The non-standard game interfaces discussion thread (move, voice, vitality, etc.)

[Shifty Geezer]

Just food for thought: It is extremely likely that Sony has already tried set ups with analog sticks on the main Move controller. I know people may think it's a good idea, or that it's "simple enough" but I'm sure they've done focus testing with things like that.

They've explained their position, that using thumbs simultaneously with movement is too complex. What they've missed is switching from movement control to thumb control. Where they recognise thumb input is a better input mechanic than motion for some cases, resulting in the existence of the Navcon, their solution was to separate the two instead of consolidate them.

 

[Rotmm]

What an absolutely off base and absurd thing to say. The fact that this and "colored balls" seem to be the main detractors from you getting Move is a bit telling. Honestly, do you think colored balls will make you look any more silly than jumping with giant headed avatars on screen? Or dancing to terrible music with extremely simple canned dance moves? Really?

Off base in what way? Coloured balls + camera is something that Dr Marks was demoing back in 2000, so all that's been added to Move are a Wiimote-type controller and a Nunchuck-type sub controller.

I've also gone into great detail to explain how I feel the system won't really work for me in "hardcore" type games, due to how uncomfortable I'd expect it to be in extended play sessions, and how it doesn't offer anything over the Wii-experience in the more casual (party, etc) games.

And where did I say I was excited about dancing or jumping. Please try to refrain from projecting your own prejudices onto me. Thanks.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Likewise, there was a time when dual analog sticks was considered too complex for people, and yet people have adjusted. Seriously a move controller with an additional analog nub that doubles as a button wouldn't suddenly make dual Move controllers significantly more complex and confusing than a standard controller with dual analog sticks, a Dpad, 2 trigger buttons, 4 shoulder bumpers, 4 face buttons, and a select and option button. IMO dual Move controllers with an analog nub on each would actually be less complex and confusing than the standard PS3 controller.

In both cases, you have to train yourself to use the controller well. Noone picks up a standard controller and immediately makes use of all the buttons in a game. Just watch someone who doesn't console game much. Quite often they use at most 1 trigger and completely forget there is a second trigger, and god forbid they even think of the shoulder bumpers. Same goes for the D-pad if they are playing a game that uses both analog sticks. Good luck them remembering it's actually there and useable.

Analog nubs would have made the Move infinitely (gross exaggeration ) more useable and more revolutionary. You would have been able to far more closely mimic how you move and interact with things in the real world with independant controls for each arm, view, and movement. /sigh at what could have been. It would have been the closest thing to the controller I've always dreamed of having ever since I played the first System Shock.

Regards,
SB

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Ok, I'll agree with you. And to that end, I'll offer my opinion that that Mr Murthi has eloquently stated why MS have chosen the revolutionary route they have, and not to follow the previous path that would have taken them to where Sony is today (except with a 2008/9 release date).

His viewpoint doesn't contradict Marks'. Marks' point is where Kinect does what it does, it cannot do what Move does, and taking the whole domain of user input types, Move is seen to offer the largest subset. Murthi's position is that they want to differentiate. Also Murthi isn't particularly correct in saying Kinect's controllerless interface is a world first. Kinect is no Eyetoy, but a lot of the Kinect experience is similar. To the point that in order to press an on screen button, you don't virtually press the button by extending your hand using the depth to determine a press, but hold your hand over a hotzone for a couple of a seconds, just like EyeToy Play. Kinect adds deeper gameplay, but the user experience of interacting with the game without a controller is the same.

Great or not, it says to me that either Sony are still not convinced they have a compelling offering in software or that they still aren't sure of what the market for Move is.

Sony are more about providing a platform for other developers. They aren't any Nintendo, and (unfortunately for them) don't provide an end-to-end vision of their experience. That doesn't mean they don't believe in the tech, nor that they won't be producing games that make the most of Move.

It's just too low-tech and last-gen to really grab me at present.

It's latest-quality MEMS and optical recognition! There's nothing last-gen about it. Move couldn't be done on PS2 as it'd consume too much processing power and would only provide 2D positioning without the MEMS to determine orientation. It sounds more like it's just the aesthetic that is clashing with you.

