Nintendo Revolutions Controller, Lets check it out.. Options

[EddieV]

The new Nintendo Revolution's Controller looks really interesting. Nintendo said they want to change the way we play video games. I think out of the three system, Nintendo to me looks the most promising. The X-Box 360 only has a few new features and slightly better graphics. But basically everything is the same. Here's a link to the Nintendo Revolution's new controller.

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3143782

[uLoVeMikeRoch]

Eh. I don't see myself using this thing. I hope they do change it. Cause, the whole remote control sensor thing, it's not really working out for me. I just can't see myself using it.

[evanbunnell]

It looks very promising, but hopefully developers will pick up on the concept of the sensor way faster than they did the DS Dual Screen thing. DS is just kinda suffering because there aren't that many good games for it. *sigh*

Good thinking Nintendo, but let's hope it works for you. For all of our sakes.

[ThunderEvermore]

I touched on all this ALOT in the Nintendo Revolution thread, but yeah.

I think the controller is an amazing and innovative addition to the gaming world.

Think about it, before Nintendo, how many of us thought we could really use a rumble feature, a memory card, analog sticks, shoulder buttons, or alot of other controller innovations theyve made?

This remote looks to be an amazing addition to that long list. Imagine being able to swing a sword, a baseball bat, conduct an orchestra playing music you composed, cast a fishing rod, shine light on object, and a million other possibilities.

It can basically take the shape of anything you can hold in your hand.

Imagine a sim where you can use it as a cell phone, and it usses a mic and voice recognition software to form intelligent responses back?

Imagine using it as the handle of a leash one moment, and as a frisbee the next, in a hypothetical Nintendogs Revolution?

Imagine taking a swig from that healing potion youve got in your pouch in the latest action RPG?

The possibilities are limitless!

[sadolakced acid]

^

all i care about is being able to play jedi knights of the old republic with a special edition controller.

that's been my dream since i was like... 5.

[EddieV]

^ I feel you, for once we actually feel like being a Jedi.

[uLoVeMikeRoch]

But what about the other game genre's ?

What about driving a car.
Shooting Zombies and people in RE5?
Jumping over obstacles in Mario.
Eating Eneimes in Pacman?

I know it has buttons. But still, I like have a good grip on my controller. and don't include that joystick add on thing, I think it looks werid.

But if IGN concept ideas come true, the idea of getting such as a light gun, and sticking in the controller. Then I might reconsider. But even then not all genres will be filled.

Also, you can already get this sort of game. You know those tyco games that you directly to your tv, with the bat, duck hunting gun or whatever. Like those TV games that are ment for 6 year olds.

[Tribal J_Rome]

it does look promising in how it's changing and stuff, but i don't think they went in the right direction. that controller looks like crap, but iono, the way they describe how it sounds it seems awesome. guess we'll find out soon enough.

[artislife90]

It looks cool, but I'd hate to have to take up a self with 40 million different attachments to make it useful for each type of game. However, I do feel that its defiantly the best of the three new controllers, and the only one I actually want to buy. So whee.

[*liquidize*]

its ugly

[ThunderEvermore]

But what about the other game genre's ?

What about driving a car.
Shooting Zombies and people in RE5?
Jumping over obstacles in Mario.
Eating Eneimes in Pacman?

Driving a Car: the controller senses tilt, turn the controller sideways and have a good ol time steering. Slap on a wheel and/or pedal function and youre good to go.

Shooting Zombies in RE5: THat one I dont know, other than turning the controller sideways.

Jumping over obstacles in mario: Well, buttons, but you could also tilt the controller back telling Mario to jump.

Eating Enemies in Pacman: Ive never played the newer 3d Pacman games, which is what Im assuming youre referring to, because in any case you just need the Dpad for the originals.

[capsule]

just cause it's gonna be new doesn't mean it's gonna be successful.

my prediction: the revolution won't fare so well (the concept won't sink in so well with everyone...especially those who weren't satisfied with the gamecube and maybe even as far back as the N64), then sony and/or microsoft will jack the idea, plaster it onto their next next-gen consoles, and THEN the idea will become a success.

but of course, i'm all for the revolution...i think it's gonna kick some ass.

[ANG33ZY]

i think it's corny. and i'd feel weird using it

[EddieV]

^ That's what everyone said when the testers saw PS3s controller, although they got the hang of it really quickly, and most said it's comfortable.

[Rachel]

I think it looks awesome!

[Ken]

me = def going to be all over it when it comes out.

[uLoVeMikeRoch]

Driving a Car: the controller senses tilt, turn the controller sideways and have a good ol time steering. Slap on a wheel and/or pedal function and youre good to go.

Shooting Zombies in RE5: THat one I dont know, other than turning the controller sideways.

Jumping over obstacles in mario: Well, buttons, but you could also tilt the controller back telling Mario to jump.

Eating Enemies in Pacman: Ive never played the newer 3d Pacman games, which is what Im assuming youre referring to, because in any case you just need the Dpad for the originals.

Ok.
But using the buttons. It's not exactly... as exciting or easy. You play it like you're holding a stick.

Also, I got a good one. FPS's. How are we gooing to play those. It's not light gun, so we can't use a lightgun. I don't see any solution for those. But thats if any good fps's come out for revolution. Actually, are there are on the Gamecube? I bet theres lot fo em. But none of them are coming to my head right now. I thought Geist was one.

[AngryBaby]

okay, that remote, is the controller? eh, i dont know about this nintendo

[evanbunnell]

Ok.
But using the buttons. It's not exactly... as exciting or easy. You play it like you're holding a stick.

Also, I got a good one. FPS's. How are we gooing to play those. It's not light gun, so we can't use a lightgun. I don't see any solution for those. But thats if any good fps's come out for revolution. Actually, are there are on the Gamecube? I bet theres lot fo em. But none of them are coming to my head right now. I thought Geist was one.

Why wouldn't you use it as a light gun? Point it to where you want on the screen to aim and move with the Analog stick adaption. FPS sounds like one of the more laid out genres to figure out a use for. It's the Action/Adventure and Fighting genres I'm worried about. Example: Super Smash Brothers. I hope they know what they're going to do there.

[AngryBaby]

i think this is a stupid idea

1. its going to be awkward and uncomfortable

2. waving the controller in the direction of where you want your guy/car/target to go is not a good idea, first off, you'll look like a retard. second off you wont have as much accurate control, 3rd off you wont feel as into the game.

3. how the hell are you gonna play an fps with one thumb? how can you play any game with one thumb? lol and feel like you have full control.

4. and the light gun thing isnt a good idea either, imagine playing halo with a light gun....no

4.your arm will start to hurt.

[vash1530]

i just hope they can get some good 3rd party publishers to put some great games on it. I hope the rumor is true that ubisoft is developing a FPS for it because that would so great.

[vash1530]

i just hope they can get some good 3rd party publishers to put some great games on it. I hope the rumor is true that ubisoft is developing a FPS for it because that would so great.

sry bout the dbl. post

This post has been edited by vash1530: Dec 5 2005, 01:34 AM

[*mipadi*]

i think this is a stupid idea

1. its going to be awkward and uncomfortable

2. waving the controller in the direction of where you want your guy/car/target to go is not a good idea, first off, you'll look like a retard. second off you wont have as much accurate control, 3rd off you wont feel as into the game.

3. how the hell are you gonna play an fps with one thumb? how can you play any game with one thumb? lol and feel like you have full control.

4. and the light gun thing isnt a good idea either, imagine playing halo with a light gun....no

4.your arm will start to hurt.

I think 1, 2, and 3 are especially good points. Personally, I'm quite partial to the Xbox 360 controllers, and I've grown accustomed to the original Xbox controller, even though it's kind of large.

[vash1530]

quote from L!ckitySplit,Dec 4 2005, 7:31 PM
i think this is a stupid idea

1. its going to be awkward and uncomfortable
looks pretty comfortable to me and it won't be that akward: it's like the z button on your n64 controller

2. waving the controller in the direction of where you want your guy/car/target to go is not a good idea, first off, you'll look like a retard. second off you wont have as much accurate control, 3rd off you wont feel as into the game.
1st close the curtains, 2nd the control will much more accurate since your actually pointing it, 3rd i think will immerse you more in the game since ur doin the actual actions being shown on screen.[B/]
3. how the hell are you gonna play an fps with one thumb? how can you play any game with one thumb? lol and feel like you have full control.
[B]the laser will act like the right analog in a fps.
4. and the light gun thing isnt a good idea either, imagine playing halo with a light gun....no
YES i can and it dosn't sound that bad to me.

4.your arm will start to hurt.
suck it up big guy

[vash1530]

somethings wrong with my browser

[ThunderEvermore]

Dude, no more of the double posting.

Anyway... As for it being uncomfortable, for one, I highly doubt that considering Nintendo makes some of the most comfortable controllers out there. Secondly, youve never held it, for all you know it could be made partially out of some form of memory foam or gel that conforms to your hand so well that you cna hardly tell its there.

On to point number two. Gaming was never about looking cool, and a bunch of people play DDR to prove it, not to mention Eyetoy. Secondly, you aught to have incredibly accurate control considering, one, what my previous friend here said, youre pointing it yourself, and secondly, youre using a far more stable and accurate form of pointing or aiming. its like a ball mouse Vs an optical or laser.

Playing Halo with a lightgun? Not gonna happen considering MS owns it. But another FPS, say a marginally better sequel to Geist? Or any other new FPS idea, I could definitely imagine, and would love it. better yet, how about a pedal peripheral and some Time Crisis action up in there? Damn that would be sweeeeet.

Your arm will start to hurt? Your thumbs will start to hurt, your hands will start to hurt, your eyes will start to hurt, your head will start to ache, your stomach will start to churn, and youll go BLIND. All common accusations towards regular controllers and video games as a whole. Seriously, do people not play football, soccer, baseball, tennis, and any other sport in the world because they may get a bit sore doing it? Like he said, suck it up, pack on some muscle, and get active!

We have yet to hear EVERYTHING about this controller. There is a big secret that the Big N is keeping from everyone, and we may not hear about it until E3 next year. So lets hear all the info, and then we can talk about what we know, because most of you guys are talking about what ifs and creating your own facts based upon nothing.

[*kryogenix*]

i think this is a stupid idea

1. its going to be awkward and uncomfortable

WTF? This is probably the most natural thing that could be use. Movement in real life corresponds to movement in the game.

2. waving the controller in the direction of where you want your guy/car/target to go is not a good idea, first off, you'll look like a retard. second off you wont have as much accurate control, 3rd off you wont feel as into the game.

How is it not a good idea/make you look stupid. What kind of gamer cares how they look when they play videogames? If you're too concerned with how you look, then you're not concentrating on the game, and you lose.

How will the control not be accurate? Developers that have actually played with the thing say it's great.

3. how the hell are you gonna play an fps with one thumb? how can you play any game with one thumb? lol and feel like you have full control.

Attach modules? That's what the expansion port is for.

4. and the light gun thing isnt a good idea either, imagine playing halo with a light gun....no

Uh, that would kick ass, unless you suck at aiming.

4.your arm will start to hurt.

As opposed to your fingers hurting?

You fail to realize that you can use a traditional controller instead of the new controller anyway.

[sadolakced acid]

i rock at light gun games.

give me a joystick with which to aim a gun... you've got to be crazy. that doens't even remotely correlate with real life...

[AngryBaby]

i wont quote all of you sooo,

personally, i think nintendo made themselves more suseptible to be hated. the general audience is going to look at this and say "what the hell" and dismiss it as a dvd player with games. and its gonna be gamecube all over again. with only the nintendo faithful buying it. it just seems too much like a peripheral to me. I don't see how u can build a system and games around this. because they will have to make games catering to these controllers. when i talk about your hand being tired i mean hand and wrist fatigue. extend your arm with the remote in your hand towards the TV for a few hours and see how you'll feel. another thing is with the "slashing" and wrist and arm turning you'll be doing you cant be too far from the tv. and button option only seems limited to "A" during fast paced gameplay. and if im going to EVER be using a light gun it better resemble a GUN. just like real light guns in the past. Do you want all your fps's to be like Time crisis? where the computer moves for you? i dont. and with the sword flinging things, reflexes play a toll, so, if you have good reflexes and is pretty quick with this you will get bored, because they will slow down things for the masses. and how is this supposed to work with older games? i notice another flaw, different size hands will have different results gripping the controller. all in all, a good example of how regular controllers are better than this one is.....well, imagine playing a versus game against somebody with the rev controller and you have a regular controller....you would woop his ass. basically this seems like the power glove all over again. and nintendos gonna lose alot of potential buyers because of this , you cant get around that. it seems REALLY directed toward casual gamers,and i mean really casual, like grandmother casual. its almost arcade like. nintendo wanted to produce something that less intimidating to new coming gamers (though who would be intimidated besides 70 yr olds i dont know) they wanted to make something more familiar to them. but i think its a sacrafice. and a risk for real gamers to buy it. but there is one good thing! when you get pissed playing smash bros, you can strangle your friend.

AHhh that's what i need after a hard days work .To sit down to some jumping ,flailing,disco dancing gaming.A cool gimmick but a gimmick at that.

[sadolakced acid]

i can whoop you with a rev controler on light gun mode( if it's anything like light guns of the old) and you with a reg contoler.

[AngryBaby]

well if the game caters to the light gun all around, like time crisis, then probably.

