Iwata on Nintendo Revolution

[thundermonkey]

Ehhh, that strategy didn't help them with the Gamecube, did it?

The GCN was pretty much just a cheaper version of the PS2 and Xbox.

The Rev or whatever it ends up being called, is a drastic departure. This time Nintendo saying they're in a different market is actually true. I'd say if they can, they need to go as low as possible with the price. I'd say drop a market bombshell and launch at $99-$149. Comparable visuals, very cheap price, and a controller that might not scare away the norms, and Nintendo might not do that badly.

 

[Powderkeg]

The GCN was pretty much just a cheaper version of the PS2 and Xbox.

That much is true.

The Rev or whatever it ends up being called, is a drastic departure. This time Nintendo saying they're in a different market is actually true.

That's a load of PR nonsense.

It's a game console, just like the PS3 and 360. The people who buy it are console video gamers, just like the PS3 and 360. It has a different controller, but the controller alone doesn't mean it's a completely different market that it's being sold to.

I'd say if they can, they need to go as low as possible with the price. I'd say drop a market bombshell and launch at $99-$149. Comparable visuals, very cheap price, and a controller that might not scare away the norms, and Nintendo might not do that badly.

I'd say they would be bankrupt inside if 5 years if they tried. I'd say at $200, the Revolution will either be noticably less powerful than their competition, or Nintendo will lose money.

 

[thundermonkey]

That much is true.



That's a load of PR nonsense.

It's a game console, just like the PS3 and 360. The people who buy it are console video gamers, just like the PS3 and 360. It has a different controller, but the controller alone doesn't mean it's a completely different market that it's being sold to.



I'd say they would be bankrupt inside if 5 years if they tried. I'd say at $200, the Revolution will either be noticably less powerful than their competition, or Nintendo will lose money.

Bah, these are all responses I should have guessed I'd get from you.

PR nonsense? Unless the traditional controller shell is packed with the system, this console is a radical departure. Instead of hitting a button to do something you do it. Do you realize how much this can pay off for the industry if they're successful? There is no bad to this. We have the PS3 and Xbox360 for the traditional games. And we have the Rev or NES5 or whatever for the games that are different. Whether different means good is entirely up to Nintendo.

As for the price issue, name one time that Nintendo hasn't released a console on par with their competitors, or at least able to output visuals close to their competitors for a cheaper price? The GCN didn't have the fancy spec numbers of the PS2 and Xbox, and the games still look right on par with them. Some better.

Nintendo definitely has to do something. Every gen their marketshare drops, if the Rev was just another console they'd be screwed. They experiement, and change their controller because they have too. Otherwise they won't just be close 3rd, but distant 3rd next gen.

 

[Cornman]

That much is true.



That's a load of PR nonsense.

It's a game console, just like the PS3 and 360. The people who buy it are console video gamers, just like the PS3 and 360. It has a different controller, but the controller alone doesn't mean it's a completely different market that it's being sold to.



I'd say they would be bankrupt inside if 5 years if they tried. I'd say at $200, the Revolution will either be noticably less powerful than their competition, or Nintendo will lose money.

we know you hate nintendo. Its ok

 

[Cornman]

Bah, these are all responses I should have guessed I'd get from you.

PR nonsense? Unless the traditional controller shell is packed with the system, this console is a radical departure. Instead of hitting a button to do something you do it. Do you realize how much this can pay off for the industry if they're successful? There is no bad to this. We have the PS3 and Xbox360 for the traditional games. And we have the Rev or NES5 or whatever for the games that are different. Whether different means good is entirely up to Nintendo.

As for the price issue, name one time that Nintendo hasn't released a console on par with their competitors, or at least able to output visuals close to their competitors for a cheaper price? The GCN didn't have the fancy spec numbers of the PS2 and Xbox, and the games still look right on par with them. Some better.

Nintendo definitely has to do something. Every gen their marketshare drops, if the Rev was just another console they'd be screwed. They experiement, and change their controller because they have too. Otherwise they won't just be close 3rd, but distant 3rd next gen.
FUD

GCN was more powerful than PS2 and was on par with Xbox(better archetecture)

nintendo never had a underpowered console in its history.

revolution will not be underpowered coming out A YEAR after 360

 

[Powderkeg]

Bah, these are all responses I should have guessed I'd get from you.

PR nonsense? Unless the traditional controller shell is packed with the system, this console is a radical departure.

Hmm, hold controller in hand, move controller in a set pattern which results in interactivity with what is going on on the TV screen.

Sorry, that's how every video game system since pong has worked. This so-called "radical departure" isn't doing anything new or different, other than allowing a slightly different way of interacting with the controller. It's about as "radical" as the first wheel and pedals controller were.

Instead of hitting a button to do something you do it.

No, if you did it, you wouldn't ahve to hold anything. And you'll be hitting plenty of buttons, unless you can explain to me how you plan on shooting in an FPS without hitting any buttons.

Do you realize how much this can pay off for the industry if they're successful? There is no bad to this. We have the PS3 and Xbox360 for the traditional games. And we have the Rev or NES5 or whatever for the games that are different. Whether different means good is entirely up to Nintendo.

It's a controller, not the greatest thing to gaming since God. And it's very nature may alienate far more gamers than it attracts, since it alienates easy conversions of all of the games that are made for other systems.

As for the price issue, name one time that Nintendo hasn't released a console on par with their competitors, or at least able to output visuals close to their competitors for a cheaper price? The GCN didn't have the fancy spec numbers of the PS2 and Xbox, and the games still look right on par with them. Some better.

Oh, is graphics alone the only thing we can use to determine "power"? How about physics and AI while doing the top of the line graphics all at the same time. Can you name me the GCN game with the physics, AI, and graphics of something like Fotza Motorsports?

Nintendo definitely has to do something. Every gen their marketshare drops, if the Rev was just another console they'd be screwed. They experiement, and change their controller because they have too. Otherwise they won't just be close 3rd, but distant 3rd next gen.

Without significant 3rd party support, they will be a distant 3rd no matter what, and their standard controller makes porting many multiplatform games difficult. Developers can't count on people having add-ons or GCN controllers, so they have to make their games work with the standard Revolution controllers, or not bother making the game for the Revolution at all.

And historically poor 3rd party game sales on Nintendo consoles isn't going to help either.

 

[thundermonkey]

Hmm, hold controller in hand, move controller in a set pattern which results in interactivity with what is going on on the TV screen.

Sorry, that's how every video game system since pong has worked. This so-called "radical departure" isn't doing anything new or different, other than allowing a slightly different way of interacting with the controller. It's about as "radical" as the first wheel and pedals controller were.

One-handed controller, tilt-sensitive, senses the position of the controller at any point in the room.

Yep, completely sounds like every controller on the market.

No, if you did it, you wouldn't ahve to hold anything. And you'll be hitting plenty of buttons, unless you can explain to me how you plan on shooting in an FPS without hitting any buttons.

Hitting 8 buttons and controlling two sticks, doesn't seem more natural then hitting 4 buttons, one stick and moving a controller? You move the controller to aim, unless you have limited motor function it should be easy as pie.

It's a controller, not the greatest thing to gaming since God. And it's very nature may alienate far more gamers than it attracts, since it alienates easy conversions of all of the games that are made for other systems.

Who knows, it might alienate players.

But at least it's something new. We've been gaming on these same tried and true controllers for almost 20 years now, different incarnations, more sticks and buttons, and along the way the industry has lost it's ability to get everyone involved. My grandmother could play Tetris on the GameBoy, D-pad and two buttons. You put an Xbox controller in front of her to play Tetris now and she's intimidated.

Whether or not people "get" the controller, at least someone is trying to fix a problem in this industry. If they are successful then everyone's happier. Games sell to more people, Nintendo stays in the market, the industry grows. If it doesn't work then Nintendo will probably be hurt pretty badly. Might go handheld only.

Oh, is graphics alone the only thing we can use to determine "power"? How about physics and AI while doing the top of the line graphics all at the same time. Can you name me the GCN game with the physics, AI, and graphics of something like Fotza Motorsports?

Can't because massively powered CPU's never seem to be Nintendo's interest. The Genesis came out years earlier and had a more powerful CPU then the SNES.

Each company has different things they want to showcase in their consoles. This might not give people advanced AI routines, or amazing physics, but again that really doesn't seem to be Nintendo's intent.

Without significant 3rd party support, they will be a distant 3rd no matter what, and their standard controller makes porting many multiplatform games difficult. Developers can't count on people having add-ons or GCN controllers, so they have to make their games work with the standard Revolution controllers, or not bother making the game for the Revolution at all.

And historically poor 3rd party game sales on Nintendo consoles isn't going to help either.

Yeah, but as with every gen, it's a clean slate.

