Quantcast
I'm Sorry but PS3 & 360 Motion Peripherals = Epic Fail.

Forums - Gaming Discussion - I'm Sorry but PS3 & 360 Motion Peripherals = Epic Fail.

Key difference between the Wii-mote and Xbox's and PS3 camera based motion is the fact the Wii's controls for all it games and the console itself is based around it. The control system is what made the Wii.

I still don't like it mind you over a good fixed controller but it is a dang sight better then the Natal and PS3's advance PSEye/dildo combination. They have limited uses as far as I can see, while the PS3's has that nice tech demo for 'bow and arrow' thing.

Motion plus, I don't think it'll take a hold like people think. It's another thing people have to buy and developers will have to make games work for both those without it and those with.

I wish all companies good luck on their motion things but I've done EyeToy and not played it in years. All are a waste of money in my view to 'score' a market already won. They just need to make games and make the people who own their consoles happy.



Hmm, pie.

Around the Network
Dinomax said:
kabhold said:
tAeZeR said:
Arius Dion said:
I understand the OP's point; If you hated or hate motion controls before, why is it now motion is cool when your console of choice implements it? He's basically calling out the fanboys.

The main reason I (im sure many others) dont like the Wii motion control was that it was way too imprecise and the quality of games were not up to par as the PS3 or the 360.

both of the montion control systems sony and ms showed is not just a copy, but a vast improvement in this technology!
there is a big difference

Bolded-  My thoughts exactly.

 

I want my wii to play like I expected it to. 

Well luckily for you this month you do, yep that motionplus will be out....for a year literally before the others. 

As for the vast improvement, geeze you guys sure know alot about something most people haven't got to play or running on tech demos vs actual games using it. 

 

 

I haven't played it, but I have eyes and can comprehend.



The issue is not technology. Microsoft and Sony will deliver competent and possibly compelling products and Nintendo has developed an improvement for its system.

The issue is market. There are already 50M Wiis with motion sensing. There are 0M (as in ZERO) Xbox 360s or PS3s with their respective new technologies. That means existing customers will have to pay for the new add-on and new customers will have to do the same (or pay more up front).

This leads to a vicious circle. Software drives hardware sales. But without a hardware install base, there is limited (or no) software development. Sony and Microsoft might make games/tech demos (as some derisively have called the Wii Sports line), but how much will others invest in these new technologies?

The Wii Motion Plus is getting support because it is building on an existing base -- and because the software is literally moving hardware. Three (in the US or four in Europe) of the five games games coming out for the WM+ include hardware bundles. Thus third parities get to sell the hardware (even before Nintendo). That will put in people's hands and increase adoption. But it is an add-on with a small price tag ($10 more in a game bundle to $20 more MSRP to $25 more for Gamestop mark-up).

Conversely, there is no base for Microsoft and Sony currently. And no one knows yet how much people will have to pay or how many will pay or what there will be to play for the new devices.

Nevertheless, the failure is not in the technology itself. The failure is in being three years behind the market leader in being released. These products will be good but they will be niche. They will also probably be standard in the next console releases by their respective companies.

Mike from Morgantown

Remember, the best tech does not always sell the best -- or even sell enough to survive.



      


I am Mario.


I like to jump around, and would lead a fairly serene and aimless existence if it weren't for my friends always getting into trouble. I love to help out, even when it puts me at risk. I seem to make friends with people who just can't stay out of trouble.

Wii Friend Code: 1624 6601 1126 1492

NNID: Mike_INTV

@mike - Its good to know not everyone on this site has lost their minds. You are 100% correct.



Questions to Microsoft about Natal

- Where's the rumble feedback if there's no controller?
- If there's no rumble, how can I feel how strong a hit was? just watching like three generations ago?
- If there will be a peripheral that will give me rumble, isn't this agaisnt the no controller philosophy Natal aims for?
- And if there's a perpheral, why two input devices when I just want one?


Questions to Sony about their controller?

-If that ball is used to detect the position of the controller on screen, if I block it there will be no indication?
-If the controller also detects position without the camera.... why need the camera?
-If you can add a weapon to the players hand with the eye toy, I saw you can give things to players without the need for a controller, so why the controller?
- if you add an extension to that controller, won't that be way to similar to Wii controllers?



Around the Network
rafichamp said:
Actually Sony's eyetoy came out before the Wii mote came out. Get your facts straight


But the Power Glove came before both!

(>'.')>



the_bloodwalker said:
Questions to Microsoft about Natal

- Where's the rumble feedback if there's no controller?
- If there's no rumble, how can I feel how strong a hit was? just watching like three generations ago?
- If there will be a peripheral that will give me rumble, isn't this agaisnt the no controller philosophy Natal aims for?
- And if there's a perpheral, why two input devices when I just want one?


Questions to Sony about their controller?

-If that ball is used to detect the position of the controller on screen, if I block it there will be no indication?
-If the controller also detects position without the camera.... why need the camera?
-If you can add a weapon to the players hand with the eye toy, I saw you can give things to players without the need for a controller, so why the controller?
- if you add an extension to that controller, won't that be way to similar to Wii controllers?

MS questions:

- There will be a controller.  Even if they have thus far claimed there wont be, eventually there will. Otherwise it will be failboat to Failington.
- See above.
- Its a dumb philosophy, so who cares?
- Eh. So you have something in your hand, but it still requires something on top of the TV. Sounds exactly like how the Wii works.

