The above controller concept could be what the NX will be controlled with... or not!

As documented in depth in a recent NeoGAF thread by user Rösti, Nintendo filed a patent in October 2014 for the above U-shaped controller and the patent saw an international filing on September 18, 2015, and publication on April 22, 2016, via WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization).

Somewhat reminiscent of the Xbox 360's Wireless Speed Wheel, huh?

Most likely the controller will be applied for fitness games following Nintendo's interest in "quality of life" products. It's not a regular controller either as it boasts an accelerometer, gyrometer, temperature sensor and load sensor. Time to get fit in the 21st century!

A rough English translation of the patent application reads: "The main object of the present invention is to provide a novel training equipment, training system and an input device."

Below are more images of the patent's drawings:

​

More interestingly, the translations refer to "portable terminals" that can apparently be connected with the device to display a screen, exemplified in the image below (and more in the source):

Well this is definitely material for further speculations. Is it for the NX or to add once and for all the U in WiiU? What other applications will it have? And will it actually be released?

SOURCE

 

[Saiyan Lusitano]

That illustration reminds me of Earl of Lemongrab.

Isn't this from that crappy animated Cartoon Network series?

 

[Hells Malice]

"The main object of the present invention is to provide a novel training equipment, training system and an input device."

I do like how half the morons in this thread just looked at the pretty pictures and immediately started getting a cross ready to crucify Nintendo for making a terrible controller for the NX. Even though it's pretty clear it's just a gimmick controller with a specific purpose.

EDIT: Oh and it's also from Neogaf, meaning it more than likely is fake, and even if it isn't...it's still just a fitness controller.

 

[Saiyan Lusitano]

That's just how Nintendo is, they make gimmicky controllers albeit not to this extend but close.

 

[Haloman800]

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.

I fully support your belief that creators should be compensated, and I support your ability to act on that belief. Would you accord me the same respect in regards to my positions and actions?

 

[FAST6191]

When it comes to matters of free speech there is a fairly popular phrase along the lines of I fully support your right to say and say you believe whatever, however it in no way shields you from being called a fool for saying or believing it. That works well enough for me, especially with the fire in a crowded theatre modifiers.
I find your position, assuming it is broadly covered by said link and what you said here, to be borderline untenable from an economic, logical and in some cases even technological perspective. For as many faults as the present system has I can not see that being a superior alternative, even as a reboot to that and clear the cruft method. From where I sit then to respect your position I would merely have to say "yep, those look like the sorts of things Haloman800 was espousing that time" if asked and as your positions seem to be yours that you arrived at by some train of logic I could say that.

 

[KSP]

God, Nintendo still doing that crap.
When will they realize, that nobody gives a shit about weird controllers.

Take the steering wheel, hasn't changed since the invention of driving.

Just make a good console and enough with the gimmicks already. Getting old.
Weird controllers will mark the end of Nintendo.

Innovation comes out of necessity, not for the sake of innovation.

Innovating for the sake of innovating is regression, not progression.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

Take the steering wheel, hasn't changed since the invention of driving.

I'd like to dispute that claim

 

[Veho]

I absolutely meant the shape, which is why I touched upon the ergonomics angle.

And that's why I said the patent application illustration has very little bearing on the actual end product, and that it illustrates a functionality, not how the controller will look like in the production model. This is what the N64 controller looked like in the patent application for the expansion port, and I dare say the end version looked a bit different.

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

I knew you would latch onto that Squidward picture and misinterpret my point but it was too good not to post


When I was a kid I had a rock and a stick, and my immersion was perfectly fine playing soldiers with a stick gun and a rock grenade, and the line between "game" and "reality" blurred with imagination in place, and not much has changed since then... including the fact this argument is, and always has been, bull.
Another example, my immersion in Link's Awakening was pretty deep, but that doesn't mean games should stop at a 160 x 144 resolution and that there's no room (or, indeed, need) for improvement. The original Link's Awakening won't benefit from a resolution larger than 160 x 144, but other games just might. (This particular example is for illustrative purposes only. I know you support advances in screen resolution.)

