They probably gave a couple reasons. The problem with suggesting that interactivity is the main feature is that in order to use multiple controllers, you need to have access to multiple systems. They're not selling the controller separately (although the system can support more than one).

Why would they release a touchscreen controller? Saying that it's obvious that Sony will inevitably release a Wii U controller is the worst form of "lol Sony copying Nintendo." You're saying that Sony copying Nintendo is inevitable.

hakanakumono

Iwata: "In the future, we may look at what other opportunities there are for gameplay and, how having two of those controllers might create fun or interesting new styles of play, but of course in doing that, it would require a consumer to purchase an additional controller. Therefore, we would need to carefully consider how we could create such an experience and, potentially, how we could ensure that there would be enough value within that experience for the consumer to accept that cost and make that purchase.

SOURCE

[QUOTE="D4W1L4H"]

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

The "pattern" is silly and reeks of fanboyism itself.

The remote play feature was designed to be able to play the games away from the TV. That's what the Wii tablet will do. No, they're not exactly the same, but they don't have to be to reach the same type of "lol copying" BS that runs rampant around here. Likewise, Sony's rumble and analog features weren't done exactly the same. And just like analog and rumble were handled better by Sony, remote play will likely be handled better by Nintendo.

The point is that none of it f*cking matters. Modern technology is based on copying.

hakanakumono

The Wii U controller was NOT designed from the ground up to be played away from the TV, that is only one small feature which the Wii U offers, because of its streaming abilities. The Wii U controller was designed to play in conjuction with the TV, like the cross platform between the GBA and GC. It's NOT like remote play.

On a side note, I don't care about this 'lol copy' thing you keep bringing up. It's obviously competition, which in turn makes better hardware, and i am certain for a fact, that sony will release a tablet controller. I am certain it will run on better than the Wii U controller, but it doesn't necesarily make it better. Just like the MOVE.

P.S: To deny the pattern is rediculous, to claim it as 'lol copying' is also rediculous.

I'm not going to spend my Christmas arguing with you, so you can think what you want, but when Nintendo was asked about how they came up with the Wii U being able to play the console away from the TV was the reason that was given as the inspiration for the console.

Reasonable: Nintendo was an industry leader in the mid 90s, reintroducing analog and bringing rumble. Sony and Sega both adapted their own versions of analog controllers quickly after, with Sony later coming out with a model with rumble built-in. Rumble and memory packs later found their way into the controller design of the Dreamcast. Design elements of the dualshock would in turn be adapted by Nintendo for the Gamecube.

Unreasonable: What is it with Sony always copying Nintendo?

I have no idea where you got that, but if you watch the Iwata asks E3 2011 video,Miyamoto and his team wanted to include a screen to provide game feedback and status messages to players, and later down the line, The Wii U controler turned into a larger screen with streaming capabilities so the game can be played on the controller itself. So the Wii U's primary function is to be used playing games in conjunction with the screen.

And again, saying that SCE won't release a touchscreen controller is rediculous, and you know it. That's what my sig is saying. Not "lol Sony copying Nintendo."

Without Tesla their would be no Nintendo! :o

Bigboi500

wrong! without some guy in 15th century china, there would be no Nintendo.

This is the response I am forseeing:

Who cares. Nintendo fanboys are all nostagia happy losers. Zelda has stayed the same since 1974, how could it be a good game? All Mario does is jump on mushroom guys, and he's been doing it for 36 years now, for the 23236 Mario game. Nintendo has never made a good game since the SNES days. They're dead now and should go third party so we can play their games on PS3/360.

Anonymous hardcore gamer

Note how he opens with "Who cares", to substitute for the fact that he "[Didn't read lol.gif]" the OP.

He then says something which is completley irrelevant to the OP, stating incorect facts along the way.

He then proves the point of the OP.

[QUOTE="D4W1L4H"]

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

Here's what's funny: Your sig is capitalizing off of the "lol Sony copies" joke that runs rampant in a forum where Nintendo fans apparently don't understand technology. Which is fine. But it's pre-emptively accusing Sony of copying technology that they already initiated, between the PS3 and the PSP and that will naturally be shared with the Vita.

It's terribly ironic. If roles were reversed and Nintendo had used "remote play," Nintendo fans would undoubtedly be crying "Sony copies" at the tablet controller design.

hakanakumono

Let me clear up my sig, because for some reason, you brought that up in a scenario which had nothing to do with my reply.

Myt sig is a mindless crack at the long history between the two rivals SCE and Nintendo. You would have to be a massive Sony fanboy to not be able to see the pattern. Show any unbiased person the history between the two, and it's blatantly obvious what there impressions would be, no question.

First of all, assuming that the remote play function between the PS3 could mimmick the function of the Wii U controller is rediculous. The remote play function was not aimed to reach the capabilites of the Wii U controller, vice versa.

In the same way that the Remote play function did not aim to reach tha capabilities of the GBA-GC cross platform abilities, which the Wii U bears more resembelance to.

The "pattern" is silly and reeks of fanboyism itself.

The remote play feature was designed to be able to play the games away from the TV. That's what the Wii tablet will do. No, they're not exactly the same, but they don't have to be to reach the same type of "lol copying" BS that runs rampant around here. Likewise, Sony's rumble and analog features weren't done exactly the same. And just like analog and rumble were handled better by Sony, remote play will likely be handled better by Nintendo.

The point is that none of it f*cking matters. Modern technology is based on copying.

The Wii U controller was NOT designed from the ground up to be played away from the TV, that is only one small feature which the Wii U offers, because of its streaming abilities. The Wii U controller was designed to play in conjuction with the TV, like the cross platform between the GBA and GC. It's NOT like remote play.

On a side note, I don't care about this 'lol copy' thing you keep bringing up. It's obviously competition, which in turn makes better hardware, and i am certain for a fact, that sony will release a tablet controller. I am certain it will run on better than the Wii U controller, but it doesn't necesarily make it better. Just like the MOVE.

P.S: To deny the pattern is rediculous, to claim it as 'lol copying' is also rediculous.

[QUOTE="farrell2k"]

extract from my blog:

[QUOTE="D4W1L4H"]

Maybe this is just my imagination, maybe i'm just going crazy but I -- Imagine -- If Sony, or Microsoft announced, a gaming enhanced, Internet connected, HD streaming tablet, with motion controls, built in speakers, a built in webcam, that's able to operate completely independent from the TV, designed from the ground up to enhance the gaming experience, it would be regarded, without question, as a cutting edge product worthy of the eighth generation of gaming consoles.

hakanakumono

Here's what's funny: Your sig is capitalizing off of the "lol Sony copies" joke that runs rampant in a forum where Nintendo fans apparently don't understand technology. Which is fine. But it's pre-emptively accusing Sony of copying technology that they already initiated, between the PS3 and the PSP and that will naturally be shared with the Vita.

It's terribly ironic. If roles were reversed and Nintendo had used "remote play," Nintendo fans would undoubtedly be crying "Sony copies" at the tablet controller design.

Let me clear up my sig, because for some reason, you brought that up in a scenario which had nothing to do with my reply.

Myt sig is a mindless crack at the long history between the two rivals SCE and Nintendo. You would have to be a massive Sony fanboy to not be able to see the pattern. Show any unbiased person the history between the two, and it's blatantly obvious what there impressions would be, no question.

First of all, assuming that the remote play function between the PS3 could mimmick the function of the Wii U controller is rediculous. The remote play function was not aimed to reach the capabilites of the Wii U controller, vice versa.

In the same way that the Remote play function did not aim to reach tha capabilities of the GBA-GC cross platform abilities, which the Wii U bears more resembelance to.

Anyway, I feel that this may be a good oppurtunity to promote my new lectures. Click the link In my sig to read the opening lecture. It's specifically designed for those 'hardcore' gamers. Classes will be open, free of charge soon!

EDIT:

Is this some kind of sick joke !?!

The WiiU is just a bigger version of the DS/3DS, Nintendo will be selling the same product to the fans over again ( with a little update on the graphic side ).

And to answer your question, most modern TVs have picture to picture, so you can actually watch 2-4 different things on one TV !!!

Anonymous

I will be using this as an example for my future lectures.

All examples will be kep anonymous.

[QUOTE="Banjo_Kongfooie"]

I love how people hate the controller for being new and innovative but fail to realise how useful it will be..farrell2k

extract from my blog:

Maybe this is just my imagination, maybe i'm just going crazy but I -- Imagine -- If Sony, or Microsoft announced, a gaming enhanced, Internet connected, HD streaming tablet, with motion controls, built in speakers, a built in webcam, that's able to operate completely independent from the TV, designed from the ground up to enhance the gaming experience, it would be regarded, without question, as a cutting edge product worthy of the eighth generation of gaming consoles.

D4W1L4H

Why is this? Just curious. If the 360 or PS3 hardware does something wrong like PS3 jaggies or the 360's DVD format they are rolled for it for being poor choices. Bu tthe Wii is brilliant and innovative?

Also- Nintendo game soundtracts are recorded on a $29 Walmart keyboard and they get 3 brain damaged 4 year olds to make beeps and sounds and they call that voice acting. Yet.....Sony and Microsoft and everyone else gets constant flap for having bad voice acting?

Call of Duty, Halo, Madden and God or War (as well as 100's of others) get beheaded for making sequels that as much if mot more then the average Nintendo games. The difference? There is 5 God of Wars and probably 20 Zelda's, Mario Karts, and Metroids. Lets not even bring up Mario, Kirby...ect.

People do not like shallow games ar bad stories. Mario.......hello?

Honestly.....Why do Nintendo always recieve this free pass?

WarTornRuston

This 13 yr old is rediculous.

First off, the PS3 jaggies in no way can be substituted by a design choice. No one is going to put jaggies or texture popping into a videogame and claim that it's for artistic purposes. Nintendo on the other hand, is pushing their hardware to it's limits with its firstparty games, and contantly making the Wiimote work in brilliant/creative ways. While your beloved Sony and MS are forcing us to play on 1997 controllers.

No, The skyward sword soundtrack was fullyorchestrated. And no, Not all Nintendo first party titles do not have voice acting. The Prime series, Other M, Punch Out, F-Zero, Xenoblade, Fire emblem, Kid Icarus, starfox, among others all have voice acting. Also, not having voice acting does not make a game bad. Do you really think Mario talking in full sentences would make his games better?

there are 15 Zelda titles since 1986, and each one may or may not have been subject to unique/innovative control scemes and well crafted storys and puzzles. So while you're playing the same control scemes since 1997, Zelda is pushing brand new control scemes, which may or may not be successful.

There is only one Mario Kart per platform. Ther have been 10 Metroid games since 1986, and the two on the Wii were considerably different. Also, the second one was subject to alot of criticism. While each GOW title is practically the same gameplay with a different storyline.

Another thing, Mario is not a story driven franchise like Metroid, Zelda, uncharted etc. Mario is pure fun, there is a storyline, but it's not as nearly big of an aspect as other games.

Is this guy serious?