Interesting thoughts Graham.
The demo was slick, and importantly had humor, which always helps sell a system.
The system is very accurate given the cost (at least in positional tracking - it still seems to have accuracy and lag issues with rotation and direction)
I didn't quite see issues with rotation and direction, but that's certainly possible. It's not clear however what technology each of the demoes used. It appears to me that there are a number of technologies implemented here that partially overlap (e.g. color recognition, gyroscopes, and sound waves). Some of these may be able to assist each other to catch out weaknesses. As for the triangulation, I'm not sure if the fact that at least the patent suggests that the two controllers seem to als be able to communicate / sense each other somehow can add to this. And of course the microphone array in the PS Eye consists of 4 microphones, which may help there too (as well as with echo cancellation?)
The 'building blocks' is perhaps the best example. The accuracy was very good, but the body simply isn't used to the lack of physical sensation in a system like this (especially when placing objects).
True, and another problem here is 3d perception. I was going to mention earlier that these new technologies are going to create a greater appeal for 3D display technologies. Head camera tracking in the way that we've seen demos on using the Wii-Mote and PS Eye may help there perhaps, but I'm not sure this is very easy to pull off in a 3D engine. I did think it was interesting that the Killzone 2 loading screen that reacts to sixaxis movement looked a lot like these demos.
I haven't seen a system like this where there isn't a more accurate conventional alternative. He was right that it's a very tough challenge - but that's not due to accuracy, it's due to how the brain expect things to react in the hand. Unless you get a full haptic system it just isn't that practical.
Basically, it's not so much a limitation of the tech it's a limitation of the application.
I do hope it has some kind of vibration built in, but I don't know if/how that could interfere. A slight rumble when you put down a block could really help.
However, more than any of these, software should be able to help deal with these issues. Think about the Little Big Planet editor which has managed to make creating stuff using analog sticks and such quite convenient, even if you'd have thought a mouse would have been much better. Reality is a cool thing to strive for, but even if you didn't have any of the technological weakness we are discussing today, reality can always be improved upon in terms of useability.
The bow and arrow demo was impressive. The directional accuracy was quite noticeably better here, (I'd expect due to using the two points of reference instead the systems motion trackers). However when they were close together you could see the system losing accuracy and when aiming the system seemed to lose sight of the rear tracker (his aim went all over the place even though he wasn't moving in the video). This is just a physical limitation however it's still interesting to note.
I'm not sure the distance was the main factor there. They created a complicated method of changing the focus depending on how the tension was put onto the bow and I think I also noticed simulation of the force being created which makes tiny movements left and right become more intense the more tension you put on the string, but I'm not sure.
The trouble comes from rapid changes in movement (if you aren't sampling high enough you can momentarily lose accuracy) but far more significant are echoes. Large flat surfaces (walls!) and sometimes occlusion of the emitter (the remote) can make processing the audio much harder.
Again, it will be interesting to see how they are using the other properties of the device to compensate, as well as the array of microphones in the camera (which in theory could help for detecting and cancelling echo?)
My final thought is also rather depressing. The PS3 already has two motion control options (sixaxis and eyetoy) yet these have seen very poor adoption. While this system is clearly more accurate than either, it's also the most expensive and, importantly, the least complimentary to existing control methods.
Actually adoption of sixaxis isn't even that poor. But for both PS Eye and sixaxis, they had too much limitations. The new controller overcomes all of their individual limitations and contains all the best qualities of both as well.
I worry the competition has far better incentive for developers to take advantage of their technology.
I disagree with this simply because of the AiLive cooperation. Most of the motion stuff that you can do for WiiMotionPlus on the Wii will be able to translate pretty much as-is to the PS3. Microsoft is in a difficult position in that the Wii has a very strong casual base and a strong history of motion control that the PS3 can benefit from, and the Playstation brand has much more roots in the casual space as well, even if pricing currently limits its acceptance. Microsoft owners currently are still a relatively hardcore crowd (just look at how many concurrent Modern Warfare 2 and Halo 3 players there are!), so it will really have to reach a new audience with new brands. It will be much easier initially to sell the motion technology to hardcore people initially and I think Microsoft should not forget to target those as well - get the tech accepted by the hardcore crowd, as they will have friends and family who are 'softcore' and can spread the word.
The position of the PS3's motion controller combined with the WiiMotionPlus controller could be very much like how the PS3, 360 and PC form a 'HD market' versus the Wii/PSP/PS2 'SD market', if you see what I mean. For the PS3 developers like EA and Sega will simply be able to put the WiiMotionPlus controls into their next release of their tennis and golf games, and since the libraries for WiiMotionPlus and PS3 will be near identical, being developed by the same company (Ailive) it's really practically copy/paste.
Of course Microsoft could attempt to find a way to make its technology behave very similar through its own libraries, so we don't know yet how that will pan out.
) patent (credit to Wollan/Neogaf) as it already looks different, but technology wise it's interesting:
