Revolution controller revealed

Grandmaster Jogurt · Post by **Grandmaster Jogurt** » 2005-09-20 05:55pm

lPeregrine wrote:
You'll notice that I DID NOT COUNT X and Y.
I'm aware of that, and I didn't either. Look at that picture, to comfortably use the D buttons, you lose easy access to A/B. Or you keep your hand on A/B, making the D buttons an awkward reach.

Have you actually looked closely at the pictures of the controller? Linkya

The distance between A and the D-pad is less than the distance between A and the C-stick on a Gamecube controller. But hey, you can't comfortably use both of those without shifting your hand around, now can you?

The A button and D-pad appear to be less than a pinky's width apart. Pick up a remote control and tell me you can't comfortably use buttons that far apart from each other.

Qwerty 42 · Post by **Qwerty 42** » 2005-09-20 05:59pm

I'm not attacking anyone here, just trying to map out the current Gamecube controller versus the Revolution controller (including the control stick attachment, not unreasonable since it comes with the console)

GAMECUBE->REVOLUTION
A Button->A Button
B Button-> B Trigger
X Button->a/X Button
Y Button->b/Y Button
Start Button->Start Button
Control Stick->Control Stick
Control Pad->Control Pad
C-Stick->Gyroscopic Functions
R Trigger->Z1
L Trigger->Z2
Z Button->Select Button
->Home Button (presumably not available for gameplay)

lPeregrine · Post by **lPeregrine** » 2005-09-20 06:06pm

No, I'm sorry. I was listing what is capable. You declared it wouldn't be simple, and you immediately said you meant 'Simple deathmatch', not 'Squad based'. Any literate individual will associate this to mean you are referring to this being sufficient to a modern realistic FPS.

Since what you just said makes so little sense, I assume you haven't even read anything I've been writing.

Who said anything about realistic? The unreal tournament series is a modern FPS, but about as far from realistic as you can get. The hypothetical game is a MODERN game, one that includes features that are expected in a game from 2005, and actually takes advantage of years of progress in game development.

What you listed was a FPS, but not a modern one. Lacking a use button might have been ok 10 years ago, but not anymore. We have higher expectations now for our minimum requirements.

So you basically can't use hte language you're typing in.

The irony of this statement is just priceless.

Projection now. God you're a boring peice of shit. You'll continue on this facade of an argument, screaming how your list of features is inviolate, how if you don't have an FPS with them, the console is a failure.

What the hell? Are you even reading what you're replying to? You complain about an inviolate list of features in reply to a paragraph where I give a specific example of a feature that does NOT need to be included.

What's this? Another set of total lies? Yep. I can name off easy ways to play a FPS; how do I know? The tech demo included such! You just constantly redefine it into 'Simple', 'First ever FPS', and other outright bullshit in your frantic, desperate attempt not to lose a point.

I haven't redefined anything. It's not my fault you keep confusing two different concepts.

Simple FPS = the game I'm talking about. The one the revolution is a few buttons short of being able to play well.

First ever FPS = my exaggerated description of the stripped-down "FPS" you posted that would work with only four buttons. The one lacking even basic things like a use button, which has been a mandatory element for years now. "First ever", because it represents a step backward in design, to a more primitive game design.

These are the same definitions I've been using the whole time.

'I'S NOT BEING MOCKED! YOU IS!' Okay, you go back to the playground now. The adults are debating here.

Either you have the reading comprehension of a small child, or you're being intentionally dishonest. Which is it?

I posted a mocking comment, you immediately started screaming about fallacies.

You posted a mocking comment, I copied you and pointed out the fallacy in it. You then replied with "ur stupid, im moking u".

See a difference? One person's mocking is taken as literal argument to be debated, but the other's is supposed to be left as mocking.

So it wasn't mocking, it was an argument. You can't even make your posts consistant.

I'm sure this is a really hard concept for someone of your childish intelligence to understand, but it's possible to write a two-part argument. The first part mocks you, then the rest presents a real argument. See:

Mocking: Haha, see this obvious parody of a one-button controller?

Serious: 4 buttons is simplicity taken too far.

What a surprise that you just scream FALLACY! at the mocking part, and ignore the more serious content. I guess it was just too complicated for you. I should just stick with "UR WRONG. I RIGHT. U IDIOT."

