Speaking to VideoGamer.com during the recent Shine Week in London, EA UK boss Keith Ramsdale has said the advent of motion control technology should not be viewed as a threat to the industry.
Or maybe you should stop fixing what isn't broken.
im so tired of motion controls, not beacuse there bad. but because they bring casual gamers and the wii is a perfect example that, casual and hardcore gamers cannot co-exist on one console.
EA had better quality games last generation maybe they should START looking back.
Its just MS haters people like motion just fine.
Why Dis.... I know you dont try to make sense EVER, but come on MS doesnt even have motion controls.
I totally agree that there is nothing "broken" about controllers, but it's not bad to try something new once in a while.
"casual and hardcore gamers cannot co-exist on one console" They did on the PS2 Reason why Wii is so dominated by casual games is because it has weak hardware, games cannot be ported from 360/PS3 to Wii. Gamers want the hardcore games with the best graphics, it has little to nothing to do with motion control.
Not sure at all about motion controls. I dont like Wii like games. I dont want to do anything that require physical effort in order to "play" a game. And btw, I'm not a fat guy by any means. I'm glad Sony is always pushing mature games content and while they want to introduce motion control, I know it is all about to cater family and younger audience. I doubt Sony takes a full Wii like path.
As long as I can enjoy a game without having to do some kind of cardio just to play something, that's what the gym is for. Still skeptical on the whole natal and PS3 wand, I'll wait for some actual gameplay before I say anything more. All I know is that motion sensing isn't flawless, I've had my fair share of mishaps with the wii when it wasn't reading my movements properly and that drives me nuts. At least with a controller you know your truly in control.
"Or maybe you should stop fixing what isn't broken." I don't recall the Nes pad being broken, do i hear you complain about that? " As long as I can enjoy a game without having to do some kind of cardio just to play something, that's what the gym is for. '" But slaying a monster in a 1:1 realtime battle isn't a work out, its immersion on a higher level =).
Broken is a relative term. Blocky, uncomfortable NES controllers were broken in the way that they would make everyone's hands cramp. And you can take your new level of immersion and shove it until I am in a room fully immersed with holograms of my playing field. Until then, buttons are just fine.
but its not about the blockyness, else it would have never gotten the shoulder buttons. If that were the case it would have gotten a new design on the shell. But the controller wasn't broken, they were expanding on it. As for immersion, simply stating that motion controls =/= a work out. So untill then you shove it, thanks. BTW ( am in a room fully immersed with holograms of my playing field.) Thought you rather played games sitting down? O well, can't fight logic everyday.
The only amount of immersion I can see with a 1 on 1 of a monster, is you standing there with your sword and shield constantly hitting it until your victorious. That sounds amazingly fun. /sarcasm I don't see fully body motion games going very far if you can't even move besides going forward or backwards. I'm not one to judge though, we'll have to see what developers can come up with.
"The only amount of immersion I can see with a 1 on 1 of a monster, is you standing there with your sword and shield constantly hitting it until your victorious. That sounds amazingly fun. /sarcasm " That doesn't matter, wether you think its fun or not, the immersion is much higher. but this immersion doesn't make it a work out.
Except it IS broken. Current controllers have limitations that motion controllers overcome.
But it's not fun. Why do I care about how immersive a game is if it's boring?
