Real Innovation, Not Gimmicks. Western Way vs. Nintendo's Way

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Nintendo has a philosophy which is fine for them but what if other developers don't share their vision? Then the Revolution is likely not for them. Nintendo could have had their vision and still had a powerful console so that both their vision and others could be accomplished. As I said before a powerful well designed console will lead allow artists and programmers to bring us the best games and innovations. Here is a perfect example of what i'm talking about, I think this technology(which could or could not be possible on Rev) will have more of an impact on the future of gaming than a WAND. And as the saying goes, there is more than one way to skin a cat. Those worried that the 360 cpu may not be powerful enough to do physics, well put the physics in the animation. This may not be true physics modeling, but when you are playing the game it won't matter to the gamer what behind the scenes technology is being utilized.

<A href="http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/702/702389p1.html"> Next gen Indiana Jones</A>

Many people have been saying the 360 is not impressive, most of the games aren't truly nextgen. It amazes me that so-called hardcore gamers would prematurely make that kind of assessment, when they should know that first generation games are the start not the end. When I look at GRAW, this is the beginning of what is possible. And with technology such as this I don't think we really understand how powerful these consoles(well 2 of them at least) are going to be. Now I do not know for sure if Revolution's relative lack of power will preclude these types of technologies, but it may preclude developers from wanting to even take the time to do a "special" Revy version.

Anyway, I wonder what Gadfly thinks of this since he believes a wand controller is going to radically enable enemy AI to improve, I think this will trump that, this looks far more promising. And like Havok it could become the de facto animation standard affecting a bunch more games than a wandtroller.

[trebor]

What is with this obsession of yours regarding the power (or lack thereof) of the Rev? Why do you care so much about it?

It's not like you would be interested in a Revolution anyways if it had comparable horsepower to that of the 360 or PS3. Did the GC have comparable horsepower to the PS2 and Xbox? Yes. Did TheMaskedGamer buy a GC? No.

So, shut your pie hole already - you won't be buying a Rev regardless if it's the best gaming machine ever or a cheap gimmick.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

What is with this obsession of yours regarding the power (or lack thereof) of the Rev? Why do you care so much about it?

It's not like you would be interested in a Revolution anyways if it had comparable horsepower to that of the 360 or PS3. Did the GC have comparable horsepower to the PS2 and Xbox? Yes. Did TheMaskedGamer buy a GC? No.

So, shut your pie hole already - you won't be buying a Rev regardless if it's the best gaming machine ever or a cheap gimmick.

This post isn't about that, try and stay on point. I figured anything about innovation, that isn't coming from Nintendo, would not be looked at favorably by the clowns who are always preaching it.

The reason why Rev's lack of power is mentioned is because I want to know will it prevent technologies such as this from being utilized. And give me a break, you guys talk about the lack of potential physics processing on a machine way powerful than Revy, and I can't talk about Rev's power? If anything it is a very apt issue to discuss on system wars.

And why do people always worry about the subjective, Rev isn't going to succeed or fail just because I buy or fail to buy it. If it has significant cpu and graphic power deficiencies to go along with 480i and lack of DVD support, those are larger issues that could be problematic, whether or not u want to admit them, whether or not u stick your head in the sand.

[Gadfly2317]

Anyway, I wonder what Gadfly thinks of this since he believes a wand controller is going to radically enable enemy AI to improve, I think this will trump that, this looks far more promising. And like Havok it could become the de facto animation standard affecting a bunch more games than a wandtroller.

I applaud anyone who helps push forward the technology of gaming, or creates something that simplifies the development and coding environment while creating a better end-result. I certainly don't think that control is the ONLY frontier that needs to be pushed.

I've been impressed with software technologies that get more from less, like the video-coding company Nintendo invested. What Lucas Arts is described as working for in this article sounds great.

As to what this has to do with the Revolution, the west, or "gimmicks". . .absolutely nothing. Thanks for the link to the article, but everything else was unintelligible, meaningless dribble.

[Renzatic Gear]

I think John Carmack put it best when talking about physics in games. To paraphrase: "It looks neat, but it doesn't really do anything beyond that."

So yeah, it's always worth a giggle or two when you see logs rolling down a hill in some FPS. But even with those realistic logs bouncing realistically down a realistic looking hill, you're still gonna be playing an FPS that isn't vastly different than the logless FPS you played before.

The wandtroller might be a gimmick, but then again so are ingame physics. Hell, everything is a gimmick when you get right down to the nuts and bolts of it all.

[theWacoKid]

I'll keep repeating and stating the bleeding obvious about Nintendo. Nintendo's all about bringing low cost to develop projects to market. They're a bloody toy company now. Whether third parites sign on board or not is immaterial to nintendo. It won't make any difference to them.

The best selling games on the DS virtually all hail from nintendo. Brain Age Training is about as low tech an offering as I've seen. This must've cost nintendo about 6 bits to put together and its sold millions in japan. The profit margin here is huge.

Nintendo has effectively pulled out of the console arms race. They're basically re-releasing the cube with a wand controller. This fits in with their strategy of regurgitating franchises and adding a new wrinkle. Third parties not on board, like Nintendo gives a flying eff. As long as they can sell their franchises over again, they're not going to care.

