Fake Nintendo Revolution Video Makes Me Cry!
- Thread starter Kschreck
- Start date
Kschreck
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2003
- Messages
- 926
- Reaction score
- 0
I agree because a LOT of fans have seen this video and if a few days Nintendo's new system is just a beefed up GameCube as the Xbox 360 is to the Xbox then I think people will be seriously disapointed. At lease 25% of the people believe this video to be real. I seriously will have no interest in Nintendo's new game system if it isn't the NintendoON or something similar. Unless they come up with another truly revolutionary way of making a game system.
Q
qckbeam
Guest
Hmm, now that I think about it, was the music used there from the movie National Treasure?
Q
qckbeam
Guest
Kschreck said:
I mean the music at the start, and right at the end. It sounds so familiar, and now it's bugging me
OCybrManO
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 4,780
- Reaction score
- 0
People thought that was really a Nintendo video/product? I thought it looked like crap... and the basic ideas behind it seemed flawed.
First, dynamic augmented reality (placing video game objects in your view of the real environment) isn't ready for decent commercial quality gameplay. For now, even the best augmented reality "games" are crap... and having that as your console's only form of local multiplayer would suck ass... especially if you had to take it outside, as mentioned in post #41.
Second, without some sort of controllers (perhaps gloves) mounted to a static object like the ground or even your torso (static in relation to your body) you wouldn't be able to feel like you were interacting with the environment or your controller in "virtual form" as was also mentioned in post #41. It would make things hard to control. I would prefer something like that video of the pen mounted on a mechanical arm that could let you feel things you were interacting with... except with a glove instead of a pen.
Third, if you ignore the second point and still choose to use "eyes" to sense where your hands move without a form of force feedback... it would be like unplugging your controller every time the "eyes" lose track of them. If the "eyes" are on the base station this would happen if you move around (as seen in the video) too much or turn around. If the eyes are on the visor thing it might happen every time you tilt your head (also seen in the video) too much in any direction. Hell, even putting one hand in front of (or above, if the eyes are on the visor) each other would block the view of one of them.
Fourth, if you use walking around as your main method of controlling movement you're going to severely restrict the playability of the system for anyone in a small room. In the video, the guy playing that Metroid game would trip over the bed or walk into the wall. There is a way to get around it by making walking in place (or the bobbing motion of it) be sensed as walking forward in the game... but that wouldn't allow you to strafe or walk backwards... and leaning to control movement would probably feel awkward... and no more responsive than using a joystick.
Then, there's the cost. It would be expensive (to say the least) to make. It would either cost the user an arm and a leg or Nintendo would be taking huge losses on every unit sold. Most developers probably wouldn't want to jump on the bandwagon until it is proven... and most gamers probably wouldn't want to buy the system unless it had plenty of developers making good games for it... especially if it was prohibitively expensive.
In theory it might sound cool... but it's just not practical. Well, at least, the version in that video isn't practical. There may be a feasible way to do something similar without all of those design problems... but it would still be ****ing expensive.
First, dynamic augmented reality (placing video game objects in your view of the real environment) isn't ready for decent commercial quality gameplay. For now, even the best augmented reality "games" are crap... and having that as your console's only form of local multiplayer would suck ass... especially if you had to take it outside, as mentioned in post #41.
Second, without some sort of controllers (perhaps gloves) mounted to a static object like the ground or even your torso (static in relation to your body) you wouldn't be able to feel like you were interacting with the environment or your controller in "virtual form" as was also mentioned in post #41. It would make things hard to control. I would prefer something like that video of the pen mounted on a mechanical arm that could let you feel things you were interacting with... except with a glove instead of a pen.
Third, if you ignore the second point and still choose to use "eyes" to sense where your hands move without a form of force feedback... it would be like unplugging your controller every time the "eyes" lose track of them. If the "eyes" are on the base station this would happen if you move around (as seen in the video) too much or turn around. If the eyes are on the visor thing it might happen every time you tilt your head (also seen in the video) too much in any direction. Hell, even putting one hand in front of (or above, if the eyes are on the visor) each other would block the view of one of them.
