Post by: Aussiedude on March 31, 2006, 12:39:22 PM
We were told this project would feature themes including blood, violence and swordplay.
Link
Possibly an early April Fools
Post by: Ian Sane on March 31, 2006, 12:47:33 PM
Post by: jasonditz on March 31, 2006, 01:14:09 PM
Post by: Pale on March 31, 2006, 01:45:25 PM
Can you imagine if CNN did a news story saying the president was killed, and then laughed about it the next day because it was an April Fool's joke?
I wish you could revoke people's internet license... =P
Post by: Dirk Temporo on March 31, 2006, 03:08:21 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pale
Can you imagine if CNN did a news story saying the president was killed, and then laughed about it the next day because it was an April Fool's joke?
That'd be hilarious. But many, many people would be disappointed.
Post by: Hostile Creation on March 31, 2006, 05:35:08 PM
Would it make more sense to fool them on some random day when they're totally not suspecting it, so that the disappointment is far greater?
Cuz, I mean, it has to be done.
Post by: Pale on March 31, 2006, 05:38:16 PM
Post by: Arbok on March 31, 2006, 05:46:20 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Dirk Temporo
That'd be hilarious. But many, many people would be disappointed.
Ba ha ha ha...
Oh my, anyway, April Fool's is that one time of the year where webmasters get to cut loose. Although, personally, any April Fool's joke that doesn't start and end on April 1st, just sucks. I hate the ones that drag it on or start way too early to just try and gain credibility before they can go, "no, it was a April Fool's joke after all... ha!"
Post by: jasonditz on March 31, 2006, 05:50:50 PM
Post by: 31 Flavas on March 31, 2006, 07:11:01 PM
QuoteNintendo Nplay QD!
Originally posted by: jasonditz
Speaking of late night April Fools... Revolutionreport has announced that the Rev is going to be called the nplay. I wonder if it's going to be a cellphone as well?
Post by: jasonditz on March 31, 2006, 07:17:47 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 01, 2006, 08:19:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
This seems more April Fools like then that painting game. This is just some site with an "exclusive" news article as opposed to a whole website.
Truth be told, if this company doesn't do it, some other company will.
A melee weapon-based game is just too flat out obvious with the Rev controller for someone to NOT make one (I suspect many will be made).
Post by: mantidor on April 03, 2006, 07:42:35 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 03, 2006, 08:34:35 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
It looks like Im probably the only one who think that melee first person combat is a hideous idea, even with the remote.
Why so?
Even if I never enjoy the genre itself, it's a genre which can only be explored on the Rev and will likely earn the console a great deal of popularity with an audience which would otherwise ignore it completely and more Rev sales = good for everyone.
The PS2 won by being the console which had everything. RPGs, racing, sports, action, shooting, platforming, dancing, etc., etc. If you wanted the safest console to buy which would promise to have games you'd enjoy, the PS2 was it.
If the Revolution can boast a library which ranges in genres and interests from Bob Roth's painting game all the way to violent FPHs (first-person hackers), then the Rev wins.
The goal is to give as many people as much reason as possible to buy your console, just like the DS which ranges from hardcore Nintendo franchises like Mario Kart, Zelda, Tetris and Metroid to "non-games" like Brain Training, English Teaching, Nintendogs and Electroplankton.
I completely understand not liking the idea, but every additional genre the Rev covers is one more reason for people to buy it and a genre likely to appeal to the hardcore "mature" crowd is a boon for the console because, when it boils down to it, all MS and Sony really have against Nintendo is the "mature" image which so many people shun Nintendo for lacking.
The more sales of the Rev, the more likely developers will feel safe in bringing the genres that YOU like over to it.
Post by: mantidor on April 03, 2006, 09:11:05 AM
Not to mention how tiring it can be, as I said, if it isnt used frequently and only appears in a mini game of some sort is fine, but waving your arm the whole game is not something I would find particularly fun.
If the rev becomes the number one console for first person sword fighters good for the console, but I couldnt care less, its a horrible form of gameplay and I cannot even imagine myslef playing a whole Zelda game using it.
Post by: Strell on April 03, 2006, 09:26:56 AM
Gosh, and here I thought ping pong, tennis, golf, swimming, and several other sports were simply impossible.
