Support NeoGAF

[ziran]

Finally I can post it :>

great pic!

:lol

 

[fortified_concept]

This thread should have stopped here:

I guess many of you would have been happy with just a d-pad, two buttons, select, and start.

Why the fuck did Nintendo have to go ahead and fuck that up, we didn't need two shoulder buttons and two extra face buttons. Who the fuck asked for rumble in home console controllers. I thought digital was better than analog, Ha analog control who needs it, we should have stuck the d-pad.

D-pad for life.

This isn't about Nintendo being the "Innovator" but more about recognizing that there's a benefit to trying something new and taking a risk.

 

[Ponn]

*sigh*

The controller is very innovative, and it brings some great new ideas to the table; I don't see how anyone can disagree with that. But, as many people have already said, we need to see some software to get a better picture of what the controller is truly capible of.

At its core, the idea of getting "non-gamers" to play games is a good idea. In any business you want to bring in new customers to further expand the market. But, my problem is with Nintendo's insistance that these "non-gamers" are truly worth this risk that they are taking. Everyone on this board knows people who simply can't get into games. Nintendo might be able to convince these people that the Revolution is fun and easy, but is this new demographic going to be reliable? Are non-gamers going to continue to buy software and spend money? There are plenty of non gamers as we speak who really like Madden or even Nintendogs. But, you rarely see these people move away from those particular games and buy/try other stuff; I know people who only play Madden, a little Halo, and nothing else. How will Nintendo get these people to truly commit?

The people I know that don't play games are usually for two reasons, sometimes together sometimes not.

1) Games are geeky and not cool. - I don't picture these people jumping on a console where you wave a remote control at the screen.

2) Games are childish, they are adults and do not have time to waste on playing games.
- If games looked fun to them at all they would have jumped on them by now regardless of controllers. There's a finite amount of time in a day and people choose what to do with that time and most are more limited then others. I think this "trying to get non-gamers" is just really pointless. If I have a meat product I don't go and advertise it too vegitarians do I?

 

[jarrod]

yes but it WAS sony who took gaming away from the 'nerds' and made it mainstream by expanding the market to 'non-gamers'. Nintendo is trying to do the same thing with a diffrent approach. and yet are labeled as 'inovators' or 'saving' the industry for mearly attempting the same thing sony did years ago.

No, Sony took gaming away from the kids... because they grew up. Sony's market today is still basically the same market NES single handedly built back after the crash. There's been some natural growth for sure, but it's not like all the 40 million American kids who had a NES just quit gaming while PlayStation pioneered some new market out of nowhere.

If you really want to credit anyone with expanding gaming beyond Nintendo's "kid's toy" industry they established, it was SEGA. SEGA (with EA's help) birthed the mainstream "jock gamer" the console market seems centered around today while kids (the actual "new" gamers) have basically retreated to handhelds and budget consoles.

 

[PhoenixDark]

The people I know that don't play games are usually for two reasons, sometimes together sometimes not.

1) Games are geeky and not cool. - I don't picture these people jumping on a console where you wave a remote control at the screen.

2) Games are childish, they are adults and do not have time to waste on playing games.
- If games looked fun to them at all they would have jumped on them by now regardless of controllers. There's a finite amount of time in a day and people choose what to do with that time and most are more limited then others. I think this "trying to get non-gamers" is just really pointless. If I have a meat product I don't go and advertise it too vegitarians do I?

EXACTLY

It just seems very hard to do. Sure, the controller is easy to use so they can play games, but do these people truly want to play games? People have lives, and they're busy. I doubt we'll ever seen 40 year old women playing Mario Party Revolution with their children and becoming avid gamers. They might try it, but they won't become paying customers so to speak.

It's like me with anime. I can't stand it, mainly because of my attention spand and I never understand what's going on. So, people try to get me to watch the "baby" animes. Yup, I thought Sailor Moon and Pokemon were cool, but to this day I still haven't been able to watch anything else. I just can't get into it. I have other things to do. I wish I could get into anime, but it just isn't happening. Now, why would Bandai or whoever else waste their R&D money on a loser like me?

 

[dlobro1080]

I hear you on that! If nintendo really wants to capture that oldschool nostalgia feel, then we should get Mario 128 bundled with rev, standard issue.

True, but they probably figured out that everyone buying the system on launch day would be willing to pay the extra $49.99 for a new Mario separately (see Super Mario 64 -- N64 was the first Nintendo system launched without a pack-in, no?).

