[QUOTE="Giant_Panda"]
Splitting the userbase with two controllers is a bad idea.
SuperFlakeman
Nope. Wii Sports doesn't work on a gamepad, so should they not release the game at all which is a 20m seller and drives hardware?
Also did you miss the fact that there are 90m Wii's sold, which means there are plenty of Wiimotes out there to justify a WM+ based Zelda. Consumers will be happy to hear that their already purchased controllers will work for the next gen console.
In the case of Sony however you're right, there won't be any 'Uncharted' that only works with Move, but that's why we have Nintendo, they will keep the remote shaped pointer controller in play next gen.
Splitting the user base will always have many bad implications, always. The whole point of consoles is that PCs split their userbase while consoles don't(well they aren't supposed to at least). You have to have a really good reason to, and I'm not sure that it would be worth it for Wii U. If Nintendo wanted to still make Wii Sports game with motion controls then they shouldn't have ditched the Wii Remote as the main controller. As it is they should just make it designed for the tablet instead.
As to your second point, congrats there are 90 million Wii's sold. That doesn't mean everyone has one, and most people certainly don't have a Wii Remote + or WM+. Some consumers will be happy to hear their old controller work, some will be pissed off that they have to buy another $50 controller to play the game they want to play. Also it's one more piece of hardware that will periodicly have to be replaced due to attrition.
Having the both the tablet and the remote really shows the indicisiveness of Nintendo. More hardware people have to own means higher price. It also leads to being a more complicated system and thus more confusing for consumers. Nintendo is free to split the userbase this way, but they'll have to accept the big downsides that come with that.
Log in to comment