As an HCI person, I have a problem with this. I do think that the Revolution controller will provide some interesting possibilities that cannot be properly duplicated with current controls. However, I do not believe for a second that this controller should completely replace the current style of controller which has evolved over the past 20 years.
well, game controllers need to evolve to something else, to push the barrier of interaction further. Pushing buttons isnt what i call deep interactivity in these days. And revolution's controller seems like the Nes controller of the now old-school controller, it can get better, of course, but that's still one hell of a step. one of my favorite quote from someone who tried the wand goes like : After that, when you return on the e3 floor and play ps2, game cube and xbox360, it feels very outdated and basic. will every controller in the future be shaped like a tv remote? I doubt it, but the idea is still there.
"Nintendo was in a similar situation a year ago when it launched the Nintendo DS. Explaining to people that a touch screen would be used to play games wasn't easy." Thats such a valid point, i really think it's a 'try before you buy' deal, roll on E3 i say.
I doubt this design will stay, but it is a intresting concept, i do think that the next gen systems (These systems and the next) will have a remote control type of controller
I'm not sure the comparison is all that valid. Just look at how popular Palms and other handhelds are. Many of them use touch screens and have games for them. Hell, look at the market for those bartop Merit Megatouch games too.
the problem is that if those things will prove successful to the average player ps3 and 360 will have more than enough power for duplicating them with some add on... so sony and microsoft can still take that direction.... i think it won't be easy for the good old ninty...
Guarenteed there is going to be some kind of revolution-like input device for both PS3 and 360 if the Rev goes over well. All it will take is to see feedback from the Revolution. Isn't PS3 supposed to have the eyetoy built in, something that can recongnize facial expressions?
I'm disapointed that this demonstration of the console was exactly the same as the one during the last TGS. Still, it's good to see more positive impressions about the controller.
Nope. Not built in. And the video with the costume changements and all (in real-tme) was just a tech demo of what you could do with the cell. The camera used was an expensive one, in the 1000+ price range. Now, if the revolution succed, im pretty sure microsoft and sony will look at the concept and try to do something.... but isnt patent something that old you from doing a special thing, if you're not the owner of it (the patent)?
Why change something that isn't broken? I'm very happy with my controllers the way they are. I DON'T want to be waving my arms around like a soft shite !! I want to relax when playing. I want to play without being a bother to those next to me. I want to play in a small space. I want to play lounging around on the floor. And so on!! Controllers we have now DON'T need to be replaced at all. Yakumo
In that case we'd all be sitting around with our digital joysticks and 1 button. Basically everything else has changed in gaming in the last 15years or so, yet the PS2, Xbox and GC controllers are all pretty much based off the snes - times change, and controllers should evolve with time. Sure, it might be shite, but at least it will make people think about input rather than just graphics.
i think it is outdated, broken. We are playing games the same manner we did 20 years ago, the basic is a carbon copy. The only thing that evolved is the number of buttons. But buttons are still the same, you simply push them to interact with the virtual world, thats it. Why do you think you jumped with your controller, or turned it when you wanted to turn when you were younger? Because it was the most human and easy (yet complex)reaction you could produce to interact. You always made those movements, from day one. Of course, it didnt worked when you moved around, and you had to understand that you needed to push buttons in order to move. But your subconscient still tried to move at times. It's like always telling you that you're just watching a movie, it breaks the immersion. I hope we will finally get rid of those buttons, at least partially, in near future. It just feels way too outdated for virtual interaction, its just too unatural, and it doesnt help for imersion.
Of course controllers have changed in a way that we have more buttons but it's still the same basic idea. Really think about this for a minute. You come home from work or school and want to chill out with a game. This won't be possible with the Revolution controller because you'll have to physically move your body just to play the game. That's not something I would want to do. Relaxing with a RPG is lovely at the weekend since I can sit lay back on the sofa playing the game with one had at times. Yakumo
oh, c'mon yak. everyone who tried it said that they were swinging their arms at first, but that they found that it wasnt necesary to do so. They just had to tilt the controller, and change the angle. They also said it was confortable to use and light. Prejudices, Prejudices.... and youll still be able to pop a game in the dreamcast.
I was going to post that! hehe Yes, true. One does not need to dance around like the Revolution demo video from TGS. From reading the Metroid Prime impressions, is easy to see that most games that use the analog stick attachment requiere very little movment at all. Kinda like moving a small, light joystick.
Yep, I'd imagine that the movements are no more strenuous (sp?) than moving a mouse. Now dont come out and tell me you use a trackball, because you know what I mean :lol:
hey, I have nothing against Nintendo ! I'm not a Sega fan boy either !! Back in the 16nit days the SFC was my main system. I just don't like the idea of this new control system. Yakumo
