Kong Returns.

Soldato
Joined
5 Jul 2003
Posts
16,206
Location
Atlanta, USA
Hi.
Found this article, and thought it was interesting:
http://www.firingsquad.com/features/nintendo_revolution/
Kong returns
Disclaimer: I am not a Nintendo fan. Of all Nintendo systems, I only owned the NES, GBA, and briefly, the SNES. The N64 was a subject of my humor and the GameCube earned immediate contempt for its storage format and the vastly inadequate memory cards it came with (it took 3 or 4 to save a season of Madden with rosters on release). Regular readers of the site will have no doubt read many of my scathing comments about the Revolution controller design.

Consider that in the past year, oil has doubled in price to hit and maintain historic highs. Except for handhelds, game sales have slumped across the board, even in the industry console darling PlayStation 2. The DOW Jones Industrial Average remained flat throughout 2005, with the S&P and NASDAQ barely keeping pace with inflation. At the end of that same year, Microsoft released the most expensive console yet, and one that sold out but is plagued by continuing supply shortages. In Japan, as usual, an American-made (or rather, American-designed) product has flopped. Like countless other American companies, Microsoft has faced a stiff, impenetrable and informal wall of Japanese nationalism which clings stubbornly to a Japanese product. In short, one of the three key markets for the Xbox 360 is denied.

Sony, meanwhile, faces its own problems. Rumors abound of a five hundred dollar PlayStation 3. That’s enough Benjamins to get your hands on a beater car or pay a month’s rent in most American cities not called San Francisco, Los Angeles, or New York. It passes that psychological barrier of being half a thousand dollars, and even in these days of raging trade and budget deficits that devalue the dollar, a grand is nothing to sneeze at. There’s a reason that prices like $99.95 are more popular than $100, though that five cents is trivial.

Moreover, gamers are dissatisfied. Though game review scores live in their own little world of the 60-90% range (with everything below being reserved for Daikatana and Mortyr), last year was not a banner year either for game sales or game awards. Nothing blew us away, there was no equivalent of a Grand Theft Auto, a StarCraft, a Quake or even a Call of Duty. Well, there was Call of Duty 2, but it was a sequel, like just about every other major title, and gamers have shown their displeasure with sequels. According to release lists for most major publishers, this coming year will be little different – more sequels!

Gameplay has stagnated beyond the obvious sequelitis. What was the last major revolution in RTS development? Homeworld gave us 3D almost six years ago now. WarCraft III and Warlords: Battlecry gave us heroes about three years ago. Age of Empires III was so similar to Age of Empires II that many reviewers found themselves making sure they weren’t playing a graphics mod for the older game by accident. Where have first-person shooters gone? Great, we have realism. Now what? We had years of Quake games, then we had years of Half-Lifes, and then years of Counter-Strikes and Medals of Honor. Come on, developers and publishers, we need something fresh! And don’t even get me started on the pathetic state of the RPG market, things are as bad if not worse than during those years before BioWare and Black Isle came onto the scene.


Enter Nintendo
Now here comes Nintendo into this situation. Whether through some sort of master genius trend anticipator, a corporate account with Miss Cleo’s psychic hotline, or sheer dumb luck, Nintendo has just the strategy to take advantage of the situation. The Revolution will be cheap. Rumors range from $200 to $250. It will be a game system, not an all-in-one multimedia home theater experience extraordinaire (with built-in blender and Blu-Ray drive) like the Xbox 360 and PS3.

Its graphics potential will be considerably lower than the Xbox 360 and PS3, but for the first time in history, this may be a good thing. Game publishers and developers industry-wide are complaining of ballooning development costs, mostly due to art teams that have to grow exponentially to create all the content that’s possible. Think back to Mario 64, one of the best-looking games of the early N64/PlayStation generation. It had flat textures, maybe 1000 polygons per character, and trees that were made of a cylinder and sphere. Now, think about Call of Duty 2 or Perfect Dark Zero. How many man-hours would be needed just to model, animate and texture the faces of the characters? Never mind the technology involved in getting lip-synching working, or the various facial expressions, or all the special shader effects. The typical Call of Duty 2 level – just the level – probably has more polygons, textures and lights on it than all of Metal Gear Solid. Programming has faced similar growth in terms of demands and complexity, though at a slower pace. In short, team sizes have ballooned.

Now take Nintendo’s Revolution. It’s going to be easy to develop for by design, being a simple system rather than some convoluted multi-chip, multi-core, Microsony Playbox 363. Not only that, developers are going to spend less money on artists, because when they make games for the Revolution, the standard of art – the upper limit of what’s possible on the console – is going to be lower than what they’d have to compete with on the Xbox 360 or PS3.

Of course, the success of that strategy depends on the Revolution carving out its own niche. It has to separate itself from Sony’s and Microsoft’s offerings sufficiently so as not to be seen competing with them on their terms. If Revolution is seen to be in direct competition for a market, purely on terms of hardware performance, it will fail. However, Nintendo has three distinct features to move the Revolution into its own segment.

1. The most obvious is the controller. It’s wacky, it’s weird, it looks like a freaking TV remote from the 1980s but and it has been the butt of my jokes for months. This video, however, convinces me perhaps not of the ultimate utility of the Revolution controller, but of the potential. It will, at the least, work. Its potential, however, is high and it offers a new way of interacting with our games.

2. Price. The disparity between cost, especially in times of relative economic uncertainty, can put the Revolution into a new category. The GameCube was a cool “second system” because it was cheaper. The Revolution, on the other hand, is cheap enough to be “the people’s console”, for the every day Joe Schmoe – with the Xbox 360 and PS3 competing to be the second consoles, and only among the richer or more dedicated folk.

3. Image. Image is important. I mean, look at Apple – why would anyone, ever pay that much for anything unless they were image conscious. Nintendo’s image is different. The kiddie-friendly persona lures in parents, but the retro links and gaming history bait hardcore console gamers. Moreover, just the idea that the Revolution is cheap to develop for and might have cool independent games is sexy. Just like the iPod, it’s the idea – not the hardware – that’s sexy. And yes, I know I am helping to spread that idea with this very article.


The Controller
Of ultimate importance, however, is the Revolution’s controller. Nintendo made it, they probably have some ideas of what you can do with it, but the key point is that it’s out there. “OK devs, you’ve got this new toy – now do something with it!” It’s like the Soundblaster being released for the first time, with the actual possibility of voice synthesization! Or the first 3D game engines – imagine no more running side to side across a flat screen, but fighting in a 3D world! Enemies that don’t just jump up and down, but side to side!

That’s what the Revolution controller is. Now you may be inclined to say “pheh, what’s the point? I doubt it can do much more than the DualShock.” You may be right. Potential is hard to see and understand, so I’ll use the reverse analogy – the loss of ability, rather than what you can gain with it. As a loyal FiringSquad reader, you’ve no doubt played Quake and CS and other shooters for years now, with your trusty mouse and keyboard. You can get rail shots on fast-moving Quake marines in less time than the average drag racer needs to launch his car off the line. You can do the AK double-tap chest/headshot clear across the CT exit on de_dust, against a moving target at that. Now imagine someone told you to unbind your mouse and play those games with nothing but keyboard. The possibility still exists, just about every shooter still has the option of binding view directions to keys. Imagine if someone does something really cool that works great on the Revolution controller, but will be difficult – or worse, boring - to replicate on a DualShock.

Do you doubt that a controller can make a game exciting? Then you haven’t played enough flight sims. Il-2 is an interesting game with good flight models and nice graphics. It plays well enough with a standard joystick and keyboard combination. Buy a HOTAS, however, like the Saitek X-52 or CH FighterStick/Pro Throttle combo, when your hands never have to leave the controls to touch a mere keyboard, and you’ve got a whole new experience. Top it off with a TrackIR unit, which translates your real-world head movements into in-game movements that permit you to look around your virtual cockpit, to track your target without resorting to anything so crude as a hat switch or keyboard, and the immersion factor goes through the roof. Trust me, as someone who has recently rediscovered his love of flight simulators, controllers matter so much more in games than we’re prepared to believe until we actually experience it.


Conclusion
Nintendo is poised for a coup. As someone who not so long ago was dismissive of what the company can accomplish, I today firmly believe that they’re capable of taking the #1 position from Sony. Slumping game sales, unimaginative games, expensive consoles and expensive games, consoles that will have features (Blu-Ray, HD-DVD) that we’re not sure we’ll need. In comes Nintendo, with the promise and the tools to let developers create cool games again. It’s guaranteed that we’ll see Castlevania, Zelda, Metroid, and Mario on the Revolution – but this time there’s the potential for so much more.

What Nintendo is, or at least should be angling for, is the thought that Revolution games should be judged solely against Revolution games. Just like you don’t judge wines by comparing them to beer, or handheld games to consoles, Revolution aims to be its own market. It’s important for Nintendo to establish itself as significantly cheaper than the competition, with a unique controller and that all-important Nintendo game library and image. As long as Revolution offers a unique experience, it won’t matter to gamers that Generic Sequel #168 or NFL Roster Update 2009 look better on the PS3.

The cheapness of the console will help it sell and it’s unlikely that Nintendo will face production shortages since it won’t use exotic and difficult-to-make components. With a large installed owner base, more developers will be inclined to take a shot at it, publishers will feel pressured to release key titles (like Madden) for the Revolution regardless of their past GameCube experience. The controller is standard enough to work for most titles – so Xbox and PlayStation games will most likely work on the Revolution without major trouble, yet that same controller offers unique features that will be difficult to replicate for Microsoft’s and Sony’s consoles.

Sony is vulnerable on three fronts. First, they’re late and they’re feeling the pressure. DreamCast was Sega’s and Sega didn’t have the financial muscle to keep it going. The Xbox 360 has no such problems. Second, Sony’s marketing cannot get away with another “Emotion Engine” claim. The media called Sony on their CGI presentations this E3 and quite frankly, we smell blood and there’s nothing anyone enjoys more than seeing the top dog go down. Third, Sony is betting heavily on Blu-Ray. If Blu-Ray fails to take off, PS3 owners will be stuck with this generation’s Betamax players (and Betamax, if you remember, was a Sony initiative – like the 8-track before it). Sony may offer an HD-DVD add-on in case of that eventuality, but the point is that someone – either customers or Sony itself – will have paid for the extra costs of Blu-Ray. Fourth, while the majority of Sony’s revenue is still from consumer electronics, its games division is the one that’s driving company growth. The only other section of the company to grow is its financial services division – all others have seen reduced sales in recent quarters. Microsoft is deliberately hitting Sony where it hurts, and Nintendo can tiptoe in between the battling giants and steal the prize.

Some very good points there.

And is it just me whos noticed the unusual fasination that the media has with the Revolution lately? Even a lot of mags that usualy pimp the endless sequals on MS & Sony consoles seem to be promoting the Revolution.

In an ideal world i'd like to belive that the entire country has finally realised that we cant rely on graphics & sequels of sequels, and are tierd of paying £30 for an updated names list and the new kit in the game. Or that its all about gameplay and whats fun, rarther than whats 'cool' to say you play.
But somehow the cynic in me says that, for the UK at least, we'll be stuck in a culture that values 'coolness and graphics' over 'gameplay & fun' for the next decade at least.

Discuss....:)
 
as above some very good points there, i REALLY want ninty to suceed this time, they have set themselves up well, thers much more hype on this console than the cube, + its rumoured they will make £ on every console they sell, rather than making a loss, so financially they are sorted, + they are guranteed huge sales in japan. Im really intrested to see how this pans out
 
They sell all of their consoles at a profit. The GC is rumored to only cost about £30 to make.
They never try to loss lead with the HW.
Which is a point i allways bring up. They dont need to 'win' the console war to stay afloat. With their hands dipped in so many areas, all running at a profit, Nintendo have potentially the most 'staying power' in the games market today.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that people arnt open minded enough. And that is a problem.
Most of the recent gadgets have been called gimmicks by people who claim to be open minded and 'gamers'.
Take the DS for example. The touch screen is a revolutionary idea.
The amount of different game control mechanisms for existing genrè's, as well as potential for future ones, is immence. And people who have spent a good ammount of time with a DS can testify to that. But then you get the croud of people who call themselves 'gamers', and dismiss it based on a few minutes with a DS with one of the demo games.

I for one cant wait for Revolution. The control method alone entices me. With the added bonus of at least 10 genrè defining games means that i wont be short on games to play.
And the 'fallback' ability of being able to use GC controllers with the Revolution means that if the new controller isnt all its cracked up to be, or isnt used properly by developers, theres still a 'secondary' control method for Nintendo to fall back on. Or for more traditional games, that wont/cant benefit from the new controller, can use.
 
you're preaching to the choir ;) look at some of my previous posts about the touch screen etc :)


I honestly think the next big improvements to games won't be due to masses of additional graphical abilities but due to new interface methods such as controllers/voice recognition (yes i know it's been around for a while but barely used*) etc.
They can, and probably will open up whole new methods for playing games :)

I know that games like Steel Battalion have benefitted hugely from having a much more complex but handy control system than the standard pad (unfortunately it cost £100+ but you did get both games with it)

If the revolution controller makes the same difference to games without having to spend out for special hardware just for the one game it could be huge.
Especially if they do make use of the fact you can plug it into a shell to give it a more ergonomic feel and additional controls.
You could fit it into the base of a cheap joystick type handle with a couple of fire buttons and a HUD on it, instantly you would have all the normal controls from a two handed pad controlled by a single hand (analogue stick held in the hand, digital or analogue mini stick under the thumb + several buttons).
Or you could get a golf/sword/fishing game where you get an appropriate grip the controller fits into.

Possibly the bet bit would be, that the same basic controller could be used in all sorts of ways in a single game, in an RPG you might use it as normal for moving around on a map, then swap to using it differently for the fighting/exploration (actually turning that "key" the right way to unlock something), or use it like a fishing rod in a mini game (fishing mini games are so common in RPG's:p)


*There was some software for the PC that worked with games back in the late 90's, but the PC's of the time weren't up to doing it in addition to the games (the applications footprint was too big).
Not to mention it was around the early days of direct-x so the interface didn't always work well with a lot of hardware (however it worked reasonably well with some games and was still faster than moving your hands from a joystick to the keyboard and back)
 
I think that the 'kiddie' image is why the gc didnt do very well, if people actually played some nintendo games most would realise that they are great fun probably more so than any on the xbox n ps2 etc.

as it will be far easier to code games for the revolution, it will attract more developers. Also do you think, as production costs will be lower that games will be cheaper than that of sony and Microsoft?
 
Likewise, i've been a Gamecube convert myself. Wasn't too in to the N64 but picked up a Gamecube quite cheap, and it has the best selection of original, interesting, good fun to play over and over games. Agree wholeheartedly with that review, and i'm hoping the Revolution is going to be all i hope it will be.
 
Werewolf said:
If the revolution controller makes the same difference to games without having to spend out for special hardware just for the one game it could be huge.
Especially if they do make use of the fact you can plug it into a shell to give it a more ergonomic feel and additional controls.
You could fit it into the base of a cheap joystick type handle with a couple of fire buttons and a HUD on it, instantly you would have all the normal controls from a two handed pad controlled by a single hand (analogue stick held in the hand, digital or analogue mini stick under the thumb + several buttons).
Or you could get a golf/sword/fishing game where you get an appropriate grip the controller fits into.

