As you can see, I rarely post, and I almost never start a new thread, so don't think this is another "filler post". MY THEORY: Nintendo's big secret is the Rev.'s ability to produce an image away from the traditional television screen. read on... Ok, we know that the Revolution will not be going HD. Honestly, I've played the 360 on an HDTV and I'm not any more impressed than I am when I play a good PC game. That being said, it must have been hard for Nintendo to justify the production costs of HD. That being said, we know that Nintendo has frequently said: 1. Graphics have reached their peak, the eye can't capture the extra detail of the HD era. 2. Games are lacking innovation and require extensive skill that casual gamers may not be willing to aquire. 3. Nintendo has hinted that the tv-to-console model is getting old, and they support that theory by the statistic that gaming interest is down in America. The DS seems to represent that theory in action, it's console-like, but "touchable". finally, some developers have hinted that technically, the Revolution controller makes it possible to make a game that does not involve the TV. Let me explain: I have been researching "augmented reality" for quite some time now, and I have reason to believe Nintendo intends to use it in the revolution. AR is basically the technology that allows 3D images to appear and be manipulated in real space with the help of video capture technology. Think of it as a step up from the eyetoy, and a step down from a "holodeck". Google it if you are confused. The only essential pieces to a simple AR unit are the computer, 4 sensors, a motion detecting controller, and either a TV screen, a digital camera, or filament glasses. SO.....if nintendo's Revolution comes with the hardware, the sensors, the proper controller, and it still has a "secret", the secret must be some way of seeing the augmented images. Imagine this: you turn on the console, place the sensors on a table, put on your glasses and there in front of you and your opponents is a real-time battlefield. The Rev. controller acts as your pointer. This stuff is possible and becoming cheaper everyday. One developer hinted that you could use the controller as a gun. With the motion sensors on the TV keeping track of your controller's movements and your opponents controllers, you could actually "shoot at them" think about it. Who cares about HD when you have this? Cost? how much is an eyetoy? Or a small LCD screen? These days, very little. It's plausible people, very plausible.
Well, you know, on the Rev movie nintendo put out, they never did actually show a TV screen or anything.... ;] This would be so cool though.....I can't freaking wait for Revolution (or whatever the name changes to)
Good stuff! And it can be backed up vaguelly with the original patent. However they could be using another companys theory, if this were true, so it would not have to be explicit in the original. But would this not drive up the cost hugely, I think at the very least the Revo, will need some kind of tv hookup. I don't need mario on the famicom to fill up my field of vision! This theory would work if there was a really good example of an image augmenter around, as virtual boy-esque visors have never caught on. Still fun theory, we shall see.
Nintendo do have patents on real 3d methods. And i really think that something like "the wand" is the perfect complement to virtual 3d spaces. I doubt they will do anything like VR glasses or anything though. But the facts are there: -Lucas art already vaguely talked about a video game machine able to output real 3d images, just like what they'd like to do with new cinemas. And this didnt apeared on a video game website first. -Miyamoto always wanted to make video games "outside of the typica tv" -they said revolution would be able to hook-up on other things than televisions, such as computer screens. -they said old games would look better, in a certain way, but they also said games needed no transformation from the original rom 2 months ago (with other words, of course). And am i the only one that think the "on" interuptor would be even more needed if games werent played on a tv? Notice that the screen went off when he pushed the On button at the end of revolution's tgs video. Could be nothing, like it could be a little hint. Lets just wait and see. Alot of people are speculating about that, and alot will be disapointed if nintendo doesnt deliver. What about force feedback with the wand? that would be cool too. Not as cool, but it would add to gameplay more in certain cases.
First of all, I'm not saying the Rev. won't use the TV. Most games will use the TV, but it will also have the ability to run AR. Secondly, AR IS NOT VR!!!!! The action in AR can be captured for all to see on a tv screen, and AR glasses are not VR headsets. Links: ARQUAKE:http://wearables.unisa.edu.au/projects/ARQuake/www/ video: http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2005/augmented-reality-p1.php http://studierstube.org/invisible_train/ http://www.microopticalcorp.com/ http://www.se.rit.edu/~jrv/research/ar/video.html http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/graphics/projects/mars/images/AR/CandG/005_icd_ar.jpg http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6689
I remember thinking about this in a handheld several years ago, that would capture the image around you, and then overlay gameplay into it, This could explain the low tech in the system, use lower cheaper tech in the console, allowing them to use more expensive tech in the headgear thingy, and still seel it at that magical and cheap compared to others, $249
I have been researching augmented reality too. The problem is that it is too expensive. Mass production will reduce the cost some, but for anything with a decent level of quality or durability will cost more than the other consoles, not less. The other problems from a technical standpoint, is that AR is entirely too slow for anything more than Virtual Boy style games. This is especially true is you are using cue tracking to overlay an image on the real environment. That could be mitigated some by building the cues into the TV display, but you would not really have AR; rather you would have 3D.
