Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion Archive [2010]

But they haven't even included the same motion detection in the Navicon as they have in sixaxis!

 

I think what deepbrown may mean is that if you designed the navicon to work as a 'proper' motion controller, the dualshock can no longer stand in for it in that its ergonomics and grip aren't suitable for that kind of use.

 

But if the Move came with nubs as standard, you wouldn't need the sixaxis.

 

It would just be confusing and open up all sorts of other issues like having to have a d-pad or having to configure what buttons should pretend to be a d-pad, which controller should be the left one and the right one, etc.

I think while you may be able to figure out something that can do everything, it'll just clutter the design and make everything needlessly complex. As far as I am concerned, the basis should be similar like the way, in that one Move controller should be all you need in principle for a lot of applications, and the fewer buttons it has to have, the better. Right now the Move is designed so that you can grip it comfortably, and your fingers will be on the A and T pressure sensitive buttons in such a way that you can fairly easily simulate actually grabbing something, put various levels of pressure on it, and letting it go. That's very elegant, and it really shouldn't have or want to be much more than that.

I say that it's the correct choice that any game that needs compatibility in that it can support both dualshock and Move controls can use the dualshock/navcon + Move combo, whereas everything that goes beyond that and wants motion controls for both hands, should use two Move controllers. Less than two months to go to start finding out if I'm right - couldn't be more excited . Man, just bring out the Hustle Kings patch already and add voice-chat suport, and I'll be selling PS3s to my father and sister - we used to go out playing snooker all three of us regularly when we still lived close to each other.

 

The motion sensors in the navcon may supersede the dpad. The DS3 has motion sensors too, so we can still use it as a stand in but it would be awkward to handle.

Unlike MS, Sony approaches the core gamers first. Hence, it is important to make them feel comfortable with the new controllers. Either a well-hidden stick to the motion controller, or additional sensors in the nav controller may make the control scheme more complete in comparison to DS3 and Wii.

Would love to hear from Dr. Marks and Anton on their collective decisions. I don't think people bought their earlier defense regarding the missing stick completely. If they can show that less is more in this case, it would be a walk over, but from what I can see, Wiimote+ and DS3 may be more expressive in some scenarios.

The goal is not to do everything. It is to do everything or at least something best. So every little details matter IMHO. I guess the feelings about missing stick/sensors will resurface or go away forever once we play the final games.

 

It needn't do everything, just add some thumb-interfacing. And a PSP-style analogue nub wouldn't detract from Wii's design at all. As it is, to get thumb input which we appreciate is more ideal interface in some cases, you have to either have an awkward sixaxis or DS3 in yout left hand, or buy a separate thumbstick Navicon that lacks the motion components, making it a costly and unsophisticated interface. Stick a nub on the Move and you have the option of thumstick interface ready to hand for every player. eg. You could go from a motion interface to a thumb control of an RC car on the same controller. If any game needs more than just the addition of a thumbstick, you could always resort to a sixaxis/DS, but I'd start to question the design at that point if your title needs too many different interface types.

 

Well, they'd first have to invent a thumbstick (or maybe steal it from Nintendo, as the 3DS appears to have a better one at least than the PSP's) that is good enough to replace the analog stick. In the end, there are always going to be stuff that you're better off doing with a Dualshock anyway, and in these cases a Dualshock is also always going to be more comfortable than a controller that is split in two halves. You're probably going to want to have the R1 and R2 buttons in the right place then as well, instead of the A button on top and the T button on the bottom, etc.

But who knows - maybe one day they'll be able to make a version of the Move controller that can pop out of the bottom of the controller, and you can turn over the controller and pop it out whenever you want to use it as a 'navcon' or something like that.

 

The PSP nub is plenty fine. Perhaps ultimately not as accurate as a proper analog thumbstick on a console controller, but works just fine even in FPS games. And would be more than enough as an addional control method on Move.

Economically that would have also been a good move on Sony's part. You remove the need of a navi-controller. Remove another obvious Wii comparison. Lower overall manufacturing costs (1 controller instead of 2) and increase revenue (sell 2 wands instead of wand + navicon) Encourage developement of games using 2 wands (as you can now also move while using 2 wands for in game activities) rather than how currently if you use both wands for say an item in each hand (sword and shield, 2 weapons, etc) you can't simultaneously move your character.

Overall it would have been a win/win situation for everyone.

Regards,
SB

 

the current nub is also a first-generation device (don't know if they've made changes in later PSP versions though). The actual design concept of a flat, sliding 'stick' was great, and I'm sure refinements can be made, especially for a controller rather than a portable where they could afford a little more size and bulk. But even then, just chucking in a PSP nub would have been adequate and had the advantage of spreading the cost of that component over another device.

 

Well, I don't agree with this at all (this after 6 years of using the thing).

