• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Fundamental Revolution Controller Question

I always read what a fabulous FPS Controller this new thing would make but there something I don't understand yet.

Obviously this device can't be centered so it has to be used like a free floating mouse. But while you can lift a mouse to reset it how do you tell this remote control the difference between actual movements and resets? How do you turn in a first person shooter? Because if you point left and return the device to its initial position you would also turn back on screen. Does it only work when you push a button? That would make it very cumbersome.

Also as you can see with laserpointers you can't hold pointing devices steadily even if you rest your arm and hand on your lap. So it either would be very shaky or if you turn down sensibility very slow and inaccurate. I also don't think you could use it as a steering device of any kind because the lack of feedback and a real centre.

So did Nintendo answer these questions and what is their solution?
 
If you tilt the controller to the right, you will look right until you stop tilting the controller. It's basically like holding down the right direction on an analog stick. I dont know if they are doing it this way, but it's a simple solution. It works the same way with steering.
 
So you would aim by tilting not by pointing and gravity would be its calibrated centre? Which means you wouldn't be able to play in any other position but parallel to the floor and you'd have to watch the remotes position all the time which would be very hard because our sense of gravity isn't very accurate?
 
I imagined this:

Movement with the analog...
Freelook with the wand. The wand detects movment. Little to no movement = no change (ie. it wont be shakey. It would only be shakey if you were changing the view based on where it was actually pointing. What I'm talking about is changing the view based on the changes in movement). Small movement = relative change in freelook, moderate movement = sharper change in movement, fast sudden movement = sharper still.

Then you could either have the freelook snap to center when there's little to no movment and you're moving with the analog, OR you could set it back with Z1 or Z2 just above the analog stick.

I can't fucking wait to try FPS with this :D
 
I don't think you'd have to watch the remote, since you can tell on screen when you're tilting it and when you're not.

But obviously I'll have to try it out to see if it works well or not.
 
Play Metroid DS. You can shoot a target in any position on screen i.e. top corners etc. You control the gun, not the centre of the screen.

Move the gun far enough in any direction and the screen will follow slowly. Picture it on your monitor now, you're playing an FPS and you point your remote around the screen, when you want to turn right, you "push" the camera towards the right by moving near the right edge. Its a very natural movement. Its not a mouse replacement, that involves you moving a cursor/screen to aim etc. This works on a different level.
 
Do it like Wow. Press button down(A) to look around(in this mode, you fire at center of screen). When it's not pressed, you only aim the weapon, camera will stay fixed.
 
Pointing directly at the sensors placed on the Tv is center. Accorinding to Nintendo theres no need for calibration.
 
nightez said:
Pointing directly at the sensors placed on the Tv is center. Accorinding to Nintendo theres no need for calibration.

Wait a second. There is a sensor to be placed near the TV? I thought the console acted like a "radar" detecting the position of the wand in the 3D space.
 
Shao said:
Play Metroid DS. You can shoot a target in any position on screen i.e. top corners etc. You control the gun, not the centre of the screen.

Actually, you control both in Hunters.

Anyway, here is how it works in the Prime demo shown at TGS:

The attachment basically gave the game a much more PC-first-person-shooter feel thanks to the ability to free-look and aim with the main controller by moving it anywhere you wanted. The analog stick controlled your movement.

Basically, I don't think you can turn around like you do lifting a mouse on a PC or the pen on the DS. That's why there's still a lock on feature in the demo?

the lock-on feature was less necessary thanks to the precision firing available via just looking around with the controller

I've the feeling u'll be able to do circles (pointing towards the side of the screen while pushing forward the analog stick) rather than a 180° or 360° on the spot.

[which would be terrible if true]

Edit: unless u can do a quick turnouround with some special movement (like a quick flip of the wand towards you - 180° get! - then pointing it again to the screen)
 
The analog stick is used to move forward, backward, and strafing.

