Topic: EDITORIAL: With Great Power ...

[Rize]

This thread is for discussion of my new editorial.

With Great Power ...

I may be MIA for a few hours, but I'll check in as soon as possible.  

[foolish03]

Wow that was an excellent article.  Sums up how i feel about next gen consoles as well.  I just hope nintendos new console is indeed a revolution.  Hopefully it attracts developers and gamers alike(instead of alienating them).  We can only hope.  
This years E3 will be my most anticipated gaming event yet.  Nintendo dont fail me now!

[Ian Sane]

This editorial looks almost like a friendly roundabout way of saying "I think Nintendo is heading down the wrong path with the Revolution."  Here all these future enhancements to games are mentioned that merely require updated hardware with no changes needing to be made to the controller.  Plus all these changes would benefit current genres thus meaning there's not quite a need to introduce "new types of gaming".  Yet Nintendo is saying borderline stupid things like how the current model has run its course or that hardware has reached a limit where we can't go any further.  In a way this editorial is listing what Sony and MS and the third parties that support them are going to do.

Personally I think Nintendo's rumoured ideas make sense in theory but their timing is totally wrong.  The current model will someday hit a wall where there's very little left to work with and gaming has to go in a new direction.  But that's a long ways away and I think going in a new direction too soon could kill Nintendo outright.  I think we went to 3D too early as post-SNES 2D games have shown that there was and is still more than can be explored in 2D alone.  We still have more to do with 3D and we have tons more to work with in the online realm which is brand new for consoles.

I think going in a new direction this soon is like if someone made a 3D console in the 16 bit era.  Remember early 3D games like Star Fox, Virtua Racing, Stunt Race FX, or Hard Drivin'?  Imagine an entire console with games like that released at the same time as the Genesis and SNES.  It would have had some really interesting games but the technology was still very early at that stage and the general public would not have accepted it.  Things like that have to be eased into.  If Nintendo has a truly revolutionary idea then people have to be eased into it.  Few will accept an entire console that focuses on a type of gaming they are completely unfamiliar with.

Plus there's a difference between building on what's there and going in a complete different direction.  The Playstation and N64 were 3D consoles but they could still play 2D games.  They built on what was already there.  It was like expanding a simple road into a freeway.  It expanded on what was there but we were still going the same route to the same place.  When Nintendo talks about the Rev they sound like they want to make another road that shoots off in another direction and aside from not taking the same route there's no indication that this new road will get us to our destination any quicker or that we'll even end up in the same final destination.  It's better to expand the existing road then to make new routes that go off all over the place.  If Nintendo is going into a new direction it has to compliment what we currently have.  Every 2D and 3D game that uses the traditional controller design we have now has to work on the Revolution.  If not the console is merely a bizzare offshoot gimmick console like the Virtual Boy.

Personally I like the concepts mentioned in this editorial and these are what I want to see in the next Nintendo console.  If Nintendo wants to give me something weird and wacky as well as these then that's fine but I don't want something trying to act as a replacement for these concepts.

[Bill Aurion]

It's quite sad that most people are excited about next-gen's technical prowess for it's looks rather than it's gameplay capabilities...I completely agree on the Co-op part, and would love to see the feature included more now...60 FPS should be standard next-gen, PERIOD...And I'd love to see what Nintendo can do with a next-gen Pikmin in terms of individual characters on screen...

However, these are still very meager changes...To me that is nothing compared to what could be done gameplay-wise...Sure it's prettier and you can add a few new gameplay aspects, and increase A.I., but to me that's not really worth a new generation, and it sure doesn't affect the immersion factor...I eagerly await Nintendo's view of the future...

(Zelda XII has the best cloud shadows ever)

[JonLeung]

When we dumb it down to this, as I often have:

NES = 2D
Super NES = better 2D
N64 = 3D
GCN = better 3D

...then it sure looks like some sort of "Revolution" is necessary.  That is, if you find "even better 3D" to be boring.  Of course, I neglect to mention consoles such as the various Ataris that were in the pre-NES era, so another generation that's still 3D wouldn't bring about some kind of video game crash, I would think.  Maybe not soon, anyway.

Seeing as how you can't make a game with any more dimensions, I would think that Nintendo would have to be working on something more immersive.  Imagining things like "true holographic 3D" or some new way to interact with characters on a television other than pressing buttons seem a bit hasty.  I'm guessing the best they can do is take a step or two in those directions.  But if not amazing enough, some people might not want to learn how to enjoy such a thing.

That's just how society works.  Everything's got to be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator.  If casual gamers like better and better and better 3D (as we know it, but just better like in the ways mentioned in the editorial) and the same ways to play, that may still sell better, no matter how innovative or new Nintendo's Revolution is.  I look forward to it, but if it's not something casual gamers will like, then I fear for Nintendo.

[Rize]

foolish03:  thanks

Ian Sane:  I don't necessarily think Nintendo is heading down the wrong path.  That all depends on what revolution is exactly.  If it provides an option but very useful new method of control (for example the N64's analog stick) then it will be good.  If the current controller design is compromised and the revolution isn't clearly useful (think DS which sorely needs an analog stick/nub) then it will not be so good.  And yes, that's more of what I'm getting at.  Nintendo may not have the wrong idea, but they're definitely jumping the gun a bit.  Unfortunately, hardware transitions only come once every five years so if not now, then another five years may be too late (though I doubt it).  Then again, the situation in Japan is somewhat different and I can't blame Nintendo for focusing on their home country (although I'm not sure it makes good business sense considering the size of the U.S. market).

"Imagine an entire console with games like that released at the same time as the Genesis and SNES. It would have had some really interesting games but the technology was still very early at that stage and the general public would not have accepted it. Things like that have to be eased into. If Nintendo has a truly revolutionary idea then people have to be eased into it."

This assumes that whatever idea Nintendo comes up with for revolution will be hardware limited (for example if they tried to do VR which I seriously doubt).  Honestly, I don't think the revolution will be hardware limited.  I think it's going to be some significant change or addition to the controller which will function exactly as they intend it to (much like the DS's touch screen which is not intrinsicly limited in any way).

"Every 2D and 3D game that uses the traditional controller design we have now has to work on the Revolution. If not the console is merely a bizzare offshoot gimmick console like the Virtual Boy."

I agree except that if the revolutionary aspect is good enough, then it will not matter.  However, I doubt it will be good enough so I hope the revolution does not exclude classic gameplay.

Bill Aurion said:  "60 FPS should be standard next-gen"

That's something I've thought about before as well.  The case is much like co-op, except when co-op is implemented there is a tangible new feature.  60 frames a second is not nearly as big a selling point.   60 fps has always been possible (as F-Zero X on the N64 demonstrates).  It just requires a developer with discipline who wants to acheive it.  They can always chop the framerate in half and essentially double the detail so I don't expect games running at 60 fps to be much more common than they are now.

"However, these are still very meager changes...To me that is nothing compared to what could be done gameplay-wise...Sure it's prettier and you can add a few new gameplay aspects, and increase A.I., but to me that's not really worth a new generation, and it sure doesn't affect the immersion factor...I eagerly await Nintendo's view of the future..."

I think it is worth a new generation if you can realize new types of gameplay in addition to better graphics.  Even the graphics alone are worth it to some extent.  Improved graphics do affect immersion more than we like to admit (for fear of seeming shallow I guess).

JonLueng said:  "Seeing as how you can't make a game with any more dimensions, I would think that Nintendo would have to be working on something more immersive. Imagining things like "true holographic 3D" or some new way to interact with characters on a television other than pressing buttons seem a bit hasty. I'm guessing the best they can do is take a step or two in those directions. But if not amazing enough, some people might not want to learn how to enjoy such a thing."

I don't think Nintendo is working with any kind of new visualization technology.  They aren't in the "TV" business and going that route would likely be far too risky and expensive.  Very likely, assuming revolution isn't a bunch of hot air, it will be a change to the controller.  I'm antipating something akin to the power glove but using both hands and of course, much more modern technology.  The power glove actually used three detectors, apparently, to triangulate the gloves location in space.  It probably used infrared (like a remote control) which would limit it's usefulness.

If they go this route the revolution's "power glove" would use RF (like the wavebird) and might include multiple sensors (one per thumb/finger).  The original powerglove measured finger movement using devices embedded in the glove.  The new one would just use the RF tags on each finger/thumb to track individual finger movements (relative to the rest of your hand).  I'm not sure how feasible it would be for each "revolution" to include RF triangulation hardware (it would have to accomodate multiple players; you would just have to buy new gloves for more players not new receivers).

But that's purely speculation for now.

[WesDawg]

Quote
Yet Nintendo is ready to bury the current paradigm of 3D gaming and move on to supposedly greener pastures. We can only hope that the design of their next generation console allows the current style of 3D games to live alongside the new.

Where do you get this info? Seems to me that Nintendo has just made a few comments about how the industry has gotten stagnant. And a few statements about how nobody has really done anything new with hardware for quite awhile. They haven't said anything about abandoning 3D gaming. They haven't said anything about abandoning 2D gaming either (which they've done amazing things with this generation).

I don't even think they've specifically said anything about their next gen controller. Almost everything that's been said has just popped out of rummer mills. Woo! I think people are really jumping the gun to think that the next box must somehow plug directly into your subconcious and be controlled by penis vibrations.

[Rize]

Wes, Nintendo has said quite a bit if you collect the various facts.  And with a little logic, it's pretty clear that the only thing Nintendo can revolutionize (without being laughed at or spending too much money) is the controller.  And when I say they're ready to bury the current 3D paradigm, I don't mean 3D period, but the current style.

[Bill Aurion]

I doubt that's the case either...I think what we are going to be looking at here is not a change in the way the game looks, but instead how it's played...Remember, Ninty wishes to interest non-gamers to the industry with the Revolution, so simplicity is key to figuring out what Ninty wishes to do...So I believe the Rev will be like the DS...New features will be there, but don't necessarily need to be implemented...

[Rize]

If they just take the controller and add a gyro or a touch pad or something, that will hardly be revolutionary imo (in fact it would be awkward).  I really think they may go with a modern powerglove design.  The powerglove was really way ahead of its time.  It hardly makes sense except in 3D games (the game that shipped with the PG, glove ball, was a psuedo 3D game if I remember correctly).  With today's technology (both in the glove and in the console) it would make a lot more sense.  And I think it could be considered revolutionary.  We'll see though.

[g-tron3000]

It seems that people are pessimistic in regards to Nintendo's "revolutionary" new direction, but  I am holding out hope.  The only Nintendo machine that I've owned that I have been terribly disappointed with so far was the N64.  That entire generation was crappy, IMHO. I hated the Playstation even more. The technology was not yet ready to create an engaging world for me, although I guess the N64 was necessary in a stepping-stone sort of way.  

The problem was, Nintendo dropped the ball with Sony.  The Playstation used CD's and gamers and developers were attracted to that.  Sony lured all of Nintendo's allies away from them, and they've never recovered.  The question is, how do they get those developers back?

Sony is now the video game king for two generations.  I think they're well established as the dominant force in "traditional" games, and Sony's not going to lose its 3rd party interest like Nintendo did if everyone plays by the same rules.  There's nothing to trip them up like that horrible decision to stick to cartridges that I think was ultimately the N64's downfall.  CD's were just inherently more "cool".  FFVII's dramatic splash was enough to cement CD's superiority in people's minds.  The 32/64 generation was an upheaval; the way we played games was dramatically changed, and Nintendo (although arguably the force that caused it to happen- remember the Playstation was originally a Sony/Nintendo collaboration) couldn't predict how things would play out.

However, this next generation will be easier to predict.  Nintendo is right in that the only thing that will be different in the XBox2 and Playstation 3 will be the graphics... and some more mundane things like expanded online gaming (which is very important, but already available in some degree).  The current generation has played itself out, and I think the new systems are coming out way too early.  They won't offer any big advantage over their predecessors.  I don't even think the graphics will be much better.  Doom 3 is state of the art and looks amazing- and that sells, but it's not all that unfamiliar of an experience.  Even the upgrades which the article described (better AI, better lighting, better physics) are neglible.  Gamers aren't simulating turbulence and drag on computer generated airplanes at home.  They're playing games.  As cool and impressive as realism can be, it's starting to enter the realm of diminishing returns.  We can largely match our imaginations now.  The new systems will do much better than Doom graphically, and I don't think that such a meager improvement is worth the upgrade.

People will buy XBox2's and Playstation 3's simply because they are newer and because developers will move to the new platforms as well.  Nintendo realises that, although the Gamecube can reasonably achieve whatever gameplay needs programmers and gamers may have, it will be rendered artificially obsolete on the basis of newer machines being out there.  They can't ignore this new generation, as superficial and artificial as it is, but they will be stomped out of the industry by their cooler, sleeker young competitors if they play the traditional rules.  Furthermore, I think gamers will get bored with the next few generations if they don't offer a distict advantage to their predecessors.  I mean, even if they were largely graphical upgrades, such as the difference from the NES to the SNES, the difference was monumental compared to today.  Nintendo needs their innovative iPod, and very obviously are trying to mimic the success of that device.  We'll see what that means soon, I guess.

[Rize]

I'm holding out hope too, but not for Nintendo to reclaim their crown in the industry.  I just want them to be a successful company and continue making games.  They don't have to be king of the world to do that (and they know it).

"Even the upgrades which the article described (better AI, better lighting, better physics) are neglible."

Doom 3 is not all that new of an experience, but Half-Life 2 is  We don't see valve rushing to port that to current consoles.  The minimum spec for that is a 1.2 Ghz CPU (with 2.4 recommended).  There are definitely gameplay scenarios that simply won't work on current hardware due to lack of processing power.  The upgrades in Half-Life 2 (AI and physics in particular) are crucial to the experience, not negligible.  If you don't have a good PC, perhaps you'll get to experience it yourself on a next-gen console.  Half-Life 2 neatly defeats your entire hypothesis.  It can't be properly done on current consoles and it is a new and worthwhile experience.  Which is why I mentioned it in the editorial.  Have you played Half-Life 2 (or even Doom 3)?

[JonLeung]

Quote
Originally posted by: Rize
If they go this route the revolution's "power glove" would use RF (like the wavebird) and might include multiple sensors (one per thumb/finger).  The original powerglove measured finger movement using devices embedded in the glove.  The new one would just use the RF tags on each finger/thumb to track individual finger movements (relative to the rest of your hand).  I'm not sure how feasible it would be for each "revolution" to include RF triangulation hardware (it would have to accomodate multiple players; you would just have to buy new gloves for more players not new receivers).
But that's purely speculation for now.

My brother got, as a Christmas present from work, a PC controller meant to replace the mouse.  It's a glove - or more like a skeleton of one, if gloves had skeletons - with motion sensors on it.  Of course, there's also a big infrared receiver, and the glove is unfortunately not wireless.  Needless to say, I still prefer the mouse.

Even if they COULD eliminate the cable and improve the reception on it, any sort of "Super Power Glove" would be a hard sell.  People are too used to pushing buttons, and no gamer is going to want to wave their hands around for even short periods of time.  It's tiring and awkward; people are used to pushing buttons and that's what they expect to do with every new console.  One day the technology is going to allow for total immersion-type games, and then button-pushing will be a thing of the past, but the first time is going to be difficult to sell and somehow it seems unlikely that that time would be now.

I remember a rumour saying that the next console will be Nintendo's first without A or B buttons.  Now should this mean that they won't use buttons at all, or that there would be other names for the buttons?

However revolutionary this new Nintendo console will be, let's hope there's still room for traditional games.

[Rize]

"Even if they COULD eliminate the cable and improve the reception on it, any sort of "Super Power Glove" would be a hard sell. People are too used to pushing buttons, and no gamer is going to want to wave their hands around for even short periods of time. It's tiring and awkward; people are used to pushing buttons and that's what they expect to do with every new console. One day the technology is going to allow for total immersion-type games, and then button-pushing will be a thing of the past, but the first time is going to be difficult to sell and somehow it seems unlikely that that time would be now."

I think you're going a little to far with that.  If such a device were used, you wouldn't be waving your arms around necessarily.  You could accomplish a lot with finger and wrist movements (more subtle things).  As for who it would appeal to... I think Nintendo will continue to appeal to Nintendo fans no matter what.  They have indicated themselves that they would like to appeal to a new market (not just steal customers or share them with Sony and Microsoft).  This is the kind of interface that could do that.

Think of Tom Cruise using that computer in the beginning of Minority Report (the move not the game *shudders*)... sure if you design something like that PC peripheral you described it's going to fail because the PC software isn't designed to work with it.  But if games and/or software are designed to use it, then it could be very effective.

[Ian Sane]

"It seems that people are pessimistic in regards to Nintendo's "revolutionary" new direction"

There's a reason for that or at least it's my reason for any pessimism.  Nintendo has really underdelivered on many of their recent ideas that they claimed were innovative and they made a lot of easily avoidable mistakes on the Cube.  The easily avoidable mistakes were minor stuff like tiny memory cards and the lack of demo discs.  Nothing too major but still stuff that any moderate fan of videogames would have spotted miles away.  They were the sort of mistakes you would expect from someone like Nokia not Nintendo, the company that saved videogames and established the console model currently used today.

The underdelivered ideas are more serious since the Revolution itself seems to be based on a new idea.  Nintendo waited to show Super Mario Sunshine because they were afraid someone would steal their idea.  It sure sounded like a really cool idea because it would have to be in order for people to want to steal it.  It turned out to be a largely uninteresting waterpack that has not been stolen by anyone because it wasn't that cool of an idea.  Nintendo made a big deal about connectivity.  It was going to give them an edge and would be incredibly innovative.  In the end most games only used connectivity as a neat bonus for GBA owners.  The only games that made heavy use of the concept were all multiplayer focused titles thus making them have very expensive hardware requirements.  Pac-Man VS which received the most hype from Nintendo at their E3 show that year was multiplayer only and had so little depth that it wasn't even sold as a standalone title.  Finally there's the DS which has some really unique features.  However Nintendo has yet to make good use of these features.  All of their DS games thus far are gimmick games that don't demonstrate the DS features as essential.

So the last three times Nintendo made a big deal about some innovative idea the result was pretty lame.  Thus there's a natural fear/assumption that the pattern will repeat.  If Nintendo really delivered with these concepts then I would be very optimistic about the Revoluton.  But they didn't and to me that shows that they no longer know what gamers want and greatly overestimate the appeal of their own ideas.

I want Nintendo to be successful and I think they're capable of being at least a strong number two to Sony.  I just don't trust them anymore to deliver on a new concept.  I hope they prove me wrong and I know they can, it's just that recent history suggests they won't.

[Rize]

Exactly Ian Sane.  The best barameter of the revolution is the DS.  Unfortunately it hasn't been around long enough to get a great reading and I'm confident the revolution will have a very different launch (it will be supported by original Nintendo titles not ports with bonus features and 3rd party games).  What I'm worried about is the revolution's "secret".

However, there is some hope.  Controllers are clearly not the optimal input device for all games (compare keyboard and mouse).  There may be some other method of controlling games that no one else has thought of yet that could truly revolutionize the industry.  Who knows, perhaps Nintendo came up with a great idea and all of this revolution talk is market speak.  In other words... I'd be more optimistic If I was sure the idea behind revolution came before the idea that there needs to be a revolution.

Maybe the input device is being changed to a more keyboard and mouse like setup.  You'd have some kind of thing with buttons in your left (or right) hand and some kind of glove or gryoscopic device in your right hand (that would have mouse-like functionality).  Both devices would be wireless and work in either hand to accomodate lefties.

[Bill Aurion]

"All of their DS games thus far are gimmick games that don't demonstrate the DS features as essential."

Wario Ware isn't a gimmick game...

"It sure sounded like a really cool idea because it would have to be in order for people to want to steal it. It turned out to be a largely uninteresting waterpack that has not been stolen by anyone because it wasn't that cool of an idea."

I am VERY sick of hearing this example, because it's really lame...The reason the idea WASN'T taken was that it was near complete when finally shown...What worries Ninty and most devs the most is showing an idea and then being beaten to the market by another dev who takes the idea and churns out a quickie before original game can be put out...

And I'm ESPECIALLY sick of hearing crap about Sunshine's water pack...I found it interesting...I found it innovative...END...

[Rize]

Hmm, yeah, I should qualify my agreement with Ian by saying that I too enjoyed Mario Sunshine and felt that FLUDD was a worthy addition.  I just wish the game had some more variety in location (too much beach/sun/water).

However, I do agree that Wario Ware DS is mostly a gimmicky game.  So was the original, however, it was unique then.  On the DS the most worthwhile games are minigames (Mario 64 mini games and wario ware mini games).  I want a *real* DS game that uses its features.  A game like Zelda that somehow uses the touch screen.  

[ruby_onix]

Quote
And lastly, the number and scope of massively multiplayer online games will likely increase significantly in the next generation, due to the increasing number of online players and the increasing prevalence and bandwidth of Internet connections.

Just a thought, is the bandwidth of the internet actually increasing? I mean, I know that more and more people are getting broadband, but is broadband getting any better? I don't think it is.

In that sense, "online" isn't going to see any improved functionality. More people, perhaps more creativity, but it's already been "maxed out" by this generation, and can't really be improved with new hardware.

Quote
Even 2D gaming, which has been around for more than thirty years, continues to attract the attention of both developers and gamers. Yet Nintendo is ready to bury the current paradigm of 3D gaming and move on to supposedly greener pastures. We can only hope that the design of their next generation console allows the current style of 3D games to live alongside the new. There is still much fun due gamers from mere evolutions of current genres and many classic franchises that have not yet made the leap to 3D.

Bah! 2D games don't make a "leap" to 3D. For the most part, they're just 2D franchise names, that get whored out to help sell new (hit or miss) 3D franchises.

The number of names and logos remaining in the old 2D bank that can be slapped on things doesn't really say how much life there is in the 3D world. However, I do agree that there still seems to be a lot of potential for new games and innovation in the 3D world. Just because we haven't seen it, it doesn't mean it can't be done.

Although I think we really need to keep in mind here that Nintendo has been arguably the biggest force in the industry towards keeping 2D alive, even though they were the ones to "really" usher in the age of 3D. I say arguably because some people tend to argue that Sony might currently be a bigger force, but that's just because Sony is a force in this generation. They've also far-and-away been the absolute biggest force pushing for the demise of 2D.

Either way, Nintendo has been a force for 2D, with their home consoles, with their own franchises, with the GBA, with the DS, you name it. If they usher in an age beyond what we call "3D", will they really abandon the past? I'm leaning towards "hell no", but you never know what the future might hold. Especially when Nintendo won't tell anyone squat about what they're thinking.

Whatever happens, revolution or gimmick, success or failure, Nintendo is dead-set in their position, and will run headlong into it.

[Ian Sane]

"I'd be more optimistic If I was sure the idea behind revolution came before the idea that there needs to be a revolution."

Very well said.  Changing because of an idea is more likely to create something worthwhile then deciding to change and then thinking up an idea.  I agree that Nintendo will probably deliver if they're not just changing for the sake of change which is what I'm afraid they're doing.

A keyboard/mouse setup isn't that bad of an idea.  The only thing that a keyboard is really missing is an analog stick and a design more streamlined for games.  If you took a keyboard and:

-removed keys not needed for gaming like the windows key, scroll lock, or symbols like ~
-seperated the keys into three sections based an typing (for messages and such), action functions, and admin functions (like pause, start, select)
-arranged the arrows into a circle so that there were easy to reach diagonal keys
-added a couple of analog sticks and analog buttons
-added a knob for old school paddle games and for steering wheel functionality
-kept the mouse with three or four buttons and a scrollwheel
-had expansion slots on the sides to add extra stuff like say piano keys for a rhythm game

you would have something that would be really flexible and would work reasonably well with most games.  Ergonomics would be a big issue though as well as cost and the fact that people can't really hold it in their hands.  If Nintendo is thinking in those sort of terms I'm less worried.

[ruby_onix]

Removing keys from the keyboard would be one of those bonehead moves that everybody could predict.

What Nintendo needs to do is make those Minority Report gloves. Then your Revolution is suddenly backwards compatible with every input device ever created. You want to use a keyboard and mouse? Sure! Just grab them. Don't plug them in. Just use them. You wanna play a Cube game? Grab a Cube controller. You think the game works better with a SNES or NES controller? Those work too.

That'd be awesome. But of course, I just have to toss that idea out of my head now, because I have no idea what Nintendo will do, and I don't want to set myself up for a major letdown.