 

[jarrod]

True, but they probably figured out that everyone buying the system on launch day would be willing to pay the extra $49.99 for a new Mario separately (see Super Mario 64 -- N64 was the first Nintendo system launched without a pack-in, no?).

Nope. NES launched without a pack-in.

 

[fresquito]

EXACTLY

It just seems very hard to do. Sure, the controller is easy to use so they can play games, but do these people truly want to play games? People have lives, and they're busy. I doubt we'll ever seen 40 year old women playing Mario Party Revolution with their children and becoming avid gamers. They might try it, but they won't become paying customers so to speak.

It's like me with anime. I can't stand it, mainly because of my attention spand and I never understand what's going on. So, people try to get me to watch the "baby" animes. Yup, I thought Sailor Moon and Pokemon were cool, but to this day I still haven't been able to watch anything else. I just can't get into it. I have other things to do. I wish I could get into anime, but it just isn't happening. Now, why would Bandai or whoever else waste their R&D money on a loser like me?

Hmm... I think you are loking it wrong. Just take the Sims for istance, it´s well known that girls and mature women as well play these kind of games. There´s a market that like playing games, but they don´t like playing the same games you do. Ever tried to play multiplayer with girls? That´s a good way to understand why Nintendo is claiming there´re too much buttons in the controller. There´s a market out there looking for something easy to play, not wanting to memorize a bazillion buttons and combinations. And I´m glad they are looking after this market, because this way I can enjoy playing videogames not only with my male friends.

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

Now, why would Bandai or whoever else waste their R&D money on a loser like me?

risk, the lifeline of making money.

 

[Ponn]

Hmm... I think you are loking it wrong. Just take the Sims for istance, it´s well known that girls and mature women as well play these kind of games. There´s a market that like playing games, but they don´t like playing the same games you do. Ever tried to play multiplayer with girls? That´s a good way to understand why Nintendo is claiming there´re too much buttons in the controller. There´s a market out there looking for something easy to play, not wanting to memorize a bazillion buttons and combinations. And I´m glad they are looking after this market, because this way I can enjoy playing videogames not only with my male friends.

Wait wait, first people want to fight that Nintendogs and other "sims" are games and now they want to admit they aren't? Actually I fully endorse sims being games, they are in game stores and considered games ever since MS Flight sim and others. These "girls" you talk about there are already considered gamers. A gamer is a gamer and a non-gamer is non-gamer. None of this splitting hairs bullshit before it even gets started. These "girls" still buy the Sims and every expansion pack, they also are more then willing to play Mario games, and party games, and DDR, and Donkey Konga, and Nintendogs, and jesus how they bought Dogz and Catz for PC, and on and on. You're whole statement above is actually quite narrow, a bit sexist and just flat out wrong.

 

[fresquito]

Hmm... I´m not narrow or sexist, it was just an example. But I wouldn´t call these people gamers, since they only play one game, maybe two. It´s like saying that you are a swimmer because you go to swim once a year, if you take what I mean.

As for if they are games or not. I´m confident they are. I mean, why wouldn´t it be a game?

Anyway, about gamers or not gamers. I say the same once again, it was just an example of what Nintendo is trying to do. My father played duck hunt like 15 years ago, ok, so what? is he a gamer? he tried playing Mario Sunshine, and it was too dificult for him. So, it´s not a matter of being sexist or not, but it´s a fact that most gamers are guys and nor girls. Denying this is narrow.

There´re a lot of people there out not playing games, and I think one of the reasons is that they find it difficult.

 

[dlobro1080]

EXACTLY

It just seems very hard to do. Sure, the controller is easy to use so they can play games, but do these people truly want to play games? People have lives, and they're busy. I doubt we'll ever seen 40 year old women playing Mario Party Revolution with their children and becoming avid gamers. They might try it, but they won't become paying customers so to speak.

It's like me with anime. I can't stand it, mainly because of my attention spand and I never understand what's going on. So, people try to get me to watch the "baby" animes. Yup, I thought Sailor Moon and Pokemon were cool, but to this day I still haven't been able to watch anything else. I just can't get into it. I have other things to do. I wish I could get into anime, but it just isn't happening. Now, why would Bandai or whoever else waste their R&D money on a loser like me?

Exactly. "Expanding the industry" is an important idea, but it's problematic. The massive success of the iPod is incredible; it's new technology that everyone seems to want and use. But the key is that, even though it's new, different, and potentially scary to people who aren't techies or computer saavy, all you have to be to want one is a music lover. And most people love music, albeit to varying degrees. Now, something like Nintendogs has the potential to expand the market, and I'm sure Revolution will have new software that is as accessible. But you still have to convince people -- namely, those of our parents' generation and our sisters -- to give gaming a try. I don't really know how possible that is.