The only way to turn is to point the remote toward the left or right side of the screen. I don't see the confusing, it's just like the WASD/mouse controls...
 
All this doesn't work for the above cited reasons.

With todays controllers you feel everything. Either you press a button or you don't. You move the stick and you know how far you moved it and it springs back to its centre.

With this remote control you don't feel anything at all. All you do is estimate and that doesn't work in a game environment. With a controller sometimes it's even hard to know how far you moved the analog stick and that is with a clear centre and a noticeable boundary.

With this device as far as I understand it you won't know what you're doing at all. You'll be surprised how far off and inaccurate your movements will be if you have nothing but air to guide it. You just can't "imagine" a centre, there's simply no way to stick to it for a certain amount of time. After ten seconds of holding it you'll move and you won't find the centre in free 3d space because all you have is some feedback on your TV screen.

Regardless of the used technology all this has been tried before and failed for these reasons which aren't a matter of technology or software.
 
Yeah, I suppose that if you point off the left edge of the screen you'll turn left and something similar for turning right. Looking up and down would follow the same procedure except that along that dimension you can't go a full 360.
 
yeah, i don't get how freelook with the revomotroller is going to work any better than freelook with a lightgun...your tv's not going to move with you, and you can't lift and reset the input device like a mouse. maybe it responds to smaller movements. or something!

actually, i've read all the writeups, and i still have no clear idea of what the revolution controller is doing. i suppose that mystery will persist until i get to try it. e3, mebbe?
 
TTP said:
Actually, you control both in Hunters.

What I meant was, you control your gun directly, the screen simply follows your gun. At least thats how it feels to me. Depends which control method you use aswell, I compared it to the tap-to-shoot one because thats where you interact with the game screen much like you would be on the rev. You can tap any point on screen to shoot anywhere, the gun goes where you drag and the helmet follows almost instantly after.

Thats similar to how I would imagine it to work on the Rev maybe with more lag between the camera following the gun, but of course thats down to individual games and developers.

Another example, FPS which let you bring up a cursor for "accurate" aiming like Goldeneye. You move the gun around the screen freely and when you push the edges the camera moves that way. Probably a better example actually.
 
Isn't the device basically built around gyros inside it? If so you can effectively recenter by holding the controller in your default position, probably roughly flat. Then alterations change it from there. If it really uses pointer sensing thats pretty weak. I'd hope the sensors are just to make sure the IR keeps a solid signal.
 
littlewig said:
The analog stick is used to move forward, backward, and strafing.

The only way to turn is to point the remote toward the left or right side of the screen. I don't see the confusing, it's just like the WASD/mouse controls...

That's right, you don't understand it. That's why so many people are getting excited over this device and its "endless possibilities". They don't get it.

You point the remote to the left you turn. Now you want to point the remote back towards the TV, right? But all the game knows is that you again are turning the remote and so turns your view to the right. Which either cancels out your previous left turning or at least will result in an undesired tilt back into the opposite direction. Get it?

And you can't centre it. Not in relation to the TV, the sensors, gravity or whatever because without actual physical restraint you won't be able to recenter it only based on same vague optical information. This has been tried before. Didn't work and won't now because humans didn't change since then.
 
You're entitled to think as such, but I don't really understand the skepticism when not one report coming out of TGS has indicated there will be any problem with this setup.

While I don't know what the remote is actually doing myself either, the idea that it is doing it successfully seems fairly certain.
 
littlewig said:
The analog stick is used to move forward, backward, and strafing.

The only way to turn is to point the remote toward the left or right side of the screen. I don't see the confusing, it's just like the WASD/mouse controls...

you are not getting the point.

Point the remote toward the side of the screen to turn your face and aim in that direction. Keep it pointed to the side of the screen to do a 360°. That's fine. But what happens if you wonna point to a target placed on that very side of the screen? Would't in strafe to the opposite direction as soon as you point at him (cos you are now turning) hence making it difficult to aim?

