The Fall and Rise of Motion Control For Games 131
Eurogamer has a story about how the design of motion-control input devices has evolved over the years, ranging from the Nintendo Power Glove and Sega Activator up to modern devices like the Wii Remote and the upcoming projects by Sony and Microsoft. Now that the technology has caught up with the ideas, EA CEO John Riccitello said he expects motion-control gaming to rapidly expand, eventually occupying half the total games market. He said, "We almost invested to create a platform extension like that for some of the games we're working on. We're very pleased, frankly, that it showed up at Microsoft, because I'd rather them pay for that. They can leverage it better, and we can build software. But I felt the market wanted that technology and I'm glad it's coming."
Re:Motion gaming on consoles already is 50% (Score:5, Insightful)
1. You ignore the PC, phone and handheld segments
2. Whilst the Wii has sold well I'd be surprised (but I guess not too surprised) if it made up 50% of the living room console market when games are taken into account.
Re:I remember the power glove (Score:1, Insightful)
Daw... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know about this... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I remember the power glove (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Motion gaming on consoles already is 50% (Score:5, Insightful)
I want a kunfu game where I really fight stuff (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I remember the power glove (Score:5, Insightful)
It isn't an ideal situation, but it's better for Nintendo than letting Natal and the Sony wand completely obsolete the Wii hardware.
Re:Motion control doesn't work (Score:3, Insightful)
Very cute, but it's really not that different from a mouse-and-keyboard setup. Which, you know, those rather un-casual Counterstrike types tend to like.
No use for TBS games (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't see a very practical use for all this motion control in turn-based strategy games - you know, the sort of games that work the mind rather than the reflexes. I suspect that increased availability of these devices and the technology will make FPS and "arcade" style games even more dominant than they already are. They will entice kids to "think with their hands" instead of their heads. It may be true that the majority are already inclined or predisposed to that, but it doesn't help shift the Bell Curve when Big Business panders to the median for the sake of profit rather than trying to help shift the median to the right a little.
Re:Daw... (Score:4, Insightful)
Short answer: You're not alone.
Longer answer:
I think an ideal controller is one that makes up for all the things we CAN'T do well in meatspace, allowing us to do them in bitspace.
Not one that favours the jocks, but one that favours the brains.
The wii was destined to be a fad from the start, much like similar approaches in the past in the arcades. Sure, they attracted users due to the novelty, but pretty soon they'd going to discover that hitting a baseball with a make-believe and unresponsive/overresponsive "bat" in front of a computer isn't nearly as fun as doing it with a REAL bat and ball.
And comparing games to games, they're not as fun in the long run as games where your decisions are more important than your physical coordination.
Yes, physical controllers are a fad. A reoccurring fad. They have their place, but won't ever take over, because they will always be a poor facsimile for the real thing, and can't compete with the controllers that are designed to let you do MORE than what's physically possible.
Re:Daw... (Score:3, Insightful)
Not one that favours the jocks, but one that favours the brains.
The reality is that current motion controller games fall into this category already; you need only apply your brain and your reflexes, which last I checked were not considered to be the exclusive purview of the jocks among us. Unfortunately, video games that don't expect you to move around at all truly do engender fat asses and poor muscle tone. Sure, not all gamers have a fat ass, but if all you do is play games you'll get that way.
Yes, physical controllers are a fad. A reoccurring fad. They have their place, but won't ever take over, because they will always be a poor facsimile for the real thing, and can't compete with the controllers that are designed to let you do MORE than what's physically possible.
You can do more than is physically possible without a controller, too. We're not talking about reality overlay games, you're going to be controlling a character just like always in most situations.
Physical controllers ceased being a fad when the Wii came out with one in the box.
Re:I remember the power glove (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not that people abhor options, but you do have to look pragmatically at both the pros and cons of add-on peripherals in the console marketplace.
From a simple numbers perspective, it means you've split your consumer-base. An add-on peripheral is never going to be as widely supported as original hardware. It also means that developers will be much less likely to *design* an entire game around the functionality of that new add-on, because they also have to think about how to make the game functional and fun for original Wii hardware.
Unless it comes with EVERY Wii, new hardware simply won't be taken advantage of to same degree, and with the substantial improvements of Wii Motion plus, it just seems a shame it wasn't working like that to begin with.
No harm to TBS games (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't see a very practical use for all this motion control in turn-based strategy games - you know, the sort of games that work the mind, but not the reflexes. They will entice kids to "think with their hands" in addition to their heads.
There. I fixed it for you.
But seriously, while I am disappointed the direction arcades, in general, have gone (all fps/racing/fighting; hardly any variation on themes), I don't think adding motion means that the games are going to be any more mindless. If you go from "A = Punch; B = Kick; C = Dodge" to "Thrust High = Punch; Thrust Low = Kick; Point up = Dodge", the game is just about as mindless, but it is at least more active.
Motion sensing opens up a whole new range of game possibilities. How much they suck is up to the people who make the games and the people who buy them.
I was playing a puzzle game on the Wii called Boom Blox [wikipedia.org]. It's an idea similar to Jenga. You could have some something basic without motion sensing. But instead, you can have something with a rather impressive physics engine, such that understanding a thing or two about weight distribution and leverage can give you an edge. Here is a simple game where understanding and thought can give you a competitive edge.
As far as turn-based games go, I enjoy them a lot. There is nothing in a motion sensing controller that would prevent someone from making a turn-based game, and there are turn-based games for the current motion-sensing platforms.
As far as your subject, 'No use for TSB games'. There is still more possibilities with motion-sensing controls when it comes to giving your turns input. How much they make use of it depends on the developer and the game they are developing.
Re:Daw... (Score:4, Insightful)
Does anyone else prefer just a standard controller?
No, I prefer keyboard and mouse.
Re:I remember the power glove (Score:3, Insightful)
Intelligent developers would have a two-mode support - if you've got it, use it, but if you don't, fall back to the old method. It worked for Sony with the original PSX/PS1 controllers and their Dual-shock replacements with analogue sticks + rumble - by the end of the PS1's life, most games had support for analogue sticks, with fall-back to the d-pad (less ideal) for those who still had the original controllers. Helped that the dual-shock was bundled with the console shortly after its introduction too, though.