Topic: Nintendo Announces Nintendo 3DS

[Rize]

I want to see how this joystick thing works.  It sounds like a seperate controller for a portable and that seems like it would have a negative effect on the portability of the system.  The DS has a stylus but it fits in this little slot.  To remain truly pocket friendly the 3DS would need a way to store this joystick when not in use.

Though the first thing that pops into my head is something like the Wii nunchuk but that just seems way too big.

Is it possible that they just meant analog stick?  A true "3D" joystick would be able to move in the third dimension and I doubt Nintendo would do that if it was intended to be operated by a thumb.  Most people have enough trouble using ordinary analog sticks.

Please follow the link I just posted. You seem to be   a little behind on the advancements that have been made in technology.   GDC just brought a lot to the table as far as 3D viewing is concerned.

I know of three ways that you can achieve 3D imaging.  The first is to actually display the images in three dimensions (such as with old holagram games or with volumetric 3D displays).  The second is fooling the brain into thinking a single flat screen image has depth by using head tracking.  These first two methods are greatly limited in that they can only show "shoebox diorama" type scenes or "virtual models".  There is no virtual camera control because in the first case there is no virtual camera and in the second case the virtual camera mimics the users head movements to create the illusion. The third way is to directly simulate the way the human eye and brain see and interpret the physical 3D world (i.e. to project two slightly different images, one onto each eye).  That is the preferred method since it doesn't have the limitation of losing the virtual camera (and with it the ability to create games any more complicated than the original Mario Bros. or Joust).

It's no more difficult or limiting than   the split screen gameplay that's been with us since the N64   days.

The difficult part is how to get each separate image to   each eye without needing glasses and for multiple people to see the   same effect from multiple angles.

Portable gaming is meant to be viewed by one person at a time and I'm sure the 3DS illusion will only work for one person.  Nintendo will never spend the money required to have multiple viewers see the image.  Nintendo would consider that a requirement for a console version though.

I figure the 3DS will use a type of polarized screen directing different images, one to each eye.  It may use head tracking only to aid in this polarization (not to achieve pseudo-3D of the shoebox diorama type).

[Jonnyboy117]

The difficult part is how to get each separate image to each eye without needing glasses and for multiple people to see the same effect from multiple angles.

I don't know much about 3D technology, but in terms of optics and visual processing, not all 3D or depth perception has to be stereoscopic. It's true that binocular vision is key for depth perception, but there are many other elements as well. For instance, you can suggest depth with the use of lighting, shadows, geometry, perspective, focus, etc. People who lose an eye don't lose all depth perception, but their brains have to rely more on these other clues. From a tech standpoint, it seems there may be a lot of potential in these other methods that don't require sending different images to each eye. For one thing, that approach doesn't work for the people I already mentioned, those with one eye, or asymmetric vision, or any other vision problem related to the specific stereoscopic method being used (color, polarization, asynchronous framing). You can avoid many of these issues by appealing to the brain more than to the eyes.

Edit:
Here's a list of monocular clues. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_perception
Another possibility: audio clues. Humans are capable of echolocation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1QaCeosUmw&feature=related) but there are some forms of 3D audio sensing that even normal people can do.

[GoldenPhoenix]

The DS touch screen is far from a gimmick, it has been utilized in fantastic ways. I think certain individuals are confusing companies throwing in all the features just for the sake of throwing in features, not looking at it from a game by game perspective where certain things, like the touch screen are great, while in others it is not. The DS has one of the most diverse and deep gaming lineups of any console, some use the touch screen RIGHT, some don't, and some just don't bother with it because it isn't necessary for the game they are creating. It is the choice of features, that, IMO has made the DS such a fantastic handheld. Probably the only thing that is gimmicky is the mic.

I know it is tough to remember that the gaming world doesn't revolve around your likes/dislikes, but if you can get past that you'll see many gaming experiences on DS that prove touch screen nor the Dual Screen are gimmicks.

[Rize]

I don't know much about 3D technology, but in terms of optics and visual processing, not all 3D or depth perception has to be stereoscopic. It's true that binocular vision is key for depth perception, but there are many other elements as well. For instance, you can suggest depth with the use of lighting, shadows, geometry, perspective, focus, etc. People who lose an eye don't lose all depth perception, but their brains have to rely more on these other clues. From a tech standpoint, it seems there may be a lot of potential in these other methods that don't require sending different images to each eye. For one thing, that approach doesn't work for the people I already mentioned, those with one eye, or asymmetric vision, or any other vision problem related to the specific stereoscopic method being used (color, polarization, asynchronous framing). You can avoid many of these issues by appealing to the brain more than to the eyes.

Correct perspective alone is enough for us to recognize the three dimensions in a flat picture, TV image or traditional video game.  However, the strong illusion of physical depth that we're talking about seems to require one of two things: either stereo images or a mono image that changes according to your movement in physical space (head tracking).

[Jonnyboy117]

Probably the only thing that is gimmicky is the mic.

Hardware features aren't gimmicky in and of themselves. It all depends on implementation, which of course is tied to individual applications or games. Putting a microphone on a handheld system is a wonderful idea, and it has even been used well in a few games (Nintendogs, anything with online voice chat). Nintendo didn't do developers any favors by using a low-quality microphone and giving the system too little processing power for real voice recognition, but a few games managed to use the feature well despite those limitations.

In the same way, the touch screen isn't intrinsically gimmicky, but there were certainly lots of games (especially in the beginning) that used it in gimmicky, regrettable ways. What I'm really interested to see is whether 3D display can enable new gameplay, or at least a significantly new aesthetic experience. It use in theaters has so far been very gimmicky, but the concept has more potential with interactive experiences.

[Ian Sane]

I think the "3D joystick" is just the motion-controlled stylus patent that we've talked about before.  I don't think it's confirmed information yet.

If they included a motion controlled stylus how much would this thing cost?  The 3D concept alone sounds expensive.  I also wonder how much juice a 3D display would require.  Though Nintendo has been so consistent with battery life that I really can't imagine them going forward with this unless that had already been taken care of.
 

 While I have some complaints with the DS Zelda games, they are in fact excellent examples of how to integrate new interface features with familiar, deep game designs.

The DS Zeldas seem to be the polarizing titles regarding the touchscreen.  I see them as a good example of how a great game can be ruined by being used to promote a specific control scheme rather than using whatever control scheme makes the most sense for the game.  If you want to go way back before both the DS and the Wii I would consider Crystal Chronicles as an example.  There was such an obvious agenda to use it to sell GBA-GC connectivity and its use of that feature was just SO lame.
 
To me the correct thought process should be game ideas creating hardware features out of necessity.  Like Nintendo is making these 3D games for the N64 and they feel the d-pad ain't cutting it for moving in a full 3D world so they create the analog stick out of necessity.  Since then Nintendo seems to be following the thought process of coming up with a unique feature and then thinking "okay, so what games could we make for this?" and that's when lame gimmicky titles get made.  When you do it in that order you don't even know if you CAN make truly amazing games with the feature.  It's all theoretical.  And other companies do this too.  Look at Sony with their analog face buttons that only Hideo Kojima uses and MS with Natal.
 
When designing new hardware Nintendo should brainstorm game ideas they always wanted to do but for whatever reason, couldn't.  Then they look towards what enhancements to the hardware would allow for these ideas to become reality.  This idea should have come about because of a bunch of game ideas Nintendo has been sitting on because only now with a 3D display can those ideas become reality.  Though with the failure of the Virtual Boy, they actually might have some.

[Rize]

I also wonder how much juice a 3D display would require.  Though Nintendo has been so consistent with battery life that I really can't imagine them going forward with this unless that had already been taken care of.

A 3D display wouldn't require any significant increase in power consumption.  It might have to flip twice as many pixels around per frame, but it still only has to backlight the 3D screens once and that's where most of that power goes.  The only additional power comes from faster CPUs and I'm sure Nintendo will use the 3D feature to justify a spec that is ultimately no more powerful than the PSP.  If the camera is used for fine tuning the image via head tracking, that would take a little more energy, but again nothing extraordinary.
 

The DS Zeldas seem to be the polarizing titles regarding the touchscreen.  I see them as a good example of how a great game can be ruined by being used to promote a specific control scheme rather than using whatever control scheme makes the most sense for the game.

I'm in 100% agreement.  Every time I try to play that game I get incredibly annoyed.  On a related note, I just bought a GameCube copy of Twilight Princess (I could have resisted the normal controller... TP's Wii control isn't that annoying, but the chance to play the game mirrored was enough to win me over).

[Halbred]

I'd bet that the "3D joystick" is really just an N64-like analog stick. Nothing fancy. An alternate, horrible possibility is that it will be a virtual analog stick.

I'm also assuming that this particular DS will be held book-style to get the depth perception necessary for 3D imagery to work.

[MegaByte]

If they included a motion controlled stylus how much would this thing cost?

It shouldn't add much.  Thanks in part to Nintendo, the technology is commoditized.  The cost of replacement styli will go way up though.

Next question: will both screens support 3D?  Will they both support touch for that matter?  Multitouch?

[Rize]

I'd bet that the "3D joystick" is really just an N64-like analog stick. Nothing fancy. An alternate, horrible possibility is that it will be a virtual analog stick.

I'm also assuming that this particular DS will be held book-style to get the depth perception necessary for 3D imagery to work.

It shouldn't be necessary to hold the 3DS book style.  In fact, it's more likely that the 3D effect would be impossible to achieve in that mode as the LCD would be designed for the traditional DS layout.  To be compatible with both ways of holding the DS, the LCD would need to be able to direct the light both left and right and up and down.  That's an unnecessary expense.

Next   question: will both screens support 3D?  Will they both support touch   for that matter?  Multitouch?

Now those are good questions.  I could very much see only one screen supporting 3D (probably the top) and very likely only one screen supporting the touch screen.  While games like Zelda DS relied on direct control, the gameplay was more 2D than 3D.  The 3D games like Prime Hunters used stylus on the bottom screen with the 3D view on the top.  I think that single touch on both screens is more likely than multi-touch.  Nintendo will just pretend like multi-touch doesn't exist.

[Mop it up]

3DS is way too close to 3DO. Let's hope it doesn't end up as a similar spectacular failure...

[broodwars]

I seem to remember the Wiimote early on being described as a 3D controller due to its ability to sense motion in 3D space.  Perhaps this 3DS joystick is something similar, like a small stylus-like stick with basic motion control?  I don't know...has technology advanced that far that we can do that?

[Ian Sane]

I wonder if using a stylus on a 3D screen might prove difficult due to it being difficult to judge the depth of the image.  So maybe the top visuals-only screen is 3D and the button touchscreen the "flat".

The issue with an analog stick on a portable was typically the problem of it getting caught on the inside of your pocket.  But with the DS clamshell design that's not such a big deal.  They just need a groove in the shell opposite of the stick for it to fit in when the 3DS is closed.

This is however supposed to be backwards compatible and that means they have to have all the DS functionality available.  That means touchscreen, mic, d-pad and all the buttons.  There is limited real estate here to throw in a "joystick" of some sort.

[BlackNMild2k1]

We both got questions that I would want to see answered.

My question is does it enable 3D on all previous games? Will you be able to go back and play Metroid Prime Hunters in 3D?

Next question: will both screens support 3D?  Will they both support touch for that matter?  Multitouch?

But like Rize already guessed, I would think that the Top screen handles 3D (I hope in regular and book formation) and the bottom screen does touch (hopefully multi-touch). But it would lead to some possibly interesting things if both screens could at least handle touch and 3D.

[BlackNMild2k1]

This is however supposed to be backwards compatible and that means they have to have all the DS functionality available. There is limited real estate here to throw in a "joystick" of some sort.

I'm gonna finish submitting my idea and you will see that I think I have a pretty good idea on how to solve that issue.

[ThePerm]

heheh i gots to make a mockup before they release screens

[MegaByte]

My question is does it enable 3D on all previous games? Will you be able to go back and play Metroid Prime Hunters in 3D?

A cool idea, but given Nintendo's sandboxing history regarding backwards-compatibility, I'd guess no.

[BlackNMild2k1]

My question is does it enable 3D on all previous games? Will you be able to go back and play Metroid Prime Hunters in 3D?

A cool idea, but given Nintendo's sandboxing history regarding backwards-compatibility, I'd guess no.

If Nintendo was smart, they would allow it since it would breathe new life into a bunch of older games.

"Play all your old games in a new way!!"

The marketing practically writes itself. Include all the VC/VH games too.... They wouldn't be able to keep a 3DS on the shelf for years.

[Jonnyboy117]

I have yet to see multi-touch used in a compelling way that truly improves the experience of a game or application. It seems more like a bullet point feature than a truly useful technology. If Nintendo has ideas on how to use it better, they may include it. Otherwise, it doesn't seem to be worth the additional cost.

[BlackNMild2k1]

I don't want Nintendo to keep designing hardware with just a single specific use in mind, I want them to throw in a little extra horsepower than they think they need, to a feature that is relatively inexpensive because they know they can use it for something later even though they might not actually be working on right now. I'm not saying they need to go overboard like Sony did with the PS3 (which was just released too soon for the tech inside), but they should start designing with a little room for flexibility towards the future.

Google added multi-touch to their phone(Nexus1) through an update. If the tech is already possible in the screen used and all that is needed is a firmware update, then why not just include the tech?

With cameras and games that use pictures to put you and your environment into the game, multi-touch picture re-sizing could come in handy, or when quick zooming on a map or many other uses that might not have come up yet since real game developers haven't really played with the tech on an actual gaming system. I don't want Nintendo to limit their hardware just because they themselves didn't have a killer-app idea to push it right from the start.

[GoldenPhoenix]

I have yet to see multi-touch used in a compelling way that truly improves the experience of a game or application. It seems more like a bullet point feature than a truly useful technology. If Nintendo has ideas on how to use it better, they may include it. Otherwise, it doesn't seem to be worth the additional cost.

Haven't there been DS games to "fake" multi touch? I could see it being used for a music game, but beyond that not sure

[MegaByte]

Multitouch is very useful for photo and web browsing, Google Earth navigation, etc.  As for games... I haven't really seen much outside of allowing multiplayer (I also haven't played any non-free games), but there is certainly potential... things like on-screen dual analog for starters.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Multitouch is very useful for photo and web browsing, Google Earth navigation, etc.  As for games... I haven't really seen much outside of allowing multiplayer (I also haven't played any non-free games), but there is certainly potential... things like on-screen dual analog for starters.

Ughs, I can't stand analog touch screen controls.

[Ian Sane]

How do you do multitouch with a stylus?  Do you put the DS down and use a stylus in each hand like a knife and fork?  So you wear little styli on your fingers like finger picks for a guitar?  Or do you use your... fingers and smudge up the screen?  Nuts to that idea.

The touchscreen is more or less like a mouse for a portable.  How often are you using a PC and think "damn I wish I had two mice right now"?

It comes across as an idea that sounds cool but no one can really think of a useful idea for it.  The most common idea is one where people suggest you just put the buttons on the screen and then you can have whatever layout you want.  But think about how hard it would be to tell what button you're on when everything is a flat screen.

[NWR_insanolord]

I think it's definitely a good idea to include multitouch. You never know when being able to execute multi-finger gestures will come in handy. It also doesn't hurt to achieve feature parity with the iPhone, which Nintendo should be smart enough to realize is going to be the primary competitor to this thing.