Wii 2 hopes...

I hope the Wii 2 does away with one of the features found on the original Wii. That feature is... ...having to plug in your classic controller into the wii remote in order to use it. Why do they do it. It makes no sense to me that they never made classic controllers that had the same input as a gamecube controllers. It would let you plug the classic controller in to the top of the wii and not have to have a wii remote in the way when playing. I think its one of the worst things about the wii and i would probably play it more if it just plugged in to the sockets underneath the door on the top. On another topic: With rumours of Wii 2 coming out i hope this is not nintendo cashing in on the whole "Apple. Ipad. Apps" craze by implementing a screen on your controller for smaller games and programs ( "note that no one has come out and said that there will be a screen and this is what its for). I can only imagine that this is why they would add a screen. Of course it works on a handheld like the ds (you need to see whats happening) but on a home console you already have your tv. I think they might be looking at all the sales that ipads make on cheap games and think it might be a more poplular way of getting out cheap - short games that have no appeal to fans who want something deep that you don't often get on nintendo consoles today. thoughts?mountainflames

In my opinion i never found the Classic Controller being plugged into the Wii Remote to be a problem, but that just me. As for the rumored small screen on the Controller there is many uses that it could have. Showing the player a map of the game instead of having to open up a seperate window in game, Show whats in a players inventory, there next objective, in game stats, how much health and bullets the have left. All this i think is a good step towards having games that don't have hundreds of different bars and windows on the games screen but at the same time the player can keep track of it without having to pause the action and go through screen after screen just to find out if they have a keycard or whatever.

As for Nintendo cashing in on the App craze, I again have no problem with this whatsoever. Nintendo are in the business to make money, if they feel that they can attract the casual and hardcore gamer market in one machine then all the power to them. If you don't like the App games then no one is forcing you to play them.

[QUOTE="mountainflames"]I hope the Wii 2 does away with one of the features found on the original Wii. That feature is... ...having to plug in your classic controller into the wii remote in order to use it. Why do they do it. It makes no sense to me that they never made classic controllers that had the same input as a gamecube controllers. It would let you plug the classic controller in to the top of the wii and not have to have a wii remote in the way when playing. I think its one of the worst things about the wii and i would probably play it more if it just plugged in to the sockets underneath the door on the top. On another topic: With rumours of Wii 2 coming out i hope this is not nintendo cashing in on the whole "Apple. Ipad. Apps" craze by implementing a screen on your controller for smaller games and programs ( "note that no one has come out and said that there will be a screen and this is what its for). I can only imagine that this is why they would add a screen. Of course it works on a handheld like the ds (you need to see whats happening) but on a home console you already have your tv. I think they might be looking at all the sales that ipads make on cheap games and think it might be a more poplular way of getting out cheap - short games that have no appeal to fans who want something deep that you don't often get on nintendo consoles today. thoughts?Mr-Espresso

In my opinion i never found the Classic Controller being plugged into the Wii Remote to be a problem, but that just me. As for the rumored small screen on the Controller there is many uses that it could have. Showing the player a map of the game instead of having to open up a seperate window in game, Show whats in a players inventory, there next objective, in game stats, how much health and bullets the have left. All this i think is a good step towards having games that don't have hundreds of different bars and windows on the games screen but at the same time the player can keep track of it without having to pause the action and go through screen after screen just to find out if they have a keycard or whatever.

As for Nintendo cashing in on the App craze, I again have no problem with this whatsoever. Nintendo are in the business to make money, if they feel that they can attract the casual and hardcore gamer market in one machine then all the power to them. If you don't like the App games then no one is forcing you to play them.

[QUOTE="Mr-Espresso"]

[QUOTE="mountainflames"]I hope the Wii 2 does away with one of the features found on the original Wii. That feature is... ...having to plug in your classic controller into the wii remote in order to use it. Why do they do it. It makes no sense to me that they never made classic controllers that had the same input as a gamecube controllers. It would let you plug the classic controller in to the top of the wii and not have to have a wii remote in the way when playing. I think its one of the worst things about the wii and i would probably play it more if it just plugged in to the sockets underneath the door on the top. On another topic: With rumours of Wii 2 coming out i hope this is not nintendo cashing in on the whole "Apple. Ipad. Apps" craze by implementing a screen on your controller for smaller games and programs ( "note that no one has come out and said that there will be a screen and this is what its for). I can only imagine that this is why they would add a screen. Of course it works on a handheld like the ds (you need to see whats happening) but on a home console you already have your tv. I think they might be looking at all the sales that ipads make on cheap games and think it might be a more poplular way of getting out cheap - short games that have no appeal to fans who want something deep that you don't often get on nintendo consoles today. thoughts?mountainflames

