Topic: New Revolution Remote Peripherals

[nemo_83]

Looking at the process of design for the remote it is clear that at some point face buttons were considered and then later the dpad was chosen because it is more simple (sure hardcore gamers might not have much of a problem with the original setup with a ring of buttons with a fifth button in the center but Nintendo is trying to avoid alienating nongamers).  The dpad is a recognizable thing which Nintendo created and should continue to use.  

I always thought the N64 should have been a two pronged pad with two dpads in the secondary positions like the Virtual Boy.

[BigJim]

I thought IceCold's idea would have been great. Switch the d-pad with the x/y buttons surrounding the A button, and my concerns would go away. The only thing different is placement. Nothing is added to complicate it.

The only reason I can think of to keep the D-pad there is that it is more visually appealing. Functionally, however, using a d-pad for actions rather than movement has always been awkward to me. It would be fine for something like weapon swapping, but not on the fly actions. Going from A to a d-pad direction would be silly when, like Ian, I am used to resting my thumb between buttons for immediate reaction.

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"But anyways, what you appear to be saying is this: Nintendo could and should replace the D-Pad on the Rev with a 4-button setup like the C-buttons on the N64."

No I'm not.  I'm saying that the face buttons shouldn't be replaced by a d-pad.  The d-pad should stay because it provides a different function: digital movement.  It's a better design for that purpose.

"I believe that, for the reasons I state above, and the fact that Miyamoto himself has probably tinkered with the 4-button instead of D-pad scheme, we can safely say that Nintendo has maed a very rational choice as to why the D-pad, and not 4 buttons, is at the top of the Rev controller."

We can't say anything.  Nintendo isn't infallible.  They made all sorts of decisions that I considered totally irrational on the Cube and many of these decisions hurt them.  The d-pad is on the top of the remote because it makes sense to.  That's an ideal location for movement controls.  I have no problem with the d-pad's presence on the remote.  My problem is with the lack of buttons.

Oh, ok. Well, Nintendo isn't replacing face buttons with the D-pad, players are. Nintendo is removing the need for face buttons by creating a deeper more versatile control method. Compare to my DS example.

And you'll notice that I didn't say that Nintendo is infallible, nor that they made the correct choice. I said that they made a rational decision, meaning that they evaluated all their possible options, including your TV-Remote Button surrounded by a circle of 4 buttons set-up, and ended up with what we have now based on the criteria they set.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[nemo_83]

What if Nintendo, rather than having the remote stick out at the top of the pad with dpad, a, and b button out of reach, made the slot so the remote could slide in deep.  Basically a tighter version of the N64 three prong pad with the a button and dpad in the middle with the trigger beneath.  I guess that would mean dual analog sticks and required use of the remote's motion control for third party ports.

Another way is to take the nunchuck/remote combo and introduce a cheap simple frame piece between them (concealing the cord) that holds the two halves together and gives the gamer other, often traditional, mechanics placed in secondary positions.  This would be low cost enough that third parties would package in custom frames.