If 2nd gen Dpad = Fighters & 2nd gen twin analog = FPS ,what will 2nd gen 6DoF = ?

[Nesh]

Other than your lambasting of me () you haven't yet contributed to the original question in this thread. Given your move-control enthusiasm and experience with DS4, are there any genres or ideas you think could be made popular thanks to DS4's superior motion tech compared to other devices?

In an FPS, motion control of the avatar, ducking (drop) and leaning (tilt) seemed an obvious fit, but it's never been realised. Is there a future in motion controlled first-person avatars?

You can use the motion control of the Sixaxis to control the reticule on a FPS just like the move with great accuracy. This was impossible with the sixaxis.

The problem with the sixaxis was that it didnt work all that great in the first place. This is the primary reason I lost interest with it.

Judging by the fast response and the accuracy of the DS4's motion controls I can see that working pretty well also for leaning and ducking. I am sure it will start seeing its way to first party titles that can work great and will raise eyebrows for future consideratuin.

But it will not lift off this generation because of the following:
1)Multiplayer popularity and competitive play. Motion controls introduce more variable player attributed errors compared to simple button presses
2)Multiplatform releases Developers dont want to deal with multiple gameplay methods in the same game and if they do, they dont put enough effort since only one platform has the extra motion control features but all have the same buttons. They also dont want to create comparisons in the gameplay community where some prefer one version better and others prefer the other
3)Whatever can be done on motion controls can be simulated with button presses.
4)Lack of experience requires risk and experimentation. Existing formula works as is
5)Motion controls dont improve practicality as much as face buttons/d-pad/analog sticks/shoulder buttons/mouse when they were first introduced. These new ways of inputs improved how we played games whereas the DS4 motion control contributes mostly to immersion. Motion controls did become very popular on the wii though because it did improve in practical ways how we played certain games. It removed complexity. The DS4 doesnt appear to remove much because most of the PS4 games that people demand require multiple inputs to play as they are intended.

I believe though that the DS4 marks a point that we will see competition copy its features and improve their implementations in next gen. They will start becoming standardized in the future

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The problem with the sixaxis was that it didnt work all that great in the first place. This is the primary reason I lost interest with it.

Was that because of the hardware, or the implementations? It appeared in PS3 games and it wasn't horribly laggy or inaccurate by and large, AFAIK (only played a limited set of motion experiences). There are enough people who liked things like motion sniping in KZ2 that suggests it wasn't in any way a limited hardware. eg. See comments here. KZ2, Heavenly Sword, Folklore, Warhawk, flOw, High Velocity Bowling, all mentioned as good experiences.

 

[Nesh]

Was that because of the hardware, or the implementations? It appeared in PS3 games and it wasn't horribly laggy or inaccurate by and large, AFAIK (only played a limited set of motion experiences). There are enough people who liked things like motion sniping in KZ2 that suggests it wasn't in any way a limited hardware. eg. See comments here. KZ2, Heavenly Sword, Folklore, Warhawk, flOw, High Velocity Bowling, all mentioned as good experiences.

Good experiences doesnt say much about the controller itself. Implementation in the games you mentioned are too limited or isolated to certain genres and I can see why.
I had a good experience with Motorstorm, Heavy Rain, Heavenly Sword, KZ2, Echochrome and Warhawk too (edit: I mean their motion control implementations). But still I found myself switching to analogue sticks when I had the choice because it was far more responsive and accurate. I would have never been able to complete Motorstorm with the motion controls.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

But that doesn't answer the question as to whether DS4 will be better or not. If it wasn't a hardware limitation preventing sixaxis being as responsive as you'd like, then DS4 won't provide any better experience. Or at least, not intrinsically, and any better experiences on DS4 will come from software design changes. So when you say, "Judging by the fast response and the accuracy of the DS4's motion controls," in what games is that, and how do they compare with PS3 such that you could be hopeful DS4 will give a more responsive experience?

 

[dobwal]

Motion control will show its merit when VR finally arrives not as some ancillary control scheme for or in lieu of a controller in the way we game today.

I am sure all the effort Sony put into motion so far will show up in Morpheus as it won't be laden down with gen 1 motion tech.

 

[onQ]

But that doesn't answer the question as to whether DS4 will be better or not. If it wasn't a hardware limitation preventing sixaxis being as responsive as you'd like, then DS4 won't provide any better experience. Or at least, not intrinsically, and any better experiences on DS4 will come from software design changes. So when you say, "Judging by the fast response and the accuracy of the DS4's motion controls," in what games is that, and how do they compare with PS3 such that you could be hopeful DS4 will give a more responsive experience?

Well this is what people from Evolution Studio had to say about it.

One other thing we’ve been looking at is the Sixaxis gyro control. Obviously there was Sixaxis on PS3, but this is significantly more accurate. We’ve been looking at this as a 1:1 steering method… it genuinely does make the driving more involved.

Yep, we already support motion controls. I think you'll be suprised by it too.

And from the PlayStation Blog

Driveclub’s controls are straightforward enough: R2 is your gas pedal and L2 hits the brakes, while the left stick steers and the right stick looks around. One thing I didn’t expect, though, was a motion control scheme that I ended up preferring over the more traditional approach. A quick trip to the options menu lets you enable motion controls, driven by DualShock 4′s built-in accelerometer and gyroscope, and — again, I say this as a classically trained, button-based gamer — it ends up correlating perfectly with the game’s in-car cockpit view. Tilting DualShock 4 left or right and watching your hands on the steering wheel move instantaneously feels perfectly natural, and makes long, soft turns much more graceful (rather than trying to find just the right angle to hold the analog stick at). Of course, traditional controls still feel great, but I think I might end up defaulting to motion controls for this one!

They all could be just hyping things up though.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I just can't get my head around the comparison because sixaxis wasn't inaccurate or laggy in my experience. It probably wasn't good enough to work like a pointer, but I'm sure it could have worked as a virtual steering wheel. It was certainly sensitive enough for the duck game (similar to the roll-ball-through-maze mobile gyro games we've seen). Videos on YT of sixaxis in action can be pretty laggy, but I'm not sure if that's the gyro controls themselves or the software+TV, and whether DS4 improves on that.

What PS4 games are using motion controls at the moment?

 

[Arwin]

I looked into it in more detail back then. Sixaxis sensors produced a very shaky output that needed a lot if averaging and interpolation for accurate tilt, and lateral movement was very laggy. You can probably still get some nice graphs on PC of the Sixaxis sensor output. Nevertheless tilt worked pretty well and you could adjust to the lag, but these new sensors are Move level and really a lot better.

 

[onQ]

I just can't get my head around the comparison because sixaxis wasn't inaccurate or laggy in my experience. It probably wasn't good enough to work like a pointer, but I'm sure it could have worked as a virtual steering wheel. It was certainly sensitive enough for the duck game (similar to the roll-ball-through-maze mobile gyro games we've seen). Videos on YT of sixaxis in action can be pretty laggy, but I'm not sure if that's the gyro controls themselves or the software+TV, and whether DS4 improves on that.

What PS4 games are using motion controls at the moment?

It's 7 years between the technology, sensors have advanced a lot between the time that the DS3/Wiimote was made & when the DS4 & WiiU Pad was made. Since then they have been using the sensors in phones, tablets ,cameras & everything so the technology & the tools to use them have advanced a lot between last generation & the new generation.
Plus according to a lot of people sixaxis was a last minute decision. If that's true they probably didn't have much time to design the PS3 or the controller to make the best of the sensors. But with the PS4 they had a lot of time to work everything out designing the controller & PS4 to make the best of the senors.

 

[dobwal]

The tech itself might be accurate and precise. The question I have is, how easy is it to incorporate the technology into a game? The implementation of the technology seems way more involved than dealing with a controller.

