Top
140°

No PS3 Rumble a 'Strategic' Move - Hirai

In a recent interview, Sony Computer Entertainment America president Kaz Hirai said that the "strategic" move to drop rumble from the PlayStation 3 controller was for the consumer's benefit.

Hirai told games website Kikizo in a recently posted Tokyo Game Show video interview, "The issue when we're talking about trying to have motion sensing as well as a vibration feature, is trying to isolate the vibration feature from the motion sensors. Is it technically feasible? Absolutely."

However, Hirai said that a tilt-control-enabled controller coupled with rumble technology would be too pricey for many customers.

He continued, "But the other problem, or the balancing act that you need to do, is to be able to present the controller to the consumer at an affordable price. We have one controller in the box, but many consumers will want to go out and get an extra controller. And if we have to come up with technology - which you can technically do - to isolate the vibration from the sensing, if that means that the controllers are going to be so expensive, then we're doing the consumer a huge disservice by coming up with a controller that is not very affordable.

"So it's a balancing act that we need to do. And we felt that ultimately, the vibration feature, which is a feedback feature, as compared to the motion sensing which is an input functionality, when you compare the two, we decided that the input device or methodology is a lot more important than feedback, and that has been a strategic decision that we've made."

Sony have revealed that the PS3 controller, now dubbed "Sixaxis," would cost the equivalent of $42 in Japan.

Read Full Story >>
next-gen.biz
The story is too old to be commented.
achira3969d ago

correct decission ! i would prefer moton sensinge in any time !

calderra3969d ago

Sorry, Kaz, but I'm catching you (and most people posting before me) with their pants down. Pick 'em up, people!

The reason Sony CAN'T put rumble in is because they lost a patent lawsuit with Immersion technology.

Say aaaaallll you want about strategy, or how it's not necessary... Sony COULD NOT put rumble into the new controller, and they're trying to justify it after the fact.

And as said, this explanation conflicts with the rest of Sony's strategy: "Is it not silly to compare the price of eating at a fine restauraunt to eating fast food?"
^Kutaragi and Kaz have already blown this explanation WAY out of the water.

TheMART3969d ago

That's bull. Rumble is just missing and that's sad. Motion is fun, but a gimmick. Like the Wii has it. Games are fun but not exciting like real next gen.

MS Sidewinder had it for PC. The same as the PS3 controller has. It was fun for 5 minutes then people turned it off because they like to game and not swing across the room

UrbanJabroni3969d ago

I'm genuinely excited about the wii controller. I may get bored after a short time, but the possibility of greatness is too good to pass up.

Mart mentioned the Sidewinder, which I had and despised. It just seemed pointless. The PS3 controller may someday become good at controlling certain games, but the controller is just after 1080p on the list of features that I, personally, could care less about. It just doesn't seem to excite me like the wii does.

Anyone else?

UrbanJabroni3969d ago

"However, Hirai said that a tilt-control-enabled controller coupled with rumble technology would be too pricey for many customers."

You mean like a $600 console? ;)

TheMART3969d ago

Indeed! And Wii/Nintendo let us see that rumble and motion control is possible all together.

So why cut the rumble and say it's not possible with motion control? Weak point of massive attack Sony.

Strategic Choice? Also bull. Rumble adds so much in so many games, even if it's so little it does.

FNR3 for example, to feel the punches makes the game so intense, shooters to know you get hit, racing games (Motorstorm anyone?) to feel the difference between the hard road/rocks, sand and mud it's gone. And that's a shame

Arkham3969d ago

Yeah, a $600 console instead of a $900 console. They're not exactly overcharging once you consider what's included. Enough with the price griping.

$700 (Premium 400 + HD-DVD 200 + Wireless 100) is $100 more expensive than the PS3, and you still have only 20GB and no memory card reader. I know where my money's going.

Fuzz McDeath3969d ago (Edited 3969d ago )

...to you PS3 is only a deal because you want wireless and HD movie features (using your example). Fore everyone who could care less (I have no need for wireless and have 400+ DVDs - not changing to HD-DVD/Blu-ray any time soon) - its A RIP OFFFFF....200 bucks to spend on games and accessories I DO WANT

Silverwolf3969d ago

The new "in" this year is: If you don't want to add it, call it a ‘Strategic’ Move.

Show all comments (33)
The story is too old to be commented.