PS3 motion control idea for FPS

[Butta]

I think that it would be quite interesting for a fps to integrate the motion control functionality into gameplay. This is the way that I think it could work, you would use the motion control simply to control head movement. In other words it would not affect cursor position which would still be controlled with the right analog stick. Now an additional option could be to have it keep the cursor centered on the screen for motion control movements and cursor moves independantly for targeting (kinda like Warhawk beta with motion controls).

Does anyone else think that this may add to the immersion factor and remove that horrible on rails system currently in use?

p.s. Could be optionally turned off of course

 

[DieH@rd]

The only thing that i would approve is little camera tilt. No matter how you twist Sixaxis, camera would move just little.

I remebered, just like custom cammera moving during MGS2 and MGS3 cutscenes.

 

[morlock]

I have had exactly the same idea.

Put the camera inside an actually model with physics, move the legs with the left analog stick and the weapon (arms) with the right analog stick and move the head for looking with SIXAXIS. You should be able to see your legs arms and chest on the body also...

Maybe the trigger-buttons to turn around..

It might get hard to control at first but should work with some practice.

 

[Arwin]

The upcoming Unreal Tournament is supposed to have full motion control support on the PS3, which I think is interesting and looks to be doing what I imagined would be possible when motion control was first announced.

Another interesting development is Time Crisis' new GunCon, which doesn't use motion control at all, but instead apparently has a Wii like pointing system combined with two analog sticks on the gun.

EDIT: Unreal 3 on PS3 with both keyboard mouse and sixaxis for looking around:

http://ps3.gamespy.com/playstation-3/unreal-tournament-2007/771700p1.html

And one of the earlier threads:

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=34455&highlight=sixaxis+fps

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

I dont think it will work very pleasant. Take your sixaxis and try try turning it around for a while. You have to move your 2 arms to turn it which isnt very pleasant. I also think it can cause some awkward situations if you are moving your controller and have to use the analoge sticks at the same time.

 

[morlock]

I dont think it will work very pleasant. Take your sixaxis and try try turning it around for a while. You have to move your 2 arms to turn it which isnt very pleasant. I also think it can cause some awkward situations if you are moving your controller and have to use the analoge sticks at the same time.

You don't need to turn the controller much to change maximum view, i.e look over shoulder, so if it's sensitive enough it should work (45 deg == 90 deg camera). For a shooter game it might not be very comfortable, but in an exploring game like silent hill-ish FPS or something...

 

[Arwin]

It's sensitive enough to only require a minimum of effort. Pretty confident this will work.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Than again, if its very sensitive, wouldnt it move around unwanted? Atleast I move my controller quite a bit (hehe I got a Wii, but seriously) even though its just minor movements. I think it could work, but the way sixaxis is designed I think analoge stick camera movement would be better.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It'd need some smart design. The idea of a camera mapped to motion seems obvious, but at the same time you'd have an awful lot of wiggle in a lot of cases! One of the PS3 devs said they encountered this very problem. Consider how the Wii cursor tends to jiggle about a bit, and imagine that applied to the whole camera...

So you'd either want some serious filtering, or...um, not use it at all I guess. In Wii's case it works well to use the motion for aiming a cursor. Sixaxis isn't as well suited for pointed a direct screen position. At first I was very keen on the idea of camera mapped to motion, but sensitivity is a major concern. If they can get it to work well, it'll be excellent, but that's the 'IF' that's hoding things back.

As for moving controllers about, that's not an issue, because when your motions are mapped to the game, you'll adopt different behaviour. eg. When using PS2 I might move my hands all over the place. But when playing a ball-in-maze tilt game, my motion control is extremely focussed. Likewise I'm less likely to shift around when using a PSP. If moving the controller affects where the camera moves, you'll learn to keep your hands still. It might be a bit tiring, but you probably won't notice while actually gaming. A bit like controller cramps in the hands! I can play for a long period, and then when I put the controller down I notice how stiff my hands are. When playing a motion game and focussing on not moving the controller unnecessarily, it'll be when you stop playing that you'll notice how stiff your arms have become from keeping the same pose!

However, that'll tie in with the problems in inital experience. Before someone's learnt to curtail their natural jiggying about, the camera or other control will be a mess and the player will just be frustrated with the control scheme and curse aloud 'why the %&*@# did they use this ?£$*&! motion control?!'

 

[Butta]

It'd need some smart design. The idea of a camera mapped to motion seems obvious, but at the same time you'd have an awful lot of wiggle in a lot of cases! One of the PS3 devs said they encountered this very problem. Consider how the Wii cursor tends to jiggle about a bit, and imagine that applied to the whole camera...