That is only how it is done for straight ports and utter, totally oblivious dumbasses like you. Any real programmer knows to do otherwise. I know this because I've done programming.

Right, because all programming starts with what hardware is available, not which program is needed. "I have a computer, what kind of programs can I write with it" makes so much more sense than "I need a program to control this machine over there."

And I suppose nobody at Nintendo ever thinks "hey, Halo just outsold our entire system for this generation. What can we do to exploit this obvious market for FPSs?" It's much better to think "I have 4 buttons available, I can make pong v2.0." No wonder their market share is disappearing.

Lying bullshit, again. You're the one saying 'Our concept needs X buttons and you don't have it'. Repeatedly. Showing this to be cart-before-horse thinking is not a strawman.

Are you honestly this stupid? Are you really trying to claim that nobody ever has an idea, then decides how practical it is based on the hardware available?

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-20 06:09pm

Grandmaster Jogurt wrote:
lPeregrine wrote:
You'll notice that I DID NOT COUNT X and Y.
I'm aware of that, and I didn't either. Look at that picture, to comfortably use the D buttons, you lose easy access to A/B. Or you keep your hand on A/B, making the D buttons an awkward reach.
Have you actually looked closely at the pictures of the controller? Linkya

The distance between A and the D-pad is less than the distance between A and the C-stick on a Gamecube controller. But hey, you can't comfortably use both of those without shifting your hand around, now can you?

The A button and D-pad appear to be less than a pinky's width apart. Pick up a remote control and tell me you can't comfortably use buttons that far apart from each other.

I THINK he was talking about the little a and b.

We should call them X and Y like they were shown in the video.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-20 06:13pm

Qwerty 42 wrote:I'm not attacking anyone here, just trying to map out the current Gamecube controller versus the Revolution controller (including the control stick attachment, not unreasonable since it comes with the console)

GAMECUBE->REVOLUTION
A Button->A Button
B Button-> B Trigger
X Button->a/X Button
Y Button->b/Y Button
Start Button->Start Button
Control Stick->Control Stick
Control Pad->Control Pad
C-Stick->Gyroscopic Functions
R Trigger->Z1
L Trigger->Z2
Z Button->Select Button
->Home Button (presumably not available for gameplay)

ROFL, you're absolutely correct- the Revolution has as many buttons as the GameCube!

This ends the debate completely. Every single button on the GameCube controller can be mapped out to the Revolution. For STRAIGHT PORTS you can use the controller expansion. For Revo-exclusives or well done ports, you can even use gestures (jerk the controller forward for melee, a quick tilt-tap to change weapons, etc).

Anyone who proclaims it does not have enough buttons also has to say the same thing about the GameCube controller.

lPeregrine · Post by **lPeregrine** » 2005-09-20 06:18pm

Praxis wrote:
Qwerty 42 wrote:I'm not attacking anyone here, just trying to map out the current Gamecube controller versus the Revolution controller (including the control stick attachment, not unreasonable since it comes with the console)

GAMECUBE->REVOLUTION
A Button->A Button
B Button-> B Trigger
X Button->a/X Button
Y Button->b/Y Button
Start Button->Start Button
Control Stick->Control Stick
Control Pad->Control Pad
C-Stick->Gyroscopic Functions
R Trigger->Z1
L Trigger->Z2
Z Button->Select Button
->Home Button (presumably not available for gameplay)
ROFL, you're absolutely correct- the Revolution has as many buttons as the GameCube!

Try again...

X Button -> none
Y Button -> none

That's two fewer, even ignoring the D-pad issue. That list includes the two lower buttons, which can not be used period.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2005-09-20 06:18pm

lPeregrine wrote:
No, I'm sorry. I was listing what is capable. You declared it wouldn't be simple, and you immediately said you meant 'Simple deathmatch', not 'Squad based'. Any literate individual will associate this to mean you are referring to this being sufficient to a modern realistic FPS.
Since what you just said makes so little sense, I assume you haven't even read anything I've been writing.

Who said anything about realistic? The unreal tournament series is a modern FPS, but about as far from realistic as you can get. The hypothetical game is a MODERN game, one that includes features that are expected in a game from 2005, and actually takes advantage of years of progress in game development.

