IGN Revolution channel open

[thatmariolover]

This gaming generation is different from every other; or so everyone keeps saying. But I personally don’t buy it at all. Looking at the past console eras I feel these consoles themselves are probably less changed from their direct predecessors than any other generation of consoles. The graphical leap from NES to SNES might not be completely apparent to most people, but Nintendo multiplied their processing power by almost 100 every way around. From the number of sprites they could have on the screen at once to the color pallet they had at their disposal, the jump was huge.

Look at the next jump, from SNES to N64; it was still a huge leap. From 2D to 3D – even the PSX was a massive jump. But that jump put the wrong idea into the head of almost everybody in the Industry – even Nintendo. The N64 was advertised as the most powerful system available – and affordable too. Everybody saw the leaps in graphical capability as exponentially and expected it to continue; until the PS2, Xbox, and Gamecube came out. Then I think the console makers started to understand what they were getting themselves into and what was happening.

Microsoft may be an exception because of their relatively recent venture into the console entertainment market. Then again, they're generally fairly shrewd about their business practices. I think Sony and Nintendo on the other hand realized full well what was expected of them and what kinds of limitations they were going to run into. From every rumor available Sony’s apparently decided to deliver another huge jump no matter what the cost to the company or consumer; maybe I’ll get a PS3 when the time comes if it’s reasonable – but what happens the generation after this one? Nintendo on the other hand decided not to change the hardware so much as offer a decent jump in graphics and combine it with new concepts for the way we should be expecting games to change. Two to three times as powerful as the Gamecube isn’t something to be shrugged at. And for the price point that so many groups and industry analysts are expecting it seems more than reasonable.

I don’t want my point lost before I’m done so here it is. I’ve been coming to Game Tavern in some form or another almost since the very beginning to see most of us really grow in terms of our concepts and understanding of the gaming industry. Most of us were massively opinionated fan-boys (or girls) of one persuasion or another (myself included) when we first came here. But through tons of debates and arguments our enthusiasm for the gaming industry was tempered. And most of us seemed to really come to an understanding that graphics didn’t make a game before, and they’re not going to make a game now. They can help you be immersed in the world you’re in and I can understand that – because I like amazing graphics as much as the next guy.

So many people think that Nintendo’s going to lose out on this next generation. But Nintendo knows how to choose their fights and I think they have a real chance to succeed. They’ve chosen to not compete on a playing field that they know they can’t win on. Nintendo’s playing a different game and if they can convince other people to play with them then they've already won - because they've got no competition. I am a Nintendo fan - and maybe I don't come from the perspective of some of you. But I think that most of you are being naive if you are willing to believe Nintendo is dead without seeing its lifeless corpse in the cold earth.

[DeathsHand]

Originally Posted by thatmariolover

Nintendo’s playing a different game and if they can convince other people to play with them then they've already won - because they've got no competition.

"If they can convince other people to play"... That's exactly the issue...

Personally, I don't think they can... Just a hunch, of course... If we were placing bets, I'd put my money on Rev. being somewhat of a 'failure' (although that word may be a bit too harsh)...

But like I said, just a hunch... There's no real hard evidence as of yet to show that it will go one way or the other... And that's why I'm really interested (moreso than last gen) to see what happens with the Rev... Because it's so different, how will things play out for it?

Will consumers embrace the new controller? Will developers?
Will people take a look at the graphics and say "You get what you pay for. *puts down the Rev. and picks up a PS3/360*"? Or will they dig the idea of being able to play games in a different way for less?

Tune in next time!

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by DeathsHand

"If they can convince other people to play"... That's exactly the issue...

Personally, I don't think they can... Just a hunch, of course... If we were placing bets, I'd put my money on Rev. being somewhat of a 'failure' (although that word may be a bit too harsh)...

But like I said, just a hunch... There's no real hard evidence as of yet to show that it will go one way or the other... And that's why I'm really interested (moreso than last gen) to see what happens with the Rev... Because it's so different, how will things play out for it?

Will consumers embrace the new controller? Will developers?
Will people take a look at the graphics and say "You get what you pay for. *puts down the Rev. and picks up a PS3/360*"? Or will they dig the idea of being able to play games in a different way for less?

Tune in next time!

And sadly, I don't think this falls into the lap of Nintendo.

Sure they will have all of their staples, and I'm sure people would buy it in droves, but it would probably been the same people who have been buying it for the last 20 years.

What they need are 3rd parties to come out, not only with exclusives but with ports that can't play anywhere else controls.

I mean imagine if EA were to take advantage of the Rev controller and allow you to directly control your pass. It would allow a lot of people who get pissed off at Madden, but still buy it to no longer blame the controller or other nonsense (and trust me they do, I know way too many people who play Madden)

Or maybe a FPS that not only looks good but offers a level of control that Halo or Killzone may never touch this generation.

