Nintendo Wii U Is Better Than Xbox One
Debate Rounds (5)
Ironically, it may seem that I am contradicting myself when I state that the Xbox One has better games than say that with the Nintendo Wii U, but it is a good paradox. Even though Xbox does indeed have better third party support, most of those games are inferior ports of PS4 games, with PS4 having better graphics and gameplay over the Xbox One ports. Nintendo, however; has games that are not only unique to its console, but also better than that of Xbox One. Though the Wii U supports 1080p HD and Xbox One 2160p, many Wii U games still look much better despite the fact that Xbox One is more advanced. I suggest taking a look at games such as Super Mario 3D World, Mario Kart 8, Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo Wii U, Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing Transformed, and Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze and compare them to games on the Xbox One to see which has better looking graphics. Speaking of graphics, the Wii U supports 1080p HD/60 FPS, while many so-called "next-gen" titles only support 720p HD/30 FPS. Besides the graphics, the gameplay is for many Xbox One games are also lacking as many professional gaming networks give low scores to "good" games such as Destiny, Call of Duty: Ghosts, and Forza, while giving high scores to games such as Super Mario 3D World, Bayonetta 2, and Hyrule Warriors (games that are considered bad by non-Nintendo gamers).
As for the controller itself, the Xbox One controller isn't that different from the Xbox 360 controller in terms of appearance and features, whereas it is for the Wii U gamepad controller and Wii Remote. The Xbox One controller is simply the Xbox 360 black controller with hard-edged handles, a Nintendo knocked-off d-pad, PS4 knocked-off control sticks, and a plastic thing that is between the shoulder buttons with the Xbox logo on it. It looks very similar and plays similar to the 360 as well, with only gyroscope/ capabilities being the difference. The Xbox One controller has no touch-screen, something that even the PS4 has built-in and absolutely no new buttons except for the gyroscope, as the 360 controller already had an accelerometer built-in to it. The Wii U gamepad controller; however, is a completely new controller compared to the Wii Remote. It is in the shape of a tablet, has a touch screen, has all the buttons that you'd see on PS3 and Xbox 360 controller (the Wii never had them); and even has other new features, such as the microphone, camera, sensor bar, TV remote compatibility, off-TV compatibility, and the new Amiibo feature that will be coming soon. Yes, many of those features are neglected, but there are still games out there that use it properly and use it well. Sure, the Xbox One has SmartGlass, but the Wii U gamepad controller can do all that as well.
The Wii U itself also has many features that its predecessor never had, while the Xbox One is very similar to the Xbox 360 and a Windows 8 OS computer. It has Nintendo Network, Nintendo's new online that actually doesn't suck and has everything that PlayStation Network and Xbox Live has. There's the Nintendo eShop, which is miles better than the Wii Shop Channel, with DLC (finally), Virtual Console, Wii U digital titles, apps, and other goodies. There's also Miiverse, a Nintendo exclusive social network very similar to both Twitter and Facebook, in which the users actually care about what you are posting as they have the same interests as you. Finally, there are many new apps never seen on the Xbox One (or isn't as good) which are: internet browser, Nintendo TVii, video-chat, video streaming services (i.e., Netflix), and even more. Now take a look at Xbox One, in which all of its features can either be used on the Xbox 360 or even on Windows 8. Heck, even the GUI for the Xbox One is almost the same as Windows 8. Since I already have Windows 8 on my computer, I find no point in using the features for the Xbox One as I already have them on PC. The Xbox One may have better online, but I am discussing about features and not online; if I wanted good online, then I would use Windows 8 on PC.
For the accessories, the Xbox One (like PS4) doesn't have any accessories except for Kinect. The Wii U has the gamepad itself, microphone, Wii Fit U balance board, Game-Cube adapter, and even the upcoming Amiibo. You may argue that the Xbox One doesn't need that much accessories as gamers do not even use them anyways and that they have Disney and Skylanders toy sets, but I am talking about console-exclusive features, not multi platform features. Besides, the Kinect itself is actually even worse than the Wii remote, as its features barely even work unless you have a room in a mansion and is expensive. The accessories for the Wii U, while gimmicky and not used at all, actually works and is sold cheap. And also do not mention the Xbox Smartglass or I will mention cross compatibility with the Nintendo 3DS.
As a note, I'm sort of playing devil's advocate here, as I prefer the Wii series to the Xbox One.
