Confirmed: No Multi-touch for Wii U Tablet Controller

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Guest

Guest
That seems fine to me. Since you're using the butons on both sides, why would they need multi-touch? I'm sure it also keeps the price down because they don't need as complex a screen. I also agree that playing a game with the controller sitting in your lap would be strange too...
 

nebun

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
1,160
0
19,240
2
lol...so underpowered it can't handle multi-touch....this is one company that needs to go out of business....they keep going backwards
 

yourablob

Distinguished
Oct 1, 2009
1
0
18,510
0
I love Nintendo, but with the release of Microsoft's similar tech, allowing anybody to use any tablet or phone as an extra screen, Nintendo is kind of shooting themselves in the foot by removing features. I just hope that they are not limiting their gaming options by doing that, and that there is a price advantage to removing multi-touch funcionality. The appeal of the wii systems is the price, and the unique functionality. If they remove their awesome functionality they are diminishing their appeal to consumers.
 

aoneone

Distinguished
May 27, 2011
105
0
18,630
0
What if Ipad releases a nifty app that controls your xbox interface or ps3s xrossbar? It's just like the stupid WII U but for hundreds less and can even control the in game characters!! OH WAIT!
 

djscribbles

Honorable
Apr 6, 2012
159
0
10,640
2
Multitouch requires a lot more than processing power... not all touch technologies are capable of multitouch and each has their advantages and disadvantages.

While cost was probably the biggest driver for the decision, I can see a lot of reasons for not using capacitive touch (which is the conventional enabler for multi-touch), consider glass weight of a glass capacitive touch screen vs a resistive film; glass would most likely drive a flat surface instead of a dip where the display, the flat surface would be much easier to accidently touch; also activation sensitivy: a capacitive touch screen can be activated without physical contact or with only a slight touch, but a resistive screen requires a small amount of force to be applied to register.

Everything isn't a smart-phone, there's no point in over-complicating something for no reason, if the usability of multitouch capable on a controller isn't as good as a resistive single touch screen, why would you add the extra cost?
 

Khimera2000

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2009
191
0
18,630
0
All devices out now have multi touch, the fact that this does not makes the feature set sound dated before its even released.

Nintendo is loosing touch with there target audience (anyone from the age of 10+). The reason I say this is based on observations of my nephews. All these kids use Ipad, all these kids use Iphones, and these kids "know" what they can and can not do with there device. They all use Multi-touch for simple photo editing, map navigation, screen rotation, and on there notebooks page swiping, scrolling, program launching, and quick access to searching.

The Wii-U will not have Multi-Touch this feels like it might heart them. With Multi-Touch in place I can see them doing crazy interactions with FPS maps. Think MW3 Missile launch, but your actually physically looking down on your controller frantically pinching and zooming then clicking at the same time your darting your head up looking out for the man who wants to shoot you! Customization would also benefit from multi-touch. make it work like a drawing tablet, allowing a person to draw out desings with a single finger on the big screen, while using two finger to erase mistakes, I can even see them binding it to a specific layer simply by holding down an icon while the other hand does its movements.

In the end I see this as being short sighted. There are rival technologies out there that can provide in themselves unique experiences. The next generation Kinect will defenatly have less lag, we know Sony has its own tools for interaction, and with the Wii Controller only lasting 4 or 5 hours! I can't say that I'm looking forward to the Wii-U release.

Sony has the PS Vita out now, from what I understand has the potential to be used as a PS3 controller, and will probably integrate even more so into the next generation consoles if the product takes off. It also has augmented reality, the potential to be used as a PS3 remote, and the ability to take the gaming out and about when needed. Nintendo needed every hardware feature they could get, and this feels like they just goofed. The potential for competition is out right now, the Wii-U already looks lacking in capabilities Vs its competition, the only way I can see them competing it price.

In the end I see Nintendo landing in the exact same position as the last console wars. Cutting out the feature because he did not see its value is short sighted when other companies already have multi-gesture interaction out NOW.
 

MajinCry

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2011
77
0
18,580
0
Meh. I didn't care for multi touch. Remember how easy it is to slide your fingers over the wrong buttons on a touch screen?

