Post by: nemo_83 on November 26, 2005, 05:29:59 PM
I'm still reading it; be back soon.
So many good quotes:
"I think it will be common for someone to own a PS3 and a Revolution or an Xbox 360 and a Revolution, but not a PS3 and Xbox 360 without a Revolution."
"For example: I've heard a lot of mention about how a sword-fighting game might be fun on the Revolution. I am sure there will probably be at least a few of them in the first year or so of the console's release. I am also sure that some of them will suck in some capacity, just because it's going to take time, effort and mistakes for people to figure out if and how it can be done in a fun way. If developers figure it out and consumers vote with their dollars then you might have whole new genres popping up on the Revolution that just can't be done elsewhere."
"I see the potential for serious full-length games. For example, one of the most common ideas is using the analog stick to run through the hallways of an FPS while shooting enemies with the controller, or "pointer" as I've seen it called."
"The Revolution will be much more powerful than the GameCube."
" My big concern with HD games is that a lot of them are sacrificing smooth frame-rates for sharper resolutions"
just a few
Post by: odifiend on November 26, 2005, 06:29:25 PM
"At the time of writing they are stilly a very successful and profitable company, and I think it won't make too much of a difference for them. Their Zeldas, Marios, Metroids and other landmark properties are still cash cows for them and they don't seem to be worried about that audience going away."
This kind of jaded statement worries me... I mean it is obviously true but who is going to go out on a limb to develop something that is not proven when they know that the guaranteed fanbase is not going to look at your game unless it has Mario in it. Bala was saying (obviously) that Nintendo needs to have a wealth of third party games in the beginning out side its own launch titles for success. Nintendo should solve this problem by subsidizing 3rd party dev. costs on finished games if the developer can get their game out within the launch window. I believe this technique was used in securing the craptastic FF:CC which experimented with connectivity. The stakes are much higher than secondary feature, connectivity, and this way devs will feel free to experiment and those devs that do not make their game in time are pretty much committed to finishing their games.
Post by: Ian Sane on November 28, 2005, 10:07:44 AM
One quote that specifically caught my eye: "Nintendo did say that the 'regular' controller will also be on sale, but developers have to support the standard" That's a very important point that a lot of people seem to shrug off with "they're making the shell" and "Cube controllers are supported." It doesn't make a difference if Nintendo makes traditional controllers an option. Developers HAVE to support the standard controller so unless the shell is included with every controller no one will support the damn thing. If the remote is the standard then all we'll ever get is remote games. Third party ports might as well not even exist.
This quote was from Eric Holmes and in my opinion he makes the best points in the whole roundtable. He seems excited about the Rev but he constantly questions the change it has made. It's a very unbiased way of looking at it.
Other quotes of his I like:
"I think it will be up to Nintendo to drive this. That's what they're good at -- forging new ground with the medium they've defined."
"As a multiplatform developer, adding new functionality to the familiarity of the old pad is what I would have preferred."
"I'd like to know more about the software. When the announcement came out there was a whole lot of buzz about what could be done with the controller, but I have yet to see some video or feature doing the internet rounds in the same way that the PS3's E3 'Killzone' movie did. There's a lot of talk about what you could do...how about showing an amazing game running that is an absolute must-have-must-play-must-get-on-day-one system seller? I think if you showed what is being done with the unit it would make the potential of the controller clear."
"I keep reading about how they're chasing a new audience, people who are 'afraid' to pick up the existing controller as it stands. Are existing controller designs really a problem for people to pick up and play? I guess Nintendo thinks so. I don't know exactly who they're talking about -- maybe non-gamers in a shared house, girlfriends or family members who don't play games...? I don't think it can be kids, because kids seem to be utterly fearless when it comes to trying things out.
Is the controller what makes people buy a console in the first place? I think they spend more of the time looking at the packaging, the logo or the console design itself. When was the last time you even saw a controller in a TV ad for a game? It feels like they're pushing for a new market, maybe for people who live in the house where there is already a games console, but who don't currently play games? I'd guess that the controller might solve that problem, but is that the key problem to be solving? Is that really what they should be focusing on? Looking at the strategy both as a third-party developer and a hardcore gamer it seems like an off-the-wall concept."