Anyway, let's get down to business.
"Even though Xbox does indeed have better third party support, most of those games are inferior ports of PS4 games."
Wait. Wait, wait wait wait wait, wait.
Why are you bringing in other consoles to prove your point? I thought this was Wii U VS Xbox One, not Wii U VS Xbox One VS PS4?
You're merely using another console you specifically stated was not in the debate to prove your point. And while I agree, out of the two consoles, PS4 is better than the Xbox One, you bringing it in to prove your point isn't relevant to this debate. If I could, I would debate PS4 VS. Wii U, however you chose Xbox One VS. Wii U. This argument is exclusively between these two, so I find using the aid of other consoles to prove your point irrelevant.
"I suggest taking a look at games such as Super Mario 3D World, Mario Kart 8, Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo Wii U, Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing Transformed, and Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze and compare them to games on the Xbox One to see which has better looking graphics."
You're telling me to compare games EXCLUSIVE to the Wii U and compare them to Xbox One games, which more than likely have:
1. Different developers
2. Different artists
3. Different engines
4. Different art styles
5. Different capabilities on the optimized system
You simply can't compare two things that are different. I cannot compare a banana to a hot fudge ice cream cake. They are not similar. In the same way, you can't compare games and their graphical capabilities to games of a completely different system UNLESS it is a port that appears on both systems, which none of these do.
"The Wii U itself also has many features that its predecessor never had, while the Xbox One is very similar to the Xbox 360 and a Windows 8 OS computer."
Well, you know the saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". The Xbox 360 interface has been renowned for its simplicity and its easiness to use. Also, the developers of the Xbox One (Microsoft) are the same people that made the Windows 8 OS. So if it has some traits related to that, isn't that a plus side, if you like your Windows 8 system? It gives you familiarity to something you're already comfortable with. Also, you said specifically this is Wii U VS. The Xbox One. You're bringing in other systems, again, to prove your point.
"The Xbox One may have better online, but I am discussing about features and not online."
Then my opponent resumes to talk about all of the online services available the Wii U. Did he already forget what he wrote?
And as well, online is a feature. If there was no online, then that would be a lost feature.
My arguments, now:
I. Easiness of Communication
The Wii U system has many unique systems to communicate with others...outside of the game. However, inside of the game, the Wii U offers very little communication amongst players. This is where the Xbox One excels.
The Xbox One has many features allowing ease of communications:
1. Voice Chat
The Xbox One offers voice chat in-game with other players who have also enabled voice chat. This allows for quick communications in games that need it.
Skype is also enabled to talk to others using it. This is useful for friends, family, and other members. And combined with the Kinect, the camera (if video is enabled) will zoom in, zoom out, and pan according to the characters in the room's positions.
Xbone allows in-game messages to be sent to other players. This can be used if the player is offline or if a longer message needs to be send and a player cannot talk via voice.
This has quite a lot of benefits, even though it may only seem to serve one at first: TV functionality.
TV is now able to be displayed on Xbox One. You can watch TV channels live and also have additional features, such as Fantasy Football.
However, this really starts to shine when it comes to backwards compatibility.
"But wait!", you say. "Xbox One doesn't have backwards compatibility!"
Oh, but it does.
ANY CONSOLE THAT SUPPORTS HDMI can plug in to the HDMI-IN port.
If a person complains that the Xbox One doesn't have backwards capability for their 360, they can just simply plug in the 360 to the One and use their older Xbox to play the games they want. This also applies for PS3, PS4, and (shock!) the Wii U. And you can EVEN USE EACH CONSOLE'S RESPECTIVE CONTROLLERS.
Speaking of which...
(this is both a rebut and an argument)
On SSB (or Project M, which I highly prefer), when's the last time you've seen someone play a competitive game with the default Wii remote?
*cricket noise*...oh yeah.
There's a reason most people don't use the default Wii controller for competitive gameplay. This is also applicable for the Wii U gamepad.
It's a luxury for those "casual" gamers. Gamers that play just to have fun, they don't mind using the touchpad all too much. In fact it benefits them. It has all of the plus sides you listed above. However, there's a reason people hated the original Xbox controller...it was too bulky. The situation is the same thing here. The Wii U touch controller is simply too bulky to properly use for competitive gaming. And while the Wii U offers its own Pro version of said controller, which IS highly better than the touchpad for competitive gaming, it just isn't that comfy as well because the two joysticks are located near the top. And for competitive gaming, comfort can mean everything.
