PDA

View Full Version : Nintendo Revolution Controller Revealed



Unseeing Eye
16-09-2005, 10:04
Viva la revolution. (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3143782)
I don't know what to make of it. Its really weird but does have potential. The DS turned out pretty well with its whacky stylus thing, this looks to be similar. I guess we'll just have to see how it works with games.

Ravening Wh0re
16-09-2005, 10:11
haha I came here to post the exact same thing :)
I have to say I'm not too impressed yet( and I usually love anything that Ninty produces), but i have to have one in my hands to see how it functions.

grey_painter
16-09-2005, 10:52
I applaud Nintendo for trying something very different and innovative. Unsure how well it will do though, something like that may put people off the revolution. Mass market is going to be sorta scared by something so far away from the familiar aren't they?

Hope it does well though.

Nazguire
16-09-2005, 11:42
The problem with Nintendo, is that they try things that are 'revolutionary' but really just come off looking as gimmicks. Unfortunately, while this looks like it has potential, it appears as no more a desperate ploy than those employed by SEGA before they died. It's unfortunate, but I'll reserve my final opinion until I have actually played it. :cries:

Ravening Wh0re
16-09-2005, 12:03
I must add that DS touchscreen and stylus wasn't too big a deal to me. It was an extra bonus but wasn't integral.
But after Kirby and Meteos, the whole system has really come into it's own.
It was genius farsight, and am glad of it

Jet
16-09-2005, 12:03
At least I hope they keep those standard GC ports in the back of the Revolution. That's what may be reverted back to, because I presume there will be a great number of "lazy" publishers, e.g. football simulations etc., which won't make use of the properties of this "controller", which may drastically cut 3rd party support for the system. The exact problem Nintendo has really had for years :rolleyes:

Arnizipal
16-09-2005, 13:07
That's... different. :eyebrows:
When people are playing it'll look like they're furiously trying to change the channel (and not succeeding :p ).

Bubble Ghost
16-09-2005, 13:46
The problem with Nintendo, is that they try things that are 'revolutionary' but really just come off looking as gimmicks.

Like d-pads, portable consoles, shoulder buttons, analogue console controllers, rumble packs and spinning 3D play areas? All of those got called gimmicks at least once in their lifespan, and all were Nintendo innovations that became industry standards.

Course, for every one of those, you've got a Virtual Boy or an R.O.B. I have to admit I was scratching my head when I saw the Revolution controller (at least until I saw the joystick part of it when it all clicked into place, and now I can't stop thinking how cool it is) and I imagine lots, if not most gamers will do the same. It just looks too off the wall for the PlayStation generation; your average late teen/twentysomething PS2-owning 'casual gamer' will take one look at that and dismiss it instantly. It has potential to connect with a wider audience, but only if it's marketed properly, and that's something Nintendo is traditionally useless at. Hmmm...

Strikerkc
16-09-2005, 14:27
Well, that sinches it for me. The revolution won't even be allowed in my home. From a removable main system that seems built to loose, to a tv remote control for the game pad. Sorry Nintendo, your officialy dead to me now.

x-esiv-4c
16-09-2005, 14:32
Well, after seeing that my decision for the next gen-machine is wittled down to 2.

Bubble Ghost
16-09-2005, 14:36
Out of curiosity, did you read the article? Including scrolling down to see the joystick, and the part about how it's position and angle sensitive so you can move the handset to control things, and use it like a pointer or a light gun, etc? It seems to be a hell of a lot more than just a TV remote. You could do a Star Wars game where you waved the controller around as your light saber.

Snoozer
16-09-2005, 15:32
If anyone is wondering (or already made haste decisions) how the controler will work with different games read this:

http://cube.ign.com/articles/651/651224p1.html

I'm so hyped by that article that I can't even wait for it to be released, just think about the possibilities.

:D

Cheesejoff
16-09-2005, 18:21
I actually think it's a big step forward. I will almost certainly be getting a revolution. The 360 has taken several steps backwards by not allowing the hard drive to use virtual memory. The PS3 is practically designed to be as expensive as possible, they even said "This is something the common man will not be able to afford".

So it looks like it's the revolution for me.

Brimstone
16-09-2005, 18:27
hmmm I'm not convinced, I'd have to use it myself before deciding how useful it will be.

Will be interesting to see if anybody but Nintendo are able to get the best out of it.

Spacemunkie
16-09-2005, 19:00
If it works, it'll be revolutionary. Games seem to have become constrained by their control systems and have fallen into a repetitious cycle with basically only the appearance improving. Doom is a great example.

This sort of technology could be great used with light guns on FPS games.

Chuffy
16-09-2005, 19:14
I'm half impressed half not. It has potential and it's certainly an interesting idea. I'm just interested to see how it could work with alot of games.

Also it's probably not the best idea for Nintendo to make, it's too radical and too whacky for the mainstream market, you CANNOT, I repeat, CANNOT gamble the future of your company on what is essentially a gimmick. Nintendo doesn't have the industry dominance to make this successful, I hope it's successful, I hope the controller is the greatest thing since sliced bread, I just have a foreboding feeling that it is a bad business decision to take a gamble like this.

The pestilent 1
16-09-2005, 19:47
that is so fragging cool!
Revolution indeed!

blitz589
16-09-2005, 21:06
Seems like to much work to play a video game, moveing your whole arme instead of some fingers.lol

Ill try before i buy.

Tom
16-09-2005, 22:43
I think this could be a very big thing. Of course, the big danger is RSI...

Unseeing Eye
16-09-2005, 22:50
Taking a second look, I like this more and more. I never play consoles. Never ever. One of the main reasons why is the controls are so clumsy. The target in the centre is usually about 5-10 times larger than on the PC. Its impossible to turn or move fast and efficiently like it is on the PC.

If Nintendo has some good hardware and starts releasing titles for a more mature audience as well as little kids, I may pick this up.

Yodhrin
16-09-2005, 22:53
Innovation for its own sake.

Reasons I wont buy this system now include:

1. Comments about games being "too long" and "too difficult" by Nintendo.

2. Their abysmal efforts gamewise since the SNES.

3. The DS. Another example of innovation for its own sake, barely any games actually make full use of the touchpad, and those that do are niche titles.

