CNN Hands-On With The Revolution

The Game Over column over at CNN has a hands-on look look at the Nintendo Revolution and its unique little controller. From the article: "By adding an auxiliary thumbstick controller, I was able to play through a level of a retrofitted 'Metroid Prime 2' (a GameCube game). Confession time: When it comes to console shooters, I'm terrible. I can finish them, but I'm nowhere near as competent as I am with my mouse/keyboard setup for the PC. In the early stages of the 'Metroid' demo, it looked like this trend would continue, as I was all over the screen. By mid-way, though, I was better able to move and aim - and enjoyed the game far more than I did with the GameCube controller. ('Metroid' fans... well, you're probably already pretty excited.)"

Comments

Re:so can't wait

[MalaclypseTheYounger]

Offtopic, sorry, but you may want to check your signature. Your friend hacked your Signature...

First-Person Shooters?

[VickiM]

Seems like someone finally let the reviewer play the demos that came out a long while back.

"I was a developer for many years before my current role, but I've never been a very good gamer," Nintendo president Satoru Iwata told me. "I've never been able to control a first-person shooter, but as soon as I used the Revolution controller, I found it very easy to control the game. So, I think that's a genre that's particularly well suited for the controller."

I'm not sure first-person shooters would be the way to go, given comments in other threads about the 360. People who play FPS seem to want HD. I personally can't wait to try out the new controller and console, though. I'm hoping the controller inspires more creativity in game developers.

Re:First-Person Shooters?

[bigman2003]

If you spend a good amount of time on an Xbox controller, you actually get pretty good for FPSs. Just remember all the practice you've had with using a mouse for general computing- that is one of the reasons keyboard/mouse seems so good. Spend time on an Xbox, and it becomes second nature.

I played games on a PC for many, many years. The first time I played Halo on an Xbox, I thought the control scheme was an abomination- who the hell thought it would work?

Now 4 years later, I do great on an Xbox 360..the last time I played a game on the PC (Half Life 2) I *hated* the control scheme. I had been away from it for so long, that I had to re-learn it, and found it just as bad as when I was introduced to the Xbox controller.

It's all what you're used to.

Here's a quote from the Gamespy review of Call of Duty 2 for Xbox 360:

Thanks to the Xbox 360's excellent controller, it won't take veterans of console first-person shooters very long to feel comfortable with the gameplay in Call of Duty 2. The default control scheme feels perfect right from the start, and there's a good chance that you'll be a genuine killing machine by the time you finish the brief tutorial that kicks off the game.

Here is a more direct comparison from Global Gaming:

And then, of course, there are the controls. The debate between keyboard and mouse vs. controller still rages on, but in this fast-paced arcade-style shooter we didn't find the control pad be a serious handicap. While a sniping match would likely end in the favor of the player on the PC, playing through the offline levels was just as easy with a thumbstick as with a mouse.

Re:First-Person Shooters?

[Ark42]

480p is a big deal vs 480i, especially for first person shooters. First off, interlacing is really annoying to look at if you move around really fast, but more importantly, 480i is more-or-less 240 lines. 480p is twice the vertical resolution, at 60 frames per second. 480i is only 30 frames per second, with 2 half-height interlaced fields per frame. Plus, many old regular TVs are lucky if that can achieve 400x300 pixels realistically, so you might be looking at near 3x the detail level simply by playing at 480p on an HDTV. Thats about the same different from going to 720p from 480p. Also, I would consider 1080i to be a step down from 480p, since interlacing is that annoying.

Re:Nintendo had to do *something*...

[Anonymous Coward]

Insightful???

The only way in which Nintendo was bitch-slapped is Install Base. Nintendo still has higher quality games, more robust hardware, more innovative controllers, a hugely successful portable console line, and is much more profitable than either other company.

But of course, since they don't pay you to buy their consoles, they have a smaller install base, and are consequently still in business.

They didn't *have* to do anything to stay in the game. The fact that they chose to is the reason I am such a big fan.

Only console I'm seriously considering

[dogmatixpsych]

The Revolution is the only console I am even thinking about getting. Both Microsoft and Sony want to have their machines do everything (and are both bigger than the Revolution, which can fit just about anywhere, it is so small), Nintendo just wants their console to play games. The controller looks intriguing too, of course. Between quality of games, interesting controller, and lower prices, if any console maker gets my money, it will be Nintendo.

Re:Nintendo had to do *something*...

[SquisherX]

We expect [the Revolution controller] to become the standard in video game controls.

Firstly, i think that neither sony or microsoft will relinquish the standard controller designs, even if the revolution is a smashing success. It will never be the standard.

Given how Microsoft and Sony have been bitch-slapping Nintendo in the console arena, they had to come up with something special to stay in the game...and it looks like they have.

Secondly, I hardly consider being the most profitable gaming console of this past generation as getting 'bitch slapped'.

Re:Nintendo had to do *something*...

[AuMatar]

And only in US install base. Worldwide, Nintendo is #2 and MS is #3.

You know

[Shad_the_protector]

When I first heared of that controller, I just laugh, and couldn't stop. I was thinking Nintendo was doing another big mistake. But the more I check, and the more I inform myself on "Next-Gen" console, Nintendo is the only one I see making a actually "Next-Gen" imporvement. For now X-Box360 is only very upgraded version of a X-Box. As for what we know of Sony right now, well, it is not much of a different case. Nintendo are trying something new. And actually they are doing better than I expected from the information we actually got, and lately my GC entertained me better than my ps2. I'm seriously considering to switch from Sony to Nintendo for my next primary console....

Re:fps on a console?

[|/|/|||]

Your old road is rapidly agin'.
Please get outta the new one if you can't lend your hand,
for the times, they are a changin'.

Re:so can't wait

[Digital Vomit]

I for one Can't WAIT until this machine comes out.

That controller looks Amazing.
--
I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME

LOL! That's classic!

Re:We shall see, personally I have my doubts

[chrismcdirty]

Yes, that does sound awfully elitist of you. Non-gamers will know about the Revolution for the same way they knew about it in the 70s. Print ads, TV commercials, billboards, word-of-mouth, and such. They may not be going into GameStop, but they're probably going into Best Buy. They can see it on display there. They can see it as they're shopping next Christmas in the mall and walk by one of the many game stores. You're acting like gaming is hush-hush. Its not Fight Club. It is possible for people to see something they've never touched and comment on it to their other friends who are not familiar with it.

Re:Nintendo had to do *something*...

[psocccer]

We expect [the Revolution controller] to become the standard in video game controls.
Firstly, i think that neither sony or microsoft will relinquish the standard controller designs, even if the revolution is a smashing success. It will never be the standard.

I find this somewhat entertaining since nintendo has created the controller standard time and time again. NES brought the dpad, before that there was joysticks. SNES brought shoulder buttons. N64 brought analog thumb-stick and rumble pack. GC brought a first-party wireless controller that didn't totally suck and lag. Now what do we have as the "standard"? Well the 360 has dual analog thumbsticks, a dpad, shoulder buttons, and first party wireless controllers included and built-in rumble.... They redefined the standard before I'm sure they can do it again.

Revolution Controller Rumble

[funny-jack]

I seem to recall that there has been some debate as to whether the Revolution controller will contain rumble. From the article:

...and try some fishing by 'feeling' fish nibble on the line (via a rumble effect)...

Just thought I would point that out.

Re:fps on a console?

[harrkev]

The point is, the people running Nintendo have been pretty much saying "We don't care if you like regular controllers. You'll do it our way, or not at all."

Try this: If you want more of the same, try one of the other two. If you want something different, here we are!

This is actually quite smart. They can go head-to-head with Sony and Microsoft and play by their rules, or they can change the rules and occupy a slightly different niche.

Re:Nintendo had to do *something*...

[harrkev]

when you come in third place in console sales, you have lost the battle, though being bitch slapped might be overly strong terminology. All day long we get to hear from Nintendo fanatics how awesome they are, but yet they remain the minority.

And exactly why is being last considered to be awful? They make a profit. They do well.

Microsoft sold the Xbox at a loss. The ONLY reason that the Xbox still lives that that your "microsoft tax" that you pay for with every PC sold goes to prop up the Xbox. If it was a private company that made the Xbox as its main product line, they would have gone under already. Nintendo does not have an OS monopoly or massive media holdings to prop up its game division, so it has to do thing a little differently -- like make a profit on games.

So, to me, as long as the company is healthy and selling products, does it really matter if they are #1? Let me put it this way: McDonalds is the #1 fast food franchise. Do you expect Taco Bell, Burger King or Wendy's to go under in the next six months because they are not #1? I don't.

The gaming market is big, and I do not mind a little competition. It keeps everybody on their toes. As long as you have three players, you WILL have a #1, a #2, and a #3. And as long as all three remain profitable, this is a good thing. At my house, my only console is a Game Cube. I purchased it because I have small children, and I wanted to be assured of being able to buy games without lots of blood and sex.

Re:We shall see, personally I have my doubts

[(A)*(B)!0_-]

Boy - you're wrong about a lot of things.

"The only people that look at it are the ones with kids in the lower grades. It is just not for adults."

Laughably incorrect. There may be a perception that the Gamecube is not for adults but that's quite different than it actually being the case. Do you think that RE4 and Eternal Darkness were games for kids?

"I haven't met a single non-gamer who turned to gaming on their own. ALL of them were turned by gamer friends."

Boy! Anecdotal evidence! That must mean something, right??! (It's sad how many people don't understand statistics but still act as if they do.)

"How many gamecube owners have the gamecube as their only console? I know that at least with both the DS and GBA that all the people I know who own one have at least got either a PC or a none nintendo console as well. No one I know has only a gamecube or handheld."

Oh boy! More statistical evidence based on that great sample set of 'people you know.' Guess what - that proves nothing and shows no trend whatsoever to anyone intelligent. Furthermore, even if the majority of Gamecube owners own another system - so what? If Nintendo can be the provider of a second console in enough homes, they will continue to turn profits. And furthermore, the untapped casual market is likely to not own any systems from the current generation so I don't even see what your point is in regards to the Revolution.

"What I fear will happen is that the games with the revolution will be considered to simple/dumbed down etc for the existing gamers to buy and therefore the necessary word of mouth will not be generated."

Well, in addition to not knowing anything about statistics, you also don't know anything about marketing.

"I have to wonder why Nintendo seems so desperate to attract a market that in the 2 decades of video games has still not be won over while possibly alienating (as they did with the gamecube) the established market."

Ignoring your poor English skills, there are people who play games but do not buy video game consoles. People who play Hearts, Popcap Games, Scrabble online, etc. are a huge market. I also don't see how the hardcore gamers were alienated by the Gamecube. The Gamecube has had some excellent games and has delivered the quality and enjoyment that Nintendo is known for. Hardcore gamers were turned off by what exactly? Mario games? Ah yes - the pubscent boys so unsure of themselves that they can only feel manly if their in-game character has tattoos. Those are a subset of the hardcore gamer market, and one who relies on mommy and daddy for cash. Oh nevermind, there's so much wrong with you and your nonsense. Go play your Xbox.

not just excited

[Lehk228]

i'm not just excited... i am HARD