Topic: Revolution "Easy to Port" to, Claims Nintendo

[PaLaDiN]

Actually I think it's just to simplify porting for lazy devs, so they don't have an excuse like "we couldn't bother figuring out how to convert it to the Rev". Ports have been canned from the GC for less.

Nintendo is definitely confident in their new controller though... hell they're gambling pretty much everything on this controller.

[odifiend]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Nintendo seems plenty trusting in their new controller... what are you talking about?"

They have a shell available to play traditional games.  If they were confident that this remote design they wouldn't bother with one because there's no need.  A real standard should be able to adapt to all previous games that used the standard controllers of the past.  You said that the problem with the shell is that if Nintendo pushes it too hard then people are going to assume they don't trust it.  I'm going a step further and saying that they very fact that they even made one shows they don't trust it.

Or I guess it's possible that NCL trusts it (actually that's very likely) but some third parties and likely some NOA execs don't and thus they came up with the shell to please them.  But even then, the very fact that they have to make a shell to appease these people should be a big alarm going off in NCL's heads.

Ian, my man, what are we going to do with you?  Why don't you dig out that analog stick vs. digital pad argument/defense you have saved in Microsoft Word somewhere and apply it to the new controller.  For somebody who always talks about Nintendo not being an 'AND' company, the shell (if it is packed in) is the perfect solution.

WindyMan, when is later?

[Ian Sane]

"For somebody who always talks about Nintendo not being an 'AND' company, the shell (if it is packed in) is the perfect solution."

It IS a perfect solution... if handled correctly.  That's my original point and I've gotten sidetracked by all this talk about how having the shell sends the message that the remote isn't good enough.  That's correct.  It does send that message and if that's a big deal then maybe Nintendo should have put more thought into the Rev controller.

[Artimus]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Nintendo seems plenty trusting in their new controller... what are you talking about?"

They have a shell available to play traditional games.  If they were confident that this remote design they wouldn't bother with one because there's no need.  A real standard should be able to adapt to all previous games that used the standard controllers of the past.  You said that the problem with the shell is that if Nintendo pushes it too hard then people are going to assume they don't trust it.  I'm going a step further and saying that they very fact that they even made one shows they don't trust it.

Or I guess it's possible that NCL trusts it (actually that's very likely) but some third parties and likely some NOA execs don't and thus they came up with the shell to please them.  But even then, the very fact that they have to make a shell to appease these people should be a big alarm going off in NCL's heads.

I think you, Ian, are the reason they have a shell. You and people like you who use every single possible thing you can to rip apart the Revolution. If they didn't have a shell then you'd say they were abanoning every current gamer. Now that they do you say they don't believe in the new idea.

ANSWER me this question: Do you or do you not understand that Nintendo is not interested in the stauts quo?

Because it comes down to that: they don't want to do the things you bitch and moan they should. Plain and simple. Yet you do not seem to get that. I wish Matt at IGN would come and kick your face in.

[KDR_11k]

Now I'm not saying they should ditch the shell because I think they need it. I'm saying the remote shouldn't be so restrictive that they need one in the first place.

I don't think that's really possible. While they might be able to stuff the rod full of buttons it wouldn't be comfortable for use as a traditional controler without grips and grips would compromise the rod's primary function. The shell design allows them to optimize each addon for its purpose instead of having to account for other purposes as well.

Look at the NGage (or most other convergence devices). The thing has a horrible form factor because it has to work for so many purposes and each purpose conflicts with another one. E.g. it needs the speaker and mic to work as a phone but as a game machine it need s buttons and a dpad in those places. That got us sidetalking. Or the numpad. That's horribly confusing for games but absolutely necessary to work as a cellphone. Try it with other devices. Use the GC controller to point at things. Try to hold a DS like a telephone. Or think of arcade sticks, flight sticks, racing wheels and gamepads. Fewer purposes means fewer design goals and therefore lower chance of conflicting goals. Nintendo wants a controller that's both intuitive for newbies and familiar for regulars. That's mutually exclusive. They could have made a hybrid that noone is happy with or they can do what they do which is offer the ability to make the controller adapt to your (or the developer's) preferences.