4. This controller.

First, when I am gaming on a console, I want to sit back and relax, not flail my arms about like a lunatic. Second, when I am playing a console, it is generally to de-stress, and I will likely be banging the controller off of things for the first thirty minutes of play. This thing looks like it would fall apart in a stiff wind. Third, all these lovely publicity photos of the controller fitting snugly into an asian female's hand tells me it's about the size of my bloody thumb. The original XBox controller was a good size for me to game with, how am I supposed to use this thing without getting Clawhand after a few minutes? Fourth, what happens if I drop the controller during an important section of a level? Not only that, but if aiming/movement is dependant on how you point/orient the "TV Remote", what happens if something distracts me and I look to the side? Your limbs follow your vision, it's a subconsious action. I dont really fancy the idea of glancing around and someone comes into the room and looking back to find that a tiny movement of my hand has sent my plane/car/whatever into the ground/a wall/whatever.

Rubbish.

The reason the current console controller layout has been around for as long as it has is simple: It works, and it works well. This is a gimmic on the level of the EyeToy - it's cool for parties or really young kids, but worthless for actual gaming.

Tom
16-09-2005, 22:56
I think it's less flailing about like a loon, more just the kind of movements you involuntarially make during things like racing games. Anyone else find they tirn their pad when driving cars?



And innovation for innovation's sake's resulted in everything but internal hard drives that you see on consoles today spawning from the deranged and possibly mad mind of Mister Miramoto.

Yodhrin
16-09-2005, 23:34
I think it's less flailing about like a loon, more just the kind of movements you involuntarially make during things like racing games. Anyone else find they tirn their pad when driving cars?

Mmm, and if I make that same involuntary movement when I DONT want to and screw up my game, is that fun? If it is an actual steering-wheel peripheral, fine, it's solid and anchored, I can glance around the room without bashing into a wall. That's not the case when Im having to hold the controller out in the air and carefully manipulate it along an imaginary axis in order to turn.

It's like the old SNES wireless controllers(yes, such a thing did exist). You had to sit perfectly still and aim the controller at the reciever box or you lost the signal. That happens as you're jumping over a pit/onto a mushroom? Well, one life to go.....

In addition, there will be flailing. They are already talking about "swinging the controller like a sword" and "flying a plane with your hand, like you did when you were a kid". Thing is, Im not a kid anymore, pretending there's a plane on the end of my arm and making "neeeeeeewvvv" noises is not fun.


And innovation for innovation's sake's resulted in everything but internal hard drives that you see on consoles today spawning from the deranged and possibly mad mind of Mister Miramoto.

Innovation out of a desire to improve insufficient technology drove the development of current standards. The current control system is far from insufficient, and could be improved in dozens of different ways without, not just reinventing, but smashing apart The Wheel.

As I said, the reason current console controllers have been around for so long is because the design works. It's solid.

This controller is innovation for its own sake because, apart from in the case of a few niche titles, it provides no real advantage over a current system.

Jet
16-09-2005, 23:45
I think one thing is almost for certain. This is likely to sell like hot cakes in Japan, but then does this mean a larger size version will come out in the west, as a reverse of the Xbox Controller S?

Shining_Spear
17-09-2005, 00:41
I personally think it is amazing. I think the 3d positioning system has huge potential.

Although I would like to see some games...

I hope that 3rd parties jump on, though, as that essentially makes or breaks a system.

Gyulkus Chaos Saurus
17-09-2005, 00:58
well, i think that this has great potential! i wasnt to sure at first but then i saw the Control stick attachment and thought"OMFG THIS IS AMAZING!"

It's like the old SNES wireless controllers(yes, such a thing did exist). You had to sit perfectly still and aim the controller at the reciever box or you lost the signal. That happens as you're jumping over a pit/onto a mushroom? Well, one life to go..... umm, how can u compare technology from the early 90s to now?! have you ever played a lightgun game at the arcade? those work perfectly, and this is supposed to track very well! if your playing say a game where you swing the sword with the remote then the attack wont just cancel out if u go out of the screen! as long as your not playing on some 6" portable tv this should work fine

Gyulkus Chaos Saurus
17-09-2005, 01:01
Fourth, what happens if I drop the controller during an important section of a level? Not only that, but if aiming/movement is dependant on how you point/orient the "TV Remote", what happens if something distracts me and I look to the side?what happens if u drop a regular controller? IT STILL SCREWS U UP! whod have thought! and u can hmmm, PAUSE THE GAME!

Unseeing Eye
17-09-2005, 01:20
Watch this (http://www.irwebcasting.com/050916/03/ff3672f7df/index.html), the keynote speech where it was first revealed.



I hope that 3rd parties jump on, though, as that essentially makes or breaks a system.

The most exciting bit in the video above is near the end, where a few third party developers give their opinions on the new controller (obviously they all loved it or they wouldn't be in the Nintendo presentation...). However, one of the developers is Square Enix. Hooray!

Yodhrin
17-09-2005, 02:11
what happens if u drop a regular controller? IT STILL SCREWS U UP! whod have thought! and u can hmmm, PAUSE THE GAME!

Dear God, please use proper grammar.

To answer your points, well, not really. Lets take a game like Crimson Skies as an example, as that is the only flight game I can recall playing on a console.

Playing with a standard layout controller is as simple as using the analogue stick. If I drop the controller, I generally have a couple of seconds to grab it before anything nasty happens.

Playing that same game with the new Rev controller is completely different. My hand movements control the plane, so if I drop the controller it goes into an uncontrolled spin and crashes into the ground because the game interprets that sudden downward motion of the controller falling as me telling it to dive.

As to your previous post, yes, the Rev system will have far better pickup, the point was that you still have to aim the damn thing all the time. How is me having to sit with my arm pointed at the TV and getting precision control an advancement over pointing at a smaller box for slightly less precision control ten years ago?

Furthermore, why should I HAVE to worry about going offscreen when I slash a sword when it's far simpler to just orient with an analogue or D-pad and then hit a button to attack? Why should I have to be flailing about at all? I play games to relax, if I wanted exersise, I would go out and play a game of rugby, or head to the gym. I do not want to spend my gaming time waving my arms around like a windmill trying to slash people with a weapon when I could do exactly the same thing while reclining comfortably on my couch, moving only my thumbs.

Tom
17-09-2005, 02:37
Of course if you want, Just dispense with the tilting altogether and ram another controller on its ****. (http://cubemedia.ign.com/cube/image/article/651/651559/understanding-the-revolution-controller-20050916041026412-000.jpg) Also available in SNES and N64.

Ravening Wh0re
17-09-2005, 02:51
1. Comments about games being "too long" and "too difficult" by Nintendo.


Well, Ninty said they were going back to basics. They wanted a more arcadey feel to a lot of games. Doesn't mean they eschew everything that may be remotely long. Hell, I can guarantee a new Zelda will be on its way




2. Their abysmal efforts gamewise since the SNES.

I think you may be stuck in the past on this one. There have been loads of fine games since




3. The DS. Another example of innovation for its own sake, barely any games actually make full use of the touchpad, and those that do are niche titles..

Nothing wrong with the DS. Your logic is flawed anyway. So, basically, ANY game that uses the touchscreen becomes a niche title...




4. This controller.

The reason the current console controller layout has been around for as long as it has is simple: It works, and it works well. This is a gimmic on the level of the EyeToy - it's cool for parties or really young kids, but worthless for actual gaming.

Nintendo have always strived for innovation and tried to be different. They don't have the marketing power of the other big two and so have to go down a seperate path.
The appeal of the new controller is mainly for ease of use. It's quite well known that the "perfect" joypad layout is quite offputting to newbies. This tries to address the issue.
They are trying to entice people who usually wouldn't play games into the hobby, and that can never be a bad thing.

So, this is not for one such as you.

Also, I highly doubt that most games would use the sensor much. You seem to think that all games would use it as the primary function. It's a feature that can be utilised when needed, and is certainly not a necessity.
I presume it would be used for such things as Monkey Ball and somesuch (and perhaps the options will allow you to choose a control style)


The industry NEEDS someone like Nintendo, otherwise things get stale very quickly. And please note that any innovation that becomes successful (no matter how loony it might seem at the time) is almost always emulated by others.

Yodhrin
17-09-2005, 03:14
Well, Ninty said they were going back to basics. They wanted a more arcadey feel to a lot of games. Doesn't mean they eschew everything that may be remotely long. Hell, I can guarantee a new Zelda will be on its way

Those quotes were exact, Ill try and find the article. We're not talking "a bit simpler" here, they want to go back to Space Invaders level.


I think you may be stuck in the past on this one. There have been loads of fine games since

Nintendo have been reusing the same five concepts since the SNES. Zelda...again. Mario.....again. Metroid.....again. I could go on. They need to stop making sequels to the same tired old franchises, for a company that prides itself on innovation it's odd that their main game has been the same for the past 15 years.


Nothing wrong with the DS. Your logic is flawed anyway. So, basically, ANY game that uses the touchscreen becomes a niche title...

No, Im saying that only niche games make use of the touchscreen functionality because it's irrelavent to normal games. Most current games simply dont need that kind of thing to play comfortably and effectively, so no games use it apart from the odd first-party niche title.


Nintendo have always strived for innovation and tried to be different. They don't have the marketing power of the other big two and so have to go down a seperate path.
The appeal of the new controller is mainly for ease of use. It's quite well known that the "perfect" joypad layout is quite offputting to newbies. This tries to address the issue.
They are trying to entice people who usually wouldn't play games into the hobby, and that can never be a bad thing.

Firstly, that really is nonsense. It's a TV remote. How does a lack of buttons and muscle strain equate to ease of use? The "perfect" joypad layout is, I assume, the current one. How exactly is it offputting to newbies? No offense folks, but if someone cant muster enough brainpower to use a device with six buttons and a D-pad, Im surprised they could learn human speech. :p

The question here is whether enticing new people is the way to go. New people get into gaming all the time, that's inevitable now that the generations who grew up with technology are maturing and passing their knowledge on to their kids. If Nintendo attracts a small amount of new people with their crazy new rig, but alienates a huge chunk of existing gamers, I fail to see how this helps their finances.


So, this is not for one such as you.

I worked that one out for myself :D


Also, I highly doubt that most games would use the sensor much. You seem to think that all games would use it as the primary function. It's a feature that can be utilised when needed, and is certainly not a necessity.
I presume it would be used for such things as Monkey Ball and somesuch (and perhaps the options will allow you to choose a control style)

So why make it the main control system? Why not release a more standard controller and have the motion-sensor-pointer-TV remote thingy as an addon like the EyeToy, rather than the other way around? You're proving my point, if most things wont use it, then it's not a significant improvement over the norm. Innovation for its own sake.


The industry NEEDS someone like Nintendo, otherwise things get stale very quickly. And please note that any innovation that becomes successful (no matter how loony it might seem at the time) is almost always emulated by others.

Oh I dont doubt that. I just think this was a mistake. Innovation should always have a purpose. You should say "This is what is wrong with X, and this is how Im going to solve it." not "Woah, a 3d air-mouse thing, cool!"

Ravening Wh0re
17-09-2005, 03:32
The question here is whether enticing new people is the way to go. New people get into gaming all the time, that's inevitable now that the generations who grew up with technology are maturing and passing their knowledge on to their kids. If Nintendo attracts a small amount of new people with their crazy new rig, but alienates a huge chunk of existing gamers, I fail to see how this helps their finances.

BUT, they aren'y trying to attract the gamers. They are trying to attract.....I hate to say it......girls. People who don't usually play games much.

Nintendo have sold loads of stuff that appeals to the non-hardcore. They kind of thrive on that.
They may not make a lot compared to Sony and MS, but they still have a healthy profit (for a supposedly doomed company)
The success of Donkey Konga emphasises just what Nintendo do, and do well.

If these things are gimmicky, how come Europeans, traditionally quite cynical when it comes to marketing, have bought so many DS's (and drums :))

Tom
17-09-2005, 03:35
Although I have to agree with the fact that in-game innovation has just gone an dbuggered right off with Nintendo.

It's all hardware now.

And, as I said, you don't like the controller, turn it into a Gamecube one. Or an N64 one. Or a SNES one. I'm gonna see whether third parties do non Nintendo styled control rigs.

Bubble Ghost
17-09-2005, 05:09
Controllers worked before d-pads; there was nothing wrong with joysticks. They worked before shoulder buttons; there was nothing wrong with face buttons. They worked before analogue thumbsticks; there was nothing wrong with digital control. But now controllers work better. It's ironic that every feature of these current controllers that Yodhrin suggests are perfect arrived thanks to Nintendo ignoring the fact that things already worked perfectly well.

There are current games that simply wouldn't have worked had analogue control or trigger buttons not been standard features. The mouse came first; then people designed an entire computing epoch around it.

This new controller just might be one of those things, like all those other features, that you look back on and wonder how you ever lived without.

Then again it might not. But taking up a defiant "ain't broke, don't fix" stance seems to be ignoring the history behind these things somewhat.

Unseeing Eye
17-09-2005, 05:27
Those quotes were exact, Ill try and find the article. We're not talking "a bit simpler" here, they want to go back to Space Invaders level.

Did you watch the video? The line he kept on pushing was roughly "We want to make things easy for new players to grasp, but to challenge and not alienate the veteran gamers.


Nintendo have been reusing the same five concepts since the SNES. Zelda...again. Mario.....again. Metroid.....again. I could go on. They need to stop making sequels to the same tired old franchises, for a company that prides itself on innovation it's odd that their main game has been the same for the past 15 years.

I agree, one of their main failing points has been a lack of titles. Of course, thats *directly* related to how their controller is shaped. :rolleyes:


No, Im saying that only niche games make use of the touchscreen functionality because it's irrelavent to normal games. Most current games simply dont need that kind of thing to play comfortably and effectively, so no games use it apart from the odd first-party niche title.

Nintendogs was actually a mass-market game.


Firstly, that really is nonsense. It's a TV remote. How does a lack of buttons and muscle strain equate to ease of use?

Do you need an X-box controller to change channels and volume on your TV? You might say that video games are much more complex, but thats the genious of it. So many controls can be bundled into move/tip/rotate the controller. And if thats not enough, the thing is very customisable.


The "perfect" joypad layout is, I assume, the current one. How exactly is it offputting to newbies? No offense folks, but if someone cant muster enough brainpower to use a device with six buttons and a D-pad, Im surprised they could learn human speech. :p

Actually, for me its not the 'brainpower' aspect. Its the 'My fingers hurt from trying to press a half dozen to a dozen buttons, press a D-Pad and simultaniously move using that tiny stub of a joystick.


The question here is whether enticing new people is the way to go. New people get into gaming all the time, that's inevitable now that the generations who grew up with technology are maturing and passing their knowledge on to their kids. If Nintendo attracts a small amount of new people with their crazy new rig, but alienates a huge chunk of existing gamers, I fail to see how this helps their finances.

Watch the video. Since the release of the DS, the handheld market has expanded significantly.


So why make it the main control system? Why not release a more standard controller and have the motion-sensor-pointer-TV remote thingy as an addon like the EyeToy, rather than the other way around? You're proving my point, if most things wont use it, then it's not a significant improvement over the norm. Innovation for its own sake.

I think this is probably a marketing reason. The idea is to lure in new gamers with the basic standard controller, then whallop them with all sorts of crazy expansions.


Oh I dont doubt that. I just think this was a mistake. Innovation should always have a purpose. You should say "This is what is wrong with X, and this is how Im going to solve it." not "Woah, a 3d air-mouse thing, cool!"

They did. The problem is game controllers intimidate people, require far too much detailed finger movement and lack accuracy. Solution? Crazy 3d air-television remote.

immortal99
17-09-2005, 08:58
i take it you can buy kind of contoller cases to slip the remotes in and function as a normal controller?

alterion
17-09-2005, 12:37
Yawn.. glad to see warseer has the usual protion of idiots too like many other places.. Vive la revolution! i say.. this is radicaaly differetnt to anything i expected and its potential is great it takes gaming to a whole new level. now i reaaluy shouldn't do this beacuse most peoepl on the inetrnet are fundamentally idiots.. with other peoples veiws and opinonjs stuck up their rear ends.. but i havn;t had a good internet quote counter qopute slug fest for at least a week now so here we go. for the sake of it i'll Pick on the most ignorant and wrong person here:Yodhrin

1. Comments about games being "too long" and "too difficult" by Nintendo.
Yawn.. what they actually were saying( as has been pointed out) is that they are trying to catr to a new audience who finds current games intimidating as well as the hardcore well. sigerou said in his address that they would not risk alienating their core audienece by simplifing games. thats a great shame isn't it cause guess who puts out the longest and hardest games consistenlty.. NINTENDO.. tell me is you;ve ever bothered to play f-zero or super mario sunshine.. they offer some of the toughest gaming expereinces i have ever played but then they're too kiddy for a hardcore gamer like you so you haven't have you :eyebrows:


We're not talking "a bit simpler" here, they want to go back to Space Invaders level.
hmm you clearly haven't understood what they said.. they said they would NOT do thsi but games that were like chess. easy to play.. hard to master your basically just making this up.. after all they don't need nes style new games.. cause they will have all the old ones availible for d/l!


2. Their abysmal efforts gamewise since the SNES.
and when poointed out that you were.. too put it bluntly WRONG.. however it was your reply that really cracked me up
Nintendo have been reusing the same five concepts since the SNES. Zelda...again. Mario.....again. Metroid.....again. I could go on. They need to stop making sequels to the same tired old franchises
heh what a load of rubbish.. with sequels and such in a succesful series ninty do innovate and develop their series.. and for a succesful series they have every right to keep making money from selling good games hat is good biuisness practise.. and they certainly have their fellow conspirators.. after all the relase of GTA for the third time in a row with a different environment was hailed as w!ked by people such as yourself. or FF 12 or pop 6(in effect) not to say that form time to time nintendo hasn;t been guilty of this.. but try playing metriod prime 2 echoes and see the way it has evolved from the original.. that is not lack of innovation its darn goiod designers delivery great games time and time again. and of couse according to your thery games like 1080 AVALANCHE, SUPER SMASH BROS, VIEUTIFUL JOE, IKURAGUA, WAVE RACE, THE PK'mon franchise (say hwat you like about it it was extremly succesful as a game and was perfect for its target audience)WARIO WARE or a thousand other titles just never existed did they? of cousre there has been a lack of major 3rd pary support for the gc but the n64 got plenty of third party games ect onto it..


3. The DS. Another example of innovation for its own sake, barely any games actually make full use of the touchpad, and those that do are niche titles..
oh dera sounds like you;v been reading to much sony hype and not paying attention to the facts.. firstly you have things like nintedogs.. a revolutionary game that showed how to make use of the ds's features.. true many third party games don;t make use of this innovation but those that do s show why its a great feature and then some of ninty's sublime first party games just show why as a console its sold well over double the amount of psp's worldwide and why ninty s the only one of the big 3 to be making a profit atm overall.. i if you knew anything about game coding you would understand why they are so different and why games will be easier to adapt to this system. and this point is of couse nonsense you can;t compare 2 different systems like this for different means ect .. its like at the mercury music awards liek comparing an orange to a space ship to a spoon

he "perfect" joypad layout is, I assume, the current one
i take it by this you means the love it or despise it dual shock deisgn... which was in no way an attempt to take all of the good bits fomr the snes controller a\nd shape them onto a crude and ugly shell.. or maybe your looking at the new sonmy anal probe controller..


4. This controller.

The reason the current console controller layout has been around for as long as it has is simple: It works, and it works well. This is a gimmic on the level of the EyeToy - it's cool for parties or really young kids, but worthless for actual gaming.

So why make it the main control system? Why not release a more standard controller and have the motion-sensor-pointer-TV remote thingy as an addon like the EyeToy, rather than the other way around?
because this isn;t like the eye -toy.. its so much more important than that that it is unreal..
this conroller presents a revolutionary way of controlling fps's that hass the potential to be better than the mouse and k/b. it offers many possibilites for existing games as well.. also they're releasing a plug-in controller with standard buttons for back catalouge games and morans like you but every major gaming site or tech center that has used this device loves it as a great innovation.

The question here is whether enticing new people is the way to go. New people get into gaming all the time, that's inevitable now that the generations who grew up with technology are maturing and passing their knowledge on to their kids. If Nintendo attracts a small amount of new people with their crazy new rig, but alienates a huge chunk of existing gamers, I fail to see how this helps their finances. they're not alienating me.. they might be alienating fools like you but that is fine by me.. in addition why a smmall number.. you seem to have your sides mixed uop there are far more peopl who don;t game than do.. if ninty wins over many of them then great.. i wuld alsoo like to point out again that for the last quater ninty is the only company still makng a profit.. its finaces are not in trouble the gc while a faliure is more popualr in japan than us/uk and is more popular in mainland eu too..
now to sit back relax.. edit a bit and witch the ignorant fools counter-qoute and batter themselves to death making themselves look stupid..

Cheesejoff
17-09-2005, 13:14
*cheers at Alterion and Unseeing Eye* You said it exactly.

They are not just trying to attract girls, but the wider audience in general. Which I think is a good idea.

However, I hope some company re-skins the remote to make it look a bit cooler.

Yodhrin
17-09-2005, 13:26
Insult, insult, insult.

Reported.

Unseeing Eye:

Im not referring to this keynote speech. There was an article linked to on the Gamespy forums a couple of weeks back(as I said, Im trying to dig it out) which was talking about how Nintendo thought that games had become too long and complex, and how they want to take their games back to the "arcade era". That just doesnt wash with me; I want value for money when I buy games, and shelling out £50 for a game which only lasts a couple of hours(again, from the interview, they talked about how games "last for ages, like ten hours and more") just isnt going to happen.

Mass Market? It sold a lot of copies, but in gaming terms it's a niche product. Petsims are popular with many people, but your average gamer isnt one of them. Aparently, the majority(something like 60%) of people who bought Nintendogs also bought the DS at the same time, and the majority of those who did have not bought another game yet. That's one expensive Tamagotchi.

You said that you dislike current controllers because you get tired thumbs...Im just trying to work out how that's worse than your entire arm being tired and getting RSI in your wrist from rotating it in the same way repeatedly. I just dont get that one, myself.

I just dont see how waving your arms about or having to hold your arm steady to aim is any less intimidating to people than current technology. How does this work for older or disabled gamers? There is one benefit I can see to the new system though: if you get kids working on it young enough, it should improve their hand-eye coordination significantly.

Bubble Ghost:

This goes for all of you. Could you please stop being so confrontational and defensive? Im not attacking you, Im just putting up my opinions and arguing my points here. Me critising Nintendo due to a personal opinion is not me attacking everyone who owns a Nintendo product or anything Nintendo has ever done.

Yes, they did work before those additions. It's called refinement. You take the basic design and make improvements on it until it begins to approach a highly polished level. There were still many refinements which could have been made to the existing standard for controllers to make them more accessible and user-friendly for the average person, as well as more interactive, instead of simply scrapping the whole concept.

This controller does not offer a significant advantage in today's games. If I picked up, for example, a GTA game, there is nothing I could do with this new controller I could not do with the current system just as well. If Nintendo want to move away from mass-market gaming and into first-party titles for super-casual gamers using quirky hardware, fine, but they need to stop trying to sell it to me on the basis it will improve my gaming experiance.

alterion
17-09-2005, 13:58
your doing just as well.. if you think i am insulting you by stating it as it is then fine.. I pointed out the reasons why you were ignorant and wrong below.. its not your faultwere not being defensive.. were being right.. my only comment on your latest tirade would be to point out that a keynote speach might be a slighty moe idactive view of what ninty are planning than a link to an article form gamespy forums. i'll say it again.. all the people ho have tried this have loved it.. being wrong is not neccessarily your fault. you can have a personal opinion that is wrong.. if however you just felt insulted then sorry.. and remeber kids.. of couse the next gen might not offer you many advantages on today's tech.

Bubble Ghost
17-09-2005, 14:36
Bubble Ghost:

This goes for all of you. Could you please stop being so confrontational and defensive?

I wasn't! I could just as well ask you to stop being so touchy. I was trying to use a level tone there, so I'm sorry if it didn't work. I'd just got in from work and it was about half past five in the morning, so my best thinking head wasn't on.:)

Anyhow, like I said, when, say, analogue thumbsticks were brought in, they definitely weren't necessary for the games of the day. But since then, games have been made that wouldn't work without them. So this pointer thing isn't necessary for today's games. Who's to say that it isn't going to make possible some games that couldn't be played on a current controller? And even if it doesn't, it should make FPS games and genres that need cursors work far better on consoles than they do at the moment.

Just wait and see before you send the men in white coats round, is all.

NaT
17-09-2005, 15:48
Somehow Nintendo is doomed because it CHOOSES to not compete against sony and Microsoft. Nintendo stands for innovation, and thatís exactly what this new console offers. I'm sure that with this new controller we will be offered another line up of amazing games, that Iím sure most people won't try.
Why? Because their head is rammed too far up their ass to be bothered trying something new. Nintendoís games are labeled kiddy because they don't involve absurd amounts of violence/blood and gore, because game-play/innovation/fun doesn't matter without it...

Letís just forget that Nintendo has dominated, and still dominates the hand held market.

Chuffy
17-09-2005, 15:51
2. Their abysmal efforts gamewise since the SNES.

....yeah, Eternal Darkness, Harvest Moon, Ocarina of Time, Viewtiful Joe, Four swords, Super Mario 64, Animal Crossing, Warioware, Wind Waker, Advance Wars and Ikaruga are all abysmal.

I should just go and play Halo or an EA movie tie-in or sports game *spit*.

Also Yodhrin, while some of the replies have been hostile Bubble Ghosts wasn't, I just thought I'd say.

Spacemunkie
17-09-2005, 16:06
Seems pretty daft to dismiss something that could possibly revolutionise the way you play games before you have even tried it. If you ask me :D

Innovate or stagnate? I know which one I'd rather see happen. Current controllers work well, but the point here is that they work well within the confines of current game genres. If we want new styles of gaming, then both control and display technology needs to be pushed further.

Or we'll be playing Doom 26 in 2020!!

Brimstone
17-09-2005, 16:26
Yawn.. glad to see warseer has the usual protion of idiots too like many other places.. Vive la revolution! i say.. this is radicaaly differetnt to anything i expected and its potential is great it takes gaming to a whole new level. now i reaaluy shouldn't do this beacuse most peoepl on the inetrnet are fundamentally idiots.. with other peoples veiws and opinonjs stuck up their rear ends.. but i havn;t had a good internet quote counter qopute slug fest for at least a week now so here we go. for the sake of it i'll Pick on the most ignorant and wrong person here:Yodhrin

Nothing wrong with a bit of robust debate but here you are straying into a mild bit of flaming, not to mention murdering English grammar and spelling.


now to sit back relax.. edit a bit and witch the ignorant fools counter-qoute and batter themselves to death making themselves look stupid..

And this is close to trolling.

Carry on but if I see either again I'll take further action.

Bubble Ghost
17-09-2005, 16:41
....yeah, Eternal Darkness, Harvest Moon, Ocarina of Time, Viewtiful Joe, Four swords, Super Mario 64, Animal Crossing, Warioware, Wind Waker, Advance Wars and Ikaruga are all abysmal.

Viewtiful Joe was by Capcom and Ikaruga was by Treasure.:p

It's a valid point though; Nintendo's output since the SNES definitely hasn't sucked. They don't only recycle old characters (Pikmin, Animal Crossing and hell, even Pokťmon come to mind here as examples of creating something good and new), and even when they do, the reason people still get excited about a new Mario or Zelda or Wars title is partly because people just like the characters; and mostly because Nintendo are one of a very few developers that consistently innovate in terms of gameplay even when they're using their established franchises.

Chuffy
17-09-2005, 16:48
Viewtiful Joe was by Capcom and Ikaruga was by Treasure.:p



Yeah but they were still on the GC and nothing else. :p

Bubble Ghost
17-09-2005, 16:53
Except we were talking about Nintendo software.

Plus Ikaruga came out on the Dreamcast. And Viewtiful Joe came out on the PS2.:D:angel:




P.S. Does the first bit of your signature come from that "They Fight Crime!" generator by chance? If so do you know if it's still operational anywhere?

Gyulkus Chaos Saurus
17-09-2005, 17:22
@alterion and unseeing eye-thanks u guys! summed up everything i wanted to say perfectly!
@all the people who say it will tire out your arm- WTF ARE U ON?! YOU JUST HAVE TO MOVE YOUR WRIST! so you guys will play DDR for a month and lose 20 lbs, but u wont move your wrist?

Mouldsta
17-09-2005, 17:45
My initial thoughts when I saw it was "WTF? It's a TV remote", but then i sat down and thought about it, and it has the potential to be very good.

Think about it, what makes PC FPS's better than console shooters? The fact that you have a mouse and with a flick of the wrist can place your reticle over exactly over the place you want it - no wrangling with thumbsticks that have left, slightly left and centre as their only option. Instead by using a larger part of your body than your thumb you have more control over it.
What's the best thing about console game? The fact that you have a joystick to move (moving requires a lot less accuracy than aiming), and all the buttons are right under your fingers - no more bending your fingers backwards to reach CTRL to duck, or wondering which button you assigned to swim up.

The Rev combines these two best things together - more control over aiming, with ease of movement.

I must say though Yodhrin, some of your arguments I find a bit weird - do you drop your controller a lot? I never had to take into consideration what happens when I drop the controller due to the simple fact that I can manage to hold onto it.

Being distracted and pointing off screen might be a minor issue, but being distracted tends to lead to bad things anyway. I might be in the minority, but I tend to turn my head to see something, not my whole body.

As for "flailing your arms" around, try sitting on your sofa and pointing your TV remote at each corner of the screen - unless you have a 40ft TV screen, then you can do this with a simple flick of the wrist. Similarly, a "slash" from one corner to another requires no more movement than you would if you were using a PC mouse.
I don't think you'd have to sit with it held at arms length either, you can comfortably use it from your lap as long as it's pointing at the screen. I don't hold the TV remote at arms length, so i don't see why I would for the Rev controller.