 

[Ponn]

Hmm... I´m not narrow or sexist, it was just an example. But I wouldn´t call these people gamers, since they only play one game, maybe two. It´s like saying that you are a swimmer because you go to swim once a year, if you take what I mean.

I get what you are trying to say, but it's still narrow thinking. These people that only play sims play them all year long though. They buy every expansion pack. I've lived with them, I have seen them come into stores to buy every expansion. Hell I consider them just as much gamers as the guys that only come in to get a new FPS for their PC every 4 or 6 months. How do you interact with these "non-gamer" girls though? The ones I lived with love to play DDR and loved to watch me play RPG's and mario type of games and loved to pick up the controller once in awhile. Where are you pulling your assumptions from? If these people are buying games, and playing them then where and what thinking process leads you to believe them to be non-gamers targeted by Nintendo with a new controller? If they didn't like fighting games before how does a different controller suddenly change their taste.

As for if they are games or not. I´m confident they are. I mean, why wouldn´t it be a game?

Quite right.

Anyway, about gamers or not gamers. I say the same once again, it was just an example of what Nintendo is trying to do. My father played duck hunt like 15 years ago, ok, so what? is he a gamer? he tried playing Mario Sunshine, and it was too dificult for him.

Did he grow out of games, it happens. Have better stuff to do with his time. Don't know, are you only going to give us information on him that is pertinent to proving your side? Would it be that much of a stretch though to think maybe the game just wasn't to his look or too complicated? A different controller is not going to suddenly make a game any easier unless the game is designed to be simple, like Duck Hunt.

So, it´s not a matter of being sexist or not, but it´s a fact that most gamers are guys and nor girls. Denying this is narrow. There´re a lot of people there out not playing games, and I think one of the reasons is that they find it difficult.

Never denied most gamers are guys, that's common knowledge. You were trying to lump girls into the "sim" market and trying to make it seem like they are non-gamers and the males are true gamers. That's the sexist part and I can guarantee you I know some hardcore female gamers that play the Sims but could more then likely kick your ass at Soul Calibur. It's all different tastes in gaming, but it's all still gaming. How you control a game does not fundamentally change the game itself. The high percentage of females that flocked to the DS for Nintendogs didn't flock there because it was a system with a stylus but because it had the games they wanted to play.

 

[fresquito]

Ok, you must understand english is not my mother tongue, so I may fail to expres myself. i didn´t try to say girls are non-gamers because they play the Sims, my most anticipated game is ACWW and I´m a hardcore gamer, you can bet. The genres you said are games that have a simple control scheme and are much more accsible than say, MGS games. That was my point. My father never was a gamer to begin with, he played that game and enjoyed it because it was simple and direct.

My assumptions came from girls I´ve known and played with. They didn´t play the sims or anything, but when playing games like Soul Calibur 2 or Smash Bros, they found themselves lost. Now, I wasn´t trying to imply that since they are girls they can´t get used to complex stuff, but all my male friends are familiar to consoles, so they never had this problem with complex games, thus my example with girls I´ve played with. But if we opted to play a game like Mario Tennis, Donkey Konga or Puyo Puyo they had great fun. And this is because those games are very accesible, the control scheme is very simple and from the very first moment you can have fun, and that´s something that is somewhat missing in most games today, even for hardcore gamers, where you need to get used to the controls... imagine for a person that isn´t familiar to control pads...

I think Nintendo is trying to reset fields and put everybody at the same level. I´m not saying this is gonna work, but I´m glad they are trying it.

 

[ChronoMagnus]

The general feeling i get from this thread is that some people just want Nintendo to fail.
Most of you guys say you only care about the games, if this is true why wouldnt you welcome a controller that has the potential to bring out good concepts and improve traditional games? It's not like the Rev wont be able to do GTA or Halo. All that The Rev brings to the table is a new way to play games. How can you hate that?

Sure the current games out are fine and i happen to like many of them but that doesnt mean that i wouldnt be open to try new stuff especially if it improves on the old formula.
I think the problem is that many of you think you are being forced to accept this new way of playing games. Well you really arent. There is a Ps3 and an Xbox360 available for you if you have completly happy with the current control configuration. For those who which to expand their horizons and actually try out new ideas there is the revolution.

Will the revolution and its controller change the way we play videogames as we now it? Maybe, maybe not, but one thing is for certain. The possibility is definitly there.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

One question I have, is when did Nintendo complete the design of the Revolution controller?

