Friday, September 16, 2005
Revolution: 17 Hours Later
My mind is focused, the pressure if off, and I am finally ready to type a coherent post about the most important news in gaming I can ever remember. Last night I was overwhelmed with the shocking news of the Revolution controller and could merely spew out ideas for how this could potentially change genres we have already been playing for years. Clearly, I missed the point entirely. This is, after all, a Revolution. One does not attempt to overthrow the king only to reinstate a similar tyrant. Nintendo is trying to change the face of gaming forever. For that we should be both pleased and very fearful.
The first thought I had last night after IGN finally posted a picture of this most elusive controller was, to use an internet acronym, "WTF." Though the final design incorporates many of the ideas people have been hypothesizing since news of a revolutionary control device were first revealed, I honestly never thought Nintendo would go against the grain quite so strongly. You have to admit, Nintendo unquestionably has some gigantic balls to attempt something like this. It's not often you see a billion dollar company defy every conventional idea and offer something never before seen to a confused public. Nintendo could have easily made a Gamecube 2, tweaked the Gamecube controller slightly, and raked in the money. Don't forget, just because Nintendo is currently behind both its competitors they still make a ton of money each year. There is no reason Nintendo needed to change things quite so severely.
That nugget of information is what gives me the most hope that this thing will turn out to be something special. Nintendo is not one to gamble its fortunes on a product it doesn't think will succeed. The Virtual Boy, the only system Nintendo has released that wasn't met with open arms, was an experiment more than a bona fide entry. Though it bombed horribly Nintendo was not damaged in any monetary way. Clearly, if they release a console, a system that will be their lifeblood for at least five years, they have to be confident it can be a viable machine in a crowded marketplace. Now you can understand why I am optimistic even though I honestly have no idea how this will make gaming more fun.
So you're telling me the controller is small?
First of all, I have to look at this from Nintendo's perspective. They have released four consoles and three (relevant) handhelds in their time. Basically, every game released on those systems can be broken down into three categories: 2D, 3D and DS. Aside from DS games, which are still in their infancy, there are hundreds of titles in the first two categories. While technology has gotten more powerful and genres have been created or modified, the games are, for all intents and purposed, very similar to one another. Though the games themselves are quite different, the actual action on screen in Katamari Damacy and Splinter Cell are quite similar. Just like R-Type and Lost Vikings have more in common than they have apart.
The first huge leap in gaming came between the Atari 2600 and the NES. Games went from single screen affairs where beating your high score is the ultimate goal, to scrolling adventures with endings. From there games improved with technology, but were virtually unchanged until 3D became standard. So, there were a couple generations of primitive gaming, two generations of 2D gaming, and now two generations of 3D gaming. With the Revolution, we are entering whatever the next generation of gaming will be known as.
What is most difficult for me to understand is how this paramount shift will change the games I love. Even though I complain a lot, if I didn't love the industry I wouldn't write about it. I wouldn't own every system and play my DS every spare minute I have. Games are fantastic right now and are only getting better. Why is there a need to shift to something completely different when games are still improving? Why try something new when the old thing hasn't even been perfected yet? Does Nintendo believe Super Mario Sunshine is the pinnacle of platformers? Why not try one more round of conventional gaming to see just how far you can push current standards?
You broke it already!?
On the other hand I do complain about gaming a lot. I was completely disenfranchised with the industry as a whole after attending E3. I hate the excess amounts of violence and sex in games. I hate how games are thugged up now. I hate the hyper-realism. I hate sequels. I hate "Blank Killers." I hate companies merely trying to top one another instead of trying to create something new. I hate that graphics are the most important thing to people. I hate that Perfect Dark Zero was mercilessly ripped because the graphics didn't look "next-gen" enough. I hate that people waited in line 3 hours to see video footage of the PS3. I hate that there is debate about whether the trailers shown were in-game or not. I hate delays. I hate hype. Essentially, I hate the direction games are going.
The Revolution is going to completely change everything. While some people, including me, have tried to imagine how this controller can improve existing genres, I don't think that is the point. Just like Kirby Canvas Curse, which I will write about in-depth some day, is only a platformer because it doesn't fit into any other genre, I expect many Revolution titles to make existing genres almost unrecognizable. Yes, we may not be able to play Super Mario like we always have, but isn't that the point? People complain that Nintendo merely releases updates to their games and fans go crazy. They complain that the new Zelda is merely Wind Waker with a new skin. I disagree to an extent, but the differences between Metroid Prime 1 and 2 are almost nonexistent. Why keep marginally improving games when you can create games no one has ever conceived of before?
