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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Choose your gimped feature on Watch Dogs for WiiU

 

Which will be the most likely feature missing from WiiU version?

No Online 60 18.18%
 
No Local Multiplayer 28 8.48%
 
No (future) DLC 193 58.48%
 
Missing Extras (i.e. bonu... 25 7.58%
 
Priced higher than other versions 23 6.97%
 
Total:329
DialgaMarine on 12 October 2013
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:
People actually care about the Wii-U version. Why not just buy it on a next gen console, if you don't want a gimped version?

Wii U is next gen.

And cos I consider the lack of a second screen controller for the PS4 and Xbox One versions to be a gimp.

 PS Vita and PS App say hello lol

But if not having a second screen means my console's RAM isn't cut in half, I think I can live without. But you can have fun playing the superior last gen version if a second means that much to you. ;)





0331 Happiness is a belt-fed weapon

Around the Network
curl-6 on 12 October 2013
DialgaMarine said:
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:
People actually care about the Wii-U version. Why not just buy it on a next gen console, if you don't want a gimped version?

Wii U is next gen.

And cos I consider the lack of a second screen controller for the PS4 and Xbox One versions to be a gimp.

 PS Vita and PS App say hello lol

But if not having a second screen means my console's RAM isn't cut in half, I think I can live without. But you can have fun playing the superior last gen version if a second means that much to you. ;)

Buying a Vita and a PS4 means paying what, $600 USD for the functionality I get for $300 USD out of the box with Wii U?

I probably won't end up buying Watchdogs on any system frankly.



DialgaMarine on 12 October 2013
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:
People actually care about the Wii-U version. Why not just buy it on a next gen console, if you don't want a gimped version?

Wii U is next gen.

And cos I consider the lack of a second screen controller for the PS4 and Xbox One versions to be a gimp.

 PS Vita and PS App say hello lol

But if not having a second screen means my console's RAM isn't cut in half, I think I can live without. But you can have fun playing the superior last gen version if a second means that much to you. ;)

Buying a Vita and a PS4 means paying what, $600 USD for the functionality I get for $350 USD out of the box with Wii U?

I probably won't end up buying Watchdogs on any system frankly.

 Well to be fair, the Vita in itself is a games console. It's not attached the console, can go anywhere, plays it's own games and apps, and it's remote play can be used elsewhere via internet. As well, the PS4 is also significantly more powerful than WIi-U. Yeah, Wii-U is cheaper, but any intelligent consumer would know that PS4 + Vita, though more expensive, offers much more bang for their buck. 

I'm not planning on getting it either, but preorders seem to show that most people know which version will be the best. ;)





0331 Happiness is a belt-fed weapon

curl-6 on 12 October 2013
DialgaMarine said:
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:
People actually care about the Wii-U version. Why not just buy it on a next gen console, if you don't want a gimped version?

Wii U is next gen.

And cos I consider the lack of a second screen controller for the PS4 and Xbox One versions to be a gimp.

 PS Vita and PS App say hello lol

But if not having a second screen means my console's RAM isn't cut in half, I think I can live without. But you can have fun playing the superior last gen version if a second means that much to you. ;)

Buying a Vita and a PS4 means paying what, $600 USD for the functionality I get for $350 USD out of the box with Wii U?

I probably won't end up buying Watchdogs on any system frankly.

 Well to be fair, the Vita in itself is a games console. It's not attached the console, can go anywhere, plays it's own games and apps, and it's remote play can be used elsewhere via internet. As well, the PS4 is also significantly more powerful than WIi-U. Yeah, Wii-U is cheaper, but any intelligent consumer would know that PS4 + Vita, though more expensive, offers much more bang for their buck. 

Except intelligent consumers who prefer Nintendo's games.

Wii U seems to offer much for bang for my buck.



Player2 on 12 October 2013

Only available in Esperanto. I'm tired of the no extras, no online, etc, I want to see more creativity in the gimping...



Around the Network
DialgaMarine on 12 October 2013
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:
People actually care about the Wii-U version. Why not just buy it on a next gen console, if you don't want a gimped version?

Wii U is next gen.

And cos I consider the lack of a second screen controller for the PS4 and Xbox One versions to be a gimp.

 PS Vita and PS App say hello lol

But if not having a second screen means my console's RAM isn't cut in half, I think I can live without. But you can have fun playing the superior last gen version if a second means that much to you. ;)

Buying a Vita and a PS4 means paying what, $600 USD for the functionality I get for $350 USD out of the box with Wii U?

I probably won't end up buying Watchdogs on any system frankly.

 Well to be fair, the Vita in itself is a games console. It's not attached the console, can go anywhere, plays it's own games and apps, and it's remote play can be used elsewhere via internet. As well, the PS4 is also significantly more powerful than WIi-U. Yeah, Wii-U is cheaper, but any intelligent consumer would know that PS4 + Vita, though more expensive, offers much more bang for their buck. 

Except intelligent consumers who prefer Nintendo's games.

Wii U seems to offer much for bang for my buck.

