This just seems really pointless. I guess I'll hold my tongue until I see it in action, but all that comes to mind is a ridiculous price tag and an ergonomically obnoxious controller.
Report: Xbox 720 has touchscreen controller
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
Don't report in the title.... Put RUMOR otherwise you're just providing false information.
Now, if this is true I will have to abandon xbox and buy myself a PS4.
Now, if this is true I will have to abandon xbox and buy myself a PS4.
I'm not thrilled about the idea, but Kinect genuinely surprised me*, so I will sit back and wait to see what they do.
*I have no idea how it works for hardcore games, but from what I did play it was pretty damn solid.
*I have no idea how it works for hardcore games, but from what I did play it was pretty damn solid.
No, that's the internet in general. Especially when it involves megacorporations.erttheking said:
I doubt this rumour holds any water, Xbox is a staple-mark for ergonomic, easy controllers - and also; it's not really copying if it's done ten-fold better, is it? Copying is taking a copy of, the selling it. Being a competitor is taking your rivals products and making them better than before. It's how manufacturing works. With that logic ATARI made a games console and everyone else copied.
By that logic, we wouldn't have left the keyboard/mouse and arcade stick combo. ie. The generic controller wouldn't exist.uhddh said:
Never ask for companies to stop innovating. NEVER. We'd still be using DOS (it works fine!) if Microsoft hadn't stuck with some crummy prototypes of Windows and Apple hadn't plowed through the early disgusting Macintosh OS. We wouldn't have cable internet or wireless, either, because telephone lines were just grand at the time.
If you genuinely dislike a new product (AFTER ACTUALLY TRYING IT), then just don't buy it. Generally, it'll get much better with time, and you may end up wondering how we did without it in a couple decades.
Well, I guess that means no more flinging controllers around in outbursts of rage.
Jokes aside; all new technologies used are good steps forward, with a big "BUT".
- But, what if its breaks quickly.
- But, what if it makes the whole thing more expensive.
- But, what if it's only used in some lame gimmicks (like Kinect, anyone?).
I'm pretty sure they know what they're doing at Microsoft, so I'll leave it up to them to answer these questions when it gets released.
Jokes aside; all new technologies used are good steps forward, with a big "BUT".
- But, what if its breaks quickly.
- But, what if it makes the whole thing more expensive.
- But, what if it's only used in some lame gimmicks (like Kinect, anyone?).
I'm pretty sure they know what they're doing at Microsoft, so I'll leave it up to them to answer these questions when it gets released.
You know the gaming industry is heading for a slump when motion control and touch screen gimmicks are put before actually making good games.
Faaack. I get incorporating a gimmick into your design later on, but starting out with one on launch platforms? That's a terrible sign.
so, i guess we can expect mandatory touch screen segments in xbox games now.... wooooo. Or hell whole games controlled with a touch screen, i don't get on with touch screens, i need the physical feedback of actually knowing i have pressed a button, instead of the whole guessing game of touch screens, call me old fashioned if you will. I can only imagine this really working for drawing games and the like.
excuse me for being pessimistic. Hell it could turn out to be awesome, a bacon dispenser on a controller awesome, but... im not holding my breath. Assume everything is rubbish and be pleasantly surprised when its not and all that.
excuse me for being pessimistic. Hell it could turn out to be awesome, a bacon dispenser on a controller awesome, but... im not holding my breath. Assume everything is rubbish and be pleasantly surprised when its not and all that.
In another thread I was discussing the fall of the industry, a crash and so it reminded me of this topic.
Looking at the 3DS and Vita, it's clear that people are moving their handheld gaming to phones and even with the inclusion of touch screens on the 3DS and Vita, they still aren't selling that well. I guess the 3DS has increased in sales since the price drop but it's clear that phones are gaining market share.
Perhaps that is why Nintendo and possibly Microsoft are putting touch screens on their next consoles. It will be a failure because simply having a touch screen isn't why phones are doing well. I think phones are doing well because they are convenient (people always carry their phone) and because the games are cheaper. I don't personally game on phones so I could be wrong here. Think about it, the best feature of the WiiU controller is a feature that the PS3/PSP already have, Remote Play. It's a feature that no one uses and Sony didn't even include the feature in the Vita.
Anyway, I think the industry is in decline for a variety of reasons. Gaming on phones is one, maybe the industries complete disregard for consumers is another. Remember, in 1983 people just stopped buying games and retail stores were left with stock they couldn't even clearance out. That CAN happen again.
Have you noticed how Sony has been removing features from existing products? That shows just how little they think of the consumer. It's a trend across the entire industry. Anyway, let Microsoft follow Nintendo into failure. It's worth a shot since they can't keep doing what they are doing. After all, is a 360 game 60 times better than a phone game ($1 vs $60)? I think so but more and more people don't.
Looking at the 3DS and Vita, it's clear that people are moving their handheld gaming to phones and even with the inclusion of touch screens on the 3DS and Vita, they still aren't selling that well. I guess the 3DS has increased in sales since the price drop but it's clear that phones are gaining market share.
Perhaps that is why Nintendo and possibly Microsoft are putting touch screens on their next consoles. It will be a failure because simply having a touch screen isn't why phones are doing well. I think phones are doing well because they are convenient (people always carry their phone) and because the games are cheaper. I don't personally game on phones so I could be wrong here. Think about it, the best feature of the WiiU controller is a feature that the PS3/PSP already have, Remote Play. It's a feature that no one uses and Sony didn't even include the feature in the Vita.
Anyway, I think the industry is in decline for a variety of reasons. Gaming on phones is one, maybe the industries complete disregard for consumers is another. Remember, in 1983 people just stopped buying games and retail stores were left with stock they couldn't even clearance out. That CAN happen again.
Have you noticed how Sony has been removing features from existing products? That shows just how little they think of the consumer. It's a trend across the entire industry. Anyway, let Microsoft follow Nintendo into failure. It's worth a shot since they can't keep doing what they are doing. After all, is a 360 game 60 times better than a phone game ($1 vs $60)? I think so but more and more people don't.
Nintendo takes their ideas off other companies....there were touch screens before nintendo you know.
Hope MS dont add this, its completely pointless addition. I just want a machine to play games on, not all this bollocks they keep adding on to it.
Hope MS dont add this, its completely pointless addition. I just want a machine to play games on, not all this bollocks they keep adding on to it.
...I'm all for touchscreens. They're multitudes better than they used to be.
My only issue is...the idea of splitting the controller in half, and gluing a touchscreen in the middle. Your thumbs are only so long.
Just a normal screen on the controller I think is a much better idea than a touchscreen, It'd get rid of a lot of menus. And the only real application for that is RPGs.
However, what intrigues me about touchscreen controllers, is adaptability. You'd no longer be constrained by "OH NO THE CONTROLLER ONLY HAS X AMOUNT OF BUTTONS!" so they have to make button combinations. Instead with a touch screen, you can divvy up the screen real estate to however many buttons you can fit on there. Have them change and move. Have your own custom layout per game. The idea is interesting. Where it can lead in the future is interesting.
I say bring it on. Gimmicks are what become standard features later on. Gimmicks are kinda where the ideas are.
Gimmicks fucking rule.
My only issue is...the idea of splitting the controller in half, and gluing a touchscreen in the middle. Your thumbs are only so long.
Just a normal screen on the controller I think is a much better idea than a touchscreen, It'd get rid of a lot of menus. And the only real application for that is RPGs.
However, what intrigues me about touchscreen controllers, is adaptability. You'd no longer be constrained by "OH NO THE CONTROLLER ONLY HAS X AMOUNT OF BUTTONS!" so they have to make button combinations. Instead with a touch screen, you can divvy up the screen real estate to however many buttons you can fit on there. Have them change and move. Have your own custom layout per game. The idea is interesting. Where it can lead in the future is interesting.
I say bring it on. Gimmicks are what become standard features later on. Gimmicks are kinda where the ideas are.
Gimmicks fucking rule.