You complain that everything about the Xbox One controller is "the Xbox 360 black controller with hard-edged handles, a Nintendo knocked-off d-pad, PS4 knocked-off control sticks, and a plastic thing that is between the shoulder buttons with the Xbox logo on it."
The Xbox 360 back controller: Using something similar to one of your systems in the past isn't a bad thing, in fact, it's a great thing if that system did well (which it did). And some adjustments have been made to the controller as well, making it more comfortable for people to use, along with other improvements.
The Xbox One Controller improved:
The D-pad "ripped off from Nintendo"
The analog sticks "ripped off from PS4"
The triggers/bumpers (no rip-off here)
I notice a trend here. You're downgrading the Xbox One controller by saying it is similar to the designs of other controllers.
And the one about the PS4 isn't even valid, because, while they have similar outer circles, the inside of the Xbox One joystick is a concave design, whist the PS4 has a convex design. And as well, the Xbox's controller has textured edges to help improve your grip on the joystick.
And apparently, if an element of a company is similar to that of another company, it's simply "ripped off"? Not even an improvement? You continually say that the controller is ripped off or deriving from something, when, in fact, it has similar elements. And if something is similar to something you already know (As with W8 similarities) isn't that a good thing instead of a bad thing?
The Xbox One (and the PS4, but that isn't the argument here) have streaming capabilities, to stream their gameplay live to Twitch. This is a LOT easier on the terms of the console users, as they don't meticulously have to set up their capture card and such, they just insert their login info to twitch and they can start streaming without any real hassle and setup. And the KINECT synergizes well with this feature, as you can use its facecam and mic if you so desire it.
Thank you for your arguments, and good luck in round 2.
Shrek_sDrecKid forfeited this round.
Anyway, I have nothing to argue, and nothing to say. I hope this trend doesn't continue.
Good luck in Round 4, opponent, if you decide to participate.
Yes, I am telling you to compare the graphics of Wii U exclusives to that of third party ports on Xbox One. They are both different systems of different graphics, and the point of this debate is to prove how one is better than the other. One is rendered at 1080p HD, while the other is rendered at 4K UHD - it does not matter whether if they are different from each other, as the graphics and hardware of each console is completely different. Opponent is in denial and refuses to accept that first party exclusives on Nintendo is better looking than third party multi-plats on Xbox, despite the Wii U games running at 1080p HD looking better than Xbox One games running at a superior 4K UHD. I am proving that Wii U games look better despite having lower quality graphics which is extremely ironic as consoles with better graphics are supposed to have better looking games than console with worse graphics.
Do not lecture me on that quote. Yes, the Xbox 360 interface is great, but you contradict yourself immediately after that statement by arguing that the Xbox One GUI is completely different than the 360 by having a Windows 8 OS. Then you (somewhat) contradict yourself yet again by stating that because the developers also made the Windows 8 OS, making the GUI of the Xbox One similar to that is a bonus to both the developers and consumers. If it was not flawed to even begin with, then why did Microsoft attempt to completely change it to Windows 8 OS GUI? "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," right? Opponent refutes and resolves contradiction by stating that Windows 8 OS is familiar, therefore effective as a GUI due to its familiarity. Has opponent not even thought about whether or not a majority or nearly all Xbox One consumers use Windows 8 on their PC; perhaps they use Windows 7 or Mac OSX instead?
Counter Argument #1: Communication Simplicity
I have been convinced that it is in fact better inside the game, but opponent has agreed and is convinced vice versa.
Counter Argument #2: HDMI-In
Opponent is now being irrelevant to the debate by bringing in a feature that is not relevant to both the Wii U and the Xbox One. If opponent can successfully refute this by explaining their disobedience to the debate rules, then it will be officially refuted in the next round. Besides, the Nintendo Wii U also has similar functionality - you can change the settings for the Wii U gamepad to serve as both as a controller and a universal remote for the TV, cable box, and the Wii U console, something that Xbox can never do. And do not mention the PlayStation Vita doing the same thing for the PlayStation 4. The Wii U also has an app called Nintendo TVii, which (surprise, surprise) is the equivalent to that of Xbox One streaming live cable TV; however, TVii can also stream Netflix, YouTube, Amazon Video, Hulu Plus, and have features exclusive to on-demand programs offered on cable boxes.
