Slashdot Mirror
Katamari Creator Critical of Revolution
Gamasutra has an article on Keita Takahashi's reaction to the Revolution controller. From the article: "Takahashi commented of the Revolution, which has drawn widespread praise for its underlying concepts from other Eastern and Western designers: 'I'm not really interested in it. I don't think a controller should have that much influence on the enjoyment of games.' He continued: 'I see what [Nintendo is] trying to do, but they're putting such emphasis on the controller; 'Woah, this controller lets you do this!' and I'm thinking - are you messing with us?'"
It's new. It obviously has new capabilities. How about you use your imagination instead of your tongue?
My work here is dung.
We all really believe that our sole interface to our games is "no big deal" to how we play and enjoy them?!? Umm, sure. Immersion beyond simple 2D controls is only natural when all games are now being created in 3D. I mean no one wants VR... who would actually want to feel like they are in the game when they can hold a small uncomfortable controller and contort their hands to manipulate little non-responsive sticks?
With Nintendo claiming over and over that they have numerous MAJOR surprises yet to be released about the Revolution I think it is foolish at best to make such a short-sighted and stupid statement as this. Let's bash something no one including third party developers even know about yet! - ??? - Profit?
Best of luck with that. Dual analogs for-evah! Please.
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
Controllers have always impacted the way people play games - the gamepad revolutionized games (all of those games we had on the original NES and since then aren't practical to play on paddles), the top triggers added to that (allowing for greater control in games), the analog stick greatly added (and became pretty much required for 3d games)... If you want to take another example - take the DDR games... would they be possible without their special controller?
Guitar Hero via Gamepad ... DDR via Gamepad ... that fishing game with a rod, via Gamepad.
Simply put, different input mechanisms allow for a better gaming experience.
What this guy should be doing is working out how to use this control system in a future game to best effect.
Not all games can benefit from it I'm sure. The question should be whether enough games will to make it worthwhile for Nintendo to make it a base component of the system, unlike the examples above. Gameplay examples have been thought of before in previous articles for multiple game genres*, so in this case I think it is worthwhile.
* aiming in a FPS
* more natural fighting in a fighting game
* aiming missile weapons in an RPG, sword/ace weapon wielding
* steering a vehicle
* looking around in walk-around-a-lots
The difference is that the Revolution controller does more than a normal controller, not less.
There already is one. It's called the Gamecube controller, and you'll be able to use it with the Revolution.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
i find it funny that he claims that "nintendo is making all about the controller" because what nintendo is trying to do is rather make the human/machine interface disappear. as it stands, current controllers are totally abstracted: "press A to do this; press B to do that". the player has to take the time to learn what really has no context, thus making it *all about the controller*. now with good software, you just roll the Revo controller to move front, back left and right, swing your sword or toss you fishing lure; the software is what has to understand the context of the humans natural movements. this makes the game more about the human and less about the controller.
Homepage
Obiter Ludens Game Blog
Well, unless they screw something up between E3 05 and release date, it will work just fine.
Many different gaming magazine writers got to sit down and actually use the controller with demo games. Pretty much every one commented on how flawlessly it worked.
Imagine if the NES had been released with the light gun as the only controller?
That would have been a problem because the light gun had only one function- read in light patterns from the screen. It did nothing else, so programmers would have been able to use that one function in their games.
This is far from a light gun.
(Also, Nintendo has already stated that it is making a "shell" for the controller so it will be more like a conventional one, for the developers and gamers who pussy out.)
Imagine if the NES had been released with the light gun as the only controller? I seriously doupt this will be the only controller the system ships with. If it is, yea I agree, it would be a bad move. Luckily we have less then a month to E3 where suppositivly all specs and "surprises" will be announced.. So we shall wait.
And if thats not good enough I understand that you can still hook an old gamecube controller to it.
The revolution will be able to support current gamecube controllers as well, so I'm wondering if he is dismissing the entire revolution platform, or just the controller? I think we will still see lots of interesting things come out of the revolution that don't particularly use its controller or use a gamecube one instead.
Monstar L
MOD PARENT UP
This is an excellent point, and one I really hadn't thought of previously. Great comment!
Remember that he also said that he wasn't going to do a sequel to Katamari Damashi and he eventually made two. He is free to change his opinion later if he wants. Who knows, the next game he makes could actually be a killer app for the Revolution. Nothing is set in stone at this point.
On another note, I am enthused about the Revolution's controller but even I still have a nagging feeling that this step won't stop cookie-cutter games that all play alike, it will just create new styles of cookie-cutter games. I have a DS and play it quite frequently but developers will eventually reach the limit of what a touch screen can do as far as game mechanics goes. Not to mention games like Castlevania Dawn of Sorrow which would've been better without touch screen support and I can see some Revolution games that would be better off with a "standard" controller.
As a video game (esp. Nintendo) zealot turned dissident, I think Takahashi may be on to something. There's been an awful lot of stabs (again, esp. by Nintendo) to "broaden the audience", getting more casual gamers playing. And hey, if Nintendo thinks this controller helps, that's their decision to make.
But, speaking as an overworked graduate student in CS who once floated through K-12, I can say I don't have time for these "revolutions" in the game industry. Katamari Damacy is the only console game I've played in a long while that I actually loved, and part of that was because I could play for 20 minutes (make the moon!) and get a healthy dose of fun and entertainment (ah, the screams of people trapped in their office buildings...) and then put the game down and get back to work.
That doesn't have any direct bearing on the controller, but the controller is representative of this push into new audiences, and I think a symptom of that is companies like Nintendo are starting to ignore old audiences. I'm not interested in using my controller as a light gun (complete with me having to stand and spin around to turn), or as a sword and shield for Zelda, or whatever other recent rumor/fanboy postulating has come up with. I want to sit down for take a break for twenty minutes.
Granted that Takahashi's track record is pretty short, and not growing at any fast rate, but when reading his interviews (and playing his games) he's always felt like, to me, someone that got it -- I want my games to be fun, lazy, and distractions, not things I need to devote my life and body to (okay, I'm out of shape, sue me).
My casual gamer friends may find using the controller as a wand to be interesting, and Nintendo may think that it's pure gold (and the majority of the industry press may agree), but I just want a simple game I know how to play and can do so without large effort.
