Move best suited for FPS? so why no Move support for 2 biggest FPS of the year

PlayStation Move is the best suited Motion Controller for first-person-shooters, according to Bioshock's writer & Creative Director , Ken Levine, so why was the 2 biggest FPS of the year released without PlayStation Move support?

should Sony push 3rd party devs to support PlayStation Move? because not having Move support for Battlefield 3 & Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 was 2 big missed opportunities.

what are your thoughts on this? leave your comments below.

[Adva]

I would have used MOVE for Bf3.

[NukaCola]

BF3 not having Move support is odd. But at the same time, the free BF1942 HD game with the PS3 version just vanished too.

MW3 supporting Move? LoL, that game can't even support itself. More is not better when the basics don't even work right.

[NegativeCreep427]

That would be an advantage for the PS3 version. They would stop giving Activision millions of dollars in free money, and Activision doesn't want that.

[decrypt]

There is mouse support for BF3 and MW3, i am pretty happy with that.

[r1sh12]

Why would MS be worried if mw3 had move support? Mw3 is way toooo fast paced on the Xbox and ps3 for move controls to be useful. If you want a similar experience get mw3 on the wii

[reynod]

I am sure the modding community will release some unofficial patch to fix this later... oh wait :P Closed platforms dont allow such freedom.

[Mr Tretton]

Move is dead. No doubt Sony is more busy working on next gen hardware which nonetheless I think is going to be forwards compatible with the current Move controls, but will use a Kinect style camera. There is no way Sony is ignoring Kinect's success, and the abandonment of deicated Move software makes that clear.

[cyclonus007]

If Move is dead than why are games like Goldeneye, Counterstrike, and Bioshock Infinite releasing with Move support?

[SonyStyled]

i just used my move today, and im looking forward to using it in infamous 2 and goldeneye when i pick those up

[Knushwood Butt]

I dislike playing FPSs with no Move support.

They are so better when Move is implemented (assuming the implementation is done well. Killzone 3 is an example of this).g

[Nate-Dog]

Well it is a multiplatform game, and Activision do favour the X360 (like EA favour the PS3), I can't imagine that many people really would have used the Move for CoD anyway, I know some may like the option but the majority wouldn't have the Move and for those that do a lot of them probably wouldn't be fussed. If they wanted to integrate Move playability they'd probably want to integrate Kinect playability too and bringing those two into any game could take quite a while.

[gamingdroid]

As you said, it might be better suited, but that ain't saying much. Better suited doesn't mean there is a preference.

It's an optional feature that doesn't really add any value to FPS i.e. hardcore gamers won't use it and they will likely just stick with the controller.

The exact same control scheme existed on the Wii and nobody cared about it then either....

Now, if there was demand for it, I'm sure BF3 that favors the PS3 would have incorporated it. The only one that implements PS Move is first party....

[Rageanitus]

hardcore gamers prefer mouse and kb.... the console market is still casual

[GarandShooter]

So Tiger Woods PGA and NBA2K are first party franchises? Good to know!

[Biggest]

So is Resident Evil. Total first party stuff.

[SonyStyled]

i didnt know bioshock infinate was a PS3 exclusive

[Ddouble]

They would sell millions either way so i guess they can't be bothered. I hope Bioshock sends the trend for third party games after seeing the move's success on Killzone 3.

[saumer]

I hope so. I loved Move in KZ3. Tried playing an BF3 on my xbox and I just hate the standard controller. How anyone would prefer it I can't understand.

I grew up with mouse and keyboard on Quake/UT, and baring that, I'd use the move before a gamepad any day.

[MsmackyM]

Totally agree, having to use dual analog sticks for a fps just takes away the fun for me. I don't care how pretty the graphics are if the interface is garbage I could care less.

[DonaldBeck]

they should do a move patch for battlefield 3

[ViciousHamster]

They should patch move out of existence.

[NegativeCreep427]

Did Move make fun of you on the little bus last week or something? Such strong feelings against a gaming peripheral, wouldn't you say?

[SonyStyled]

no, eye pet made his hamsters very jelous

[CynicalVision]

It's common knowledge that multiplatform titles don't care about support like that, hell...COD4 didn't even support rumble. That's how lazy these developers are.

[DonaldBeck]

yeah i was like wtf no rumble for cod 4? i seriously would not mind if cod went pc/360 exclusive because the support they give ps3 owners is shameful.

edit: oh i see what you mean. still lazy developers though.

[gamingdroid]

ermm... CoD4:Mw was released practically before rumble was introduced on the PS3. The problem wasn't CoD, it was PS3 didn't have the feature!!!

Please redirect your anger to the responsible party, because rumble was supported on the Xbox 360 version....

In fact, CoD4 didn't have trophies either since that wasn't introduced until July of 2008.

[CynicalVision]

@gamingdroid

That's my point, the PS3 released the feature and the COD4 developers couldn't care less.

[gamingdroid]

So Sony released the feature after the game was released and somehow Infinity Ward should have patched it in?

Therefore everything is CoD4 developers fault?

Did you consider the fact that the demand wasn't there? I mean how many people actually had the new controller with Rumble?

Did rumble get support in the sequels?

Also, do you know anything about software development and life cycle? If not, I suggest you look more into it before blanket calling a developer lazy.

Some of those might just give you a CLEAR clue to why is the way it is.

[Biggest]

Well, yeah? How else would the rumble feature get into an Infinity Ward game? Maybe they should have asked Martha Stewart to enable rumble. She didn't make the game either.

[NeloAnjelo]

@ Gamingdroid... You are missing the point. This is an easy patch. Activision and COD developers are lazy and accept responsibility for nothing. This is why the game hasn't changed in years. I hate that fact that people defend them so much. Most other games have been patched, but this franchise that makes the most money can't right?Activision cares nothing about the consumer. They give you COD Elite, a feature set that Bungie and Dice give FREE to their users, but Activision charges for. They charge $15 dollars for a "throwback" map slightly modified with zombies added.

They milk the consumer. It's bad for the rest of the industry as they have no chance to show innovation as COD eats up the market with their rehashed product year after year."

@ CynicalVision... spot on with you comment.

[ambientFLIER]

"They give you COD Elite, a feature set that Bungie and Dice give FREE to their users, but Activision charges for."

Um...it's FREE. There is a paid version, but even the basic Elite is better than BF3's and Halo's feature set. At least get your facts straight...

[NeloAnjelo]

@ambientFLIER... Actually the free version of COD elite is not better but the same service. Strange how you can't say anything else about my other points raised.

COD players seem to only hear or see what they want to, and your reply proves this. Take my comment as a whole and not just pick out a single point to defend.

[Krew_92]

Oh yes I know. I have many games that were released before rumble, and they did indeed get rumble support. For example I have a Ratchet and Clank: Future Tools of Destruction which came out in 2007, and it got a rumble update. I also have Unreal Tournament 3, which came out in 2007 also. That got a rumble update.

To this day I still get ticked off seeing no rumble in Call of Duty 4, and Assassin's Creed 1. You can even see my comment history, I talk about Assassin's Creed 1 lacking rumble haha.

[GraveLord]

Because of Microsoft. They would want Kinect support too.

[Majin-vegeta]

Would it look something like this??xDDDDD.
http://youtu.be/7XzYDpAQ-xg

[Venjense]

Move should be in every FPS but MS is probably holding it back because they want every multiplat to be the same or better on 360.

It has a high learning curve but after you get the hang of it, it's the best way to control console FPS games. It's so much faster and more accurate.

[LOGICWINS]

I learned how to use it in a couple of days. At first you think its a POS...then you realize that YOUR the problem. I'd recommend Move to anyone that heavily enjoys first person shooters.

[Venjense]

Totally agree man, pulling off headshots is ridiculously easy.

[saumer]

Loved move in FPS games. Played Resistance and KZ3. Socom felt really good to.

[iamnsuperman]

It is because it cost (mainly time wise) more to develop it in the game. The games were going to sell well anyway so adding this feature isn't entirely necessary even though it would be good.

[Phantasm]

You took the words right out of my mouth.

