Analyst: PlayStation Motion Controller better for core gamers than Natal

[Reasonable]

kowenicki said:
@akvod

I dont think they said that no.... I think they said it was superior becasue it didnt NEED one. there is a big difference.

I disagree a little.  They didn't full out claim that, but, alongside Steven Speilbergs' comments, etc the context and message offered was that Natal was an evolution beyond the controller.  Many times the idea of 'no controller' was stated as central to Natal.  Natal removed the 'barrier' of a controller, etc.

Now, of course if they decide they need controllers they'll do so.  MS is a business, they'll downplay how much they implied controllers weren't needed, etc. and release them if needed.

But right now I'd agree with the article (taking everything at face value as presented).

I can imagine many good uses of Natal for gaming, but most lean to genres and approaches that are not around games like FPS, driving, etc.  For those I absolutely believe a controller is going to be superior.  Just the lack of rumble in an FPS or driving would feel strange.  Imagine driving with thin air (as they did just to prove a point with Burnout) and feeling no judder from the road surface, no tremble from glancing into another car, just standing (or sitting) with no physical feedback, your only feedback purely visual on-screen.

Nintendo is already there in many ways, with combined motion control/feedback, and could easily add a camera too.  Sony is aiming for both, using the camera/control route - clearly taking the view that covering all the bases is the way to go, both copying Nintendo while bring in existing tech they have with the EyeToy.

MS I believe has the superior camera approach with Natal, but in the end if they don't actually mix it with controllers I'll be amazed.  Which is the point of the article and the OP.  MS did position as Natal as being all about no controllers (just look at the glossy trailers, etc. they certainly aren't imagining any controllers) and when you think about many popular genres today that's going to be hard to stick to IMHO.

But in the end that's why the article was caveated too.  A while back MS was squarely positioning 360 for games while Sony seemed to struggle with 'entertainment hub' - but now it suits their goals better MS is happy to position 360 more as an 'entertainment hub'.  Are they backtracking unfairly?  No.  Would they be backtracking unfairly mixing controllers with Natal later?  No.  But they would be backtracking.