What you listed was a FPS, but not a modern one. Lacking a use button might have been ok 10 years ago, but not anymore. We have higher expectations now for our minimum requirements.

You talked about realistic FPS', you fucking liar. Do I need to repeat your lies back at you?

So you basically can't use hte language you're typing in.
The irony of this statement is just priceless.

The Troll sees a common typo and latches on when he can't fucking communicate concepts.

You're unworthy of the bandwidth you waste on this server.

lPeregrine · Post by **lPeregrine** » 2005-09-20 06:25pm

SirNitram wrote:
lPeregrine wrote:
No, I'm sorry. I was listing what is capable. You declared it wouldn't be simple, and you immediately said you meant 'Simple deathmatch', not 'Squad based'. Any literate individual will associate this to mean you are referring to this being sufficient to a modern realistic FPS.
Since what you just said makes so little sense, I assume you haven't even read anything I've been writing.

Who said anything about realistic? The unreal tournament series is a modern FPS, but about as far from realistic as you can get. The hypothetical game is a MODERN game, one that includes features that are expected in a game from 2005, and actually takes advantage of years of progress in game development.

What you listed was a FPS, but not a modern one. Lacking a use button might have been ok 10 years ago, but not anymore. We have higher expectations now for our minimum requirements.
You talked about realistic FPS', you fucking liar. Do I need to repeat your lies back at you?

Please do. Give me an exact quote of where I talked about realistic FPSs as anything but "this is not what I'm including in 'simple FPS'." I keep trying to beat this point through your thick skull, but realistic FPSs and the extra control demands they bring are an entirely separate issue from what I'm talking about.

So you basically can't use hte language you're typing in.
The irony of this statement is just priceless.

The Troll sees a common typo and latches on when he can't fucking communicate concepts.[/quote]

I see irony is wasted on the small-minded...

Since you don't get it, you left a typo in an insult accusing me of poor use of language. And just like you left a meaningless insult and ignored the actual content of the paragraph, I left a meaningless insult about you.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-20 06:26pm

lPeregrine wrote:
Praxis wrote:
Qwerty 42 wrote:I'm not attacking anyone here, just trying to map out the current Gamecube controller versus the Revolution controller (including the control stick attachment, not unreasonable since it comes with the console)

GAMECUBE->REVOLUTION
A Button->A Button
B Button-> B Trigger
X Button->a/X Button
Y Button->b/Y Button
Start Button->Start Button
Control Stick->Control Stick
Control Pad->Control Pad
C-Stick->Gyroscopic Functions
R Trigger->Z1
L Trigger->Z2
Z Button->Select Button
->Home Button (presumably not available for gameplay)
ROFL, you're absolutely correct- the Revolution has as many buttons as the GameCube!
Try again...

X Button -> none
Y Button -> none

That's two fewer, even ignoring the D-pad issue. That list includes the two lower buttons, which can not be used period.

Um, the X-button is on the list as is Y.

And looking at the size of the controller compared to the hand, if you map them to, say, Start and Select, and map X and Y to start and select, voila, no problem.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2005-09-20 06:28pm

Since Peregrin has abandoned actual debate for lunacy, I'll propose a simple layout for Lightgun/FPS hybrid for the Rev.

Aim is controlled by the sensor, of course.

Fire with B, zoom with A. Intuitive; the 'trigger' and the 'sight'.

Jump and crouch with the buttons of the analog stick.

Analog stick moves.

Weapon cycling through the D-Pad's left and right.

'Context' is down on the D-pad, easily accessible by all but the poor cripples of terrible blender accidents. Those cripples can have context somewhere else.

Poof. Full FPS functionality. More, in fact, since the aim isn't going to be crippled like most. And frankly, folks worry more about aim in FPS' than if their grenades are on an independent button.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2005-09-20 06:32pm

lPeregrine wrote:
SirNitram wrote:
lPeregrine wrote: Since what you just said makes so little sense, I assume you haven't even read anything I've been writing.

Who said anything about realistic? The unreal tournament series is a modern FPS, but about as far from realistic as you can get. The hypothetical game is a MODERN game, one that includes features that are expected in a game from 2005, and actually takes advantage of years of progress in game development.

