Nintendo Revolution controller

You can purchase larger, third-party controllers for the PlayStation 2 which retain the same basic design.

Nintendo seems to be trying for a revolution, as they have for years, but to date all they have achieved are gimmicks. This controller doesn't really seem to be a revolution, but it will be hard to tell until games specifically designed for it are published. Then there is the fact that there will have to be real, good games that use this controller, rather than games based around a gimmick that utilizes the controller in some fashion.
 
I don't know what they've been smoking as of late; the DS is a magnificent misscariage of a design, anyone with a freakin PalmPilot knows that there are huge disadvantages to playing games with a touch-screen.
 
LOOOOL!! Hahahahaha! Is this a hoax? It's gotta be, no developer would be that suicidal. I mean, a remote control? What the fuck!?

Mouse keyboard combo sucks for games that require a lot of turning, like racing games.

Seriously, this looks like such a troll.
 
DirtyDreamDesigner said:
All of this is bullshit! We were promised VR gear 20 years ago. I was sure that by the year 2005 all games would be played using virtual glasses and gloves.
Click to expand...

You haven't been around for 20 years, and VR hasn't been around for 15.

I predict numerous lawsuits from fuckwit parents claiming that Nintendo harmed there children, when their violent armswings put each other's eyes out.
 
Graz'zt said:
I imagine using Nintendo Revolution will be a lot like masturbation. It will require a lot of repetitive wrist movement, which can lead to exhaustion after prolonged use and even serious health issues in the long run. Trust me, I've been there. :look:
Click to expand...
How would this be any different from a normal controller or a keyboard and mouse? That's a lot of repetitive movement as well, the only difference will probably be the places where the strain is focused.

As for the controller, it seems interesting enough, and it might work really, really well. It's not the first time that innovations have been made out to be ridiculous but turned out to be brilliant (the mouse, for one).
I think it'll lead to a lot of different gameplay as well, which might prove brilliant, because innnovation isn't exactly what the game industry is known for.
 
Sander said:
How would this be any different from a normal controller or a keyboard and mouse? That's a lot of repetitive movement as well, the only difference will probably be the places where the strain is focused.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Since Revolution controller will require a lot of vertical movement as well as horizontal, you won't be able to rest your hand on the desk as you do when using a mouse and that will likely strain the muscles and the wrist more. I fear this controller might not be suitable for eight-hour gaming sessions.
 
Kotario said:
Nintendo seems to be trying for a revolution, as they have for years, but to date all they have achieved are gimmicks. This controller doesn't really seem to be a revolution, but it will be hard to tell until games specifically designed for it are published. Then there is the fact that there will have to be real, good games that use this controller, rather than games based around a gimmick that utilizes the controller in some fashion.
Click to expand...

THANK YOU!

I hate it when they make a game just to capitalize on a special add-on that doesnt pan out and is never used again.

Well at least with this thing it could give everyone some exercise. To say the least the target audience tends to be lacking in such activities and who knows...maybe if you attach weights to the controller "swinging a sword" could actually build muscle. Those who play excessively could actually start to look like thier in game characters...though thats just silly.

Really I dont have much hope for this. It looks like a remote and I think it would be really awkward to play through movement unless they were trying to make a complete virtual reality simulator which thier not.

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
 
again, with the exception of all out sword swinging, i don't see this controller being that difficult or taxing to use. Hold a remote control in your hand and rest it on your desk. Tilt the front end upward slightly, downward slightly, and from side to side. It takes no more energy than it takes to push and hold an analog stick to turn.

I'm with Sander here and see this as potentially opening a lot of venues for innovation. Whether it will be a success or not is in the developers hands.
 
You play console games from behind a desk? From my experience, that is an unusual arrangement.

From my experience most people play either while lying down/sitting up on their beds or in a chair. They will rest their elbows on the bed, laps, or armrests. Typically there is not much wrist movement, as the figures rest on their respective control or control clusters.

This controller is obviously manufactured to be held in a different manner. I envision quite a bit of wrist movement, even if it is slight. Practice now, without a desk, especially tilting it up and down. It won't be physically taxing, no, but there is quite a bit of wrist movement. It's that wrist movement which concerns me. Now the attachment looks to be little problem, operating like a normal controller.
 
Sorry, I referred to the desk because it happened to be where I am now and likely everyone else here. I'm sure 100% of everyone here wouldn't go try my suggested experiment like I'd said to but I thought there MIGHT be a chance if there was no investment in having to get off your ass to do it ;-).

But I don't know, I would think you would still be able to play in typical positions people would... (indian style, slouched back against a chair) lying down might be difficult if only because of the position your arm would have to be in but I would think it'd be just as comfortable as a controller in that situation. The only difference now is with this controller, only one hand is used so the other is free to... erm... I'll let Ratty decide ;-).

And as for working your wrists, well now gamers will work out a new part of their body. Combine old controllers with this one and gamers will not only have strong fingers but strong wrists now too. YAY!
 
Graz'zt said:
Exactly. Since Revolution controller will require a lot of vertical movement as well as horizontal, you won't be able to rest your hand on the desk as you do when using a mouse and that will likely strain the muscles and the wrist more. I fear this controller might not be suitable for eight-hour gaming sessions.
Click to expand...
Actually, this is better for your joints. RSI is often caused by the fact that your hands are always in the same position, eg when holding a mouse or typing on the keyboard. It's not worse at all, perhaps even better, to have more varying movement.
 
Hrmm... it seems to be making a big point of having to buy more more more for the revolution, as affirmed by the entire last box in which potatomato is jumping with his money in hand. But the revolution will probably cost about half the price for a ps3 or xbox360. So in the end, the system would still cost less, even IF attachments were needed. Mmmmm I think potatomato needs to celebrate all consoles :).

And the comic predominantly about him... Was that the point of it? That consoles are retardedly pricey?
 
SimpleMinded said:
Hrmm... it seems to be making a big point of having to buy more more more for the revolution, as affirmed by the entire last box in which potatomato is jumping with his money in hand. But the revolution will probably cost about half the price for a ps3 or xbox360. So in the end, the system would still cost less, even IF attachments were needed. Mmmmm I think potatomato needs to celebrate all consoles :).

And the comic predominantly about him... Was that the point of it? That consoles are retardedly pricey?
Click to expand...

I take it you don't remember Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles, for the GameCube? If you wanted to play multiplayer (which was a major selling point of the game) each player needed to use a separate Game Boy Advanced for the controller. So, if you wanted to play with three of your friends, you need a GameCube and four GBAs (not to mention link cables, sold separately). Does that not sound a bit excessive?
 
Kotario said:
I take it you don't remember Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles, for the GameCube? If you wanted to play multiplayer (which was a major selling point of the game) each player needed to use a separate Game Boy Advanced for the controller. So, if you wanted to play with three of your friends, you need a GameCube and four GBAs (not to mention link cables, sold separately). Does that not sound a bit excessive?
Click to expand...

Good Lord! That's terrible!

I can barely fathom that...ugh...

On a side note thank you very much for introducing me to these "VG Cats" Kotario though I think Ratty gave me a link in another post. Their target audience is perfectly suited for me...well all of us really...

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
 
Good point kotario, I was really looking forward to FF:CC but then never bought it because of the large investment it would have taken to play it :). I need to buy this link cable and game boy advance... so i can access the menu screen? Couldn't they have... put it on the tv?
 
well i had FF:CC - it can be played single player... a bit drab, but not bad. Is definately better multiplayer. Luckily, at the time, I had access to a GBA and the friends who played with me already had GBAs - the only investment I had to make was a link cable (they already had theirs) and my link cable came packaged with the game.

still, however, it WAS excessive... but no worse than GC Four Swords.
 
so was it a design decision by Squaresoft or Nintendo to include the game boy connectivity piece?

And is the game worth getting if you can play multiplayer? I have two brothers and a sister and we have enough game boys to go around. Would you recommend it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top