 

[tha_con]

Off base in what way? Coloured balls + camera is something that Dr Marks was demoing back in 2000, so all that's been added to Move are a Wiimote-type controller and a Nunchuck-type sub controller.

I've also gone into great detail to explain how I feel the system won't really work for me in "hardcore" type games, due to how uncomfortable I'd expect it to be in extended play sessions, and how it doesn't offer anything over the Wii-experience in the more casual (party, etc) games.

And where did I say I was excited about dancing or jumping. Please try to refrain from projecting your own prejudices onto me. Thanks.

And you somehow think that Kinect technology is "new gen"? You don't think it's been around for sometime? You're seeing it now because it's price is low enough now to make it a consumer product. This technology has been around for a while, yet you aren't spouting how last gen or low tech it is.

With move, you could use the combination of the ball and gryo's to remove the plastic drums from rockband and use two move controllers, which is really something I'd love to see. You can't do that with the Wii, and I'm fairly certain you couldn't do it nearly as accurately with Kinect.

For casual games, I can picture quite a few that benefit greatly from the Move set up compared to the Wii setup, specifically party games of the board game era, like pictionary. , jenga, even operation.

A game like cooking mama could be fantastic with move, as you would be able to grab the different ingredients with the move controller. I think Eyepet already illustrates a great implementation of a Nintendogs like set up.

The problem here isn't Move, or it's low tech, it's simply your perception of it and ability to ignore any creative ideas that may bud from such a product, while suggesting another form of technology may be better, somehow ignoring any faults it may have.

And to be clear, yes, it irritates me when people call a certain technology "last gen" as though it's meant to diminish it's importance or value as a product. It doesn't matter how "last gen" it is, so long as the software is good and the product build is good. Unless of course you have zero interest in videogames at all and prefer to strictly stick to sales data and meaningless technology discussion. Both Kinect and Move are "old" technology, so to speak, and both have amazing potential to deliver fantastic games. That's all thats important.

 

[Rotmm]

Your argument was purely technical, and in terms of technology the only advantage Wii has over Move is that irrespective of where a player is within a room, outside the FOV of a camera set up under the TV, if the Wiimote is facing the sensorbar it'll have a calibration point. Scrub that, Move's magnetometer serves the same purpose, so I don't think Wii has any real advantage that'd be applicable to a real game.

Point taken. I think anyway

But in terms of potential, we can certainly evaluate the number and range of input methods these systems offer in hardware.

Which brings me all the way around to my original point, with Arwin flatly stating that one can't argue against Move being the "best controller".

Move, as it is sold, is a PSEye and a Move controller. That makes Move the most limited of the 3 "motion control" systems, albeit with the most pointer accuracy. But with Move you can play most upcoming games, though you may need to hold a DS3 uncomfortably for some of them. From there you can add a navigation controller to get the most out of those experiences, and a second Move controller to get the best out of one or two other games.

I said right at the start that Move allowed for more varied experiences, but that 4 seperate peripherals (which could rise as high as 7 for 2 players) is, to paraphrase, too inelegant a solution overall.

Warhawk was excellent

Never played Warhawk, but I suppose just as you can't judge sixaxis a failure based on Lair, you also can't judge it a success based on a couple of titles out of 500 or so.

I don't even understand this point.

I think I misunderstood your original post, where I remembered it as reading one had good feedback over the other. That was not the case and I apologise.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Which brings me all the way around to my original point, with Arwin flatly stating that one can't argue against Move being the "best controller".

Move, as it is sold, is a PSEye and a Move controller. That makes Move the most limited of the 3 "motion control" systems...

Most limited? In what ways? I think if one was to draw up a list of possible input methods, Move in its base package would have more bases covered than Wii and Kinect. The controller covers all of Wii, and the camera overlaps a reasonable subset of Kinect, including things like head tracking, EyeToy type games (why aren't Sony developing these for PS3 to compete with Kinect mindshare?!), and controllerless interfaces.