2. How much time has Nintendo software developers have had to develop games around the controller?

This to me would determine whether or not Nintendo will have a AAA title ready, or several titles ready for launch. I think the next Mario title went into early development for the Revolution. Its possible Nintendo is making a serious push to have a significant number FPS(exclusive) titles available for Revolution.

 

[vitaflo]

The general feeling i get from this thread is that some people just want Nintendo to fail.

The feeling I get is a lot of people really hate video games.

 

[marc^o^]

The general feeling i get from this thread is that some people just want Nintendo to fail.
Most of you guys say you only care about the games, if this is true why wouldnt you welcome a controller that has the potential to bring out good concepts and improve traditional games?

I share this feeling. Some people want a one console future. Weird. Stupid. Competition is good. Nintendo made a lot of mistakes in the past. People got pissed off and I can understand that. But we all learn from mistakes. And whoever can't see Nintendo has deeply changed is living in denial. DS is a cheap yet wonderful device, full of novelty and promises. And so is Revolution. So why the hate? For once bully, Nintendo is creating new gaming experiences. Hats off for that. There should be no other reaction to the Revolution announcement, from true gamers at least.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

The general feeling i get from this thread is that some people just want Nintendo to fail.
Most of you guys say you only care about the games, if this is true why wouldnt you welcome a controller that has the potential to bring out good concepts and improve traditional games? It's not like the Rev wont be able to do GTA or Halo. All that The Rev brings to the table is a new way to play games. How can you hate that?

Sure the current games out are fine and i happen to like many of them but that doesnt mean that i wouldnt be open to try new stuff especially if it improves on the old formula.
I think the problem is that many of you think you are being forced to accept this new way of playing games. Well you really arent. There is a Ps3 and an Xbox360 available for you if you have completly happy with the current control configuration. For those who which to expand their horizons and actually try out new ideas there is the revolution.

Will the revolution and its controller change the way we play videogames as we now it? Maybe, maybe not, but one thing is for certain. The possibility is definitly there.

Its fear, fear that Nintendo will come in and destroy what they love about gaming as it is now. Some its just deep dislike for Nintendo. What if the Revolution is a hit, and garners significant third party support. Then MS and Sony may follow Nintendo and create there on remote controller. Some may have started gaming during 32bit generation, so gaming has only been around for 10 years to them, although they know its been around longer than that.

 

[ziran]

The general feeling i get from this thread is that some people just want Nintendo to fail.
Most of you guys say you only care about the games, if this is true why wouldnt you welcome a controller that has the potential to bring out good concepts and improve traditional games? It's not like the Rev wont be able to do GTA or Halo. All that The Rev brings to the table is a new way to play games. How can you hate that?

Sure the current games out are fine and i happen to like many of them but that doesnt mean that i wouldnt be open to try new stuff especially if it improves on the old formula.
I think the problem is that many of you think you are being forced to accept this new way of playing games. Well you really arent. There is a Ps3 and an Xbox360 available for you if you have completly happy with the current control configuration. For those who which to expand their horizons and actually try out new ideas there is the revolution.

Will the revolution and its controller change the way we play videogames as we now it? Maybe, maybe not, but one thing is for certain. The possibility is definitly there.

i agree.

nintendo wants to do something different. if you don't like it, don't buy it.

 

[jarrod]

Except the same people mocking Revolution's divergent controller are also generally the same people to knock Nintendo for rehashing the same few brands repeatedly. Chrono's right... the vocal minority here just want Nintendo to fail. Details don't matter, only the overriding mission does.

 

[marc^o^]

I found a great reading. It starts with an article about Ghost Recon 3, and finishes with an interview of Ubisoft lead beta testor: Matthieu Buxtorf. The interview is in french and I used google to have it translated. But as the page is too long you won't see the end of the interview, which remained in french. I translated the Revolution part of the Interview for you: "People who criticized the Revolution controller stupidly do not realize the possibilities that Nintendo offers to the players but also to the developers. Here is an example of a constructeur/developpor who does not base himself solely on the technological aspect and who concentrates especially their efforts on the level of the gameplay." Wow. The guy is the Ghost Recon 3 lead beta tester. Such good praise from him says a lot on Revolution's ability to handle FPS.

 

[Ponn]

Its fear, fear that Nintendo will come in and destroy what they love about gaming as it is now. Some its just deep dislike for Nintendo. What if the Revolution is a hit, and garners significant third party support. Then MS and Sony may follow Nintendo and create there on remote controller. Some may have started gaming during 32bit generation, so gaming has only been around for 10 years to them, although they know its been around longer than that.

