Topic: another interesting 1up article: Developer roundtable

[nemo_83]

the article

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

[odifiend]

Nice read.  I might have to start following 1up...  I liked it all but the strategies for Nintendo really stood out in my mind (maybe because they were last?).
"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.

[Ian Sane]

This was a very good read.  It's too bad though that I'm not interested at all in any of the developers involved in the discussion.  While it's good for developers to be showing interest in the Rev we need to hear more from the third parties that actually matter.  Having the Alien Hominid guys on board is nice but it isn't going to sell any Revs.

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.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Ps3's E3 Killzone movie is the must-have-must-get-must-watch HD CG FMV movie of 2006?

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'].

[Deguello]

I notice that the guy least-enthused about the Rev is also the guy who has the most boring, mundane, and copycat ideas for games.

"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?"

[Bill Aurion]

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.

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 )

[Ian Sane]

"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"

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.

[Berto2K]

All i have to do is remind you Ian of all the people who complained about the xbox's controller and how big it was with the crappy "d-pad" as their reasons for not buying a system when it came out.

[odifiend]

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."

[Ian Sane]

"All i have to do is remind you Ian of all the people who complained about the xbox's controller and how big it was with the crappy 'd-pad' as their reasons for not buying a system when it came out."

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.

[Bill Aurion]

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.

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...

[odifiend]

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.

[Ian Sane]

"Can you not say then that the simplicity of the Revmote and intuitive nature of motion control are perfect for making less complex games?"

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.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

Well first off I disagree, there is nothing more intuitive than movement as its something we do from birth.  And complexity does not benefit games, it is much better to have the ability to just look in a direction rather than move thumbsticks until your character is looking in that direction.

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.

[Bill Aurion]

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.

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...

[Ian Sane]

"Well first off I disagree, there is nothing more intuitive than movement as its something we do from birth."

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.

[odifiend]

This is the danger of the simulator.  How do you swing a baseball bat?  It depends who you ask - ask a child and you might get a cartoon like swing, but if you ask a baseball coach you'll get a different answer.  This is something that will probably be at the discretion of the developers but should there be a reward for correct motions?  If there is tons of leighway, it is not that different from pressing a button except you'll get tired faster.  I could see sports games becoming much more rewarding when you win (like a real sport) and more frustrating for bad players.

EDIT: Damn, Ian, posted what I said faster and applied it more generally.  

[KnowsNothing]

I think pointing is much more simplistic and intuitive than trying to coordinate the movement of two analogs sticks in all different directions.  The Dual-Shock method of controlling shooters is very complicated for beginers....and even advanced players sometimes have trouble with it, or at least recognize that it's very clunky.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

While I agree that swinging the remote alone can be interprted in many waysthe rev remote isn't intended to be wildly swung like you're assuming but rather smaller more precise movements, in addition, the addition of buttons can further narrow the actions of said movement, for example if you want your character to scratch themselves, then you can press the A button while moving the remote in the general area, much in the same way that moving the stylus over a particular area on your puppy in Nintendogs results in "petting" the puppy.

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.

[IceCold]

"I don't see the Revmote as being inuitive. I see it as just different."

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?

[nemo_83]

Ian, the right side of Sony's or MS' controller has six game buttons, an analog stick, and an analog stick button.  The revmote itself replaces that stick and its button by far, and the revmote features six game buttons.  The nunchuck egg lacks a dpad and analog stick button (analog stick buttons shouldn't be used, gamers are left asking what of the seventy three buttons on the 360 controller they use and noone looks down and immediately thinks, oh yeah the internal stick button, that must be jump cause noone would put it somewhere obvious like on the trigger or a button).

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.

[Don'tHate742]

All I know is, I'll be shocked if Nintendogs REV isn't a launch title.

[IceCold]

Quote
Originally posted by: Don'tHate742
All I know is, I'll be shocked if Nintendogs REV isn't a launch title.

Nah, Iwata said we'd be getting a brand new IP from Miyamoto. It may be a "nongame" but it won't be Nintendogs.

[Don'tHate742]

Well saying that we're getting a new IP doesn't eliminate that possibility of Nintendogs being made for launch. We could get a new IP and Nintendogs (since technically, it isn't new anymore).

[KDR_11k]

Therefore it is no different then a button press except that button is nearly 100% accurate and swinging a remote isn't.

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.