Just try Hunters on the Ds for a second and ask yourself how would you play it if the pen was glued to the touchscreen.

I think there will be an area around that screen that triggers the "on spot turn" when pointed at. Maybe.
 
I see another problem with the FPS genre besides that, and it's because there's not enough buttons to map the common actions of a FPS (reload, jump, change weapons, grab a weapon, etc, zoom)
 
East Clintwood said:
That's right, you don't understand it. That's why so many people are getting excited over this device and its "endless possibilities". They don't get it.

You point the remote to the left you turn. Now you want to point the remote back towards the TV, right? But all the game knows is that you again are turning the remote and so turns your view to the right. Which either cancels out your previous left turning or at least will result in an undesired tilt back into the opposite direction. Get it?

And you can't centre it. Not in relation to the TV, the sensors, gravity or whatever because without actual physical restraint you won't be able to recenter it only based on same vague optical information. This has been tried before. Didn't work because humans didn't change since then.


You do realize that the need to reset is absolutely nil, unless you really suck at FPS. Just like on the mouse, the rate and how far you turn determines how FAST you move it.


A quick jerk on the mouse will cause you to make a huge turn, a slow jerk, a little tab will only move the cursor on the screen, without moving the your orientation on the screen. I rarely, if at all have to lift my mouse off the pad.


The same thing will apply to the Revolution since it can track your speed. Problem solved, all the nay sayers can go back to sucking their thumbs thinking how they'll be able to compete with Revolution FPSs on other consoles.
 
littlewig said:
You do realize that the need to reset is absolutely nil, unless you absolutely suck at FPS. Just like on the mouse, the rate and how far you turn determines how FAST you move.


A quick jerk on the mouse will cause you to make a huge turn, a slow jerk, a little tab will only move the cursor on the screen, without moving the your orientation on the screen.


The same thing will apply to the Revolution since it can track your speed. Problem solved, all the nay sayers can go back to sucking their thumbs thinking how they'll be able to compete with Revolution FPSs on other consoles.

But wuithout lifting the mouse you will be able to do that just in the cone of sight before you. The Q East is asking is "how do I turn around?"
 
FiRez said:
I see another problem with the FPS genre besides that, and it's because there's not enough buttons to map the common actions of a FPS (reload, jump, change weapons, grab a weapon, etc, zoom)

Well, in a demo a map was zoomed by moving the remote closer or farther from the screen. I suppose it could be implemented similarly in FPS.
 
FiRez said:
I see another problem with the FPS genre besides that, and it's because there's not enough buttons to map the common actions of a FPS (reload, jump, change weapons, grab a weapon, etc, zoom)
i know it's something no one wants to do, but if you flick through the many pages of the stickied revolution controller thread i believe that issue has been discussed and analysed to death. the conclusion? All those play mechanics you mentioned will work fine on the remote.
 
FiRez said:
I see another problem with the FPS genre besides that, and it's because there's not enough buttons to map the common actions of a FPS (reload, jump, change weapons, grab a weapon, etc, zoom)

Well, I think there are enough buttons if you consider the d-Pad. Dont forget you got two triggers an A button and an easy reachable Select button (used to motph into a ball in the Metroid Prime demo).
 
You point the remote to the left you turn. Now you want to point the remote back towards the TV, right? But all the game knows is that you again are turning the remote and so turns your view to the right. Which either cancels out your previous left turning or at least will result in an undesired tilt back into the opposite direction. Get it?

No, that's not how it would work. You point the remote to the left and you turn. Now you point the remote towards the TV and you stop turning. You wouldn't turn right until you go past the point of the tv and to the other side. Hopefully this intricate diagram can explain what I mean:

<<<<<<<<< TV >>>>>>>>>>

~Cris
 
In a nunchuk controlled FPS conceptually the analog stick controlls your feet and the remote controls your head and torso. Probably you can't turn the full way with the remote alone any more than you can turn right around by just twisting your waist.

