| User | Post |
HyperLamer
Posts: 4970/8210 |
It's essential for old games. You simply can't play, for example, Metroid Fusion with a stick. |
Ran-chan
Posts: 9942/12781 |
Originally posted by Xeomega
I hope they'll keep the D-Pad.
Are you insane?  It |
Tanookirby
Posts: 136/509 |
I don't think the controller will be that difficult to use. Once you use it a few times, you'll get used to it. |
HyperLamer
Posts: 4902/8210 |
I've always been used to using the button on the left to run and attack and the one on the right to jump. On NES and Game Boy that meant B=run and A=jump. On SNES, Y=run and B=jump. It's always been that way, which makes it pretty hard to get used to a different layout.
And yeah, X? WTF was I thinking? |
JDavis
Posts: 642/815 |
Originally posted by HyperHacker
DS could work, sure, but then you have to buy a DS for it.  And if they do use it (maybe as an option?) I damn well hope they do a better job with button mappings this time. Playing GB games on Super Game Boy was nice because X=B and B=A which worked perfectly... Playing GBA games on DS is a pain because A=A and B=B, which is akward. Since it uses the same button layout as SNES it would have made sense to use the same mappings.
Better yet, make it have something similar to a PC's BIOS or OS. Then you could remap them however the hell you wanted, and the program would do the mappings appropriately before the game got the chance to query the buttons.
I kinda see what you're getting at, but at the same time I don't agree. First off, it was Y, not X. That doesn't really have anything to do with it, but it had to be said. Now, with the SNES and Super Gameboy the issue was mostly an issue of the size of the buttons, their distance from each other, and how close they were to the edge of the controller that made using the B=B and A=A scheme (which WAS still available as an option, mind you) uncomfortable. I just grabbed my DS and tried out how it would be like with a Y=B B =A scheme, and it was fairly awkward. Unlike the SNES controllers' buttons, the DS buttons are tiny and close together. With the SNES the tip of one's thumb (or at least somewhere around the center of its end phalange) rests on Y while the joint of the thumb bends to press or not press B. The only time B and A have been handled in this manner was on the N64 controller. Normally B and A are placed horizontally (NES) or diagonally in a down-left/up-right manner (GB, GBP, VB GBC, GBA, GBASP, SNES, GC, NDS, etc.) with B to the left of A and one's thumb resting between them and moving to one direction or the other to press either one (or pressing down in the middle to hit both at once). This was a little awkward on the SNES controller because the angle B and A were placed at wasn't quite a natural-feeling one at the distance they were placed (at least not without having your hand hanging out in the air barely holding on to the controller). The DS doesn't have the squashed-diamond shape layout for the buttons, more of a tilted box or cross (partly because they intended the buttons to be usable as a secondary D-Pad for left-handed people who needed their left hand for stylus-usage). Y and B are too close together to be used in quite the manner of the SNES's Y and B or the N64's B and A. However, it's B and A work just fine under the standard method of B and A usage that's been in place for decades.
Would an option to switch GBA's B to Y and A to B be nice? Yes, I think it would. Do I think it would be a more comfortable control scheme? No. Not unless you have very, very tiny thumbs (like a baby). |
Ten
Posts: 132/198 |
Most GBA games were designed with adjustible configs in midgame though. |
HyperLamer
Posts: 4876/8210 |
DS could work, sure, but then you have to buy a DS for it. And if they do use it (maybe as an option?) I damn well hope they do a better job with button mappings this time. Playing GB games on Super Game Boy was nice because X=B and B=A which worked perfectly... Playing GBA games on DS is a pain because A=A and B=B, which is akward. Since it uses the same button layout as SNES it would have made sense to use the same mappings.
Better yet, make it have something similar to a PC's BIOS or OS. Then you could remap them however the hell you wanted, and the program would do the mappings appropriately before the game got the chance to query the buttons. |
NSNick
Posts: 2375/3875 |
They could always release new NES, SNES, and N64 controllers that would work with Revolution. Ka-ching, overpriced accessories! |
Colin
Posts: 8551/11302 |
Well, we all know the controller has to have buttons for the NES, SNES and N64. Aside from that... who knows.
Would be nice if they snuck in a port for a classic NES/SNES/N64 controller though.  |
Xeolord
Posts: 2127/3418 |
I hope they'll keep the D-Pad.
Even though it's hardly used these days ... it's like, a part of Nintendo. You know what I mean? 
Then again, I think they really should have the D-Pad, especially if we're going to be using the Revolutions controller for the classic games.
Trust me, it's either going to have morphing functions, or it's going to be like a big Lego controller, where you can attach and detach NES / SNES / N64 / GC parts, and combined, they make the Revolution Controller.
Hey, it could happen. |
NEONswift
Posts: 48/117 |
Sorry Xeodious didnt mean to bite i just tend to get extremist over Nintendo at times.
As long as Ninty have franchises like Pokemon to sell to the masses theyll always have enough cash to survive the tough years. Surprisingly the mistakes that they have made have never had too much of an impact on their finances.
The thing im looking forward to most now is the controller for the Revo. Every generation of console since the NES nintendo have introduced new technology which has been either nicked or cloned by other companies. No doubt theyll design something now thatll be ripped off promptly.
