I love the Revolution Controller. It's so bad.Well, if we want to say who did it first, from my memory the power glove was the first to detect position in 3-space plus rotation.
-Rob
I love the Revolution Controller. It's so bad.Well, if we want to say who did it first, from my memory the power glove was the first to detect position in 3-space plus rotation.
-Rob
The moral is, don't **** with Uncle Tim when he's been drinking!
Sooo tempted to use that as my sig.Originally Posted by rbudrick
The Power Glove was made by Mattel, not Nintendo. Nintendo isn't "stealing" the technology from themselves. Mattel designed it and released it.
Yeesh.
Dan Loosen
http://www.goatstore.com/ - http://www.midwestgamingclassic.com/
** Trying to finish up an overly complete Dreamcast collection... want to help? (Updated 5/3/10!) http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=61333
y'know, if you replace wand with wang, it sounds funny:
The gaming wang interacts with a web cam, which feeds into the console and is designed to read only certain light effects (given off by the wang) and will ignore ordinary room lights. The web cam will then map the movements of the light (i.e. the wang) and incorporate them into the application that is running on the console. Looks like both Sony and Microsoft have been toying with their own magic wangs for a while now, but unlike Nintendo, neither has been bold enough to whip it out.
Yeah! What he said. And you should, like, have to actually have to thrust the controller through your unsuspecting friend's skull to slay a monster in teh Zelda!!!Originally Posted by InsaneDavid
And then you could throw it across the room and yell "GRENADE!" and dive behind the couch while the Rev. controller fragments, taking out the living room wall.
Now THAT'S a Revolution in gaming!
It doesn't get any more serious than a Rhinocerus about to charge your ass.
YES. Oh how I wish Gunpei was still alive. :( Then again, if he was, he'd just be making the WonderHeron or something. :POriginally Posted by InsaneDavid
Personally, while the Revolution controller is innovative for the video game industry (which isn't saying much considering this industry survives off of rehashing ideas), it isn't exactly... ahem, "revolutionary". It's a no-brainer, if you ask me, so I'm not surprised if other companies have been toying around with similar ideas.
I don't know what you're "pushing upstairs", but lets hope next time its some common sense.Originally Posted by Push Upstairs
Whats next? People complaining they don't actually die in real life when they lose in a game? Pleaaase... I know its disappointing that the Revolution isn't defying any universal physics rules as we all expected, but when we eventually acheive virtual reality-like interactivity in video games, we'll all have Nintendo to thank for making the first bold steps in that direction.
[Damn, this sounded negative when I read it back.]
Anyway, wait until you've played a game to judge. Right?
Originally Posted by davepesc
That's because it's all right there in your hand, you are minipulating balance related objects 1 to 1 right there. Your motions carry weight because all they simulate is the effort of balancing, tweaking movement, etc. Now imagine swinging a controller to simulate say, a baseball bat (I'll lay off the sword example), wouldn't you rather feel a hard, crisp, clean reverberation when you make contact with the ball? A little vibration in response instead would pull you out of the experence, so hits would feel the same as missing the ball completely.Originally Posted by NE146
I mean, that Xavix game "system" was somewhat similar for sports games anyway, and that felt pretty hokey because there was no realistic resistance - because at this time such cannot be accomplished. That is unless Nintendo is going to package a 'little person' with each Revolution to grab the controller when you make contact with something. A boxing game where you "feel" your fists come into contact with your opponent and feel them hit your hands when you're blocking is the type of sensory feedback I'm talking about that will complete the link. Understand now?
The controller is interesting yes, and undoubtedly there will be some very unique and entertaining gameplay experences. However this "controller is going to CHANGE the industry forever" stuff is BS. It is nice to see Nintendo trying something new though instead of saying they're doing something new when it's just a redesign. (GameCube controller for instance - come on, stupid Z button in an awkward place, same thin cord that doesn't coil properly - should have just called it the N64 controller Mk.II)
It's time for a Kid Icarus FPS.
Thanks for seeing my point.Originally Posted by Push Upstairs
Actually the more I think about it the PS3 controller looks like a direct rework of InterAct's PS1 Barracuda...Originally Posted by Jumpman Jr.
http://store.videogamecentral.com/ps1inbaco.html
(Best picture I could find) Also at TGS it seemed Sony backpeddled and said the E3 controller mockup was just that, a progressing design. We shall see Xur, we shall see!
Thank Nintendo for giving everyone the modern day equivilant of the "Power Glove"? Please. x_xOriginally Posted by Lord_Magus
You want me to be wowed by a controller that can make motions but provides no sensation in return. Forgive me if i wanted something a bit above the standard "rumble" function that the past couple generations have offered.
The more i think about this controller the more it feels like another empty gimmick promise brought to you by Nintendo. Buy it for the promise of using it as a sword, keep it for all the plug in accessories you'll have to use with the controller.
Possibility is infinity! You must be satisfied!
