My first reaction to a picture of the controller was to gape at my screen in horror.

Though I suppose... if they really do that cool stuff like the sword swinging, and if they have attachments that\'ll actually make it usable as a \"normal\" controller... I\'ll... consider it. (Now... the money part on the other hand...)

What \"money part\" are you talking about? The Revolution is in all likelihood cost a lot less than the Xboxcomeagain and the PS3, I mean Nintendo said they are going to market it to Everyone not just hardcore gamers. I take that to mean that they will cost less and be more fun, wow what a combination. Did you see what the DS did they came out $100 less than a PSP and outsold it 4:1 now that\'s a big deal because that means more money in the long run.

So unless you like to pay more then money is not going to be a problem at all.

<.< >.> That very well could be the case. well if you\'re loaded with cash the Rev is the best choice

wow....Controller looks a bit difficult to handle...I think id stick with my PS2 >_>;;
Wonder how much of a price tag is gonna be on that thing.

I\'ve said it once and i\'ll say it again Nintendo said around $150 (U.S.).

Thank you Doc! It\'s good to be understood...

Actually I thought he was talking about the money for the extra attatchments..

I\'m sure Nintendo won\'t pass up the opportunity to milk some more money out of consumers by creating \"must have\" peripherals in order to play certain games.

BEHOLD ANOTHER GIMMICKY DEVICE FROM NINTENDO. They are all about gimmi...I mean, revolutions, these days.(Sometimes I forget about all the Nintendo fanboys around here.) Okay but seriously folks, you might all know from that DS Vs. PSP thread that I am not a big fan of Nintendo. Yes, they were once the saints of the gaming world, but they have fallen out of favor nowadays. Many people are in to new ideas and gimmicky things like the DS and the Revolution controller, but really, look at the DS. When\'s the last time you saw a really in depth use of the stylus screen, not very often, I won\'t totally discredit Nintendo yet, but I am very skeptical of things like this, if you look at gaming history, there are very few, if any, times that gimmicky things have worked.

Remember, before you try to rip me down, think it over, also, point out any holes in my arguement, just say it nicely, we don\'t need a flame war on our hands, sometimes my arguements have holes because I forget to mention something, so just point it out nicely and I will rebutt in a friendly manner. I\'m trying to avoid the flame war from the DS vs. PSP thread, which is why this paragraph of defense is so freakin long, gotta cover all my bases.

Forgive my ignorance, but is playing movies and music more or less gimmicky that an alturnative way of controlling game characters?

This is an excellent controller. It has a few buttons which act like a usual TV controller, but if you tip it to the side it acts like a NES controller, if you clip the analogue tick to the end, it is like half a GCN controller and there is a big A and B button on the top and bottom. And that doesn\'t even take into account the ability to movie it with a swing.

And if you\'re taklking about gimmicks, I will remind you that the PSP plays about a million things, only one of them is a game. Is this not a gimmick? An alturnative meathod of controlling the game, with a map without a split screen, or would you prefer the DS to be a copy of the PSP?

I also prefer Nintendo as a company. Why? Because Sony have a habit of overpricing everything just because they used to be known for their quality, and Microsoft have been known to dominate the market with substandard products. They both have something to fall back on, should sales drop, but gaming is all Nintendo does, so I think they are disadvantaged from the start.

Amen

Really that is the most important point. Sony and Microsoft saw Nintendo get \"so much money\" (if you caould remotely call it that way) And they said \"Hey looks like there is a good field market, since we are known for other things lets get into the videogame bussines and get rich\" lol
No really, they saw/se the video game field as a way to make money, since almost everything they care about are:

1.- Graphics
I HATE it when everyone says that the Xbox is better just because the graphics are cool. I a agree that they are important, but if I wanted to see cool graohics I would be going to the movies right? As I said I believe that graphics are important, but a videogame is like a big cake. It has to have all the correct ingredients in adequate proportions or it will taste too salty, too sweet, will be too soft or too rough. If the console is only focused in one thing the game wil end up more like a grahpic movie because it wont mean its fun. SMB3 Is one of the simplest games ind its considered the best game of all times because its GAMEPLAY, not GRAPHICS.

2.- Mature audience videogames
Lets face it, just like I published in an old topic called \"Blood and Gore\" (perhaps some of you remember, if you can put the link here ok?) The teenagers and adults only want one thing: violence. Sony specially shows this because it knows that it generates large amounts of money, not caring that even when its \"Mature\" I can see a 10 year old child firing a shotgun at other people in GTA. That is another reason of why them see videogames as a bussines always. Nintendo has always cared to bring us game that can be enjoyed by every one.Nintendo has cared to bring us family F-U-N not just make money, if that were the case, why do you think Nntendo consoles are always less expensive than the others?

3.- Games
Nintendo has the biggest variety: Rpg, puzzles, fighting, adventure, action, simulation, FPS, sports, all genders here. And the series are all good. The legend of Zelda is one of the best sagas, Mario party is one of the greatest multiplayer games, even megaman was born in the NES. Old games that first saw the light under the hand of nintendo are now legendary. And what do the other consoles offer? Nothing novedous or \"revolutionary\". Most are only Sports games, fighting games, RPGs, or pretty bad adventure games where ALL you do is to collect something and move to the next level. Nintendo has Always the corage and originality to try new stuff because it wants to expand our horizonts.

4.- Multi funcion machines
When you buy PSX or XboX admit it, you are attracted by the fact that they are more like entertainment machines. And thats good, heck I danced of joy when I jnew the Nintendo revolution would have those funtions as well, but that is also another important point. The gamecube does 1 thing, against the 4-5 the other consoles do AND STILL is recognized as one of the Third generation machines. What does this tell? Imagine, If nintendo ONLY with videogames is tied up with sony and microsoft that do 4 more things, Can you imagine how the revolution will be now that it will have the same enterteinment features?
1 Nintendo feature = 4 Sony/Microsoft features

4 Nintendo feature >>>> 4 Sony/Microsoft features

5.- Online Playing
I thing is something great, but not everygame shoul focus on it, I mean, Why Im going to be alone in my room playing multiplayer via web, when I can invite my friends and have 10 times more fun with them?
Think about it really.

So....


Nintendo Is always trying something new while the other companies just copy him, or use something of other parameters where they have advantege, like Microsoft with online playing.
Some say its a big mistake. Well, a lot of us (yes us, myself included) were wiling to kill miyamoto after the first scenes of TLOF The windwaker, and it became the game of the year!! Dont you think that we need to try new things in order to advance? The videogames are suffering a crisis because now a lot of games (especially the adventure games) are just about everything but one thing: Fun.

I believe its time we try something new.


I believe we need a \"revolution\", dont you?

Post redacted

The other advantage to the Nintendo systems is that Nintendo also make some of the best games themselves, and most of them are sure as hell not coming out on any of the other system (espectially now with the new controller).

took the words right outta my mouth. i was leaning toward the 360, but now, i\'ve joined the revo fan club.

I\'m not gonna play Zelda with the tv remote, The revolution remote plus a zelda game= Bomb dropped on NIntendo world headquarters.

What are you talking about? Haven\'t you seen the D-Pad, motion sencer or the plug-in stick-\'n\'-buttons?

The motion seser is like an eyetoy ripoff: you swing controller Link swings sword. the d pad looks uncomfortable and the plug in stick buttons are a joke.

OK, the motion sensor may not be to your liking; the D-Pad makes it a thinned-out silver NES controller and how are the plug-in stick buttons a joke? It looks extremely comfortable in your hand, and things like that are already used for giving presentations with a computer. There is a rollerball on the top, and the left-click and right-click are on the side, operated by the forefingure and middle-fingure.

This kind of thing:



All Nintendo have done is replace the ball with a stick. They aren\'t exactly anything new.

One Video:
http://media.cube.ign.com/articles/651/651334/vid_1249127.html

[Edited on 27/10/05 by Samsara]

[quote]Originally posted by Samsara
OK, the motion sensor may not be to your liking; the D-Pad makes it a thinned-out silver NES controller and how are the plug-in stick buttons a joke? It looks extremely comfortable in your hand, and things like that are already used for giving presentations with a computer. There is a rollerball on the top, and the left-click and right-click are on the side, operated by the forefingure and middle-fingure.

This kind of thing:



All Nintendo have done is replace the ball with a stick. They aren\'t exactly anything new.

One Video:
http://media.cube.ign.com/articles/651/651334/vid_1249127.html

[Edited on 27/10/05 by Samsara] [/quote]
I still don\'t think it\'s a wise idea though.

It\'s only going to act like a GCN controller. What\'s wrong with that?

I looks about as useful as a tracker ball. *pictures playing F-zero with Tracker ball Tv remote.

hehe you sling the word tv remote around a lot...I think that is the most irritating thing I\'ve seen people do in some time. Ok it looks like a remote I see that but it acts NOTHING like one. it acts just like a mouse in 3D, when was the last time you had a remote that could do that?! Also the people saying that the control is/looks uncomfortable are simply uneducated...you\'ve never touched one so how would you know, I as well have not touched one so I have to go by the words of others, who ALL (not one person has said otherwise as of yet) say it\'s very comfortable.

I\'m thinking that it\'ll come with at least one cradle controller thing....so you can play ported games on the launch day. Hell for all we know the rev could put the PS3 and the Xbox360(AKA: right back where it started) to shame in the graphics department. All we know for sure is that the big N is going to try to change the way we all play games again just like the nes did...

How can you say that looks uncomfortable!? I think the people who don\'t like th Revolution are just afriad of change. Just like when the nes came out. I cannot wait to get my hands on it! The tv remotes come in different colors, too!! How can you beat that!?:lol: I would love to play silent hill with that set up...move around with the dpad, shoot with the button on the bottom. Just imagine Metroid Prime!!

It looks more like a virtual reality system than a console right now.

And what is so bad with VR? The more hands-on the controlling is the better, in my oppinion.

It\'s just not the same though VR could be a potential hazard sometime but for now this is expieremental.

VR could be a hazars? In what way? (I still believe that swinging the controller is a better way of swinging an on-screen sward than bushing the A button.)

zyes but the cost could go up if it goees VR I mean I like the idea of swinging a sword around as link but the theou of playing F-Zero or Mario with that is unbearable.