If its not cheap and easy to incorporate, it won't matter how accurate or precise it is. Given the fact its hardly proven to be a game seller outside of certain genres, most devs are hardly going to be motivated to overcome any barriers presented by the tech to accommodate any trivial functions or functions easily handled by the controller.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I looked into it in more detail back then. Sixaxis sensors produced a very shaky output that needed a lot if averaging and interpolation for accurate tilt, and lateral movement was very laggy. You can probably still get some nice graphs on PC of the Sixaxis sensor output. Nevertheless tilt worked pretty well and you could adjust to the lag, but these new sensors are Move level and really a lot better.

If there's a hardware level latency advantage (less smoothing needed) then that would improve things where they were an issue last gen. AFAIK no-one's gotten DS4 motion working on PC yet to compare.

It's 7 years between the technology, sensors have advanced a lot between the time that the DS3/Wiimote was made & when the DS4 & WiiU Pad was made. Since then they have been using the sensors in phones, tablets ,cameras & everything so the technology & the tools to use them have advanced a lot between last generation & the new generation.

7 years improvement over something that was already extremely good may result in negligible real-world improvement. I'm not saying it hasn't resulted in any improvement, but just citing the march of progress isn't a great basis for comparing these devices. What are the operating parameters of sixaxis's motion (angular rate-change limits, G limits, noise, sample frequency) and what are the same for DS4? Because if it's a case of sixaxis having high noise and low limits whereas DS4's is low noise and high limits, there'd be a notable improvement, but if sixaxis was already operating within good ranges for normal use, DS4 won't be able to improve on that.

 

[Nesh]

But that doesn't answer the question as to whether DS4 will be better or not. If it wasn't a hardware limitation preventing sixaxis being as responsive as you'd like, then DS4 won't provide any better experience. Or at least, not intrinsically, and any better experiences on DS4 will come from software design changes. So when you say, "Judging by the fast response and the accuracy of the DS4's motion controls," in what games is that, and how do they compare with PS3 such that you could be hopeful DS4 will give a more responsive experience?

The sixaxis had limited uses in the examples you mentioned because there was a hardware limitation.
It felt like an extra because of it.

The DS4 is a Move controller only shaped as a normal controller. Already tested. I can attest with certainty that this is whats sixaxis should have been. There is already a game on PSN that shows it.

Sixaxis cannot be held as an example to prove a point because it didnt work perfectly. It worked satisfactory enough for limited implementation

 

[onQ]

If there's a hardware level latency advantage (less smoothing needed) then that would improve things where they were an issue last gen. AFAIK no-one's gotten DS4 motion working on PC yet to compare.

7 years improvement over something that was already extremely good may result in negligible real-world improvement. I'm not saying it hasn't resulted in any improvement, but just citing the march of progress isn't a great basis for comparing these devices. What are the operating parameters of sixaxis's motion (angular rate-change limits, G limits, noise, sample frequency) and what are the same for DS4? Because if it's a case of sixaxis having high noise and low limits whereas DS4's is low noise and high limits, there'd be a notable improvement, but if sixaxis was already operating within good ranges for normal use, DS4 won't be able to improve on that.

From the thread I made a month ago



http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=65549
_____________________________________________



I was wondering what the difference was between the DS4 & DS3 sensors so I dug up the Datasheets of the Accelerometers & Gyroscope sensors. DS4 has a single IMU made up of a 3 axis digital accelerometer & a 3 axis digital gyroscope. Where DS3 used individual chips, a 3 axis analog accelerometer & a vibration gyro sensor.


Accelerometer g-force measurement range

DS4 (programmable) ± 2 g, ± 4 g, ± 8 g, ± 16 g

vs

DS3 ± 2 g


Gyroscope angular rate measurement range

DS4 (programmable) ± 125°/s, ± 250°/s, ± 500°/s, ± 1000°/s, ± 2000°/s

vs

DS3 ± 100°/s





Dualshock 4

DualShock 4's Bosch BMI055 6 axis inertial measurement unit

Key features

•  2 inertial sensors in one device an advanced triaxial 16bit gyroscope and a
  versatile, leading edge triaxial 12bit accelerometer
  for reduced PCB space and simplified signal routing
•  Small package LGA package 16 pins
  footprint 3.0 x 4.5 mm², height 0.95mm
•  Common voltage supplies VDD voltage range: 2.4V to 3.6V
•  Digital interface SPI (4-wire, 3-wire), I²C, 4 interrupt pins
  VDDIO voltage range: 1.2V to 3.6V
•  Smart operation and integration Gyroscope and accelerometer
  can be operated individually
•  Consumer electronics suite MSL1, RoHS compliant, halogen-free
  Operating temperature: -40°C ... +85°C
  9DoF software compatible
  
