ID:276666
 Jan 8 2006, 8:21 am
|
|
Everybody basicly knows that the Nintendo Revolution's controller is alot different from any controller ever made, so its very easy to spot someone copying off of them. Here's a PS2 controller that "coincidentally" looks similar to the Revolution controller.
| |
|
Jan 8 2006, 9:22 am
|
|
Hell Ramen
 |
Oh well, we'll all know who had the original (and better) idea in the end. :)
|
Big deal. Third parties make weird controllers and controllers matching different consoles all the time.
Quite honestly, the idea isn't that original. It's the fact that Nintendo is implementing it as their main source of input that makes it special. Developers will be forced to support it instead of shrugging it off. Nintendo deserves about as much credit for the pointer as Sony does for analog stick positioning. | |
Uhmm, lol i thought the Ps2 and Xbox made a Remote controller that could work for playing games and playing DVDs?
| |
Just because the controller looks the same dosen't mean it will work the same.
The actual revolution controller isn't a split design to begin with, it looks a little like a orginal nintendo controller, or like a dvd remote control. Nintendo made it like this, first off, so people could identify with it right away and secdonly so people wouldn't be scared off by it. Scared off by it? How would it do that? Well my mother used to play orginal nintendo with me all the time, it was like the 70s or 80s commercials, Nintendo really was a family thing. As the systems got bigger, better and got more buttons, my mom played less and less and less. Now she won't even touch the NGC or PS2 because of the way they look. Anyways, you get the split design when you want to use accessoires like a analog stick, then you plug the analog accessorie into the port and then its a split design. Besides, I am fairly certian the revolution dosent use some cheap laser hardware to decide what you are doing on screen. If you ask me, it is a pretty orginal concept. Your right, some games do use wirless interface, but not an entire system. | |
Scared off by it? How would it do that? Well my mother used to play orginal nintendo with me all the time, it was like the 70s or 80s commercials, Nintendo really was a family thing. Heh the last time my parents played a console was playing the original Super Mario Brothers. They gave up due shortly after not being able to finish the first level :P. | |
My mother plays SNES games, but won't touch anything afterwards. If it's real-time, she just can't play it. And she just can't seem to handle things like Lord of the Rings: The Third Age. I have no idea why.
| |
ACWraith wrote:
Developers will be forced to support it instead of shrugging it off. Nah, they could develop for a different system. Nintendo deserves about as much credit for the pointer as Sony does for analog stick positioning. Which, coincidentally, Nintendo had first. | |
SSJ2GohanDBGT wrote:
ACWraith wrote: Exactly- was just gonna mention that. Nintendo invented the Analogue-stick. "In 1996 Nintendo introduced a modern analog stick on their Nintendo 64 controller. Unlike the D-pad, the analog stick allowed for varying levels of pressure and 360-degree control, translating into more precise movements in games such as Super Mario 64. During this same period of time, Sony was also creating a similar analog stick. Their first version was the November 1996-released "Dual Analog" controller." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogue_stick Nintendo should be far more secretive about the stuff they invent. They've been practically carrying the whole games industry from one technology to the next, so it sucks that companys rip off Ninty all the time. I heard that Nintendo have been tightening up on people ripping off their stuff, actually. They sued like, a few companies for it. I was in a rundown market in a dump-of-a-town called Newquay, and they were selling "Double Game" consoles. They looked almost exactly identical to the DS in size, shape and design, except it felt and looked cheap and shoddy. Basically all it was was two different liquid crystal game thingies (like game'n'watch, 'cept rubbish) on the two different screens. Way to try and rip off an out-of-luck, out-of-cash parent (who wouldn't know the difference) finding a cheap collection of the console their kid has been asking for for the last 6 months... | |
Technically, some 1980s (1970s?) consoles had analogue joysticks, but they were not as functional. Also, the Sega Saturn had an optional analog pad roughly around the same time as the Nintendo 64 was released.
However, you appear to have completely missed what I was talking about. What I said had nothing to so with who used an analog stick for consoles first. I mentioned joystick positions. At one point, only Sony console controllers were allowed to have their sticks lined up. That's why other consoles had those ridiculous offsets. (I think the rights expire with the XBox 360 generation.) | |
SSJ2GohanDBGT wrote:
ACWraith wrote: Actully there was an article saying recently that not only are games increadbly easy for developers to make and port over to the Nitnendo Rev, but many big name companies are very intrested in it. | |
Heh. The fact that companies aren't allowed to put their sticks in the same places as anothers while Nintendo gets its ideas ripped off is a little upsetting ( =( ).
However I don't see anything wrong with the offsetted positions, let alone them being ridiculous. =p The GC's controller was pretty damn great, if not for the C-stick being that slightly too sensitive. | |
Sarm wrote:
...there's a COPYRIGHT on how button layouts are set? It would be a patent, if anything. I don't think copyright would apply in that way. Stupid patent. | |
I was quoted, but the reply was to SSJ2GohanDBGT. In case that was for me, I was speaking of controller support rather than console support. If I had a Nintendo Revolution and a company chose some third party controller based on ease of development, I'd shoot them for not supporting what was already in my house. ;)
| |
Nintendo deserves about as much credit for the pointer as Sony does for analog stick positioning. Which, coincidentally, Nintendo had first. Hah, that's life, even if Nintendo had a stick on the controller to move the character around, it's not an Analog stick, and surely doesn't function like one. The new controller is like the touch screen for the DS, and we all know how the touch screen worked out, except for games like Mario Kart, i have yet to see the Nintendo fully utilize the TOuch screen in a successful manner, in some cases, the touch screen was the reason that the game being released failed in the first place--Poor Compatability. Nintendo is no doubt original, but when they do think up something with the slightest bit of originality, they go and ruin it by not using it to it's fullest extent, and half ass it to where the compatability is shot and it's hardly worth using. | |
Divine Apprentice wrote:
we all know how the touch screen worked out Yes, we do. It worked out quite well. except for games like Mario Kart, i have yet to see the Nintendo fully utilize the TOuch screen in a successful manner I have to disagree with that. I don't even own a DS and I've seen creative uses of the touch screen (watching my friend play). There was one (mini?)game involving Yoshi where you had to circle enemies with the stylus to remove them from the playing field. I call that pretty creative. (The same game also had you blowing into the microphone as another form of control, which was a great little touch. I forget what it was for exactly - blowing away clouds or some such.) How is it actually possible to use a touch screen BADLY, anyway? What constitutes "bad use of the touch screen"? | |