I really feel there should be more elegant solutions for this. Maybe you could use the Shield Move controller for moving around, and use it for direct shield control whenever you press and hold one of the buttons. The best solution will depend on the game. A gladiator duel for instance could auto-target your viewpoint, but have your movement forwards and backwards controlled by the A and T pressure buttons on the Shield Move controller.

 

Even with just one move controller I think it would be possible. Although it would come across as, for some, the dreaded tank like controls...

I posted this on NeoGaf....but I believe the "square" and "x" buttons on the Move controller are pressure sensitive like the DS3.

you can walk, jog or run full speed forward using "square".

example one....lets just say that you only own just one Move controller.

the trigger is used to shoot, grab, etc.
and "square" to go forward, while the aiming courser (sphere) is used to look around/for the direction you would be moving in. Then "x" can be used to go backward.... (maybe tap "x" 2quick times to do a 180 turn, to run for your life. Or another available face button instead)

now for those who own 2 move controllers...

same thing ("square" and "x" to move) but this time, the Left Move controller's sphere is used to look around. While the Right Move controller is used to shoot at any particular spot on the screen, like a pointer.

but it would really be fun to use for a game like Demon Souls where you hold the shield by pressing Left Move's trigger. While using the Left Move to pan to where you want to block an incoming attack. With this method you can still move around using "Square" and "x". You then can use the 2nd Move controller (right one) to swing with the sword. So basically like sports champions' gladiator game...but being able to navigate through out an environment.

all of these motions in 1:1, would seem fun.

edit- sorry Arwin, the only post I didn't read was yours. Which was the last one before I responded. So I agree, although I still prefer "square" and "x" to navigate. While using the trigger for other natural uses..

 

They shouldn't need to. They can compensate for that, as Move is the most balanced motion controller.

A lot of people know how Wiimote does work, and how unique it was back then. Kinect in my opinion is the most innovative and revolutionary of the bunch, really interesting, BUT.....

The thing is that the traditional controller will never disappear for many reasons -how about people with a sprained ankle or a broken finger, or just needing/wanting to rest?-.

And Move combines a traditional controller with a good button layout, amazing precision and lag, plus the help of a camera.

So focusing on the hardcore fans wouldn't make a difference if you believe in a product that can be as good.

It sounds... entirely fun, and they can do so many things I cannot know for sure.

 

Aye but approaching the core gamers first should give them the best initial response without spending too much $$$.

Also it gives them a known base to work on.

The problem is it's very very difficult to replace an entrenched DS3 usage unless they can come up with new use cases and genra, or/and prove that Move is superior. The latter may be impossible if the devs keep balancing their games against DS3.

So far Sony has not clearly defined their direction yet; probably not ready to commit for first party games, and don't intend to restrict creativity for devs in general. Personally I do think they need to consolidate/organize the basic design patterns like how Apple has UI guide for apps.

I really hate it when they seem to downplay PSEye themselves too.

 

Tech Interview: Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-needforspeed-tech-interview

So they unlocked hidden RSX power or I don't understand this correctly?

 

That's not what they're implying or saying at all...

 

They just don't need any, is what they're saying. From what I remember, they actually bothered to figure out the strengths and weaknesses of both graphics cards with Burnout Paradise, and then design a graphics engine that can be realised within those boundaries. Which still means that they do some of the things on the RSX completely differently from how they do it on Xenos (lots of optimisation), but the end result is similar. It doesn't necessarily mean that they don't do something like culling on an SPU though. From the sound of it, they may be doing that kind of thing on all systems anyway, working out what in the scenery is blocked by the cars, for instance. Note that Insomniac despite having worked on the PS3 exclusively also still made the conscious choice not to use anything but RSX for rendering the graphics and save the CPU for other things like physics, AI, bullet trajectories and so on.

Would have been a nice question to ask them about AA though maybe. But we may still find that out later.

 

I meant that usually developers are talking about using SPU's to obtain platform parity. Criterion is saying that both versions will be identical and both are running on the GPU's, they mentioned SPU's only when they talked about physx etc. (CPU stuff). I know that they are most likely culling on the SPU's (like almost all devs) but this is very interesting if they are able to obtain parity with RSX "only" (culling aside).

Yeah, I was waiting for the question about MLAA

 

I always thought Paradise was an amazing piece of programming achievement...60FPS, lots of physics, huge open world, day-night transition (included through patch) & all this while being a game that was not ugly looking, instead it was something which was astounding to look at. And it even had pixel perfect cross platform parity.

 

You missed one important point besides the unlocked 8 dormant pixel shaders in RSX ( ). Ehmm yes that is parity for this game and this games GPU load.

 

Dev's usually only say that when trying to do things on RSX that they can do on Xenos but then find RSX is too slow or incapable.

In this case, they have instead categorized what each GPU can do at reasonable speeds. Then, they tailor the graphics engine to ONLY use those features that work well on both GPUs.

In short, instead of attempting to beef up RSX (through SPUs) to match Xenos, they are handicapping Xenos to match RSX.

Regards,
SB