Old Discussion Thread for all 3 motion controllers

[patsu]

Why, do you want speech recognition to be the only interface going forward? Those heaps of buttons give you quick access to a host of features. You don't have to use every last bit of it if you don't want to, but if you know what you want and how to do it, it lets you be more efficient. Why toss that away when it's optional anyway?

Ha ha, no TV remote does not mean speech recognition. First and forth most, we should only need one easy-to-use remote for the entire Home Theater set up. So it should be called "Living Room remote" or "House remote".

Secondly, you should be able to control the devices via multiple methods. Controller-free, one button, many buttons or out-of-the-house, depending on your needs. Baseline should be "No controller" (if possible). Some games, for example, require quick and subtle input. They may need a buttoned/triggered controller for best effect.

The Wiimote was intimidating to me because I was concerned with pressing the wrong button when I hold it. I was also confused as the console paused when I pointed the Wiimote out of the screen (accidentally).

I didn't get why so many buttons are needed. In the end, they didn't cause any problem, but the first impression was there. I consider the PS Move buttons equally "concerning" as the Wiimote buttons. Nintendo proved that with a good UI, casuals can game with a well designed buttoned controller.

 

[Crossbar]

Nothing that I've seen so far on Move is doing anything to acquire that client. They seem content to go for the hardcore and Wii sloppy seconds which in my mind is a complete waste of time. Natal for all it's perceived vaporware and technical issues is at least giving it a try.

So you consider Sport Champion, TV Superstar, Move Party, EyePet, Little Big Planet hardcore games? You can see them here: http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/playstation-move-games.

On a side note, the controls of Eyepet definitely looks to have improved with Move.

 

[tha_con]

You're getting bogged down with semantics. The word 'casual' gets batted around on forums because it tends to be synonymous with 'non gamer'. If you want a better and more concise description of who MS/Sony should be going after, it should be anyone that does not have a 360/PS3 and has no interest in procuring a 360/PS3 in their current forms and incarnations. That's who they should be going after. Nothing that I've seen so far on Move is doing anything to acquire that client. They seem content to go for the hardcore and Wii sloppy seconds which in my mind is a complete waste of time. Natal for all it's perceived vaporware and technical issues is at least giving it a try.

Then please do illustrate to me how Natal is giving it a try? As far as I can tell, they've shown everything just as Sony has, going after the Wii Market (BOP and it's driving, similar to Mario Kart) and existing users (skateboarding and fighting). What exactly are they doing to "pull in that new market" that you talk about? You're pulling this all from your ass. What YOU think they should do, and what they should do in reality are two different things.

Except that neither manufacturer should care at all about your opinion, nor should any resources whatsoever be spent to acquire you as an audience. That's the hardest part to get across. You already have the console, you already spend dollars on it, and you already will be spending future dollars on it, so who cares about you anymore (from a business point of view). You're in the bag, you will support your console with your money one way or the other, on plenty of new content already in the pipeline. Natal/Move should have nothing to do with you. If they do, then it's time and resources totally wasted in my mind.

Really? And why shouldn't they care about my opinion as a consumer? Move will sell at a profit. If they sell it to me, they make a profit. Remind me again how that is bad for them? I mean, what if I bought a PS3 because I didn't like Motion Controls. How exactly would I be "in the bag"? Natal / Move should have EVERYTHING to do with me, because they can sell to an already established user base. Selling exclusively to people who DON'T own the console is far far more difficult, because now you're trying to sell it to someone who already own's a Wii, or wasn't interested in video games in the first place...

Your mind isn't right if you think that's a waste of time and resources. Maximizing profits is the name of the business, and selling to the already established userbase will generate word of mouth buzz, which is what the Wii was all about.

No clue what you're on about here.

Just pointing out your clear disdain for Sony and their products, and you're illustrating a clear double standard. You are poo pooing the Move, while championing Project Natal, when both are clearly after the same market, doing the same thing with different technology. It's pretty clear that you play exclusively for one team.

