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

[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.