As for "replacing earlier standards": PCs have shipped for years with CD drives, then writers, then DVD writers yet they still included the 3.5" floppy drive (I think most manufacturers don't include them nowadays but it took nearly ten years to phase them out). Why? CD ROM was the new standard and great and everything but for some purposes the 3.5" floppy was superior. But instead of making some ugly chimera of a technology they went for a medium that does not 100% replace the earlier one but offers huge advantages nonetheless. If they had insisted that CDs are just as writable as floppies, the technology would have been a lot messier and taken much longer to gain a foothold.

[Bill Aurion]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
That's my original point and I've gotten sidetracked by all this talk about how having the shell sends the message that the remote isn't good enough.  That's correct.  It does send that message and if that's a big deal then maybe Nintendo should have put more thought into the Rev controller.

Nintendo can't win, they are doomed!  Let's totally squash hopes for new gameplay by just doing more of the same!  Thank GOD you aren't running the show...

[stevey]

"they keep talking about the shell but they havnt confirmed it comes with the console
it makes me worry "

Relaxs they confirmed that a long time ago at the IWATATON!!!

[Ian Sane]

"Let's totally squash hopes for new gameplay by just doing more of the same!"

At least I don't think that gaming as it is is dead.  If Nintendo can't think of new ideas using a traditional controller then they're no longer the brilliant game designers they were and might as well just quit.

"Do you or do you not understand that Nintendo is not interested in the status quo?"

Oh I see that and that's a big reason why I'm complaining.  I think this direction they're going in will be their downfall and thus as a fan I'm pretty upset about that.  The only way I can see it succeeding is if this non-gamer strategy works but then as a "real" gamer I'm left out in the cold.  With Nintendo's plan I see either Nintendo dying or Nintendo turning into something that doesn't consider me part of their audience anymore.  I don't want either to happen so I'm going to be vocal about what I think is taking them down those paths.

"I don't think that's really possible. While they might be able to stuff the rod full of buttons it wouldn't be comfortable for use as a traditional controler without grips and grips would compromise the rod's primary function. The shell design allows them to optimize each addon for its purpose instead of having to account for other purposes as well."

That's true.  It is a flexible design provided the shell is included with every controller.  But that's a big "if" and I think it alone could make a huge difference in the Rev's success.  It's hard to think that Nintendo will provide the flexibility needed thought just because they've been inflexible dickheads since the N64.  To me it's more expected for Nintendo to force the remote on us as the standard than to include both parts.

"Thank GOD you aren't running the show"

Bill if I was running the show Nintendo would never have given you the idea that a new controller is a requirement for new gameplay or that non-gamers need to be targetted or that HD is bad or that a remote is even a good idea and thus you wouldn't care.

[KnowsNothing]

[Hostile Creation]

Ian, your logic is totally flawed.  First you complain about the new controller.  Nintendo provides a shell because they realize it's impractical to jump straight into an entirely new medium of control.  Many developers, Nintendo included, will make plenty of games using the new controller.
Also, Nintendo is utterly capable of making games with a standard controller, better games than most other developers are making.  However, they're the only people in the industry who create hardware and are willing to innovate and take a risk.  Plenty of developers innovate in their games, and Nintendo does as well, but Nintendo is the only company that's willing to broaden the field of gaming and our minds as gamers.

That's no goddamn reason to complain.

[ShyGuy]

Ian, would you be really happy if Nintendo went third party?

[denjet78]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Bill if I was running the show Nintendo would never have given you the idea that a new controller is a requirement for new gameplay or that non-gamers need to be targetted or that HD is bad or that a remote is even a good idea and thus you wouldn't care.

It sounds to me like you also would have never thought of a crosspad, or a diamond button layout, or shoulder buttons, or force feedback, or anologue control because they weren't "needed" before they were introduced to mainstream gaming now were they? It wasn't until Nintendo decided to impliment those changes, the same type of changes that you're arguing against now, that gamers came to realize that there was more out there. Until we see how Nintendo's choices play out you're really only arguing semantics now aren't you... especially if Sony decides to jump the shark and throw 3D motion sensing into the PS3 controller. Remember how after the Rev controller was shown that Sony came out and declared that the controller they had shown previously wasn't the finished unit? You're going to tell me that wasn't a reactionary statement? What was there to react to if this new controller is such a dead end?

Either way you're showing the true signs of a human being:  Fear of the Unknown.

And as for the shell... Can anyone else realize that they need it for other purposes besides 3rd party ports? I mean, maybe it's also meant to be used to play old games with? You know, the whole "virtual console" thing? Anyone remember that? Besides, Nintendo's always kept full functionality from previous generations in it's controllers, all the way back to the NES. And remember what happened the last time Nintendo tried to remove a depreciated controller component, the d-pad, from the GC controller? Almost EVERYONE had a heartattack!

