Nintendo Revolution Controller

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

Oh, your point is that since Nintendo might not make insane profits the next round, they shouldn't even try?

 

"Nintendo has proven that they don't care about the actual hardware of their console."

 

Yeah, it seems to me they're more into figuring out new ways to improve gameplay and change the way we play games. Which is something I, as a gamer, appreciate more than neater particle FX.

[EnderAndrew]

Nintendo hardly sold any consoles last time around, and honestly, I don't expect them to sell that many this time around either.

 

People who post here are likely more the hardcore gamer crowd, but in actuality, few people own Gamecubes.

 

Mine completely gathers dust.

 

In order to play the each iteration of Zelda, I must own a Nintendo console. I honestly considered never playing another Zelda, simply because I didn't want to buy the Gamecube.

 

Consider this.

 

If Nintendo were to go the way of Sega, and not release home consoles, instead they could release the next Zelda on the PS3 for instance, with jaw-dropping visuals. If they wanted to integrate their new controller, they could just the same way any peripheral controller could be used.

 

The game would be in high-def, could use the hard drive, and could have plenty of content on that awesome blue-ray disc.

 

We all win, right?

 

Nintendo makes their money on handhelds, and their software. They would continue to do so, and perhaps even more so.

 

If their titles were suddenly available to a larger audience (ie, people who don't own Gamecubes, which is the vast majority of people) then they would actually likely sell more software titles and make more money.

 

Consumers win. Nintendo wins.

 

Comparisons to M$ dropping out aren't nearly as relevant because M$ has a decent and growing market share. Their console has unique strengths beyond one controller. For instance, in the next generation, the 360 will have an advantage in how easy it would be to port a PC title, or develop for the 360 in general.

 

The Revolution's one advantage comes in a gimmick controller which easily could have been released as a gimmick controller licensed by Nintendo for the PS3 or 360.

 

Sony currently dominates market share, and early polls suggest that they will overly dominate Japan and Europe. I haven't seen a poll suggesting whether or not the PS3, Revolution or 360 is most anticipated in the US yet. Sony also has several unique advantages with it's console. The PS3 will yield the Blu-Ray drive, dual 1080p support, most power, etc.

 

Seriously, the Revolution may be the new Dreamcast. It will have it's fans, but it may be the death knoll for Nintendo's console division.

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"If they wanted to integrate their new controller, they could just the same way any peripheral controller could be used."

 

Yeah, because games that require a controller other from the standard tend to do well.

 

"The game would be in high-def, could use the hard drive, and could have plenty of content on that awesome blue-ray disc."

 

Last I heard, none of the next gen consoles have a hard drive in the basic version of the console. As for blu-ray, barring HD movies, I just don't see the use for discs as big as those. Revolution's status on HDTV is still unclear, too: we don't know yet if it can't output to HDTV at all or is it just left to developers' discretion.

 

Besides, I might not want to see resources thrown on that **** anyways.

 

"For instance, in the next generation, the 360 will have an advantage in how easy it would be to port a PC title, or develop for the 360 in general."

 

Oh really? I thought it would be kinda hard, what with the dual core processor and all.

 

"The Revolution's one advantage comes in a gimmick controller which easily could have been released as a gimmick controller licensed by Nintendo for the PS3 or 360."

 

Yeah, a gimmick just like the touch screen on DS, right? Besides, an optional third party controller would hardly be used at all.

 

"Seriously, the Revolution may be the new Dreamcast. It will have it's fans, but it may be the death knoll for Nintendo's console division."

 

I really don't see how Dreamcast is analogous to Revolution.

 

There are two consoles already going for the "neater particle FX" direction, I'd like to see something different.

[EnderAndrew]

Yeah, because games that require a controller other from the standard tend to do well.

You seriously have no clue what you are talking about apparently.

 

The Revolution's gimmick controller is not the primary device most games will use. The Revolution's controller when fully put together looks just like the Gamecube controller, with the remote sticking out the middle. Nintendo has yet to announce a single title designed around the pointing device.

