Exactly, not a single second of game footage shown, and it's already generating more excitement than the Xbox 360 which has already been released. I'm pretty sure that's what they were going for with the new controller. It's unlikely they'll show game footage until early next year. It's still at least 6 months to system release, so they have plenty of time.
You are correct about the Revmote. It uses 2 sensors and triangulation for positioning. Nintendo hasn't stated whether it uses gyroscopes for angular movement detection, or if it also uses the sensors for that as well.
I don't think they ever stated whether it used RF, but I think that most likely what is used.
Unless you're going to tell me that Super Mario Bros. is the same game as Mario 64.
Perhaps the original Legend of Zelda is the same game as Ocarina of Time, or perhaps it'd be better to compare it to Zelda 2?
There is a difference between franchises and sequels. GTA3 is in the same franchise as GTA2, but isn't really a sequel. They had the technology to improve the game, and made it a different game, but with a similar name.
Mario has Mario Party, Paper Mario, Mario Kart, Mario Baseball and so on. They're part of the same franchise, but they're hardly sequels.
That being said, there are 7 Mario Parties now, true sequels, all basically the same game. I personally couldn't stomach more than one of those, but just because you dont' like sequels, doesn't mean everyone else hates them. What's more, with the revolution controller, we can look forward to something new even in sequels. I plan to pick up Mario Party for the Revolution, which will be the first one I've picked up since the original, because it will likely have sufficiently different gameplay (at least in the minigames) to make it worthwhile.
Myself, I actually own more PS2 games than Gamecube games, but then I'm a big fan of RPGs and Strategy games.
The very first thing to do, before buying any books or anything, is find people to play with. This can be friends who are similarly interested, or people who are already playing.
There are several reasons for this, the first being, there is no point in buying the books for the games if you have no one to play with. This is not the type of game you play by yourself, it requires a group of at least 4 people. That way, you can split the cost of the books (specifically with D&D there are 3 core books needed to play), or if you find a group already playing, most of them will already have the books, and you can borrow them until you decide whether you like it enough to own it.
Another good reason to find a group is because, while D&D is a big name, it's not the only Pen & Paper RPG out there. You may get into a group who prefers Shadowrun (a futuristic cyberpunk game), Big Eyes, Small Mouth (an anime game) or one of the branded big name games (there are Star Wars & Star Trek games, a Serenity game coming out, even Buffy and Angel games). There are a lot of choices, so finding a group of friends, and deciding what kind of setting you want, is really the first step. Once you have an idea of setting, pop by your local hobby store (in group even) and ask them what games they suggest for that particular setting. Pick up the main core books, and maybe a module to get you going if you've never RP'd before, and you should be ready to go from there.
My problem with the PS3 is that, despite the fact that it seems otherwise, we actually know less about it than we do the Revolution. Hopefully that will be fixed at CES in January, but up to this point, all we really have is specs. They've shown the system and the controller, but nothing that says whether it plays or feels any better.
At least with Microsoft they put all the information out well in advance of the console release so we had an idea what we were getting.
At least with Nintendo they've let people (even if only a few) play around with the controller and give feedback. They've put out a commercial that displays some of the ideas behind what they're doing, so even if they haven't shown any games, you get a feel for what they're trying to do.
With the PS3, I just feel like they've said, "It's like a PS2, except with a different CPU & GPU! And we redesigned the controller! And it has games! Isn't that great!" Unlike Microsoft & Nintendo, it doesn't seem like Sony has any kind of concrete design philosophy, and with Microsoft pushing Live lilke mad, and Nintendo trying to get everyone to appreciate their new control design, that can only come off as a flaw.
No, the closest developers did not get devkits until shortly before TGS this year (in September I think). Supposedly the processor for the Rev has been finished, so they may have updated devkits soon.
Yes, but Twilight Princess currently has a release date set for April 2006 I believe. Nintendo's fiscal year ends March 2006, so it won't help their profitability estimates for the current fiscal year.
As already mentioned, the Power Glove was made by Mattel, not Nintendo, Nintendo just licensed them to use it with the NES.
Also, the Revmote is not a gyro based control system. It does use gyros to detect rotation, but the big deal is that it uses sensors to detect movement in 3d. It uses 2 sensors and some form of triangulation.
