What is Nintendo's "Revolutionary" weapon?
by Ajari Wilson · in General Discussion · 07/08/2005 (8:33 am) · 166 replies
I know I'm a big geek for starting this thread. Sorry if it has already been talked about. Like most of us here, I've been following the next generation systems and being an owner of all 3 consoles I have to admit that even though not much information has been told about the Nintendo Revolution, I'm not very excited about the system. (not that I'm too excited about anything "real" I've seen for the 360 or PS3 either) I hear it will be under powered compared to the 360 and the PS3. I've seen the little Metroid Prime 3 demo that looked almost exactly like the game cube version. And the Nintendo spokeperson (Regie Fills-Amie?) for that event was boasting about how "powerful" the system is."As you can see, the Revolution can more than hold it's own when it comes to graphical power". I would have been embarased to show that demo. I'm suprised he got that sentence out with a straight face. Nintendo is a stubborn company that always shoots themselves in the foot with their consoles (violence, cartridge, online, DVD, kiddie image and design, and now HDTV) but still manage to survive through Pokemon or the GBA.
"Revolution" so far means I get to play old games I've long forgotten about from an online service (I'm glad the big N is breaking new ground and changing the industry with online play. Now Microsoft and Sony need to get on the boat), I won't be playing the best looking games compared to the 360 and the PS3, and my system will most likeley look like a teched out Poptart. We have a lot to look forward to from Nintendo.
Anyway, despite my dissapointment with Nintendo and my lack of enthusiasm twards their new system, I am very eager to see this "mystery controller" they have up their sleeves. And I would like to ask you what you think or hope it will be.
This is what I hope Nintendo does to "revolutionize" the industry. The controller is obviously going to have some kind of touch screen (whoopee...) device but what I'm hoping for is some kind of VR headset. (Not like Vurtual Boy but a real VR headset) You ever wonder what happened to VR from the early 90's? Hasn't technology evolved far enough so that VR is very much a possability now? Screw HDTV and the limited pariphrial vision TV gives you in games like Halo, Burnout, and Metroid Prime. I'm tired of being hit from the sides by an enemy that I would have seen had I had the wrap around vision I do in real life. What better way to emerse yourself into the game world than to see nothing but the game and hear nothing but the game with 5.1 headphones. The screen can wrap around the inside of the headset slightly past your parephrials up, down, left, and right so you can never quite see the edge of the screen. The VR headset could also flip up when the game is paused or be flipped up manually. Having the headset wireless would probably be the best thing to do as well if it doesn't hurt costs too bad.
If the system came out for around $200 and the VR headset was $150 or less and came bundled with the system, I would pick it up over the 360 and the PS3 even if it had Nintendo 64 graphics. That alone is something I have NEVER experienced before. That would be a true revolution in games as we know them. And also may be why Nintendo is not supporting HD. But again, Nintendo is a very stubborn company that hates to evolve anything until it comes back to bite them in the ass (cartridge, online, kiddie image and design).
(Least paragraph I swear) To keep the cost down I would probably leave the 5.1 headphones optional. And leave the gameplay completley up to the controller, meaning no head movement will effect the game at all. I feel like a stupid 15 year old (not that all 15 year olds are stupid) with a "great" idea but it is fun to speculate and hope (I'm at work bored anyway). And plus I can say to the world "I KNEW IT!!!" if it is true. Well anyway, what do you guys think is this "revolutionary" device Nintendo has up their sleeves?
-Ajari-
"Revolution" so far means I get to play old games I've long forgotten about from an online service (I'm glad the big N is breaking new ground and changing the industry with online play. Now Microsoft and Sony need to get on the boat), I won't be playing the best looking games compared to the 360 and the PS3, and my system will most likeley look like a teched out Poptart. We have a lot to look forward to from Nintendo.
Anyway, despite my dissapointment with Nintendo and my lack of enthusiasm twards their new system, I am very eager to see this "mystery controller" they have up their sleeves. And I would like to ask you what you think or hope it will be.
This is what I hope Nintendo does to "revolutionize" the industry. The controller is obviously going to have some kind of touch screen (whoopee...) device but what I'm hoping for is some kind of VR headset. (Not like Vurtual Boy but a real VR headset) You ever wonder what happened to VR from the early 90's? Hasn't technology evolved far enough so that VR is very much a possability now? Screw HDTV and the limited pariphrial vision TV gives you in games like Halo, Burnout, and Metroid Prime. I'm tired of being hit from the sides by an enemy that I would have seen had I had the wrap around vision I do in real life. What better way to emerse yourself into the game world than to see nothing but the game and hear nothing but the game with 5.1 headphones. The screen can wrap around the inside of the headset slightly past your parephrials up, down, left, and right so you can never quite see the edge of the screen. The VR headset could also flip up when the game is paused or be flipped up manually. Having the headset wireless would probably be the best thing to do as well if it doesn't hurt costs too bad.
If the system came out for around $200 and the VR headset was $150 or less and came bundled with the system, I would pick it up over the 360 and the PS3 even if it had Nintendo 64 graphics. That alone is something I have NEVER experienced before. That would be a true revolution in games as we know them. And also may be why Nintendo is not supporting HD. But again, Nintendo is a very stubborn company that hates to evolve anything until it comes back to bite them in the ass (cartridge, online, kiddie image and design).
(Least paragraph I swear) To keep the cost down I would probably leave the 5.1 headphones optional. And leave the gameplay completley up to the controller, meaning no head movement will effect the game at all. I feel like a stupid 15 year old (not that all 15 year olds are stupid) with a "great" idea but it is fun to speculate and hope (I'm at work bored anyway). And plus I can say to the world "I KNEW IT!!!" if it is true. Well anyway, what do you guys think is this "revolutionary" device Nintendo has up their sleeves?
-Ajari-
#102
I'm not angry with you. I think you're a tool, but I'm not angry. Everyone likes to assume that, but I don't get angry when I argue.
As for Silicon Knights parting Nintendo? The left for no particular reason other than they wanted to sell more of their games on other consoles.
08/24/2005 (4:47 pm)
Just because I inferred something doesn't mean you said it specifically. If Quote:Adult American gamers want more mature games along with their "E" rated ones.then why aren't they buying Metroid Prime et al in droves? You will find that nearly all 'gamers' in the age group I'm talking about (16-25), and this is talking overall, not your own opinion, my own opinion but plain truth, don't consider a game as 'adult' unless it oozes violence and sex.
I'm not angry with you. I think you're a tool, but I'm not angry. Everyone likes to assume that, but I don't get angry when I argue.
As for Silicon Knights parting Nintendo? The left for no particular reason other than they wanted to sell more of their games on other consoles.
Quote: Asked if today's news meant Silicon Knights would not continue to develop for Nintendo platforms, Denis Dyack said: "No it doesn't. It's possible that we may do another game with Nintendo, actually. It just means that we've decided to break our exclusivity with Nintendo."
#103
08/24/2005 (5:24 pm)
Matt, Ajari, let's let this simmer down please...getting -way- too personal! Each of you has an opinion, and those opinions happen to disagree with each other. Let's leave it at that!
#105
08/24/2005 (7:26 pm)
There is a HUD for the PS2 its called the sony pud-j5a I am having a hard time finding info about, the price that I found was around $400 us, Its for the game Energy airforce
#106
The thing is, Sony and MS have ulterior motives. Sony uses their playstation line to push new consumer electronics now. Blu-Ray is their pet format and they plan to make it a sure thing by tossing it into their PS3. That is all Sony cares about, pushing their formats into mass market so their electronics division can be successful. SCE rarely makes games worth playing, that I've noticed.
MS on the other hand... I believe they're trying to "bridge the gap" between consoles and PC's. Why? Because MS produces the absolute dominant PC operating system. The more like a PC they can make their system look and feel, the closer they are to selling a copy of Windows to another person. (Even though most people already own a PC anyway.) Also, name recognition. They don't want to be known as "big bad monopolizing Microsoft".
Nintendo makes games. They are a gaming company. One with more ethical backbone than most other current companies on the planet combined. Their philosophy that everyone should be able to enjoy their games is a good one. Right now, Nintendo is just losing a lot of business to a fashion trend. Nintendo is "uncool" for their games, so all the wannabes of the world (There are more than you would believe.) want to go with the offerings of the Electronics company, or the software company. Unfortunately, Sony capitalized on this LONG ago and pulled massive 3rd party support. Really, the 3rd party thing is the only thing hurting Nintendo. They still make the best games and they still profit, so technically, they're fine.
Also, toward the end of GameCube's life, you'll notice more and more titles taking the "Mature" approach. Nintendo is raising it's third party support once again, so maybe their "Revolution" will be a success. If they can net all the high-caliber offerings this time around, there's no reason they can't beat a software company or an electronics company at the very game THEY created.
08/25/2005 (5:24 am)
Personally, I appreciate the Nintendo philosophy. I seems very noble to not give in to demand if it compromises the company ethics. That said, they will never "win the war" this way. The thing that nobody seems to understand about the console wars, however, is that Nintendo is still a very profitable business. How they can produce consoles, sell them for half the price of Sony or Microsoft and still turn a profit where Sony and MS lose money hand over fist... Kind of boggles the mind. The thing is, Sony and MS have ulterior motives. Sony uses their playstation line to push new consumer electronics now. Blu-Ray is their pet format and they plan to make it a sure thing by tossing it into their PS3. That is all Sony cares about, pushing their formats into mass market so their electronics division can be successful. SCE rarely makes games worth playing, that I've noticed.
MS on the other hand... I believe they're trying to "bridge the gap" between consoles and PC's. Why? Because MS produces the absolute dominant PC operating system. The more like a PC they can make their system look and feel, the closer they are to selling a copy of Windows to another person. (Even though most people already own a PC anyway.) Also, name recognition. They don't want to be known as "big bad monopolizing Microsoft".
Nintendo makes games. They are a gaming company. One with more ethical backbone than most other current companies on the planet combined. Their philosophy that everyone should be able to enjoy their games is a good one. Right now, Nintendo is just losing a lot of business to a fashion trend. Nintendo is "uncool" for their games, so all the wannabes of the world (There are more than you would believe.) want to go with the offerings of the Electronics company, or the software company. Unfortunately, Sony capitalized on this LONG ago and pulled massive 3rd party support. Really, the 3rd party thing is the only thing hurting Nintendo. They still make the best games and they still profit, so technically, they're fine.
Also, toward the end of GameCube's life, you'll notice more and more titles taking the "Mature" approach. Nintendo is raising it's third party support once again, so maybe their "Revolution" will be a success. If they can net all the high-caliber offerings this time around, there's no reason they can't beat a software company or an electronics company at the very game THEY created.
#107
Quoted by Matt Banfall:
Quoted by Matt Benfall:
Quoted by Ajari Wilson
Quoted by Matt Benfall
-Ajari-
Now I'm gonna go out and enjoy my birthday. I'll try to refrain from any further talks on this subject when I come back tomorrow.
lol George you gotta be kidding me! Thay had a whole channel dedicated to Pokemon?? :)
08/25/2005 (7:22 am)
I just had to stop by real quick to say this....Quoted by Matt Banfall:
Quote:As for Silicon Knights parting Nintendo? The left for no particular reason other than they wanted to sell more of their games on other consoles.You were worng again Matt. Thanks Adam. You've basically proven me right with that video. Just like I said, Silicone Knights wants to move on from an exclusive deal with Nintendo because Nintendo is making stupid moves. They have officially lost their minds. The lead at Silicone Knights said it a lot nicer than me but I'm being real and saying what he really wanted to say. What is it the kids are saying nowadays Matt? ...ummm...OWNED!!
Quoted by Matt Benfall:
Quote: then why aren't they buying Metroid Prime et al in droves?Uh, Because most adults that play games don't own a Nintendo Game Cube. Ever think of that scenario? Uh, most people didn't care for the controller setup. Uh, most people already have Halo and Halo 2.
Quoted by Ajari Wilson
Quote:Matt I'll be back on in a couple of days to see what other halarious and greatly exaggerated hate fueled statments you make.
Quoted by Matt Benfall
Quote:I think you're a toolI'm reading this guy like a book ain't I? Let me just respond. Matt I think you've got it backwards. I'm not the #1 fan with the Nintendo tattoo on my ass.
-Ajari-
Now I'm gonna go out and enjoy my birthday. I'll try to refrain from any further talks on this subject when I come back tomorrow.
lol George you gotta be kidding me! Thay had a whole channel dedicated to Pokemon?? :)
#108
@Matt: Many people agree with you, but you can't make everyone agree. Just let it go.
@Dustin: I think you were dead on in your last post. That's exactly the way I think things will go.
-Peter
08/25/2005 (7:55 am)
@Ajari: Happy Birthday@Matt: Many people agree with you, but you can't make everyone agree. Just let it go.
@Dustin: I think you were dead on in your last post. That's exactly the way I think things will go.
-Peter
#109
Its were the other two competitors are headed as well, MS more so.
Possibly stronger digital distribution and possibly content sharing.
Look at alot of the DS titles. A few allow one person to buy the game and other users with DSs can play the game through multiplayer without even purchasing it.
I think Nintendo's revolution is the same one that the Console market is headed towards in general.
But maybe nintendo will go farther with it. or maybe thy are going to do somethign completely different.
08/25/2005 (2:42 pm)
If I was too guess I think thier revolution is going to be a business model shift of sorts.Its were the other two competitors are headed as well, MS more so.
Possibly stronger digital distribution and possibly content sharing.
Look at alot of the DS titles. A few allow one person to buy the game and other users with DSs can play the game through multiplayer without even purchasing it.
I think Nintendo's revolution is the same one that the Console market is headed towards in general.
But maybe nintendo will go farther with it. or maybe thy are going to do somethign completely different.
#110
08/25/2005 (7:10 pm)
My personal thoughts are hardly halarious and greatly exaggerated hate fueled statments. You sitting there and saying I'm a blind Nintendo follower is, however. And it's also massively incorrect. You can't dictate my opinions, as much as you'd like to. You came in saying Nintendo were losing the 'console war' and I showed you quite the opposite when it came to pure profit. That you disbelieved it it reason enough for my opinion of you. Everything else was just you and I going at each other's throats, something you seem intent on doing, even when asked nicely by the staff here.
#111
Looks a bit odd to me, but I guess the proof will be in pudding.
09/16/2005 (12:26 am)
Thought I'd bump this, as it looks like the revolution is in the controller. More here: money.cnn.com/2005/09/15/commentary/game_over/revolution/Looks a bit odd to me, but I guess the proof will be in pudding.
#112
I think they are really really ........WTF?
09/16/2005 (2:09 am)
Well....it seem the controller let you "target" at screen....I think they are really really ........WTF?
#113
Seriously, WTF are they thinking? That will never work as the main controller for a next-gen console. There are too many game types that simply will not work with so few buttons and such a wierd control mechanism. Granted, it would work wonders for Arcade Shooters (Like House of the Dead, don't have to buy a gun), and for simple racing games (turn it sideways and use it like a wheel) or flight sims (hold it vertically and use it like a flight stick), but how will you play Zelda? How will you play Mario? You can't point where you want to go, because how do you turn all the way around? How do you use all the functions in Zelda when you only have 2 triggers and 3 buttons, instead of 3 triggers and 4 buttons (like the gamecube). You can't even hit most of the buttons at the same time (without putting down the extra analog stick to hold the remote controller).
I can't wait to hear what the warranty is on that, since people are going to tear them up when they have to "stab" with the remote, but forget its connected to the analog stick, POP!, there goes the cord/plug.
The simply truth is that it should be an accessory that people buy for very specific games, just like a light gun, racing wheel, or bongos. Making it the main controller will relegate the Revolution to a gadget, not a main gaming machine. What developer is going to recode their game to work (not take advantage of, but simply to make it work at all) with such an input device when they will already have to spend tons and tons of time just making the game run on the PS3?
I think this generation of console warfare will result in almost total exclusivity to one cosole for every game. Some games will only be Xbox, some will only be PS3, and some will only be Revolution, and I doubt there will be many that run on all 3.
I suppose only time will tell, but it feels like Nintendo is shooting themselves in the foot with this one...
09/16/2005 (2:48 am)
Look! It's Nintendo's Carpal Tunnel Controller!Seriously, WTF are they thinking? That will never work as the main controller for a next-gen console. There are too many game types that simply will not work with so few buttons and such a wierd control mechanism. Granted, it would work wonders for Arcade Shooters (Like House of the Dead, don't have to buy a gun), and for simple racing games (turn it sideways and use it like a wheel) or flight sims (hold it vertically and use it like a flight stick), but how will you play Zelda? How will you play Mario? You can't point where you want to go, because how do you turn all the way around? How do you use all the functions in Zelda when you only have 2 triggers and 3 buttons, instead of 3 triggers and 4 buttons (like the gamecube). You can't even hit most of the buttons at the same time (without putting down the extra analog stick to hold the remote controller).
I can't wait to hear what the warranty is on that, since people are going to tear them up when they have to "stab" with the remote, but forget its connected to the analog stick, POP!, there goes the cord/plug.
The simply truth is that it should be an accessory that people buy for very specific games, just like a light gun, racing wheel, or bongos. Making it the main controller will relegate the Revolution to a gadget, not a main gaming machine. What developer is going to recode their game to work (not take advantage of, but simply to make it work at all) with such an input device when they will already have to spend tons and tons of time just making the game run on the PS3?
I think this generation of console warfare will result in almost total exclusivity to one cosole for every game. Some games will only be Xbox, some will only be PS3, and some will only be Revolution, and I doubt there will be many that run on all 3.
I suppose only time will tell, but it feels like Nintendo is shooting themselves in the foot with this one...
#114
-Ajari-
P.S. I second everything you said Jacob. I was thinking the same exact thing. I just don't wanna get all flamey up in here.
09/16/2005 (2:53 am)
Like I said before, lost their minds. But I'll try to keep an open mind and reserve my judgment for when I get my hands on the system. While some uses of the feature sound cool, others seem pointless. And the look of the whole unit and controller isn't to my liking personally. The shape is an update of the NES controller. They made a whole system around their 8-bit lineup and quite honestly, who's attention is Ice Climber and Kid Icarus gonna hold when you have more modern games to spend your time with. Cool for novelty but it'll get old fast. Could this controller be Nintendo mistake #24397?-Ajari-
P.S. I second everything you said Jacob. I was thinking the same exact thing. I just don't wanna get all flamey up in here.
#115
09/16/2005 (2:58 am)
Wow. Talk about some quick judgments. I mean, c'mon. You haven't seen more than a nice preview, and people are already talking about how the controller is complete and utter shite. Ah well, I guess there will always be naysayers, and resistance to innovation, even among the indies. :shrug:
#116
09/16/2005 (3:33 am)
It's not an innovation. There are plenty of "pointing" controllers out there for the computer, like mice with gyroscopes and such. They don't work for games. Period. In fact, they don't work that well at all. And even if you could design a game to work with it, it then wouldn't work on any other system. Nintendo just said "screw you" to everyone that wants to make their games for all 3 systems, and have ensured that none of the "innovative" games on the Revolution can be ported to the other systems. They are trying to force developers to be exclusive to Nintendo with a gimmick that might not even be popular.
#117
Though if their goal is to make kids get exercise by having to actually put some effort into playing games I think they might have succeeded ;)
Logan
09/16/2005 (9:38 am)
I wrote about this in my blog already, but to sum things up I am not terribly impressed by this, to me it seems like a gimmick. Plus how on Earth are you supposed to use it for multi hour gaming sessions without becoming tired or developing some aweful ailment (ie. carple tunnel)? Though if their goal is to make kids get exercise by having to actually put some effort into playing games I think they might have succeeded ;)
Logan
#118
Nintendo doesn't want developers to recode their games to work with the new controller. Nintendo doesn't give a damn if they get the next Tony Hawk, they've said so themselves. They want to be the "other console" that people buy IN ADDITION to the XBox360 or PS3. Which means if a person wants Tony Hawk they'll buy it for their main console, but if they want a new and original experience they will buy it for the Revolution.
Plus, Nintendo hasn't revealed all of their cards yet. The Revolution is backward compatible with the Gamecube (announced by Iwata at GDC). That controller is not. Therefore, the revolution has to have more to the controller than just the wand/stick combo.
09/16/2005 (11:51 am)
@ Jacob Fike "What developer is going to recode their game to work (not take advantage of, but simply to make it work at all) with such an input device when they will already have to spend tons and tons of time just making the game run on the PS3?"Nintendo doesn't want developers to recode their games to work with the new controller. Nintendo doesn't give a damn if they get the next Tony Hawk, they've said so themselves. They want to be the "other console" that people buy IN ADDITION to the XBox360 or PS3. Which means if a person wants Tony Hawk they'll buy it for their main console, but if they want a new and original experience they will buy it for the Revolution.
Plus, Nintendo hasn't revealed all of their cards yet. The Revolution is backward compatible with the Gamecube (announced by Iwata at GDC). That controller is not. Therefore, the revolution has to have more to the controller than just the wand/stick combo.
#119
My take is that at long last, i can game and drink beer whithout pausing the game! same goes for cheesy snacks.
09/16/2005 (2:22 pm)
@joe, i believe there are 4 gamecube ports on the revolution.My take is that at long last, i can game and drink beer whithout pausing the game! same goes for cheesy snacks.
#120
Upon realising that it wasn't, I started to laugh.
Bye Nintendo. We'll miss you.
(Personally, I liked the original Nintendo design shown further above in the picture. :) )
09/16/2005 (4:10 pm)
When I first saw it, I thought it was a sick joke.Upon realising that it wasn't, I started to laugh.
Bye Nintendo. We'll miss you.
(Personally, I liked the original Nintendo design shown further above in the picture. :) )
Torque Owner nibbuls
L'est we forgot Pokemon Channel. :) Rest its soul.