Now opponent goes on to state about backwards compatibility; since opponent is using it as completely new arguments, I will not penalize opponent for it. Not to offend opponent, but many are unaware and completely ignorant of such a feature as Microsoft is either ignorant as well or refuses to tell its consumers through its website, customer service, and to gaming networks. The Xbox One may be compatible with the Xbox 360, but it is unfortunately not compatible with the original Xbox or PC. The Nintendo Wii U, has compatibility with all of its systems: NES, SNES, N64, and Wii, even though they are no longer supported; plus, the Wii U also has compatibility with handheld titles such as the GBA and the Nintendo DS, something that was not done in the past with the Wii. The Game-Cube still has not been confirmed nor denied if it is supported but at least the controllers are supported via the Nintendo Game-Cube adapter coming soon for the Wii U to play Super Smash Bros. for Wii U as an option.
Counter-Argument #3: Controllers
Opponent now claims that bulky controllers such as the Xbox controller, Wii U gamepad controller, and the Nintendo Wii Remote are examples why gamers prefer smaller, ergonomic controllers for competitive gaming. Sadly, opponent contradicts themselves yet again by stating that the Xbox and Wii U controllers are too bulky, and then state that the Wiimote is not suited for competitive gaming - not because it is bulky, but too small. In what way is the Wiimote too bulky; it is rather the opposite and quite comfortable with time and practice. Trying to mention Project M is irrelevant as I have stated to bring in other consoles listed above - if opponent continues to infringe on the rules, then this debate will be discontinued automatically for misconduct.
I thank the opponent for being convinced and agreeing that the Wii U gamepad benefits gamers with touch screen and other features, so I will only begin penalizing opponent for breaking the rules in next round. The Xbox controller and the Wii U gamepad is too bulky for competitive gaming, as opponent said earlier. But there are many people out there that do not constantly competitively game with others; in fact, one can assure opponent that there are many competitive gamers that are just as skilled even with it. The Pro controller is there for those that find the gamepad too bulky, as with the Classic Controller Pro, which is the best controller for competitive gaming used for the Wii. Opponent mentions the Wiimote has failed, but never mentioned the Classic Controller Pro, which is the superior out of them all and is compatible on the Wii U. Again, the Pro controller has an awkward layout, but it can be used properly with time and practice.
As for the Xbox One controller itself, it indeed uses features of other companies, which can be considered copyright infringements, as well as plagiarism, both of which can result in a lawsuit by Nintendo and Sony. Correct, the control sticks and d-pad are not entirely based off of the latter companies, but it seems to closely resemble them to the point that Nintendo and Sony can sue Microsoft if they please. Opponent may argue that this benefits the controller and consumers as it is familiar to them, but the features (as claimed by opponent) do not resemble closely enough to be that familiar. Some adjustments have been made, but not nearly enough to be extremely different from the Xbox 360; this will confuse gamers to assume that Microsoft has not changed and will be angry for feeling betrayed - sad, but it will decrease the customer satisfaction which has been declining since the Xbox 360 which will increase sales and liking for Sony.
Counter-Argument #4: Streaming
While the Xbox One certainly has such streaming capabilities, one must remember that the Wii U was meant to compete with the PS3 and Xbox 360, and not with the PS4 and Xbox One. Opponent and myself can blame Nintendo for their ignorance, but the fact is the Wii U is not as advanced as the Xbox One. However, Miiverse does allow users to upload gaming footage to YouTube and extrenal recording devices such as a PVR can easily record footage without any capture cards or similar things to record them. I hope for the best in round 4.
"I will allow the use of mentioning the PlayStation 4, PlayStation 3, Xbox One, Xbox 360, Nintendo Wii U, Nintendo Wii, and (maybe) PC. There, now you will no longer have to complain; this is my debate, so you must follow these rules."