I share this feeling. Some people want a one console future. Weird. Stupid. Competition is good. Nintendo made a lot of mistakes in the past. People got pissed off and I can understand that. But we all learn from mistakes. And whoever can't see Nintendo has deeply changed is living in denial. DS is a cheap yet wonderful device, full of novelty and promises. And so is Revolution. So why the hate? For once bully, Nintendo is creating new gaming experiences. Hats off for that. There should be no other reaction to the Revolution announcement, from true gamers at least.

The feeling I get is a lot of people really hate video games.

Oh brother, here it comes, the Nintendo Martyr squad. Nail nintendo to the cross "Nintendo is dying for your sins! Believe!" Whatever. Keep preaching while I puke in the corner over here.

Here's a stretch for you though, maybe, and maybe i'm just crazy here, but people aren't too wild for the controller. Simple as that may be and foregoing any preconcieved notions of agenda. Not to start a big stupid debate on how it's "technically different" then past incarnations, the concept is not new, was not a very big hit and not just because technical limitations. I know people like to fantasize all these big great games using the "magic wand" but reality is different.

You are right on one point though, I do love gaming as it is now. I don't need Iwata or Nintendo to tell me i'm bored with gaming, because i'm not. And my first console was Pong, then atari 2600, and so on and so forth. I think the controller has been fine tuned through the generations and we are seeing some great versions. Nintendo is going off and doing their own thing though and I personally, and probably others aren't too keen on the controller. I'm all for innovation and gimmicky type stuff, but not as such an integral part as your main controller. Do I want to see it fail though? Honestly I don't care, I doubt they will because of the legion of Nintendo fans that will support them no matter what they are given. In the end though, I just choose not to buy it. Are there some nintendo games I would like to play on the revolution? Yea, i'm sure there will be but if I don't buy it because of the controller then it's their problem, not mine.

The part that I take exception with is saying stuff like "true gamers" should support this innovation or Sony and MS will just copy them (Good lord no) as if they have declared the controller a rousing success before they even touched it and generally think anyone that doesn't is anti-gaming. No amount of technology can overcome the fundmental flaws I found with motion devices and gaming, the biggest being the factor precison and hand movement. No matter how precise the instrument you are still bound by your hands movement with no support which varies widely. Now i'm sure someone will come back and say "it's all about the games" and I totally agree with that sentiment and that's why i'm calling a bunch of you on your hypocrisy. Because without seeing the games and playing it with the controller you are claiming it will change gaming, just because of the controller, not the games. I like the games they are now just fine, and since my experience with this concept in the past has done nothing but ruin my enjoyment of those games I did love I have absolutely no reason to be hyped up for a console that is basing itself around said controller. In other words, don't try to say i'm not a true gamer just because I choose not to support your agenda or gimmicky controller.

 

[Buffy4ever]

The people I know that don't play games are usually for two reasons, sometimes together sometimes not.

1) Games are geeky and not cool. - I don't picture these people jumping on a console where you wave a remote control at the screen.

2) Games are childish, they are adults and do not have time to waste on playing games.
- If games looked fun to them at all they would have jumped on them by now regardless of controllers. There's a finite amount of time in a day and people choose what to do with that time and most are more limited then others. I think this "trying to get non-gamers" is just really pointless. If I have a meat product I don't go and advertise it too vegitarians do I?

He is correct. I don't see many Non-gamers playing games just becuase the controller is like a remote. Heck, to use this remote controller, it may take alot of eneregey. Alot of older people I know just want to go home and relax, they don't want to have to swing thier arms like a sword. I think the remote is actually made more for Japan. I don't see it flying in America,

 

[Jiggy]

While I'll agree that people aren't bored of some current series yet, or the way the gaming industry relies primarily on producing hordes of sequels, that doesn't mean players won't eventually get bored of them. Maybe a person hadn't felt GTA:SA was running the series into the ground, but jump ahead ten years and six to eight GTA sequels and is anybody really going to care anymore? It's just diminishing returns, however long it takes to go into effect.

Hey, a lot of people already feel that way about series like Madden, Smackdown, Mega Man, Castlevania, Pokemon, and Mario Kart--regardless of how justified or unjustified it is in each particular case, that doesn't change people's, and if their feelings aren't changed, neither will their inclinations to continue buying games from that series. And that's not even getting into games that have more or less already dropped off the map, like Tony Hawk or most fighting games not named Soul Calibur or Smash Bros (which are both so early in their series that they haven't had time for people to get bored).

