By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Rumour: Wii-mote like controller for the PS2

redspear on 27 June 2007
BenKenobi88 said:
Tispower said:

I don't really think much of that site, here's why:

For "The Nintendo GameCube WaveBird Controller", it says that it is "notable for being the first, best and so far only wireless first-party controller."

...

eh?

It also says "revolutionary Nintendo 64 controller. I would hardly say it was revolutionary, I mean the thing looked hideous, and was horrible to hold.


 Well at the time I don't think PS2 or Xbox had official wireless controllers.


not to mention if you don't think the N64 controller is revolutionary well just put down your PS2 controller and use the SNES controller to play your 3-D games because well it may not be teh best looking controller it certainly changed the way games are played today.

 

BTW the Wavebird was the first First party Wireless controller that actually worked a damn and had decent battery life



Around the Network
Tispower on 27 June 2007
BenKenobi88 said:
Tispower said:
 

 

I don't really think much of that site, here's why:

For "The Nintendo GameCube WaveBird Controller", it says that it is "notable for being the first, best and so far only wireless first-party controller."

...

eh?

It also says "revolutionary Nintendo 64 controller. I would hardly say it was revolutionary, I mean the thing looked hideous, and was horrible to hold.


Well at the time I don't think PS2 or Xbox had official wireless controllers.


But the site also hasthe 360, SIXAXIS and Wiimote controllers...

And yeah, I'd agree the foundation of most controllers is the SNES controller, I'd easily agree that was revolutionary, less so the N64 controller. 



One person's experience or opinion never shows the general consensus

PSN ID: Tispower

MSN: tispower1@hotmail.co.uk

your mother on 27 June 2007
Bodhesatva said:
BenKenobi88 said:

What's with the PC dissing? It's got plenty of exclusive games, that are only now getting ported to consoles.

Half Life 2 games are definitive on the PC...I'd honestly say you're stupid to buy those games on a console...it's so perfectly designed for PCs, and the modding capabilities are endless.

Crysis is definitely a "next-gen" PC exclusive.

Honestly...there's a few good exclusive PC games out there...not many, but at least a few.

Most of the appeal for PC games for me is that you can adjust the options and fine-tune graphics as much as you want. If you have a better computer, you have better graphics...once it's on a console, you can't improve the graphics later. I played Half Life 2 for the first time on a fairly crappy computer...yet it still looked amazing to me. Later I got a much better computer, and now the game and it's many Source mods look very good.

I could turn the same argument back to a PS3 owner and ask what the good-looking, top-notch PS3 exclusives are. I wouldn't get many answers.


There's a couple mistakes that people are making, Ben.

First and foremost, there are a LOT of PC exclusives. In fact, looking at the "Exclusive Arms Race", you can see that PC exclusives aren't listed because they would absolutely dwarf the consoles in sheer number of titles -- NOT because there are too few. Of course, this includes mods (such as Counter Strike) and all sorts of little, simple games.

If we're only going to include games with excellent graphics, then we are effectively saying: "Yeah, PC's have better graphics, but where are the exclusive games? Why would I buy a PC for a smaller games selection?" People should recognize that this precise argument could be turned on the PS3. The exclusive games selection, both current and upcoming, is noticably smaller for the system than the Wii.

So. Sure, the PS3 has better graphics, but where are the exclusive games? Why would I buy a PS3 for a smaller games selection?

 



Edit: Currently the Exclusive Arms Race page isn't loading for me; that's where the link goes to when the site comes back up though.

Try the ESRB - the total amount of games among ALL current-gen consoles, portable or not (PS3, Xbox360, Wii, DS, PSP), stands at 1180 titles.

Expand that list to cover ALL consoles, past and present, from the three top manufacturers (Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft) and you get 6325 titles.

There are a total of 6746 games for the Wintel platform.

Edit: Come to think of it, if you want your volume of console games to *nearly* match that of the PC you would have to buy every single Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft console. The cost of purchasing all those consoles (Xbox, Xbox360, PS1, PS2, PS3, PSP, NES, SNES, N64, GCN, Wii, GB, GBA, Virtual Boy), would probably match the cost of a pretty nice PC. it'd be a hell of a collection, though.



Timmah! on 27 June 2007

notgonnahappen. If someone did this, they'd be stupid. Why develop a niche product for a last gen piece of hardware that virtually no 3rd parties would even use?? (I'm not saying 3rd parties won't use PS2, just not the PS2-mote)

If it is made, it will flop.



MikeB on 28 June 2007

The original report at Tweakers.net has been updated to include Sony's comments, interestingly they put emphasis on Sony stating that they only stated specifically not to add motion sensing to the existing PS2 controller. So according to them they didn't say anything with regard to a new controller. Maybe just whishful thinking or maybe not...



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

Around the Network
HappySqurriel on 28 June 2007

In raw numbers of games released in a year the PC dominates but it generally has far fewer "exclusive" high quality games than a console. This is mainly because anyone can publish a game for the PC if you have enough money whereas Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft have standards when it comes to who publishes games for their platforms.

 

Back to the original point of the thread ... I think that if Sony produced a Wiimote like device for the PS2 they'd be making a massive mistake. It would be unable to sell particularly well because of how few people would buy it as an add on, and it would validate the approach that Nintendo has taken.



MikeB on 28 June 2007

MikeB wrote:

I appreciate modern games as artistical efforts, art of graphics, sound, coding, story-telling, acting and directing all coming together into an interactive experience. Better specced machines only provide the artists with more tools to express themselves.


Compare my comments with:

"Director of Final Fantasy Versus XIII and character designer of Final Fantasy XIII Tetsuya Nomura has recently spoken of his preference of the PS3, stating that “It's not just about how pretty the graphics are but more of how much limited amount of movement we can put in one go and how big our imagination and ideas are. The PS3 is the machine that is closest to being able to express our imagination."

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=166668



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales