rob_simple said:
The difference is that my examples were functional, motion controls at present are frivolous and don't work properly most of the time, that is a truth I have proved empirically with every Wii game I own.
I agree with you that they have a place in gaming (I don't think it should be limited to any one method of control and, yes, I'm hoping for some form of VR in my time too) but what I object to is the way they're currently being rammed down our throats.I prefer motion control games that give you the option to turn the motion control off, so that when I want to just lie on the couch and vegetate with a game I can do that.
So, in Ratchet & Clank I could disable the six-axis flight controls and just use the analogue stick. In Metroid Prime 3 though, (and that was a game I loved) if I want to play it, I have to be swinging controllers around, twisting this and pulling that and sometimes I just don't want to do that; it's creating barriers to play. The other objection I have to the Wii in particular is that, as Yahtzee pointed out years ago, it's pretty much limited to swords and guns.
This example will be shaky but try and stay with me on it: When I want to jump in a traditional game, I press X or A and I jump. That's it, no confusions or complications. When I want to jump in WiiFit, however, I have to bend my knees and then jump without my feet leaving the balance board. It's completely counter-intuitive to everything that jumping is. On the other hand: take those occasions in Dead Space when you got covered by those bullshit bugs that killed you in seconds; you furiously tap one button to get them off. That's dumb. If, instead, you used motion controls and waved your hand around like your were wiping them off, that'd be pretty cool.
I think motion controls can be a part of gaming but they shouldn't be the single core element because, with the best will in the world, they're never going to be as accurate as the precision afforded by a traditional controller.
There are several things that I disagree with here. The most obvious is that I feel that I've already played dozens of games that either wouldn't have been as good or wouldn't have worked at all without motion controls. You think that motion controls are much too raw to take out of the oven just yet, and I feel that, while they may be a bit undercooked, they make quite a treat when served properly.
When you say that motion controls are "never going to be as accurate as the precision afforded by a traditional controller," I think, "bullshit." I find that most of the people who think motion controls are unresponsive are simply uncoordinated. The waggle is one thing, but to argue that the Wii remote's pointer and gyroscope functions are inaccurate is simply asinine, and I pity the people who couldn't handle Skyward Sword without problems.
THE POINTER:
MP3 may have had superfluous nunchuck waggle commands, but running and gunning in that game felt better to me than any dual analog stick shooter ever has, and it's basically inarguable that the pointer is better suited for twitch reactions and quick switching. I don't see how fans of the mouse+keyboard combo can say that a gamepad with two analog sticks is better than an analog stick combined with a pointer. If the Wii Remote+ Nunchuk had been the standard control scheme for the original Halo, would people really think that replacing the pointer with an additional analog stick was an improvement? And I don't want to hear any crap about how it limits your turn speed or requires a moving reticle, because those are BS arguments....easily fixed through a basic preferences menu. Then there's the issue of accessibility/intuitiveness....let someone who's never played a video game try out both of these control schemes and then see if you want to continue arguing that the dual analog stick is more accurate.
As you mentioned, the mouse is good for selecting units in RTS games, so how is it that anybody can possibly think that the Wii remote isn't superior to conventional gamepads for the genre? Seriously, I'd love to hear how you think the 360 controller would be better suited for Starcraft than the Wii remote.
Even games like Final Fantasy and Elder Scrolls would be greatly improved with an onscreen pointer. Think about how much quicker you would be able to select combat commands or manage your options/abilities/inventory if you had an infrared pointer. I'm sorry, but to deny this point would be beyond stubborn.
THE GYROSCOPE:
Look at games like Bit.Trip Flux/Beat, Fluidity, Monkey Ball, and Mario Kart, as well as in-game mechanics like the plane control in Wii Sports Resort or the beetle in Skyward Sword.
Think about playing a racing game with a gyroscope instead of an analog stick. In both cases, you're limited to varying degrees of two directions. (tilting or pressing up/down doesn't do anything) The difference is, with the gyroscope, you can get much more accurate/sensitive control due to the greater displacement between neutral and the extreme of any one direction. On top of this, it is also much easier to maintain a constant turn of any degree, because with an analog stick, doing so requires that you apply constant pressure that is equal to the opposing elastic force. Most people, when making a turn that is less than the most extreme, would rather fluctuate rapidly between neutral and max than find the proper middle ground and stay there, but the gyroscope makes it much easier to find that proper turn radius and maintain it.
Bit.Trip Flux is essentially a modern day Pong, and the game wouldn't be possible with a 360 controller. You need either a mouse, a touchscreen, a pointer, or a gyroscope, otherwise the game would just be a hassle.....not fun in the least. But, thanks to the Wii Remote's gyroscope, it has become a modern day classic, and I was able to play the game at a completely different level....I was making insane twitch reactions and instantaneously moving the paddle from point A to B without even thinking. I was in a trance.....muscle memory was taking over, and I was able to associate paddle positions directly with my own hand orientations.....this just couldn't have happened on my Xbox, and even if the game had been ported, the change in control scheme would've made it a completely different (and inferior) game.
I'd like to hear how you think a simple game like Brick Breaker/Pong could be controlled on the 360.....funnily enough, I think Kinect is better suited for those types of games than the standard controller.
THE ACCELEROMETER:
Definitively the least accurate and nuanced of the Wii remote's motion capabilities, this was the feature that was most affected by the Motionplus expansion. It's true that this feature acts as a substitute for a simple button press all too often, but there are still cases where it shines.
I'm sure Skyward Sword is the obvious example to most people, and I happen to agree. Skyward Sword's combat was better than that of any other 3d Zelda IMO, and it had everything to do with the mechanic- not the controls. The fact that the controls were so well suited for this particular mechanic is obviously not a coincidence, but that doesn't mean that anything was shoehorned either, and I really don't think that the game would've been as fun if I was using an analog stick to make my sword slashes....and pressing the analog stick in to stab.
I hate to point to what is essentially a tech demo for another of my examples, but the Frisbee games from Wii Sports Resort really do stand out for me. The direction, speed, and orientation of the throw are all commanded by you and determined by the game in well less than a second in a way that is incredibly intuitive. Had the game been on the 360, it would've either been broken up into some menu-based proceedings or required some ridiculous control scheme that involved at least both analog sticks. As it is, the difficulty of the game isn't in the strategy- you already know how to throw the thing to get it through all the rings- it's in the execution, and if the difficulty weren't provided by the accelerometer, it would need to be provided by some other, more artificial source. It would end up looking like one of those golf games that require multiple well timed button presses in order to line up the arrows with the lines, and God knows we don't need any more of those.
All this adds up to me being incredulous of anybody who says that modern day motion controls are a gimmick, let alone motion controls in general. Sorry that this post dragged on for longer than I intended, but hopefully it gives you and other readers some idea of why I'm frustrated by the idea of any so-called "gamer" dismissing motion controls as a fad or a gimmick.