You just can't handle my jawusumness responces. -The Sizz
Nintendo has every right to copy controllers, because Sony and Microsoft (amongst many others) have been copying off Nintendo. Who invented the control pad? Nintendo. Who was the first with a standard vibrating controller? Nintendo. Who was the first with a standard self-centering analong joystick in addition to a control pad? Nintendo. Who was the first to offer top "L" and "R" buttens? Nintendo. Shall I go on, or stop here?Originally Posted by Cmtz
Not Nintendo, Gunpei Yokoi did. Sorry, you know if Nintendo's management didn't have their head up it's ass (to this day) then Mr. Yokoi's dream R&D project, the Virtual Boy, would have had at the very least a FULL DEVELOPMENT CYCLE. And if it had a full dev cycle it would have had at least one or two hit games. And then he wouldn't have left Nintendo and died such a meaningless death.Originally Posted by White Knight
Eight months (what the VB got) is not a full dev cycle and will cause anything to fail. Hell, geez, remember how pisspoor the first NES games were? Oooohhh... Gyromite and Duck Hunt! Just imagine where the industry would be if we stopped after that. Hint: it wouldn't exist.
*rant over*
And who came along and fine tuned those developments into feasable standardized designs? Not Nintendo. And Nintendo did NOT have a "standard" vibrating controller, the Rumble Pak was an EXPANSION MODULE for the N64 controller. The Sony DualShock was the first "standard" vibrating controller when it became the norm packed with the PlayStation retail box. Once again, it also made the rumble feature into something that enhanced gameplay rather than made a controller feel like a vibrating pager (which the Dreamcast vibration unit did poorly as well).Originally Posted by White Knight
Not a Sony fanboy, just telling it as it is. And don't start with the Zapper, Ralph Baer was building light rifles far before anyone else. And guess who began installing lightgun shooting galleries in Japan in the 1970's... if you answered Gunpei Yokoi then you're correct!
That's meaningless. Nintendo was the first to use it with their Game Watch series, and the NES was the first system to use it. It has been copies countless times.Originally Posted by InsaneDavid
The N64 controller may not have been ready 2 rumble (haha, I made a funny) right out of the package, but it certain was rumble ready, and the N64 was the first system to offer that with an included controler (although you had to buy the rumble pak). Sony heavily copied it with the DualShock. Yes, it was superior, but since it came out a few years later, it had every right to be superior. And what about the analog joysticks that are now standard? Once again, Nintendo starts the revolution, while everyone copies.Originally Posted by InsaneDavid
I know that, I have a 70's pong system with a light gun. Nintendo can't win 'em all.Originally Posted by InsaneDavid
Exactly. Video games would be nowhere without NINTENDO.Originally Posted by InsaneDavid
Double Post Bandit Strikes Again!
This signature is dedicated to all those
cyberpunks who fight against injustice
and corruption every day of their lives
You know... when we were childeren we would gather up our toy guns and cap revolvers and disappear into the woods for an entire day yelling "bang" and falling over in feigned death. I can personally assure you that we were so enthralled with this activity due to the realistic recoil/kickback produced by th... wait a minute... no... we didn't! We could give a shit about realism... our little pretend world of murdering each other with toys far surpassed reality... why else would we brave the mosquitoes and poison oak to play hmmm? Duh, to play a GAME! Remind me never to play Risk at your house man... I mean damn...Originally Posted by InsaneDavid
This signature is dedicated to all those
cyberpunks who fight against injustice
and corruption every day of their lives
One thing I did notice that was funny was the gun aspect of the controller. IMO, that was kinda over the top. It reminded me of Super Scope 6 commercial with the kid dodging behind the couch. It looks cool, but in real life, you'd just be sitting there.
Oh, and about the sword aspect. It could work, let say your fighting and your swords clashed together. Now both of you are face to face so there needs to be some sort of push off. Now the player would have to tape a button to see who would win the position hold etc, etc.
I could so see people complaining about that. " Dude I so didn't even lose a arm last night in Metal Gear solid!"....Originally Posted by Lord_Magus
If you really believe that...Originally Posted by White Knight
If Nintendo didn't reignite the flame, someone else would've. They were just at the right place at the right time. But computer games had never died, and the Sega Master System came out at about the same time... If it wasn't Nintendo, it probably would've been Sega. And if not Sega, someone.
Yes, Nintendo did some amazing things. But saying that there would be no video games is like saying that movie sound would've never progressed beyond mono had Disney not made Fantasia the first surround sound movie. It would've happened anyway. Disney just happened to be there first.
Dan Loosen
http://www.goatstore.com/ - http://www.midwestgamingclassic.com/
** Trying to finish up an overly complete Dreamcast collection... want to help? (Updated 5/3/10!) http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?t=61333
No no no no no no no no no, I was talking about the Virtual Boy not having a full development cycle there and what would happen if the NES didn't have a full development / release cycle in the US either. A "what if" if you would since I've never been able to even mention the VB without a "the Virtual Boy sucks" comment, and never been able to mention Gunpei Yokoi without the VB coming up sooner or later.Originally Posted by goatdan
Besides, Walt Disney simply followed in the footsteps of Winsor McCay.