Stop Fixing What's Not Broken- Good Point. However, gaming has always been great but not perfect. There are so many ways to improve gaming today. For the last 30 years I played video games I've seen a trend of improvement in video games. The stories got better, gameplay got better, and the realism got better. In my years many thing have been accomplished. I've seen Sony create a standard button layout during the PS1 and PS2 era. Games became more fun and addicting. Games were starting to add depth and break boundries on all fronts where they were limited before. Somewhere down the line though these companies seemed to give up on this evolution. They began another path instead of making games for people who wanted to live inside a character in another world. Instead they changed that concept to playing with friends and standardizing everything around a great video game. They standardized online, motion control, trophies/achievements, and will soon be standardizing digital downloads. Is it me or is Sony the only gaming company this generation focusing only on making great games? As a gamer I want to be immersed inside a fantasy world and live the story. I want to see characters move realistically, talk realistically, and control realistically. I want the interactivity to be so seamless that I would never have to see something and say "that's not real". This immersion got severed when they decided to go mass market. Generalize and standardize. Now, I'm not saying that motion control sucks. It doesn't. But since when did a steering wheel be the prime peripheral to interact with every game made? That's my point here. Not only should motion control be implemented in certain games, it should not be beat to death just because it is a great idea. Why? It's there to enhance certain games. Not all the games. The same concept goes for online gaming. They beat the online concept to death by making it standard. In doing so, they ultimately raised the cost of video games this generation. Online games should be selective based on the relevence of the core game itself. Same goes for trophies and achievements. As for the core game, it had a future until these clowns decided that the future had nothing to do with games at all. In their eyes the future is always the highest dollar amount. One day they will realize that what they are doing will cause a collapse in the game industry. Why? Targeting the mass market doesn't even guarantee they will stick around to game. If gaming was a mass market hobby it would have caught on by now. If video games were good enough to begin with they wouldn't be replaced with all these social features like Facebook, Twitter, party chat, and Sony Connect. That's whats carrying the industry today and the real gamers, while in the minority, are getting sick and tired of being neglected. One day the core gamers will be gone and they will lose their ability to grasp the attention of the mass market and casual gamer.
"But it's not fun. Why do I care about how immersive a game is if it's boring? " Well GTA 4 was boring...on a traditional controller. Maybe its the games that decide if something is boring. Because twilight princess was a great game and certainly was NOT boring. Aiming with the remote was great and using the roll-and-slash made the game better. But im sure you would know this because im sure you finished the game... "The only amount of immersion I can see with a 1 on 1 of a monster, is you standing there with your sword and shield constantly hitting it until your victorious." So if they made a game with a light sabar in the star wars universe using 1:1 movement...that would be boring in your mind? I feel sorry for you.
"And you can take your new level of immersion and shove it until I am in a room fully immersed with holograms of my playing field. Until then, buttons are just fine." So what your saying is basically you would rather use your whole body (kinda like natal) instead of slightly moving your arm. I think using your whole body would bring up more of a sweat....dont you?
You completely missed the point. I said full body motion, anyway I'd rather not waste my time trying to explain cause I'm pretty sure everyone but you understands. And for the lightsaber comment, I can wield and perform combos with a lightsaber just as angelically with a controller than anyone else with the full body motion tech ever could without feeling like a complete moron in my own home waving my hands around like a mad man. So in short, yes, I would find that wielding a lightsaber with a natal like tech would be boring and uninteresting. Oh and I forgot, I've already beaten Twilight Princess when it first came out. Sorry, bet you didn't see that one coming.
"waving my hands around like around like a mad man" lol If thats how u played twilight princess i can see how u didnt like it. Bit of an exaggeration dont ya think? And no im not surprised you didnt like it, people dont always have to like everything but alot of people on here ASSUME alot. And who said anything about using natal for a light sabar, i was more liking the idea of the wii remote or sonys wand. Also i dont remember breaking a sweat and doing a "cardio workout" when playing zelda. I mean if u broke a sweat playing zelda then u must be more unfit than u think if u think holding a remote is exercise.