Never played Warhawk, but I suppose just as you can't judge sixaxis a failure based on Lair, you also can't judge it a success based on a couple of titles out of 500 or so.

You cited a lack of experience of good sixaxis games as cause to question the value of the sixaxis offering. One good title is all it takes to show the possibilities are there, even if developers don't use them. If Move (and Kinect, and Wii) works well in only one title, it shows the technology can be good as long as the artists craft for it. DS3 is better than DS2 because sixaxis motion allows for better control, only developers are a but rubbish in using it. Similarly, Wii Sports and Mario Galaxy show Wiimote could be a great controller, even though most 3rd party games are pretty rubbish in their implementation.

 

[tha_con]

Which brings me all the way around to my original point, with Arwin flatly stating that one can't argue against Move being the "best controller".

Move, as it is sold, is a PSEye and a Move controller. That makes Move the most limited of the 3 "motion control" systems, albeit with the most pointer accuracy. But with Move you can play most upcoming games, though you may need to hold a DS3 uncomfortably for some of them. From there you can add a navigation controller to get the most out of those experiences, and a second Move controller to get the best out of one or two other games.

I said right at the start that Move allowed for more varied experiences, but that 4 seperate peripherals (which could rise as high as 7 for 2 players) is, to paraphrase, too inelegant a solution overall.

How is Move limited? Not only is it the most accurate for pointer controls, but also for gyro and 1:1 tracking of the move ball. If anything, I'd say the playing field for limited looks more like this (from least to most)

Move
Wii M+
Kinect
Wii vanilla

I don't understand how you can come to the conclusion that it's the most limited, though I think this may be because you simply state that, without any discussion or points to round out your thoughts. Some more detail would be helpful.

As for the amount of devices that may or may not be required to have some experiences, well, I guess I can say it's worked for the Wii so far. I mean, if I have 2 people who want to play a M+ title, I need (potentially) two Wii Remote, two nunchucks, and two motion plus add on's. Of course, we in reality all know this isn't always the case, and people buy things as time goes, not all at once. Adding the price all together in one giant lump sum to help a point is foolish, considering most people will acquire what they want over a period of time.

Never played Warhawk, but I suppose just as you can't judge sixaxis a failure based on Lair, you also can't judge it a success based on a couple of titles out of 500 or so.

I don't understand this logic. You can't judge the failure based on one game, but you can't base it's success based on another? I guess I can say the same for my G25, as in some games it's marvelous, but in others it's useless, right? So in the end the product must have short comings no? This is, after all, the logic you're using. I could also say the same for my surround sound set up. It's 7.1, but not all of my titles support it, so I guess it's a failure for me.

You can't argue one way or the other that a product or feature is "bad" because one experience lead you to believe that. It's simply misleading, to say the least. Kinect Adventures looks absolutely abysmal to me, but Child of Eden looks brilliant. I certainly wouldn't say that either the hardware or software were bad, just that the implementation in one particular instance was less than stellar.

 

[goonergaz]

I'm sorry Rotmm but your comments are laughable, Move is so last-gen that nothing this gen (or any other gen) has/can do the same.

Kinect is so 'new' it's nothing at all like eyetoy.

Try getting a bit of paper and writing down the pros and cons for each system, if after this you still think the same I think you must be Bill Gates in disguise or something

Move over Wii only:
Augmented reality
Accuracy
Depth

Move over Kinect:
Accuracy
Speed

Kinect over Wii and Move:
You don't need controllers (however it's all but confirmed that without controllers you won't be getting much accuracy or many 'hardcore' games)

 

[Npl]

Kinect over Wii and Move:
You don't need controllers (however it's all but confirmed that without controllers you won't be getting much accuracy or many 'hardcore' games)

Well, is that really a point over Move? You also got a camera so you dont strictly need controllers, there will also be games exploiting this so its not just a theoretical point:

 

[obonicus]

And of course, we don't really know that yet.