[sadolakced acid]

i love time crisis. :-)

a light gun if more intuitive than a joystick for just about every FPS, i'd say.

[*mipadi*]

I'd prefer not to use a light gun. I normally play videogames in a confined area--while sitting on a futon with three other people, for example--and I don't have room to be waving my arms around.

[EddieV]

^ Who said you have to wave your arm around, you just have to angle it the right way, unless you have a really big TV screen that's a different story.

[ThunderEvermore]

personally, i think nintendo made themselves more suseptible to be hated. the general audience is going to look at this and say "what the hell" and dismiss it as a dvd player with games. and its gonna be gamecube all over again. with only the nintendo faithful buying it.

Except its being reveled in by critics and fans alike, not to mention its being revered by game producers and creators.

it just seems too much like a peripheral to me. I don't see how u can build a system and games around this. because they will have to make games catering to these controllers.

Of course they will, they had to do it for the 64, they had to do it for the PS1, and they had to do it for the Xbox. Controllers cant stay the same forever, and when they do, they become obsolete to a newer and better version. Take the original xbox controller Vs the current 360 controller. Which is better? Who still owns an original xbox controller? Everyone went out and bought an S controller, why? It was better, more comfortable. Every generation controllers have differed on every system except two, PS2 and Xbox 360(yes there are minor differences such as the xbox menu button which is annoying as hell). Changes like this happen all the time. Just because it looks a little different than what youre used to doesnt mean its that far out, or that its horrible because its different.

when i talk about your hand being tired i mean hand and wrist fatigue. extend your arm with the remote in your hand towards the TV for a few hours and see how you'll feel.

I dont see how thats different than holding a controller towards the TV/Console. You CAN rest it on your leg, lap, arm of the chair, etc when youre not directly using it to slash and shoot.

another thing is with the "slashing" and wrist and arm turning you'll be doing you cant be too far from the tv.

Why?

and button option only seems limited to "A" during fast paced gameplay.

Dont forget the B trigger button, and the possible shoulder buttons on the joystick peripheral.

and if im going to EVER be using a light gun it better resemble a GUN. just like real light guns in the past. Do you want all your fps's to be like Time crisis? where the computer moves for you? no.

You have a joystick peripheral to use for movement while you aim with the remote. Just like a keyboard and mouse, but better.

and with the sword flinging things, reflexes play a toll, so, if you have good reflexes and is pretty quick with this you will get bored, because they will slow down things for the masses.

The same thing goes for all other controllers. If your Dead or Alive reflexes are out of this world, youre going to guffaw at the computer's measely AI, that is, unless you raise the difficulty. Oh, yeah, sorry, I forgot about DIFFICULTY. Youre better at a game? Make it harder! Its so easy, just a menu selection or two.

and how is this supposed to work with older games?

NES games? Turn it sideways. SNES/N64? Peripherals, probably. Possibly changed control schemes as well. Gamecube? The Revo is compatible with GCN controllers.

i notice another flaw, different size hands will have different results gripping the controller.

Same goes for all controllers. I cant wrap a rope around the original xbox controller let alone my hands.

[AngryBaby]

^ Who said you have to wave your arm around, you just have to angle it the right way, unless you have a really big TV screen that's a different story.

exactly, and my game systems are in my theatre room 110 inches

Of course they will, they had to do it for the 64, they had to do it for the PS1, and they had to do it for the Xbox. Controllers cant stay the same forever, and when they do, they become obsolete to a newer and better version. Take the original xbox controller Vs the current 360 controller. Which is better? Who still owns an original xbox controller? Everyone went out and bought an S controller, why? It was better, more comfortable. Every generation controllers have differed on every system except two, PS2 and Xbox 360(yes there are minor differences such as the xbox menu button which is annoying as hell). Changes like this happen all the time. Just because it looks a little different than what youre used to doesnt mean its that far out, or that its horrible because its different.

what? ....no. the rev controller effects gameplay, tremendously. games like prince of persia for example that usually come out for all systems wont be able to be played on rev.
so most of the games that come out for rev. will be ONLY for rev. will it be able to get Call of Duty? Soul caliber? brothers in arms? Tony Hawks? NBA games? etc

[EddieV]

exactly, and my game systems are in my theatre room 

Well yeah me too, that's why once I get the Revolution, it's going to be in my room, not my entertainment room, lol.

[sadolakced acid]

i assume the revolution controler could have a traditional controler like the dreamcast, and have the rev controler slide into it...

let's wait untill we try it before passing judgement on it's difficulty of use, shall we?

[EddieV]

^ I was thinking the exact same thing, this topic wasn't made so people can make fun of it, but rather what people should expect from it.

[sadolakced acid]

well, we certainly know it will be different.

i think any change is good. simple processor upgrades or software upgrades aren't very much of a step. change is always, although it may be backwards.

[ThunderEvermore]

what? ....no. the rev controller effects gameplay, tremendously. games like prince of persia for example that usually come out for all systems wont be able to be played on rev.
so most of the games that come out for rev. will be ONLY for rev.  will it be able to get Call of Duty? Soul caliber? brothers in arms? Tony Hawks? NBA games? etc

Of course you can, with changed controls. Just like the GCN controller VS the PS2 VS the Xbox. Sure, theres a striking difference now, but its the same basic scheme.

At any rate, there're talks of a controller "shell" peripheral which makes it into a traditional controller, and so that could solve the problem as well.

[*kryogenix*]

i wont quote all of you sooo,

personally, i think nintendo made themselves more suseptible to be hated. the general audience is going to look at this and say "what the hell" and dismiss it as a dvd player with games. and its gonna be gamecube all over again. with only the nintendo faithful buying it. it just seems too much like a peripheral to me. I don't see how u can build a system and games around this. because they will have to make games catering to these controllers.

The impression I get from the online consensus is that this thing is a change for the better, and it has the potential to, well, revolutionize gaming. Even EA Games wants to develop for it.

when i talk about your hand being tired i mean hand and wrist fatigue. extend your arm with the remote in your hand towards the TV for a few hours and see how you'll feel. another thing is with the "slashing" and wrist and arm turning you'll be doing you cant be too far from the tv.

My wrist only starts to hurt after three sets of tough tennis. I doubt the revolution controller will cause any more pain than a traditional controller. And it doesn't really matter where you are, since motion is detected by gyroscopes, rather than the way it is with past light guns.

and button option only seems limited to "A" during fast paced gameplay.

Your point? Wouldn't actually slashing downward be more natural than pressing quarter circle forward a+b?

and if im going to EVER be using a light gun it better resemble a GUN. just like real light guns in the past.

NES zapper and Super Scope. Nintendo has made light guns in the past, they're not going to screw this up.

Do you want all your fps's to be like Time crisis? where the computer moves for you? no. and with the sword flinging things, reflexes play a toll, so, if you have good reflexes and is pretty quick with this you will get bored, because they will slow down things for the masses. and how is this supposed to work with older games?

I'm getting the impression you didn't even see the mockup video of the revolution controller in use. How about you watch that first, then you come back and continue this arguement.

As for the fast reflexes, they have this thing called tiered difficulty level...

i notice another flaw, different size hands will have different results gripping the controller. all in all, a good example of how regular controllers are better than this one is.....

Not really, since I don't know anyone who can't hold a remote control comfortably. Meanwhile, My friend has trouble with the Gamecube controller, while I struggle with the xbox controller.

well, imagine playing a versus game against somebody with the rev controller and you have a regular controller....you would woop his ass.

You know this because? And guess who would have more fun actually playing.

basically this seems like the power glove all over again.

Read up on your videogame history. Nintendo did NOT make the powerglove. Mattel (the company that makes barbie) did. You really can't blame them though, the idea was there, but the technology wasn't. Nintendo has put a lot of research into this, and nintendo hardware has always been of superior quality.

and nintendos gonna lose alot of potential buyers because of this , you cant get around that. it seems REALLY directed toward casual gamers,and i mean really casual, like grandmother casual. its almost arcade like. nintendo wanted to produce something that less intimidating to new coming gamers (though who would be intimidated besides 70 yr olds i dont know) they wanted to make something more familiar to them. but i think its a sacrafice. and a risk for real gamers to buy it.

I can't see anyone turned off by this controller, except for fanboys. It seems like one of those things that is easy to learn (for your 70 year olds and little kids), but difficult to master (for the gamer). This is exactly the way Smash Bros is, and that's exactly the reason why everyone likes it so much.

but there is one good thing! when you get pissed playing smash bros, you can strangle your friend.

As opposed to throwing a boomerang or remarking how much your controller looks like the Dreamcast controller? You can find a reason to hate any controller.

[AngryBaby]

I'm getting the impression you didn't even see the mockup video of the revolution controller in use. How about you watch that first, then you come back and continue this arguement.

i saw it about a week ago on IGN. i never knew what the rev's controller looked like, so i typed it in on google. and the ign site came up. i saw the controllers and i thought "nooooo that cant be it, thats gotta be like the remote to a dvd system or something" then i saw the video, and i was like ":mellow: ooookay..." have fun with that. look at the video, and listen to the sounds that the "games" are making as the player swing their remotes like fools. to me this implies that the games will be arcade like. which turned me off. to me this is a gimmick, more than trying to be "revolutional" i mean c'mon without this new controller, what else does the nintendo have to offer that the others dont? the others have better games and more fans. which pits revolution in 3rd again. so what did they do? the brilliant idea of the remote. and if it is not a gimmick, why did they have a WHOLE commercial centered around the controller? BEFORE advertising even a clip or photo of a graphics shot at the least. and actually, it seems as though to me that the revs controller makes things more complicated, throwing your arms about, and hopping around just to play a damn game, ehhhh. geared towards kids much?
please someone, please explain to me how, in detail, you would play a game like prince of persia with this controller. please.

As opposed to throwing a boomerang or remarking how much your controller looks like the Dreamcast controller? You can find a reason to hate any controller.

whats my controller? are you talking about xbox? because, i dont even own an xbox 1.

but the 360 doesnt look much like the dreamcast controller.

erm close to same color and thats about it.

[uLoVeMikeRoch]

whats my controller? are you talking about xbox? because, i dont even own an xbox 1.

but the 360 doesnt look much like the dreamcast controller.

http://www.x-360.net/images/controller4.jpg
http://www.axess.com/twilight/console/detail/dc.jpg[/img] erm close to same color and thats about it. 

He means the original xbox. Which is litterally, just a friggin black copy of the dreamcast copy, except with a few differences.


Compare that
to that.

[*mipadi*]

He means the original xbox. Which is litterally, just a friggin black copy of the dreamcast copy, except with a few differences.

I see...at least four more buttons on the Xbox's, one more control stick, and a much more ergonomical design...

[*kryogenix*]

i saw it about a week ago on IGN. i never knew what the rev's controller looked like, so i typed it in on google. and the ign site came up. i saw the controllers and i thought "nooooo that cant be it, thats gotta be like the remote to a dvd system or something" then i saw the video, and i was like ":mellow: ooookay..." have fun with that. look at the video, and listen to the sounds that the "games" are making as the player swing their remotes like fools. to me this implies that the games will be arcade like. which turned me off. to me this is a gimmick, more than trying to be "revolutional" i mean c'mon without this new controller, what else does the nintendo have to offer that the others dont? the others have better games and more fans. which pits revolution in 3rd again. so what did they do? the brilliant idea of the remote. and if it is not a gimmick, why did they have a WHOLE commercial centered around the controller? BEFORE advertising even a clip or photo of a graphics shot at the least. and actually, it seems as though to me that the revs controller makes things more complicated, throwing your arms about, and hopping around just to play a damn game, ehhhh. geared towards kids much?
please someone, please explain to me how, in detail, you would play a game like prince of persia with this controller. please.

Sounds like sour grapes and fanboyism to me. Well, if you're not into the immersiveness, and if you're really concerned that you'll look like a "retard," then obviously the revolution is not for you. I can't imagine why someone who calls themself a gamer would think this way, but to each his own.



I've never played any of the newer Prince of Persia games, but from what I saw of Sands of Time, I'm sure it's playable with the analog stick dongle.

The only game I can't see it being played with are fighters, and ironically, Super Smash Bros.

whats my controller? are you talking about xbox? because, i dont even own an xbox 1.

but the 360 doesnt look much like the dreamcast controller.

erm close to same color and thats about it. 

Very good, you linked to an image from Sockmaster's Controller Family tree. But did you take a look at it? The Xbox line can clearly trace its roots to the DC controller.

Look at the button/stick locations, the color scheme, the expansion slots. It's clear that the 360 was heavily influenced by the DC. Hell, take a look at this:

http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3145154&did=1

Although that kinda diverges from the point about controllers, you get the point.

[vash1530]

yea the xbox controller looks like an advanced dc controller.

[AngryBaby]

Sounds like sour grapes and fanboyism to me.
http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3145154&did=1

fanboyism? lol and what system am i being a fanboy to? i dont even want an xbox 1.5. i never even said anything good about it. so what are you talking about? your the one making constant threads dissing sony buddy i WAS hoping nintendo would come back and woop ass, but then they do this, they just had to do something that would give them controversy. and it is, indeed giving them controversy.


and as for the dc controller and the 360 one. first off they are two TOTALLY different shapes. thats should already shut down that theory, look at it as from artist stand point. wow the analog and the D-pad are in the same spot, wow. but how many things can i list that are different? well the start and select buttons are in a totally different spot, the secondary triggers are in a totally different spot also sooooooo. its like saying pokemon and full metal alchaemist look the same just cause they are animes. and besides, even if it did look like the dc controller thats not a reason to hate it, because at least ps3 and 360 controller dont change almost everything.

I've never played any of the newer Prince of Persia games, but from what I saw of Sands of Time, I'm sure it's playable with the analog stick dongle.

The only game I can't see it being played with are fighters, and ironically, Super
Smash Bros.

naw, for prince it would be difficult. its not about the analog, its about the combinations, fighting combos and acrobatic moves, like running up the walls, and controlling the sands. ESPECIALLY with the newer versions. it just cant be done or at least done well.

Well, if you're not into the immersiveness, and if you're really concerned that you'll look like a "retard," then obviously the revolution is not for you. I can't imagine why someone who calls themself a gamer would think this way, but to each his own.

its not all about that man, thats just another peice as to why its bad. It would effect my gameplay for an ultimately unecessary cause,and it would make my accuracy worse, my control worse, and limit me from things i wanna do. another huge huge flaw that was pointed out to me from my friends and even my female friends is "look how far the b and o (is it o?) buttons are from where your hand is!" thats a huge flaw. and will ruin ALOT, and slow your movements down also. wow i didnt even notice that.

[*kryogenix*]

fanboyism? lol and what system am i being a fanboy to? i dont even want an xbox 1.5. i never even said anything good about it. so what are you talking about? your the one making constant threads dissing sony buddy  i WAS hoping nintendo would come back and woop ass, but then they do this, they just had to do something that would give them controversy. and it is, indeed giving them controversy.

You're already dismissing the controller, implying that it will be hated by a large percentage even though the vast majority of people who have actually played it absolutely love it. This is not to say you can't have a different opinion. However, the reasons you have used to support this opinion are extremely superficial. Seriously, who the hell cares what they look like when playing videogames? And the video was just something to emphasize how different the controller was, and how it could attract so many people. In fact, I don't see how playing with this controller would make you look retarded anyway. If you're so against the idea of going through the motion of swinging a sword or shooting a gun, why are you playing a sword game or shooter in the first place? Do you say "Hahaha, Mitsurugi looks like a retard!" when playing Soul Calibur? The character would only move like a retard if the person holding the controller moved in an akward fashion. If one has problems swinging a sword correctly, it's not the controller's fault.

What's your point about me making threads that point out what Sony is doing wrong? Maybe because Sony IS doing something wrong (unless you actually like rootkits and a corporation perverting the artform of graffiti and the Kutaragi talking arrogantly). Maybe if the validity of what Sony is doing is debatable, you'd have a point, but the allow a customer's system to be exploited and vandalizing public property is unnacceptable from a company. I'm not the only one that believes this either, nor am I the one making threads on these matters. If you're not concerned, you really should read up on it.

and as for the dc controller and the 360 one. first off they are two TOTALLY different shapes. thats should already shut down that theory, look at it as from artist stand point. wow the analog  and the D-pad are in the same spot, wow. but how many things can i list that are different? well the start and select buttons are in a totally different spot, the secondary triggers are in a totally different spot also sooooooo. its like saying pokemon and full metal alchaemist look the same just cause they are animes. and besides, even if it did look like the dc controller thats not a reason to hate it, because at least ps3  and 360 controller dont change almost everything.

Shape? Give me a break. That's like saying the SNES controller didn't influence the DualShock because it doesn't have handles. The handles are angled on the Xbox controller. If you subtract the extra buttons the Xbox 360 has (it was made for console FPSes while the DC's controller was more geared towards fighters), they look very similar. In fact, I believe Microsoft even admitted that the original Xbox controller was based on the DC's controller.

I don't think I said I hate the 360 controller. I feel quite the opposite, it looks like it's a change for the better from the original Xbox controller, especially the relocation of the white and black buttons to triggers.

naw, for prince it would be difficult. its not about the analog, its about the combinations, fighting combos and acrobatic moves, like running up the walls, and controlling the sands. ESPECIALLY with the newer versions. it just cant be done or at least done well.

Again, I admit that I have no experience playing the new Prince of Persia games, so it would be imprudent for me to argue here. If indeed it requires more than what the Rev controller can provide, then the gamer can always revert back to the standard controller shell.

its not all about that man, thats just another peice as to why its bad. It would effect my gameplay for an ultimately unecessary cause,and it would make my accuracy worse, my control worse, and limit me from things i wanna do. another huge huge flaw that was pointed out to me from my friends and even my female friends is "look how far the b and o (is it o?) buttons are from where your hand is!" thats a huge flaw. and will ruin ALOT, and slow your movements down also. wow i didnt even notice that.

I don't know, to me it seems like it'll help gameplay out alot. Ever since I've been playing videogames, I've thought "if only it felt like I was more in the game." The controller is pretty small (I believe about the same size as a NES controller). If anything, it seems like it would enhance gameply because corresponding movements are more natural than button combinations.

[EddieV]

Jesus Christ, what have I created....?

[*mipadi*]

I find it a bit hypocritcal that a common response to people who criticize the controller is "Well, you can't comment, because you haven't used it yet," when the people who like it yet haven't used it yet either. It seems, by that logic, you can make no comment about the controller.

Frankly, I don't think it's such an amazing design either, and several gamers I've talked to agree. It's interesting, but I don't see it revolutionizing the game industry--especially since no one is going to buy a console due to its "revolutionary" controller, and it seems most people are watching the Xbox 360 and the PS3; the Revolution is the dark horse in the console race. It's not going to make an impact on gaming unless it becomes widespread, and that's not likely to happen, given Nintendo's dismal showings the past few years.

[*kryogenix*]

I find it a bit hypocritcal that a common response to people who criticize the controller is "Well, you can't comment, because you haven't used it yet," when the people who like it yet haven't used it yet either. It seems, by that logic, you can make no comment about the controller.

Frankly, I don't think it's such an amazing design either, and several gamers I've talked to agree. It's interesting, but I don't see it revolutionizing the game industry--especially since no one is going to buy a console due to its "revolutionary" controller, and it seems most people are watching the Xbox 360 and the PS3; the Revolution is the dark horse in the console race. It's not going to make an impact on gaming unless it becomes widespread, and that's not likely to happen, given Nintendo's dismal showings the past few years.

How so? Most of the people who like it say they like it because of all the applications it can be used for. Most of the people who say they don't like it state that it will be awkward to use. You don't need to actually hold the thing to dream about it's potential, but saying it won't even function properly with only the information that has been released to the public is a whole different thing.

It seems like you're missing the point of the controller. People buy consoles for good games. The controller is means of, well, controlling the game more naturally. Therefore, if the use of the controller makes gameplay better, people will buy the console. People won't say "Wow that controller looks different, I'll buy it!" No, the'll say "I'll feel like I'm actually in the game with this controller, I'll buy it!" The plan for the controller is to attract people who gave up on console gaming (ie me, as I skipped this generation of consoles) or people who have never tried it yet.

Microsoft and Sony are already looking into controllers similar to the Revolution controller; Microsoft is making a wand for media center pc's and Sony is making a wand for use with Eye Toy.

[*mipadi*]

How so? Most of the people who like it say they like it because of all the applications it can be used for. Most of the people who say they don't like it state that it will be awkward to use. You don't need to actually hold the thing to dream about it's potential, but saying it won't even function properly with only the information that has been released to the public is a whole different thing.

How is your imagining how much fun and easy to use it will be in certain applications any different from my imagining how akward and ungainly it would be to use in certain applications?

I'm not saying that we shouldn't comment on the controller; but stifling criticism by saying that "you haven't used it yet, so you can't no" is hypocritical and inaccurate. Sure, I don't know precisely what it will be like, but having played videogames for nearly sixteen years, I have a pretty good idea of how it might be to use one, and what I am looking for in a console.

It seems like you're missing the point of the controller. People buy consoles for good games. The controller is means of, well, controlling the game more naturally. Therefore, if the use of the controller makes gameplay better, people will buy the console. People won't say "Wow that controller looks different, I'll buy it!" No, the'll say "I'll feel like I'm actually in the game with this controller, I'll buy it!" The plan for the controller is to attract people who gave up on console gaming (ie me, as I skipped this generation of consoles) or people who have never tried it yet.

No, I'm not missing the point at all--I know that's what the controller is for. And I still think it's a bad idea. Just because I disagree with Nintendo on this, doesn't mean I have no idea what their aim with this "revolutionary" controller is. I'm just saying that no, I don't think it will be interesting enough to make people buy a console; I don't think the gameplay with it will be so much better that people will abandon the Xbox 360 and the PS3 in droves to buy the Revolution. It's sad, because I love Nintendo, but I think the GameCube had its flaws (mainly the lack of DVD playback and the use of non-standard discs), and I think the Revolution's controller is a flawed approach to gaming.

Being at college, I'm around people that play games a lot. It's how we kill time. I haven't even gamed since I was in ninth grade or so, but I've started to get back into it because of the immersion. And very few people I know are seriously looking at the Revolution. No one is saying, "I bet the gameplay with the Revolution will be so much better than the PS3 and the Xbox 360 that I'm going to buy a Revolution instead." So if that's the goal of the new controller, it's not doing a good job of attracting people to the platform.

The Revolution may be critically acclaimed and innovative, but that won't necessarily attract people. Look at Apple: Apple's products are critically acclaimed, and they're one of the most innovative home PC makers--yet their market share still hovers around 3%.

[AngryBaby]

You're already dismissing the controller, implying that it will be hated by a large percentage even though the vast majority of people who have actually played it absolutely love it. This is not to say you can't have a different opinion. However, the reasons you have used to support this opinion are extremely superficial. Seriously, who the hell cares what they look like when playing videogames? And the video was just something to emphasize how different the controller was, and how it could attract so many people. In fact, I don't see how playing with this controller would make you look retarded anyway. If you're so against the idea of going through the motion of swinging a sword or shooting a gun, why are you playing a sword game or shooter in the first place? Do you say "Hahaha, Mitsurugi looks like a retard!" when playing Soul Calibur? The character would only move like a retard if the person holding the controller moved in an akward fashion. If one has problems swinging a sword correctly, it's not the controller's fault.

lol wtf, okay your not listening. you totally disregarded what i said about "thats not all its about". do you honestly think im the only one that ever said this? the majority of people i know that is going to be "your average buyer" say quote "wtf thats so gay hahaha" frankly, it wouldnt matter if the controller was a fricken masterpiece. people will go "what the hell" just as i did and not buy after taking first glance. but guess what? i highly doubt it will be a "revolutional" masterpiece. and gamecube was already not the most liked system in the world and is the pun of every console joke on g4, so i dont understand why they would take the chance of being hated even more. im just saying, from what i see and from what i know what the controller will do, thats not what i, and many others will want. for one example, considering seeing that the buttons b and o are located at the bottom of the controller and the d-pad at the top that tells EVERYONE ive talked to and myself that the buttons are too far away from eachother, making it uncomfortable, and will mess up how you play.

Do you say "Hahaha, Mitsurugi looks like a retard!" when playing Soul Calibur? The character would only move like a retard if the person holding the controller moved in an akward fashion. If one has problems swinging a sword correctly, it's not the controller's fault.

what.....the.....hell well if you plan on looking like a samurai warrior while playing you go ahead im just saying thats not all necessary, especially when there is going to be sacrifices in gameplay. like: how will you be able to perform combos? will you have to act out the combo yourself? or will it limit the game your playing to robotic movements to try to match yours. and how will it handle intensity in an fps like in call of Duty 2? id really like to see that. and once again doing all those things that you would have to do to play, you would be working harder than i am.( if i had a regular controller)
i could see it now, me and some other guy sitting on the couch playing a versus match in any game, i'd just be sitting on the couch with my regular controller, and he'd have a rev. like controller. i'd just be sitting there playing comfortably , while most likely wooping his ass, while he's got 2 controllers in each hand fwailing about, sweating, pointing his remote towards the tv, waving his arms around until he passed out. yeah ill just stick with the traditional thank you.

What's your point about me making threads that point out what Sony is doing wrong? Maybe because Sony IS doing something wrong (unless you actually like rootkits and a corporation perverting the artform of graffiti and the Kutaragi talking arrogantly). Maybe if the validity of what Sony is doing is debatable, you'd have a point, but the allow a customer's system to be exploited and vandalizing public property is unnacceptable from a company. I'm not the only one that believes this either, nor am I the one making threads on these matters. If you're not concerned, you really should read up on it.

lol to be quite honest, and i know i speak for many others when i say this, i could give a rats ass what sony does, as long as they give me a good and reliable system their fine with me. they have been, are, and probably will still be the number one console, they pulled in the most money,and they never dissapointed, so they're doing something right. maybe nintendo should take some lessons and think about their real gamer consumers before they do something drastic.

[*kryogenix*]

How is your imagining how much fun and easy to use it will be in certain applications any different from my imagining how akward and ungainly it would be to use in certain applications?

I'm not saying that we shouldn't comment on the controller; but stifling criticism by saying that "you haven't used it yet, so you can't no" is hypocritical and inaccurate. Sure, I don't know precisely what it will be like, but having played videogames for nearly sixteen years, I have a pretty good idea of how it might be to use one, and what I am looking for in a console.

Because there is no way to tell if indeed it will be a "Powerglove" type failure until after you use it. Meanwhile, liking the concept of a controller that tracks your movements does not require you to have held the controller. I can't see how the concept is bad if it works as intended.

