Nintendo's announcement of the Wii U console is going to change not only the way games are played, but also the way games are developed. Icrontic's editor-in-chief throws his opinion of Nintendo's new console into the mix.
LOL can't PS3/Vita can do the same thing?
Yep, it took Nintendo again. Legends! I can't wait for Wii U! Above - oh all of a sudden IGN are gods>? sigh
nintendo also did the same thing with the GBA and GC it just wasn't as refined as it is now
Big difference is that this console is built around it, with the gba gc connectivity you had to buy both products, this time they are given out of the box
Title should read "Nintendo debuts hardware that Sony will refine within the next few years and support with better software...AGAIN". The Wii was and still is a toy and a gimmick, and while Move is similar in many ways, it's tech has been better implemented as far as enhancing the gaming experience is concerned. As usual, Nintendo showed off some fancy, innovative hardware with little to lackluster software behind it. Me wonders if buyers are stupid enough to fall for the same trick again.
It took Nintendo again? Umm 3 things: 1. I guess Kinect didn't redefine gaming? 2. PS4 and Xbox 720 aren't even out yet. 3. The PSV can already do some of the things that the Wii U can and with a update to the PS3 it can very likely do everything the Wii U can do except it wouldn't be a console game and you wouldn't be able to use the PS Move and other PS accessories with it and the PSV would be fully PORTABLE.
This will not redefine gaming. It's a cool technology but it adds very little to the actual gameplay. And the BIG question that NO ONE wants to ask: How much per "Wii U" controller? It won't be only $50, I can promise you that. So, what will be the price to play with 4 players on the Wii U? $100 per controller? $150 per controller? And that's not even the cost of the console itself...
@brudda I fail to see how Move has been any more implemented than Wii, especially with all the hype it had. Move has been standard with shooters but I'm not seeing any of Move's sophisticated technologies used there. Tumble used Move well, but other then that as we have seen this E3, the Move is being used for pointless reasons. Nothing I am seeing is significantly exclusive to Move's strengths. With the Wii Nintendo took a gameplay mechanic and changed it. Much like they did with the DS. It's too bad about all the shovelware. That is my main concern with Wii U. I like that gameplay can be approached differently but like the Wii, I expect tons of quick shovelware while Nintendo themselves are left utilizing the actual tech. Same goes for Sony and Move, I'm not seeing anything by third parties that are impressive. @dedicated Yes, that's a good question as well.
its funny to me because ive heard these complaints before what 2 screens big deal what motion controls big deal remember those? i can actually go on even more
You know, i keep seeing the same line about PS Move being better than the Wiimotes as far as accuracy is concerned. I purchased Move on this basis but all i have experienced is Drift issues with the damn thing. It made Killzone, Dead Space and many other games unplayable. I've never experienced the same issue with the Wii yet that is supposed to have inferior tech?! I'm not alone with this either as there are many users on Youtube and The Official PS3 Forums reporting the same issue. PS Vita looks great and it will be great if it can do what WiiU does but it won't make me buy one. My money is going on the WiiU day one with the Vita getting purchased once a Big library of games are available for it. (providing they're not Console ports that is)
I have a good feeling that the wiiu controller will sell for 50-70$ think about it o.o its only a 6.2 single touch screen cheap buttons accelerometers and etc cheap by now a battery and a camera this already changed the game because again now sony ppl go oh psvita we can do this too think for a second if nintendo dint announce this console today would you as a ps3vita supporter say hay we can do this this and that. i think the answer is no. nintendo changed the way you think.
Rumours are saying that you cant buy the controller separately and that's why they're having backwards compatibility with the wii stuff.
ps3/vita is integration between a HOME CONSOLE and a HANDHELD notice the terms i capitalized
ya but it can still do mostly the same thing. The controller is a nice idea but... they spent too much time trying to sell the controller instead of what everyone was looking for, which is the system.
Im rather glad nintendo is taking this approach, rather then just be another HD console it provides something more And I dont want to see developers try to make the most amazing grafixzzz everzzz I would prefer them taking risks and taking advantage of all the new controllers features Only developer I can think of that would is Hideo Kojima
I haven't seen anything from Sony saying that they can stream the same content on the PS3 to multiple Vita's Also, this is part of a console, it's a controller as opposed to you having to separately buy each Vita for a PS3 to get the same result (if they indeed can stream) Not saying it can't be done, but I haven't heard of it
@waseem335 I have no idea why people like you don't like when developers try to make the "da b3st grafixzzz evazzz." I guess people really wouldn't mind if the graphics remained the way it was in the 80's
Why are people disagreeing with Alpha? He's absolutely right. PSV is not doing anything like this, and in fact, it was only shown to do it with some very ugly dungeon crawler and Little Big Planet.
Typical IGN. Always praising everyone else except Sony.
Its not IGN
this isnt ign dude. Sony fanboys on the attack every site is giving this shining feedback
@dktxx2 ignore her, she's stupid
get back in the kitchen
It's because Sony doesn't do anything right. Well, that's not fair. They do, but it always feels half-baked: Move, the PS3 OS, the PSN, and those are big things to half-ass. Honestly I think the only thing they've taken on full force is 3D, and for better or worse, I commend them for pushing it when nobody else will. Blu-ray was a good call as well. Let me tell you, when I look at a Wii and a 360, I see video game consoles. When I look at my PS3, I see a blu-ray player that also plays games. Good games, but to me it doesn't really feel complete, you know? Like it's missing some character. Tons of people will disagree, and that's fair, but to me it just seems... it's hard to describe it differently than I already said.
A handheld combined with a console vs...a controller? -_-
Well, even if the PSV and Wii U have similar functionality, I think that just goes to show that both Sony and Nintendo saw the next logical step in gaming. That's pretty exciting to know two huge companies have a similar vision at the same time, I think. It should be less about competition in the pejorative sense and more about positive competition.
Nah, This should fail it's going to be too expensive and dreamcast curse is going to be all over it.............jk lol.
It is nice to finally see Nintendo making an HD console. The bad thing about it is that they're SIX years too late. The Wii U is pretty much on par with the 360 and PS3. It might be a TAD more powerful. This thing is supposed to be a next gen console though. Why is it on PAR with current gen consoles then? Also why should I buy this to get simple ports of games that will have been released six or so months ago? The fanbase for games like BF3, Batman AS, Ghost Recon, etc are already on the PS3 and 360. There'll be a LOT more players online for these third party games on the two current HD consoles. I don't believe the Wii U will do any better than the Wii with third party support. It'll get ports of already released games at launch that won't sell well since Nintendo's fanbase doesn't care for them and those who do will already have owned the game for months on the PS3/360. Thus I see the Wii U failing. It is joining a race that was started six years ago. There is no way it'll be able to catch up. In the end I see no reason for a hardcore gamer like myself to invest in the Wii U. All the games I want and more will be released on the consoles I already own. There is no reason to buy a new console just to get ports with small gimmicks possibly added to them. I'm afraid Nintendo is too far behind now to catch up. This console was their one and only chance and they blew it. Sony and M$ will continue to dominate the hardcore gaming market for now on.
I too question how well the Wii U will compare to Sony and Microsoft's new consoles in 2-3 years, but that's still a long way out. Saying the console is destined to "fail" seems a little strong. I think this is the right next step for Nintendo to do. Yes, I full admit that it would have helped Nintendo out quite a bit if it had more power under the hood for the Wii, but think about it. Nintendo thinks long-term. They let the Wii slide a bit for lower prices, and thus a lower entry barrier for younger and older generations. Now that they know and love the Wii, the Wii 2 can now cater for those that are wanting more conventional/contemporary game styles. From a marketing perspective, it's genius. Besides, honestly where could Nintendo have gone with a console today and still make it affordable? I don't think that would have been in Nintendo's best interests, especially for 2012. And before anyone starts throwing crap around, I spend the least of my gaming time playing the Wii. It gets perhaps 1% of my total game hours. But I'm hoping Nintendo shakes things up with the U. We'll see.
yea but you cant take the Wiiu out of the house.
Stop this new fanboy'z blog idiotic articles...every day a new one... "i want my blog to tell people how much tendocrosoftsony is better than the others, because even others sites are biased, they are not as much as i am" for the delusional below : "didn't people say the same about the Wii?? Funny how a 'last gen' out sold a 'this gen' console by quite a fair few million!! :D " yeah cool, your granma and your 4 years brothers bought a wii..but gamers don't use it since decade (not enough games, rare good games, ps2 graphics, etc) "Nintendo always has to go out on a limb and push it forward. Whether you guys hate Nintendo or not, you gotta give'em props for taking risks." wow lol..."taking risks" = sony, with $$$ hardware ps3, bluray, more and more studios, new ips (not always the same mario/zelda jokes), and best motion controler avaiolabe ! by the way motion controlers was existing way before nintendo decide to go with "cheapest consoles + motion controler for everyone" because they could'nt fight with graphics and technology with teh others 2 (it was a good idea for shareholders, not a "push forward" or anything good for gamers)
Wii U is getting excellent feedback.
What worries me is how much are the replacement controllers going to cost? Say for instance you wear out a button on the controller will it be cheaper to get it fixed or will it be cheaper to get a new controller?! With a screen and everything integrated into the controller I would expect them to be very expensive. I am very curious about it all. This is no doubt the way they have integrated everything into the controller is fantastic although how ground breaking it is, it still a mystery as are the specs of the apparent "box".
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Nintendo has the younger demographic nailed, so I'm sure they know not all of them are responsible enough to handle something fragile. I'm hoping they aren't too expensive or that the warranty is rock solid.
A lot of people are pointing out that it will be extremely expensive to buy 3 more of these tablet controllers. But one thing to point out, according to the article I linked, the Wii U only supports ONE of these controllers at a time. Looks like there's a video streaming bottleneck... and if these have 1080p screens, then I can see it as being difficult for any system to have to drive up to 5 1080p displays (TV + 4 controller tablets). Now, what players 2, 3, and 4 will have to use in multiplayer, I have no idea. I'm guessing non-display controllers (think classic controller pro, etc). We'll see how it all develops.
Good questions...I guess we'll see
Nintendo always has to go out on a limb and push it forward. Whether you guys hate Nintendo or not, you gotta give'em props for taking risks.
they are launching a console in 2012 with only 1.5gb ram and a 2008 gpu(old tech) without usb 3.0 support. that TOTALLY fails as the 720 and ps4 will wipe the floor with it
So basically, you think GRAPHICS pushes gaming forward...........lol. It's all about HOW we play games dude. YEs, graphics are nice but they are a small part of the advancement of videogames. Also, were the specs ever confirmed? Nope....
didn't people say the same about the Wii?? Funny how a 'last gen' out sold a 'this gen' console by quite a fair few million!! :D
@shock you have a point and the specs haven't been confirmed :/ im just hatim on nintendo lol sue me
So, PC's has been wiping the floor with PS3/360 from yeeeeeears ago.
@jayzablade They're leaving this gen too early, longevity will win out saleswise in the end.
nintendo isnt the only one. sony has taken many too. with cd tech in psone, pushing dvd with ps2, now bluray and a foreign yet powerful processor with ps3. xbox has has also had nice innovations as well.
I love how Sony fanboys are bashing this even though there saying PSVita can do the same thing. Sony didn't show many examples other than carrying over the same game files. If you like what sony is doing then you should like what Nintendo is doing. Both systems will have great software for it.
A very positive observation. Indeed, both the Wii U and the PS Vita have their own spin on it. And as cool as the Vita is (and I do like it), getting both a Vita AND a PS3 sounds awfully expensive if what you want is a display in your lap and in your entertainment center. Ultimately, Sony and Nintendo have their own "flavors". Gamers can pick and choose what to make in their entertainment cocktails. If all the game consoles were identical, that would be pretty damn boring.
This is exactly why I think Nintendo CLEARLY won E3. MS and Sony will have to copy Nintendo once again.
I would love for you to explain that statement further?? "MS and Sony will have to copy Nintendo once again. " Im trying to figure out how sony and M$ copied nintendo, they put out a motion controller like the wii, but for sony it was more of an add on that a device that defines the system. Sony's core is to have top notch 1st party exclusives and give its core gamers what it wants, which is awesome games. Sony was the first to release a system that integrated a blu ray dvd player even if M$ had a add on HD-DVD drive. And now Sony was first to launch a HD Handheld in the Vita that can be used with the ps3. Nintendo released a console the wiiU that has a controller with a screen, I dont see M$ and sony's new consoles doing this, I would rather have a big screen to play on then watching a small screen on your controller. As I said I would really love for you to explain further on what you mean in your comment.
Move = Wiimote+light up golf ball
Move was really the answer to the wii so I don't know why people would deny that but I do think etown could have worded it a little better. They didn't just downright copy it. There was more effort put in than just that.
Nintendo introduces motion control, and MS and Sony scramble and come up with their own motion controllers. Now Nintendo introduced a controller with a extra screen that can be used for so many games to bring an added immersion ..... Just imagine playing Fallout 3 with he Wii U, or games that requires a separate map, or controlling remote control devices in COD, or check you inventory in Resident Evil, or hacking in Mass Effect, Bottom line .... Ammo, health, inventory, and.so many other possibilities can be put into the screen and the controller. Ms and Sony will eventually have to copy and follow Nintendo lead with a controller that does something similar ... Or be left behind and criticized same way sixaxes was for not including rumble.
@etowntwo Hmm ok so every time I wanna check for ammo and inventory I gotta look down at my controller, would be a bastard in a boss fight, or say surrounded by 100 blokes and wondering how much health you have left. Or even the fact why would I wanna have to look at my controller playing on a console at any time?! And nah they didnt scramble at all, all three consoles have done well and i have been happy playing HD games for years now, not crappy shouvleware. As for the motion side of things yeah 2 different approaches, sony's was to make it a add on that can be used in many of its HD core games whilst M$ went with a more heavy approach and are aiming at more of the casual market with kinect. And follow nintendo, oh I dont think so, I think M$ and sony will bring out a insanely powerful console one again that will once again destroy the specs that nintendo's console has to offer, and with a standard controller. Im not saying their is anything wrong with the nintendo's console, it is a great idea and is great for nintendo lovers that can finally play their fav games in HD although at the end of the day ill stick to having a sony console and gaming pc. Thanks for explaining your point of view though.
Odd... I always thought online, hard drives, and things like that changed gaming far more than motion controls did.
your obviously wrong!! ever heard of move, kinect...Wii?? lack of a harddrive or the ability to go online never stopped me from enjoying games!! Wow, look at how this 1tb hdd increases the fun in the latest Zelda...wow, such innovation!!
I could probably count on one hand the number of games that make motion controls (Move, Kinect, Wii) truly worthwhile to a mass audience. Sure, there are plenty of games for each, but none of them are enough to "reinvent" gaming to the point that it becomes any more than a fun alternative option. On the other hand, I couldn't even begin to count the number of games that benefited from being a small downloadable game, getting DLC, or being patched, or became something unique thanks to online support. The very fact that Nintendo is promising a PSN/XBL-like online system and dropping motion controls in favor of something far closer to a traditional controller just proves my point.
Agreed... Nintendo has always done "their" own thing and they've always had a following but after the n64 they haven't "defined" gaming by anymeans.. This motion control suff hasnt had as much impact on gaming then more powerful consoles that can stream much larger enviroments, better graphics, much more complex game situations, online gameplay, harddrives, better disc formats, cross console compatibility etc.. Not motion contorls and screens in your controller... Sorry but this has no interest to me whatsoever... Of course the pro nintendoites will trumpet the sales of the wii but based on the games coming out for the wii it's obvious that this is a casual effect... The wii was trendy and not because of its gaming implications but it was the it thing for a while to waggle and jump around.. It got old quickly....
@ Mopar well said. In addition, I do not see how holding that controller is comfortable or even good for gaming. I don't care if it sells. The Wii sold and it was a trendy piece of hardware that did nothing for gaming. Gladly wait for Xbox and PS before buying a 'console' or whatever this is.
They are mostly playing catch up. but the tablet thing is pretty different and cool but it could end up just like the wii remote. And some Nintendo fanboys are hypocrites.
Expensive controller time.
I agree Nintendo is implimenting it in a cool way, but Sony has been introducing all sorts of PS3 PSP connectivity for awhile now.
Nintendo redefined CASUAL gaming, not GAMING. Big difference The Wii wasen't really a GAMING console. It was more of those kiddy gaming units you get from Toys'R'Us, just more advanced.
Will nintendo just stick with one controller style. They complain about controllers being too confusing yet with ever new console their making a completely different controller. Now that confusing.
True, they would have a stronger following if they would keep some consistency in their controller design.
Do they not realise that kids and even people with small hands are not going to be able to use the touchscreen properly?
It would be nice if the controller was more ergonomic, like 360 style and still have the screen in the middle. Instead they went with a brick style pad. I really don't understand how Nintendo don't think these things through. It may feel comfortable when actually holding it, but I doubt it
People in the e3 who used that controllers said i's pretty confortable. Have u used one? me neither.
Wii U redefines gaming? Um...no. Look at four years from now. The controller's screen functionality won't add anything meaningful to games. Just like motion control on the Wii.
It's not that, in my eyes. Look at Microsoft's E3 conference. Nearly entirely Kinect. Nintendo derailed it's competitors, making them focus on something their actual fans didn't even want. Sure, it may help Microsoft in terms of sales. But it screws you folks over slightly, and that, I am all for.
... and it would take them to scar it for the rest of their lives lols jk wiiU looks kinda messed but friendly
Always funny to see how many fanboys come out in defense when an article like this comes out. I see the promise of the new way to play, but Nintendo usually disappoints on the software side. that is where other parties come in, whether they be Microsoft, Sony, or third parties. They are the ones who support these ideas in the long run. It's not really copying, when they all work in tandem, the industry moves forward... Nintendo operates only as a videogame company, unlike Microsoft and Sony, so they can focus on more risky/innovative concepts. Then the others are able to step in and move the industry to the future, Can't we all just be friends.