Slashdot Mirror
How The Revolution Will Change Games Forever
1up.com has a lengthy article discussing the possible ways that Nintendo's next console will change the face of gaming. A nice pie-in-the-sky article for a quiet Holiday afternoon. From the article: "... We're sick of waiting, so we came up with a list of hypothetical Revolution game concepts -- some pulled directly from Nintendo's Tokyo Game Show video that showed actors but no real games, others pulled from some of the popular ideas we've heard floating around -- and took them to impartial third-party developers to find out how practical it is for games on Revolution to be more than just gimmicks. Over the next five pages, we talk with developers from Harmonix, Radical Entertainment, Foundation 9, Atlus, and Midway to figure out how many of these hypothetical game ideas that are floating around have the potential to become actual games, and what advantages/problems might come with that as a result of the Revolution's remote control-shaped, motion sensor controller."
How can you "prove a negative" without ever having your hands on one? I'm not a Nintendo fanboy, but I do see that it's way too easy for people to say "X is a bad idea" before having any experience with it. Based on that, 99.999% of the population could justifiably say Nintendo Revolution is crap. How is this kind of comment useful?
PlayStation3 - does the same thing as my computer. Xbox 360 - does the same thing as my computer. Nintendo Revolution - Gives me the opportunity to get away from my desk and sit back on the couch or play games with some friends who are in the same room as myself(without breaking the bank.) I remember when I was teaching my Mom how to play Super Mario Brothers for the NES 12 years or so ago ... No Mom! Just push the buttons, violently jerking the controller up in the air will not make you jump any higher. Ahhhh, memories.
Never Compromise
If you want to figure out what Nintendo is paying attention to, perhaps you should go check this out. It's a transcript of a presentation given at an investor's meeting (IGN also has some videos of the presentation available in small resolutions for free).
Also, it's odd that you talk about Nintendo as if they make immature games. The games that you think are mature on the PS2 and X-box are really made for children -- those 14-24 year old boys who belive that seeing explosions, blood, guts and dead hookers everywhere makes them a Man. Seriously, a 30 year old man shooting hookers in GTA is not "mature" -- it's childish and pathetic. The problem is that seems to be the ONLY audience that the Xbox is really paying attention to.
The controller is the major concern with the Revolution; however, it looks like it might be the best controller for FPS on a console yet. We'll just have to wait for it to come out to try. There will also be the shells that turn the controller into retro contollers, maybe Nintendo will also settle on a standard shell for game that wouldn't map to the remote style gameplay for use with multiplatform games.
The Revolution is also supposed to directly play Gamecube disks so it has a 1up on the 360s hokey backwards compatiblity. The back library being available could be a major asset if they priced it right. I'd be willing to spend $5/month to access Nintendo's old NES and SNES game legally, I doubt it will be this cheap but we'll have to see. It would also be nice if 3rd parties get into the mix such as Capcom and Konami releasing their old games as well with the standard service.
From the view of a pretty avid gamer, with many friends who also game, it seems like Nintendo are focusing on a completely different market. To many people now, if you want a console that is fun for yourself.. you go Microsoft or Sony... if you want a console that is fun for when you have your friend's round, you go for Nintendo. Many people can't play a lot of Mario Kart on their own as it gets boring, but if you have many people playing with you, it is truckloads of fun. Nintendo just need to realise that not everyone always has lots of friends to play their consoles with.
Business Voyeur
So, will Nintendo evolve the game industry? Considering they have played catchup for the last 10 years, I doubt it.
Played Catch-Up?
When it comes to videogame designs and trends Nintendo (as a game developer) is usually months or years ahead of their competition. The games that they have published have been copied by every company; Mario 64, Goldeneye, Zelda OoT, Pokemon, Mario-Party, etc. have all had their designs stolen to produce crappier games on other platforms. Pikmin, Advance Wars, Battalion Wars, Nintendogs, Wario Ware, Electroplanktin, Kirby's canvas curse, etc. are all excellent games that are nothing like any other game you can get on any other platform. Whether Sony or Microsoft Fanboys like to admit it or not, Nintendo has been inventing far more genres and pushing the industry more than any other company; other companies are interested in adding Rag-Doll physics to a First person shooter, or adding 'correct' differential noises to a racing game.
The truth is that there are few genres that Nintendo hasn't had a massive impact on how they're played and thought of. The Revolution suddenly allows this visonary company the freedom they require to create new genres and redefine existing ones.
You know, I love it when people point to Virtual Boy as "thier other new tech".
Look at a PS2 or X-box controller.
D-pad. Shoulder buttons (hell, even the pattern of the four face buttons). Analog stick. Rumble. 1st Party Wireless.
What companies controllers do you think all of those things appeared on first?
Look at how crazy successful games like DDR are. My sister in high school saved money with friends so they could buy a nice DDR pad. They get a bunch of people together some weekends and create tournaments. Otherwise they don't play video games.
If the Revolution (games) can deliver on creating that sort of experience even on a infrequent basis (not every game, but 3-4 a year), it could signal a shift in how some developers think.
However there is still a huge demand for "traditional" games too, but the Rev has that covered with the ability to use GC controllers (unlike the PS3 and Xbox where you have to buy all new hardware.) Yeah I'm a slight Nintendo fanboy, but if I weren't, I'd still be more interested in the Revolution than the competition, because I'm a gizmo nerd first and formost.
No sig for you!!
"Nowaday, Sony is leading, Microsoft and Nintendo aren't far behind. Nintendo cannot really afford too loose too much terrain"
Considering their profitability, Nintendo has more leg room than the other two.
"Derp de derp."
Maybe you were just put off by the 3D. I was worried before playing it that the 3D/FPSness would ruin it, but Retro did it properly, not a "3D is better!"/half-assed job (cough Lament of Innocence cough). In Prime, the 3D world combines with the first person view and the log entries to give you an even more intense "explorer" feel; the very thing that I think makes Metroid excellent. Ahem, that's enough ranting about Metroid. Yeah, it's horrible. GC owners can't play GTA. And there aren't a zillion horrible "RPGs." The bottom of the GC barrel is nowhere near as low as the bottom of the PS2 or Xbox barrels.
Perhaps the people who play video games just need more friends(in real time or in real life.) I have to admit that after I saw the propaganda video from Nintendo I have more of a desire to get my hands on one. Remember the old Nintendo Commercials - they showed kids walking around as if they were in the game environments or sometimes they ran into an exploding Nintendo Entertainment System Kiosk http://www.retrojunk.com/details_commercial/50/ . I must agree with the idea that Nintendo is more for friends in the room while psx and xboxs might be more considered for the lone gamer who makes friends online (not that there is anything wrong with that.) However based on the friends factor alone I feel like we are missing the point. 1. Not everyone is rich enough to drop 400 bones on a gaming system. 2. Then you need to buy games at 50 bones a pop. 3. If I want to sit alone in my room for hours on end - its because I am already doing it with my computer. The computer with the mouse keyboard input options offer much more than a console with any type of "joystick". Think Arcade. Think Friends in the same room. Think the reason that games became popular in the first place - to have a good time with your friends (solitaire is one of the few exceptions I can think about for the moment.)
Never Compromise
I am not dissing the Revolution's RC, I think it will be fun if done right and depending on how well they integrate the add-on components, it could become a major selling feature of the Revolution. It could also become their crutch if ALL games for the Revolution must make use of this novel gimmick. But will it change game controllers forever? No.
Before Nintendo, everyone used joysticks instead of dpads. Then everyone used dpads, until Nintendo added analog sticks. Now everyone uses analog sticks. Just because everybody does something one way doesn't mean they'll refuse to change when something better comes along. Is the Revmote better? I don't know, but I do know that I've yet to come across a current game concept that can't be done intuitively with the revmote & nuchuk. The planned controller shell isn't even necessary.
