Do FPS fans want to go motion-based direct-aim?

[nightshade]

I LOVED playing Metroid Prime trilogy on Wii...I never played a Metroid Prime game until I played Trilogy & eventhough it was a bit disorienting at first I got used to it & it was awesome. But perhaps that's because the game itself is so amazing cause it WAS a tiring job to play the game with motion controller & every once in a while I wished I had a pad controller to play the game.


This was after playing the game for 2-3 hours non-stop...something tells me its going to be even more tiring in Multiplayer since you have people moving,running,jumping everywhere with non-uniform pattern.

 

[corduroygt]

Example : The object you want to shoot is 2cm up and right from the centre crosshair. You move your Wagglestick to point at this object, so your Wagglestick is targeted 2cm up and right from centre. The object now moves into the centre of the screen. However, you're pointing 2cms up and right, so the object scrolls down-left. Now you react, chasing back to the moving object, and constantly chasing it around the screen.

Proper aiming requires the reticule to be where you are pointing. You see it, you shoot it. However, limits in controller inputs mean we also have to map player rotation somehow, and so the Wagglestick takes on dual roles. If you can't point and shoot at your target directly as in SOCOM, then I certainly won't be interested in playing shooters with waggles.

The same problem also exists with a mouse, what you do is to lift the mouse up when it gets to the edges of the mouse pad. With a motion controller, you'll just have a button to hold down when you want to recenter it.

Here's an example of pc gaming with a much less precise, gyro-only mouse, looks decent except that the game is running at a bad framerate...

 

[Arwin]

Right now I'm pretty confident in the potential of the Move providing a better experience for people who are used to mouse/kb than the analog controllers could ever do. I discussed it with a few PC only guys who were enthusiastic about the prospect of being able to play a shooter like this on a console.

With the Move, I think we can see a rather big improvement over the WiiMote, because all that we've seen so far is also pre-Motion+. The resolution advantage of the Move versus the standard controller is really rather big, and should rival a mouse for console games fairly easily.

For the keyboard part of the keyboard/mouse combo, it takes very little to be an improvement over that - an analog stick and a few buttons is already much better in any way I can think of.

Instinctively I feel that two moves could be even better, but I don't know if that's true. I'm thinking I could hold a move controller in my left hand to control every single bit of non-standing still movement, but I'm not sure. It should probably be precise enough, but maybe it would take too much movement versus the thumbstick. I would love, say, Killzone 3 to be fully configurable though so that you could try out any combination of options for this.

Certainly, as I've said many times before, I'd love a Descent style game with two Move controllers, or G-Police, or any space shooter.

Ah, I can't wait to get my hands on the move. Hope it sells a tonne and gets great support.

One of the biggest reasons why I want something like Move for shooters comes, by the way, from my experience with Time Crisis with the GunCon controller. Shooting with that felt so incredibly much better than any FPS I'd ever played up to that point (and that was basically all of them starting with the first of them, which for me is 16 player Midi Maze II even before Wolfenstein 3D came out ) and I was done playing FPS's from that point on for quite a while! I still miss that feeling to this day, and if Move gives me that feeling back, but in a full fps environment rather than an on-rails shooter, it's going to be pure heaven, and I'm convinced in that case it'll be hugely successful. I really have a hard time at the moment to not see it work, and I can even see myself buy that strange lovegun peripheral that harnesses the Move.

 

[specwarGP2]

if move is more precise than thumbsticks i'm all for it

 

[Arwin]

Precision for pointing is close to a pixel I think (I remember a figure of 1024x1024 dropped in the early days but no idea if that changed), while twisting is less than a degree per step of a full circle (so 360 steps, was recently mentioned in an interview)

