Nintendo Revolution controller

Originally posted by Red Superfly
Yeah but the peripherals it was designed around were crap. Until now I haven't seen a point and shoot device that looks halfway competant in its design and consideration of games, until the Revolution controller.

And it was a shit game.

The Revolution is more than just a shitty lightgun, and Gun Survivor was a really shitty lightgun game.

I see your point, but I don't think its a very fair comparison.

You could be right, but I'm unwilling to make up up my mind until I lay my hands on the thing, with a game. Thats the only time anyone should really think "this is shit/this is great".

Oh yeah I agree with ya like I said I was just throwing it out there, that the whole lightgun FPS type thing isnt a new idea.

Actually in retrospect it wasnt much like a FPS in that you can really move while shooting, it was more like an average lightgun game with a kind of active 3d positioning in the field.

That's funny. The N64 controller was made for someone with three hands, this one's made for someone with one hand.

Originally posted by Onikirimaru

Actually in retrospect it wasnt much like a FPS in that you can really move while shooting, it was more like an average lightgun game with a kind of active 3d positioning in the field.

What the hell does "3d positioning in the field" mean?

Do you mean that you can move in the game (thats 3d), and aim at the same time?
Well that sounds mighty familiar to FPS.
The difference is that you actually control the viewpoint of your character with the controller and also move anywere.
The controller gives precise aim and control, while the standard controller is very crappy for that. (thats why console games generally have autoaim).

Originally posted by Jargon343
That's funny. The N64 controller was made for someone with three hands, this one's made for someone with one hand.

I don't have 3 hands, I thought the N64 controller was the best one yet.

I guess everyone with one arm will be buying a Revolution - they've opened up a whole new market! 😱

Originally posted by Smasandian
What the hell does "3d positioning in the field" mean?

Do you mean that you can move in the game (thats 3d), and aim at the same time?
Well that sounds mighty familiar to FPS.
The difference is that you actually control the viewpoint of your character with the controller and also move anywere.
The controller gives precise aim and control, while the standard controller is very crappy for that. (thats why console games generally have autoaim).

Lightgun games play in 2d. They may have 3d polygon graphics, but as far as gameplay is done the screen at which you shoot at (the field of play) has monsters or what not on it attacking you in the 2 dimensions. Some games may have aspects that make the game seen 3d, like having enemies hide behind things, but gameplay is still in the 2 dimensions.

Gun survivor, if I recall correctly (and I may not be) had you moving the character, and then when you go to shoot something, he stands still, and the view goes into the first person. When you press the button to start shooting, it zooms down and you see the field, but you have the ability to go out of gun mode, and position yourself differently in the field, changing the shooting game from 2d field of gameplay constantly to being able to move and position the field you play in in 3 dimensions, I didnt think it was that hard to figure out what I was talking about.

A first person shooter your view is constantly first person, and you constantly are moving about the level while firing. Gun Survivor is a light gun game that allows you to simply change the position of the screen you play in by moving around.

personally, i think the controller is a good idea. if it doesnt work out, nintendo will probably release a normal controller or another company will. the sensors are a good add-on, and i've heard that it can be used for fps aiming, tennis games like if you're holding a racket, and so on. why is everyone so against something different? in videogames we need originality, and nintendo often comes up trumps. whther its successful, i dont know. it will however, be extremely fun.

it might take some time to get use it, but it will be all good..and they have taken gaming one step further so that shouldn't be a bad thing

Originally posted by darth_royke
personally, i think the controller is a good idea. if it doesnt work out, nintendo will probably release a normal controller or another company will. the sensors are a good add-on

There will be a 'normal' controller as well.

Originally posted by Red Superfly
I don't have 3 hands, I thought the N64 controller was the best one yet.

I guess everyone with one arm will be buying a Revolution - they've opened up a whole new market! 😱

The N64 was the only console system I would play a FPS on, it's controller was made very well for that. But let's face it...if you wanted to use the shoulder buttons or dpad at the same time you were using the analog stick, you had to either a: take your left hand off of the stick and relocate it to the Dpad/left shoulder button accessible grip, or b: have three hands 😄

Originally posted by Onikirimaru
Lightgun games play in 2d. They may have 3d polygon graphics, but as far as gameplay is done the screen at which you shoot at (the field of play) has monsters or what not on it attacking you in the 2 dimensions. Some games may have aspects that make the game seen 3d, like having enemies hide behind things, but gameplay is still in the 2 dimensions.

Gun survivor, if I recall correctly (and I may not be) had you moving the character, and then when you go to shoot something, he stands still, and the view goes into the first person. When you press the button to start shooting, it zooms down and you see the field, but you have the ability to go out of gun mode, and position yourself differently in the field, changing the shooting game from 2d field of gameplay constantly to being able to move and position the field you play in in 3 dimensions, I didnt think it was that hard to figure out what I was talking about.

A first person shooter your view is constantly first person, and you constantly are moving about the level while firing. Gun Survivor is a light gun game that allows you to simply change the position of the screen you play in by moving around.

Thats all and good and stuff but it doesnt matter with the revoultion controller.

First, the attachment allows you to move freely, just like any other FPS game.
So its not a lightgun game. Its a FPS game. The difference is that instead of moving the controllers analog stick (or mouse), you aim with the controller.
So again, its not a lightgun game.

The new controller is awesome. The idea of attaching several components to it is smart and the motion sensor feature is remarkable, and i think it really suits the revolution. Nintendo said the new controller would be revolutionary, and they have done just that.

I think its a great Idea... seeing as Nintendo have the bases covered with the news of a standard controller aswell....

My only reservation is that it goes really wrong... and no one can use it... Then an idea that should put us into the future, is ruined, and no-one will touch it for the stigma that the crappy controller brought....

(Take Concorde for example.... great plane, ruined by some bad manufacture.... now future tech is a thing of the past and we are still stuck with slower jets.)

They shut the concorde down cuase it was very old and too much money everytime they flew. Remember, when you fly on a plane your paying for the fuel, i think to fly on a concorde was about $1500.

Concorde was the future... that got ruined after a couple of accidents... sure there was problems, but what killed it was the bad publicity, no one would revive the programme cause of the name...

Originally posted by Smasandian
Thats all and good and stuff but it doesnt matter with the revoultion controller.

First, the attachment allows you to move freely, just like any other FPS game.
So its not a lightgun game. Its a FPS game. The difference is that instead of moving the controllers analog stick (or mouse), you aim with the controller.
So again, its not a lightgun game.

Theoritacly yes, I was just trying to illustrate what I meant by "3d positioning in a lightgun game"

Originally posted by Jargon343
The N64 was the only console system I would play a FPS on, it's controller was made very well for that. But let's face it...if you wanted to use the shoulder buttons or dpad at the same time you were using the analog stick, you had to either a: take your left hand off of the stick and relocate it to the Dpad/left shoulder button accessible grip, or b: have three hands 😄

You could use the shoulder buttons and the analog...just not d-pad and analog. Although you never really needed to do that.

It is about what is easier for you.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
You could use the shoulder buttons and the analog...just not d-pad and analog. Although you never really needed to do that.

And if you wanted to use the left shoulder button and the Z button on the back? Plus you couldn't reach the left shoulder when you were using the analog stick. I remember how much of a pain in the ass it was to use the overlay map in Turok because of that. Not to mention switching ammo types or ducking, which used the D-pad.
.

Originally posted by Onikirimaru
Theoritacly yes, I was just trying to illustrate what I meant by "3d positioning in a lightgun game"

But the comment means nothing because what your actually saying is called a first person shooter.
Whats wrong of having a FPS that allows you to aim realistically instead of auto aim?
I think its a great idea.

All this talk bout the controller, but we dont really know anything about the actual system. Thats still going to be a surpraise also.

Don't knock it until you try it folks.