Nintendo doesn't have to concern themselves with investing large amounts of time and money on art assets, sound design, complex animation, sophisticated AI or impressive phsyics. As long as Link shows up and they get to wave that wand controller around like a sword, nintendo brownie hounds will be in seventh heaven. This is like the coolest thing, EVAR!

The DS is having major success in japan. Here in NA, suprisingly to me, they're in a real dogfight with sony's psp. I think the current design of the psp is seriously flawed, but its impressive enough to NA consumers to have sold very well. However, nintendo's success in the handheld market has not translated to success on the console front. The gc is currently an unmitigated disaster. And that's actually a negative for the revolution. How do you sell b/c on the revolution when nobody cares what's on the cube. Its not like its a major selling point to the mass consumer. Hey, you can play all those games on the revolution, then you never cared about on the cube.

The big problem with the wand controller is whether the actual gameplay mechanic adds any depth to the game. And without actual games to check out and without any hands on experience, its all just conjecture and speculation as to whether the wand will offer revolutionary or gimmick gameplay.

If nintendo prices accordingly, then the revolution launching alongside Zelda Twilight Princess should be enough to justify brisk sales for this holiday. Its bizarre though, that your key app for a new system is a game for the old system. If nintendo maintains current game prices, that will also be an advantage for them.

Will nintendo dominate or advance their position this gen? Doubtful. But it doesn't matter to nintendo, they're going after a business model that will ensure their survival.

[Gadfly2317]

Oh omniscient Waco. Please demonstrate to us how a game like Red Steel or the next Metroid are merely "toy" level technology. . . when they pack in depth, hi-speed control, and double the graphical power of the GC, which was nearly on par with the Xbox.

The "toy" argument regarding the Rev just doesn't seem to have any merit.

[trebor]

I figured anything about innovation, that isn't coming from Nintendo, would not be looked at favorably by the clowns who are always preaching it.

Yeah, I've seen a lot of kitties around screaming "our innovation is better then yours!!" :rolleyes:


The reason why Rev's lack of power is mentioned is because I want to know will it prevent technologies such as this from being utilized. And give me a break, you guys talk about the lack of potential physics processing on a machine way powerful than Revy, and I can't talk about Rev's power? If anything it is a very apt issue to discuss on system wars.

Hence my first post.


And why do people always worry about the subjective, Rev isn't going to succeed or fail just because I buy or fail to buy it. If it has significant cpu and graphic power deficiencies to go along with 480i and lack of DVD support, those are larger issues that could be problematic, whether or not u want to admit them, whether or not u stick your head in the sand.

The Rev has as much DVD support as the Xbox1 does. I.E. you will need to buy an extra peripheral to view DVD movies.

Please explain to me how it has "significant" cpu and graphic power deficiencies. It's more powerful then the Xbox1, which you have been enjoying for the last 4 years.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

So yeah, it's always worth a giggle or two when you see logs rolling down a hill in some FPS. But even with those realistic logs bouncing realistically down a realistic looking hill, you're still gonna be playing an FPS that isn't vastly different than the logless FPS you played before.

The wandtroller might be a gimmick, but then again so are ingame physics. Hell, everything is a gimmick when you get right down to the nuts and bolts of it all.

Exactly, that is where this technology overcomes the superficial role physics has traditionally played. I don't know know, maybe you should re-read the article, maybe you didn't get exactly the gist of what the technology will enable. To put it in your context traditionally in a shooter or something you blow up something and maybe a fence or railing tears off the wall, with animation physics instead of it looking pretty, perhaps now a baddie can grab that now fallen rail or fence and climb it and attack you. Before that would have to be programmed as part of the AI routine. To me this will advance AI behavior to the next-level, especially when you realize that there is the possibiity on these systems for hundreds of AI or NPCs to be on screen at once.

One of the problems with GRAW for example could be addressed by this very technology to make a dramatically improved game that is way beyond any of our expectations. GRAW has this tremendously detailed version of Mexico City, that happens to be completely void of human life or activity aside from the few baddies. It would be possible for Ubisoft to populate the city, but it would A) Increase CPU load B) require pre-programmed AI routines that would lead to the same group behavior(think State of Emergency and C) when the AI does something illogical, the game is gonna get ripped critically. With this type of animation physics you can have minimal programmed AI routines, yet enable animation based physics that allows each person in the city to follow their AI scripts but stilll react "realistically" to a blown up car. Not only would it lead to way cooler realistic games(also the devs could implement non-realistic animation just as easily, just saying realistic because it is behavior we can all understand) but the also employ a variety of actions and behavior that would take tons of code to implement. Think about games like Kameo and Dynasty Warriors they put scores of characters on the screen and they all do the same thing, and people eat that stuff up. Look at Madden and other sports games or games like Spiderman or GTA. To me this has the potential to be one of the most promising technologies of the nextgen. We thought rag-doll havok type animation was great, where if u shoot a guy in the leg he falls or shoot him in the hand and he drops his gun, this makes havok look like Pacman.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

I applaud anyone who helps push forward the technology of gaming, or creates something that simplifies the development and coding environment while creating a better end-result. I certainly don't think that control is the ONLY frontier that needs to be pushed.

I've been impressed with software technologies that get more from less, like the video-coding company Nintendo invested. What Lucas Arts is described as working for in this article sounds great.

