Revolution = "paradigm shift"

[one]

http://cube.ign.com/articles/579/579499p1.html

Revolution Update
Nintendo's president says the console will represent a "paradigm shift."
By Matt Casamassina

January 13, 2005 - In an interview with the Kyoto Shimbun today, Nintendo's president Satoru Iwata said that the successor to GameCube, codenamed Revolution, would bring about a "paradigm shift."

Iwata explained that, just as Nintendo did with its recently released DS portable, it wants to create something unique with the new home platform. He indicated once more that Revolution could be a machine targeted specifically at the mainstream audience, saying that if something looks too complicated it could alienate players.

Last May, Nintendo announced that work was well underway on Revolution and that it would be unveiled in some form at the Electronics Entertainment Expo 2005. Very few specifics about the console have been released since, except for a few vague comments by Nintendo executives that it might not use a traditional controller and that it will be able to hook up to a computer monitor as well as a television.

Iwata also told the newspaper that with Revolution Nintendo wanted to create games that would move the industry forward.

"paradigm shift", uh-oh.
I won't be surprised if Revolution is turned out to be a full-fledged Linux PC...

 

[Geeforcer]

Virtual Boy II

 

[Megadrive1988]

plus 2x

plus

8)

 

[zurich]

Don't want to create something too complicated that could alienate gamers?

2 screens, touch pad, and stylus - plus a d-pad 5 buttons. Sure - that doesn't look too complicated

More meaningless hype..

 

[Teasy]

Zurich

Being able to directly touch what you want to effect in a game is hardly complicated. Its quite the opposite in fact. Also d-pad and 6 buttons is very simple compared to normal console controllers. Dual screens is not inherently complicated either.

Megadrive1988

What's that first pic supposed to be?

 

[cthellis42]

I believe this:

Something I'd completely forgotten about. ^_^

 

[Teasy]

I've got no idea what that is

 

[cthellis42]

You can look at a list of them all right here. The Uforce takes #1!

Basically, a motion-sensing controller that had limited use and worked like shit.

 

[hovz]

this console is going to flop harder than the movie alexander. nintendo has noidea what gamers really want, and even if they did they are unwilling to give it to them.

 

[Almasy]

Mmmmm....this is an interesting bet for Nintendo.

In the other thread I posted that I believed Revolution to offer an ultimately non important gimmick and that´d be it. However, I´m going to assume Nintendo does offer that differentiates its machine in a deeper level.

As I said, this inherently carries an enormous bet, and this is it: Nintendo isn´t the market leader, therefore it can´t dictate trends in game design. What is going to happen once Revolution is released, with titles that require a big shift of paradigm in gaming design to create games for it. Third parties will align with the two most succesfull console makers this generation, so, aside from Nintendo, who is going to make games for the Revolution then?

Revolution can only work if the new feature(s) is a big hit among the public, if not, the console´s life WILL be cut short very prematurely.

That is Nintendo´s big bet, if their statements about it pan out. My opinion? I doubt Nintendo has the b*lls to make their machine too different from PS3 and Xbox 2.

Nintendo just isn´t about risks.

 

[Acert93]

I think Nintendo has some valid concerns about controllers and complexity. But, they need to remember:

1) Controllers have evolved to the state they are currently to allow complex interaction with the game enviroment. Controllers were not made more complex just for the sake of complexity, they arose to this point of development because of the degree of interaction (not necessarily complexity) games have grown to include.

2) An alternative Human Input Device must WORK. It is as simple as that. While the DS touch pad is nice and all, it is not ideal (or even functional) for all game types. While no single control method will ever meet the needs of every game, making something that excells in most circumstances is important. A gimmik that half-way works is no fun, frustrating, and will turn gamers away. It needs to be a BETTER solution that the standard controller, not similar.

3) An alternative Human Input Device should not only simplifiy the control, but also give an equal or superior degree of control/input into the game.

4) An alternative Human Input Device must consider current game types (platformers, sports, FPS, RPGs, racing, etc...) and the needs of 3rd parties. If the input device alienates 3rd parties are makes their games more difficult to make/allow gamers to use them, then this will turn more 3rd parties away.

I am sure Nintendo knows all of this, but it will be interesting to see how much those 4 points influences their new design.

Oddly enough, who was it who introduced the shoulder buttons on the controller? The first time I saw them was the SNES (same goes with the 4 buttons). The SNES controller was very comfortable. Who introduced analog sticks to console controllers? Nintendo with the N64 and their comfortable 3 pronged boomerange. This also had rumble addons and the 'unique' C-buttons. I loved the N64 controller. And the GCN controller is just a dream IMO. I never realized how much so until I got a 3rd party PS2 controller recently--my small hands cramped and cramped! And my short fingers could hardly use the R2/L2 buttons (I ended up returning it and getting a smaller Pelican controller). The GCN controller is very comfortable with should triggers instead of buttons. They did begin to simplify it thought with the big middle botton... (while OT, have to mention the Wavebird in here!)

Heck, Nintendo even introduced the cross shaped digital pad!

It seems to me that Nintendo has been a MAJOR part of the increasingly complex controller! But you know what, I LOVE their controllers and the innovations they have introduced to the console market.

So history says they wont mess up... the skeptical side of me says they lay an egg. Since I enjoy the more family oriented games Nintendo creates I hope history is continued.

Personally, I think a good Headtracking/Glasses setup would be sooo simple, yet very intuitive. I know many hate the idea, but Nintendo gambled in this area before (VB). The technology is getting much closer to being affordable and I can think of how this would make games not only easier to use, but also more immersive and interactive WITHOUT complicated controls.

But I doubt it will happen.

 

[Acert93]

Nintendo just isn´t about risks.

I think recent history backs this statement. 10 years ago? I say they would have taken a risk. But then again, as you stated, being the market leaders allows such risks because you can dictate the market some.

I think the DD64 and GBA Connectivity are good examples of unique features that never took off. The DD64 was a good idea but addons just do not do well. Nintendo could barely find good uses for the Connectivity deal, let alone 3rd parties. Nintendo has a history of learning from their mistakes--sometimes slower than others, but overall they tend to come around.

The key for Nintendo is pretty simple: 3rd party support. Period.

Whether someone likes their 1st/2nd party games or not, the bottomline is they sell very well. If Nintendo can get a lot of 3rd party support their console floats. The thing that gets me is that if Nintendo has more consoles sold because their game library appeals to a large cross section of gamers their own games will sell better. The more 3rd parties who sign on EARLY the better. If Nintendo could get some early momentum with 3rd parties with Revolution that would do them well. As a consumer who has bought every console they have made I will be watching Revolution 3rd support. If it looks poor I will most likely buy another system that supports online play first and look at the Nintendo console when games/console have dropped in price.

 

[hovz]

i agree about the nintendo 64 controller. it was fucking great. they rly pushed things foward with it. they pushed alot of things forward with nintendo 64. to this day i say it was leaps and bounds better than the ps or saturn, hands down. its been all downhill from their however. gamecube is trash with boring rehash sequals that offer nothing new except graphics.

 

[Megadrive1988]

2) An alternative Human Input Device must WORK. It is as simple as that. While the DS touch pad is nice and all, it is not ideal (or even functional) for all game types. While no single control method will ever meet the needs of every game, making something that excells in most circumstances is important. A gimmik that half-way works is no fun, frustrating, and will turn gamers away. It needs to be a BETTER solution that the standard controller, not similar.

3) An alternative Human Input Device should not only simplifiy the control, but also give an equal or superior degree of control/input into the game.

4) An alternative Human Input Device must consider current game types (platformers, sports, FPS, RPGs, racing, etc...) and the needs of 3rd parties. If the input device alienates 3rd parties are makes their games more difficult to make/allow gamers to use them, then this will turn more 3rd parties away.

I am sure Nintendo knows all of this, but it will be interesting to see how much those 4 points influences their new design.

well said. agreed.