The lack of 3rd party support is purely the customers' fault. The Gamecube had massive 3rd party support for the 1st two years it was out. But when they compared how many games they sold on other systems compared to on the cube, they gave up making games for it. The more systems that are out there, the more likely a company will make a game for it, because they stand to make more money, even with a lower sell through rate. A 95% sell through rate on a game made on the cube is great, but still nets you less overall sales than a 35% sell through rate on a PS2 game.
I think he mentioned them because they added them back for the Revolution. The revmote will have controller expansion ports so that additional control types can be added.
Goldeneye was made by Rare, a company that was owned almost in its entirety by Nintend until they sold it to Microsoft. Before Rare was sold, almost every single person who had actually been on the creative and technical teams for Goldeneye and Perfect Dark formed a company called Free Radical Design, which makes Timesplitters, a game which has had 2 sequels, and can be purchased for any of the 3 available consoles.
Actually, if you look at Nintendo's traditional approach to console/controller design, it's easy to see why the virtual boy failed.
If you can find them, try to read some interviews with Shigeru Miyamoto from when the N64 and the GCN were first coming out.
Basically, what Nintendo has always done was this. Someone at Nintendo (most often Miyamoto-san) said, "I have this really great idea for a game! But the controller everyone is using won't work for it."
And Nintendo goes..., "Well, what kind of controller do you need?"
And Nintendo R&D goes to work. They get a prototype controller, they make their game, and the game designer says, "It still doesn't work right. You need to do this, this and this." And R&D goes back and makes the changes that the game designer suggested.
Throughout Nintendo's history, their controllers have been influenced not by R&D or management or marketing but by what the game designers need to make the games. They went to a dpad when everyone else was using joysticks, because they had a game that wouldn't work right with a joystick. They added more buttons, and especially shoulder buttons when they made the SNES because there was a game that needed the extra buttons, and having more than 4 buttons accessed by the right thumb proved to be uncomfortable and complicated, so they found a better place to put the extra buttons. Remember the N64 controller, and how bizarre it looked when your first saw it? The reason it was designed that way was specifically because of Super Mario 64. At the time, there simply didn't exist a controller that could play this game Miyamoto had been working on, their flagship title, so they made a controller that had the new features he needed, analog control, camera buttons for camera control, and easy access to thumb and forefinger buttons, but they added the 3rd prong so as not to give up dpad control, since there were still many games that worked better with a dpad than with analog.
It was Miyamoto's decision to change the button shape and design on the GCN controller as well. He wanted games to be more intuitive, he was working on Pikmin at the time, and he wanted a few things on the controller changed so the game would work better.
Now, conversely, the VBoy was designed to do 3D, but they designed and built the unit first, and then designed the games later. The only other time in Nintendo history they've done such a thing is with the Nintendo DS (I say this only because I've not heard anyone at Nintendo say they had a particular game in mind when they created the DS, but I could believe that Kirby Canvas Curse inspired the creation of the system), but they worked on enough game ideas for it, before releasing it, that they didn't run into the same problem as they did with the VBoy, which was that it wasn't really comfortable or fun (another reason I can believe they took an R&D before Game Design approach with the DS is that it's nto really comfortable to play in a game that requires quick access to all the buttons).
So while I can't say the controller will be an unqualified success, I'm optimistic because, the way everyone at Nintendo is all smiles whenever they talk about the controller, I suspect we'll learn soon that they had a game idea they were kicking around for a while, but which they simply couldn't make with the existing control scheme and voila (too lazy to find the accented i) you have the Revmote. (Which actually may be why Mario 128, which was announced years ago for the GCN, never came into existence, and is now being mentioned as being a game for the Rev.)
If they are going one about the whole "Remote Controller" concept, it will be a gimmick. Widely used in Nintendo's popular titles like Mario Party or Metroid, many third party developers will come out with a few novel games, but as long as other game consoles and the PC market use "traditional" gamepads, it will not be revolutionary.
I am not dissing the Revolution's RC, I think it will be fun if done right and depending on how well they integrate the add-on components, it could become a major selling feature of the Revolution. It could also become their crutch if ALL games for the Revolution must make use of this novel gimmick. But will it change game controllers forever? No.
Before Nintendo, everyone used joysticks instead of dpads. Then everyone used dpads, until Nintendo added analog sticks. Now everyone uses analog sticks. Just because everybody does something one way doesn't mean they'll refuse to change when something better comes along. Is the Revmote better? I don't know, but I do know that I've yet to come across a current game concept that can't be done intuitively with the revmote & nuchuk. The planned controller shell isn't even necessary.
