Now I'm beginning to understand why Nintendo didn't show Mario Party 6 at E3...done properly, it could be like a threesome with Reggie and teen Link.

Yea, I can't really see Nintendo blatantly ripping off the eyetoy. And if they do, it'll probably be some super mega hyper mode of it.

Hmm... hooking up the Revolution to the PC as well as a TV? Couldn't hooking it up to a PC be the potential solution to the problem of developing an online system in consoles?

I think Nintendo's strategy for attracting casual gamers doesn't make any sense. Non traditional controllers, touchscreens, dualscreens, one button games, etc are in fact very hardcore. The casual gamer has no interest in such things. They want generic titles in familiar genres. I'm not saying I want Nintendo to go in that direction, I'm just saying that casual gamers are not going to be interested in Mario Party 6 because it doesn't use a controller.

Non-gamer is probably a better term for what they're targeting. But even then I fail to see the advantage of targeting those people. I'm sorry but if you can't handle a f*cking controller videogames just aren't for you and frankly I don't want Nintendo using up development time to make games for my DAD when they could spend those resources making games for ME. I'm concerned that by focusing too much effort on these "revolutionary" games that target non-gamers they're going to ignore their own hardcore fanbase that like games that have some depth and complexity to them. I don't want everything being dumbed down for a bunch of morons that can't use a controller. I probably would feel more confident if Nintendo had done something better with connectivity or shows something on the DS that's more advanced than the demos they showed at E3.

"On the technology side of things, GameFront is reporting that Nintendo's Managing Director Genyo Takeda has told Bloomberg that the 'Revolution' console will be able to hook up to a PC monitor as well as the traditional television screen."

Cool. This makes me a little less worried. PC monitor support is something that many hardcore gamers have wanted out of the box and if they're including it it shows that they're do intend to target the hardcore as well. In fact I think Nintendo should exclusively target the hardcore and they might inadvertingly do that when they realize that people that aren't interested in playing a game with a controller probably aren't interested in playing with bongo drums either. Or at least not enough to actually buy a console for it.

I am a pretty casual gamer but I think something radical would get my attention. Sure good graphics are all well and good but if one console is offering something that I can get nowhere else then I'm probably gonna get that console. Also if the Revolution console uses a big touchscreen or something then nobody can complain about not being able to use a controller, becuase it won't be a controller. I doubt that Nintendo will rip off the E-Toy because that Isn't their thing. It will probably be more along the lines of a touchscreen or VR glove setup. Imagine having to shake some virtual dice and then move your piece. That would rock.

"Also if the Revolution console uses a big touchscreen or something then nobody can complain about not being able to use a controller, becuase it won't be a controller."

If that was ALL the controls were I certainly wouldn't buy it. There's no way Nintendo could make the games I love with that sort of setup. That's really my ultimate concern.

Thats why i said or 'something'. Personally I like the idea of VR gloves. YOu put your hands in certain places to perform certain actions. That would be good.

Whatever the something is it will at best compliment a controller not replace it. I'm saying that if there was no controller, only some new method, I wouldn't buy it or at least wouldn't make it my only console purchase. VR gloves sounds like a cool idea but I can't play a traditional SHMUP or fighting game with them so it would suck if that was all there was for controls.

The controller still has to be there and the types of games that have been made since Pong still have to be playable on it.

An FPS would be perfect for the VR gloves since you could use one hand as a trigger and one to control movement. I dunno, its just a little fantasy of mine...

It's called the power glove and might actually make sense now that we have proper 3d graphics.

You could use a certain type of VR glove on Black and White on PC, so I don't see why that can't be applied to certain games on the new console.

Ian, have you heard of Sony's EyeToy? It's been a huge seller in Europe and America, mainly to casual gamers. People don't mind peripherals at all. What's very important about the EyeToy is that it doesn't segment the userbase or require complicated setup. You buy the inexpensive hardware, and it includes a game already. You plug it into the system, turn on the game, and are playing within a minute. The games are so simple that you don't even need instructions. (Not unlike...Wario Ware.)

And yet it would be total plagerism if Nintendo used the eyetoy idea. THey need something original and I am sre that they can pull something amazing out of their sleeve.

WAX ON WAX OFF

UP DOWN UP DOWN

SHOW ME SAND THE FLOOR!

Oh, and you don't need a motion sensor *that's also a camera* (hence, the EyeToy) to input wacky physical movements. You just need the motion sensor.

I think all of this is good.

If you think about it objectively, touchscreen allows people to write and draw - skills people already have whether they play games or not.
Making the machine hear, which can only extend it's functionality.
Making the machine see with an eyetoy like camera is the same.

All nintendo are doing is thinking about ways in which they can make a gaming device aware of/accessible to more possible means of input.

Of course the implementation of all this functionality will be according to how interesting they themselves find the experiments they use to test the viability of each of the elements - on their own and together. They'll build countless prototypes, gradually changing this bit and that bit and re-writing software to test and play with it. Then they'll factor in cost, means of production and mass production. Find some sub contractors get tenders for varying rates of production. Work out how big a risk they'll take to make the initial orders for components to all suppliers sufficiently large that the economies of scale will make it possible to bring it out at a competitive price without over-ordering and ending up paying huge fines or compensation if they can't sell that number of machines and have to stop production early. Then dole the work out among them all, get production lines going, build the software and development tools, incorporate it all into 1 device that conforms to all worldwide safety and manufacturing standards, is easy to manufacture with the minimum of retooling of factories still producing other products and bobs your uncle. All they have to do then is justify themselves in childishly simple terms to journalists who ask questions blindly from outside the process and wannabes who always know better and take an highly revisionist approach to memory.

Then it'll either sell or it won't in the arbitrary and savage animal guts of the consumer group-mind. Dice rolling.

Yes I think it's all very good.

Motion sensing games are of huge interest to me since....the weekend before last. Seriously, I was at a sports bar and they had this boxing arcade game. You put on these "gloves" that were attached to the unit by cords and stood under a motion sensor and you had to duck and dodge and punch to play. It was the most exciting gaming experience I've had since I played Super Mario 64 for the first time. I also think it was the first time I truly enjoyed exercise!

I agree with Ian that it would be foolish for Nintendo to give up traditional controllers at this point in time, but I think it's absolutely worthwhile to pursue new control ideas like this. They're a lot of fun, and while they may not offer fifty hour quests, I think a lot of them would have strong replay value.

Besides, I think Nintendo is well aware that hardcore gamers aren't about to give up the type of games we've played all these years. In spite of Nintendo's drive to innovate, it still relies heavily on sequels (Metroid Prime 2, Pikmin 2, Paper Mario 2, Star Fox 2...) and it isn't even afraid to go completely old-school if that's the best way to make the game (Zelda: Four Swords).

Edit: explained boxing game more...better.

In NOM I read about this game in Japan where you hold a small sword and you use this for fighting and even fro casting spells. Obviously it is a very specialised product but I think it is a good idea.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: Jale
And yet it would be total plagerism if Nintendo used the eyetoy idea. THey need something original and I am sre that they can pull something amazing out of their sleeve.

---

The gameboy camera is very different to the eyepd because the games did not involve the camera. It was just a digital camera with funy add-ons. Good stuff though.

I don't believe you can "plagerise" technology. As long as you don't make it work exactly the same it's not illegal. If it was then Nintendo would be the only console maker to offer a d-pad of any sort.

"Ian, have you heard of Sony's EyeToy? It's been a huge seller in Europe and America, mainly to casual gamers. People don't mind peripherals at all. What's very important about the EyeToy is that it doesn't segment the userbase or require complicated setup."

I am well aware of the EyeToy. "Doesn't segment the userbase" is the important part. Plus Sony doesn't talk about how the EyeToy is the future of the Playstation brand and that their next console is going to revolve around the EyeToy and similar forms of gameplay. If Nintendo would just release this kind of stuff I would be perfectly fine with it. The fact that they're talking about this type of stuff as if it's their main focus for the next gen and the key to all future success is what scares me. Sony just releases the EyeToy as a fun quirky toy. Nintendo is talking like the EyeToy is a killer app to base a whole system around.

That's ultimately what bugged me about connectivity. It's a cool little idea that adds to a console's value. Nintendo acted like it was a system-selling feature and talked about how it was a valid replacement for online and showcased Pac-Man Vs as if it was the big title of 2003. Obviously they greatly overestimated how useful and interesting the concept was. I'm worried that whatever they do next gen will get the same treatment.

Ian, I think you're missing the whole point Iwata is trying to make- if the industry continues on the path it's following it will grow stagnant and eventually collapse under lack of originality and difference. All games are now are bigger, more complicated versions of their predecessors. Nothing new has happened to the industry since the 3D revolution. The industry needs a change is what Iwata is saying. You're still viewing this stuff as gimmicks, claiming you know what the public likes. The PSP/DS rivalry is a perfect example of what Iwata's saying. The PSP is just a natural progression of existing products- its only real claim to fame is better graphics, merely an evolution of the Gameboy Advance. I'm sure it's a wonderfully designed piece of hardware, but it's nothing new, it's just more of the same. The DS, on the other hand, is completely different and offers entirely new methods of interaction that will change the whole way you play the game. The PSP just encourages PS2 ports, the DS encourages developers to think of game design in completetly new ways, to really change the way the player plays the game. One huge reason game quality has started declining is lack of originality- all we really have is the tweaking of concepts that have existed for over a decade. I understand your desire to still play games the traditional way, but don't downplay the necessity for a major change in the industry. As much as you complain about everything I'd think you would be happy for something new.

I do want something new. I just don't want Nintendo to concentrate on nothing but which is why I'm so uneasy about the situation. The DS actually has made the whole situation easier to digest because it can still play traditional games and if that's the case with the N5, great.

"Nothing new has happened to the industry since the 3D revolution."

Oddly enough there is something new that's becoming popular: online gaming. But this isn't the MC vs the world thread so I won't take that any further but it is something new to console gaming that has a lot of potential.

I'm totally into something new. I just don't want the N5 to be grossly underpowered or use weird controllers that suck for third party games or have nothing but one button Kirby Air Ride games. I'll probably feel better about the whole situation when I get ahold of a DS and can see for myself if this is a good direction to go in.

Online gaming is simply a new way to play with other people- it's opened up the way for MMO games, but that's hardly a revolution that completely changes the way we play games. It just changes who we're playing with. Besides, online gaming has been around since Doom.

Who was the first to come up with something like the eye toy? I remember a few years ago hearing about Intel making something just like that.

Anyone considered the possibility that it may actually make use of the bongo's from Donkey Konga and DK: Jungle Beat? I doubt it, but just thought I'd toss another idea into the fire!

"Besides, online gaming has been around since Doom."

Well 3D gaming has been around since Battlezone and early polygon games like Virtua Racing and Star Fox. 3D existed well before Super Mario 64 came out it just became the standard after that. I'll agree that online gaming doesn't change games nearly as much as the move to 3D but realitically it's pretty hard to have something of that magnitude happen again any time soon. Unless they're making the holodeck odds are whatever ideas Nintendo has won't change gaming as much as 3D did either. Plus Nintendo themselves haven't done much with online gaming yet so at the very least for them it's new.

My point was online gaming has technically existed longer than 3D- just a semantics squabble.

In any case, don't judge what effect Nintendo will have when you don't know the first thing about it. For all you know they could completely change the industry.

I believe Sega had something called the "Dream Eye" that they were working with at one point in time.

I think it will just use the Kongo Drums.
They'd be more than sufficient for moving around the game board and the creative guys at Hudson could easily come up with a ton of mini-games using them. Actually about a third of the mini-games in old games could easily be done with the Kongo Drums - many of them would actually be BETTER with them too.

You're certainly afraid of Nintendo going all radical on us Ian. But I don't see anything to support those fears.

Nintendo is trying to figure out how to create new relationships and interactions that people can have in, with, and revolving around videogames. They're not looking for some sort of gimmick to set them apart from the rest. As long as Miyamoto is involved, it's quite apparent that Nintendo will only dive into a technical innovation when they have a good idea of implementation to back it up.

This goes for online connectivity too. Nintendo isn't going to set up a server farm until they can figure out a way to do something beyond mere player-matching and persistant worlds.

Nintendo isn't necessarily looking to abolish the old-school, and they probably never will as long as the market keeps reminding them of it's importance (like they reminded Nintendo that they wanted a D-pad on the GC controller, which they got). Instead, Nintendo is looking to move videogames beyond the normal boundaries of the medium and open up new frontiers and fields in the way relationships and interaction can be interpreted. They don't want videogames to forever be someone simply looking at pretty graphics and pressing buttons to get more pretty graphics.

Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Yeah, I doubt Nintendo will axe support for old game controls, especially with all of this talk about backwards compatibility going on...

I want Minority Report-style controls.

That would work for some games and would totally rule for turn-based combat games...FIre Emblem on the N5 anyone?

If the "Revolution" truly is a "revolution" then this could be major news. Nintendo has been very stagnant and to change that it needs something big. A duel screen will not do it. Basic online play will not do it. I don't have any great ideas on what they should have, but it needs to be radically different.

I don't see why Nintendo is so intent on doing so,ething really radical. If they concentrated on franchises that are popular in the West like Fire Emblem as well as those like Mario and Zelda, their future would be pretty secure. I'm completely in leauge with Ian here; Nintendo's 'revolutionary' ideas in the past have sometimes suceeded, but more often flopped.

It's not axing suport for 'old-style' games that concerns me, it's not concentrating enough on them. I'm fine with the DS: by putting so much emphasis on saying that the DS was completely seperate from the GB and console, everyone knows that Nintendo won't lose anything really big if it fails. But if Nintendo release a dance pad or waffle iron or whatever with the 'Revolution' and make most of their launch titles compatible soley with it, I'm going to be really pissed.

There is already a market for games that people make now, and Nintendo's sucess is proven by it. The reason why we are on these forums is because of games made now. Innovation is fine, but something completey new, even if very sucessful in bringing new people to the gaming market, could just as easily alienate the actual gamers. Nintendo had a hard enough time this generation convincing ordinary gamers to buy their console because of a games drought for a bout 6 months. No one wants a repeat of that. If they couldn't handle it normally this generation, what makes anyone think they could handle it when making half their games for a waffle-iron next generation?

Now I like waffles as much as the next guy but waffle-iron video games would be more of something that I would do but not tell anybody.
But I'm accually looking forward to seeing what Nintendo has up their sleves just as long as they're not pulling it out their asses.