In my opinion i never found the Classic Controller being plugged into the Wii Remote to be a problem, but that just me. As for the rumored small screen on the Controller there is many uses that it could have. Showing the player a map of the game instead of having to open up a seperate window in game, Show whats in a players inventory, there next objective, in game stats, how much health and bullets the have left. All this i think is a good step towards having games that don't have hundreds of different bars and windows on the games screen but at the same time the player can keep track of it without having to pause the action and go through screen after screen just to find out if they have a keycard or whatever.

As for Nintendo cashing in on the App craze, I again have no problem with this whatsoever. Nintendo are in the business to make money, if they feel that they can attract the casual and hardcore gamer market in one machine then all the power to them. If you don't like the App games then no one is forcing you to play them.

I totally agree that the Wii2 needs more 3rd Party, but also the Wii as far as i can see was meant to be built for the casual gamer market because thats what has brought the money for Nintendo in the past. With casual gamers being attracted with Smartphones and iPads and such like you said, Nintendo has to rethink there tactics and with the Wii2 it looks like there trying to appeal to both parties which is a very much win situation for them. Also one of the main reasons that the Wii has been very quiet in terms of 3rd Party games is the lack of graphics and power that really hinders what developers want to do, many developers didn't want to have to tone down there games just for a Wii release when they could release it on the two HD consoles and then maybe port the game to the Wii at a later date depending on popularity (Call of Duty is a good examples of this).

In my opinion i never found the Classic Controller being plugged into the Wii Remote to be a problem.Mr-Espresso

that's the reason the CC is cheap too

lol TC have you never heard of the DS? It has a touch screen too you know. And the whole transfer thing, if true, likely only works within a certain vicinity of the console, if they were trying to tap into the handheld market with that, they would be doing a poor job and only stepping on their own toes by making the console tread into the handheld market. This thing would have nothing to do with Apple or Apps, that's what the 3DS is for. And the short cheap games you find on Wii Ware, PSN etc is something everyone is doing as it taps the indy market that were given away their games for free for years on the PC. Things like Cave Story, And Yet It Moves and so on all come from free games you could get years ago. Sepewrath

Same here

• A traditional controller that connects to the console on it's own without the need to plug into the Wii remote
• The ability to play DVDs. Come on, I don't need to here that crap about "Duur it's game console" or "We have Netflix". Even if we do have netflix on the next one, the fact is a wide portion of Netflix's Instant's library isn't in HD, and it's not that great(the streaming selection, not netflix it's self)
• A large hard drive, that rumor that there will be no hard drive again is pretty stupid and killed part of my optimism for this thing. A harddrive is needed, I don't care if it's only 30GB or 40GB out of the box, if we don't need to install an unecessary amoumy of crap(looking at you Sony/PS3), then it'll be pretty good.
• An actual headset. It's no wonder Wii Speak failed, lack of support and games and stupid made around the kids style, I got it and it seemed pretty ok, never used it at all, even on Animal Crossing. I only have about two actual friends with Wiis, and they don't play them anymore. Be it, they're not gamers.
• This is a little nitpicky, shallow, and aesthetics based but can we have console openings back? What? Are in a time where everyone is too serious to play a platformer, that we can't have a good system intro?
• Don't promise handheld to console connectivity ever again, or don't put emphasis on it. Two gens of supposed great useful connectivity between handhelds, both failed(GCN, Wii) can we just not go down this route again? Especially if the controller is to have a screen.
• Yes keep backward's compatability disc wise with GCN, buy shouldn't this new console be able to download Gamecube games? Xbox and PS3 lets you download certain full on current gen titles, and I'm pretty sure something like Burnout Paradise or InFamous out spaces any game of the last gen of console(PS2, GCN, Xbox)
• An easy no hassle way of letting me move my Wii purchases to the new console
• A worthy launch window. I think a new Smash Bros would be perfect since even though Brawl was great it had a shoter time in the light than Melee which came out years before it did. Better online, gameplay closer to Melee's with better graphics and stages. A return of SSB 64 stages. Lets face it, it's the 2010s the 90s are retro now, 2 decades about. SNES and N64 are retro gaming now, and 90s nostalgia is a big emerging market
• Better online, friend's list etc. We're not all kids, Nintendo; remember that.

alright there goonna make a OoT HD for this lol

Anyways I love how the classic controller pro plug into the wii mote is. I LOVE WIRELESS!!! If I stand up I put thew wii mote in my pocket no biggi.

Given that reports peg the controller as being a conventional type, you probably won't even need the classic controller. The new one will probably serve its purpose.

Another thing that nobody else has been saying is that Nintendo should keep the Virtual Console, and they should add more to it (like GCN games).Gam3r29

I don't know. They'd have to have quite the storage capacity on the system if they were going to put GameCube games up for download. They'd likely need at least around a hundred gigabytes.

I would like…

If they are going to incorporate motion controls with this thing I wouldlike themto include at least a second sensor bar. One at the front like where the Wii's one is now. A second one at 90 degrees to the side (wireless of course). This might be able to add some responsiveness to the movements you make. Sure if it needs it I would prefer 4 sensor bars so the person was surrounded like them. Make them like speakers and incorporate it into a surround sound system or something that would just make it all the more cooler.

Improved graphics or whatever it takes so that the next Nintendo doesn't simply get watered down versions of the other games. I used to love the FIFA games and get them every year. On the Wii they are shotty arcade versions of the real thing. I only play FIFA on my mates Xbox now and it's something I miss. There are many other games in the same category. It seems the general consensus is that the Wii gets watered down games because it is so different to design for than the other consoles. If graphics is the problem something to fix it would be good.

That's enough for now but those are my biggest issues with the Wii at the moment. The channels at the moment are good and will only improve (if they stick with the concept)

Given that reports peg the controller as being a conventional type, you probably won't even need the classic controller. The new one will probably serve its purpose.

[QUOTE="Gam3r29"]Another thing that nobody else has been saying is that Nintendo should keep the Virtual Console, and they should add more to it (like GCN games).c_rake

I don't know. They'd have to have quite the storage capacity on the system if they were going to put GameCube games up for download. They'd likely need at least around a hundred gigabytes.

Terrabyte hard-drives have been selling for less than $50. If Nintendo can't have at least 100GB, then they deserve to lose the next-gen

Terrabyte hard-drives have been selling for less than $50. If Nintendo can't have at least 100GB, then they deserve to lose the next-genGojiMaster

The rumors have been saying it's only gonna have 8GB of flash memory, I think. Not a whole lot. I'm really hoping that ain't the case.

The only major thing I want is for it to be properly supported. The wii is lagging at the moment and many people are pointing to the same reasons that it was never supposed to be successful to be begin with. In other words, they are wrong to say that the wii's hardware deficiencies have caught up with it. The wii is lagging because it is not properly supported with excellent software. I blame nintendo for much of that. The first half of software was better than the second so far. Nintendo is a pale shadow of how they supported the gamecube. Third parties have not supported the wii nearly to the degree that they are supporting the other consoles despite the wii's userbase supremacy.

If we are talking hardware, I really believe that nintendo MUST put a serious hard drive in their next system. This is useful not just for game saves but for VC titles (sheesh nintendo), game installs, and other downloadables. Also, make VC games transferable from the wii to wii2

[QUOTE="Mr-Espresso"]

In my opinion i never found the Classic Controller being plugged into the Wii Remote to be a problem.JuarN18

that's the reason the CC is cheap too

I just hope that if it does backwards play wii games it upscales the resolution of them to 720p/1080p. I can tell you then i would basicly buy all the wii games i wanted to but i didnt because of the low resolution problem i had with the wii. Once i moved up to a big 42" 1080p flatscreen the 480p picture the wii displayed was too blury.

They should have just made the classic controller wireless.riariases

[QUOTE="GojiMaster"]Terrabyte hard-drives have been selling for less than $50. If Nintendo can't have at least 100GB, then they deserve to lose the next-genc_rake

The rumors have been saying it's only gonna have 8GB of flash memory, I think. Not a whole lot. I'm really hoping that ain't the case.

