Post by: RABicle on September 20, 2005, 08:10:47 AM
OK so here it is.
Revolution's controller is going to revolutionise first person shooters more than we initially think. The genre has been dying all over again, having to resort to horror themes and generally making everything bigger and longer to improve itself. When people get excited over the ability to hold two different pistols at the same time you know we're heading towards a brick wall.
Everyone's already thought about simply aiming with the controller by tilting, as we would a mouse or second analogue stick. I propose however that with the revolution controller FPS games can move beyond that, beyond even what light guns offer, and offer true realism in handling firearms as done in real life. I'm talking blind shooting, shooting around corners, behind ourselves, over objects.
So far. Most people have accepted the obvious idea, to simply map the motion sensor as you would a mouse or right thumbstick. To look up and down and turn left or right. To aim. You gun remains shooting towards the middle of the screen.
I believe this to be a flawed approach. If you consider turning in the keyboard/mouse setup. You move the mouse towards the desired direction then lift it off the surface and back to your central position. If you do not do this and move back to centre, your character does the same, facing the original direction. When you apply this to a motion sensor, should the motion sensor be on at all time, we have no way to 'cancel' our movements as we can a mouse by lifting it. Therefore when we turn around a corner in a game we would have to hold the controller or our whole arm at 90° until we face our initial direction again. I dread to think of the difficulties we'de face holding our controller backwards, pointing away from the screen, should we ever need to backtrack. Because of this I suggest my own scheme.
My control scheme is as follows.
Detachable Thumbstick: Move forward and back and turn left or right. *
Motion sensor.
Moving the 'remote' left and right across a horizontal plane to reach left or right.
Tilting the 'remote' up down, twists left and right to aim.
Moving the 'remote' up and down to raise and lower your gun.
Crosspad: Left and right: to strafe. Up and down to look up or down*
Under my scheme, we wield the controller as we would a real firearm. My approach intergrates the precision aiming of lightgun games and the player controlled movement of traditional first person shooters. But it takes it up another notch.
Imagine a situation we're you're taking cover behind a wall. Around the corner to your left, enemies are opening fire, awaiting for you to appear. In a traditional FPS you would have to move out into the open and take out the gunmen while standing in the way of their gunfire. But now, with revolution, you could just edge up with your back pressed against the wall. Then at the corner. Reach around, moving the controller around your shoulder, and just firing. In person you would be holding the controller behind you, pressing the B trigger. In the game your character would we shooting blindly into the room, with only their arm exposed. Maybe you might be lucky, but if not you can still just swing around and run in firing at enemies as you would a light game game.
But there's much more you could do. Taking cover behind a crate you could raise your arm to shoot over the top, or failing that, lob a grenade, simulating a throwing action with your arm, pressing the trigger to release the explosive. In multiplayer while running past an open doorway you could fire into it, just incase you hit someone, while not breaking stride or changing direction.
In case you just skipped all this or didn't understand. To put it simply, in shooters, you should use the motion sensor to replicate the movements of the characters arm. Use the crosspad and thumbstick to take care of his feet and head.
*I say this because I'm used to the "Goldeneye" setup. For those who want to strafe with the thumbstick or walk with the cosspad it really doesn't matter, they could map it like that. I just find speed and precision in turning to be more important than strafeing.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 20, 2005, 08:30:09 AM
Since you control the gun directly the game could handle melee weapons with exactly the same control scheme, just that you'd be bashing in heads with the rod (guns could be abused as clubs as well).
That could turn into a fun movie-realism shooter, perhaps even with VFX powers. Slow mo so you can aim your shots better, "focus", where the camera tracks the bullet on its way to the enemy (Max Payne sniper rifle, for example) to deal a lot of damage and "dodge" which makes enemies shoot around you (you know, like in those hollywood action movies where the hero dashes through a hail of fire without being hit).
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 20, 2005, 08:47:01 AM
I would also suggest that the A button could be pressed to select weapons you want to use or Items.
