Mad Genius Motion Controller is Almost What I Wanted

Every now and then, now that we know what the proper DualShock 4 is going to look like, I wonder about what could have been with my proposed MoveShock idea.  I mean, sure, technically it wasn't -my- idea, but you can't deny that I took it and ran with it in the whole scheming sense.  I started to think that I was kind of the only one, but as the video above shows, I certainly wasn't.  While the prototype might've not even been born of the same train of thought (and likely isn't, given that it was displayed on a 360 rather than a PS3), it's along many of the same lines as the MoveShock idea seemed to touch on, and, more importantly, it could theoretically be the device that I insisted was not a dumb idea.  Some agreement is better than none, even if it's not done all that...convincingly.

Granted, it's a proof-of-concept thing more than anything at this point, and it's definitely going to be a little rough because of that.  The actual moving with the controller to move your character seems superfluous at best, and the input lag is noticeable to say the least.  However, there are some obviously solid ideas under the surface there.  Actually pulling the controller apart makes it send commands to the game to prepare it for actual use?  Brilliant.  Using it to precisely aim thanks to the refinement of the tech?  Expected, but still great.  Actually having the left hand control the left hand and the right control the right?  Yes, thank you.  Thank you for actually just...doing the smart thing.  The natural thing.  Overall, it understands the concept of getting motion while also having the full range of controls (and then some, surprisingly) and the only issue I take with it all is the actual execution so far.

First off, it seems like they really focus on all sorts of motion control uses for what is a split controller with full controls that...aren't taking advantage of the fact that it's a split controller.  Again, the whole dodgy "move around with the controller" springs to mind.  Even with the archery thing, all you're doing is taking an archery stance without...actually getting the archery experience.  There's no pulling, no illusion of a string or lining up a shot, you're pointing and hitting a button.  You get more accuracy, of course, but it still seems like it's completely missing the point.  Then when you actually get into the good stuff, the using the motion to swing the sword, you're not actually swinging the controller, but just punching it forward.  But you're not stabbing, you're slashing.  Faster punching, according to the video, means a more powerful strike.  That's....what?  It's the same thing when they even got into the double-attack thing for the werewolf bit.  Not even mentioning the absolute lag included in the whole thing.

Now, I realize this is a limitation of the parity, and not actually representative of the device, but at the same time, that's sort of its one big downfall.  This was meant to bring motion controls to games that don't have it, not design the controls.  You can't map the controller to make your character swing in an animation arc that is not pre-programmed already, and that's completely understandable.  You cannot get full extension on the arms out to the side simply because you're standing as such.  You cannot dual-wield magic and launch one spell one way, another spell another way and slowly bring them together for a more powerful version or combined version of the spell.  It's not in the base game.  The motion controller is literally just adding a new layer of inputs for the -same- inputs you already have on the controller.  Which, ultimately leads to the very big question:  Why?

If the game cannot take full advantage of the motion controls that you're bringing in, what's the point in having them whatsoever?  Beyond a little accuracy and a little novelty....the answer is unfortunately "none" really.  When implemented correctly, motion controls can add a surprising amount of depth into a game.  Certainly aiming a bow with the feel of holding one between your split controller adds -something-, but not nocking an arrow, not being able to determine a sword's swinging arc, not being able to block high and shield block low directly afterwards, these are all things that should be available with motion controls.  Yet not a one of them are used by this new controller that is literally the best of both worlds as a situation.  That is truly unfortunate.  Really, the only environment a controller like this could have survived in would've been the main one, where it would've been a 'requirement' for some things.  As a third party controller that adds cumbersome motion controls to games that don't have, don't need and/or can't properly utilize them?  That's...uh....that's not going to work.

So I've Been Thinking About That MoveShock

Of course, I mean the split controller idea I mentioned yesterday and before you ask, that is my word.  Mine.  I've been looking around and unsurprisingly people are coming out of the woodwork to ridicule this thing that might not ever see the light of day for reasons that....well, are certainly internet reasons.  Perhaps I've over-thought this a bit as I tend to do, but I feel like people would be a lot more welcoming of this idea if it were an idea presented as anything -more- than an idea, if that makes sense.  As I tried to do, introduce it with some functionality, something to give a little taste of it, to push people beyond the initial difference of it.  Of course, that would require actually naming it as a thing that exists which is something that is likely a year off or so, if ever (basically my thinking is that it's going to be the PS4 controller or nothing at all), so for now it honestly really just has to stay a patent and a concept.  And it will unfortunately be judged a little prematurely and a little immaturely, but I really hope people remember that nobody thought the Wii was going to be a thing, and if the Nintendo apologists out there have been saying anything in terms of 'teh hardcorez gaming' as it were, Motion Controls are a thing that can work.