Grow some balls, kids.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 03, 2006, 09:35:34 AM
Probably because no one has provided a decent response to it other than "what a wuss" or "no they won't". I think it's going to be an issue and honestly until I have played with the Rev for any serious amount of time and noted that it isn't a problem it's going to be a concern. It's just common sense that having to hold an object up for several hours and swing it around is going to be a little tiring. One thing I like about gaming is that I can just relax and sit in any position I find comfortable and play for hours. Once motion control comes into it that option just no longer exists. Now where you sit or stand and where you hold your hand is all crucial to the game.
Post by: Kairon on April 03, 2006, 09:46:19 AM
I agree with Ian though, until some games EXIST that use this dynamic and we can try them out FOR OURSELVES, then it will continue to be an orphan talking point that no one can really form an opinion on.
Let's let the game come out first and see how much we get "tired" before we halt the game's production on that account, shall we?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 03, 2006, 09:50:26 AM
You have to consider the aspects of the gameplay which would have to be involved here. For starters, you cannot have a game where the player slashes wildly away at everything. Real swordplay isn't about tiring yourself out very quickly but about watching the movements of your opponents and reacting to them accordingly. Also, what fun is there in slashing everything to bits relentlessly? That might make for a decent minigame but no way would that satisfy in terms of actual gameplay.
If I designed a FPH, it would start with the player killing enemies which wear little to no armor and difficulty would increase from there. I'd move on to enemies which hide behind large shields and can only be defeated by off-balancing them or striking them in the leg or face when they peer out from around the shield. Then, fully armored foes which need to have their weak spots exposed before they can be struck, either by off-balancing them or removing a vital piece of armor. Or, there would be a specific weapon which can damage them through the armor. The game would ideally be less about hacking through an army of foes and more about facing fewer individual enemies which are strong, powerful and will require a certain strategy/technique/weapon to defeat them. Upgrading your weapons would be a definite must.
At some point, I'd probably forsake armor entirely and require that the player battle a whole host of fantasy creatures, from zombies to massive wyrms and demons.
I'd think this would make for solid gameplay which would engage the player far beyond "flail the Revmote around like a spastic monkey".
But that's my vision. I wouldn't be surprised if the first few FPHs out of the gate were nothing more than simple "chop up everything in sight" hackfests which would be fun for the first half hour and then would rapidly become insanely boring (like Mystic Heroes, which I thought was the absolute coolest game in the world until the repetition set in and it went rapidly downhill from there) .
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 03, 2006, 10:12:39 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane Probably because no one has provided a decent response to it other than "what a wuss" or "no they won't". I think it's going to be an issue and honestly until I have played with the Rev for any serious amount of time and noted that it isn't a problem it's going to be a concern. It's just common sense that having to hold an object up for several hours and swing it around is going to be a little tiring. One thing I like about gaming is that I can just relax and sit in any position I find comfortable and play for hours. Once motion control comes into it that option just no longer exists. Now where you sit or stand and where you hold your hand is all crucial to the game.
Same reason players can play DDR for 3-4 hours at a time: practice builds stamina and becoming tired is no longer an issue.
Don't you think that people's thumbs and hands got tired when they first started using controllers? We're not BORN with the muscles used to repeatedly press the same button or rapidly flick an analogue stick back and forth. We developed those from gaming, the same way we'll develop the necessary muscles and stamina for using the Revmote.
If the games are fun, we'll play them no matter what.
Post by: Strell on April 03, 2006, 10:14:34 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Probably because no one has provided a decent response to it other than "what a wuss" or "no they won't".
Right. Because sports don't exist.
Also, I have no problem playing Dance Freaks for hours on end, even on the 200+bpm songs. Same with Guitar Hero. Little kids move their arms when they play games. Millions of people play DDR. You people act like only body builders could put up with the "punishment" you think exists.
Gosh, I'd sure hate to tell you to grow some balls again, but I think I will.
Grow some balls.
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 03, 2006, 10:17:57 AM
The game is motivation to do it. Just like controllers and button pressing, just like DDR and repeated stepping, people will develop the Revmuscles because the games will be the driving factor in doing so.
Post by: Strell on April 03, 2006, 10:20:34 AM
I highly doubt Nintendo is out to revolutionize the gamer body (no pun intended mostly). They wouldn't be stupid enough to make it so intensive that only marines could do it.
So it IS a question of balls. And being a self-satisfied wuss that is intent on destroying the gameplay concept before trying it.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 03, 2006, 10:28:24 AM
When I want to play sports I play sports. When I want to play games I play games. Ever thought that maybe some of the appeal of a passive entertainment is that it's PASSIVE? If someone suggested adding physical activity as a requirement for watching TV or reading a book would you agree with it?