Asside from that, there is nothing truely revolutionary about the Revolution. Sure, Nintendo will make their back library available for play on the new system, again a gimmick that will drive sales in the first year or so, but I bet Nintendo will opt for a subscription based service that people will grow tired of paying some $X amount of money a month to play games they already owned. Also, this concept isn't even NEW. PS2 could play its entire back library, and the new Xbox360 offers an arcade marketplace for downloading and playing old game favourites from arcades and PC shareware.
Yeeeeeah, we don't know that. It took from E3 to TGS for Nintendo to reveal the controller. It's 6 months minimum to release (doubtful they will release before or even near next year's E3), and they're still holding a lot back. Will anything else be revolutionary? Only Nintendo execs.
Also, Nintendo has already said, for first party games, the wifi connection that used for the DS & Revolution (they're going to use the exact same infrastructure to lessen costs and ease approachability) will be free. Older games will be a pay per download service, almost exactly like Live Arcade. You pay once, download the game to the flash memory stored in your system, and play it whenever you want. This has already been stated. They have stated you can extend the flash memory with SD cards, but have not stated whether you'll be able to copy retro games to those cards and take them with you to a friends Rev. There are valid reasons to allow this, and other, equally valid reasons to disallow it. We'll find out eventually I suppose.
And to put it quite frankly, the PS1+PS2 library together don't quite match the library of titles available to Nintendo if 3rd parties offer their games as well (which several have already said they plan to do...or, more precisely, Nintendo has made deals with them so they will offer said content). Also, as someone else has mentioned, the Rev will play GCN discs. They may have similar problems to the 360, but then again, the Rev has the same hardware manufacturers for the CPU & GPU that the GCN did, and is using the same API as the GCN, so very likely it will use hardware emulation for GC games instead of software, meaning a 98% or better compatibility rate.
For size, I bet the Revolution will be the smallest again, but traditionally Nintendo isn't big on "slick" designs, and usually the end result looks more like a Fisher Price product. I expect that we won't see the slim silver/white wedge that their PR department has been coming out with. It will probably be made out of cheap plastic with handles and other superfluous design elements that aim more for the young gamer market.
Compare the design of the GBASP or the GBM w
just some guy
Why is it that every time I see an article about Nintendo's future, the Virtual Boy is mentioned, and someone throws out the argument "They failed with that, so they can fail with this too!". Yeah, they failed on one system, they failed badly. But look at all their other successes.
;)
Microsoft failed with Windows, but everyone's flocking to the X-box and the X-box360, right?
But seriously, think about it. One failed technology does not mean all new technologies will fail. With that attitude, the world will never innovate, and we'll be stuck with the same boring crap forever.
The wii is the revolution, comrade!
From gamerankings.com, GCN list of M-rated games:
1. Resident Evil 4
2. Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem
3. Resident Evil
4. TimeSplitters: Future Perfect
5. Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes
6. Def Jam: Fight for NY
7. Prince of Persia: Warrior Within
8. Hitman 2: Silent Assassin
9. Resident Evil 0
10. Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance
11. Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell Chaos Theory
12. True Crime: Streets of LA
13. Red Faction II
14. Killer7
15. Mortal Kombat: Deception
16. Dead to Rights
17. XIII
18. Spartan: Total Warrior
19. Serious Sam: Next Encounter
20. Midway Arcade Treasures 2
21. Geist
22. Hunter: The Reckoning
23. Turok: Evolution
24. BloodRayne
25. Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six 3
26. Blood Omen 2
27. Rogue Ops
28. Resident Evil 2
29. Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon
30. Resident Evil Code: Veronica X
31. Die Hard: Vendetta
32. Spawn: Armageddon
33. BMX XXX
That seems like a decent amount of M-rated games for the person who absolutely can't play anything that's rated E. And.. that is only M-rated games, not just games rated T, but are not "kiddy" games.
It's like sex, except I'm having it!