xanikseo Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 I was just thinking how top-heavy that would be if it was like that. Assuming the revo controller is about as heavy as the current GC controller, you would have the additional weight of the shell. The revo controller sticking out at the top would mean the controller would naturally tilt forwards, resulting in hand aches etc. I doubt Nintendo will release it like I think it will be, but what is the solution?
demonmike04 Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 I really doubt the revo control on its own will weigh the same as a cube controller, but seeing as the cube's control is light already it might be the same weight. I wouldnt say that would be heavy, maybe the weight of an xbox pad or wavebird?
Nintendork Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 Revolution's controller has been designed to be well balanced and as intuitive and habitual as a television remote. They have engineered it so the batteries and rumble pack are based in the back. I think Revolution controller is going to be extremely light.. and if you consider that the 'shell' is a shell, it doesn't have all the electronics and circuitry because a lot of the processing is still being handled by the Revolution controller. As far as vibration and power is concerned I'm not sure whether the shell will be self powered or vibration friendly, I'm guessing it will be vibration compatible but will leech from the Revolution FHC (free hand controller) You're right to be worried because for many genres like racers this will be utilised, I think the technology gets lighter every year. If you compare a dual shock 1 to a dual shock 2 the difference is immense.. but they both perform very well. I expect Revolution's FHC to be very light, and the shell to be even lighter. Rumble packs are the most heavy thing because they have high powered motors that stimulate the spinning of big weights, I expect Revolutions force feedback to be very minimal personally, in comparison to the xbox's which was stupid. Notice: can we all adopt FHC as the standard acronym for the Revolutions free-hand-controller? Someone on the boards came up with the idea and it's so much easier to type and pronounce than rev-mote. Rev-mote sounds quite lame. Also we're pretty much aware but the add-on shown below is the nunchuka controller, or simply analog stick add-on.
Charlie Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 I doubt the Revo controller will be that heavy. It's much smaller than you would think, and the GC controller isn't really heavy at all... Has anyone thought of just using the GC controller for non-wand games?
Retro_Link Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 Remember that the shell will effectively be just that! I'd imagine it will be extremely light weight as it wont have to house a rechargable battery pack, rumble pack or any other main controller components. The power and rumble pack etc... will be utilised from the Rev controller when you attach it. And the Rev controller is considerably smaller than a Gamecube controller/Wavebird anyways! I'd expect the Rev controller and shell combined to weigh about the same as the Gamecube controller!
Nintendork Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 I doubt the Revo controller will be that heavy. It's much smaller than you would think, and the GC controller isn't really heavy at all... Has anyone thought of just using the GC controller for non-wand games? If it's less than £10 I'm going to get one for personal use, merely for convenience. Of course if we're talking multiplayer Smash Bros. Melee, that could get excessively expensive to buy 4. So in that case we'd probably break out the classic controllers.. The power and rumble pack etc... will be utilised from the Rev controller when you attach it. And the Rev controller is considerably smaller than a Gamecube controller/Wavebird anyways! The rumble pack in the Revolution controller would not power that much of a console.. it wouldn't be powerful enough to distribute enough energy. I think to get a real depth that we expect in games you'd expect 2 standard rumble packs on each arm of the controller. It's like listening to music in mono.. you'd never go back after stereo and the same for surround.
4stringdj Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 if they used a shell for the revo controller i think they should turn it on its side. It just looks odd and not very subtle when its poking out of the top!
Nintendork Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 It needs to be on top for communication reasons if I'm not mistaken.. it's not that big of a deal.. also they're not to scale. The FHC looked small in Iwata's hands, and he's Japanese so over here expect that A button to fit your thumb pretty much perfectly.
colormonkey Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 Has anyone thought of just using the GC controller for non-wand games? I have read that you won't be able to use the old gc-controller to play rev-games. I'm probably not the only who has read that ...?
Nintendork Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 I see no reason why Nintendo would waste their time implementing wired interfaces for a more complicated controller when the system the game is built for comes with a wireless controller standard.. But Nintendo has said developpers will have access to the shell in the dev kit. So I can't see a reason why they would complicate it by changing the systems language for the shell/gamecube controllers. I think standard gamecube controllers will work fine if the developper has chosen to support the shell over the free hand controller (FHC)
RedShell Posted February 24, 2006 Posted February 24, 2006 if they used a shell for the revo controller i think they should turn it on its side.That's what I was thinking too. It needs to be on top for communication reasons if I'm not mistaken.. it's not that big of a deal.. also they're not to scale. I don't reckon it does, you can point most TV remotes anywhere and they still work, plus isn't the whole point of the shell that it will be an alternative to using the movement of the FHC? Oh and by the way those images are to scale, well according to the paper mock-up thing from the new Nintendo mag, I just compared it to my Gamecube controller and it looks the same size as in that image.
Shoe Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 The shell looks exactly like the GC controller That's gay
Fresh Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 The shell looks exactly like the GC controller That's gay Ladies an gentlemen we have a retard!
