[Refreshment]

Something that i think it's worth a comment is how forced the Upad implementation seems in the Wii Fit game. Not compelling features added and it seems more an inconvenience having the control stumbling around. I don't think that tray mini game is enough justification of the device. Nintendo created the fitness game sensation and now it's outclassed by more fitting devices (to that genre) like the Kinect.

[Grall]

Kinect needs a lot of room to work, I never bothered with it because my pad's just too small to be able to use it. It's OK if you own a house with a proper living room, but not everyone lives like that.

Everything has their pros and their cons. There's no one totally superior solution.

[Refreshment]

Originally Posted by Grall

Kinect needs a lot of room to work, I never bothered with it because my pad's just too small to be able to use it. It's OK if you own a house with a proper living room, but not everyone lives like that.

Everything has their pros and their cons. There's no one totally superior solution.

I was speaking in terms of fitness software, you are supposed to have space to make the exercises. Nothing Nintendo could offer in the WiiU will top what a Kinect can achieve. Maybe the successor to the Kinect will improve the efficiency in smaller spaces.

[Arwin]

Originally Posted by Refreshment

I was speaking in terms of fitness software, you are supposed to have space to make the exercises. Nothing Nintendo could offer in the WiiU will top what a Kinect can achieve. Maybe the successor to the Kinect will improve the efficiency in smaller spaces.

You are absolutely right, but the question is how much of Kinect features you need. I am in the same boat as Grall by the way - some Move games cause me trouble already, and Kinect is basically impossible in our livingroom. I think so far that something like Move Fitness is a lot more fun than any other game on any other platform, but i guess I'm in the minority.

So yes, Kinect is theoretically better, and I don't think Wii U can match it. But software makes the difference in the end. The power of Wii U for now is that all Wii U come with the controller. Neither Sony nor Microsoft currently have that basis yet, and it will be interesting to see if that changes next-gen. When that happens, we'll get a real test.

[Refreshment]

Originally Posted by Arwin

You are absolutely right, but the question is how much of Kinect features you need. I am in the same boat as Grall by the way - some Move games cause me trouble already, and Kinect is basically impossible in our livingroom. I think so far that something like Move Fitness is a lot more fun than any other game on any other platform, but i guess I'm in the minority.

So yes, Kinect is theoretically better, and I don't think Wii U can match it. But software makes the difference in the end. The power of Wii U for now is that all Wii U come with the controller. Neither Sony nor Microsoft currently have that basis yet, and it will be interesting to see if that changes next-gen. When that happens, we'll get a real test.

I wish to reiterate that when i commented: "Nothing Nintendo could offer in the WiiU will top what a Kinect can achieve." it was in terms of fitness and dance software. There are things in which both concepts excel and fail, like many things in life.

Next Xbox will probably come with the Kinect bundled and MS is making a good job stimulating the first gen Kinect absorption.

The WiiU concept is easy to reduce: Do you like DS interaction on your big screen TV? If yes, the WiiU will be a compelling device to own.

[Squilliam]

To go against the grain here I feel much more positive about E3 after having watched this presentation. I feel much more positive about the Wii U and I can see that the device itself to me is likely to receive reasonably good reception. After watching a bunch of rehashed stuff, Pikmin 3 was for instance a relief after watching the gratuitous violence of the Sony presentation.

Mario, Wii Fit, Just Dance etc are important to a lot of people so I wouldn't personally be so pessimistic about the future of the console so long as they don't price the thing in a way which is too expensive. Unlike the Wii they seem to actually have some decent cross platform titles so as long as they can take advantage of even some of their diminished Wii momentum they have a platform which they can build off. I think $249-299 is a good price for this device, $349-399 I feel is really pushing it.

[Arwin]

I think it is already confirmed to be $249 or something like that. And I just want to reiterate that I thought Nintendo had a good presentation as well. I'm as skeptical as ever towards owning one, but with my son just having turned 4, the chances are bigger than ever .

[Strange]

I don't agree with the price tag. Wii U with its stuff should be aiming for a price tag at around 350 USD. Anything below that would seem quite surprising to me.

[Refreshment]

Originally Posted by Strange

I don't agree with the price tag. Wii U with its stuff should be aiming for a price tag at around 350 USD. Anything below that would seem quite surprising to me.

Given the underwhelming hardware i think they'll ask for 300 in America. I wonder what 350 would've allowed them to put inside?

Probably what comes in the box:
Wii Remote
Nunchuck
Sensor Bar
Upad
Console
Power adapter or Cable (don't remember if PSU is internal)
Composite HD cable
Cradle
USB charging Cable
Nintendo Land
Some NFC cards

[Brad Grenz]

I doubt it includes a wiimote/nunchuck.

[ToTTenTranz]

Still hoping for a new 3DS to be announced tonight, even though the website claims it's a "software showcase".

Maybe this thing was strictly about getting cheaper components into the 3DS after all..

[ToTTenTranz]

Epic Mickey 3DS looks like.. a Gameboy Advance game?

[ToTTenTranz]

Nope, nothing.

No new hardware, not even a piece of software that wasn't briefly shown yesterday.

Meh.

[pc999]

3DS SHOWCASE

Great games but nothing new

This is the worst E3 ever (in general) without almost any new game revelation

It is SHAMEFUL

Some new apps (creative for music, photo...) or youtube/vimeo video and firmware updates(browser) would be great to.

That said I wish I had enough money to many of this games, maybe if they release at a lower price on the eShop. But not NSMB, that looks like miking.

[Refreshment]

Originally Posted by Brad Grenz

I doubt it includes a wiimote/nunchuck.

It's doubtful that it doesn't since all logic points out to it's inclusion. There's a strong emphasis on asymmetrical multiplayer and a great candidate for pack in software does extensive use of the WiiRemote.

Hopefully, i'll remember your post and come here at this years end

[Rodéric]

When can I buy a WiiU, and what are the launch titles ?


(I otherwise agree this E3 is pretty lame, no suprise, just more of the same. [WiiU was already announced past E3 so it doesn't count ;p])

[Shifty Geezer]

ShopTo reckons £280. Nikkei reckons 30,000 yen (£250).

[Grall]

I'm sure Nintendo will try to get the price as low as they can without actually losing (much) money. As we all know, Nintendo historically really doesn't like to sell hardware at a loss, although I believe they're doing that with the 3DS right now, or was anyway at the time of the price cut.

Considering the economic times however and their decision to upgrade their hardware to THIS current generation just when their competitors are preparing to spring to the next level, and their tumbling market share I really don't think they'll attempt again to sell low-powered hardware at a premium price, like they did with the Wii.

[Ika]

If they were so desperate about this screen on the controller thingy, wonder why they didn't just make a 3ds v2.0? A little bigger screen and a decoder chip to receive stream from the main console, double the vertical resolution for "Wii U" mode, and they would end up with a much more potent hardware. (and still portable too)

I understand that they would need to sell it separately or much more expensive if bundled, but I'm afraid that most of the ported third party games will play better with a pro controller anyway, so "user must have Upad" games will become minority as time goes by, or devs will put there things like inventory or maps, which can be accessed with one button on other systems or while playing with the pro controller.

[Refreshment]

Originally Posted by Ika

If they were so desperate about this screen on the controller thingy, wonder why they didn't just make a 3ds v2.0? A little bigger screen and a decoder chip to receive stream from the main console, double the vertical resolution for "Wii U" mode, and they would end up with a much more potent hardware. (and still portable too)

I understand that they would need to sell it separately or much more expensive if bundled, but I'm afraid that most of the ported third party games will play better with a pro controller anyway, so "user must have Upad" games will become minority as time goes by, or devs will put there things like inventory or maps, which can be accessed with one button on other systems or while playing with the pro controller.

I have been thinking about Nintendo releasing a hybrid console (portable and home use) for years. But they seem interested in keeping separation of both markets at the time.

So i wonder if Nintendo at least contemplated the possibility of multi console rendering? I know the details of how to market and sale the device could become murky but there is something important to gain. So they get away with a small and cheap console to produce for the mass market. Then the user willing to make a bigger investment in a console could get an extra unit and benefit from higher resolution and better image quality, or maybe better frame rates for 3D games. Sell a really nice rack to house both consoles and sell it at profit.

After some years, they could make some market research to study user adoption of multi gpu set up. If results are positive games specifically target for it could be made and a single unit housing 2 GPU's could be produced, the early adopters wouldn't be screwed because by that time production costs will have decreased and the option to acquire another unit is present for them. We have seen people buying up to 3 Xbox360 consoles due to hardware failures.

How feasible could this be?

[Ika]

Originally Posted by Refreshment

I have been thinking about Nintendo releasing a hybrid console (portable and home use) for years. But they seem interested in keeping separation of both markets at the time.

So i wonder if Nintendo at least contemplated the possibility of multi console rendering? I know the details of how to market and sale the device could become murky but there is something important to gain. So they get away with a small and cheap console to produce for the mass market. Then the user willing to make a bigger investment in a console could get an extra unit and benefit from higher resolution and better image quality, or maybe better frame rates for 3D games. Sell a really nice rack to house both consoles and sell it at profit.

After some years, they could make some market research to study user adoption of multi gpu set up. If results are positive games specifically target for it could be made and a single unit housing 2 GPU's could be produced, the early adopters wouldn't be screwed because by that time production costs will have decreased and the option to acquire another unit is present for them. We have seen people buying up to 3 Xbox360 consoles due to hardware failures.

How feasible could this be?

Exactly. I was thinking about the ability to stream data directly into the 3ds's memory. The data could be the video output of the main console, and the 3ds could render onto/modify that picture additionally with its on capabilities, or display it untouched.......
......But it could be other kind of data as well. For example: The powerful CPU of the main console could calculate and simulate the world in Sim city, and stream the result of the simulation into the handheld. This kind of calculations do not require 60+ updates per seconds, and it would be even possible to stream the data a few times per second via the internet, when the user is not even home.
etc, etc... it would be much better than a "useless" gamepad with a screen, even if it's very tempting to bring it with you into the toilet or into the bath

Btw, it was possible to connect the GBA to the Gamecube with some games, so this territory is not new to Nintendo after all.

[liolio]

Well it's been a rant of mine for a while but the fact that the 3ds and WiiU were obviously not design hand in hand is a great mistake from Nintendo.
I believe that Nintendo should have moved away from the 2 screens design of the DS (serious power constrain for the system on top of it).
They should have kept the "foldable" design of the DS. It's too convinient and make the device resilient.
They should have tried to make the screen so it can be rotated making the screen 9/16 would allow for BC (both DS screens would be stacked on the new screen). And like some laptop you could have the device set as a tablet (so when folded the screen would no longer face the controls).

*That would have free the lower part of the device so it would have proper controls from scratch.
*That would lower the power budget of the device allowing either a net save or to go with better hardware.
*They may have use a single bigger screen.
*It should have been multitouch.
*It should be the WiiUMote.