I walked into a gamestop yesterday. I was quite surprised to see an actual Nintendo rep there, pitching the WiiU and the new disney infinity bit. I guess they really are in trouble if they need to hire reps like that in addition to all the advertising all through the store. I played the game on a gamepad. It's certainly kid friendly.
j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
The Wii U console is a stationary object. It sits under your TV and, unless you like to take your consoles out to play or something, that's where it will stay.
First off, you were talking about the gamepad, I was talking about the system. So the distinction is valid. Secondly, The 360 also sat on a shelf as a stationary object and yet I'm not entirely sure even the wiimotes had such a high failure rate.
The fact is, as the software and hardware get more complex,the console failure rate inches up. Currently, a 10% failure rate is a market standard and considered to be quite good. Depending on the actual guts of the WiiU, it appears to be a significant jump over the Wii. More powerful/complex than the 360. The thing is though, it's only somewhat better than the 360 and 6-7 years after the 360 was released. So the tech is well established. So I don't know about where the failure rate would be and the 360 was clearly flawed beyond the norm of things RROD. The ps3 did hit right there in the sweet spot.
Nintendo have already gone on record about the lengths they've gone to in order to make sure the Wii U console itself will be a durable piece of kit. They deliberately kept power consumption low in order to minimise heat production, and therefore the overheating issues that plagued the 360. They claimed to have done thousands of heat tests on the Wii U's MCM board, and to have demanded certain standards of components when buying from other electronics companies. Until we hear about a spate of Wii U spontaneously consoles going up in flames, I really don't think there's any call for assuming that the console itself will be markedly less reliable. The general consensus thus far is that the console itself is a rugged bit of kit, and there doesn't seem to have been any great problem with reliability.
Reliable does not mean it's going to have a lower-than 5% failure rate again. Again, it just needs to hit the 10% mark to be considered a perfectly reliable system. I'm unsure why you're debating this. The other consoles should be much less reliable comparatively and the WiiU is old enough tech that it should still be under 10% by a few points. In any event, failure rates are only ever calculated regarding the first two years after purchase. If we're talking about five years, there's going to be a non-trivial number of people who have lost their game library to this. Even at 3% failure rates like the Wii, you're talking about 105,000 people who own a WiiU losing a library because of this nonsense.
Does your phone have buttons? No. Does it have analogue sticks? No. Does it have triggers and bumpers? No. Then it will never be an adequate replacement for a gamepad. Seriously, if you think you can play something like Uncharted with touchscreen-only controls... well, good luck to you. Seriously. You'll need luck without any tactile feedback.
You've really got to get with the times (joking, this kind of tech is easy to miss).
http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/20/4001278/best-controllers-for-your-smartphone-android-or-ios
You can plug a ps3 controller into your phone with a $15 device and your already purchased phone or you can plug in the controller from a distance. Android and iOS devices both allow this. I've played with the gamepad, I much prefer Nintendo's ergonomic controllers to this tablet crap. Frankly, I get frustrated when developers shoehorn in the use of peripherals just because they exist. If the XBO requires me to wave my hand in the air to throw a grenade or something I'll rage quit immediately.
Being able to play on the tablet with the actual console controller is a perfect one for one. But there's all kinds of desings, controllers that wrap around tablets/androids and everything. None of which cost the $140 that an unnecessary gamepad adds to the WiiU's price because these are items you're likely to already have purchased. If that weren't enough, touchpads can make buttons. How do you think we play games that require buttons right now? The developer just gives them a stable location on the screen and you press that area. What's more, for $60 more dollars you can get a PS Vita that is not only able to play from anywhere in the world that you have a wifi connection but is itself a gaming system capable of storing and playing other forms of media as well. All of this was made optional by Sony on the consumer. However, Sony has mandated that all developers make their games compatible with remote play. Every game. Nintendo just made everyone swallow the cost whether the wanted to or not and most games will unnecessarily throw a few gimmicks its way but at the yend of the day a controller will just be easier to use.
I'm sorry but the gamepad just wasn't necessary. They wanted to have a gimmick for this console generation and it not only wasn't necessary, but it confused customers and nearly doubled to the cost of the console. I'm sorry if you think this was a good idea on their end. I simply disagree.
EDIT: Sony just had a price drop, the 3G one is now $200 new, I don't know what the wifi one will go to. We could be looking at quite a disparity.