Wii U / Vita Screen Specs (No Flame Wars - Keep it Civil!!)

#41dj___rollPosted 12/28/2012 1:32:27 PM
Quote:backguard222 posted...
TC here.

I agree the Wii screen is no slouch. It is in no way bad looking, but the difference in quality sort of blew me away after almost a year of using a Vita.

The comparison between the Wii U controller and Vita and even tablets/smartphones is appropriate. First, they all use touch screens so they can be compared on the basis of screen quality alone.

More importantly, there are lots of functions that the devices share that use that fancy screen. Handheld gaming device (Wii U only when near the console though?). Internet browsers. Watching streaming movies and TV. Phone calls/Skype. The Vita can actually function just like a Wii U controller in LBP2 now (and who knows what will happen with the PS4). I'm sure there will be more apps in common as the generation progresses.

So the comparisons are relevant.


Not even close, when the Wii U game pad have NFC.

@xfactor
He mentioned its ability to be used on its own while near the system. How did you miss that?
---
Sent from my iPhone via PowerFAQs 1.10
#42ORANGE666Posted 12/28/2012 1:37:39 PM
LightHawKnight posted...
nevi posted...
My main gripe with the WiiU pad is that its touchscreen is restistive! No multi-touch EVER ;a;


Resistive is the way to go for gaming. MUCH more accurate. Which is WAY more important in gaming.


So in a game like Uncharted GA, you're saying we should have whipped out a stylus everytime we want to scratch something? Sounds annoying.

And the accuracy debate between resistive and capacitive ended years ago. Capacitive is accurate to 2 pixels, resistive to one. Pointless on new devices when because of the high ppi, a stylus uses atleast 4 pixels on the screen.


Yes thats right, technology advances. Articles from 2006 mean nothing now.
#43GdboyratedloudPosted 12/28/2012 2:11:59 PM
ORANGE666 posted...
LightHawKnight posted...
nevi posted...
My main gripe with the WiiU pad is that its touchscreen is restistive! No multi-touch EVER ;a;


Resistive is the way to go for gaming. MUCH more accurate. Which is WAY more important in gaming.


So in a game like Uncharted GA, you're saying we should have whipped out a stylus everytime we want to scratch something? Sounds annoying.

And the accuracy debate between resistive and capacitive ended years ago. Capacitive is accurate to 2 pixels, resistive to one. Pointless on new devices when because of the high ppi, a stylus uses atleast 4 pixels on the screen.


Yes thats right, technology advances. Articles from 2006 mean nothing now.


scratch something in a game.....
---
PSN: JamesDeanONdaLOW
little did I know, James Dean was actually on the down low.
#44GodMWOLFPosted 12/28/2012 2:20:58 PM
schadow posted...
Is it just me, or does the Vita screen look "dusty" compared to glossy LCD screens?


Clean your screen bro..............
---
Official Hardcore Risette Fan
TUTURUU Oh Okarin. Psn:mwolfizcool
#45LightHawKnightPosted 12/28/2012 9:43:28 PM
ORANGE666 posted...
LightHawKnight posted...
nevi posted...
My main gripe with the WiiU pad is that its touchscreen is restistive! No multi-touch EVER ;a;


Resistive is the way to go for gaming. MUCH more accurate. Which is WAY more important in gaming.


So in a game like Uncharted GA, you're saying we should have whipped out a stylus everytime we want to scratch something? Sounds annoying.

And the accuracy debate between resistive and capacitive ended years ago. Capacitive is accurate to 2 pixels, resistive to one. Pointless on new devices when because of the high ppi, a stylus uses atleast 4 pixels on the screen.


Yes thats right, technology advances. Articles from 2006 mean nothing now.


Don't know where you are getting your facts, but I have yet to see a capacitive touchscreen that is as accurate and useful as a resistive for gaming. For other stuff, such as browsing, well nothing beats a capacitive for that. Also you do not need a stylus all the time to use a resistive touchscreen. Stylus does make it even more accurate, which is useful.
---
The Official Odin of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board.
"You know how confusing the whole good-evil concept is for me."
#46Enigma149Posted 12/28/2012 9:48:35 PM
Well, the Vita's screen is OLED, which is nice, and it has a higher resolution, but the Wii U's screen is resistive...

*sigh*

I see that this has already devolved into pointless bickering.
---
3DS:4897-5935-1924; NNID: CrimsonEnigma; PSN: CrimsonEnigma (not currently in use)
'If you think a system will make you look mature, you ain't mature' -squatch
#47xfactorPosted 12/28/2012 11:17:45 PM
dj___roll posted...
Quote:backguard222 posted...
TC here.

I agree the Wii screen is no slouch. It is in no way bad looking, but the difference in quality sort of blew me away after almost a year of using a Vita.

The comparison between the Wii U controller and Vita and even tablets/smartphones is appropriate. First, they all use touch screens so they can be compared on the basis of screen quality alone.

More importantly, there are lots of functions that the devices share that use that fancy screen. Handheld gaming device (Wii U only when near the console though?). Internet browsers. Watching streaming movies and TV. Phone calls/Skype. The Vita can actually function just like a Wii U controller in LBP2 now (and who knows what will happen with the PS4). I'm sure there will be more apps in common as the generation progresses.

So the comparisons are relevant.


Not even close, when the Wii U game pad have NFC.

@xfactor
He mentioned its ability to be used on its own while near the system. How did you miss that?


how is the NFC tech in Wii U game pad related to that?
---
www.capcom.co.jp/bio6