Natal marketing hasn't really started yet, so not sure what you are comparing it to.

Really? Please do explain to me what all this is:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/projectnatal/

http://www.youtube.com/user/xboxprojectnatal

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/993/993791p1.html

http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/12/project-natal-makes-a-smallville-cameo-does-not-guarantee-abili/

I mean, it seems like they're going out of their way to capture that "Good Morning America" crowd, wouldn't you? Or was that just an accident and it wasn't supposed to be on national television?

This one is hilarious, especially if you knew what was really going on behind the scenes. But there is no way for me to publicly defend it, so I'll just leave it at that.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you refer to yourself as a "drone programmer"? Essentially someone easily replaceable? Maybe I'm being a cynic, but I find it hard to believe that you have some kind of special information roaming around that Move is so terrible, or that Natal is so good.

I'm an enthusiast, nothing more, and all I can honestly do is follow the media. However, I've listened to my fair share of podcasts, followed stories, and watched both products very carefully. If any 'bad news' was rumbling about either product, we would have heard about it by now. The fact that you suggest there is something going on "behind the scenes" is telling, since you're pretty much the only person who's said anything like that.

 

[Arwin]

Touch screen remotes have existed for a quite a while allowing you to do just this (eg. Philips Pronto). They even go back to the black-and-white lcd days. But they have evolved to include several hard-buttons for common tasks like volume control and d-pad navigation. Buttons provide important tactile feedback so you can use the remote without having to look at it every time. For that reason I'm not a big fan of them but they can be very easy to use when set up well and certainly have a high cool factor.

You are right of course, but the capacitive screens of today are of a really different level of touch interfacing and graphics (once you've chosen your channel, just swipe up and down for volume, left and right for next/previous channel or whatever). And of course, integration could drive things further ... I have a great TV guide app on my iPod, and if I could use that to automatically switch to the right channel (and for my wife, turn on the right components ), that could be a big help too.

Though definitely things could be driven much further than that, and devices like Move and Natal are definitely going to be interesting if they can bring these things together on your TV screen providing an interface that allows you to access everything directly from one user-interface. But that's a little way off yet for sure.

 

[obonicus]

The iPod Touch interface could be a really awesome TV remote. Take the exact layout that selecting an App has now for instance. What you would have is the bottom row could have the four colors that current remotes typically have, or they could simply default to Favorites / Settings / Guide / Mode.

The default 16 icons above would each correspond to a group of TV channels. The default layout offered could consist of Sports / News / Comedy / Local etc. each represented by a nice graphic that makes clear what it is immediately, with the name of the category below, again just like the basic iPod/iPhone interface is currently.

Once you've selected a category, you can select one of the channels in that category, again just by tapping a tile, probably looking like the logo that most channels currently have on their screen somewhere already anyway.

Isn't that sort of like those fancy Logitech Harmony tablet remotes?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you refer to yourself as a "drone programmer"? Essentially someone easily replaceable? Maybe I'm being a cynic, but I find it hard to believe that you have some kind of special information roaming around that Move is so terrible, or that Natal is so good.

I'm an enthusiast, nothing more, and all I can honestly do is follow the media. However, I've listened to my fair share of podcasts, followed stories, and watched both products very carefully. If any 'bad news' was rumbling about either product, we would have heard about it by now. The fact that you suggest there is something going on "behind the scenes" is telling, since you're pretty much the only person who's said anything like that.

Not that you can reply for a while, but what Joker is talking about is the overall support and motivation given to developers. By his example, MS are courting developers and encouraging them to create specific Natal titles, whereas Sony aren't. This isn't the sort of backroom chat that'd bubble to the surface en masse. And given Sony's prior, there's every reason to believe Joker and that there's history of Move being delayed (and come on, we know they've had motion experiments for years!), sidelined, and just plomped in front of developers with little push and no long-term vision for developers to get behind.

 

[joker454]

What you are saying makes perfect sense but it is looking at it from the buisness perspective only, not everyone is interested in it from this angle. I have little doubt Natal is going to be a bigger commercial success for MS than Move for Sony, i do however wonder how much of a success it will be to us from a gamers perspective. Many of us are looking at this from a gamers perspective and i believe thier are two seperate discussions to be had here that are caurrently getting muddled. I dont care how many new non-gamers buy a 360 or PS3, i care how i am going to be effected.

Fair enough

Really? And why shouldn't they care about my opinion as a consumer? Move will sell at a profit. If they sell it to me, they make a profit. Remind me again how that is bad for them?

Here's an example. In the typical case, a client has a gaming budget. That budget will get carved up over whatever number of product. So if Joe PS3 has $200/yr to spend on his console, then maybe he spends it buying 4 games.

Now add Move to the mix. Joe PS3 likes Move and buys Move. So this is better for Sony right? Well, no. Sony did not acquire any *new* money from Joe PS3. He was going to be spending $200/yr on his PS3 anyways, but now instead of buying 4 games maybe he buys 3 games and Move. Sony is both not making any more money, and they are not acquiring a new client. So in the end they spent all their marketing and research dollars to effectively compete with themselves.

Suzy Casual though also has a $200/yr budget to spend on fluff. Right now Apple gets the most of it. Suzy Casual doesn't own any console, they are all "killing and shooting" to her so she has no interest. However one day Suzy Casual sees (insert new motion controller totally tailored to her here) in an ad on (insert whatever tv channel and/or publication she frequents here). She likes it and buys it, shifting some of her fluff budget over to this new product. That is the desirable scenario for MS/Sony because they acquired both a new client to whom over time they can also sell other products to (down-loadable movies or whatever), and this client brings a new $200/yr budget into the fold which they previously did not have access to.

That is, or at least should be, each companies goal. That's why I say from a coldly business point of view, the gamers are completely irrelevant when it comes to the new motion controllers.

Just pointing out your clear disdain for Sony and their products, and you're illustrating a clear double standard.

Amusing given that to family and long term friends I'm well known as a Sony whore. Yes, I own tons of Sony products, with three of their video cameras sitting right next to me as I type. It just shows that you really have no clue who or what I am.

Really? Please do explain to me what all this is:

That's teasers. Sit tight, the real marketing is coming.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you refer to yourself as a "drone programmer"? Essentially someone easily replaceable? Maybe I'm being a cynic, but I find it hard to believe that you have some kind of special information roaming around that Move is so terrible, or that Natal is so good.

First you are misreading me. I didn't say Move is terrible and Natal is so good. I'm saying Move's direction is totally wrong, whereas Natals (so far) is more where it should be, but they still have work to do. And yes, they can still screw it all up as well. Getting either of these motion controls to succeed is going to be exceedingly tough, but where I've given up hope on Move I still have some hope for Natal.

Second, just work in games sometime. They are usually small companies where you drink and party with the ceo's. Everyone knows everything, from tech lead to QA, it's a very small world.

 

[obonicus]

For what it's worth, my point may sound similar to tha_con's, but it's not. I just think that motion control is a false prophet. The number of compelling new ideas on motion controls in Wii's time you can count on one hand -- Motion+ hasn't improved this dramatically, and there isn't enough new in Move to give it the benefit of the doubt. Likewise, in a year I haven't seen a good idea for Natal even as a thought exercise. Gamers suggest that simplification should be the goal, but people here have already pointed out how the arguments of simplicity being 'popular' are fallacious. Likewise, any analysis that goes 'well, Nintendo became successful because they made games no ordinary gamer would care about' is just silly, it's oversimplifying things.

As for giving joker a hard time for his opinions, it's not that I think he's speaking falsehoods, but rather that telling us stuff that touches on the subject but he can't elaborate on doesn't really advance the discussion at all. That's part of it. The other is: unless he's seen something concrete, talking about how one or another product will claim the market isn't so much factual as an article of faith. Which is fine, but not that different from other people who believe strongly about things around here.