What you listed was a FPS, but not a modern one. Lacking a use button might have been ok 10 years ago, but not anymore. We have higher expectations now for our minimum requirements.
You talked about realistic FPS', you fucking liar. Do I need to repeat your lies back at you?
Please do. Give me an exact quote of where I talked about realistic FPSs as anything but "this is not what I'm including in 'simple FPS'." I keep trying to beat this point through your thick skull, but realistic FPSs and the extra control demands they bring are an entirely separate issue from what I'm talking about.

Watch those goalposts move. You ask whose talking about them, I demonstrate you are. You immediately change the requirements again.

Pathetic. You're 'point' was dismissed as the utter bullshit it was pages ago. You can stop trolling now; your blatant dishonesty is on display already.

So you basically can't use hte language you're typing in.
The irony of this statement is just priceless.
The Troll sees a common typo and latches on when he can't fucking communicate concepts.

I see irony is wasted on the small-minded...[/quote]

If there was irony in 'You can't communicate basic comments' and 'I make typos like every other human', you would be right. There isn't. As usual, your pathetic attempts fall short.

Since you don't get it, you left a typo in an insult accusing me of poor use of language. And just like you left a meaningless insult and ignored the actual content of the paragraph, I left a meaningless insult about you.

Gosh, what a pathetic, petulant little whine. I make a comment about your inability to use the language, you whine about typing mistakes. You can't even recignize this much?

Brain dead cretin. Stop cluttering the thread with your bullshit.

Mad · Post by **Mad** » 2005-09-20 06:40pm

lPeregrine wrote:Try again...

X Button -> none
Y Button -> none

That's two fewer, even ignoring the D-pad issue. That list includes the two lower buttons, which can not be used period.

They can be used, you just have to reach for them. Just like you have to reach for the Start button on the GameCube and the Select/Start buttons on the PS2.

The Revolution controller does have something that the GC, PS2, and X-Box do not have: the ability to use three control sticks/pads at once.

On the X-Box, you can use 2 control sticks, the 2 triggers, and the control stick "clicks." In order to hit any other buttons or the control pad, you have to let your thumb off a control stick. (4 buttons max if using a dual-analog setup.)

On the PS2, you can use 2 control sticks, the 4 triggers, and the control stick clicks. Again, to hit any other buttons, you must take your thumb off of a control stick. (6 buttons max if using a dual-analog setup.)

On the GC, you can use 2 control sticks, the two triggers and the Z button. Once again, to hit any other buttons, you must let your thumb off of a control stick. (3 buttons max if using a dual-analog setup.)

Enter: the Revolution controller.

You can use the control stick and the motion/tilting, the 2 Z buttons, the the control pad, and the B button all at once, easily. And probably the A button with no extra trouble.

That gives you 7, maybe even more, buttons maximum when using a dual-analog setup. No other system gives you access to as many buttons at the same time in a dual-analog setup as the Revolution's controller.

And you were saying there's a problem?

EDIT: also, it looks like you can access the a/b buttons by holding the control stick with the pinky and ring fingers and using your index and middle fingers to press the Z1/Z2 and a/b buttons as needed. Suddenly, you have at least 9 buttons at your disposal on the Revolution.

lPeregrine · Post by **lPeregrine** » 2005-09-20 06:53pm

Watch those goalposts move. You ask whose talking about them, I demonstrate you are. You immediately change the requirements again.

You know, anyone with a bit of common sense would define "talking about them" as "using them as part of your argument". Not "you used the words 'realistic FPS' somewhere in your posts, I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN".

And if you bother reading instead of just giving reflexive insults, you'd notice that most of the times it's even discussed, it's because you insist on dragging it back in so I can say "I'm not talking about those" a few more times. Only an idiot would count "No, for the 15th time, I'm not talking about realistic FPSs" as talking about them.

If there was irony in 'You can't communicate basic comments' and 'I make typos like every other human', you would be right. There isn't. As usual, your pathetic attempts fall short.

Oh, there's irony in making a typo in an insult complaining about my language skills. You just don't want to admit it, because it would make you look bad.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2005-09-20 06:58pm

lPeregrine wrote:
Watch those goalposts move. You ask whose talking about them, I demonstrate you are. You immediately change the requirements again.
You know, anyone with a bit of common sense would define "talking about them" as "using them as part of your argument". Not "you used the words 'realistic FPS' somewhere in your posts, I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN".

