Topic: Let's Talk Controller

[Don'tHate742]

I appreciate that; I'm glad someone can comes to grip with what I see. And your right, the tape strap wouldn't be that big of a deal if all you had to do is use a tape measure type mechanism, but that's a small point anyway. What do you think about the total idea, especially the comfortablity factor? Really, because I'm actually thinking of pitching this idea to the NOA; even if it might not be taking seriously (maybe a better illustration would help). Most people are skeptical that it won't simplify things (which is half true), but IMO it would make those who picked up a game like Halo and couldn't grasp it, pick up a game on the REV and try it again.; only to successfully become "good" at the game, while having alot fun experimenting with it.

I know from personal experiences that people who completely sucked at Halo (my brother for one), though they tried to get good, just couldn't see the fun in playing with the controls. It was too hard; to move and aim with two joysticks is extremely complicated. Now when my brother plays it on the computer, with controls he can easily grasp....he has a blast. He loses frequently but he loses cuase he isn't that experienced and not becuase of translating what he wants to do onto the controller. I think the REV can do the same thing, but with all games, and not just FPS (which are extremely easy to play on the PC). If people can feel that they have the gun in their hand, or their fist in a boxing glove, or anything else; they will automatically relate to the game, instantly making it easier (to control that is).  

[nemo_83]

originally in my designs i tried to create something people would grip like a gun or flight stick, but ultimately came to the conclusion that the hand should be relaxed so we can use our fingers as well as our thumbs.  so i made my design more like a mouse with the hope that it would feel familiar to PC gamers.

[KDR_11k]

A mouse is uncomfortable, it's meant for resting on a surface. Guns are meant to be hewld steady so I'd take that as an inspiration.

[Hostile Creation]

That's a pretty interesting possibility, Don'tHate.  Do you intend to have a controller for each hand?  I mean, it'd be amazing if they could incorporate some device that could sense the distance between the two, sense motion in the controller.  It'd feel very natural to use the entire controller to move if you held it in one hand, I think, and it could provide some great potential.

[Don'tHate742]

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
That's a pretty interesting possibility, Don'tHate.  Do you intend to have a controller for each hand?  I mean, it'd be amazing if they could incorporate some device that could sense the distance between the two, sense motion in the controller.  It'd feel very natural to use the entire controller to move if you held it in one hand, I think, and it could provide some great potential.

I'm not understanding what you mean. Could you explain further? To clarify myself and my design goals --  The main reasons for having a controller for each hand is to allow: 1. each hand to seperately control different aspects of the game and 2. to allow previous games or ports to be playable on the REV. It is still possible to have a one-handed game, such as Metriod. Where you aim with your arm and shoot like you would a gun. The face buttons would be used for turning into a ball (using the analog stick to move) and other metriod functions, while the analog stick can be used for selecting views and such in non-ball mode (maybe you hold down the second trigger to switch the analog menu from different views to guns).  Also, Super Monkey Ball could easily be one-handed, and more fun.

That's it really. I included two joysticks in the design as well as a sufficient amount of face buttons and triggers, to allow for games that don't take advantage of the gyroscope.  It would be a pain in the arse if developers, developing multi-console games, had to transform the controls to use your hands instead of the sticks (I wish they would though). It's to say "Hey, we're the weird and innovative Nintendo. We like making games more fun and interactive; however, that doesn't me you can't make the games the way you want! Everything can be done with Nintendo!" Something like that would attract new developers, while at the same time not turning others away.

Also to clarify the use of the straps that fit around your hand. It is to keep the controller in the palm in your hand, and provide proper leverage for pushing buttons rapidly.

[nemo_83]

the controller needs to conform to the hands in a relaxed position.  the gamecube controller fits the hand excellently, but the revolution controller's mold will most likely be even more comfortable and cause less stress to the joints.  i don't mind the idea of a strap, but there will always be opposition claiming the strap is too complicated or uncomfortable and the controller is useless without it.  in one of my designs i originally included a brace/glove that was attached to the controller by velcrow or magnets in the palm allowing you to relax your entire hand without dropping the controller.  i've come up with at least a dozen new designs, but i don't want to show them on the board.  some include ideas dealing with how to connect and disconnect the handles and how that would play into gameplay.  