The DS3 controller has 256 steps or more (I think they actually went from 8 bit to 10 bit for PS3) from left to right, but you cannot be pixel precise using your thumb no matter what the analog precision. To get any kind of precise control with the ds3 you have to manage its speed variably, something you can also do with the move but may not actually need to, being precise enough for point and shoot.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I think you'd find that in terms of straight-up pointer functionality, the differences between the wiimote and the move will be negligible. Even if the move offers precision in millimeters, you wouldn't have that much precision with your hand in a fast paced game. You can be extremely accurate with the wiimote in Medal of Honor: Heroes 2, and imagine Move would feel about the same. The only difference between the two might be how your environment affects the quality of the experience. Move will be immune to the IR interference that Wii is subject to. With the Wii, candles or sunlight reflected off shiny surfaces seem to cause interference that Move should not be affected by. A lot of people complain about the Wii cursor jumping around, which is a problem with this kind of interference. I never had any problems like that until I moved the Wii downstairs in front of a glass coffee table that was exposed to light from a window. Well, and for actual motion controls there might improvements in recognition of movement patterns. Pointer shouldn't be noticeably different.

 

[tha_con]

Pointer controls in a 3rd person shooter, absolutely, 1st person? Not entirely sure...maybe not? I'll have to try it first.

I think you'd find that in terms of straight-up pointer functionality, the differences between the wiimote and the move will be negligible. Even if the move offers precision in millimeters, you wouldn't have that much precision with your hand in a fast paced game. You can be extremely accurate with the wiimote in Medal of Honor: Heroes 2, and imagine Move would feel about the same. The only difference between the two might be how your environment affects the quality of the experience. Move will be immune to the IR interference that Wii is subject to. With the Wii, candles or sunlight reflected off shiny surfaces seem to cause interference that Move should not be affected by. A lot of people complain about the Wii cursor jumping around, which is a problem with this kind of interference. I never had any problems like that until I moved the Wii downstairs in front of a glass coffee table that was exposed to light from a window. Well, and for actual motion controls there might improvements in recognition of movement patterns. Pointer shouldn't be noticeably different.

They actually can be considerably different. The Wii stops pointing (and registering your pointing) once you leave the viewable area of the LED Sensor Bar. With move they can alter the bounding box considerably and allow you to aim at the very edge of the screen if they wanted to, which is pretty difficult on the Wii. Not only that, but the technology is more stable and predictable, which means it'll do what you want it to do when you want to do it a lot more than the Wii does.

I love RE4 on Wii, but there is nothing more frustrating than lining up a headshot and occasionally having it jump in a random direction because of another light source. I had to remove picture frames from around my television set because the reflection of lights was making my Wii remote malfunction so much.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I think some "hardcore" players will be made about going through a learning curve with the control scheme, but overall I think it's a good setup for both wiimote and move. I want to see more of Socom.

 

[tha_con]

I think some "hardcore" players will be made about going through a learning curve with the control scheme, but overall I think it's a good setup for both wiimote and move. I want to see more of Socom.

Oh, I definitely agree here. The first time I played RE4, I was extremely disappointed. I HATED it. In fact, I got rid of it the first time. A few months later I managed to run into a copy a little later for free, and I decided it was worth a second try. I took time to actually learn the mechanics, and MAN, something clicked and I loved it. It was simply a more "immersive" experience compared to analog sticks. It actually FELT good, as opposed to playing good. So yea, there is certainly a learning curve involved, but after you get over it, the experience is extremely rewarding (IMO).

Move could be onto something with the Move/Chuck/Camera, but SOCOM looked trashy at E3 IMO. I would rather do Gears controls than the trash I saw there (Gears controls GREAT with a pad, very simple).

Can you elaborate on this? I'm not entirely sure I understand why it looked "trashy". I mean, I don't really understand how you can compare SOCOM playing on a Move controller, to Gears of War playing on a 360 controller...

 

[Silent_Buddha]

The same problem also exists with a mouse, what you do is to lift the mouse up when it gets to the edges of the mouse pad. With a motion controller, you'll just have a button to hold down when you want to recenter it.

Here's an example of pc gaming with a much less precise, gyro-only mouse, looks decent except that the game is running at a bad framerate...

I have a free air mouse that is quite accurate. It's an absolute nightmare in games however as there is no method to instantly recalibrate location. Even if there was a button to automatically bring the "cursor" back to center, it'd still be a royal PITA.