Another thing that nobody else has been saying is that Nintendo should keep the Virtual Console, and they should add more to it (like GCN games).Gam3r29

- Scrap the controller screen; I think it will have more disadvantages than advantages.supmt

It is worth noting that flash memory... especially high performance flash memory... does cost a lot more per GB than hard drives. ThePlothole

Then that makes going with flash memory that much dumber. If Nintendo's smart they'll go with an actual hard drive.

Imho I think they should make the new Wii2 games ALL with both standard controlls and motion controls compatable.

Imho I think they should make the new Wii2 games ALL with both standard controlls and motion controls compatable.

HeavyMetalKirby

lol TC have you never heard of the DS? It has a touch screen too you know. And the whole transfer thing, if true, likely only works within a certain vicinity of the console, if they were trying to tap into the handheld market with that, they would be doing a poor job and only stepping on their own toes by making the console tread into the handheld market. This thing would have nothing to do with Apple or Apps, that's what the 3DS is for. And the short cheap games you find on Wii Ware, PSN etc is something everyone is doing as it taps the indy market that were given away their games for free for years on the PC. Things like Cave Story, And Yet It Moves and so on all come from free games you could get years ago. Sepewrath

[QUOTE="riariases"]They should have just made the classic controller wireless.ThePlothole

[QUOTE="HeavyMetalKirby"]

Imho I think they should make the new Wii2 games ALL with both standard controlls and motion controls compatable.

ThePlothole

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="HeavyMetalKirby"]

Imho I think they should make the new Wii2 games ALL with both standard controlls and motion controls compatable.

riariases

[QUOTE="riariases"]

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"] Making games fully compatible with a standard controller makes it difficult if not impossible to fully ultilize motion controls.ThePlothole

Substituting button pressed and analog stick movement is what motion control is. Think of it in terms of Killzone 3. Switch out the analog stick for an on-screen pointer, reload with a twist of your hand and boot kick or swing your gun with a jab of the controlle, etc. What more do you want them to do with it? Because I'm not seeing much more they could do. Kinect is a whole different issue. Since it maps your whole body as a controller, the possibilities are endless. There aren't as many buttons on a standard game controller as there are movements associated with the human body.riariases

[QUOTE="riariases"]Substituting button pressed and analog stick movement is what motion control is. Think of it in terms of Killzone 3. Switch out the analog stick for an on-screen pointer, reload with a twist of your hand and boot kick or swing your gun with a jab of the controlle, etc. What more do you want them to do with it? Because I'm not seeing much more they could do. Kinect is a whole different issue. Since it maps your whole body as a controller, the possibilities are endless. There aren't as many buttons on a standard game controller as there are movements associated with the human body.supmt

Example: You can swing your sword with 'A' or you can swing it with moving the controller. The difference is you have more options in which direction and angle to swing it at. You can aim your gun with an analog stick or you can use the on-screen pointer to aim. The difference is you're gonna get more accurate aiming and a lot quicker. You can shoot a basketball with the 'B' button or you can bring your controller over your head and thrust it forward.

Motion controls with a controller just adds to the experience but it doesn't change it so much. Kinect is the exception. P.S. Wii Motion+ makes the Wii and Move controller identical in function. I don't see any differences aside from controller design.

Substituting button pressed and analog stick movement is what motion control is. Think of it in terms of Killzone 3. Switch out the analog stick for an on-screen pointer, reload with a twist of your hand and boot kick or swing your gun with a jab of the controlle, etc. What more do you want them to do with it? Because I'm not seeing much more they could do. Kinect is a whole different issue. Since it maps your whole body as a controller, the possibilities are endless. There aren't as many buttons on a standard game controller as there are movements associated with the human body.

riariases

Since we really have to stop comparing other systems, I'm first going to point out that FPS on the Wii generally have very similar controls.

Now a Wiimote with Wii motion plus is capable of detecting roughly one to one movement in both tilt and acceleration, on the X, Y, and Z axes. That is six axes of analog information, with far smoother gradation than is possible with a tiny analog stick, and they can be manipulated all at onces. In practice what this means is that you can not only swing a sword, but precisely control the angle and speed in which it is swung. You can also manipulate 3D objects in a far more intuitive manor.

