| curl-6 said:
You've never offered anything that debunks it.
|
Now you're not even trying. Anyone who's been reading this thread knows that's a blatant lie.
"I only said it's controls are optional. Optional means it's up to the player to choose what their primary control scheme for it is"
"Nintendo most certainly sees motion control as secondary to traditional control now as shown by how they've scaled back on their mandatory implementations and how most games are mostly controlled by traditional controls with a traditional controller. ...games like Zelda and Splatoon motion is mostly used for aiming and nothing else while the rest of the game is played traditionally. It's no longer a tacked on inferior replacement for buttons for the most part."
"Your logic here is so messed up though, that just because a game has motion controls regardless of the extent of their usage, the game is primarily controlled by them, and even when you use the option to play without motion, the game is still primarily controlled by motion. I'm glad you acknowledged the Wii games though, the flagship motion control franchise that Nintendo has completely given up on."
And yes what I'm saying is demonstrably true. I don't use motion controls at all in Splatoon/Mario Kart/Woolly/World/etc., my primary control method is traditional controls. Yep in Splatoon motion is the default, but traditional is still my primary control scheme. In games like 3D World and Wonderful 101, the non-optional motion control usage while mandatory is not even apart of the core gameplay, it's just a rare diversion, so to say motion controls are the primary feature of these games is laughable. The relevance of the Wii series speaks for itself, nothing since Wii Fit U in early 2014, and Wii Sports Club was an afterthought. Nintendo obviously wouldn't just let their flagship motion control series die if they still thought of motion as their primary control.