[Dark_king]

Actually adding move support is really simple for fps games.The only part you actually need to work a bit at is the Ui to set it up to your preference.

[Az1mov]

cause move and kinect are pointless when it comes to fast paced and quick response competitive shooters; just a casual gadget for casual users. you'll get no accuracy but only latency if you are involved in such competitive games as in BF3 or MW3 MP. I'm happy w/ my controllers.

[Sprudling]

Are you kidding? First of all, all console shooters are slow paced. Secondly, when it comes to aiming quickly and accurately the controller is the worst input device. The mouse is obviously by far the best while the Move is somewhere in the middle. The reason controllers do the job just just fine is _because_ console shooters are slow paced.

You obviously weren't a gamer in the days of Quake, which is a truly fast paced game.

[MsmackyM]

Pretty retarded statement coming from someone who has probably never used the move. An average Move player can easily outperform a seasoned dual analog player. I personally feel the "hardcore" gamer fear competition from Move users so they hide behind "what hardcore gamers want".

[StupidDude]

It's up to the developers. Naughty Dog is first party, but, no Move in Uncharted.

I think the only time Sony forced Move controls on a game was with Heavy Rain.

[mcstorm]

The is one reason why they dont support more or kinect.its because most users who have kinect or move wont buy cod or bf3and it is not a standardon both consoles.

But what will make it interesting is next gen becasue i see sony dropping the ds3 for a move like controller and ms using kinect with a different type of controller so there will be 2 different ways to play games as well as the wiiu offering another way to play. So to me 3rd party developers will have to come up with different types of control systems for each console as they will work in different ways. Which may mean 3rd partys making more exclusives for each console and less multi platform games or one version working well on one control system but not the other two.

[jjb1981]

I'm good with a controller. Move just isn't the same and neither is kinect. I have both of the periperals and they are only fun for drunk party games. This is just my own personal experience. I've tried games with both and they are only suited for casual gamers. These periperals just do not appeal to a hardcore gamer such as myself. I wouldn't want to squad up in bf3 with someone who is "trying" the move with it or the kinect. I also wouldn't want my team losing on search and destroy in MW3 because the kinect has a slight lag in it. The other way around, I wouldn't want to put my team in that position although it might be fun...

[kevnb]

move is not well suited for multiplayer fps, do what you want in single player but it has no place multi.

[saumer]

Sounds like you've never used it.

[Series_IIa]

Socom implemented it awfully(3rd person I know), but to turn you basically had to turn your 'gun' to the side of the screen... making turning and aiming impossible at the same time.

Pointless me talking about Kinect for FPS since it will never ever ver er r work.

[Gam3rSinceBiRTH]

People that would use Move for multiplayer are straight up noobs. Get some skills son!

[leogets]

I tried move on MAG and by eck I was all over the place looking into the sky when I didnt wana.it sucked.controllers ya cant beat.cant be dealin with mouse n keyboard as im a hardcore controller guy.the guy who said before me that console players cant be hardcore is a nob. Using a device ov ya choice doesnt make you less hardcore than someone with a keboard mouse.imo its a nerdy way to game but thats my opinion.

[bozebo]

Move best suited for FPS?

I will leave it at that...

[capcock]

because motion controls suck.

[Pandamobile]

Does anyone even use Move?

For anything, let alone shooters.

[ginsunuva]

Yeah, for Resistance, infamous, killzone, etc.

[btk]

Because they could not implement it for Kinect.
Why don't we just ask the devs why not?

[kramun]

Because hardly anyone would actually bother using it and it would be a waste of development time. That's the long and short of it.

[tonywood]

PS3 Move and Xbox 360 Kinect are both lame to me. Motion is a gimick, and mist Wii games don't need it.....in fact, Nintendo really needs a new platform. U would only consider move for house of the dead overkill and time crysis.

[icecoldfire]

cause move's controller looks like a dildo and is too gay for bf3 but might suite mw3 for the kiddies

[SuperbVillain]

If MOVE worked on BF3 the same it worked for KZ3 online,then I'm glad its not there....Would be cool for single player def,but they need to leave the peripherals out of multiplayer