Maybe you guys would rather mash buttons. I'd rather aim with the controller in a football game than deal with centering a passing cone. I'd rather slash low than press Down + X+Y. I'd rather actually aim a gun than wave around analog sticks. I dunno, it just seems a lot more fun.

No, I'm not missing the point at all--I know that's what the controller is for. And I still think it's a bad idea. Just because I disagree with Nintendo on this, doesn't mean I have no idea what their aim with this "revolutionary" controller is. I'm just saying that no, I don't think it will be interesting enough to make people buy a console; I don't think the gameplay with it will be so much better that people will abandon the Xbox 360 and the PS3 in droves to buy the Revolution. It's sad, because I love Nintendo, but I think the GameCube had its flaws (mainly the lack of DVD playback and the use of non-standard discs), and I think the Revolution's controller is a flawed approach to gaming.

I think you're still missing it. Nintendo's aim doesn't seem to be to reduce the other console's marketshare. They seem like they want to increase their own market share by adding more gamers. People who gave up on games and people who have never played video games before won't buy the 360 or PS3, but will buy the revolution, if Nintendo is right. The gamecube's flaws weren't exactly flaws from a business standpoint. The price could be lower and piracy would not be an issue.

Being at college, I'm around people that play games a lot. It's how we kill time. I haven't even gamed since I was in ninth grade or so, but I've started to get back into it because of the immersion. And very few people I know are seriously looking at the Revolution. No one is saying, "I bet the gameplay with the Revolution will be so much better than the PS3 and the Xbox 360 that I'm going to buy a Revolution instead." So if that's the goal of the new controller, it's not doing a good job of attracting people to the platform.

See above.

The Revolution may be critically acclaimed and innovative, but that won't necessarily attract people. Look at Apple: Apple's products are critically acclaimed, and they're one of the most innovative home PC makers--yet their market share still hovers around 3%.

The key difference is that the OS market is pretty much a monopoly, whereas the console market is an oligopoly.

lol wtf, okay your not listening. you totally disregarded about what i said about "thats not all its about". do you honestly think im the only one that ever said this? the majority of people i know that is going to be "your average buyer" say quote "wtf thats so gay hahaha" frankly, it wouldnt matter if the controller was a fricken masterpiece. people will go "what the hell" just as i did and not buy after taking first glance. but guess what? i highly doubt it will be a "revolutional" masterpiece. and gamecube was already not the most liked system in the world and is the pun of every console joke on g4, so i dont understand why they would take the chance of being hated even more. im just saying, from what i see and from what i know what the controller will do, thats not what i, and many others will want. for one example, considering seeing that the buttons b and o are located at the bottom of the controller and the d-pad at the top that tells EVERYONE ive talked to and myself that the buttons are too far away from eachother, making it uncomfortable, and will mess up how you play.

I'm not disregarding anything. The only people I know that hold the "OMG GAY" opinion are (you guessed it) the fanboys. The key is to keep ean open mind (I'm planning on going to the mall as soon as the PS3 kiosks open to make my final decision on the PS3 controller) The majority of the responses on 1up's boards (which is owned by the people who do EGM and Official Playstation magazine, go figure) have been positive towards the revolution controller. G4 has lost all credibility as a gaming channel (but that's a different topic, gphoria=yuck). I can't see a good reason not to at least think the concept is novel.

what.....the.....hell  well if you plan on looking like a samurai warrior while playing you go ahead    im just saying thats not all necessary, especially when there is going to be sacrifices in gameplay. like: how will you be able to perform combos? will you have to act out the combo yourself? or will it limit the game your playing to robotic movements to try to match yours. and how will it handle intensity in an fps like in call of Duty 2? id really like to see that. and once again doing all those things that you would have to do to play, you would be working harder than i am.( if i had a regular controller)
i could see it now, me and some other guy sitting on the couch playing a versus match in any game, i'd just be sitting on the couch with my regular controller, and he'd have a rev. like controller. i'd just be sitting there playing comfortably , while most likely wooping his ass, while he's got 2 controllers in each hand fwailing about, sweating, pointing his remote towards the tv, waving his arms around until he passed out.  yeah ill just stick with the traditional thank you.

That's not what I was arguing. I was stating that it is stupid to be concerned with what you look like when gaming.

And how would it have trouble in an FPS? The controller would be for the aiming axes, the analog attachment would be for player movement.

I still can't see how using the rev controller would be more difficult than a traditional controller. It's practically made for swordfighting! That's like saying that between two equally skilled drivers, a person with a dualshock would beat a person with a steering wheel in Gran Turismo.

If you still insist on saying it would be more fun using the original controller than the rev controller, answer this. Would you rather play DDR on a dance pad, or on a controller? I can get perfect scores with the controller, yet I can barely break a score of B on the dance pad. Guess which controller is more fun to use.

If you're more concerned in winning than having fun playing the game, design a controller that has just one big "WIN" button. As for me, I'm going to find the most fun way of playing a game.

lol to be quite honest, and i know i speak for many others when i say this, i could give a rats ass what sony does, as long as they give me a good and reliable system their fine with me. they have been, are, and probably will still be the number one console, they pulled in the most money,and they never dissapointed, so they're doing something right. maybe nintendo should take some lessons.

If Sony is compromising your system with backdoor applications, you wouldn't care?

And you are mistaken: Nintendo is the most profitable gaming company and Nintendo's hardware lasts the longest.

My issue with the Xbox 360 and PS3 is that they have other agendas than being videogame consoles. They're trying to compete for dominance of your entertainment center. Nintendo is all about the games. Now if only Sega would come back and replace Microsoft and Sony, we'd have much better quality games, but alas, it's not going to happen.

[ThunderEvermore]

Wow, this turned into a novel.

I think the whole point is, if you never take chances, if you never make changes, you can't ever grow. Someone once said, "WTF is a joystick?" "Wheres my turny knobby thing?" Someone once said, "Why do we have these buttons on top of the controller?" Someone once said "HOLY CRAP MY CONTROLLER JUST MOVED!" Why? Because things change, especially controllers. In the history of console gaming nothing has changed more than controllers. Shapes, sizes, comforts, buttons, layouts, etc. Through these changes our gaming experience becomes better, more immersive, deeper, and different.

Nintendo is being different. Theyre taking a chance. Some people are gonna love it, some people wont, and such is an inevitability of change. But without change gaming cannot grow, and without the Revolution, gaming cannot grow. We've seen PS3 and X360 stick to their tired old guns, and they probably will until PS9 is finally released and we're all breathing in Playspores. Meanwhile Nintendo is throwing the old blue print out and drawing out something new. Maybe it will be a huge success, maybe itll be mediocre, and maybe it will bomb like Hiroshima, but either of ways, it will be a milestone, and a turning point in gaming. Hence the code name.

At any rate, if this bombs, the Gameboy will sell more than the PS3 anyway. Haha.

EDIT: Kryo, whatever happened to the name that game contest???

[AngryBaby]

If you still insist on saying it would be more fun using the original controller than the rev controller, answer this. Would you rather play DDR on a dance pad, or on a controller? I can get perfect scores with the controller, yet I can barely break a score of B on the dance pad. Guess which controller is more fun to use.

personally i rather not play either. but anyway, i always thought "whats the fun in playing DDR with a controller?" ONLY because it started off as a arcade game and is more geared towards the actual dance pad. same with time crisis, i would definately rather play time crisis with a light gun than a controller, only because its geared towards the light gun. house of the dead, time crisis,vampire nights, police 911, etc. are all 1hr long arcade games, not fps's, that are traditionaly made for light guns and are therefore more fun and easier to play with light guns. games like Call of Duty and Brothers in arms is a different story. these are made for a controller and definately not a light gun. and for good reason. first of all the controls on the rev controller just seem that they wont be up to par certainly enough to play brothers in arms. first off, it clearly doesnt have enough buttons to play an fps, especially brothers in arms, which uses every button option on a controller. the remote only has 4 options A,B,O and the trigger. definately not enough to play a real fps.(or many other real games) secondly, you actually move in real fps's, we've never experienced a light gun game that allows you to move yourself. because it will give you a head ache. and when i move with my controller in an fps you feel like you have more control over your player, and honestly, you kinda do. i move with my controller in Call of Duty almost like i move in CS. the light gun and analog as i can imagine, not so much. another thing i thought of is, when your holding the analog and the remote, you'll feel restrained. for example, you cant scratch your nose for second without the analog falling on the floor. unlike a controller.

I think the whole point is, if you never take chances, if you never make changes, you can't ever grow. Someone once said, "WTF is a joystick?" "Wheres my turny knobby thing?" Someone once said, "Why do we have these buttons on top of the controller?"

im aware of this, but i think we care more and know more about the games that we play then back then. the issues back then were just looking at it. my complaints are about my gameplay and comfort but actually more gameplay wise. if they came up with a better idea its not like i wouldnt go for it. this just isnt THAT next great thing. like mipadi said, i dont think it will be that big of deal to make people dump their ps3 and 360's. c'mon. its honestly not that revolutional. because it honestly feels as though it has been done before. thats why we can imagine what its like so easily.

[*kryogenix*]

personally i rather not play either. but anyway, i always thought "whats the fun in playing DDR with a controller?" ONLY because it started off as a arcade game and is more geared towards the actual dance pad. same with time crisis, i would definately rather play time crisis with a light gun than a controller, only because its geared towards the light gun. house of the dead, time crisis,vampire nights, police 911, etc. are all 1hr long arcade games, not fps's, that are traditionaly made for light guns and are therefore more fun and easier to play with light guns. games like Call of Duty and Brothers in arms is a different story. these are made for a controller and definately not a light gun. and for good reason. first of all the controls on the rev controller just wont be up to par certainly enough to play brothers in arms. first off, it clearly doesnt have enough buttons to play an fps, especially brothers in arms, which uses every button option on a controller. the remote only has 4 options A,B,O and the trigger. definately not enough to play a real fps.(or many other real games) secondly, you actually move in real fps's, we've never experienced a light gun game  that allows you to move yourself. because it will give you a head ache. and when i move with my controller in an fps you feel like you have more control over your player, and honestly, you kinda do. i move with my controller in Call of Duty almost like i move in CS. the light gun and analog as i can imagine, not so much. another thing i thought of is, when your holding the analog and the remote, you'll feel restrained. for example, you cant scratch your nose for second without the analog falling on the floor. unlike a controller.

Yep, FPS's were made for controllers. The millions of people who use keyboard and mice do so because they are not enlightened. Also, the US military will now make their weapons and vehicles in the shape of console controllers in order to operate more efficiently.

I am hoping that someone releases a cross platform FPS where Rev users can play PS3 and Xbox 360 controllers. That would be the only definitive way of testing how well the Revolution controller works.

[AngryBaby]

im actually talking console wise, i never said "all FPS's are made for controllers" im talking consoles here and you know it.

[*mipadi*]

Because there is no way to tell if indeed it will be a "Powerglove" type failure until after you use it. Meanwhile, liking the concept of a controller that tracks your movements does not require you to have held the controller. I can't see how the concept is bad if it works as intended.

Maybe you guys would rather mash buttons. I'd rather aim with the controller in a football game than deal with centering a passing cone. I'd rather slash low than press Down + X+Y. I'd rather actually aim a gun than wave around analog sticks. I dunno, it just seems a lot more fun.

I still don't see how you can claim to imagine it as being fun without using it, but I am incapable of imagining it being not fun without having used it. It's essentially the same use of imagination.

[vash1530]

i think fps's will play great on the controller but a lot of genre's will have trouble making the adjustment to the controller (rpg's, fighting games, sportsgames, etc.). this is why nintendo will be implementing use of a gamecube controller peripheral so that there is an alternative for people who believe the controller is not fit foer smmoe games:



i see this as nintendo's back-up plan for those afraid of change.

[AngryBaby]

It ISNT fit for all games!^ it only has 4 damn buttons! that's a step backward not a "revolutional" step forward. its not about being afraid of change dammit. its not like we havent used anything like that before . its all just arcade. we all gave you valid reason as to why it just wont work well, it is flawed. if we were afraid of change, we wouldnt even want a ps3 or 360. stop looking at it and just thinking it looks cool because of its concept. and actually really think about it. nintendo knew it wouldnt work for everything so thats why they have the peripheral controller (which i think is pretty nice looking). its more of a eye toy thing. and shall work well with only eye toy like games, which usually suck. and thats that. They're going to have an entirely new controller, that takes some real familiarization / calibration, and they're going to be selling at least initially to a lot of fanboys...

...will we be seeing Duck Hunt Revolution on release?

how will you be able to perform combos? will you have to act out the combo yourself?   or will it limit the game your playing to robotic movements to try to match yours, oooh fun.

i want this question answered..... and if im playing a car game, how can i turn my car in a quick 180 turn? will i have to turn my wrist in an awkward position? imagine it for a sec. and will all the sword games you play have to be in first person? because it seems like it will be stupid 3rd person. and first person sword games=ehhhh. also, Is there a review of the Revolution controller being used in an actual game? I read the reviews at IGN from X05 where the press could use the controller on the little demo apps. As they all said, it gave them an idea of how it COULD be used, but without actual gameplay, so im still not convinced. ...and what about 3rd party support? did they completely dismiss that? because i was looking into this more and many people are asking the same question.

Because there is no way to tell if indeed it will be a "Powerglove" type failure until after you use it. Meanwhile, liking the concept of a controller that tracks your movements does not require you to have held the controller. I can't see how the concept is bad if it works as intended.

Maybe you guys would rather mash buttons. I'd rather aim with the controller in a football game than deal with centering a passing cone. I'd rather slash low than press Down + X+Y. I'd rather actually aim a gun than wave around analog sticks. I dunno, it just seems a lot more fun.

its official, your an arcade gamer. this isnt something new its basically arcade like. i played Halo 2 in an arcade in California, and they made u use a light gun and a joy stick. it was AWFUL. absolutely frustrating. so you making this sound like somethng nobody experienced before is stupid. this isnt new, nor revolutional. sure arcade games are fun, but i and like 99% percent of the population still have more fun with a controller in REAL games. its not even a comparison. by the way your not aiming with a gun your aimng with a remote. how should that make you feel more "immersed". and why are you now dissing the controller you've been playing with since you were born? like you never had fun with it hey, they also have a tekken 5 booth in gameworks where when you kick the person kicks and when you puch, the person punches! thats more advanced than the rev controller, and that was done along time ago. but guess what? ITS NOT THAT FUN,and definately not more fun than a controller. sure in theory you'd think "awsome, how could this go wrong?" well it went wrong, because when you kick and the person kicks: its slow, it doesnt respond quick enough or at least as quick as a controller would, it reduces the game to be robotic and did i mention its an incredibly slow fight? you are thinking to naively about this, of course its supposed to seem more fun because "OMG i'll feel like im actually doing it"
thats the same pull in they did when they first introduced the damn light gun, and here you are falling for it again and acting like its something new. but seriously,This really isn't all that amazing, as the Revolution controller uses Gyration technology. A few years ago (either 2002 or 2003), Nintendo signed a deal with Gyration Technologies, and everyone pretty much brushed it off as no big deal.

So all in all they better have godlike 1st party titles or they're f**ked.

[sadolakced acid]

your fallacy is you assume that everyone else thinks like you.

(they don't, by the way).

[*kryogenix*]

I still don't see how you can claim to imagine it as being fun without using it, but I am incapable of imagining it being not fun without having used it. It's essentially the same use of imagination.

Well, if you actually play tennis/shoot guns/conduct symphonies/fight swords, you already know what if feels like to do your activity of choice. Now, if you heard that you could use the same motions in those activities in a video game, you would call it a good thing, no? I can't see how you can predict that it won't be fun if you haven't even used it yet.

i want this question answered..... and if im playing a car game, how can i turn my car in a quick 180 turn? will i have to turn my wrist in an awkward position? imagine it for a sec. and will all the sword games you play have to be in first person? because it seems like it will be stupid 3rd person. and first person sword games=ehhhh. also, Is there a review of the Revolution controller being used in an actual game? I read the reviews at IGN from X05 where the press could use the controller on the little demo apps. As they all said, it gave them an idea of how it COULD be used, but without actual gameplay, so im still not convinced.

It's up to the developer. I'd imagine you'd do the combo though.

See for yourself.

its official, your an arcade gamer. this isnt something new its basically arcade like. i played Halo 2 in an arcade in California, and they made u use a light gun and a joy stick. it was AWFUL. absolutely frustrating. so you making this sound like somethng nobody experienced before is stupid. this isnt new, nor revolutional. sure arcade games are fun, but i and like 99% percent of the population still have more fun with a controller in REAL games. its not even a comparison. by the way your not aiming with a gun your aimng with a remote. how should that make you feel more "immersed".

My an arcade gamer? What does that mean?

Newsflash: people want controllers that are more intuitive. That's why we have light guns, steering wheels, dance pads and fishing controllers.

Picture of the controller layout? I'm sure you had to stand in one spot. And why do you think 99% of the population agress with you? As for aiming with the remote, peep this mockup (I stress the word MOCKUP):

and why are you now dissing the controller you've been playing with since you were born? like you never had fun with it.

When you were a year old, you probably thought walking was awesome. Then when you became 5 years old, you got a bike, and thought, "it isn't going to get any better than this." Then when you drive a car, you think "screw my bike, this is the best."

Things get better. It's called progress. Just because something was good enough then, doesn't mean you can't move on to better things.

hey, they also have a tekken 5 booth in gameworks where when you kick the person kicks and when you puch, the person punches! thats more advanced than the rev controller, and that was done along time ago. but guess what? ITS NOT THAT FUN,and definately not more fun than a controller. sure in theory you'd think "awsome, how could this go wrong?" well it went wrong, because when you kick and the person kicks: its slow, it doesnt respond quick enough or at least as quick as a controller would, it reduces the game to be robotic and did i mention its an incredibly slow fight? you are thinking to naively about this, of course its supposed to seem more fun because "OMG i'll feel like im actually doing it"
thats the same pull in they did when they first introduced the damn light gun, and here you are falling for it again and acting like its something new. but seriously,This really isn't all that amazing, as the Revolution controller uses Gyration technology. A few years ago (either 2002 or 2003), Nintendo signed a deal with Gyration Technologies, and everyone pretty much brushed it off as no big deal.

I think I know what you're talking about, is there a little ring that you get inside?

The problem is that the ring is detecting your movements. With the rev controller, the gyroscopes detect their own orientation and movement.

And you are sadly mistaken if you think the technology behind light guns is the same as the technology behind gyroscopes.

When people "brushed" the Nintendo-Gyration deal aside, did you think Nintendo was trying to, you know, play it down? Just because no one cared initially doesn't mean it's crap. No one really paid attention to Halo during the E3 it came out, now it's Microsoft Games' killer app.

You have to learn to not make bad comparisons.

[*mipadi*]

Well, if you actually play tennis/shoot guns/conduct symphonies/fight swords, you already know what if feels like to do your activity of choice. Now, if you heard that you could use the same motions in those activities in a video game, you would call it a good thing, no? I can't see how you can predict that it won't be fun if you haven't even used it yet.

I already noted several reasons why I think it is a bad idea. Again, I point out that both you and I are using our imaginations here; you haven't shown why your use of imagination is more valid than mine, so it's hypocritical to tell me to wait until the controller comes out to make a judgement, while you make judgements based on a product you haven't used, either. I might disagree with your assessment, but at least I haven't gone so far as to say that your opinion is not valid.

I have played videogames before, so I can imagine the problems that might go into such a controller. One problem I already pointed out: what if you are playing from a confined space in which it is hard to make a range of motions with your arm? That's one key problem right there. Most of the time when I play console games, there are about eight people in the room: four guys smooshed together on a futon playing the game, along with four observers waiting their turn to play. We barely have space to use a normal controller effective; how are we to mimic throwing a football, or shooting a blaster rifle, or swinging a lightsaber?

Secondly, this controller doesn't map well to all games. What about a boxing game--am I really expected to stand in my living room and throw imaginary punches? How will that even work? How will I simultaneously duck and weave with my boxer, while trying to use the controller to throw a punch? And why do I even want to stand in my living room and box with thin air? And what about Mario? Is using a controller that I have to wave around that more effective than using a control stick to maneuver Mario? I'd say no, not really.

I like realism in games, but not necessarily with the gameplay itself. Sure, even a fantasy world like Zelda is a lot better if the bad guys obey laws of physics, and objects function in a way I expect; but I don't care if I'm not actually swinging a sword, or shooting a bow and arrow, or throwing deku seeds. That aspect of gameplay is not important to me, primarily because I play games to relax--meaning that I'd rather curl up on my futon and run my player around with a control stick, rather than stand and wave a piece of plastic around in the air.

Furthermore, it's hard to say how well this controller will work. Sure, it works well in demos, but demos are designed to make products look good. How precise will it be?

As I've noted, the reason I--and a lot of gamers I know--don't like this new controller is for the simple reason that there's nothing wrong with a "normal" controller. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

This discussion almost seems to offend people. Far be it from me to say that Nintendo doesn't have a right to pursue this idea. Maybe it will pan out. I'm just saying that I don't think it's a great idea, and it's one of the major reasons I won't be buying a Nintedo Revolution.

[ThunderEvermore]

I still don't see how you can claim to imagine it as being fun without using it, but I am incapable of imagining it being not fun without having used it. It's essentially the same use of imagination.

1) This could be cool to shoot with in an FPS.

2) This is gonna suck and its gonna fail like the Powerglove and Nintendo will go the way of Sega.

Can we see the differences?

I can.

Am I hallucinating?

I dont think so.

My glasses are on.

Ok I just went and cleaned them, still a difference.

But I digress.

Why are less buttons a step backward? The PS3 controller has less buttons than Xbox or 360 or even the current Gamecube. Is it a step backward?

Controller HAVE CHANGED OVER TIME PEOPLE. The PS1 controller hasnt been around since the dawn of time. Things get different, its the way of life.

my complaints are about my gameplay and comfort but actually more gameplay wise. if they came up with a better idea its not like i wouldnt go for it. this just isnt THAT next great thing. like mipadi said, i dont think it will be that big of deal to make people dump their ps3 and 360's. c'mon. its honestly not that revolutional. because it honestly feels as though it has been done before. thats why we can imagine what its like so easily.

1) "my gameplay and comfort" constitutes YOU and only YOU. So why are you bundling your opinion with "99%" of the population? The majority of people out there actually like it and are excited. Its not a hundred percent, but its over fifty, probably less than 75, around 65-70 Id say. Dont talk for everyone, talk for yourself.

2) What IS "THAT next great thing"? It cant be anything the PS3 or 360 is putting out because its all the same thing. Changes breed what people call the next big thing. And you cant say its not that, because its not out, its not getting the chance to take the world by storm or anything like that.

3) The point is not to take over, its not to put Sony and M$ out of business. The point of the thing is to change the way people think about gaming, to create a more intuitive and immersive gaming experience, and to allow not only the supposed hardcore gamers to play, but casual and nongamers as well. You yourself have stated that anyone under 70 years old shouldnt fear the controller, and its true, because its simple and easy to use, and its a recognizable way of controlling. Even our grandparents can work their TV, so why not a Revo? OH! And hey! Its got cool games on it, PLUS you can get classic games. If the rents want to play some old school NES stuff that they havent played since they were sixteen in their parents basement playing round robin Mario Bros, and they want to pop in an affordable means of reaching back to the old days without blowing through a cartridge, theyll want it. If the grandparents want to conduct an orchestra without having to be a pro, then they may want it. Or go fishing, racing, sword slashing and bug catching. Pop on the shell peripheral and play your favorite fighting games, or even something like an arcade pad. Pop in a mic and play Karaoke with the family, use the pointer to create a presentation for the boss, use the 3d sensors and the gyroscope tilt sensors to create REALISTIC sword slashing, not just one button combos, but real swiping, as if you were holding a real sword. Hear the buzz of a lightsaber in your hands with a speaker peripheral. The possibilities are ENDLESS. Its up to the developers to create the games.

[vash1530]

THIS SHOULD DEF. BE IN DEBATE!!!

btw it should be coming with the nunchaku analog stick attachment which would increase the button count to six. and if you think about it, they'd probably utilize the d-pad as 4 more buttons bringing the total to 10. that's right up there with the 360 controller.

[ThunderEvermore]

THIS SHOULD DEF. BE IN DEBATE!!!

btw it should be coming with the nunchaku analog stick attachment which would increase the button count to six. and if you think about it, they'd probably utilize the d-pad as 4 more buttons bringing the total to 10. that's right up there with the 360 controller.

Except the A & B buttons cant be utilized at the same time as the a & b buttons.

[uLoVeMikeRoch]

Ok ok, I hear you guys. But ok. Still, nobody has answered my question. How are we going to play fps's!! You can' use it as a light gun, cause then it won't be a fps. It will be a light gun game!!

I see...at least four more buttons on the Xbox's, one more control stick, and a much more ergonomical design...

Ok, sure it seems a little much on paper. But you have to agree, almost 60-70% is from the DC controller.

[uLoVeMikeRoch]

Whoops.

[vash1530]

Except the A & B buttons cant be utilized at the same time as the a & b buttons.

didn't know that

ane ways to play a fps you'd use the nunchaku peripheral as ur left analog stick, the B button as your trigger, and the laser as ur right analog/mouse. pretty simple. btw like i said ubisoft is in the works on a game already for revolution so ther's ur 3rd party support. want more? got to ign.com where many head developer's have given very positive feedback on the rev's controller.

[ThunderEvermore]

Ok ok, I hear you guys. But ok. Still, nobody has answered my question. How are we going to play fps's!! You can' use it as a light gun, cause then it won't be a fps. It will be a light gun game!!

Yeah, the "nunchaku" or joystick peripheral acts as your forwards/backwards, and strafe. Meanwhile you use the pointer to move side to side and up and down, much in the way of a keyboard/mouse combo.

The trigger button underneath the remote will fire, and you can use the A button and the two shoulder buttons on the nunchaku for various things.

[*kryogenix*]

I already noted several reasons why I think it is a bad idea. Again, I point out that both you and I are using our imaginations here; you haven't shown why your use of imagination is more valid than mine, so it's hypocritical to tell me to wait until the controller comes out to make a judgement, while you make judgements based on a product you haven't used, either. I might disagree with your assessment, but at least I haven't gone so far as to say that your opinion is not valid.

I have played videogames before, so I can imagine the problems that might go into such a controller. One problem I already pointed out: what if you are playing from a confined space in which it is hard to make a range of motions with your arm? That's one key problem right there. Most of the time when I play console games, there are about eight people in the room: four guys smooshed together on a futon playing the game, along with four observers waiting their turn to play. We barely have space to use a normal controller effective; how are we to mimic throwing a football, or shooting a blaster rifle, or swinging a lightsaber?

Secondly, this controller doesn't map well to all games. What about a boxing game--am I really expected to stand in my living room and throw imaginary punches? How will that even work? How will I simultaneously duck and weave with my boxer, while trying to use the controller to throw a punch? And why do I even want to stand in my living room and box with thin air? And what about Mario? Is using a controller that I have to wave around that more effective than using a control stick to maneuver Mario? I'd say no, not really.

Only 16 people? We had 20-30 when we played Goldeneye

I know there are some games you probably can't play all games with the controller (unless developers get creative and surprise us), and I have acknowledged this in previous posts. This is where the controller shell comes in handy. If you're absolutely against using the new controller, you can use the traditional shell. There is no game that this controller can't handle.

As for the boxing, I've heard many people say that they'd be excited for another Punchout! game, maybe using two controllers as boxing gloves.

I like realism in games, but not necessarily with the gameplay itself. Sure, even a fantasy world like Zelda is a lot better if the bad guys obey laws of physics, and objects function in a way I expect; but I don't care if I'm not actually swinging a sword, or shooting a bow and arrow, or throwing deku seeds. That aspect of gameplay is not important to me, primarily because I play games to relax--meaning that I'd rather curl up on my futon and run my player around with a control stick, rather than stand and wave a piece of plastic around in the air.

I guess we're different. I view games as a way to do things you couldn't do at that exact moment in a way that is fun and exciting. The more I feel that I'm in the game, the more authentic the experience is.

Furthermore, it's hard to say how well this controller will work. Sure, it works well in demos, but demos are designed to make products look good. How precise will it be?

It's good enough for the developers to actually make games around the controller.

As I've noted, the reason I--and a lot of gamers I know--don't like this new controller is for the simple reason that there's nothing wrong with a "normal" controller. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The old controllers weren't broken, but Nintendo fixed it with the D-Pad. The D-Pad wasn't broken, but Nintendo fixed it with the analog stick.

You never know that you're missing out until you actually experience what you're missing out on in the first place. When broadband first came to our area, I thought that we'd never need to upgrade, but now that I have it, I'll never go back to 56k.

I've lived with VHS and thought it was good enough, then when I saw DVD for the first time, I all of a sudden realized how poor VHS was.

Don't fear change.

[*mipadi*]

Don't fear change.

This is part of my problem with this "discussion"--no matter what reasons I give, my argument keeps getting reduced to "I fear change." That's not at all what my argument is about, and it would be nice if people would actually listen to what I said. The people who like the controller seem only to be saying, "It's going to be really cool," (there's not much more to say, since none have tried it yet), but at least I don't reduce their arguments by saying they are fanboys who are just gobbling up anything their favorite company releases. I know some have a better argument than that, so I've actually responded to what they wrote. I'd appreciate if it people didn't put words in my mouth, either.

[vash1530]

^i have to say that i totally isagree with ur opinion on the controller but ur right in this case. sorry about accusing you of being scared of change but that's what i thought ur comments where implying. in anycase im actually not a nintendo fanboy(i was a sega fanboy before the dreamcast's prematture death)so im glad ur argument didn't succumb to that.

[ThunderEvermore]

This is part of my problem with this "discussion"--no matter what reasons I give, my argument keeps getting reduced to "I fear change." That's not at all what my argument is about, and it would be nice if people would actually listen to what I said. The people who like the controller seem only to be saying, "It's going to be really cool," (there's not much more to say, since none have tried it yet), but at least I don't reduce their arguments by saying they are fanboys who are just gobbling up anything their favorite company releases. I know some have a better argument than that, so I've actually responded to what they wrote. I'd appreciate if it people didn't put words in my mouth, either.

Id appretiate if you listened to me.

At all.

The other guy weaved stories of the controller being uncomfortable, of his arm getting tired, and that it would bring hellfire and brimstone down on Nintendo.

Thusly, his "opinion" was shut down.

No one even said anything to you about it. You just came in here talking about how people were hipocrites when they didnt say anything to you.

[AngryBaby]

im gone for a few seconds and already you think i got "shutdown" you obviously werent listening to him, he said hypocrits because you guys were saying how we cant judge it until it comes out, yet you guys can say how fun it will be. thats what he meant by the hypocracy.

now i actually found out today that one of my friends got the oppurtunity to play an import of the rev. with the controller. but ill get to his review in a second.

kryo you talk up nintendo now like it was the top system last generation. sure, back in the day nintendo was the man. but it really had no competition. now that it has two competitors, they have beaten nintendo in sales, scores, reviews, and fans. and its not like i dont like nintendo, im just being real. now nintendos is being deemed as "more of a childrens title" which may or may not be true, but still is being said. and you probably know this.

The point is not to take over, its not to put Sony and M$ out of business. The point of the thing is to change the way people think about gaming, to create a more intuitive and immersive gaming experience, and to allow not only the supposed hardcore gamers to play, but casual and nongamers as well.

sorry, wrong, nintendo's not that out of touch with the real world. this is a business strategy, a clever but incredibly risky one. because with the attitude that you listed, nintendo would go out of business. nintendo didnt have the best year for the gamecube, and people speculated and made rumors that nintendo will be gone like Sega ( for example the thread about apple buying nintendo). do you honestly think nintendo doesnt care about this? thats why they need something different, something that sets them apart that may still give them a fighting chance, which is this controller. because really, without this controller(incredibly flawed or not) what really makes nintendo interesting now? because we have two top systems having everyones attention that everyone is talking about and is excentric about. while nintendo, having less than sadisfactory years with the Cube and being deemed as kiddie, no one is even paying much attention to it, especially to consider buying it over a PS3 or 360. except its fewer percentage of loyal fans. and i say fewer because if it was a high percentage, gamecube would still be at the top. this is a average and sensible thing to do. but nintendo decides to mess with the controller. not a little bit like in the past where people went "oooh cool" but made it so that it changes everything where your casual gamer will go "what the hell" which may not be the best thing to do (which i think is an incredibly stupid move on their part) nintendo made a remote to bring something less intimidating, more familiar to the "casual gamer" but, how "casual" do they think they are? after about 10 years i think people got used to controllers by now. now i asked the kind of people that nintendo is trying to pull into gaming what they think of this controller, after telling them everything that it cand do, the "kind of people" were...my parents. my dad said, "eh, not something i wanna play with," he saw a picture of it also."that...looks more awkward than fun, i dont know what nintendo is doing now-a-days" my dad is in the retail industry he's district manager of Best Buy to be exact. so he knows alot about the sales comparisons on the cube, and when he tells parents what system to get for a young child guess what he points them to. and when someone of a mature nature comes in and wants advice on what they should get guess what he points them too.
my mom: "its a remote" i had to explain to her again what it does " sounds like too much for me" i told my uncle (who is young) he just laughed and said "thats stupid nintendo used to be good but now they should just stop" and you know these people wont look into this any further. these people arent "fanboys" either they dont care about "loyalty" (neither do i). and when i talked to peole at my school about this it was even worse of a response. they would say "thats so gay"
in laughter, even people that owned a cube would say " i dont like this idea much"
or " what? we have to reform so nintendo can TRY to pull in a broader audience?"
and then theres the general responses "you'll look like a crazy person" and then they mock how the controller would be used in laughter,(and this was people who saw the video). and these are seniors and juniors in high school. i got not one person that thought this would be awsome. i even got to the point where i tried to use points i didnt even agree with to try to persuade people, just for the sake of experimentation. and they said "like, every game will be like timecrisis" or "thats like a fucken arcade" so thats a little insight for when you guys say
"most people love it" here look at this for example

Controller Debate



Some people love it, some people hate it.

Original Opinion Piece

Cyndy Threadgill writes:

When the gaming world got wind of Nintendo’s next-gen system, the Nintendo Revolution, everyone wondered how the big N was going to compete with the Xbox 360 and the PS3. The E3 unveiling of the little black box served to amaze and confuse gamers around the world. Then they come out with pictures of this…thing. Some weird as heck, ungodly looking controller thing that looks all too much like a remote control.



Now I am always open to new and innovative gaming ideas, but come on! What in the world were they thinking? Who needs another remote? I have a hard enough time keeping up with the ones I already have. The last thing I need to do is lose the remote controller or whatever you want to call it, to my console and then have it end up as nothing more than a sleek looking piece of modern art.



But while I’m complaining, let’s take a look at the overall design of this monstrosity, just to make sure that we’re all on the same page. I want fan boys to pay close attention because I am not biased. I own nearly every home console system ever created. Anyone and I do mean ANYONE should be able to see the flagrant flaws in this design.



First off, it’s a remote. Plain and simple. Wireless…good. Remote…bad. I can already see myself losing the thing and all the bright colors and flashing lights in the world aren’t going to help me with that. I sure hope the Nintendo Revolution has a built in page button so I can find my lost remote control. Next, who in their right mind puts the power button next to the directional pad? Pick it up wrong after a snack break or thumb slips off the D-pad and someone is going to be literally crying because they hadn’t saved in three hours. I hope it’s not very sensitive or requires a fingernail to push it all the way down.



An optional analog stick. Hmm. Does no one see how awkward this would be? Look at that short cord. Now just imagine playing a game that requires you to rotate the analog stick like the numerous Mario Party games. Hold your hand up, put your thumb out and try that in midair. Granted that’s not every game, but just think about quick movements. Sure you could just set it down on your lap but you’ll be pulling that annoying remote all over the place while you’re doing it.



I don’t have a problem with this being just a glorified remote. I have a problem with it being poorly designed. The button layout is horrific. You aren’t going to be playing any serious fighting game or much of anything complex with this set up. I can’t even imagine playing anything in the Soul Calibur or Resident Evil series on it.

It’s essentially got four unfathomably awkward placed control buttons (not including start, home and select), a ridiculous “optional” analog stick and it’s a REMOTE! Nintendo needs to go back to the drawing board and come up with a real controller that gamers can actually use intuitively for something other than simplistic games. The NES days are long gone. Gamers don’t mind a bit of complexity in control but they do mind outright…I don’t even think there’s even a term for what this thing is. It seems just that bad to me.

Agree or disagree with this opinion piece? Share your thoughts in this thread!

and thats not all, just type in "rev. controller sucks" or something on google.

now, heres what my friend that actually got to play an imported rev. with the controller had to say.

him(russel): the thing isnt all that great, i dont like it at all, nintendo better do something quickabout having regular controllers.

me: seriously? what was wrong with it?

him(russel): well first off, you know the tracer? its like, a bit too accurate yaknow?, when you're "moving" and you do the slightest wrong thing with your wrist the character will do it, which made me pissed because if my wrist went down a bit and there goes your guy.

but like, you can turn it off and on with the remote.

me: i know, that is pretty convient

Him(russel): no, not so much, because its like, RIGHT next to the D-pad. i swear i turned the game off like 8 times because my thumb accidently hit the off button. and it gets you so pissed because you get far, and then you'd push the off button accidently, and your screwed.

me:wow hahahaha damn anything else?

him(russel): oh! and the b and a button were so far down from from everthing else. i had to throw the controller up and down in my palms to try to get to it. and when i threw the controller up in my palms, thats when you can easily accidently press the off button.

me: what did you play?

him(russel): um, first i played a baseball game, like that advertisement, you do swing after the ball. you do it while pressing B.

me: did you like it?

him(russel): it wasnt... fun, its just like the batting cages at gameworks. baseball games on the old systems were better.

me: and what else did you get to play? did they have any third person games?

him(russel): they had about 3 demonstrations on 1st person games and 1 on a 3rd person game.

me: ooh, and how was the 3rd person? how can you do stuff, like combos? you have to swing the remote right?

him(russel): well they have this extra analog thing thats like attached by cord

me: haha yeah i know all that

him(russel):oh, haha well they have the analog thing right, did i mention that thing is wierd? the cord is too short, but anyway yeah there is two buttons on the front of the analog thing and you gotta do combinations while swinging your sword. its just all......blah, too wierd.

me: jeez

him(russel): yeah, you know whats funny? through out me playing the whole time, i was wishing i had a regular controller haha. it just basically sucked. and the rev. didnt even have that great of graphics. haha just to throw that in. the games are too simplistic.

me: wow some of that stuff i didnt even think about, like the off button thing.

(then somebody over hears our convo)

new guy: hey are you guys talking about that revolution?

me: yeah he actually got to play it.

new guy: seriously? is that controller not the stupidest thing you've ever seen? hahahaha.

him(russel): yeah pretty much, i didnt it would actually be bad at first

and this is a kid that owned a gamecube as well, so you cant necessarily call him a fan boy.


you see, its not change im afraid of im just afraid of suck

[sadolakced acid]

it's just a controller guys.

(try to keep your arguments shorter. i don't want to read novels on this!)

[vash1530]

^yea wtf! i'm not gonna read all that!!!

[*mipadi*]

Id appretiate if you listened to me.

At all.

The other guy weaved stories of the controller being uncomfortable, of his arm getting tired, and that it would bring hellfire and brimstone down on Nintendo.

Thusly, his "opinion" was shut down.

No one even said anything to you about it. You just came in here talking about how people were hipocrites when they didnt say anything to you.