Well I am glad you understand that control is not the ONLY frontier. But it seems to me you still discount innovation or improvements unless it is from Nintendo.

<b>
As to what this has to do with the Revolution, the west, or "gimmicks". . .absolutely nothing. Thanks for the link to the article, but everything else was unintelligible, meaningless dribble.</b> Well I guess that was to match your previous unintelligible dribble in another thread where u said:
<b>
"Well, never-the-less, we can still cheer for the failure of innovation and hope third parties will ignore the revolution in favor of resting on their laurels and creating games that are just like the ones we played this generation.

Afterall, who could deny that going with Sony is the safe decision, and that playing it safe can be smart business, artistic and creative merits aside. " </b>

Nintendo isn't about pushing gaming forward, they are trying to control gaming based on their own philosophy, they are trying to become game dictators in essence. Sony and MS are saying we are trying to make powerful open systems where WE can individually create our own games, but also developers input has been incorporated so that they can pursue their own visions and art also, and also their own technologies. Nintendo is not doing that, they have this philosophy that gaming is turning into an arms race, and graphics and power are actually bad things. It seems to me Nintendo should be saying the pursuit of ONLY graphics and power is bad, but that innovation, creativity, graphics, and power together is the future of gaming, but that is actually what Sony and MS are saying to me.

You feel 360 and Sony are only about graphics and power and the showing the "sweat on Shaquille O'neal's head" as you said previously. Then as I quoted you have somehow come to the belief that the entire industry is ready to rest on its laurels and give us the same that we got last gen, aside from bells and whistles and eye-candy. Well, I'll tell you this maybe Sony will do that, I feel that is what they did with the PS2. The PS2 was nothing but an eye-candy improvment over the PSOne, that is not to say there were no good games. But XBOX was the only system to change how we game last generation on consoles, and XBOX DNA is in everything Sony and MS are doing with the 360 and PS3, and hopefully I believe those two systems will push it forward this generation. Notice I said systems, not companies, because with technologies like Animation Physics from LucasArts on the 360 I do NOT think the rest of the industry is resting on its laurels.


The thing about the power of the revolution, is two-fold, first it is like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Take Red Steel for example. Suppose the game is great. But people don't believe there will be many similar games or good games at all on Revy and people want support for HD sets and online gaming, so for a variety of reasons the game does not move, then guess what Ubisoft has lost a lot of money, and they are done with the system. That's one potential problem and if u don't think it is valid I have two words for you Resident Evil 5, the franchise was on GC exclusively, they moved the exclusive to PS2, and now the new game will omit Nintendo altogether and jump to 360 and the PS3.

The other concern is technologies such as this animation based physics or the kind of physics that was debated in Slade's post are possible maybe at some sacrifice to the PS3 or 360, but if it is going to require a sacrifice on those systems, is it even possible or worthwhile to attempt on the Revy? Waco is 1000% correct, this is all a money move in guise as a benefit to gamers. Nintendo if they really were totally concerned about gaming they would recognize that you need creativity and innovation as well as power and graphics.

[Gadfly2317]

Context man. I was just ribbing slade a bit. But thanks for the speech.

[Fivespot]

Nintendo made a ton of money off of it's gaming properties this last year. Same with the year before and the year before that going back quite a few years. This includes the Nintendo Gamecube years.

As a business, you couldn't be much more successful in this niche.

Why the frick should they be worried about having a little less power than MS and Sony when they've proven for quite a few years that they can sell less powerful games/hardware and make a ton of money.

Let's look at it this way. Walmart as much as you either like them or hate them, has devoured many smaller businesses across this great nation. By offering a little of everything while also having the ability to control some of the prices they pay and sell items for/at, they've made it damn near impossible for some smaller companies to compete.

Here in Wisconsin, we have another chain department store called Kohl's (expanded to many other states so I'm sure you've heard of it). They are not in jeopardy of being beaten and ruined by Walmart due to them offering completely different products. Mainly they specialize in better quality clothing with more to choose from.

Getting back to my point, do you think Kohl's is upset with their performance as a company? Are they about to close shop and call it quits if they don't beat Walmart this next year in sales? NOOOOO!!!!! They are a business making tons of money and aren't going to start carrying a little of everything in an attempt to outsell Walmart (although they could certainly head that direction if they chose).

Kohl's isn't competing directly with Walmart and neither is Nintendo with MS/SONY. Both are raking in the profits while the "big" boys exchange blows for world supremacy (literally - well, kind of).

What makes this whole argument even more interesting is that Nintendo had it's most profitable year in many years this last year. And some still think they are doing everything all wrong.....

[theWacoKid]

Oh omniscient Waco. Please demonstrate to us how a game like Red Steel or the next Metroid are merely "toy" level technology. . . when they pack in depth, hi-speed control, and double the graphical power of the GC, which was nearly on par with the Xbox.

The "toy" argument regarding the Rev just doesn't seem to have any merit.

Give us all a break here, nintendo boy, you haven't played jack, so wtf do you know about Red Steel? Anything? Quit flapping your gums, you're just raising a breeze, and I got news for you, oh, clueless one, nintendo themselves have stated that they're structured like a toy company. This is their direction, whether you want to accept it or not. And news flash, sherlock, videogames are toys, don't get any illlusions otherwise.

