Wii: A look at motion-controls from the past
Does history repeat itself? If so, do previously failed "motion-controlled" interfaces spell disaster for Nintendo's Wii? Gameworld Network explores the unsuccessful attempts from the past including old-school Nintendo licensed products. From the article: "If you look [the] examples, you will notice a common thread among them: all failed largely because of imprecise input. While interest in the Wii at this year's E3 was staggering, and most of the people who played it thought it was great fun, the largest complaint was that the controls were too imprecise... history is not working in Nintendo's favor here."
I love the Wiimote. It's so bad!
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Jhemps @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:37AM
Just wait until they actually use the sensor bar.
Paul P. @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:40AM
I think the main problem for those devices is that they were made to play games that were not developed to be controlled that way.
Jose Miguel @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:40AM
"were too imprecise... history is not working in Nintendo's favor here"
Overstating much? Comparing the Wiimote to the power glove or anything like it is just stupid considering the technological differences that have taken place since that time. And how could the games be fun if the controls were too imprecise?
Smells like that article is looking for controversy to make some hits.
KawF @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:47AM
The problem with all earlier games and the usage of motion sensing or spatially aware aparatuss was that quite frankly, the games really did not benefit at all from the added axis' of input or the simplification of three dimensional movement or viewpoint adjustment. Todays games are on the other hand getting so complicated to play with a simple gamepad that is might just be the "right time" for motion sensing and other simmilar controls. Added to that, that the technology is now cheap, accurate, and good enough to actually provide some good precision in the games in order to simplyfy movement...
It seems to be the right time for "the next step" in controller evolution. At least as I see it.
barry @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:54AM
two major points were conveniently overlooked in the article:
1. none of those third-party accessories were made by nintendo. they were made by cheap toy manufacturers.
2. the wiimote doesn't use infrared.
this is just flamebait.
crono141 @ Aug 2nd 2006 11:55AM
"the largest complaint was that the controls were too imprecise... "
Funny, I heard exactly the opposite complaint from E3, that the control was TOO precise and was picking up all your hand jitter, or that sensitivity was jacked up way to high in the demos and thus were difficult to control, with subtle movements sending the cursor from one end of the screen to the other.
Jdoki @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:01PM
I don't completely agree with the final statement in the article.
Sure the devices were imprecise; but in my opinion they failed because they were add-ons.
Who wants to buy something that is only supported by one or two games?
The Wii comes with motion sensing right out of the box, so there's no question over whether it will/won't be supported.
If you look back at add-ons you'll generally see it's a vicious circle - devs won't suport it as it's not standard, people won't buy it as there's no support for it...
Rumble support on the N64 was Ok, but not great. Support for the Dreamcast lightgun.. pretty weak. The N64 memory expansion... two games was it that used it? Xbox360 hard drive... errr, I think I've said enough :)
Paul P. @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:04PM
Starcraft, Donkey Kong 64, Perfect Dark, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Turok 2, and... I think one other game I can't think of used it. Maybe Banjo-Tooie?
Player1 @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:06PM
I had a powerglove when it came out (yes, I was the one person) and there were games specifically made to use it. Guess what. It still sucked because it was so imprecise.
Controls on a standard controller are simple: press a button. Nobody can screw that up. Now when you are controlling with a device like a wiimote, the button press is now a specific movement. That throws a lot of varaibles into the mix that can make it more difficult, like if you aren't moving fast enough, far enough, too far, etc.
I just don't think it's as simple as changing a button press to a movement to make something more usable. You can't screw up a button press.
I don't mean to bash the Wii, I'm just saying I agree that it better be really accurate for it to work.
Derbeste @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:26PM
I very much doubt this is an accuracy issues like the controllers of the past.
The problem with the power glove is that many tried to use it on racing games and such that were not DESIGNED with the powerglove (and others) in mind. If they were, they would have give players a lot more leeway.
Think of how hard it is to control a fighting game on an anolog joystick. It SUCKS! VERY innacurate!!! Really...try to pull off a consistent dragon punch with the dual shock analog stick or the N64 analog nub. Now....try playing Mario 64 with the analog stick! zOMGWTFBBQ what a difference! Precise and enjoyable because the game was DESIGNED for analog control.