But it really seems that no matter what they do, they're never going to win. They come out with a completely new controller that makes gaming 10x more intuitive but developers are actually going to have to "THINK" about how to use it. They're doomed. They announce a shell that makes it compatable with not only the other two consoles but also alows you to use the "virtual console". They're sending mixed signals! They don't really believe in their new controller! Still doomed.

Really, from a casual observer your argument seems to be:  "Nintendo isn't Sony! They're doomed!" or "Nintendo isn't Microsoft! They're doomed!" Which basically breaks down to:  "Nintendo hasn't sold out gaming! They're doomed!"

Me personally, I don't care what 3rd parties do with the system. They can bite me for all I care, the level of tripe they force feed the gaming market now a days and people eat it up like it's caviar. I don't care how many triangles it can push or how many textures it can layer or even how much RAM it has. It's going to have NINTENDO games and it's going to have a completely new and intreaging interface. I'm practically wetting myself in anticipation here.

Every time Nintendo's adds a new feature to their controllers, its become standard industry wide. I don't see anything to worry about... well, other than if you're looking for something to worry about.

*steps down from soapbox*

[Bill Aurion]

Quote
But it really seems that no matter what they do, they're never going to win. They come out with a completely new controller that makes gaming 10x more intuitive but developers are actually going to have to "THINK" about how to use it. They're doomed. They announce a shell that makes it compatable with not only the other two consoles but also alows you to use the "virtual console". They're sending mixed signals! They don't really believe in their new controller! Still doomed.

It's an Ian wet-dream...

[wandering]

"At least I don't think that gaming as it is is dead. If Nintendo can't think of new ideas using a traditional controller then they're no longer the brilliant game designers they were and might as well just quit."

If Nintendo can't think of new ideas using a traditional arcade standard of shooting enemies instead of jumping on them then they're not brilliant game designers and might as well just quit.

If Nintendo can't think of new ideas using a traditional single screen instead of 2 (Game and Watch) then they're not brilliant game designers and might as well just quit.

If Nintendo can't think of new ideas using a traditional controller with a single joystick and a single button then they're not the brilliant game designers they once were and might as well just quit.

If Nintendo can't think of new ideas using the traditional d-pad and 2 button scheme then they're not the brilliant game designers they once were and might as well just quit.

If Nintendo can't think of new ideas using the traditional d-pad instead of some sparkling innovationy analogue stick, then they're not the brilliant designers they once were and might as well just quit.

If Nintendo can't think of new ideas using the traditional one screen standard for portables instead ot some gimicky dual-screen touch-screen enabled design, then they're not the brilliant designers they once were and might as well just quit.

[Kairon]

Well put wandering. Innovation occurs as much on the hardware side as it does on the software side.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[PaLaDiN]

I don't think Ian would be happy if Nintendo went third party.

He's fine with Nintendo innovating hardware as long as they don't innovate it in a way he doesn't like.

[KDR_11k]

At least I don't think that gaming as it is is dead. If Nintendo can't think of new ideas using a traditional controller then they're no longer the brilliant game designers they were and might as well just quit.

1. Nintendo's design process for controllers reportedly works by having developers file requests for controller features with game ideas attached and if enough requests are made a feature is implemented. I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo had a huge stack of game ideas doable with the rod by now.

2. Nintendo alone cannot keep the system up and "yet another generic console except it's by Nintendo" wouldn't catch much attention with third parties. Additionally, third parties, especially EA, like to keep their games low-risk. They'll reuse proven formulas ad nauseum. By changing the controller and giving the Revolution the public perception of a system for new kinds of games the old "this is safe" paradigmas get thrown out and third parties start thinking about new types of games because they aren't sure the old formulas will sell as well as they previously did. Nintendo is shaking up the publishers, not the controls.

3. Next-gen is turning out rather underwhelming. People expect a huge step forward when they shell out the money for new hardware and the x360 has made lots of people unhappy because it delivered only a small step. Even the mainstream media is panning the system!

I don't care how many triangles it can push or how many textures it can layer or even how much RAM it has.

Personally I DO care how much RAM it has because more RAM == larger game world in memory == larger draw distance and larger range of interaction (ever played a game from the X series? The entire universe keeps moving no matter where you are. Streaming can't make up for that).