[BlackGriffen]

I'm back!

If you check out the new issue of GameInformer (GameStop's glorified ad) they have an article on the next gen consoles. Mostly, they focus on Microsoft and Sony, but mostly Microsoft. At the end, however, they make a claim that, while I suggested it a while ago in this thread (I think), sounds tough to believe at best. GI is claiming that the Rev controller will be touch screen based. To what extent, in what areas, etc they don't say. While I am obviously intrigued by the idea, I'm also concerned about the problems with touch screens:

1. The lack of tactile feedback can make touch screens imprecise.
   
2. Touch screens, AFAIK, only let you touch one place (ie no button combos)
   
3. The lack of consistency in layout will likely up the learning curve on most games.
   
4. Porting games will be difficult at best
   

#1 is a real problem if developers try to do the obvious thing and just draw buttons on the screen and expect the gamer to hit them. Without the feel of a button to them gamers they're in the right place, there'll be a lot of missed presses. This problem is only made worse if devs are all using non-sandard layouts because gamers can't build up muscle memory of where the press (the only thing that saves the sorry ass of the PS2 with it's 4 identical face buttons - the SNES at least differentiated between the XY and AB buttons). Because of that, control schemes will likely have to be gesture based (eg make a line, make a circle, the joystick replacement in SM64DS, etc) instead of "touch here" based. Without solving the first problem, I can't see them replacing digital buttons with touch screens. One or more analog sticks, maybe. GameInformer specifically mentioned joysticks and shoulder buttons going, so maybe it's only a replacement for the analog interfaces.

The last one, however, is the killer. If anyone thinks Nintendo has third party support problems now, having a controller that can't handle the control schemes of cross platform titles will absolutely kill it.

I'm very intrigued, but also pessimistic. Nintendo needs to do more than just have an interesting idea - they need to make it workable and have it fit in the market so third parties aren't scared off.

That said, there's one thing we know for certain that should alleviate everyone's fears - GameCube backwards compatibility. The revolution cannot be backwards compatible in any kind of meaningful way unless it has the ability to mimic standard control schemes in a way that doesn't require tuning software (that is to say two sticks, digital buttons, d-pad, and shoulder buttons). Given that, I see three possibilities: first, and most likely IMHO, GameInformer is full of it; second, Nintendo solved all aforementioned problems and has something really interesting/potentially genius coming down the pipe; or third, Nintendo's execs have gone insane and decided to commit corporate seppuku in that quirky way that only Nintendo could.

I suppose it's also possible that the Rev could simply use the same controller ports as the GC - then they could say that backwards compatability requires a GC controller (knowing Ninty they'd try to make a quick $5 on adaptors ). In that case, IMHO, Nintendo would be working on scenario three (corporate suicide). Let's hope that's not the case.

BlackGriffen

[Caillan]

That was probably just MS fanboys crapping on everyone else. Iwata has said that the Revoluton will not use touch-screen technology. What he has said, is that the Rev. will use a 'new interface'. It will be new in the same way that the DS is new. I think the Revoluton controller will be original and we will never guess what it is.

[slingshot]

Touch screen could be integrated somehow, but not as the main system of buttons- obviously.  You are looking at the
tv screen playing a game that requires your focus- you cannot be looking away to locate a buttons image on your controler.
That would make things very difficult.  A screen could be useful in some way- (but that should be through connectivity of the
DS)  Trust me- Nin is up to something new and different and exciting- they won't cut and paste something that we just
got from them in the DS and call it revolutionary.

[Ian Sane]

I imagine the only reason that a touchscreen controller is being rumoured is because that's what the DS has so it's an easy guess.  To think of something else either requires one to think like Nintendo or to come to some inane solution that makes no sense.

BlackGriffen sited the obvious flaw in using a touchscreen for buttons.  Personally I see no advantage whatsoever for using it as a replacement for analog sticks.  Super Mario 64 DS' controls SUCK.  They're a broken workaround for a system with no analog stick and they're greatly inferior to traditional controls.  Now that doesn't mean all touchscreen control sucks but as a replacement for an analog stick or d-pad it's useless.  Touchscreen control is different.  It's not a replacement.