Why don't you go back and look at what I've actually said, child: That if you were meaning to exclude them, you are pretty fucking illiterate. Of course, you're too busy masturbating to finding the typo 'hte'.

And if you bother reading instead of just giving reflexive insults, you'd notice that most of the times it's even discussed, it's because you insist on dragging it back in so I can say "I'm not talking about those" a few more times. Only an idiot would count "No, for the 15th time, I'm not talking about realistic FPSs" as talking about them.

If you were able to unfixate yourself from this, you'd see people discussing button layouts that allow for modern FPS capabilities. Even I put one forward, as unlike some gibbons in this thread, I can see that moving your thumb from 'A' to 'D-Down' is not a huge effort.

If there was irony in 'You can't communicate basic comments' and 'I make typos like every other human', you would be right. There isn't. As usual, your pathetic attempts fall short.
Oh, there's irony in making a typo in an insult complaining about my language skills. You just don't want to admit it, because it would make you look bad

How precisely does a common typo make me look bad? To any mature, intelligent person, I mean. You and Spoofe barely merit as humanity, you definately fall short of 'mature' and 'intelligent'.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-20 07:00pm

On the topic of the shooting-on-the-screen:

Eurogamer: Some critics have voiced concerns about compatibility issues with all the different television standards around these days... Will the Revolution controller work with all types of tellies?

Jim Merrick: I guarantee it. It works with LCDs, plasma screens, projectors... Everything. It's not like the old lightgun technology, where you had the classic problem of requiring a CRT screen. But this isn't working on a scan line basis, so there are no issues there.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2005-09-20 07:18pm

Praxis wrote:On the topic of the shooting-on-the-screen:

You know, if 'Home' was the button to reset the gyro to 'I am pointing at the middle of the screen', you could get away with any kind of TV. Hell, you could potentially do it with a projector onto a sheet.

Cosmic Average · Post by **Cosmic Average** » 2005-09-20 07:20pm

Man, those little a and b buttons appear to be rather diffult to reach, in fact, the entire button layout is off-putting. Then the remote's completly uncontored, meaning it's not going to rest comfortably in a person's hand.

On the other hand, the gyroscopic control idea does sound really cool.

SirNitram wrote:Why don't you go back and look at what I've actually said, child: That if you were meaning to exclude them, you are pretty fucking illiterate. Of course, you're too busy masturbating to finding the typo 'hte'.

Um, he brought it up originally as an example, to show that the remote wouldn't even be able to work well with it.

lPeregrine wrote:Even a very simple FPS (no options like alternate fire modes, scopes, etc) requires view control + 7 other buttons. MINIMUM. And this is the LOW end of game complexity. So we're presented with two choices:

1) Sacrifice gameplay features because the designers were too stupid to design a decent controller, and you don't have enough buttons to access them.

2) Buy extra add-ons for something that any competent designer would've put in the basic controller. But now you can pay extra for it.

and

lPeregrine wrote:The point is that an FPS is an example of a game on the low end of the complexity scale. A simple quake-style deathmatch game isn't too demanding on the controller, compared to a flight sim which needs a keyboard and 30 keys minimum.

The simple fact is, the designers have limited themselves to sub-FPS complexity as a maximum. There's just no excuse for that kind of poor design.

Both from page four.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-20 07:31pm

Cosmic Average wrote:Man, those little a and b buttons appear to be rather diffult to reach, in fact, the entire button layout is off-putting. Then the remote's completly uncontored, meaning it's not going to rest comfortably in a person's hand.

On the other hand, the gyroscopic control idea does sound really cool.

SirNitram wrote:Why don't you go back and look at what I've actually said, child: That if you were meaning to exclude them, you are pretty fucking illiterate. Of course, you're too busy masturbating to finding the typo 'hte'.
Um, he brought it up originally as an example, to show that the remote wouldn't even be able to work well with it.

lPeregrine wrote:Even a very simple FPS (no options like alternate fire modes, scopes, etc) requires view control + 7 other buttons. MINIMUM. And this is the LOW end of game complexity. So we're presented with two choices:

1) Sacrifice gameplay features because the designers were too stupid to design a decent controller, and you don't have enough buttons to access them.

