Motion control craze hate it/love it

[marvelman2006]

If theres already a thread about this then just delete this.

I will admit I was duped into buying a PS move last novemeber thinking it was cool and would be something neat. I thought how cool it would be to play killzone 3, little big planet and stuff with it. Well almost year later and nothing really good is on it and I hoped maybe madden would have some sort of implementation for it but there not even supporting it. Im done with the whole motion control craze. Any of you guys like or hate your Kinects, Wii's or Moves?

 

[Oscorp]

I've never tried Move or Kinect, but I've played some Wii and I really don't like it. I don't like the idea at all that you have move all your body when playing TV-games. When I want to exercise I go out for a walk or go to the gym, play some football (soccer) with my friends or some other activity. Playing games should be like watching a movie; it can make you put your whole mind into it but it's still very relaxing. Normal controllers are much easier to use and much more accurate.

 

[Upset Spideyfan]

Outside of party games I've only ever seen a few titles that I thought benefited from the motion controls. I wouldn't go so far as to say that they don't have their own place and I'm sure in the future we'll see such control schemes better integrated as the technology improves but I'm not crazy about them as they stand right now.

 

[Benstamania]

The only "motion gaming" I like is the Wii and even then I don't really play their full on motion games (like the sports titles...) I'll play Mario, Zelda, ect. I will say Godfather: Blackhand Edition was pretty great on the Wii though. I couldn't get into it as much on the 360. The Kinect and Move are... weird. Kinect seems to forced and Move seems like "Hey, we can do that Wii thing too! ...Just with less games that take advantage of it."

Bottom line is: I'm not big on motion gaming at all. I have no issues with Nintendo but the other guys are obviously just jumping on the band wagon. Sure the tech behind Kinect is cool... but we're probably never going to get anything more than a suped up EyeToy.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

double post

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

I've never tried Move or Kinect, but I've played some Wii and I really don't like it. I don't like the idea at all that you have move all your body when playing TV-games. When I want to exercise I go out for a walk or go to the gym, play some football (soccer) with my friends or some other activity.

The Wii has turned what alot of people view as work into a game. It's like an achievement system were you do actually get a real life achievement for doing something worthwhile other than sitting on your butt playing halo man shooting Pokemon. It's also opened games to people who aren't necessarily in our demographic.

It's similar tol what Gabe Newell was talking about at the "games for change" keynote. When a 10 year old kid plays something like a World Of Warcraft raid, he probably needs to learn quite alot about skills, how they combine, the layout. Classes, stats e.t.c.... but alot of those kids probably couldn't point out Canada on a map because learning and thinking, is boring. By just changing the perspective people can become really engaged. Games can do that, arguibly more so than tv or movies because they are interactive.

One of the few "sit on your butt games" that actually does set out to educate as well as entertainment is probably Total War. I think having two tv shows using it to demonstrating military tactics is pretty much proof of a game being able to transcend something designed for young males who want to shoot things in the face and save america. Which is fine but it's almost what gaming with high quality games is totally focused on. Also the wii made a crapton of money by specifically aiming games not at these people, which is probably why Microsoft and Sony are ripping it off. I think you could argue the wii is actually the only true next generation console, for winners with big muscles. While the Playstation 3 and Xbox360 are essentially the same console, with slightly more power. The wii has arguably contributed more to gaming, being a gamechanger for both this and the coming generation.

 

[Oscorp]

You know, I see gaming as something fun to do once in a while, not as some kind of education or sport activity or whatever you'd want to call it.

That's the charm with games to me. After school or work, if you have nothing to do, you can sit and relax and play a little on the console. Like watching a movie.

I love the Total War games, but not all games should be educative. I know you didn't say that, but you seem to bash all games that aren't that. I've learned things in school and will learn more in the real life. I use my body at work, at the gym, when going for walks etc. There's no need for me to use a gaming console for either of those two things. Sure, if a great game also learns me interesting things, that's definitely a plus. But I don't want to wave my arms like an idiot every time I want to play.

I must ask you though, in what way is motion control more educative?

I have no problem if motion control is an OPTION for very specific games, but if it starts to become the main way of playing then I'll have no interest in playing games anymore. It's kinda like what 3D is for movies these days.