So at this point, if someone tells me Natal (or Move, really) is going to be amazing, I expect more than the equivalent of 'because it has a camera and you can move your arms around and soccer moms'.

So, um, joker, I don't really mean to put you on the spot, or at least not more than anyone else telling me stuff I have no reason to believe.

Edit: that's not to say I don't see some virtue to Move's hardcore appeal, but I get about as excited about being more precise in shooters as I do about buying a new overpriced Razer mouse. I'm referring to new experiences, of which I saw none.

 

[joker454]

Deleted, double post somehow

 

[ShadowRunner]

....

I agree with what you are saying but i also think they have to work with what they have. Natal has a chance of bringing in non-gamers, those that are not intersested in Wii/360/PS3 currently, where as i dont think Move would ever have the same sort of leverage regardless of how they marketed it. IMO Sony realise this and see that they are much more likely to make a success of it selling to current users rather than going directly for the non-gamers, while also adding another string to the PS3s bow if you will, giving just another reason to own it for those who see value in the whole package. With Move PS3 now offers bluray, hardcore games, free online, casual games, unique motion control games, Wii HD gameswink, etc. Its easy to forget that there are tons and tons of gamers, forget non-gamers, that dont own a PS3 yet and for these gamers Move could be just another reason to get one. PS2 sold 140mil, if Move gives any of these an extra reason to pick up a PS3 then its a valid addition, regardless of how many extra consoles it sells directly on the back of it, compared to Natal

 

[ShadowRunner]

Edit: that's not to say I don't see some virtue to Move's hardcore appeal, but I get about as excited about being more precise in shooters as I do about buying a new overpriced Razer mouse. I'm referring to new experiences, of which I saw none.

I agree, im interested in Move not because of the great new experiences its going to offer (though maybe we will see some, who knows.) but because it may be benificial to the experiences i already like. Resident Evil is a perfect example of this, RE4 on the wii made that game much better IMO even though the core experince was the same. To me i really like the Wii interface, the reason its collecting dust is because it doesnt offer the more adult or hardcore game experiences and especially the graphics that i desire, to me Move could be simply the Wii i always wanted. Thats oversimplifying it a bit because i recognise Move has a lot more possibilities than the wiimote that i think could be utilised effectively and would be interested in a hardcore ping pong game that uses 1:1 orientation and xyz positioning in space, but i digress

 

[patsu]

RE4 on the wii made that game much better IMO even though the core experince was the same.

How so ? [size=-2]I have not tried it.[/size]

 

[ShadowRunner]

How so ? [size=-2]I have not tried it.[/size]

The aiming worked so much better with the pointer, and without any of the bound box issues you get with Wii fps games because of the way you are in either aim mode or move mode in RE games.

In games that have an aim mode where you are pretty much stationary the pointer style aiming works well because everything is laid out in front of you and doesnt need significant camera movement to see each enemy and the analoge stick is also free for camera movement if needed rather than a bound box. Could work well in a cover based game like Gears or Uncharted and actually improve the experience you have with the game rather than it being just a alternative/substitute.

 

[itch]

You are right of course, but the capacitive screens of today are of a really different level of touch interfacing and graphics (once you've chosen your channel, just swipe up and down for volume, left and right for next/previous channel or whatever). And of course, integration could drive things further ... I have a great TV guide app on my iPod, and if I could use that to automatically switch to the right channel (and for my wife, turn on the right components ), that could be a big help too.

Yeah, a gesture based control could be interesting.

Though definitely things could be driven much further than that, and devices like Move and Natal are definitely going to be interesting if they can bring these things together on your TV screen providing an interface that allows you to access everything directly from one user-interface. But that's a little way off yet for sure.

I had hoped Nintendo would do some gesture based dvd control with the Wii (not mouse pointer style), I was excited to see what they would come up with. But as far as I know they never did anything. It will be interesting to see what Sony and MS do here, if anything. I'm surprised Sony hasn't already released some form of XMB control for the Eye.

 

[Danalys]

Here's an example. In the typical case, a client has a gaming budget. That budget will get carved up over whatever number of product. So if Joe PS3 has $200/yr to spend on his console, then maybe he spends it buying 4 games.

All wrong. They have an entertainment budget that they may have a maximum value for but they don't necessarily need to fulfil, A console manufacturer or publisher need to fight for as much of that entertainment budget as possible, and to keep it at maximum if below maximum, while competing against anything else people could spend money on for entertainment. So increasing the desirability for their current user base makes it more likely for more of that entertainment budget to go to them.

 

[-tkf-]

I'll admit, I just saw that picture and decided to included it - it probably wasn't the best choice, but the other article I linked to has some great examples of their strategic incompetence http://gizmodo.com/5477633/how-sony-lost-its-way

They really need focus, rather than their current 'lets put everything we can think of out to market and see what sticks' modus operandi, just look at their product lineup:
http://gizmodo.com/5481454/infographic-sonys-overwhelming-gadget-line+up

You could spawn a whole thread about most those product lines and have a really hard time convincing everyone that Sony lost their way. The classic to throw is the proprietary formats, Sony makes money from these, Minidisc made them money until the MP3/Flash Devices were invented. Betacam is standard in the Professional TV World that is still earning them money while VHS is dead. They are very big with the Professional Discs and they even have Flash Based Memory Stick Cams and Blu-Ray "ownz"

Their laptops is considered the only PC choice for those that would have bought a PC Mac. They sell great TV´s. Ohh wait i am close to spawning that thread all by myself.

Did they drop the ball on the Wii audience? Ohhh absolutely, would a Wii remote have saved the PS3 launch? no way, only a cheap console would have saved that.

The Wii wins because it´s what people want, not what gamers want. I think the Natal is more what people want than Move, but Natal has something that the Wii didn´t have. Competition and a audience that expects a certain quality and way of controlling games that they learned from the Wii, anything that doesn´t match that wont reach in to the people segment.

So far, all 3 control systems disappoint me to the point of being useless, i am learning my kid to play on my Gamecube and PS3, like a real gamer (dont burn me)

 

[corduroygt]

As others have pointed out, this is a fairly silly comparison to begin with.

However, just using raw numbers from the year 2000, 95% of the 100,800,000 houses with televisions had a remote control in the US alone. 76% had multiple telelvisions sets, and hence multiple remote controls.

Lifetime to date world wide, the iPod is only around the 150 million mark for total sales. In other words, television remotes in use in the US any given year right now probably equals the total number of ipods sold to date. It seems to me the television remote is far more popular than the iPod. Worldwide, I've heard estimates of around a billion television sets sold in the history of television. If you assume even only 50% of those had remote controls, your picture argument looks just silly.

I am not sure your picture helped your case at all. Rather, you just proved the other poster's point. TV remotes are far more common that ipods, and have a lot more buttons.

TV's are what, 70 years old and everyone has gotten used to them. Gaming isn't that old and it's constantly evolving, where TV was always about staring at moving pictures in your home.

My point was not comparing an apple remote to a TV remote, but a media center remote.

Also when you want to change to channel 173 with the apple remote, you can press the main button that brings up an on screen phone keypad, where you use the arrows to navigate and enter your channel number. It's easier than looking down on your TV remote in the dark and finding the numbers you want to press.

Move/natal have to target non-gamers, like my grandmother to sell. If you could look at all the wii sales to hardcore gamers, and not include the non-gamers, I bet it would be lower than the 360/PS3 sales.

 

[joker454]

All wrong. They have an entertainment budget that they may have a maximum value for but they don't necessarily need to fulfil, A console manufacturer or publisher need to fight for as much of that entertainment budget as possible, and to keep it at maximum if below maximum, while competing against anything else people could spend money on for entertainment. So increasing the desirability for their current user base makes it more likely for more of that entertainment budget to go to them.

Sure, same thing. I called it "fluff budget" for the Suzy case, but basically expendable entertainment dollars that get spent wherever. You are still better off going after new client entertainment dollars than working on an existing one, unless you somehow think all your current hardcore audience will totally stop spending on your platform overnight. Plus there is strength in numbers, building a larger audience gives leverage elsewhere, like when negotiating rates for movie distribution deals, etc. Apple is a good example for that, they have a huge audience which gives them leverage over content providers in a variety of ways. Building a huge and varied console audience likewise will pay dividends long term.

I posted many years ago, I think in 2006, how these new consoles actually had little to do with games, where games were just a means to an end for them to control the tv and hence ultimately control that lucrative digital distribution channel (your living room). Building a vast and varied audience today is a stepping stone to that. It's easier to convince content providers to hop on board and support you if you can demonstrate that you have a large and varied audience. They kind of do that now, tossing out XBLive and PSN numbers in press releases, but we know those numbers are kinda bullshit in many ways, and even if true they are still too small to get them to where they need to be. Or worded differently, the hardcore audience simply isn't enough to meet the long term goal of controlling the digital living room, so they need to expand the audience. The Wii served as the proof of concept of this, now both Sony and MS are pushing it as well (finally), although in my mind far more Microsoft than Sony. Incidentally I think Nintendo, while instrumental in starting the "go after a new audience" revolution, will eventually get pushed out and one day transform into purely a content provider, but that's another argument

Their laptops is considered the only PC choice for those that would have bought a PC Mac. They sell great TV´s. Ohh wait i am close to spawning that thread all by myself.

Oooh, dangerous topic. If you look into it deeper you'd see that Sony has indeed been pushed aside in many markets, although they still seem to hold tight on some like video cameras. Definitely off topic, but Sony really is off from their trendsetting highs, in many cases they have become also-rans. Tv's especially where companies like Vizio eat their lunch.

 

[patsu]

You are right of course, but the capacitive screens of today are of a really different level of touch interfacing and graphics (once you've chosen your channel, just swipe up and down for volume, left and right for next/previous channel or whatever). And of course, integration could drive things further ... I have a great TV guide app on my iPod, and if I could use that to automatically switch to the right channel (and for my wife, turn on the right components ), that could be a big help too.

When I travelled to China a couple of months ago, someone lent me a touchscreen phone that would provide some tactile feedback when I interacted with the UI.

The TV and DVR UI have been abyssal for eons. A natural interface TV guide or even a iPhone/iPad/PC/PS3 web browser integrated with a home theater would be great.

Though definitely things could be driven much further than that, and devices like Move and Natal are definitely going to be interesting if they can bring these things together on your TV screen providing an interface that allows you to access everything directly from one user-interface. But that's a little way off yet for sure.

I need to test it personally. e.g., for iPhone/iPad, while the touchscreen is very responsive, I still encounter noticeable lag when playing with a shuffle puck game. PS Move claims to provide rather high spec (i.e., precision) for tracking motion. We shall see how noticeable it is to the final experience.

 

[Lucid_Dreamer]

Not that you can reply for a while, but what Joker is talking about is the overall support and motivation given to developers. By his example, MS are courting developers and encouraging them to create specific Natal titles, whereas Sony aren't. This isn't the sort of backroom chat that'd bubble to the surface en masse. And given Sony's prior, there's every reason to believe Joker and that there's history of Move being delayed (and come on, we know they've had motion experiments for years!), sidelined, and just plomped in front of developers with little push and no long-term vision for developers to get behind.

In other words, MS is money-hatting/greasing palms and Sony isn't? The reports of over 30 3rd party developers developing Move games aren't true? That sounds suspect.