Hell, look at sony and their little video cam gaming accessory. What's it called? Frickin Eyetoy. Don't tell, me gazoo, that you're going to pull a peter effin moore and start talking about the wand controller as the gateway to the zen of videogaming or something equally pretentious. They're toys, you play with em, end of effin story.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Context man. I was just ribbing slade a bit. But thanks for the speech.

Oh yeah like anybody who knows you is really going to believe you don't think Nintendo is the first and last word in gaming. Just ribbing yeah right.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Nintendo made a ton of money off of it's gaming properties this last year. Same with the year before and the year before that going back quite a few years. This includes the Nintendo Gamecube years.

As a business, you couldn't be much more successful in this niche.

Why the frick should they be worried about having a little less power than MS and Sony when they've proven for quite a few years that they can sell less powerful games/hardware and make a ton of money.

Let's look at it this way. Walmart as much as you either like them or hate them, has devoured many smaller businesses across this great nation. By offering a little of everything while also having the ability to control some of the prices they pay and sell items for/at, they've made it damn near impossible for some smaller companies to compete.

Here in Wisconsin, we have another chain department store called Kohl's (expanded to many other states so I'm sure you've heard of it). They are not in jeopardy of being beaten and ruined by Walmart due to them offering completely different products. Mainly they specialize in better quality clothing with more to choose from.

Getting back to my point, do you think Kohl's is upset with their performance as a company? Are they about to close shop and call it quits if they don't beat Walmart this next year in sales? NOOOOO!!!!! They are a business making tons of money and aren't going to start carrying a little of everything in an attempt to outsell Walmart (although they could certainly head that direction if they chose).

Kohl's isn't competing directly with Walmart and neither is Nintendo with MS/SONY. Both are raking in the profits while the "big" boys exchange blows for world supremacy (literally - well, kind of).

What makes this whole argument even more interesting is that Nintendo had it's most profitable year in many years this last year. And some still think they are doing everything all wrong.....


I guess u missed the whole part where Nintendo themselves came out with a press statement calling the Gamecube a complete failure and giving up on the console and slashing the price as a desperation move. When the maker of a product calls it a failure I don't know how anyone else defend it. I'm not down on Nintendo as a company, there are two Nintendo DS' in my home and one Gameboy Advance. Nintendo has made a lot of money in the handheld market and so i'm not criticizing the entire company. I am criticizing their HOME CONSOLE products. And the gamecube in 2005 did lose money, I couldn't dig up how much it lost, but the quote was something like Nintendo made X amount of money from its handheld division and the profits would have been higher if not for the gamecube. You either have a profit or a loss and if the Gamecube had even a $1 profit, then it would not have reduced Nintendo's profit. And do we really even need to discuss the success of the console? It went something like 9 months without a game in the top 20 in the U.S., who would call that successful.

Now many of you will say XBOX lost more money, yes of course, any business loses money in the first 3 to 5 years. This is a billion dollar industry with significant start-up costs. But MS and Nintendo have very different problems. MS doesn't have to try and make the 360 popular or try and get people to make and buy good games for it, it already figured that out. MS problem now is to make 360 profitable where XBOX was a money pit. I understand that. But Nintendo has a different problem they have got to make the Revolution into a viable competing product in the eyes of consumers, they have got to attract good games and developers and somehow get the public to buy the games. If I am a business, I would rather be in MS position, because it is much easier to get a popular business with popular products costs under control, then it is to turn around the perception of a product in the market.

Don't believe me look at portable audio for Sony. If we apply the logic you guys do to videogames Sony is doing just fine in portable audio, because the PS2 division made a bunch of money. Hey they invented the walkman and dominated the industry. But they haven't made the transition to digital portable players and let competitors come in and eat their lunch. On top of that, they still haven't figured out, despite their storied past in this category, how to even start to combat the IPOD. Now they have a lot of funky ideas that technically sound good, but all that propriety my vision do it our way ATRAC nonsense is counter to what the public wants, plain old MP3s and compatiability.

We have to remember Nintendo's enemy isn't really MS, its Sony. Nintendo was flying high with the SNES and then Sony came in and overnight cut their throats. Nintendo is busy trying to tell the world what is wrong with gaming, when thanks to Sony gaming is larger than the movie industry. How does it make sense that there is a problem with gaming when it has grown exponentially? Now Nintendo recognizes that they have problem, even though u don't. They know that just as quick as they lost home consoles they can lose handhelds, and then they are done. So they are railing away at an industry they lost control and trying to do push solutions on the industry the industry doesn't want. I find it really stupid that people can sit here on this site and brag about how powerful the PS3 is going to be, dual 1080P, blu-ray, and HDD and now an online network, and then believe that Nintendo has the answer by downplaying all of that stuff. Well maybe u guys will buy all the consoles so it doesn't matter. But the public will not so Nintendo's approach has to succeed out there, not here. And nobody out there is calling for less power.

I don't think Nintendo believes everything is okay since they are still profitable. I think if MS was relegated to dominating cell phone O/S, while Tiger took over the PC O/S market, MS would be cool with that. Nintendo needed to do something to answer not just 360 but also PS3, there is no way the Revy will regain their dominance, I don't there is anybody here who believes that. I guess all they can do is sit back and hope they can hang on a few more years with what they are offering. My point is why bother, just get out the game and design software if the Revy is all you are going to come up with. And claiming power and graphics are bad is just a completely wrong approach when GAMERS feel otherwise.


Sorry for the typos no time to correct.

[mandark]

Nintendo needed to do something to answer not just 360 but also PS3, there is no way the Revy will regain their dominance, I don't there is anybody here who believes that. I guess all they can do is sit back and hope they can hang on a few more years with what they are offering. My point is why bother, just get out the game and design software if the Revy is all you are going to come up with. And claiming power and graphics are bad is just a completely wrong approach when GAMERS feel otherwise.

I don't think anybody around here is claiming that power and graphics are bad. Only you have made such statements so far. Power and graphics are very important to the advancement of videogaming in general whether its console gaming, handheld gaming or PC gaming. Everybody here knows and understands that. But what you fail to understand is that power and graphics by itself cannot survive on its own without the proper advancement in controllers for the games that a gamer will be playing.

Will you be willing to play your 360 games with a NES controller? I did not think so. You yourself is a big advocate of dual analog sticks. Guess what? Dual analog sticks did not really come into being until the PSX introduced it. Racing games, 3rd person, Flight games in particular sucked big time without dual analog sticks. Nowadays dual analogs is the only way to go for most console games. Point is without the proper advancements in controller technology we will still be playing videogames with an Atari 2600 controller.

To tell you the truth, personally, I am not that excited about the 360 and the PS3. Yes, not even the PS3!(unless of course it supports KB/Mouse) I know those two consoles will deliver games that will rival the latest PC games for a fraction of the cost in terms of graphics. But I also know that I will be still be playing those games with the same controllers I am using now. What is so exciting about that? Its like saying:
"Hey! We have finally invented the holodeck! It features REAL LIFE graphics, REAL LIFE physics, REAL LIFE sounds, REAL LIFE neural feedback, and a collapsible virtual box that can be folded to fit under your bed when you are done playing! Isn't this AWESOME. Now here is your wireless Dual Shock/S controller! ENJOY!" -- WTF!

I applaud Nintendo for trying to deliver something different. Its very difficult to take the path less taken. Many people fear change. Better graphics and physics are also changes, but those are what I call "SAFE" changes. A controller on the other hand is a radical change. Like you yourself said, the wandtroller is unproven. But I'll bet you $50 bucks that IF this controller succeeds MS and Sony will be developing clones of it to use for their next gen of consoles 4 years from now for MS and 5 to 6 years from now for Sony.

[trebor]

Don't believe me look at portable audio for Sony. If we apply the logic you guys do to videogames Sony is doing just fine in portable audio, because the PS2 division made a bunch of money. Hey they invented the walkman and dominated the industry. But they haven't made the transition to digital portable players and let competitors come in and eat their lunch. On top of that, they still haven't figured out, despite their storied past in this category, how to even start to combat the IPOD. Now they have a lot of funky ideas that technically sound good, but all that propriety my vision do it our way ATRAC nonsense is counter to what the public wants, plain old MP3s and compatiability.

What do you think the PSP is for then, Goober? Sony is competing directly with the iPod as well as attempting to compete with Nintendo's handheld market.

Look at the facts - the PSP has sold over 3 million units worldwide since it's launch, yet has dreadfully low software sales. Why do you think that is? What do you think these PSP owners are doing with their PSP's? They are downloading music and movies onto the memory sticks. Guess what ipods do these days - store music and movies. PSP owners sure as hell aren't just using them to play emulated NES games, because that would be fuggin stupid - paying $300+ to play NES games they can play for free on their home computers via emulation.

[Gadfly2317]

Give us all a break here, nintendo boy, you haven't played jack, so wtf do you know about Red Steel? Anything? Quit flapping your gums, you're just raising a breeze, and I got news for you, oh, clueless one, nintendo themselves have stated that they're structured like a toy company. This is their direction, whether you want to accept it or not. And news flash, sherlock, videogames are toys, don't get any illlusions otherwise.

Hell, look at sony and their little video cam gaming accessory. What's it called? Frickin Eyetoy. Don't tell, me gazoo, that you're going to pull a peter effin moore and start talking about the wand controller as the gateway to the zen of videogaming or something equally pretentious. They're toys, you play with em, end of effin story.

And you haven't played jack either, so you don't really have any grounds to dismiss it as some kind of inferior game experience, a mere "toy." And if you're now retreating into "all videogames are toys" which is fine, then what was your damned point?

Have you and Masked Gamer actually read detailed descriptions of how the Wand functions? Do you really not get it? Aside from all the praise heaped on the Revolution from developers who have tried it, did you actually read--with comprehension--the GI hands on article with Red Steel--both the descriptions of how it functions and the way the GI staff felt about the experience? You and I haven't played the thing, but the guys at GI who have said some pretty interesting things, and I'd be interested to hear on what grounds you so easily dismiss this stuff:

"When Nintendo first showed the Revolution controller last year, I laughed out loud at the absurdity. . . But I'm not to proud to eat my own words. Nintendo is onto something here."

"It could change the very way all games are played now and forever."

"The Revolution is real. We've played it. And it will change everything."

I'm not hyping Red Steel, which could turn out to be a lousy game for a lot of other reasons, but all indications are that the Rev technology works, and it improves at least one traditional type of game, and it doesn't take a whole lot of imagination to see how it could be applied to a lot of new types of game designs.