Double Tap A and Hold to select items then point and select your item.
Tap and Hold A to select weapons and Point and select your Weapon.
You still have 2 buttons on the analog Stick that are unused. You could use one for ducking and one for jumping.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 20, 2005, 08:52:20 AM
I think that was more to do with consumer ignorance. Anyone with any serious interest in gaming knows that Goldeneye was doing that years before Halo 2 and several PC games have done it as well.
This idea is fantastic. It's the sort of idea that gets me interested in the remote controller. It makes no sense to have aiming and looking be controlled the same way. Plus I find mouse looking to be really disorienting. Too many times I accidently flick the mouse a little too hard and make myself dizzy. This is much more natural. It would add a whole new element of strategy. Simple stuff like running away while shooting wildly behind you would add a lot to the experience. If Nintendo has something like this cooking up then they've got a killer app.
The only issue is using two guns at once. I guess you could use two remotes but using the analog stick for moving would allow you to walk at different speeds a lot better than the d-pad would.
Post by: RABicle on September 20, 2005, 09:39:22 AM
I figure whatever game they incorperate this into should just not be designed with holding two guns at once in mind. I doubt people would even notice.
As for the rest of the controls, it's hard to say. Once again it feels like there's just a few buttons too few on Rev. I figure A would be the all purpose action button. You know, reloading, opening doors, punching gobs, switches etc.
We still need to crouch, change weapons and maybe jump. Perhaps holding A brings up a Turok styles weapons menu and you scroll through with the joystick? Z1 and Z2 can be for ducking and jumping?
It really depends on the game.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 20, 2005, 09:53:56 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on September 20, 2005, 10:04:21 AM
No, but better marketing would.
"I figure whatever game they incorperate this into should just not be designed with holding two guns at once in mind. I doubt people would even notice."
That would be pretty minor. Plus then they can save it for the sequel. Now I'm thinking like a boardroom executive.
Post by: Switchblade Cross on September 20, 2005, 10:29:53 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Reloading and weapon switching could be mapped to the X/Y buttons. After all, reloading or changing weapons isn't just a flick of the wrist in real life, either.
YES! Imagine that a virtual arm and hand would mimic your real moves exactly. Imagine lifting your arm so the gun is pointing upward ni the game, and then sticking out your left index finger and tapping X and then watching the clip fall from the gun. Simple things like that would make this game extrememly immersive. I can see whole lot of genres being moved to a first person view. People rant about how awsome it would be to swing your sword with Link in a Zelda game. But really, it could be akward watching the action in 3rd person. A 1st person zelda game, or one the switches from 3rd to 1st when swordplay begins, would make much more sence. Same thing goes for a fising game, or tennis. Many genres would benifit from going 1st person. In the end, we would be one step closer to virtual reality. Perhaps after this controll is standard and advanced further, like current controllers, in 20 years we'll be ready for the next revolution, and conincidently, LCD VR headsets will be very cheap...
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 20, 2005, 11:48:48 AM
X could be used to reload, and you can still use the double tap menu system for selecting new weapons and items.
After all...you don't just quickly pull an item or weapon out of your pocket...it takes time, and that time can be quickened by skill of reloading or skill of weapon selection...it adds a whole new element and strategy.
Now you have A button for Melee attacks--which would also require time to pull off, which works for a more realistic experience and B for primary attack.
You would still have 2 buttons on the analog stick to use for something.
Also, people asking for dual weapons, you can still do dual weapons in the game...you just are going to be limited to aiming one direction at a time, which I think is fine. Most of the time that is all you really need to do anyway.
This level of accuracy would match lightgun games, and could make you have to aim very precise shots at Boss battles to damage the enemy.
