Forums / Discussion / General

So, now that at least a little time has passed since release, what does everyone here think of Nintendo's newest home console?

---

Personally, I think it sucks.

Remember when I said that Nintendo needed to have plans for a new F-Zero or they could 'kiss my ass'? Well, Nintendo can kiss my ass even if they DO release a new F-Zero, because I get the feeling an F-Zero game would be damn near unplayable on that clunky-ass "tablet" controller.

In fact, I've played two games for it so far: Nintendo Land, where you have to use the tablet to do anything at all, and I tried the F-Zero activity within it, but it forces you to hold the tablet in a way that makes it even more awkward (which I didn't know was even possible); and 007 Legends, which forces you to use the clunky-ass tablet just to play the single-player campaign (which is utter bullshit).

I even tried playing one of the games I had previously downloaded on my Wii then transferred to the Wii U, Super Hang-On, a Virtual Console Arcade title; but even then, I pressed every button on both the Wii Remote and the Classic Controller, but neither got any response.

I will be gathering up all Wii U games and accessories that I own and promptly trading them in at the local Gamestop. At this point, nothing Nintendo can do could possibly redeem them in my eyes. I honestly believe that it would be best for them to sell off the rights to F-Zero, perhaps Star Fox, Metroid and Zelda as well, and let them be developed by third parties and released multi-platform.

TL;DR: Get this piece of junk out of my sight.

The controller honestly doesn't bother me. I don't own it yet, but from what I played in the demo unit at the store it's weirdly light and will take some getting used to, but the last 4 major pieces of hardware Nintendo has released (DS, Wii, 3DS, Wii U) required some getting used to too, so I can safely say I am used to getting used to stuff (yo dwang).

However, what Nair is bringing up is mostly Launch Game Lineup Fuckups (present in nearly every console release). These games where given a limited amount of time to rush out the door to make it in time for the Wii U's release. Game Developers will likely get their shit together and start creating better and better games before the end of the next year.

Also, The F-Zero game they may release will probably control a lot closer to it's predecessor rather than the Nintendoland Attraction. And what else did you expect from a License Tie In Game? Those always tend to suck.

Lemme be honest here: I wanted to give this thing a fair chance, I wanted to try to find SOME redeeming element in it.

I can't.

I just want to be rid of it. I'll get 007 Legends for 360, get rid of the Wii U and everything I bought for it, get rid of all the Wii games I've got since I put all my data for them on the Wii U, and just use my Wii as a glorified Gamecube.

Maybe I'll try to re-download all the WiiWare and Virtual Console titles I had on it…

But as for the Wii U, I can't honestly say I see it getting any better.

007 Legends will suck no matter what you play it on. Give the Wii U a chance. As Natsu said, those games were rushed for the release. Of course they were mediocre.

The tablet sucks. Worst part of the entire console if you ask me. I just don't like it.

And maybe I'm just the type that would want a Bond game? Maybe I'm willing to give it a chance when you're not?

I understand this makes us both hypocrites, but at least for my part, I know what I like and what I want it to play like. I have the new GoldenEye game, for two separate consoles (Wii & 360), and I only ever used it with the Classic Controller when I played it on the Wii. I just don't like motion controls, and that damned touch screen on the tablet makes it more unwieldy than it has any right to be.

I just can't see myself liking it under any circumstances. Maybe if I could use the Wii U Pro Controller to play the single-player campaign of 007 Legends, I wouldn't feel the need to get rid of my Wii U as quickly as possible.

So you find the use of the tablet controller to be awkward? That would be okay and all, if you summarized how long you had the console and roughly how long you had been playing it. I can't take a review seriously if the reviewer himself hasn't been playing this for more than a day. (There is an App in the menu you can use to look your exact usage up. Pics if possible please)

About the 007 Legends game, after a bit of digging around it had gotten some overall really crappy scores. The review of the nintendo version game got a 4/10 meaning that I can't take your assessment of the console seriously though the judgement of this game.

On the other hand, many other higher rated games on the Wii U have better game-play, use of the game pad, use of the Pro Controller, and overall better first hand experiences than the first game you picked up. (One that might strike your fancy is Call of Duty Black Ops 2, though I assume you may already own that one for a different console)

Nintendoland is basically Wiisports for the WiiU: A series of experiments to show off the new controller and get people used to it. None of the games using licenses (ie Metroid, F-Zero) are gonna behave the same as the games they are based on.

As for 007 Legends? Game is shit bro, just dump it. Even on Xbox 360 and PC it has terrible review scores.

I must say that I do not have a WiiU yet so don't take my word for it but from what I've heard, FPSes like BLOPS II and ZombiU control just fine if not better using the Tablet controller.

I also have a Wii U, and the tablet does not bother me. But if you were expecting good games at launch, then based on your interests, you picked the wrong ones. As previously stated, 007 Legends is awful on all consoles, and Nintendo Land is a casual game, which really is only there to show what the Wii U can do. I wouldn't judge the console based on it's line up library, they never really show the true potential of a console. Also, I love the controller, t's got lot's of potential (as long as game designers don't transform it's usage into a giant gimmick, which everyone says it is already). I don't think it feels clunky at all, in fact I think it holds quite nice. When it came out, I was worried that the touchscreen would disrupt gameplay, but I was shocked. I got ZombiU at launch, and am loving it. It uses the touchscreen a lot, but never to a point where it feels uncomfortable. Nintendo have done great with the console so far, especially the third party support and, "Hardcore" games, so if they can keep it up and drop their hatred of violence, it could regain a Ninty a few lost fans.

Also, everyone uses the classic controller for GoldenEye, everyone.

American Tanker, Hell on Tracks wrote:

So, now that at least a little time has passed since release, what does everyone here think of Nintendo’s newest home console?

Wii U is definitely an interesting console. Now that Nintendo has released it, people are automatically going to go for the latest and greatest, regardless of any flaws or drawbacks. That means decreasing sales of PS3 an Xbox360.

Decreasing sales of both, Sony's and Microsoft's consoles will force them to make consoles before the damn 10-year life cycle and that will result in newer technology, and better graphics from all the competitors. (And finally replacement of the PS3's aging Marvell 88W8580 wireless chipset that sucks soooo much).

Personally, I don't hate or like the Wii U, but I respect the fact that it will force other companies to hurry up and make new consoles. (And them making new consoles can either be bad or good – depends on players' budgets, etc).

I don’t have much to say about the Wii U, considering that I don’t own one yet, but I think it looks like it would be deficient for the types of games that I would like to play, namely racing games or shooters. The capability for turn-based or real-time strategy games looks rather unsatisfactory, at least from first glance. I fancy other genres as well, but Nintendo is not the organization I would expect games of those genres from. Heck, even the design seems moderately grungy and slipshod. But my opinions lack attestation behind them, of course. I’ve only seen the Wii U on display at a GameStop, no less, so take of that what you will.

Evan wrote:

The capability for turn-based or real-time strategy games looks rather unsatisfactory, at least from first glance.I fancy other genres as well, but Nintendo is not the organization I would expect games of those genres from.

You do know that Nintendo invented the Turn Based RPG…?

But I don't understand how the WiiU is deficient for the games you want to play? Shooters and Racers were plenty on the original Wii and the tablet looks awesome for both Turn based AND Real time Strategy.

Okay, so I've actually tried the F-Zero activity in Nintendo Land, and I was far less than impressed, to put it extremely mildly. Definitely not fun to me.

I guess all I can do is just grind away at it, hoping Nintendo will do something with F-Zero somewhere down the road, but I know I won't be having any fun doing it.

As for 007, I'm not looking forward to using the tablet to play an FPS. However, if the gunplay is at least similar to the new GoldenEye and relies on dual analog instead of motion control, I might be able to look past a few faults here and there. I will confess that I am actually a pretty big Bond fan, though I'll also confess that I think I prefer the Daniel Craig-era Bond over older versions. Though that may be because besides Brosnan, Craig's the only one I've ever seen in the role.

What can I say? I'm not accustomed to Nintendo's constitutions, I guess. It could be thought of as just a lack of receptivity on my part. Like I said, I don't know much about the Wii U, so take my post with a grain of salt.

And I didn't think it indispensable for me to say that I speak and act with judgment based on limited experience. My thoughts on the Wii U console are my thoughts on how it looks, not what it is. It doesn't appear to be something I'd rush to the mall to buy this holiday season, to put it simply. Like I've already said, though, it's likely just a lack of receptivity on my part.

Honestly? It looks vexatious. Invalid though my opinion may sound, I don't think I'm really the kind of guy that would like that kind of thing, at least not until I knew more about it.

As for your earlier question, Fire Emblem is great. But particular. Or so I think; consider me wrong if you must. I can't say I'd blame you, really.

From the reviews of other FPS' I've seen, motion control isn't unnecessary, which I believe is a good thing. If you don't mind me saying, I'd say give it a little longer to prove it's worth before getting rid, I'll admit the launch lineup still doesn't show it's full potential. But hey, that's just me saying that.

I like it. Maybe it's just because Scribblenauts Unlimited is an awesome game, but I really like the fact that you can play without even having the TV on.

That just sounds stupid, Fry. Why would I play with the TV off?

Ridiculous ideas at the very finest, Nintendo. I know I'm never trying THAT.

Mainly just in case you share a tv in high demand. I'll admit, it's pretty stupid though.

Who said you absolutely HAD to turn the TV off to play?

Also, you don't want to play that, just BECAUSE you have the optional choice of turning the set off?

Playing only on the game pad has a limited number of uses, and not even every game uses it. However if you just want to stand up and go to the kitchen and play while you wait for your food to be done cooking, it's a nice gimmick.

Gimmicks. That's all Nintendo's been doing since they came out with the DS (or the Wii, whichever came first).

Gimmicks.

Which is why I'm sincerely thinking of dropping Nintendo altogether and focusing strictly on Sony & Microsoft.

Hey, gimmicks aren't always something's downfall, as long as it has other features to make up for it. I believe that there is still potential, so we can only wait and see, but I'm not her to stop you hating Ninty, that's your opinion. And hey, one of Nintendo's first gimmicks is widely considered to have saved the videogame industry..

Though Nintendo continually tries to push new innovation with every console, some times to their disadvantage, they have finally learned their hard lessons well and gave their default controller everything all the other consoles have and more.

So what I am saying here the Gimmick this time around can only work to enhance any standard experience instead of entirely change it upon the game getting ported to the system.

And Sony and Microsoft aren't gimmick free themselves. Remember the Kinect and Move? Though Sony had probably decided the Move is just useless, the Next Xbox will likely have the Kinect built into it or something else big and spooky.

Natsuru posted:

…the Next Xbox will likely have the Kinect built into it or something else big and spooky.

If that happens, I'm going fully over to Sony. DEATH TO ALL GIMMICKS!

I like the console, I really do, but the new tablet play is a bit different and is slightly putting me off. Other than that, because of my undying love of Nintendo that burns as hot as a thousand Random 21's, I really wouldn't mind if anybody got it for me for Christmas…

…

*Motions towards KYM to get me a Wii U*

Games actually look a lot better on the tablet for me because my TV is shitty.

Also I was pretty unsure weather I'd like playing with the tablet at first, but I can play BLOPS 2 pretty comfortably with it.

Say what you will about Gimmicks, but I bought the gimmicky DS and the PSP. I only play with the DS still.
fucking Nintendo, how does it work.

Seriously though, nintendo might have its flaws, but its excellent IPs are what keep me interested. Ive had fun with Super mario WiiU so far, and while it hasn't blown me away yet, I'm sure it will soon enough.

What's so bad about gimmicks?

We can't go any farther without a few risks here and there.

That's how we got the NES D-pad, the Wavebird, and whole loads of creative games.
If you can't connect any of those back to any of your games, Douglas Engelbart created the computer mouse in 1964. Back then, what do you think a mouse was considered besides some cheap gimmick?

Don't think of change as a bad thing, Tanker. You could very well become the next 90s Nick that way.

@ Dac: You know where I stand on Nintendo IPs.

@ Joe: Then I'll become that guy and not care that I have.

That's nice Tanker. But this is a thread about the Wii U, not gimmicks in general.

Nintendo always ran on gimmicks, and they've always been succesful with it. When the Wii first launched, people were going full bananas over the whole motion controller idea. Look at how popular the thing turned out to be. Put some faith in them. I'm at least not judging anything until I had first hand experience.

Nintendo puts their audience focus on the casual gamer and their Mario, Zelda, etc. fanbase. You, Tanker, are a serious hardcore gamer. Your kind is best of with a PS3, so it's easy that you won't be pleased with everything Nintendo produces.

Well then why did you buy the wiiU? I'm mean, even the biggest Nintendo fanboy will tell that neither the controller nor the third party support was even close to being the main selling point or even that interesting( Atleast compared to the wiimote) the main selling point was the Nintendo IPs finally were gonna be in hd and be able to be bigger and better. While Nintendo was talking about connectivity and The game pad, every Nintendo geek was like " holy fuck, zelda, Mario bros, f zero, metriod, Pokemon, etc. in glorious HD".

I bought it because I'm hoping for a new F-Zero, nothing more.

It's really the only thing I want out of Nintendo anymore.

So my brother and I don't have to fight over who gets to use the TV. You have the choice between playing it like a console or playing it like a handheld, depending on which you prefer. No other system does that.

Then you just made a bad decision, and should've thinken your actions through better beforehand.

You went:

• [Buy Wii U]
  • → If new F-Zero, keep.
  • → If no new F-Zero, sell.

The correct order of decisions would be:

• [Wait for announcement new F-Zero]
  • → If so, buy Wii U.
  • → If not, save money.

Also, like RM said, lots of Nintendo consoles start with a gimmick, and it (almost) always works. The Game Boy Advance SP had a backlight and rechargeable batteries (now a standard in pretty much all handheld devices). The Nintendo DS had a touch screen. The Wii had motion control. The 3DS had 3D (although this wasn't its main selling point). And now the Wii U has a screen on its controller. If you got upset over gimmicks, you would never get new consoles; look how quickly Microsoft and Sony jumped on the motion control bandwagon after the Wii vastly outsold both the PS3 and the Xbox 360. Nintendo is an innovator, and if you don't like change then maybe you should stop buying video games.

Why would you buy a 300 dollar system for one game.

Because I'm just that big a fan of F-Zero, alright?

So I made a bad call, so what? Worst that can happen is that I take it to trade in at the local Gamestop and put the money toward something else I like.

What is pirating?

Something I don't do.

What…you guys play videogames in your room…..alone?

Am I the only one who has to fight for the right to use the living room TV with my family members?

And for fuck's sake, it's an optional thing. AN OPTIONAL THING THAT IS VERY USEFUL TO ME!

However, if the gunplay is at least similar to the new GoldenEye and relies on dual analog instead of motion control, I might be able to look past a few faults here and there.

blops 2 and ZombiU use Dual Analog controls and they work fine (though I believe ZombiU uses motion control for Melee attacks, but I'm not 100% sure)

If we're talking about gimmicks, Nintendo has been ALL about gimmicks and a lot have been adopted by everyone:

Game and Watch: D-Pad
NES: R.O.B. The Robot, Zapper gun
SNES: Shoulder Buttons
N64: Rumble, Analog control built in
Gamecube: No Gimmicks, worst selling Nintendo console.
Wii: Motion controls
WiiU: Tablet controller

And I'm skipping a lot of stuff like the Virtual Boy, Super Scope, Wii Fit board, GBA E-reader…the list goes on.

So saying that Nintendo has been doing gimmicks since the Wii days is kind of a misnomer. They're a company BUILT on gimmicks:

Looking under the Christmas Tree I see a familiarly shaped box with my name on it that may be what I think it is.

If it is, I shall give a first impression and a hands on before the year is done.

False alarm. It was new riding boots. >_>;;

Silly Natsuru.

*Laugh track plays*

Okay, so I've put a bit more time into Nintendo Land's F-Zero activity, called "Captain Falcon's Twister Race". I can safely declare it "mildly amusing".

Now that I've gotten used to how to hold the tablet for this, it's not quite as awkward as I thought. However, for something based on F-Zero, it's far less thrilling than it should be. I think I'll stick with Playstation Home's Sodium 2: Project Velocity for my futuristic racing fix.

I still haven't actually played 007 Legends yet, but the way they describe all the functions in that game, why can I NOT use the Pro Controller to play the single-player? It's not even like the tablet's touch screen is even necessary. And I mean AT ALL.

Oh, and one last thing: I'm kinda wondering why they don't have a Star Fox activity for Nintendo Land. Could they not come up with a name? Maybe they don't know how to incorporate the touch screen? I don't know, but that's one more disappointing thing on the list.

I think they said they MIGHT do a new Star Fox game at some point, but I might have read something wrong.

Frist are my thoughts on playing Batman Arkham City AE with the Wii U Controller.

At frist glance the controller seemed like it would play arkward, but when I used it was actually a little more comfortable then the PS3 Controller and I had no problem playing the game with it, and the touch screen was pretty convenient for showing stuff like Maps and Menus you would usully have to press a button that stops the game to bring up.

But I think the best part of the controller was being able to play games without the Tv, Because of this my brothers don't have to interrupt my game when they want to use the Tv, This way I can have more time to enjoy the game without hoarding the TV from my brothers

So if your want to play single player console games like Mass Effect 3, Assassins Creed 3 and Arkham city but you don't have that much TV Time, Get them on the Wii U if you already have one, But if you pretty much have your own TV the controller won't make a big difference between playing these games on the Wii U and other Consoles.

Those are my thoughts on Single-Player games on the Wii U, I'll post my thoughts on Nintendo land in a another post later.

Phoenix, kill me for saying this, but I believe that the 'Cube is Nintendo's best console to date.

What worries me with the Wii U is that it's gimmicky, and that this gimmick might just be thrown in our faces with some games which of course detracts from the game and the system as a whole. There were a lot of games on the Wii that instead of putting an emphasis on using the Wii to enrich the gaming experience though parts of the gameplay might be useful, decided to just try to shove the Wiimote into everything. I expect worse problems with the Wii U, because the tablet is more gimmicky and less useful than a motion controller.

Back when it was announced I was all like AWESOMESAUCE but the novelty wore off on me and I had been thinking "what can this thing do besides make strategy games and RPGs feel a bit more awesome?"

In my opinion Nintendo should have expanded more on the ways games can be played rather than just shelling out a gimmick. Nintendo as an idea has become something for gamers to have push beyond the confines of basic controller gameplay and expand, but those of us who jumped in ended up playing The Conduit for the rest of the generation, while other people moved away from the Wii. I avoided a lot of games that required the Wiimote because of how crappy they were and I opted instead to just to play Smash Bros (no motion control) Mario Kart, The Conduit, Metroid Prime 3/Trilogy, The Force Unleashed, and etc. When your console fails to produce enough games that use your gimmick properly, you've failed.

Remember Nintendo, people used the Zapper with Duck Hunt because it made sense to have a gun in a shooting game. Make games that properly use your gimmick, or don't use the gimmick at all.

When your console fails to produce enough games that use your gimmick properly, you’ve failed.

---

I'm sure the Wii's sales disagree with the term "failure" being appropriate here. I think it was wasteful to have motion controls for many of the better selling games, but for a select few (Skyward Sword comes to mind, and I'm sure there are others although not many), the Wiimote was used really well. If other games are sold and enjoyed without the gimmick, but the console and games for the console are still sold, then I don't think it's a failure: I think it's wasteful. For gamers.

Anecdotally, most of my friends or friends' families are not gamers. But if they have a next generation gaming console, it was a Wii. And surprisingly, more families than I thought have the Wii. And they often use the motion controls for the Wii. Most traditional gamers probably don't (myself included), but those who aren't even casual gamers did.

People who'd play games like SSB, Mario Kart, Metroid, etc. are probably fans of those Nintendo games prior to the Wii. As long as you could play it, then it didn't matter if you didn't use the focus of the system.
 
I do see your point, but I think it's an exaggeration to call a system that far outsells its competitors a failure in any meaningful regard, and those who bought the system in such high numbers probably did use the motion controls. In fact, I'm willing to bet that if they didn't have it, they wouldn't have outsold the PS3 or the 360.

---

Now, how does that translate to the Wii U? Can't tell you yet. I want to:

1. Own a Wii U. Nintendo will always have 1st-Party games that I'll want to play, and Zelda, SSB, and Mario Kart give me enough play and replay value to justify my purchase of them as long as the games are playable somehow. And With these games, I've never had a game that was unplayable. I don't think this will be any different, so I'll get a Wii U when I have the money.
2. See how all demographics respond with time. When the Wii U has a better library, I want to see how it's doing. I thought the Wii would fall flat on its face after half of a year. It did not.

Personally, I think it'll be more wasteful with its technology than the Wii's motion controls, but perhaps Notsocool's dilemma of needing to play without a television is something shared by many others. Perhaps other games are being developed that will make better use of the tablet.

Maybe it'll be great for people like me: The Wii sucked for sports games. I considered getting a PS3 (and actually purchased a used PS2 due to the price of the PS3) because many of the sports games were so bad and so limited on the Wii. I don't think that the Wii U will have that kind of problem, and the types of games that I play could all fall within the domain of the Nintendo console. So I wouldn't have to get another console to play my favorite NCAA Football games or Need for Speed with par graphics. If the Wii can play those games, then Nintendo will have my balls more than it does now.
 
 
 
Also, potentially Earthbound.

Oh I didn't say that I hated the Cube. I loved it! But it was clearly the worst selling Nintendo console. They tried to go with straight horsepower against Sony and Microsoft and it didn't work, which is why they threw a curveball with the Wii.

Katie C wrote:

What worries me with the Wii U is that it’s gimmicky, and that this gimmick might just be thrown in our faces with some games which of course detracts from the game and the system as a whole. There were a lot of games on the Wii that instead of putting an emphasis on using the Wii to enrich the gaming experience though parts of the gameplay might be useful, decided to just try to shove the Wiimote into everything. I expect worse problems with the Wii U, because the tablet is more gimmicky and less useful than a motion controller.

I don't think the tablet is more gimicky and less useful than a Tablet controller.

Think about it…the Wiimote was so different that people had trouble porting games to the Wii.

But the Tablet controller? It's literally a standard dual analog controller with a tablet built in. If they completely ignore the screen….it's a normal controller.

And that's what the Wii lacked. You needed the Classic Controller Pro to get Xbox/PS3 controls on the Wii but the WiiU has it out of the box.

Ok, I know what you need to do American Tanker, just find all the F Zero games for Virtual Console (if it's still called that on the Wii U) and just have those to tide you over until the next F Zero game.