Hey, remember that Gamasutra feature where Michael Pachter said Xbox Twitter was the greatest thing of E3? Yeah, well in that very same

feature, Cowen and Company analyst Doug Creutz had some choice words for the PlayStation Motion Controller. Specifically, Creutz believes that

while Project Natal may have gotten the bulk of E3 coverage, the PlayStation Motion Controller is the better peripheral for hardcore gamers.

"Natal appeared to me to be a technological solution in search of a problem," said Creutz. "I had a very hard time envisioning playing Modern

Warfare 3 using Natal," he said, adding, "By contrast, I had a very easy time envisioning it (and enjoying it) using Sony's control/motion capture

scheme." Creutz stated that Microsoft is likely trying to snag some of the Wii's casual marketshare -- "a difficult proposition given that you're

essentially asking casual gamers to upgrade twice during the cycle," according to Creutz --

while Sony's device caters more to the core gaming demographic.

We must point out that neither Project Natal nor the PlayStation Motion Controller are finished products, so there's no telling how they might be

implemented in future games. For example, there's no reason that Natal couldn't make use of both motion sensing and traditional control, similar

to Sony's device. Furthermore, we'd say Sony is probably just as keen to capture some of the casual market as Microsoft.

..................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Source: http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/24/analyst-playstation-motion-controller-better-for-core-gamers-th/#comments

yeah it would be pretty hilarious playing cod modern warfare 3 with natal,imagine diving behind the sofa every time you wanted cover

Yeah, i think natal needs games specifiably made for it

That would actually be pretty fun. Not to mention it would surpass Wii in console caused injuries

well said

I think that NKAJ is right in the certain genres such as FPSs (the engineers during the Sony conference even made the same point clearly by pointing out you need buttons for things such as triggers) NATAL won't work, and you won't be able to see games like the Conduit and COD.

However there is always the option of combining the regular controller and motion control (but then it goes against what Microsoft and Xbots were saying, after all the nose raising and saying *rich person accent* "Buttons? Buttons are simply a burden!")

I'm sure there are things/genres/gameplays only possible on NATAL, but I do agree that "core" games and genres, are better on the Wii/PSmote than NATAL. Even RTSs I say will be better with a mote.

But didn't Microsoft say that their product was superior specificly because it had no controller? Wouldn't putting in a traditional controler not only make them contradict that argument, but severely lessen the difference they want with their competitors?

"But didn't Microsoft say that their product was superior specificly because it had no controller?"

Microsoft can talk crap all they want.

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.

This sword fighting was the thing that got me so into it, however it still looked a bit... strange I hope they fix that.. the bow shooting was pretty cool to, they still have something to do but I liked this version much more then NATAL