Finally someone that doesnt want NO motion controls, and can see SOME potential in them.NeutralDrow said:
And someone that probably hates selective caps lock.
Poll: Where do you stand on Motion Controls in Games?
- Thread starter TheKillerCliche
- Start date
Recommended Videos
And someone that probably hates selective caps lock.
Oh, good, I was worried I'd have to prepare a sarcastic response to someone. But yeah, I was fine with the original Wiimote, love the Motion Plus, and I'm interested in seeing where move and kinect go (not to use myself, since I don't have either console, but still).TheKillerCliche said:
But then, I'm also someone who mimes <url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4rzqEi2670&feature=related>Link's sword-sheathing pose just for kicks. I'm easily immersed.
Nah, it gets the point across fine. I do tend to use italics or bold for emphasis, though, and CAPS for yelling...
I just can't understand the hatred that motion controllers inspire in people. If you don't like them, you don't have to use them, but it's pretty weird that people are now trying to find all sorts of theoretical arguments for why they are objectively bad. It's pretty close-minded, actually, because once you find a theoretical argument you like you can dismiss them without even trying them out.
Firstly, there are some people who say they shouldn't be used until the technology driving them has been fully developed. How exactly do you see that technology getting developed if they're never used? Do you think a profit-seeking entity is going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars and 20 years developing a piece of technology and only then release it on the off chance that it might catch on? I think the controllers themselves work just fine, so I don't really understand what technological limitations you're talking about anyway--even without Wii-motion plus I never had a huge problem.
Secondly, for those of you who say it takes too much energy, are you serious? I've worked some pretty tough jobs in my day, but I have never been so exhausted by the day's labor that I couldn't move my hands around a little bit. On the contrary, one of the things I like about the Wii is that playing it gets my blood flowing and tends to wake me up and make me feel more energetic, unlike controller based games where I just kind of veg out and lose many more hours to the game than I intended.
Thirdly, I think Yahtzee has had some pretty deep and fascinating opinions in the past, but his whole "motion controls are bad because they won't lead to anything in the future" argument is pretty silly. These are games. They are fun, entertaining, and if we're lucky some of them might even be a little bit enlightening. But they're supposed to be a way to make the time you spend on them have more interest than it might have otherwise. Do you people really play a game today and think "curse the imperfect present! This game would be so much better if my brain was wired in and I was fully immersed in its virtual world!" Is playing a game really just technological research that you pay someone else to perform for them? There are many cases where we must sacrifice the moment to ensure a better future. But isn't having fun supposed to be about enjoying the moment without worrying about the future?
I remember in one of Yahtzee's earlier videos, he argued against companies like EA who would drop titles because they didn't see them having the potential to generate sequels that could be released year after year. Basically, even if a game was good now, if it couldn't be good (or at least profitable) years and years into the future then it wasn't worth having. Yet the same thing he argued against he now seems to be arguing for.
There are some kinds of games that motion controls aren't very good for. But there are others that it works wonderfully for--are you going to tell me that Resident Evil 4 wasn't much more fun on the Wii? I think the problem is not with the controllers, but with the fact that game companies want to make one game and release it on all the consoles with minimal changes. This means that most of the games that are made are not going to really explore the potential of motion controls because they have to work well on normal controllers, too.
Firstly, there are some people who say they shouldn't be used until the technology driving them has been fully developed. How exactly do you see that technology getting developed if they're never used? Do you think a profit-seeking entity is going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars and 20 years developing a piece of technology and only then release it on the off chance that it might catch on? I think the controllers themselves work just fine, so I don't really understand what technological limitations you're talking about anyway--even without Wii-motion plus I never had a huge problem.
Secondly, for those of you who say it takes too much energy, are you serious? I've worked some pretty tough jobs in my day, but I have never been so exhausted by the day's labor that I couldn't move my hands around a little bit. On the contrary, one of the things I like about the Wii is that playing it gets my blood flowing and tends to wake me up and make me feel more energetic, unlike controller based games where I just kind of veg out and lose many more hours to the game than I intended.
Thirdly, I think Yahtzee has had some pretty deep and fascinating opinions in the past, but his whole "motion controls are bad because they won't lead to anything in the future" argument is pretty silly. These are games. They are fun, entertaining, and if we're lucky some of them might even be a little bit enlightening. But they're supposed to be a way to make the time you spend on them have more interest than it might have otherwise. Do you people really play a game today and think "curse the imperfect present! This game would be so much better if my brain was wired in and I was fully immersed in its virtual world!" Is playing a game really just technological research that you pay someone else to perform for them? There are many cases where we must sacrifice the moment to ensure a better future. But isn't having fun supposed to be about enjoying the moment without worrying about the future?
I remember in one of Yahtzee's earlier videos, he argued against companies like EA who would drop titles because they didn't see them having the potential to generate sequels that could be released year after year. Basically, even if a game was good now, if it couldn't be good (or at least profitable) years and years into the future then it wasn't worth having. Yet the same thing he argued against he now seems to be arguing for.
There are some kinds of games that motion controls aren't very good for. But there are others that it works wonderfully for--are you going to tell me that Resident Evil 4 wasn't much more fun on the Wii? I think the problem is not with the controllers, but with the fact that game companies want to make one game and release it on all the consoles with minimal changes. This means that most of the games that are made are not going to really explore the potential of motion controls because they have to work well on normal controllers, too.
Other: They're undignified, imprecise, not suitable for those of a reserved disposition, not suitable for competition, not suitable for development budget that would have been better spent on games... Just take it away.
Take a page from the very young. Leave it in the toilet or something. It doesn't belong anywhere else.
Take a page from the very young. Leave it in the toilet or something. It doesn't belong anywhere else.
I'm not really sure on the "motion" parts of motion controls, but I do enjoy the lightgun-esque gameplay in some Wii titles. I always found it difficult to aim with analog sticks in shooters and never really got into them. While using a mouse to aim on a PC game allows for more accurate shots I could never really get away from that gnawing in the back of my mind that told me I was playing another "click here to win" game. The Wii remote combined with an analog stick for movement has really brought me into the singleplayer FPS, and is basically what I wanted to play when I was a kid playing on-rails lightgun shooters in arcades.
The rest of the motion controls I've played with seem kind of middle of the road. They haven't been particularly bad, but they weren't any better than just using a regular controller would've been. I don't really understand these people complaining about having to "flail their arms about" to use motion controls, small, decently timed flicks of the wrist are all most of them take. People making big gestures with them are either: 1. making the game more fun for by really throwing themselves into it (Hey, it really is more fun like that for some people). or 2. Don't really understand how it works and think that they have to to make it work. The latter reminds me of playing Mario with my parents on the NES, and how they would move the controller around as they wildly pressed buttons trying to make Mario jump a little further.
The rest of the motion controls I've played with seem kind of middle of the road. They haven't been particularly bad, but they weren't any better than just using a regular controller would've been. I don't really understand these people complaining about having to "flail their arms about" to use motion controls, small, decently timed flicks of the wrist are all most of them take. People making big gestures with them are either: 1. making the game more fun for by really throwing themselves into it (Hey, it really is more fun like that for some people). or 2. Don't really understand how it works and think that they have to to make it work. The latter reminds me of playing Mario with my parents on the NES, and how they would move the controller around as they wildly pressed buttons trying to make Mario jump a little further.
I agree. I mean it's easy to think that motion controls are more immersive, but it's quicker for your character to respond to button presses than movements.SL33TBL1ND said:
I love you. There, I said it. Shenmue! Woo!OceanRunner said:
That game was incredible and it brings me on topic as it, or any other RPG for that matter, never would work with motion controls; I think. I don't hate them but they do just seem unnecessary. It'd be pretty nice not to have to look for the remote but elsewise I think you have to look at it by genre, if not game by game.
Someone mentions how rail shooters are good on Wii and I get this because the remote is just a substitute for a light gun. Mario Kart works well with the wheel and maybe for swordplay but other than these examples I can't see big enough advantages over keyboard and mouse or analog controller.
Also, I agree with OceanRunner. And Shenmue is impossibly good: check it out.
Total gimmick, just like 3D in films/tv/games/greetings cards.
More precise control is achievable through a controller/mouse+keyboard. Motion control is simply more accessible, and therefore, more lucrative. This is why the big console companies are pushing it.
(By the way, notice how no PC developers have extolled motion control. Why? Because using a PC is not that accessible to non-computer users... the "casual" market does not exist, and therefore isn't being targeted. "Bejewlled" playing mums are happy the way they are, and have no desire to step-up their gaming by investing in further hardware; not to mention that the lack of hardware requirements - bar internet access - is part of such games' appeal in the first place.)
