Printable View
Crap, I can't believe nobody's made a topic about this yet. What's wrong with you people?
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3143782
The controller is basically a gyroscope in the shape of a remote that you hold in one hand (with an analog attachment in the other that literally plugs into the back of the "remote"), and you controll games by moving the controller.
Your thoughts? Me, I'm preordering this thing as soon as possible.
I'd like to learn a little more about it before I support it. Sure, it's innovative, but do I really want to have to swing my arm around like a fool whenever I play a video game?
No. Just no. I can't see how you can use that for normal games. It's still good for other games.
I have little interest in playing with a remote control. I have trouble with my own as it is
I can see this being either awesome or completely unworkable. Or somewhere in between. Frankly, I have no idea. All I know is, I'm definitely going to find a store with a Revolution on display and try it before I put down money on it.
I don't care how cool the internal gyro motion sensor gizmo is that controller does NOT look comfortable for long periods of gaming. The oversized, button laden remote control for my digital cable box is more ergonomically designed than these iPod design inspired controllers! I think it would have been much smarter if Nintendo stuck with the conventional two handed controller design but kept the internal motion sensor and other forward looking technologies.
I see another Sinclair C5 looming on the horizon. They got too carried away with their own success.
I'm not sure anyone can comment on the ergonomics of the controller just yet seeing as nobody besides a few industry journalists have even touched the thing. But the reviews so far of the controller have been unanimously positive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spino
We'll have to wait and see how the games are. As for me, I'll stick with Sony. They know what they're doing.
I'm looking forward to seeing how it actually works with games. Normal games, not gimick games. But it looks very promising.
I started a pole at the Arena and so far, as I expected, the PS3 is winning with the Xbox360 coming up behind.
Gelatinous Cube - I think Nintendo is getting more third-party developers behind them for this system. Sony no longer has a monopoly on Square-Enix for example.
Zalmoxis -I agreeQuote:
We'll have to wait and see how the games are.
If Sony and Microsoft knew what they were doing they would have made a profit by now, but I see your point. The PS2 and Xbox have a larger market share than the GC, but the DS still vastly outsells the PSP, though granted, the DS has been out longer.Quote:
As for me, I'll stick with Sony. They know what they're doing
And just a correction: the controller uses a motion sensor, not a gyroscope as far as I know. The sensor detects several axes of movement, forward/backward, left/right "strafing", left/right "panning", up/down panning and up/down strafing. It also detects tilting.
It operates (unlike a light gun, which detects scan lines, and so will work only with a cathode-ray tube TV) by having the emitted signal from the controller picked up either by the Revolution itself or by a special, independant reciever, I'm not sure which, and so will work with any display.
I can't imagine playing Soulcalibur with that controller. Or any fighting game, for that matter.
Yes, playing Soul Calibur with only 3 total combos would be awkward.
I don't see how it could be any less ergonomic than a mouse+KB.
The only way it will succeed is if it can do everything previous controllers can do and more. We'll see. I'm not going to jump to conclusions. Even if it fails I appluad the effort to try something fresh with gaming.
Talk about Suckage :dizzy2:
I think it will be interesting how the system plays out. I'm not going to reserve any systems before they launch (no point if there are no must-have games [the DS is finally starting to have a good library and PSP is still a pretty paper-weight]).
I just want to use the controller to try something, anything, and see how it works out. Right now, I'm excited about it though.
Azi
That is just it GC, there is not one game coming out for the Xbox 360 or PS3 that you can't already play, in a slightly uglier form, on the Xbox, PS2 or GameCube. But of course, I am just referring to the games we know are coming out. Personally, my favorite console games are RPGs (very few of which are known right now for any of the three systems) and action games (and I have DMC, DMC 3, Ninja Gaiden for that genre).
Maybe the new sports games (e.g. Madden 2006 on Xbox 360) could be amazing... but I think NCAA 2006 on Xbox is pretty darned good too!
That being said, I am going to be following the release of all three systems, just out of natural (and nerdy) curiosity.
Azi
That is the worst controller I have ever seen! Nintendo have really done it this time. Oh well! There goes any chance of me buying the Revolution.
AmbrosiusAurelianus - what do you think is bad about it? All the reviews say its great, albeit without playing any final games, so what are you basing that comment on?
God of War is for all three consoles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
not very interesting and very gimicky, in my opinion.
Nintendo has always gone after the "child" market, but this is going a little too far. The controller will be entertaining for 5 minutes, before people realize that interesting gameplay comes from interesting gameplay mechanics, not new controller types.
I can only hope that some other system picks up the zelda franchise....
God of war is for PS2 only.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonGod
There is an attachment you can plug it into to play it like a Gamecube controller.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zalmoxis
No, the one GC and I are thinking of is only for the PS2. It was developed by Sony itself... somehow I don't see them helping Xboxes...?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonGod
http://ps2.ign.com/objects/661/661321.html
And you get interesting gameplay mechanics only from the traditional controllers? I rather liked the Duck Hunt gun myself, and Dance Dance Revolution had that silly mat. There have been Donkey Kong games that use bongos (no... not THOSE bongos), and I think that is a lot of fun.
Yes, it is a gimmick, in the stricht sense of the term, but I think Nintendo has a good plan here. Look at the DS for example. I thought it was a joke when I first heard about it. Nope! Hugely popular in Japan and very successful here too. (To be sure, the touch screen capacity is not used in any revolutionary way, but the dual screens are cool.)
Azi
Azi, I can understand your openness about the design, but I believe there are some problems that are working against Nintendo and the new design.
1. Cross-system games. Dunno if there will be as many as there are now, but how easy will it be for designers to take advantage of the new controller's "style" when making cross-console games? The Playstation, 'Cube, and Xbox had roughly the same system; no one had some wierdly unique controller.
2. Familiarity. Many people seem comfortable with the standard controllers in use right now. They have a lot of buttons for complex games and generally are intelligently laid out. Why fix what isn't broken? Real gamers will not be easily swayed by a change in something that they already liked. Casual gamers on the other hand...this move would support Nintendo's seeming marketing shift towards a more casual, younger crowd.
3. Actual competence. I won't prejudge, but the controller as is does not seem capable of giving me the level of control I want for complex games, such as SCII or even Mortal Kombat. Lack of buttons is the most obvious issue here.
Lehesu -
The controller proper (the one-handed remotey thing) is unique I would agree, whether its weird or not I'm not prepared to hazard, but with attachments it will be almost identical to the other major systems' controllers. Retro Studios, the makers of the Metroid Prime series on GC, managed to modify their control scheme to utilise the motion sensitive controller in only a couple of weeks (with a resultant control scheme which some say surpasses the mouse 'n' keyboard approach), so I'm not so sure that third-party or cross-console developers will withdraw based on this.Quote:
...some wierdly unique controller
I think they aren't trying to "fix" what's there, they're simply trying something new, and potentially innovative. Humans weren't "broke" when we lived in caves, or hunted mammoths, but we would probably all say we were better off now than we were then.Quote:
Many people seem comfortable with the standard controllers in use right now. They have a lot of buttons for complex games and generally are intelligently laid out. Why fix what isn't broken?
There are 4 buttons on the main controller (trigger, A button and two more below), as well as two triggers on the analogue attachment. This is ignoring the use of the D-pad (which was not utilised to any real purpose on the GC version of SCII) which is now much better placed, possibly providing another four "buttons". This bings the total buttons (with the analogue attachment which will be bundled with the system and seperate contollers) up to 10 (obviously excluding the function buttons like start etc.) Without even considering the use of the motion sensor for more control, this count exceeds the Xbox360 button count (2 (4?) shoulder buttons, and four face buttons = 6 (8?)) by two and the PS3's count (4 shoulder buttons and 4 face buttons = 8) by two also. I do not count the pad in Sony's case for the same reason that I do not count the Analogue stick in the case of the Revolution.Quote:
Lack of buttons is the most obvious issue here.
Just my opinions.
No, my point was that you get interesting gameplay mechanics from interesting game design choices, not the controller (traditional or otherwise).Quote:
Originally Posted by Azi Tohak
In other words, gameplay should dictate control setup, and not vice versa. I have a feeling that this will be the case of the latter. Like that big rug mat nintendo made for "track and field" -- how many games involved some twist on "running really fast" or "hopping on the right buttons" before you realize that you're stretching to make the control device useful?
Exactly my point, Dorkus, and much more elegantly stated than my fumbling attempts. There have not been too many games that I have sat down and said..."Man, this would be cool with a better controller." Most games with bad controls tend to be game-side, rather than hardware-side. Idiotic design decisions and such.