I'd be pretty disorienting. Quite a few 3DS/DS games require you to be looking at both screens at the same time, and some require you to rotate the 3DS.

You know, I didn't even think about the gyroscope, but the gamepad does have one as well. They could have an option to have both screens on the TV for those types of games (you would still use the gamepad for the bottom screen's stylus controls/gyroscope). It might actually make the gyroscope games much easier to play, because you could just move the gamepad and look at the TV. It would be kind of tricky to do, but certainly far from impossible.

I've actually been wondering myself why they haven't come out with this yet. I was always confused as to why they didn't come out with a DS player for the Wii as well (I assumed it was because the Wii wasn't powerful enough), but with the Wii U's gamepad and extra power, a DS/3DS player would be a perfect match. You could have the top screen on the TV and the bottom screen on the gamepad. I mean it's even a touch screen! I feel like Nintendo is going to come out with this eventually, it would be a huge missed opportunity if they didn't. The Wii U's definitely powerful enough to add anti-aliasing as well to smooth out the pixels.

Come on guyz, we all know Mario and Sonic are just rip offs of Pitfall!

Don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed other platformers but feel that Mario is the best.

 

The only games that I have not played that you have mentioned is Sonic Adventure and Super Meat Boy ... Tell me about Super Meat Boy if you will.

    Super Meat Boy is an indie 2D platformer that came out a couple years ago on PC, Xbox Arcade, and PSN, it's a very challenging platformer with short levels, but very smooth and responsive controls. Here's a video of it:

You do make some good points here but Mario's list of moves seems to have outdone Sonic on all levels ... He also has very tight control ... something lacking in many platformers ... to this day, I can not say that I have played a platformer that was as good as a Mario platformer.

    Then you have obviously not been willing enough to give other platformers a chance. There have been many, many platformers that I have felt were definitely up to par or sometimes even better in controls than Mario platformers. In my opinion, Super Meat Boy still has the smoothest and most precise controls out of any 2D platformer I have ever played, ever. Both Rayman Origins and Rayman Legends are fantastic 2D platformers. There were tons of great platfomers for the NES such as the Mega Man and Ninja Gaiden series, Banjo Kazooie/Tooie and Donkey Kong 64 are also great 3D platformers that came out for the N64. All of the PS1 Crash Bandicoot and Spyro games are extremely solid 3D platformers. Sonic Adventure 1 was definitely a revolutionary platformer for its time. There are also a lot more platformers that I'm probably forgetting about and even some obscure and unrecognized ones as well. Not to mention all of the other platforming games Nintendo themselves have put out, like the Donkey Kong Country series, Kirby, the older Metroid games, Kid Icarus and so many more. All I am trying to say is that you're only limiting yourself if you truly believe Mario platformers are the only good platformers out there.

To try and compare Mario and Sonic is pretty much a mute point nowadays. Neither SEGA nor Nintendo are in a position where they can compete with each other. If you haven't realized this already, they have basically teamed up. This is why Sonic Lost World is Nintendo exclusive, Mario and Sonic at the Olympics is a regular release, and Sonic is basically a permanent character in SSB. Also, yes, Sonic Lost World may be inspired by Mario Galaxy, but both Mario and Sonic have been inspired by each other before.

In case you don't believe me that Mario has had inspirations from Sonic, here's a list of things Sonic did first:
Spike Traps
Bounce Pads (Springs)
Continuous  Pipes (Chemical Plant Zone)
Planetoids (Mad Space, Sonic Adventure 2)
Slopes (Yes, even this)

And these are just some of the things I can think of off the top of my head, I am sure there are plenty more. In the end, trying to say that Mario has done it first and that anybody who tries to make a game that has an inspiration from Mario are just copying Mario is like saying anybody who tries to make a video game is copying off of Pong. Let's remember also, that Mario was NOT the first platforming game either.

I'll just leave these here:

     So I'm sure that we all know DKC:TF got delayed until next year and that Mario Kart 8 comes out in Spring along with SSB sometime next year as well.

     So if I'm correct, that leaves us with Super Mario 3D World as this holiday's premier Wii U title, but what if all of these games were coming out this holiday instead? Yeah, yeah, I know, Nintendo needed more time, but let's just say they somehow managed to complete all of these games in time for this holiday season (without any downgrade in quality).

     How do you think the Wii U would fair against the PS4/Xbone in that situation. Exactly how much of a difference in impact would there be? Let's discuss...

Definitely! I wasn't too interested in the PS4 at first tbh, but after the whole fiasco with microsoft (makes me sad), I'm really curious to see what Sony's going to do. I'm really hoping they don't do the same thing. Plus, they do have some interesting exclusive games as well.

For all of you that are saying to get rid of Jigglypuff, they shouldn't get rid of anyone from the original Smash Bros., it would just be... wrong...

I still think they should just stop being cheap and go back to cartridges. The only advantage discs have over cartridges are that they are cheaper. It's not like size is a problem anymore either, because they could fit 2 terabytes in a N64-sized cartridge nowadays. Faster loading times and being able to save stuff to the cartridge (imagine downloading DLC to it) are just a few benefits of cartridges.

Understand why it isn't going to be on Wii U (in development for like 5 years I think) and then buy it on Xbox 360 or PC.

I really hate the 30fps on consoles nowadays. It really annoys me, because I grew up with 60fps, it's literally etched into my brain. I automatically can tell when a game is only running at 30fps and it feels so slow and partially unresponsive. If the game is fun enough I can bear it, but sometimes it can ruin the gameplay altogether. There is no need to make the game 30fps just so they can make the graphics slightly better. That's one thing I like about Nintendo actually, most of their games run at 60fps and I think that's part of the reason why their controls are so silky smooth. It seems like most third parties just don't care about gameplay/controls nearly as much as they used to.

Starting from oldest to newest I guess:

Home Consoles:

Intellivision 2 (in storage)

Colecovision (in storage)

NES

Genesis w/ CD
SNES (when I was younger)

PS1
N64

Dreamcast

PS2

Gamecube

Xbox

Wii
Xbox 360
PS3 (not again for a while though)

Handhelds:

Game Gear (really lol)

GBC

GBA
DS

3DS

Going to get:
PS3 (again eventually)

Wii U (in a couple weeks)
 

Just spotted this review http://gamingtrend.c...anted-u-review/

 

I was a bit surprised the review says the graphics are worse than other console versions. I'll be able to check this for myself later this week, got the PS3 demo to compare it against.

He mentioned that the textures "are far less crisp"  . Considering they used the PC's textures (it literally doesn't get any better than that), it's obvious that either this guy needs new glasses or he just assumes, because it's the Wii U it must not be as good.

     I can honestly say that I don't believe Nintendo will ever get back the "core" gamers, because the reality is that Nintendo now has the reputation of being a company for kids/families. Even though they aren't and never really were just for kids/families, "core" gamers are still going  to think that they have to play PS/Xbox in order to get the "mature" games. If the Wii U keeps getting more third party games though, maybe people will change their minds, but we can't really tell at this point.

     I feel as though people are choosing to ignore the obvious progress which we have made from a visual standpoint. Simply having higher poly models isn't going to cut it anymore. We have reached the point where spheres look like spheres and making those spheres have higher poly counts isn't going to change their look drastically anymore and since the Wii U is set when it comes to hi res textures and lighting, its lack of higher poly characters/environments is going to mean very little in the long run. Unless PS4/720 can come up with some kind of ground breaking lighting/physics system that can only be done on their consoles, than I doubt the difference will be anywhere close to that of previous generations.

    Even now though, can you honestly say that this: http://img.gawkerass...pg/original.jpg

looks like a huge upgrade from even the PS3? Putting the specs aside, does it actually LOOK a lot better? If you can honestly say that it looks like a "quantum leap" than you must be seeing something that I'm not, because that is not even close to a PS1 to PS2 difference at all.

Please, no more "HD" remakes. It would be great if they bumped up the resolution of Virtual Console games, but remakes are completely unnecessary. They can use the resources and time it would take to remake a game and make brand new games instead. Plus I'd much rather see sequels to some of the games mentioned in this thread.

     I know another one of THESE topics, but I feel as though there is a very important factor everybody seems to be missing. It's THE biggest factor in why the Wii seemed so under powered, the resolution. The Wii only supported 480p and the PS3 supported 1080p. THIS was the MAIN reason the PS3/360 were such a big jump in comparison to the Wii. Don't believe me, just play a Wii game on an emulator. Some games, like Super Mario Galaxy, are much more easily comparable to PS3/360 when they are running in true 1080p.

     It amazes me that everybody seems to be forgetting this huge factor. Even though the PS4/720's graphics are going to be better than the Wii U's, it won't matter nearly as much, simply because of the resolution. Both the PS4 and Wii U are mainly supporting 1080p (supposedly the PS4 could do a slightly higher resolution, but I doubt it will ever be used). This makes the difference way less noticeable. Slightly higher poly models and more dynamic lighting effects are going to matter very little when the resolution is identical.

     Another thing is the Wii U's textures. Need for Speed Most Wanted U is going to support PC's textures. That means there is going to be very little if any difference between Wii U and PS4 texture-wise. This means even smaller of a difference between Wii U and PS4. Will lower poly models really be noticeable if the texture quality is the same? How about slightly more advanced lighting effects or even slightly bigger draw distances? 

    In the end, when both systems are side by side and both are running in 1080p with their best looking games, you're going to have to squint to see the graphical differences this time around. Where as with Wii to PS3/360, the resolution made it much easier to notice the graphical difference, the fact that the Wii U has good texture quality and runs in 1080p is going to make it 10x harder to tell the difference.

Super Smash Bros. Ruckus