2) Buy extra add-ons for something that any competent designer would've put in the basic controller. But now you can pay extra for it.
and

lPeregrine wrote:The point is that an FPS is an example of a game on the low end of the complexity scale. A simple quake-style deathmatch game isn't too demanding on the controller, compared to a flight sim which needs a keyboard and 30 keys minimum.

The simple fact is, the designers have limited themselves to sub-FPS complexity as a maximum. There's just no excuse for that kind of poor design.
Both from page four.

Both of which points are completely invalidated by the fact that the Revolution controller has the SAME NUMBER OF BUTTONS AS THE FREAKING GAMECUBE, as posted above. Just relegate secondary switching and multiplayer stat displaying to the two hard-to-reach buttons and you're set.

And using a single gesture (jerk forward for melee), Halo is easily playable as shown by the Paint-made image I posted.

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2005-09-20 07:31pm

SirNitram wrote:You know, if 'Home' was the button to reset the gyro to 'I am pointing at the middle of the screen', you could get away with any kind of TV. Hell, you could potentially do it with a projector onto a sheet.

Which, of course, means that you're going to need to recenter if you shift on the sofa, go and get food, or for a piss and sit in a slightly different position, or any one of a hundred small movements you might make whist playing a game.

The controller doesn't know where it is or where it's pointing, a sensor on the console itself tracks the position and orientation, the controller only has gyroscopic controls, to tell what angle it's being held at relative to local gravity. The TV you're using is totally irrelevant (but you will need one large enough for precise aiming), it's the position of the controller relative to the Revolution itself that matters.

If you move relative to the console, you have to recenter. Which is a faff.

It may also get weird if the game thinks it's being played in one aspect ratio, and the TV is set to another. If a game's only got a 4:3 ratio output, but you've told the Revolution you have a widescreen display (after all, you'll have to spend a fair amount of time setting all this up, TV size, position, position of console, etc. when you first bring your Revolution home), will you have to stretch the output? Or will it be able to cope.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2005-09-20 07:34pm

Cosmic Average wrote:Man, those little a and b buttons appear to be rather diffult to reach, in fact, the entire button layout is off-putting. Then the remote's completly uncontored, meaning it's not going to rest comfortably in a person's hand.

The 'little' A and B appear to be 'clones' of the other A and B. IE, you're able to hold it like a classic NES controller. It appears to be made to be used like a remote the rest of the time; while not ergonomially perfect, it's a hand position lots of people are used to.

On the other hand, the gyroscopic control idea does sound really cool.

It does. Though the demo of a guy using it as a sword looks goofy.. I must admit I wanna try it.

SirNitram wrote:Why don't you go back and look at what I've actually said, child: That if you were meaning to exclude them, you are pretty fucking illiterate. Of course, you're too busy masturbating to finding the typo 'hte'.
Um, he brought it up originally as an example, to show that the remote wouldn't even be able to work well with it.

I did in fact see those. Because of the poor wording on his part, it looked like a shifting around of arguments. In either case, the idea you can't make an FPS work has been dealt with by the creative minds here working out button arrays. It'll be interesting to see how FPS' are shaped on the Revolution; I won't deny it'll be far different from programming for the Batarang. But to leap to 'OMFG IT'S IMPOSSIBLE' is just reactionary bullshit. As expected from some members.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2005-09-20 07:37pm

Vendetta wrote:
SirNitram wrote:You know, if 'Home' was the button to reset the gyro to 'I am pointing at the middle of the screen', you could get away with any kind of TV. Hell, you could potentially do it with a projector onto a sheet.
Which, of course, means that you're going to need to recenter if you shift on the sofa, go and get food, or for a piss and sit in a slightly different position, or any one of a hundred small movements you might make whist playing a game.

The controller doesn't know where it is or where it's pointing, a sensor on the console itself tracks the position and orientation, the controller only has gyroscopic controls, to tell what angle it's being held at relative to local gravity. The TV you're using is totally irrelevant (but you will need one large enough for precise aiming), it's the position of the controller relative to the Revolution itself that matters.

If you move relative to the console, you have to recenter. Which is a faff.