I don't think this "movement" is so much anti-motion or motion-hate or anything like that. The problem here is I just think people don't want to end up seeing motion controls take over Xbox or PS3 like they have with Wii. We don't want a motion control-centric gaming experience. Sure I can see how it could be fun for some games (I like playing High Velocity Bowling, and that's motion control), but there has to be a cut-off point. We don't want to see full out motion control expansion. And that's what this is all about really. Cause quite honestly (and many have said it before me), I play games to sit and relax. I don't want to have to be moving around anytime I want to play a game. I just want to be able to recline on my sofa, laid back, controller in hands with my hands resting in my lap, relaxing after a day of work and enjoying some gaming. I think there are some games that would cater to motion control well (like plenty of sports games, and shooters, stuff like that) but more action based titles would practically be a workout just to play and we don't game for exercise. We game to chill and relax and have fun. So really, I don't think people are hating on motion controls. Really it seems to me that maybe, with all the attention it's getting and companies maybe looking to piggyback Wii's success by incorporating motion controls, people just don't want to see it end up being the way of the future and completely take over. It's a nice option to have, but ONLY if it's an OPTION. Edit: Let me clarify "OPTION". I don't want some idiot thinking I mean each game being able to be played by either motion or by the traditional controller. That probably just wouldn't be able to work. What I mean is that it can't all become motion. Need to really be promoting two systems in one. In the case of the PS3, you know have your big titles and whatnot that cater to the motion controls. But you also need to keep big titles for traditional controls. Not forcing everyone to adopt these motion controls. Because quite frankly, not all of us want to be having to use motion controls all the time to game.
I never related cardio to anything Zelda in my first post, and again I see you miss that I was pointing out what I wouldn't like about the natal approach with full body motion sensing seeing how it would be a workout if your constantly moving while playing. And no I never said that's how I played but with a lot of the wii games I've encountered, that's usually the norm with a lot of their games. I mean if your standing still while just using your hands then whats the point of natal? Not forgetting to mention that you might as well stick with the wii if that's the case. I don't mind the wii and PS3 wand but I don't love them. I only see motion sensing as a sort of quirk and add-on in games like you see in KZ2 and Heavenly Sword to name a few. You remember Lair? That was built around the whole motion sensing with the controller and you see how that turned out? I just don't think they can make hardcore AAA games with nothing more than a natal/wand "controller", unless of course like in the case of Zelda, it's a sword or lightsaber wielding game (for those who think FPS's would work, yea, what are you going to do? Pretend to hold a gun in your hand while shooting baddies? jeeze). Twilight was fun, being a big fan of the Zelda series and all, but it was so much better with the gamecube controller. And just for the record, I'm most guaranteed to be in better shape than you are right now. ;)
"You remember Lair? That was built around the whole motion sensing with the controller and you see how that turned out? " Built around the motion sensing, sure. Thing is at that time it seemed sony just thru their "six axis" in at the last second. Just like the game it was just thrown in. Why they didnt give u multiple options of motion sensing and traditional no one knows. So saying the game was built around something that was just thrown in, i can see why the game flopped (btw i dont like the six axis) I think u think im a big supported of motion sensing, ..thing is all i was saying mostly was that u were over exaggerating what playing motion sensing games is like. "waving your arms around like a mad man", "doing a cardio workout". I mean come on. "it's a sword or lightsaber wielding game (for those who think FPS's would work, yea, what are you going to do? Pretend to hold a gun in your hand while shooting baddies? jeeze)" I dont even like the idea natal. So why u keep mentioning arguments against natal is beyond me. By the way u said pretend to hold a gun, i assume u meant natal btw. I think playing a FPS on natal would be ridiculous (and i have said that in many many posts). "I just don't think they can make hardcore AAA games with nothing more than a natal/wand "controller", unless of course like in the case of Zelda, it's a sword or lightsaber wielding game" Hmm so in one sentence u say "I just don't think they can make hardcore AAA games" and then u continue to say "unless of course like in the case of Zelda, it's a sword or lightsaber wielding game" in the very next sentence. Whos the one getting mixed up here? "And just for the record, I'm most guaranteed to be in better shape than you are right now. ;)" I seriously seriously doubt that.
Your post you just wrote proved nothing so I assume your all out of steam so I'll just leave it at that. Good day.
And what have your comments proved? Nothing. Everyones opinion is their own...so no1 is right or wrong (unless there are facts involved of corse). And by looking at your last comment the only person out of steam is you. But im sure u will make a big long speech knowing that im out of bubbles to reply on here so if u have anything to say send a PM.
Maybe pro-motion gamers should stop treating motion control as the Second Coming, especially when one takes away vibration/force-feedback.
I bet there could be a easy fix for that, like a small glove that vibrates or a little wrist thing. >.> if i recall the ps3 controller didn't start with a vibrate feature, yet no one complained there.
Oh didn't they? People, mainly the anti sony press, moaned and moaned at the lack of rumble. Gamers missed it though, when it wasn't there-though personally I was gutted when I couldn't get a new sixaxis when my orginal broke as I always disliked rumble! The thing is we'll see if all this works and what the effects are to our trad controllers, won't we? On the Wii they hardly signalled a renaissance in FPS, for example, did they? I expected them to as it sems a better bet than keyboard and mouse but it didn't pan out that way and even if you had full body controls how would you actually get around the game world? At 1:1 it'd be daft as my front room just isn't as big as , say, Hyrule and whose is? Without controlling an onscreen avatar remotely as well as having 1:1 combat where possible you'd be stuck in one place as far as I can see so when you wanted to move on wouldn't the immersion be killed anyway? I don't think anyone, pro or anti motion should worry just yet as so much remains inanswered that it's unclear just what we'll be able to manage with motion controls just now. We should cool our boots, Natal has as many questions as answers and I can only see some being solved with peripherals/normal controllers. Wii currently needs the analogue stick on the nunchuck to get about the game world and I'm yet to see how either Sony or MS aim to do differently. Natal still looked shaky , if ambitious,from what we saw and the Sony wand demo, while looking very accurate(i.e the handwriting compared to Natal just throwing the clour about a bit) at what it did still had no answer that we saw for actual in game travel-just the limited, in fight, back and forth which leaves us wondering just what's going to be the final outcome of all this.
Motion controlled games killed my family. Not really. But still... Go to hell motion controls!
the real problem of motion control is the wii's rubbish first attempt. well that and the fact that in its current state its a step back, not forward. we're not really going to get a good take on motion control until we see it on an xbox or playstation. also, F U EA, you condescending bastards.
gimmicks and add-ons are the future of gaming. It's the new Happy-Meal all wrapped up in a cute little box.
Motion ftw! Ea make something good with these controllers.
"Motion ftw! Ea make something good with these controllers." Yeh like "Tiger Woods PGA Tour 10".....it got 9.5/10 on most sites.
people are angry at montion control games because of the shovelware on the Wii. If they make great games with motion control I dont see what will be bad about it. Only beneficial to the consoles.
Yep, but the average N4G guy is not very clever. They never look in depth into anything. When Wii has alot of crappy casual games it automatically means that all motion control games will be bad regardless of platform.
When i play games for 6hrs straight i cannot imagine it being super fun if im jumping moving etc. like said above im not fat either i work out and this is not appelling. This is me though also to add to that I will agree with above to when you say Natal for example and Full VR 2 differnt thing completly you cant compare the 2. I always tell my work buddies when i can feel like in the movie gladitor(though not dead) when he is walkign in isluym(Sorry) and he has his hands at his side feeling the plants as he walks then i will like motion controls when i can be in it and not look around and see my Wife lol and my couch i want holodeck until then i will continue to experiment with motion control becasue it is fun on something and im not arguing that im only arguing about the fact that if i replace my controller with how much i play i will ahte life how can i play socom and have to aim myself for hrs or throw grenades yea sure its fun and i see the appell but i see that it wont last and will be treated more of a hey check this out kind thing more then a feature i will use as a all time thing. i know people agree maybe not here but alot of people.
they debuted last gen. First Sony, then Nintendo, now Microsoft... Although the technology is promising and has its place, it has not been the success we're expecting to be. Natal is more hype than anything right now, but it isn't going to change the core gaming experience. We're 'looking back' because there is nothing truly to look forward to, just the same old promises. This time the burden of proof are on the big 3.
He's got a point. The 'we fear change' people are holding the industry back by wanting to play the same games we've been playing for the past 25 years. Sure some may say there is nothing wrong with that but hey new things are usually good too. Motion control is hardly the second coming but it is a fresh new way to play games and actually gets you immersed in it as well. Just like with the d-pad, analog, and rumble you just need to get use to it before you start to realize it's actually pretty cool. Just glad Sony and MS are starting with it too now so people who just hate Nintendo for no reason will get a taste of motion controls and maybe see how worthwhile it is.