 Well, in that case, it's a to-each-his-own scenario. You want to play the same IPs forever, go Nintendo, you want some diversity, go Sony. Nintendo has great classic IPs, whereas Sony is consistently changing it up. It's all about attitude then. I personally feel like PS overall has given me more bang for my buck. :)





0331 Happiness is a belt-fed weapon

curl-6 on 12 October 2013
DialgaMarine said:

 Well, in that case, it's a to-each-his-own scenario. You want to play the same IPs forever, go Nintendo, you want some diversity, go Sony. Nintendo has great classic IPs, whereas Sony is consistently changing it up. It's all about attitude then. I personally feel like PS overall has given me more bang for my buck. :)

I'd disagree with this evaluation. Nintendo has plenty of diversity; they range from the cartoon platforming of Mario, to a philosopical open world JRPG in Xenoblade, (also a new IP) to the Alien-esque sci-fi of Metroid, to fantasy action-adventure in Zelda. Plus each series is consistenly changs things up, giving immense variety even within an IP; Wind Waker is unlike Twilight Princess, Mario Galaxy is unlike New Super Mario Bros.



burninmylight on 12 October 2013
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:

 Well, in that case, it's a to-each-his-own scenario. You want to play the same IPs forever, go Nintendo, you want some diversity, go Sony. Nintendo has great classic IPs, whereas Sony is consistently changing it up. It's all about attitude then. I personally feel like PS overall has given me more bang for my buck. :)

I'd disagree with this evaluation. Nintendo has plenty of diversity; they range from the cartoon platforming of Mario, to a philosopical open world JRPG in Xenoblade, (also a new IP) to the Alien-esque sci-fi of Metroid, to fantasy action-adventure in Zelda. Plus each series is consistenly changs things up, giving immense variety even within an IP; Wind Waker is unlike Twilight Princess, Mario Galaxy is unlike New Super Mario Bros.


Despite the fact that it is purely an opinion that will defer for each person, I'd like to reexamine the whole "bang for your buck" PS4 vs. Wii U thing.

Wii U = $300 + a potential free bundled game (Nintendoland, Wind Waker, Zombi U, NSMB and so on) + free online + Nintendo's exclusives (some of the most critically applauded games in the industry) + the cost of an external HDD (if you buy a bunch of indie and retail games and don't already have one laying around) = $350 (Wii U + free game + a 500GB HDD, jut putting it in there for the sake of it)

PS4 + Vita combo = $600 + at least one PS3 retail game with the purchase ($60) the cost of PS+ ($50 per year) + the best value Vita memory card if you're seriously gaming with the Vita = $660 + $50/year + 40$ for one Vita game and memory card = $750 at checkout if you decide to get all of these things Day 1. I purposefully did not include the price of a game with the Vita because there are several bundles available. If memory cards are included for free in those MSRP bundles, please correct me: I am not above reproach! However, I'd assume no 8GB memory card would last that long.

So $750 worth of stuff better be way, way, way more "bang for the buck" than $350 worth. "Any intelligent consumer" can see that. It's been my experience that intelligent consumers don't give a crap about which console is more powerful anyway. They buy them based on which one has the most games that interst them.



burninmylight on 12 October 2013

Accidental repost, sorry.



killerzX on 13 October 2013
burninmylight said:
curl-6 said:
DialgaMarine said:

 Well, in that case, it's a to-each-his-own scenario. You want to play the same IPs forever, go Nintendo, you want some diversity, go Sony. Nintendo has great classic IPs, whereas Sony is consistently changing it up. It's all about attitude then. I personally feel like PS overall has given me more bang for my buck. :)

I'd disagree with this evaluation. Nintendo has plenty of diversity; they range from the cartoon platforming of Mario, to a philosopical open world JRPG in Xenoblade, (also a new IP) to the Alien-esque sci-fi of Metroid, to fantasy action-adventure in Zelda. Plus each series is consistenly changs things up, giving immense variety even within an IP; Wind Waker is unlike Twilight Princess, Mario Galaxy is unlike New Super Mario Bros.


Despite the fact that it is purely an opinion that will defer for each person, I'd like to reexamine the whole "bang for your buck" PS4 vs. Wii U thing.

Wii U = $300 + a potential free bundled game (Nintendoland, Wind Waker, Zombi U, NSMB and so on) + free online + Nintendo's exclusives (some of the most critically applauded games in the industry) + the cost of an external HDD (if you buy a bunch of indie and retail games and don't already have one laying around) = $350 (Wii U + free game + a 500GB HDD, jut putting it in there for the sake of it)

PS4 + Vita combo = $600 + at least one PS3 retail game with the purchase ($60) the cost of PS+ ($50 per year) + the best value Vita memory card if you're seriously gaming with the Vita = $660 + $50/year + 40$ for one Vita game and memory card = $750 at checkout if you decide to get all of these things Day 1. I purposefully did not include the price of a game with the Vita because there are several bundles available. If memory cards are included for free in those MSRP bundles, please correct me: I am not above reproach! However, I'd assume no 8GB memory card would last that long.

So $750 worth of stuff better be way, way, way more "bang for the buck" than $350 worth. "Any intelligent consumer" can see that. It's been my experience that intelligent consumers don't give a crap about which console is more powerful anyway. They buy them based on which one has the most games that interst them.

your meme picture thing is wrong. it shows 2 pictures of Uncharted 1. the second image isnt uncharted 2. just goes to show how good even uncharted 1 looks even by todays standards. No Wii U game graphically better.

that is all.