A lot of people have rightly criticized Nintendo for its weakness in supporting third parties and instead coming to launch mostly with its own software available. But none of the same people have stepped up and complemented Nintendo on unclenching its tight ass and letting a third party be the first piece of software unveiled.

I'm not sure how you and TMG come-off calling me Nintendo boy when you're both regulars enough to know that the Ps2 is the only console I've gamed on in a long time, and the I've stated the 360 is a highly likely purchase for me unless Ps3 really steps up big time. You guys seem like the real biased haters to me, and not like game-enthusiasts at all, because I don't see how a REAL gamer couldn't see how damned amazing the potential of this control is, and be cheering for it to succeed, and for the system to get strong consumer and third party support.

I'm seriously not that pro-Nintendo. I'm pro new experiences. It's why I bought Guitar Hero. It's why I'm going to buy Okami. And if Nintendo were introducing a same-old souped up GC2 and it were MS who were preaching innovation and bringing to market new hardware with a whole new type of game experience, I'd be the loudest Xbot on this board. And I think you damned well know this is true.

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

What do you think the PSP is for then, Goober? Sony is competing directly with the iPod as well as attempting to compete with Nintendo's handheld market.

Look at the facts - the PSP has sold over 3 million units worldwide since it's launch, yet has dreadfully low software sales. Why do you think that is? What do you think these PSP owners are doing with their PSP's? They are downloading music and movies onto the memory sticks. Guess what ipods do these days - store music and movies. PSP owners sure as hell aren't just using them to play emulated NES games, because that would be fuggin stupid - paying $300+ to play NES games they can play for free on their home computers via emulation.

Both the Mode T and a Ferrari use steering wheels. Same Control method different experience no?

I'll say it again they should include a wave bird as well.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Well Gadfly I do not at all believe that if other companies were introducing innovation you would be all for it because other companies have introduced innovation and u have been all against it!

First u only accept innovation as it meets your criteria. But think about this, how were people playing console games before the XBOX? They were playing alone or in the living room with a buddy split-screen. Now aside from DC's largely failed attempt, it is MS that has changed the most how we play games and how games are made.
The industry is always changing some changes big some small. Some make a big impact some don't. Hell I think wireless controllers is big, no memory cards is big, voice and online, of course HD and digital audio, music in games.
In terms of actual gameplay experience there tons of changes some big some small. The Wandtroller MAY BECOME huge, but it may not. Animation physics may be huge or not. We do not know. And I cannot put absolute faith in one game mag, maybe a bunch of media, if they are all saying it will change gaming and Rev is for real I would give it more credence. But just because a person is skeptical, u think we are haters or don't want to accept change.

Also u cannot view the wandtroller tech and Revy separately, I can. The Wand could be great but the console could suck. As I said before if that's the case we cud see wandtrollers on Sony or MS machines while Nintendo is history.

My point is this, your original claims that this will change FPS is hard to see, because of the Revolution. FPS are not popular among Japanese or Nintendo fans here. They usually are the most tech games, and certain devs who do them well are not really on board.

Me personally if the Rev supported HD it would be much easier, even sans power, to see it being successful, I think that omission will hurt more than anything in the long run.

Gaming will always change and innovate so don't close your eyes and only open them when Nintendo has a bright idea.

[theWacoKid]

And you haven't played jack either, so you don't really have any grounds to dismiss it as some kind of inferior game experience, a mere "toy." And if you're now retreating into "all videogames are toys" which is fine, then what was your damned point?

Have you and Masked Gamer actually read detailed descriptions of how the Wand functions? Do you really not get it? Aside from all the praise heaped on the Revolution from developers who have tried it, did you actually read--with comprehension--the GI hands on article with Red Steel--both the descriptions of how it functions and the way the GI staff felt about the experience? You and I haven't played the thing, but the guys at GI who have said some pretty interesting things, and I'd be interested to hear on what grounds you so easily dismiss this stuff:

"When Nintendo first showed the Revolution controller last year, I laughed out loud at the absurdity. . . But I'm not to proud to eat my own words. Nintendo is onto something here."

"It could change the very way all games are played now and forever."

"The Revolution is real. We've played it. And it will change everything."

I'm not hyping Red Steel, which could turn out to be a lousy game for a lot of other reasons, but all indications are that the Rev technology works, and it improves at least one traditional type of game, and it doesn't take a whole lot of imagination to see how it could be applied to a lot of new types of game designs.

A lot of people have rightly criticized Nintendo for its weakness in supporting third parties and instead coming to launch mostly with its own software available. But none of the same people have stepped up and complemented Nintendo on unclenching its tight ass and letting a third party be the first piece of software unveiled.

I'm not sure how you and TMG come-off calling me Nintendo boy when you're both regulars enough to know that the Ps2 is the only console I've gamed on in a long time, and the I've stated the 360 is a highly likely purchase for me unless Ps3 really steps up big time. You guys seem like the real biased haters to me, and not like game-enthusiasts at all, because I don't see how a REAL gamer couldn't see how damned amazing the potential of this control is, and be cheering for it to succeed, and for the system to get strong consumer and third party support.

