Unless it has gyro and the like, that's too much.

No rumble and no analog triggers and they still want $50?
Caterin to the Hardcore...and gouging them at the same time!

Fucking rip off.  The Gamepad will probably be traditional enough to suffice.  A classic controller pro on the Wii is HALF this price!

Wait, no rumble AND no triggers?!  This controller is going to be a tough sell at that price.  Sounds like they are trying to persuade people to use the wiimotes.

I thought for sure they had rumble. I remember at the Nintendo event the person told me the final product would have rumble. What are triggers again?

Analogue L&R buttons.  Like the L2 and R2 buttons on the PS3 controller.

Less than that. I mean, the Wii U Pro controller doesn't need a Wii remote to function but still...

No rumble? Fine, but that battery better last at least as long as the Wavebird did AKA forever.

Ouch!! When you combine this with the prices of the Wiimotes not changing it looks like they want to make up all of their lost revenues on peripherals.  Didn't I see the the Gamepad was going to sell for like $170 in Japan?  Double ouch!!!

13,300 yen, or about $171 after currency conversion. It's also a large part of the reason why the console's $300/$350.

It's a weird balance. Nintendo makes most of their money on software. Turning a profit on hardware and peripherals is extra. If they lowered the price, they may sell more, like how you might buy 2 of something if a second is half price instead of just buying the 1. However, Nintendo probably figures (or flat-out knows), they will make more by just marking up hardware and peripherals since people have to buy these things (and most likely will) to get the most out of their products.

I will probably end up getting 2 Pro Controllers. Looks like it's back to man-whoring so I can afford everything...

At this price I won't be surprised if there is little support for this peripheral.  Think how many times games would have been improved with simple Classic Controller support and that never happened. 

How much?

I've been out of the loop a bit here.. but I'm going to assume the Pro controller is the X-box looking controller shown at E3, correct? Who needs it? How will this make any game better?? I'm still not a big fan of the GamePad because it might make 3rd parties stick to default dual analog controls for FPS games which I loathe after the awesomness that is IR control, but at least the GamePad does MORE than the Pro controller so why even bother with it???

The difference is that Wii U is easy to port to (for now) and is pretty much a gimped version of the console's main controller, the Gamepad which the console can only support 2 of simultaneously. I think the Pro Controller has a really good chance of being the Wii U's go-to controller for most local multiplayer games.

http://youtu.be/ko-BkMKVpCs?t

Iwata said the Pro Controller was for those who wanted to play with a more traditional controller so they arms don't get tired.

arms get tired from holding a controller on your lap? fat slobs.

My classic controller pro will work with Wii U games... right?

Yes, all Wii controllers are confirmed to work.

Probably not unless developers specifically code Classic Controller support into their games. The Classic Controller is missing some of the Wii U Pro Controller's functionality in the analog stick click. I can't imagine that being such a barrier for most games, but you're pretty much at the mercy of developers and whether they feel like including Classic Controller support. In other words, I wouldn't count on it all the time. I mean, you couldn't even use the Gamecube controller on the Wii Menu.

this controller DOES have rumble and analog triggers. This controller is just like the WiiU gamepad, just without the touchscreen.

Where did you see "Analog Triggers"?

Yeah, the only thing that's really been confirmed is the digital "click" of the sticks.. aka L3 and R3 (what will Nintendo call these buttons?!) These suckers better have rumble. Or papa's gonna fight.

Nintendo already said, they are ZL and ZR

Naaaaaaah.... I think that's incorrect. ZL and ZR are the shoulder trigger buttons - according to this picture anyway.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/media/26111/4/19.png

Seriously, they're going to have to name them SOMETHING.

Ahh, blame Wikipedia. LOL

I'll wait for Nyko to make controllers with rumble. Best 3rd party controllers ever!

The price of this controller is quite a rip, there's no way it costs $30 over a Classic Controller to add a battery terminal, transmitter, and clicky sticks. This may not get much support if it doesn't have much adaption, so this could be a mistake on Nintendo's part. I'm certainly not going to get one until an extreme sale/price drop.

Official Wireless 360 Controller at GameStop - $49.99

Official Wireless PS3 Controller at GameStop -$54.99

Above-Standard, Name Brand Wireless PC Controller at GameStop - $49.99

****ing Nintendo and their ****ing gouging of consumers.

I'm not sure why anyone expected Nintendo to charge less than the standard rate for extra controllers. That wouldn't make sense for any number of reasons.

EDIT: For the record, Mop it up's right, they're most likely charging way more than the cost of the components, just like everybody else in the business does.