My opponent fails to mention this in his introduction when I agreed to the debate, then decides to use this reasoning in later arguments to prove his point, and feels free to "penalize me" for it. I feel that this should be considered invalid as my opponent did not state this clearly at the beginning of the debate. This is not the debate I agreed to, therefore, I feel no "need" to follow these rules. Such arguments by my opponent to further validate this claim are "if opponent continues to infringe on the rules, then this debate will be discontinued automatically for misconduct", "if you do not agree with the above rules, then you may leave this debate now as this is my debate and not yours", and then tells me not to debate him on topics that are part of a debate. I feel this is repulsive communication and conduct by my opponent. Opponent further states that this is "my debate, not yours", but I find this to be not the case. WE are debating a subject, WE are sharing our resources, WE are making arguments against each other. Opponent simply started the debate. If he wanted these "rules" in place, he should have mentioned them at the start of the debate. So feel free to "penalize me" for following rules that were not stated at the beginning of the debate, as they should have been. Again, very poor communication and conduct.
"Yes, I am telling you to compare the graphics of Wii U exclusives to that of third party ports on Xbox One. They are both different systems of different graphics, and the point of this debate is to prove how one is better than the other."
But the true way to compare two things such as these is to compare a game that runs on both consoles and see how it looks on each. While opponent feels the games look "better" on the Wii U, this is entirely subject to opinion, as I could very well say I feel exclusive games look "better" on the Xbox One, at that would be just as relevant as this argument is. People have different opinions on consoles and their games. He even states that Xbox One games can run at a superior quality than that of the Wii U's (4K UHD). So opponent helps my argument out a little bit by stating that the capabilities are in fact better in terms of quality on the One.
If you were to fully compare the differences between the Wii U and Xbox One's graphical capabilities, then you should compare a game that appears on both systems. That way, you can get a fair judgment as to each of their capabilities.
And, in addition, opponent explicitly states at the beginning that he feels the graphics are better on the Xbox One, "far superior", even.
"Opponent is now being irrelevant to the debate by bringing in a feature (HDMI-In) that is not relevant to both the Wii U and the Xbox One."
HDMI-In is a feature available to the Xbox One and not the Wii U. How is it not relevant?
As well, opponent states that some functions (changing to a TV remote, off-screen play, etc.) is something the "Xbox can never do".
This by itself shows a narrow mindset. The opponent refuses to believe that anything can be made across the years that could have a similar function as the current Wii U gamepad. If the Xbox One has lived its full life and has not had this tool made for it, opponent could use this as a valid argument. However, this is not the case. The lifespan of the One is just beginning, and has been out for less than a year.
I state in the OS argument that the Xbox One's OS is similar to that of the 360's, which is a good thing because it was renowned for its simplicity. Opponent then argues it's too similar to his Windows 8 machine, and I stated that since it is indeed similar, then it's a benefit for all users for W8. Opponent then argues about users who use W7 or Mac OSX. If they are used to the 360 layout, converting should be no problem. However, if they aren't, then they will find getting used to the One's interface is very easy due to its simplicity and easiness to use, as well as seamless transitioning from app to app, and two apps running at once (an example can be a game and Skype). I never stated that "the Xbox One GUI is completely different than the 360 by having a Windows 8 OS", I just merely stated the two were similar. Feel free to check.
"...and then state that the Wiimote is not suited for competitive gaming - not because it is bulky, but too small."
I never stated that people don't prefer the Wiimote because it is too small. I simply stated that "it is a 'luxury' for casual gamers" (my exact quote, feel free to check, again), and I also stated "There's a reason most people don't use the default Wii controller for competitive gameplay". Opponent feels free to twist my saying to his own desires to prove his point once more.
As well, one could be very skilled with the Wiimote or the Gamepad, as opponent mentions. However, players have the potential to perform better with controllers like the GameCube controller or the Classic Pro controller, as well as other joystick-themed controller styles, such as the Xbox One's. That's why many pro competitive players use these style controllers, even with the other options available to them.
"Correct, the control sticks and d-pad are not entirely based off of the latter companies, but it seems to closely resemble them to the point that Nintendo and Sony can sue Microsoft if they please."
Opponent feels free to make this argument, but then later self-contradicts, stating "Opponent may argue that this benefits the controller and consumers as it is familiar to them, but the features (as claimed by opponent) do not resemble closely enough to be that familiar."
So the features of the controller are familiar enough to be suable, but not familiar enough for the people playing them to notice?
"Some adjustments have been made, but not nearly enough to be extremely different from the Xbox 360; this will confuse gamers to assume that Microsoft has not changed and will be angry for feeling betrayed - sad, but it will decrease the customer satisfaction which has been declining since the Xbox 360 which will increase sales and liking for Sony."