EDIT: However, I must say that I agree that WoW is one of those games that is destructive. The world in that game is just too "big" and players have to memorize so many things and details that it kinda takes over their minds. That's why I don't like RPG's or other games that are like WoW. It requires the player to be so into it that he eventually becomes socially handicapped.

But I don't understand why regular games such as Gears of War would be addictive. Those games aren't designed for you to play forever, but more like a fun thing to play through once in a while. If one becomes addicted by such a game, then there is something wrong with the person playing and not in the game itself IMO.

 

[StrainedEyes]

I bought a Wii at launch and never touch it. Kinect has some good ideas but man the software is terrible and it's still really janky.

Move has intrigued me for awhile now. Some of the PSN games for it look great (echochrome 2, beat sketcher, the LPB dlc, tumble), but I was so thoroughly burned by the Wii that it will take something awesome to get me to pick one up.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I'm actually more in the 'impartial to it' camp. I don't really have a strong love or hate kind of feeling towards motion control; it's more that I just don't really care all that much about it. I've played a couple of Wii games that focused on motion that were okay, but overall, I find myself bluntly apathetic about it.

 

[SuperFerret]

Depends on the game. The Wii's done it the best using their party/sports games, but even then, platformers like Mario and Donkey Kong don't need the occasional wiggle. I don't mind if the tech improves, as long as it doesn't completely replace a handheld controller.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

I must ask you though, in what way is motion control more educative

I wasn't saying that. using a traditional control scheme can also probably just be as educating. The thing is though, games that use a control pad, or mouse and keyboard, tend to be in the demographics of games aimed at young males not really interested in doing anything outside of entertainment. The wii's motion control almost entirely ignored that demographic and was successful in doing so. With the wi''s motion control, anyone can use it. It's very simple. A 3 year old or an 80 year old. While I did use Total War as an example, that isn't accessible and is also arguably aimed at young males.

The Wii Fit commercial doesn't have some 14-20 year old male in it, or some dude in a helmet shooting pokemon, it uses Hellen Mirren, a 75 year old woman who is fit as well as attractive. It's not aimed at you or me, or even probably a male. A woman. perhaps old, just given birth, whatever, can learn things like Yoga, stretching, reps, body clock, whatever, in a very accessible, entertaining and personal manmer. While you could just say they could go down the gym, not everyone has the confidence or means to do that.

 

[Benstamania]

I actually just traded my Move in. Biggest waste of money ever, IMHO.

 

[Soapy]

My opinion when all of this motion control stuff started was that it was a gimmick and a fad. Which is an opinion I still hold. Nintendo changed nothing (except their financial standing) with the Wii. All they did was remap the press of a button to a flick of the wrist. There's nothing innovative about that. In the vast majority of Wii games, even in most first party titles from Nintendo, you're doing the exact same things you've always done, just in a really janky unresponsive kind of way. And if you think that you're getting any real exercise by playing motion games then you're being delusional. Even the "fitness" games aren't a replacement for a actual workout.

Now on to this idea that motion controls, the Wii in particular, have opened up gaming to a whole new audience. Unless we're counting soccer moms who bought the Wii on a whim because they saw it on The Today Show and forgot about it a month later, then it's total nonsense. A fallacy. The best-selling console of all time (the sales of which the Wii hasn't come close to matching) is the Playstation 2. A console with a "complicated" controller, which is ostensibly the largest barrier to entry for most people. The best-selling video game of all time is apparently Call of Duty: Black Ops. One of those damn "complicated" games that uses so many buttons.

I don't really have a good way to integrate this into my previous paragraphs, so I'll just stick it here by itself: The Wii's sales have been in a sharp decline for two years and it still has a lousy attach rate. So yeah, there's that.

As for the other guys, Move was dead in the water from day one as far as I can tell. I know it's had decent sales, but I just don't see or hear about anyone getting excited for any Move games. I don't even see anyone using those controllers at all. Kinect will follow the exact same path as the Wii. Pretty strong hardware sales, but very poor software support from publishers and low attach rate from consumers, followed by irrelevance. Though I imagine Kinect will complete that cycle much faster than the Wii did.

My personal feeling about motion control is that I'm pretty much indifferent to it. For a while there after the Wii became really successful, I was fearful that this was how all gaming was going to be moving forward, but it's clear to me now that there's absolutely no danger whatsoever of traditional video games going away. At least not due to the perceived popularity of motion controls.

 

[Oscorp]

You, Soapy, speak the truth!

 

[SuperFerret]

He used the "F" word. I'm out.

 

[marvelman2006]

I actually just traded my Move in. Biggest waste of money ever, IMHO.

Im trading mine in tonight through amazon while it still has some worth to it. I havent had a feeling of regret like this since my horrible experience with sony customer servie and how they tried to not pay for my ps3 to get replaced when it still had a week left under the warranty. The move just never had any great games to go with it besides golf or tennis. I maybe might have kept it if madden offered support like it does for the wii but oh well.

 

[SpideyVille]

I was always a Nintendo person since my brother was a Sony person, so after he got a PS3, I got a Wii and it was fun for a while, but I found myself switching to a regular controller in games that allowed their use. I haven't really played my Wii and the last game I got for it was Mario Galaxy 2 a few months ago, but I recently got a PS3 for Christmas and when I tried to go back to the Wii, I stopped playing a few minutes later because I just didn't like it anymore.

Sure it was innovative, but it shouldn't replace the controller.

 

[Havok83]

Overall if given a choice, I tend to prefer a controller to motion control. Some games however are just as good if not better with motion controls. Heavy Rain and Dead Space Extraction are 2 for the PS3 that come to mind

 

[SpideyVille]

I haven't tried the Move, but I'd imagine the idea of certain games being compatible with it works much better than every game depending on it like it does for the Wii.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Now on to this idea that motion controls, the Wii in particular, have opened up gaming to a whole new audience. Unless we're counting soccer moms who bought the Wii on a whim because they saw it on The Today Show and forgot about it a month later, then it's total nonsense.

When you look at the stats of people playing core games, massive chunks seem to be doing the exact same thing "soccer mums" are doing. Not fully explorering the product. These games are something like only 6-12 hours each. So, more than a month? Unless you count multiplayer. Doubtful. Is it even a new audience? Debatable. I think it's pretty unfair to have a dismissive attitude to people who don't really play games buying and using the wii for a set duration as it would seem the same thing is happening across the "hardcore" platforms.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=417616

Modern Warfare 2
Complete the game - 66.75%

Mass Effect 2
Complete Final Story Mission - 65.8%

CoD4 Modern Warfare
Complete the Game - 64.41%

Gears of War 2
Complete all acts - 62.22%

Assassins Creed 2
Complete Final Mission - 57.59%

Halo 3
Complete the Game - 56.69%

Halo Reach
Complete the Game - 56.18%

Shadow Complex
Complete the Game - 55.88%

Gears of War
Complete all acts - 55.84%

Castle Crashers
Complete the Game - 55.16%

Mass Effect
Complete Mass Effect Playthrough - 54.79%

Resident Evil 5
Complete All Chapters - 54.54%

Halo ODST
Complete the Game - 53.68%

CoD World at War
Complete the game - 49.14%

Braid
Complete the game - 45.01%

Fallout 3
Finish Finally Story Mission - 44.85%

Assassins Creed
Complete Assassins Creed - 44.57%

Bayonetta
Complete all Chapters on any difficulty - 43.58%

Dead Space
Complete the game - 43.24%

Dirt 2
Completed the Singleplayer - 41.29%

Devil May Cry 4
Complete All Missions - 36.78%

Alan Wake
Complete the game - 35.56%

Grand Theft Auto IV
Complete the final mission - 32.15%

Darksiders
Complete the game - 30.81%

Dead Rising
Survive 72hours - 26.18%

Battlefield: Bad Company 2
Finish Last Mission - 23.88%

'Splosion Man
Complete the Single Player game - 16.16%

Trials HD
Complete Extreme - 12.20%

Battlefield: Bad Company
Complete Last Mission - 7.56%

Red Dead Redemption
Complete the final Story Mission - 5.2%

The best-selling console of all time (the sales of which the Wii hasn't come close to matching) is the Playstation 2. A console with a "complicated" controller, which is ostensibly the largest barrier to entry for most people.

True but the Playstation 3. it's succesor that carries on the same mentality, isn't the best selling console of the generation and the wii didn't exist back then. Now that the wii does exist in the same realm of the Playstation. Most likely because A) It's cheaper and B) It's accessible which seem to be what both Microsoft and Sony are trying to do. With a bunch of wii knockoffs. It seems also the generation is being extended partly because the wii has shown people don't necessarily care about cutting edge graphics.

The best-selling video game of all time is apparently Call of Duty: Black Ops. One of those damn "complicated" games that uses so many buttons.

Yup

Black Op's sold what, 18 million? From what I read, Wii sports has shipped 76 million units. Which is about 3-4 times higher. I'm pretty sure Wii-Fit also had higher sales by a few million. If you combine it with wii-fit plus, it would be about 40 million. Most hardcore games outside Call Of Duty are lucky if they hit 1-2 million.

Even if you look outside of the wii at new bussiness models with games aimed at a similar audience, namely, casual people who may not necessarily play games, or again, like the wii fit, males. Farmville is sitting with 100 million registered users with about 30 million active users. Which is hilarious, as when you look at it, farmville is actually a casual strategy game. Angry Birds is also sitting with something like like 300 million, both these games aren't hardcore, aren't really aimed at you and me and are vastly more popular than most (if not all) hardcore games. That's not to say hardcore games can't flourish under the right bussiness model, League of Legends is doing very well, not quite farmville but pretty well.

Actually, we are also ignoring the Nintendo DS, which again, like the wii, is a family freindly casual platform. Nintendogs (a pet simulator) is sitting with 23 million sales. That also, like the wii, used a new control system, didn't it? Touchscreen and a microphone. Very accessible, a game that revolves around nurturing rather than destruction. Which is pretty much the vast majority of games core gamers play.

Waving a stick, dancing like a jerk and pressing X to win is the future. Most of Microsofts e3 confrence this year, very much like last year, was pandering to casuals. Even looking at supposedly "hardcore" games they too have became increasingly simplified because they too want to reach out to people other than you and me like the wii has.

 

[Soapy]

When you look at the stats of people playing core games, massive chunks seem to be doing the exact same thing "soccer mums" are doing. Not fully explorering the product. These games are something like only 6-12 hours each. So, more than a month? Unless you count multiplayer. Doubtful. Is it even a new audience? Debatable. I think it's pretty unfair to have a dismissive attitude to people who don't really play games buying and using the wii for a set duration as it would seem the same thing is happening across the "hardcore" platforms.

First off, my argument was admittedly quite reductionist, but I think it's truthful. Or at least fairly accurate. Also, the data you posted, while interesting, wasn't really relevant to my point. Which didn't have anything to do with not finishing games. Who cares if 1/3 of the people who played Call of Duty didn't finish the campaign? They probably play the **** out of its multiplayer. Everyone knows that's the primary draw for that series. And I would bet quite a bit that the people who play the games on that list are probably quite active in regards to gaming. Playing a variety of games fairly frequently.

Anyway, my point was about buying a console and letting it sit and collect dust for years after only using it with one or two games for a very short period of time. If that is the experience of most Wii owners, and by all indications I've seen, that seems to be the case, then that hardly qualifies as broadening the market and bringing in a bunch of new gamers into the fold, and all that good stuff.

I mean, it's great Nintendo sold all of those consoles, but when the majority of people who bought them don't buy games to play on them, then it's bad for the industry. But this isn't really news. That's always how Nintendo has done business.

True but the Playstation 3. it's succesor that carries on the same mentality, isn't the best selling console of the generation and the wii didn't exist back then. Now that the wii does exist in the same realm of the Playstation. Most likely because A) It's cheaper and B) It's accessible which seem to be what both Microsoft and Sony are trying to do. With a bunch of wii knockoffs. It seems also the generation is being extended partly because the wii has shown people don't necessarily care about cutting edge graphics.

The Wii sold like hotcakes, of course Microsoft and Sony are going to bite that ****. But they don't see accessibility and motion controls as an avenue to introduce more people to video games or grow the industry, they only see it as a way to grow their bank accounts.

