New DS coming, what will be different?

Maybe becos every comment about the lack of new games and crappy 3rd partie support is follow by "IT GOTS THE WIIMOTE!!1!!one":110:

Seriously, the DS even with the low spec list was a great idea and pretty edgy since at the time touchscreen was still kinda rare outside the PDA market.

But the Wii is old hardware coupled with an old idea. Yes, is better on the flesh (or is it plastic?) than in paper, and its fun and everything, but is not the friggin messiah, ok?

I'm getting one, not at $250 cuz I think thats a scam, but as soon as theres a price cut I'm buying a wii.

 

If they bundled the Wii with Galaxy instead of Wii Sports, I'd buy one right now.

 

I dont think that such level of complexity is good (or even practicable) on a portable, not only during actual usage but the fact that most of the time people loose the stylus, and I dont wanna know how expensive would be to make a stylus with the same functions of a wiimote.

A DS with higher specs (more CPU, a good GPU and higher resolution 16:9 screens) would be pretty cool, specially if they ad multitouch.

That would make playing FPS games on the DS a blast:thumbsup:

Or at least Metroid cuz it isnt freash out of the oven.

Paying full price for a series of minigames like wiisport is a ripoff, but on the other hand I doubt nintendo will change that since is part of their new casual-oriented strategy.

 

Why would they change it when its selling anyway? For every one of you who wont buy it with Wii Sports bundled, there are 10 more willing to buy it.

 

Exactly, plus a lot of people would like Sports instead of any other game...

As I said before, the odds are against us.

 

I do wish DS had widescreen. I'm pretty sure GBA had a type of widescreen, so that really confused me, but the games are pretty damn good and there something you don't get somewhere else. It may be "old" hardware on the Wii and DS, but there still a lot cheaper then the other systems. I do think Wii needs more games I would play though. The wiimote can be very fun to use but it seems to be tacked on more then anything else.

 

The new DS should have a PictoChat update. It'd be really convinient if they had preset images you could use in the chat. Mainly, I just want to be able to draw a penis instantly... that's all.

 

LMAO, Pictochat is so funny. I haven't got to use it much though.

 

I don't get that. How can the stylus interact like a wiimote. Do you mean in terms of input or motion controlls?

Either way it's f**king retarded (sorry had to be said).
Best bets for the DS2 is same style, wider screens, an accelleromitor, & multi touch screen.

Truthfuly thats probably asking for too much from nintendo (they always go the cheap route). I think I have higher hopes in PSP2 having multi touch and acelleromitor the the DS 2 (ds will probably only get one).

 

Maybe the DS will be just 2 big (big being something like the PSP's screen) screens, the lower one being multitouch and no physical controls at all. The other day I plaed with the Nes emu in a friend's iPhone and quite honestly touch controls arent that bad at all.

Just try to imagine the control revolution that would unleash, and coupled with some good specs it could make a bigger impact than the Wii did.

On the other hand I see a BIG chance that the PSP could be like that (or just a big touchscreen like the iphone) since sony will want to get on the DS touch capabilities.

 

Except for the fact that people actually want and desire tactile feedback from the controls, whether they realize it or not.

 

Just like they used to desire normal controllers, and now check out how the Wii is selling:dance:

The problem with full touchscreen controllers is that most attempts out there where half-assed, with poor coding, bad screens and almost no calibration at all.

Saying touchscreen controllers will fail becos of that is like saying the Wii was doom to failure becos the Activator couldnt do it

 

Though it would be cool to have an entirely touch screen interface ala the iPhone, I agree that the lack of tactile feedback would be weird and people wouldn't glomp onto it the way they have with the stylus. Hell, even the stylus has some feedback by pressing it to the screen, but doing it entirely with your fingers? That isn't going to work. There has to be some click.

The DS 2 is a long way off. We're certainly not going to see it before the Wii 2 (maybe a dual launch?). The DS is still selling like mad and Nintendo is not going to risk losing a 50 mil install base just to introduce new hardware features.

When it does come, I think it will be similar to the GB - GBA transition. Just a lot more power under the hood. Maybe more of a multi-media device like the PSP.

I'm still waiting for the combined console/handheld option. It would be awesome if the PS4/Wii2/Xbox 3 were POWERFUL handheld devices with TV out features. With wireless controllers etc, companies wouldn't have to do the 2nd pillar thing. Sure I'm dreaming. But its a damn good dream.

 

as a long-time user of touch-screen emulators (on my phone), I m dead against virtual buttons. Tactical feedback is essential and buttons are surely more durable than a screen.

 

I agree to that....

even on my Palm TX, you just can't play an emulator with screen buttons. You have to use the hardware buttons on the bottom or it's just too difficult and awkward.

