This is one game where I feel that both the Wii Remote and Wii U tablet controller would significantly benefit the gameplay (pointer controls, streamlined visor combat/interaction). You could also use the touch screen for mode/item selections and the map. I'd rather have this option than be forced to choose between the two.
@carlosrox I hate competitive multiplayer shooters and the entire culture that surrounds them, I would never be good at CS no matter what control method I used because I would never put in the time it takes to be competitive. And let's be serious, the guys who are the best at those games aren't super-humans with god-like reflexes, they're the guys that log the most time, I'm not interested in trying to beat someone whose logged 500 hrs into a game by spending 1000 hrs to learn more tricks than him. But if you want to argue about control methods that's fine, I'm perfectly willing to admit that playing an FPS with a mouse is way faster and more accurate that dual analog, everyone knows that, the thing that PC gamers find hard to grasp is that some gamers don't care about what is technically is the twitchiest control scheme. Besides, analog sticks are not that bad, every since Mario 64 it's been pretty evident analog sticks are a simple and elegant solution to the problem of how do you hold a gamepad and manipulate it with your thumbs and fingers and have a little more finesse than simply the binary on/off of a d-pad. Oh hey, there's this stick, if you push it in a direction very slightly your character/camera moves slowly, push it further and it moves gradually faster and faster, take your thumb off the stick and it manually centers itself, pretty neat. Worked for Mario 64, worked for Halo, those games are classics. PC gamers and other very obnoxious people like to say they're SHIT because that makes them feel superior, but it truth analog sticks work well. It's really just the preference of do you want to sit at desk with a mouse to get that extra edge, or do you want to sit back and relax and hold a controller like you've been doing since the NES. Honestly I have nothing against PC-gamers and guys who are super competitive if that's the way one chooses to play games, except when they get all uppity and act superior, which is sad, pathetic, and annoying (and never ending, we get it guys, you're better than us... let it go).
Personally I play games for fun and adventure, meaty single player campaigns that transport you to a different world and sometimes even make you think. Control schemes for me don't need to be lighting fast and twitchy, they just need to get out of the way, which is the one thing that Wii controls and Kinect controls and all these motion-type gimmicky devices can't do. Playing through Dead Space on PS3 I never thought about the controls once, everything made sense and functioned well, after 5 minutes of getting used to the way Isaac moves I was then concentrating on the story and the atmosphere and getting totally wrapped up in the experience, the same way I felt playing Metroid Prime on GCN. Playing Metroid Prime 3 on Wii was the opposite experience, controlling that game was a constant struggle with jank and awkwardness, trying to find objects to balance my hand on to keep the Wii-mote level so the screen didn't shake, doing that awkward drag the screen to turn thing and then having to recenter the reticule to regain camera control, folllowing all these stupid and intrusive on-screen commands to rotate and push/pull the Wii-mote backwards and forwards trying to open doors where it would take like 6 times to get it right because the Wii couldn't track movement in z-space for shit before WM+, that horrible waggle the nunchuck move to lash the shields off of enemies, just layers and layers of shit slapped on because Nintendo has some kind of mandate that developers have to use motion controls when a simple button press or stick movement would work better. The controls ruined the experience of that game for me because it took me out of the world of Metroid and brought me back to real life struggling with a bunch of white plastic, simply having the option to play it with the classic controller would have made it a billion times better. Just like Donkey Kong Country or a million other Wii games which should have the option for normal controls for those of us who don't think it's "innovate" to make a game a chore to play instead of fun.
I'm not saying motion controls are always bad, sometime they're completely appropriate, like Wii Sports, and light-gun shooting galleries where you don't have to move the camera are really fun, and even the combat in Skyward Sword looks like it has been done well and makes sense, it has the potential be really invigorating and immersive, I just hope Nintendo can rein it in a little bit and only use the motion controls where it makes sense and don't force us to waggle when a simple button-press will do.
@casper884 But why? You could still only look at one screen at once. How does that enhance the experience?
I get IR. It makes aiming more intuitive. I get dual screens for supplemental map info. I don't get the purpose of holding the tablet up to the screen to see things differently. It sounds superficial and redundant or something. Like, Nintendo said "Hey, we have this tablet now, and we have to explain to people why it's better, so let's shoehorn it into every game possible.". Maybe I'd have to see it in practice but I just don't understand the point. At all.
And still it's like, if MP3 basically tried to make you feel like Samus, where essentially your right arm is Samus' right arm, your left arm Samus' left arm, and the screen is like looking through Samus' eyes...how is that made better by holding a gun peripheral, when Samus doesn't hold a shotgun? Im sorry and I really don't mean to be rude, but I just really hope Nintendo doesn't do something like this with Metroid.
If and when they do it with Zelda, theres at least a chance that you'll be mimicking what link is doing ok screen (for instance, holding the lens of truth in front of his eyes).
I mean, the idea isn't bad. It looks like it could be fun in a sniping game that doesn't take itself too seriously or something. Or maybe a Ghostbusters game where you hold the Zapper like the proton pack gun, and the tablet is your PKE meter or something. It's not bad when it mimics what's going on screen, or is done for a novelty sort of effect in a mini game.
To act as an alternate display in a single player game? I guess I just don't see the point. A cool idea, just not in that situation.
I like the idea of forcing the scan visors onto the tablet, since it might make the experience less clunky. Instead of switching visors all of the time, you could just hold the screen up and tap. And I could just blissfully ignore all of that jazz and play in peace.
The IR is used as a reference point (to know in what direction the tv is facing), but the tablet has the ability to measure its absolute orientation by itself. So aiming down the sights (looking through the touch screen) would not require the IR for aiming. This was not the case with the wiimote, since it depended on an IR source to move the cursor.
What extra tech does it have? Just the MotionPlus stuff, you mean?
It was very obvious at E3 that the tablet had something more going on for it than just WM+ technology. It felt immediately more accurate, especially the Shield and Japanese Garden demos. It was almost like magic.
It is magic, isn't it? You can tell us Casper since I guessed it. That's how NDAs work.
It enhances the experience by making the gameplay more streamlined, and also introduces new concepts.
For instance, say that 'hypermode' was the visor on the tv, and scan mode was the visor on the tablet. While hypermode would allow you to deliver more powerful attacks and potentially see enemy weakpoints, scan mode on the tablet would allow you to scan enemies in real-time by moving the screen to the area of the enemy that you want to scan, and view color-coded status ailments and effects for visibility so that you don't necessarily have to read text if you just need a quick reference.
I see a lot of potential with this, but I feel for some people they may have to see good implementations of these ideas before they jump onboard. And I've heard the "but you can only look at one screen at a time, so what's the point" misconception before. But games like The World Ends With You on the DS have proven that it's possible to have two different gameplay elements on different screens while being used simultaneously, so I'm pretty confident it wouldn't be much of an issue in this Metroid zaplet concept.
My golden rule is "the least peripherals required to play a game, the better". Your ideas seem interesting, but also limiting. The zapper especially leads itself to simple point and shoot games while I want to be able to do a lot more than that on my next Metroid. For example, please explain how would the camera work with the zapper. Also what's the need of having a 6" screen in front of you blocking the main screen all the time. It just doesn't seem practical or comfortable.
You can't use the Wiimote's pointer and the tablet at the same time unless you use this peripheral.
You're assuming that I would want both the wiimote pointer AND tablet for controlling the game, which I don't. Either controller is fine with me, even though I'd prefer the pointer for FPS and tablet for everything else. Also, you cannot look at 2 screens at the same time, you simply, cannot. Not in the middle of a heated battle or when some other action is happening on the main screen.