 

[see colon]

I think Nintendo has some valid concerns about controllers and complexity.

the question i'm asking myself right now is, what do sony and microsoft have planned for in the controller department. i'm quite sure sony's design won't deviate from the dual shock mold too drasticly. af for microsoft, they've made it clear already that they are moving, removing, or changing buttons for xenon.

nintendo so far seams to be concentrating on input (controller) and output (display) according to current rumors. what if the rumors are were about the some item? while i wouldn't put it past nintendo to trick people into buying [insert name of gba successor here], i could also see them integrating something in the hardware capabilities of the gba or gbc into an all in one controller. i think nintendo had big plans with connectivity but couldn't justify spending the money on it once it basicly flopped. of course that would make for one expensive controller.

i'm assumung (with the basic success of the wavebird and so far the ds) that they'll be going 100% wireless. and that would be nice. especialy if they up the "ports" to support up to at least 8 controllers. and with wavebirds costing only $5 more than the msrp of an xbox controller, i'm sure nintendo can drop to $25-30 price point by 2006.

something else that would be nifty would be multiple display support. if multiplayer multimonitor gaming done right could really change things next generation. this is basicly a "free" feature in the pc world now, so i can't see it adding too much of a premium to the cost of revolution.

there are lots of "innovations" nintendo could pull off that wouldn't be too cost prohibitive. the trick is to create a system where if your innovation fails it (the innovation) doesn't prohibit you from (or 3rd parties) from making games that can compete with the competition.

gamecube is trash with boring rehash sequals that offer nothing new except graphics.

what would that make the ps2 or the xbox?

 

[Megadrive1988]

my next question is, will Revolution offer anything that Sony and/or Microsoft could not implement into PS3/Xenon within a year or two after launch ?

 

[Acert93]

my next question is, will Revolution offer anything that Sony and/or Microsoft could not implement into PS3/Xenon within a year or two after launch ?

What a hypothetical question! My response would be, "If they could, would they want to?"

Without knowing WHAT Nintendo will do it is hard to say. If Nintendo goes a route where they (a) offer something *totally* new and unique that opens new gameplay oppurtunities, while (b) not alienating 3rd parties and traditional game genres, then it may get the attention of Sony/MS. But that is a big if. I think it would be great if Nintendo's new innovation was something totally great, but could also be a "take it or leave it" and allowed developers to stick with the traditional control scheme IF that is what would work best with their game. This goes back to the RE4 impressions thread... in some games simplified controls work great for the game, and in other games a more complex setup is required. I think the best course for any console maker is to find that fine line and make their product approachable and desirable to as many segments of the market as possible.

The only real practical point I have is this: Addons fragment a market and are in general very unsuccessful. So while the easy answer to your question is YES, almost anything Nintendo does can be implimented by Sony/MS a year or two down the line. That is the easier part. The real question is would it be worth their bother. Sony/MS would have to consider compatibility with first gen games and fragmenting their market if the "innovation" required a new "paradigm" as Nintendo claims.

And there is always the issue of the market leader conceeding that its competition has a better product/idea... and that alone is a good reason for Nintendo not to show much of Revolution at E3 in 2005. If they are releasing in fall of 2006 there is no point showing off what is "revolutionary" until after Xbox releases and PS3 is too far down the pipe to make big changes. But then again, all of this assumes what Nintendo is doing is revolutionary...

 

[one]

And there is always the issue of the market leader conceeding that its competition has a better product/idea... and that alone is a good reason for Nintendo not to show much of Revolution at E3 in 2005. If they are releasing in fall of 2006 there is no point showing off what is "revolutionary" until after Xbox releases and PS3 is too far down the pipe to make big changes. But then again, all of this assumes what Nintendo is doing is revolutionary...

Since they already clarified that their release date would be adjusted to the competitors schedule, fall 2006 is highly unlikely. Just like DS, they'll release Revolution to steal thunder from others, namely some weeks before competitors release.

If Nintendo's idea for Revolution is something like dual-screen in DS, then it's hard for others to emulate it with the same impact.

 

[V3]

I think they should make wireless controller a standard for revolution. Wireless controller, keyboard, mouse, tablet, etc.

The controller itself is rumour to have no d-pad this time. Maybe they'll have a touch pad in its place. Though I hope not, since I hate those touch pad. Maybe they'll just have a start button in the d-pad area like how they plan it for Gamecube, before they succumb to developers pressure.

What ever it is, I hope they make the controller bigger than Gamecube's.

They should really push surround gaming IMO. If it can support 3 screens out of the box, it'll be great. Flat panel will be dirt cheap, in the next few years. Peripheral would do.

A tablet like device, something cheap like Cintiq would be great too.

Network and Hard Disk out of the box should be a standard too.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Yes! Surround gaming!
Screens on the side and back. With 5.1 sound games would be so immersive it blows my mind!