What's important to remember, to reiterate over and over again is that this generation's concept of Motion Controllers have been a game of sacrifice.  We actively lost input methods in the form of buttons, in the form of movement, and in the form of 'choice' for the sake of a new input that, for the reasons mentioned, wasn't implemented properly.  The Wiimote's actual motion sensing wasn't up to par to be used extensively, so much so that it required Motion+ to upgrade it, and then Nintendo never capitalized because they won't 'force' consumers to have a better product.  (Except for, well, Skyward Sword)  The Move's piecemeal sale method did the exact same thing, as most games would only 'require' that you have the wand, and not a Nav Wand (or a Dualshock 3, despite being stated as a method for input for moving around and such, basically only Sorcery capitalized if I'm remembering right) and the overall negative opinion of the thing, despite it being something seen as a positive for Nintendo, precluded it from a lot of use.  Basically, in every case save a few, it was 'assumed' that you don't have the full range of input, thus nothing used everything, leaving it all to be seen as a sort of after-thought.

So imagine motion gaming if it weren't like that, if it were directly in your hands by standard, so it could be treated as a full suite out of the box.  Imagine that you can have motion as an input without losing any other input because it's all right there in your hands anyway.  You have to imagine it because it's a first, because to this point we have not had the full range of buttons and motion controls at the same time - we just haven't.  Despite Sony's efforts, despite Nintendo's efforts, we've lost things along the way regardless, and that is the differentiating point between what we've had and what this idea can offer and that is what I am trying to hammer in because it's clear that it's something that has completely and totally gone over the heads of just about everyone that comments on a website that features this.  Which is not to say that I'm some genius who sees the potential or anything, I'm just somebody who has given it a modicum of thought without knee-jerking which is, frankly, something the internet could stand to see a whole lot more of.  You can't disagree with that, I'm sure.

Anyways, take the above Gladiator example from Sports Champions into mind for a moment, if you would.  This is sort of something that leverages the Skyrim idea I had in the last post since, if you use two Move Wands while playing that game, you're allowed input of both hands, and it's something that works quite well, according to seemingly everyone who's attempted it.  You have that much more control over where your sword goes, over where your shield goes and it opens the door for more precision in what you're actually playing.  I dare not use the dreaded 'immersion' word, but I'm sure you'll agree there's a difference between hitting square and swinging a sword that just happens to hurt a dude and swinging an object that directly damages a dude's arm.  There's a difference between pressing L1 to block and pressing a stick to stagger your foe and raising your left hand to move your shield in the path of an attack, adding a little flick that pushes your enemy off-balance.  I don't think anyone can say with a straight face after the Wii, that motion controls cannot add something to an experience that you wouldn't have otherwise, but at the same time, it's hard to imagine a scenario where it's effectively been done that way in the myriad of games where your sole motion input is aiming.

The limitation of the above example with Gladiator is that, if you're using two Move Wands, you have absolutely no movement input beyond your arms.  The Move Wands have the Move Button, Triangle, Circle, Cross and Square, and Start and Select buttons, but no D-Pad, no Analog stick.  Your movement comes in with the Nav wand which, as stated, nobody 'assumed' you had (nor were willing to use a Dualshock 3 to emulate this effect) and if you were using two Move Wands, you can't use anyway.  This is precisely the case of losing a lot to gain a little, but the important fact is that there is something gained.  Even with the Wiimote, all you have is a D-Pad and not a very good one at that, so two of those aren't exactly viable either.  But if you have everything that a DualShock has to offer between two Move Wands, you have the full suite of what you need and -that- is what makes it a forward step.  That's what pulls it out of the relative stagnation it went through with Wii and Move games, since it basically went from Wii Sports functions to cutting stuff ala Red Steel, to First Person Shooter to being a flashlight in Silent Hill:  Shattered Memories and your wand in Sorcery.  There was not a whole lot of progress, if we're being honest.