So while then number of possible inputs is more limited than full body tracking, it is also greater than a conventional controller. And body tracking has some limitations too. Like how do you tell your character to move through an expansive environment without an analog stick? And what about feedback? I think the ultimate solution is a hybrid of body tracking and a handheld motion controller. And who knows, that might be the direction Nintendo takes next gen.

[QUOTE="riariases"]

Substituting button pressed and analog stick movement is what motion control is. Think of it in terms of Killzone 3. Switch out the analog stick for an on-screen pointer, reload with a twist of your hand and boot kick or swing your gun with a jab of the controlle, etc. What more do you want them to do with it? Because I'm not seeing much more they could do. Kinect is a whole different issue. Since it maps your whole body as a controller, the possibilities are endless. There aren't as many buttons on a standard game controller as there are movements associated with the human body.

ThePlothole

Since we really have to stop comparing other systems, I'm first going to point out that FPS on the Wii generally have very similar controls.

Now a Wiimote with Wii motion plus is capable of detecting roughly one to one movement in both tilt and acceleration, on the X, Y, and Z axes. That is six axes of analog information, with far smoother gradation than is possible with a tiny analog stick, and they can be manipulated all at onces. In practice what this means is that you can not only swing a sword, but precisely control the angle and speed in which it is swung. You can also manipulate 3D objects in a far more intuitive manor.

So while then number of possible inputs is more limited than full body tracking, it is also greater than a conventional controller. And body tracking has some limitations too. Like how do you tell your character to move through an expansive environment without an analog stick? And what about feedback? I think the ultimate solution is a hybrid of body tracking and a handheld motion controller. And who knows, that might be the direction Nintendo takes next gen.

Your right. But my original point was about standard/motion control games. Just because they're compatible with both doesn't mean they can't fully utilize motion controls.

riariases

But making every single game compatible with a standard controller, as HeavyMetalKirby suggested, does limit the number of ways the motion controller can be used. That was my whole point.

[QUOTE="riariases"]

Your right. But my original point was about standard/motion control games. Just because they're compatible with both doesn't mean they can't fully utilize motion controls.

ThePlothole

But making every single game compatible with a standard controller, as HeavyMetalKirby suggested, does limit the number of ways the motion controller can be used. That was my whole point.

Shooters, racers, platformers, puzzle and tactical games can be fully functional with standard and motion controls but action, role playing, sports, adventure and fighting games would see some majour differences with the two control types. You can't hit a baseball with the hit of a button the same as you could swing a motion controller, but you can steer a car the same because you're just replacing a gyrosensor for an analog stick, play shooters the same because you're just replacing an analog stick with anon-screen pointer, and there isn't much control-wise when it comes to puzzle and tactical games.

Since we really have to stop comparing other systems, I'm first going to point out that FPS on the Wii generally have very similar controls.ThePlothole

I'm just going to chime in and say, yes -- you should. Let's not forget that we're in the Nintendo Wii board, okay? Other platforms and the like aren't allowed to be mentioned here. If you wanna do that you can head elsewhere. We clear? Cool.

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="riariases"]

Your right. But my original point was about standard/motion control games. Just because they're compatible with both doesn't mean they can't fully utilize motion controls.

riariases

But making every single game compatible with a standard controller, as HeavyMetalKirby suggested, does limit the number of ways the motion controller can be used. That was my whole point.

Shooters, racers, platformers, puzzle and tactical games can be fully functional with standard and motion controls but action, role playing, sports, adventure and fighting games would see some majour differences with the two control types. You can't hit a baseball with the hit of a button the same as you could swing a motion controller, but you can steer a car the same because you're just replacing a gyrosensor for an analog stick, play shooters the same because you're just replacing an analog stick with anon-screen pointer, and there isn't much control-wise when it comes to puzzle and tactical games.

[QUOTE="riariases"]

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"]

But making every single game compatible with a standard controller, as HeavyMetalKirby suggested, does limit the number of ways the motion controller can be used. That was my whole point.

ThePlothole

Shooters, racers, platformers, puzzle and tactical games can be fully functional with standard and motion controls but action, role playing, sports, adventure and fighting games would see some majour differences with the two control types. You can't hit a baseball with the hit of a button the same as you could swing a motion controller, but you can steer a car the same because you're just replacing a gyrosensor for an analog stick, play shooters the same because you're just replacing an analog stick with anon-screen pointer, and there isn't much control-wise when it comes to puzzle and tactical games.

