I think that's the reason why games in general were absent. Sony and Microsoft know what the controller is, but they don't know how to translate it into games. Nintendo has been working with it for a year or two, so they probably have a good handle (no pun intended) on what gestures work well, how sensitive it needs to be, good and bad button placement schemes, etc.
Basically, the controller means nothing to Sony and MS until it's proven successful, and its success can't be evident until real games are shown. We know how it works as a device, but we don't know how it works as a controller until playable games are shown.
"Although, on the flip-side, I can see people dismissing it since the info isn't from an unbiased source."
Or because it's completely meaningless. Video games aren't the only factor on youth crime. Maybe something about the education system improved over the last five years. Maybe parents are doing a better job of teaching their kids to respect the law. Maybe law enforcement is doing a better job of deterring youth from illegal activites. Or maybe kids are too busy playing GTA to steal stuff in real life. Studies like that can't really directly correlate games and crime rates.
And I also agree with the GP, this is a very immature move from Rockstar. It makes the entire industry look very childish. Their site could possibly be construed as libel, in which case I'm sure Jack Thompson wouldn't hesitate to sue them, as if Rockstar needs any more legal problems.
Rockstar should have just admitted defeat while they had the chance. Now they risk further criticism of the industry. If this little retort makes it to the mainstream press, it'll probably set public perception of the games industry back about five years.
Yes, but those people would have been disappointed if the system was revealed at E3, anyway.
I'm talking two scenarios (which may or may not be 100% accurate) - revealing at E3 2005, or revealing sometime later (say, Fall '05). Apart from the time difference, everything else about the system is the same: games, specs, third-party support, release date, pricing, name, etc.
Both scenarios will generate almost identical sales figures. The people who aren't interested wouldn't have been interested at E3. The people who want the system will still want it after it's revealed later. Is there anyone who is honestly saying, "I'm not going to buy the Revolution because Nintendo is taking too long to tell people about it"?
As for the fanboy thing - yes, some fans will most likely be let down by the changes. Most "hardcore gamers" are pretty resistant to change. But again, they would have been disappointed regardless of the date of the reveal. And with the Revolution, Nintendo isn't targeting the "hardcore", anyway. They're aiming it toward families, older non-gamers, and basically people who want to have fun. The loss of a few million "hardcore gamers" is trivial if Nintendo can truly appeal to the mass market, and that mass market doesn't care about specs, launch dates, "reveal dates", or anything other than the console's entertainment value.
I'm curious... why would a late reveal make a console less interesting? If the console is as "revolutionary" as Nintendo claims, I would assume that it would be well-received regardless of the announcement date. Unless, of course, Sony and Microsoft are able to develop something better in that time frame, but the PS3 and 360 seem pretty firmly established already.
It doesn't take six months to hype a console... Most of the public won't know about the Xbox 360 until a few weeks before its launch. As long as the release date itself is appropriately timed, Nintendo could "reveal" the Revolution a month before its launch and still see very similar sales.
Though few people will see the parent's comment, he's most likely right. Nintendo is working with third parties - we know this from recent comments by representatives from THQ, Ubisoft, and Sega, for example. These publishers are probably under big NDAs right now because Nintendo doesn't want them to reveal anything about the Revolution before the "due time".
Why would Nintendo allow a third-party game to be shown off before they've had a chance to promote first-party titles? It doesn't make sense from a business standpoint.
If you ignore EA's massive collection of crappy game-dumps, the only other ports are SM64, Zookeeper, and Star Wars Episode III. Every other game is a sequel or built from scratch for the DS.
Super Mario 64 is the only Nintendo-made port for the system. Any others are the fault of third parties (namely EA), not of Nintendo itself.
They're stressing the fact that they don't want to be associated with the "Pokemon generation". So they release collectible trading cards with video game characters that you need to collect by buying two different products.
"I have been trying to figure out why Nintendo has never come out with a portable version of SSB, and i still don't know why, but the DS would be perfect for it."
My guess is the lack of analog control. SSB relies on the analog "smash" move for a lot of game mechanics, and to port the game as-is to a d-pad would eliminate a lot of functions. They'd have to ditch nearly half of the available attacks, running, one method of jumping, and dropping through platforms.
Not that the game wouldn't work, but the controls would need some serious reworking.
Re:Illegal use of trademarks and such
on
GoldenEye:Source
·
· Score: 1
Yes. They're remaking it with new models, textures, sound effects, and environments to fully utilize the Source engine. Valve basically just patched all the old HL1 stuff into a newer engine. These guys are trying to make a full-fledged remake. It sounds like a good idea, IMO.