For me, Takahashi is right. And it makes me wonder if Nintendo is marginalizing one audience in favor of another.
Nice to see the ad hominem attack is alive and well on Slashdot.
The Power Glove and other non-standard controllers were not designed to be the primary controllers for their respective consoles. In other words, you weren't going to buy an NES with just a Power Glove inside, nor just a light gun, nor just a DDR pad, and on and on. One can reasonably assume that the new controller will work just fine out of the box because doing otherwise would just plain kill the console.
As for Takahashi's whine, he seems to be talking out of the proverbial hindquarters. Of course controllers have "that much influence on games," just like my keyboard and mouse have huge influence when I work with a PC. Of course, I can see this kind of griping being commonplace as people have to get used to something new after being weaned for so long on more traditional stick/pad controllers. Change scares people...
What happens if this thing comes out and it has massive lag, or a problem with the box "losing" the controller, or any number of other technical glitches
Do you really Nintendo would not bother to beta test their flagship product?
I'd think if they were going to ship a product that was horribly flawed they would notice it before they spent millions of dollars to bring it to market.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Keita Takahashi is the creator of one of my favorite games ever, and I'm inclined to listen to what he has to say on game design issues. But I couldn't disagree more with this statement, seeing as how it implies that he thinks good game design is completely independent of the platform it is made for.
:)
Keita can go and make Katamari Damacy for the original PS1 then. Oh, what's that? Can't handle the huge number of polygons in the game? Lack of dual-analog CONTROLLER makes it not nearly as fun? Yeah, that's what I thought
The Revolution's controller, at the very least, will allow for new gameplay elements. Whether or not this will lead to new and exciting game design is up for speculation, but it won't hurt and it's certainly not some kind of smoke screen.
or any number of other technical glitches
Nintendo hardware has been consistently of very high quality. That probably isn't something to worry about.
Everyone is commenting on it like they assume it's actually going to even work right in the first place. What happens if this thing comes out and it has massive lag, or a problem with the box "losing" the controller, or any number of other technical glitches (Power Glove anyone?).
So you've missed where many industry people have already had hands-on experience with the thing, and are already a fair way through developing games that use it? Apparently you're assuming Nintendo learned nothing from the Power Glove, and also that they're doing zero testing on the new controller - practically every public report i've ever seen by someone that wasn't a rabid Microsoft/Sony fanboy has had nothing but glowing praise for it.
Imagine if the NES had been released with the light gun as the only controller?
How is that even a valid comparision? The light gun was designed to do one thing - gun games. The Revolution controller is being specifically designed to be a "real" controller, and not just a one-trick pony.
I suspect we might see a more traditional controller emerge when everything is said and done--whether from Nintendo itself, or a 3rd party.
AFAIK, there will be "shells" released for different controller types, which the remote-style controller will be able to plug into as needed. I don't have a link offhand, but i'm pretty sure Nintendo has announced something official to that effect. Not to mention the fact that the Revolution will have 4 ports for standard Gamecube controllers, which has been known basically since the system was announced.
Gotta love these Nintendo articles....Please try searching a little first, instead of blathering some quasi-doom n' gloom statements with no real substance.
I'm not really interested in it. I don't think a controller should have that much influence on the enjoyment of games.
The controller has everything to do with the enjoyment of games, because that's how you interact with them. If this statement was really true, we'd all be using controllers like the Colecocision and other such monstrocities from the early 1980s. Look, it has nine buttons AND A KNOB! What more could you possibly ask for? And it's a sturdy, small design, so it can easily be stored.
Can you make enjoyable games with the current controllers? Hell yeah. But the Revolution contoller is about immersion as much as it is about enjoyment. Instead of sending an instruction to your character to swing the sword (passive second person) you actually move your arm to swing the sword (active first person), which will make people much more interested if they actually play the game instead of watch it.
Let's say you like playing sports. Which would you rather do? Be the coach who sits in the box and tells the batter when to swing, or be the batter and decide when you want to swing?
Games will be made on the PS3, 360, and Revolution that are enjoyable. But games will only be made for the Revolution that are immersable, which just compounds the enjoyment.
Having trained for a couple years in Western-style fencing, I can see the Revolution controller being really good as an actual fencing trainer, especially in foil, because of its sensitivity to both attitude and position. While sabre training might be hindered by the lack of force-feedback, when fencing with the foil the blades rarely actually come into direct opposition, and force-feedback isn't really required for a good simulation.
I'd think if they were going to ship a product that was horribly flawed they would notice it before they spent millions of dollars to bring it to market.
;)
Well, if it works for Microsoft...
Guitar Hero via Gamepad ... DDR via Gamepad ... that fishing game with a rod, via Gamepad.
You just proved his point. Your examples are simply rehashes of old games with a new controller. Just like redoing the makeup of an old game to use a new systems higher powered graphics without touching gameplay and calling it something new (GT3 anyone?) Innovation can't just be about "Yet Another 3rd Person Shooter But With a New Controller Paradigm". I'm sure someone will do it, I'm sure it'll be cool, but after a while, guess what, it's still yet another 3rd person shooter. Big Whoop. Where's the innovation there?
I don't think he's saying that the Rev's controller is inherently crappy...I think he's saying that a good game should stand on its own merits, regardless of what you're using to control it. Granted, controls that are difficult to use can ruin an otherwise good product...but any developer worth his salt should be able to program around a controller, not for a controller.
Just because the guy developed one popular game doesn't suddenly make him an expert. On the other hand, I tend to agree with the guy. I'm positive that the Revolution's controller is going to be absolutely phenomenal, but only with a handful of games. Excessive amounts of emphasis have been placed on this controller when the reality is that most games just wont quite work with the controller. It's control mechanism is simply too specialized to fit most games. Maybe its partly the media's fault for pushing this thing so much, but then again, Nintendo hasn't really shown us anything other than that controller.
I personally cant stand the existing controllers covered in buttons and poorly designed games where developers felt the need to use every single button on them. So, I'm not saying Nintendo shouldn't use this thing as the centerpiece for the Revolution. Games like Guitar Hero have shown that Nintendo doesn't really corner the market on unique controllers. So I don't think it's going to quite spur the sort of innovation some people are expecting. The innovations that come will be due to compelling game design, not because some unusual controller has inspired it.