But generally speaking, if Move (in any one of its variations) ends up not quite as good as the Wiimote with party-type games because, for example, the need to capture the coloured ball by the PSEye means it keeps losing signal because of limited fov, whereas the Wii sensor bar allow more latitude, or that Move isn't as easy and immersive as Kinect for casuals and those who rarely play games, or that the DS3 works out a better option for the hardcore gamers because pointing a stick with a glowing ball at the screen for 2 hours is far too uncomfortable.... does that make it a better controller because it can do all of those things, even if it doesn't do them as well as something else already available?

Isn't that covered by 'the quality of the game experience'? You're throwing hypotheticals around, but I can do that too: what if Kinect is only marginally better than EyeToy when it comes to precision? It's STILL a more narrowly defined product than Move, so it must still be better. In fact, going by the notion of purity over gameplay quality, it doesn't even have to work at all.

Purity is a stupid, invalid argument. If you think we can't discuss game experience quality, then don't waste people's time by bringing it up in hypotheticals.

Just because a control method can be shoehorned into existing game-types, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's a better controller.

I suppose not. I think you should argue with the person saying that, not me, though.

Is the DS3 better than the DS2 because of 6axis? Or has it generally been the case that 6axis controls shoehorned into games have usually felt unnecessary and maybe even become a negative in the overall quality of the game experience?

I assume we're excluding the actual design differences between the controllers here, and focusing on motion control. This is a tough one, since where it was used correctly it added a lot to the game (like Warhawk), but elsewhere it suffered either from bad game design or bad implementations. Do bad implementations spell doom for a control scheme, when we're judging by game experience? I don't think so, since we're talking about problems that lay outside of the controller's technology. It's especially tricky for something like motion control, which I think has very limited applicability in general. Based on that, I'd say that yes, judging only on motion controls, based solely on Warhawk and 1 or 2 games that used motion control well, the DS3 is superior to the DS2.

Conversely, from your argument, does the mere presence of motion control make the DS3 worse than the DS2?

Just to be clear, though, are you stating your opinion that sixaxis shoehorned into games is a negative, or are you referencing anyone else? It sounds like you're talking about someone else, but in a 'some people say' kind of way.

 

[goonergaz]

Well, is that really a point over Move? You also got a camera so you dont strictly need controllers, there will also be games exploiting this so its not just a theoretical point:

well indeed, but I had to try and give Kinect some advantage

 

[goonergaz]

I love the whole SIXAXIS arguement.

Do I want the ability to potentially have extra features (SIXAXIS controls) or have no option what-so-ever?

It's a tough one that, people play the lottery every week. There's next to no chance of winning a decent amount of money - yet people spend millions every week in the hope they will win. I know that sounds nuts, but it's sort of the same thing.

I'd much rather have the option -or the chance - that SIXAXIS will improve a game in some way. It may not have been implemented very well in many games, but it has provided some nice moments, Warhawk and Flower have already been mentioned - but I also preferred the PS3 bowling games vs the Wii version, personally I thought it worked a lot better. Then there's flow and LBP implementation...a few diamonds that a lack of SIXAXIS would never have uncovered.

 

[Rotmm]

It's probably time for me to back out of the thread now. I'm replying to multiple individuals (which, in itself gives a hint that I may be wrong, or at the very least in the minority, with my concerns about Sony's foray into motion control ) and I'm being forced to repeat the same points over and again to individuals who choose either to not read earlier posts, or to deliberately misinterpret them.

So, some selective quoting to clear up some misaprehensions/misinterpretations of earlier points:

Most limited? In what ways? I think if one was to draw up a list of possible input methods, Move in its base package would have more bases covered than Wii and Kinect.

Move, in its base package, doesn't allow for avatar/player movement as the Wii does in its base package, and it doesn't allow for full-body tracking in all lighting conditions, along with as comprehensive voice recognition, as Kinect.

Also Murthi isn't particularly correct in saying Kinect's controllerless interface is a world first. Kinect is no Eyetoy, but a lot of the Kinect experience is similar.

Mr Murthi didn't say it was a world first, and for those in the cheap seats, I'll repost my paraphrasing of him:

"...[Kinect is]revolutionary move forward, bringing gesture, voice and video together in a way never done before in the consumer space..."

