| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (71)

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:14AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
IDUNNOLOLOLOL
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:15AM jynxycat said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Kojima hit it square on the head.

Hybrid controls that use the camera system passively, or subtly, are the games that will really push this forward.

Straight motion control games will be upgraded versions of Wii shovelware.

I'm extremely excited to see what Kojima will release.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:15AM Level 47 Melee Warrior said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Agreed. It would be awesome to play with a conventional controller, but have Natal record things like facial expressions or the occasional gesture. Awesome example: A game where you control your character with the controller, but use hand signals or spoken orders to command AI teammates.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:33AM PR0F3TA said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
who said Kojima is releasing a game for Natal? He did a press conference about motion control and Natal's recognition, no where did he say he was going to work on a game for it.

So far all we have seen is casual games for it, don't expect anything good and deep out of natal till at least 2011
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 12:52PM Anthology said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Profeta is like Pachter except his predictions are baseless.
Reply

Posted: Oct 2nd 2009 11:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
On a different note, who is your avatar?
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:17AM MattF said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
100ms latency is huge...I would think that an acceptable maximum would be more like 10-20.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:28AM SoulBlade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
wow i didn't catch that bit.. that's already a 3 frame lag...

definitely not for the core experiences..
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:31AM The Monarch said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
actually, 50ms is the fastest that a game running at 60fps can possibly reach, and few games reach that. So no, 100ms is not a lot.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:32AM Enosoma said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You realize we're talking about Space Invaders, right?
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:35AM The Monarch said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
also, 100ms is the fastest that a game running at 30fps can reach, GTAIV, for example, has a 133ms latency.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:47AM SoulBlade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
xtreme - how are you getting your numbers?
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:11AM SoulBlade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
nevermind - read some links and googled around...
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:20AM jynxycat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
100ms is normal for any controller, for a game running at 30fps.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:39AM spin cycle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yes, 100ms is a huge amount of input lag. xtreme is full of it.

As to this latency article, the article is measuring total input, processing and output lag, including your TVs display lag (which rarely will be less than 1 frame). The designers of Natal are talking about trying to reach 100ms just for the input recognition and deliver time, which is just the input lag portion.

I don't see how 3 frames is the minimum round trip time, even including 1 frame of lag for your TV. If I press the button just before the end of a frame, then I only have the tail of that frame delay before the button is read and forwaded, we'll assume 0ms there, since I got lucky on the timing. Then the game will start rendering a new frame with my input taken into account, while this is done, a previous frame, which was already rendered is being displayed (as the game is double buffered), so that's an entire frame of lag. But after that 1 frame lag, the new frame is displayed. So if I have a CRT, that's 1 frame of lag. If I have an LCD or such (I do), it'll be another frame before that comes out, 2 frames of lag.

That should mean the minimum round-trip latency is 33ms for a 60fps game that is double buffered. Now, the average lag under that setup would be 42ms, since I'm not going to get lucky and push the button right at the end of a frame every time, so I have to add another half frame, an average of 0-1 frame time of delay time between my press and when it is even read.

If a game is triple buffered, it could mean the minimum latency is 3 frames, if the game does its processing in the most straightforward manner. But not all games are triple buffered and you don't have to do your input processing in the most straightforward manner (guitar games sure don't!).

Another note: The 2405FPW doesn't have a 3 frame lag, it was the 2408FPW that had huge lag, but Dell fixed it later.

Either way, no matter what the round trip latency is for the game processing, adding another 100ms input lag on top will make the total latency noticeably higher. It would at least double the latency.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 1:28PM R Planteer said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
100ms is the length of the average blink, lol.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 5:27PM arrrgh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
How do you know he didn't mean they were shooting for a total round-trip lag of 100ms? Lots can be lost in translation from foreign press conference to internet blog comments
Reply

Posted: Sep 26th 2009 3:47AM spin cycle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Natal doesn't have any control over any part of the total round-trip latency other than the input portion.