 

You guys have such a narrow view...

If it were for you the Wii would use something like that sidewinder which is the most simple kind of motion control.

Now before you can read the rest, You need to see this.

That game is just a mere example of how touchscreens can change the way gameplay works.

Touchscreens doesnt have to be a replacement for pointing devices, they can usher a completely new way of playing games!

Drawing a virtual representation of a normal controller is just plain dumb! is like going into a plane but stay on land. The only use for a virtual controller would be to use old games that work on BC and werent designed for touch controls.

About tactile feedback, go try the RAZR2 or the Voyager: both have a touchscreen with a haptic feedback that helps you "fell" the virtual button.

 

The Wii works well due to our bodies being better able to deal with proprioception (look it up :110 and the fact that you actually hold and manipulate the controller. The Activator, while also allowing the player to utilize their limbs, provides no frame of reference aside from visual feedback. Comparing the two on the interface side of things is like comparing apples and cardboard.

The problem with touchscreens being used for controllers still comes down to the lack of tactile feedback. Yes, there are plenty of examples of very successful touchscreen interfaces. The DS, slot machines and games like Psy-Phi do demonstrate good touchscreen interfaces. However, you are missing the obvious problem with the concept of a touchscreen controller: you have to look at it in order to have a good frame of reference. Case in point, I used to do drafting on a Sumigraphics tablet. A tablet like this (or common Wacom equivalents) uses absolute positioning instead of relative like a mouse does. When you click in the middle of the tablet, you are clicking on the middle of the screen, always. This lets you use certain areas of the tablet as quick click areas to perform set actions. In a drafting setup, you could have 75% of the tablet's surface dedicated to just quick key areas. Even with practice, you still have to look at the tablet to know exactly where you are and to see what you are about to click on. Touchsreens are a conduit for the user to directly interact with the environment. If you take that away by making a touchscreen which merely displays a set of interaction controls, then you take away one of the main reasons to have a touchscreen.

People rely on the tactile feedback provided by the joysticks and buttons on a controller. Think about it: how many times do you actually look at a controller to know what button(s) you are pressing? I would venture to say not often, if at all. In the heat of the moment, you just know what button you are hitting because of how it feels. You take away that feeling, and you could have no idea of what you are hitting. Try taking a tablet, overlaying some mock controls on it and see if you can reliably hit target areas on that tablet without looking. It's not easy and requires more cognitive attention dedicated towards figuring out where you fingers are.

One of the biggest complaints I see to touchscreen remotes, which are a form of controller, is that keys are easily missed or the wrong key is easily pushed. Even on remotes with reconfigurable layouts, you still need to look at the screen to know what you are hitting due to the lack of tactile response. If you think about the main functions of a remote, the priority goes to number, volume and channel selections. With a large screen, you could be talking about buttons with upwards of a half inch on each side. What happens when you start looking at game controls? I completely agree that switching controllers to touchscreen requires us to completely rethink how a player interacts with a game. On the surface, and excluding any emergent genres, you are still going to be looking at a minimum of avatar movement and action buttons. The big advantage with current analog joysticks is the ability to notice and adapt to a change in force/direction. Even though many tablets support multiple pressure levels, those levels are determined by the stylus, not the screen surface.

If you try to translate this form of movement range to a touchscreen, which can be done easily with a bullseye style control, you have to address the problem of what I will call "finger splattering". That is, how much area of the finger is touching the screen at any one time. A person with large fingers is going to have more contact area than someone with smaller fingers. The difficulties in determining the relative movement with a change in finger position are huge since it has to be able to work with any player. Sure, slider and similar controls really do not have a good equivalent in current non-flight stick controllers. However, when you start adding more and more controls to the screen, the "splatter" effect becomes even more pronounced.

Touchscreens work well for direct interaction applications, but not necessarily for blind interaction. I am not saying that a partial or complete touchscreen controller could not be done. I am just saying that it shouldn't be done simply because it can be.

 

THat's because people who never play games buy it for shite such as WiiFit. My wife want's me to get it to which I replied "No, F*ing way!" To be honest if a game has Wii and normal controlls I always use the normal ones. THey're just so much better. Dragonball Z using Wii controlls is just dumb plus you look like an idiot. The same with basara 2, I use the classic pad set up with dual analogue sticks. Works far better than the Wii set up. Thank God companies give us the option. Now if only Sega did with Sonic, it could have been the fisrt great Sonic game in the last 6 or so years. But I'm going off topic now so I'll stop my rant :nod:

Yakumo

 

If the Wiimote is so good, why do we need so many add ons?