His opinion was shot down? If a guy says a controller is uncomfortable to use, that might make no sense, but it's hard to refute it if you haven't used the controller either. Thus, such an argument is hypocritical. In this specific case, both arguments make no sense.

[*kryogenix*]

im gone for a few seconds and already you think i got "shutdown" you obviously werent listening to him, he said hypocrits because you guys were saying how we cant judge it until it comes out, yet you guys can say how fun it will be. thats what he meant by the hypocracy.

So many of your points have been shut down already...

now i actually found out today that one of my friends got the oppurtunity to play an import of the rev. with the controller. but ill get to his review in a second.

BS. The "Broadway" processor was only completed a little while ago. The alpha kits (read: Not the revolution, just hardware to simulate the revolution in order to develop software) were just shipped to developers very recently.

One of a few possibilities here:

1) Your friend is a higher up in Nintendo or a software developer, and he *might* have just broken an NDA, and now is subject to lawsuit by Nintendo.
2) Your friend is a liar.
3) You are a liar.

kryo you talk up nintendo now like it was the top system last generation. sure, back in the day nintendo was the man. but it really had no competition. now that it has two competitors, they have beaten nintendo in sales, scores, reviews, and fans. and its not like i dont like nintendo, im just being real. now nintendos is being deemed as "more of a childrens title" which may or may not be true, but still is being said. and you probably know this.

I talk up Nintendo because I hear so much crap about them, like the "kiddie" image you mention. I'll remind you that I skipped this console generation entirely, because I didn't want to have to drop hundreds of dollars on something I wouldn't have so much fun on. I'm definitely buying an Xbox once the price drops below $100, maybe a PS2 if I don't end up getting a PS3. If all things hold true for the Revolution ($200 or below launch, hit titles at launch, virtual console and awesome controller are the selling points I am most interested in), I'm buying it.

sorry, wrong, nintendo's not that out of touch with the real world. this is a business strategy, a clever but incredibly risky one. because with the attitude that you listed, nintendo would go out of business. nintendo didnt have the best year for the gamecube, and people speculated and made rumors that nintendo will be gone like Sega ( for example the thread about apple buying nintendo).

Contrary to your belief, Nintendo isn't doing as poorly as you think. It's number one in profits, and if I recall correctly, number two in worldwide sales. And if you count handheld sales, it's a solid number one in total hardware sales.

and thats not all, just type in "rev. controller sucks" or something on google.

Yeah, type in the world is flat and you'll get people saying it is, doesn't everyone believes it. Try revolution controller opinions, and you'll get a view more representative of what people think online.

now,  heres what my friend that actually got to play an imported rev. with the controller had to say.

Again, someone is probably lying here.

[AngryBaby]

i cant tell if you even read all what i had to say^

if you guys "shut me down", you'd have me on your side, all you did was help convince yourselves, you didnt convince me of anything, therefore you didnt shutdown shit.

His opinion was shot down? If a guy says a controller is uncomfortable to use, that might make no sense, but it's hard to refute it if you haven't used the controller either. Thus, such an argument is hypocritical. In this specific case, both arguments make no sense.

of course i agree with you, though i didnt say it is uncomfortable, i basically just said it looks. and i gave reasons why i thought that, over and over. and its not like what i had to say was unfathable, i simply looked over the remote, and pointed out flaws i saw that would make sense. i didnt just look at it and say "its a damn remote" like most people will do. so at least respect that.

becaus its morning and i dont feel like typing much and im about to head out and see narnia. i going to paste an opinion that basically matches what my general thoughts are of the controller, keep in mind this wont go into detail of the flaws that it has. this is just a general thought.

Over the last several years Nintendo has worked hard to become next to nothing compared to their once former glory. They’ve been pretty successful so far since the once mainstream name brand that anyone knew and loved has been demoted to a game company that makes games for 12-year-olds and rabid fanboys (many of them 12). The most ridiculous thing the big N has done lately is to focus gamers away from their upcoming next generation system specs like those silly companies Microsoft and Sony by making the gaming public pontificate on the most important thing of all: What’s their next controller going to look like?

The controller was rumored to be godlike and perhaps give you orgasms. N-fans with way too much time on their hands spent the last several months trying to reproduce what they think the thing might look like via Photoshop. Message boards were crowded with hot debate over the controller. Forget about what kind of games might be available, will the controller have a gyroscope? Will it be virtual reality? Or would it bake cookies for the homeless? It got so inane that an episode of G4 TV spent at least twenty minutes talking about the damn thing. They took calls and even had a guest discussing what it might actually do. If you’re wondering, the most obvious question wasn’t asked, “Why does anyone care?”

It really speaks about the company when the biggest thing they have coming down the pipe is a new Zelda game, downloads of 20-year-old games that you can get for free off the internet, and some mysterious mana-powered controller. While X-Box 360 is nearly here and Playstation 3 details are coming out, Nintendo creates speculation about something nearly inconsequential. Just a couple of weeks ago the mystic, world shattering controller was unveiled and it’s…. drum roll…. a f**king remote control. Granted, I’m doing a lot of judging without ever having played with the thing, but come on already. It’s a remote control with a D-Pad. Oh I forgot, if you wave it around, it affects movement on screen. This is exactly the kind of thing that would seem awesome if I was six. Need I remind anyone of gaming gimmicks like like that stupid Nintendo Robot, U-force, or Power Glove? I’m twenty-six now so the prospect of waving a controller around has lost a lot of its appeal. Oh yeah, to play shooting games that require more controls there’s a special plug in unit that makes it look like a tampon for robots.


An early prototype controller had a rear entry port so Nintendo could screw you directly.

In the article on 1Up.com Nintendo is quoted as saying that they want a controller than no one will be intimidated with, one that even your mom can use. You know what? My mother doesn’t play video games, and I’m willing that most mothers don’t give two craps about what a controller looks like. Nintendo said they are not in competition with Microsoft and Sony. I guess they weren’t kidding since they’re after that valuable untapped mom market. If your mom does play video games though, I’d hope she’s bright enough to use a normal controller and not be scared of the thing. I can see an overly frantic mother seeing an Xbox controller for the first time, “Lordy no! My child ain't touching that tool of the devil!”

It's no surprise that the Nintendo fan base is turning out in mass support for it. In their comments at 1Up they say things like, “After being not so sure about the DS, seeing this convinces me that Nintendo is serious about reinventing gaming.” Yes, it’s certainly a revolution to use a one handed controller, if we forget that one handed controllers have been made by third parties in the past. They just turned the whole industry on its ear with this one! How about this comment: “I can't believe it. But it seems like Nintendo has done it again. I can't wait to play a virtual boxing game, or swing a lightsaber!!” Oh boy, and maybe I can buy one of those games I see wasting away at Wal-Mart where the controller looks like a baseball bat or golf club and you can swing it at the screen. I can say things like, “I’m swinging my force powered remote! Look at me, I’m a Jackass!” Personally, I can’t wait for the new wave of Hentai/Dating Sims. Just think about it; the thing is a one-handed motion sensitive controller. Hot ass.

At least Nintendo has done something good for me. It’s narrowed down the hard choice of what new gaming system to get between Sony and Microsoft.

[sadolakced acid]

nintendo= wants to change the way you play games.

microsoft= wants to make your games more realisitic.

sony= wants you to buy a blu-ray player.


of these three goals, i think nintendo's is the best, don't you?

[AngryBaby]

sometimes the feeling i get from nintendo is that im an experiment.

one fault that nintendo has is that they experiment a little too much, which means somethig may be good, or something may be okay, or something may be bad.

for example, DS and PSP, (i own both).

DS sure, its more innovative with the touch screen and mic and all, but does that mean i have more fun with it than my psp? no, not necessarily. to me a touch screen doesnt beat an overall game. nintendo is too focused on HOW you play the game, than the game itself. because i have more fun with the initial games on the psp, like metal gear ac!d and tony hawks american wasteland or need for speed underground rivals. and even when the games come out for both handhelds, i still have more fun with it on the psp. the touch screen can only do so much for me. i always feel like its not necessarily needed. when it comes down to it, i think nintendo forgets that the games are supposed to create the fun, not a controller or a touch screen. because what matters, is what the game it plays is like. i fear that the controller will make games too simplistic and arcade like.

[pandamonium]

its funny how i made a topic JUST on the nintendo revolution's controller and it got closed and here is the same exact thing and there is 4 pages on it. thats so screwed up.

well. thats great.

but i think nintendo puts you in the game more. gets you to interact with the game more than other games. thats why is so fun to play nintendo games. thats why everybody will be curious to try out this revolutionary controller.

[*kryogenix*]

i cant tell if you even read all what i had to say^

if you guys "shut me down", you'd have me on your side, all you did was help convince yourselves, you didnt convince me of anything, therefore you didnt shutdown shit.
of course i agree with you, though i didnt say it is uncomfortable, i basically just said it looks. and i gave reasons why i thought that, over and over. and its not like what i had to say was unfathable, i simply looked over the remote, and pointed out flaws i saw that would make sense. i didnt just look at it and say "its a  damn remote" like most people will do. so at least respect that.

Would you like me to point out the comparisons you made that were proven invalid?

Now for the opinion bit:

Over the last several years Nintendo has worked hard to become next to nothing compared to their once former glory. They’ve been pretty successful so far since the once mainstream name brand that anyone knew and loved has been demoted to a game company that makes games for 12-year-olds and rabid fanboys (many of them 12). The most ridiculous thing the big N has done lately is to focus gamers away from their upcoming next generation system specs like those silly companies Microsoft and Sony by making the gaming public pontificate on the most important thing of all: What’s their next controller going to look like?

This is laughable. Look at Nintendo profits compared to SCEI and Microsoft Games, and you'll see Nintendo knows what they're doing. The "Kiddie" image is a myth, which is used as an excuse by people not to buy Nintendo, because they're afraid their peers will laugh at them.

The controller was rumored to be godlike and perhaps give you orgasms. N-fans with way too much time on their hands spent the last several months trying to reproduce what they think the thing might look like via Photoshop. Message boards were crowded with hot debate over the controller. Forget about what kind of games might be available, will the controller have a gyroscope? Will it be virtual reality? Or would it bake cookies for the homeless? It got so inane that an episode of G4 TV spent at least twenty minutes talking about the damn thing. They took calls and even had a guest discussing what it might actually do. If you’re wondering, the most obvious question wasn’t asked, “Why does anyone care?”

Likewise, people made mockups of the PS3 and XBOX 360 as well. Everyone cared because Nintendo kept it a secret, knowing that in the past, they were copied when they released a new controller feature.

It really speaks about the company when the biggest thing they have coming down the pipe is a new Zelda game, downloads of 20-year-old games that you can get for free off the internet, and some mysterious mana-powered controller. While X-Box 360 is nearly here and Playstation 3 details are coming out, Nintendo creates speculation about something nearly inconsequential. Just a couple of weeks ago the mystic, world shattering controller was unveiled and it’s…. drum roll…. a f**king remote control. Granted, I’m doing a lot of judging without ever having played with the thing, but come on already. It’s a remote control with a D-Pad. Oh I forgot, if you wave it around, it affects movement on screen. This is exactly the kind of thing that would seem awesome if I was six. Need I remind anyone of gaming gimmicks like like that stupid Nintendo Robot, U-force, or Power Glove? I’m twenty-six now so the prospect of waving a controller around has lost a lot of its appeal. Oh yeah, to play shooting games that require more controls there’s a special plug in unit that makes it look like a tampon for robots.

Don't forget Mario 128 and Smash bros online. The Gamecube launch was weak because it lacked a solid Mario title. The only other Nintendo console that didnt' launch with Mario was, you guessed it, the Virtual Boy (Even that made a profit though, if I recall correctly).

Then the guy proceeds to compare the thing to ROB, UForce and PowerGlove. All bad comparisons. First of all, ROB was not a controller. It was a novelty toy, like voice activated PC cold cathodes. It wasn't meant to put you into the game. Second, as I mentioned earlier, Power Glove was made by Mattel. UForce was made by Broderbund (Funny enough, they're the makers of Prince of Persia). That's not to say it's entirely their fault, the idea was pretty good, but the technology just wasn't there.

In the article on 1Up.com Nintendo is quoted as saying that they want a controller than no one will be intimidated with, one that even your mom can use. You know what? My mother doesn’t play video games, and I’m willing that most mothers don’t give two craps about what a controller looks like. Nintendo said they are not in competition with Microsoft and Sony. I guess they weren’t kidding since they’re after that valuable untapped mom market. If your mom does play video games though, I’d hope she’s bright enough to use a normal controller and not be scared of the thing. I can see an overly frantic mother seeing an Xbox controller for the first time, “Lordy no! My child ain't touching that tool of the devil!”

Again, he misses the point. Nintendo says that moms are thinking "oh, he's playing those videogames again, they're too complicated for me." With the Revolution controller, the scheme is a lot more intuitive, so it would be easier for a mom to pick it up and start waving it around to control movement.

Have you seen old Atari commercials? I remember seeing the Yar's Revenge commercial, where the mom says "let me try that!" and picks up the joystick. Back then controllers were very simple, Nintendo wants to make a controller that is the best of both worlds: simple enough for new users to learn but capable of doing more complex moves.