  Accelerometer features
•  Programmable functionality Acceleration ranges ±2g/±4g/±8g/±16g
  Low-pass filter bandwidths 1kHz - <8Hz
•  On-chip FIFO Integrated FIFO with a depth of 32 frames
•  On-chip interrupt controller Motion-triggered interrupt-signal generation for
• - new data
• - any-motion (slope) detection
• - tap sensing (single tap / double tap)
• - orientation- & motion inactivity recognition
• - flat/low-g/high-g detection
•  On-chip temperature sensor factory trimmed, 8-bit, typical slope 0.5K/LSB.
•  Ultra-low power IC 130µA current consumption, 1.3ms wake-up time,
  advanced features for system power management

Gyroscope features
 Programmable functionality Ranges switchable from ±125°/s to ±2000°/s
Low-pass filter bandwidths 230Hz - 12Hz
Fast and slow offset controller (FOC and SOC)
 On-chip FIFO Integrated FIFO with a depth of 100 frames
 On-chip interrupt controller Motion-triggered interrupt-signal generation for
- new data
- any-motion (slope) detection
- high rate
 Low power IC < 5mA current consumption, 30ms start-up time
wake-up time in fast power-up mode only 10ms


Product description

The BMI055 is an ultra-small, 6 axis inertial sensor, consisting of: A digital, triaxial 12bit acceleration sensor and a digital, triaxial 16bit, ±2000°/s gyroscope. The BMI055 allows very low-noise measurement of angular rates and accelerations in 3 perpendicular axes and thus senses tilt, motion, shock and vibration in cellular phones, handhelds, computer peripherals, man-machine interfaces, remote and game controllers.
With its ultra-small footprint of only 3 mm x 4.5 mm the BMI055 is unique in the class of low-noise inertial measurement units. On top, the BMI055 integrates a multitude of features that facilitate its use especially in the area of motion detection applications, such as device orientation measurement, gaming, HMI and menu browser control.

Applications

• Activity monitoring, step-counting
• Navigation
• Vibration measurement, also for active damping
• Six-dimensional tracking of trajectories
• Flat detection, tap sensing, menu scrolling
• Tilt compensation for electronic compass
• Advanced power management for mobile devices
• Shock and free-fall detection
• Image stabilization

Typical applications

 Advanced gaming & HMI
 Advanced gesture recognition
 Indoor navigation
 Image stabilization
 Display profile switching
 Advanced system power management for mobile applications
 Menu scrolling, tap / double tap sensing
 Pedometer / step counting
 Free-fall detection
 E-compass tilt compensation
 Drop detection for warranty logging

General description

The BMI055 is an inertial measurement unit (IMU) for the detection of movements and rotations
in 6 degrees of freedom (6DoF). It reflects the full functionality of a triaxial, low-g acceleration
sensor and at the same time it is capable to measure angular rates. Both – acceleration and
angular rate – in three perpendicular room dimensions, the x-, y- and z-axis.

The BMI055 is designed to meet all requirements for consumer applications such as gaming
and pointing devices, HMI and image stabilization (DSC and camera-phone). It also senses tilt,
motion, inactivity and shock vibration in cell phones, handhelds, computer peripherals, man-
machine interfaces, virtual reality features and game controllers.
An evaluation circuitry (ASIC) converts the output of the micro-electromechanical sensing
structures (MEMS), developed, produced and tested in BOSCH facilities. The corresponding
chip-sets are packed into one single LGA 3.0mm x 4.5mm x 0.95mm housing. For optimum
system integration the BMI055 is fitted with digital bi-directional SPI and I2C interfaces. To
provide maximum performance and reliability each device is tested and ready-to-use calibrated.

