no, it sucked totally and made multi-console release games a waste of time on the cube (unless they were cube first then ported).
i think sony hit the nail on the head with their ps3 controller- standard controller with motion abilities. the wii controller takes the fun out of games for me, i feel like i'm playing with a toddler's toy, not a game console.
d-pad = copied from Intellivision disc controllerOriginally Posted by Rob2600
shoulder buttons = perhaps Nintendo, but 5200 had sort of on the side buttons, Amiga Powerstick
analog = all 70s consoles, Interton VC4000, Atari 5200, Vectrex (Vectrex even had 'Japanes style' joypad: 'control' left hand, 'fire' right hand)
rumble: (ok 1 out of four ain't bad, but arcades had it first)
Last edited by tom; 10-21-2007 at 10:39 AM.
They hit the nail on the head, with the PS3 controller? No rumble, "original" sixaxis idea, same controller for the last ten years? I know that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", but they just fix little things here and there. (Dual Shock 3)
I'm not saying that you have to love the Wii controller, but I don't think you should knock one, while saying the other one's perfect.
My Room of Doom:
http://videogamecollectors.com/gallery/SuperMarioFan
True. But it did introduce the first successful first-party wireless controller to the market and that seems to have paved the way for the wireless controllers of the current generation.
Last edited by alxbly; 10-21-2007 at 11:27 AM.
Xbox Live: alxbly | PSN: alxbly | Wii friend code: 2326 4589 7536 6941
So true. Wavebird showed everyone else how wireless controllers should be done. Shame about the lack of rumble, though. I also love the N64 controller because it allows you to use analog or dpad without shifting your thumb in an unnatural position. That did not catch on, but it should have.
Just because you can identify the ancestors of bits and pieces of the Nintendo controller does not negate that the way Nintendo put everything together was revolutionary. The fact that they were wholesale copied only proves that Nintendo defined the modern videogame controller.
BTW, the Intellivision disc was total ass. The only thing it had in common with the cross Dpad was that you pressed it -- everything else was divergent.
Last edited by UniHamachi; 10-21-2007 at 11:43 AM.
Incorporating motion sensoring into a standard control set up is one thing; making the it the centerpiece of the controller is something else.
The problem is that it's just as bad for certain types of games as it is great for others. Until something comes along that works great for ALL types of games, I don't see it becoming the industry standard.I think a pointing device will also become standard -- it just lends itself to so many games.
No previous industry standard (and indeed, no controller in the history of gaming) has worked great for ALL (or even almost all) types of games. Every controller ever made has significant drawbacks.
Also, while they weren't the first to make a light gun (several Pong-type systems in the 70's had one), they were the first to use it on a dedicated system, the first to include it in a deluxe package, and the first to make it popular.
Well no, Magnavox Odyssey (1972) was a dedicated system, and that introduced a light gun, a rifle actually which Nintendo copied for their arcade rifle range. And Milton Bradley issued a machine gun with their game 'Spitfire Attack' in 1982 for the VCS 2600. But yes, besides arcades, Nintendo popularized the light gun with Duck Hunt for NES. But on the whole, Nintendo copied, never invented.
Last edited by tom; 10-21-2007 at 01:47 PM.
Not quite true, the Atari CX40 was standard for almost ten years, as it was used on VCS, 7800, A8, C64, Atari ST, Amiga etc. It was called 'the 9-pin era', from 1980 to 1988.
I guess it depends how you define dedicated. I was talking programmable, where the 1976 Fairchild Channel F was the first cartridge programmable dedicated 100% system.
I'm going to nitpick throught your list in order
The Godfather - Crap. And on every other console.
Manhunt 2 - wasn't impressed with the first one, probably won't be with this one. Probably would be if they'd have kept the AO rating.
RE4 - Good game, but seeing as how it's the best game on the Wii (IMO), it was also the best game on the GC. I still view it as a Gamecube game - not a Wii game.
MP3 - Got bored with after about a week
Medal of Honor - Sucked. And also on every other console
Red Steel - Sucked HARD.
PoP - meh. It had it's moments...
Scarface - Absolute CRAP.
And besides... I was talking about first party Nintendo. I'm tired of seeing Mario, Princess Peach, Bowser, and Link plastered over every game they come out with. And when you look at Nintendo's library, the ratio of kid games compared to mature games is astronomical.