One thing I actually don't like about DDR is that it doesn't really fit with my regular gaming routine. When I want to do something active I go for a run or a ride my bike or jump on the trampoline. I play games when I want to relax. DDR is odd in that I don't want to play it when I'm in the mood for gaming.
Besides all of the examples given are for speciality games. Since the whole console is based on motion control motion games are going to be a lot more common which makes it a bigger issue.
Post by: Strell on April 03, 2006, 10:41:03 AM
That is, unless you are playing a Square title, in which case over 99% of the game is just watching. OH SNAPZ.
Where as books and TV are not interaction, they are activities in which you merely watch/read the action, not change it. But I have to give you at least a point for attempting an analogy, but negative a billion points for making a totally worthless one.
And I've told you to stop whining about the motion control. You pull this bs in every argument - that it is going to replace every last function in the control scheme. What a load of crap. It's going to be used for one or two things at best. Again, MAYBE the camera movement/aiming in an FPS, and nothing more. And that is analogous to mouse movement. In fact, it's probably less impactful because you won't be picking up/moving a mouse down on a flat surface repeatedly, and instead just have fluid motions.
Hell, arcade games. Joysticks were you use your entire arm to play. Are you unable to play those, Ian? Is it just too physically demanding for you?
It isn't a big issue. You want it to be one. And Nintendo isn't going to give you that cake and eat it too. Why? Because they aren't that stupid.
As I've said before, don't buy the Rev, Ian. I can do without people like you whining constantly over every last detail on it. OMFG THE FRONT CORNER IS TOO SHARP.
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 03, 2006, 10:52:20 AM
Ian, how much do you think the remote control is going to weigh? I'd guess that it'll be just enough to have a solid physical presence but no more than 1-3 pounds (which is absolutely nothing, by the way). If you rest your elbow on something and then pivot your arm, that's very likely about the amount of motion you can expect for the Revmote. You seem to have some pre conceived notion of standing in an open area and twirling the Revmote around like a baton. Where did you get this idea? In all the first-hand accounts of using the Revmote I've heard about, I've never ONCE heard of anyone saying "But my arm rapidly grew tired from such a strenuous motion." I've heard "After I got used to it, it was very intuitive." and I've actually heard, "I was playing Metroid Prime 2 with it better than I ever did with my GC."
Seriously, the Revmote is not a full-body workout, it's moving your hand and wrist, something which most people do daily and without complaint. The argument of "passive entertainment" doesn't hold water because, with any "intense" game, the amount of mental strain the player experiences is far worse and far more tiring than any amount of moving your wrist and arm.
This is another case where I think you're making a mountain out of a mole-hill.
Post by: Strell on April 03, 2006, 11:05:12 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on April 03, 2006, 11:06:58 AM
Holding a joystick and moving your wrist is nothing like holding a controller and swinging it all over the place. Besides arcade games last like five minutes until you run out of money. Even if you're good enough to beat one it only takes like half an hour total. Console games are expected to be played a little longer.
I'm just thinking of a game where you hold your hand out in front of you with the remote and move it all around. That sounds like it would be a total chore after about ten minutes.
"You pull this bs in every argument - that it is going to replace every last function in the control scheme. What a load of crap. It's going to be used for one or two things at best. Again, MAYBE the camera movement/aiming in an FPS, and nothing more."
I think that's hopeful at best. Nintendo's whole plan is about how this remote is going to attract people that aren't interested in games and is going to make controllers no longer intimidating. They're skimping on the hardware so that they can make the Rev affordable AND have this new controller. They haven't even shown us the shell. Nintendo's gung ho about the remote and when they're really interested in something they use it. Nintendo is going to use the motion control a lot. I'll predict that almost every first party game will use it just like practically no first party N64 games used the d-pad over the analog stick. The remote is EVERYTHING. Without it the Rev is just a significantly underpowered "normal console" that has no advantage over the competition aside from retro games. Anyone who owns a Rev is going to be using it a lot. So then issues like arm fatigue and arm position and where you sit or stand while playing are important. With the Gamecube if I'm in an uncomfortable position I can move and the game won't even notice. With something that detects motion how do you do that?
"And Nintendo isn't going to give you that cake and eat it too."
I don't understand what you mean by this in this context.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 03, 2006, 11:10:42 AM
The demo movie Nintendo released. People were moving all over the place in it. Plus in this example it's a sword swinging game. Obviously for such a game you're going to be making swinging motions with your arm.
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 03, 2006, 11:59:47 AM
Buy the games which allow you to use the controller shell or only use the Revmote to aim (like MP3 will inevitably do).
Ragging on the idea of a FPH for having rapid arm movements is akin to bashing strategy games because they make you think too much. If the game requires more effort than you're willing to expend, don't buy it, but don't ignore the strength that these games might have in the marketplace. There are a lot of people who WILL expend the effort and buy a Rev solely for this genre.
And like I've always said, more Revs sold = more developers willing to develop for it = more games for everyone. Every sale counts and furthers the chances of seeing games you both like and enjoy on the Rev.
Because of the DS, I now know what PS2 users must have felt like for all those years. For the first time ever in my recollection, there are more games that I'd like to play than I have money to spend on them. I'd be nice if the Rev had that problem and covering as many bases as possible when it comes to your console's offerings is the only sure-fire way to do that.
Post by: vudu on April 03, 2006, 12:02:14 PM
Post by: Requiem on April 03, 2006, 12:29:05 PM
I think both sides are ignoring what the NRC has been said to do.
During the madness that was TGS, many editors said that the NRC could require nothing but little wrist flicks or movements. In fact, most of the demos previewed by the editors used very little movement at all. The NRC has the abilitiy to dull the sensitivity making it so that you would have to swing like crazy, however, the sensitivity is so accurate that most games won't need anything more than wrist movement.
1up.com
"IMPRESSIONS: A great demonstration of how intuitive the controller can be-pointing it to aim felt perfectly natural, right from the very first second, just like with a light gun. It always shot exactly where it felt like I was aiming, and was incredibly responsive to even slight wrist movements-I barely had to move my hand at all."
"IMPRESSIONS: At first, I was standing up and swinging my hand all around to aim - and my arms got really tired really quick. But once I sat down and relaxed, resting my hands on my legs as I would with a normal controller, everything clicked."
Post by: zakkiel on April 03, 2006, 12:49:49 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on April 03, 2006, 02:31:35 PM
Post by: Strell on April 03, 2006, 03:28:32 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I'm just thinking of a game where you hold your hand out in front of you with the remote and move it all around. That sounds like it would be a total chore after about ten minutes.
You know, with this comment, you've lost whatever minute shred of credibility you've had.
I will keep that in mind in the future.
In the meantime, balls. Please grow some.
Edit: I wasn't going to add this, but I guess I will so I can avoid idiotic retorts from people saying OMG U R NOT MAEKING TEH ARGUMINTS.
1) Do you honsetly think Nintendo is going to force you to hold it out STRAIGHT for a huge period of time? I sincerely hope not.
2) The movie/demo reel was meant to be FULL OF EXAGGERATIONS. They HIRED people to ACT. They had/have NO IDEA about how the games WILL control. That is why it was a DEMO MOVIE without ANY kind of screenshots.
3) It's obvious you don't know 1/2 because you've ignored every last damn impression from every last damn person who has played with the thing. You'll notice NONE of them talked about getting tired, waving their arms around, etc etc etc.
Now ask yourself. How stupid do you think Nintendo is?
You might also want to ask yourself how smart you think you are.
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 03, 2006, 04:42:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Requiem "IMPRESSIONS: At first, I was standing up and swinging my hand all around to aim - and my arms got really tired really quick. But once I sat down and relaxed, resting my hands on my legs as I would with a normal controller, everything clicked."
That should answer Ian's concerns right there.
Post by: zakkiel on April 03, 2006, 05:52:05 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 03, 2006, 06:10:35 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkiel which makes this a pointless conversation.
That much was always clear.
Not sure why I keep wandering into the midst of these, really...
Post by: MaryJane on April 03, 2006, 06:23:39 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Ragging on the idea of a FPH for having rapid arm movements is akin to bashing strategy games because they make you think too much. If the game requires more effort than you're willing to expend, don't buy it, but don't ignore the strength that these games might have in the marketplace.
I can't stop laughing. I'm crying, I'm laughing so hard. Ahh you gotta love the stupid people. Not saying Ian is stupid, but I just picture someone complaining about a game making them think too much and it makes me laugh. Hmmm after explaining it, it's not that funny anymore. That kind of sucks.
Anyway, I say bring on the wild swinging sword games. I showed my gf the first rev commercial type of thing they released and she said and I quote: "You have to buy that tennis or ping pong, game they were playing I wanna play it, so that I can shove you into the wall..." How nice huh? anyway, some people see physical gaming as fun. i sure as hell do, but realistically I don't see too many games playing like that. However, Ultraviolent, great, making me work off some of my beer belly, Priceless! There are somethings typical systems can't do, for everything else there's the Revolution.
Post by: IceCold on April 03, 2006, 06:42:43 PM
Post by: mantidor on April 04, 2006, 06:16:52 AM
Post by: zakkiel on April 04, 2006, 08:27:41 AM
Quote
I wasnt implying that rev will be tiring for all games, but for a decent first person sword fighting game you must do exaggerated movements, thats one kind of game where gentle gestures dont work.
Simple sword-fighting controls: press and release A to thrust in the direction you're aiming, press A and flick in a direction then release to slash from that direction, press B to block and move the block in the direction you want, moving the controller around without pressing buttons moves the cursor, or the entire screen if you're holding L1. The analog makes you move and sidestep, double-tapping in a direction makes you roll in that direction, L2 makes you jump, L2 and a direction on the analog stick makes you jump that direction. The bottom of the D-pad locks in on enemies (it's my belief that if you want a deep first-person fighter you still have to have that feature). There you go, a sword-fighter with only small wrist movements.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 04, 2006, 08:55:01 AM
Subtle movements make sense for aiming but anything else, I think, kind of misses the point. If you're making a boxing game for example there's no point in having subtle wrist movements for punches because if you're going to do that you might as well use buttons which are going to be more accurate. If you're going to use motion control you might as well do it accurately so that your fist is the same fist on the screen.
Post by: Kairon on April 04, 2006, 09:53:40 AM
That's what Matt meant when he said "franchises would be returning!"
~Carmine M. Red
*Goes back to playing the N-Game*
Post by: zakkiel on April 04, 2006, 10:01:08 AM
QuoteOk, if you can come up with a button scheme that allows you to slash from any direction or thrust towards any direction or block in any direction while moving, be my guest. Unless you have three thumbs with which to control two analog sticks while hitting a face button, you're gonna have isssues. (And even if you did, trying to use an analog stick both quickly and precisely is a nightmare).
If you're going to rely so much on button presses then it's pretty much a waste of time to even use the remote to make a sword fighting game. The whole reason to have motion control is to have your movement reflected accurately on the screen. Otherwise you're just replacing button presses with gestures.
Buttons being mroe accurate is just nonsense. More precise, yes, but as anyone who's taken any statistics knows, accuracy and precision are two completely different subjects. And making your fist the same fist on the screen is incredibly limiting and pointless. For a few games it will be fun, for novelty's sake at least; but any decent game designer will be much mroe intrigued with the possibilities beyond putting your hand in a game.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 04, 2006, 10:30:29 AM
Inform me of how they are different. I push 'A' and the hardware recognizes it as 'A' 100% of the time unless the game is complete crap. I move the controller left and what does that mean? What if I'm a little upwards in my movement? What if I was too subtle? What if I didn't intend to move the controller but ended up moving it a bit? What is neutral for something that has no "rest" position? Suddenly there's a big range of results that can be interpretted differently. So if I'm moving the controller it better be doing more than just interpretting gestures as a replacement for buttons.
Plus if you're only doing subtle movement why does the controller have to be stripped of established functionality to look like a remote? If all I'm doing is little movements then I might as well just have something resembling a Cube controller with motion control.
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 04, 2006, 11:11:08 AM
Quote
DDR is also not a good comparison, because is just jumping, its a lot less tiring than moving your arms with fast and strong movements.
Actually, DDR is likely far more tiring because, in addition to jumping, the game is all about shifting your weight around the pad rapidly so you can hit difficult clusters of arrows. I won't deny that rapidly swinging the Revmote around will make for a good workout, though.
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
If you're going to rely so much on button presses then it's pretty much a waste of time to even use the remote to make a sword fighting game. The whole reason to have motion control is to have your movement reflected accurately on the screen. Otherwise you're just replacing button presses with gestures.
Subtle movements make sense for aiming but anything else, I think, kind of misses the point. If you're making a boxing game for example there's no point in having subtle wrist movements for punches because if you're going to do that you might as well use buttons which are going to be more accurate. If you're going to use motion control you might as well do it accurately so that your fist is the same fist on the screen.
Ian, you're contradicting yourself here. On one hand, you say that the games appear too tiring if you rapidly moved the Revmote around while standing. On the other, you say that simply using the Revmote to aim is not enough and that the fist on screen should be your fist.
So which do you want?
I don't see any reason why we can't have games from all genres which behave differently. Clearly, one the variables the controller must offer is how much on screen motion should happen when the player moves. When the player moves the Revmote 1cm, the character or point being controlled on screen would move 1 ______, where ______ could be a millimeter, centimeter, meter, kilometer, etc. It's the same principle of adjusting the sensitivity of the touchscreen in Hunters, where you can make it so you need less stylus movement to equate the same amount of in-game motion.
Frankly, Ian, I don't think you'll have to worry because the style of the game will largely reflect the amount of motion required, and being worried that you'll only get one or the other would imply that the Rev will have a severe drought of titles. If anything, the Rev will suffer from the DS's problems where there are too many titles which look like they might bring something new and original to the system and ultimately be worth buying, no doubt giving us a range of games which will use the Revmote in different ways.
Like I said earlier (and much to MJ's amusement
), worrying that all Rev games will require you to expend too much effort is just plain silly. Revmote games which require physical effort will exist right alongside those which don't, and we already have at least one first-hand account of the fact that this is the case.Developers know that there are people who don't want to move around a lot while they play games. Nintendo knows this, too, which is why the reporter even said that he could rest the Revmote on his leg like a regular controller and just slightly move his wrist and yet it worked perfectly, expending minimal effort in the process.
Again, thinking that games which cater to those who don't want to move won't exist on the Rev is like believing games on the DS will not use the crosspad and buttons because the touchscreen is available, and we all know that this just isn't the case.
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 04, 2006, 11:21:39 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian SaneInform me of how they are different. I push 'A' and the hardware recognizes it as 'A' 100% of the time unless the game is complete crap. I move the controller left and what does that mean? What if I'm a little upwards in my movement? What if I was too subtle? What if I didn't intend to move the controller but ended up moving it a bit? What is neutral for something that has no "rest" position? Suddenly there's a big range of results that can be interpretted differently. So if I'm moving the controller it better be doing more than just interpretting gestures as a replacement for buttons.
Then your character dies a horrible death and you take that game back to the store and buy one which doesn't use the Revmote's motion features. Jesus f*cking christ, Ian. I've never seen anyone more capable of bitching about nothing.
I think I see what Strell was getting at...
Post by: Ian Sane on April 04, 2006, 11:21:50 AM
Well in all honestly I don't really like either option. I find substituting gestures for button pushes to be really g!mmicky and not worth stripping the controller down to a remote for. I don't like the idea of swinging my arm around a bunch either. But if you're going to have a motion controlled remote you might as well do it right and actually justify the switch with accurate motion control.
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 04, 2006, 11:24:33 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane Well in all honestly I don't really like either option. I find substituting gestures for button pushes to be really g!mmicky and not worth stripping the controller down to a remote for. I don't like the idea of swinging my arm around a bunch either. But if you're going to have a motion controlled remote you might as well do it right and actually justify the switch with accurate motion control.
Then don't buy the games that use motion control. Just snap your Revmote into the shell and never take it out, ever.
PROBLEM SOLVED!
I hate to say it, but at some point, you're going to have to come to grips with the fact that Nintendo isn't pandering to YOUR needs specifically AND that you're a minority when it comes to disliking the concept.
The majority of Nintendo fans are excited. Gaming journalists are excited. Even developers who threw off Nintendo because they figured they were going to the way of the Dreamcast have come BACK and THEY are excited.
Given the fact that you haven't even placed a HAND on Revmote or even watched a video of one being used, I fail to see the purpose of generating concerns when everything we've heard from first-hand accounts of its usage has dismissed these concerns.
Post by: MaryJane on April 04, 2006, 12:56:25 PM
Either that or he's a spoiled five year old who will never be happy with anything except his ability to complain.
Maybe I'm just a fanboy who loves many different types of game genres, but I can't wait for the Rev to blow my T.V and my mind away. Inferior graphics tiring controller... bring it the f*ck on!
Post by: zakkiel on April 04, 2006, 01:17:53 PM
QuotePrecision is a matter of consistancy; accuracy is a matter of hitting what you want to hit. If you just press A, you can count on your character performing exactly the same action every time, but no control over the aiming, and thus accuracy is either moot (the game automatically makes you hit) or random. Neither of those options offers any depth or sophistication of game play.
Inform me of how they are different. I push 'A' and the hardware recognizes it as 'A' 100% of the time unless the game is complete crap.
QuoteWhat if you try to recover in SSBM and wind up triggering over-B rather than up-B? I've played that game religiously since its release, and it still happens to me occasionally. What if you play an FPS and your hand twitches accidentally sending your aim way off? It's no less likely with a mouse than holding something in your lap.
What if I'm a little upwards in my movement? What if I was too subtle? What if I didn't intend to move the controller but ended up moving it a bit? What is neutral for something that has no "rest" position? Suddenly there's a big range of results that can be interpretted differently. So if I'm moving the controller it better be doing more than just interpretting gestures as a replacement for buttons.
QuoteTell you what: you build yourself a mouse out of a GC controller, and see how well that works out for you playing an FPS. Small, precise movements make a light and manuevarable controller more important, not less.
Plus if you're only doing subtle movement why does the controller have to be stripped of established functionality to look like a remote? If all I'm doing is little movements then I might as well just have something resembling a Cube controller with motion control.
Post by: ShyGuy on April 07, 2006, 09:22:57 PM
Post by: Jensen on April 08, 2006, 10:07:17 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Ian, how much do you think the remote control is going to weigh? I'd guess that it'll be just enough to have a solid physical presence but no more than 1-3 pounds (which is absolutely nothing, by the way).
I don't think you know how much a pound weighs..... A little more than twice the weight of your DS Lite. :-)
Post by: Dirk Temporo on April 08, 2006, 10:33:05 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
DDR is also not a good comparison, because is just jumping, its a lot less tiring than moving your arms with fast and strong movements.
Are you INSANE? I've played DDR, and watched people play DDR. I've also done LARP, and swinging your arms is WAY less tiring than DDR.
Post by: Artimus on April 08, 2006, 10:57:31 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Dirk Temporo
I've also done LARP
Let us observe a moment of silence for Dirk's dignity.
Post by: Strell on April 08, 2006, 01:00:05 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ArtimusQuote
Originally posted by: Dirk Temporo
I've also done LARP
Let us observe a moment of silence for Dirk's dignity.
LIGHTNING BOLT!
LIGHTNING BOLT!
/please tell me someone gets the reference
Post by: Blue Plant on April 08, 2006, 01:31:43 PM
Quote
LIGHTNING BOLT!
LIGHTNING BOLT!
/please tell me someone gets the reference
Of course, the very scary real-life role playing nerds of the forest video.
It made me blush.
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 08, 2006, 02:32:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Jensen I don't think you know how much a pound weighs..... A little more than twice the weight of your DS Lite. :-)
Then I need to buy a new shipping scale...
Post by: trip1eX on April 08, 2006, 03:51:42 PM
http://theboard.zogdog.com/index.php?automodule=blog&blogid=11
Post by: Smash_Brother on April 08, 2006, 04:04:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: trip1eX
HEre's a source of good info on Red Steel.
http://theboard.zogdog.com/index.php?automodule=blog&blogid=11
That needs to be posted:
Details:
-Game development started shortly after E3 2005. Ubisoft saw and demoed the controller before E3 2005.
-Ubisoft Paris took their idea directly to Iwata and Miyamoto, and were given the go ahead. After that meeting they were given prototype controllers. The article states that Ubisoft worked "closely" with Nintendo's engineers in Japan on the title
-Game Informer mentions that while conducting the interviews with Ubisoft, they were handed the "latest version" of the controller
-During the beginning of the game, you are encouraged to use your weapons ruthlessly, but as the game progresses you become more proficient and strategic. This gameplay idea led Ubisoft to decide to give the game a martial arts setting. "Enter the Yakuza"
-The first third of the game will be all about being "brutal by necessity"
-You will be less precise and favor more devastating weapons (machine guns)
-As you progress and become more precise, smaller guns will be used
-"The goal...is to use five bullets to kill five enemies"
-"When fighting with this level of skill, the music and sound effects will reflect it, remaining calm and peaceful"
-"When you fight brutally, the sounds around you grow increasingly more intense"
-"Audio feedback"
-Freeze shot: by fighting effciently you fill the Freeze Shot gauge...fighting chaotically causes to decreases
-When the gauge is filled you can hit a button to momentarily stop time, and then target specific locations on enemy bodies
-Headshots thus are tempting, but non lethal shots, such as shooting guns out of enemy hand, can be more beneficial
-By defeating high ranking leaders who command others and sparing their lives, you will be rewarded. He will offer you respect and help (guns, help, new weapons, alternate paths, etc)
-Respect plays a MAJOR part in the game
-Flailing your sword isn't a smart idea
-Specific motions with the controller will trigger combos (in the final game)
-Tracing an X in the air, for instance, will unleash a devastating attack
-You can stop these combos at any time by simply pausing your own movement. So if you do something that leaves you open to attack, you won't be screwed
-New moves will be taught to you by two mentors in the game
-One will teach you gun tactics, and another will teach sword tactics
-If you don't show the proper respect to them, they won't help you
-Friendly/respectful interaction is tied to the controller
-You signal "yes/no" answers by nodding the controller up or down or shaking it from side to side
-You show extra respect by bowing to the masters
-Ubisoft is still coming up with other interactions
-"You can act disrespectively as well: there are no cut scenes in the game - all conversations take place in game, as in Half Life 2. However unlike that game, characters wont keep prattling on if you walk away from them. They will react angrily to your imputent behavior"
-Staying in the master's good graces is key: they give you missions that can be tackled in any order
-You track down the gang leaders and try to turn them to your side. If you don't, they will join Tokai's (the main villian) gang
-You have to prove you are worthy to them by battling them and sparing their lives.
-You will need as many of them with you as possible to face Tokai. Without their help, you'll have a rough time when you finally face him
-You turn gang leaders to your side by besting them in battle and stopping a deadly blow miliseconds before it strikes
-Training sessions are offered by the two masters so you can hone your skills
Multiplayer:
-Split screen multiplayer with traditional deathmatches
-Totally original multiplayer modes Ubisoft is not revealing yet. Wait until E3
-They didn't talk about Nintendo Wi Fi (NDAs). Full details haven't been revealed yet
-Revolution works by placing a small sensor bar either above or below any TV
-You can stand at any angle and not lose any accuracy. You can even take your controller to a friend's house and instantly start playing without syncing up the controller
-"Perhaps most impressive is the fact that although splitscreen reduces the amount of onscreen space you are playing in, you don't have to make smaller movements - you can gesture as wildly as you want, and it won't interfere with the other player's onscreen quadrants
Game Informer's hands on:
-The two triggers on the front of the analog unit activate ducking and jumping. The analog stick controls movement, and the revmote controls aiming. No rails.
-Level consisted of shooting ranges that popped out from behind cover
"Aiming with the controller is as simple as using a laser pointer. You point your hand at a target and hit the trigger on the underside of the controller to fire
-"Unlike other FPS games, which tie the camera and aiming together, Red Steel's camera follows your aim with a slight delay. If, for example, you point to the edge of the screen, the camera will turn to re-center on your view after a second. With the sensitivity of the controller, a standard FPS control would move too much, potentially making the player feel ill
-"Thanks to the improved reaction that the controller offers, the team can create gunfight scenerios that would be extraordinarily diffilcult with a standard controller"
-Most console FPS games limit their enemies to horizontal planes to prevent player frustration, but targets on a verticle plane are just as easy to hit with the Revolution controller
-You can aim at a target as quickly as you can move your hand
-In the demo targets popped up on rooftops and in second story windows, as well as behind cover points on the ground, and all were equally easy to hit
-While you can quickly shoot enemies anywhere on screen, Red Steel never feels in a light-gun game - this is a true FPS, one that feels like it has drawn from the best of both the PC and console shooter worlds
-According to lead game designer Oriola, it takes roughly three seconds to turn completely around around in most console shooters, while it takes about one-quarter second in a PC game. In Red Stel, it takes one second
-AI characters will care for themselves. They will go for cover, attack you while you're reloading. They focus on risk management
-"They won't walk around a table to get to you. They will simply jump over the table"
-"The benchmark for their intelligence and aggressiveness, says Oriola, is the PC title F.E.A.R., which has widely been praised for it's AI"
-Destructable environments. There's a pic of a giant explosion on a carm with gang members being thrown left and right by the blast. Nice effects. The lighting on the explosion and the store signs is pretty good
-GI: we found Red Steel most enjoyable to play while standing up
-Straffing is extremely easy and effortless
-"Aiming felt similar to using a PC mouse, and it's possible to quickly explore every direction in a three-dimensional space with quick gestures"
-"In the finished game, you will be able to push forward with the controller to knock over an object to use for cover, pull it backwards to reload, and twist it to lead behind walls"
-Lob grenades with the controller, or roll them on the ground like a bowling ball
-"gangsta style" shooting is cool
-Total immersion. Feels like you are living the game
-GI: the Revolution is real
-Andy: It could change the very way all gamers are played now and forever
Damn, this game sounds INSANELY cool...
