Nintendo files patent application for new controller

Discussion in 'GBAtemp & Scene News' started by Prans, Apr 26, 2016.

  1. Lilith Valentine

    Lilith Valentine GBATemp's Succubus™ Waifu material

    Member
    25
    Sep 13, 2009
    Antarctica
    Hiding from Area 51 guards
    Could they just not?
     
  2. MarioFanatic64

    MarioFanatic64 The guy who does things

    Member
    7
    Sep 13, 2009
    Australia
    Nintendo files millions of patents. Probably so they can claim ownership of the idea if they decide to use it at any point. That doesn't mean it'll be used. This is likely due to all the patent sharks attacking Nintendo over the last few years
     
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  3. KingBlank

    KingBlank King of Nothing

    Member
    6
    Sep 17, 2008
    New Zealand
    New Zealand
    nx just needs a pro controller with a audio jack and switchable analog/digital triggers
     
  4. Bladexdsl

    Bladexdsl ZOMG my posts...it's over 9000!!!

    Member
    16
    Nov 17, 2008
    Australia
    Queensland
    I dub thee: Horse U!
     
  5. KingVamp

    KingVamp Haaah-hahahaha!

    Member
    13
    Sep 13, 2009
    United States
    Netherworld
    I guess you are forgetting about the nunchucks.
     
  6. DesuIsSparta

    DesuIsSparta GBAtemp Advanced Fan

    Member
    3
    Oct 13, 2015
    United States
    There is no reason for core function in games to be sold on a separate device
     
  7. Abcdfv

    Abcdfv What comes around goes around.

    Member
    6
    Dec 24, 2013
    United States
    Seriously disgusted by the amount of people who can't even read the first post on this forum.
     
  8. Pleng

    Pleng Custom Title

    Member
    9
    Sep 14, 2011
    Thailand
    Well for some people there's no such thing as "serious business" when it comes to playing games!

    It really depends if you're playing for amusement or high-scores. When I sit down to play a bit of Sega Rally or Daytona, then you're absolutely right in that I'm going to do better when playing with a pad than when using a wheel. I'd much rather use a wheel though as it's far more entertaining.

    But... I generally use pads. Why? Because using a wheel is a PITA. A controller you can plug in and go. A wheel you have to have lined up nicely with the monitor, and you need have a table a bit further back to rest on. Playing properly with a wheel just takes up a shit load of space, which people (including me) don't account for when they buy the wheels to begin with. That is probably the main reason you find a lot of them in second hand stores...
     
  9. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer

    pip Reporter
    23
    Nov 21, 2005
    United Kingdom
    Alignment has never really been an issue for wheels for me and mine. I have also had a few that have wings and go under your legs as well so you can sit on the sofa or a reasonably sized computer chair or something.

    The serious business thing was supposed to be a joke of sorts, anyway I suppose it is more that nobody can be bothered to own and store 4 wheels and if you have one wheel user and 3 controller users then the wheel poses a significant handicap. Perhaps not keyboard and mouse vs controller level but more than takes the edge off.
    Or if you prefer I have seen kids fight over the colour of controllers but nobody fights over who gets to use the wheel in mario kart, need for speed or whatever other car game that is not gran turismo levels of control needed that the kids are enjoying this week after the first time when they want to try it out. Even single player the only times I ever see anybody use them is for free roam type modes.
     
  10. TotalInsanity4

    TotalInsanity4 GBAtemp Supreme Overlord

    Member
    20
    Dec 1, 2014
    United States
    Under a rock
    It's not exactly a second device if it's sold with the console as part of the controller. If anything it's a controller add-on to give added functionality
     
    KingVamp likes this.
  11. That's optional and even then you don't have analogue triggers on it.
     
  12. KingVamp

    KingVamp Haaah-hahahaha!

    Member
    13
    Sep 13, 2009
    United States
    Netherworld
    Multiple uses controller. Some only use the Wiimote. Some use both, but you already knew that.


    Just as optional the games that need the nunchucks. My point is, if you are going complain about the controller, complain about the whole thing.
     
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  13. The Wiimote is the primary controller whilst the nunchuk is an additional accessory to it.
     
  14. Veho

    Veho The man who cried "Ni".

    Former Staff
    18
    Apr 4, 2006
    Croatia
    Zagreb
    There's quite a gap between "acceptable" and calling it "*perfectly fine*" / claiming that trying to improve on a dual analog is "solving a problem that isn't there". I would believe that you only meant the shape if you didn't generally balk at any mention of moving away from the dual analog control scheme.

    Again, this ridiculous horseshoe magnet design is just a patent application illustration, and this patent application is just one of the hundreds they file each year, so even if this becomes part of the final controller, there's no reason to assume the NX controller will actually look like this.


    Regardless, the "default" controller (what the dual analog is today) will change significantly in the upcoming years, and there is nothing you can do about it. Resistance is futile. It is THE FUTURE


    [​IMG]
     
  15. Foxi4

    Foxi4 On the hunt...

    Supervisor
    28
    Sep 13, 2009
    Poland
    Gaming Grotto
    I absolutely meant the shape, which is why I touched upon the ergonomics angle. When I say "dual analog" or "Dual Shock" I usually mean the modern shape of a gamepad, not the sticks themselves unless that's the context of the conversation or unless I specify that's the case. As for the "future", I'm one of those people who do not entertain the thought of having to strap a TV to my face in order to "immerse" myself (my immersion was, again, perfectly fine when I was 7, playing Castlevania on my 22-inch CRT TV with a mono speaker and a Famiclone hooked up, and not much has changed since then - the line between "game" and "reality" blurs with imagination in place, not with goofy goggles and vibrating didontrolsticks), and I know I'm not alone in that mindset, so I guess we'll see what wins out - the comfort of a couch or the weird innovation. I'll welcome anything that "works better", I don't like innovation for the sake of being different and quirky. As long as something improves gaming, I'm game for it.
     
  16. Haloman800

    Haloman800 a real gril

    Member
    7
    Dec 18, 2009
    United States
    Completely irrelevant and failed attempt at a joke. Not an argument.
    Businesses aren't people, neither are families, organizations, governments. They are made up of people. This is also not an argument, and has nothing to do with individual property rights. A business may be privately owned by a person, or by many people (who then jointly own the property).

    I'm not arguing the current law; the US government claims IP is a valid concept; I'm arguing that 1. this is false, no one can own an idea, color, or arrangement of words, and 2. The First Amendment, if applied consistently, would invalidate all IP laws, since copyright and patent systems are blatant violations of freedom of speech (they limit what you can say, write, view, etc).

    That's not an argument.

    You make 2 claims here. #1 is "You can produce anything for private use, as long as you don't sell or give it away", this is false. If I hand write out Twilight, then I can be sued for violating Mrs. Meyers copyright on that arrangement of words. #2 is based on a false assumption, but even if you were allowed to use it for private, but could not sell it; this is still a violation of property rights, since it's limiting what you can do with your property (e.g. it states you can't trade your handwrwitten book for someone else's burned CD, as both items are illegal under arbitrary IP laws)

    This isn't even debatable; IP laws are violation of freedom of speech, at least admit this. The only argument you can make in favor of IP laws are utilitarian, as in "even though it violates property rights, it's for the betterment of society as a whole", if you're going down that route, I have other arguments to respond with.
     
  17. Foxi4

    Foxi4 On the hunt...

    Supervisor
    28
    Sep 13, 2009
    Poland
    Gaming Grotto
    At which point exactly does IP protection violate freedom of speech? The right to freedom of speech concerns freedom of expression, you cannot be penalized for expressing an opinion, even if it goes against the general opinion (and this only binds government bodies, by the way - individuals are free to discriminate against you in their establishments - an important factoid people often forget about). Intellectual property does not concern opinions, it concerns practical application of ideas, for example the contents of a book or a design of an engine, both of which have an author attached to them. The author's work is not a public good unless the author makes it so - you took no part in the creative process, thus you have no rights to its result.

    Following your reasoning, libel shouldn't be a criminal offense - after all, I'm free to say whatever I want, right? Wrong. If I accuse someone of being a peadophile, that accusation has real-life implications for the person in question - I expose that person to harm of all sorts, from monetary (s/he could lose his/her job) harm to endangering their livelyhood (s/he could be shunned by their community or even lynched), not to mention possible prosecution. Libel is illegal because the words we say often times have serious implications, so if I'm making an accusation, I should make sure that I have evidence.

    The same rule of thumb apllies to IP protection - by not protecting ideas and designs, you're exposing their owners to loss of profit, which is harmful to them. Not only that, you're depressing the rate at which ideas are even publicized since they come at a huge expense and can be freely usurped at no cost. Your freedom of speech is not violated when you're not allowed to sell a book you haven't written as your own (plagiarism), a book is not an opinion, it's a physical representation of the writer's mental labour. You're free to say whatever you think about the book - that's freedom of speech.

    Your whole point hinges on the idea that one cannot claim ownership of an idea, which is patently (pun intended) false - if I come up with an innovative solution to a problem through mental labour, meaning research and development, I have full rights to capitalize on that. The fruits of mental labour in this context are the same as the fruits of physical labour. Working on a song is no different than working on a piece of stone - I as the creator apply my effort into the medium of choice and in the first instance I come up with a song, in the latter I come up with, say, a statue. Those are both mine, even though only one has a physical representation, the other one is just an idea that can be performed.

    Long story short, we're working with three very different concepts here - an opinion (expression of emotion or belief on a given subject, which is covered by freedom of speech), statement of fact (true by default and not protected by freedom of speech, hence the example of libel) and an idea. Explaining what an idea is would be dwelling into some mild philosophical territory (read Plato), so let's just define it as a mental representation of a concievable object or solution (a form) which, although intangible, has an express author and thus also ownership.

    As a side note, the legal entity of a corporation has a degree of personhood rights, thus it can claim ownership. A business is a collaborative effort of the owner, the shareholders and the employees, so it very much can own property, including intellectual property. The results of a corporation's labour as a whole belong to that corporation, just like a song created by an independent band belongs to that band.
     
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  18. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer

    pip Reporter
    23
    Nov 21, 2005
    United Kingdom
    I never said businesses were people, quite the opposite. It was more detailing the position I find myself (there are those that would tell me businesses are people and thus are afforded certain rights I might find odd to afford them), it was with that in mind that I still questioned the logic espoused in your link.

    If we are going to throw current established law out of the window then I invoke magic fairy land law to bring it back in -- we exist within the laws and ignoring them is not a terribly useful thing here. Anyway there are held to be exceptions to first amendment law, the classic example being yelling fire in a crowded theatre, so would this IP lark not form another exception?

    How is that not an argument? It makes a claim, I state that if that is the case then this is a potential logical result or valid within the logic of that claim which would invalidate some other things you are saying. A more classical rhetorical technique I do not know. I don't think it would classify as a strawman or anything. It could be invalid but I could not see an obvious failing that would lead it to be thus.

    The claims thing was more for patents than copyright (hence the workshop and slant towards building things in it), if it was being applied to copyright then that would be troubling. If the first amendment existed within a vacuum then a strict reading of it would have much IP law see the government disallow certain speech and thus contravene it, it is not within a vacuum and not even close. IP law had kind of existed for the better part of a century before it came in as well, though more interesting things would come later.
    You would be right though that my main reasoning for the continued existence of patents and IP law would be for creators to feel it worth the effort of continuing to create. There are some serious issues with the implementation and directions it is going in, especially in the US but nowhere is immune, but the underlying logic is sound. The breaking of freedom of speech or property rights does not even register as a thing that it might be.
     
    TotalInsanity4 likes this.
  19. Pluupy
    This message by Pluupy has been removed from public view by Veho, Apr 29, 2016.
    Apr 29, 2016
  20. ov3rkill

    ov3rkill GBAtemp Maniac

    Member
    7
    May 10, 2009
    Australia
    in a cardboard box
    That illustration reminds me of Earl of Lemongrab.

    [​IMG]
     
  21. TotalInsanity4

    TotalInsanity4 GBAtemp Supreme Overlord

    Member
    20
    Dec 1, 2014
    United States
    Under a rock
    ? Which one?
     
Quick Reply
Draft saved Draft deleted
Loading...