Given that he created one of the more innovative games released recently, it seems to me that he is trying to say you don't need innovative hardware in order to come up with innovative games if you're a good developer. I'm not against the new Revolution controller. However, he has a point in that perhaps too much focus is being put on it. The new controller shouldn't be the only reason games on the Revolution are fun. He's a little too quick to dismiss it though. It seems like games that utilize the controller will have some very interesting elements.
Keita Takahashi, as a game designer, is not slave to the limitations of the hardware. He is master of the limitations of the hardware. Takahashi is one of those rare people who knows how to play limitations like a harp.
I would imagine this is why he is apparently not all that interested in seeing those limitations removed.
He is, of course, a bit of an aberration. Pretty much all other game designers are working at a quite different level. Among this group of developers ("everybody else"), there are quite a lot of people who are excited by the possibilities the Revolution controller offers nad feel it will allow them to express ideas that otherwise would be impossible to manifest in game form, and a lot of other people who aren't expressing interest in the Revolution but in the whole don't seem to think a whole lot about play control (and so keep churning out games which never quite feel natural or correct when thoughtlessly shoehorned underneath the modern standard maze-of-joysticks-and-buttons game controller). With both of these groups, and I think that's a significant portion of all game developers, both the developers and the resulting games would benefit from the Revolution control idiom if it became standard.
But if anyone has the right to say the revolution controller isn't necessary, it's the guy who, with Katamari Damacy, managed to make a totally revolutionary and unique control scheme out of the Dual Shock 2.
Hey, maybe if you created something otehr than a Super Monkey Ball rip-off, then maybe I'd care what you think. Seriously, if thinking of something new hurts your brain that much, then maybe it's a good thing you stick with your own kind on Playstation.
Keita can go and make Katamari Damacy for the original PS1 then. Oh, what's that? Can't handle the huge number of polygons in the game? Lack of dual-analog CONTROLLER makes it not nearly as fun? Yeah, that's what I thought :)
Oh, he already did. Of course, it was for the PSP, and not the PS1. But exactly the thing you described happened. Katamari Damacy PSP couldn't handle the huge number of polygons in the game and had to reduce the ball-of-junk katamari to a big object-eating ball, and the PSP only has one analog stick so the control scheme was wrecked. The result was something that just wasn't all that fun or interesting.
I think really what we should take away from these comments is that Mr. Katamari Damacy is really, really, really at home on the PS2. The idiom of the console works for him, and it shows. He isn't interested in taking a step forward into something new and different with the Revolution, and when he tries to take a step backward into what the PSP represents it just doesn't work. There is nothing wrong with this. The PS2/PS3's idiom is just what suits his style of creativity best, and as long as that's what gives his creativity flight, that's a good thing for all of us.
"I'd think if they were going to ship a product that was horribly flawed they would notice it before they spent millions of dollars to bring it to market."
Hello, Virtual Boy! How have you been?
Konichi-wa! Have you ever been to Tokyo?
We dropped the controller there. It just fell out of Our hands while We were playing. Just slipped right out.
We hope you can visit during the day's rolling. Like that's possible.
If We were designing the controller, We would have made it much bigger.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
While Takahashi is free to have any opinion he wants, its slightly suspicious that a man who has been quoted as saying that, the drive behind the Katamari games was to "create a quirky and fun game", eschews Nintendo for trying the same thing.
I dun get it.
---space.is.the.place---
Standardized interfaces exist because it allows developers to map the controls they want to a widely accepted standard. I can't tell you how much it irritates me switching between games and having to learn a completely different control system. Games should allow custom controller maps, not require custom controllers.
I'm excited to see them prove me wrong, as I'm sure they will with one or 2 outstanding titles (preferably with something other than Zelda, Metroid, or Mario in the title, plzkthx) but the words "Glorified light gun" keep springing to mind....
Physics is nothing like religion. If it was, we'd have an easier time trying to raise money!
#1. The controller everyone is talking about is the base unit. Not every game will be played with the remote control style. There will be shells that fit around it that haven't even been thought of yet - Nintendo certainly doesn't have all their eggs in that basket.
#2. Just who the hell is this guy anyway, and why do I care what he's excited about? Never heard of his game, so I looked at some screenies - looks like dererative shit to me. It's cool though that the hype around Revo is so good that every time some dumb-shit designer burps the name Nintendo.
AE
I'd think if they were going to ship a product that was horribly flawed they would notice it before they spent millions of dollars to bring it to market.
Yeah, or if someone were to like ship a bunch of systems that got really hot and caused all sorts of problems and negative feedback. That'd be stupid!
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
I've said this before, but dual-analog SUCKS. It is a horrid way to control a FPS and it has kept me from buying one of the current incarnations of consoles. If I wanted to play FPS I would just play them on the PC where it makes sense. They need a new control mechanism if they want to do FPS games on a console effectively. If you think about it, the controller design with the seperate analog stick might just be what is needed, a separation of concerns. Yes it will be able to detect position and everything, but just the fact that you have one hand controlling position and the other controlling other actions is a step closer to the native feel of mouselook.
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
I don't know what katamari is, but it looks friggin weird.
What I find ironic is the title of this article! "Katamari Creator Critical of Revolution" ... I thought the whole Katamari game was based on rolling a ball around ... the more revolutions the better!
The controller is so weird that combined with the lower specs in the machine, games makers are going to have a hell of a job to port their games over to the platform. Nintendo may find themselves one of only a handful of makers who even bother.
In all of your examples, however, the gameplay dictated the design of the controller. Revolution appears to be the other way around.
Wow, what kind of morons do you think are running Nintendo? This company has been around for over a century, and is the only company currently managing to make an actual profit on video game consoles. You actually believe that they would risk the entire existence of their company by putting out a new console (in a very competitive marketplace) with a main controller that faulty? I mean, if they would, they don't deserve to keep existing anyhow, because that would be such a colossally stupid move. They're not Sony or Microsoft, they don't have a bazillion other products that can keep them afloat if their console bombs. They've got consoles and handhelds, and that's their business.
Yes, it could still be a flop just because of the whims of consumers. But I seriously, seriously doubt it will be because of actual flaws in the technical aspects. They'd push back the date or cancel the controller entirely rather than risk that. The fact that they've gotten this far strongly suggests that it won't be a problem.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
imo, I think that nintendo's two latest creations have been to deter emulation. I mean, provided a revolution emulator is created, it won't be easy to control the games without the revolution controller.
Also, look at the DS. I am not sure if any DS emulators exist, but if they do, I can't imagine it's very easy to play with that extra touchscreen section.
-freeze
"I don't think a controller should have that much influence on the enjoyment of games." This man clearly never played his own game for more than 5 minutes. Either that or his thumb is just one giant callous.
So the cretaor is saying control doesn't matter? So that his games dont need the buttons and only the analog stick doesnt matter at all then ? he is a big hypocrite
Nintendo's not seeing another penny from me until they localize and bring an official Mother 3 here to the States. "Not profitable" my ass. Maybe that was true 10 years ago but EarthBound's following has GROWN over the last decade! I'm not buying another Nintendo product, be it the Revolution or DS or anything else they put out, until Mother 3 reaches the states!! Westerners shouldn't have to rely on fan translations just to enjoy Mr. Itoi's brand of fun and humor.
Get it through your minds. The powerglove was Not a nintendo product.
How come there seems to be an anti-Nintendo agenda of late. This is like the 3-4 story like this totally bashing the Revolution. I understand news is news, but how come there were no stories totally bashing the 360 before it came out. There were some articles about questionable sentiment toward the system but nothing outlandish like the articles about the Revolution. I want to know everyone's thoughts about the existence of an "agenda" here on slashdot. Frankly, it's pissing me off cause I love gaming and only someone who would apparently know nothing about gaming would say "I don't think a controller should have that much influence on the enjoyment of games". That's about the dumbest statement I've ever heard and we all know why. This article is a waste of my wasted time at work reading the news. The controller is only the single way that a person inputs their abilities into a console. (Sarcastic Response) Yeah, there's no way that's important. What's way more important is if it's wireless or not cause everyone knows that 95% of the enjoyment of a game comes from maneauverability around the room while your playing the game.
Um, you can't play guitar hero with a gamepad
Fundamental limitation of the game, or artificial limitation of the software (like dongle-based PC copy protection)? To use a standard controller for a game like Guitar Freaks, which can be considered a predecessor to Guitar Hero, one would have to place one hand on the buttons and the other on the Control Pick. Is that so hard?
and DDR via a gamepad defies the point of the game.
Tell that to people who play 15-foot songs in StepMania on their arrow keys.
The DS's touchscreen has created new gameplay, both in the available games, the interfaces and the interaction.
Touch screen gaming as seen on the Nintendo DS is nothing that could not have been done on a PDA running Palm OS or Windows Mobile. Likewise, the early Revolution games will be ports of PC titles that use the mouse for control.
I'm just curious...Am I the only one that sees a 3rd party manufacturer if not Nintendo themselves releasing a wireless standard controller? Or perhaps even simply using the gamecube controller ports? You people do realize that the gamecube controller is a potential option for controlling the games yes? Hence the only real restriction is that Nintendo isn't blowing their load on a hugely technical machine that only avid gamers will be willing to pay for.
Give Nintendo a bit of credit and think about the whole system and what Nintendo is trying to achieve before knocking them. They are competing for the players money not for a monopoly of the players time. I'm pumped about the Rev and just might pick up a 360 as well simply because the online experience looks to be so streamlined. Meanwhile Sony looks to be pumping out the same dull crap for a third time. I'm tired of seeing a new Madden, NHL, and MLB every year. Give me something new and exciting instead of more FPS.
Maybe I am alone in this?
It's normal since he cancelled Katamary for the nintendo DS and released it only for PSP
Sony has bucks to buy some opinions...
I agree with him, Nintendo do keep banging on about the controller like it's the most important thing they've ever done. I just see it as the illegitimate lovechild of the superscope and the mariopaint mouse.
They also keep talking about the ability to play their back catalogue on the revolution. Yes, fantastic, it just sounds like a cynical attempt of trying to grab a hold of the liscences and rights of old ROMs to try to cripple the emulation scene - which won't happen, thankfully. Neither feature is revolutionary, so I'm hoping their keeping something special up their sleeves.
Don't get me wrong, though, I do like Nintendo.
Instead of dumping their back catalogue on the Revolution, why don't they do so for the DS? To be able to download roms from the DS' wireless connection for a reasonable price of £1 each would be great. To do so on the Revolution, well, you may as well build a PC that connects to the TV for the same price and download the roms illegally
"well, I'm not impressed with the keyboard. Why should the way I enter data into the computer depend so much upon learning to type?"
"I'm not that impressed with the remote control. Why should my ability to change the channel be so dependant upon this thingy i can hold in my hand?"
"I'm not impressed with google, why should my ability to find porn on the internet be..." oh nevermind
replacing it with NEW Folger's Crystals! (lets see if they notice the difference)
The thing that worries me about this is that there was a similar controller available for the original NES.
Exactly. In addition to the tilt sensor and the A and B buttons used in the remote position, the Revolution controller has the same +Control Pad, a Button, b Button, Select Button, and Start Button as the NES.
Don't mess with us? Is this guy that scared of change, that he responds to a new controller paradigm with the same response ghetto white kids use with people who insult their freestyling? If he doesn't like the motion-sensors, he can tell people that play his game to turn the controller sideways and use the cross or attach the nuncuck peripheral. This guy's just spewing FUD.
Katamari was a fantastic, unusually creative game, but it did suffer a bit in the controls. I liked the idea, liked what they were attempting to do, but much like Ape Escape 2, the dual analog system was just sort of clunky and weird.
So, with all due respect to one of my favorite video game designers, I don't think he's really the right person to speak about controllers. I think the revolution sticks may even be a bigger and better change than analog sticks.
Keita Takahashi has never developed anything outside of PS2 and PSP titles so why is this a surprise? Whats next, an interview where Bungie declares it lack of desire to port halo to the ps3?