[mantidor]

how can the GC render games like the Wind Waker and Twilight Princess when its RAM is so small?

[KDR_11k]

We don't know how large the gameworld in TP will be but for Wind Waker it's easy: It loads only one island into memory, the rest is just sprites or VERY simplified versions of the islands. And nothing happens on the other islands while you are gone. The system doesn't simulate e.g. a monster attack at some far off island while you're shopping in Port Monee (whatever that's called in the english version). While that's fine for a static world like Wind Waker's, it'd make games like X much less interesting.

[ShyGuy]

I donno, those little buggers in Animal Crossing do all sorts of crap even when I have the disc and memory card out of the system. Nintendo magic this is...

[couchmonkey]

Quote
"Retro took TWO weeks to implement Rev controls to a traditional game...Sounds rather quick to me...

"

It does sound good, but it may not sound as good to a developer trying to cram a title onto several systems within a one-year development cycle (see Prince of Persia), and those who played the Metroid Prime II demo mentioned that it had occassional bugs.  I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few extra weeks of tweaking and bug-stomping to do on the controls.  Not to mention Retro probably has access to developer support from Nintendo that third party developers could only dream of.

I don't want to be too pessimistic, but I really feel that unless the system matches or outsells the other two, third parties are going to be hesitant to throw multiplatform support at the Revoution.

[Bill Aurion]

You make it sound like that's something new to us...

Seriously, it won't be getting any worse than it is now...

[Ian Sane]

"It sounds to me like you also would have never thought of a crosspad, or a diamond button layout, or shoulder buttons, or force feedback, or anologue control because they weren't 'needed' before they were introduced to mainstream gaming now were they?"

I thought all of those ideas were brilliant the second I saw them.  Ever since I saw Kirby's Tilt 'n' Tumble I thought "they gotta put motion control into a standard controller".  But the remote doesn't just add to what's there like Nintendo's previous controllers did.  It takes away previously standard features.  We basically have an NES controller with motion control.  Nintendo's taking a step forward after taking three steps back.  Now if the shell and the remote together were the standard then it would be different.  It would be like taking what's there and adding a removable motion sensor wand.  Maybe in the end that's what we'll get but Nintendo has only really pushed the remote thus far.

"Additionally, third parties, especially EA, like to keep their games low-risk. They'll reuse proven formulas ad nauseum. By changing the controller and giving the Revolution the public perception of a system for new kinds of games the old 'this is safe' paradigmas get thrown out and third parties start thinking about new types of games because they aren't sure the old formulas will sell as well as they previously did."

That's a pipe dream.  Third parties won't abandon the "safe" designs because those will still sell on the much more successful competing consoles.  Nintendo doesn't have enough "hand" in the industry to throw out an old standard and introduce a completely new one.  If a developer has to think about how to get their game to play on the Rev and it's the last place console anyway why should they even bother?  Nintendo can add to what's there but only the market leader could try to drop an existing standard.

[odifiend]

Ian, the market starts over every generation.  By default, Xbox360 is the next gen market leader right now.  In fact according to reports, the Sony is making it pretty uncomfortable for developers with regards to the PS3.  Most PS3 news lately has talked about how developers are dropping it for the Xbox360.  Add to that factors such as Sony will mostly likely be forced to sell it higher than the core Xbox360 due to its BluRay player, and already we are gearing up for a shift in power in the so called 'console wars'.  Add to that the investment required for 3rd parties to compete with monster 3rd parties like EA who will be sinking tens of millions in their PS3 and Xbox360 games.  To assume that Nintendo can't force a shift when the the alternative to the Revolution's familiar hardware is Sony's complex cell and the Xbox360's multiprocessor is being delusional.

[Ian Sane]

"Ian, the market starts over every generation."

Not really.  Momentum from the previous generation directly affects the next one.  Nintendo had very little momentum going in with the Cube because the N64 ended with such a whimper and it made it harder for the Cube to get out of its shadow.  The Xbox 360 has a lot of momentum because the Xbox just kept going up since it launched.  The DS survived a horrible launch because the GBA was so successful.  People typically follow the trends.  Nintendo's market share is dropping so the assumption for consumers and publishers is that that trend is going to continue and the Rev is not going to have a chance at doing any better than the Cube next gen.  It's kind of unfair but that's just how it works.  It takes a lot of effort to change people's expectations.