Possibly the bet bit would be, that the same basic controller could be used in all sorts of ways in a single game, in an RPG you might use it as normal for moving around on a map, then swap to using it differently for the fighting/exploration (actually turning that "key" the right way to unlock something), or use it like a fishing rod in a mini game (fishing mini games are so common in RPG's:p)

Thats what worries me though. You spend £150 on the console, £20 on an attachment to make the controller ergonomic, and then with every unique game you spend £30 on the game, and an additional £20 on attachments for it. I'm firmly in the 'I'll wait and see before passing judgement' camp when it comes to the Revolution.

PS3 imho will be the console that fails this generation, if devs are complaining about the 360 being expensive and difficult, they'll have a hernia with the PS3.

360's Live Arcade is imo, MS's (only) answer to the Revolution. Of course its no match for the Revolution, but it does offer the same ideas: Cheap easy to develop games that are addictive, cheap, and can be played for short (or long if you wish) periods of time with online league tables as an incentive to keep playing.
 
Werewolf said:
I honestly think the next big improvements to games won't be due to masses of additional graphical abilities but due to new interface methods such as controllers/voice recognition (yes i know it's been around for a while but barely used*) etc.
They can, and probably will open up whole new methods for playing games :)
I completely agree.
Look at DoA4. It looks almost no different to the previous one on Xbox1.
Theres very little to gain now graphically imo.
Boogle said:
Thats what worries me though. You spend £150 on the console, £20 on an attachment to make the controller ergonomic, and then with every unique game you spend £30 on the game, and an additional £20 on attachments for it. I'm firmly in the 'I'll wait and see before passing judgement' camp when it comes to the Revolution.
No-ones said anything about loads of attachments. Nintendo have said that developers can do it if they want, but the idea is the basic controller, and the shell as the main 'addon'. Which may or may not be shipped with the console.
And the price of a simple 'shell' with a few buttons on it will be mere pounds, meaning that Revolution games that want to take advantage of that ability can be shipped with the addons, and the games would still be £10-20 cheaper than the 360 & PS3 games.
 
yup, as the "shells" wouldn't need any complex electronics (just the interface with the main stick if they even have buttons), they could be made very cheaply.
Unlike the 360 to make a custom wireless controller for the Revolution wouldn't involve making the whole controller (complete with transmitter), but possibly just a unit the standard controller plugs into:)

I half expect to see some companies making 2 versions of games available, those with the shell for the game (and if need be additional buttons/mini stick) selling for a tenner more than the standard version*.
Or for third parties to jump on (as they usually do) and make generic compatible shells for game types (light gun shells, steering wheels, rod handles etc).

Think along the lines of the Ipod with it's docking connector, because the connector is easy to interface with, the costs of making accessories is low and you can have a whole range of them.



*Rather like already happens with various games (light gun games, Donkey Congo, FF Crystal Chronicles etc), except the controller would be cheaper to make.
 
BoomAM said:
I completely agree.
Look at DoA4. It looks almost no different to the previous one on Xbox1.
Theres very little to gain now graphically imo.

I normally agree with a lot you say, but thats absolute rubbish.
I have Dead or Alive 3 AND Dead or Alive 4. Believe me, they aren't even close!
 
Thats because you've played/are used to both. 'Side by side' if you like.
I saw the adverts for DoA4, and thought it looked no different to 3.
Now, i played it in town, and there are visual differences, but they're not huge. imo.
 
Dead or Alive 3:
doa3_screen015.jpg


Dead or Alive 4:
928260_20051229_screen001.jpg
 
Could you have picked a worse picture of DoA3? :p
What is that, the PS2 version or something?
Try this one:
DOa33.jpg

I know that DoA4 must be your new favourite game and all that. But even you must admit that the jump in visual quality isnt actually that much. Compared to the jump from N64/PS1 to GC/PS2/Xbox.
 
Back
Top Bottom