Games now are being devoloped specifically FOR the wiimote and leeway is being programmed into it. That is how the present differs from the past.
niels @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:29PM
I look at the wiimote and just frown...
usually the point in videogames is to make stuff happen on the screen, and the game requires you to do that with *speed* and *accuracy*.
even if the wiimote attains the required accuracy, isnt hitting a button much faster than making some kind of movement?
im just frowning away here...
niels @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:34PM
it should also be added that all the arguments against motion sensing made here apply equally to the ps3 controller...
Derbeste @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:37PM
"it should also be added that all the arguments against motion sensing made here apply equally to the ps3 controller..."
As much as I wish that were true....it's not.
The Wiimote is using motion as it's MAIN form of input. The PS3 controller put in motion sensing as just another option...but never claimed it to be used more than tradition directional stick and buttons.
ruddiger @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:45PM
All the accuracy in the world is nice, but humans don't really have the dexterity in their arms that's needed to make the wiimote practical. Typing on a keyboard or using a gamepad requires ony the use of the hand, which is capable of fine movements. Your arms are mostly at rest when usng those devices. The wiimote largely wastes the fine movement of your hand by using it to mainly just firmly grasp the controller and has your arms do the accurate and precise movement. Arms are not capable of finely controlled movement. People say that arm waving will be tiring and it won't be used, but sudden and large but innacurate movements are what arms are best at. Holding the wiimote in the air stationary and trying to precisely move it around centimetres at a time will cause fatigue much sooner.
flymolo @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:53PM
The Wiimote also doesn't nessesarily map buttons to movement. most games designed for it seem to use the movement as movement instead of a button press.
Jeremy @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:54PM
They missed 2 others: http://www.xgaming.com/newsletter/Wii%20Dupe.shtml
niels @ Aug 2nd 2006 12:56PM
i think one generalisation is that current game concepts that rely on speed and accuracy are dangerous ground for the wiimote. what will be needed is new game concepts that will make use of the motion sensing tech in an usuable, intuitive and non-frustrating way.
whether such games will be fun to play remains to be seen.
vidGuy @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:03PM
I'm impressed by the posts here. Nearly all of the pertinent information has already been discussed.
The Wii remote will see great support since it is the default control mechanism of the console. Compare this to the abysmal support of other motion-control devices, or even other periphs like the Lightgun.
Nintendo has suggested that sensitivity will be user adjustable for all games, so you will be able to control the remote to your liking.
You do not have to hold the remote out away from your body because it does not work like a Lightgun and thus you do not line up shots like a Lightgun. You do not AIM at an on screen target. Rather, you move the cursor over it much like you would move the mouse cursor on your monitor.
Player1, it may be easier to press a button, but for new comers or casual gamers, the question is 'which button?'. Example: hand your mom (or another non-gamer) a DVD remote and ask her to turn on the subtitles to your favorite DVD. Now ask her to act like the remote is a baseball bat. She may look at you like you are crazy, but the swing is going to be much easier to comprehend.
The Wii remote is in a much different class than former motion-sensitive devices. Let's give it a chance, because it could very well be the best thing going for videogames right now.
J.Goodwin @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:07PM
Paul, 'Star Wars: Episode Three Racer" supported but didn't require it.
metayoshi @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:12PM
"While interest in the Wii at this year's E3 was staggering, and most of the people who played it thought it was great fun, the largest complaint was that the controls were too imprecise... history is not working in Nintendo's favor here."
By all of what I read, it seemed like people believed that the controller was incredibly accurate and extremely sensitive. The only complaint I remember is the invisible box thing in first person shooters and not being able to make a quick 180 degree turn in those games. With today's technology, Nintendo can make a more precise controller than the Power Glove.
Also, didn't the Famicom have a microphone and it was able to connect to the internet? Look at the DS; I'd hardly call that history working against Nintendo.
mykie @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:19PM
"This first attempt at motion-sensing control technology comes from none other than Nintendo themselves"
Is the person who wrote this completely retarded? Nintendo did not make the Power Glove, Mattel did.
IT'S RIGHT THERE IN THE PICTURES, MORON!
vidGuy @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:21PM
"The only complaint I remember is the invisible box thing in first person shooters and not being able to make a quick 180 degree turn in those games. "
Metroid Prime 3 has an Expert Mode for controls that eliminates the invisible box and instead allows the player to use the remote like a mouse in a keyboard+mouse setup. The reticule stays in the center of the screen.
I can dig up the links if any one is interested to read more. It wasn't covered much because it's not the DEFAULT control method, but it is most definitely available.
Bocaj @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:21PM
The point of motion sensitive control should be to do away with pre-determined control. When you press a button in a game you are just triggering a pre-defined animation, and the Wii controller so far appears to be doing the same thing. The difference is that they have replaced pre-determined button pressing and thumbstick moving with pre-determined pointing and tilting. If the thing really did act as a 3d mouse and it was “motion-capture control” rather than “motion-sensitive control.” Now I don’t actually know, because I wasn’t at E3 and all the information on the Wii from people is so bias that it’s utterly impossible to know anything about it at all. All of the games though, appear to just have pre-determined control.
In Mario Galaxy, you shake the remote to make Mario spin. Ok, so what is the big deal. It’s the same thing as pressing a button, only now there is a movement to trigger the canned action rather than a button press. The Wii remote is better than all the other motion sensitive controllers (why do they always use the powerglove as an example, and never bring up the P5 glove) because it’s less stupid. The reason the other controllers failed because they were intensely ridiculous. The Wii remote is the first one that makes any sense, and it will probably be the first one that’s fun to use. But it’s not revolutionary, because it’s still pre-defined. “Nintendo Revolution” was never an appropriate name. A more appropriate name would be “Nintendo Step in the Right Direction.”
Jonah @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:24PM
Does this mean we will finally get Duck Hunt 2?
I for one am looking forward to the wiimote even though the past motion sensor devices didn’t work very well.
Look at the wavebird. Nintendo got it right with that wireless controller, where as every other wireless controller for any system by any company I personally had tried for a console up to that point had been spotty at best.
vidGuy @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:37PM
@Bocaj,
The Wii games discussed so far do feature canned animations. Example - Red Steel is said to have a limited number of sword slashes, i.e. it is not 1 for 1 movement. This is due to two things: 1) players are not advanced sword fighters, so the AI would have to be disgustingly simple for the game to be fun to play and 2) 1 for 1 movement is tiring. As it is, you will be able to sword fight with simple wrist movements rather than full arm swings.
However, canned animations are not the result of the hardware but rather the programming. Games could easily take advantage of 1 for 1 if they could create it in ways that wasn't tiring. So let's take a boxing game. You don't want to be swinging 2 remotes around for 10 rounds. But having the user press buttons until his/her opponent is staggering on his feet, and then allowing a finishing uppercut to be done in 1 for 1 motion control is totally possible.
Call of Duty 3 on Wii will feature motion control elements not on either the 360 or the PS3. It has been officially announced that you will be able to smack the baddies and grab their weapons using the remote.
With various games, grenades could be thrown overhead or underhand based on how you move the remote. If the developers want to make this 1 for 1 they can, allowing the player to control the speed and degree at which the grenade is thrown.
@ Jonah,
Miyamoto told IGN he is working on the "E3 Pointer Demo"... aka Duck Hunt. I'd venture a guess that it will either be part of a Wii Sports title (I expect there to be several different genres of Wii Sports) or a Virtual Console download for less than $10.
blakepro @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:46PM
Thats funny, The most common complaint I heard was that the controllers were TOO SENSITIVE... not the other way around...
They talked about how it was hard to keep their hand steady and how it was so precise that it was almost overly sensitive...
Who has this guy been talking to?
Even if the controllers end up sucking, they can always fall back on the classic controller and gamecube controller...
unreal mccoy @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:56PM
Paul, Star Wars:Rogue Squadron used it too. While it was not required, it made a big difference in the graphics.
tjgg @ Aug 2nd 2006 1:58PM
I wouldn't want to rely on that Blake..then you just have a moderately better performing gamecube. If you give up on the controller, theres nothing really left that makes it so special and unique..unless they make some realllly good games.
Brian Richerson @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:03PM
I'm dating myself here, but there were other successful "3D" game controllers and "motion sensitive" controllers that most people didn't even know about. Here is a brief description and my opinion on how good or bad they were.
Back in the late 70's and early 80's, before Atari hit it big with the 2600, my dad worked for a company that had it's hands it lots of different technologies. That company was Fairchild. They came out with a cartridge based console system that they called "Channel F". It came with two wired controllers (one for each player). You would hold the controller in, say your left hand, and with your right hand you held the top. Here is where it was way ahead of it's time.... The top could be pulled (up), pushed (down), twisted (turn right, turn left), and pushed in 8 directions (move forwards, backwards, left, right, diagonal). Many of the games used all of the directions of the controller, but the games were so simple, that you didn't actually have 3D games, just a 3D capable joystick. I remember playing a tank game where you could move your tank by pushing the top forward (say north) and turn your turret by twisting it(say headed south) and then push the top of the joystick down (to fire south while driving north).
Next memory, fast forward a couple of years, I'd say 1982, at a computer convention in Silicon Valley. The 2600 is a big hit, the Apple computers are a big hit and Atari's 400 and 800 computers are becomming very popular, using the 2600 joystick. I see one vendor with an 800 playing (I believe it was) Space Wars, but instead of a 2600 joystick, he's got what is basically an old BMX bike grip, held on it's side with a button at the "closed" end and a cable out the "open handle bar" end going to the 800. Yep, it had some sort of motion sensitive doohickey in it so that you could fly through space by tilting your hand left, right, forward or backwards. And, when you got the bad guy in your sights, push the big red button to fire.
next memory, I'll try to keep this one short. Early years of Logitech and the internet. My dad had a 3D mouse, that was used for browsing 3D websites. It was moveable like a mouse, but also had the ability to raise and lower to simulate up and down movement. It was ahead of it's time, and I haven't seen anything like it since. I think it was in the mid 90's.
Last memory. Microsoft came out with a D-pad called the Sidewinder Freestyle that they bundled with Motocross Madness. With a motion sensitive gyroscope thinghy in it, it was great for motorcycle games (especially if you needed to adjust your bike in mid air), driving games (if you didn't have a wheel) and flying games (because it worked like a yolk).
Whew, I like toys. But that's all. Enjoy.
KR @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:06PM
Nintendo fanboys: BOOO! This isn't journalism! This is flame bait!!! IGNORE THIS CRAP!!!!!!!! BOOOO!!!!!
Just because someone doesn't dare to suck Nintendo's Wii. Here's a newsflash for you Mushroom-heads: the Wiivolution has proven exactly zero so far at retail. Like it or not, there's a noteable chance that it will flop if the public rejects the remote.
LOL at #19...no, the Famicom didn't "connect to the internet." Man, I must be getting old because how someone could be that ignorant just baffles me.
blakepro @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:07PM
I'm just saying that even if the controllers do suck (which I really dont think they will) They can still use traditional controllers.
I suspect with this type of wireless connection, nintendo could probably rig up a version 2 controller as well without the need to change the hardware.
Thats really besides the point though.
Point is, that this article has a whole bunch of inaccurate information. I dont think the past failures of third party control devices are an indication of the level of sucess nintendo is going to have with the Wii (A system that was designed from the ground up with motion sensors in mind)
I know about 5 people that are interested in it just for the virtual console. I know about 3 people that are going to get it because its backwards compatible with the GC and they want to stock up on all the cheap games they have missed this generation. And I know about 10 people that (like myself) are very interested in the new method of the controlls and just cant wait to actually try them.
KR @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:08PM
Of course Nintendo didn't manufacture the Power Glove - but they still promoted the hell out of it as if they DID. It's like the crack dealer at the end of your street didn't MAKE the crack he's trying to get you to buy, but he's still trying to get you to give him your money for it. Pretending like Nintendo is totally innocent in the Power Glove dibacle is a pathetic excuse for people who can't accept reality.
Ben V @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:15PM
One major information missing here is that Nintendo's Wii is NOT ALONE in launching motion sensors as standard feature of its controllers. So does a not-so-minor player Sony with its PS3. (see http://www.exergames.com/exergames_when_exercise_m/2006/05/ps3_the_console.html)
The only thing that the PS3 does not have compared to Wii remote is rumble.
So, the question is can such giants can jointly go totally wrong. Can so many engineers, brainpower be wrong? It's possible but somehow unlikely.
There's been significant progress in both the motion sensors and the CPUs' power supposed to process their input.
Bocaj @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:34PM
@vidGuy
Ok, I don’t know anything about programming. The closest thing I can come to knowing anything about actually making games is animation (and I’m barely starting at that). My question is, how advanced of physics can the Wii do. To me, it doesn’t matter if you can role a grenade in a FPS unless it’s a physics object. I know you can do that with current gen consoles, therefore the Wii should be able to do it, but compare that to what is being done on next-gen systems. So what do physics objects depend on more, hardware or programming.
On the next gen systems, support for more advanced physics is coming up, and Lucas arts is also trying to put digital molecular matter/endorphin in games. I think that they will actually do this because these are used in 3d animation. A lot of effects in games, like HDR, and anisotropic filtering where used in 3d animation already. It’s only natural that the above technologies get used at some point in games too. It doesn’t seem like the Wii will ever be able to do that, and I think that motion-based control would go along better with advanced dynamics.
[-Z-] @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:47PM
Let faces it,average gamers are lazy. Yes it might be appealing at first to swing the Wiimote. But once you get used to it, it gets old pretty fast. For some games like onimusha, I prefer to use my thumbs instead of using my arms because I am not going to swing my arms for 5 freaking hours. History will repeat itself.
Place your bet.
Lord Meph @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:53PM
"even if the wiimote attains the required accuracy, isnt hitting a button much faster than making some kind of movement? "
Yeah. Too bad then that the wiimote doesnt have any buttons on it, eh, Elroy?
As for the pissant that wrote #29, what is your point? The people here rebuking the claims in the article did so with reasonable and factual arguements. And you come on here whining like the 8-year old pimple faced geek you probably are... For what?
Get. A. Life.
vidGuy @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:55PM
Ben V, the PS3 has motion sensitivity, but only (6?) degrees of tilting. It isn't quite on the same level as the Wii remote.
Bocaj, I know four programming languages but nothing in-depth enough to do physical simulations. I very much agree with your point, though, that 1 for 1 is useless without advanced physics in-game. And that's why I think the Wii is better suited to motion-controlled canned animation, which is not a bad thing, IMO. I'm actually very excited about that.
Life-like physical simulations require heavy-duty hardware and advanced programming. Let me use a football game as an example. Rather than programming a dozen tackling animations in the game and allowing a few factors to determine which one to use, the developer would create an advanced calculus that would take into effect everything that is a part of real life physical reactions: speed, mass, inertia, angles, etc. Everything that is interacted with in a game must have a list of properties. Once everything has correct properties, the background physics must be in place to allow these things to interact realistically.
This is no small task. However, it will become a viable option down the road when realistic physics 'libraries' are available. See, programmers don't write all their own code, sometimes they borrow a common task from a library. In video games, this may be the "Earth" physics library, which a game developer would then tweak to his/her liking.
While I'm sure that some more advanced physics will be coming to all next-gen systems, the Wii's less tech power will not likely be able to handle the more advanced stuff. Yet, I don't see "virtual reality" level physics being useful in video games for at least another 5 years. That means that the Wii won't be missing out on much.
[-Z-], I'll place my bet on Nintendo leading worldwide hardware sales by at least 10%. After all, you will be able to play nearly all of the Wii games without using a single arm swing. Even Wii Sports Tennis can be controlled within a few inch cube.
Evan @ Aug 2nd 2006 2:57PM
Several years ago, I worked with a tracking system for the disabled that was similiar to Nintendo's IR tracking bar. It was very robust, and could accurately determine both pointing at a screen, and the device's location and orientation in 3D space. It had the same limitation as has been said about Nintendo's system (it didn't work if you were too close or far from the computer monitor), but otherwise it was almost perfect.
If Nintendo's IR tracking system works as well as that unit, then we have nothing to worry about.
Lord Meph @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:06PM
"The only thing that the PS3 does not have compared to Wii remote is rumble."
Bull$hit Alert!
Wii Remote: Communicates positional data in conjunction the Wii console. Console knows when the remote is pulled forward, backward, left, right, up, down. It has a built in 3-axis MOTION SENSOR (not to be confused with a tilt sensor, as was featured in the Gameboy game, Kirby Tilt n Tumble.)
PS3 remote: "nope."
Wii Remote: Allows for pixel perfect pointing/manipulating of data on tv screen
PS3 remote: "Well, I do have the same analog stick Ive had since 1998"
Wii Remote (w/ nunchuck): has an accellerometer that can determine the amount of "force/speed" that is used when the controller is pushed in any given direction.
PS3 remote: "I'm silver and shiny!"
WiiRemote: has a built in speaker for added control feedback
PS3 remote: "Did I mention my SNES-inspired button layout?"
WiiRemote: only requires one hand to operate
PS3 remote: "not unless you arent concerned with accuracy..."
Gameboy Advance Game "Kirby Tilt n Tumble": Has a tilt sensor that can determine if the unit is tilted left or right.
PS3 remote: "I can do that!!"
baberg @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:12PM
[-Z-] "Yes it might be appealing at first to swing the Wiimote. But once you get used to it, it gets old pretty fast. For some games like onimusha, I prefer to use my thumbs instead of using my arms because I am not going to swing my arms for 5 freaking hours."
Dude! Where do you live? I'm gonna get on a jet right now and fly out to where you live, since you have a Wii and have played Onimusha on it! I can't wait to play on your Wii!
GSI @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:12PM
"This first attempt at motion-sensing control technology comes from none other than Nintendo themselves." (-Power Glove)
WRONG! I swear...I can see why people who post on gaming sites getting this info wrong (mainly b/c the ones who do get it wrong don't know anything.) However when a website does a full blown article about it and get its wrong, then that is down right pathetic.
So who made the Power Glove?
M_A_T_T_E_L !!!
It's printed on the damn ad that they posted on the website. It is a 3RD PARTY accessory! Do your damn homework people!
blahman @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:14PM
In my humble opinion, I can't say I'm a fan of where motion sensor technology is going. I don't believe in Nintendo's desire to attract non gamers with simple interactive games. All I see is less and less of a reason for developers to make my two favorite types of games, 2d fighters, and verticle shooters, for the Wii at least. These two types of games require mastery of joysticks (or d-pads) and buttons as do 2d platformers i.e. smb3. I still find it hard to believe that the people who made smb3, the quintessential 2d platformer, would eschew a conventional controller in favor of somewhat brand-spanking new technology. Before you complain, I realize that there is a d-pad and buttons on the wii remote. I just believe that the overall design seems to lend itself too much toward moving it around, and less about adding motion sensor technology to controller that can stand its own with current gen games. In this respect, I reluctantly applaud the ps3 controller, for being true to current gen design, while adding motion sensor support as a small bonus to next gen games.
My fear is that soon every developer will jump on the Wii remote bandwagon, and probably all the theoretical games displayed at the TGS controller unveiling (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tXgjYqpbhM&search=nintendo%20tgs) will probably come to fruition. Don't get me wrong, i can see why a number of you would want to play cooking games, or dentist games (as seen in the video), but as for me, I will be deeply saddened if skilled operation of joysticks and buttons becomes a lost art. I would sincerely hate it if fighting game fans of the next generation don't even know what a QCF is.
[-Z-] @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:15PM
WOW WOW WOW, I can see alot of people starting to get defensive on wiimote there. I guess PS3 must piss lot of some half-hearted fanboy to Wii. Now it's all about smashing PS3 and promoting Wii. I just wondered 360s are briefly discussed nowaday. It's all about hype, man. All Hype
Lord Meph @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:16PM
"I prefer to use my thumbs instead of using my arms because I am not going to swing my arms for 5 freaking hours."
I agree that certain games are better suited to "traditional" control. Even Nintendo themselves have freely admitted this, hence the "Classic Controller" that will be available at launch.
But you are incorrect to characterize the Wii Remote as something that requires one to "swing their arms around". You can do that if you wish, but the WiiMote only requires subtle movements to operate. Miyamoto himself has stated as much.
If that sounds too tiring for you, then how on earth can you possibly muster up the strength to bend an analog stick around for 5 hours, since the two require about the same amount of effort.... :-/
PayTheMan @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:21PM
Regarding the failed motion-controls from days passed, we all have to realize one thing: the Wii's controller, while different, isn't revolutionary technology.
I'm sure we all use one everyday as we flip through the channels which ends up being an advantage for Nintendo since most of us are already familiar with remote controls.
The difference lies in Nintendo's delivery and the fact that no video game console has ever used this as their medium of control.
Lord Meph @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:29PM
"Regarding the failed motion-controls from days passed, we all have to realize one thing: the Wii's controller, while different, isn't revolutionary technology"
The very definition of "revolutionary" is something that changes the status quo. Changes the way things are done, or in this case, changes the way games are played.
As far as home consoles are concerned, the Wii undeniably features "revolutionary tech". Similar things have been attempted in the past, but they weer always afterthoughts and were always poorly executed.
This is the first time the system itself -- and just about every original game for it -- are being built around the mode of control, which is vastly different from the "traditional" way of controlling games.
The Wii, by definition, is indeed revolutionary. Whether the revolution will succeed or not is an entirely different question, however..
Bocaj @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:30PM
@vidGuy
Ok I agree that the Wii is better for canned animations. I really think that developers should start reaching for the stars and shooting for completely freestyle control though. The control elements for Wii games need to be actually innovative though. Mario Galaxy appears to be a at least partially innovative game, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the control. The game looks different because rather than running around boxlike levels you are going in-between small planets, which is neat and different. Red Steel might be innovative due to the emphasis on impressing your enemies and making them join you rather than killing them.
A lot of people seem to think that the controller is just going to make everything different, but as those games exemplify, it doesn’t. Developers are going to have to come up with ways of using it, and the games at E3 didn’t show very innovative uses of the controller. I can think of some examples of hypotheticaly innovative uses of the controller, but a lot of them depend on physics. One way you could use the controller is to have a game were you actually use the pointer to “draw” gravity paths and portals (like the ones in Prey) through environment so your character can walk on/through them. Draw portals of varying sizes and shapes to get different effects, like say a circular portal is normal, a triangular portal will pull objects toward itself, and square portal will repel objects.
Player1 @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:31PM
vidGuy,
Come on, the question of which button to press isn't that hard to sort out. What I'm saying is that with the Wii, there are unique instructions on how to even hold the controller for each game. I think the control legends for each game will become more complicated. Before you could figure out a games controls just by pressing each button. It's not going to be as simple as that with the Wii since there's so many ways the controller can work.
vidGuy @ Aug 2nd 2006 3:48PM
I understand your point, but controls aren't 'one button = one action' anyway. You have context-sensitive buttons. In Madden, the same button is used to hike the ball, run faster, select a receiver, kick, etc, based on the situation. The Wii has the capability to eliminate the "which button" question by allowing you to mimic the motions. Perform a hike in game by making the motion with the remote, kick by moving the remote upwards, run faster by jabbing it forward. While game developers may not make the best control mapping decision, and that will certain detract from the Wii's possibilities, the objective is to make controls more intuitive.
vidGuy @ Aug 2nd 2006 4:22PM
@Bocaj
Along with making Mario spin, the remote is used to control objects around Mario. While flying from planet to planet, you wave the remote around to reach out and grab coins. You use it to hold on to a Bullet Bill until you are ready for it to fire at you, helping you destroy blockades. A second player can even help you by controlling a second remote to help you accomplish tasks. There are many other uses for the remote besides making Mario spin, and these examples are things you couldn't do with a button press.
Red Steel will be one of the first games that involves free-hand motion aiming at enemies while being able to walk and run in fully 3D (as opposed to being on rails like a Lightgun game). That seems fairly innovative to me.
Your idea of drawing is interesting. In the new Zelda game on the DS, you can use the stylus to draw a map of where to throw the boomerang. I don't see why Nintendo would skip out on using this ability in Wii games.