Chairman-Mao said:
Yeah we CAN control shooter games with motion controls; but they are MUCH better with the regular joystick controls. Just look at Call of Duty 4. It came out last year and had 2 years to improve on the original and it wasn't even equal, let alone any better. Motion controls may be better for some genres, but not shooters. |
No FPS are only meant to be played with a mouse and keyboard. Analog sticks are way to inaccurate and clumsy.
If games all goto game controllers instead of mouse and keyboard it's bye bye video games for me.
That was the prevailing attitude when the NES came out and again when Xbox tried to seriously bring FPS and RTS to consoles in a PC gaming way.
Motion doesn't work for aiming but IR on Wii does and is in fact superior to dual analog unless you have developed skills with dual analog with years of practice. Then going to IR (or even mouse) aiming feels inferior because you have no skill at it. Fact is, analog controls brought in the standard practise of 'autolock' on target and 'aided' targeting because of inherent inaccuracy of aiming with them, which was a bastardization of the FPS to many purists. IR aiming doesn't need either of those because of it's pinpoint accurancy, if you can aim which takes time to develop that skill set.
OT: I don't see the wiimote or Natal as the future but I do think the days of the PS2 type dual analog controller are over. It's too cumbersome and unintuitive for anyone that didn't grow up with it. We might see something like two nunchuks (one for each hand) with WM+ type tech and buttons for each finger and IR aiming on each - almost like holding two guns with multiple triggers and a stick on top. Or something completely different. Only time and consumer purchases will tell.