Jay Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 The shell looks exactly like the GC controller That's gay You're trying to tell me that the shell has relations of a sexual nature with other controller shells The cube controller is a fantastic design, it has all the buttons you could need and I don't think there's any need to make any major changes, maybe slight ones to the D-Pad/Z Button/C-Stick (Making them a little bigger) but nothing more.
Sarka Posted March 2, 2006 Posted March 2, 2006 If it was like that, you could have a noraml controller, with movement added in, use the controllers sensors wheil having the shell on. I'm hoping it will just be very much like the pic at the top of the page.
raven_blade2006 Posted March 3, 2006 Posted March 3, 2006 The Shell hasnt been shown yet! That is just a mock up design made by IGN.
Jamba Posted March 3, 2006 Posted March 3, 2006 'Dork the controller doesn't have to be on top. The sensor on the front of the FHC is only used as a pinting device however the actual communication is either wireless protocol or bluetooth (I can't remember and I don't really care!). It would make more sense for it to be on it's side really but hey, I guess we'll see in a coupla months!
Zero Seven Posted March 3, 2006 Posted March 3, 2006 I love the N64 controller when it had the rumble pak in it for the weight its self, I liked the weight of the controller and it took me ages and ages to get used to the controllers after the n64. Id have no problem with it at all if it was heavy, id preferr it infact.
Nintendork Posted March 3, 2006 Posted March 3, 2006 'Dork the controller doesn't have to be on top. The sensor on the front of the FHC is only used as a pinting device however the actual communication is either wireless protocol or bluetooth (I can't remember and I don't really care!). It would make more sense for it to be on it's side really but hey, I guess we'll see in a coupla months! Doesn't make sense that they would sacrifice the internal space of the controller which is needed for components.. If they want it to be evenly balanced (very important) they'd put the controller slot vertically down the middle of the device. While the Revolution pointing system is used for pointing, it no doubt uses a lot less electricity than using a wireless protocol that you speak of. To conserve battery life on laptops and mobile phones you have to turn it off.. IR (i think) however is pretty good because it doesn't require constant activation. IR is better for TV remotes.. could be better for this too..
DCK Posted March 3, 2006 Posted March 3, 2006 The controller will be light, and most of the weight will be in the lower part of the controller, that's where the batteries will be and probably the rumble too. The part sticking out won't put it off balance at all.
Kurtle Squad Posted March 3, 2006 Posted March 3, 2006 And also...The shoulder buttony area is the heavy bit on a cubetroller i think, it would way balance that supid lil bit sticking out the top...Most of the remote is in that mock up shell anyway..
Jamba Posted March 3, 2006 Posted March 3, 2006 Seriously Dork the controller doesn't need to be pointing at the screen. IR is pretty archaic compared to bluetooth and other wireless transfers technologies. The controller can tell the Rev what it is doing without pointing directly at the screen. On the point of balance, you may be right but then wouldn't it be front/back unbalanced?
Kurtle Squad Posted March 3, 2006 Posted March 3, 2006 I have read that you won't be able to use the old gc-controller to play rev-games. I'm probably not the only who has read that ...? You could be right. I don't know if that's true, but it sounds plausable, especially since the Rev seems to be 2 consoles in one (The Cube + Rev). The Revolution part of it might only be able to be controlled by a Revo controller; I don't know thoguh.
Nintendork Posted March 3, 2006 Posted March 3, 2006 Seriously Dork the controller doesn't need to be pointing at the screen. IR is pretty archaic compared to bluetooth and other wireless transfers technologies. The controller can tell the Rev what it is doing without pointing directly at the screen. On the point of balance, you may be right but then wouldn't it be front/back unbalanced? It's not that heavy.. why on earth would it slide in sideways? it would look ugly. It will go in the top for balance reasons.. it's not like it is made of metal.. it's a plastic TV style remote, if you consider that the 'arms' that fit into the palm of your hand are quite long, with a vaguely weak grip the controller's weight would be very evenly distributed along the hand. Just go pick up a freaking PS1 dual shock, those things are bricks.. but we put up with them for years, why? Because it was evenly balanced and had arms to distribute the weight evenly in the palms. He doesn't complain, he gets on with it.. The batteries, rumble pack and main bulk of the Revolution's controller is located on the back. There is even a large area cut out of the nose proving this, it's where you fingers slide in for the trigger action. This thing isn't gonna be made of lead. Jeez, it is just such a hard piece of engineering for having a few inches of plastic coming out the top of a controller. If you weight the mass of the controller cord you hold up from the ground when sitting on your couch it would probably be heavier than the Revolution's controller's nose. Conclusion: Quit yo' jibba jabba.
trondjac Posted March 5, 2006 Posted March 5, 2006 Well, first of all, why create a GC shell for the revolution? Why make a gc controller that you put the revo controller into. When you just can make an gc wavebird controller that can communicate with the Nintendo Revolution?
Recommended Posts