I'm seriously not that pro-Nintendo. I'm pro new experiences. It's why I bought Guitar Hero. It's why I'm going to buy Okami. And if Nintendo were introducing a same-old souped up GC2 and it were MS who were preaching innovation and bringing to market new hardware with a whole new type of game experience, I'd be the loudest Xbot on this board. And I think you damned well know this is true.

Gazoo, enough already, developers hype their own personal projects and the systems they appear on. These guys are marketers as wel as developersl. I did read the article. Frankly, I found it worrisome that GI staff felt it was more natural to play the game standing up. Sorry, I'm not into DDR stuff and I'm not standing up to play a vidgame. I play them to chill out and rest my ass on a comfy sofa.

You're all balled up, eat some raisin brain and take a large dump. All videogames are toys. When you break down each and every videogame down, they boil down to a game of tag. All modern videogames are based on the simple concept of collision detection, in the atari 400/800 days, sprites were referred to as player/missile graphics. When you shoot someone, kick a ball, play breakout, platform, whatever, its all based on collision detection, in essense, digital tag.

All nintendo is looking to do is to tweak that basic formula. But, because you're so all into "NEW" experiences, that aren't really new, its like, OMG, this is so frickin cool. Just like the DS and you get to interact using the touch screen. Its a tweak, a different method of interacting but the underlying basics don't change, spanky. The point is, you're all into these new experience which aren't really new. I like light gun games, they're different, have they changed the face of gaming? Hell, no. Has the entire world embraced DDR games and eyetoy software? Hell, no. All you see is the potential but you don't stop to consider all the limitations. Like how do you control the fricking camera, how long can you play a rev game before it becomes uncomfortable, what kinds of game will the rev positively suck at.

Developers hype, mags hype, haven't you learned anything all these years. I don't give a flying you know what these parties claim. When I get to try it out and can say yea or nay, then and only then, can I render an actual opinion as to whether the design is successful or not. I"m not about to be duped by Nintendo's extravagant claims and buy their new found TOY, hook, line and sinker like you have. You pissed all over the 360, Mr. Short term memory without so much as a playtest of the system.

I have a DS, its all right. I enjoy some of the games, but there's no software on the system that I can't live without, and I don't consider anything on the system to be revolutionary or to somehow have redefined gaming. In fact, I would argue, that DS games as of late have featured very little in the way of innovation. A lot of the gee whiz factor has worn off. Hell, look at the new Super Mario Bros. Your basic 2d side scroller. Stop the presses.

Advances in AI and physics are far more compelling to me than a different take on interaction. Absolutely no one and I mean no one knows how people will react once the newness wears off. If a game is the same old, same old, it sucks and its boring, what difference does it make if you interact with it with a controller, a stylus or a wand. Its still going to suck and be boring. Playing with the wand won't make a bad game good, no matter how much your fevered little brain wants it to be so.

[Gadfly2317]

Well Gadfly I do not at all believe that if other companies were introducing innovation you would be all for it because other companies have introduced innovation and u have been all against it!

I don't know what innovation I've been against. I even wrote I gigantic boring essay that I posted here awhile back about MS making the biggest impact this generation with Live. Nintendo had some innovative GAMES, but in terms of anything else, there wasn't anything you could point to about the GC itself. . .except for maybe introducing the first decent wireless controller.

I have said there were very few of the games I like on Live, but that's different than being against innovation, it's just a statement of my tastes. Noticed how I suddenly warmed up to the 360 when Culdcept was announced for it? That game was the bomb, but it sorely needed online. Same criticism I lobbed at my favorite games on the 'cube. I would have LOVED to have had Pikmin 2 online.

And like you say, it would be nice if we could have our cake and eat it too. . . if the Revolution were hi-def and the most graphically powerful.

[Gadfly2317]

All nintendo is looking to do is to tweak that basic formula. But, because you're so all into "NEW" experiences, that aren't really new, its like, OMG, this is so frickin cool. Just like the DS and you get to interact using the touch screen. Its a tweak, a different method of interacting but the underlying basics don't change, spanky.The point is, you're all into these new experience which aren't really new.

I just don't see it or experience it that way. Take Kirby CC for instance. . .it was just a platformer, but the experience, the challenge involved felt significantly different than the way I'd had to play any other platformer before. It wasn't due to graphics, or AI, or some cool physics thing. . .it was an entirely different interaction with the characters on the screen. Same thing with Trauma Center. In some games, I do concede the touch screen is merely a tweak, but often, the dual screens or the voice command have been implemented in ways that significantly enhance the game in ways that can't be done on the more traditional PsP.

All you see is the potential but you don't stop to consider all the limitations. Like how do you control the fricking camera, how long can you play a rev game before it becomes uncomfortable, what kinds of game will the rev positively suck at. I've considered limitations, but it's hard to see the excessive concern you have, especially when the wand also will be able to dock inside a traditional shell. With that set-up you have the good old dual-analog and button set-up, and if reports are to be believed, this "shell with wand" will still also feature motion-sensing."

I know about hype, and I can be skeptical. I've stated why I'm less skeptical about the Rev control, and at this point there's nothing more to do than wait and see who's predictions or concerns will turn out to be more valid.

Playing with the wand won't make a bad game good, no matter how much your fevered little brain wants it to be so. My fevered little brain has never indicated I think the wand will make a good game bad. In fact, my dim-witted hunchback with the frost-bitten brain. . . I said in the very post you are responding too that even if the Rev controller works well technically, Red Steel could still suck for any number of reasons that make games suck.