Mairsil, you have no idea what you are talking about. Go read up on AR before you make comments. AR has already been implemented in the Rev controller and the PS2 eyetoy. The virtual boy and AR are apples and oranges. Explain to me how AR is too "slow".
What you just said makes no sense, the virtual boy used vector graphics and shading. AR doesn't necessarily constitute overlaying real environments, but could be a tabletop 3d image rendered away from the TV. Is this AR? Sure, not advanced by any means, but certainly a jump from the limitations of the flat screen of a tv.
Augmented reality is effectively the process adding something virtual to a real world environment. In other words, you augment the real world with something that isn't there. There are many, many examples of it and they range from something simple as projected video on a table, to near virtual reality applications. Take a look at Matysczok's "AR Bowling" or Starner's "MIND-WARPING" projects. The most common thing, and arguably one of the more expensive portions, associated with AR is the head mounted display. This is generally how reality is augmented. The functionality with the Revolution controller is not AR, even though it can function for the input. And while the EyeToy "puts" the player in the game and uses camera tracking for input, it again does not serve to augment reality in any way. My point about the speed is the amount of processing which is required by AR applications. Basically, you have a controller or input of some form, an output device (be it projectors or an HMD) and the system itself. Unless the image shown in the HMD is static (i.e. a heads-up display), then the system must constantly track the player's head movement in order to determine how to properly orient the augmented images. Remember that for a normal person, the minimum frame rate should be 60 fps. That means that 60 times a second, the system is scanning the environment, determining if the player has moved, updating the position state information, calculating the displayed augmented image and finally displaying the image. Don't forget, it has to play a game at the same time. Granted, my comparison to the Virtual Boy might not have been the best, but the point is that AR is still in a infantile stage of development. Yes, you will find some commercial applications and some of them will be very advanced. But overall, AR is not in a state where it could be commercialized on such a level that a Nintendo console would require.
So, you fight enemies in your house? My mom and dad would think I had gone insane if Im walking through the house with glasses and a controller in hand and shooting "imaginary" enemies.
Aha! That explains the whole Revo-gun, you can play virtual Duck Hunt :clap:: When I saw this thread, I was all hyped up about the Nintendo Revolution, until I came to the part that read "MY THEORY" :banghead:. This whole idea of AR technology is not bad at all, but I'm completely clueless on the costs of such a device. Wouldn't such be quite expensive? Well, we all just have to wait for Nintendo to reveal this their "Big Secret"... Thanks a million for those video links BTW. Whenever I'm feeling low in my physics class, I'll remember that video to inspire me.
Ever see the Star Trek: TNG episode where everyone gets addicted to that game with the wormholes and disks. They were all wearing headsets that "beamed" the game images directly into their retinas, but they could still see everything else. Aside from replacing the direct retinal beam with an HMD, that would be classified as AR.
Well, I never saw that episode, but I just have to ask... how? How is such possible? I have a grasp of understanding of the technology though...
Well, most HMD's that I have seen are actual goggles with a small projector that projects the image to the goggle lenses. You can get a stereoscopic 3D effect if it uses two projectors also.
lol, I remember that...great example. In the show it's like the year 8000372 or whatever, but their videogames had shitty graphics, just like how nintendo likes them. I can't wait for some throwback style nintendo duckhunt off the wall with lights and stuff with this... lol no I'm just joking....
Nintendo want their console to appeal to as many people as humanly possible - bear in mind 99% of people with TV's don't have HD it would be losing them the majority of their customers already. Also factor in the fact that HDTV rollout is not expected to have been adequately taken up untill 2012 then it's just a waste of time and money supporting it so early when by 2012 we will be on another console anyway. It's not some bullshit reason like projectors/virtual reality/augmented reality or whatever yall crackpots think up, it's just good business sense -_-
http://nintendo-revolution.blogspot.com/2005/12/is-displacement-mapping-last-secret.html displacement mapping eh
I swear Revolution fanboys are the worst seen in the entire history of gaming hype. You watch, the "big secret" will be something mundane like removeable covers, which is why they showed the prototype in a few colours. The duckhunt on the wall thing has been done, Nintendo made it years ago, you had a little projector and a light (shot)gun, and shot the ducks projected on the wall.