The market does have to expand at some point both in terms of innovation and getting new people in. I don't think I can completely agree with Nintendo that that point absolutely must be right now (although from a business standpoint I can see why they're doing it), nor would I want to hedge a bet that the system will be as much a mainstream success as I think they're hoping for--although I hope it is--but given that this is their decision and their direction, I'm still excited to see what they can do.

I don't see many Non-gamers playing games just becuase the controller is like a remote. Heck, to use this remote controller, it may take alot of eneregey. Alot of older people I know just want to go home and relax, they don't want to have to swing thier arms like a sword. I think the remote is actually made more for Japan. I don't see it flying in America.

Older people still play golf and such, don't they?
Besides, older people aren't going to be the only potential non-gamers coming to the table. DDR saw a lot of success in America, for example, and that's despite the fact that, for most people, a game using your feet is inherently less newbie-friendly than a game using your hands.

 

[WindyMan]

Here's a stretch for you though, maybe, and maybe i'm just crazy here, but people aren't too wild for the controller.

Yeah, you're just crazy. While the group of people that got to use the controller have some doubts and concerns, the overall reaction to the thing is overwhelmingly positive. Since we can only base our opinions off of those who have got to use it, your opinion seems a little strange, don't you think?

Now i'm sure someone will come back and say "it's all about the games" and I totally agree with that sentiment and that's why i'm calling a bunch of you on your hypocrisy. Because without seeing the games and playing it with the controller you are claiming it will change gaming, just because of the controller, not the games.

It's all about the games. It's true you can't say the controller is the greatest thing ever without seeing the games first. However, that also means you can't ridicule or discount the controller without seeing the games, either.

In other words, don't try to say i'm not a true gamer just because I choose not to support your agenda or gimmicky controller.

We're not saying you're not a true gamer, just a closed-minded one.

 

[Gaia Theory]

Reading through some of the posts, and skimming others, I noticed something.

There are people that feel they are being TOLD by Nintendo that they are bored with the games of today. Is that what is really being communicated? I don't think so.

Nintendo is telling us that THEY are bored with the games of today, and judging from DS third party developer support and third party enthusiasm over the Revolution, it is likely that many third party developers are bored with the games of today.

Yes, every single damn one of those developers (Nintendo included) will continue to release what we expect them to release - games we like to play - be it through sequels that are simply rehashes (that many people purchase and enjoy), sequels that introduce something new, new ip, whatever... BUT, many developers seem quite keen on trying to create new ways to play and interact with our games with the new tools that Nintendo (and Sony w/ eyetoy, MS w/ online) have provided.

Is there something inherently wrong with a company providing both developers AND gamers with a new tool to enjoy their work/play?

Hell no.

For the detractors/skeptics - sleep comfortably knowing that if Nintendo's controller idea fails, they likely fail and will certainly become even more marginalized then they already are.

However, be prepared for night terrors in the event the controller idea is wildly successful, because that would likely mean that the industry as a whole would embrace the new tool (ie: MS and Sony incorporating similar control mechanisms for their machines), as has happened with virtually ALL of Nintendo's past controller configurations (D-pad, Analog, rumble, wireless).

There is one other major point I'd like to discuss. Anyone that is arguing for or against this controller like it is some sort of crusade need to recognize that only a very small percentage of the population have actually experienced the controller first hand (and even then it wasn't with finalized retail software), and those that have tried it overwhelmingly think that with the right execution, the controller IS going to change the way we play (some) games.

Don't knock it till you try it, but don't sing it's high praises till you know that it works.

Personally, I endorse any company attempting to innovate within their sectors (be it the car industry, games, publishing, film, music...). With innovation comes risk, failure and success.

Bring it on!

 

[mj1108]

Reading through some of the posts, and skimming others, I noticed something.

There are people that feel they are being TOLD by Nintendo that they are bored with the games of today. Is that what is really being communicated? I don't think so.

Nintendo is telling us that THEY are bored with the games of today, and judging from DS third party developer support and third party enthusiasm over the Revolution, it is likely that many third party developers are bored with the games of today.

Yes, every single damn one of those developers (Nintendo included) will continue to release what we expect them to release - games we like to play - be it through sequels that are simply rehashes (that many people purchase and enjoy), sequels that introduce something new, new ip, whatever... BUT, many developers seem quite keen on trying to create new ways to play and interact with our games with the new tools that Nintendo (and Sony w/ eyetoy, MS w/ online) have provided.

Is there something inherently wrong with a company providing both developers AND gamers with a new tool to enjoy their work/play?

Hell no.

For the detractors/skeptics - sleep comfortably knowing that if Nintendo's controller idea fails, they likely fail and will certainly become even more marginalized then they already are.