Let me guess... you couldn't beat Ocarina of Time?:p
I'm sure you already know this, but you're in the vast minority. The three 3D Zeldas have each been top-rated and top-selling games on their respective consoles. Nearly every third-person adventure game since 1996 borrows some gameplay elements from OoT (targeting, context-sensitive commands, puzzle design). So whether you enjoyed the games or not, it's foolish to ignore their success and impact on the industry.
And by the way, there have been at least four 2D Zelda games since LttP. Are you implying that those are trash as well, or were you referring to only the 3D games?
OoT's plot began with a big war, right? I could definitely envision a Zelda MMOZelda where players choose sides in a full-scale war in the various locales of Hyrule. Not an RPG, mind you... an MMORPG couldn't offer the playability or accessability of the Zelda series.
But letting players choose between classic Zelda characters (Gorons, Dekus, Hylians, Zoras, Gerudos, Skull Kids, Stalfos, Darknuts, etc) and duking it out in a massive battle through mountains, lakes, tundra, caves, and forests could be really cool. I, for one, would enjoy an MMO with Zelda-like controls and combat. Most current MMORPGs feel too... disjointed for my tastes.
What are the numbers on Advance Wars? It and Nintendogs were released the same day, and I've heard several people say they bought a DS for AW. I'm sure Nintendogs did sell systems, but I wonder if Nintendo is bending the numbers a bit to make their original title look a little more impressive.
Yeah, they were very under-the-radar for the most part, so I don't blame you for missing them. The only reason I remember is because a few guys on some forums I visit got interested in the MP2 one, which led to some discussion on the others.
It was nowhere near the level of ILoveBees. Really, the only people who knew about it were already plenty hyped for the game, so it had little or no effect. Here's a little piece about the campaign, which is about all the press it ever got.
From Sony's website: "With gaming at the product's core, PSP features graphics rendering capabilities comparable to the leading in-home console, PlayStation 2, bringing an unmatched gaming experience to a portable platform..."
This is the [i]games[/i] channel. There's not a whole lot of videogame news right now. The next big upcoming gaming event is the launch of the Xbox 360 (unless you're more excited about the Game Boy Micro, I guess).
Expect to see plenty of news about the 360, at least until it launches, when the attention may be turned to the PS3 or Revolution.
"I'm not sure you understand what viral marketing campaigns are, MS's ILOVEBEES or Origen are two examples. Nintendo has never ran a viral marketing campaign so far, and I don't think they ever will, it's not their style."
Majora's Mask and Perfect Dark both had sites similar to ILoveBees, although not nearly as publicized. Nintendo recently ran a viral campaign for Metroid Prime 2, with some fake military manufacturer trying to make morph ball-type armor. And leading up to the DS launch, several non-Nintendo websites had replaced every instance of the letters "ds" with the Nintendo DS logo, which was most certainly Nintendo's doing.
They officially have stopped being a second party to Nintendo and are now a third-party developer. That doesn't stop them from making games for Nintendo consoles by any means; it just leaves them open to develop for other systems.
Besides, Nintendo owns the rights for Eternal Darkness, if I'm not mistaken. A sequel isn't really likely since the original didn't sell too well, but you never know.
I don't know what the delay on the Wavebird is, either, but 3ms would not be remotely noticeable. A game running at 60 fps (which is double the refresh rate of most games) only updates the screen every 17ms, so the lag would need to be more than that to even miss a single frame of response.
Maybe you're getting interference from somewhere. Everyone I've talked to about this hasn't noticed any lag whatsoever, and nearly every professional review says the same thing.
I find it hard to believe that the "greatest control system ever" is an array of keys that's been around since the 1800s and a 40-year-old tool for navigating graphical interfaces.
It doesn't take a whole lot of thinking to come up with a tool that's simpler, more intuitive, and less restricting than a keyboard and mouse. Most PC "elitists" that proclaim the superiority of the keyboard/mouse are just bitter because either they can't figure out how to use an analog stick or they can't play their favorite games with a console controller.
Don't get me wrong; the current dual-shock controller model is far from perfect. It's incredibly closed-minded to think that any of today's control mechanisms will be the preferred game interface in even 20 years.
From what I understand, most TVs cut some of the top and bottom pixels off when displaying SNES games, so the average consumer would only see about 192 vertical pixels anyway. The DS would make a very good portable NES/SNES player if the games+emulator were downloadable from the Revolution.
The N64, on the other hand, outputted at 320x240, so a single DS screen is too small for that. Also, there's no way the current DS hardware could emulate an N64 at anywhere near full speed. Mario 64 was a port, which required the game to be reworked for the system. Nintendo seems to be discouraging N64>DS ports anyway, with SM64 being the notable exception.