I think the current methods on Wii are probably the best way to do it. With center meaning don't move and distance from center being how fast to move in that direction.

When using a pointer and pointing at a screen after all, the natural reaction will be to try to point at the target.

If the position was absolute like a mouse, people will try to point at a target above them, the screen would move to that location and stay there. But now while the center crosshair is perhaps on target, their pointer is no longer pointing at the target. Natural reaction then is to point the pointer at the target. But that just moves the crosshairs down and now the target is back up at the top of the screen and pointer is pointed at the center again where it was originally.

If you have distance from center being how fast you move, pointing and aiming becomes more natural and intuitive. You try to point at the target above you (same scenario as previously) screen moves up to it and it starts to move down. Now you have to point at the target which means as it nears center your motion will slow making aiming easier. Once at center not only has motion stopped allowing you to shoot at him, you've also automatically re-centered and re-calibrated the pointer.

Regards,
SB

 

[mrcorbo]

They had discussed this a bit on this past Friday's "Weekend Confirmed" podcast. One of the concerns raised with wand-type motion controls was lack of persistence of aim like you have with both kb/mouse and thumbstick control. That is, once you point at something the crosshair remains pointed at that target unless you actively move it. Motion controls would require active effort to maintain an aiming point. Not saying this is a big deal, but it's something that makes the experience decidedly different than mouse/keyboard and I could see it being fatiguing over a long play session. The only way to ease this would be to lower the sensitivity, which would take away from one of the advantages of the control scheme.

 

[scooby_dooby]

I voted no, and would've voted "HELL NO" if it was an option.

I just do not see this catching on with hardcore gamers at all.

Maybe if Halo, or COD does it really well, then it could catch on. But short some sort of huge AAA title that absolutely revolutionizes the control scheme*, it will be nothing more than a gimmick that gets inserted into a few games, but does not leave any lasting impression on the genre, ala SixAxis.

*Which will not happen, since these will be peripherals with a paltry install ratio. It would have to be first party, and the options are pretty limited there. Even if Killzone 3 does it, it's not a big enough franchise to matter, it would have to be one of the really heavy hitters.

 

[patsu]

If the Move scheme does not require frequent recalibration, or re-centering, then I will take a closer look.

If it's more accurate than DS3, and at least as intuitive as dual-stick, then I will use it regularly. But I doubt it.

If it allows me to combine melee moves with armed combat, then I will prefer it over DS3. If I can use the controller to communicate better with my teammates (without talking), then I'll prefer it over DS3 also.

If it makes throwing grenade easier, I'd appreciate it more too.

 

[obonicus]

I voted no, and would've voted "HELL NO" if it was an option.

I just do not see this catching on with hardcore gamers at all.

Maybe if Halo, or COD does it really well, then it could catch on. But short some sort of huge AAA title that absolutely revolutionizes the control scheme*, it will be nothing more than a gimmick that gets inserted into a few games, but does not leave any lasting impression on the genre, ala SixAxis.

*Which will not happen, since these will be peripherals with a paltry install ratio. It would have to be first party, and the options are pretty limited there. Even if Killzone 3 does it, it's not a big enough franchise to matter, it would have to be one of the really heavy hitters.

That's not really the question that's being asked. It's not 'will you buy Move?', but 'are you interested in pointer FPS controls?'

 

[Arwin]

I don't think concerns about being able to hold on to a target are warranted. You can see the Socom player rest his hand on his lap while playing. If the controller is sensitive enough, which it is, you require really small movement. This is not tiring at all, and not much different from playing flower or motorstorm with tilt either.

Once you do use a gun aiming style, which is pretty cool to do so I can see it happen, I generally play with a raised knee on which I rested my 'gun arm' so that I could comfortably look over my sights. This, again, in Time Crisis, which more people should have played.

Oh, and make no mistake: Killzone 3 will support Move, and you need a lot of bias to believe Killzone is too small! That's ridiculous.

