Since the N64/PS1 generation, consumers and critics alike have wondered if Nintendo has lost a couple of its marbles. As such, Nintendo's popularity has declined since then. In many ways, the Revolution, Nintendo's latest console, was to determine its fate. Already trailing at last in sales in the United States, this new console, many believed, would either solidify that position or give them their last chance to turn things around. Well, the Revolution's revolutionary controller has finally been revealed and it's . . . a remote control? Like . . . a TV remote control? Yup. If you haven't heard yet, the special thing about this remote control is that the Revolution can detect its relative position and angle. This could be used for many things, but as an example, it can be pointed at your television screen to act as a light gun -- just point the "remote" at your target and pull the trigger. So, once again, has Nintendo gone crazy?

There are many things about Nintendo that I don't like - one of those being their "I know what you want more than you do" attitude. However, what if they do? They didn't just get that attitude overnight. What we now refer to as the video game crash wasn't a crash back then. After the popularity of Atari 2600 died down, everyone thought that video games were just a phase and that we would never hear or see from them again. On paper, nobody liked the NES, it was too risky and consumers weren't excited. Consumers weren't into video games and surveys showed that they didn't intend to buy any consoles. Nintendo ignored all the surveys and released the NES anyway. That of course, changed the history of video games.

The same company (and mostly the same team) is responsible for bringing such innovations as the D-Pad, shoulder buttons, analog sticks, force feedback and an effective wireless solution. All of these innovations have been quickly copied by other companies and now, we couldn't imagine consoles without them. I can imagine, most people are now thinking, "yeah but these changes weren't nearly as crazy as Revolution's". That's mostly correct. Most people aren't aware however, that before N64, analog sticks had long been taboo. The Atari 5200 had analog joysticks and it frustrated gamers to no end due to the fact that it wasn't self-centering. This made Nintendo's analog stick more risky than most people are aware of.

As of late however, their track record has been more bad then good. They were unwilling to shed their stubborn attitudes and stuck with cartridges instead of optical media and didn't support online when it was popular to do so. Most of the time, it seems that Nintendo is different only to be different and that is frustrating to consumers (including myself). So what do they do to solve this? They make their new console even more different.

The thing is however, is it really as silly as people are making it out to be? Is holding a controller with one hand really all that ridiculous or is this new interface actually more intuitive? I belong to the camp that believes the latter. Pick up a remote control and swing your arm to swing a sword, bat, tennis racket, golf club or even your own virtual fist in a boxing game. Point the remote at the terrorists, metroids or timesplitters and pull the trigger to shoot at them. You can potentially even zoom in by moving the "remote" closer to the television.

Most people are wondering about multiplatform games and how you're going to play them with such an unorthodox interface. To that end I say, who cares? Nintendo has already confirmed that they have a solution which I find satisfactory, but if they didn't, who cares? I'm a huge Street Fighter fan, but I could care less if a version of it is ever released for Revolution -- the interface is being wasted if all you want to do is play the same old games in the same old way. Don't get me wrong, I'll still pull out whatever system has a good old fashioned fighter with good old fashioned controls and whoop some butt in it, but that's not what I care about when I envision the Revolution.

The Revolution is all about brand new, more engrossing, experiences. How is it possible to not feel more like a part of the game when I'm actually controlling the sword in the game with the swings of my arm? Just because we have all been playing games with two hands for 20 or so years doesn't make it the right way to do so. I can think of no logical reason that makes two hands necessarily better than one and all I hear most people say in return is "it's just wrong". If you keep an open mind and give this new interface a try, I think most people will enjoy the Revolution, but of course, only time will tell.

Sources (for the little objective material that is in this editorial):

Note: views and opinions expressed in this article are the author's and are not necessarily those of Wolverine Soft.