Asside from that, there is nothing truely revolutionary about the Revolution. Sure, Nintendo will make their back library available for play on the new system, again a gimmick that will drive sales in the first year or so, but I bet Nintendo will opt for a subscription based service that people will grow tired of paying some $X amount of money a month to play games they already owned. Also, this concept isn't even NEW. PS2 could play its entire back library, and the new Xbox360 offers an arcade marketplace for downloading and playing old game favourites from arcades and PC shareware.
Yeeeeeah, we don't know that. It took from E3 to TGS for Nintendo to reveal the controller. It's 6 months minimum to release (doubtful they will release before or even near next year's E3), and they're still holding a lot back. Will anything else be revolutionary? Only Nintendo execs.
Also, Nintendo has already said, for first party games, the wifi connection that used for the DS & Revolution (they're going to use the exact same infrastructure to lessen costs and ease approachability) will be free. Older games will be a pay per download service, almost exactly like Live Arcade. You pay once, download the game to the flash memory stored in your system, and play it whenever you want. This has already been stated. They have stated you can extend the flash memory with SD cards, but have not stated whether you'll be able to copy retro games to those cards and take them with you to a friends Rev. There are valid reasons to allow this, and other, equally valid reasons to disallow it. We'll find out eventually I suppose.
And to put it quite frankly, the PS1+PS2 library together don't quite match the library of titles available to Nintendo if 3rd parties offer their games as well (which several have already said they plan to do...or, more precisely, Nintendo has made deals with them so they will offer said content). Also, as someone else has mentioned, the Rev will play GCN discs. They may have similar problems to the 360, but then again, the Rev has the same hardware manufacturers for the CPU & GPU that the GCN did, and is using the same API as the GCN, so very likely it will use hardware emulation for GC games instead of software, meaning a 98% or better compatibility rate.
For size, I bet the Revolution will be the smallest again, but traditionally Nintendo isn't big on "slick" designs, and usually the end result looks more like a Fisher Price product. I expect that we won't see the slim silver/white wedge that their PR department has been coming out with. It will probably be made out of cheap plastic with handles and other superfluous design elements that aim more for the young gamer market.
An update to what is available for wireless play, as well as to wireless play in general is possible. The DS uses flash ram based cartridges, and, assuming the game doesn't use up the entire space on the cart, upgrades to the programming are possible, but unlikely to occur anytime soon.
Advance Wars (GBA or DS)
Battalion Wars (GCN)
Kirby Canvas Curse (DS)
Mega Man Battle Network (GBA)
Meteos (DS)
Lumines (PSP)
Katamari Damacy (PS2)
There are many games that fit your description. Some are on Nintendo systems, some are not. And if you haven't played Super Smash Bros, you should. Sure, it has all the things you complain about in a game, but it's not any less fun because of it. For that matter, neither is Super Mario 64, or Mario & Luigi Superstar Adventure for the GBA, or Paper Mario. Just because it has a franchise character in it doesn't mean it's just another Mario game.
For all that you're right about the incessant sequels there are a few things you're missing.
Nintendo doesn't only make sequels. In fact, in many cases, fans have desperately pleaded with Nintendo to make sequels and been ignored for years (there was no Metroid released for the N64, there still hasn't been a new Kid Icarus, and I see no GCN Pilotwings).
You're right about very few games at system launch, but usually, those games they launch with are the biggest system sellers, and hold people's interest long enough for good software to come out.
Nintendo was actually the first home console to offer internet service. The original Famicom offered internet service about 17 years ago, but it never made it to the US. They tried it again with the Super Famicom, again only in Japan, and then again with the N64. Think the Live Marketplace is a unique offering. The basic idea behind it was tried by Nintendo on the original Super Famicom, with microtransactions and everything. While not a complete failure, Nintendo made next to no actual money on it, and neither did their partners at the time. That's why they were so leery about it on the Gamecube, they'd yet to find a way to make it both profitable and fun. You can thank Microsoft for proving that online gaming was viable. But Nintendo doesn't have a billion dollars to throw away, so they're not going to offer something that has no chance of making them money.
And yes, their business practices were not the nicest for many years. In fact, the very system of 2nd & 3rd parties was practically invented by them, and 3rd parties tended to get the shaft. But times changed on them, and you know what they did, they changed with the times. Nintendo has a new president, and as a company they are very, very different from what they were even just 5 years ago.