It may also get weird if the game thinks it's being played in one aspect ratio, and the TV is set to another. If a game's only got a 4:3 ratio output, but you've told the Revolution you have a widescreen display (after all, you'll have to spend a fair amount of time setting all this up, TV size, position, position of console, etc. when you first bring your Revolution home), will you have to stretch the output? Or will it be able to cope.

Valid points. The 'Home' button is really puzzling to me. Unless it's for some sort of 'Main Menu' of the system, but would you want that easily triggerable?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2005-09-20 07:38pm

Praxis wrote:On the topic of the shooting-on-the-screen:
Eurogamer: Some critics have voiced concerns about compatibility issues with all the different television standards around these days... Will the Revolution controller work with all types of tellies?

Jim Merrick: I guarantee it. It works with LCDs, plasma screens, projectors... Everything. It's not like the old lightgun technology, where you had the classic problem of requiring a CRT screen. But this isn't working on a scan line basis, so there are no issues there.

Didn't they already cover that in the initial press releases? Isn't that what the two TV sensors are for? Didn't they already say that there weren't going to be any compatability issues concerning different types of televisions? Are people so stupid that they don't even bother to read anymore?

Fuck, I mean seriously, this was covered on like day one...

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-20 07:45pm

Vendetta wrote:
SirNitram wrote:You know, if 'Home' was the button to reset the gyro to 'I am pointing at the middle of the screen', you could get away with any kind of TV. Hell, you could potentially do it with a projector onto a sheet.
Which, of course, means that you're going to need to recenter if you shift on the sofa, go and get food, or for a piss and sit in a slightly different position, or any one of a hundred small movements you might make whist playing a game.

The controller doesn't know where it is or where it's pointing, a sensor on the console itself tracks the position and orientation, the controller only has gyroscopic controls, to tell what angle it's being held at relative to local gravity. The TV you're using is totally irrelevant (but you will need one large enough for precise aiming), it's the position of the controller relative to the Revolution itself that matters.

If you move relative to the console, you have to recenter. Which is a faff.

It may also get weird if the game thinks it's being played in one aspect ratio, and the TV is set to another. If a game's only got a 4:3 ratio output, but you've told the Revolution you have a widescreen display (after all, you'll have to spend a fair amount of time setting all this up, TV size, position, position of console, etc. when you first bring your Revolution home), will you have to stretch the output? Or will it be able to cope.

I don't think so; according to Nintendo it also knows the distance from the receiver, IIRC.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2005-09-20 07:46pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:
Praxis wrote:On the topic of the shooting-on-the-screen:
Eurogamer: Some critics have voiced concerns about compatibility issues with all the different television standards around these days... Will the Revolution controller work with all types of tellies?

Jim Merrick: I guarantee it. It works with LCDs, plasma screens, projectors... Everything. It's not like the old lightgun technology, where you had the classic problem of requiring a CRT screen. But this isn't working on a scan line basis, so there are no issues there.
Didn't they already cover that in the initial press releases? Isn't that what the two TV sensors are for? Didn't they already say that there weren't going to be any compatability issues concerning different types of televisions? Are people so stupid that they don't even bother to read anymore?

Fuck, I mean seriously, this was covered on like day one...

Apparently, some people felt the need to ask again, as Eurogamer did.

Someone else in this thread was stating that the light gun technology doesn't work with HDTV's and other types of TV's blah blah blah, so I provided the above quote.

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2005-09-20 07:51pm

Praxis wrote:Both of which points are completely invalidated by the fact that the Revolution controller has the SAME NUMBER OF BUTTONS AS THE FREAKING GAMECUBE, as posted above. Just relegate secondary switching and multiplayer stat displaying to the two hard-to-reach buttons and you're set.

And using a single gesture (jerk forward for melee), Halo is easily playable as shown by the Paint-made image I posted.

Not all of those buttons can comfortably be accessed at the same time though.

And your 'jerk forward' might also be interpreted by the controller as 'look down', remember that the position sensor already needs to be an axis, as it was in the modified MP2 demo when the controller was demoed. (Gyro control for view in an FPS is fucking awful, there's absolutely no chance at any kind of precision aiming, believe me, I had a Sidewinder Freestyle Pro for my PC, and playing Quake on it was an excercise in masochism)

Of course, using the controller as an 'air mouse' for mouselook style control comes with it's own problems, as you run into sensitivity issues, how far should you have to move to turn all the way around.