Hardware Would you buy an HD GamePad (v2.0) if Nintendo released it?

[aofelix]

Technology isn't at the level where we can have HD gamepads and still work within a decent price range. That much should be obvious.

Apart from Shinkodachi who can finance and manage Nintendo singlehandedly from his bedroom. He would also be able to lower energy consumption of the console to ensure his electricity bill is not too much.

 

[shinkodachi]

The Wii U was designed with a single 480p screen in mind. The whole second gamepad thing only came about after people complained about it only supporting a single gamepad.

And Reggie himself confirmed it during Nintendo's E3 2012 presentation. If support for two GamePads was never meant to be, Nintendo shouldn't have announced support for two GamePads. If people complain it's okay to address the complaints, but it's not okay to give empty promises to your customers.

 

[aofelix]

Having a 720p for the gamepad and a performance hit down to 30fps would be HORRID.

I'd much rather have 480p rock solid stability in frame rate at the highest possible.

I feel we are all speculating on shinkodachi's "theory" which is really really unreliable. I trust Nintendo's theory more than shinkodachis. Sorry bro.

 

[grossaffe]

And Reggie himself confirmed it during Nintendo's E3 2012 presentation. If support for two GamePads was never meant to be, Nintendo shouldn't have announced support for two GamePads. If people complain it's okay to address the complaints, but it's not okay to give empty promises to your customers.

Support for two GamePads is highly unlikely to come to the Wii U at this point, so let's just focus on there being only one. As I laid it out, the Wii U can technically run at least a 1080p screen (TV) and 720p second screen (Wii U GamePad), but it remains to be seen whether that happens at 60fps or 30fps. I believe the reason there would be a performance hit is because there's not enough bandwidth in the wireless transmission to support more than two FWVGA screens at 30fps each. E.g. if we take mirrored content and want to send it over to two GamePads, this would be done by sending every other frame in a 60fps stream to each GamePad. But because we don't have to support two GamePads, it's possible to have one GamePad running at twice the resolution (2xFWVGA = 1138x720) at 60fps. This is only theory that without any more available information is hard to prove, but if we work with the information that's available to us now, this is a plausible theory.

I'd love to hear your comments. If I left something out, feel free to criticize.

My thought are that you are speculating too much and speaking of things you don't fully understand.

 

[aofelix]

My thought are that you are speculating too much and speaking of things you don't fully understand.

Agreed.

 

[shinkodachi]

My thought are that you are speculating too much and speaking of things you don't fully understand.

This is only theory that without any more available information is hard to prove, but if we work with the information that's available to us now, this is a plausible theory.

You barely know me, how do you know about my qualifications to talk about video transmission tech? That's beside the point anyway, you didn't disprove my theory either. We both know that without any more details on the used tech there's little more that can be said. What I provided isn't out of the ordinary and within possibility.

 

[aofelix]

You barely know me, how do you know about my qualifications to talk about video transmission tech? That's beside the point anyway, you didn't disprove my theory either. We both know that without any more details on the used tech there's little more that can be said. What I provided isn't out of the ordinary and within possibility.

Shinkodachi, you need to learn to admit when you have a lost. That guy got you there friend.

 

[shinkodachi]

Shinkodachi, you need to learn to admit when you have a lost. That guy got you there friend.

Lost? This is not a competition, we're having a discussion and as of yet I haven't seen more from you than personal remarks. If "that guy got me there" then at least provide a comment how.

 

[grossaffe]

You barely know me, how do you know about my qualifications to talk about video transmission tech? That's beside the point anyway, you didn't disprove my theory either. We both know that without any more details on the used tech there's little more that can be said. What I provided isn't out of the ordinary and within possibility.

I do not, in fact, know you, but I have read your arguments. You are using the lack of details on the tech to support yourself here, but it only goes right back to my statement that you are speculating too much. And the fact that you limit this to purely video transmission shows me that you aren't even speculating on the full picture, which includes the rendering of the image to be transmitted to the gamepad. What it comes down to is that you don't know what their video transmission rates are capable of, and you don't know the strain it would put on the GPU, but you still assert that they should use an HD screen based on the information that you do not know. I may not know your qualifications, but I would trust Nintendo's qualifications on the hardware they use over your mysterious qualifications on hardware that you do not even know.

 

[Foxi4]

Technology isn't at the level where we can have HD gamepads and still work within a decent price range. That much should be obvious.

What are you on about? You can stream HD content to a portable device as we speak - the NVidia Shield is a good example here. To be fair, it only does 720p wirelessly, but that's still considered HD.

 

[ReBirFh]

What are you on about? You can stream HD content to a portable device as we speak - the NVidia Shield is a good example here. To be fair, it only does 720p wirelessly, but that's still considered HD.

He said "within a decent price range". How much costs a Nvidia Shield? does it stream or only receive the content being streamed? Does it generate two different streams? can it read bluray discs?

 

[JoostinOnline]

Because of the screen size, I think it looks fine at 480p. Besides, games would have to be updated to send a higher-res picture. I'm not sure if it could even pull that off because of the hardware limitations of the Wii U itself. It's already transferring a huge amount of data to keep everything in real time.

But to answer the main question, I would not buy an HD Gamepad if it existed. If graphics were that important to me, I would have bought a PS4. I still play NES games.

 

[Foxi4]

He said "within a decent price range". How much costs a Nividia? does it stream or only receive the content being streamed? Does it generate two different streams? can it read bluray discs?

The NVidia Shield is only on the receiving end, the device doesn't have to be nearly as powerful to accept a high definition stream at low latency, this was merely an example. I could give you more of those, for instance OnLive, Gaikai/PS Now etc., but what's the point? It can be done and it doesn't cost an arm and a leg - it's a stream for crying out loud, it's the server that does most of the job rendering and encoding, the client merely decodes the stream.

 

[grossaffe]

The NVidia Shield is only on the receiving end, the device doesn't have to be nearly as powerful to accept a high definition stream at low latency, this was merely an example. I could give you more of those, for instance OnLive, Gaikai/PS Now etc., but what's the point? It can be done and it doesn't cost an arm and a leg - it's a stream for crying out loud, it's the server that does most of the job rendering and encoding, the client merely decodes the stream.

Yes, but achieving ultra-low latency is a unique problem to streaming interactive video. The PS remote play suffers from quite a bit of latency.

 

[Foxi4]

Yes, but achieving ultra-low latency is a unique problem to streaming interactive video. The PS remote play suffers from quite a bit of latency.

I'm merely pointing out that it can be done and it will be even easier next generation. This is all about whether or not an HD gamepad should be released and whether or not Nintendo should hold onto the idea - in my opinion they shouldn't, they should make a handheld that does what the gamepad does and more.

 

[shinkodachi]

I have to actually revise my post:

I believe the reason there would be a performance hit is because there's not enough bandwidth in the wireless transmission to support more than two FWVGA screens at 30fps each.

This is fact, not just a guess.

Wii U sends an MJPEG compressed 854x480 (FWVGA) stream at 60fps to the Wii U GamePad, at a 36MB/s bitrate. That is 288Mbps, very close to the maximum throughput supported by 802.11n (300Mbps) on which the wireless transmission tech is based on. Since bandwidth for this kind of transmission is equal whether the Wii U is sending one FWVGA stream at 60fps or two FWVGA streams at 30fps, we come to the conclusion that the performance hit is due to the limitation of the wireless transmission.

Source: Eurogamer

Compression is essential owing to the sheer volume of data. A raw 24-bit RGB stream with 854x480 resolution at 60FPS would require a 72MB/s transfer rate - way too high for WiFi. As we noted in our original Wii U review, colour space on the transmitted image has been downscaled significantly, reducing base image bandwidth to 36MB/s. Employing compression technology such as h.264 could reduce that by a factor of ten with little discernible loss of quality. The direct connection may even open the door to the less computationally intensive MJPEG compression: it's often deployed for applications where latency is a key issue and the 802.11n wireless standard should be able to sustain bandwidth for a 480p screen running at 60Hz.

So yes, I was wrong. Wii U can only support an HD GamePad at 30fps.

 

[grossaffe]

I'm merely pointing out that it can be done and it will be even easier next generation. This is all about whether or not an HD gamepad should be released and whether or not Nintendo should hold onto the idea - in my opinion they shouldn't, they should make a handheld that does what the gamepad does and more.