So I'll be getting a 360, and a Revolution, and a PS3, but I'm not gonna get one at launch because it usually just isn't worth it for a least 3 months.
I'm sorry, I think I'm missing your point. Can you explain to me what you mean when you say a game is for kids?
Because, I have several nieces and nephews. They spend a lot of time with me because I own multiple gaming systems and a library of several hundred games. You know what I've found kids between the ages of 2 to 8 like to play? Sports games, racing games, first person shooters and fighting games
They don't play platformers like Mario Sunshine, because they're too hard. They'll play Metroid Prime for all of 5 minutes before they decide it's too hard. They don't play RPGs because they're too boring. Same for puzzle games.
I keep picking up these games other people claim are 'kiddie' games, because I enjoy them, and I can't get any of the actual kids I know to play them. But I pick up Mortal Kombat and my 9 yr old nephew has no problem learning all the moves to the point where he can beat a pc opponent easily, or his cousins about the same age.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not telling you to play games you don't enjoy. I certianly don't. The very reason I don't have a PSP, there just hasn't really been a game for it yet that's drawn my interest. I pretty much picked up a DS because of Kirby Canvas Curse and Meteos. But, are you really saying that it makes a difference what characters appear in it? If the best FPS of the next generation just happens to have Mario and his pals in it, with superior gameplay to anything that has gone before, you're going to not play the game because the characters are too cutesy? Not that any such thing is particularly likely, I just think it's a silly thing to judge a game on.
Nintendo has always gone for more diversity of games. They can't get them because 3rd parties won't make games for a system that doesn't sell (unless it's the Xbox for some reason). If another 100 million Gamecubes had sold, all those games you enjoy so much on PS2 would be on the gamecube as well. The only way to encourage 3rd parties to make games for a system is to buy the system, nothing else works. Sure, they can farm out their core characters (like they did with Link to get Soul Calibur 2), but you notice there's no Soul Calibur 3 for the gamecube, even though the gamecube version of SC2 sold more? It's because there are less gamecubes out there, so less potential for sales. Simple accounting.
Actually, yes, I believe Iwata (company prez) has said on more than one occasion that he wants everyone to pick up a Revolution alongside their 360 or PS3. In fact, if every person who bought a 360 or a PS3 also bought a Revolution, I think Nintendo would be ecstatic.
I work for Comcast in Nashville, TN.
When we released the Video OnDemand service, PPV movie rentals more than tripled. In the old system, you had to wait until the movie started, rent the movie, and watch it right then, and if you missed part of it and wanted to see it again, you had to rent it again.
With ondemand, you now get PPV movies for 24 hours, and even regular premium or free movies for 2 hours. People who'd never even considered PPV before started renting PPVs on a regular basis with this new system, especially since you can rent it anytime you want.
As buggy, slow and unreliable as ondemand is (and there are multiple reasons for this), it's still the number one selling point of digital service.
When you watch anything on ondemand, after it's over it takes you to the 'My Rentals' section after it's done. It would be nothing at all to add an extra button that only appears in this section (ensuring you'd already rented the movie, but not necessarily that you've watched it) to order the DVD.
And people will do it, because most of them are normal people. And normal people are lazy. They'll just see it as convenient. They'll watch a movie they were only a little interested in, and if they like it, they can buy it then and there. Hardcore movie buffs and technofreaks probably won't take advantage of this, but seriously, if you're a hardcore movie buff, if you buy $100+ worth of DVDs every couple of weeks, how often do you even watch PPV? That's not the target audience, because they don't buy PPV movies anyway. This is targeted at people who already spend upwards of $50 a month on PPV (no, really, lots of people do this), often times ordering the same movie 3 or 4 times (I kid you not).
Actually, I consider this a good thing. It'll stop you from flailing about wildly, because, in a real fight, if your sword is blocked, you can recover immediately and be on guard for your opponent's attack, or even weave your sword around the item used to block. After flailing wildly, having your attacked blocked, and not being able to recover because your arms still moving, you'll learn to not put as much force into your blows, so you can recover if you need to. Not every attack has to be bone shattering.
Some of your comparisons are a tad sketchy, but that's not something I'm going to go into.
While the point of your argument is good, you're kind of making Nintendo's argument for them. They were never trying to make a controller that simply imitates things we can already do. Their intent, from the beginning, was to improve the way we interact with games. It's what they've said since before they revealed what the controller was, the one thing they wanted to do was make playing the game more fun, easier and more intuitive. I'm not saying they've accompished it because I haven't had a chance to use one, and while I personally think the controller looks stupid, how it looks has no bearing on how it plays.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly, not a single second of game footage shown, and it's already generating more excitement than the Xbox 360 which has already been released. I'm pretty sure that's what they were going for with the new controller. It's unlikely they'll show game footage until early next year. It's still at least 6 months to system release, so they have plenty of time.
You are correct about the Revmote. It uses 2 sensors and triangulation for positioning. Nintendo hasn't stated whether it uses gyroscopes for angular movement detection, or if it also uses the sensors for that as well. I don't think they ever stated whether it used RF, but I think that most likely what is used.
Unless you're going to tell me that Super Mario Bros. is the same game as Mario 64.
Perhaps the original Legend of Zelda is the same game as Ocarina of Time, or perhaps it'd be better to compare it to Zelda 2?
There is a difference between franchises and sequels. GTA3 is in the same franchise as GTA2, but isn't really a sequel. They had the technology to improve the game, and made it a different game, but with a similar name.
Mario has Mario Party, Paper Mario, Mario Kart, Mario Baseball and so on. They're part of the same franchise, but they're hardly sequels.
That being said, there are 7 Mario Parties now, true sequels, all basically the same game. I personally couldn't stomach more than one of those, but just because you dont' like sequels, doesn't mean everyone else hates them. What's more, with the revolution controller, we can look forward to something new even in sequels. I plan to pick up Mario Party for the Revolution, which will be the first one I've picked up since the original, because it will likely have sufficiently different gameplay (at least in the minigames) to make it worthwhile.
Myself, I actually own more PS2 games than Gamecube games, but then I'm a big fan of RPGs and Strategy games.
There are several reasons for this, the first being, there is no point in buying the books for the games if you have no one to play with. This is not the type of game you play by yourself, it requires a group of at least 4 people. That way, you can split the cost of the books (specifically with D&D there are 3 core books needed to play), or if you find a group already playing, most of them will already have the books, and you can borrow them until you decide whether you like it enough to own it.
Another good reason to find a group is because, while D&D is a big name, it's not the only Pen & Paper RPG out there. You may get into a group who prefers Shadowrun (a futuristic cyberpunk game), Big Eyes, Small Mouth (an anime game) or one of the branded big name games (there are Star Wars & Star Trek games, a Serenity game coming out, even Buffy and Angel games). There are a lot of choices, so finding a group of friends, and deciding what kind of setting you want, is really the first step. Once you have an idea of setting, pop by your local hobby store (in group even) and ask them what games they suggest for that particular setting. Pick up the main core books, and maybe a module to get you going if you've never RP'd before, and you should be ready to go from there.
At least with Microsoft they put all the information out well in advance of the console release so we had an idea what we were getting.
At least with Nintendo they've let people (even if only a few) play around with the controller and give feedback. They've put out a commercial that displays some of the ideas behind what they're doing, so even if they haven't shown any games, you get a feel for what they're trying to do.
With the PS3, I just feel like they've said, "It's like a PS2, except with a different CPU & GPU! And we redesigned the controller! And it has games! Isn't that great!" Unlike Microsoft & Nintendo, it doesn't seem like Sony has any kind of concrete design philosophy, and with Microsoft pushing Live lilke mad, and Nintendo trying to get everyone to appreciate their new control design, that can only come off as a flaw.
No, the closest developers did not get devkits until shortly before TGS this year (in September I think). Supposedly the processor for the Rev has been finished, so they may have updated devkits soon.
Yes, but Twilight Princess currently has a release date set for April 2006 I believe. Nintendo's fiscal year ends March 2006, so it won't help their profitability estimates for the current fiscal year.
As already mentioned, the Power Glove was made by Mattel, not Nintendo, Nintendo just licensed them to use it with the NES. Also, the Revmote is not a gyro based control system. It does use gyros to detect rotation, but the big deal is that it uses sensors to detect movement in 3d. It uses 2 sensors and some form of triangulation.
The lack of 3rd party support is purely the customers' fault. The Gamecube had massive 3rd party support for the 1st two years it was out. But when they compared how many games they sold on other systems compared to on the cube, they gave up making games for it. The more systems that are out there, the more likely a company will make a game for it, because they stand to make more money, even with a lower sell through rate. A 95% sell through rate on a game made on the cube is great, but still nets you less overall sales than a 35% sell through rate on a PS2 game.