A. Opponent brings in other systems and their companies (again)...
B. Opponent fails to mention that with the Sony systems (PS), they had essentially the same controller for many, MANY years (almost 20!), starting from the original PlayStation! The controller has only been modified to a severe degree just recently, from the PS3 to the PS4, as opposed to Xbox, who, with each console have modified their controller to at least some major extent.
As well, as I stated in my last argument, it seems stupid for Sony to sue for the joysticks, as the Xbox One's are concave, while the PS4's are convex. Opponent, again, shows ignorance.
"While the Xbox One certainly has such streaming capabilities, one must remember that the Wii U was meant to compete with the PS3 and Xbox 360, and not with the PS4 and Xbox One."
The Wii U is, by technicality, considered an "eighth generation gaming system", directly competing with the PS4 and Xbox One. Opponent also mentions Miiverse to allow recording and sharing of gameplay, which can also apply to the Xbox One, as it has a similar function.
Looking forward to round 5. Best of luck.
It appears that con does not fully understand the wording of my rebuttals. I have stated that while the graphics for games on Xbox One may be superior to that of the Nintendo Wii U, the first party exclusives still manage to outnumber those games in terms of graphics (pun entirely intended). Opponent assumes that I am agreeing to them that Xbox One is superior to Wii U graphically no matter what - but no, that is not the case at all. I am simply saying (in a complex way) that Wii U still outmatches the Xbox One graphically even though the latter has lower quality graphics than the former. A good example to make things easier to understand is even though the United States is superior to Vietnam in terms of military strength, Vietnam still won the Vietnam War - despite Vietnam being the weaker country. If opponent still refuses to accept that my statement of graphical comparison is invalid, than please get anti-fanboyism therapy by yours truly, Phil Spencer.
Yes, comparing ports to exclusives is invalid, so how about the exclusives on Xbox One be compared to exclusives on Wii U. What exclusives are even on Xbox One? Oh right...let us see: Halo Remastered Collection, Titan-Fall, Forza, Dead Rising 3...not that much. Comparing them to exclusives on Wii U is a joke; as opponent said earlier, since the Xbox One is still young in its life-span, its fullest potential has not been realized yet. Speaking in terms of graphics, the graphics for Xbox One still isn't in true native 2160p 4K UHD. For now they are all in non-native 2160i UHD, running at 1080p HD/30 FPS; for all Microsoft knows, they can really be native 1080p HD and 720p HD/30 FPS upscaled to look 2160i UHD. Therefore, the graphics on Xbox One aren't so great; besides slightly higher resolution textures, slightly accurate character models, and slightly better lighting effects, there isn't much of a graphical difference. Especially since the Nintendo Wii U is at native 1080p HD at 1080p HD/60 FPS, which is superior to PS3 and Xbox 360 being native 720p HD, which makes the graphical difference between this and last generation even smaller.
As for the other arguments regarding the features and Xbox One's fullest potential, there are already features on Xbox being similar to that of Wii U. It's called Xbox Smart-Glass that has existed since the Xbox 360; because such features already existed with the Xbox One and 360, opponent's rebuttal of Xbox One not reaching its fullest potential is invalid. This add-on is inferior to the Wii U gamepad, as the Wii U and PS4 can do much better, especially since they both also have cross compatibility with their respective handheld cousins - the Nintendo 3DS and the PS Vita. There is no such compatibility with the Xbox One, and speaking of which, why hasn't opponent mentioned the arguments regarding backwards compatibility...oh, that's right, they were successfully refuted due to the Wii U being compatible with the NES, SNES, N64, Wii, GBA, and DS, while Xbox One only being with the Xbox 360 and not the Xbox or the PC.
Opponent then refutes pro's arguments stating that if the users are used to Windows 8 or the Xbox 360 GUI, than it should be no challenge to easily convert to the new GUI. Then opponent contradicts themselves several times, by stating that the Xbox One layout is similar to the 360 layout, but still similar to the Windows 8 layout simultaneously. I thought opponent stated that one GUI resembles the other, and not both at once; now they say otherwise? Opponent must either be making a paradox to purposely confuse their opponent, or just stupid. I may have unintentionally started a paradox, but using one to refute a paradox only makes it more of a paradox, right?