Furthermore, "perfect motion control" would be impossible in my opinion, and I offer the following example to substantiate:
Kinetic Feedback. I swing the wiimote to launch a sword attack, said attack is parried by my computerized opponent, my arm + the wiimote will continue on as if the attack hadn't been parried, both breaking the immersion and being incongruous. For this reason, short of redefining the laws of physics, 1:1 motion control is unimplementable.
For the good of "real" games, let's hope that the market becomes polarized...
More precise control is achievable through a controller/mouse+keyboard. Motion control is simply more accessible, and therefore, more lucrative. This is why the big console companies are pushing it.
(By the way, notice how no PC developers have extolled motion control. Why? Because using a PC is not that accessible to non-computer users... the "casual" market does not exist, and therefore isn't being targeted. "Bejewlled" playing mums are happy the way they are, and have no desire to step-up their gaming by investing in further hardware; not to mention that the lack of hardware requirements - bar internet access - is part of such games' appeal in the first place.)
Furthermore, "perfect motion control" would be impossible in my opinion, and I offer the following example to substantiate:
Kinetic Feedback. I swing the wiimote to launch a sword attack, said attack is parried by my computerized opponent, my arm + the wiimote will continue on as if the attack hadn't been parried, both breaking the immersion and being incongruous. For this reason, short of redefining the laws of physics, 1:1 motion control is unimplementable.
For the good of "real" games, let's hope that the market becomes polarized...
The term motion controls is such a buzzword. I just like to point at things, without an analog stick.
I hate how Sony and Microsoft are wasting money on them thinking that casual gamers bought the Wii just because of motion control. I've already said this, but...
There. That's it.
Ironic Pirate said:
There. That's it.
Really? I don't have to use them?Helmutye said:
So I can play MadWorld or Red Steel 2 with a Classic Controller instead of the WiiMote?
Fun fact: The Wii is the only console on the market right now with motion control, and 99.9% of it's games require it, so I'm really confused as to where you got that "you don't have to use them" idea.
No, Resident Evil 4 wasn't fun period. It was a pathetic pile of poo that ruined everything about the RE series that the true fans liked. But that's another rant for another day.Helmutye said:
At present, I have 88 Wii games, and there is only ONE that even remotely begins to come close to that "works wonderfully for" notion - Wii Sports Resort. And even that game still botches it here and there. Red Steel 2, the game that was really supposed to show off the new WM+ motion control is a mess and just leaves me screaming "why the hell can't I just use a regular f'in controller". But damn near every Wii game leaves me screaming that.
Fun fact: Again, the Wii is the only console on the market right now with Motion control, and much of it's library are propriatory games made just for it and it's motion control. So again I'm confused where you get this idea from.Helmutye said:
Maybe MS and Sony will be different. Since they are consoles that came with and used regular normal controllers by default, and the motion control is just an add-on. Unlike the Wii in which motion control was the only default control that every developer had to make use of regardless if it worked or not. I think THAT goes further to explaining why most Wii games play like crap. Anywho, yeah, in the case of MS and Sony, real games that don't need pointless gimicks will still use regular controllers and the motion control will be saved for the casual Xbox Sports Resort and Sony Athlete Challenge type games. Atleast I'm hoping.
Regardless, the big fundamental problem of motion control has yet to be resolved and never will be. 1-to-1 Feedback. Bowling requires one to have a mass the weight of a bowling ball in their hand to know how hard to throw the f'in thing. Tennis requires the impact of the ball against the racket to know how hard to hit the f'in thing. Cannoeing requires you to feel the resistance of the water against the paddles so you know what angle to twist the f'in thing. Etc., etc., etc..
Motion Control is just gimicky BS that only moderatly works for a very isolated set of game types. It is not appropriate and does not/will not work for everything. The Wii has only been proving that fact for nearly 4 years now.
I spent 1000$ on controlers, games, mics, xbox lve, and the xbox 360 console. I will probably buy more games as well. But I bought all of those, and my couch, to play a nice game while sitting down being comfortable while reciving enjoyment from the games. I pray to god not every console will be like wii next generation. this motion controle stuff is just another reason to pay game companies another 300 buck bonus-per-player. (system, games) and I don't have that sort of money. nor am I intreeged by the motion controle. Come on, what happened to the good old days where the only option was to sit and play games? (or stand at a machine)