Game and Watch / NES = D-Pad
SNES = Shoulder buttons
N64 = Analogue Stick, Trigger Buttons & Rumble Pack
Gamecube = Wireless Game Controllers, Analogue Shoulder Triggers
Revolution = Self destructing controllers that detonate upon failure to complete game.
|
Ailure
Posts: 9888/11162 |
They try to take a wide audiance that the "gamers". And it's not a bad move, if it's succeful. Really.
If you don't belive me, take a look at The sims. Guess why it become more succeful than any other PC game? |
Xeolord
Posts: 2122/3418 |
Originally posted by Emptyeye
Erm, I'm presuming you mean 3rd party support. 1st party support (IE Nintendo-developed games) has always been their strong suit. 
Err, must of slipped. Yeah, that's what I meant.
NEON: Don't worry ... don't have to get too critical on me. I agree that MM was a fantastic game, and TWW was decent, but I just liked the older ones more. Still though, that's not really a good arguement on my part. I can say however, yes Twilight Princess looks fantastic.
Kawaiilmoto-e: Don't worry about it, because none of that will ever happen.
Also, it's been stated in articles that Nintendo doesn't want to be competitive agains't Sony and Microsoft this time around, they've said they want to be "their own thing". Whatever that means? |
KawaiiImoto-e
Posts: 785/1068 |
A Short Theory of mine:
If Nintendo and Sony cooperate, Microsoft's X-Box is in deep shit.
If Nintendo and Microsoft cooperate, the Playstation wont be number 1.
If Sony and Microsoft cooperate, Nintendo will not crumble.
They won't be a Number 1 or 2, may a behind 3rd, but who buyes a Nintendo Device for 3rd Party Products? The majority of Nintendo Device Owners own more 1st Party Games than 2nd Party. Not? |
Colin
Posts: 8532/11302 |
The majority of games aren't made by Nintendo.  It's extremely difficult for a company to survive without third party support - no matter how good Nintendo's games are, if they're the only games of note for the console then there's a pretty serious problem there. |
NEONswift
Posts: 47/117 |
Originally posted by Darth Xeodious
Because he doesn't direct the Zelda games anymore?
(MM and TWW at least)
I'm just hoping the Revolution will have more 1st Party support, but seeing as how Nintendo didn't really have that with the N64 (cartridges were a big factor) and not even with the GC (not very well at least, all "exclusives" pretty much appeared on other systems months later) I'm not sure if it's possible for them.
Regardless, I'm still thinking and hoping, the Revolution will altogether be a better system than both the N64 and GC, and right now I'm thinking that's where Nintendo's heading.
At least Shigsy gave the zelda series to someone who is competant and not gonna screw the series up. Majora's mask was the toughest out of all the zeldas and with it the most atmospheric and clearly surpassed Ocarina on a lot of things. Mainly the complexity of dungeons (despite there only being 4) which is only a good thing. As for Wind Waker, despite statements that it was the downfall of the zelda series it still managed to hold its own when it was released and even though lacking in many areas you can not say it wasn't majestic throughout.
Aonuma's work on the new zelda looks set to be fantastic and he seems to have taken a lot of gamers opinions into account when designing it. If it really is as large as he claims it to be then hes also listened to the criticism over the last two 3d zeldas being too short.
I never really noticed the lack of 3rd party games on the N64 cause i was too busy playing the 1st and 2nd party games. Except for Mystical Ninja starring goemon and rogue squadron i dont really remember playing much else that wasnt made by Ninty.
The Revolution main attraction to me is the backwards compatibility really. I own (and there for have spent) too much for the Cube. If i couldnt play my complete Resident Evil and Zelda collection i would be disappointed. I know you can always dig out the old consoles and seeing as my cube is on the way out (god rest its soul) i'd rather not replace it. Who could deny that they will stick resi4 into their revolution when they get it and play it for like the 10th time. |
Emptyeye
Posts: 1867/2273 |
Erm, I'm presuming you mean 3rd party support. 1st party support (IE Nintendo-developed games) has always been their strong suit. |
Xeolord
Posts: 2112/3418 |
Originally posted by NEONswift
Originally posted by Ailure
Well, I even heard that Yamauchi didn't play Video games. So he ran a company without testing it's products apparently.
That's cause the dude had faith!
How could you not trust this man.
Because he doesn't direct the Zelda games anymore?
(MM and TWW at least)
I'm just hoping the Revolution will have more 1st Party support, but seeing as how Nintendo didn't really have that with the N64 (cartridges were a big factor) and not even with the GC (not very well at least, all "exclusives" pretty much appeared on other systems months later) I'm not sure if it's possible for them.
Regardless, I'm still thinking and hoping, the Revolution will altogether be a better system than both the N64 and GC, and right now I'm thinking that's where Nintendo's heading. |
NEONswift
Posts: 45/117 |
Originally posted by Ailure
Well, I even heard that Yamauchi didn't play Video games. So he ran a company without testing it's products apparently.
That's cause the dude had faith!
How could you not trust this man. |
Ailure
Posts: 9867/11162 |
Well, I even heard that Yamauchi didn't play Video games. So he ran a company without testing it's products apparently. |
| This is a long thread. Click here to view it. |