And I mean, come on! You expect the console to have atleast £500 of hardware, and then bitch about it "BEING 2 EXPENSIF". Atleast try to act like a person that can think.


Please?
 

drwho1

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2010
367
0
18,930
0
Nintendo's Wii U has now made an appearance at two E3 conferences and we still don't know all there is to know about the upcoming console
Really?
Is Nintendo, so we know that is going to pale in comparison to both PS4 and M$ Xbox 720.
That's all we"needed to know".

That's all.
 

djscribbles

Honorable
Apr 6, 2012
159
0
10,640
2
[citation][nom]Khimera2000[/nom]All devices out now have multi touch, the fact that this does not makes the feature set sound dated before its even released.[/citation]

Like the Nintendo DS? Oh wait, that is single touch; because multi-touch doesn't make any sense considering the design of the platform.

Touch controls aren't magic, every touch technology has tradeoffs and multi-touch doesn't magically make it better; it's a necessity for tablets and phones because the touch screen is the only major input device, and a second touch point is required to expand the total number of actions that can be recognized. A control has plenty of additional inputs to modify actions, and better to access them without having to put the controller down so you can zoom in by pinching...
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
162
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]Khimera2000[/nom]Sony has the PS Vita out now, from what I understand has the potential to be used as a PS3 controller, and will probably integrate even more so into the next generation consoles if the product takes off. It also has augmented reality, the potential to be used as a PS3 remote, and the ability to take the gaming out and about when needed. Nintendo needed every hardware feature they could get, and this feels like they just goofed. The potential for competition is out right now, the Wii-U already looks lacking in capabilities Vs its competition, the only way I can see them competing it price.[/citation]
Some of this may be true, but one important factor you don't seem to be considering is the success of the platform. How many people actually have a PS Vita? And how many of those people also own a PS3? The Vita has been absolutely trounced by the 3DS in weekly sales figures since its launch. In the last figure I saw from about a week ago, the 3DS outsold all of Sony's active consoles (Vita, PS3, PSP) by a wide margin. In fact, up until just recently the PSP was outselling the Vita.

The Vita is a separate system, with the additional ability to interact with some PS3 games should the developer choose pursue its very small user base. Whereas the Wii U controller is... well, a controller, and comes packed with every system. Once the Vita starts coming standard with every PS3, then Sony will start having a lot of the advantages you've mentioned.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Considering it has an analog stick, a directional pad, a gyroscope and an assortment of buttons and triggers I don't think multitouch is a big loss. It's certainly a more important feature for a tablet with no other interface options. Obviously it would be better if it had it but I imagine they're trying to keep costs low.

The Vita and Glass are optional accessories that are more expensive and, due to the nature of being "optional add-ons", won't be widely supported. Sony took a major hit when they launched the PS3 at $600. Selling a $300 console that needs a $300 handheld to control it is just as bad. Odds are if you have that kind of cash to spend on gaming you aren't looking at nintendo anyways.

Not that I'm sold on this idea in the first place. The ultimate decider is software and they've yet to show me a killer app I want. PC gaming is still my home.
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
162
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]dragonsqrrl[/nom]In the last figure I saw from about a week ago, the 3DS outsold all of Sony's active consoles (Vita, PS3, PSP) by a wide margin.[/citation]
And just to clarify, that's all of Sony's active consoles combined.

Too bad there's no comment editing on Tom's Guide...
 
G

Guest

Guest
First Mover DISadvantage. Sony/MSFT will copy and improve this Wii U junk in 3 months tops. Consumers saw this movie 5-7 years ago and have learned. They will wait for PS4 Xbox720 to improve upon Wii U's shortfalls. Nintendo needs to figure out their target market segment, casual players are moving to phones and Ninentendo can't produce a strong console box so they're stuck in the middle

Wii U = DOA
 

dreadllokz

Distinguished
Mar 2, 2010
7
0
18,510
0
6 months after launch... Multi-touch version, just pay us a little more! -.-' always the same planned obsolescence bullsh*t!
 

orionltd

Distinguished
Apr 16, 2010
6
0
18,510
0
I played the Wii U at E3. I had the opportunity to try 5 of their games.
First of all, the large controller worked well and seemed to play as intended as a single touch controller. The press dwells upon the new controller as the primary control of the system. The Wii U utilizes the traditional remotes in game play as well. For example, I was playing Luigi's Haunted House. One player was the Ghost (with the touch controller) while 4 others were the Luigi's searching with their flashlights. As Ghost, I used my thumb stick to move the ghost, my button to light up the whole room and only looked at the touch screen to play. The other 4 players only looked at the TV and could not see me unless I attacked or lit up the room. When playing the ninja star game, I flicked my fingers across the screen to launch the star while aiming the controller at the screen. The faster I flicked, the harder the stars would launch.

The Wii U may not be for everyone. What console is. I personally own a Wii, PS3 and XBOX 360 for different reasons. I liked the Wii U's gameplay. What will be the deal maker or breaker is the price. It already is backwards compatible with Wii titles so it will come down to how much for the new console with the nifty touch screen controller.

P.S. The best feature of the Wii U is the "asymmetric game play". You as the big controller can have a different game play experience than the other traditional controllers have. This is a potential gold mine with parents and kids. How many kids totally dominate as compared to their parents when playing? What if one part of the game play is better suited towards the parents while the other is better suited to energetic kids?

Hmmm
 

husker

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2009
428
0
18,930
0
Here is why Nintendo has the upper hand: The software will be the key to the Wii U. Games will have to be designed in a way that makes having an extra display on the controller actually matter to the game, and be integral to the gameplay. If somebody suddenly makes it possible for and android tablet or iPad to be used as a touch screen controller for the xBox, it will just be a sideshow novelty unless there is a concerted effort on the part of game developers actually design a game which actually requires these screens to be a part of the gameplay. The problem is developers won't do this, because then they would be limiting the market potential of their product (classic chicken and egg dilemma). Therefore, the only developers that will be willing to devote the time and money in building a game that actually requires a touchscreen controller are people designing games for the Wii U, because they know that all Wii U owners have already bought into the idea of the controller/display and also have already purchased the hardware.
 

husker

Distinguished
Oct 2, 2009
428
0
18,930
0
Orion is right.

Here is why Nintendo has the upper hand: The software will be the key to the Wii U. Games will have to be designed in a way that makes having an extra display on the controller actually matter to the game, and be integral to the gameplay. If somebody suddenly makes it possible for an android tablet or iPad to be used as a touch screen controller for the xBox, it will just be a sideshow novelty unless there is a concerted effort on the part of game developers actually design a game which actually requires these screens to be a part of the gameplay. The problem is developers won't do this, because then they would be limiting the market potential of their product (classic chicken and egg dilemma). Therefore, the only developers that will be willing to devote the time and money in building a game that actually requires a touchscreen controller are people designing games for the Wii U, because they know that all Wii U owners have already bought into the idea of the controller/display and also have already purchased the hardware.
 

invlem

Distinguished
Jan 11, 2008
265
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]drwho1[/nom]Really?Is Nintendo, so we know that is going to pale in comparison to both PS4 and M$ Xbox 720.That's all we"needed to know".That's all.[/citation]

Yet it will be on the market over a year in advance, during that time its only competition will be 360/PS3, 7 year old hardware, which it will blow out of the water.

Will it be less powerful than the PS4/720, yes probably, but the difference this time around won't be nearly as noticeable, its going to be running 1080p, its going to look better than current generation hardware, and knowing Nintendo's pricing history its going to be affordable.

My bet it they'll have a good 5-10 million shipped and sold before MS/Sony get their consoles on the market
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Streaming Video & TVs 7
J Streaming Video & TVs 4
G Streaming Video & TVs 11
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 9
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 12
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 28
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 10
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 5
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 7
G Streaming Video & TVs 7
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 1
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 39
Z Streaming Video & TVs 8
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 11
Z Streaming Video & TVs 9
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 9
Z Streaming Video & TVs 9
G Streaming Video & TVs 14
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 1
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 9

ASK THE COMMUNITY