As for the controller, I believe Nintendo's goal isnt to focus on the controller but to make the controller something you dont have to think about. I really think they have the right idea and if its done well, it will revolutionize the game industry. Imagine an interface that has virtually no learning curve. People that have never gamed before will be attracted to it after learning its as easy as using a remote control. As a bonus, educators and parents groups will praise it because it not only encourages but requires physical activity. I really think the hardcore gaming community is really underestimating what Nintendo is bringing to the table.
have you ever seen an average person try to pick up Katamari or any number of FPS games for any of the current gen systems? It's almost painful to watch.
For Katamari on PS2, you only need two axes: left forward/backward and right forward/backward. It's in fact easier than Battlezone because you don't have the additional axis of having to shoot.
There already is one. It's called the Gamecube controller, and you'll be able to use it with the Revolution.
Unless Nintendo's lot check guidelines require that only GameCube compatible games may use the GameCube controller. This is not without precedent: the GBA hardware accepts a GBC 2-player link cable just fine between two GBAs, but licensees are urged to make their games compatible only with the GBA-GBA multiplayer cable, which is actually slower (half duplex, slower baud rate) than the GBC cable.
RTFA
This is an interesting comment coming from the person who, according to TFA, is "arguably more interested in designing children's playgrounds than video games."
Virtual boy was their flagship product?
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
the light gun had only one function- read in light patterns from the screen. It did nothing else
The NES light gun could detect both light/dark of the target area. By correlating the raster timing with the light/dark reading, games using the light gun could detect the Y (up/down) coordinate of the target. On top of that, the Super NES light gun added a more accurate timer that could detect the X position, giving pixel-perfect aiming albeit in a too-large package.
Virtual boy was their flagship product?
Virtual Boy was released after the Super NES and before the N64, and it was significantly more powerful both CPU-wise and graphically than the Super NES (albeit with only one color component).
Do you remember when you played video games as a kid? When you'd twist the controller to the right and left? The revolution will actually respond to these movements.
No, I will not work for your startup
Katamari Damacy concentrates on gameplay, where Revolution makes it seem if you don't use the capabilities of the new joystick your game will suck. It's understandable that he can become a bit frustrated having to rethink the control use and build a gameplay around it, he might also give couple of bitter intervews but with time he'll get over it...
And by the way, without the add-on the Revolution controller has one joystick and Katamari requires two, one more reason for his grievance.
The Power Glove was *NOT* a Nintendo product.
This really can't be stated enough, and it is entirely relevent to this discussion, should any moderators notice.
A community-oriented lyrics site
My thoughts exactly. A guy who has only released software for the PS2 doesn't have anything good to say about the competition's new box? Man that's a suprise.
God, even REMEMBERING that POS gives me a headache.
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The kind that would release the Virtual Boy.
The kind that would lose a virtual monopoly on the console industry.
Should I go on?
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Wow, what kind of morons do you think are running Nintendo? The kind that would release the Virtual Boy.
The people people responsible for Virtual Boy are no longer running the company, so your comment is baseless.
Flagship or not, the Virtual Boy was released to a big ad campaign and was greatly anticipated...and "horribly flawed" would be something of an understatement. :)
Exactly. The Power Glove was made by a big-name toy manufacturer (Mattel) who's two main product lines are molded plastic dolls (Barbie) and die-cast miniature cars (Hot Wheels). I thought it worked fairly well, all things considered. There were some things that you could do with one that you could not replicate on a regular controller. I remember playing Milon's Secret Castle with the "Glove" and having the character moonwalk (i.e. walk backwards).
That, and he only had 2 comments in over a century of history, with profits every quarter.
Please, do go on. I wouldn't want to call you out on your silly little attempt to be witty though.
It's good to see someone in the industry figuring out the most frustrating part of video games. After all, those of us with poor hand-eye coordination have been blaming the controller for decades.
wish I had some mod points to give you some karma since most people don't know that and his games require dual sticks to be any sorta fun ;p
it looks odd, it plays odd probably 2
but if someone is able to do it righ... nintendo is the right company for the job, no doubt about that
What happens when microsoft brings out a similar controller for the Xbox 360...uh oh, Revolution de-evolved.
Try replacing the word "controller" with "Virtual Boy".
The only problem I see with this new type of controller design is that we will be forced to buy 4 of them, maybe even five (If we include our heads) to be able to play fighting games; this doesn't make financial sense. Not only that, our significant others will die of laughter; this controller is dangerous.
Those of you that are old enough, think back to the days of the 2600. Some of the best most memorable games used the paddle. To date, Kaboom! has not had a decent remake. It simply cannot be done with anything other than a paddle. As much as I love Playstation controller for a gamepad, it had definitly limited game play. That is also why FPS suck on the consoles and are good on the PC. FPS need the mouse/keyboard interface.
he's just mad because the controller isn't made of glue so crap will stick to it.
Criticism is one thing, but outright dismissal? To me such a reactionary stance on a potentially huge industry development indicates feelings of inadequacy on Takahashi's part, and perhaps a lack of imagination as well.
I think I would put my trust in Shigeru Miyamoto and his team over this guy. Miyamoto's track record's just a bit more prestigious...
### Do you really Nintendo would not bother to beta test their flagship product?
GBA, the one without ligth and an extremly dark screen
Virtual Boy
that Z-Button on the Gamecube controller
Sure, Nintendo does beta test their stuff, but not-so-release-ready products have already been released by that company and it migth happen again. It migth not be likly that the controller sucks, but that it holds up to all expectations of the players isn't a sure thing either.
Takahashi is making the same mistake a lot of developers made before the DS came out: he's assuming that because this new control mechanism is offered, you *must* use it to make a good game. That's not it at all, the Revolution controller simply opens up a brand new area of control never before offered in such a way- the focus on it is marketing.
The same thing happened to the DS- developers assumed that because there were 2 screens and a touch screen and a microphone, you had to use all of that in your game. A few developers pre-emptively knocked the DS for this very reason. But look at the best DS games, like Castlevania, Mario Kart, or Nintendogs: they're all more or less the same kind of games we're used to but they use the features the DS offers in exciting ways to enrich the gameplay and immerse us in it. The Revolution operates on the same principle- don't build your game AROUND the features but rather use the features to enhance an already-good game design.