Something that's interesting though, and this kind of strengthens my first argument, is that while Microsoft and Sony are trying to do the casual motion control thing (and not being nearly as successful as Nintendo at it) Nintendo is actually pushing back the other way a little bit. Trying to win back the enthusiast crowd they turned their backs on because they realize the "casual" udder seems to have dried up for the most part when it comes to console games.

The Playstation 3 not selling as well as its predecessor, I think, can be mostly attributed to the Xbox 360 becoming much more popular than the original Xbox, plus the price turned a lot of people off, and well, those first couple of years for the PS3 were blunderous to say the least and did an incredible amount of damage to the brand. If the Wii had any impact on the sales of the PS3 at all, I honestly don't think it was because it was more "accessible", but rather because motion control seemed like such a novel, fresh thing at the time.

Yup

A tutorial level is easy?? Someone get the President of Video Games on the phone! THIS. IS. AN. OUTRAAAGE!!

Black Op's sold what, 18 million? From what I read, Wii sports has shipped 76 million units. Which is about 3-4 times higher. I'm pretty sure Wii-Fit also had higher sales by a few million. If you combine it with wii-fit plus, it would be about 40 million. Most hardcore games outside Call Of Duty are lucky if they hit 1-2 million.

I really don't know what the current sales figured are for BLOPS, but I know they hit 20 million in March. But I'm sure Activision had some asterisks at the end of that "best-selling game ever" announcement. Actually, having a quick glance at wikipedia's page for best selling selling games of all time, it seems as if Activision might be omitting pack-ins. Which I think is fine. I don't count them either. People are buying those games whether they want them or not.

Even if you look outside of the wii at new bussiness models with games aimed at a similar audience, namely, casual people who may not necessarily play games, or again, like the wii fit, males. Farmville is sitting with 100 million registered users with about 30 million active users. Which is hilarious, as when you look at it, farmville is actually a casual strategy game. Angry Birds is also sitting with something like like 300 million, both these games aren't hardcore, aren't really aimed at you and me and are vastly more popular than most (if not all) hardcore games. That's not to say hardcore games can't flourish under the right bussiness model, League of Legends is doing very well, not quite farmville but pretty well.

Facebook games and the vast majority of iOS games are a totally different beast when comparing them to console and PC games. They're apples and oranges. Hell, they're more like apples and deck chairs. Totally, fundamentally different. If Portal is comparable to a movie, then Angry Birds is comparable to the popcorn you buy on the way in to the theatre that you probably didn't really want or need. It's an impulse item. Though much cheaper than movie popcorn. :/

Facebook games are trifles. I read an article recently about the correlation between the decline of the soap opera and rise of Facebook games. Apparently the prevailing theory is that bored housewives are now using Farmville to kill time between loads of laundry instead of watching soaps.

I'm not trying to be dismissive of these other kinds of entertainment, but they really are completely different. The only reason people want to push PC and console games into the same pile as these other things is because they're all interactive in some way. That's the only thing they really have in common.

Waving a stick, dancing like a jerk and pressing X to win is the future. Most of Microsofts e3 confrence this year, very much like last year, was pandering to casuals. Even looking at supposedly "hardcore" games they too have became increasingly simplified because they too want to reach out to people other than you and me like the wii has.

I genuinely don't believe that. I mean, maybe the games with the biggest budgets might lean further that way in the future, but I don't think for a second that motion controls are going to have a huge impact on most traditional games. Here's why, and this something that goes back to what I said in my last post about not being afraid of motion controls affecting traditional games. What I'm about to say isn't a word for word quotation, but you'll get the gist of what was said. In an interview with Todd Howard a few years back when the Wii was at its height of mainstream notoriety, one question the interviewer basically asked can be summed up as this, "The Wii is pretty popular, are you guys going to sell out and make games for the Wii?" And Todd responded, "Well, we don't have anything planned, but there's no reason we can't make a Wii game some day in the future. But if you're asking if we're going to stop making the kind of games we're known for making then the answer is no. We love playing these kinds of games and we love making them." He then went on to say that game developers in general like making conventional types of games. So yeah, I really don't see the future of games only being "Dance like a jackass!" or "Press button for awesome!".

And if the worse case scenario happens and from here on out all consoles are heavily based on motion controls, and every mainstream game is "Waggle to win!" Then you'll see game developers leave the big publishers and form smaller indie studios where they'll make similar games to what they used to make, just with a smaller budget. We've already seen some go that route, and the end result is usually pretty good. So either way, we really have nothing to worry about.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

I've got an Xbox 360 and Wii, while I probably have double the number of games for the 360. There are still a number of good games on the Wii and a decent number uses the motion control very effectively. It's just a matter of taking the time to develop it well. Metroid Prime 3 is a great example, that game uses the motion controls really well, Boom Blox is another example. Rayman's Raving Rabbids and Zach&Wiki are others. That said, I don't plan on getting a Kinect, right now everything is either a ripoff of a Wii game, or an "on rails" shooter, not worth $150.

 

[TheBat812]

I have yet to play a game on PS Move or Wii that is MORE fun than a traditional game. Here's hoping it happens, but it might be awhile. That Killzone gun thing seemed like a potentially awesome experience, but I heard mediocre-at-best reviews.

 

[Benstamania]

Overall if given a choice, I tend to prefer a controller to motion control. Some games however are just as good if not better with motion controls. Heavy Rain and Dead Space Extraction are 2 for the PS3 that come to mind

Really? I tried HR with the move and wanted to throw the stupid thing off the wall, lol.

 

[DrCosmic]

My opinion when all of this motion control stuff started was that it was a gimmick and a fad. Which is an opinion I still hold. Nintendo changed nothing (except their financial standing) with the Wii. All they did was remap the press of a button to a flick of the wrist. There's nothing innovative about that.

It's innovation according to the dictionary. "All they did" is a very old form of oversimplification. Downplaying a fact in order to support a point. I like your data, but the conclusions you're drawing I disagree with.

Now on to this idea that motion controls, the Wii in particular, have opened up gaming to a whole new audience. Unless we're counting soccer moms who bought the Wii on a whim because they saw it on The Today Show and forgot about it a month later, then it's total nonsense. A fallacy. The best-selling console of all time (the sales of which the Wii hasn't come close to matching) is the Playstation 2.

As for the other guys, Move was dead in the water from day one as far as I can tell. I know it's had decent sales, but I just don't see or hear about anyone getting excited for any Move games. I don't even see anyone using those controllers at all. Kinect will follow the exact same path as the Wii. Pretty strong hardware sales, but very poor software support from publishers and low attach rate from consumers, followed by irrelevance. Though I imagine Kinect will complete that cycle much faster than the Wii did.

Again, you seem to have some standard for what constitutes a new audience that isn't baked into the words 'new' and 'audience.' For you, low attach rate = irrelevance, as opposed to 'not enough relevance for me to respect.' More people play video games now that would never have picked them up... how many tens of millions still do, I don't know, but it is tens of millions, and in the next gen of consoles, they'll expect more party games that support more headset-less socialization as part of their gaming experience. And they'll get it, cuz there's an audience there. How many years does a fad go before it becomes more than just fad? Apparently, five is not enough. -shrug- Even in the worst case scenario, where less than a million people still actively use the Wii/Kinect/Move, the movement got a generation of kids 3-10 year olds into videogames five years earlier than they normally would have, which is not only good for the industry, but dang near necessary.

Personally, I think the best motion control games are an absolute blast, and a unique experience that simply cannot be obtained any other way. There's nothing like dancing with my cousins, or the kids at my day camp to Michael Jackson Experience. For those memories alone, the Kinect and the Wii have my stamp of approval. I don't want it near my Mass Effect, of course, they're completely different experiences, but both are a lot of fun, and the fact that both are viable validates the other in a way that is, in my humble opinion, quite innovative.

edit:
I'm sure this is wrong, but it's hard for me not to see the degrading of this motion control innovation as valid. It's good for the industry, and it hasn't hurt anybody's controller-based gaming experience. Most of the people complaining aren't in the target audience for these games, so it leaves me wondering, why trash talk it? I don't like the Disney channel, but I don't spend a lot of time thinking about it because its for tween girls. Even if it does own my comic books, at the end of the day, it's good for them and it doesn't adversely affect me. Perhaps someone can show me how motion controls actually cause problems for hardcore gamers one day.