Because it isn't the standard controller, the GamePad is, and because the Classic Controller is $20. I expected it to be $30.

Can't we just use an Xbox 360 controller instead? Because that's essentially all this Pro controller is...

Because it seems everyone thinks that Nintendo is a Church with a vow of Poverty.

The Classic Controller was only $20 because it required a Wii Remote to work. Nintendo was wise enough to realize that people wouldn't pay $50 for something that required a separate $40 controller to function, or else they totally would have done that. This has almost nothing to do with component costs and everything to do with what they can get away with charging.

I'm sure Nyko and others will introduce their own alternatives at a lower price (and quality).

A fully functional Classic Controller Pro is $59.98.

Essentially you have a controller with the system that is the same functional and more then the WiiU Pro Controller.  So if you buy a second controller which this would be you can pay $49.99 for the Wii U Pro or $59.98 for the Wiimote+CCPro.  Since most of us have a Wiimote and CCPro this is a luxury item.

Insano beat me too it but I worked long on that :P

I don't think everyone doing it makes it right, and I find it somewhat unsettling how people accept it so easily.

I never said it makes it right, just that you shouldn't be surprised by it. And there's really nothing to do but accept it, because it's not going to change.

I say boycott and start an internet petition.

Two very well thought-out, practical methods of protest with a proven history of success.

I never said I was surprised by it, just that it's a rip. Thinking there's no way to change things is the only reason nothing changes, but that's a discussion for another time.

Nah, we need to reach people whose opinions actually matter.

I don't think anyone saying the Pro Controller is a ripoff is also saying that the Dual Shock 3 and 360 Controller aren't ripoffs. Those are 2 entirely different comments. The former doesn't automatically lead to the latter. Do you know what I am saying? I would think people would agree that all 3 controllers cost too much. However, like insano said, Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are charging X amount because they can though as I said in another thread, I kind of feel like Nintendo pricing the Pro Controller similarly for parity so it doesn't seem inferior.

Any confirmation on whether the Pro controller has rumble? I haven't been able to find a concrete answer to that.

I also think this plays into it, as well as into the pricing of the console itself. If the Pro controller is $20 cheaper than the extremely similar 360 controller and Dual Shock 3, people will ask why, and not necessarily come to flattering conclusions. For every person like Mop it up who is angry at it being $50, there's someone who would question its level of quality if it were significantly less than that.

I have not heard any confirmation that it has rumble.  No confirmation of analogue triggers or not either.  They sure don't look analogue though.  Both of those and six way accelerometer are all in the ps3 controller (two rumble motors in fact).  I think most without the accelerometer are in the 360 controller.  Seems like Nintendo has the bigger ripoff, even though there controller is brand new and the others have been out for 6-7 years.

Woah, woah, I'm not angry about it. I'm just not buying one. I'm sure it will be bundled with a game at some point, and that's when I'd get one.

Does anyone actually have a reliable breakdown of manufacturing costs for any of these controllers?

My understanding is that hardware teardowns typically compare to similar parts with known prices and cost is estimated. The best I was able to find on the Wii remote was, I think, last year. This website mentioned that the parts were something like $9 in 2009 or 2010. I don't think that was official or reliable by any means, but the estimate didn't seem terrible off base. I'm too lazy to dig up that old post.

I have no opinion on the whole ripoff thing. I bought an additional Dual Shock 3 controller and will undoubtedly buy 2 Pro controllers if only for the next Smash Bros. game. I'd rather not pay $50 for anything, but that's just unabashed consumerism. The only point I'm trying to make is that after 5-6 years, the price of components inevitably drops. That's just the nature of technology and the passage of time which I'm sure we're all well aware of. Something that cost $50 half a decade ago probably shouldn't cost that much today. It's important to note the difference between what something is worth and what something costs. I don't think any of these controllers (GamePad not withstanding) are using parts that aren't dirt cheap now. Still, every day we pay for things in which the individual parts are worth less than the whole.

Is it fair to say this is 6 year old tech?  We don't know what's in the controller...  could be all kinds of new tech that makes the wireless communication more reliable, the batteries last longer, the construction be more durable, etc. etc.

I was referring more to the Dual Shock 3 and Xbox 360 controller (though I suppose the Dual Shock 3 is technically less than 5 years old). As for the Pro Controller, this is Nintendo so I wouldn't expect especially new tech. Perhaps it's newer compared to what's inside Sony's and Microsoft's controllers though not new enough to push the price upwards for $50 for more than parity. I admit that's only a guess based on the fact that Nintendo has made it a point to not use cutting edge/state of the art technology. Even the Wii Remote wasn't new technology, just new in a gaming context. They're still following Gunpei Yokoi's "Lateral Thinking with Withered Technology" philosophy.