 

[woundingchaney]

Im primarily a pc gamer though I dont mind using a gamepad for fps titles. I dont think many consumers are going to want a motion based interface in this genre primarily because there is an incredibly large amount of consumers that are more than comfortable (and actually prefer) gamepads over motion controls or even kb/m.

 

[patsu]

I suspect when implemented correctly, a Move shooter may be more expressive than a DS3 one. The latter has a very optimized FPS experience today. The former is a less optimized but more versatile combat tool. e.g., shooting, melee, directing, signaling, etc.

Many times when I play with Cornsnake and JPT in MAG, I can't $&#*%& find them. I needed them to be in somewhere but I didn't know how to identify a place with 3 trees, 5 bushes and a rock. Chatting doesn't always work, and my mic is off usually.

Marking on the map works (by pressing a mark button on the DS3/Move). But if people have time to look at the map, having a pointer allows me to do more to communicate enemy position and intentions for players with or without mic.

The other way is to use in-game gestures and equipment... like pointing Move upwards to fire a flare, or send smoke signal. If I see one with the right color, I'd head there to help out. [EDIT: I just realize (if you're mad enough) you can use Move to mimic "flashlight" morse code also.]

So if you're willing to forgo some of the DS3 optimization, you may get a different and still very entertaining experience back. Move shooting alone is interesting. Move + teammates may be more interesting.

EDIT: Just saw this... although RE5 is not an FPS.

http://kotaku.com/5571555/resident-evil-5-with-move-controls-better-than-youd-think

Let's be honest, it's easy to assume tacked on motion controls are a gimmick. Really easy.

Yet, I didn't get that feeling with the Move controls for Resident Evil 5. I was bracing myself for that feeling, but it wasn't there. In fact, in the hands on time I had with them at E3 last week, they actually felt better than the straight up controller — this coming from someone who generally prefers traditional game controls.

The controls are reminiscent of the ones for the Wii version of Resident Evil 4. Players aim and shoot with the Move controller. While aiming (holding down the Move controller's trigger), players can fire by pressing the Move button and reload by shaking the controller. Shaking the controller while out of aiming mode produces a melee attack. The Nave controller controls character movement.

Of course, the "standard" Resident Evil 5 controls offer more precise aiming, so I'd be hesitant to take them into a multiplayer situation, but for me, the Move controls really breathed life into the single player RE5. And it felt more than a fresh coat of paint, but instead like a new experience for that game.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Heh, if people had at least 3 arms and hands, Move could be absolutely revolutionary.

If you could move (one hand) and aim your viewpoint (second hand) and then use Move to aim your weapon (third hand) that would be an incredible experience.

That would get somewhat close to some of the more complex Mech simulation games where you had a joystick for movement and view change. Joystick controlled feet movement, twist stick for side to side view change, coolie hat for up and down view change. And then mouse to aim cursor freely around the available view window.

Perhaps someone needs to make an analog foot controller for foward, back, right and left (basketball size foot trackball?). Or maybe an analog navigation controller with an analog thumbstick and an analog index finger (trigger) stick?

Talk about scaring away people that are afraid of complex controls.

Regards,
SB

 

[obonicus]

I think we should highlight that this isn't something new Sony is bringing to the table -- pointer-based FPS controls exist, people have used them for years. Some people love them, even. These people might have terrible taste (and in fact quite a few do) but this isn't some abstract thing that we will only know about when Move comes out.

 

[patsu]

If you could move (one hand) and aim your viewpoint (second hand) and then use Move to aim your weapon (third hand) that would be an incredible experience.

There are advantages to keep things simpler.

I tried the Time Crisis gun (with analog stick on the gun to control movement). It's too confusing to use. I enjoyed it much better when it's on rail + a simple gun.

Wii has done free-movement FPSes with dual controllers. The limitations I think may be the game's scope (shooter + what other mechanics ?), and existing entrenched gamer behaviour. It will take time to change. I believe the view and reticule controls are managed by one motion controller.

Metal Gears Arcade has a gun and a camera/3D glasses (for view camera). Should be good enough to do your 3-hand game, plus depth perception.