However, be prepared for night terrors in the event the controller idea is wildly successful, because that would likely mean that the industry as a whole would embrace the new tool (ie: MS and Sony incorporating similar control mechanisms for their machines), as has happened with virtually ALL of Nintendo's past controller configurations (D-pad, Analog, rumble, wireless).

There is also one major point I'd like to discuss. Anyone that is arguing for or against this controller like it is some sort of crusade need to recognize that only a very small percentage of the population have actually experienced the controller first hand (and even then it wasn't with finalized retail software), and those that have tried it overwhelmingly think that with the right execution, the controller IS going to change the way we play (some) games.

Don't knock it till you try it, but don't sing it's high praises till you know that it works.

Personally, I endorse any company attempting to innovate within their sectors (be it the car industry, games, publishing, film, music...). With innovation comes risk, failure and success.

Bring it on!

[/end thread]

 

[GitarooMan]

Don't knock it till you try it, but don't sing it's high praises till you know that it works.

This is a great point. But I tend to think that a lot people who "knock" or question the Rev controller are just reacting to the "Nintendo is god, let's all bow down to the sole innovator and anyone who doesn't similarly prostrate themselves fears change and will ruin the industry" rhetoric that comes on pretty strong around here....

 

[Mihail]

This is a great point. But I tend to think that a lot people who "knock" or question the Rev controller are just reacting to the "Nintendo is god, let's all bow down to the sole innovator and anyone who doesn't similarly prostrate themselves fears change and will ruin the industry" rhetoric that comes on pretty strong around here....

Yeah, but a lot of that rhetoric comes from the "Nintendo is crap. They wouldn't know a good game if Sony presented it to them on a silver-lined BD-ROM" talk that comes on pretty strong around here.

Both sides are annoying and fail at being objective, but the cause and effect is circular.

 

[GitarooMan]

Yeah, but a lot of that rhetoric comes from the "Nintendo is crap. They wouldn't know a good game if Sony presented it to them on a silver-lined BD-ROM" talk that comes on pretty strong around here.

Both sides are annoying and fail at being objective, but the cause and effect is circular.

I agree with your point, in general the Nintendo arguments seem to bring out the strongest emotions and wild speculations on both sides. I think it's because most gamers who have been playing for a long time have really strong opinions on Nintendo and how they work and how they've changed for better/worse moreso than others just because of the lengthy history and the nostalgia involved.

 

[BorkBork]

He is correct. I don't see many Non-gamers playing games just becuase the controller is like a remote. Heck, to use this remote controller, it may take alot of eneregey. Alot of older people I know just want to go home and relax, they don't want to have to swing thier arms like a sword. I think the remote is actually made more for Japan. I don't see it flying in America,

I hate this argument, that old people have to swing their arms around and tire themselves out. Number 1, it's already been established that the controller is very sensitive and will not become tiring in a typical gaming session for most games. Second, you make it seem like swinging the controller around is essential for all games. It's akin to saying that fat lazy people don't play conventional games because they have to dance in DDR. It makes no sense when taking other games into account that don't require that sort of effort. When you talk about old people, you do realize that the video released by Nintendo alone opens up a tremendous amount of possibilities? Don't old people love to go fishing, golfing, cooking, conducting, or hunting? The controller removes the crucial entry barrier for all of these games and make them completely intuitive, without forcing people to expend a lot of energy.

 

[Flo_Evans]

lol next gen nintendo is no longer 'teh kiddie' it will be known as the retirment home console.

Yeah old people like to play golf and go fishing. There have been numerous golf and fishing motion sensing controllers forever and yet the old people still prefer the real thing.

 

[vantastic]

i'm still waiting to see the games

 

[Monk]

Yeah old people like to play golf and go fishing. There have been numerous golf and fishing motion sensing controllers forever and yet the old people still prefer the real thing.

And they were all additional costs to the system....

I'm really surprised people still buy into the "industry is dying" shtick. Yes, big companies are buying smaller companies. Other smaller companies are still producing quality content on their own.

A lot of smaller companies that have produced quality out put have died in the recent years especially in the pc market. But next gen is clear aboutr one thing, there won't be enough room for 3 console makers going the same direction and it wouldn't be good on smaller companies as they will have to port it to 3 architecturally different systems. And I really hate EA simply because they prefer to sell half of the ideads in a game at full price and sell the other half adden on at full price aswell.

 

[DrGAKMAN]

I absolutely understand this sentiment, I was also one who grew up on Nintendo. I think that in any market the early people who were in at the beginning feel somewhat betrayed when the market expands and they're not the focus anymore (similar to a band someone discovers who "sells out"). What's interesting is that some Nintendo fans (not you) seem hypocritical in that they don't like the new people brought in by Sony and Sega, yet are encouraged by the fact that Nintendo is trying to bring in other "non-gamers" now with Rev and DS, as if Nintendo will expand the market in a "good" or "better" way.

I honestly think Nintendo's biggest problem (which hasn't been discussed much here), is that their in-house software development, not hardware development, has slowly but surely dropped in quality IMO. Nintendo's first party output on GC was the worst in quality for any system they've ever made IMO, and that makes the lack of third-party support more evident. For NES, SNES, and N64 they're were tons of quality Nintendo games that made the system worth owning, for GC they're will still some but they seemed rushed (Wind Waker, SMS) and they're weren't that many of exceptional quality. If I was a big Nintendo fan (I still like their games, I'm just wouldn't call myself a huge fan of the company), I would be more worried about their software output than the Rev hardware

I am one of those very Nintendo fans though. I'll say it, I don't like the way some Sony/MS fans are...especially the one's who lump ALL Nintendo fans into this "n-tard" category who all think and act the same way as well as have the same tired arguments against their console of choice. Not all of us are the same ya know...and we have just as much of a right to bear the opinion that you PSers & X-BOT's don't respect your gaming elders (Nintendo) properly just as you lot have the right to bash Nintendo 'cos they're not "hip" or the latest Mario didn't outsell the latest GTA. But I can repress my angst for the most part, look at the whole picture and be more realistic. I agree some Nintendo fanatics are utterly rediculous in that Nintendo can do no wrong and such, but those are the fanatics. I just want to express that not all Nintendo fans are the same.

As far as the "new gamers" that Sony has brought in versus the "new gamers" Nintendo is bringing in, it's not a matter of the type of people, but more an issue of what attracts them. If they're being brought in with new ideas that expand upon this industry...great...more variety and more of a chance for this market to grow outside the a-typical young male demographic. But if they're being brought in by T&A, violence, sports related activities and explossions then it'll just be more of the same year after a year until Nintendo's "prophecy of gaming boredom" comes to fruition in the form of more & more mediocrity. I'd prefer a variety of people involved in gaming so that A) gaming is on it's way to being taken as a serious medium & B) so that the variety of tastes will bring about a variety of games.

I dissagree on what you think Nintendo's biggest problem is. While I agree that some of Nintendo's efforts were lacking in this past generation...I think in the main way they were lacking was not 'cos of Nintendo losing it's touch, but 'cos of various reasons that led to lower overall sales of covetted franchises. I garauntee that if these games woul've sold as well as their N64 counter-parts or whatever, the "GAF He-Man Nintendo Haters Club" wouldn't say sh!t about these games. You say that this hasn't been discussed enough...pffft...remember the whole GAF allergic reaction to Metroid being a FPA? How about the Celda fiasco. Mario using a waterpack: gimmick. Luigi at launch instead of Mario...I mean it goes on and on and people HAVE discussed this so called Nintendo internal lackluster effort this generation. Sales...that's the only thing that talks to some people when trying to convince them something is better or worse than something else. But I can see beyond that. Luigi's Mansion, Metroid Prime, SMS & Celda were ALL magnificent games despite them not outselling the N64 efforts. They didn't sell less 'cos they were less worthy, they sold less 'cos Nintendo overall had less of a marketshare to sell these games to.

Nintendo's #1 problem is their image, which I've covered over and over again. They're on their way to fixing it though, but they still need to work on PR, representation, branding & advertising. I think the foundation of the image is the way the product itself looks (see: iPod). Of course there's more to it, but already Revolution looks more attractive and (more importantly) more serious than the GCN. Even the asthetics of the remote-controller looks better than the GCN's fisher price controller. NOA will have a much easier time trying to sell a Revolution on it's look than they did with the lil' purple cube ad's they had at the beginning of this generation. It's alot easier to back up a serious looking product than a silly looking one!

 

[marc^o^]

Interview from Ubisoft lead beta testor: Matthieu Buxtorf, on this page. I translated the Revolution part of the Interview for you: "People who criticized the Revolution controller stupidly do not realize the possibilities that Nintendo offers to the players but also to the developers. Here is an example of a constructeur/developpor who does not base himself solely on the technological aspect and who concentrates especially their efforts on the level of the gameplay." This guy is the Ghost Recon 3 lead beta tester. Such good praise from him says a lot on Revolution's ability to handle FPS.

up