Post by: Artimus on September 20, 2005, 11:49:21 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: RABicle
You move the mouse towards the desired direction then lift it off the surface and back to your central position. If you do not do this and move back to centre, your character does the same, facing the original direction. When you apply this to a motion sensor, should the motion sensor be on at all time, we have no way to 'cancel' our movements as we can a mouse by lifting it. Therefore when we turn around a corner in a game we would have to hold the controller or our whole arm at 90° until we face our initial direction again. I dread to think of the difficulties we'de face holding our controller backwards, pointing away from the screen, should we ever need to backtrack.
First of all, who actually picks a mouse up? I'm terribly confused by all this talk of "moving your arm" when using a mouse. Proper use of the mouse requires only wrist movement. But anyway, there's one reason you don't need this scheme:
Tilting. To turn left or right you just need to tilt. Up, down, left and right would be used as a lightgun. You point where you want to shoot. Moving forward and strafing would be the analog stick. To turn left or right you simply tilt. The longer you tilt the further you turn. The faster you tilt the fast you turn. This is why tilting is the huge advantage of the revolution.
Lift your arm above your head and such is, I'm sad to say it, going to prove Ian right. That'll be exhausting and annoying.
Tilt is the answer for FPS. Though I do like the idea you have in that being able to do those things would be wicked, and incorporating them would be very good too, and truly next gen.
Post by: Hostile Creation on September 20, 2005, 11:58:01 AM
You could have dual weapons in the sense that Goldeneye or Halo 2 did, in that you aim both the guns in one direction.
Ian's suggestion could work, but it's not quite as intuitive.
But it could work very well for a game that worked along the lines of Killer 7. Each remote could control a separate gun, and you wouldn't have to worry about movement. That would be very cool, I'd like to see another Killer 7 esque game on this system.
It'd have to be single player, though, because that many remotes wouldn't work at once with four players.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 20, 2005, 12:03:05 PM
Don't take things so damn literally. I mean moving the mouse suddenly and getting disoriented.
"To turn left or right you just need to tilt."
I don't like it. In the original idea it's like the remote is your gun. Once you start moving the remote for purposes other than aiming it's less natural. When you tilt the remote and you're aiming where you can see the character's hand should tilt like he's holding the gun sideways.
Plus imagine your want to reach out to the side and shoot. If tilting moved the character you would have to hold the remote level as you moved it. Grab a TV remote and pretend to be shooting things with it. I'll bet you you tilt the controller while you're doing it without trying to.
Post by: Hostile Creation on September 20, 2005, 12:11:27 PM
Post by: zakkiel on September 20, 2005, 12:45:51 PM
QuoteThrow in the ability to displace your gun by displacing the controller, and you have the full funcitonality of your scheme, plus the ability to actually change weapons, which is a bonus.
FPS solution: Just moving the wand will aim your gun [without moving the view]. Moving the wand while holding A will rotate the avatar. When rotating, the crosshairs would automatically center on the screen. Solves the problem of being able to turn around while still intuitively allowing you to point the wand at things on screen and shoot them.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 20, 2005, 12:51:56 PM
NINJAS FIGHT ALL THE TIME.
WHEN THEY'RE NOT FIGHTING, THEY'RE FLYING.
~~~~~
Brilliant stuff, RAB.
Post by: ThePerm on September 20, 2005, 01:11:37 PM
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 20, 2005, 01:19:50 PM
You could either have the game be 4-player, or 2-player with dual shooting. The D-Pad could be used for dodging and ducking.
What a fun game that could be...and you could even design it for several people to play online, like a massive 16 player game, linked to 4 systems. Levels could be designed with 4 different paths each that intersect and intermingle.
Hmmm...
The more I think about that the more wonderful it sounds.
Post by: ThePerm on September 20, 2005, 01:48:36 PM
Post by: Dirk Temporo on September 20, 2005, 02:04:31 PM
Post by: RABicle on September 20, 2005, 06:44:24 PM
QuoteActually I prefer the method suggested by KDR. That being just swinging your arm around, clubbing them with your gun.
Now you have A button for Melee attacks--which would also require time to pull off, which works for a more realistic experience and B for primary attack.
A button reload/open doors/hit switches etc.
X and Y cycle through weapons.