My opinion matters.

Actually, we should blame you since most of your post sound like they are excerpt'd directly from wikipedia, yet you continually try to pass it off as if it was something you already knew.

Actually, I do know most of what I say. And I am not the one who acts like others are wrong because they disagree.

People pay - without whining - the same price for the PS3 controller, which has very little difference to the DualShock on the PS1, which is about twelve years old.  The only reason it's considered a "premium" price here is because it's a Nintendo console.  The outrage over Bayonetta 2 along with this just proves that people think Nintendo isn't allowed to compete with Sony or Microsoft.

If they weren't complaining before (when Sony & MS where charging the same amount for years now), but are complain now (that Nintendo is doing the same), I CAN"T WAIT till everyone sees how much the uMote cost when they start selling those things stand-alone.

Who wants to start the guesstimate thread on that one?

Would Have Been Posted, If Not For Kairon.  Attempted re-posting below.
- broodwars.  :P: :

And the 360 controller is SEVEN years old. HHHHHURRRR.

Microsoft also charges money for simple online play, a concept I find pretty abhorrent given how the market has changed and the fact that its competitors do not charge for online.  But despite all the ads and the increasingly worse interface Microsoft forces on them, people pay Microsoft's online ransom anyway so it's hard to argue they aren't getting what they deserve.  The same goes for the controller costs: they're terrible, but Microsoft wouldn't be charging what they do for them if people weren't buying them at that price so I guess there's no point arguing it.

Note: This is an attempted recreation of an earlier post that was lost.  If it seems out of the flow of conversation by the time it is posted, that is why.

I think the Wii U Pro Controller pricing just put a spotlight on a pricing scheme everyone thought was terrible but had just learned to live with after all these years.  I've actually been needing to pick up a new Dualshock 3 for my PS3 lately, as my original controller now refuses to sync with my PS3 and my backup DS3 has been rapidly draining its battery lately.  I've been reticent to pull the trigger (pun intended) on the purchase, though, because for the price of that one controller I could almost buy a new game, and I could buy 1-2 less-new games with it.  This pricing sucked with the PS3, it sucked with the 360, and it still sucks now with the Wii U Pro Controller.  The pricing here just seems less excusable because of the previous Pro Controller cost on the Wii, as well as this new controller probably using 5-6 year old technology.

Of course, I think the Wii U is overpriced in general for the same reason.  :P:

I meant to go into this controversy further in our recent Nintendo Free Radio Ep. 4.5 discussion of the Wii U launch conference, but we were running very short on time and it didn't seem necessary.  Suffice it to say that I don't think the outrage has much to do with an "OMG! Nintendo isn't allowed to have exclusives!" mentality, so much as 1 or both of 2 things:

1.  The original Bayonetta was a multi-platform game that appealed to a very vocal niche audience, and now its sequel is going exclusive to an entirely new platform that isn't an iteration of the previous platforms.  This kind of outrage isn't that uncommon, though, as it happened fairly frequently earlier this generation when certain previously-Sony-exclusive franchises went multi-platform.  I remember well the whining from Sony fans when Final Fantasy XIII and Devil May Cry 4 were announced they were headed to the 360 as well.  Heaven knows I've complained time and time again about Valkyria Chronicles 2 and 3 becoming exclusive to the PSP.  As like is not, we would have seen a similar (though perhaps not as vocal) reaction from the Bayonetta fans if Bayonetta 2 was announced as a 360 or PS3 exclusive.

2.  If the Wii U was a console that had a more attractive lineup of new and exclusive games, I don't think the reaction from that niche audience would have been nearly as virulent because most of those folks would probably be buying a Wii U anyway.  I think it speaks to a general lack of interest that the Wii U has that is more widespread than the pre-order numbers would indicate (many of which are probably Ebay scalpers, as happens every console launch).  As someone on my Twitter feed wrote: "Remember, the 3DS AND Vita sold-out their pre-order numbers, and look at how that worked out."

There.  Now hopefully THIS post won't need a Would Have Been Posted, If Not For Kairon tag.  ;)

Put like that I think it makes Bayonetta 2 look like a good first step to Nintendo reaching out because the people who aren't already planning to buy a Wii U are EXACTLY the audience they will need to work the hardest to grab the attention of.

T-T

Done.