Big name devs get in on the ground of nearly every console. Ubi-Soft has announced support for the Rev, EA has, Konami, Namco, Capcom, Koei, hell even Gearbox has interest in the thing, so the console can't be all bad considering Gearbox has no history at all with Nintendo.

I'm not trying to change your opinion on the matter, since Nintendo and you seem about as compatible as Urine and breast-milk, but it's not doom and gloom for the company. They've been trying to set themselves apart from Sony and MS, and the fact that games can't be accurately reproduced from the Rev to PS3/X360 or vice versa Nintendo has set themselves apart. For better or for worse.

 

[Powderkeg]

One-handed controller, tilt-sensitive, senses the position of the controller at any point in the room.

Yep, completely sounds like every controller on the market.

Up, down, left, right, forward, back. Oh, that sounds like a radical departure from now.

Hitting 8 buttons and controlling two sticks, doesn't seem more natural then hitting 4 buttons, one stick and moving a controller? You move the controller to aim, unless you have limited motor function it should be easy as pie.

You said I did it, and you said I could do it without hitting buttons. Now you say I have to move the controller, move a thumbstick, and I do have to hit buttons.

Who knows, it might alienate players.

But at least it's something new. We've been gaming on these same tried and true controllers for almost 20 years now, different incarnations, more sticks and buttons, and along the way the industry has lost it's ability to get everyone involved.

That's 20 years of development and refinment to find the best possible comprimise between functionality and usablility.

My grandmother could play Tetris on the GameBoy, D-pad and two buttons. You put an Xbox controller in front of her to play Tetris now and she's intimidated.

That's nice. Now, load up a driving sim and tell me if a drving game enthusiast would be more comfortable with the Revolution controller or a wheel and pedals controller.

A gamepad has to work for a wide variety of games. If your controller is cutting out some of those options, then it's cutting out some of your potential customers.

Now, I don't fault Nintendo for trying something different, but I wouldn't make the leap that the controller would be more important than the selection of games for the system. The controller may very well limit quite a few games that were designed around the standard gamepad, and that cannot be seen as anything but bad for Nintendo and gamers alike.

Each company has different things they want to showcase in their consoles. This might not give people advanced AI routines, or amazing physics, but again that really doesn't seem to be Nintendo's intent.

I will readily agree with that, and I think that CPU power is something Nintendo could easily sacrifice. RAM is the other, although again, these may prevent a few games from making it to the Revolution.

Yeah, but as with every gen, it's a clean slate.

It's never a clean slate. If it was, no one would choose the PS3 over the 360, since it's obvious that the 360 will have the larger usebase for at least the first year or so.

Big name devs get in on the ground of nearly every console. Ubi-Soft has announced support for the Rev, EA has, Konami, Namco, Capcom, Koei, hell even Gearbox has interest in the thing, so the console can't be all bad considering Gearbox has no history at all with Nintendo.

Espressing interest does not equate making games. Care to name specific games that have been announced?

I'm not trying to change your opinion on the matter, since Nintendo and you seem about as compatible as Urine and breast-milk, but it's not doom and gloom for the company. They've been trying to set themselves apart from Sony and MS, and the fact that games can't be accurately reproduced from the Rev to PS3/X360 or vice versa Nintendo has set themselves apart. For better or for worse.

I'll agree with that.

My point is I believe the market for existing game types is far larger than the market for games that are significantly different than what established gamers are used to.

For better or worse, there is an established fan base of over 120 million Xbox/PS2 owners that seem quite happy with the gamepad and existing gametypes. I don't believe the market for Nintendo's controller is larger than that.

 

[Sonic]

Cornman, this is your only chance to improve your posting. Do not continue to troll this board or you will be banned for two weeks.

 

[thundermonkey]

Bah, I guess this isn't going to go anywhere Powderkeg.

We both have entirely different views on what we define as an altogether change. I truly do think given the right amount of thought devs will be able to use this controller for some truly interesting things. And to me this controller could breed a new series of games that allow for much more interesting interactivity then just pressing a button.

I've got a great series of ideas for my little action game that will take full advantage of the controller. When I get one of these studios to start listening to me!!!

Damnit I've got a story written, characters designed, and began working on a game design document start paying attention! I don't want to have to do it all for them to notice!

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The Rev or whatever it ends up being called, is a drastic departure. This time Nintendo saying they're in a different market is actually true. That's a load of PR nonsense.