Fourth, if you use walking around as your main method of controlling movement you're going to severely restrict the playability of the system for anyone in a small room. In the video, the guy playing that Metroid game would trip over the bed or walk into the wall. There is a way to get around it by making walking in place (or the bobbing motion of it) be sensed as walking forward in the game... but that wouldn't allow you to strafe or walk backwards... and leaning to control movement would probably feel awkward... and no more responsive than using a joystick.
Then, there's the cost. It would be expensive (to say the least) to make. It would either cost the user an arm and a leg or Nintendo would be taking huge losses on every unit sold. Most developers probably wouldn't want to jump on the bandwagon until it is proven... and most gamers probably wouldn't want to buy the system unless it had plenty of developers making good games for it... especially if it was prohibitively expensive.
In theory it might sound cool... but it's just not practical. Well, at least, the version in that video isn't practical. There may be a feasible way to do something similar without all of those design problems... but it would still be ****ing expensive.
Kitfox
Spy
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2003
- Messages
- 493
- Reaction score
- 5
Although this is most likely fake (i pray its not). Take into concideration that not only is this not the entire video but obviously all the features of the machine haven't been presented i wouldn't be suprised if in fact this is real that u get a controller as well. Walk with a controller move look around with your head. Stop coming to rediculus stupid conclusion trying to disprove this. OMG this so impratical.. you haven't tried out this fake peice of hardware i'm sure it's quite practicle. Surely Nintendo isn't stupid enough to bind it's users and make you walk around a room to play game. That being said this is a fake. Stop trying to disprove a fake machine with out knowing all it's fictional features and facts.
ThomasToad
Spy
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2003
- Messages
- 381
- Reaction score
- 0
http://onlynintendorevolution.blogspot.com ....found this on the gamespot forums(yeah, i know ), seems totally fake except for one interesting point he makes about rs.ign.com , rs = revolution system as stated in this "fake" video....
), seems totally fake except for one interesting point he makes about rs.ign.com , rs = revolution system as stated in this "fake" video....
Korgoth
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2003
- Messages
- 3,233
- Reaction score
- 0
oh come on, nintendos biggest market (younger children) haven't downloaded and watched this video, and once they see a revolution up for sale along with some nintendo original IP they are still gonna beg mommy and daddy for it.
Only people who expect this much from nintendo now, are the hardcore fanboys, and the skeptical wishers... Nintendo will have a good system, surely, and they have all the hype they are spitting and absence of proof is really only hurting them. But after they unveil, the hype will pick up or die, and either way they will take their share of the market come holiday season (05 or 06) just because its new, its nintendo, and its garunteed fun...
Only people who expect this much from nintendo now, are the hardcore fanboys, and the skeptical wishers... Nintendo will have a good system, surely, and they have all the hype they are spitting and absence of proof is really only hurting them. But after they unveil, the hype will pick up or die, and either way they will take their share of the market come holiday season (05 or 06) just because its new, its nintendo, and its garunteed fun...
Mechagodzilla
Tank
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2003
- Messages
- 6,973
- Reaction score
- 0
I figured it was fake the instant that they mentioned the virtual boy. Then it was confirmed by the fact that they didn't bother to mention gameboy pocket or colour.
One thing I know from these sorts of trailers is that they either show nothing but a logo/slogan, or they show a lot of slickly edited in-game footage right off the bat.
They don't dally about with a big ten-minute flash animation that amounts to much ado about very little.
And, like people said, the control scheme makes no sense.
One thing I know from these sorts of trailers is that they either show nothing but a logo/slogan, or they show a lot of slickly edited in-game footage right off the bat.
They don't dally about with a big ten-minute flash animation that amounts to much ado about very little.
And, like people said, the control scheme makes no sense.
StardogChampion
Tank
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2003
- Messages
- 8,037
- Reaction score
- 2
Yes, yes, yes we know it's fake now.
Similar threads
