Why didnt Nintendo or Sony let Guitar Hero III use their bluetooth like MS did??

The Sony version of the guitar peripheral has to use a wireless usb port and the Nintendo version of the peripheral uses the Wiimote for most of its funtions which happens to be awsome because the Wii one can do a little bit more with rumble, speakers, and motion sensing. But my point is if my information is correct that if Nintendo did not use the Wiimote theywould probably havemade Guitar Hero 3 use a USB as well. Why is only MS allowing accessories with their wireless capabilities and no one else???

The Sony version of the guitar peripheral has to use a wireless usb port and the Nintendo version of the peripheral uses the Wiimote for most of its funtions which happens to be awsome because the Wii one can do a little bit more with rumble, speakers, and motion sensing. But my point is if my information is correct that if Nintendo did not use the Wiimote theywould probably havemade Guitar Hero 3 use a USB as well. Why is only MS allowing accessories with their wireless capabilities and no one else???

sonic_rusher

Part of it may be because they didn't allow it for Guitar Hero II and a lot of 360 fans (like me!!) complained about it.

Because the makers of guitar hero want people to purchase thier guitars. They don't want other video game control manufacturs to produce thier control guitars. Similar to why the xbox360 has its oen proprietary wireless signal. ryder05

There are aftermarket 360 controllers you know.

Microsoft wasn't so willing to do that either.

http://www.engadget.com/2006/11/06/report-microsoft-not-down-with-third-party-360-wireless-periphe/

xbox 360 doesn't have bluetooth

and i have no idea as to your other questions, perhaps it was the same reasons sony didn't come out with rumble(the lawsuit with immersion)

Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.nytrospawn

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

xbox 360 doesn't have bluetooth

and i have no idea as to your other questions, perhaps it was the same reasons sony didn't come out with rumble(the lawsuit with immersion)

mistervengeance

No they all have bluetooth and they can all use it for their peripherals. its a matter of Nintendo and Sony letting them use their bluetooth.

Correction....Sony has bluetooth....Nintendo and MS do not

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.sonic_rusher

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

No YOU don't understand. Bluetooth is a standardized wireless protocol used with lots of headets. PS3 and Wii have it but I think PS3 is the only one that uses it for controllers. MS has some proprietary bandwidth for controllers so they can control 3rd party periphereals.

Correction....Sony has bluetooth....Nintendo and MS do not

MikeE21286

[QUOTE="mistervengeance"]

xbox 360 doesn't have bluetooth

and i have no idea as to your other questions, perhaps it was the same reasons sony didn't come out with rumble(the lawsuit with immersion)

sonic_rusher

No they all have bluetooth and they can all use it for their peripherals. its a matter of Nintendo and Sony letting them use their bluetooth.

PS3 and Wii both use bluetooth, 360 uses it's own wireless system.

[QUOTE="mistervengeance"]

xbox 360 doesn't have bluetooth

and i have no idea as to your other questions, perhaps it was the same reasons sony didn't come out with rumble(the lawsuit with immersion)

sonic_rusher

No they all have bluetooth and they can all use it for their peripherals. its a matter of Nintendo and Sony letting them use their bluetooth.

the wii and ps3 has bluetooth the 360 uses 2.4ghz ir. it is pretty similar but not bluetooth.

The Sony version of the guitar peripheral has to use a wireless usb port and the Nintendo version of the peripheral uses the Wiimote for most of its funtions which happens to be awsome because the Wii one can do a little bit more with rumble, speakers, and motion sensing. But my point is if my information is correct that if Nintendo did not use the Wiimote theywould probably havemade Guitar Hero 3 use a USB as well. Why is only MS allowing accessories with their wireless capabilities and no one else???

sonic_rusher

Why does the 360 wireless version of Rock Band cost more than the one with cords, while the PS3 costs less and doesn't even have a version with cords?

Why is the sky blue? Why do sheep still post here?

[QUOTE="mistervengeance"]

xbox 360 doesn't have bluetooth

and i have no idea as to your other questions, perhaps it was the same reasons sony didn't come out with rumble(the lawsuit with immersion)

sonic_rusher

No they all have bluetooth and they can all use it for their peripherals. its a matter of Nintendo and Sony letting them use their bluetooth.

Wrong.

Do your homework, Link. Educate yourself before you make a thread.

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.sonic_rusher

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

Wow... so much mislead conceptions here.

First off, MS's propietary wireless signal is being used, cause I'm sure MS believes it's time to let other companies in, plus the other two versions would already be wireless. So they have to let it happen. Before they were very reluctant. That's why the GH II controller didn't have it.

The PS3 one uses it, but the USB dongle is to recharge the battery if I'm not mistaken... plus for the PS3. Anytime you want to setup a wireless controller you need to sync it up via Bluetooth.

The Wii one could have just made a controller without the need of the Wii Remote, but to keep the costs down, they just used the technology inside the Wii Remote and adapted the game around it a bit. Actually, the GH controller for Wii is a "Classic Controller" above all else. It's not a "Nunchuck" attatchment.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.Lazy_Boy88

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

No YOU don't understand. Bluetooth is a standardized wireless protocol used with lots of headets. PS3 and Wii have it but I think PS3 is the only one that uses it for controllers. MS has some proprietary bandwidth for controllers so they can control 3rd party periphereals.

They all have some sort of wireless capabilities to the point that they dont need useless add ons like USB adapters. Wii uses bluetooth for their Wireless controllers, so does PS3, 360 may not but its a term most commoners know and it does not make a difference because Nintendo and Sony still have to allow them to use it just like MS. It has nothing to do with cost. They are at a huge advatage because veryone loves their games. They can charge alot of money.

Wow... so much mislead conceptions here.

First off, MS's propietary wireless signal is being used, cause I'm sure MS believes it's time to let other companies in, plus the other two versions would already be wireless. So they have to let it happen. Before they were very reluctant. That's why the GH II controller didn't have it.

The PS3 one uses it, but the USB dongle is to recharge the battery if I'm not mistaken... plus for the PS3. Anytime you want to setup a wireless controller you need to sync it up via Bluetooth.

The Wii one could have just made a controller without the need of the Wii Remote, but to keep the costs down, they just used the technology inside the Wii Remote and adapted the game around it a bit. Actually, the GH controller for Wii is a "Classic Controller" above all else. It's not a "Nunchuck" attatchment.

yoshi_64

And you are fueling that misconception.

Here is quote from IGN: "The PS3 controller we used required a USB dongle which means that the controllers don't use the standard PS3 bluetooth to communicate with the system."

Here is the link:http://wii.ign.com/articles/825/825222p1.html

also I am pretty sure I never said it was a nunchuk attachment. The Wiimote is actually a better alternative to using bluetooth as the article says it has really good motion sensing, rumble, and internal speakers which it uses.

I am not complaining about how the Wii gets around using Bluetooth I just am pretty confident that they wouldnt let them use it anyway.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="mistervengeance"]

xbox 360 doesn't have bluetooth

and i have no idea as to your other questions, perhaps it was the same reasons sony didn't come out with rumble(the lawsuit with immersion)

excelR83

No they all have bluetooth and they can all use it for their peripherals. its a matter of Nintendo and Sony letting them use their bluetooth.

Wrong.

Do your homework, Link. Educate yourself before you make a thread.

OK ok for my point it does not even make a difference whether MS uses bluetooth or not. I should have specified, but I am alot closer to the truth than most here.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

The Sony version of the guitar peripheral has to use a wireless usb port and the Nintendo version of the peripheral uses the Wiimote for most of its funtions which happens to be awsome because the Wii one can do a little bit more with rumble, speakers, and motion sensing. But my point is if my information is correct that if Nintendo did not use the Wiimote theywould probably havemade Guitar Hero 3 use a USB as well. Why is only MS allowing accessories with their wireless capabilities and no one else???

excelR83

Why does the 360 wireless version of Rock Band cost more than the one with cords, while the PS3 costs less and doesn't even have a version with cords?

Why is the sky blue? Why do sheep still post here?

Ya you can leave if you dont understand the question. Its a legitimate question as to why another thing about the PS3 has to suck.

Nintendo fans post here because we dont ask stupid questions like why is tyhe sky blue or why one of the biggest fan groups in the world participate on one of the biggest gaming media outlets in the world.

What? The Wiimote uses bluetooth. If the guitar uses the Wiimote, then it's already using bluetooth. No ands or buts about it.Zhengi

Well I am saying that if the Wiimote was not there they probably would not have let them use the bluetooth directly. Anyways the fact that they used the Wiimote instead of a direct feed to bluetooth connection is good. The Wii version Guitar hero has the best guitar because of ruumble, aswome motion sensing, and internal speakers.

haha the PS3 has wireless, the 360 has the wired

[QUOTE="mistervengeance"]

xbox 360 doesn't have bluetooth

and i have no idea as to your other questions, perhaps it was the same reasons sony didn't come out with rumble(the lawsuit with immersion)

sonic_rusher

No they all have bluetooth and they can all use it for their peripherals. its a matter of Nintendo and Sony letting them use their bluetooth.

Because Bluetooth communication technology is expensive and would drive up the price of the controllers because the Bluetooth modules would have to be installed in the controllers and to this day even PC Bluetooth is still expensive for connectivity.

Isn't the 360 controller supposed to be the most expensive of the 4? I know the 360 uses it's own wireless connectivity, not Bluetooth like the PS3 and Wii do.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"]What? The Wiimote uses bluetooth. If the guitar uses the Wiimote, then it's already using bluetooth. No ands or buts about it.sonic_rusher

Well I am saying that if the Wiimote was not there they probably would not have let them use the bluetooth directly. Anyways the fact that they used the Wiimote instead of a direct feed to bluetooth connection is good. The Wii version Guitar hero has the best guitar because of ruumble, aswome motion sensing, and internal speakers.

But since it is, what's the problem?

[QUOTE="mistervengeance"]

xbox 360 doesn't have bluetooth

and i have no idea as to your other questions, perhaps it was the same reasons sony didn't come out with rumble(the lawsuit with immersion)

sonic_rusher

No they all have bluetooth and they can all use it for their peripherals. its a matter of Nintendo and Sony letting them use their bluetooth.

No, they all have wireless, but they do not all have bluetooth. Microsoft uses its own form of wireless and does not allow companies outside of it to use it unless they pay a fee.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="Zhengi"]What? The Wiimote uses bluetooth. If the guitar uses the Wiimote, then it's already using bluetooth. No ands or buts about it.Zhengi

Well I am saying that if the Wiimote was not there they probably would not have let them use the bluetooth directly. Anyways the fact that they used the Wiimote instead of a direct feed to bluetooth connection is good. The Wii version Guitar hero has the best guitar because of ruumble, aswome motion sensing, and internal speakers.

But since it is, what's the problem?

Because this problem comes up in different ways. Nintendo does not let most devs use programmable shaders for their games. On the Wii that would make a substantial difference. So it is a problem in many other ways.

[QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.sonic_rusher

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

No YOU don't understand. Bluetooth is a standardized wireless protocol used with lots of headets. PS3 and Wii have it but I think PS3 is the only one that uses it for controllers. MS has some proprietary bandwidth for controllers so they can control 3rd party periphereals.

They all have some sort of wireless capabilities to the point that they dont need useless add ons like USB adapters. Wii uses bluetooth for their Wireless controllers, so does PS3, 360 may not but its a term most commoners know and it does not make a difference because Nintendo and Sony still have to allow them to use it just like MS. It has nothing to do with cost. They are at a huge advatage because veryone loves their games. They can charge alot of money.

Bluetooth is open technology and independent of Nintendo and Sony. They can't "allow" someone to use or not use it in the case of MS's proprietary technology.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

The Sony version of the guitar peripheral has to use a wireless usb port and the Nintendo version of the peripheral uses the Wiimote for most of its funtions which happens to be awsome because the Wii one can do a little bit more with rumble, speakers, and motion sensing. But my point is if my information is correct that if Nintendo did not use the Wiimote theywould probably havemade Guitar Hero 3 use a USB as well. Why is only MS allowing accessories with their wireless capabilities and no one else???

excelR83

Why does the 360 wireless version of Rock Band cost more than the one with cords, while the PS3 costs less and doesn't even have a version with cords?

Why is the sky blue? Why do sheep still post here?

The world may never know.....

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.ramey70

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

No YOU don't understand. Bluetooth is a standardized wireless protocol used with lots of headets. PS3 and Wii have it but I think PS3 is the only one that uses it for controllers. MS has some proprietary bandwidth for controllers so they can control 3rd party periphereals.

They all have some sort of wireless capabilities to the point that they dont need useless add ons like USB adapters. Wii uses bluetooth for their Wireless controllers, so does PS3, 360 may not but its a term most commoners know and it does not make a difference because Nintendo and Sony still have to allow them to use it just like MS. It has nothing to do with cost. They are at a huge advatage because veryone loves their games. They can charge alot of money.

Bluetooth is open technology and independent of Nintendo and Sony. They can't "allow" someone to use or not use it in the case of MS's proprietary technology.

Well that is what IGN said when they were complaining about Nintendo's lack of a headset. Saying that a third party company could make a headset and Nintendo could give them the access to their wireless technologies.

[QUOTE="ramey70"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.sonic_rusher

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

No YOU don't understand. Bluetooth is a standardized wireless protocol used with lots of headets. PS3 and Wii have it but I think PS3 is the only one that uses it for controllers. MS has some proprietary bandwidth for controllers so they can control 3rd party periphereals.

They all have some sort of wireless capabilities to the point that they dont need useless add ons like USB adapters. Wii uses bluetooth for their Wireless controllers, so does PS3, 360 may not but its a term most commoners know and it does not make a difference because Nintendo and Sony still have to allow them to use it just like MS. It has nothing to do with cost. They are at a huge advatage because veryone loves their games. They can charge alot of money.

Bluetooth is open technology and independent of Nintendo and Sony. They can't "allow" someone to use or not use it in the case of MS's proprietary technology.

Well that is what IGN said when they were complaining about Nintendo's lack of a headset. Saying that a third party company could make a headset and Nintendo could give them the access to their wireless technologies.

The editorial on IGN focused more on the lack of support for voice chatting rather than the lack of headsets. In fact, the artice itself says that there are no technical barriers to the use of headsets on the Wii. Nintendo has no power to selectively enforce or restrict Bluetooth technology. The only ones that can do that are the promoter members of the Bluetooth Special Interest Group which are Microsoft, IBM, Intel, Ericsson, Motorola, Nokia, and Toshiba.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="ramey70"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.ramey70

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

No YOU don't understand. Bluetooth is a standardized wireless protocol used with lots of headets. PS3 and Wii have it but I think PS3 is the only one that uses it for controllers. MS has some proprietary bandwidth for controllers so they can control 3rd party periphereals.

They all have some sort of wireless capabilities to the point that they dont need useless add ons like USB adapters. Wii uses bluetooth for their Wireless controllers, so does PS3, 360 may not but its a term most commoners know and it does not make a difference because Nintendo and Sony still have to allow them to use it just like MS. It has nothing to do with cost. They are at a huge advatage because veryone loves their games. They can charge alot of money.

Bluetooth is open technology and independent of Nintendo and Sony. They can't "allow" someone to use or not use it in the case of MS's proprietary technology.

Well that is what IGN said when they were complaining about Nintendo's lack of a headset. Saying that a third party company could make a headset and Nintendo could give them the access to their wireless technologies.

The editorial on IGN focused more on the lack of support for voice chatting rather than the lack of headsets. In fact, the artice itself says that there are no technical barriers to the use of headsets on the Wii. Nintendo has no power to selectively enforce or restrict Bluetooth technology. The only ones that can do that are the promoter members of the Bluetooth Special Interest Group which are Microsoft, IBM, Intel, Ericsson, Motorola, Nokia, and Toshiba.

Then why do i keep hearing that Nin tendo is stopping third parties from using bluetooth? I mean Im not doubting you but if it is readily available then they should use it and why am i haring that nintendo is stopping them

[QUOTE="ramey70"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="ramey70"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.sonic_rusher

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

No YOU don't understand. Bluetooth is a standardized wireless protocol used with lots of headets. PS3 and Wii have it but I think PS3 is the only one that uses it for controllers. MS has some proprietary bandwidth for controllers so they can control 3rd party periphereals.

They all have some sort of wireless capabilities to the point that they dont need useless add ons like USB adapters. Wii uses bluetooth for their Wireless controllers, so does PS3, 360 may not but its a term most commoners know and it does not make a difference because Nintendo and Sony still have to allow them to use it just like MS. It has nothing to do with cost. They are at a huge advatage because veryone loves their games. They can charge alot of money.

Bluetooth is open technology and independent of Nintendo and Sony. They can't "allow" someone to use or not use it in the case of MS's proprietary technology.

Well that is what IGN said when they were complaining about Nintendo's lack of a headset. Saying that a third party company could make a headset and Nintendo could give them the access to their wireless technologies.

The editorial on IGN focused more on the lack of support for voice chatting rather than the lack of headsets. In fact, the artice itself says that there are no technical barriers to the use of headsets on the Wii. Nintendo has no power to selectively enforce or restrict Bluetooth technology. The only ones that can do that are the promoter members of the Bluetooth Special Interest Group which are Microsoft, IBM, Intel, Ericsson, Motorola, Nokia, and Toshiba.

Then why do i keep hearing that Nin tendo is stopping third parties from using bluetooth? I mean Im not doubting you but if it is readily available then they should use it and why am i haring that nintendo is stopping them

It's not that they are stopping people, they are just making it pointless. Why market a headset for the Wii when it doesn't support voice chat? What Nintendo does stop is the motion sensing 3rd party Wiimotes, which is proprietary Nintendo technology.

Wow... so much mislead conceptions here.

First off, MS's propietary wireless signal is being used, cause I'm sure MS believes it's time to let other companies in, plus the other two versions would already be wireless. So they have to let it happen. Before they were very reluctant. That's why the GH II controller didn't have it.

The PS3 one uses it, but the USB dongle is to recharge the battery if I'm not mistaken... plus for the PS3. Anytime you want to setup a wireless controller you need to sync it up via Bluetooth.

The Wii one could have just made a controller without the need of the Wii Remote, but to keep the costs down, they just used the technology inside the Wii Remote and adapted the game around it a bit. Actually, the GH controller for Wii is a "Classic Controller" above all else. It's not a "Nunchuck" attatchment.

yoshi_64

Thank you :D

[QUOTE="mistervengeance"]

xbox 360 doesn't have bluetooth

and i have no idea as to your other questions, perhaps it was the same reasons sony didn't come out with rumble(the lawsuit with immersion)

sonic_rusher

No they all have bluetooth and they can all use it for their peripherals. its a matter of Nintendo and Sony letting them use their bluetooth.

Personally I'd rather have the Wii-mote plug into a guitar controller, rather than paying extra for a guitar controller with blue-tooth, rumble, and tilt sensing.

[QUOTE="yoshi_64"]

Wow... so much mislead conceptions here.

First off, MS's propietary wireless signal is being used, cause I'm sure MS believes it's time to let other companies in, plus the other two versions would already be wireless. So they have to let it happen. Before they were very reluctant. That's why the GH II controller didn't have it.

The PS3 one uses it, but the USB dongle is to recharge the battery if I'm not mistaken... plus for the PS3. Anytime you want to setup a wireless controller you need to sync it up via Bluetooth.

The Wii one could have just made a controller without the need of the Wii Remote, but to keep the costs down, they just used the technology inside the Wii Remote and adapted the game around it a bit. Actually, the GH controller for Wii is a "Classic Controller" above all else. It's not a "Nunchuck" attatchment.

MikeE21286

Thank you :D

Just letting you know he is starting a huge misconception himself. The USB dongle is not to recharge the battery. Its so they can communicate with the Guitar.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="ramey70"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="ramey70"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.ramey70

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

No YOU don't understand. Bluetooth is a standardized wireless protocol used with lots of headets. PS3 and Wii have it but I think PS3 is the only one that uses it for controllers. MS has some proprietary bandwidth for controllers so they can control 3rd party periphereals.

They all have some sort of wireless capabilities to the point that they dont need useless add ons like USB adapters. Wii uses bluetooth for their Wireless controllers, so does PS3, 360 may not but its a term most commoners know and it does not make a difference because Nintendo and Sony still have to allow them to use it just like MS. It has nothing to do with cost. They are at a huge advatage because veryone loves their games. They can charge alot of money.

Bluetooth is open technology and independent of Nintendo and Sony. They can't "allow" someone to use or not use it in the case of MS's proprietary technology.

Well that is what IGN said when they were complaining about Nintendo's lack of a headset. Saying that a third party company could make a headset and Nintendo could give them the access to their wireless technologies.

The editorial on IGN focused more on the lack of support for voice chatting rather than the lack of headsets. In fact, the artice itself says that there are no technical barriers to the use of headsets on the Wii. Nintendo has no power to selectively enforce or restrict Bluetooth technology. The only ones that can do that are the promoter members of the Bluetooth Special Interest Group which are Microsoft, IBM, Intel, Ericsson, Motorola, Nokia, and Toshiba.

Then why do i keep hearing that Nin tendo is stopping third parties from using bluetooth? I mean Im not doubting you but if it is readily available then they should use it and why am i haring that nintendo is stopping them

It's not that they are stopping people, they are just making it pointless. Why market a headset for the Wii when it doesn't support voice chat? What Nintendo does stop is the motion sensing 3rd party Wiimotes, which is proprietary Nintendo technology.

The devs would develop a game that uses the headset. Im pretty sure they could get around the roadblocksNintendo pointlessly sets up with online communities, but I dont think the devs want to do that with Nintendo.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.ramey70

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

No YOU don't understand. Bluetooth is a standardized wireless protocol used with lots of headets. PS3 and Wii have it but I think PS3 is the only one that uses it for controllers. MS has some proprietary bandwidth for controllers so they can control 3rd party periphereals.

They all have some sort of wireless capabilities to the point that they dont need useless add ons like USB adapters. Wii uses bluetooth for their Wireless controllers, so does PS3, 360 may not but its a term most commoners know and it does not make a difference because Nintendo and Sony still have to allow them to use it just like MS. It has nothing to do with cost. They are at a huge advatage because veryone loves their games. They can charge alot of money.

Bluetooth is open technology and independent of Nintendo and Sony. They can't "allow" someone to use or not use it in the case of MS's proprietary technology.

Finally. I was waiting for someone to point that out.

[QUOTE="ramey70"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="nytrospawn"]Well, its cheaper to not have wireless components in the controller. Thats why the Wii controller uses the Wii-mote. Making the controller completely wireless like saying if you have a car with no seats, you buy a new car instead of replacing the seats. As for Sony, I got no idea.sonic_rusher

Ya I dont think you understand how it works because they all have wireless Bluetooth, Wii, 360, and PS3 all have it.

No YOU don't understand. Bluetooth is a standardized wireless protocol used with lots of headets. PS3 and Wii have it but I think PS3 is the only one that uses it for controllers. MS has some proprietary bandwidth for controllers so they can control 3rd party periphereals.

They all have some sort of wireless capabilities to the point that they dont need useless add ons like USB adapters. Wii uses bluetooth for their Wireless controllers, so does PS3, 360 may not but its a term most commoners know and it does not make a difference because Nintendo and Sony still have to allow them to use it just like MS. It has nothing to do with cost. They are at a huge advatage because veryone loves their games. They can charge alot of money.

Bluetooth is open technology and independent of Nintendo and Sony. They can't "allow" someone to use or not use it in the case of MS's proprietary technology.

Well that is what IGN said when they were complaining about Nintendo's lack of a headset. Saying that a third party company could make a headset and Nintendo could give them the access to their wireless technologies.

Maybe it was the people behind Red Octane that

[QUOTE="MikeE21286"][QUOTE="yoshi_64"]

Wow... so much mislead conceptions here.

First off, MS's propietary wireless signal is being used, cause I'm sure MS believes it's time to let other companies in, plus the other two versions would already be wireless. So they have to let it happen. Before they were very reluctant. That's why the GH II controller didn't have it.

The PS3 one uses it, but the USB dongle is to recharge the battery if I'm not mistaken... plus for the PS3. Anytime you want to setup a wireless controller you need to sync it up via Bluetooth.

The Wii one could have just made a controller without the need of the Wii Remote, but to keep the costs down, they just used the technology inside the Wii Remote and adapted the game around it a bit. Actually, the GH controller for Wii is a "Classic Controller" above all else. It's not a "Nunchuck" attatchment.

sonic_rusher

Thank you :D

Just letting you know he is starting a huge misconception himself. The USB dongle is not to recharge the battery. Its so they can communicate with the Guitar.

And your doing the same...