Here, you have your cake and you can eat it too.  You can use two inputs for both arms of your Gladiator while still being able to move him around as you want.  Walk him back and use the shield arm to deflect while your opponent is on the offensive and surge forward, swinging when you see an opening.  That's not where it stops, either.  Take a game where dual pistols is not uncommon like Max Payne 3.  You enter a room and crouch in front of the first thing you can, sizing up the room.  Then you vault and kick in the slow motion as you would normally.  But now that you have two inputs for aiming, a left and a right for a left and right gun, you take aim at a thug on the left side of the room and one at the right side.  You fire and they both go down and as Max is flying in slow-motion you slowly bring your hands back together, firing as you do to clear the room.  You land, turn Max towards the remainders and unload on them two at a time.  You're not limited by where you can aim and where you can move because you have the reticule trained with your sights, you have movement with your left stick and you have camera control with your right.

Take Metal Gear Rising:  REVENGEANCE and imagine you've built up your Zan-Datsu meter or however they're going to handle that and it's time to use it on some poor fodder.  You activate it by pulling your controller apart which prompts Raiden to pull out another blade (because you know dude's got more than just the one sword) and you're free to slice freely because, well, that's the point.  Instead of using analog sticks to determine the angle you cut how you want.  With left hand and right hand you make two parallel slices under his shoulders and above his waist.  You bring them back around and cut in an 'X' to impress yourself if nobody else with your precision and then you swing wildly to reduce what's left to itty-bitty bits before Zan-Datsu is finally finished.  Or imagine that you're in a fight where you specifically need to cut off an arm because it holds a rocket launcher or something.  If Zan-Datsu can be entered and left freely, then bam, hop in, pull it apart and slice off the arm with speed and ease, then exit the mode and fight like normally because, well, you still have all the normal controls.

Take Star Wars:  The Force Unleashed 2 and pretend it doesn't suck.  I know, that's asking for a lot, but just do it for me, alright?  Imagine it doesn't suck and that it actually matters where your lightsabers go.  Imagine that you can cut off parts of scenery or otherwise destroy it with your lightsabers (because I'm pretty sure you can), so you use your left stick (in the left controller half in your left hand) to move, jump with X as usual (with the right half, etc. etc.) and slice off a tank at the top with a motion, and then fall and slice it off at the bottom.  Imagine then that you can press one of your buttons while aiming at it to Force Grab it and flick it in a direction while letting go to use it as a projectile instead of flicking the analog sticks.  Imagine that you can grab a platform that somebody is standing on with the force and rend it apart, dropping them to their doom.  Hell, just imagine that you can grab two soldiers at the same time and use them to clean house by throwing them both at a group at the same time.

The important thing is that, with a split controller design that is literally a split controller, I can see this being a reality.  Or rather, I can't see why it -can't- be a reality, since I'm assuming the theory behind it takes in account the technical aspect of it.  If nothing else, I see this concept as the next evolution, the progression, of what we were offered in Motion Gaming this generation.  I mean, that's the point of leaping generations, right?  To refine the latter generation and update it with more ideas.  It's how we went from a controller with four buttons to controllers with eight or more without making them cumbersome.  Each generation is supposed to let you do things that you just couldn't do in the previous one.  This certainly counts as that, and as a prospect, it's exciting to me at the very least.  Nintendo has already cast their die and it rolled away from what they brought to the table, and being that this is Sony's patent, I'm hoping they actually step to the plate with it, provided it is what the tech states it will be.  Putting an analog stick on a Move Wand to let you use two probably won't be enough, it has to be standard, and that's what I fear the most, that this is just going to be an alternative that, by virtue of that, will never get used.  Done properly, it's just going to compliment what we're used to and integrate itself in comfortably, and for the sake of how much I've gone and worked myself up with ideas, I'm pulling for it.

This Isn't Dumb, Trust Me

Hey, don't give me that look.

No, seriously.  Stop it. 

Just....just hear me out on this one.

So, alright.  I've been feeling kind of bad because the last two posts in a row were me just whining and grumbling about things instead of being enthusiastic and/or excited about something.  Or just interested in something.  Or just being positive whatsoever about something.  All that negativity isn't good, it's not healthy nor is it fun and personally I like fun.  So I was trying to find something out there on the interwebs that made me feel a pang of interest, of hopefulness, or -something- positive that I could work off of, and honestly nothing really came up initially.  I doubled back to Joystiq for the fourth time in hopes that I had missed something, or there'd be some late, great piece of news and eventually came across the image you see above and the post associated with it.  To be honest, I took a look at it and didn't really know what to think, so I did what I always do when I come to that cross-roads which is absolutely 100% not the smart thing to do - I read the comments.

All in all, it's about a 50/50 split between people saying 'it looks fucking stupid' and 'it's copying the Wii' which are both amazingly hilarious when you put them together and, as usual, it made me sigh and rub my head a little bit.  There was, however, a little useful tidbit to be gleaned from the mess, and it is the fact that the image, while indeed a patent image, is a tech patent and not a design one.  So take the look, whether you think it's stupid or simply a little strange and don't worry about it because that's not the actual design of anything.  It's a technological theory conveyed in an image in the easiest way to understand.  That's pretty much exactly what a tech patent is, since its whole goal is to give you something to wrap your mind around and the theory that this idea invokes is a rather fantastic one to me and it is the only reason why I dare speak of it in a positive light.

If you look at the two split controller designs we have now, the Wiimote/Nunchuck combo and the Move/Nav combo, you can see two attempts at a theory with their own faults and their own good points.  Nintendo's minimalist design is accessible, the accelerometer in the nunchuck makes it a viable motion tool, the actual motion control (with Motion+) is serviceable and it can technically be used multi-functionally (Not just a pointer, basically, but I refer to New Super Mario Bros.' twist controller to spin jump mechanic).  On the downside, however, being that Motion+ was an add-on that was barely imple it saw limited usage, it still wasn't totally precise and the overall lack of buttons hampered more 'advanced' ideas.  Sony's more ergonomic design was more comfortable and placed more buttons in the right areas, had the benefit of better tracking overall and had more potential from the thought-out tech.  It suffered from the poor choice in not putting an accelerometer in the Nav controller, offering less buttons overall than a controller, thus limiting its conformity and barely saw and proper implementation.

The issue both controllers suffered from was the fact that they were both not full controllers in their own right.  One analog stick per pair (while motion control all but replaced the need for a second stick, this did not factor in for usage of the second stick as a button, as some games use) less triggers (as standard seems to be two bumpers, two triggers now) and neither option offered you the ability to have a full experience without both 'component' controllers.  Essentially, neither option could offer you a full controller experience because both options are hampered by their own 'sub' controllers if you will.  (The Nunchuck and the Nav)  This, this is where the beauty of the idea, the theory, the image indicates comes in.  Imagine a Dualshock controller.  Now cut it in half.  Now imagine both halves are motion controllers.  Now imagine that you can take it apart/put it back together at your leisure because it serves as a regular controller and a motion controller at the same time.

That right there is the elegance and the actual smart area of the design.  It's forward progress in the space where nobody has been -able- to make it and it's the best of both worlds.  Let me spell it out in terms of an actual game application, though, instead of just saying "trust me, it's smart" because, well, that works better.  Let's use Skyrim as a reference despite the hilarious ineptitude Bethesda has displayed with the game and the add-on content of it, because I'm just using the core mechanics.  The 'big thing' in Skyrim is the ability, nay, the impetus to dual-wield things to destroy your enemies.  Any combination of weapons, spells or shields can be wielded together to whatever effect and the key ideal is that you are using both hands to their best effects. 

Now apply the split controller, the literal split motion controller to the idea.  You have the left portion of the Dualshock in your left hand that has you moving around, you have the right portion for menu controls like normal and when combat comes in, you can either attack as normal or you can use the motion controllers as intended and control things like that.  Prepare two different spells and fire at two different enemies at the same time because you just have to point and attack.  Bring the controllers together to merge the magic for the stronger cast while aiming at whatever it is.  Or bring up the menu with the buttons, switch to two swords or what have you and just swing and bash at whatever's near while using the analog stick to still move around as normal.  All this without a technical loss of functionality because you still have all the standard controls right there.

That, my friends, is an exciting prospect.  Unfortunately, its entire usefulness rests in whether or not Sony will adopt it as the 'standard' controller since, as both the Move and Nintendo themselves proved, providing something as an add-on or an accessory means you cannot count on it being actually used, thus defeating its entire purpose.  If, like Sixaxis, this functionality was built into the controller from the start, then it's there for developers to use as they would desire.  Yes, some will shoe-horn it in, and some will ignore it completely in lieu of going "Well, it's a normal controller", but the people that truly use it will prove that it is something of actual value.  This generation was a proof-of-concept and going forward with this idea would be a true statement of going 'next gen', since it would be a natural refinement.  We'll just have to see if they run with it, and I genuinely hope they will.  If nothing else, that is your PS4 hook right there, and if the PS4 will need anything, it will definitely be a hook.

A Very Nintendo News Dump

So, there've been a few Nintendo-centric things thrown out in the last couple days, and while they're not noteworthy enough to warrant a full big post, all three things are kind of enough of a deal that they warrant mentioning.  I kind of have a thing just for this type of occasion as we know, so I won't be very coy about it here.  I'm just going to bring up all three points, have my little opinion on them as I do, and just sort of put that out there as a thing.  I say that, because I know my ideas and opinions are very, er, counter to the general ideas and such I see on the places in the internet that I frequent.  What with being slightly critical and whatnot - apparently that's not a popular thing.  Who knew?

Anyways, the first bit of news is that that little thing Nintendo mentioned about being able to use two of the Wii U Gamepads, pictured above, was....well, it's -true-, but not so much immediately so.  In layman's terms, the Wii U games will only support one Gamepad at launch, which I think is different than saying the Wii U -itself- won't support two at launch.  Because I think it -is- expected to support two in itself, just that any of the shiny games you'll want to pick up alongside the console won't.  Which won't lead to any confusion in the household at all, no siree.  Actually, I suppose it won't if Nintendo has the foresight to -not- print that on the launch-shipping boxes so that anyone who would want to buy more than one Gamepad will either A.) Be in-the-know enough to know they can't effectively use it yet or B.) Someone who completely has no idea and decides to buy multiple Gamepads and will, again hopefully, be instructed that such a thing is unnecessary.  But I think something like "Supports Two Gamepads" will make it on the box regardless because who really cares right?

What the problem here is that this smacks of something that people would (and likely have) mocked Sony quite openly for in the past, yet there doesn't seem to be quite so much of that going around.  As usual with what could be said as a 'negative' story for Nintendo, the bulk of the opinion out there seems to be a lot of hand-waving and "bah, who needs it at launch anyways?"  While that mindset isn't wrong at all, even though there could be the argument that "Since they announced it, it needs to be usable in -some- fashion at start (which could still be possible with Nintendoland), I have to wonder where this popular opinion is when the company involved is -not- Nintendo.  This kind of level-headed thing is not exclusive to dealings with just one company, you realize, because we could honestly just take a look at everything like that and everything would be so much nicer.  Radical thinking, I know, but there it is.

Regardless of the fact that it's not going to happen, it's pretty -obvious- as to why it's not.  A lot of these games have been in development alongside the final tweaks of the system itself, meaning that they've worked the games from bottom to top to work with just what they were given - one Gamepad.  I would suggest that sending as much information as is needed to the Gamepad is not a simple process, so suggesting that it's possible for -two- seems to border on madness, and I can only see the games itself suffering for the attempt.  This may be unfounded, but I have heard that using two Gamepads caused a drastic FPS loss when shown off at E3, likely on the floor.  Granted, it's new, it's not anywhere near done and it's not going to be fine-tuned for a while post-launch (The Gamepad and its usage, I mean) but if that's true then it's...well, it's not a very positive suggestion for the future.  Certainly something to worry about regardless of something that I cannot found with proof at this time, since that screen is meant to hold a -lot- of data.

Something else that seems to have been said before...well, thought went into it is the idea that the Wii U will be designed to support free-to-play games, which is kind of a thing that has been happening.  FarmVille is only pictured because I imagine that's what comes to a lot of minds when the term 'free-to-play' is thrown out.  Personally, I think of Phantasy Star Online 2 because of recent conditioning but just that right there, I think, is something that shows the absolute scale of the term.  Of course, neither type of game is instantly what is going to be on the console, if anything, because it was just mentioned as a statement of the Wii U's infrastructure.  Notably, it mentions the 3DS' recent ability to add updates, patches and DLC as a contributing factor, since the whole layout is probably similar on the console being that the 3DS can (now) apparently do the same thing, should any developer decide the 3DS is -just- the place for their new game that they don't want to charge for anything beyond cosmetic items and such.

It's worth mentioning, in my opinion, because it's actually not worth mentioning.  It's such a non-issue that I have to wonder exactly why it was mentioned in the first place and why it was important in any facet.  I mean, maybe I'm a little under-excited because I've been exposed to this sort of thing for, uh....years with my time years ago with Maple Story, and then my time in Playstation Home as well as watching FreeRealms from afar, but I just thought it was sort of a given that that type of thing was going to happen henceforth.  I didn't realize that 'infrastructure' and 'online architecture' had to be put in place specifically to allow free-to-play and/or micro-transaction games.  But it is apparently a thing there, and it was a big enough deal that it had to be mentioned by Joystiq, so there it is.

I don't see how this is going to be used whatsoever.  One of the comments suggests Maple Story and/or Nexon's other properties which is quite possible, but there isn't a whole lot of other ground out there.  I don't see Nintendo rolling out their own version of Home (despite really wanting to so I could see the massive amount of hand-waving) nor do I see many MMOs jumping on the Wii U just because they -can- for the whole free-to-play thing.  The only 'child-friendly' ones out there that I know about are FreeRealms (which is understandably not going anywhere near it, being a Sony property) and Wizard 101 which I literally know nothing else about than the name and that I see commercials for it all the time and doubt it's free-to-play.  Given how Iwata has somewhat of a distaste for the model, I doubt anything wholly Nintendo will come out of it, so this one is a little unnecessary.  Which is totally why it was necessary to mention.

The last piece of information is possibly the biggest, hence why I held it for last.  On the subject of the Legend of Zelda, there are quite obviously many potentials including a game for the upcoming Wii U as well as the 'next' game for it on the 3DS.  Of course what that 'next' game could be is up in the air, considering the last one was a remake of the Nintendo 64's Ocarina of Time.  The logical progression would state that, given there were two Zelda games on the N64, Nintendo and ports/remakes go together like that, and the fact that it would make more than a little bit of money would point to Majora's Mask seeing a 3DS remake.  And that is certainly an option that's up in the air, apparently, however it's being contested with two other ideas.  It basically boils down to whether or not Nintendo wants to remake MM or A Link to the Past first.  That is most certainly a thing, but I can't claim that it's wholly positive.

Now, I'm not going to pretend you're dumb or anything and just state the simple conclusion one could draw from Occam's Razor is that, with the resources used to port Ocarina of Time still kicking around, and Majora's Mask mostly using the same resources as Ocarina of Time, it would be rather simple to make Majora's Mask for 3DS.  That is why I believe this is the course they're going to take since it is simply easy money in various quantities.  Despite what and how we like to romanticize it, Nintendo is a company that wants as much of your money as possible.  That's why the 3DS launched at $250 - because they knew people would buy it at that price despite everything else.  And for as much as people like to say that it kicked off with slow sales, they were certainly -sales- and I have to suggest that had the Vita not been launched at $250, the price would have stayed constant for a while longer.  That they launched it 'at a premium' (using other companies talk) and essentially bragged about it is something that would incriminate most other companies, but again, it's Nintendo and everyone can afford to be level-headed with them, whatever.

What bothers me about the whole situation when I initially skimmed it is that Nintendo is basically saying "Hey, we don't know which game to put minimal effort into and sell for max profits, but one of them is gonna happen soonish" which is something that would get Sony and/or Microsoft verbally reamed all over the internet.  It's rather annoying that Nintendo gets away with it simply because we're all supposed to really like everything Nintendo and first party there.  After reading about the same situation elsewhere, however, I do have to admit that a third option is present:  something new-ish involving LttP, as in something (most likely a sequel) that involves A Link to the Past, but isn't simply a copy and paste 3DS playable version with bells and whistles.  With these three options on the table, I can forgive two of them being remakes for the simple fact that the third is -not-, even if it is the least-likely outcome, with Majora's Mask 3D being the most likely.  Were I a betting man, I would bet on it, but I am simply a person who is bad at predictions, so there's that.

I sort of wish something a little more news-worthy had been out there, but, well, them's the breaks.  The Wii U is still big news since everything at E3 more or less fell flat (including the Wii U stuff at E3) and Nintendo always gets mentions for the tiniest things, so given that I don't have anything else I -can- talk about at the moment (for a reason), that's what I could figure on eeking out a post about.  I'd say I did what I set out to do, of course, and if nothing else, I have something to point out when I'm proven right or wrong about the whole Zelda 3DS thing.  As well as getting to be a little bitter about Nintendo since I simply don't see enough people applying realistic talk to them out there.  Not saying it doesn't get done, simply that I don't see it at the places that I frequent.  Still, these are some things that could amount to something in the future, so I figured it was worth bringing up and discussing now, if just to see how different or similar it all ends up to how I thought it might.