Package and interfaces of the BMI055 have been defined to match a multitude of hardware
requirements. Since the sensor features a small footprint, a flat package and very low power
consumption it is ingeniously suited for mobile-phone and tablet PC applications.
The BMI055 offers a variable VDDIO voltage range from 1.2V to 3.6V and can be programmed to
optimize functionality, performance and power consumption in customer specific applications.
In addition it features on-chip interrupt controllers enabling motion-based applications without
use of a microcontroller.

DualShock 3

DualShock3's Kionix KXPC4 (Accelerometer - 3-Axis)

Epson-Toyocom XV3500CB (Gyroscope Sensor)

 

[Arwin]

LBP supports everything on everything I think so if you don't believe me that will help with comparing. The Vita and PS3 versions can already be compared. If LBP doesn't support Sixaxis locoroco cocorecchi does implement it in similar ways.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The sixaxis had limited uses in the examples you mentioned because there was a hardware limitation.

Which was?

From the thread I made a month ago

Okay. I'm nothing like an expert at MEMS but this is what I think I'm seeing in those sheets.

DS4 has a clear range advantage for high forces and faster turn rates. Resolution is 0.1 degree per second at 50 Hz, but with changeable sample rates (is that 1000 to 8 Hz selectable I read), accuracy will likely be relative. I can't make head nor tail of the sixaxis gyro specs, but the fact it's recommended for optical image stabilisation suggests to me it's high sensitivity within a smaller range of motions (and its peak speed is 100 degrees/s, well below DS4s).

Listed noise for the accelerometers is 150 for DS4 and 100 for sixaxis, although I don't know if that's directly comparable.

What I think I'm seeing is that sixaxis is very accurate for small motions, at least in one axis of rotation but then has to rely on accelerometers for fast turns. That'd add inaccuracies and latencies as motions are computed (including the non-gyro tracked rotations I guess). For gentle movements though, I don't think there'd be any noticeable difference. It might be a lot harder to implement tracking algorithms though if you have to compute rotations. I've seen MEMS data for mobiles and it's not pleasant to work with.

We really need an expert to weigh in!

 

[onQ]

Which was?

Okay. I'm nothing like an expert at MEMS but this is what I think I'm seeing in those sheets.

DS4 has a clear range advantage for high forces and faster turn rates. Resolution is 0.1 degree per second at 50 Hz, but with changeable sample rates (is that 1000 to 8 Hz selectable I read), accuracy will likely be relative. I can't make head nor tail of the sixaxis gyro specs, but the fact it's recommended for optical image stabilisation suggests to me it's high sensitivity within a smaller range of motions (and its peak speed is 100 degrees/s, well below DS4s).

Listed noise for the accelerometers is 150 for DS4 and 100 for sixaxis, although I don't know if that's directly comparable.

What I think I'm seeing is that sixaxis is very accurate for small motions, at least in one axis of rotation but then has to rely on accelerometers for fast turns. That'd add inaccuracies and latencies as motions are computed (including the non-gyro tracked rotations I guess). For gentle movements though, I don't think there'd be any noticeable difference. It might be a lot harder to implement tracking algorithms though if you have to compute rotations. I've seen MEMS data for mobiles and it's not pleasant to work with.

We really need an expert to weigh in!

Beyond the changes to the sensors themselves you have to take into account the processors in the controller / consoles because they might be handling a lot more work in hardware & have better tools for the devs to use. More experience is a really important part of things also so devs coming from Wii/PS-Move & Smartphones/Tablets will already have some experience with the sensors.

 

[Nesh]

Which was?

What do you mean which was? Try and see by yourself. It doesnt respond as well as it should and it was never as precise, never as responsive. I dont know the technical descriptions, but experience shows. Now if you want to suggest it was all the software's fault thats a huge assumption that blames developers, even when their intention was to make it function as well as possible.