This is darn-kids-get-off-my-lawn level of crotchety old man logic. You've drawn a line at a completely arbitrary point, and decided this is where changes in gaming should stop. All progress made from Pong to this arbitrary point were "advances", but everything after this point is "goofy gimmicky nonsense".
You are not alone in this mindset. People who think 3D game engines are unnecessary and that 2D side-scrollers are as far as gaming should have gone are not alone in their mindset either. People who think videogames are newfangled nonsense and that you should go out and play a "real" game instead of staying glued to the TV for hours are not alone in their mindset. People who think ball-in-a-cup and a hoop and stick are the be all and end all in entertainment are not alone in their mindset. Does that lend any credence to their stance? Is it a valid argument in their favor? Nope.



Pic related, it's Foxi ;O;

I guess we'll see what wins out - the comfort of a couch or the weird innovation.

I am also aware of your extreme reluctance to leave your couch but VR headsets do not mean you have to play standing up or control games with pelvic thrusts detected via a glow-in-the-dark cock ring, in much the same way that owning a pair of speakers doesn't automatically mean you have to listen to music exclusively on vinyl, wear a velvet house robe, smoke a pipe and have a broomstick up your ass; they allow it, but don't demand it. They are a display and do not automatically include nor necessitate the aforementioned vibrating dildosticks. They do not by any means preclude the comfort of a couch. There is no competition between "strapping a TV to your face" and "the comfort of a couch" so this point is pretty moot.


Anyway, my point was that, entirely unrelated to VR, or the Vive/Oculus/Move/whatever specific controllers the press is drooling over at the moment, let's try to forget it was ever mentioned, the default controller on upcoming consoles will not be the classic dual analog controller, because being merely "passable" in a lot of genres is not good enough any more, and fortunately the technology is advanced enough for improvements to become viable while still conforming to the console philosophy of having only one, universal controller, that can be used sitting on a couch or on the floor in front of the TV.

 

[Foxi4]

And that's why I said the patent application illustration has very little bearing on the actual end product, and that it illustrates a functionality, not how the controller will look like in the production model. This is what the N64 controller looked like in the patent application for the expansion port, and I dare say the end version looked a bit different.


I knew you would latch onto that Squidward picture and misinterpret my point but it was too good not to post


When I was a kid I had a rock and a stick, and my immersion was perfectly fine playing soldiers with a stick gun and a rock grenade, and the line between "game" and "reality" blurred with imagination in place, and not much has changed since then... including the fact this argument is, and always has been, bull.
Another example, my immersion in Link's Awakening was pretty deep, but that doesn't mean games should stop at a 160 x 144 resolution and that there's no room (or, indeed, need) for improvement. The original Link's Awakening won't benefit from a resolution larger than 160 x 144, but other games just might. (This particular example is for illustrative purposes only. I know you support advances in screen resolution.)

This is darn-kids-get-off-my-lawn level of crotchety old man logic. You've drawn a line at a completely arbitrary point, and decided this is where changes in gaming should stop. All progress made from Pong to this arbitrary point were "advances", but everything after this point is "goofy gimmicky nonsense".
You are not alone in this mindset. People who think 3D game engines are unnecessary and that 2D side-scrollers are as far as gaming should have gone are not alone in their mindset either. People who think videogames are newfangled nonsense and that you should go out and play a "real" game instead of staying glued to the TV for hours are not alone in their mindset. People who think ball-in-a-cup and a hoop and stick are the be all and end all in entertainment are not alone in their mindset. Does that lend any credence to their stance? Is it a valid argument in their favor? Nope.



Pic related, it's Foxi ;O;

I am also aware of your extreme reluctance to leave your couch but VR headsets do not mean you have to play standing up or control games with pelvic thrusts detected via a glow-in-the-dark cock ring, in much the same way that owning a pair of speakers doesn't automatically mean you have to listen to music exclusively on vinyl, wear a velvet house robe, smoke a pipe and have a broomstick up your ass; they allow it, but don't demand it. They are a display and do not automatically include nor necessitate the aforementioned vibrating dildosticks. They do not by any means preclude the comfort of a couch. There is no competition between "strapping a TV to your face" and "the comfort of a couch" so this point is pretty moot.


Anyway, my point was that, entirely unrelated to VR, or the Vive/Oculus/Move/whatever specific controllers the press is drooling over at the moment, let's try to forget it was ever mentioned, the default controller on upcoming consoles will not be the classic dual analog controller, because being merely "passable" in a lot of genres is not good enough any more, and fortunately the technology is advanced enough for improvements to become viable while still conforming to the console philosophy of having only one, universal controller, that can be used sitting on a couch or on the floor in front of the TV.

I see a difference between refining something we already have (increased resolution, leap into the 3rd dimension, improved controllers) versus reinventing the wheel. Switching from riding horseback (sticks and stones) to the automobile (video game) makes sense - it serves the same purpose, just better. I'm not so sure VR does - to me the idea of wearing a headset is needlessly convoluting the process and making it awkward. I also draw a distinction between opposing progress and opposing certain avenues of it - there are multiple ways to "progress", some are better than others, some are just bad. Adding a fifth wheel to a cart doesn't make a better cart. I'll fully embrace VR once they can jack me straight in Matrix style, wearable tech just doesn't gel well with me. By removing all the motion-sensing cockrings and the pelvic thrusting from the Oculus experience you're also killing your own argument. If you treat the Oculus as "just a display", ignoring the motion sensing aspect completely, you literally are just "strapping a TV to your head" - there is no "progress" here, you've just changed the distance between you and the screen. As for the controller picture, again, there's a difference between a very general tech schematic and a concept picture, but I guess you're right. By the way, how long has it been since I posted that? Necromancy is heresy, Veho - the Eternal Emperor shall be informed. ;O;

 

[TotalInsanity4]

I'm not so sure VR does - to me the idea of wearing a headset is needlessly convoluting the process and making it awkward.

You've never tried VR, have you?...

 

[Foxi4]

You've never tried VR, have you?...

I'm one of those guys who don't wear hats in winter time because they're constricting and make my forehead itch, are you kidding me? Of course I haven't and I don't plan on trying until I can have a socket in my brain stem and forgo the archaic "goggles" stage. Even if the headset didn't weigh anything at all I still wouldn't wear one or even be interested in one - it's just not my jam. Perhaps I'll pick one up from a bargain bin eventually, but not before then. You can criticize that along the lines of "don't knock what you've never tried", but on the same token I've never eaten glass either and I have a fair idea that I wouldn't be impressed by the experience. I just don't think that completely isolating myself from the outside world would profoundly change my gaming experience - I can already do that by "not paying attention" when I want to, with VR I don't get to choose, I'm wearing the TV.

 

[Veho]

By removing all the motion-sensing cockrings and the pelvic thrusting from the Oculus experience you're also killing your own argument. If you treat the Oculus as "just a display", ignoring the motion sensing aspect completely, you literally are just "strapping a TV to your head" - there is no "progress" here, you've just changed the distance between you and the screen.

I didn't mean to remove the core functionality of the VR headset, but the unrelated extras (the aforementioned dildosticks). The head tracking is what makes it a VR headset and not video glasses, and the head tracking is the main point. We've had video glasses for decades, merely having the screen bolted onto your head is not the important part. The important part is that you get to look around by looking around, and the fact you are in the middle of the scene instead of looking at a photograph of the scene from a distance, something that merely pressing your face against the screen can't accomplish. It expands the field of view compared to a fixed screen, and then expands it even more by letting you look around naturally. But the important thing to note here is that it is not a control scheme, it's a display enhancement.

The motion sensing and body-tracking and pelvic-thrusting controllers designed for the full VR environment aren't an integral part of the headset. They are alternative controllers, while the headset is a display that can be used with existing control schemes like, for example, the dual analog. You don't have to change anything else about the game, and you don't have to stand up and bounce around the room. The VR headset can work (arguably even better) without the VR controllers, just as the motion sensing controllers can work without the headset, as seen with the Wii, the PS Move or the Kinect. Tl;dr: they are separate things, and not an all-or-nothing deal.

You can criticize that along the lines of "don't knock what you've never tried", but on the same token I've never eaten glass either and I have a fair idea that I wouldn't be impressed by the experience. I just don't think that completely isolating myself from the outside world would profoundly change my gaming experience - I can already do that by "not paying attention" when I want to, with VR I don't get to choose, I'm wearing the TV.