Maybe I just like what he says because it's very similar to what I think.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 28, 2005, 10:15:53 AM
I'm remember talking about how it turned out to be 'poorly' edited pre-rendered junk, not talking about how the demo played [playing was the easy part, load up your media player software and press 'play'].
Post by: Deguello on November 28, 2005, 11:57:10 AM
"I know! I'll do GTA! WITH THE HULK! Then I'll criticize new ideas!"
I bet he wishes he was important. Not that the rest of the chaps on this panel are the movers and shakers of the industry, but he in particular is the least important. It seems like he got on that panel because his card in the Rolodex was stuck to the Gearbox guy's and 1up figured, "what the hell?"
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 28, 2005, 12:38:20 PM
I can answer this myself...The controller (or at least it's look) doesn't necessarily make someone want to buy a console, but it CAN be the first thing to deter them from it...Also, he speaks of the controller of having standard functionality, which the Rev most certainly doesn't have...In this case, the controller is most certainly a reason to buy the console, considering it's the Revolution (or at least part of it
)
Post by: Ian Sane on November 28, 2005, 01:07:59 PM
I think that's debatable and it's basically the same issue. Is the controller what makes people buy a console and NOT buy a console are pretty much the same question. In my own experience I have never met anyone who was scared of a console because of the controller. I've found that the concept of gaming itself is usually what they're scared of. Or in the case of my brother it was how complex the individual games themselves looked. He hasn't played games regularly since the switch to 3D. But he still plays multiplayer games like Mario Kart or Conker's Bad Fur Day and Perfect Dark. The controller doesn't intimidate him in any way at all. He adapted to the N64 and Cube controllers with ease, even the analog stick. It was the games themselves.
I see the controller largely as Nintendo trying to find a quick fix to their problems. It's easier to blame any decreased sales on a scapegoat like a controller than key problems with Nintendo's attitude and way of doing things.
Ironically I think the Rev's controller has the potential to scare people away more than any other controller ever made.
Post by: Berto2K on November 28, 2005, 01:12:57 PM
Post by: odifiend on November 28, 2005, 01:15:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
I bet he wishes he was important. Not that the rest of the chaps on this panel are the movers and shakers of the industry, but he in particular is the least important. It seems like he got on that panel because his card in the Rolodex was stuck to the Gearbox guy's and 1up figured, "what the hell?"
Eric Holmes's importance doesn't matter. His interview represents the most practical and businesslike views. His statements seem to indicate he is putting thought into the both pros and cons of new control schemes. Holmes, I think sees the potential of the Rev, but also realizes the investment that will go into getting a worthwhile product.
I personally like to hear from all devs because ingenious ideas are not exclusive to only big developers.
"I don't know that it's going to be more difficult than existing games -- but it is going to be difficult in different, new ways. What I mean by this is that everyone in development has the problem of finding a way you use the controller as a fun, intuitive device to effectively put a smile on the face of the gamer. With this new controller there are fewer proven models, so it'd be probably easier to find new ways to create fun experiences, which is always interesting to gamers. At the same time, it'll be harder to hone them due to a lack of proven successful models."
Post by: Ian Sane on November 28, 2005, 01:19:03 PM
I don't recall that actually making a big difference sales-wise. And it's a little different. "This controller has some problems" and "I'm scared of that controller because it is too complex" are different arguements. Nintendo considers the basic design to be a problem. With the Xbox the complaints were regarding the execution of the basic design not the basic design itself.
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 28, 2005, 01:20:30 PM
1) I have met quite a few people that won't play games because of the number of buttons on current controllers...These people tend to be older, but not necessarily those that don't play around with technology...My dad plays around with electronics of all types but doesn't want to step anywhere near a game controller...
2) Can you not say then that the simplicity of the Revmote and intuitive nature of motion control are perfect for making less complex games? The Revmote is clearly not just a matter of aesthetics, it's a matter of functionality...The more intuitive design of the Revmote will allow for less complex games to be designed, which will hopefully lure people (such as your brother) back into the fold...
I see the controller largely as Nintendo trying to find a quick fix to their problems. It's easier to blame any decreased sales on a scapegoat like a controller than key problems with Nintendo's attitude and way of doing things.
Lolololno...
Post by: odifiend on November 28, 2005, 01:29:05 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I see the controller largely as Nintendo trying to find a quick fix to their problems. It's easier to blame any decreased sales on a scapegoat like a controller than key problems with Nintendo's attitude and way of doing things.
Ironically I think the Rev's controller has the potential to scare people away more than any other controller ever made.
Re-EDIT (I knew someone would post in that time):
Maybe... though it is probably not quite that shady. The controller has tons of potential and it is radical enough to blow Nintendo's negative image away. It worked for Apple within a year. I don't see how being a quick fix is a bad thing... You might just complain until the end of this gen rather than 2 or 3 generations.
Post by: Ian Sane on November 28, 2005, 01:38:10 PM
Not really. I would consider motion control to be much more needlessly complex then a simple button push. I don't see the Revmote as being inuitive. I see it as just different.
And decreasing complexity is not always a good thing. Sometimes you WANT something to be complex. Some games benefit from that. So making a controller that FORCES everyone to try to cut down on complexity is a HUGE restriction on creative freedom. If Nintendo wants to make things less complex then they should do so by example, showing that even with 10 buttons they can make a simple game, instead of putting a big ball-and-chain on every developers foot including their own.
Plus while it's all nice and good to lure people back into the fold there is also the huge risk of turning large groups of people already in the fold away.
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on November 28, 2005, 01:52:16 PM
I think what you are thinking of is a restriction on capability rather than complexity, you're worried that the REV won't be capable of doing everything that necessary in a game, when in reality it'll do them with a much more natural feel.
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 28, 2005, 01:56:49 PM
Wrong...Let's take the perspective from someone who has never played a videogame before...If you asked them, "How do you swing a baseball bat," how would they reply? They would show you the actual motion of swinging a bat...The idea of swinging a bat at a press of a button is something we have learned through experience with videogames, it's NOT a extension of experiences in reallife...THAT is what makes the possibilities of the Revolution so sweet: it will allow developers to transfer reallife motions into gameplay rather than training the brain into swinging at bat at the press of a button...
Post by: Ian Sane on November 28, 2005, 01:58:10 PM
This isn't movement, this is virtual movement. Intuitive would mean that I can move my body and the character responds exactly as I do. Like I scratch my nose and the character scratches his nose. Here I'm not doing that. Here I'm swinging a remote and that can represent all sorts of different things. Therefore it is no different then a button press except that button is nearly 100% accurate and swinging a remote isn't. Plus in reality we don't pretend to react with things that aren't there. While it is intuitive to swing a sword it is not intuitive to swing a sword, hit an object and yet still have your arm follow though instead of recoiling.
Post by: odifiend on November 28, 2005, 02:04:01 PM
EDIT: Damn, Ian, posted what I said faster and applied it more generally.
Post by: KnowsNothing on November 28, 2005, 02:06:19 PM
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on November 28, 2005, 02:06:54 PM
And while I agree that swinging the remote won't work like an actual sword swing, again the remote isn't meant to be swung like a sword. As was repeatedly mentioned by the people who had hands on with the remote at TGS the movements are much more subdued than people assume at first glance.
For something like a sword or baseball swing I expect it'll be much more like simple wrist flicks based on timing rather than massive arm movements like you would do in real life.
Post by: IceCold on November 28, 2005, 03:06:00 PM
Well, I definitely agree you with one thing. Being different most certainly does not equate to being better, or in this case, more intuitive. It's like the Canadian Tire adverts where the tag line is "Now That's Different, and only at...!" Who cares if it's different, seriously? I don't buy something just because it's different - I want to know if it's better.
In the Revolution's case, as we all know, the controller is different. But since we haven't seen any games, we don't know if it really improves games. However, Nintendo has a great track record when it comes to software, and I'm willing to bet that they'll come through with the games that will define the NRC. But I guess we can only wait, right?
Post by: nemo_83 on November 28, 2005, 04:07:49 PM
I would complain that the revmote's trigger should be analog (but that may prove difficult to use, like an analog stick when you are using the remote for motion capture). Try using analog functions while having to hold your Cube controller tightly to wave it around with one hand. I'm beginning to believe we need to be able to hold our thumb down on the revmote and a stick requires you to hold it loosly.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on November 28, 2005, 04:42:03 PM
Post by: IceCold on November 28, 2005, 04:45:13 PM
QuoteNah, Iwata said we'd be getting a brand new IP from Miyamoto. It may be a "nongame" but it won't be Nintendogs.
Originally posted by: Don'tHate742
All I know is, I'll be shocked if Nintendogs REV isn't a launch title.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on November 28, 2005, 06:15:19 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on November 29, 2005, 01:49:40 AM
Let's take a simple game: Duck Hunt. Sure, the lightgun could be replaced with an analog stick, autoaim and a trigger button but that defeats the whole point of the game. If dexterity with the rod is one of the challenges in the game it shouldn't be replaced with a simple button press. And besides, the rod could simulate a weapon and include all possible attacks and combos in just the movement. Compare that to the controls of e.g. Tekken and "a button is easier" no longer holds true.
Post by: Stimutacs Addict on November 29, 2005, 04:59:42 AM
Gamers don't look at the Xbox 360 controller and piss their pants. They think it looks pretty good, feels comfortable, etc. But if you ask your dad and mom to join you in a game of Perfect Dark Zero, you'll have a damned hard time convincing them to stick around, simply because there are so many moves that telling them what each one does is sensory overload.
I don't see how non-gamers will be frightened by the Rev controller, or even in the least bit put off. Once you explain the motion control, they'll want to try. They will only have to learn the location of two buttons, so there wont be a learning curve where they're looking down at the remote every time they're required to press a button.
I used to think Nintendo's strategy was folly, but after trying to teach my girlfriend how to play smash bros, I see how a simplified setup will open up the market. I can imagine Good Morning America or Regis and that dumb btch bringing a Rev on to show the wonders of technology.
As for complex games, yeah I think the hardcore fans are kinda screwed. We'll either plug the controller into the shell any time we want to take sam fisher on an adventure or developers will have to think of reduce multiple moves to a single context-sensitive button. I don't really like the thought of that.
Post by: couchmonkey on November 29, 2005, 05:54:12 AM
I am a little surprised and worried that Nintendo is forcing third parties to make their games work on the standard controller layout. I think that's going to scare some third parties away and make for some games that play very poorly without the controller shell. However, I do think the remote can make things more intuitive if it's used wisely.
I think most of us could agree that at least one genre - First-person shooters, will be more intuitive on the Rev than on a regular controller. Isn't it possible that it can make other genres play better too? The improvements may not be obvious, but with a little imagination, maybe wall-jumping and back-flipping can be a lot easier in Super Mario 128 than in analog-stick games.
Edit: Stimutacs Addict, I don't think the nunchuck set up stops us from playing hardcore games at all. It will put off some multi-platform developers, but Retro has already translated the Metroid Prime controls to this setup with no problems, I bet a lot of games cn be translated if developers put the effort in. What if Sam Fisher did all his complicated moves by gestures of the controller rather than by a big set of button mappings? I personally can't remember the controls in Splinter Cell because they're so complicated and I'm just not that interested in the game, but if I could crouch by moving the controller down and sidle up against the wall by waving towards it, and wall-climb by flipping the controller sideways and "walking" it upwards, it would be easy to remember them. I'm not saying that control set up would work, but we'll never know if nobody tries.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 29, 2005, 11:21:36 AM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on November 30, 2005, 04:14:12 AM
Quote
I know people that are intimidated by current gen controllers. Most of them will get past it because everyone else is playing, but they don't buy consoles, and they normally prefer a simple game like Mario Party to a game like Halo or WaveRace. I think Nintendo wants to go after those users.
I have to agree. So many people I know enjoy playing gamecube, but don't own one because they don't see the need to. They play a couple games (mario party, smash bros., super monkey ball) and that's it. If Nintendo can persuade them that owning a console and it's several games is actually worth it, then that's just icing on the cake. Also, the cheaper price tag definitely helps...
Quote
I think most of us could agree that at least one genre - First-person shooters, will be more intuitive on the Rev than on a regular controller. Isn't it possible that it can make other genres play better too? The improvements may not be obvious, but with a little imagination, maybe wall-jumping and back-flipping can be a lot easier in Super Mario 128 than in analog-stick games.
Well it can obviously help with racing, flying, FPS, and sports games. If you look at what people buy in NA, those genres come up the most frequently. Nintendo has to lead the way though. If they can show a spectactular use of the REVmote in only two of those genres (FPS - Metriod, Flying - Starfox), then they got it made.
About racing games, I think WaveRace could quite possibly be the most fun racer to date. If you've ever ridden a jetskit, you would know that to make a tight left turn, you have to lean left and back. Fortunately, the REV can immitate that gesture flawlessly.
To play, you would hold the REVmote flat, with the front pointed towards the tv. This would act as the base of the jetski. To take a sharp left, you would point left and twist the leftside of the REVmote downward. To simply move left, you would point left. Again, this would replicate cutting the water and give you extremely precises controls. To dive, you tilt the REVmote foward. Brilliant.
Post by: couchmonkey on November 30, 2005, 05:35:02 AM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on November 30, 2005, 06:19:14 AM
I came up with two possible solutions:
1. Turn up the sensitivity, so that your wrist only moves 45 degress to the left and right instead of 90 degrees (which I was originally thinking).
2. Hold the REVmote at the bottom and use the small "a" button for acceleration. This helps with the ackwardness as well as allowing you even more precise movement and control (it would be easier to move a certian degree left). However, I don't know how comfortable it would be holding it at the bottom like that.
Post by: KDR_11k on December 01, 2005, 03:43:36 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on December 01, 2005, 05:43:27 AM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 01, 2005, 05:58:29 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
I'd say hold the rod on both ends and turn it like a steering wheel.
That would ruin the intuitiveness though. You don't drive a jetski like you would a car. Nor would you turn a snowboard by turning a wheel.
My idea allows for the controller to feel like what you are riding. I just don't know how awkward it would be when you turn left (for lefty's) or right (for righty's).
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 01, 2005, 07:01:43 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on December 01, 2005, 07:50:19 AM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 01, 2005, 08:55:02 AM
+Z is the general up [away from the floor?], err umm, or the direction away from the plane of the 4 face-up corners of the controller [ x-cross-y? ], according to the right-hand rule.
I didn't think as far as what would happen if someone decide to play upside down while hanging from a tree branch with his/her arms extended towards the ground. And I probably won't work out the details anyway.
But that IS the idea of how i'd like to hold it under my usual upright-sitting-in-couch gaming position.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 01, 2005, 09:44:05 AM
Your effectively flipping the actual way you'd control a real swobard though.
When you turn sharply to the left, you rotate the controller to the left as well as bring the left side of the controller back. Is that what you are trying to describe?
Well if you freeze that picture in your mind for a second, you can see that if you were using my method for control, that it is essentially flipped. The controller (if holding the front in your right hand) is pointed towards the right and tilted to the right.
I see how your control would be far superior to even the best gaming steer wheel, and in racing games comparative to my method. However, I'm not so sure about snowbaording games and the like. Your control method is very intuitive for a racing game. I held a remote and imagined playing a game. When I turn really hard to the left or right, my instinct told me to pull back on the appropriate side; something that you can't even do in a car. For that I applaud the your control scheme. It will make for some very intense races.
But again, how intuitive do you think controlling a snowboarding game or wave race would be with that setup? Imagine playing 1080 with a steering wheel....it doesn't seem like a good fit.
If I had to choose, I'd go with yours because my has some faults, but who knows if there as huge as I make them sound.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 01, 2005, 10:41:51 AM
I've never ridden any jetski type craft, particularly the Wave Race kind, so I don't know how it controls -- as in -- What must I do to steer while holding onto the handles. But I do know how Blue Storm controls, in that it has analog steering (mild leaning?), forward/back leaning/tilting, and extra-extra sideways leaning via L/R triggers. That's what I tried to translate.
But for snowboarding, I'd imagine using something like yours.
Mario once mentioned holding the controller as if it were one of the jetski handles. Missing the other handle would be awkward, but I can imagine being able to translate the relavant body movements to the scale of a single handle.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 01, 2005, 11:51:52 AM
Also, the way you control a jetski is much like a motor-cycle and a snowboard. You lean a cooresponding way. To make a tight turn, you turn and lean the direction while leaning backwards at the same time. It's hard to explain, but its something that would be hard to translate with your control scheme.
P.S. F-Zero would be AMAZING. Its the perfect game for such a perfect control scheme. The R/L buttons for grip could be activated by pulling the right or left side towards you. The a/b buttons could be acceleration and attack. Brilliant!
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 01, 2005, 01:07:22 PM
The thought experiment is more important than the proposals.
Post by: Kairon on December 01, 2005, 01:22:54 PM
Quote
did you forget rotating of the controller and nose right nose left Pro666?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
