Wii U GamePad and Pro Controller compared to tablets and ...

[robometal cowboy]

Wii U GamePad and Pro Controller compared to tablets and other controllers
Click Here to View Story




Galleries here

[BudokaiGamer]

I hate it when people compare the Gamepad to tablets and portable gaming devices...it's not a damn portable! People are just stupid as hell!

[shmuga9]

I hate it when people compare the Gamepad to tablets and portable gaming devices...it's not a damn portable! People are just stupid as hell!

It's an easier way to compare sizes than using a 360 or PS3 controller

[MrChewtoy]

@BudokaiGamer
But there are comparisons to be made...

[Nickius]

iPad screen is bigger NO BUY!

[komicturtle92]

Typical Engadget.

[metalpants]

I would up-vote this because it shows how much better the GamePad is because of those beautiful buttons... and it's not even a tablet!! Wins all around!

[Jerome]

I would up-vote this because it shows how much better the GamePad is because of those beautiful buttons... and it's not even a tablet!! Wins all around!

So if the Gamepad is better because of its buttons, that would mean tablets with larger screens and full portability would be better if they added buttons, right?

[metalpants]

I would up-vote this because it shows how much better the GamePad is because of those beautiful buttons... and it's not even a tablet!! Wins all around!

So if the Gamepad is better because of its buttons, that would mean tablets with larger screens and full portability would be better if they added buttons, right?

Eh. I guess. The GamePad is strictly for Wii U use so sure, I suppose so.

[Jerome]

I would up-vote this because it shows how much better the GamePad is because of those beautiful buttons... and it's not even a tablet!! Wins all around!

So if the Gamepad is better because of its buttons, that would mean tablets with larger screens and full portability would be better if they added buttons, right?

Eh. I guess. The GamePad is strictly for Wii U use so sure, I suppose so.

See, this is another big thing that concerns me about Nintendo's strategy with Wii U. They're taking focus away from full 3D motion controls (a unique strength of a home console) to focus instead on emulating the features of portable systems and tablets. In that case, though, why not have a portable or tablet system that can hook up to your TV and double as a home system? The technology in tablets is approaching console standards, and that way you'd have a system with full portability instead of only partial.

[metalpants]

Eh. I guess. The GamePad is strictly for Wii U use so sure, I suppose so.

See, this is another big thing that concerns me about Nintendo's strategy with Wii U. They're taking focus away from full 3D motion controls (a unique strength of a home console) to focus instead on emulating the features of portable systems and tablets. In that case, though, why not have a portable or tablet system that can hook up to your TV and double as a home system? The technology in tablets is approaching console standards, and that way you'd have a system with full portability instead of only partial.

True, but it's hard to say where console gaming is going. The Wii U can easily get some sort of VR helmet wirelessly connected to it and bring about a deeper experience, or some 3D projector, or that weird thing MS is doing with projectors and walls. In other words, even if the iPad was the next home console king, developers would have to make two totally different experiences within the same game (granted that they make projectors or VR helmets popular later on) if people are to use the system for both portable and home gaming. I don't know if that would be the most ideal thing to do. People will get exhausted by so many changes...

Also, I honestly think that Nintendo can make some sort of accessory that plugs at the bottom of the GamePad that can extend the signal range (or like one of those portable WiFi hotspots) thus giving the GamePad full portability without the insane amount of cash that it normally takes to get an iPad. I dunno... the possibilities are just too many nowadays...

[Jerome]

True, but it's hard to say where console gaming is going. The Wii U can easily get some sort of VR helmet wirelessly connected to it and bring about a deeper experience, or some 3D projector, or that weird thing MS is doing with projectors and walls. In other words, even if the iPad was the next home console king, developers would have to make two totally different experiences within the same game (granted that they make projectors or VR helmets popular later on) if people are to use the system for both portable and home gaming. I don't know if that would be the most ideal thing to do. People will get exhausted by so many changes...

I don't quite understand. Who said anything about VR goggles? There aren't any products like that currently on the market, and no proof that will ever take off. Even if it did, though, Wii U wouldn't really be in a better position than anything else, because it would require purchasing all that stuff seperately.

Also, I honestly think that Nintendo can make some sort of accessory that plugs at the bottom of the GamePad that can extend the signal range (or like one of those portable WiFi hotspots) thus giving the GamePad full portability without the insane amount of cash that it normally takes to get an iPad. I dunno... the possibilities are just too many nowadays...

The idea of adding stuff onto the already bulky Gamepad seems a bit funny to me, but let's say they can come up with an effect little add-on that improves wireless range from a base station. That would most likely mean enabling use with Wi-Fi hotspots, which would be an improvement, but still far from full portability. Full portability would require something more, namely a radio that could work through cellphone networks. This would require an expensive new radio, and a cellular data plan, which would be extremely expensive and have bandwidth and coverage limitations. At that point, it'd be better just to put a graphics chipset in the Gamepad and let it run software itself. Besides these issues, though, how many people are going to want to take the huge and chunky Gamepad everywhere anyway? Its footprint is similar to that of a large tablet, but it's around 5 times as thick.

[metalpants]

True, but it's hard to say where console gaming is going. The Wii U can easily get some sort of VR helmet wirelessly connected to it and bring about a deeper experience, or some 3D projector, or that weird thing MS is doing with projectors and walls. In other words, even if the iPad was the next home console king, developers would have to make two totally different experiences within the same game (granted that they make projectors or VR helmets popular later on) if people are to use the system for both portable and home gaming. I don't know if that would be the most ideal thing to do. People will get exhausted by so many changes...

I don't quite understand. Who said anything about VR goggles? There aren't any products like that currently on the market, and no proof that will ever take off. Even if it did, though, Wii U wouldn't really be in a better position than anything else, because it would require purchasing all that stuff seperately.

Also, I honestly think that Nintendo can make some sort of accessory that plugs at the bottom of the GamePad that can extend the signal range (or like one of those portable WiFi hotspots) thus giving the GamePad full portability without the insane amount of cash that it normally takes to get an iPad. I dunno... the possibilities are just too many nowadays...

The idea of adding stuff onto the already bulky Gamepad seems a bit funny to me, but let's say they can come up with an effect little add-on that improves wireless range from a base station. That would most likely mean enabling use with Wi-Fi hotspots, which would be an improvement, but still far from full portability. Full portability would require something more, namely a radio that could work through cellphone networks. This would require an expensive new radio, and a cellular data plan, which would be extremely expensive and have bandwidth and coverage limitations. At that point, it'd be better just to put a graphics chipset in the Gamepad and let it run software itself. Besides these issues, though, how many people are going to want to take the huge and chunky Gamepad everywhere anyway? Its footprint is similar to that of a large tablet, but it's around 5 times as thick.

I honestly think you're reading too much into it. Just by taking a look at Nintendo Land, you can see what Nintendo has in mind. They want the living room to become a party room with the TV as the center of attraction and the GamePad to supplement it while also playing an important role. It's not meant to be taken outside the house, and it's not trying to do so as you clearly pointed out. Otherwise Nintendo wouldn't have bothered to make a 3DS. That said, even with Apple TV in the market, the volume of people using it versus the volume of people that own an iPad is nothing for Apple to brag about. Nintendo is trying to revitalize the way we use the TV and gather around it with the GamePad as well as stuff we already own (Wii remotes and the like). Apple can't mimic that with what they have to offer right now (unless it's a family of 5, with an iPad and each owns an iPhone/Pod... which adds up to a nice, large sum of cash). So Nintendo's solution is simple: Fun in the living room for an affordable price. Price wise you can't match with i-devices what Nintendo is offering with the Wii U.

[Jerome]

I honestly think you're reading too much into it. Just by taking a look at Nintendo Land, you can see what Nintendo has in mind. They want the living room to become a party room with the TV as the center of attraction and the GamePad to supplement it while also playing an important role. It's not meant to be taken outside the house, and it's not trying to do so as you clearly pointed out. Otherwise Nintendo wouldn't have bothered to make a 3DS. That said, even with Apple TV in the market, the volume of people using it versus the volume of people that own an iPad is nothing for Apple to brag about. Nintendo is trying to revitalize the way we use the TV and gather around it with the GamePad as well as stuff we already own (Wii remotes and the like). Apple can't mimic that with what they have to offer right now (unless it's a family of 5, with an iPad and each owns an iPhone/Pod... which adds up to a nice, large sum of cash). So Nintendo's solution is simple: Fun in the living room for an affordable price. Price wise you can't match with i-devices what Nintendo is offering with the Wii U.

The only reason I brought up portability is because you did, I was mentioning the reasons it isn't really feasible. As for Nintendo's vision for Wii U, the fact remains that there's nothing of real significance possible with the Gamepad that isn't with a controller with pointer functionality and smart use of button-activated on-screen overlays (the former providing near identical functionality to a single-touch screen, and the latter to a secondary map/status/inventory screen) with two exceptions:

1. Games with one person having information hidden from others
2. The ability to play away from a TV

While the first can be used in some specific situations, I don't think it's a big general-purpose advantage. It only benefits 1 vs. multiple local gameplay, not 1 vs. 1, team-based, or internet multiplayer, and certainly not single player. As for the second, it seems a nice option to have, though rather limited. Both of these features, though, could be easily emulated (and the second improved on by having full portability instead of limited portability) with a tablet-type system which could connect to a TV. This which goes back to my initial point, namely that Nintendo may be painting themselves in a corner with a system whose headlining features could easily be emulated and improved upon by hardware which is already emerging as competition, while downplaying features that would help differentiate themselves from that competition. As for Apple not being able to compete because everyone owning an iPod or a tablet would cost too much, that's kind of strange. Nintendo's just having people use Wiimotes, you make it sound like Apple or some other smart device maker couldn't just release little extra controllers.

[metalpants]

I honestly think you're reading too much into it. Just by taking a look at Nintendo Land, you can see what Nintendo has in mind. They want the living room to become a party room with the TV as the center of attraction and the GamePad to supplement it while also playing an important role. It's not meant to be taken outside the house, and it's not trying to do so as you clearly pointed out. Otherwise Nintendo wouldn't have bothered to make a 3DS. That said, even with Apple TV in the market, the volume of people using it versus the volume of people that own an iPad is nothing for Apple to brag about. Nintendo is trying to revitalize the way we use the TV and gather around it with the GamePad as well as stuff we already own (Wii remotes and the like). Apple can't mimic that with what they have to offer right now (unless it's a family of 5, with an iPad and each owns an iPhone/Pod... which adds up to a nice, large sum of cash). So Nintendo's solution is simple: Fun in the living room for an affordable price. Price wise you can't match with i-devices what Nintendo is offering with the Wii U.

The only reason I brought up portability is because you did, I was mentioning the reasons it isn't really feasible. As for Nintendo's vision for Wii U, the fact remains that there's nothing of real significance possible with the Gamepad that isn't with a controller with pointer functionality and smart use of button-activated on-screen overlays (the former providing near identical functionality to a single-touch screen, and the latter to a secondary map/status/inventory screen) with two exceptions:

1. Games with one person having information hidden from others
2. The ability to play away from a TV

While the first can be used in some specific situations, I don't think it's a big general-purpose advantage. It only benefits 1 vs. multiple local gameplay, not 1 vs. 1, team-based, or internet multiplayer, and certainly not single player. As for the second, it seems a nice option to have, though rather limited. Both of these features, though, could be easily emulated (and the second improved on by having full portability instead of limited portability) with a tablet-type system which could connect to a TV. This which goes back to my initial point, namely that Nintendo may be painting themselves in a corner with a system whose headlining features could easily be emulated and improved upon by hardware which is already emerging as competition, while downplaying features that would help differentiate themselves from that competition. As for Apple not being able to compete because everyone owning an iPod or a tablet would cost too much, that's kind of strange. Nintendo's just having people use Wiimotes, you make it sound like Apple or some other smart device maker couldn't just release little extra controllers.

Ah well, that's definitely not what I said. But it doesn't matter cause I agree with you. I think the only edge Nintendo kind of has at the moment is the lagless connectivity between system and GamePad. That said, it seems your main concern is that Nintendo will seriously lag behind the competition technology wise... but that never stopped the Wii from having so much success last gen that the competition opted to add motion controls to their own hardware. I think that the very fact that Nintendo is conservative with hardware is what ignites that creative spark of theirs. Like back in NES and SNES days. The technology was so limited that people would come up with their own ways to surpass those limits and impress with a level of skill not thought possible. I think it will be the same this gen... well... so long as they keep that passion and creative spark going...

[Jerome]

Ah well, that's definitely not what I said. But it doesn't matter cause I agree with you. I think the only edge Nintendo kind of has at the moment is the lagless connectivity between system and GamePad. That said, it seems your main concern is that Nintendo will seriously lag behind the competition technology wise... but that never stopped the Wii from having so much success last gen that the competition opted to add motion controls to their own hardware. I think that the very fact that Nintendo is conservative with hardware is what ignites that creative spark of theirs. Like back in NES and SNES days. The technology was so limited that people would come up with their own ways to surpass those limits and impress with a level of skill not thought possible. I think it will be the same this gen... well... so long as they keep that passion and creative spark going...

I actually agree about technical limitations being opportunities. The thing I'm concerned about actually isn't Nintendo's hardware lagging behind in technology, but it getting bloated and gimmicky and other companies coming in with more streamlined, efficient, and convenient options that are nicer to use. Nintendo's making games with more complex and gimmicky dual-screen controls and interfaces to justify using their Gamepad, games on 25GB discs to justify their $60 price tags, slightly better graphics than 360/PS3 to justify its higher price, a taste of being able to play content in a hardware-agnostic manner, yet only a taste, a small selection of downloadable games tied to a very restrictive DRM system. All these are areas in which competitors can offer advantages that don't depend on having more advanced hardware. In the previous generation, Nintendo was concerned with Disrupting the HD consoles, but I'm now seeing more potential for them to be Disrupted themselves.