It's really tough to know what the best option is with things like this. Let's just assume for argument's sake that the technology to wirelessly stream HD video to the handheld with ultralow latency is affordable for next generation. Now we have to consider whether or not the technology should be bundled with the console. If Nintendo considers it to be an essential feature, it must be bundled to prevent a splintering of the market guaranteeing to developers that all users will be able to play games developed to use it. So then at this point, we're at the point of choosing if we want a gamepad-like device that is made specifically for use with the home console and does not have it's own processor, or do we use a "standalone" handheld console that is engineered to work with the home console? Using the handheld console instead of the gamepad will increase the entry cost to the home console. And then you have to look at purchasing options. Will you sell the handheld as a standalone that does not require the home console? If so, then you'll have to sell a home console without the handheld for people who already own the handheld, but then how much will that confuse the market buying the home console without the handheld not knowing they need the handheld to go along with it? Basically, things get quite convoluted if this functionality is considered essential and you want to do it with a full-blown handheld and I'm just not sure how to best tackle the problem (not saying it can't be done, but it would take a lot of careful thought).

The other possibility would be if it was determined to be non-essential more like the GBA connectivity but with better technology. In that case, they wouldn't have to worry much about the bundling, but it would be a splintered market with only a subset of home console owners, so it would mostly be relegated to stuff like off-TV play, or non-essential features. There may be a few games to make full use of it, but they'd be few-and-far-between because developers don't want to limit their market.

There are just so many factors at play and honestly, I'm not sure what the right solution is to get the most out of it not only from a technical standpoint, but works with the consumer market and development standpoints.

 

[shinkodachi]

The other possibility would be if it was determined to be non-essential more like the GBA connectivity but with better technology. In that case, they wouldn't have to worry much about the bundling, but it would be a splintered market with only a subset of home console owners, so it would mostly be relegated to stuff like off-TV play, or non-essential features. There may be a few games to make full use of it, but they'd be few-and-far-between because developers don't want to limit their market.

You sound like you're describing the PS Vita, which isn't a bad thing. For people who like to have Off TV Play / Remote Play, a separate option like that is good to have, but admittedly most people will be content with playing on a TV because that's why they buy a home console for. Nintendo already has the 3DS if someone wants a handheld exclusively, so I really don't see people choosing the Wii U over other consoles just because of the Wii U GamePad.

 

[grossaffe]

You sound like you're describing the PS Vita, which isn't a bad thing. For people who like to have Off TV Play / Remote Play, a separate option like that is good to have, but admittedly most people will be content with playing on a TV because that's why they buy a home console for. Nintendo already has the 3DS if someone wants a handheld exclusively, so I really don't see people choosing the Wii U over other consoles just because of the Wii U GamePad.

That post was on a theoretical next gen console, so we're moving on from the 3DS. As for it essentially being the Vita, there'd be at least one important distinction, which would be that this console would use direct communication between the devices like the Wii U does to limit latency. But yes, by having them as separate entities, it would relegate it to be more like the Vita and have much less integration into games than the Gamepad currently does, which is why it's important to decide how essential the second screen device is to Nintendo.

 

[shinkodachi]

That post was on a theoretical next gen console, so we're moving on from the 3DS. As for it essentially being the Vita, there'd be at least one important distinction, which would be that this console would use direct communication between the devices like the Wii U does to limit latency. But yes, by having them as separate entities, it would relegate it to be more like the Vita and have much less integration into games than the Gamepad currently does, which is why it's important to decide how essential the second screen device is to Nintendo.

Okay, substitute 3DS with New 3DS or whatever comes after that. One thing I'd have an issue with is buying a separate controller that would only use direct communication like the Wii U <-> Wii U GamePad. It greatly limits its working range. Nintendo calls their feature Off TV Play because it's exactly that. Sony however has Remote Play and that works wherever you are as long as you have an internet connection. The good thing about Sony is that they made Remote Play better with the PS4 as it supports a feature called Direct Connect and that's pretty much what Off TV Play is with very low latency. If Nintendo can't offer the same flexibility like Sony does, then there's little point to having a second screen, either bundled or separately.