Users can get used to the simplicity, but due to its striking resemblance to the Windows 8 OS, users may as well resort to PC as literally all games on Xbox One can be played on PC as both are produced by Microsoft, and that the Windows 8 OS (while similar to Xbox One) is superior to the GUI on Xbox One for being original and not a knock-off. However, on PC, there are exclusives not available on Xbox One that also run at 4K resolution, and also having several different platforms, specifically Steam and PC Online that are not available anywhere else (except for Mac). There are even multiple ways to play PC games with different controllers, such as the traditional keyboard+mouse, Xbox 360 gamepad controller, Xbox One gamepad controller, and (shock) a retro arcade joy-stick. That and PC being superior to Xbox One in every way possible, but now I am going off-topic...
Speaking of controllers, opponent states there is a reason for gamers not preferring the Wii Remote in competitive gameplay, yet fails to provide a valid reason other than using casual gamers as a scape-goat. Opponent goes on to state that I have twisted the words to my advantage, yet opponent does just that with their first rebuttal in order to emotionally comfort themselves and to convince opponent for being unfair to the rules, when clearly the debate was set up by their opponent and therefore their opponent gets to decide the rules. If the debate was set up by them, then I will gladly debate based on their rules, even if they are randomly added every now and then. Now the opponent finally gives a reason, but it is too vague; by joy-stick themed controllers, does opponent mean controllers with joysticks, or controllers with control-sticks? If that is the case, then my rebuttal has been successfully been refuted - if not, then opponent has failed to make a valid reason to explain the Wii Remote being too "casual".
Opponent does not seem to grasp the difference between joy sticks and control sticks. Joy sticks are long sticks with gigantic colored balls that allow movement or selection of characters and menus in an arcade game. Control sticks are short sticks with flat circles attached to the top, primarily used for video games and on gamepad controllers, whereas the latter is used for arcade games on arcade machines and video games of the first and second generation (Atari and PONG comes to mind). If opponent never knew such a difference, then they should have done some internet research or asked their opponent. It appears opponent is ignorant, as the original PlayStation controller had no control sticks (except for the newer model) and that gamepad controllers have no joy-sticks. The Xbox controllers have barely changed in terms of the buttons; yes, the shape and design has, but the buttons are still the same - only the two menu buttons on the original Xbox have been removed; all others have been prominent with the Xbox 360 and Xbox One.
All other arguments have been successfully been refuted by opponent; good luck in the last round as well.
Responding to arguments:
A. Notice I never "twist" any of opponent's statements. I quote EXACTLY from the text that was given to me by opponent. I am calling him out on his exact wording, not twisting it to my own desires like opponent has done on multiple occasions.
B. If the rebuttals I stated in R4 did indeed offend opponent, I'd like to apologize. However, from my perspective they were never offensive. In fact, arguments in round 5 by Pro could be considered offensive by me, even at one point suggesting the possibility I might be "stupid", when I never mentioned such a thing in round four. Opponent even goes on offending me in the comments section, when I have never shown such conduct. Asking voters to "penalize me" for calling out on your errors isn't a valid reason.
Now onto the main bit:
"Like I have said, this is my debate; therefore, it is my rules and I get to decide how things are done here. Whether or not opponent finds these new rules stupid is entirely up to their opinion; unfortunately, opponent agrees with one's rules at beginning and contradicts themselves by disagreeing with the newer rules simply because they have not adapted to such a debating style with any opponent except for this debate, and that it is not in the introduction and within the arguments to be used as rebuttals."
No, I simply pointed out you never stated the allocation of the other consoles at the beginning of the debate, and therefore it should not count. It is not the debate I agreed to. You state these rules later on, which makes it totally unfair. If we were playing a game of soccer, and you kept scoring every time, and I added a "new rule" to make it harder for you and easier for me, and I was scoring every time afterward, naturally you would feel cheated and not want that rule in place. This is not the game of soccer you agreed to. You would not "gladly debate based on their rules", as you so put it. If my rules were, "OK, you can't use any information about the Wii U whatsoever, you just have to say what you think and why. No technical stuff, nothing, but I can still use information", naturally you would want out. In the same way, adding on new rules as time goes on just to improve your argument isn't OK, and I feel that this is worse conduct by my opponent than myself.
"Yes, comparing ports to exclusives is invalid, so how about the exclusives on Xbox One be compared to exclusives on Wii U."