I define the Odyssey as programmable, as it uses different cards. The game cards re-programmed the console, a sort of reverse to what was expected from Channel F onwardsI guess it depends how you define dedicated. I was talking programmable, where the 1976 Fairchild Channel F was the first cartridge programmable dedicated 100% system.
I define absolute crap as maybe a 3 rating. Scarface I'd give in the area of 7ish, and pretty much the same for Godfather. Neither are that bad, and sometimes fun. Red Steel I can see your side though. MP3 got 9 to 9.5 from critics, so you're in a tiny minority. How did you rate Zelda TP? Next week, Guitar Hero comes out, should be awesome. If that's not your style, perhaps you will like Super Mario Galaxy? Should be the top seller this Christmas season.
Edit: Oh yeah, MOH did suck...badly!
Last edited by Zap!; 10-21-2007 at 03:06 PM.
Well, even counting that, the NES made gun games popular. The average Joe Videogamer can probably name Duck Hunt, but not a single console gun game before then. Of course, the Sega Master System light gun was even better, as it registered misses.
The Atari CX40 was inadequate for a multitude of games. How is one button not considered a drawback? I remember playing Star Master and needing to use the console switches to bring up maps and things. That really showed how inherently limiting the controller was.
Nintendo is on the right track with the controlller + nunchuk design, but their misstep was to make the main remote shaped like a remote control. Imagine if it were shaped more like the nunchuck, with 4 main buttons and two triggers. Much more comfortable and functional. I think a split controller design would also benefit lefties.
You could always have a classic controller attachment for fighters and other DPad based games.
Last edited by UniHamachi; 10-21-2007 at 03:49 PM.
At least a standard controller works marginally well for all genres. There are some, like fighters, that the motion sensor control isn't good for AT ALL. Until things like that can be fixed, I don't see it becoming the standard. Growing in acceptance? Perhaps, but not replacing the regular controller.
If you have to have a classic attachment, then you're basically admitting that the motion sensor control doesn't work well for that.
Your attitude doesn't make sense -- there are games released with game specific controllers all the time, so there's no reason to limit either the controller or game design just to fit a universal controller. If a game requires a DPad (and that essentially is the limit to the split controller I described) and yet gaming itself is moving away from the DPad, then what the issue with having a Dpad style controller for some games? Why force a DPad that is used in a limited number of games for a pointer that has more versatility and utility?
I'm not talking about game-specific controllers, like Samba de Amigo's maracas. I'm talking about motion sensors replacing stock controllers as the industry standard in ALL consoles. Your assumption makes no sense, because you're implying that people are going to buy a special control just to play, say, fighting games. That's totally different than having to buy a guitar to play Guitar Hero.
Saying that the D-pad controller will become a game-specific one implies that all consoles will switch to motion sensor. Are you going to have a separate controller for Street Fighter? Mortal Kombat? Tekken? Virtua Fighter? How many game-specific controllers are people supposed to buy because motion sensor - which you're saying will become the industry standard in the future - doesn't work even decently for every genre? For MS to replace a stock controller as the norm, it has to at least work decently with every type of game.
I can play Guitar Hero with a D-pad, and virtually all games requiring a special controller don't force you to have it to play. Will this be the case with motion sensor? Can you actually see people playing fighting games, RPGs of all kinds, sports, and everything else with a waggle controller? I can't.
What you're talking about is wholesale replacing button and joystick controls with motion controls. I'm not talking about that. Nintendo didn't do that with the Wii either. I don't know why you feel it has to be all or nothing -- rumble, for instance, isn't necessary in most games but works well with others.
Bascially, I don't understand your point. You're arguing something I'm not even advocating.
You said:
If the term "industry standard" doesn't imply the replacement of standard D-pad controllers with motion sensor controllers, what does it imply then? All I'm saying is that MS won't become the type of controller included in every console by every hardware manufacturer until it's proven to work with every genre. Right now, that's not the case.
I don't understand the argument for the MS control on Wii. On one hand, people are touting it as the future of gaming and the biggest innovation since the D-pad, while on the other hand they're saying it's not required for play. It won't become standard as long as you split people's options like that, and this philosophy is not really working on the Wii so far. Nintendo is incorportating the MS control from the ground up with games like Wii Zelda and Prime 3, but it's basically letting everyone else just tack it on. You can't expect people to embrace it as an innovation when you're letting everyone who makes games for your console treat it as a gimmick that's tacked on as an afterthought.
