I think the Revolution will work well as a good alternative system to the Xbox 360 and PS3, but not as a direct competitor. It’s a great idea - I’m impressed with it, and can’t wait to give it a go - but I just don’t see the standard controller going away any time soon. However, hats off to Nintendo for trying something new(ish). I hope it works out for them.
Now all we need to see are some games…
[quote=“Gehpnaet”]http://cube.ign.com/articles/651/651559p1.html
Bottom of the page
Something like this would solve many problems indeed.[/quote]
Well, as it says on IGN, that’s their own take on the shell, the actual shell hasn’t been revealed yet. So perhaps it’ll be an even handier little device. XD
This is such a heated topic and I don’t quite relate to the reasons. It certainly seems to have at least as much to do with the complex levels of fan loyalty/distrust/enmity around the big N as the objective merits of the design. So here’s my take on it in that context…
I don’t think it matters one way or the other just yet, here’s why:
Because the control is so unfamiliar it will not be an automatic selling point for the system. The games, as always, will bear the burden of making the system a success or not. Now, assuming that the tech is solid can Nintendo deliver games that then turn the controller into a selling point? Of course, they have done it before with the analogue pad and Mario 64. However Mario 64 was an all time classic game in it’s own right, and Gamcube has greatly reduced confidence in N’s ability to turn out classic gaming.
Absolute worst case scenario the controller becomes irrelevant and the system lives or dies on the strength of the games. Best case scenario Nintendo or anyone else deliver a few games that are so exciting and bad-ass that, just like with the Dualshock and Nights-Pad, Sony and MS have no chioce but to copy them and everyone’s happy. Right?