So in that sense I agree with Takahashi, that the quality of a game design is not inherently linked to a controller. However, I think the best game designs are the ones that use the unique tools available to them. Dawn of Sorrow would've been just like the trifecta of Castlevanias on the GBA had it not included the new spell system you drew onto the touch screen yourself. In this way, a good game design was enhanced with the DS's tools to make it unique, which I think very much helped Dawn of Sorrow become the best game in the series, save Symphony of the Night only.
The Revolution is all about ENHANCING gameplay, not CREATING gameplay.
-Moses
Why do gaming elitists deride cutting edge graphics as sucking the life out of the game industry, but then claim that cutting edge controller design is somehow going to save the game industry. Both graphics and controller are a means for communicating between the gamer and the game. Improvements in either controller or graphics will allow for the creation of better games, more innovative games, etc. However, in the end, the game is all that is important. A crappy game on a console capable of breath taking graphics is still a crappy game, and a crappy game on a system with an extremely innovative controller is still a crappy game.
I can't be the only person to have noticed the hypocrisy, but then again, the fanboyism around here seems to cause people to lose the ability to think rationally. Nintendo fanboys often say something along the lines of the following:
"The PS3 and 360 are crap because they emphasize cutting edge graphics, but the Revolution will be great because it emphasizes cutting edge controllers".
Lets start calling them out on their hypocrisy.
I have always been frustrated with controllers, and it always seems to be a neglected area in gaming. As a simulation fan, I have spent a lot of money of quality joysticks and rudder pedals for flight simulators. Yet I am still tied to the keyboard for many controls - unless I went and built a whole cockpit with switches, levers and dials. It just feels wrong trying to create an immersive experience, but then to have it feel like you are operating a computer.
I think it would be great if interfaces and controllers were the next fronteir of game development.
... and then they built the supercollider.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I can kind of understand this remark coming from him considering that he did use dual analog sticks in an unconventional (although not entirely new) way to control the Katamari. But has he seriously never considered how the shape of ALMOST EVERY GAME WE PLAY today has been entirely, uh, controlled by the input options available to designers? When I consider it, the venerable old analog stick is just a metaphor for human locomotion. We are all creatures which, essentially, just move about in a 2-dimensional plane. Hence, our joysticks are 2-d input devices optimized for making our little avatar run around on an essentially flat plane of polygons. Trouble is, we humans do so much more than just moving around. We pick up and manipulate things with our hands, we swing our heads around, etc. Three dimensionally complex motions like this have always just boiled down to "press a button to perform an action". Yes, just picking things up will get boring, but my point is that maybe designers can now focus on actions at a finer level of detail than just "move here and press a button". My skill at a sword fighting game can now be based on my ability to move in a way that actually mimics real swordfighting, instead of the challenge of pressing a button at the correct time. I can now play a billiards game where I actually have to move like a person playing pool would. We can now shape challenges in ways that aren't limited to a direction and a binary input. Videogame players are comfortable with our conventions. Of course we can immerse ourselves in an experience that completely abstracts itself through joysticks and buttons, because we've grown up doing it, our minds are trained to do it. Nintendo sees the masses of people out there who can't understand this, those people who see the moving of sticks and the pressing of buttons as the central part of the experience, and who can't understand why the rest of us are so enamored of it. That's why Nintendo is pushing this, and why they'll have a 'backwards compatible' controller for the Revolution. As bullish as I am on the controller, I still want to see it in action, use one for myself, to see if the promise pays off. But still, at least Nintendo is trying to open new doors for designers to peer through.
Now before all the nintendo fanboys try to rip me a new one, bear with me...
It's a controller. This is NOT an integral part of the console that could never be done without buying a Revolution, as nintendo are trying to make out.
Do PC makers make a big deal out of the fact that you can buy an entire car simulator controller (proper pedals, wheel, seat, etc)?
I believe I'm on the same wavelength as the guy, and my problem isn't really the idea of the controller per se`.... just that nintendo seem to be relying on using it as their entire marketing campaign, and are hyping the shit out of something that is a PERIPHERAL and not a core part of the console.
There is NO technical reason that this controller could not exist on a PC, PS2, Xbox... or even a Gamecube, n64, etc.
This is contrary to the story nintendo are trying to push - and this is what is pissing people off about it.
IMHO....
I mean I may well end up buying a Revolution, but it's not because of the controller, and in fact the controller/hype is one of the things pushing me AWAY from that choice at the moment...
smash.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
This is twice as odd when you consider that Katamari's control scheme would have been ass without the Dual Shock (the greatest controller known to man).
The controller will require you to use larger muscles and more muscle groups rather than smaller muscles individually. So in theory it should be much better than current controllers for RSI. There is pretty much nothing that could be worse than what we have now for causing RSI.
I can see one potential problem-- a given game could require lots of isolated wrist rotation. but unlike, say, using a screwdriver, it won't require the application of any force while doing the rotation. and if you're moving your whole arm while rotating, shouldn't be a big deal.
Of course the controller isn't measuring force, so you don't have to do anything forcefully.
And c'mon... if you are already preemptively worrying about it bumping into someone, or flying out of someone's hand and giving somebody else an owie... i'm sure your type can find a million other things to worry about until it's actually released.
there is only the door, the door, the door.
Seeing as Bungie originally planned on releasing Halo for the Mac & PC. Halo was only announced for the Xbox after Bungie was acquired by Microsoft. They actually created the first real FPS for the mac. Check out the wikipedea article for more info. Your point was made, though.
Except that the Revolution ships with just a Rev controller, not a game cube one (and probably not a shell). Games have to be playable with a system out of the box, no third party acessories unless they include them, ala guitar hero of FFXI. If nintendo shipped with the old controller, or alowed developers to develop specifically for it, then nobody would utilize the new controller because its probably a lot more complicated. I think the shell will be their mostly for backwards compatability, to play GC games, and SNES-N64 games, you dont need anything else for NES/Famicom though, since if you turn the Rev controller sideways its exactly the same.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
You have completely missed the point- Nintendo fanboys, as you're calling them, aren't attacking graphics as a whole, they're attacking the notion that higher-quality graphics make for a better game on their own.
Beyond that, if they ARE implying a new controller makes for a better game, they're dead wrong. Rather, what myself and many others are excited about are the *possibilities* offered by the new controller. It has the potential to open up completely new avenues of game design, which may end up changing the industry.
