Nintendo says the following about controlling old school games in an article on their site:

"The response from all major publishers worldwide has been extremely positive. Beyond its other innovations, the new controller gives third parties flexibility, allowing them the option to use as many or as few of the controller features as they desire. In addition, incorporated technology will easily allow games from the NES, SNES, N64 and Nintendo GameCube generations to be controlled in familiar fashion."

It doesn't really tell us anything, but at least it sounds like they have a plan for the older console games' control schemes.

I agree with msdmoney in that lots of advertising will be needed, and I still think it will be a tough sell for most people. It's different, and people don't like different things all that much.

Oh, and I just read something else that says they will release retro type controllers for people who want them for older games.

like this?
http://www.rockxz.de/stuff/revsig.png

Like that.

Looks interesting. Hopefully they get 3rd party support for this type of controller.

Aye now you guys are getting it. You turn it sidesways and depending on the addon device at the bottom you can get many different types of retro controllers.
Here is another site with a video just incase with all traffic some are getting, just press play:

http://www.dagbladet.no/kultur/2005/09/16/443527.html

I for one am really interested in this development. I know this isn't something that's said very often, but videogame controllers have really failed to properly evolve in the past few game generations. We went from one button and one stick on the Atari to four buttons and one joystick on the NES to six buttons and a joystick on the Super Nintendo...and now we're at 3 joysticks and 10 buttons on the PS3 and Xbox 360, which look like modern art masterpieces of their old controllers. If anyone's played any really complex adventure/action game as of late, it seems like they've run out of buttons to map actions on, and it's really becoming a limiting factor in enjoying games. Metal Gear Solid 3 was the last game I played that really made me realize how limited controllers have become. Remember how much the mouse/keyboard combination revolutionized PC gameplay? this is a major step in the right direction for console games which have often been criticized for it's lack of control options.

Still, while it has the possibility of being an incredibly versatile tool, it's not going to bode well for games that require conventional set ups, as the Gamecube controller has already shown. But this is different. While it doesn't seem to have enough buttons, it does away with the need for many of them. Why bother try to do something with 10 buttons when you can get away with a few?

...of course, i'm sure that somewhere someone's complaining about this. But Nintendo has already shown that it can take something that sounds really iffy to a lot of people and make it work - the Nintendo DS is proof of that. If anything, it's really pushing the boundaries of gaming possibilites. I for one am tired of playing the same old games the same old way.

The fanboy fires have already started all over the place. "gimmick" and "virtual boy" are being thrown around alot.

Its not enough for Nintendo to be in third place, its not enough for Nintendo to intentially opt-out of a direct head-2-head competition, its not enough that Nintendo is behind in development. These people want Nintendo dead for whatever reason.

My belief, I think they are afraid. I'm not predicting a world wide domination or anything here, but people, even the haters, recognize that Nintendo continues to challenge the ideas of gaming while others simply up the graphical and feature ante. Plus there is something to be said for simply not understand something. I've already responded to several people that think its a DVD-remote. :rolleyes:

I've got a Gyration wireless keyboard and mouse for my HTPC setup. The mouse can be waved in the air like the Revolution controller. But it's certainly not the ideal setup for a FPS game. It's innacurate and awkward to use.

This new controller reeks of the powerglove debacle. Thank goodness they included ports for the GC controller.

My thoughts exactly, about the Power Glove......

It looks like the "Virtual" video game system they had set up at Best Buy for awhile....where you would actually swing a bat, or bowl a ball, etc....

The DS and Nintendogs has shown that people are ready to try something new, something different, so this is a pretty exciting leap for Nintendo. With both this and the DS Nintendo is really trying to get games out to more than just the pre-teen boy crowd, which Sony and Microsoft will continue to focus on almost exclusively. I think, above all else, it really seperates Nintendo's new system from the other two and puts it firmly in its own little market, which is exactly what they were going for.

Precisely. Ooooh, more polygons, aaaah. :rolleyes: I'm ready to try something different. This is different enough to make me want to buy it just to try it out. :) I also agree that the number of buttons on a controller has gotten way out of hand.

The powerglove was released late into the NES life cycle to help push some more systems out the door. It was a gimmick. This is THE controller for the system. Do you think they would put their seal of approval on something for the main control device that wasn't proven in many, many, many tests? Also the Powerglove was, what, 18 years ago? Technology changes in that amount of time, no?

Nintendo had nothing to do with the power glove. It was Mattel.

I know you have all been waiting for my analysis [:D], so here goes:

Nintendo has definitely delivered a "evolution" in gaming, but I don't see this as the "revolution" they promised.

Positive: The idea is a good one. It takes the precision of a mouse, and brings it to the TV. For years, people have been using controllers which use variations on the joystick for movement. While this provided excellent control for the user, the movement was relatively slow and not at all precise. With the use of the pointer system, you can move as fast as you can move your hand, and your hand movement is much more precise than any joystick could ever be. For the first time on a gaming console, users will beable to play games without the common speed changes made to adjust for the slow joystick. It will allow for faster games that require more precision on the users part.

Negative: As people were quick to point out, there are a lot of draw backs to using this new controller. The first is that it limits non-precision games. Any PC gamer knows that you can't play a sports game without a joystick - the mouse just doesn't work. Driving games are another example. Nintendo tried to solve this issue by adding an optional analog stick, but this does not solve the issues that arrise with games which require two sticks.

A good example that comes to mind is platformers. The left analog stick controls player movement and the right analog stick controls the 360 camera. The limit of the pointer is that you don't have 360 movement. The character needs 3D movement, so the stick is assigned to player movement. The camera would be assigned to the pointer, which would allow me to look left and right, but how would someone look behind them? If you had a sphere around you, you could only physically beable to move the pointer in the front half of the sphere. Unless you had a robotic arms, there is no way to point the controller at yourself to look behind you. This will likely be solved via button assignment, but that not optimal.

As others mentioned, fatigue is a huge issue. With batteries, this thing is going to have some weight, and holding anything out infront you for an extended period of causes muscle fatigue. Gamers will have to change their "remote" habits from reaching out to point, to holding their arms closer in when pointing.

Idea: What should have been done, is adapt the Wavebird controller with the pointing optical. If we look at the controller, it is really just the middle part of the N64 controller with a few more buttons. If you add the analog stick, you have the left third of the N64 controller. So why not just take the proven Wavebird and modify it with a gyroscope? That would allow for the same pointing mechanism, with the familiar feel of a controler. It would be a must better transition for gamers.

I believe this drastic evolution will isolate Nintendo from the mainstream gamer even more. Games which play fine on the 360 or PS3 will have to be completely reprogrammed to deal the control issues, meaning possibly even less third party support than before. The other problem is that gaming precision is a strictly PC advantage over consoles. By adapting that to the console, they are reallying going to be competing with the PC rather than other consoles - a battle they will never be able to win.

As with the DS and GCN, there will be a number of games which will take advantage of the new controller, but poor thrid party support resulting in games which force the conversion to the new controls for a sub-par experience (ie Tiger Woods DS) or simply don't bring over popular games at all. Like I said, this is an evolution in gaming, but not all evolutionary changes survive.

I seriously doubt Nintendo would say "Well most people use modern TVs these days, so let's make controllers that ONLY work on older TVs"

I agree with joshd2012; I think Nintendo will be able to make some interesting games for this, but I think it mayl hurt them (further) with 3rd-party developers, especially those who develop for all 3 platforms; I don't see it being easy to adapt the handling and controls from an Xbox360/PS3 game to this, without the feel of the game being really different. It seems like the games will have to be build from the ground up to take advantage of this, and how many 3rd party developers are going to do that?

But it is all perspective. Who said company X will design a game for 360 and then port it over to Rev.? The company could easily design it for the Rev. and then "dumb it down" it to the other systems, which makes more sense. If you look at it that way, then the PS3 and 360 get the less than stellar ports.

Count me in as another one who said WTF when I first saw the controller. But the more I read the more I was intrigued. Still skeptical, as swinging it around will take some getting used to, thats so different from anything done before.
It does look like a DVD remote close up :D But turn it round and its a NES/SNES pad - smart :D
How do you play N64/GC games with it? Wheres the analogue stick?
Or, even better - can you hook up GC controllers to the Revolution?

I disagree with this statement. Just by looking at the design with the attached analog stick, movement will be controlled by that. I would think that the 360 camera would be controlled by the controller itself allowing you to move the controller in the direction that you want to look making it feel more mouse like. The problem I see with the controller design is a game like Mortal Kombat or Madden. There are 2 buttons on the analog stick and 4 buttons (3 front & 1 back) on the actual controller.

I think the design sucks but I've said that about the N64 and GC controllers as well and ended up liking them. I give Nintendo a lot of credit for being innovative with their controller unlike other companies. Can't bash it 'til you try it, right? :)

The quick answer to this question is yes. Look at the first page of this thread. There will be 4 GC controller ports.

However, with the door that goes up and down to conceal the ports, it does not look like the Wavebird controller will work, because the top of the port, pertrudes beyond the top of the console. Not being able to use the Wavebird on the Rev, would be a big :down: for me.

Its not so much a matter of "dumbing it down" as it is completely different control mechanics. When using an analog stick, you have to program in compensation for the fact that it will possibly take some time to get from the current position to the desired position. This can be built in by a making an enemy shoot later after they reveal themselves, or slowing down game progression. These are not easy to add or remove when considering that it will greatly alter gameplay. Vice, they are not easy to add because they will greatly alter gameplay.

Can't wait to try this out.

I'm sick to fucking death of playing the same old games with a new coat of paint.

This new control scheme opens up worlds of new gameplay options. Hell, just controlling games differently is a huge breath of fresh air. I love the touch screen on the DS and this is even more innovative.

As long as this doesn't get terrible reviews, my next gen purchase decision has just been made.

Actually, sounds like some nintendo fanboys are getting a bit defensive.

And I like what N has done with the DS (more so than the psp) so whatever..

Anyway, can someone please explain, using technical descriptions if necessary, how pointing this thing is as accurate as a mouse? I really cannot see it.. I mean, I can shoot 10x more accurate in Counterstrike than HotD2 (with a light gun), so how is the pointing principle of the revolution that different from a traditional light gun? I understand now that they are techically different but it seems like both devices would be operated in similar ways.

I'm the first one to get fed up with pc owners going on about how they 'ownz j00 c0nsole kiddies' with their l33t keyboard and mouse skills, but I'm failing to see how this is significantly better than a dual analog stick setup, let alone a pc mouse.

Edit: just to clarify I mean significantly better for FPS type games...