[Rize]

Broadband is getting better.  My Cable company now offers three different tiers of service (with the standard 50 dollar tier being the middle one now).  But more importantly, many more people are upgrading to broadband from modem's.  That's mostly what I meant by increasing bandwidth.  Even world of warcraft (the most recent high profile MMORPG) requires only a 56k modem at worst.  Soon more games will require a broadband connection at the minimum and that will have an effect on MMOG design.

"Bah! 2D games don't make a "leap" to 3D. For the most part, they're just 2D franchise names, that get whored out to help sell new (hit or miss) 3D franchises."

That's what people who don't like 3D games much like to say.  And it's true in many cases.  However, completely false in many other cases.  Metroid Prime, for example, has a lot in common with 2D metroids.  It has a similar weapon/energy system, similar upgrade system and similar basic design (with exploration and backtracking).  I won't bother citing the details of other examples, but I think it's clear to most people that Mario 64 and Zelda OoT borrow quite a bit from their 2D brethren.  Other good examples are:  Metal Gear Solid and Pricnce of Persia.  Excitebike 64 is an example of a game that has very little in common with the original, but still turned out quite well (of course it does still feature the redlining from the classic and the track editor).  You sound a bit jaded to me (probably thanks to the castlevania, mega man, contra, rygar, ninja gaiden etc. transitions to 3D).

"Either way, Nintendo has been a force for 2D, with their home consoles, with their own franchises, with the GBA, with the DS, you name it. If they usher in an age beyond what we call "3D", will they really abandon the past? I'm leaning towards "hell no", but you never know what the future might hold. Especially when Nintendo won't tell anyone squat about what they're thinking."

Not a bad point.  However, the controller may be designed in such a way as to force the past to be abandoned (at least on that console).

Ian Sane: that device you described is far too complex for Nintendo's style.  You're talking about the company that refused to put a second Z button on the left side of their GameCube controller (which would have made PS2 ports so much easier).  It would be good if such a device could have an analog stick on it... but I could see them doing something like that and leaving it out.  However, your hand could easily function as an analog stick with a glove on it.  There would be one censor on your wrist that would only move if you moved your arm.  For analog functionality your arm movements would be ignored.  Instead, it would measure the movement if, say, your index finger with respect to your wrist (so essentially you would just pivot your hand around on your wrist just as you pivot the analog stick around in its socket to move a character).  Imagine how much more intuitive that would be for people who have not yet adjusted to analog sticks (and there are many).

You know, I like the sound of this idea more and more as I think about it.  Two gloves sounds bad, but one glove with an auxillary device in the other hand could work excellently.

ruby, that could work, but it would be more difficult than it sounds.  THat would require extraordinary precision and you would need standardized dummy devices (or else you'd have to calibrate any device you need to use).  It would work in theory, but I think it would be too complex.  It's cool though, because such a glove on one hand could function as an analog stick or as a mouse.

[NWR_Lindy]

I think the most promising thing I've heard about Revolution is the rumor that Camelot has a Golden Sun title in the works for the console.  If this is true, Nintendo can't be doing something too far off the map hardware-wise because their controller will have to be useful for RPGs...even if it's something that emulates a mouse pointer interface.

I'm concerned though.  I'd much rather have a console that's easy to port third-party games to than have some weird proprietary gizmo.

silks

[JonLeung]

Quote
Originally posted by: Rize
Think of Tom Cruise using that computer in the beginning of Minority Report (the move not the game *shudders*)... sure if you design something like that PC peripheral you described it's going to fail because the PC software isn't designed to work with it.  But if games and/or software are designed to use it, then it could be very effective.

The Minority Report scene you mentioned is kind of like how the PC glove I have works...(sometimes...)  I didn't mean that people would be moving their arms about - but you try holding your hand up for an hour.

I'm sure if games were made SPECIFICALLY for it, you wouldn't get as fatigued as quickly 'cause you're having fun...like those people who like the EyeToy and DDR and etc. where they're physically moving about.  I guess we're jumping the gun with many assumptions here, but if this is what Revolution is about, then if I'm not fearing for Nintendo, I'm fearing for conventional games.

Of course, chucking all assumptions aside, we're left with, well, nothing.

May can't get here soon enough.

Well, maybe, but you know, there's definitely some anticipation.

[Rize]

I think one could be designed that doesn't require anymore effort than a controller for the most part.  Of course, a large part of that would be up to the game designer.