By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
bluesinG on 05 June 2009
Edit Thread
Squilliam said:
bluesinG said:
Squilliam said:

1. The PS3 interface feeds off Wii M+ development. The middleware comany used for M+ is used for Sony. I cannot comment on what Microsoft is doing as it seems more internal.

2. The PC is less important than ever for the consoles. I doubt the PC market has expanded to nearly the same extent that the HD consoles have essentially starting from 0.

3. I don't think at this point it would matter. Programming is not the major expense with HD games and like the above, the PC is less important than it used to be. The legacy controls are still available as well.

4. It goes without saying really.

5. See above.

6. See above, but the cost of the controls will be marginal and the initial attempts will not need a large adoption as the console manufacturers would subsidise such development.

I agree with most of what you said. Some responses:

First, related to your point 3, I agree that gamepad controllers will be around next generation, and I think that third-party developers will continue to support them. I don't think that Malstrom is predicting otherwise. He is simply predicting that few motion-controlled games will be developed for the 360 or PS3.

Second, regarding your points 2, 3, and 5, I disagree with your stance on the importance of porting. I think that currently being able to easily port between 360 and PS3 (and PC) is a MAJOR incentive for third-party developers to invest in HD games. Given that the Microsoft motion-control interface is very different from the PS3 and Wii interfaces (no buttons, joysticks, or physical controller of any kind), I think that it would be very difficult, or impossible, to port many motion-controlled PS3 or Wii games to the 360. And I think this would be a major disincentive for third parties to develop motion-controlled games for the 360 (unless MS revamps their interface to include a "360-mote"). I agree that MS and Sony will initially subsidize the development of some motion-controlled games, but it doesn't make sense for them to do that forever, and if the subsidies stop I think it will dramatically reduce or completely wipe out support for motion controls.

Third, I think we agree that the similarity of the PS3 and Wii motion-control interfaces might lead to the cross-platform development of Wii-PS3 motion-controlled games. Which would be just fine by me!

I think about these issues in economic terms, I think around the margins. The important point I have to make is that the cost of adding a PS3 mote interface to an existing game which would have already been created is the cost of designing and programming vs the benefit of using it. Since the cost of the programming is marginal with the use of essentially free Wii M+ development, then even a small userbase of PS3 Mote users would justify the expense because the expense would be extremely minor. Thats the motion component right there, as far as the pointer goes; the airmouse = wiimote = mouse. They are practically one and the same. Supporting it would be like adding mouse support to a PS3 game.Lastly, this is a very important point; There does NOT need to be a Wii game in the picture to use the interface and/or middleware.

As for Natal, I simply have no information so I cannot judge it either way.

I agree with everything you said there. I know that motion-controlled games would not HAVE to be ported between PS3 and Wii, but I do think there would be a strong incentive for that. It would be possible to develop PS3-only motion-controlled games, but I don't think there would be much incentive for third-parties to do that (except for games that are subsidized by Sony). Just like third-parties are not currently developing games for the PS Eye.