And Super Mario Galaxy is an adventure game. I'm pretty sure I said adventure games wouldn't work with both control types, even though Super Mario Galaxy is an exception. Any game NOT using Wii Motion+ (just a regular Wii controller) can be compatible with a standard controller. Waggle controls can be mapped to a button and on-screen pointing can be replaced with an analog stick.

And that level in Super Mario Galaxy would still work out with an analog stick. Any game where you have to aim with an analog stick, there are sensitivity setttings. If you're not moving the analog cursor quick enough, raise the sensitivity setting. Done deal.

In terms of standard to motion controls, I'm only including Kinect, PS Move and Wii Motion+. The Wii controller alone isn't enough of a difference from standard controls. There isn't accurate X, Y and Z axis sensing. Any shake or waggle you can do with a normal Wii controller can be done with a single hit of a button. With Wii Motion +, you can move at an infinite amount of angles and positions and at infinite levels of velocity. A single button can only do a single action over and over again.

And Super Mario Galaxy is an adventure game. I'm pretty sure I said adventure games wouldn't work with both control types, even though Super Mario Galaxy is an exception. Any game NOT using Wii Motion+ (just a regular Wii controller) can be compatible with a standard controller. Waggle controls can be mapped to a button and on-screen pointing can be replaced with an analog stick.

And that level in Super Mario Galaxy would still work out with an analog stick. Any game where you have to aim with an analog stick, there are sensitivity setttings. If you're not moving the analog cursor quick enough, raise the sensitivity setting. Done deal.

riariases

[QUOTE="riariases"]

And Super Mario Galaxy is an adventure game. I'm pretty sure I said adventure games wouldn't work with both control types, even though Super Mario Galaxy is an exception. Any game NOT using Wii Motion+ (just a regular Wii controller) can be compatible with a standard controller. Waggle controls can be mapped to a button and on-screen pointing can be replaced with an analog stick.

And that level in Super Mario Galaxy would still work out with an analog stick. Any game where you have to aim with an analog stick, there are sensitivity setttings. If you're not moving the analog cursor quick enough, raise the sensitivity setting. Done deal.

ThePlothole

your hope is answered because nintendos controller is that of a gc controller just with a screen built in

and it will still probably be compatible with current wii motes ,

or have its own 2ndary controller, -that is a wii mote like thing

as they said it will have motion still maybe its in the controller i mentioned or bc with wii mote b ut ya your hopes is answered by rumor already

and its solid already given the fact its been sorta announced,

and such

but touching on more 3rd party support naw it cant get any better just the types of games maybe but the publishers already supported wii the only 1 i think that didnt was valve ,

but every one and their mother else did , just not with a fps this fps that market, and thats a good thing , cause i sure as heck dont want a wii with hundreds of generic fpses and next to nothing in between

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="riariases"]

And Super Mario Galaxy is an adventure game. I'm pretty sure I said adventure games wouldn't work with both control types, even though Super Mario Galaxy is an exception. Any game NOT using Wii Motion+ (just a regular Wii controller) can be compatible with a standard controller. Waggle controls can be mapped to a button and on-screen pointing can be replaced with an analog stick.

And that level in Super Mario Galaxy would still work out with an analog stick. Any game where you have to aim with an analog stick, there are sensitivity setttings. If you're not moving the analog cursor quick enough, raise the sensitivity setting. Done deal.

AlmightyDerek

But yeah, I don't mind waggle control either, it's just not the real motion sensing of this generation. It's like the 1.5 step inbetween standard and motion.

your hope is answered because nintendos controller is that of a gc controller just with a screen built in

{snip}

as they said it will have motion still maybe its in the controller i mentioned or bc with wii mote b ut ya your hopes is answered by rumor already

and its solid already given the fact its been sorta announced.

mariokart64fan

Rumors are just that: rumors. And this isn't even the first time a Nintendo home console has been rumored to have a touchscreen equipped gamepad. We were hearing the exact same thing before the Wii was announced. I honestly wouldn't put much weight in it this time.

It's really not so hard. That's why FPS's, RTS's and on rail shooters have all been working with analog sticks even before this motion sensing era of gaming. That's not saying it doesn't work better with a Wii controller, but it still works good without one.