Therefor, your analogy of comparing graphics to controllers is flawed. Graphics are extremely important in communicating gameplay, but that has more to do with style and less to do with actual quality. A better comparison would be like saying the Revolution controller is akin to a completely new art style: not inherently good on its own, but when used correctly can create very new experiences. What you're talking about is like comparing the quality of graphics to the quality of the build of the controller- just as adding a few more polygons really doesn't offer a whole lot to the game, just like making the controller a bit sturdier really doesn't add a whole lot to the game..
So what I'm saying is, graphics become integral to a game's quality based on *how* they're used, not to the level they're used. Similarly, the Revolution controller becomes integral to a game's quality based on *how* it's used, not to the level it's used (as in, employing as many crazy features as possible). The controller is not the game itself but can enable great things *in* the game. The Revolution is all about posibilities.
-Moses
As for losing a virtual monopoly... They're still the only one turning a profit on their consoles, even if their marketshare has fallen. It hasn't exactly destroyed the company.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
That's probably what they said about the mouse when the first one was made...
Katamari Damacy is the only console game I've played in a long while that I actually loved
Sounds like you are a jaded gamer that could use something like the Nintendo Revolution.
I think a symptom of that is companies like Nintendo are starting to ignore old audiences.
I'm sorry, but didn't you just say you hadn't played a game you loved in a while until Katamari? Maybe Nintendo should branch out to new audiences and make new and different games!
I just want a simple game I know how to play and can do so without large effort.
If you want to play a game you know how to play, why not play one you already own? It can't get much simpler than that. Oh yeah, you are already jaded with those...
See here's the thing. Nintendo doesn't want ports. They are setting themselves up as the second console. A person might own a PS3 or a 360, but most consumers will not spend the cash to have both. So what does Nintendo do? They sell an ultra-cheap console to sit alongside the more expensive console of choice. There's no point of having a game that is a port on a Revolution when more than likely the consumer will buy that game for their more expensive console. It's a brilliant strategy if you ask me.
There already is one. It's called the Gamecube controller, and you'll be able to use it with the Revolution.
Actually, you won't. I think you are thinking of how a dev Revo controller was being used on a Gamecube dev kit before the Revolution dev kits were being sent out.
Takahashi thinks outlandish and outside-the-box, whereas Miyamoto thinks integration and connecting-the-dots. It's easy to see how their opinions would differ.
Hasn't this Revolution controller been around for a while and made by macally and called the air stick? or the even older gyro mouse thing. I remember the gyro mouse when it came out in 1995. What does this Revolution controler do that Gyro mouse and the air stick don't?
. html
The air stick has been out for a good few years.
http://macally.com/spec/usb/input_device/airstick
OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink
Well, to be fair, Takahashi had nothing to do with the PSP version.
just some guy
Um, no, you're assumption is incorrect. Nintendo has been around since 1889. They started off by making cards for card games. See the wikipedia article below for more details.
Oh, and I do mean actually "your". Bah, typos be damned!
Well, I can see where he's coming from, he does have a point.
Fun games depend on good gameplay. Good gameplay depends on good design, and that's all in the software. No controller will ever change that. No piece of hardware will ever automatically make a game fun if it's not well designed.
But I think he's missing two really big points.
The first is, the controller is flat out more capable than existing controllers. It can do things current controllers can't, and for the most part, can do everything they can in a slightly different way.
Second, from a consumer standpoint, it's less complex. Arm, wrist & hand movements are more natural than precise finger movements, easier too. For instance, most people can hit a nail with a hammer, drum out a rhythm with their hands, or play air guitar with ridiculously exaggerated strumming. Less people can touchtype, play piano or play a real guitar.
The first set of actions require some hand eye coordination, and maybe a sense of rhythm. The second set of actiosn require that, as well as a great deal of flexibility and precision with individual fingers.
Existing controllers fall into the second set of actions. They're something that is learned, and not everyone can learn. Nintendo's objective is to create a controller that falls into the first set. Something that anyone can just pick up and use, and understand intuitively.
Which, you know, is great. But it doesn't matter how easy it is to use if the software abstracts from the base design too much. Badly designed games are badly designed no matter what controller you use. But a better controller can make what was previously impossible possible. What's more, a better controller can make a brilliant designed game more popular, because more people will be able to play it, if for no other reason than the controller itself is less daunting to look at.
And that brings me to the other point he is missing. The reason Nintendo is putting so much emphasis on the controller is mainly because they don't want to show anything else yet. Nintendo always plays things close to their chest, they don't like to reveal all their ideas early on.
Nintendo is focusing on the controller for two reasons. First, it's a pretty large paradigm shift they're trying to pull off here. The longer people have to get used to the idea, the less likely they are to disregard it out of hand. Second, it's distracting. It's something that's already out there, that people can talk and speculate about. Slashdot alone has proven that we can argue over the controller for months without even one single bit of extra information. That means as long as Nintendo can keep hype, speculation and thought about the controller going, they don't have to say a damn thing about anything else in the Revolution. People will totally ignore the fact that they haven't shown games yet simply because there's so much to talk about with just the controller itself. And that means they can keep their secrets that much longer. Anytime someone gets close and says, "Hey, is that a game with Pitt you're working on!?" Nintendo pulls the controller slight of hand with another interview or statement on theorectical possiblities, and we all shift gears just like they want us to. If you ask me, Nintendo is being bloody brilliant on this one.
In the end, Takahashi is right. The controller itself is just a tool. A superior tool, yes, but still just a tool. What matters most is whether anyone makes good use of that tool, and that will depend on the developers themselves. But you can't imply Nintendo is ignoring game design. Nintendo always focuses on game design. In fact, every controller Nintendo has ever released has been a direct result of the games they designed. They design controllers arou
just some guy
It has been stated in several places the Rev will support the Cube joysticks. Any developer who has trouble with the new stick, can just calm down and stay old gen if they want.
i personally think concern over the controller is warrented. the controller is the first thing i look at in a gamr system. i don't care it has 40 quadrillion teraflops of processing power in it. i care if the controller is comphorable and easy to use without having to look down at it.
this would be the reason why i hate the Playstation's (the controllers are too fracking small and give me sore hands. even the aftermarket ones are too damn small.) and i love the gamecube (comphy and and differantly shaped and sized buttons are a great idea.) and the original (huge) xbox controller (i'm beginning to feel like i'm the only one who likes that controller.)
then the next concern is "are the games good?" if there aren't any good games, why bother?
then finally the power of the system itself and the graphics and such then enters into my sphere of thought.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
I agree that he probably meant the comment to be understood like this. However, I still don't agree.