That won't do any good either. As I stated in my last argument, to truly test how a game system runs a game in comparison to another system, you need the same game to adequately test its performance. I cannot compare how Forza Motorsport runs on Xbox One to Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze and say "yep, this game obviously looks better". Each game, as I stated in R1, has its own sets of developers, artists, designers, art styles, and target console. If it were a PORT, however, that appears on both the One and the U, THEN you would be able to test and see which game runs better. Ever since I debated this, opponent refuses to accept this statement, constantly trying to find alternative solutions when the answer is quite simple, just use the same game!
"If opponent still refuses to accept that my statement of graphical comparison is invalid, than please get anti-fanboyism therapy by yours truly, Phil Spencer."
I don't know what opponent was trying to do here, but he explicitly says that his statement of graphical comparison is invalid.
So, I accept that it is invalid, and shall not rebut it.
And in case you're wondering, I've already taken therapy, as I have neither systems.
"Opponent then refutes pro's arguments stating that if the users are used to Windows 8 or the Xbox 360 GUI, than it should be no challenge to easily convert to the new GUI. Then opponent contradicts themselves several times, by stating that the Xbox One layout is similar to the 360 layout, but still similar to the Windows 8 layout simultaneously."
If I did state that, and the statement is true, then it is not a paradox but, in fact, true.
And the Xbox 360 GUI is similar to the One GUI, which is similar to the W8 GUI. I don't understand how this a paradox, but whatever.
Opponent also mentions ramblings about PC that isn't relevant to this debate, as this is exclusively Xbox One VS. Wii U. And he even states himself he's going off topic, so I don't understand why he even included the section on PC, even though PC is my system of choice, and I'm already convinced of that. But moving on...
In response to backwards compatibility:
Xbox One supports Xbox 360 gameplay through HDMI-In.
Xbox One supports Wii U gameplay through HDMI-In, which also supports NES, SNES, N64, Wii, GBA, and DS.
One console has the potential to support more than the other.
If I misused the word "joystick" on my previous arguments, I would like to correct my mistake and state I meant "control sticks". Thank you for clarifying my error, opponent, but you didn't need to state all of the research, as that was (slightly) unnecessary.
If I didn't specifically delve into this detail in R4, I shall do so now:
The Wii remote and Gamepad are better for "casual gamers" because they are simpler and have more features available to them that "casual" gamers use. The pros and competitive gamers use controllers such as the GameCube, Xbox, and Classic Pro controllers. The "pros" use controllers like these because the buttons are more readily accessible to them and closer together than that of the Wiimote and the Wii Gamepad's. As well, many of the controls on the GameCube/Classic Pro by default have one button that can execute multiple tasks, which would need to be individually inputted on the default remote/gamepad (on certain games). While it is argued the Wiimote and Gamepad have more features available to them, the pros have all of the controls they need right in front of them, and not in somewhat awkward positions the Wiimote or Gamepad has.
Responding to PS controller mistake:
The original model of controller (with no control sticks) was replaced with the version WITH the control sticks in 1997. It's not that I didn't do my research, I simply may have confused you.
2014-1997 = 17
17 is almost 20.
In my past argument, I said that PS had the near same style controller for almost 20 years.
To clarify, I should have said "over 15". If I confused you, I'm sorry.
Final Argument: Opponent's whole goal was to prove that the Wii U is better than the Xbox One. I have countered his arguments, and even stated reasons why the Xbox One is better than the Wii U, some of which opponent has not refuted because, as he states in the last sentence of R5, he agrees, or everything else has been refuted. In the last round, he lists his last arguments, and states that everything else (all of his other arguments, even from previous rounds) have been refuted. Since I refuted to all of opponent's arguments in R5, that leaves no arguments for opponent, while I still have topics such as live streaming, in game communication, and the HDMI-In functionality.
Each game console has its own exclusives, own bonuses, and own weaknesses. With each having their own bonuses in certain areas, both appeal to certain people. As you listed in the introduction, the One has its upsides while the U has its own. With these, along with the reasons I have stated, I believe it is entirely up to the consumer's choice as to what is best for them. As each console meets the needs of different types of consumers, isn't it safe to say that they both appeal to different types of people, and they are essentially equals?
If I have successfully proved that the Xbox One can be considered on an equal level with the Wii U or better than the U, then vote Con. If Pro successfully proved the Wii U is better, then vote Pro. I hope all voters vote wisely, and I thank opponent for the debate and his time.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.