Why do you think they'd count the lag generated by the LCD TV, when changing to another TV would change it? Why do you think they'd count the lag in the game when that's up to the game programmers?
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:18AM copa said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"Moving back and forth horizontally steers the ship, while raising your arms will fire your weapon at the incoming aliens."

That sounds annoying as shit after about two minutes.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:34AM Enosoma said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I bet every amputee who was excited about not needing a controller to play with Natal is disappointed with the concept of using your arms to fire a weapon.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:21AM Chris DPSN AggieCEO XBLThe Aggi said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have to agree....I mean I know there will be better games than this...but this damn sure doesnt make me want "NATAL" at all
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:32AM maveric101 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
the image in my head literally made me lol. seeing a person scuttering back and forth with their hand up like a crab...
Reply

Posted: Oct 2nd 2009 11:24PM Kenoji said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree with Chris. I don't know about you, but I'd rather press a button than hold my arms up or wave them up and down.

That's ridiculous.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:30AM KaneRobot said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I like how the press is generally saying this thing actually works and can be very fun, but we still will get a bunch of drooling 'tards who've never used it showing up to say it sucks and nobody needs this.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:35AM Duke said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Well, I don't like the idea of it being used all the time, but I like the idea of it being used in a more passive sense. Some of the people just don't like motion controls as the means to play their games. I don't think that makes them "tards".
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:02AM TwEE said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
I'm very skeptical of anything involving Microsoft or the press. Must feel good to have faith.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:36AM Mr Khan said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I still find the whole approach of "but you can use a traditional controller with it," to be rather confusing. The point of Natal is to replace a controller, if you have to have a controller with it, you might as well drop the pretense and just use the damn controller

I quite realize that subtler motion control has often been better for older game-types (except for anything that can use pointing functionality to great effect), but why can't Natal itself do the subtler things? This is the problem that Microsoft engineers should overcome within the product itself.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:59AM Co said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
"I still find the whole approach of "but you can use a traditional controller with it," to be rather confusing. The point of Natal is to replace a controller, if you have to have a controller with it, you might as well drop the pretense and just use the damn controller"

Exactly. This thing will not reach a 3rd of the success levels as Wii.

At least Sony is taking a decent path of their own.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:05AM ructus said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
maybe something like strafing by moving your upper body while sitting on a couch, point weapon with your finger(s), while the other hand, makes simple gestures, maybe show backhand or palm to shoot, holding palm side ways to the camera stops the shooting. Then you hit these huge buttons on screen like you do on the iphone to move forwards or backwards lol.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:23AM JXCGunrunna said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I hope to god this doesnt make it into every shooter out there. Some might be able to work in small things but without an IR pointer a shooter can not have the precision needed to be competitive.

I think this would work best with RTS games like Endwar where you can use voice to issue commands and ur hands to move around the map.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:41AM Duke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
We got it already Cody, you slam anything MS does. We got it.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 1:01PM Co said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I got it Duke, you stalk and slam every post I put up that rubs you the wrong way because you have a hidden distain for my Pro Nintendo views, I got it.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 1:10PM Duke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I really don't slam you that often, but if you need to feel you're that important then go right ahead. You being pro-Nintendo has little to do with pissing on every MS related issue.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 6:42PM Co said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I'm sorry were you saying something?
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:46AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
My thoughts for a third person melee game controls:

Movement:
Step right foot forward - Move forward
Step right foot or left foot back - move backwards
Turn Hips - Turn
Stomp right foot - Stop Movement

Melee:
Left arm = Shield
Right Arm = Sword

Look Around/Camera:
Head Movement = Look Around

Options/Inventory:
Stomp right foot twice - open inventory *Usage of controller or hand gestures like pointing
Stomp left foot - back out option

I think if they make the lower half of the body static and the upper body free movement, we can really get some awesome semi virtual reality experience. What you guys think?
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:49AM SoulBlade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
how do you crouch or jump? FPS games require teabagging now.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:58AM mr nimblewick said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I hope you weren't one of the people complaining about looking stupid while playing the Wii.

Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:09AM Giggman said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
There's going to be some furniture moving going on in Antcoh's house!
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:10AM Johnny Locke said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
If you turn your head, how do you see the tv?
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:17AM Vcize said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"how do you crouch or jump?"

By crouching and jumping maybe?
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 1:08PM Shagittarius said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If only they could come up with a controller that was more responsive and less work to use, then they'd be on to something!
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 2:06PM Kodros said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"What you guys think? "

I'll be blunt. I think it sucks. I'm want to play a video game, not Twister.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 10:54AM MrU2 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I heard that THQ owns a lot of Instrument Protagonists.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:03AM Pipp said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Is anyone actually looking forward to this or think it will be something they really want to use?

I'm going to be completely honest here and say I am absolutely not excited about this in any sort of way. I think Microsoft is late to the boat, and the novelty of raising your arms to shoot stuff died out after the first week of owning a Wii. The whole waggle idea and concept is perfectly fine in moderation, but entire games it is just too annoying.

I guess I agree with what Kojima is saying. Use it sparingly.

And with that said, no one will want to spend a penny of a device that is rarely used.

It's a no win situation and I think Microsoft should be putting more efforts into their next console instead of this junk.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:43AM darkquota said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, I agree with you.
That's the main reason I'm probably going to end up passing on this if I ever get a 360. Why pay for something that's probably going to cost $150 (MS already charges $100 for a wifi adapter lol) when it's either going to only be used for subtle movements or be used to a point where it's not fun anymore (I'm lazy and I don't want to hold my hands up like I'm gripping a steering wheel for the entirety of a race).

I was really looking forward to motion control games, and while I enjoy my Nintendo Wii occasionally, it's not as great as I expected. It seems there are always going to be a few issues with functionality with motion controls (Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft's motion systems), so maybe the next few years will offer advancement in the technology until the inevitable "next big thing,": Mind Controlled games.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:28AM killr0y said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I love how the haters all try to lock Natal down to one form or another. It never crosses their mind that Natal can be used in purely "party game" fashion for some games, as a passive system for others (imagine playing Forza 3 in cockpit view with a wheel and Natal picking up that your eyes shift up and right, automatically scrolling the cockpit view to the rearview mirror). Or using Natal just for voice commands in a squad-based FPS, etc. Oh no, the hater-ade drinking 'tards automatically jump to the conclusion that Natal will turn everything into Mario Party, because they lack the comprehension necessary to understand a gaming world beyond a pair of analog sticks.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 12:19PM enbadesign said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Natal will not have the resolution reguired to pick up on eye movements to control a camera. If you think that you must be high.

The resolution of Natal's camera will be in the 2-3" range, not the submilimeter range.

Issuing voice commands doesn't need a camera, it's called a microphone. A whole lot of games already use one.

I can imagine a game controller that is directly connected to my brain where I don't need any controller or camera at all. I think it and it happens. Matel made a toy coming out this Christmas where you can move a ball up and down with your mind.

Matel could have made a product vision video like Microsoft showing you controlling your dog with your mind. Hell it's a product vision, not reality.

In reality you can move a ball slightly while concentrating very hard. It is cool but really just a gimmick. You can imagine the future posibilites but the reality is far different. Exactly the same as Natal.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 1:10PM Shagittarius said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
This talk reminds me of my friends talking about the power glove when I was a kid. Don't let your imagination run wild, its not that good.
Reply

Posted: Sep 25th 2009 11:06AM Giggman said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm not convinced yet. I like the idea but I wonder what will happen in certain situations. Like I'm 6'4, if I have to get my whole body on the screen I'm going to need to buy another house or stand in the hallway. Every time Natal has been demonstrated that I know of it has been on a big TV set or on a stage not in a living room.

Also I may be wrong again but I haven't seen anything with more than one player at a time. Everyone always takes turns. Could me and my son who is 7 and naturally shorter than me play a game at the same time where both of our bodies have to be scanned (or whatever it does).

These are the type of questions that I hope would get answered soon. (I know there is plenty of time but still... inquiring minds would like to know.) Sony's team seems to demonstrate and address these types or concerns more openly and I hope the Natal camp will do the same.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW