Topic: FORCE FEEDBACK GYROS FOR THE REV---

[Slew]

Quote
Slingshot, I just reread your original post, and I have to pont out a problem. There's no restoring force in gyroscopes. They resist being reoriented, but after you've moved them they stay put. It's not like a steering wheel or joystick where you constantly have a force pushing it back to zero. Gyroscopes just resist being moved, they don't care what way they end up pointing. So you won't get "force feedback." just a sort of resistance when you try and turn.

I'm pretty sure Gyroscopes could move the controller around.

There used to be a science centre in the city that I went to a few times, they had a suitcase with gyroscopes in it. It was able to lift itself at an angle while you held the handle with a fair amount of force.

So FPS's could jerk the controller back upon firing, or if you were using the tilt sensitivity to turn, it could force the controller against the way you were tilting it.

[Spak-Spang]

Yes.  But forcefeed back Gyroscopes could be much more expensive than normal Gyroscopes.  I don't think forcefeed back is important in a game.  So far its only been used as a cheesy means to show being hit.  It doesn't immerse you anymore than anything else.

I personally think they should just take that out, specially with Gyroscopes.  Let us gamers only have to worry about how t move the controller without worrying about forcefeed back to fight.

[zakkiel]

Um, no, there is no such thing as "force-feed gyroscopes." That's why rockets have to use propellant instead of gyroscopes to get around. Anything else violates the conservation of momentum.

Yes, the suitcase could lift itself as long as you were applying a force. Stop applying the force, the suitcase stops. Same with the controller. You can get forces out only by putting forces in. If you just have the controller static in space, you can't ever us the gyroscopes to generate a force.

[Don'tHate742]

Makes sense, but what if the joystick/controller could use electrical energy to stimulate the gyroscope?

[Guitar Smasher]

I think what he's trying to say is that the only way something could change movement (in this case, going from none to any) is when an external force is applied to the controller.  Any internal forces result in the equal/opposite reaction force, equalling a net force of zero.  I hope that's what you were wondering about.

[slingshot]

I guess we'll see.  It would still work for looking around- instead of 2 analog sticks I mean.  And that would be a huge
improvement- very intuitive.  If they could be used in another way- that would  be great- thinking about a fishing game
that actually pulls at the controller, instead of  vibrating unrealistically?

-But what happens when the gyroscope changes direction?  Wouldn't you feel it jerk the controller in a direction?
(either equal to or oposite to the direction change?)  I think so, but I am no expert.

Sure, if the gyro is kept in a perpetual motion that is constant- and in 1 direction you would not notice a change unless you
try to move it- but what if the gyro kept changing direction- then you may notice a change----- hmmm....

Either way- it adds to the experience- especially when shooting or driving- or fighting.  Pretty cool things on the horizon.

I don't care what people think- if your holding something that is spinning in 1 direction, and it suddenly stops and changes
direction, you will feel that change.  And if it only requires a simple electrical current (aplied through the controller) to cause
that change- then it is possible.  After all, it works with the rumble feature- what is really so different?

[PaLaDiN]

"I think what he's trying to say is that the only way something could change movement (in this case, going from none to any) is when an external force is applied to the controller. Any internal forces result in the equal/opposite reaction force, equalling a net force of zero."

Yes, which is why if you put a controller on the ground and let it rumble, it doesn't move. Also, human beings are stationary at all times until they're pushed. And if you're trapped inside a cardboard box, there's no way to tip it over from the inside.

Reaction forces don't cancel out the effects of a force.

"Yes, the suitcase could lift itself as long as you were applying a force. Stop applying the force, the suitcase stops. Same with the controller. You can get forces out only by putting forces in. If you just have the controller static in space, you can't ever us the gyroscopes to generate a force. "

Just by holding the controller, you're applying a force. It's not hanging in space by itself.

All that said, I have no idea if gyroscopes could do what they're implying... it's been a long, long time since I studied mechanics. I'm sure I could figure it out if I thought about it.

[Myxtika1 Azn]

Quote
Originally posted by: PaLaDiN
Yes, which is why if you put a controller on the ground and let it rumble, it doesn't move. Also, human beings are stationary at all times until they're pushed. And if you're trapped inside a cardboard box, there's no way to tip it over from the inside.

I'm sure that Psycho Mantis would disagree with you.  

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Very amusing, Paladin.  Tickle an engineer's funnybone

[Slew]

Quote
I don't care what people think- if your holding something that is spinning in 1 direction, and it suddenly stops and changes
direction, you will feel that change. And if it only requires a simple electrical current (aplied through the controller) to cause
that change- then it is possible. After all, it works with the rumble feature- what is really so different?

I concur. Anything that vibrates is plain and simple proof that 'internal' forces can move an object.
Gyroscopes are just more advanced.

Might be expensive, but then again, Gyration's wireless gyro-mouse/keyboard suite is only US$99.
A controller using similar gyro technology could stay at a decent price I'm sure.  

[PaLaDiN]

I hope you're being sarcastic to help support the point I proved through sarcasm.

I don't see how anybody can think I'm being serious when I say "Also, human beings are stationary at all times until they're pushed."

That's a big tipoff right there, hmmm?

[ThirdMarioBro]

That would be funny.

[Slew]

*Smacks head*
Heh, yeah I'm stupid.
I wasn't paying close enough attention to what you said.
And now let us never speak of this again.
*Edit*

[Don'tHate742]

That's exactly what I was talking about Paladin.

An electric force could definitely make Force-Feedback possible....I don't know what's up with all the nay sayers.

[nickmitch]

That and a rumble would kill the battery if the controller was wireless.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Fossil fuels, baby.

[Don'tHate742]

No rumble....there's no need really. I'm guessing if it's wireless, it's going to use ion batteries....

[The Omen]

Would it be crazy to allow the controllers to charge when they're plugged into the REV?  They could still be used as regular corded controllers and then when they're fully charged,, go cordless.

[nemo_83]

that is what i believe they should do.

[PaLaDiN]

"Would it be crazy to allow the controllers to charge when they're plugged into the REV?"

Yes, actually. Unless you're planning on having the cord be retractable somehow, which would make either the console or the controller that much bigger, then the cords would just get in the way.

[Don'tHate742]

It wouldn't really make sense. Either you go wireless, or you don't. A cord would just be another thing too lose, or to bulk up the console/controller. A dock station might be a little easier. If it's just a small box that the controllers can plug into on each side (like the PS2 extra controller attatchment), then I think it could be easily concealed and won't bulk up anything.  

[slingshot]

Look- My fricken iron has a retractable cord that is bulkier than the cord on a controller, and just as long.  It retracts by
pushing a button, and it only takes up a space the size of a mini disc in diameter, but about 1 inch thick- and I reapeat,
the cord on my iron is more than twice as thick as the cord on a game controller.  I would love to have a wireless option,
with a retractable cord.  Right now, When I am done playing I have to either wrap my cord around my controller, and put
it next to or behind the console.  Or just try to stuff it all behind the TV.  As a whole, that is FAR FAR messier, and takes up
MORE space than the cord would if it were retracted into the console.  We arn't talking aobut a 2 foot size difference to have
the cords retract- and Just have 2 retracable cord plugs, any extras can be stored elsewhere- it would still make a difference,
rather than having 3 or 4 cords all over.

Go for it Nintendo.

[Dasmos]

Bahahaha!

You have an iron..........

[The Omen]

Quote
Look- My fricken iron has a retractable cord that is bulkier than the cord on a controller, and just as long. It retracts by
pushing a button, and it only takes up a space the size of a mini disc in diameter, but about 1 inch thick- and I reapeat,
the cord on my iron is more than twice as thick as the cord on a game controller. I would love to have a wireless option,
with a retractable cord. Right now, When I am done playing I have to either wrap my cord around my controller, and put
it next to or behind the console. Or just try to stuff it all behind the TV. As a whole, that is FAR FAR messier, and takes up
MORE space than the cord would if it were retracted into the console. We arn't talking aobut a 2 foot size difference to have
the cords retract- and Just have 2 retracable cord plugs, any extras can be stored elsewhere- it would still make a difference,
rather than having 3 or 4 cords all over.

Go for it Nintendo.

Then you and I are in agreement.  

I mean, really, how difficult would it be ?

[Don'tHate742]

I wouldn't mind it on the console if it was neatly concealed without a controller plug sticking out the front of it. On the controller however, if it's already wireless and it implements gyro, as well as having ion batteries, it's going to be heavy already. Adding more weight would be stupid at that point.