So the main feature you are interested in a video game is the ability to ignore it?
The point of a VR headset is not to isolate you from the outside world (that's what these things are for, and they're not exactly a new invention). Isolating yourself from the surroundings is not what a VR headset is about.

While "don't knock it 'til you've tried it" can be used when suggesting eating glass, it is more commonly used to say that you are unable to visualize and comprehend the full impact and the complete experience of something before you've tried it out yourself, and that imagining what something would be like invariably suffers from bias and insufficient information, and that is it impossible to form an informed opinion without actually being informed.

The reductio ad absurdum counterargument doesn't really work here because VR headsets only very rarely cause internal bleeding, and saying "I don't have to try it to know I won't like it" just makes you sound like a child when someone suggests a food that isn't chicken nuggets.

By the way, how long has it been since I posted that? Necromancy is heresy, Veho - the Eternal Emperor shall be informed. ;O;

Excuse me, but some of us have a life, you know ;O;

 

[Foxi4]

@Veho By saying "not paying attention" I obviously meant the world around me, not the game itself. If I ignored the game, it would defeat the purpose of playing it - the context was "VR blocking the outside world", so that's what I meant.

I'm really good at blocking stuff out and letting the reptile part of my brain do the talking while the mammal side is doing something else - I believe people call it "the autopilot", especially in the context of driving. I once had a conversation with my fiancee in my sleep - she asked me what groceties I want and apparently I specifically told her not to forget the chicken pate. I'd like to underline that the conversation was in English, a second language to me, and I have no recollection of it - by the time I actually woke up she was back with the shopping. Yeah, I don't need no googlie-gogglies to shut the outside world out if I really want to - normally I don't.

Perhaps you're right and I just can't see the appeal because I'm an old man with arthritis and can't move my head fast enough to make this work, I maintain that I'm not interested in it strictly because it's a silly headset that I have to wear that weighs on my head and blocks out the world. I don't see any magic in that black box - it's just a display, and I get that the "intricate set of lenses" and "cutting edge programming" enhances the FOV to the point that I can't see the edge, I get that it tracks my head, but... I can already do both of those things, the first by focusing, the latter with my controller or mouse. If and when they can jack something into my brain and make me think I'm Scorpion, I'm all in. Right now? Eh.

To me this is the Steam Controller 2.0 - remember how excited you were for the thing, how the touchpads were supposed to be insanely precise, how they were supposed to have great haptic feedback, how this was the end of the era of the analog stick and how everything was supposed to be honkey dory? And what did I say? I said that it looks stupid and it's going to suck because touchpads are crap and as it turns out, it does suck - just calibrating the thing for each game takes an hour, at which point I'm not in the mood to play anymore. A valliant effort by Valve, they tried something new, but the old man was right in the end.

 

[Veho]

Perhaps you're right and I just can't see the appeal because I'm an old man with arthritis and can't move my head fast enough to make this work, I maintain that I'm not interested in it strictly because it's a silly headset that I have to wear that weighs on my head and blocks out the world. I don't see any magic in that black box - it's just a display, and I get that the "intricate set of lenses" and "cutting edge programming" enhances the FOV to the point that I can't see the edge, I get that it tracks my head, but... I can already do both of those things, the first by focusing, the latter with my controller or mouse.

Let's set the intricate set of lenses aside for a moment because it's obvious they are only confusing you. Let us ask Stephen Hawking whether he prefers turning his head using a joystick, or would he rather be able to turn his head on its own. Sure, you can do this with the controller, but it's slower, less responsive and less natural-flowing than simply looking in that direction, and it takes up a controller input that could have been used to perform a different action.

All this aside, I understand people don't want to headbang their way through the game, and I agree this should not be forced onto people. But here's the thing: unless you are strapped into a Clockwork Orange style harness, your head naturally moves all the time, and it is never completely still. When this happens with a normal screen, nothing happens, but a headset follows your movements, and the fact that the whole scene subtly tilts and shifts and moves in response like the real world would makes a difference that you, evidently, can't begin to imagine. Suddenly, you aren't on the other side of a screen, you are inside the game and are looking at the world. You look around and you actually look around, and you are surrounded by the game instead of just pressing your nose against the glass. A lot of my favorite games wouldn't benefit at all from this, and it would be completely wasted on them and on me, but for a lot of games it makes a huge and awesome difference. And the functionality and the enhancement this brings to games is an undeniable improvement - or at least it will be as soon as they make one with a resolution that doesn't suck balls.

And it's true, you don't "need" this in order for a game to be immersive and enjoyable. You don't need HD resolution either. You don't need any sort of high resolution at all; Link's Awakening was amazing at a resolution that today's watches would be ashamed of. You don't need realistic sound effects; 8-bit MIDI blasting out of the PC speaker was catchy enough. You don't need color; the first games I played were black and white and they kicked ass. You don't need video games at all, you can have fun with a stick and a rock and your imagination will fill in the rest just fine. And each of these points makes as much sense, and carries as much weight, as saying you don't "need" VR: the response is always "yeah, and?". And the moment you stop, draw the line, and start arguing that changes up to that point were "improvements" but all changes after that point were pointless gimmicks, is the point you become an old man that can be set beside the fire and safely ignored.

To me this is the Steam Controller 2.0 - remember how excited you were for the thing, how the touchpads were supposed to be insanely precise, how they were supposed to have great haptic feedback, how this was the end of the era of the analog stick and how everything was supposed to be honkey dory? And what did I say? I said that it looks stupid and it's going to suck because touchpads are crap and as it turns out, it does suck - just calibrating the thing for each game takes an hour, at which point I'm not in the mood to play anymore. A valliant effort by Valve, they tried something new, but the old man was right in the end.

You do know that you can save the settings and load them the next time you are playing the game? But i realize customizing controls to best suit you is a concept alien to console gamers

Reviews by people who own the thing and have had more than 5 minutes to test it out say that it is superior to the dual analog in a lot of genres (except for, all together now, action adventure games), but since consoles don't support it and PC already has a superior controller, there is simply no place for it in the current gaming market. I will gladly debate this further elsewhere, we are sprouting too many tangents for one conversation.

 

[Foxi4]

@Veho, my Veho, everything is such an extreme for you. I mention motion tracking without even giving it much thought and you're already on the defensive, going all "y-you don't have to do it all the time, that would be silly!" Once again you ignore the fact that I'm not against progress, just against goofy headsets, but since you have to push everything to the extreme, a lack of enthusiasm for a googlie-wooglie equals a hatered of progress as a whole - I mean, we have to simplify the argument to a "black and white" and "good versus bad" or else we won't be able to come off as complete assholes, right? We can't say that we both like progress, just in different areas - it has to be all or nothing at all times.

VR is *designed* to take you out of reality and into virtual reality, the tip is in the name, I don't see why you contest that point when it's the single why VR was invented. We can argue "immersion" till we're blue in the face, but at the end of the day VR does cut you off from your surroundings, at least your eyesight and your hearing, it does so by definition and is required to do so to achieve its objective of "immersion", so the point stands.

As for the Steam Controller, half on the online community and the reviewers I follow and respect agree that the touchpads/trackpads by themselves are insifficient and not accurate enough to be servicable. Most notably, Valve agreed with me to by adding an analog stick last minute, making it a complete Frankentroller. The prevailing opinion I hear is that the controller is clearly an attempt at marrying a dual analog gamepad and a mouse+keyboard, but due to technological shortcomings it fails at either task, or rather, it's not as good as dual analog for games made for gamepads and not as good as a mouse and keyboard for games made for those, so it "fixes" nothing that wasn't "fixed" by Joy2Key or Xpadder before. I've even seen people "aiming" using the controller's motion controls in action games as a fall-back because the trackpad is incapable of fast, accurate aiming, especially twitch aiming, which I find particularly funny. The controller was designed to work specifically with games it factually works most poorly with.

That's neither here nor there though. As I've mentioned before, I wasn't excited for the Steam controller (due to the aforementioned worries that, in my mind, are still valid in the final product) and I'm not excited for VR for a set of different reasons that may or may not be accurate to you - it's a matter of taste more so than being an "old contrarian who's against progress 100% of the time". Let's bury the argument though, we indeed are causing too big of a commotion here and we both have good points, we just don't agree on the matter, which is fine. I don't have a perverse need to "prove you wrong" or anything like that, I just have a different opinion. You like porrige, I like corn flakes, what's the problem?