Quote
Tilting. To turn left or right you just need to tilt. Up, down, left and right would be used as a lightgun. You point where you want to shoot. Moving forward and strafing would be the analog stick. To turn left or right you simply tilt. The longer you tilt the further you turn. The faster you tilt the fast you turn. This is why tilting is the huge advantage of the revolution.
I think you've missed the point Artimus. I suggest that each directional control on the gamepad (thumbstick, crosspad and motion sensor) control parts of the human body (legs, head and arm) independantly. Under your system, as we go to aim, we're liekly to also tilt the controller, moving our character around as we try to aim.
Post by: mantidor on September 20, 2005, 07:06:24 PM
Post by: ThePerm on September 20, 2005, 07:35:00 PM
Post by: RABicle on September 20, 2005, 09:37:56 PM
Shoot up in the air and watch everyone hit the ground. Women screaming.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 20, 2005, 11:26:27 PM
Post by: Dasmos on September 21, 2005, 04:51:34 AM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on September 21, 2005, 03:42:04 PM
Quote
I was thinking about this. I thought I was the only one who thought it was a good idea.
Pfff...ya right...if you've read anything that I wrote a long ass time ago you'd realize that I predicted the ability to "use your hand" as a gun, even before I knew what the NRC was about.
Quote
Perhaps one attachment for the controller will be a "pass through" connection that links a second rod to it and allows you to use two rods on one controller slot. Perhaps with a different kind of rod to link to it, it wouldn't need the power, home, start or select buttons and could add a few different control elements like an analog stick and two triggers.
Wow that setup sounds incredibly familiar...hmmm....maybe cause I came up with it a long ass time ago.
Post by: KnowsNothing on September 21, 2005, 03:56:23 PM
Post by: Stimutacs Addict on September 21, 2005, 04:29:57 PM
Post by: trip1eX on September 21, 2005, 06:44:52 PM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on September 21, 2005, 07:03:46 PM
Quote
Wow Don'tHate, I now have much more respect for you. You are truly a great being- a prophet even
Obviously sarcastic, but thanks anyways
Post by: wandering on September 21, 2005, 08:17:41 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 21, 2005, 08:49:13 PM
Post by: MrMojoRising on September 21, 2005, 11:47:13 PM
It sounds easier to use it like Nintendo has it planned...unless I'm missing something here...
Post by: couchmonkey on September 22, 2005, 05:36:17 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on September 22, 2005, 07:55:29 AM
Post by: Kairon on September 22, 2005, 01:04:48 PM
Same for mindlessly spraying bullets around a corner without looking!
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 22, 2005, 02:42:46 PM
Next March they'll introduce the 1-cubic-meter Crate peripheral and the French Soil Foxhole, to coincide with the releases of Half-Life 1/2 and Medal of Honor: Euro Trip, respectively.
Post by: RABicle on September 23, 2005, 04:49:13 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: MrMojoRising
Wait...how is this all that much different than the way Nintendo had it set up in the Metroid Demo? Instead of turning more naturally by simply moving the controller farther to the left or right you have to use the D-pad?
It sounds easier to use it like Nintendo has it planned...unless I'm missing something here...
Clearly you are.
Put it this way, there's nothing wrong with Nintendo's current approach. But it doesn't do nything that couldn't be done before. Frankly Nintendo have to jsutify this motion sensing controller by giving us ways to play our games and things to do in these games that we coudln't do before. In my scheme it would be possible to shoot on the left side of the screen while you're turning right. Under my scheme you could strafe in a straight line while aiming in any direction.
You can't do that in FPS currently, and Nintendo's initial metroid demo can't do that either.
If we can't do new things with a new controller than there is no point.
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 23, 2005, 05:17:23 AM
The Metroid Demo can still give more precise and accurate control than a Controller FPS can. It is also a more friendly user system, that can attract more players to playing a first person game.
Design and Control for a game doesn't have to always bring up new possibilities and ways to play to be a revolution. Sometimes it just takes making that experience easier and more enjoyable than it was before hand.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 23, 2005, 05:51:01 AM
Post by: trip1eX on September 23, 2005, 06:24:04 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: RABicle
Clearly you are.
Put it this way, there's nothing wrong with Nintendo's current approach. But it doesn't do nything that couldn't be done before. Frankly Nintendo have to jsutify this motion sensing controller by giving us ways to play our games and things to do in these games that we coudln't do before. In my scheme it would be possible to shoot on the left side of the screen while you're turning right. Under my scheme you could strafe in a straight line while aiming in any direction.
You can't do that in FPS currently, and Nintendo's initial metroid demo can't do that either.
If we can't do new things with a new controller than there is no point.
YOur approach might be an idea worth trying but not anything more than that. It would be too difficult for most games.
Think about it. You'd be aiming awkwardly all the time. TAke your remote in your right hand and move it up near your left shoulder and then try using your wrist to aim back at the TV. Have some fun with that one. IT doesn't work.
Keep the remote in your right hand and hold it on to your right a bit. Try aiming at your TV. Awkward. Not fun comes to mind.
For the most part it's going to be setup like the Metroid Demo for fps games. Like other guys have said it's in the ease of use and fluidity of movement is where this thing will shine. It will be alot easier to look around 3-d worlds. This will be the beauty of this controller for 3d games. The zooming in and out function would be totally natural for 3-d games. Try it in your living room and see how simple it would be to zoom in and out in 3-d environments!! Yeah this movement could even be used to move your character forward/backward. YOu could do all that with one hand.
This doesn't mean this controller won't be used for new things. Some of what you are talking about could be used in games. But it will have to be more thought out.
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 23, 2005, 06:24:19 AM
People that play with the simpler "Metroid Demo" interface could never compete with a player of any skill with this new shoot anywhere interface.
And the shoot anywhere interface, will be awesome, but will also be hard to learn and potentially difficult to master. Meaning there will be a huge learning curve that will hurt the online competitive gaming for new players.
Really, it just depends on what the developer wants to create. For a Metroid game, the "Metroid Demo" control scheme is perfect...but for say Unreal Tournament or Timesplitters this new control scheme works well. Geist could fit in with the Metroid demo theme.
Giving the option means it will hurt competitiveness.
Post by: zakkiel on September 23, 2005, 07:48:30 AM
Quote
Journalist Chris Kohler, who wrote a Revolution hands-on article for Wired News, started a thread on the Gaming-Age forums in which he answers specific questions about his time with the recently-unveiled Nintendo Revolution controller. There's been a lot of speculation and misinformation spread around about the device already, and many of his answers give good closure to some of those rumors. Below are some of the more noteworthy quotes:
Regarding general handling and control: "I can't really compare the controller to existing tech. I can say that the learning curve was practically nonexistent. It's light. It's comfortable. It's goddamned precise." and "I can definitely say that you can point the thing at an angle at the TV, because that's the whole point of the device: you're not moving your whole arm around, you're just making very slight inflections with your wrist." and "When you play with a Wavebird, do you stand up and hold it at arm's length towards the screen? No. And you don't have to do this with the Revolution controller. You can sit with your hands in your lap and just move your wrist a little to cover the entire screen."
Regarding the Revolution-enabled Metroid Prime 2 demo: "As far as Metroid Prime 2, the honest answer is that it was so intuitive that I wasn't even thinking about HOW the controller was doing it. All I know is that I was easily able to spin in circles. IIRC: if you move it further and further towards the left or right of the screen, Samus will start to spin around, and if you bring it back to the center she stops." and "I don't know what sort of impressions other than "Metroid Prime 2 was comfortable and intuitive" I really need to give at this point. The analog attachment was really light. The wire was long enough. Moving, aiming, shooting, and turning took no -- zero -- conscious thought. The only problem I had was remembering which shoulder button scanned and which jumped. But I can't remember that very well on the GameCube either." and "And with the Metroid Prime demo, I was waving the controller all the hell over the place really really fast and the cursor was always exactly where I wanted it."
Regarding other Revolution demos: "The fishing game was the only one that took me more than a second to grasp, because it uses depth perception. But after I got the hang of moving the rod around in a pseudo-3D space, it got easier." and "I really loved the airplane demo. It was as if you were holding a toy plane in your hand, and everything you did with it in real life was reflected on the (very nice*) tv screen."
Not informative, but it made me laugh: "When I first saw it, they hadn't yet explained what it DID. So I was like 'what the jesus is that.' Then Miyamoto was like, check this out, and he starts waving it around and shooting boxes and my stomach felt like it had done a flip-flop."
Regarding the nature of the further surprises promised by Nintendo president Satoru Iwata: "I think it's safe to say that after this I don't put anything past that guy."
So it loks like it uses a sort of mega-analog stick set-up. Unlike an analog stick, you can push it as far as you want and get uber-fast turns, while still having precise control. Not nearly as revolutionary as anything discussed here, but maybe simpler is better.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 23, 2005, 09:30:01 AM
Triplex: Why would you want to hold it in that position? You could hold it anywhere you like as long as it points where you want the shots to go. And if you want them to go somewhere behind you, that's fine.
Zakkiel: That sounds like relative controls *shudder*. I hope it works better than it sounds.
Post by: trip1eX on September 23, 2005, 02:33:09 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Triplex: Why would you want to hold it in that position? You could hold it anywhere you like as long as it points where you want the shots to go. And if you want them to go somewhere behind you, that's fine.
Well the pt was your going to get your arm/wrist into some funky positions. I'm merely trying to illustrate that moving the remote and tilting it in certain directions is just not going to work in certain positions.
Also I don't think you've worked out how you look around in the 3d world yet if you have this kind of setup. Maybe I missed that part.
Anyway I much rather just have the simple and intuitive ability to look around freely in a 3d world.
But hey I could see this happening if say it's used in conjunction with a shift key. HOld down the big 'A' button and suddenly moving the remote in 3d space moves your arm(gun) in the 3d game world. And not your view pt. YOur viewing angle is temporarily frozen.
Post by: Kairon on September 23, 2005, 02:50:58 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: zakkiel on September 23, 2005, 07:20:24 PM
QuoteMeaning? Anyway, reactions to the MP2 demo have ranged from "huge improvement over analogue stick" to "better than a mouse," so I think it's probably ok. I certainly can't see how it would be worse than a stick.
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Spak-Spang: Well, PC FPSes allow you to use only the keyboard or work a joystick or gamepad into your control scheme. Sure you have no chance in a competitive environment but hey, if you can't master the control scheme, how do you expect to master the game?
Triplex: Why would you want to hold it in that position? You could hold it anywhere you like as long as it points where you want the shots to go. And if you want them to go somewhere behind you, that's fine.
Zakkiel: That sounds like relative controls *shudder*. I hope it works better than it sounds.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 23, 2005, 09:36:51 PM
Triplex: Context sensitive controls are annoying. RABicle already said it'd use a dual dpad (or one dpad and one analog if you use only one rod) setup for rough movement and the gyros for shooting things.
Post by: zakkiel on September 24, 2005, 10:37:05 AM
Post by: trip1eX on September 24, 2005, 04:08:32 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
relative means that it's like an analog stick, holding it in one position keeps the velocity constant. With absolute controls holding it in one position will keep the position constant.
Triplex: Context sensitive controls are annoying. RABicle already said it'd use a dual dpad (or one dpad and one analog if you use only one rod) setup for rough movement and the gyros for shooting things.
It's not context sensitive. IT's a shift key.
Anyway you need the gryos and the remote for looking around. The whole moving arm and moving gun separately controls needs to be mapped to a shift key so you can use the remote to look around.
You just haven't thought this out enough imo.
Post by: zakkiel on September 24, 2005, 04:41:24 PM
Post by: BlkPaladin on September 25, 2005, 07:44:38 PM
Just to add to the confusion, I have read that the Revolution will be able to detect the player doing a twisting motion with the controller, I have been thinking about how that can be seamlessly intergrated into a game. I finally came up with a sniper scope, when you are in a FPS and using a sniper scope the twisting motion could zoom in or out depending on which way you twist the controller.
Post by: KnowsNothing on September 26, 2005, 02:15:04 AM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on September 26, 2005, 11:48:06 AM
Anyway, it's a good control scheme Rabicle. I remember way back when when I was described playing with essentially two NRC's in a FPS. While I think your control scheme is that sh*t (it's basically GoldenEye on crack), I'd rather use two NRC's then a nunchuck style NRC.
Think about it. It could use your control scheme, but instead, use the gyros to determine how high or low you want to look (just tilt the controller up to look up and vice versa).
Or you could even map the camera (your head) to the left controller with relative settings, map the gun with absolute to the right controller, then map the movement to any D-pad or both (strafe on one controller, forward/backward on another).
It could be halariously intuitive or horribly aggravating. If intuitive, you could finally play with one hand (good thing?). More importantly, it could make way to a whole slew of new genre-breaking features.
Those included could be: *NOTE* Camera NRC means the NRC with relative controls. Absolute NRC means exactly that.
1. "Attaching" a second gun to the Camera NRC, with the aiming circle fixed to the center of the screen as with most FPS's today. This could allow you to shoot two different enemies.
2. Driving and shooting at the same time.
3. Having your primary gun attached to the Camera NRC, and an item to your absolute NRC. The item could be a shield that you can have complete control over. You could realistically cover your part of the body that is taking fire. You could even swing your shield to melee, or deflect a grenade. Other items could be anything; ranging from a sword to a flashlight.
And that's just the beginning....
Post by: mantidor on September 26, 2005, 02:11:19 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
relative means that it's like an analog stick, holding it in one position keeps the velocity constant. With absolute controls holding it in one position will keep the position constant.
All I know is that Kohler said that he wasnt even thinking how the remote was doing it, Samus was doing exactly what he wanted to do, so maybe its not that bad. Its probably a mix of both relative and absolute positioning for all I know, like absolute while you are onscreen relative when you are off screen or something along those lines.
Post by: zakkiel on September 27, 2005, 09:34:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidorQuote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
relative means that it's like an analog stick, holding it in one position keeps the velocity constant. With absolute controls holding it in one position will keep the position constant.
All I know is that Kohler said that he wasnt even thinking how the remote was doing it, Samus was doing exactly what he wanted to do, so maybe its not that bad. Its probably a mix of both relative and absolute positioning for all I know, like absolute while you are onscreen relative when you are off screen or something along those lines.
That makes a lot of sense, actually. The more I think about it, the more I like it.
Post by: ABlueflameA on September 29, 2005, 03:13:25 PM
Other ideas: If anyone has ever used mouse-gestures on the Opera or Firefox (personally, I use and love Opera) web browsers, you know that by holding a button down and performing a simple movement, moving right, moving down, moving down and then right, can act like very fast short cuts in web browsing. There's no reason that this couldn't be done in games as well. Hold a button down on the remote-like controller and move it in a certain direction to select menus, specific items, or set each direction as if it were a hotkey. That would be great for strategy games. Group your units with the pointer and then make a "controller-gesture" instead of using a precious button, to set them to that gesture.
I'm sure you all can think of many more ideas for doing something like this, it just hit me so I thought I'd throw it in there.
-Blueflame
Post by: ShyGuy on October 05, 2005, 07:30:53 AM
http://catalog.belkin.com/IWCatProductPage.process?Merchant_Id=&Section_Id=2071&pcount=&Product_Id=157024#
Post by: KDR_11k on October 05, 2005, 07:40:22 AM
Post by: Toruresu on October 05, 2005, 11:49:33 AM