I do have a number of concerns, though. I worry, first and foremost, that Nintendo is pushing this too hard towards the casual and non-games. I am not sure they will release forty hour adventure games. I just don't think games will ultimately be complex enough to reward diligent gamers who put in hours learning intricacies of the game. I worry that the control will be too tiring to manage for long periods of time. I worry that third party support, which has been dwindling for the past decade, will cease to exist.
I wish I had four hands...
Furthermore, I think the attachment idea is out and out bad. Just like I am furious with Microsoft for segmenting their user base before release (which is November 22 if you cared), I am mad that Nintendo is planning the same thing. Sure, the analog attachment will be packaged with the system, but what about the quirky ones they haven't announced yet? And how much will they cost? If there is an add-on for Mario Kart will all of your friends have to buy that add-on as well to enjoy the four player goodness? I assume the system will be significantly cheaper than the competition, I expect it to be $200 like every other newly released Nintendo system, but if they nickel and dime us with peripherals it could end being even more expensive.
Yesterday, they mentioned, though you can use your old GC controller to play SNES and N64 games, they will most likely release a peripheral add-on for those as well. How ridiculous is that? I'm trying to get my hands on one of those 2D GC pads now so I can enjoy an emulated Super Mario Kart without breaking my fingers on the GC D-Pad or shelling out more cash for an add-on. This is the most pressing issue right now. Nintendo has been known to be quite greedy in the past, I sure hope they don't take advantage now.
To sum up my feelings, I am optimistic right now, though only because this is Nintendo. I remember writing column after column dismissing the Nintendo DS as a simple gimmick. Now that there are games that actually take advantage of its features I can see that Nintendo was right all along. Hopefully the Revolution software will prove all the naysayers wrong. If not, expect the virtual arms race between Sony and MS to escalate until graphics can't improve anymore. And then...
The first thought I had last night after IGN finally posted a picture of this most elusive controller was, to use an internet acronym, "WTF." Though the final design incorporates many of the ideas people have been hypothesizing since news of a revolutionary control device were first revealed, I honestly never thought Nintendo would go against the grain quite so strongly. You have to admit, Nintendo unquestionably has some gigantic balls to attempt something like this. It's not often you see a billion dollar company defy every conventional idea and offer something never before seen to a confused public. Nintendo could have easily made a Gamecube 2, tweaked the Gamecube controller slightly, and raked in the money. Don't forget, just because Nintendo is currently behind both its competitors they still make a ton of money each year. There is no reason Nintendo needed to change things quite so severely.
That nugget of information is what gives me the most hope that this thing will turn out to be something special. Nintendo is not one to gamble its fortunes on a product it doesn't think will succeed. The Virtual Boy, the only system Nintendo has released that wasn't met with open arms, was an experiment more than a bona fide entry. Though it bombed horribly Nintendo was not damaged in any monetary way. Clearly, if they release a console, a system that will be their lifeblood for at least five years, they have to be confident it can be a viable machine in a crowded marketplace. Now you can understand why I am optimistic even though I honestly have no idea how this will make gaming more fun.
So you're telling me the controller is small?
First of all, I have to look at this from Nintendo's perspective. They have released four consoles and three (relevant) handhelds in their time. Basically, every game released on those systems can be broken down into three categories: 2D, 3D and DS. Aside from DS games, which are still in their infancy, there are hundreds of titles in the first two categories. While technology has gotten more powerful and genres have been created or modified, the games are, for all intents and purposed, very similar to one another. Though the games themselves are quite different, the actual action on screen in Katamari Damacy and Splinter Cell are quite similar. Just like R-Type and Lost Vikings have more in common than they have apart.
The first huge leap in gaming came between the Atari 2600 and the NES. Games went from single screen affairs where beating your high score is the ultimate goal, to scrolling adventures with endings. From there games improved with technology, but were virtually unchanged until 3D became standard. So, there were a couple generations of primitive gaming, two generations of 2D gaming, and now two generations of 3D gaming. With the Revolution, we are entering whatever the next generation of gaming will be known as.
What is most difficult for me to understand is how this paramount shift will change the games I love. Even though I complain a lot, if I didn't love the industry I wouldn't write about it. I wouldn't own every system and play my DS every spare minute I have. Games are fantastic right now and are only getting better. Why is there a need to shift to something completely different when games are still improving? Why try something new when the old thing hasn't even been perfected yet? Does Nintendo believe Super Mario Sunshine is the pinnacle of platformers? Why not try one more round of conventional gaming to see just how far you can push current standards?
You broke it already!?
On the other hand I do complain about gaming a lot. I was completely disenfranchised with the industry as a whole after attending E3. I hate the excess amounts of violence and sex in games. I hate how games are thugged up now. I hate the hyper-realism. I hate sequels. I hate "Blank Killers." I hate companies merely trying to top one another instead of trying to create something new. I hate that graphics are the most important thing to people. I hate that Perfect Dark Zero was mercilessly ripped because the graphics didn't look "next-gen" enough. I hate that people waited in line 3 hours to see video footage of the PS3. I hate that there is debate about whether the trailers shown were in-game or not. I hate delays. I hate hype. Essentially, I hate the direction games are going.
The Revolution is going to completely change everything. While some people, including me, have tried to imagine how this controller can improve existing genres, I don't think that is the point. Just like Kirby Canvas Curse, which I will write about in-depth some day, is only a platformer because it doesn't fit into any other genre, I expect many Revolution titles to make existing genres almost unrecognizable. Yes, we may not be able to play Super Mario like we always have, but isn't that the point? People complain that Nintendo merely releases updates to their games and fans go crazy. They complain that the new Zelda is merely Wind Waker with a new skin. I disagree to an extent, but the differences between Metroid Prime 1 and 2 are almost nonexistent. Why keep marginally improving games when you can create games no one has ever conceived of before?
I do have a number of concerns, though. I worry, first and foremost, that Nintendo is pushing this too hard towards the casual and non-games. I am not sure they will release forty hour adventure games. I just don't think games will ultimately be complex enough to reward diligent gamers who put in hours learning intricacies of the game. I worry that the control will be too tiring to manage for long periods of time. I worry that third party support, which has been dwindling for the past decade, will cease to exist.
I wish I had four hands...
Furthermore, I think the attachment idea is out and out bad. Just like I am furious with Microsoft for segmenting their user base before release (which is November 22 if you cared), I am mad that Nintendo is planning the same thing. Sure, the analog attachment will be packaged with the system, but what about the quirky ones they haven't announced yet? And how much will they cost? If there is an add-on for Mario Kart will all of your friends have to buy that add-on as well to enjoy the four player goodness? I assume the system will be significantly cheaper than the competition, I expect it to be $200 like every other newly released Nintendo system, but if they nickel and dime us with peripherals it could end being even more expensive.
Yesterday, they mentioned, though you can use your old GC controller to play SNES and N64 games, they will most likely release a peripheral add-on for those as well. How ridiculous is that? I'm trying to get my hands on one of those 2D GC pads now so I can enjoy an emulated Super Mario Kart without breaking my fingers on the GC D-Pad or shelling out more cash for an add-on. This is the most pressing issue right now. Nintendo has been known to be quite greedy in the past, I sure hope they don't take advantage now.
To sum up my feelings, I am optimistic right now, though only because this is Nintendo. I remember writing column after column dismissing the Nintendo DS as a simple gimmick. Now that there are games that actually take advantage of its features I can see that Nintendo was right all along. Hopefully the Revolution software will prove all the naysayers wrong. If not, expect the virtual arms race between Sony and MS to escalate until graphics can't improve anymore. And then...
Thursday, September 15, 2005
Revolution!
Nintendo has finally revealed what makes their new system so darn revolutionary. Believe me, it's unlike anything else we have ever seen in gaming.
This is the real thing
Ok, so the way the controller works is so complicated it's ridiculous. In one hand, we'll say the left, you hold what looks like a frickin' TV remote control. When I first saw this I groaned. Who wants to play games with a TV remote? It has a D pad and some buttons on it, which makes sense, as well as a 3D sensor on the front. More on that in a second. First, you can turn the damn thing sideways to play SNES and NES game. How sweet is that? Pretty awesome.
There is more to the controller than that, but I want to get to some ideas out there first. I was talking to Tim about this and, as he was scoffing and making fun of its complicated nature, we thought up some great ideas. First of all, it can work as a simple 3D pointer. Just like those lame laser pointers jerks bring to theaters. A demo was shown where the controller would point to colored blocks on the screen. Doesn't sound too fun on its own but get this - it essentially makes the system a touch screen.