As for the single screen/analog sticks, there are a lot of practicality problems with those. Both of those additions would hinder the form factor, durability, and playability of the DS. The idea sounds good in theory, but it's pretty different from the path Nintendo wants to take with the DS.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that's the reason why games in general were absent. Sony and Microsoft know what the controller is, but they don't know how to translate it into games. Nintendo has been working with it for a year or two, so they probably have a good handle (no pun intended) on what gestures work well, how sensitive it needs to be, good and bad button placement schemes, etc.
Basically, the controller means nothing to Sony and MS until it's proven successful, and its success can't be evident until real games are shown. We know how it works as a device, but we don't know how it works as a controller until playable games are shown.
And I also agree with the GP, this is a very immature move from Rockstar. It makes the entire industry look very childish. Their site could possibly be construed as libel, in which case I'm sure Jack Thompson wouldn't hesitate to sue them, as if Rockstar needs any more legal problems.
Rockstar should have just admitted defeat while they had the chance. Now they risk further criticism of the industry. If this little retort makes it to the mainstream press, it'll probably set public perception of the games industry back about five years.
Way to go, Rockstar. Idiots.
Yes, but those people would have been disappointed if the system was revealed at E3, anyway.
I'm talking two scenarios (which may or may not be 100% accurate) - revealing at E3 2005, or revealing sometime later (say, Fall '05). Apart from the time difference, everything else about the system is the same: games, specs, third-party support, release date, pricing, name, etc.
Both scenarios will generate almost identical sales figures. The people who aren't interested wouldn't have been interested at E3. The people who want the system will still want it after it's revealed later. Is there anyone who is honestly saying, "I'm not going to buy the Revolution because Nintendo is taking too long to tell people about it"?
As for the fanboy thing - yes, some fans will most likely be let down by the changes. Most "hardcore gamers" are pretty resistant to change. But again, they would have been disappointed regardless of the date of the reveal. And with the Revolution, Nintendo isn't targeting the "hardcore", anyway. They're aiming it toward families, older non-gamers, and basically people who want to have fun. The loss of a few million "hardcore gamers" is trivial if Nintendo can truly appeal to the mass market, and that mass market doesn't care about specs, launch dates, "reveal dates", or anything other than the console's entertainment value.
I'm curious... why would a late reveal make a console less interesting? If the console is as "revolutionary" as Nintendo claims, I would assume that it would be well-received regardless of the announcement date. Unless, of course, Sony and Microsoft are able to develop something better in that time frame, but the PS3 and 360 seem pretty firmly established already.
It doesn't take six months to hype a console... Most of the public won't know about the Xbox 360 until a few weeks before its launch. As long as the release date itself is appropriately timed, Nintendo could "reveal" the Revolution a month before its launch and still see very similar sales.
"The original Seaman was released on Sega's Dreamcast in 1999 and was later ported to the PlayStation 2."
Though few people will see the parent's comment, he's most likely right. Nintendo is working with third parties - we know this from recent comments by representatives from THQ, Ubisoft, and Sega, for example. These publishers are probably under big NDAs right now because Nintendo doesn't want them to reveal anything about the Revolution before the "due time".
Why would Nintendo allow a third-party game to be shown off before they've had a chance to promote first-party titles? It doesn't make sense from a business standpoint.
If you ignore EA's massive collection of crappy game-dumps, the only other ports are SM64, Zookeeper, and Star Wars Episode III. Every other game is a sequel or built from scratch for the DS.
Super Mario 64 is the only Nintendo-made port for the system. Any others are the fault of third parties (namely EA), not of Nintendo itself.
They're stressing the fact that they don't want to be associated with the "Pokemon generation". So they release collectible trading cards with video game characters that you need to collect by buying two different products.
Gotta catch 'em all!
Picross could really benefit from downloadable puzzles, or at least a puzzle designer a la Polarium. I agree -- a DS Picross would be really awesome.
Not that the game wouldn't work, but the controls would need some serious reworking.
Yes. They're remaking it with new models, textures, sound effects, and environments to fully utilize the Source engine. Valve basically just patched all the old HL1 stuff into a newer engine. These guys are trying to make a full-fledged remake. It sounds like a good idea, IMO.
Let me guess... you couldn't beat Ocarina of Time? :p
I'm sure you already know this, but you're in the vast minority. The three 3D Zeldas have each been top-rated and top-selling games on their respective consoles. Nearly every third-person adventure game since 1996 borrows some gameplay elements from OoT (targeting, context-sensitive commands, puzzle design). So whether you enjoyed the games or not, it's foolish to ignore their success and impact on the industry.
And by the way, there have been at least four 2D Zelda games since LttP. Are you implying that those are trash as well, or were you referring to only the 3D games?
OoT's plot began with a big war, right? I could definitely envision a Zelda MMOZelda where players choose sides in a full-scale war in the various locales of Hyrule. Not an RPG, mind you... an MMORPG couldn't offer the playability or accessability of the Zelda series.
But letting players choose between classic Zelda characters (Gorons, Dekus, Hylians, Zoras, Gerudos, Skull Kids, Stalfos, Darknuts, etc) and duking it out in a massive battle through mountains, lakes, tundra, caves, and forests could be really cool. I, for one, would enjoy an MMO with Zelda-like controls and combat. Most current MMORPGs feel too... disjointed for my tastes.
"They" (being Nintendo) didn't make those games, crappy as they may have been.
What are the numbers on Advance Wars? It and Nintendogs were released the same day, and I've heard several people say they bought a DS for AW. I'm sure Nintendogs did sell systems, but I wonder if Nintendo is bending the numbers a bit to make their original title look a little more impressive.
There's a reason that Nintendo is running a successful video game company and you aren't.
Yeah, they were very under-the-radar for the most part, so I don't blame you for missing them. The only reason I remember is because a few guys on some forums I visit got interested in the MP2 one, which led to some discussion on the others.
It was nowhere near the level of ILoveBees. Really, the only people who knew about it were already plenty hyped for the game, so it had little or no effect. Here's a little piece about the campaign, which is about all the press it ever got.
From Sony's website: "With gaming at the product's core, PSP features graphics rendering capabilities comparable to the leading in-home console, PlayStation 2, bringing an unmatched gaming experience to a portable platform..."
... that's games... darn HTML.
This is the [i]games[/i] channel. There's not a whole lot of videogame news right now. The next big upcoming gaming event is the launch of the Xbox 360 (unless you're more excited about the Game Boy Micro, I guess).
Expect to see plenty of news about the 360, at least until it launches, when the attention may be turned to the PS3 or Revolution.
Majora's Mask and Perfect Dark both had sites similar to ILoveBees, although not nearly as publicized. Nintendo recently ran a viral campaign for Metroid Prime 2, with some fake military manufacturer trying to make morph ball-type armor. And leading up to the DS launch, several non-Nintendo websites had replaced every instance of the letters "ds" with the Nintendo DS logo, which was most certainly Nintendo's doing.
They officially have stopped being a second party to Nintendo and are now a third-party developer. That doesn't stop them from making games for Nintendo consoles by any means; it just leaves them open to develop for other systems.
Besides, Nintendo owns the rights for Eternal Darkness, if I'm not mistaken. A sequel isn't really likely since the original didn't sell too well, but you never know.
I don't know what the delay on the Wavebird is, either, but 3ms would not be remotely noticeable. A game running at 60 fps (which is double the refresh rate of most games) only updates the screen every 17ms, so the lag would need to be more than that to even miss a single frame of response.
Maybe you're getting interference from somewhere. Everyone I've talked to about this hasn't noticed any lag whatsoever, and nearly every professional review says the same thing.
I find it hard to believe that the "greatest control system ever" is an array of keys that's been around since the 1800s and a 40-year-old tool for navigating graphical interfaces.
It doesn't take a whole lot of thinking to come up with a tool that's simpler, more intuitive, and less restricting than a keyboard and mouse. Most PC "elitists" that proclaim the superiority of the keyboard/mouse are just bitter because either they can't figure out how to use an analog stick or they can't play their favorite games with a console controller.
Don't get me wrong; the current dual-shock controller model is far from perfect. It's incredibly closed-minded to think that any of today's control mechanisms will be the preferred game interface in even 20 years.
From what I understand, most TVs cut some of the top and bottom pixels off when displaying SNES games, so the average consumer would only see about 192 vertical pixels anyway. The DS would make a very good portable NES/SNES player if the games+emulator were downloadable from the Revolution.
The N64, on the other hand, outputted at 320x240, so a single DS screen is too small for that. Also, there's no way the current DS hardware could emulate an N64 at anywhere near full speed. Mario 64 was a port, which required the game to be reworked for the system. Nintendo seems to be discouraging N64>DS ports anyway, with SM64 being the notable exception.
As for the single screen/analog sticks, there are a lot of practicality problems with those. Both of those additions would hinder the form factor, durability, and playability of the DS. The idea sounds good in theory, but it's pretty different from the path Nintendo wants to take with the DS.