 

Futhermore, the pointing device pretty much removes access to most of the other buttons. Mouse and keyboard comparisons aren't fair, because you do quite a bit with a mouse and keyboard as opposed to a pointer and two buttons.

 

Either way, Nintendo has released a wide variety of gimmick controllers over the years. None of them have EVER had major support in their games. In Nintendo wants to make games for their gimmick controller, they could do that just as easily on the PS3 as the Revolution.

 

Since the "pointer" replaces the analog controller supposedly seemlessly in a game like Metroid Prime, then it could seemlessly replae the analog control on the PS3 or XBox.

 

Again, I'm still curious how to you acecss all the buttons that suddenly aren't on the controller anymore, but that is besides the point.

 

If Nintendo designed the peripheral for another console, then it would be just as standard as how they are designing it for the Revolution. You are not required to use the pointer on the Revolution for every game, nor would it be required on the PS3.

 

Last I heard, none of the next gen consoles have a hard drive in the basic version of the console. As for blu-ray, barring HD movies, I just don't see the use for discs as big as those. Revolution's status on HDTV is still unclear, too: we don't know yet if it can't output to HDTV at all or is it just left to developers' discretion.

Again, you have NO CLUE what you are talking about.

 

M$ is shipping a console with a HDD in it. Sony lists the HDD in the system specs, and the final word has not been released if they will have two versions, make the HDD optional, etc.

 

However, Nintendo has said outright that the Revolution is not capable of 720p, 1080i, 1080p, let alone dual 1080p images. So much for next-gen when you are sticking with 480 vertical lines.

Besides, I might not want to see resources thrown on that **** anyways.

I bought a brand new HDTV for $400.

Oh really? I thought it would be kinda hard, what with the dual core processor and all.

Apparently you haven't heard about the XNA. Again, Microsoft has been developing an API so that you could seemlessly develop for the PC and 360 at once. They have toolkits for multi-core compiling.

 

When you want to comment on something that you actually know something about, please let me know.

Yeah, a gimmick just like the touch screen on DS, right? Besides, an optional third party controller would hardly be used at all.

No, again you have no clue what you are talking about. The DS's touch screen is the primary interface for the DS. Every game for the DS has to be developed are two screens, one of them being a touch screen. The Revolution has a standard controller, with a gimmick side that games don't have to utilize. Every single time Nintendo has ever done that in their history, 3rd parties have rarely supported the gimmick controllers.

I really don't see how Dreamcast is analogous to Revolution.

I'm not going to repeat myself anyone just because you're not comprehending.

There are two consoles already going for the "neater particle FX" direction, I'd like to see something different.

So would I, but Nintendo isn't doing that. They haven't shown how they will change gaming. They have also said that hardware isn't important. If that is the case, then why bother putting out a console?

 

You ignore the actual questions I post and respond with flippant and unfactual remarks.

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"The Revolution's controller when fully put together looks just like the Gamecube controller, with the remote sticking out the middle."

 

"Our current plan is for each [Revolution] hardware system to be sold with the free-hand-style controller and the nunchuck-style expansion controller," confirms Nintendo of America's senior director of public relations, Beth Llewelyn.

 

Yeah, they don't mention the "shell" being standard issue there, do they? I think that pretty much debunks 90% of your post, too.

 

"Futhermore, the pointing device pretty much removes access to most of the other buttons. Mouse and keyboard comparisons aren't fair, because you do quite a bit with a mouse and keyboard as opposed to a pointer and two buttons."

 

Spellmar says: "Furthermore."

 

Yeah, it isn't fair. The mouse is, by far, less intuitive and also has less functionality.

 

"However, Nintendo has said outright that the Revolution is not capable of 720p, 1080i, 1080p, let alone dual 1080p images. So much for next-gen when you are sticking with 480 vertical lines."

 

Well, the Wikipedia article I got my information from disagrees with you. Go change it.

 

"Apparently you haven't heard about the XNA. Again, Microsoft has been developing an API so that you could seemlessly develop for the PC and 360 at once. They have toolkits for multi-core compiling."

 

Woo. Toolkits for compiling. I'm sure that it will take care of all the troubles that having multi-core processors has.

 

"You ignore the actual questions I post and respond with flippant and unfactual remarks."

 

You mean the 'why put one out'? I thought it was kind of obvious, what with the Nintendo being the most succesful company in console business, that they should do as they see fit, since they clearly know how to run their business.

[EnderAndrew]

Yeah, they don't mention the "shell" being standard issue there, do they? I think that pretty much debunks 90% of your post, too.

You can keep putting your foot in your mouth.

 

At the Tokyo Game Show, they showed the controller in its entirety, and stated that the full controller is standard. Without it, you couldn't play the back catalog of games and Nintendo said not only at the TGS, but at E3 that out of the box it would play all previous Nintendo games.

 

Again, please feel free to chime in when you have a clue what you're talking about.

Yeah, it isn't fair. The mouse is, by far, less intuitive and also has less functionality.

I'm going to just refer to you as Volourn Jr. Nintendo compaired it to a mouse AND KEYBOARD. I stated mouse AND KEYBOARD. Did you perhaps miss the AND KEYBOARD part? I can repeat it another 50 times until you get it, but I am beginning to suspect, just like Volourn that you are intentionally being obtuse and that there is no real means of getting through to you with logic or facts.

Well, the Wikipedia article I got my information from disagrees with you. Go change it.

Wikipedia, or actual quotes from Nintendo.

"Nintendo doesn't plan for the system to be HD compatible."

"It is accurate that at this time we will not support high-definition [on Revolution]," confirmed Nintendo of America's vice president of corporate affairs, Perrin Kaplan, in early 2005.

http://cube.ign.com/articles/522/522559p2.html

 

The Wikipedia is written by any given schmoe. I'll take the direct quotes from Nintendo, thank you.

 

Again, feel free to chime in when you actually know what you're talking about.

Woo. Toolkits for compiling. I'm sure that it will take care of all the troubles that having multi-core processors has.

Illiteracy isn't funny. You really should learn to read someday, or it will hold you back in your future endeavors.

 

I wrote that you can develop seemlessly for the PC and 360 at once.

 

But like Volourn, you probably need me to repeat it 50 times.

You mean the 'why put one out'? I thought it was kind of obvious, what with the Nintendo being the most succesful company in console business, that they should do as they see fit, since they clearly know how to run their business.

If they are so successful, why did they completely fail this generation?

 

Why are industry experts predicting them to completly fail next generation?

 

Have you noticed that major gaming sites don't have sections for the Revolution, but they all have sections for the PS3 and 360?

 

I proposed a logical arguement wherein Nintendo and consumers would both profit from them taking a page from Sega.

 

I also pointed out how your "they have been historically successful" has zero weight. It did nothing for Atari, and did nothing for Sega. Where as industry experts also said Sony had no chance against the N64, and we know how that turned out.

 

Your responses have nothing to do with the questions I posed. You have gone beyond flippant and now resort to flat out trolling.

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"You have gone beyond flippant and now resort to flat out trolling."

 

Oh, Ender, you're ****ing retarded and also being a ****.

 

Yeah, I went there. After you're done crying go report me.

[EnderAndrew]

Thanks for showing your true colors. You have both been reported, and added to my ignore list.

[Fionavar]

Thread closed - you know the usual irritants :? The baiting/trolling is unacceptable within this thread. Such behaviour is not exclusive to only one member. Though I am tempted to act in a formal manner, I hope that a breather in this regard may lead to cooler and more constructive posting. Be advised, however, that should such behaviour that has occurred within this thread continue, it will result in formal censure of posting privileges.