magicmilner wrote:By proper i mean I want a return to a GC style controller. If they want to add a gamepad esq item then sell it alone. The gamepad was uncomfortable for me when playing games like Bayonetta
Yes, going backwards is the way to advance gaming.
magicmilner wrote:By proper i mean I want a return to a GC style controller. If they want to add a gamepad esq item then sell it alone. The gamepad was uncomfortable for me when playing games like Bayonetta
Which begs the question...why didn't you purchase a Nintendo Wii U Pro Controller?
Wii U already offers the ability to do what you want. I'd like to see Nintendo stick with trying something new (or at least a perfected version of the Gamepad) and offer what you call a 'proper' controller as an alternative.
magicmilner wrote:By proper i mean I want a return to a GC style controller. If they want to add a gamepad esq item then sell it alone. The gamepad was uncomfortable for me when playing games like Bayonetta
Yes, going backwards is the way to advance gaming.
How many genuinely new experiences did the gamepad deliver? If they do go for an unorthodox control scheme again then I hope they have games that are only possible thanks to the new controller.
Whilst it is debatable whether Nintendo have fulfilled the gamepad's potential, I am glad that they at least tried something different. It did offer new experiences, though perhaps it didn't prove as revolutionary as you would hope.
Still, out of the three companies, they are the only ones pushing new control schemes and new ways of interacting with games. The other two are more progressive in other areas - online infrastructure for one - but it is important that we keep trying new things in games and not just accepting that the 360 pad or the GC controller is the pinnacle of gaming controls and nothing will surpass it. We might get failures (though I wouldn't call the gamepad a failure; it is just a control method that is part of a failing console, so never saw the attention or innovation it deserved) but it is important to keep trying.
Besides, the Wii U offers more control options and methods than any other console, so it is a bit much to complain on that front. Only the PC offers more.
The gamepad has not really advanced anything, not when you look at what you could already experience on a DS/touch devices. It was also big and clunky so was not an ideal way to experience certain games like i said.
Had a thought, imagine if the NX is an add on device for an existing console? What if it stood for......Nintendo: Now on Xbox
Parksey wrote:Whilst it is debatable whether Nintendo have fulfilled the gamepad's potential, I am glad that they at least tried something different. It did offer new experiences, though perhaps it didn't prove as revolutionary as you would hope.
There's no debate there the gamepad hasn't lived up to potential, it's tragic really it offered control that was beyond the standard eight buttons we become accustomed to, For example I would have loved to have seen that second touchscreen be used aid control of a fighter plane/spaceship/etc or for a RTS or for the fact it can offer two angles of view at once (like playing a football game where the screen can be used for close up tacklin), developers made good use of the second screen with the DS I'm surprised the Wii U failed to enhance that experience,let. And it's not just Nintendo failing it's the industry in general, third parties where snobbish with the Wii U specs maybe if it was as powerful as the xbone at least it could have stood a better chance. What is a debate though is whether they'll use the gamepad concept again for the NX after it's been a associated with something that hasn't been a success. I hope they would
From a business perspective, with Nintendo's influence in Japan and Microsoft's in America, they'd be a better fit together.
Not that it's going to happen.
It would be like MS to go and buy a company, but Sony would give them room to develop games at their own pace and provide a more powerful system and wider demographic.
It's pointless and hypothetically anyway - Nintendo would cost so much to buy, it's arguable that anyone could even buy them.
And also, a Nintendo that was bought out and part of another company, would likely be radically different to the autonomous company we know today, that does things differently (in both a good and a bad sense). They would, effectively, be an arm of aother company and would undergo drastic changes in such a process.
I always think it is odd that people single out Nintendo as being vulnerable to going third party or being bought out. As I mentioned, they are still ridiculously weathy and as stubborn as ever. I can't imagine them working for anyone but themselves. In contrast, Microsoft and Sony (when we talk about them) are just one division of a massive, multi-focus company. I believe something radical would have to happen for either of them to be in trouble, but because they have to answer to other people further up a company hierarchy, I always see them as being in a potentially more perilous situation, should stuff go tits up. Especially MS, in my eyes. If they have a number of commercial failings, it isn't completely unrealistic to imagine them either folding their games division, retooling it to go third party or changing its focus to the entertainment side of things.
Nintendo have the simplest, purest company focus, so I always find it odd that people jump on any crisis they seem to have.
I think they're on course to make a pretty big profit for their latest financial year. They've matched the drop in revenue with cost cutting.
They're certainly not in bad shape as a business and things like the amiibo range and mobile gaming partnership will expand their income streams. I know they're worried about brand damage after getting burnt before but I really think they should be looking at using their franchises in movies too. The Sony email leaks hinted at discussions round Sony Pictures making a Mario film so it'll be interesting to see what develops there.