As for getting muscle strain, if you get muscle strain from moving your wrist, you probably shouldn't be playing video games anyway. I don't see why it would be any worse than using a PC mouse.

Cheesejoff
17-09-2005, 17:53
Thats a fair point, but they are making games which are taking advantage of the remote, suc as sword-fighting games where you use slash the remote like a sword, etc. You are right, it may not improve your gaming experience now, but it will in the future when they make games to take advantage of it.

alterion
17-09-2005, 18:24
i consider myself warned brim.. but you should know by now my spelling is appaling.. i did have a discalimer in my sig about it but i had to remove it to make way for bunny 2.0

Chuffy
17-09-2005, 20:18
Except we were talking about Nintendo software.

Plus Ikaruga came out on the Dreamcast. And Viewtiful Joe came out on the PS2.:D:angel:




P.S. Does the first bit of your signature come from that "They Fight Crime!" generator by chance? If so do you know if it's still operational anywhere?

Damn your logic.

The first bit from my sig doesn't come from any sort of generator. It's a parody of cop films with a grizzled hardball detective/John McClane type character.

I'd suggest google if you cant find it.

Tom
17-09-2005, 21:05
Actually, there is something wrong with the current system: It is worryingly hard to aim compared to PC. You have to fiddle with analogue sticks all day long just to get in the right area if your co-oridnation, like mine, isn't perfect.

This is point-and-click gunplay. This is essentially mouse aiming on a console.

That's why it's not innovation for innovation's sake


That and if it vibrates women WILL be picking it up, I assure you.

Unseeing Eye
17-09-2005, 21:26
People are a bit hectic here, is this a real revolution? :p

Anyway, in response to the "flailing" comment. You might as well say a mouse is crazy, you have to drive the damn thing all over your desk. The promo video looks very exagerated, as previously said it looks like everything will just be a flick of the wrist or some such. I read somewhere (a mystical land?) that the controller is designed to be used with your elbows resting on something to provide stability.

There are two things that really excite me here, however. Currently, RTS games are pretty much non existant on the console, and FPS games kinda suck as they're hard to control. As already pointed out, this makes FPS games a lot more accurate and easy (though 'shaky hands' and distractions will have to be dealt with somehow...lets wait and see). But think, RTS games! Simply put a little icon where you are pointing on the screen and bam, its like a mouse. You can click the mini-map easily to move around, press lots of build buttons, and most importantly CLICK AND DRAG. This is the most important control needed for a Real Time Strategy game. You could use the other buttons as say, squad selection.

Face it, RTS on the console does not work right now. Remember Starcraft on the N64? That was an example of Nintendo trying something new and failing horribly. Thats one problem this new controller directly remedies.

Zark the Damned
17-09-2005, 23:52
When I first saw the controller I was all 'OMG WTF were they thinking?'

But then I calmed down a bit, and realised 'actually, it's a pretty damn good idea'.

It'll take a while to get used to, but the concepts pretty damn cool. I just hope they go with the recharge-dock option and not seperate batteries.

Spacemunkie
18-09-2005, 01:32
And you'll still be able to stick a more traditional pad in the port too if you are a total Luddite.... :D

TomKamakazi
18-09-2005, 05:23
Worried about your arms getting tired?
I'm sure there is a joke about "hard core" gamers and their already well muscled wrists... But I'm not going there... That would be crass :)

fredmundo
18-09-2005, 13:08
Well it hasn't changed my choice of console IF I'm to be buying one, it has to be the PS3 for me. I love Nintendo, but never seem to think thay have got it right (I haven't tried a DS yet though!) since Mariokart and Streetfighter II Turbo on the SNES, from there on in it's been down hill.
Having said that they do have a great approach to thier style of games which I love, so many crazy Japanese only games which are really fun to play is also the bonus of nintendo. Nintendo's Revolution looks really stylish but I just hope that the pad looks doesn't condem it to being know as a bit of a Betamax. The fact that you can use it like a light gun the idea to measure the tilt etc of the pad is really very cool though. I suppose only time will tell....I want it to be a hit though.

Inquisitor Engel
18-09-2005, 14:08
In my opinion, this controller has definitely put me off getting a Revolution.

Revolutionary? Yes.
Smart? Yes.
A good idea? Probably not.

Even with the little plug in analog stick (with triggers) I still don't think I'll ever feel comfortable with this control. Playing third person adventures like Zelda is going to be an extreme hassle, and what about the backwards compatability of the Revolution?

How am I supposed to play all those old games on it, the ones I can download?

Hopefully the ports in the back will allow for Gamecube controllers. I'll be using a Wavebird, and that's if I end up getting the thing.

I think this may well be Nintendo's last gasp. :(

TomKamakazi
18-09-2005, 14:19
How am I supposed to play all those old games on it, the ones I can download?



Did you even read the article? You turn the controller on its side and it's virtually the same as an original NES controller.

Also, I direct you to:


Of course if you want, Just dispense with the tilting altogether and ram another controller on its ****. (http://cubemedia.ign.com/cube/image/article/651/651559/understanding-the-revolution-controller-20050916041026412-000.jpg) Also available in SNES and N64.

Bubble Ghost
18-09-2005, 14:30
I reckon what they need is a killer FPS at launch. Not a something as adventure-orientated as Metroid; an actual shoot 'em up, that takes advantage of the control device and that they can demonstrate in gaming stores to really sell people on their console, doing for it what Halo did for the Xbox. I think the presence or absence of single must-have, non-cute title to really demonstrate the advantages (or not, as the case may turn out to be) of their controller will be what decides the console's fate. But given Nintendo's history of launch titles, all we'll probably get is an ingenious Mario title that will be acclaimed by critics but roundly ignored by bloodthirsty players, a couple of hastily programmed and non-exclusive EA efforts, and a surreal concept game by Sega or Konami in which you conduct an orchestra using the controller or something.

Ho hum.

Gyulkus Chaos Saurus
18-09-2005, 15:00
@inquisitor engel-why would playing zelda be an extreme hassle? i think it would be cool, use the control stick and the face buttons to walk around/jump/use items etc, and then when you get close to enemies,you could lock on and swing the revolution controller to slash and stab(not actually swing, just flick your wrist). and using a bow u could go int 1st person and aim with the controller.

The Dragon Reborn
18-09-2005, 23:00
IF YOU DONT LIKE IT, THEN YOU CAN STILL USE A NORMAL CONTROLLER

anyway, I have always been a nintendo fan, I own every system and the only games I have for the xbox are kotr and halo, down the xbox I say up with nintendo

sony is cool to....

thegnome
19-09-2005, 09:53
I've been a longtime Nintendo consumer, so it's basically a given that I'll buy the Revolution. I've accepted that. The thing is, now I really want to; the controller has me that interested. It has the potential to be incredibly intuitive, and reports from people who have had an opportunity to test the controller are starting to confirm this. The "Nunchaku" plug-in looks to be an interesting way to play first person shooters. I don't doubt that it will immediately polarize the public upon its release, but if we give it a try, we may find that we like it. If nothing else, it will be a new way to experience the medium.

Inquisitor Engel
19-09-2005, 16:09
:eek: Gnomey posts! :eek:

Good to see you. ;)

Anyway, I quite like the option. I'm sure there are plenty of games I can have fun with the TV remote, and I'm sure I'll pickup the controller it fits into for some games as well. Of course, that depends on the pricetag. I'm not buying a $400 Xbox 360, $500 PS3 AND the Revolution if it costs more than $300.

I'm still of the opinion that it will probably not sell nearly as well as Nintendo wants it to, at least amongst the people Nintendo needs broaden their horizons to. (Older gamers who they had before Sony came along) I'm sure parents will buy it for their kids, but I'm concerned about the people who are buying it themselves is where it'll flop.

Then again, it could be the exact opposite... ;)

Snoozer
19-09-2005, 17:07
I feel we still have a few members here who don't understand how great the new controller is, so why not

try the controller (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v507/mousedown/revo.swf) your self

that's how good it will be :p

:D

Arctic Angel
20-09-2005, 14:37
Well here is the supposed current announced game list (so far) for the Revolution:

http://www.revolutionsource.com/content/view/13/30/

Animal Crossing Revolution [Confirmed to be online enabled and possible connectivity with the DS version.]

Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles Revolution

Kid Icarus Revolution

Killing Day

King Kong [Based on Peter Jackson's King Kong movie debuting in late 2005.]

Legend of Zelda Revolution

Mario Revolution

Metroid Prime 3

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

Possession [An online-enabled game where players control a leader of a mob of zombies that kill humans. Also releasing on Xbox 360 and Playstation 3.]

Super Smash Bros. Revolution [Confirmed to be an online enabled launch title.]

The Darkness

Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell 4

A new Miyamoto-signature title will premier with the launch of the revolution.


Well, that pretty much seals it for me. A Kid Icarus sequel. Not that the backwards compatibility, ability to download games from the Nes, Snes, N64 and 'cube at low prices (and talk of some of the classic games possibly getting graphic updates), inbuilt flash memory, revolutionary control (the possibilities are enormous), slick design, ORIGINAL games made by Nintendo and the online capability hadn't already done so. Not to mention the non too pocket-friendly pricing of the XBOX 360.

Bubble Ghost
20-09-2005, 14:57
I'm starting to head that way as well. Despite having been a big fan of Nintendo's stuff ever since the NES I was a bit lukewarm on the Revolution, having witnessed the total apathy that third party developers treated the Gamecube with. But I think I can see a shaft of light penetrating the clouds over Kyoto...

Who the hell was I kidding? It was only ever going to take one Zelda or Metroid game to make me buy the new Nintendo console anyway, dammit.


On another note: A The Darkness game? Truly, the mind boggles.:D

fredmundo
20-09-2005, 19:31
Possesion also looks too cool, there a nice look at it on IGN.com, i think it's abouthe only game I've seem for next Gen consoles that would make me want to by another...
I skipped out on the last batch, no killer app for any of them for me.
(I play FPS mainly, and why do I need anything other than CS source and BF2!)

Inquisitor Engel
20-09-2005, 20:42
Not to mention the non too pocket-friendly pricing of the XBOX 360.

$300 fore base and $400 for something like $550 worth of box and accessories? Sign me up.

I'm more worried about the rumoured $500 price tag of the PS3 and its "Kangaroo hunting" controllers.

Unseeing Eye
20-09-2005, 21:10
Arctic Angel--thats the most awesome lineup Nintendo has ever had. Splinter Cell 4 and King Kong, finally some more mature FPS games.

Zark the Damned
20-09-2005, 21:20
I'll probably get the Revolution for Smash Brothers alone, never mind the other great titles.

Jet
20-09-2005, 21:34
Indeed, Smash Brothers and Animal Crossing online will be perfect if they work suitably efficiently over the net.

Snoozer
21-09-2005, 18:14
I guess some of you have probably read this already (it was posted in today's penny arcade news post), but I found it very interesting.

it's about the gaming industry and why nintendo did what it did with the controller:

http://lostgarden.com/2005/09/nintendos-genre-innovation-strategy.html

:D

Bubble Ghost
22-09-2005, 16:11
Wow, that was a really good article. Made me feel positively stupid just reading it.

There was an interesting point I hadn't yet considered on Gamecentral (channel 4 teletext p.375) yesterday about the Revolution's controller design. They said that while Nintendo and a select few other top tier developers - Capcom, Konami, Sega etc. - will be able to get the most from the device, the existence of the 'joypad simulator' rig may prove to be a cop-out for less able developers, and the system will end up underused - perhaps it migh put off some developers from even attempting Revolution games. Which would almost certainly mean the failure of the Revolution. It may come down to whether big-name PC developers get on board and buoy the thing up while everyone's still getting to grips with it, inspired by the controller to port their mouse-dependent expertise.

johnblund
22-09-2005, 16:58
I have big expectations on the revolution controller.
If they came up with something as crazy as this then imagine the extensions to the controller. Only two have been revealed yet (the joystick and the "shell" in which you insert the controller to make it look and work like a traditional controller).

me like :)