You have to ask yourself why all of a sudden Move and DS4 solved all the issues of the sixaxis in similar or identical scenarios. Sixaxis didnt even see its way on a simple rail shooter that worked as well as the DS4 from the first effort. No developer is willing to make something primary which isnt perfect. Even Echochrome had a noisy impementation, Heavenly Sword and Motorstorm which were supposed to showcase the controls and the PS3 abilities had obvious lag and precision problems. Heavenly Sword used motion controls as a selling point. It was a highlighted feature,not something just shoved in for the sakes of shoving it in. If they could do more and make it work better they would have done it. Motorstorm was immersing with motion but never felt as responsive. Why not make it work better if it can? It couldnt. Unless you blame Evolution Studios

Blaming the games is a big assumption especially if this was repeated.

But as you can see there are a ton of technical differences posted above

 

[Shifty Geezer]

What do you mean which was? Try and see by yourself. It doesnt respond as well as it should and it was never as precise, never as responsive. I dont know the technical descriptions, but experience shows. Now if you want to suggest it was all the software's fault thats a huge assumption that blames developers, even when their intention was to make it function as well as possible.

I'm not making any assumptions; I'm asking questions for real evidence. And as for being the 'developers fault' and 'blaming' them, that doesn't factor into it at all. If the hardware generates data that has to be accumulated over several frames to determine motion, then it's a software limit that no-one can do anything about. And if DS4 has the same issues, then it's still going to have the same responses.

You have to ask yourself why all of a sudden Move and DS4 solved all the issues of the sixaxis in similar or identical scenarios.

I can't ask those questions because I haven't seen them yet! Some people may have plenty of first hand experience of the differences, but I haven't. And when I search on the internet, I see lots of positive feedback for sixaxis, and not loads of people saying, "this is a crap idea because it's really laggy and inaccurate." So I'm not seeing evidence first hand or second hand that sixaxis wasn't very god at motion controls.
I haven't seen DS4 in action doing things sixaxis was doing only way better other than the pointing which I've already acknowledged. The only comparison I can make with the evidence I have is sixaxis being accurate in a small range of motion (although plenty enough for typical game use I think) but maybe a bit laggy.

Sixaxis didnt even see its way on a simple rail shooter that worked as well as the DS4 from the first effort. No developer is willing to make something primary which isnt perfect. Even Echochrome had a noisy impementation, Heavenly Sword and Motorstorm which were supposed to showcase the controls and the PS3 abilities had obvious lag and precision problems. Heavenly Sword used motion controls as a selling point. It was a highlighted feature,not something just shoved in for the sakes of shoving it in. If they could do more and make it work better they would have done it. Motorstorm was immersing with motion but never felt as responsive. Why not make it work better if it can? It couldnt. Unless you blame Evolution Studios

That's the first time I've heard of criticism about the results. You may be right. My experience first hand with things like Warhawk's flight were nigh perfect, and can't really be improved upon AFAICS. But there may be other games where it can be improved.

But as you can see there are a ton of technical differences posted above

I'm not going to enter into a technical discussion until someone who knows what all those numbers means comes in to explain them. I have my interpretation but there's little reason for me to trust it, nor anyone's else's interpretation if their electronic engineering know how is as weak as mine.

I think some people have been reading me wrong though, and thinking I'm being a bit obtuse. My position is that I have used sixaxis without problem. I've found it accurate and responsive, as I've used it. I've also read positive things on the internet about it. So I don't see the hardware as weak and limited. Now it could well be, but the way to convince me isn't to just say, "it's better," or, "it's newer," or "look at these numbers," because none of those are real arguments - just assertions. Either I need to see some comparisons of use that show not only the improvements but also the original limitations (eg. why DS4 could be used for a hockey game for direct player control but sixaxis couldn't), or a technical breakdown of the hardware and why DS4 could be better.

eg. The tech argument. AFAIK the original iPad had no gyro, but was still capable of an accurate, responsive ball-through-maze game, so DS4 adding a 3-axis gyro won't necessarily make that sort of gameplay better. Someone needs to explain how it would be better, such as sixaxis needing two frames of latency that DS4 doesn't need.

It's like the difference between EyeToy being 320x240 resolution and PSEye being HD being 640x480. PSEye is way higher in specs, but how much improvement could it actually bring to games? For things like EyeToy Play, it wouldn't make much difference.