I'm sure they are making some backdoor business, but they really need to throw everything they got into the system in the first year or so.

First party or 3rd party because hopefully they can build up a big enough base so that people are more willing to experiment when the 2nd year comes around and the graphics are less of an issue when people feel they need the controller to play.

[Null]

well if ps3 and x360 allow for keyboard/mice, then they've arleady have the top level of control over the lution controller, theres no doubt that nitnendos controller will be better then a normal controller for FPS, but every review i've read from people who've tried it admit it still doesnt touch the pc setup.

and with icon passing in sports games, i think its still alot easier to press X to pass to the person with X over thier head then anything this controller could do.
Say you could throw it like a real foot ball in the direction you want to throw your pass....
Fun? oh hell yea, it would be a blast.
Practical? sadly no, expecially in the age of competitive gaming, you using something thats 'fun' and someone else using something for more precision, they're gunna win, and they're gunna have more fun because of the win.
Having something be fun to me does not replace a better way of controlling something.


Anywho, that issue aside.. My main question is this...

the way nintendos controller works, is setup on the sensors you have to put around your TV, which makes it an accessory to the main console. Now if by some chance this controller succeeds, what really would be stopping Sony or MS from producing an addon that does the same thing... then either of them claiming they have both the graphics AND the controller then.

i mean it honestly wouldnt be hard for either of them to do that.

i think nintendo is trying to let MS and Sony battle each other, but i think they're putting themselves in a spot that they may not be able to climb out of later on.

[Canyarion]

That's what I also thought of. Like the analog stick, rumble function, this can be easily copied into other controllers. It happened before...
Nintendo will need more than this to sell their console.

[Jonbo298]

We also have to remember we dont know the full capaibilty of the Controller yet. Miyamoto said there is something else about it we dont know yet.

What I'm hoping for also is that Ninty does what IGN and other sides have shown, taking the "middle" out of a wavebird controller and sticking in the Rev controller and you have a normal controller but with Rev capabilities also. That would make it so both camps are happy (Nintendo and other 3rd party companies)

[DeathsHand]

Originally Posted by Null

what really would be stopping Sony or MS from producing an addon that does the same thing...

I heard someone ask that on the IGN board, and the reply he got was "Nintendo patents"...

*shrug* I dunno exactly how that works, or if Sony/MS will be able to find a non-infringing way to make their own version of the controller...

And even if they did release one, it wouldn't be the default controller, so it could be an eye-toy kind of situation where it gets like... 5 games over the console's lifetime...

But eh! If it's "INNOVATIVE AND AMAZING, THE FUTURE OF GAMING!" as Nintendo fans are all hyped up about, it'd be a no-brainer that someone's gonna copy it somehow somewhere down the line...

And of course Nintendo fans would then get all pissed off, yelling about how Sony/MS ripped Nintendo off, and how the future of gaming was supposed to be owned exclusively by Nintendo...

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by Null

well if ps3 and x360 allow for keyboard/mice, then they've arleady have the top level of control over the lution controller, theres no doubt that nitnendos controller will be better then a normal controller for FPS, but every review i've read from people who've tried it admit it still doesnt touch the pc setup.

Just curious you read the part about it not touching the PC set-up.

As for keyboard/mice on PS3/X360 it may run into the problem most accessories do and that is usage. I mean the controller is standard so developers have to implent it into their games, some will, some won't.

and with icon passing in sports games, i think its still alot easier to press X to pass to the person with X over thier head then anything this controller could do.
Say you could throw it like a real foot ball in the direction you want to throw your pass....
Fun? oh hell yea, it would be a blast.
Practical? sadly no, expecially in the age of competitive gaming, you using something thats 'fun' and someone else using something for more precision, they're gunna win, and they're gunna have more fun because of the win.
Having something be fun to me does not replace a better way of controlling something.

I don't think this point is entirely true. Well atleast on a whole.
There are people who buy fishing rods for games or steering wheels for racing game.
The games are built around the controller yes, but people find it more immersive to actually have a device they can control. While the Rev doesn't necessarily take the shape, it does allow a certain level of interaction as you control the action with your body.

Its like this I guess, have you ever played or known someoen who played a game and leaned their body in one way or another trying to well I guess control whats going on?

I don't know the last point with fun/precision. Case and point is most people will be using the Rev controller all at once. Unless, you are referring to playing a game on the 360 compared to the Rev.. then er I don't know

the way nintendos controller works, is setup on the sensors you have to put around your TV, which makes it an accessory to the main console. Now if by some chance this controller succeeds, what really would be stopping Sony or MS from producing an addon that does the same thing... then either of them claiming they have both the graphics AND the controller then.