"The 'we fear change' people are holding the industry back by wanting to play the same games we've been playing for the past 25 years." And yet the 'embrace change' can only talk about playing those same old games with motion control.
You mean these people?
haha Wayne's World :) Well yes indeed we at least get new ways to immerse ourselves in the gameplay. Just like Foxgods minor example of opening a door. Sure you can press a button but actually opening it by grabbing it, twisting, and sliding it open is just cooler. Plus fps with the Wii Remote and Nunchuck are stellar. It's like a new genre in vein of the PC world. Plenty of accessories are accepted over traditional controls as well. Look at driving and who most have there own wheel to do the driving rather than the standard controller. Progression is always on the forefront of gaming and when visuals can no longer be the end game how we play is the next step
you DO realize that "fps with the wiimote" is virtually the EXACT SAME THING as the lightguns of the 80's? Talk about progression! (And frankly I'd rather just tap "A" or "X" to open a door than having to grab and twist some lock...if they're putting that much focus on a little gimmick like that, chances are they're missing out on more important stuff) Sure I agree that different game types do better with special add-ons (Racing gets the wheel and pedals, fighting games get classic joystick, etc.) But saying that Motion control should cover the rest of the bases is just kinda high and mighty...frankly, I feel that the only genre that definitely needs a remodel via add-on is the rts field, because I think it could do very well with natal-esque motion controls (using your finger to "circle" groups or point just to select individuals...things could get incredibly fast paced and extraordinarily precise with that level of control) Just my opinion, but I'm gonna stick by it.
actually fps on the Wii are more in tune with mouse and keyboard fps. But hey I respect that you'd rather just hit buttons then get more involved in games ;)
" you DO realize that "fps with the wiimote" is virtually the EXACT SAME THING as the lightguns of the 80's? Talk about progression! "... virtually the exact same? Boy we can say that about lots of things when we put on our gaming goggles.
I am pro motion, people who are anti motion are lazy are going to be passed up, cause just like with life itself, videogaming is subject to change. Dont stay in the past, you dinosaur!, youre like those people who complained that color tv would take away the mood that was provided by black and white tv.
BECAUSE IT DOES!!!
you was anti pro motion gaming until E3 2009!
Motion controls are fun in certain circumstances, not EVERY game needs them or even works with them. FPS games need at least a standard controller with two analogue sticks or ideally a mouse and keyboard. Strategy games need the same. The whole point of most games is fantasy, and fantastical characters move with superhuman speed and have incredible accuracy in their context. Expecting me to fight off a group of five people using a Wii-mote in a God of War type game, where all moves are executed with 1:1 motions, would require the speed and movement control of a fantastical superhuman. I've yet to meet one in real-life. There's a reason many games have context sensitive controls and button controls, and it's not because they're backwards or not "hip" enough.
I agree with you that there will always be a need for a standard controller, and that motion controls certainly don't need to be shoved into every game. But I completely disagree with you on what genre(s) they belong in. Metroid Prime 3 and Conduit are the best-controlling console FPS games ("FPA," in Metroid's case) I've ever played. There is absolutely NO way I can go back to dual analog after them. IR control is faster, more precise, and now more customizable, to boot. It's closer to a mouse and keyboard than dual analog will ever get. OTOH, I don't think I'd really need any motion control for a boxing game, as if I wanted to work out, I'd just go to the gym. But there is potential for motion controls in core games. That doesn't mean the games have to be completely focused on them, but they can be implemented in some cases. I imagine just how nice the shooting in GTA would be if the IR control aiming scheme from the RE4 Wii edition was put in Rockstar's franchise. (But that's what the controls should be limited to in that case, IMO. You don't need tilt control for the driving or anything else shoved in.)
motion control is good, when waving ur controller around isnt mapped to the action that couldve been done by pressing a button.
Yeah like metroid, grab switch, pull it out, twist it, push it back. Only with natal it will be more realistic, cause you can make hand movements, instead of pointing a darn stick.
Foxgod, you should bookmark your comment so when Natal comes out you can show everyone you arent just blowing hot air. Until then....
I think a true win-win for the industry is to offer a choice of both traditional and motion-control gaming. However there is a risk, as it happened with the Wii, that traditional games that controlled fine with dual thumbstick controllers for years will only be offered in motion control form. Once traditional games become motion control only on the 360\PS3, that is when some of us will loose. I understand that some new types of games may be only suited to motion control. However things like 'waving your arm' to do a simple attack that used to be mapped to a button press, shouldn't be forced down all the gamers' throats; it should be a choice.
Not when you have to pay extra for it. As it stands the Wiimote is the Wiimote + the nunchuck now + Wii motion plus, which is what the Wiimote was suppose to be in the first place.
Sooner or later everyone will try and wave their penis in front of the camera, to see how it plays. That sure beats pushing buttons with your dong. K maybe the girls wont, but most guys will probably be curious enough to do it :D
There's always co-op play if the ladies begin to feel left out.
I am all for it :D *dreams about humping a girl in front of the cam while playing the game, Milo*
as long as the pro-motion control crowd will admit it's not usable for many types of hardcore games. Holding your hands in the air will never replace a steering wheel peripheral or regular controller for that matter. Navigating through a large or even medium sized virtual space is not doable without some form of physical controller unless you want to kill immersion. Minority Report style controls for RTS or inventory management/menu navigation is one thing, controlling a run and gun shooter is another. Voice recognition has much more potential for a wide variety of games than pure motion control.
Every game needs motion, us from the NMO (New motion order), will not rest until everybody is playing without controllers. Prepare to be taken over!
You going to come over to my house and move my 120 lb coffee table out of the way whenever I want to play a game, foxgod? You also going to mystically create space in my office or bedroom for full body motion gaming? How about in college dorms, where space is typically limited as it is? I don't dislike motion control gaming, it just doesn't fit into my gaming life. I come home and go running to get my exercise. When I game, I want to relax and not stand up and flail my body about in jerkish manners that don't make sense, let alone don't do anything remotely healthy compared to the half hour run I do each day.
well i like to sit and relax and have a few drinks when i play. if i wanted to jump around like an idiot id throw a party or buy a wii.... @foxgod: below... your missing my point...im just saying i like to relax...it would be pretty annoying trying to reach for my beer and/or smoke a cigarette with motion control going on...lol
who says you have to jump around like an idiot ? Most games will probably be playable by doing relaxed handmotions. I never jumped around like an idiot while playing metroid on the wii, and thats a shooter.
so you want to sacrifice accuracy and response time just to wiggle controller even if its a small thing. I hated resistance for having to wiggle controller to release stupid chimera that grab you. bloody annoying.
Once again, Gun_Senshi, you don't sacrifice accuracy in all games. In some, yes. And that's why traditional controllers won't simply die out. But for games like first and third-person shooters, I'll take IR/motion aiming over dual analog any day of the week. The control in Metroid Prime 3 and Conduit is closer to a mouse/keyboard than dual analog will ever get (same for the aiming in RE4 on Wii). I'll take faster, more precise, and more customizable controls any day of the week. And if a game would be more precise with a traditional controller, so be it. No skin off my back.
"Most games will probably be playable by doing relaxed handmotions" Why not just use a regular controller then? I am not a fan of motion controls because like others have stated it's not my style. I do not want to play games like that and I will always prefer K/M and standard console controller because there is nothing broken with that approach what-so-ever. Innovation is good and always welcome but don't force it when it's something like motion controls because not all inventions fit everyone the same and sadly I am just not an advocate of this "step forward" as some like to put it. Some genres it will work well with but not all or many. So as long as there is standard controls with the option of doing motion controls then by all means go full steam ahead but don't make it mandatory.