So you'd either want some serious filtering, or...um, not use it at all I guess. In Wii's case it works well to use the motion for aiming a cursor. Sixaxis isn't as well suited for pointed a direct screen position. At first I was very keen on the idea of camera mapped to motion, but sensitivity is a major concern. If they can get it to work well, it'll be excellent, but that's the 'IF' that's hoding things back.

As for moving controllers about, that's not an issue, because when your motions are mapped to the game, you'll adopt different behaviour. eg. When using PS2 I might move my hands all over the place. But when playing a ball-in-maze tilt game, my motion control is extremely focussed. Likewise I'm less likely to shift around when using a PSP. If moving the controller affects where the camera moves, you'll learn to keep your hands still. It might be a bit tiring, but you probably won't notice while actually gaming. A bit like controller cramps in the hands! I can play for a long period, and then when I put the controller down I notice how stiff my hands are. When playing a motion game and focussing on not moving the controller unnecessarily, it'll be when you stop playing that you'll notice how stiff your arms have become from keeping the same pose!

However, that'll tie in with the problems in inital experience. Before someone's learnt to curtail their natural jiggying about, the camera or other control will be a mess and the player will just be frustrated with the control scheme and curse aloud 'why the %&*@# did they use this ?£$*&! motion control?!'

Have you tried the Warhawk beta? The way you seem to move your Warhawk with the Motion Control and then do cursor aiming with right analog is incredible!!! Sensitivity is not a huge problem. Also I think that since in a FPS your range of motion is more restriced... this could become even easier to manage in a FPS.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I haven't even used a PS3 yet! But Warhawk's different. Controlling a vehicle, a wobble of 1 or 2 degrees around the desired direction isn't going to make much difference. In an FPS controlling the viewpoint, a wobble of that small will shift the camera that much, which will equate to distant objects moving big distances across the screen, like looking through a handheld telescope.

 

[Arwin]

I haven't even used a PS3 yet!

Try it sometime. You'll quickly understand that it can and will work.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Has anyone implemented an FPS camera on motion control yet?

 

[morlock]

Has anyone implemented an FPS camera on motion control yet?

Insomniac scrapped the idea when it stood clear that the people in the focus test was moving with the whole body whilst playing and thus made it very hard for them to play...

iD has implemented it in UT3, and they say it takes a while to ge a hang of it, but when you do it's actually pretty neat.

Maybe Insomniac tries it out once more in Resistance 2 when they have more dev-time.

 

[infinity4]

i am thinking of using motion control as a method of looking elsewhere whilst shooting, so

i) you look left with sixaxis
ii) you aim right with right stick, so you have aiming 'thingi' on right hand side

at same time, i thought it won't work because you lose pointers, but might be worth trying out as i get dizzy when looking around 360 degrees

 

[Arwin]

Has anyone implemented an FPS camera on motion control yet?

Obviously not yet, but that's not the point I was trying to make. If you try some of the motion controlled games, you'll get a feel for how the sensitivity works. For instance, if you use the sixaxis to precisely tilt the tub in Super Rub-a-dub, stuff like that, then you'll easily figure it out.

And yeah, for Resistance motion control was too late.

In other games though, maybe not. I think it's a matter of getting to grips with it. For instance, if you could use a button to enable 'looking around with sixaxis' and then disable it again when you don't need it, that could work very well for a number of games.

But I am especially keen about what UT3 is going to do, to see if what I thought might work actually does. It's not nearly the only thing though - jumping in any direction could also benefit from sixaxis support, as it could give you both controls that match your instincts (forward for jumping forward, etc.) and give you a very natural delay - preparing a jump in any direction requires you to adjust your balance, so there is always a delay before you can make the actual jump.

 

[djskribbles]

for games that use lean or the cover system (like gears, vegas and uncharted for example), i think that would work well.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Obviously not yet, but that's not the point I was trying to make. If you try some of the motion controlled games, you'll get a feel for how the sensitivity works. For instance, if you use the sixaxis to precisely tilt the tub in Super Rub-a-dub, stuff like that, then you'll easily figure it out.

Sure, and generally I'm all in favour of motion control additions. It ought to be awesome in Soccer for example. But I don't think it'll work well for FPSes. At least not for direct camera control.

 

[infinity4]

Sure, and generally I'm all in favour of motion control additions. It ought to be awesome in Soccer for example. But I don't think it'll work well for FPSes. At least not for direct camera control.

what example has there been for footy games

 

[tha_con]

It would be better suited to a supplement to traditional controls, and should have an "activate" button.

i.e. pressing (insert button) will put you into 'motion control' and pressing it again will take you out of it. This way, movement doesn't get tiresome and irritating.

I think it would be better to have motion control linked to something like 'peeking'. You'd press and hold a trigger (or other button) and tilt left or right to 'peek' behind cover.