Nintendo Revolution Controller Revealed

[Nick Laslett]

What annoys me is the "whole Nintendo invents a new controller thing!".

It was the same with the Touch screen on the DS. You would think there had never been touch screens before. Oh and you can use the mike to give commands in Nintendogs, please like thats not been done before.

These are not innovations. They are applications of exisiting techniques.

A fancy 6 direction Remote will be very interesting and for games designed around it a fun rewarding experience. But lets not get things out of perspective. It is not the control device that is holding back gaming and never has been.

When I got my first Pong game in the mid-seventies it came with a paddle. This was the perfect control device for this game and no mouse, d-pad, gyro-thing or analogue stick was going to improve on the Paddle for playing Pong.

But the take-up of this pong game was fairly limited. People also got tired of the system and put it in their attics. The cartridge system with new games helped keep people interested for longer and there was even a joypad. But what really drove gaming forward into a mainstream entertainment activity it is today was 3D and the development of compelling game worlds, ie GRAPHICS. The evolution of the control device had very little to do with this. Not even the anlogue stick was required as demonstrated by the 5 years of the PSOne.

Continued improvement in graphics as well as better AI, realistic physics, persistant worlds, destructable environments. These are the things that are going to drive the industry forward and keep us all playing games. Nintendo are going down evolutionary cul-du-sac. They think a better game of Pong is what we want.

I have an Eyetoy, two dancemats, two singstar mics, two lightguns, a steering wheel, a headset, a set of maracas and DJ mixing-Deck. And each of these has made the respective games they were designed for much more fun.

But I'd much prefer to have the next Zelda with traditional controls and use voice actors, have amazing graphics, realistic physics, destructable environments, be a persistant world and AI that wasn't just a set of scripted events. If Nintendo decided that the Remote was more important than that, then I am very sad and believe that they want gaming to go somewhere I do not.

 

[emerge]

> Continued improvement in graphics as well as better AI, realistic physics, persistant worlds,
> destructable environments. These are the things that are going to drive the industry
> forward and keep us all playing games. Nintendo are going down evolutionary cul-du-sac.
> They think a better game of Pong is what we want.

You speak only for yourself. I don't care wheter physics are modeled down to every drop of water or whether a footstep I left in the sand on the beach of a locale is still there if i return to the game the next. Better graphics is certainly not what has driven me to play games recently. It were new gameplay experiences that sometimes just happened to have better graphics because technology is evolving. I play games from the 16bit and 32bit era now for the first time and am having a lot of fun - and certainly not because of the sophisticated tech. Maybe a better game of pong is what many people really want.

 

[Mr. Saturn]

So much ignorance & bias against Nintendo here, clearly not much thought nor much background reading has gone into this. (Power Glove?) Clearly all software will not use all of the controller's potential possibilities (ala the DS) & let's completely gloss over the fact that it can be slid into other more traditional controller peripherals to become more standardized. If having a real-time internet swordfight doesn't excite you, or swinging at real opponents' pitches, you're either too obese or lazy, or simply not a real gamer.

Real developers chime in:



http://cube.ign.com/articles/651/651304p1.html

As far as fps are concerned, direct impressions from 1UP:



Precision aiming:



Flight-based game possibilities:



http://gamecube.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3143782

Of course Nintendo is still refining it's control, but the possibilities have been demonstrated here nonetheless. Notice the lack of negativity in impressions from those who actually demoed the controller as opposed to you viewing an exaggerated commercial made for the purposes of exhibiting its many innovative gameplay aspects imo. You must surely realize that all games will not require such intense movements. I quoted heavily for those too lazy to read. If it mimics keyboard/mouse control as closely as indicated, (with added functionality) fpsers will be pure heaven. If you skeptics had any imagination whatsoever, you would see what this could do/add to many existing genres.

That sounds great and all but I want to see some damn games being used with the system and I want to know if the Revolution will at least be comparable with the 360 and PS3 in terms of graphics. Hey Bai I'm just wondering do you know if we'll get to see Revolution demos soon or will we have to wait till E3 '06.

 

[JasonLD]

What annoys me is the "whole Nintendo invents a new controller thing!".

It was the same with the Touch screen on the DS. You would think there had never been touch screens before. Oh and you can use the mike to give commands in Nintendogs, please like thats not been done before.

These are not innovations. They are applications of exisiting techniques.

A fancy 6 direction Remote will be very interesting and for games designed around it a fun rewarding experience. But lets not get things out of perspective. It is not the control device that is holding back gaming and never has been.

When I got my first Pong game in the mid-seventies it came with a paddle. This was the perfect control device for this game and no mouse, d-pad, gyro-thing or analogue stick was going to improve on the Paddle for playing Pong.

But the take-up of this pong game was fairly limited. People also got tired of the system and put it in their attics. The cartridge system with new games helped keep people interested for longer and there was even a joypad. But what really drove gaming forward into a mainstream entertainment activity it is today was 3D and the development of compelling game worlds, ie GRAPHICS. The evolution of the control device had very little to do with this. Not even the anlogue stick was required as demonstrated by the 5 years of the PSOne.

Continued improvement in graphics as well as better AI, realistic physics, persistant worlds, destructable environments. These are the things that are going to drive the industry forward and keep us all playing games. Nintendo are going down evolutionary cul-du-sac. They think a better game of Pong is what we want.

I have an Eyetoy, two dancemats, two singstar mics, two lightguns, a steering wheel, a headset, a set of maracas and DJ mixing-Deck. And each of these has made the respective games they were designed for much more fun.

But I'd much prefer to have the next Zelda with traditional controls and use voice actors, have amazing graphics, realistic physics, destructable environments, be a persistant world and AI that wasn't just a set of scripted events. If Nintendo decided that the Remote was more important than that, then I am very sad and believe that they want gaming to go somewhere I do not.

Sure, they are applications of "existing technologies", but has "existing technologies" applied in games to the degree that Nintendo is trying to come up with Revolution? I really don't think so. Graphics and realistic physics are important, but lets not say Revolution is not capable of having amazing graphics and physics...I am sure all three consoles are pretty capable of handling all that....but aside from that, as long as control remains the same...whole gameplay experience won't be that much different. It is not unual to see that people are getting wowed with all those beautiful graphics and realistic movements but just like every generational changes...when we get used to seeing those kind of graphics, it is going to be all same.
Is PGR3 any different from racing games we used to see during PSone, N64 days? besides its ultra fancy graphics? Or is upcoming Tekken will be any different from Tekken 1 from PSone days? I really don't think so. As long as controller remains same, the way we interact with games will not be much different....we will basically be looking at fancier looking same games every generation over and over again.
What Nintendo is coming up with Revolution has potential to change total game experience that hasn't really changed for last 15 years...I think what Nintendo is doing with Revolution is lot more important and revolutionary than anything Sony or MS is coming up with.

 

[Pete]

The video shows a lot of interesting applications. I'm psyched.

Now, Dave, where's the Nintendo message icon?

 

[KimB]

Continued improvement in graphics as well as better AI, realistic physics, persistant worlds, destructable environments. These are the things that are going to drive the industry forward and keep us all playing games. Nintendo are going down evolutionary cul-du-sac. They think a better game of Pong is what we want.

No, don't you see? You've hit the nail on the head as to exactly why Nintendo is doing this! Pong had its control scheme. That control scheme was tied very closely with that game, and was not good for other games. Different control schemes will lend themselves to different games.

Consider, for a moment, that PC games and console games are still quite different, most of the time. This is mostly because of the control interfaces (since consoles are now getting high resolution, internet connectivity, and storage, controls are about the only thing left that PC's have that is unique).

Graphics were already at the point that nobody much cared about improvements back when the PS2 was released. This was pointed out most explicitly by the fact that the PS2 did so well. Better graphics will come with the next-gen consoles, people will say, "Oh, cool!" and then they'll start playing the games....and that is what will matter, the games.

And the new control interfaces will allow new ways to interact with games, and thus will allow for new types of games. That's going to set Nintendo apart, and if they're successful (which requires mostly that the control system is implemented fantastically), then everybody else is going to copy them.

 

[ERP]

At the risk of inciting a riot, it looks to me like the controller was designed more for web browsing on a TV and possibly doing versions of DS stylus games. Rather than for mainstream game playing. It will likely be the best browser interface available outside a PC and maybe that's how they intend to pull in the more casual "gameplayers"?

I'll probably buy one because Nintendo will release at least one must have game for the system, but I have to wonder if they're just not simply trying to distance themselves from the competition.

 

[KimB]

Well, we'll see. I do know that Nintendo has been first with a lot of innovations on console controllers, and since this control setup is the first I've seen for a console that might actually rival a mouse/keyboard setup (though the number of buttons seems rather disappointing), I'm inclined to give it the benefit of the doubt.

One would hope that Nintendo is playtesting the hell out of this thing, though, which will hopefully mean that most of the fears expressed in this thread are completely unfounded.

 

[dukmahsik]

not buying a revolution

 

[hughJ]

After seeing the promo video.. got to admit that it looks exciting the way they show it. But then I remembered the Nintendo ads that showed the powerglove with the kid doing this huge jumping punch to deliver a KO in Punchout. It may pan out, it may not.. but forming any kind of conclusions based on a commercial is probably a bad idea.

The first thing I thought of when I saw the TV remote-style control was the Phillips CD-I.

 

[clem64]

There's really no way at this point to see how good or bad the REV controller really is. It's just too early. To me the good:

- it's a different way to play games. At rhe risk of sounding like a nintendo PR exec., I've been playing my games with dpads sticks and buttons for 20 years, but this is different. I'm all for that.

- Everything that has to do with the remote's functions (Camera control, pointing, selecting, etc...) really does seem like it will be made simpler and more intuitive. That's how it seems anyway.

The bad:

- I'm not convinced I'll want to keep my arm(s) up in the air for hours at a time.
- for several reasons, I have a feeling the library of games won't be that big, at least compared to 360 and PS3.

For me it depends if what we've seen in that trailer is really the kind of games we can expect. if it is, then cool.. sign me up. If it's not I'm afraid it'll turn into another DS. Plenty of potential but very few games that make use of it.

 

[DEO3]

Nintendo is attempting to invent a "one size fits all" controller, which I predict will fail brilliantly 95% of the time, but will come away with a few breakway hits.

Eh, I'd argue the exact opposite. Nintendo is offering something which can be used in a lot more ways than PS3/X360 controllers.

 

[Teasy]

- I'm not convinced I'll want to keep my arm(s) up in the air for hours at a time.

That's not even an issue, you don't need yo keep your arms up at all. You can rest it on your knee like any other controller and still use it effectively.

Nintendo is attempting to invent a "one size fits all" controller, which I predict will fail brilliantly 95% of the time, but will come away with a few breakway hits.

With respect you don't know what your talking about. Nintendo are offering completely the opposite of the one size fits all controllers being offered by Sony and MS:

Nice controller, I especially like the fact that they've replaced the little c-stick with a full size second analog stick.

 

[DEO3]

Most smaller developers work on shoestring budgets as it is, can they really afford the gamble of supporting this heavily and losing the possibility of going multiplatform with their game?

Can they really aford not to? I mean what's going to be the average budget for a PS3/X360 games? Nothing small developers on showstring budgets can afford.

 

[DEO3]

That's not even an issue, you don't need yo keep your arms up at all. You can rest it on your knee like any other controller and still use it effectively.

BTW I can't believe nobody has posted this yet:

http://cubemedia.ign.com/cube/image...volution-controller-20050916041026412-000.jpg

Nice controller, I especially like the fact that they've replaced the little c-stick with a full size second analog stick.

Looks akward. This isn't an official pic, is it?

 

[Powderkeg]

So what? We already have 2 consoles that will have the same 3rd party titles ported to each other, what do game makers or players have to gain from a 3rd version of the same thing?

GCN had great 3rd party support at the beginning, but this generation suffered from severe port-itis. Why would consumers care about ports...especially when the Xbox usually had the best version? The result was dwindling 3rd party support.

If anything, the Revolution requires developers to do something different, and so the third party games that do show up will offer something unique to players. I think this will boost per game sales of 3rd party titles compared to the gamecube, and this could lead to more 3rd party games.

But lets ignore all that and assume that all we will get is first party nintendo games that utilize this neat new way to interact with software. How could that possibly be considered a *bad* thing by anyone that really enjoys games?

/boggle

Just a little historical note.

The more 3rd party support Nintendo has had, the better their systems sold. Once they started losing that 3rd party support they have steadily fallen to last place.

Do you really want them to lose even more 3rd party support? Their console sales are bad enough as it is, can they even afford to lose more?

 

[Powderkeg]

Can they really aford not to? I mean what's going to be the average budget for a PS3/X360 games? Nothing small developers on showstring budgets can afford.

Sure they can afford not to.

A game on the 360 or PS3 doesn't cost more to make than the Revolution, and they could easily do a straight port from the PS3 to 360 or visa versa. If they can afford to make a game, they could make it for both the PS3 and 360, and have a massive userbase to sell it to, or they could make a Revolution exclusive game, and hope that it sells at all. Nintendo fans aren't really well known for buying 3rd party games after all.

 

[Teasy]

Looks akward. This isn't an official pic, is it?

In what way? Its the same size as a wavebird controller but with a better second analog stick. Obviously the pointer controller is sticking out by about 2 inches at the top but its totally out of the way of your hands, so why would it be awkward?

Not sure if its totally official though to be honest I hope so since I think it'd be great.

 

[DEO3]

Well, how is the DS doing in terms of 3rd party support? It seems like there's plenty of support for that platofrm, and it's just as unorthodox. Not only is it cheap and easy to develop for, but it also makes it easier for your game to really stand out.

 

[DEO3]

In what way?

Just seems like it'd be a bit top heavy.