Nintendo Wii U Is Better Than Xbox One

Responding to arguments:NOTES: 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. Therefore, refuted. "Joystick" Incident: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. Controllers: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 = 1717 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?