Revolution controller

Man i’m excited. The Nintendo revolution controller came out and
I was wondering what everybody thinks of it. heres the link.

Is this a joke?


personally I like it, it looks nice n comfy, and with a price tag of $200-$300, it’ll be the only next gen console I will consider getting.

I’ve read a number of the reviews and watched the keynote address. I’m really happy with Nintendo on this one. I think it’s a brilliant idea to make a 3D pointing device and make it look like a remote control. It’s something that non-gamers are familiar with and are not intimidated by, not to mention how it will improve already existing genres for hardcore gamers like me.

Of course, it’s all about the software. Nintendo has said that themselves. I think developers will be backing this kind of control rather than a touchpad and stylus. If they can get plenty of good 3rd-party developers behind them, I think we are in for a real treat.

It’s funny, actually. Sony and Microsoft have been bragging innovation and “mass market appeal”, which is a term I’ve grown to hate (thanks Mr. Allard), and I think Nintendo is not only going to attract more non-gamers, but it might, if pulled off, will make the PS3 and Xbox 360 look like 10 year-old technology.

agreed, I am quite looking forward to some of the planned titles, the only one I miss is oblivion, but I will hopefully get that for pc.

No, read up on it. It’s actually a fantastic idea.

I think it will cause mass RSI across the world. No wait, it’s for the Nintendo Revolution… no one’s really going to buy one of them are they? :stuck_out_tongue:

I reckon there will be people going yeah, y’know that looks nice for a change but when they have to actually use the thing for hours of gameplay, I could see people getting frustrated with it.

The battery life is another thing. That controller is supposed to last about the same as the Nintendo Wavebird controller, which is about 100 hours maximum. If they don’t include a rechargeable option then you could be replacing battteries every couple of weeks. I’d pass on that alone.

The only advantage to wireless is that there are no wires to trip over but the range of the comtroller is 10-15 ft, which is similar to a wired controller.

Also, in the interests of saving battery life, they can’t use any force feedback motors so no vibrations in racing games to make you feel the gravel.

Nope, call me old-fashioned with 10 year old technology if you want but the traditional controllers are just better.

There’s only one thing I like about the Revolution and that is being able to download old SNES and N64 games for it but I bet the service will cost a lot and I can do that now and play them using emulators.

Also, even though the machine will probably have some good games, they tend not to stray from the tired old games they’ve always had. You will likely get more Mario games, more Metroid Prime games, more Zelda games but you likely won’t be getting all of the decent games and if you do not exclusively nor first.

The food chain from top to bottom currently goes: PS2, XBox, Gamecube.

The food chain from top to bottom will soon go: PS3, XBox 360, Gamecube Revolution.

Well, they said that they were aiming to make the machine affordable and have lower power consumption, which inevitably means they will have less power than the PS3 and XBox. They say they will try to make the games run better but it’s not like the developers for the other consoles won’t be doing that. They will be trying to push their superior hardware to the max too.

Do you mean because you prefer things to be the best rather than what people say they like? I partly agree but on a business level you can’t think that way. The more you meet the demand of the consumer, the more money you make and the cheaper you can make each product.

It’s smarter to listen to your consumers and meet the demand than tell them what they should want to buy.

BTW, does anyone think the name XBox 360 sounds a bit like the traditional Microsoft rip-off but renamed so no one notices? They probably heard Nintendo picked Revolution so they said well what’s a revolution - it’s like going 360 degrees. OK we’ll use that. I think it’s a dumb name.

Personally I think Nintendo is trying to avoid “non-gamers” by being innovative; new-comers won’t want to buy something that doesn’t look like what it’s meant to look like.

The Revolution doesn’t look like a typical games console, neither did the Gamecube with its cubeness and small discs. Nearly everyone I talk to about the Gamecube says it just can’t compete with the PS2 and x-box because of how small it is. “it mustn’t be as good as the x-box because there’s no room for the graphics and a dvd player”.

Metsys, why is it funny that Sony and Microsoft have been pushing “mass market appeal” when that’s exactly what they’ve got?

As for the controller, it doesn’t look like it’s going to attract anyone except the most hardcore fans. I don’t think everyone should have to read an article to be convinced why they should buy something. I haven’t read the article yet, and I doubt most people are going to.

Now I’m off to read the article…

I read some more about that controller. That may actually be a pretty good idea. I do think they have a major lack of buttons, though.

The food chain from top to bottom currently goes: PS2, XBox, Gamecube.

Food chain meaing what exactly? If you mean power, then it would be more like this:

X-Box, Gamecube, PS2.

The food chain from top to bottom will soon go: PS3, XBox 360, Gamecube Revolution.

Not likely. I think Nintendo has some serious potential with the Nintendo(not gamecube) Revolution. The last thing I heard about pricing was 200$, they also said that if all goes well, the price will decrease further.

They have announced that it features built-in force feedback.

And the reason why we have those conventional controllers is because of Nintendo. :slight_smile:

Do you mean because you prefer things to be the best rather than what people say they like? I partly agree but on a business level you can’t think that way. The more you meet the demand of the consumer, the more money you make and the cheaper you can make each product.[/quote]

Sure. Businesses can think that way, and they do. It’s called taking risks. How else can you find more consumers? By catering to every whim of your current ones? That’s simply how you keep your current customer base to make sure they are still giving you money. So, you need to do both if you want your company to grow.

Anyway, here’s how I feel about “mass market appeal”, at least how the term is used by people like J Allard and publishing companies.


What would have happened if Atari (in the 80s) told their developers, “That’s a stupid idea for a game. No one will want it except a niche market. We are pulling the plug.” Would we have the large industry that we enjoy today? The game industry, and many others, are built off of a niche markets, flops, and the occational innovation that pulls more people into realizing what the niche market is so excited about.

Currently, niche markets in the game industry are looked down upon because it isn’t going to make them as much money as, say, Madden 2007 3rd Edition (see also what has recently happened with Darwinia, a game that has already gotten very good reviews by people like IGN, and yet no publishing company wants to make money off of it. Again, niche market).

The fact is, that it’s okay that not everyone wants to play your game. Also, someone should tell Microsoft, the “mass market appeal” whore (remember 1 billion units?) that not everyone watches MTV.

Yes, having as many people play your game as possible is a good thing, and a noble cause. However, the more correct term that they should me using is “mass MARKETING appeal”, i.e. the MTV crowd, or the most impressionable youth with money in their pockets, which is where most marketing is aimed at. I think marketing for the industry now is becoming less about finding people that would be interested in your game, and more about getting people who are not interested in your game to buy it. Remember, it’s the same game, they are just marketing it to different people, rather than offering them something that they might like.


In short, niche markets are okay. Business risks are okay. Risks, economically speaking, DO in fact make sense. All those things eventually grow. That’s where we’ve gotten our so-called “standard controllers” of today, is because of that previously noted process. Saying that companies should be doing otherwise is going against what the industry is built on.

“The Xbox 360. A whole new direction?” :slight_smile:

Again. 360. MTV skater crowd.

Well, you’ve got to trick the newcomers somehow :). And I think that’s exactly the reason why it looks like a remote control.

Anyway, to end my very long post. Hats off to Nintendo for sticking their neck out. Microsoft? Well, just natural hatred I guess :slight_smile: Sony? Cell is going to be a pain in the butt to develop for. Array of 7 SPEs? Developers want a single core approach! Nintendo? I like that they are not trying to take over my livingroom, by trying to be everything. Oh, and thanks for not playing the TFLOP war with the other two.

The Revolution might end up being the first Nintendo console system I buy. Just… PLEASE don’t suck :).

how would guys feel about modeling with that controller? just wave…click…wave more…rotate…wave…i would do that…i mean, i guess i’d do anything…

that has to be a joke c’mon how can u play a car or fps games on this ???

Looks great as far as i’m concerned. I’ve always hated first person shooters on consoles because I can never aim the gun and this looks like it could be fairly easy to aim and fire.

Car games you could hold it horizontally in the NES configuration and turn it like a steering wheel. Or maybe they’ll have a steering wheel you can slot this into.

I bet Sony and Microsoft are desperately working on one now, just incase it does cause a revolution. I wouldn’t be surprised if they release one for the PS2 or Xbox to spoil the revolution launch.

Nope, food chain meaning the consoles that developers want to develop for in order to maximize profit. It’s the same with the handhelds now. Developers will want to make games for the PSP instead of the DS. It’s the same reason why BMW don’t advertise that they support the Creative Zen mp3 player or any other player - they support the Ipod. They support what is popular.

[quote]The food chain from top to bottom will soon go: PS3, XBox 360, Gamecube Revolution.

Not likely. I think Nintendo has some serious potential with the Nintendo(not gamecube) Revolution. The last thing I heard about pricing was 200$, they also said that if all goes well, the price will decrease further.[/quote]

Well, the Gamecube currently costs about half what a PS2 costs and they still aren’t flying off the shelves. When I walk into my local games store, the Gamecube games take up a couple of shelves (about 10%). The PS2 takes about 55% of the store space and the XBox about 35%.

None of the Gamcube games reach the front of the store because they obviously know that those games are not likely to draw people in.

OK, that’s good for the gameplay but again not for the battery life. I’ve read articles that say with force feedback, wirless controllers can go dead in 3 hours.

Nah, they probably stole it from Xerox or something :P. You’re right, their NES system started it all and the controllers haven’t really changed since then. I guess they deserve some credit.

True in some ways but once you have a significant user base, you don’t need innovation to keep them or to attract new customers. Take Microsoft for example. Their software is at the moment the least innovative system in terms of structural design. But you don’t hear all that many people wanting to switch to something new because they lose peripheral support, software support and compatibility with their current software.

It’s also what nearly everyone else uses so even though it’s not innovative, most people will still follow the pack. If all your friends have PSPs, will you be the lonely one in the corner with your DS because it’s innovative?

Yeah, I understand what you mean that it sometimes pays off. Take the Ipod again with its navigation wheel. If people were asked in the street what they would want, most people would just have said directional buttons.

Lol, only Microsoft could advertise that turning 360 degrees would point you in a new direction. It should have been the Xbox 270 or something.

Yeah that’s true. I’m sure they will develop some code to make it more transparent though. There is software all over the place already that does that. Mainly in supercomputer clusters.

I agree there. I’ve actually considered getting a keyboard and mouse for the PS2. I still manage to play the games though so I don’t think it’s too much trouble.

hahaha i never thaught of that. it is kind of stupid.

yea maybe but nintendo to a risk. I think they shoudl also have a normal controler that you should be able to choose.

From the first impressions that I’ve read of different people in the gaming media that had an opportunity to actually play with the thing, they said that playing the FPS demo was quite responsive and felt very natural. So I can only hope that this could be a big leap in playability for video games.

The technology seems sound. They just NEED to have plenty of 3rd party support.

That’s a very good point. Although one thing to remember is that those decisions are made by publishing companies now more than development firms. Very very few development firms can actually fund to make their own games anymore (id is one of the few left I believe). Publishers are what fund games now a days, and publishers are unforunatly, on average, far less likely to take risks on games, and certainly a lot less prone to take risks than Nintendo, which is why I can imagine that they are not as supported as they could be.

It’s a hit game or go broke market. Only one forth of games actaully make money. Games are costing a lot of to make, and the industry is not quite ready for it in my opinion.

Now, I’m not a doomsayer like some of those other developers and commentators on the industry. I’m not spelling doom for the industry. What is going to happen is the pendulum effect that you see throughout history. Reaction, then reation to the reaction. It started swinging from small firms and blocky graphics, now it’s swinging to photorealism and huge dev teams, and I can tell that it’s going to swing back to smaller firms and stylized, simpiler (or more abstract) graphics, and probably through in some new gameplay, because people are reacting to the industry as it is now. Sooner or later, the pendulum will swing back the other way.