Well, I'm sure its possible.
And it could very well happen.

But two things really stand out to me.

1)Rev would of had it first and its a console built around it. Its the way there were more games that used the analog stick on the n64 than the dual shock on the original PSX or the games that used 6 buttons on the Genesis.

2)Basically same point, but it would be an accessory to the console. It would be added money to the consumer and then something developers have to factor in about userbase who have it versus those who don't.

i think nintendo is trying to let MS and Sony battle each other, but i think they're putting themselves in a spot that they may not be able to climb out of later on.

It is quite 50/50 in this regard. they could als elevate themselves to a status that neither the Ps3 nor 360 can touch because they don't offer the same level of control.

Look at it this way, people still playing Genesis and Nintendo and PSX and it isn't because of the graphics.

A good game is a good game because it plays well. Graphics help a ton, I won't deny that. But once you get past how it looks, you need some type of substance. Games aren't moving pictures they are more an interactive story.

The example I was fond of was in the days of the n64/PSX.

PSX had the SmackDown series which by far the most featured packed and best looking wrestling series at the time (to a point it still is)

But the n64 had AKI's series which well not better looking nor touting as many features as the Smackdown was the much much better series by a long shot. Simply because the gameplay was hands down far superior.


Now this all however assumes that they actually deliver on games.

I mean look at Sunshine, it was supposed to spout some magical feature, and it really didn't. And in many regards was inferior to Mario 64 at least in my books.

[Null]

Originally Posted by BreakABone

Just curious you read the part about it not touching the PC set-up.

not sure what you mean there.

As for keyboard/mice on PS3/X360 it may run into the problem most accessories do and that is usage. I mean the controller is standard so developers have to implent it into their games, some will, some won't.

i think this a whole different ball game then what your pointing out.
for 1, we're talkin FPS games, not maping a keyboard out to use a platformer, that would be silly.
keyboard support is already in many of the online games that consoles use.. basic keyboard support is VERY easy to impliment.

i can almost guarantee that all the FPS companies making these FPS games for PS3 and x360 that make em for PC are going to add the keyboard support if the console allows them to. (the console only developers will follow suit afterwards) In many of these games, like Unreal tourmanent 2007, Quake 4, Call of Duty, Half Life 2, etc. that have been developed on PC, will/already have the keyboard functions built into them, they just lie unused on a console that doesnt let it use it.

because for keyboard controls YOU develop the config. not them, when they have to design a game for 2 completely different controllers, they have to make up things to add and take away buttons. to figure out how they can get one thing done on another controller thats layed out different.

this is nothing like adding keyboard/mouse support. where you go into the control settings and tell it i want e to be move foward, and this key to jump. or that key to shoot.


IF the consoles allow the developers to add the support... then Keyboard/mouse support will be STANDARD for FPS games on consoles by the end of the new gen.

I don't think this point is entirely true. Well atleast on a whole.
There are people who buy fishing rods for games or steering wheels for racing game.
The games are built around the controller yes, but people find it more immersive to actually have a device they can control. While the Rev doesn't necessarily take the shape, it does allow a certain level of interaction as you control the action with your body.

Its like this I guess, have you ever played or known someoen who played a game and leaned their body in one way or another trying to well I guess control whats going on?

I don't know the last point with fun/precision. Case and point is most people will be using the Rev controller all at once. Unless, you are referring to playing a game on the 360 compared to the Rev.. then er I don't know

yea, but fishing rods, are something you play on your own for fun, and i dont know they may be easier to play then a controller i've never played em.

Steering wheels in racing games ARE the more procise and easier way to race. like, if someone were to go online with a racing game, one using a controller, one using a steering wheel. i'd give the advantage to the one using the wheel. he can control speed and turning much smoother and more accuratly then the person with the controller.



What im saying for nintendos new controller, is while it may be a more fun way to control such and such game, it may not be the BEST way to control it. it all depends on the game. i'd love to use it on sports games and try it out, but i wouldnt want to seriously play a sports game using it. i'd want the better way.

[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by Null

not sure what you mean there.

I was referring to...

theres no doubt that nitnendos controller will be better then a normal controller for FPS, but every review i've read from people who've tried it admit it still doesnt touch the pc setup.

I ahven't actually seen any review that made reference to it in comparision to a PC setup.

i think this a whole different ball game then what your pointing out.
for 1, we're talkin FPS games, not maping a keyboard out to use a platformer, that would be silly.
keyboard support is already in many of the online games that consoles use.. basic keyboard support is VERY easy to impliment.

i can almost guarantee that all the FPS companies making these FPS games for PS3 and x360 that make em for PC are going to add the keyboard support if the console allows them to. (the console only developers will follow suit afterwards) In many of these games, like Unreal tourmanent 2007, Quake 4, Call of Duty, Half Life 2, etc. that have been developed on PC, will/already have the keyboard functions built into them, they just lie unused on a console that doesnt let it use it.

because for keyboard controls YOU develop the config. not them, when they have to design a game for 2 completely different controllers, they have to make up things to add and take away buttons. to figure out how they can get one thing done on another controller thats layed out different.

this is nothing like adding keyboard/mouse support. where you go into the control settings and tell it i want e to be move foward, and this key to jump. or that key to shoot.


IF the consoles allow the developers to add the support... then Keyboard/mouse support will be STANDARD for FPS games on consoles by the end of the new gen.

I'll be frank here.

i don't know and I don't care. I really don't like FPSers.

yea, but fishing rods, are something you play on your own for fun, and i dont know they may be easier to play then a controller i've never played em.

Maybe its just me, but I play all video games for fun

Steering wheels in racing games ARE the more procise and easier way to race. like, if someone were to go online with a racing game, one using a controller, one using a steering wheel. i'd give the advantage to the one using the wheel. he can control speed and turning much smoother and more accuratly then the person with the controller.

I think we've been through this before on AIM.
But I really think it deals with a level of comfort no matter what you are using.

In general it may be easier to control with a steering wheel but someone who can master the game with a controller is pretty much in the same boat.

Same way some people work better with certain setups than others.

What im saying for nintendos new controller, is while it may be a more fun way to control such and such game, it may not be the BEST way to control it. it all depends on the game. i'd love to use it on sports games and try it out, but i wouldnt want to seriously play a sports game using it. i'd want the better way.

How do you know the better way yet?
I mean you have to give it a try before you claim the conventional way is the only way.

And no controller works well for EVERY genre of game.. its pretty much impossible I think. There are games in most genres that may work around a controller but eh.

Case in point, I still find the PSX/PS2 controller akward for wrestling games and any game that uses dual analog.

And we know Cube controller sucks for fighters and pretty much anything you need the D-Pad for.

Fact of the matter is if they can find ways to cater to their strenghts they have an advantage.

There are lots of doubts, I have.

I don't see how wrestling games would work. (yes if you haven't picked it up enjoy wrestling games)

On the same note, I don't see how fighting games may work.

But I can see it working for like RTS or FPS or racers.

I think that many of the people who still play 'the classics' are ones who actually grew up with the games... They're fueled by nostalgia and familiarity...

I can pull out an NES/SNES game I played as a wee boy and still thoroughly enjoy it...
Yet when a friend or someone else recommends an amazing OL' SKOOL game that I just have to play, I find it extremely hard to get into...

That is a good point.

But I really think it is about the games.

I mean just look at the Mario Advance ports, which sold real well, I highly doubt that was nostalgia sakes, I believe those games really hold up well no matter if you grew up on them or not.

But yeah there are games/genres that have been vastly improved that just seem so weird playing on older systems. It happens it even happens in a generation, I believe.

I guess an example I can use is my roommate.

Who prefers NBA Live 2004 on the Xbox to any other version of the game before or after it. Even though newer versions may look better or add more stuff. I guess it was just a combination of things in that one game that made it the best overall for him.

[DeathsHand]

Originally Posted by BreakABone

Look at it this way, people still playing Genesis and Nintendo and PSX and it isn't because of the graphics.

I think that many of the people who still play 'the classics' are ones who actually grew up with the games... They're fueled by nostalgia and familiarity...

I can pull out an NES/SNES game I played as a wee boy and still thoroughly enjoy it...
Yet when a friend or someone else recommends an amazing OL' SKOOL game that I just have to play, I find it extremely hard to get into...

Originally Posted by Xantar

If Nintendo can outsell the PSP with a game about petting puppies (with graphics that were really not much better than the N64), I think there's a distinct possibility that the Revolution will be a best-seller too.

Not sure if that's a fair comparison, as they're two different markets (The ability to have something to do 'on the go' can appeal to someone who might not really be interested in sitting around at home playing games, and they'd probably be the kind of consumer that's more inclined to spend 130 on a DS than 250 on a PSP), and, as a PSP owner, the DS admittedly has a lot more going for it than "a game about petting puppies"... And the PSP has a lot less going for it than it should...

Whereas PS3 will likely have the same, full-on developer support that the PS2 has, and Revolution... Welllll... That's up in the air for now...

[Xantar]

If Nintendo can outsell the PSP with a game about petting puppies (with graphics that were really not much better than the N64), I think there's a distinct possibility that the Revolution will be a best-seller too.