It's no surprise that the Nintendo fan base is turning out in mass support for it. In their comments at 1Up they say things like, “After being not so sure about the DS, seeing this convinces me that Nintendo is serious about reinventing gaming.” Yes, it’s certainly a revolution to use a one handed controller, if we forget that one handed controllers have been made by third parties in the past. They just turned the whole industry on its ear with this one! How about this comment: “I can't believe it. But it seems like Nintendo has done it again. I can't wait to play a virtual boxing game, or swing a lightsaber!!” Oh boy, and maybe I can buy one of those games I see wasting away at Wal-Mart where the controller looks like a baseball bat or golf club and you can swing it at the screen. I can say things like, “I’m swinging my force powered remote! Look at me, I’m a Jackass!” Personally, I can’t wait for the new wave of Hentai/Dating Sims. Just think about it; the thing is a one-handed motion sensitive controller. Hot ass.

Nintendo has been reinventing gaming over and over again.

1) Post-videogame crash of 1983- What's a Nintendo Entertainment System? Isn't it one of those videogame things that suck? It'll never sell.
2) D-Pad- What's a D-Pad? It's just a crossed shaped thing, I think I'll stick with my joystick.
3) Analog thumbsticks- What's an analog thumbstick? It looks funny, D-Pads have worked all this time, no sense in changing them.
4) Force Feedback- What's this? I don't see the use of a shaking controller.
5) First Party Wireless controllers- Why do we need these? I'm sure no console will ever ship with these as standard?
6) Touchscreen- These are just gimmicks. They will never sell, and the PSP will dethrone Nintendo as king of handhelds.

I saw the controller first on 1up.com. Even though it is a multi platforum website, EVERYONE was talking about the controller. I dont' see how people don't get that this is a big deal.

Those cheap TV game golf baseball crap are wasting away for a reason. They suck, they're not meant to sell millions, they are just cheap toys that use cheap technology.

It sounds to me like this guy was ready to hate the Revolution controller, it's just that he didn't have anything to hate until it was launched.

Tell me how Narnia was when you get back.

[AngryBaby]

Tell me how Narnia was when you get back.

lol will do, im off. ill argue with you later ;D

[KrunkMuzik]

Uhm, plain stupid and ugly. I hate Nintendo. And i think it's not going to work out for them anymore. Sony and Microsoft just blew them away from their OWN skill.

[vash1530]

^thank you for that great contribution to this discussion

[ThunderEvermore]

His opinion was shot down? If a guy says a controller is uncomfortable to use, that might make no sense, but it's hard to refute it if you haven't used the controller either. Thus, such an argument is hypocritical. In this specific case, both arguments make no sense.

I said it had no merit.

i think this is a stupid idea

1. its going to be awkward and uncomfortablep

He did say it "IS" or it "IS GOING TO BE" uncomfortable.

Anyway... As for it being uncomfortable, for one, I highly doubt that considering Nintendo makes some of the most comfortable controllers out there. Secondly, youve never held it, for all you know it could be made partially out of some form of memory foam or gel that conforms to your hand so well that you cna hardly tell its there.

And I refuted it as such. Easy to see, and easy to read.

I wont go on and just reiterate everything Kryo said, I just wanted to make that point.

[*mipadi*]

Tell me, have you personally used the controller? If no, then it's not possible to make an effective statement about its comfort for awkwardness in either direction. Anything would just be speculation--which is fine, but if you speculate about something such as comfort, don't say that others can't spectulate, too.

[ThunderEvermore]

Tell me, have you personally used the controller? If no, then it's not possibly to make a statement about its comfort for awkwardness in either direction.

Youre not even reading, at all. Seriously, take a look at the words.

I said one thing about the confort in either direction, and that was that I doubted itd be uncomfortable, because Nintendo makes very comfortable controllers. but that was not the main aspect of the argument. The whole thing was about how he cant say anytyhing because hes never touched it.

I NEVER said that the controller was comfortable.

He said it wasnt.

Revised edition

Tell me, have you personally used the controller? If no, then it's not possible to make an effective statement about its comfort for awkwardness in either direction. Anything would just be speculation--which is fine, but if you speculate about something such as comfort, don't say that others can't spectulate, too.

He didnt speculate, he prophesized, he stated supposed fact. He made a statement, not an opinion.

[*mipadi*]

He didnt speculate, he prophesized, he stated supposed fact. He made a statement, not an opinion.

Negative. Clearly it's his opinion, as he not has not used it himself yet. Just because it is not phrased as "I think that..." does not mean it is a fact, not an opinion.

A lesson about expressing opinions: it is much better to express them solidly ("The controller is uncomfortable") rather than weakly ("I think that the controller is uncomfortable"). In a discussion such as this, it is clear that, unless shown to be a fact ("I have used the Revolution controller, and it is uncomfortable"), the statement is speculation and an opinion based on speculation. Furthermore, since comfort is subjective, any statement regarding comfort is an opinion.

[sadolakced acid]

he did assert it as fact and offered the testimonail of his "friend who got to use it"

[ThunderEvermore]

Negative. Clearly it's his opinion, as he not has not used it himself yet. Just because it is not phrased as "I think that..." does not mean it is a fact, not an opinion.

A lesson about expressing opinions: it is much better to express them solidly ("The controller is uncomfortable") rather than weakly ("I think that the controller is uncomfortable"). In a discussion such as this, it is clear that, unless shown to be a fact ("I have used the Revolution controller, and it is uncomfortable"), the statement is speculation and an opinion based on speculation. Furthermore, since comfort is subjective, any statement regarding comfort is an opinion.

Opinions, Lesson 2. You have to be using a topic in which it is clear that an opinion can be formed.

For example, I cant form opinion on the expression, 2+2. "2+2 is 78"

I can however form an opinion on how cake tastes. "Cake tastes great"

You can make an opinion on whether or not the controller is comfortable, but distinguising whether or not what youre stating is to be interpreted as such or as a fact is a bit blurry.

When he says "The controller is going to be uncomfortable" it is confused as fact because there is no tone nor word in which we can believe this is opinion. Its my "opinion" he stated this as fact.

Especially considering, as a previous poster pointed, he made claim that his friend actually held the controller.

Dont try and make me look dumb, Im not. When someone says "I never said this" and they did, I point it out, whether or not its supposed to be interpreted one way or another is irrelevant, especially considering he conveyed it in a particular way.

[*mipadi*]

I'm not really sure what you're getting at with your examples. "2+2=4" is a fact; thus, "2+2=78" is factually incorrect. There is no "opinion" on the matter.

There should be no confusion as to whether a statement such as "The Revolution's controller is uncomfortable" is fact or opinion, because comfort is a subjective state; therefore, it is never a fact. Even if someone phrases their statement as "The Revolution's controller is uncomfortable", it does not make it a fact--it should still be analyzed as an opinion. One cannot refute an opinion. One can question an opinion ("Why do you think the Revolution's controller is uncomfortable?"), or show errors in reaching an opinion ("You should not say the Revolution's controller is uncomfortable, since you have not used it yet, and at any rate, it looks ergonomic to me"), or question the credibility of a source ("I don't believe your friend used the controller"), but one cannot make a statement such as "Your opinion is wrong"--especially in a discussion in which all statements are speculative in nature.

My problem with the arguments in this thread is that many seem to be disregarding the opinions of others, and writing them off as invalid, which comes off as quite insulting. For example, a typical "discussion" might go like this:

"I think the Ninteno Revolution's controller is really cool, and will be a lot of fun to use."
"I don't. It will be uncomfortable and hard to use."
"Well, you haven't used it yet."

The argument makes no sense: neither person has yet used the controller; both are use their imagination to form an opinion. Yet, one basically says that the other's use of imagination is invalid, which makes no sense.

My point is that a more mannered discussion might go like this:

"I think the Ninteno Revolution's controller is really cool, and will be a lot of fun to use."
"I don't. It will be uncomfortable and hard to use."
"Why do you say that? It looks very ergonomical to me."
"I think it will be hard to use two pieces at once, and a quick test with my remote control shows that your wrist could cramp up pretty easily."
"The developers will probably make sure the controller setup is natural and easy to use. Besides, the design might change by the time the Revolution is released."

See? Both are recognizing that the other's use of imagination is valid; they are merely questioning each others ideas, not the use of the tools of imagination bestowed upon them.

[EddieV]

^ You give me a headache, not because I disagree with you, I don't know, it's confusing....

[AngryBaby]

Youre not even reading, at all. Seriously, take a look at the words.

I said one thing about the confort in either direction, and that was that I doubted itd be uncomfortable, because Nintendo makes very comfortable controllers. but that was not the main aspect of the argument. The whole thing was about how he cant say anytyhing because hes never touched it.

I NEVER said that the controller was comfortable.

He said it wasnt.

Revised edition

He didnt speculate, he prophesized, he stated supposed fact. He made a statement, not an opinion.

dude thats one opinion i made, if i didnt word it the best way, sorrrry. i thought you would realize that it was an opinion. you disregarded about every argument i made and made it seem like thats the only one i did make...

Opinions, Lesson 2. You have to be using a topic in which it is clear that an opinion can be formed.

For example, I cant form opinion on the expression, 2+2. "2+2 is 78"
I can however form an opinion on how cake tastes. "Cake tastes great"

what the hell is that supposed to mean?

[ThunderEvermore]

There should be no confusion as to whether a statement such as "The Revolution's controller is uncomfortable" is fact or opinion, because comfort is a subjective state; therefore, it is never a fact. Even if someone phrases their statement as "The Revolution's controller is uncomfortable", it does not make it a fact--it should still be analyzed as an opinion.

No, it can be interpreted as an objective fact. Its gonna be a fact that its uncomfortable in his hand, while it may be comfortable in another's. And you can't make this statement without that knowledge, in which he doesnt have.

One cannot refute an opinion. One can question an opinion ("Why do you think the Revolution's controller is uncomfortable?"), or show errors in reaching an opinion ("You should not say the Revolution's controller is uncomfortable, since you have not used it yet, and at any rate, it looks ergonomic to me"), or question the credibility of a source ("I don't believe your friend used the controller"), but one cannot make a statement such as "Your opinion is wrong"--especially in a discussion in which all statements are speculative in nature.

I didnt say he was wrong, I said I doubted it, and also pointed out that he shouldnt say it considering its not in consumer hands yet. AAAAAND I pointed out "Flaws in his opinion" as he gave reasons to why he felt itd be uncomfortable.

Find me one place where ANYONE here said he was wrong.

Anyone?

My problem with the arguments in this thread is that many seem to be disregarding the opinions of others, and writing them off as invalid, which comes off as quite insulting. For example, a typical "discussion" might go like this:

"I think the Ninteno Revolution's controller is really cool, and will be a lot of fun to use."
"I don't. It will be uncomfortable and hard to use."
"Well, you haven't used it yet."

The argument makes no sense: neither person has yet used the controller; both are use their imagination to form an opinion. Yet, one basically says that the other's use of imagination is invalid, which makes no sense.

My point is that "It will be uncomfortable and hard to use" is an unnacceptable expression of a so called opinion. You cant expect us to say "I think" all the time and you not to. "I think the controller will be uncomfortable" is fine.

At any rate the conversation still progresses despite the use of the statement "Youve never used it" popping up over and over. Youre the only one really hung up on it, and youve drawn in a few followers.

My point is that a more mannered discussion might go like this:

"I think the Ninteno Revolution's controller is really cool, and will be a lot of fun to use."
"I don't. It will be uncomfortable and hard to use."
"Why do you say that? It looks very ergonomical to me."
"I think it will be hard to use two pieces at once, and a quick test with my remote control shows that your wrist could cramp up pretty easily."
"The developers will probably make sure the controller setup is natural and easy to use. Besides, the design might change by the time the Revolution is released."

See? Both are recognizing that the other's use of imagination is valid; they are merely questioning each others ideas, not the use of the tools of imagination bestowed upon them.

And this is how it DID go

I think the controller is an amazing and innovative addition to the gaming world.

i think this is a stupid idea

1. its going to be awkward and uncomfortable

I highly doubt that considering Nintendo makes some of the most comfortable controllers out there. Secondly, youve never held it, for all you know it could be made partially out of some form of memory foam or gel that conforms to your hand so well that you cna hardly tell its there.

when i talk about your hand being tired i mean hand and wrist fatigue. extend your arm with the remote in your hand towards the TV for a few hours and see how you'll feel.

I dont see how thats different than holding a controller towards the TV/Console. You CAN rest it on your leg, lap, arm of the chair, etc when youre not directly using it to slash and shoot.

And so it goes on.

No insult tossing.

No disregarding.

Infact, everything was ok until you started throwing around the word hypocrite.

The bottom line is that when you state something that can be, and is being interpreted as a fact, especially when backed up by supposed first/second hand knowledge, you cant really speak because ITS NOT OUT YET.

[jEllyBeaNs]

ooo wow who in the heCk would actually use a freaKin "remote" to play a video game? come on now, that would be soo awkward trying to use one hand to, let alone ONE thumb to control wut u are doing. that would be soo difficult....for myself atleast. but my opinion is that it is just plain ugly, and just "STUPID"! its like a "handicap" controller or somethin.

why would you want to move yourself and the "remote" to the right or left just to make your player go that direction. thats just plain stupid. isn't that why some games made controller guns and steering wheels and what not. sometimes when i play House of the dead or a shooting game with a gun, its sometimes not so acurrate on shooting the target, soo think about how hard it would be to control a lil ugly a** remote, move your whole body, and use just only one thumb to controll wuts going on. i just dont understand why anyone would make this, and why anyone would actually like playing with it.