I'm loving Meteos right now and, using this 3D controller, you'd be able to play the darn thing on a TV. And even Kirby would be pretty easy to play. Heck, any DS game could be easily replicated on the Revolution. How amazing is that? We get the functionality of a touch screen without the lack of tactile feel or a huge price tag.
But who cares about a puzzle game? What about Zelda? IGN mentions how fishing will work much better now. Sine the controller can actually sense movement you'd be able to mime the motion in real life and watch Link throw the line, or whatever the appropriate fishing term is. Sounds fun, but not something you would buy a system for, right? How about being able to swing a sword? Or flick your wrist to use your hook shot? With rumbling it should provide enough force that it actually feels like you're controlling these things. This is a fun version of virtual reality.
Potentially even better is how sports games will work. Easy first thought is something like baseball or tennis. Again, simply swing your controller and you can really match your skills against the pros. But then Tim thought up a great idea: football. Hold on a second, this is great. The quarterback would cock his arm and throw, hitting a button at the end of his motion to release the ball. The receiver would then have to move the controller into his body at the right time to make the catch. Amazing.
And the best part is most of these things can be optional. If you want to just hit A to swing your sword or throw a football you can do that as well. I don't see a problem with this at all.
How about this: in Beyond Good and Evil you sneak around a government facility taking pictures. What if you had to hold the controller high up over your head to simulate hiding behind a crate to take a picture? The level of interaction possible is mind-boggling.
Oooo! You could play an interactive Spin the Bottle! Killer App Right There!
In Pikmin 3 you could use the controller as somewhat of a lasso to grab your troops. In the next Luigi's Mansion you could use the controller to simulate the flashlight. Or how about the next generation of music games? You could pretend to play drums or conduct an orchestra with ease.
Ok, so that's my idea for just the standard controller. Now I can talk about the attachment. You can plug in attachments into the controller. The only one they showed is kind of like a 3D mouse, with an analog stick and a few buttons. This is suppposed to be the attachment of choice to play FPS with. The only problem I have with this idea is cost. Are we going to have to buy a bunch of different attachments to play all the games we want? Nintendo better work this out before launch because add-ons are never a good idea.
I have to say that, even though I was initially shocked beyond words, I am quite excited now. I like that we have a company willing to actually advance the industry. If the fun I'm having with the DS is any indication what Nintendo is capable of I will be one happy gamer next year. Can't wait to see what games Nintendo comes up with.
Edit: Just to flesh out Tomsie's post a bit, here are a couple of links with some nice hands-on write-ups, and a video which demonstrates some possible uses quite nicely and gives you more of an idea of how this whole deal works. I'll probably post some impressions tomorrow sometime. - Nick
This is the real thing
Ok, so the way the controller works is so complicated it's ridiculous. In one hand, we'll say the left, you hold what looks like a frickin' TV remote control. When I first saw this I groaned. Who wants to play games with a TV remote? It has a D pad and some buttons on it, which makes sense, as well as a 3D sensor on the front. More on that in a second. First, you can turn the damn thing sideways to play SNES and NES game. How sweet is that? Pretty awesome.
There is more to the controller than that, but I want to get to some ideas out there first. I was talking to Tim about this and, as he was scoffing and making fun of its complicated nature, we thought up some great ideas. First of all, it can work as a simple 3D pointer. Just like those lame laser pointers jerks bring to theaters. A demo was shown where the controller would point to colored blocks on the screen. Doesn't sound too fun on its own but get this - it essentially makes the system a touch screen.
I'm loving Meteos right now and, using this 3D controller, you'd be able to play the darn thing on a TV. And even Kirby would be pretty easy to play. Heck, any DS game could be easily replicated on the Revolution. How amazing is that? We get the functionality of a touch screen without the lack of tactile feel or a huge price tag.
But who cares about a puzzle game? What about Zelda? IGN mentions how fishing will work much better now. Sine the controller can actually sense movement you'd be able to mime the motion in real life and watch Link throw the line, or whatever the appropriate fishing term is. Sounds fun, but not something you would buy a system for, right? How about being able to swing a sword? Or flick your wrist to use your hook shot? With rumbling it should provide enough force that it actually feels like you're controlling these things. This is a fun version of virtual reality.
Potentially even better is how sports games will work. Easy first thought is something like baseball or tennis. Again, simply swing your controller and you can really match your skills against the pros. But then Tim thought up a great idea: football. Hold on a second, this is great. The quarterback would cock his arm and throw, hitting a button at the end of his motion to release the ball. The receiver would then have to move the controller into his body at the right time to make the catch. Amazing.
And the best part is most of these things can be optional. If you want to just hit A to swing your sword or throw a football you can do that as well. I don't see a problem with this at all.
How about this: in Beyond Good and Evil you sneak around a government facility taking pictures. What if you had to hold the controller high up over your head to simulate hiding behind a crate to take a picture? The level of interaction possible is mind-boggling.
Oooo! You could play an interactive Spin the Bottle! Killer App Right There!
In Pikmin 3 you could use the controller as somewhat of a lasso to grab your troops. In the next Luigi's Mansion you could use the controller to simulate the flashlight. Or how about the next generation of music games? You could pretend to play drums or conduct an orchestra with ease.
Ok, so that's my idea for just the standard controller. Now I can talk about the attachment. You can plug in attachments into the controller. The only one they showed is kind of like a 3D mouse, with an analog stick and a few buttons. This is suppposed to be the attachment of choice to play FPS with. The only problem I have with this idea is cost. Are we going to have to buy a bunch of different attachments to play all the games we want? Nintendo better work this out before launch because add-ons are never a good idea.
I have to say that, even though I was initially shocked beyond words, I am quite excited now. I like that we have a company willing to actually advance the industry. If the fun I'm having with the DS is any indication what Nintendo is capable of I will be one happy gamer next year. Can't wait to see what games Nintendo comes up with.
Edit: Just to flesh out Tomsie's post a bit, here are a couple of links with some nice hands-on write-ups, and a video which demonstrates some possible uses quite nicely and gives you more of an idea of how this whole deal works. I'll probably post some impressions tomorrow sometime. - Nick
Killing Time
Trying to kill time until tonight's Iwata keynote or my inevitable rave write-up of Burnout Revenge? Just gaze at this wondrously badass screen of Dead Rising, and all worries and impatience will be forgotten...
Don't you just wanna pick up one of those steaks and beat a zombie senseless with it?
Don't you just wanna pick up one of those steaks and beat a zombie senseless with it?
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
Not just whelmed any more
This is the most excited I have been about video gaming in quite some time. With a new system coming out in just a couple months and a plethora of great games recently released, it's hard not to giggle with joy at the limitless potential of this amazing industry. What has made my gaming grin grow ever wide, though, has been the divine intervention of stylus supplanting the directional pad I have been faithful to all these years. I'm nearing the end of Kirby Canvas Curse and, while I won't give it the space it deserves today, I will say it's the most fun I've had in a platformer since Super Mario World. I've recently bid adieu to my favorite mushy ball to tackle Meteos and, suffice it to say, Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo is in serious jeopardy of being dethroned from the top spot.
While the unknown is what caused me to post today, I have a bit of news I must share before this column becomes completely ridiculous. I just found out, not more than five minutes prior to whenever you are reading this, that Nintendo of America is bringing Final Fantasy IV to America this December on the Game Boy Advance. Along with Final Fanasy III (which is still coming to the DS as far as I know), FFV, FFVI and Chrono Trigger, FFIV is one of the top five games I desperately want to be ported to my aging, yet still adorable, little handheld. I know Nick owns the original on the SNES, but there is just something so simple and pure about leveling up while waiting for a light to turn green. I plead with Nintendo to port the first six Final Fantasy titles to their portable hardware. There is not a better place in the world to play old school RPGs than where ever I happen to be bored.
Moving away from concrete news to pure speculation, at 9pm Central Time tomorrow Nintendo is expected to announce exactly what makes the Revolution so gosh darn interesting. The two most popular guesses as to what will separate Nintendo from the competition seem quite lame to me. Most people assume that, since the NDS is so popular (and fun), Nintendo will slap a touch screen on their next controller. While good in theory, Nintendo has already said the touch screen will not be a part of the Revolution. Clearly, many interesting things can be done with styli controls, but losing the tactile feel of buttons while eating the cost of what would surely be a pricey peripheral does not seem like the best idea.
The other popular theory, gyroscopic controls, seems even more insane. Sure, watching your character respond to physical movement of your controller would be interesting, but what new types of gameplay are even possible with such a device? I don't anticipate MS or Sony would fear tilting controllers when they have all the third parties and much more powerful systems on their side. While gyroscopic controls could potentially add some new gameplay twists to stale genres, I don't see it as a revolution on its own.
Let's hope the real controller doesn't have a ball gag
So what else is there? We know the system isn't a virtual reality machine because we are sensible people who know such technology is not only ridiculous but not even fun. I also can't imagine it is something as simple as the analog stick that made the N64 home to the best 3D games of its time. Nintendo has said whatever it is they are including cannot be duplicated by competition. Sony proved they are not above stealing a great idea only a short while after the N64 came to market. That means whatever the revolution is creates such a paramount shift in gaming it would be extremely difficult for Sony or MS to implement without severely dividing their user base.
I may have backed myself in a hole. As I sit here staring at the screen I cannot come up with one idea about what the Revolution actually could be. I can't think of one thing that would affect how games are played that actually adds to the experience. Furthermore, Nintendo said this is not new technology. Rather, whatever it is they are planning is only new in the video game industry. If anyone else can think of existing technology that is not used in gaming but would greatly enhance the experience please comment. Either that or apply for a job at MS or Sony because, clearly, they could learn a thing or two about innovation.
My number one concern is that Nintendo is planning something that will alienate actual game players. Time and time again they have stressed that the Revolution will attempt to draw in both casual and non-gamers. While the idea of a system that appeals to every person on Earth is obviously an admirable goal, I don't see how Nintendo can simplify gaming enough to entice grandma while still making Zelda a relevant franchise. If Nintendo makes me wear some lame hat or a vibrating belt while I play I am not going to be pleased.
While the unknown is what caused me to post today, I have a bit of news I must share before this column becomes completely ridiculous. I just found out, not more than five minutes prior to whenever you are reading this, that Nintendo of America is bringing Final Fantasy IV to America this December on the Game Boy Advance. Along with Final Fanasy III (which is still coming to the DS as far as I know), FFV, FFVI and Chrono Trigger, FFIV is one of the top five games I desperately want to be ported to my aging, yet still adorable, little handheld. I know Nick owns the original on the SNES, but there is just something so simple and pure about leveling up while waiting for a light to turn green. I plead with Nintendo to port the first six Final Fantasy titles to their portable hardware. There is not a better place in the world to play old school RPGs than where ever I happen to be bored.
Moving away from concrete news to pure speculation, at 9pm Central Time tomorrow Nintendo is expected to announce exactly what makes the Revolution so gosh darn interesting. The two most popular guesses as to what will separate Nintendo from the competition seem quite lame to me. Most people assume that, since the NDS is so popular (and fun), Nintendo will slap a touch screen on their next controller. While good in theory, Nintendo has already said the touch screen will not be a part of the Revolution. Clearly, many interesting things can be done with styli controls, but losing the tactile feel of buttons while eating the cost of what would surely be a pricey peripheral does not seem like the best idea.
The other popular theory, gyroscopic controls, seems even more insane. Sure, watching your character respond to physical movement of your controller would be interesting, but what new types of gameplay are even possible with such a device? I don't anticipate MS or Sony would fear tilting controllers when they have all the third parties and much more powerful systems on their side. While gyroscopic controls could potentially add some new gameplay twists to stale genres, I don't see it as a revolution on its own.
Let's hope the real controller doesn't have a ball gag
So what else is there? We know the system isn't a virtual reality machine because we are sensible people who know such technology is not only ridiculous but not even fun. I also can't imagine it is something as simple as the analog stick that made the N64 home to the best 3D games of its time. Nintendo has said whatever it is they are including cannot be duplicated by competition. Sony proved they are not above stealing a great idea only a short while after the N64 came to market. That means whatever the revolution is creates such a paramount shift in gaming it would be extremely difficult for Sony or MS to implement without severely dividing their user base.
I may have backed myself in a hole. As I sit here staring at the screen I cannot come up with one idea about what the Revolution actually could be. I can't think of one thing that would affect how games are played that actually adds to the experience. Furthermore, Nintendo said this is not new technology. Rather, whatever it is they are planning is only new in the video game industry. If anyone else can think of existing technology that is not used in gaming but would greatly enhance the experience please comment. Either that or apply for a job at MS or Sony because, clearly, they could learn a thing or two about innovation.
My number one concern is that Nintendo is planning something that will alienate actual game players. Time and time again they have stressed that the Revolution will attempt to draw in both casual and non-gamers. While the idea of a system that appeals to every person on Earth is obviously an admirable goal, I don't see how Nintendo can simplify gaming enough to entice grandma while still making Zelda a relevant franchise. If Nintendo makes me wear some lame hat or a vibrating belt while I play I am not going to be pleased.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]