Don’t misunderstand my apparent dislikes for publishing companies. They are not Satan. They are most likely evil though, and I know for a fact that they work for Satan everyone once in a while :slight_smile: It’s just that it has become such a sink or swim market. There really needs to be room for people with neat ideas to still be able to make some money, and from Iwata’s keynote, that’s what they are shooting for.

One thing Nintendo does have in common with the other two is that it is also a corporate whore. Guess who came up with the idea of having the console company charge liscencing fees for each cartridge? Ooo, we can make money of each game that other people produce. Money money money! That philosophy has screwed the industry a few times and has resulted in a few illegitimate children. And because of that, they can afford to pull things like the Virtual Boy, the Power Glove, the DS and now these goofy looking remote/nunchuck controllers.

But, this time around they have been really showing an interest in a lot of my concerns for the industry as it stands now. They are probably just luring me down a path that leads to Walmart or Gamestop or wherever, but at least I’ll likely be happy to pull out my credit card when I get there.

That comment was a joke, by the way. (“You ending a sentence in a preposition. You bastard!” Name that quote :slight_smile: ). I don’t think they actually used that as a tag line. If they did I’d certainly laugh my face off.

yea maybe but nintendo to a risk. I think they shoudl also have a normal controler that you should be able to choose.[/quote]

Nintendo is planning on having a conventional controller and acts like a cradle for the Revolution controller. Also, look at what happens when you turn the remote side ways. Ooo, old skool NES controller :).

I don’t think Microsoft or Sony will copy the controller, at least at launch. It’s too late for Microsoft (November 22). They are both crossing their fingers with their financial risks of making these systems already. Sony has big research and development costs to recover from. Also, branding is important (branding as in what your company represents). I think if they add something wierd like “tilt action” to a controller, it will bad for their branding. Just remember who they are marketing to. Goofy family oriented stuff is more Nintendo’s branding.

Its pretty obvious that soon after launch 3rd party accessory manufacturers will be making more traditional controller designs. I too said, “This can’t be a controller…” and immediately imagined myself trying to play something like smash brothers with one hand… but the add-ons look pretty good and my guess is this thing is really easy to hold and fun to play. Thats really all that matters to me.

As for software for this console… who knows. I’m fairly certainly this will be Nintendo’s last console venture. Their sales have been dropping year after year, but their software is definitely high-quality. They’re going to go the way of sega… replaced by mega-market pan-global congolmerates that have more money, more marketing power, and more monopolies. That’s just the way business is. Its just a matter of time before Nintendo announces they won’t be manufacturing any more Nintendo Revolutions and will in the future be focused on the hand-held market and software.

Sad to see ya go Nintendo. But its not because you’re no good.

the link you provided to that article didnt work for me so i went looking for another one about it, my search turned up this:

there are a few pics, and near the bottom you can see the more traditional shaped cradle for the controler, the article you posted might have said this, but i have no way of finding out, so sorry if this is old info.

Why must it constantly be reiterated that Nintendo is the only console manufacturer that has been profitable this generation. Sony has lost something like $70 billion, while MS has lost more than double that. The first one to drop out of the console race will be Sony. It doesn’t matter that they currently have the most popular system, because their shareholders will not continue to put up with the company feeding a multibillion dollar black hole. MS won’t quit so easily, but in the end, they won’t be able to sustain their losses either (probably about the time Vista ships and bombs). The only reason both of these companies are still in this industry is that they are able to subsidize their console divisions with profits from other divisions (Sony’s home electronics, MS’s Windows and Office). So, with only 10 percent of the market share, and the lowest-priced console on the market, Nintendo still maintains a profit margin of 20 percent (GE, for a comparison example, has a profit margin of 11 percent). Nintendo will stop making consoles and handhelds whenever they feel like it, not because some MTV kids want them to.

It’s a business, people. If a company wants to stay in it, it has to be profitable. Sony and MS are not.