It's a game console, just like the PS3 and 360. The people who buy it are console video gamers, just like the PS3 and 360. It has a different controller, but the controller alone doesn't mean it's a completely different market that it's being sold to.

I think this is an unknown. Will Rev just be bought up by the existing gaming sector, or will non-gamers be attracted to it? Nintendo are betting on the latter, much the same as with DS. I dunno how it'll work. I was (and still am) rather skeptical that traditional non-gamers find DS's stylus appealing enough to buy a handheld, but Nintendogs has shown that's at least true with some of the right software. I think it'll befall their software and marketting combined strategy. If they can find games casuals want to play, and market the console as such, they may well be targetting a different audience to the traditional gamers who are buying XB360/PS3s.

 

[mckmas8808]

I was (and still am) rather skeptical that traditional non-gamers find DS's stylus appealing enough to buy a handheld, but Nintendogs has shown that's at least true with some of the right software. I think it'll befall their software and marketting combined strategy.

And still till this day I'm not sure how many non-gamers are buying Nintendogs. Isn't it possible that the same gamers that liked Mario and other cute Nintendo games also like Nintendogs? Why is it that just because it's different all of a sudden it must be the non-gamers that are buying that game. Now Brain Training is another story.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

From what I've heard a large female contigent is buying into Nintendogs. I don't think anywhere keeps tabs on gender of purchases though, so there's no way to know. Could just be the application that's getting existing GBA owners to upgrade.

 

[StefanS]

From what I've heard a large female contigent is buying into Nintendogs. I don't think anywhere keeps tabs on gender of purchases though, so there's no way to know. Could just be the application that's getting existing GBA owners to upgrade.

I remember reading that the precentage of female NDS buyers was particularly high in Japan (Nintendogs, Electroplankton etc.). It might have been a Nintendo PR, but I am not sure.

 

[Powderkeg]

I think this is an unknown. Will Rev just be bought up by the existing gaming sector, or will non-gamers be attracted to it?

The vast majority of non-gamers aren't even interested in trying the Revolution, mostly becaus3e they are non-gamers and simply don't give a crap.

My wife is a classic "non-gamer" I showed her a picture of the Revolution controller and she simply said "That looks stupid" I tried to describe how it worked to her, and her reaction was "Why are you telling me this, you know I don't like video games."

I don't think very many people who don't like, or are not interested in video gaming are suddenly going to change their mind because they see a new controller that looks like a TV remote.

Nintendo are betting on the latter, much the same as with DS. I dunno how it'll work. I was (and still am) rather skeptical that traditional non-gamers find DS's stylus appealing enough to buy a handheld, but Nintendogs has shown that's at least true with some of the right software. I think it'll befall their software and marketting combined strategy. If they can find games casuals want to play, and market the console as such, they may well be targetting a different audience to the traditional gamers who are buying XB360/PS3s.

And therein lies the problem. The casuals want to play games like the ones found on the PS2. This is why the PS2 outsold everyone else by 5:1. For Nintendo to really attract the casuals, they will need to go head to head with Sony and MS, which is something they don't seem to be willing to do.

 

[Ragemare]

I predict that Revolution will sell to hardcore PC fans as well.

I know I want one, I'v already got a PC for my FPS's and simulation games. However my PC doesn't have a funcky controller and I can't get multiple people to play on it very easily. I want a cheap console with simple, fun and novel games. Revolution seems to be just that.

Also that isn't just what I think, alot of PC gamers have expressed an interest in Revolution, but little or none in the other consoles. I think alot of people who left gameing because it was too deep and involveing will come back by buying Rev as well.

It's not just about the controller either, I was considering getting a Revolution before the controller was annouced. I'm not sure if the general non-gameing public will take to it, but their's a fair chance.

Up, down, left, right, forward, back. Oh, that sounds like a radical departure from now.

In 3D space it's pretty difficult to get anything different. His point is you create these motions by moveing/aiming your hand instead of pressing one or two of four seperate buttons or by moveing a thumb stick.

Now, load up a driving sim and tell me if a drving game enthusiast would be more comfortable with the Revolution controller or a wheel and pedals controller.

Now, load up a driving sim and tell me if a driving game enthusiast would be more comfortable with the Xbox360 controller or a wheel and pedals controller.

How do you know Revolutions controller will be any more or less capable playing of playing a raceing sim than a Xbox360/PS3 game pad? There's no evidense to suggest it will be any better or worse, but quite frankly it doesn't matter becasue that may not even be the type of game which will be made for Rev.