I don't disagree, but it's going to take a series of "must-buy" 1st party games (which Nintendo currently doesn't have on Wii U) and more than one 3rd party exclusive like this to make it so.  And we can't have nonsense like we've seen from than in the latter years of the Wii, where they've refused to bring enticing games to certain territories when they have nothing else.  I don't care about Bayonetta 2, but this is a great "first step" towards re-establishing Nintendo as a core-friendly console manufacturer.  But until they do re-establish themselves, I can't blame people for being disappointed/pissed at Platinum Games.  I CAN, however, blame them for what they do with that disappointment (i.e. the death/suicide threats), which I did in NFR 4.5.

Would you have preferred Editing: Recommended, Except for Kairon?  ;)  I wanted something that played on that old category.  :D

From what i've seen, Nintendo Land is one of those games that everyone loves once they get to play it. So that could be considered a must-buy first party game (and anyone who buys the Deluxe bundle will get it anyways).

People can't complain about Bayonetta 2 being Wii U exclusive, but they will anyways. I have seen people bitching about Final Fantasy being multiplatform and threatening to no longer buy Square Enix games if they weren't on a Sony system, and I wonder if these people realize that the first SIX mainline games in the series were on a Nintendo system.

Sorry, but any game that requires Nintendo to pull the "people aren't uninterested in this game! They just don't understand it!  You have to play this to understand it!" excuse card isn't worthy of being considered a system-seller. You should want that game regardless. It should speak for itself.  There's nothing in Nintendo's announced roster of titles that speaks to me, which is why I have no interest in buying a Wii U right now.

You could have said the same thing about Wii sports too.

Yep, word of mouth was a big reason Wii Sports sold the Wii. A lot of people bought the system just for it.

What I'm wondering - all these people coming out now saying how Nintendo is ripping people off and saying that Sony and Microsoft were ripping people off as well... where were their posts (on any forum, it's not just here where people are claiming the price is a rip off) saying that Sony and Microsoft were ripping people off before this?

Or is it just because it's fashionable now to be negative about Nintendo that everyone's all "Oh, yeah - Nintendo's ripping you off.. ohandsonyandmicrosoftaretoo...."?

I can't speak for anyone else, but I've always thought that all controllers are overpriced. Even the Wiimote, which I never bought separately, I got all mine from bundles (and one was a gift). I also felt the GameCube's controllers were overpriced, even though they were only $5 more than N64 controllers.

I don't recall if I ever posted about it, though.

I can consistently get a PS3 controller for $40 or less in many places outside of Gamestop.  I've seen the 360 controller go for $30.  I'm guessing it'll be awhile before that is the case for the pro controller.

I just want to know if the thing has rumble. If so, then sure...I'll be okay with that price tag. If not, though...then that controller is a bit overpriced. I don't even care about "Sixaxis" control being in it either - just rumble will do.

And yeah, Louie, I've found PS3 controllers at my local Walmart for $40, too.

You must be finding those on sale or stores willing to take a drastic loss as the average prices are much higher. Is Sony still screwing people by not including the charging cable with the DualShock 3? When I bought one last year, it didn't have one (which is ridiculous as you need one to charge the controller).

Hmm.. I think I'll wait for Nintendo to wise up and add rumble to the controller. I have a feeling we'll see the same thing that happened with the PS3 and Dual-shock 3. Fans will complain, and they will add rumble back.


I will never understand why they decided to remove it in the first place. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Nintendo beat every competitor to the vibrating controller feature with the rumble pack? Why is it that companies invent a new innovative feature that gains wide popularity, only to take it away with no stated logical reason?

Rumble is already confirmed for the controller.

Yes. It's just like when I bought the PS3 MGS4 bundle. An HD console that included an HDMI port but no cable to use it. I was so mad, I live in a rural area. I drove 40 miles to buy a PS3, 40 miles home to hook it up, and 40 miles BACK to the store to buy an HDMI cable, and 40 miles back home to finally play. That was an annoying day.


I bought a dualshock 3 when they released, and it came with a charge cable. It may have only been a few inches long, but it was better than nothing! Years later that controller needed replacement. So i bought a new one - it did not come with a charge cable either. That's pretty shady business.

Thanks for clearing that up - the earlier comments had me misinformed. Yeah Nintendo! That actually makes me happy, I have been curious about the Pro Controller, the analog sticks above the buttons on both sides of the controller - to me seem like it may fit nicely.


Has anyone with NWR had their hands on one? If so, - their thoughts?

If you've used an Xbox 360 controller, it feels a lot like that, except it's much lighter. I had no real complaints in my short time with it, other than having a bit of trouble adjusting to the flipped position of the right stick and buttons.