Flashy graphics have a very small influence on the kind of games that are possible and on the gamer's enjoyment of the game.
The controller, however, can fundamentally change what games are possible (e.g. RTS games hardly work without a mouse) and can make specific genres much more enjoyable (e.g. Metroid Prime on the DS is the first portable FPS that is actually fun to play).
If you compare a fundamentally new controller to updated graphics, you're not doing the controller justice.
So what you're saying is that Katamari Damacy would not have been possible with a controller without two analog sticks? That's, like, every console generation before the current one.
Not to mention that it was Nintendo who introduced the analog stick. But that shouldn't have that much influence on the enjoyment of games, right?
The Revolution has 4 GameCube controller ports and two slots for GCN memory cards for full backwards-compatibility with GCN disks. So, yes, the GCN controller can be used with the Rev. However, Nintendo nor any third parties are designing games with a traditional controller in mind. The "shell" controller has yet to be revealed to developers, so for launch games and likely for the first year, hardly any games will use the shell. Likely, by the time games come out that require a shell, there will be so many non-shell games that noone will care anyway. Between the RevMote and the nunchuk joystick/triggers combo, that gives you enough buttons and movement axes for pretty much every game anyway. A shell is not needed but will be included to make developers feel like they have a plan B in case they can't get their game working ok with the remote, and also to let people play downloaded retro games (NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, TurboGraphix) without buying a GCN controller.
Born to Play
Steel Battalion
Guitar Hero
X Gaming
Bass Fishing
DDR
Samba De Amigo
Taiko Drum Master
Beatmania
Light gun
You can't combine all or even two of these controllers without killing game play.
This is how it will go.
... fantastic ... Wand control is the only way to go, we always thought that!
Katahashi : Revolution controller is the worst!
Nintendo : We think your games are fantastic!
Katahashi:
1: I'm guessing that was for cost and/or battery life reasons. Original GBA is far from a bad console, I got a lot of use out of mine.
2: True dat
3: They designed the controller around Mario Sunshine, allegedy. And the z is fine in that, it's just crap in games where it sees heavy use. I see their logic, I don't like it, but I can't say it's actually wrong.
There are others, all of which are arguable, like the crappy shoulders on the SP, the N64 controller which was either genius or madness...
Every console company has problems though. Multitaps - what the fuck, how about 4 controller ports... Original xbox controller... paying to play deathmatch online... dreamcast VMs (cute, but so not worth it)...
Failing to ever capitalize on the Gamecube
The abysmal technical glitches that plagued the Famicom on its Japanese release (the one that required a complete recall).
I'm sure they had some screw-ups when they were a card company too, but I can't remember back that far and the records were probably destroyed by the radiation.
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
If graphics have more to do with style, then I'd love to see the gameplay that is possible in a 3D game such as Oblivion done on the NES.
the ds version was a fake as well. only ever seen one article about it and lets face it, katamari on the ds would get loads of press attention.
Introduction of NES != founding of Nintendo. If you were truly born before Nintendo was founded, congratulations. Be sure to get Guinness to attend your next birthday party.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
can't you write a game that uses the revolution controller for its "normal" features?
MORTAR COMBAT!
That is, if you're going to look around, move quickly from one side of the katamari to the other , zoom out, etc.
My Journal
### 1: I'm guessing that was for cost and/or battery life reasons. Original GBA is far from a bad console, I got a lot of use out of mine.
I kind of doubt it, battery life might have been gone down by light, but it would be easy to make it make it toggleable, like they later did on the GBAsp. The biggest problem was that the missing light wasn't just a little annoyancy like it was with the former GBAs, but it made the GBA pretty much unusable under anything but almost perfect light conditions, since the GBA was quite a bit darker then its predecessors. My guess would be that Nintendo switches to another kind of LCD sortly before releasing it and that turned darker then expected, the dev kits for the GBA at least where a lot brighter then what got out to the massed.
### And the z is fine in that, it's just crap in games where it sees heavy use. I see their logic, I don't like it, but I can't say it's actually wrong.
Well, a bad z-button is better then no extra button, the Gamecube pad is already short on buttons, but as it stands the Z-trigger doesn't make a whole lot of sense, it doesn't press well, its only on one side and really doesn't fit very well in the overall controller design. I would bet that it wasn't planed to be there from the start, but something that got tacked on in the last few minutes before going into production.
### like the crappy shoulders on the SP,
More like I taste issue I would say, never had problems with them.
### the N64 controller which was either genius or madness
Wrong planing for most part, the controller would have been fine if there would have been classic 2D games for the N64, but there almost wasn't any, so almost no game made use of the dpad, which made the whole dpad section of the controller useless.
### Original xbox controller.
Thats definitivly a beast, wondering what mad cow drove them to stick not just one, but two memory slots in the controller (one of the reasons why its so damn fat), when memory slots on the console are a lot more usefull. That controller really shouldn't have made it beyond quality assurance.
Again, you've missed the point- you're assuming that 3D graphics are inherently of better quality than 2D graphics. Rather, 3D graphics are just another medium, like, say, oil paint as opposed to watercolor.
Just look at animated movies- would Snow White have worked as well as a CG movie? Would Toy Story have worked as well as a classically animated movie? No on both accounts. Some pieces work better as 3D, some better as 2D.
Now that's not to say the level of quality in the graphics of Oblivion aren't important, because for a game like Oblivion, it *is* important. Oblivion's main goal is to immerse you in a virtual world, so a better argument you could have made would have been asking me if Oblivion would have worked on the N64 or Playstation, in which case the answer is no. The gameplay would be just as good, but the experience as a whole would be incredibly lacking.
However, I wasn't making the case that graphical quality improvements as a whole weren't important, but more that the improvements made between last generation and this generation aren't terribly important. I think Oblivion would work almost as well on the XBox (and in fact it did as Morrowind).
-Moses