The combination of analog stick and remote allows you to strafe. quick turning is just strafing with such a small radius that you seem to be spinning on a point. Seems to me that if you can strafe you should be able to turn.

Anyway, I'm not really an FPS player so maybe I'm not making any sense. However, I'm pretty sure that if you couldn't turn we'd be hearing about it from TGS. :)
 
I'm assuming that the wasd actions are controlled by the slight movement of the remote and not where your pointing it, so it wouldn't work like a light gun. I'm also assuming that it works because everyone who has actually played it has said so.
 
masud said:
I'm assuming that the wasd actions are controlled by the slight movement of the remote and not where your pointing it, so it wouldn't work like a light gun. I'm also assuming that it works because everyone who has actually played it has said so.

FiRez said:
I see another problem with the FPS genre besides that, and it's because there's not enough buttons to map the common actions of a FPS (reload, jump, change weapons, grab a weapon, etc, zoom)

Using the analog thingy you have quick access to 8 buttons that’s more than any current controller.
 
crisdecuba said:
No, that's not how it would work. You point the remote to the left and you turn. Now you point the remote towards the TV and you stop turning. You wouldn't turn right until you go past the point of the tv and to the other side. Hopefully this intricate diagram can explain what I mean:

<<<<<<<<< TV >>>>>>>>>>

~Cris



makes sense.

maybe pointing it more to the left causes a faster turn to the left, same for right side


fastest<<<fast<<normal<<<TV>>>normal>>>fast>>>fastest


??
 
Why don't you all forget what you know about FPS for a second.

Picture yourself holding a remote and imagine on your pc monitor right now you have a FPS game. You want to aim at someone in the corner? Point your gun at him and keep it on him. The screen will trail your movements so eventually the guy will be at the centre of the screen. Because you have been targeting him all the way, the screen wil no longer move as you are now centred on him.

Perhaps theres an enemy just off screen, maybe you see his arm. Point your gun at him. The camera will follow the gun and if you'd kept aiming at him, he will now be centred. I don't think that sounds too far fetched.

But of course it depends how developers make it.

Don't assume that the wand = the camera. Thats where things start going wrong. The wand is not equal to an in-game object, it is your tool for interacting with the TV.
 
ok sorry, now I see that the analog add-on has 2 triggers and seeing that the d-pad is very reachable in vertical position. I think that answer my questions about controlling a FPS for now.
 
Perhaps tilting the controller in your right hand to the left or right along the length axis moves your torso in a FPS, and tilting the controller in the other two axis controls on-screen aim (and/or moves the cursor).

In other words, imagine the control flat, in your hand, aiming at the screen. Keeping it level but moving it around like a gun aims at the screen (or moves cursor) in various locations. Breaking the level plane of the controller (by say, more than 10-15 percent) begins to rotate the screen to the left or right. I don't think any resetting would be required.
 
Analog stick for foward movement/strafe and freehand controller for freelook, I dunno, I had the same thought when I started to think about how one would play an fps. Dunno, but I hope the Rev gets lost of light-gun-esque games ala Point Blank meets Wario Ware :lol
 
pointing would 'look'

tilting the controller left or right could be quick turn around.

Lowering the remote would crouch

raising it would jump.
 
East Clintwood said:
Also as you can see with laserpointers you can't hold pointing devices steadily even if you rest your arm and hand on your lap. So it either would be very shaky or if you turn down sensibility very slow and inaccurate.

No thats not right. The thing you need to remember is that the pointer gives you a larger area of movement. An analogue stick say you can only move a centimetre each way, the deadzone is a couple of millimetres. This you can point a couple of inches each way with little effort(a flick of the wrist). So what you do is have a large dead zone compared to analogue, but you will still have a wider range of movement. An analogue stick has what? 256 degrees of accuracy. This could have thousands of degrees of accuracy and so allows more accurate control(fine aiming) but also more distance in control(fast turning).

Oh and for the question regarding buttons, the pointer is supposed to reduce the number of buttons you need. So instead of having zooming on two buttons, you just move the pointer in and out. It is actually better because with buttons you have one speed of zooming, but with this you get many speeds, zoom slowly or quickly very easily.
 
EternalDarko said:
Anyone played the MP2 Revolution demo that can clear some issues up?

This is from www.rllmukforum.com apparently (couldn't find the original post):

So what did you play?

I played the Retro-fitted version of Metroid Prime 2: Echoes.

And ...?

It played far better than the original controls. Turning and aiming were instantaneous. Control was absolutely precise.

At a certain point during the demo, one of our designers did a double-jump over a gap and spun a full 180 degrees in midair before landing on the opposite side. When I saw this my arm literally started shaking and had to grab and squeeze the cup holder on my theater seat like Doctor Strangelove to hold my arm steady.

Then he circle-strafed around a Space Pirate.

Yes, circle-strafed.

In Metroid Prime 2.

And that's without target-locking.

How were the controls set up?

It was set up in the "nunchaku" configuration described in the article. On the left controller, the thumbstick controlled player movement, the upper trigger button was assigned to visor-switching, and the lower trigger was assigned to the "scan" function and locking onto a target. On the right controller, the controller itself moved the player's gun independently of the player's view (yes, you could fire at any point on the screen without changing the player view -- the gun tilted to face toward the aim point), the trigger button fired the gun, and three of the buttons controlled jumping, firing missiles, and switching to morphball mode.

How does it compare to a mouse?

>From what I experienced, it seemed to be more precise than a mouse, but it's also much faster because it requires only a much smaller movement of the hand to achieve the desired effect. You just instantly point the controller at any part of the screen and bam!, that's where you're looking.

There is no lag.

There is no error.

It took a while to get used to the idea of how little effort is required to play a game with this controller. I kept wanting to lean forward and move the controller closer to the screen, and it took some practice to just sit back and just calmly move my hand ever so slightly.

At one point, someone said, "If you were to play a game with this against someone using a mouse, they'd have no chance against you." I had to admit it was true.

I've been using a mouse and keyboard for gaming for almost as long as I've been a gamer. I've logged over 80 hours so far in Battlefield 2 and I have a level 60 World of WarCraft character. If somebody had tried to tell me before now that a better controller would come along, I would have laughed at them.

But it only took me 5 minutes with the Revolution controller to realize that I don't need to use a mouse ever again.

Let's take a first-person shooter as an example. With a flick of the wrist, you can completely change your aim point from one corner of the screen to the other. Changing your aim point that way would require you to move a mouse all the way across a gamepad and could potentially take up to several seconds of pushing on a thumbstick with a standard console game controller.

Add to that the fact that the controller can correctly interpret roll (rotation of the controller clockwise and counterclockwise) and movement toward the screen or away from it, and you start to get an idea of the universe of new gameplay possibilities that Revolution games will be able to explore.

Gizzard: I would worry that if its in any way sloppily implemented, it will suck bigtime.

No worries in that category. If there was any sloppiness whatsoever, I didn't see it.

I do not expect to be using any other controllers ever again once the Revolution comes out.

The Angriest Smurf: This is cool as a novelty, but how does this lend itself to extended play sessions?

Try it yourself. Then see if you can still call it a novelty.

Trust me, I was very skeptical going into this. That skepticism is gone.

Could you imagine playing an FPS for over an hour with this without your hands getting tired?

Hell yeah, brother.

I often play Battlefield 2 for up to 3-4 hours in an evening (yes, I'm an addict), and after 10 minutes with the Revolution I'm ready to throw my mouse out the window for good.

When you take into account that the Revolution controller is very light (it seemed to me a bit lighter than I'd expect a TV remote of the same size) and that it's basically effortless to play with it, extended play sessions are a non-issue.