SONY questions:

- Yeah that'd be pretty much true, if it can't see the controller, it won't be able to show it.
- Its all additional information. The controller has much the same stuff as the wiimote+ minus the camera, which SONY moved to on top of the TV so the camera can usefully be used to collect additional information besides where the remote is.
Simple. The camera alone is not good enough to get telemetry like the angle of your hand if its in a certain position. The camera + the remote make it possible to get more info.
- Sorta. The SONY solution, and even the MS solution are slightly to a large step above the NINTENDO solution in terms of information that can be gathered by the games.



A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of his first breath to the moment of his last.



dharh said:
the_bloodwalker said:
Questions to Microsoft about Natal

- Where's the rumble feedback if there's no controller?
- If there's no rumble, how can I feel how strong a hit was? just watching like three generations ago?
- If there will be a peripheral that will give me rumble, isn't this agaisnt the no controller philosophy Natal aims for?
- And if there's a perpheral, why two input devices when I just want one?


Questions to Sony about their controller?

-If that ball is used to detect the position of the controller on screen, if I block it there will be no indication?
-If the controller also detects position without the camera.... why need the camera?
-If you can add a weapon to the players hand with the eye toy, I saw you can give things to players without the need for a controller, so why the controller?
- if you add an extension to that controller, won't that be way to similar to Wii controllers?

MS questions:

- There will be a controller.  Even if they have thus far claimed there wont be, eventually there will. Otherwise it will be failboat to Failington.
- See above.
- Its a dumb philosophy, so who cares?
- Eh. So you have something in your hand, but it still requires something on top of the TV. Sounds exactly like how the Wii works.

SONY questions:

- Yeah that'd be pretty much true, if it can't see the controller, it won't be able to show it.
- Its all additional information. The controller has much the same stuff as the wiimote+ minus the camera, which SONY moved to on top of the TV so the camera can usefully be used to collect additional information besides where the remote is.
Simple. The camera alone is not good enough to get telemetry like the angle of your hand if its in a certain position. The camera + the remote make it possible to get more info.
- Sorta. The SONY solution, and even the MS solution are slightly to a large step above the NINTENDO solution in terms of information that can be gathered by the games.

 

With MS questions, you gave the idea how much promise it has and how will underdeliver to the consumers

 

they are a large step above but many steps back as well compared to their standard controllers (no feedback, more than one input device, no integraded hardware)



Hahahahahaha... Sony and Microsoft fanboys really make me laugh.

Do you people actually believe that Sony was the first for motion control? Seriously, stop saying they did this back in the ps2 day because they did nothing with motion control during the ps2 era. Do you guys think Nintendo decided to add motion control in 2006 one month before the wii release date? Jesus christ... They already knew they had to do this after the launch of the failcube(ok gamecube)
The hard cold truth is, sony wouldn't dare to release motion control first. They copied from Nintendo, just accept it.

Fanboys called motion waggle and gimmick, then so is this. 

 

For the people who think this will be succesfull, it won't. It will fail and they know it. It's just to prepare them for the next gen.



the_bloodwalker said:
dharh said:
the_bloodwalker said:
Questions to Microsoft about Natal

- Where's the rumble feedback if there's no controller?
- If there's no rumble, how can I feel how strong a hit was? just watching like three generations ago?
- If there will be a peripheral that will give me rumble, isn't this agaisnt the no controller philosophy Natal aims for?
- And if there's a perpheral, why two input devices when I just want one?


Questions to Sony about their controller?

-If that ball is used to detect the position of the controller on screen, if I block it there will be no indication?
-If the controller also detects position without the camera.... why need the camera?
-If you can add a weapon to the players hand with the eye toy, I saw you can give things to players without the need for a controller, so why the controller?
- if you add an extension to that controller, won't that be way to similar to Wii controllers?

MS questions:

- There will be a controller.  Even if they have thus far claimed there wont be, eventually there will. Otherwise it will be failboat to Failington.
- See above.
- Its a dumb philosophy, so who cares?
- Eh. So you have something in your hand, but it still requires something on top of the TV. Sounds exactly like how the Wii works.

SONY questions:

- Yeah that'd be pretty much true, if it can't see the controller, it won't be able to show it.
- Its all additional information. The controller has much the same stuff as the wiimote+ minus the camera, which SONY moved to on top of the TV so the camera can usefully be used to collect additional information besides where the remote is.
Simple. The camera alone is not good enough to get telemetry like the angle of your hand if its in a certain position. The camera + the remote make it possible to get more info.
- Sorta. The SONY solution, and even the MS solution are slightly to a large step above the NINTENDO solution in terms of information that can be gathered by the games.

 

With MS questions, you gave the idea how much promise it has and how will underdeliver to the consumers

 

they are a large step above but many steps back as well compared to their standard controllers (no feedback, more than one input device, no integraded hardware)

If done correctly both the MS and SONY solutions can be better than the NINTENDO motion controls.  If done wrong you're right.  That's just the way it always is in this business.  If MS adds a force feedback controller, hell it could just be something you strap around your wrist for all that matters, then it would be moot.  I still don't get why you care about more than one input device.  Nintendo uses two things for input needs, SONY's and MS's solutions will too.  There's no integrated anything with NINTENDO either.  I just dont understand what you're going for.



A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of his first breath to the moment of his last.