I think he mentioned them because they added them back for the Revolution. The revmote will have controller expansion ports so that additional control types can be added.
Goldeneye was made by Rare, a company that was owned almost in its entirety by Nintend until they sold it to Microsoft. Before Rare was sold, almost every single person who had actually been on the creative and technical teams for Goldeneye and Perfect Dark formed a company called Free Radical Design, which makes Timesplitters, a game which has had 2 sequels, and can be purchased for any of the 3 available consoles.
Heh, by that logic, a multiplayer, first person shooter starring the rugrats using waterguns would be considered mature.
If you can find them, try to read some interviews with Shigeru Miyamoto from when the N64 and the GCN were first coming out.
Basically, what Nintendo has always done was this. Someone at Nintendo (most often Miyamoto-san) said, "I have this really great idea for a game! But the controller everyone is using won't work for it."
And Nintendo goes..., "Well, what kind of controller do you need?"
And Nintendo R&D goes to work. They get a prototype controller, they make their game, and the game designer says, "It still doesn't work right. You need to do this, this and this." And R&D goes back and makes the changes that the game designer suggested.
Throughout Nintendo's history, their controllers have been influenced not by R&D or management or marketing but by what the game designers need to make the games. They went to a dpad when everyone else was using joysticks, because they had a game that wouldn't work right with a joystick. They added more buttons, and especially shoulder buttons when they made the SNES because there was a game that needed the extra buttons, and having more than 4 buttons accessed by the right thumb proved to be uncomfortable and complicated, so they found a better place to put the extra buttons. Remember the N64 controller, and how bizarre it looked when your first saw it? The reason it was designed that way was specifically because of Super Mario 64. At the time, there simply didn't exist a controller that could play this game Miyamoto had been working on, their flagship title, so they made a controller that had the new features he needed, analog control, camera buttons for camera control, and easy access to thumb and forefinger buttons, but they added the 3rd prong so as not to give up dpad control, since there were still many games that worked better with a dpad than with analog.
It was Miyamoto's decision to change the button shape and design on the GCN controller as well. He wanted games to be more intuitive, he was working on Pikmin at the time, and he wanted a few things on the controller changed so the game would work better.
Now, conversely, the VBoy was designed to do 3D, but they designed and built the unit first, and then designed the games later. The only other time in Nintendo history they've done such a thing is with the Nintendo DS (I say this only because I've not heard anyone at Nintendo say they had a particular game in mind when they created the DS, but I could believe that Kirby Canvas Curse inspired the creation of the system), but they worked on enough game ideas for it, before releasing it, that they didn't run into the same problem as they did with the VBoy, which was that it wasn't really comfortable or fun (another reason I can believe they took an R&D before Game Design approach with the DS is that it's nto really comfortable to play in a game that requires quick access to all the buttons).
So while I can't say the controller will be an unqualified success, I'm optimistic because, the way everyone at Nintendo is all smiles whenever they talk about the controller, I suspect we'll learn soon that they had a game idea they were kicking around for a while, but which they simply couldn't make with the existing control scheme and voila (too lazy to find the accented i) you have the Revmote. (Which actually may be why Mario 128, which was announced years ago for the GCN, never came into existence, and is now being mentioned as being a game for the Rev.)
I am not dissing the Revolution's RC, I think it will be fun if done right and depending on how well they integrate the add-on components, it could become a major selling feature of the Revolution. It could also become their crutch if ALL games for the Revolution must make use of this novel gimmick. But will it change game controllers forever? No.
Before Nintendo, everyone used joysticks instead of dpads. Then everyone used dpads, until Nintendo added analog sticks. Now everyone uses analog sticks. Just because everybody does something one way doesn't mean they'll refuse to change when something better comes along. Is the Revmote better? I don't know, but I do know that I've yet to come across a current game concept that can't be done intuitively with the revmote & nuchuk. The planned controller shell isn't even necessary.
Asside from that, there is nothing truely revolutionary about the Revolution. Sure, Nintendo will make their back library available for play on the new system, again a gimmick that will drive sales in the first year or so, but I bet Nintendo will opt for a subscription based service that people will grow tired of paying some $X amount of money a month to play games they already owned. Also, this concept isn't even NEW. PS2 could play its entire back library, and the new Xbox360 offers an arcade marketplace for downloading and playing old game favourites from arcades and PC shareware.
Yeeeeeah, we don't know that. It took from E3 to TGS for Nintendo to reveal the controller. It's 6 months minimum to release (doubtful they will release before or even near next year's E3), and they're still holding a lot back. Will anything else be revolutionary? Only Nintendo execs.
Also, Nintendo has already said, for first party games, the wifi connection that used for the DS & Revolution (they're going to use the exact same infrastructure to lessen costs and ease approachability) will be free. Older games will be a pay per download service, almost exactly like Live Arcade. You pay once, download the game to the flash memory stored in your system, and play it whenever you want. This has already been stated. They have stated you can extend the flash memory with SD cards, but have not stated whether you'll be able to copy retro games to those cards and take them with you to a friends Rev. There are valid reasons to allow this, and other, equally valid reasons to disallow it. We'll find out eventually I suppose.
And to put it quite frankly, the PS1+PS2 library together don't quite match the library of titles available to Nintendo if 3rd parties offer their games as well (which several have already said they plan to do...or, more precisely, Nintendo has made deals with them so they will offer said content). Also, as someone else has mentioned, the Rev will play GCN discs. They may have similar problems to the 360, but then again, the Rev has the same hardware manufacturers for the CPU & GPU that the GCN did, and is using the same API as the GCN, so very likely it will use hardware emulation for GC games instead of software, meaning a 98% or better compatibility rate.
For size, I bet the Revolution will be the smallest again, but traditionally Nintendo isn't big on "slick" designs, and usually the end result looks more like a Fisher Price product. I expect that we won't see the slim silver/white wedge that their PR department has been coming out with. It will probably be made out of cheap plastic with handles and other superfluous design elements that aim more for the young gamer market.
Compare the design of the GBASP or the GBM w
An update to what is available for wireless play, as well as to wireless play in general is possible. The DS uses flash ram based cartridges, and, assuming the game doesn't use up the entire space on the cart, upgrades to the programming are possible, but unlikely to occur anytime soon.
Advance Wars (GBA or DS) Battalion Wars (GCN) Kirby Canvas Curse (DS) Mega Man Battle Network (GBA) Meteos (DS) Lumines (PSP) Katamari Damacy (PS2) There are many games that fit your description. Some are on Nintendo systems, some are not. And if you haven't played Super Smash Bros, you should. Sure, it has all the things you complain about in a game, but it's not any less fun because of it. For that matter, neither is Super Mario 64, or Mario & Luigi Superstar Adventure for the GBA, or Paper Mario. Just because it has a franchise character in it doesn't mean it's just another Mario game.
Nintendo doesn't only make sequels. In fact, in many cases, fans have desperately pleaded with Nintendo to make sequels and been ignored for years (there was no Metroid released for the N64, there still hasn't been a new Kid Icarus, and I see no GCN Pilotwings).
You're right about very few games at system launch, but usually, those games they launch with are the biggest system sellers, and hold people's interest long enough for good software to come out.
Nintendo was actually the first home console to offer internet service. The original Famicom offered internet service about 17 years ago, but it never made it to the US. They tried it again with the Super Famicom, again only in Japan, and then again with the N64. Think the Live Marketplace is a unique offering. The basic idea behind it was tried by Nintendo on the original Super Famicom, with microtransactions and everything. While not a complete failure, Nintendo made next to no actual money on it, and neither did their partners at the time. That's why they were so leery about it on the Gamecube, they'd yet to find a way to make it both profitable and fun. You can thank Microsoft for proving that online gaming was viable. But Nintendo doesn't have a billion dollars to throw away, so they're not going to offer something that has no chance of making them money.
And yes, their business practices were not the nicest for many years. In fact, the very system of 2nd & 3rd parties was practically invented by them, and 3rd parties tended to get the shaft. But times changed on them, and you know what they did, they changed with the times. Nintendo has a new president, and as a company they are very, very different from what they were even just 5 years ago.
So I'll be getting a 360, and a Revolution, and a PS3, but I'm not gonna get one at launch because it usually just isn't worth it for a least 3 months.
I'm sorry, I think I'm missing your point. Can you explain to me what you mean when you say a game is for kids? Because, I have several nieces and nephews. They spend a lot of time with me because I own multiple gaming systems and a library of several hundred games. You know what I've found kids between the ages of 2 to 8 like to play? Sports games, racing games, first person shooters and fighting games They don't play platformers like Mario Sunshine, because they're too hard. They'll play Metroid Prime for all of 5 minutes before they decide it's too hard. They don't play RPGs because they're too boring. Same for puzzle games. I keep picking up these games other people claim are 'kiddie' games, because I enjoy them, and I can't get any of the actual kids I know to play them. But I pick up Mortal Kombat and my 9 yr old nephew has no problem learning all the moves to the point where he can beat a pc opponent easily, or his cousins about the same age. Don't get me wrong, I'm not telling you to play games you don't enjoy. I certianly don't. The very reason I don't have a PSP, there just hasn't really been a game for it yet that's drawn my interest. I pretty much picked up a DS because of Kirby Canvas Curse and Meteos. But, are you really saying that it makes a difference what characters appear in it? If the best FPS of the next generation just happens to have Mario and his pals in it, with superior gameplay to anything that has gone before, you're going to not play the game because the characters are too cutesy? Not that any such thing is particularly likely, I just think it's a silly thing to judge a game on.
Nintendo has always gone for more diversity of games. They can't get them because 3rd parties won't make games for a system that doesn't sell (unless it's the Xbox for some reason). If another 100 million Gamecubes had sold, all those games you enjoy so much on PS2 would be on the gamecube as well. The only way to encourage 3rd parties to make games for a system is to buy the system, nothing else works. Sure, they can farm out their core characters (like they did with Link to get Soul Calibur 2), but you notice there's no Soul Calibur 3 for the gamecube, even though the gamecube version of SC2 sold more? It's because there are less gamecubes out there, so less potential for sales. Simple accounting.
Actually, yes, I believe Iwata (company prez) has said on more than one occasion that he wants everyone to pick up a Revolution alongside their 360 or PS3. In fact, if every person who bought a 360 or a PS3 also bought a Revolution, I think Nintendo would be ecstatic.
Hehehehe, I would actually play that if that were the subtitle. That's most of the fun in your average MMORPG anyway.
I work for Comcast in Nashville, TN. When we released the Video OnDemand service, PPV movie rentals more than tripled. In the old system, you had to wait until the movie started, rent the movie, and watch it right then, and if you missed part of it and wanted to see it again, you had to rent it again. With ondemand, you now get PPV movies for 24 hours, and even regular premium or free movies for 2 hours. People who'd never even considered PPV before started renting PPVs on a regular basis with this new system, especially since you can rent it anytime you want. As buggy, slow and unreliable as ondemand is (and there are multiple reasons for this), it's still the number one selling point of digital service. When you watch anything on ondemand, after it's over it takes you to the 'My Rentals' section after it's done. It would be nothing at all to add an extra button that only appears in this section (ensuring you'd already rented the movie, but not necessarily that you've watched it) to order the DVD. And people will do it, because most of them are normal people. And normal people are lazy. They'll just see it as convenient. They'll watch a movie they were only a little interested in, and if they like it, they can buy it then and there. Hardcore movie buffs and technofreaks probably won't take advantage of this, but seriously, if you're a hardcore movie buff, if you buy $100+ worth of DVDs every couple of weeks, how often do you even watch PPV? That's not the target audience, because they don't buy PPV movies anyway. This is targeted at people who already spend upwards of $50 a month on PPV (no, really, lots of people do this), often times ordering the same movie 3 or 4 times (I kid you not).
Actually, I consider this a good thing. It'll stop you from flailing about wildly, because, in a real fight, if your sword is blocked, you can recover immediately and be on guard for your opponent's attack, or even weave your sword around the item used to block. After flailing wildly, having your attacked blocked, and not being able to recover because your arms still moving, you'll learn to not put as much force into your blows, so you can recover if you need to. Not every attack has to be bone shattering.
Some of your comparisons are a tad sketchy, but that's not something I'm going to go into. While the point of your argument is good, you're kind of making Nintendo's argument for them. They were never trying to make a controller that simply imitates things we can already do. Their intent, from the beginning, was to improve the way we interact with games. It's what they've said since before they revealed what the controller was, the one thing they wanted to do was make playing the game more fun, easier and more intuitive. I'm not saying they've accompished it because I haven't had a chance to use one, and while I personally think the controller looks stupid, how it looks has no bearing on how it plays.
Not at all, but I'd probably still enjoy sucking at a game like that more than I've ever enjoyed winning any existing baseball game. Ever.