 

[Nesh]

I'm not making any assumptions; I'm asking questions for real evidence. And as for being the 'developers fault' and 'blaming' them, that doesn't factor into it at all. If the hardware generates data that has to be accumulated over several frames to determine motion, then it's a software limit that no-one can do anything about. And if DS4 has the same issues, then it's still going to have the same responses.

Well if that was the case Move and the DS4 should have been facing the same issues. But we can experience and test them in more extreme scenarios in games that require sharper inputs

I can't ask those questions because I haven't seen them yet! Some people may have plenty of first hand experience of the differences, but I haven't. And when I search on the internet, I see lots of positive feedback for sixaxis, and not loads of people saying, "this is a crap idea because it's really laggy and inaccurate." So I'm not seeing evidence first hand or second hand that sixaxis wasn't very god at motion controls.
I haven't seen DS4 in action doing things sixaxis was doing only way better other than the pointing which I've already acknowledged. The only comparison I can make with the evidence I have is sixaxis being accurate in a small range of motion (although plenty enough for typical game use I think) but maybe a bit laggy.

I am a guy who had experience with a plethora of games with Move and Sixaxis and a few games that require DS4's motion controls. I am here to provide you with evidence .
As I said earlier "positive" does not reveal the Sixaxis ability to stand in its own right as a complete motion controller. My experience was also enjoyable in those limited applications, but I could also experience its latency and not so accurate input at the same time. I wouldnt be surprised if some of the positive comments you found were mine. For example I enjoyed it a lot more throwing stuff with the motion controller in Heavenly Sword despite that the analogue sticks worked better in achieving the same goal. It worked nice in that scenario and was more immersing. It was enjoyable. But certainly the sharpness and accuracy wasnt perfect despite the enjoyment.

In those scenarios the game was forgiving and thus letting you enjoy motion for what it was. When games did that it was enjoyable. Beyond that it wouldnt work

If this was Devil May Cry or Ninja Gaiden though where you are punished for mistakes and awarded for skill this would have been a game breaker.

That's the first time I've heard of criticism about the results. You may be right. My experience first hand with things like Warhawk's flight were nigh perfect, and can't really be improved upon AFAICS. But there may be other games where it can be improved.

Its not exactly criticism. I like the motion controller of the sixaxis. It was a nice addition that kind of enhanced the experience in those scenarios that fitted it well with the given abilities. At the same time I could feel the limitations (or imperfections if you like) and why it didnt take off in more gameplay scenarios.

I cant remember much about Warhawk since I only played the demo but I guess errors would be less observable or less annoying because you control an object in an open space in all directions and you can keep your distance from targets/objects. In games like Motorstorm you need to be accurate and move when an object or a sharp turn is near you while your movement is limited to left and right. Unlike Warhawk you cant move down or up and you cant keep distance whenever you decide.

I'm not going to enter into a technical discussion until someone who knows what all those numbers means comes in to explain them. I have my interpretation but there's little reason for me to trust it, nor anyone's else's interpretation if their electronic engineering know how is as weak as mine.

Well I am not that guy either

I think some people have been reading me wrong though, and thinking I'm being a bit obtuse. My position is that I have used sixaxis without problem. I've found it accurate and responsive, as I've used it. I've also read positive things on the internet about it. So I don't see the hardware as weak and limited. Now it could well be, but the way to convince me isn't to just say, "it's better," or, "it's newer," or "look at these numbers," because none of those are real arguments - just assertions. Either I need to see some comparisons of use that show not only the improvements but also the original limitations (eg. why DS4 could be used for a hockey game for direct player control but sixaxis couldn't), or a technical breakdown of the hardware and why DS4 could be better.

If you have a PS4 I suggest you try the Blue Estate demo if you want to check the DS4's accuracy and fast response
Its a Move without a camera and shaped as a controller

 

[tuna]

Evolution was one of the studios that pushed for better motion control in the DS4 (source: Edge article from spring 2013) so it is not surprising they have a good implementation for DriveClub...