I think the problem with Nintendo's approach to the Revolution can summed up with this quote from an interview with Iwata that was posted on IGN recently.  "We have a number of candidates for a new interface but are not ready to reveal them."  That suggests to me that they did what I was afraid they would do.  Instead of discovering a new better way to do things and adapting to it they decided to change things without any real plan on what to change.  They just want to make the Revolution different to be different instead of to improve.  Why else would they not have decided what the new interface is?  They want the Revolution to be different but have no actual reason to make it different.

I figure the Rev controller will either be one of three things:
1. Basically the same thing as the Cube controller except with one minor addition.  Disappointing for those expecting a "revolution" but thankfully traditional enough to not wang everything.  Nintendo will make one or two games that use the new feature and then it will just be ignored and we'll get familar style games.
2. Something completely bizarre that while different is functionally very restrictive and severely limits control options.  The Revolution either completely bombs with no third party support or Nintendo wises up and releases a normal controller shortly after.  If the normal controller is released things settle down a bit but the Rev suffers poor third party support due to the poor first impression.  Another possibility is Nintendo reveals this weirdo controller at E3 and it goes over very poorly so they redesign the thing to something more normal (ie: option 1) before launch.
3. Something that truly is groundbreaking and changes gaming forever.  This is the most unlikely occurance due to the rarity of such historical ideas.

Personally I think 1 is the most likely due to Cube backwards compatibility and that fact that although Nintendo is odd at times I give them enough credit to not be so insane as to completely ruin their whole business over one idea.

[Spak-Spang]

A Touch Screen could never simulate Analog Control well enough to replace it.  However, it does add features that could replace buttons.  The Touch Screen isn't a perfect replace for buttons mind you, but you could technically custom create Buttons and Switchs for whatever you need for a game.  

That would be quite revolutionary, and I can see some amazing ways to design games for it.  It could be awesome.

[Bill Aurion]

"That suggests to me that they did what I was afraid they would do. Instead of discovering a new better way to do things and adapting to it they decided to change things without any real plan on what to change."

Maybe you can take it that manner if you are the negative, angsty type that can't think positively...I say it's because Ninty has a lot of ideas and is still deciding on which ones they should finalize in the system (as in combinations of features)...I am 100% positive there is at least a main theme behind the interfaces Ninty is looking over...

[nemo_83]

I recently saw the same rumor on nintendo.com from another source

can't forget that cub.ign has also said that EA told them that there was a touch screen on the Revolution controller

hopefully this is not the revolutionary aspect, hopefully there isn't a damn touch screen on the controller cause i refuse to play a game in which i have to look down at the controller  

[SgtShiversBen]

For all we know, there may not even be a controller.  It may just be that the console itself is a touchscreen and all that stuff.  I know that's expensive like crazy, but hell, we're all speculating. :-D  It could still play Gamecube games with a drive and all, but be all REVOLUTIONARY.  It would, like Reggie said, remove the tether from the console to the TV.  Also you could hook it up to a computer screen and be all bling bling.  It would be nice, but I know it's a real far fetched idea.

[Don'tHate742]

Ian, I usually agree with you, but this time, you are twisting Iwata's words. He said we have a few different options, that can mean anything. You saw it as having COMPLETELY different ideas, and I think that's wrong way to look at it. He also mentioned the word interface; this leads me to believe that they have the concept down, but not the way they are going to integrate it. Gyration can be used in many ways, and so can a touch-screen. They probably have many mock designs, with or without buttons/sticks, and are deciding which one is the best based on pro's and con's of intuitiveness and overall "Revolutionary-ness". My theory is: they have many gyration controllers made; some in two parts, some as one, some with d-pads/sticks/buttons, some without.

I also think that there is NO WAY they'll have a touch-screen on the controller. Though sales prove the DS popular, many.....very many media officials have been negative towards the idea, and are skeptical of it's idea. Even I, a Nintendo fan, is holding out from buying the DS till I see something worth buying (can't wait to see E3!). Showing a touch-screen controller would make the entire media and most of the Nintendo fan-base let out a big sigh.  Plus, since they have already introduced a product using the touch-screen, it won't be seen as revolutionary since it's already been done. Not to mention the contract with Gyration regarding an UNDISCLOSED amount to use their products. Maybe a combination of the two, but touch-screen alone....very, very unlikely. I know I'm leaning towards my idea, but it is so blatanly revolutionary to games that it had to of crossed a few R&D minds. It may be hard to implement correctly, that's why i'm guessing they have many mock ups. Still, the fact that they have a contract with Gyrations points ----> to it's use.