My concern is with playing today's standard genres of games. How do I play a racing game? Do I spin the controller around like a steering wheel?

That would be one way to do it.

Given the number of buttons available in the "nunchaku" configuration, combined with the tilt/rotate/push/pull aspects of the controller, I can't think of a game you couldn't easily adapt to the Revolution controller.


(Naysayer: "It's just not going to work"

I have played it. It works brilliantly.

So now that you've played it, what kinds of things do you think are possible with it that weren't possible before?

Off the top of my head:

A tennis game where your motions control the racket directly, and you never have to press a button the entire game.

A Harry Potter game where you can control Harry Potter's magic wand with the Revolution controller, and cast "Expelliarmus" with a few flicks of the wand.

... and where you steer your Quidditch broom just by steering your controller.

A boat racing game that lets you steer entirely by rotating the controller clockwise and counterclockwise.

A fencing game where you can slash, parry, and stab with the controller.

A Nintendogs game that lets you pet your dogs, pull on a leash, or throw a frisbee with the Revolution controller.

A real-time strategy game ... yes, on a console.

Furthermore, I want this RTS game to have a special cargo helicopter unit. Move the controller forward, and the cargo chopper descends and grabs hold of a tank sitting underneath it. Pull the controller toward you, and the cargo chopper lifts the tank into the air. Then you tilt the controller wherever, and the chopper flies over there, and you move the controller forward a bit to lower the tank to the ground again.
 
actually from the descriptions on IGN, i think it works like a normal FPS game setup... the controller would be the camera... It would not work like a light gun unless they set it up that way, and i don't like the idea of the simulated analog stick either (<<<<<tv>>>>) That would be no better than just hold a stick all the way to the left and waiting for your guy to scroll that way.

I think the solution would be pretty simple really...

a dual function key that serves as a use button (for opening doors and such) and ALSO turns off the analog movement when you are just pointing in the air for re-centering. everybody is thinking in terms of holding a button to turn it on, but i think it would be the opposite, at least for fps games. They would want to simulate the free feeling control like a mouse.

You combine that with a high degree of sensitivity... i'm talking about four inches moving you in a 360.. about the degree of sensitivity that you would use with a mouse pad... I use my mouse on a very high sensitivity level, and i almost never need to recenter, because it takes such a small movement to turn all the way around.. things just work themselves out so that i usually end up somewhere on my mousepad and rarley find myself close to the edge.

in the metroid demo, lock on would turn off the analog movement so you could recenter. In most fps games it coule be the use key (probably the a button).. and would be context sensitive so that it only serves as a recenter button when not pointing at something usable. So you would hold in the A button, and move the controller back to a comfortable position.

also remember, you will be playing this thing on a chair, with your arm resting on your leg for stability, so the shakey thing will not be a problem once you get used to it. it will take some getting used to though.. it will be like learnign to use a analog stick all over again in terms of having to build up new gaming muscles and stuff like that.

edit// after reading the post above, it sounds like my description is completley innacurate, at least as far as the metroid demo (although i still think my idea would be a fairly solid way to do it)... i would like to know how he circle strafed without using lock on though.
 
Iwata specifically said that the Rev. controller would set the standard for FPS games.

His words, not mine.
 
Gahiggidy said:
Iwata specifically said that the Rev. controller would set the standard for FPS games.

His words, not mine.
"In the first person shooter genre, very important overseas, we believe the nun-chuk will set a new standard, for instance you can intuitively explore in the dark using it as a flashlight."

Iwata's TGS 2005 Transcript
 
TTP said:
So no quick turnarounds?


/goes check Hunters

Could easily be a gesture control, i.e. swipe the controller quickly to the left or right for a quick 180 degree.

About the topic of this thread... I haven't seen a complaint from the journalists who gave the Metroid Prime 2 demo a shot, has anyone else?
 
Top Bottom