Rev's games will suit it's controller, that may cut down on the number of 3rd party games ported to it, it may not. It doesn't actually matter, what people are saying is Rev will be peoples secondary platform, so porting a game from PS3/Xbox360/PC to Rev will be a bit pointless when people have already bought it for another platform they own.

 

[Powderkeg]

In 3D space it's pretty difficult to get anything different. His point is you create these motions by moveing/aiming your hand instead of pressing one or two of four seperate buttons or by moveing a thumb stick.

Meh, you move your hand with a joystick. You move your hand the same directions to make the same inputs with the Revolution. The only real difference is the bottom half of the joystick is removed on the Revolution.

Now, load up a driving sim and tell me if a driving game enthusiast would be more comfortable with the Xbox360 controller or a wheel and pedals controller.

Wheel/pedals first, 360 gamepad second choice.

Sorry, but I've got to give the nod to the analog triggers, which simulate a gas and brake pedal far better than sticking your arm farther forward or pulling it back would. And the analog triggers are better than digital buttons as well.

How do you know Revolutions controller will be any more or less capable playing of playing a raceing sim than a Xbox360/PS3 game pad? There's no evidense to suggest it will be any better or worse, but quite frankly it doesn't matter becasue that may not even be the type of game which will be made for Rev.

Less capable? I didn't say it was. Less natural should be obvious. The Revolution doesn't ahve anything that would give a good simulation of gas and brake pedals.

And if it doesn't have that type of game, that is bad. The Gran Turismo series alone has sold over 40 million copies. Not producing games for that large of a group of gamers would not earn Nintendo a first place next-gen.

Rev's games will suit it's controller, that may cut down on the number of 3rd party games ported to it, it may not. It doesn't actually matter, what people are saying is Rev will be peoples secondary platform, so porting a game from PS3/Xbox360/PC to Rev will be a bit pointless when people have already bought it for another platform they own.

That's not what the original article said. It claimed Nintendo was shooting for the #1 spot. IMO, this ain't the way to get there.

 

[Mefisutoferesu]

You know... ... I just thought of something... ... SOul Calibur would be INSANE of the revolution. High Low left right up back defend High Low Low High. (Z1 + High) = charge then Jab. You could do a sword fighting game that actually mimics proper sword fighting all 9 zones could be properly expressed, and Oh My Sweet God! I pray they make SOul Calibur for the Revolution. Sorry, got a little excited, but I just thought I should say I could see a game like Soul Calibur being vary good on rev. Charges and leaps could be defered to Z1 and 2 and weapon swings could be tied to the remots. Or perhaps A could be charge... hold A plus say move the remote back (-z) and then pick a zone and slash or stab.

 

[Qroach]

To be honest, nintendo isn't aiming for # 1. They are simply trying to maintaint the home console market share they have. This came from a friend of mine (a game designer) working closely with nintendo of Japan. I grew up with this guy and I treat him as family, we dreamed of working in video games our entire lives, and he's made it big (i'm too stubborn to move out there). I mean he's had compliments from Miyamoto himself. I've mentioned who he was in the past and what game he was working on, so you'll have to dig that info up if that's what you are planning to ask.

Anyway back to some things he told me. he's flying to Japan in a few weeks to discuss how they will utilize the revoloution controller in their next game. He gave me a call on saturday and we started talking about nintendo... he said niintendo fully expects to lose some developer support with revoloution. They think they can reach some new audiences, but they expect companies like EA and their sports titles to not be on the platform due to the controller (even though technically you can still use a game cube controller.). Multiplatform games simply won't be working for nintendo. It's a risk they are willing to take it seems...

 

[Powderkeg]

You know... ... I just thought of something... ... SOul Calibur would be INSANE of the revolution. High Low left right up back defend High Low Low High. (Z1 + High) = charge then Jab. You could do a sword fighting game that actually mimics proper sword fighting all 9 zones could be properly expressed, and Oh My Sweet God! I pray they make SOul Calibur for the Revolution. Sorry, got a little excited, but I just thought I should say I could see a game like Soul Calibur being vary good on rev. Charges and leaps could be defered to Z1 and 2 and weapon swings could be tied to the remots. Or perhaps A could be charge... hold A plus say move the remote back (-z) and then pick a zone and slash or stab.

If you have a DC, you can play Soul Calibur with the fishing rod controller, which will seem very much like the Revolution controller.