[Ian Sane]

"Though sales prove the DS popular, many.....very many media officials have been negative towards the idea, and are skeptical of it's idea. Even I, a Nintendo fan, is holding out from buying the DS till I see something worth buying (can't wait to see E3!). Showing a touch-screen controller would make the entire media and most of the Nintendo fan-base let out a big sigh."

True but Nintendo probably doesn't care about something like that.  Sales prove the DS popular.  I think the DS needs some work but I doubt Nintendo cares if I don't buy one provided that millions of other people do.  I doubt it's a touchscreen but I don't think Nintendo would make a decision like that because a lot of the media aren't impressed with the concept thus far.

"You saw it as having COMPLETELY different ideas, and I think that's wrong way to look at it."

Yeah that is how I interpreted it.  It could just be "do we include this or this AND this".

[Don'tHate742]

"True but Nintendo probably doesn't care about something like that. Sales prove the DS popular. I think the DS needs some work but I doubt Nintendo cares if I don't buy one provided that millions of other people do. I doubt it's a touchscreen but I don't think Nintendo would make a decision like that because a lot of the media aren't impressed with the concept thus far."

You're right, and with that mentality, they could make a decision that's "cool" on the revolutionary meter (7 of 10). Japanese people might eat it up, but americans might just see it as another gimmick, as well as some developers. If Nintendo plans on getting out of third place state-wide and second place world-wide, they need to step it up. They have many competent employees and a simple brain-storm in a group of 15-20 individuals, everyday for about a month, should yeild a really great idea. Hell, we as forum go-ers have came up with great possibilities, not to mention the media, with most of it's ideas tossed between a few people. Nintendo can do this.........they have to. Only a really appealing Revolution, or a really appealing Portable GC can pull Nintendo out of third place.


I also re-did my concept. It's relatively the same, but is ALOT easier to understand what the hell i'm talking a about. Colors, buttons....blah blah blah not finalized. Go ahead give it a click http://tinypic.com/28sgut .   Admire my Rev logo, and kneel before my artistic might! hehe

[Spak-Spang]

You know for those that fear the Touch screen would hinder gameplay, I say that doesn't have to be true.

If you included an analog stick on the left as normal,  4 Trigger Buttons, 2 analog with Trigger click function, and 2 Digital, a Right planted Touch Screen could work for other buttons.  Specially if its designed to respond well to pressure.

Here is the idea:

Allow the Right interface to become anything you need.  If you want to create a driving game that requires precision driving, you can use a touch screen to choose speed, and then just slide the thumb across the speedometer to speed up or slow down.  

Or a game that simulates driving a giant mech could have switchs and icons switch up and down to play.  

If the controller is erganomical enough, and the buttons were well layed out it could be just like normal to play the games.

Also they could design the touch screen with a small indent for a thumb resting point to help gamers have a feel where their fingers are on the controls.  

I see no problem with this setup.

[Don'tHate742]

I see your point, but what about hitting two buttons at the same time? Many fighters today do that. Also, what about sliding you finger across the screen to hit another button? If your finger barely touches a button you didn't mean to touch, does it click it anyway? Also, what about rapidly pressing buttons? Could the screen get confused on which button your hitting and do something unintentional?

It has to many flaws as a button-replacement mechanism. Having real buttons is essential for accurate play. They could still include a touchscreen, but it would have to be implemented like the DS. Again, it's not very revolutionary anyways.....

[Spak-Spang]

Don'tHate.

Simple for a fighting game  You have the Thumb rest and you have a button above, below, left, right.  once you "press the Button" then it will activate.  The Button can demand a certain amount of pressure and not just rub against the screen and have it triggered.  

You could also have 4 regular buttons, as well as the analog stick.

Another idea would be to include a few face buttons along with a touchscreen.  I don't know how comfortable that would be in the long run but its possible to work.

[Don'tHate742]

I geuss I don't understand or can't comprehend what your including in the controller. Are you saying it should have buttons and a touch-screen?......how? To me, that seems to cumbersome and from a business perspective, it'll look like they threw everything together to try and make everyone happy.

I really think Nintendo knows what they want from their games, but what they don't know is how much of a risk they want to take. Let's take your touch-screen idea. They want to use it.....somehow. Should they make the whole controller one big touch-screen? Or should they make it a normal controller with buttons and a touch-screen? Or anything in between?

That's what they are debating right now; the interface in which they wish to have the revolutionary aspect integrated in. They may have multiple revolutionary aspects, although, I know they have one that is in every mock-up they make. Personally, I hope they lean to the side that provides less risk.

[mantidor]

All this rumors about a touchscreen controller had me worried, but I realized is more a worry about the media's reaction to it than actually the gamers (and non-gamers) reaction, because a touchscreen idea is really great! it would made games completly customizable, every game having his own unique control layout that actually helps the gameplay for it to be more intuitive, it can also be an instant eye catcher, I mean imagine a costumer seeing how the controller adapts to any game, its almost an instant seller, it would be easily picked up over the other two consoles, specially because the difference in graphics will be almost undetectable...

But then comes the media  they will bash to death the idea and Nintendo for doing it, every site from gamespot to ign would call it gimmicky and such, and they ultimately will lead everyone of their readers to hate the controller...[/paranoid mode]

well, hopefully everything will turn out well  

[KDR_11k]

I doubt there will be a touch screen. They've already tried that on the DS, no reason for the Rev to try it again.

[Don'tHate742]

Exactly. Also, if the Rev did feature that control, it would ruin the uniqueness of the DS. If you can play games that are not unlike the DS, on your Rev, this time with better graphics and easier usability....it would kill the main principle of the DS, and make it look obsolete except for the fact it is portable.

I doubt it greatly, and I hope I'm right come E3.


EDIT: Oh ya I just remembered something that most people are forgeting. It seems that the common consensus believes that the touch-screen will be almost exactly like the DS's, maybe a few cosmetic changes and smaller size.....Still, It will be a screen that you view, as well as a touch-screen. You know how expensive it would be to put just a normal screen on each Rev controller? The cost of each controller would be $50 at the least.

[vudu]

I have no idea if this is feasible, so someone stop me if they know it's not.

Would it be possible to have a controller that has removable/changeable face plates?  I know it wouldn't be possible on the types of controllers we have the current generation, but bear with me for a second.

Here’s my idea.  The controller has a removable face (by face, I mean the side that faces you with all the buttons/controls), and underneath the face is a small touch screen.  The controller face would literally fit right over the touch screen, and the nodes (for lack of a better term) on the bottom of each button would hover right above the touch screen until pressed.  The touch screen would be programmed (most likely through a game's option menu) to recognize pressure in certain spots as a button press and operate accordingly.  

(To better describe what I’m picturing, the face plate could technically be removed and a game could be played just by pressing the appropriate spots on the touch pad that would normally be pressed by the button.  However, the touch screen would just recognize touch—there would be no video playback on it.)

If this possible, Nintendo could include a few different place plates (each with different button placement) with each controller.  Each face plate would have the same buttons, but with different placements and/or button sizes.

It would also be possible to have a variable amount of buttons.  A simple beat ‘em up could have two large face buttons, while a more complex game could have six or eight (or more) smaller buttons at its disposal.

The gamer could change the face plates easily, so each game could have a controller design that was best suited for it.  For example, if there were four face buttons and two shoulder buttons on the "regular version" of the controller, there could be a special face plate that would put the two shoulder buttons on the main face, letting there be six face buttons.  This might be good for fighting games that use the quick/medium/fierce punch/kick scheme.  On games with a context sensitive button that is used quite frequently (like Zelda and RE4) the main button would be much larger than the others.

Developers could (of course) design games to work best with a certain face plate, but the gamer would be free to use whichever one he liked best.

In addition to this, the face plate could be removed completely, and the gamer would have a small touch pad that he could use for games programmed to take advantage of it.  I’m not sure if it would be possible to have the analog stick as part of the touch pad interface, or if it would be separate and the touch pad just on the right side of the controller (where the buttons normally are).

Is this technically possible?  Would it be possible to make a controller like this that didn’t cost an arm and a leg?  Would this be a “revolutionary” controller design, or would it confuse the consumer?