As for rumble, you're again comparing specific, non-essential enhancements to something that gamers would have to use right out of the box, unless they want to buy a special attachment.
To be honest, WiiSports is the only game that has really utilized motion control successfully. But the pointer has been implemented well, and is the large part of the experience in some games. But to say "industry standard" means that all controllers utilize it, not that it becomes the de facto control standard. I still don't know why it has to become the main control scheme to be considered "industry standard". Once MS joins the party (assuming they launch a next gen), montion control will be "industry standard" considering Sony and Nintendo both have it.
When the NES came out, there were lots of games it wasn't good for at all. It had come out just after an era of 10-key pads and multiple controller designs. You couldn't do Microsurgeon on NES; Kaboom! with a d-pad would suck. But that didn't hinder the NES at all; it simply didn't have those kind of games (or in some cases it tried to, but they sucked and were ignored).
I do agree that some games simply couldn't work well with the Wii controller. But it goes both ways -- there are (and will be) games that work great on the Wii controller and wouldn't work very good on 360 or whatever. Have you played the 360 version of Rayman Raving Rabbids? It sucks ass.
And? How is that different from consoles having arcade sticks for fighting games, light guns, dance pads, and so on?If you have to have a classic attachment, then you're basically admitting that the motion sensor control doesn't work well for that.
The Wii controller may necessitate the use of some game-specific controllers that wouldn't otherwise be necessary, but the converse is also true: with the Wii controller, some games that would otherwise require a specific controller no longer need to. You mentioned Samba de Amigo, which is interesting, because a new Samba de Amigo is coming to the Wii. I'm sure it will use the regular Wii controller -- that's probably the reason it's on Wii to begin with. Were it on 360, Sega would have to make a new maracas controller. Look also at Ghost Squad, which on another console would need a separate light gun controller, but on Wii it's not necessary.
Last edited by j_factor; 10-21-2007 at 07:58 PM.
Again, you're pointing to specific examples and not the overall amount of games released. Even on the 2600, Kaboom! needed a special controller. Not all games played like it, so it needed a game-specific controller. That's not the same as saying that motion sensor would be used for the majority of games released, as in "use MS unless special circumstances require a special controller."
I agree, but I think it would take some MAJOR innovation on the part of developers to make motion sensor the norm with all types of games. We're not seeing this innovation on the Wii outside of Nintendo itself, and it doesn't look like anyone else going to really try any time soon.I do agree that some games simply couldn't work well with the Wii controller. But it goes both ways -- there are (and will be) games that work great on the Wii controller and wouldn't work very good on 360 or whatever. Have you played the 360 version of Rayman Raving Rabbids? It sucks ass.
Because I don't need any of those to play a platformer, shmup, fighting game, etc., though it makes them play better. True, they enhance the experience, but the games that support them aren't totally unplayable without them. I can play games in any of the genres you listed with a D-pad. You're automatically assuming that if MS becomes the norm, they'll include separate control schemes for all games for those who want to use a regular control pad? I don't need a dance pad to play a platformer or a light gun to play Contra. I'd have to use MS for all genres if it were the standard controller included with every hardware, and right now that just doesn't work.And? How is that different from consoles having arcade sticks for fighting games, light guns, dance pads, and so on?
You use two games that require special controllers as examples? Samba is a natural fit for the Wii, but is Street Fighter? Raiden? Can you imagine playing a fighting game for extended periods with the Wii controller?The Wii controller may necessitate the use of some game-specific controllers that wouldn't otherwise be necessary, but the converse is also true: with the Wii controller, some games that would otherwise require a specific controller no longer need to. You mentioned Samba de Amigo, which is interesting, because a new Samba de Amigo is coming to the Wii. I'm sure it will use the regular Wii controller -- that's probably the reason it's on Wii to begin with. Were it on 360, Sega would have to make a new maracas controller. Look also at Ghost Squad, which on another console would need a separate light gun controller, but on Wii it's not necessary.
Look, it's still quite early to judge, but we're not looking at shoulder buttons or an analog stick here. We're talking about totally replacing the existing control scheme with something completely different. Until the technology is there to allow people to use it with every game without thinking that it would be better with a regular controller, it won't become the standard. I think the next logical step would be something like the Sixaxis. You have both included, and one isn't totally replacing the other.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks