Developers Having Fun With Nintendo's Revolutionary Controller

[Phanto]

MTV.com (http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1517776/20051208/index.jhtml?headlines=true) chats it up with some developers regarding Nintendo's upcoming console.

"Within a matter of weeks we had literally dozens if not well over a hundred kinds of play patterns that could be done with the controller," he said. "There's almost too much that people can think of, which is a sign that it's inspirational."
Interesting read here, post your comments if you have any..

[bapenguin]

The one thing that worries me....that developers will create these gimmicky style games that get old real fast and charge us 50 bucks for them. On the other hand, we may end up seeing a lot of Wario Ware/Feel the Magic style things coming out in which one game has a bunch of concepts in it.

[copasetic]

You ah make eh me so happy!
/best said in an Italian accent. Mario perhaps?!

[El-Rodente]

there will always be gimmicky games, like eyetoy (though eyetoy play was awesome, the others got old pretty quickly) but the controller will actually spawn new genres, like the fencing game everyone wants, and bring new ways of playing driving games and such.

i was skeptical at first, and i'm kind of worried that nintendo are straying away from the games market in the opposite direction than everyone else (sony and MS veering to media center type stuff) and EA porting games horribly onto it.

but innovation is always good from the big N



edit: the talk of RTS is good, maybe the first console to pull it off properly? (ps2 doesnt count, because you just plugged in crappy knock-off pc peripherals anyway)

[rein]

I have yet to read one blurb where a developer has said that they did not like the controller. I would take that as a very good sign.

[Leto K]

Gimmick games are a shame, but they're part of the growing process aren't they? First you get the games that test out the features, then you get the games that make full use of the features that are found to have the most promise.

I know its probobly too much to ask, but maybe a first person sword fighting game? Kind of like Bushido Blade's first person, except more fun. Personally I'd flip out if they just released a gimmick game based on that as long as they did it well, simple concept but damn... I'd be dueling with my friends for days.

[DirtyChimp]

"Nintendo Executive VP of Sales and Marketing Reggie Fils-Aime offered his own EA insight. "I've heard some of the reaction of the EA sports guys, and they're the ones that are off the hook with what you can do with a two-controller setup."

It seems like the controller has a lot potential for sports games. BUT, it will be interesting to see if EA makes ports of their sports games with a different control scheme for the Revolution, or make completely custom games for it instead.

[Twinkie]

I want a star wars game. I want to be dueling a friend and perform a saber-throw by chucking my controller at his head.
ooooooh, fun.

[OUX]

I know its probobly too much to ask, but maybe a first person sword fighting game? Kind of like Bushido Blade's first person, except more fun. Personally I'd flip out if they just released a gimmick game based on that as long as they did it well, simple concept but damn... I'd be dueling with my friends for days.

Yeah I would actually get in shape for that.

[Phanto]

If they know how to use this "new technology" well enough" i would have to said that it maybe will be a success. But i really hope that they make great games and not cheap & easy games.
What i mean is that they can make some quality games with that "tech" and i not mean a freaking hockey game like if you were playing in a real table if you know what i mean.

[agentgray]

heh. MTV.com

Anyway, Nintendo is the king of gimmick controllers. If you build it, people will come.

[NoName]

Anyway, Nintendo is the king of gimmick controllers. If you build it, people will come.
And I'm just that much happier because of it.

[copasetic]

At one point and time, everything was considered a gimick. It takes time, but the masses will accept. Remember, the serfs were freed in 1861, so don't let the man hold you down. :P

[Syl]

Gimmick games are a shame, but they're part of the growing process aren't they? First you get the games that test out the features, then you get the games that make full use of the features that are found to have the most promise.
Yoshi Touch'n'Go is a gimmick game.

Kirby: Canvas Curse is the full game concept that devoloped from the idea, and what a damn good game it was.

Gimmick games will come and go - some will fare better than others, but the result is a knowledge of the hardware and some idea's that will be worked into a full game later on.

[Worldcrafter]

Every time I stop to think about the types of games that could be made for this console, I start grinning from ear to ear. I love the Wario Ware games, and one made for the Revolution controler could be insane, in a very fun way.

Oh, and as far as gimicky games go, I still enjoy running through "Yoshi's Touch and Go" every now and then. But you're right, gimicky games sometimes lead to much fuller, grander ideas. Speaking of grand, that's sort of how the GTA series worked, a gimicky idea (hey lets put the player in a big city and let them steal cars), fleshed out into a full world to play in. I am expecting exciting things from the Revolution.

[TheBrainKills]

Everybody bow down before the controller and sing your praise. And the unbelievers will play their boring old xbox and playstation games in purgatory.

cue Player1 ...
cue Zeal ...

[Balthasar]

I always find it fascinating how gamers are so resistant to change, and then complain that EA creates too many sequels. I for one am pretty intrigued to see what Nintendo can do with this controller--much more so than the DS, which seemed gimmicky and completely unnecessary.

[Rafer]

From what I've read, any 1st or 3rd person shooters should work really well with the revolution controller (and any mouse driven games) so there are a lot of established genres that should work better with the revolution than a gamepad... so it won't just have gimmick games.

Yeah but I think people's imaginations are getting a little wild, I have a feeling a 1st person sword fighting or light sabre type game will end up sounding better in theory than in practice.

[Twinkie]

Yeah but I think people's imaginations are getting a little wild, I have a feeling a 1st person sword fighting or light sabre type game will end up sounding better in theory than in practice.
Oh, I don't really care if it's a good game or not. I just want an excuse to hit people with my controller. :D

[Yeti2005]

The controller is supposed to be very sensitive so you don't have to worry about waving your arm around like a mad man in a fencing game for example. It's supposed to work just by moving your wrist.

I'm excited about the Revolution but I don't think we'll see any "non-gimmicky" till 6 months after launch (assuming launch is Nov 2006 so we're looking around April 2007).

[RMan]

The one thing that worries me....that developers will create these gimmicky style games that get old real fast and charge us 50 bucks for them.
I'm not too worried about that, but what if it's slightly different, what if it's a bunch of gimmicky games that get old after 2 or 3 hours, but cost 5 - 10 bucks? I mean, is it the gimmicky part that bothers people, the getting old, fast part, or the part that they imagine it’ll cost $50 per game? If the games were easily acquired and cheap, I personally would welcome these low commitment games, it’d be more like the arcade days instead of having to make a heavy commitment to a $50/$60 game (which is why I rent nearly all my games now).

Also, if the mechanics of the game get old fast, who cares, the mechanics in most games gets old fast, which is why many concentrate more on cinematic elements and what not. If a game is made based on cool mechanics, and not the streams of expensive content in newer 360/PS3 games, do you really think they’re going to charge $50 for it? Did you expect the 360 to charge $50/$60 for it’s live arcade delivered titles? And if not, why not?

[jwbxx]

Dear nintendo,
Wow a new controller, that has to be revolutionary.

Sincerely,
The nintendo glove

[agentgray]

Dear nintendo,
Wow a new controller, that has to be revolutionary.

Sincerely,
The nintendo glove
remember the robot that spins tops? WTF was that all about?

[thecrazyd]

Dear nintendo,
Wow a new controller, that has to be revolutionary.

Sincerely,
The nintendo glove
NOTE: Nintendo did not make the Power Glove.

Now feel free to go back to posting ignorant statements on message boards.

[Balthasar]

remember the robot that spins tops? WTF was that all about?

If we are thinking about the same robot, R.O.B., I think it just picked up objects, not capable of spinning tops. I had one game that used it, which I played quite a bit but wasn't all that good.

[MasterEvilAce]

I believe you can make an FPS for this.. but I don't think you'd get anything like doom, where enemies come up behind you.

Can someone tell me how you can do a 360 in-game? That one half-life video has the guy hardly turning his position around. Do you have to aim the thing off the screen, then aim it above/below, then come back on from the other side? I don't know if that could be done fast enough to turn around in-time. The bigger the TV, the bigger the disadvantage I guess.

Oh, and what if you have a very small TV? If you're aiming the controller at it.. at some point will the game just kill everything on the screen, because it has no clue the exact location you're aiming?

[RMan]

Can someone tell me how you can do a 360 in-game?
It would work precisely like an analog controller, except without the confusion over whether forward should move up or down. Likely best solution would be having an "aiming" area in the middle of the screen, then aiming outside it would turn the view, the more outiside the more turn (this would likely be best since the user couldn't feel the center point of the controller as well as with an analog stick). That would give you the ability to pick off opponents inside your view without having to turn all the time, which may be slightly easier to follow for some than, say, mouselook on a PC (might make run&gun/vehicle mechanics a bit better too). In essence, it's very similar to the scrolling system found in many RTSs.

[Darkholmme]

I believe the big innovation is that this controller isn't like those light-based peripherals like the guns used in Time Crisis, so perhaps the same problem wouldn't apply?

[MasterEvilAce]

It would work precisely like an analog controller, except without the confusion over whether forward should move up or down. Likely best solution would be having an "aiming" area in the middle of the screen, then aiming outside it would turn the view, the more outiside the more turn (this would likely be best since the user couldn't feel the center point of the controller as well as with an analog stick). That would give you the ability to pick off opponents inside your view without having to turn all the time, which may be slightly easier to follow for some than, say, mouselook on a PC (might make run&gun/vehicle mechanics a bit better too). In essence, it's very similar to the scrolling system found in many RTSs.

That is a very good point, I'd have to say. Sounds like it would actually work very well. Hopefully it can detect a wide range off of the television area.. the further off, the faster the scroll. Sounds good

[RMan]

Hopefully it can detect a wide range off of the television area.
BTW, the TV size doesn't really matter, the controller doesn't "point" at the screen, instead the screen is just feedback for your movements. IOW, it's precisely like the relationship between your monitor and your mouse, not like a lightgun and a TV.

[MasterEvilAce]

Yeah, but wasn't it said that the sensors go on your TV, as to detect, basically... where you're aiming in relation to the portion of the TV.. Or something like that

[RMan]

No, they just said you had two sensors, and the one place I saw it being talked about said they'd be at the left and right of your TV. However, I think that's just a recommended placement (and likely where most people would put them), it's a full 3D controller, so it's not limited by the TV. I think the article just wanted to let the user know about the existence of the 2 sensors, and I think the sensors likely need to be separated somewhat for proper triangulation, but their stated position was kinda like saying where your stereo speakers should go, technically they just need to be separated for the best results.

[Zeal]

This thread reaks of fanboy.

[Lon Lon Rabbit]

Can someone tell me how you can do a 360 in-game? That one half-life video has the guy hardly turning his position around. Do you have to aim the thing off the screen, then aim it above/below, then come back on from the other side? I don't know if that could be done fast enough to turn around in-time. The bigger the TV, the bigger the disadvantage I guess.


My gyro mouse arrived this week and I've been fiddling around with it ever since.
As RMan said, and as I believe was confirmed in various impressions of the reworked Metroid Demo, there are circles of movement on the screen determining if you're just aiming at what is on screen or if you're actually turning. If you've played Mario 64 DS and tried using the touch screen to move, you can see the same thing, where they literally show concentric cirlces for stop, walk, and run motions.

The gyro mouse, like in the half life video you're referring to, does not have this. The slightest movement to the side makes the entire field of vision move to the side. Just like with a mouse, the crosshair is fixed permanently at the centre of the screen, whereas with this concentric circle system this does not necessarily have to be the case.

[Tennistoad]

Will the "nintendo seal of approval" work for The pron games I'm thinking of?

/No wait nintendo is for 12 yearolds wtfwIthinking?

[kizke]

Will the "nintendo seal of approval" work for The pron games I'm thinking of?

/No wait nintendo is for 12 yearolds wtfwIthinking?

I fear you're not long for this forum with that attitude.

[mister_slim]

No, they just said you had two sensors, and the one place I saw it being talked about said they'd be at the left and right of your TV. However, I think that's just a recommended placement (and likely where most people would put them), it's a full 3D controller, so it's not limited by the TV. I think the article just wanted to let the user know about the existence of the 2 sensors, and I think the sensors likely need to be separated somewhat for proper triangulation, but their stated position was kinda like saying where your stereo speakers should go, technically they just need to be separated for the best results.
I would imagine that individual games could also caliberate for exact placement, by having people point and shoot targets on the screen a few times. 10 shots would give pretty accurate data as to the screen size and position relative to the sensors.