyped woman, fat doughnut guy and tough black dude. People would stop watching the weaker ones. And your show is dead. People easily accuse things of being unoriginal. It's why movies like Battleship are made. It's something original. But with orginality risk people not liking it (U Pad), or rejecting it (Always online connection). So everything must do something different to justify its existence. In the Wii U's case. The pad doesn't sway enough people to do that. So Nintendo has to focus on other areas now. These things are apart of what determins something's sucess or failure. iPod could of been the loser and Zune winner. If Zune had the things majority of people wanted.

Everything that is trying to be sold to people must make it unquie to its past products and give a reason for the person to look at it, and want to buy it.

it enhances the games. Like ti or not but it's just true. A more seamingless experience.