More idiot "analysts"...

[Paco]

...A real debate?? No flaming "you're an idiot" posts?? Woohoo! :D

Not at all. I enjoyed your post quite a bit.

I think you already know this, but the 'shell' is basically a GC controller with a slot for the remote, it's wireless as well that's why I called it wavebird-like. All games from Nintendo (and hopefully 3rd parties) will be using the remote's 3-D functionality

I say this with confidence because you cant help but marvel at the idea of controlling something in full 3-D; Every genre under the sun will benefit from it even if it's wasted for controlling the camera in a 3rd person game. But it goes much, much deeper than that. All you need to do is imagine a genre, like a Starfox game, and imagine controlling your Arwing ...with your hand. Not huge movements (unless you're avoiding a wall), just small movements from the wrist to turn, bank, roll, climb, etc.

And because all or most games will be taking advantage of that, Nintendo gives the player the option of using the remote or sliding it in the GC-like controller. All the same functionality is there, you can play Starfox exactly the same way by moving your controller to simulate the control of the ship, but now it's in the shell of a GC controller with more buttons and a more traditional sense of gaming.

It wont be 'This game requires a shell to play' (unless it's a specific game, like a music game or something whacky), any game that uses the 3-D control can be played with the remote or in the shell, it's not a one or the other thing. It's not an add-on or a peripheral, it's an option for developers and game players to choose what feels best for them depending on the game they play.

The new football game has 3-D functionality, so do you want to use the remote/stick setup or use the shell? Your choice. Just like games that ask you if you want to turn 'rumble' on or off, it will ask you (or detect) what setup you want to use.

I have no doubt in my mind that most 3rd parties will opt for the shell design. And at first, the 3-D functionality will be wasted on the camera movement like I said. Look at the 3rd parties on DS, they were (some still are) releasing games for it that dont use the touch screen at all! But slowly they're experimenting and trying things out and we end up with gems on DS outside the Nintendo camp. And the same 'transitional period' will happen on Revolution.

The question i'm wondering is, the shell; will it come with the Revolution in the box, or do I need to buy it seperately. Nintendo has already hinted that many of it's d/l games will be "updated". In the TGS video, you can hear that people are playing the original Mario Bros with the remote, jumping by flicking the remote controller up. But you also have SNES and N64 games that need a more traditional controller... They could still benefit from the 3-D functionality, but they need the 'pad' design (or an overhaul in the control scheme, which could happen if a developer wants their older game updated for the Rev controller). So i'm thinking, based on that alone, Nintendo will include one Remote controller with a traditional controller shell in the box.

Yes, yes. I've thought about all this and it comes down to the same question you have; will the shell come with the Revolution or not? If it does then I really can't see a negative for Nintendo, the system will be more dynamic and, imo, be better for it. All my concerns stem from the possibility that it won't come with the shell and I'll be forced (for lack of a better word) to play all Revolution games with the new controller. I willing to try a new Zelda, Mario, and Metroid but I'd be comforted to know there's a possibility of getting those games in the same vein I've come to know them on a control scheme I'm used to (is the shell included and will it be utilized by Nintendo, or will they drive solely in the new direction?). I say this without knowing the full extent of the new controllers' function and have no idea just what the developers have in mind for it. Perhaps it will allow for similar gameplay style, but maybe not. I could love it, or I could hate it. I wouldn't know because I've never played a game with anything like it. Do you see why I refuse to take a side on this?!

On the same token, I want a bigger and more diverse library of games. That can only occur given a healthy lineup of interested third parties.

And of course, Nintendo themselves said "We haven't shown everything about the controller or system yet." And the controller could go through some minor and major changes before we see it again.

I'm waiting, and curious.

Just keep in mind that there has never been a bad Nintendo-made controller. Every controller that Nintendo has made has caused the industry to change. D-pads, shoulder buttons, anal sticks, rumble paks, wireless, you name it Nintendo did it so you shouldn't be too worried about it being poop. They know what they're doing.

I suppose that depends who you talk to. I know many people who just don't like the Gamecube controller (the biggest complaint is that it's too small), and I'm not sure it brought anything new to video game scene.

I know Nintendo received some backlash for their controllers (namely the N64 and GC controllers) from developers, but the complaints have been minimal and are mostly caused by the button layout. Miyamoto said it himself that the N64 controller was designed specifically for Mario 64. That does reinforce the notion that Nintendo doesn't always act with everyone else in mind, such has been the case with different formats as well, and it does tend to alienate game developers. What of everyone else who wants to make games for the Nintendo console? Can Nintendo win back third parties to create a more desireable console, one that doesn't primarily feature Nintendo made games?

Meh, we'll see soon enough I suppose.