[trebor]

Both the Mode T and a Ferrari use steering wheels. Same Control method different experience no?

Ehh... how does this relate to what I was saying again?


I'll say it again they should include a wave bird as well.

They might.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

I don't know what innovation I've been against. I even wrote I gigantic boring essay that I posted here awhile back about MS making the biggest impact this generation with Live. Nintendo had some innovative GAMES, but in terms of anything else, there wasn't anything you could point to about the GC itself. . .except for maybe introducing the first decent wireless controller.

I have said there were very few of the games I like on Live, but that's different than being against innovation, it's just a statement of my tastes. Noticed how I suddenly warmed up to the 360 when Culdcept was announced for it? That game was the bomb, but it sorely needed online. Same criticism I lobbed at my favorite games on the 'cube. I would have LOVED to have had Pikmin 2 online.

And like you say, it would be nice if we could have our cake and eat it too. . . if the Revolution were hi-def and the most graphically powerful.

I don't know how the two are mutually exclusive? Creativity, power and graphics should go hand in hand. Take Too Human for instance. I think you are going to get all of that from this game. And you should love reading about the funky way they are going to use the controller, sounds pretty weird to me, but hey Gunvalkyrie sounded weird but I loved it's control scheme.

Here is the article:

<a href="http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/703/703226p1.html"> Latest update on Too Human </a>

The 360 is just snowballin' now. Valve announces support, Prey will be here in July( I was thinking they would wait for PS3), Gears of War and Mass Effect, and then Too Human, let me tell u if gamers were truly objective the 360 would crush everything this year. Nobody is going to have games like these this year. What I love, no Halo! Since 360 hasn't had one Halo game yet, I don't have to hear the stupid claim that "without Halo blah blah blah!"

[Gadfly2317]

I don't know how the two are mutually exclusive? Creativity, power and graphics should go hand in hand. Take Too Human for instance. I think you are going to get all of that from this game. And you should love reading about the funky way they are going to use the controller, sounds pretty weird to me, but hey Gunvalkyrie sounded weird but I loved it's control scheme.

Too Human is the #2 reason I covet the 360, and it would be pretty bizarre if hardcore adult GC fans weren't drooling over the game. . .and I mean those of us who were flippy about Eternal Darkness. ED was "just a horror game" but it had a lot of cool little innovations in it, not to mention a rich, well scripted storyline--a true rarity in videogames. How could a Nintendo fan not be stoked about a new game from Silicon Knights, especially when those guys are talking about how much they learned working with Nintendo and Konami's Hideo Kojima and are incorporating all that into Too Human?

You and I need to stop being on the opposite side of arguments for no reason. I know I'm stoked about Revolution and DS and that I see the radically different hardware and interface as the BIG innovations this year, but I am totally in agreement with you that there are lots of other ways to innovate, and that Nintendo is not the only creative company. I also think a game can be really traditional and be a truly great experience if well executed.

Just because innovation is my favorite thing, I know it's not the ONLY thing.

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

Well it looks like Madden is coming to the Rev. With full use of the nintendo controller.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6148455.html

"Players will hike the ball by mimicking a quarterback receiving the ball from the center, and then pass it to a receiver by making a throwing gesture with the free-hand controller. The faster the passing motion, the more of a bullet pass it becomes (in previous Madden editions, bullet passes were made by holding the passing button down longer).

Kicking the ball will be accomplished by sweeping the controller up as if it were a kicker's leg striking the ball. A fast, level swing will make for a hard, straight kick.

The Revolution controller will also come into play when running the ball, as jerking the controller left or right will make the ball-carrier juke to either side, while shoving it straight ahead will make him stiff-arm the opposition."


There is also an interview. Personally this seem somewhat interesting. But like Visual Concepts First Person Football nothing I would want to be restricted to while playing the game. Can you imagine 2 player games with this. Stiff arm could be a real life stiff arm (pow to the grill):devil:

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Based on DT post that sounds really cool. I haven't played Madden or a football since the launch of XBOX, and I don't plan on playing ANY sports game(aside from boxing) in their current form. But this sounds very promising. The only action they described which I don't like is how they described running the football, that doesn't seem like natural motion. The kickoff seems more like a golf-swing, but still pretty cool.

As I said before, I could forgive the Wii for lack of power if but they included HD. I would really really feel more enthusiastic about Wii's chances if it were at least HD. Maybe Nintendo will change there minds, i'm sure their GPU is capable.

Hey I wonder if Michelle's gonna get pissed about Nintendo coping her name?

[Superjoint Ritual]

As I said before, I could forgive the Wii for lack of power if but they included HD. I would really really feel more enthusiastic about Wii's chances if it were at least HD. Maybe Nintendo will change there minds, i'm sure their GPU is capable.
What does HD have do do with anything ?

" Wow! The new controls seem really interesting and unique. "

" Yeah, but it's not high-def... So it sucks. "

You sound like the typical mainstream b!tch that is killing our industry. We get it, you don't like Nintendo, but can't seem to keep from talking about the company. You're like the annoying guy at a party who says he's over his girlfriend, yet keeps talking about her. Do the forum a favor, and reserve your post to ankle grabbing MS bullsh!t.