He didn't say it's a world first, and I didn't imply that he did in my paraphrasing. He's quite clear in stating that the way Microsoft are going about it, with depth mapping, noise cancelling microphones, etc is something that has never been done in the consumer space before, and it's his belief that it is a revolutionary step forward. Further in the interview, he talks about how Kinect is 1/3 hardware and 2/3 software. Yet nowhere has he mentioned world first, and nowhere in any post have I put that argument forward.

Hope this helps clear up any misunderstanding.

How is Move limited?

See above post about "Move Pack". Also I'll repeat the original post from me: "Move, as it is sold, is a PSEye and a Move controller. That makes Move the most limited of the 3 "motion control" systems, albeit with the most pointer accuracy."

I mean, if I have 2 people who want to play a M+ title, I need (potentially) two Wii Remote, two nunchucks, and two motion plus add on's. Of course, we in reality all know this isn't always the case, and people buy things as time goes, not all at once.

True. Except that with the Wii you start with everything (except M+) you need for one player, and only need to add a single new controller set. Maybe going forward all PS3's will be released with a camera, Move and navcon and new PS3 owners will therefore have everything to play games, adding new controller set as needed.

I'm sorry Rotmm...

Don't be

To repeat myself yet again, I've already stated (in the very first couple of paragraphs in the very first post of my entry into this discussion no less) more than once, I think that the Move controller set offers more versatality than the other two console offerings.

I'm not going to disagree with your list per-se, but rather make a general comment.

Firstly, I am going to reuse and amend a post you made earlier in the thread as to why I'm not overly excited about Move:

"I must confess to being guilty - clearly there is a lot more tech (altho I still think the price is way too high) - the problem is, until it grabs me and says 'see I'm not a slightly better* Wiimote!' then I'm still not 'getting it'."

*except for increased complexity, reflections, etc

With regards to all those who are saying, or implying, that Move can match Kinect as it has a camera also, I'd just like to ask, "Where is Fitness Evolved" for the PS3?, "Where is Dance Central" for the PS3? Where, even, is Joyride for the PS3?

If the PS3 has been able to do those titles all along, why has no developer bothered?

Or is it more likely that the PS3 is just as limited as the MS camera, and the best that can be achieved in full body recognition are abortions like In the Movies, where the lighting conditions have to be "just so" and be ready with a white sheet to block out the background.


So overall, to reiterate my main points again why I'm not sold on the Move set, it seems overly complicated and precise for "the casuals", where neither complication nor (especially) precision are what the target audience are after. And for titles such as shooters, it offers unprecedented precision, but in my opinion is too uncomfortable a control method for "hardcore" gamers.

If you doubt the latter, grab a remote control or microphone or something and aim it at the TV for 15 minutes, pulling an imaginary trigger while shooting imaginary targets. You can also hold the DS3 in your left hand if you like and move things around a bit.

I did this a couple of weeks ago (I chose to have the O.C. on, which make it more fun) and I had terrible wrist-ache, along with some ache in my tri. And that was exactly 15 minutes, with the last couple of minutes being very unpleasant. Obviously the Move controller will be better balanced, but you are still going to be holding your hand at an unnatural angle for extended periods to "aim", so I can't see the real thing being much more comfortable.

Well, that's it from me. I won't be replying to any more posts to me on this point, because I've wasted enough time as it is However, I will be reading those posts.

Let me end by saying that I have heard a lot of compelling arguments "for" Move and I will take them on board. Maybe I'm wrong and it is the best thing since sliced bread. Maybe I'm currently in a position where I was looking forward to it and it hasn't met my high expectations of Sony. Maybe I really just am put off by the glowing balls. Maybe I am just confused by the fact that Sony are offering no differential, other than, "it's a bit more accurate than the Wii" to give Move its own identity.