But yeah, I don't mind waggle control either, it's just not the real motion sensing of this generation. It's like the 1.5 step inbetween standard and motion.

riariases

While they may technically work... and I would argue whether the word "good" can really be used with all but the most basic RTS... generally that's because the developer has tweaked the gameplay so that it's not so much of a handicap. AIs don't move around as much. Hit boxes are bigger. Players are given more time to react. Things like that.

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="riariases"] But it doesn't have to. There are those games like Wii Sports Resort that wouldn't work with a controller, but that's just because of the type of game those are.But GoldenEye, Zelda: The Twilight Princess,Mariokartandplenty of games aren't being held back. Twilight Princess was held backby the poor functionality of the Wiicontroller without Wii Motion+, but the Gamecube version could play with button controls just the same.

Shooters, racers, platformers, puzzle and tactical games can be fully functional with standard and motion controls but action, role playing, sports, adventure and fighting games would see some majour differences with the two control types. You can't hit a baseball with the hit of a button the same as you could swing a motion controller, but you can steer a car the same because you're just replacing a gyrosensor for an analog stick, play shooters the same because you're just replacing an analog stick with anon-screen pointer, and there isn't much control-wise when it comes to puzzle and tactical games.

riariases

And Super Mario Galaxy is an adventure game. I'm pretty sure I said adventure games wouldn't work with both control types, even though Super Mario Galaxy is an exception. Any game NOT using Wii Motion+ (just a regular Wii controller) can be compatible with a standard controller. Waggle controls can be mapped to a button and on-screen pointing can be replaced with an analog stick.

And that level in Super Mario Galaxy would still work out with an analog stick. Any game where you have to aim with an analog stick, there are sensitivity setttings. If you're not moving the analog cursor quick enough, raise the sensitivity setting. Done deal.

In terms of standard to motion controls, I'm only including Kinect, PS Move and Wii Motion+. The Wii controller alone isn't enough of a difference from standard controls. There isn't accurate X, Y and Z axis sensing. Any shake or waggle you can do with a normal Wii controller can be done with a single hit of a button. With Wii Motion +, you can move at an infinite amount of angles and positions and at infinite levels of velocity. A single button can only do a single action over and over again.

I'd rather want developers not wasting time on trying to implent both ways of controling just because ,it would work'. Silent Hill Wii got a PSP release with traditional controles tacked on later and it scored like 10% lower than the Wii version in reviews... it wasn't necessary, just made the game less immersive. No More Heroes 2 got Classic Controller support that was simply horrible, as waste of developing time. The PS3 version of No More Heroes 1 without ,,waggle'' sounds horrible in every impression I've read. Pointer controls should be standard, since they are clearly superior if done right. The people prefering dual analog over that are either doing it wrong (acting like in Wii commercials, lol) or are the same kind, that would complain about how the analog stick ist clearly inferior to ,traditional D-Pad' at the start of the N64 era.

You're basically saying that every RTS game before the Wii,or any game that depends on the right analog stick for that matter, had bad controls. I've been playing Supreme Commander for Xbox 360 and the controls are perfect. The analog cursor doesn't move too slow either. It would be BETTER with a Wii controller but it works GOOD with an analog stick. And if analog controls for FPS games are so bad, then why are there so many of them? And why are all the Wii FPS's getting worse reviews than standard control FPS's, even though Wii FPS's have superior control schemes? And haven't you ever heard of the Starcraft or Warcraft series? Both of those games are RTS, have been working fine for a very long time and neither one uses anything like a Wii on-screen pointer. Yeah, they use a mouse but it's the same old arguement. That's why the PC and Xbox 360/PS3 get so many multiplatform games. Because they all use similar control schemes.

[QUOTE="riariases"]

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"] I said "every single game". That includes Wii Sports Resort. And even Mario Galaxy would need to have several of its levels redesigned in order for it to work properly with a conventional controller (eg. An analog stick just wouldn't let you aim the cursor at those those little gravity magnets quick enough).MangaPicture

And Super Mario Galaxy is an adventure game. I'm pretty sure I said adventure games wouldn't work with both control types, even though Super Mario Galaxy is an exception. Any game NOT using Wii Motion+ (just a regular Wii controller) can be compatible with a standard controller. Waggle controls can be mapped to a button and on-screen pointing can be replaced with an analog stick.

