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?'"

Comments

What Evokes These Comments?

[eldavojohn]

Seriously, during an interview does anyone actually think before they speak? It's almost like any new interview must end/start with an encouragement to say anything at all offensive or shocking so that the interview will be read by a wider audience. And it's kind of disgusting.

"I'm not really interested in it. I don't think a controller should have that much influence on the enjoyment of games."

A lot of the games that are released are cookie cutter games that are slaves to the limitations of the hardware. I welcome a new kind of controller. In fact, I would be tempted to say that you're narrow minded if you're not ready to try a completely new kind of controller.

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?"

Takahashi, who has not yet announced his current post-Katamari game project or its platform, concluded on the subject of the Revolution: "So, there's nothing I really want to do with it right now."

I sincerely hope this was taken out of context or misquoted otherwise I would mod this article as flamebait.

It's new. It obviously has new capabilities. How about you use your imagination instead of your tongue?

Re:What Evokes These Comments?

[Fallen Kell]

I agree with you completely on this. I think his main problem is that they WILL have to think outside the box again. This takes time and costs more money then just rehashing something you have already done in the past with maybe some new flashy graphics and some extra physics engine capability.

Heaven FORBID that they need to go back to the drawing board on HCI (Human Computer Interaction) because there is now a lot more capability that was just added to the HCI interface. This completely causes you to re-design full gameplay and get new test studies on how to do things. It makes the companies work again for the titles instead of chop/paste from the past. WOW! They need to take some time again to develop games... what a concept. The sky is falling because of this.

Re:What Evokes These Comments?

[Anonymous Coward]

answer: A large wad of cash courtesy of Sony.

Re:What Evokes These Comments?

[Anonymous Coward]

I sincerely hope this was taken out of context or misquoted otherwise I would mod this article as flamebait.

Try this, replace the word "controller" with the words "flashy graphics" in his quotes and I think you'll start getting a better sense of where he's coming from. I don't think his point is that he is not willing to adapt to a new controller, instead, he's saying that Nintendo seems to be emphasizing the controller itself instead of the things that Nintendo has been traditionally strong in, such as good gameplay and design. In a way he does have a point, cool controller does not a good game make. Just like having the most powerful graphics engine in the universe won't automatically make a crap game great. That's not to say that cool new innovative games that take advantage of the controller won't appear, I'm sure they will, but there's gotta be more than that in the long run to have a healthy platform.

Re:What Evokes These Comments?

[Chris Burke]

Yeah, from that point of view it makes sense. But I think he's not giving Nintendo enough credit -- I believe they are emphasizing the controller's ability to enable good gameplay and design. The controller is the "revolution" in the "Revolution". Otherwise it's just a new console incorporating new silicon advancements following Moore's Law, like the other two.

If you require neither flashier graphics, superior processing power, nor a new look at game input, then you really don't need a new console at all. Which you could argue you don't, if in fact you are one of those who has mastered good gameplay and design. But if you want to create actual change in gaming from the standpoint of hardware, then a game controller is a good way to do it.

Case in point: Would you say that Nintendo abandoned good gameplay and design when they developed the N64 controller? Is a D-Pad all a good game designer ever needs? Or did the addition of the analog stick open up possibilities for good designers that didn't really exist before? From Mario 64 to Super Monkey Ball to Katamari Damacy itself, there are slews of games which were able to do more with an analog stick than they would with a digital one, and have much better gameplay as a result.

I highly doubt Nintendo has de-emphasized gameplay and design. I strongly suspect that Nintendo's game designers want the new controller as much as anyone as a way to realize better gameplay. If Nintendo is mostly talking about the controller, it's because 1) it's the major change the console brings to the table and 2) they probably don't feel they really need to say that they'll put effort into making games that are well designed irrespective of the controller.

Re:What Evokes These Comments?

[EggyToast]

Perhaps, except that his use of dual analog controls is really what makes the game fun. The limited movement on the PSP proves that in a large part, the controller's abilities made the game what it was.

The thing that I don't understand about criticisms of the controller is that they seem to ignore the fact that "attachments" seem to be the order of the day. I'll balk at the Big N as much as the next guy if each attachment runs $20 and you need 4 or 5 in order to play the best games, but ignoring that, there's no reason he couldn't create a very creative game, and then create an attachment that really works for the game -- instead of having to graft it on to a standard controller.

Re:What Evokes These Comments?

[Doomstalk]

BUT Nintendo is notorius for taking an old concept and revamping.

Nintendo's also known for innovation in its hardware. With the Game & Watch Nintendo invented the D-pad, and introduced it to the home console with the NES/Famicom. Then they introduced the analog stick with the N64 (albeit in a bizarrey shaped controller). With the Gamecube they created the "digital click" which, though largely unused, was a very nice compromise between digital and analog shoulder buttons (for a good use of this feature see Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes). And now, with the DS, they've introduced all kinds of interesting possibilitied with the touchscreen (not their invention, but it's a first in consoles). There are games for the DS that simply CAN NOT be reroduced with a standard controller, such as Yoshi Touch & Go and Kirby's Canvas Curse. Then there are interesting side-notes, like the gyroscopic controls in Kirby Tilt & Tumble.

Furthermore, you complain all you want about Nintendo's stable of franchises, but they do innovate a lot within the confines of said IP. For a classic example, look at Mario 64- it's basically the template from which all other 3D platformers are drawn. Also take a look at Super Smash Bros.- character-wise it's the epitome of Nintendo's franchise-itis: it's nothing but old Nintendo franchises stuffed into a fighting game. Pokemon, But, when you look beyond that, you'll find a fighting game that's hugely different from just about any other on the market. Pokemon, hated as it is by insecure teens, is another great example of innovation. It's a variation on the standard RPG formula, but it veers sharply from mand of the standards/cliches of the genre with wildly entertaining results. Finally, the Kirby titles in the previous paragraph also serve as a good example- the little puffball's had at least 4 different control schemes.

I wouldn't say that Nintendo's reliance on fanchises is a case of laziness. It demonstrates an understanding of the power and recognizability that such old standards can have. Hell, I'd go so far as to say that it's a testament to the power of Nintendo's innovation. You don't create such strong brands by simply doing the same thing over. You do it by making something new and different that sticks with people.

Impact of controllers

[JediLow]

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?

Re:I doubt it will ever materialize anyway

[drinkypoo]

And, even if it does actually work as advertised, it still may be a huge flop. Imagine if the NES had been released with the light gun as the only controller?

The difference is that the Revolution controller does more than a normal controller, not less.

I suspect we might see a more traditional controller emerge when everything is said and done--whether from Nintendo itself, or a 3rd party.

There already is one. It's called the Gamecube controller, and you'll be able to use it with the Revolution.

paradoxical comment

[0biter]

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.

Re:I doubt it will ever materialize anyway

[RyoShin]

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.)

Does "it" mean the controller or the platform?

[antifoidulus]

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.

Re:I doubt it will ever materialize anyway

[vertinox]

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.

One Man's Opinion

[spyrral]

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.

Not deep enough?

[RyoShin]

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.

Re:Not deep enough?

[DrXym]

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.

Which is great, but I suspect that a few years down the line you will a Lancet study on a whole slew of Revolution related injuries - RSI, bruises and fractures etc. - caused by a system that requires someone to wave a controller around, possibly quite forcefully.

Re:Hmm... good opinion

[spyrochaete]

We Love Katamari was started without the say-so of Takahashi, who later joined the project to ensure quality control of his brand. Me And My Katamari for PSP was made entirely without Takahashi.

I think everybody's missing the point

[scolby]

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.

I tend to agree.

[MaWeiTao]

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.

Remember who's speaking

[Silent sound]

"I'm not really interested in it. I don't think a controller should have that much influence on the enjoyment of games."

A lot of the games that are released are cookie cutter games that are slaves to the limitations of the hardware.

Have you ever played Katamari Damacy? There are a full thirteen buttons on the PS2 controller which Katamari Damacy ignores. The entire game is played with two joysticks. The simplicity is enough to make even the Revolution controller look complicated, and yet it entirely achieves the sense of natural interface that the Revolution controller aspires to.

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.

The King of All Cosmos says...

[RobertB-DC]

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.

Re:I doubt it will ever materialize anyway

[porcupine8]

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?).

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.

Wow a sony dev has no interest in Nintendo? SHOCK

[grapeape]

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.

Do you remember

[GWBasic]

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.