Or maybe I'm just a victim of my own tendency to overthink and over-analyse things. Things that seem obvious to me, such as the Move balls glowing and being reflected on TV screens, seemed obvious to me and I was surprised that no one else seemed to even consider it. And then doing things to myself like the "15 minute test", because I know in myself that if I'm playing an Alan Wake, a Mass Effect or an Uncharted 2, I'm there for 2+ hours without even knowing where the time has gone.

Or maybe, 4 years later, I was hoping for something a little more compelling than WiiHD.

 

[tha_con]

I don't think anyone is saying Move is the best thing since sliced bread, rather, that your views and thoughts about move are inaccurate and misleading. For instance, the bundle comes with absolutely everything you need to experience a plethora of games on the Move platform, yet you think it requires a Navigation controller.

Also, I find it disingenuous to say that this is "WiiHD" when it's pretty clear at this point that Sony is taking a different stance from a software perspective, first hand, and trying to push new ideas, rather than just sports and fitness games. If anything, I'd say that Kinect is more "WiiHD" at this point that Move, judging from software (which is really what's important).

As for what Move can do and Kinect can't, well, I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Crossbar]

I dislike the notion of a DS3 in the left hand. the idea of resting it on your leg is forcing an ergonomic that isn't a comfortable fit for me - I play with controller raised. There'd be virtually no clutter taking the very same move we have now and putting a PSP nub on it, and if Sony designed this properly, they could have a nub where the current M button is and have it pressable too, involving no more clutter than the current design.

Yes you are right that such a design would not be cluttered, but at the same time it would reduce the functionality compared to having a second controller with different set of buttons, unless you start to assign different functions for the X button etc. on the left controller compared to the right controller. The amount of confusion that would cause for the gamer is probably enough reason to stay away from such a design.

The wand + DS3/sub controller design is also basically a super set of the main game control buttons of the wiimote + nun-chuck, which surely will be appreciated by a lot of devs that can re-use the control scheme between those two platforms for certain games.

By the way I also play some games with the DS3 controller raised today, but that depends on the intensity of the game. I thought the E3 videos of the guy playing SOCOM looked pretty comfortable and envision myself playing Heavy Rain in the same way, but with a DS3.

 

[AzBat]

As for the 2 cable thing coming from the Kinect, is that still true? I remember there was some talk of it because a seperate power supply was seen on a Natal dev unit. But as far as I'm aware, there has been no confirmation of of this being present with final Kinect units, and indeed there doesn't seem to be anywhere to plug a PSU in going by the latest Kinect images (seen from all sides).

It's been proven by the design of the special Kinect port on the newer 360 systems that those systems will not require a separate power connection. The connection was designed specifically to do just that. All of the older 360 systems will require a USB port and separate power. MS achieves this by including a splitter cable in the add-on SKU that connects to the special cable on one end and then splitting to a standard USB connector and wall power adapter cable on the other ends.

Tommy McClain

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Move, in its base package, doesn't allow for avatar/player movement as the Wii does in its base package, and it doesn't allow for full-body tracking in all lighting conditions, along with as comprehensive voice recognition, as Kinect.

But Kinect in its base package doesn't support screen-pointing or accurate placement, making games like Tumble and The Shoot unsuitable for Kinect. Wii doesn't have a camera so can't do embedded-video games like Kung-Fu. Like I said, draw up a list of possible user experiences and see which platforms tick the most boxes. Whichever has the most is the most flexible control scheme.

Mr Murthi didn't say it was a world first, and for those in the cheap seats, I'll repost my paraphrasing of him:

"...[Kinect is]revolutionary move forward, bringing gesture, voice and video together in a way never done before in the consumer space..."

Ah, a lack of accuracy, and I was wrong. There's a difference between describing a controllerless interface as a first, and saying you're bringing together tech for a first. But then, that very same argument applies to Move! It's a world first bringing video, motion, and voice with pin-sharp 3-dimensional positioning.

With regards to all those who are saying, or implying, that Move can match Kinect as it has a camera also, I'd just like to ask, "Where is Fitness Evolved" for the PS3?, "Where is Dance Central" for the PS3? Where, even, is Joyride for the PS3?

These types of titles were out for EyeToy years ago, such as EyeToy:Kinetic, EyeToy:Antigrav , and Eyetoy:Groove.

If the PS3 has been able to do those titles all along, why has no developer bothered?

You can't claim potential of a system based on what developers are creating! You have cautious devs and publishers who won't try anything new. You have a requirement to plan years in advance to do such a title, so wait-and-see developers won't be creating anything just yet. You also have a limited amount of resources to spend on developing titles, and Sony clearly felt they needed something new rather than a repeat of Eyetoy's library from 5 years ago (their mistake!). Potential of something can be found in understanding it. If you only ever look at what is being achieved, you can miss potential.

Or is it more likely that the PS3 is just as limited as the MS camera, and the best that can be achieved in full body recognition are abortions like In the Movies, where the lighting conditions have to be "just so" and be ready with a white sheet to block out the background.

Kinect has a big advantage in the tracking space. However, PS3 enables background removal which opens up a lot of doors that kept EyeToy closed in. Also Kinect isn't without its problems - none of these systems are! No interface allows you to do everything.

So overall, to reiterate my main points again why I'm not sold on the Move set, it seems overly complicated and precise for "the casuals", where neither complication nor (especially) precision are what the target audience are after.

Augmented reality with effectively superimposed props is only possible on PS3. Wii and Kinect lack the accuracy for the player to wield a vitural tennis-racquet or sword. They both use avatars. EyePet showcases the best use of AR in a game to date, with different devices being wielded like their real-life counterparts.

I did this a couple of weeks ago (I chose to have the O.C. on, which make it more fun) and I had terrible wrist-ache, along with some ache in my tri. And that was exactly 15 minutes, with the last couple of minutes being very unpleasant. Obviously the Move controller will be better balanced, but you are still going to be holding your hand at an unnatural angle for extended periods to "aim", so I can't see the real thing being much more comfortable.

That's true, but also why gun attachments exist.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Yes you are right that such a design would not be cluttered, but at the same time it would reduce the functionality compared to having a second controller with different set of buttons, unless you start to assign different functions for the X button etc. on the left controller compared to the right controller. The amount of confusion that would cause for the gamer is probably enough reason to stay away from such a design.

I hadn't considered that. The button layout is fine, but how would you communicate which square button does what?! I suppose the manual would read LO and L[] and RX fir left and right face buttons. Which is a bit rubbish.

The wand + DS3/sub controller design is also basically a super set of the main game control buttons of the wiimote + nun-chuck, which surely will be appreciated by a lot of devs that can re-use the control scheme between those two platforms for certain games.

Sadly though, that's a sort of legacy support for a future tech. It's saying games developers will target both interfaces, meaning wishy-washy Move implementations. Both Wii and Kinect get games designed solely for them, no compromises.

 

[Crossbar]

I hadn't considered that. The button layout is fine, but how would you communicate which square button does what?! I suppose the manual would read LO and L[] and RX fir left and right face buttons. Which is a bit rubbish.

Exactly my thoughts. So far I think I have only seen the fight game and the archery using two Move wands. I expect the fight game to hardly use any buttons at all during fights and the archery game only using the trigger and action button for holding and releasing the arrow and possibly only the buttons on one of the wands. Maybe the archery game in SC can be played with one controller? I also expect that Dr. Marks and Antons AR demos used the action and trigger buttons to pinch and hold stuff, I guess that comes very natural and does not need elaborate instructions explaining the functions of the left respectively the right wand buttons.
Having a separate set of buttons supported by the DS3 and the sub-controller to be used by less casual games can be seen as a compromise that will make Move more versatile and cover a wider spectrum of games. The future will show if it was a smart decision.

Sadly though, that's a sort of legacy support for a future tech. It's saying games developers will target both interfaces, meaning wishy-washy Move implementations. Both Wii and Kinect get games designed solely for them, no compromises.

That may very well be consequence for third party games. Let´s hope that the games from Sonys first party studios set the bar high with so carefully tuned implementations, that third party studios will feel obliged to follow suite to avoid looking inferior in comparison.