And that level in Super Mario Galaxy would still work out with an analog stick. Any game where you have to aim with an analog stick, there are sensitivity setttings. If you're not moving the analog cursor quick enough, raise the sensitivity setting. Done deal.

In terms of standard to motion controls, I'm only including Kinect, PS Move and Wii Motion+. The Wii controller alone isn't enough of a difference from standard controls. There isn't accurate X, Y and Z axis sensing. Any shake or waggle you can do with a normal Wii controller can be done with a single hit of a button. With Wii Motion +, you can move at an infinite amount of angles and positions and at infinite levels of velocity. A single button can only do a single action over and over again.

I'd rather want developers not wasting time on trying to implent both ways of controling just because ,it would work'. Silent Hill Wii got a PSP release with traditional controles tacked on later and it scored like 10% lower than the Wii version in reviews... it wasn't necessary, just made the game less immersive. No More Heroes 2 got ****c Controller support that was simply horrible, as waste of developing time. The PS3 version of No More Heroes 1 without ,,waggle'' sounds horrible in every impression I've read. Pointer controls should be standard, since they are clearly superior if done right. The people prefering dual analog over that are either doing it wrong (acting like in Wii commercials, lol) or are the same kind, that would complain about how the analog stick ist clearly inferior to ,traditional D-Pad' at the start of the N64 era.

You may rather have them just implement motion controls, but that's not how a lot of other people feel, including game developers who are trying to make money. When they release a game that appeals to more people (those who prefer standard controls and those who prefer motion controls), they get more sales. If they're gonna get more sales, they're gonna try and release it with both control types. Personally I like the motion controls more, but lots of other people would rather just have a standard controller.

Silent Hill: Shattered Memories for PSP didn't get a worse review than the Wii version. It got the same score of 8.0 on Gamespot for both platforms. And what do you mean it "wasn't necessary"? What exactly was unecessary about it? The game wasn't any less emmersive except for the fact that it was on a portable, 4.3 inch screen. And no one ever complained about the classic controller support for No More Heroes 2. You're just making that up. The PS3 version of No More Heroes 1 is gonna be way better than the Wii version for the simple fact that it WON'T have waggle controls. You do realize why there are waggle controls? Not because game developers (or anyone) wanted them, but because of the limitations of the Wii controller. The PS Move controller is a lot more accurate, with 1:1 movement sensing. If Wii Motion+ was out before No More Heroes was released, the game would have gotten some real controls. But hey, if you prefer inaccurate controls (waggle) to accurate controls (1:1 sensing), then that's your call.

Pointer controls are definitelly better than dual analog sticks, but some people still prefer the analog controls. They both work good, but pointer controls work better. That doesn't mean analog sticks don't work at all. You two need to realize that.

[QUOTE="mariokart64fan"]

your hope is answered because nintendos controller is that of a gc controller just with a screen built in

{snip}

as they said it will have motion still maybe its in the controller i mentioned or bc with wii mote b ut ya your hopes is answered by rumor already

and its solid already given the fact its been sorta announced.

ThePlothole

Rumors are just that: rumors. And this isn't even the first time a Nintendo home console has been rumored to have a touchscreen equipped gamepad. We were hearing the exact same thing before the Wii was announced. I honestly wouldn't put much weight in it this time.

This is a bit different than the pre-Wii rumors. No one had any idea what the controller would be and we got a ton of different rumors, which were mainly just wild guesses. This time all the major gaming websites are reporting on the same rumor from various big time developers. Now I'm sure there are a lot of details wrong but it seems pretty likely there will be a screen on the controller of some sort. It still could be a false rumor, but it's a lot more believeable than the average Wii rumor.

riariases: I'm only going to continue this conversation if you can either avoid referencing other systems or move the conversation elsewhere.

This is a bit different than the pre-Wii rumors. No one had any idea what the controller would be and we got a ton of different rumors, which were mainly just wild guesses. This time all the major gaming websites are reporting on the same rumor from various big time developers. Now I'm sure there are a lot of details wrong but it seems pretty likely there will be a screen on the controller of some sort. It still could be a false rumor, but it's a lot more believeable than the average Wii rumor.

AlmightyDerek

Even if it does have a screen, it could be as simple as the 1" monochrome LCD they used on the pokéwalker. And the number of sites reporting this doesn't necessarily mean anything. They often get their information from exactly the same source.