Natal In Halo Will Only Happen If It "Makes Sense"

[Keane Ng]

Natal In Halo Will Only Happen If It "Makes Sense"

Worried that you'll be flailing your arms around like a goon to fire your Assault Rifle in Halo: Reach? Don't get too paranoid yet: Microsoft says that it'll only incorporate motion controls "when it makes sense."

Though Bungie studio president Harold Ryan said back in June that he "absolutely" thought Halo: Reach could make use of Microsoft's everything-sensing Natal technology, don't count on it as a sure thing. Though Microsoft undoubtedly wants to show off all the motion sensing magic they've whipped up with Natal, the company says that if Natal shows up in Halo, it won't be just a gimmick.

"A lot of people are interested in what Natal's presence in Halo's going to be. We are committing to only doing it when it makes sense," Microsoft Game Studios' Alex Cutting, a producer on Halo 3: ODST, said. "We are not going to produce a gimmicky feature that just takes advantage of motion controls when it doesn't feel right."

Cutting said that if there's an opportunity to use Natal, "we will definitely investigate it. If it's fun we will leave it in the game. But further than that, I can't tell you any specific plans."

Even if Natal doesn't make it into Reach (for some reason I have the feeling that it will), Cutting still feels there's something to be said for the idea of motion controls in FPS.

"I think FPS, there's a lot to be said for dual stick control," Cutting said. "But, you know, before dual sticks came around and before Halo: Combat Evolved established it on a console, people were pretty doubtful about that, that it could ever move from keyboard and mouse. So we've seen it already form one control scheme to another. I'm not going to bet against Natal."

[Via VideoGamer [http://www.videogamer.com/news/ms_well_only_do_natal_halo_when_it_makes_sense.html]]

Permalink

 

[Caliostro]

"But, you know, before dual sticks came around and before Halo: Combat Evolved established it on a console, people were pretty doubtful about that, that it could ever move from keyboard and mouse.

And here we are 8 years later with definite proof that they suck at it and are a very, very inadequate substitute at best.

Can motion sensors be better than controllers for FPSes? Probably, not too difficult. Jamming your privates in a drawer is better than playing shooters with a controller... Can they best mouse and keyboard? There is a possibility, but it's not looking good as of yet.

 

[scotth266]

Microsoft says that it'll only incorporate motion controls "when it makes sense."

There. Argument is over: Natal is NOT becoming the only method of controls for the 360.

And I'm happy to hear the news.

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

Microsoft says that it'll only incorporate motion controls "when it makes sense."

There. Argument is over: Natal is NOT becoming the only method of controls for the 360.

And I'm happy to hear the news.

Indeed. However that tears them between "push this tech until you choke on it" in order to get maximum exposure and success, or "waft it about a bit and see who comes sniffing" approach, which is risky.

I just want to see them do a wave of interesting things with the tech, rather than a ripple.

 

[DarkMessiah]

In terms of Halo, Natal controls for Theatre (think Minority Report) and Forge would work well. Especially considering how horrific it is to become adept at Forge, if Natal is as sensitive and precise as is being made out, it would allow more control and accuracy.

 

[DrunkWithPower]

I really want to see what the natal and halo can break on through. Maybe to the other side??? (Cheesy, I know, that's all I had instead of banter)

 

[Random Argument Man]

When it "makes sense"? So in otherwords....They don't even know what they're doing?

 

[King CoN]

Good. There is no point trying to use Natal just because its there, they should just wait until they have a proper application for it.

 

[Griloch]

So they're not gonna follow the Nintendo route? I'm very glad to hear this.

 

[Kiutu]

Microsoft says that it'll only incorporate motion controls "when it makes sense."

There. Argument is over: Natal is NOT becoming the only method of controls for the 360.

And I'm happy to hear the news.

Anyone who thought that is a fool. Anything should only use stuff if it 'makes sense' so SHUT UP NO TES V using NATAl.

 

[Anton P. Nym]

"But, you know, before dual sticks came around and before Halo: Combat Evolved established it on a console, people were pretty doubtful about that, that it could ever move from keyboard and mouse.

And here we are 8 years later with definite proof that they suck at it and are a very, very inadequate substitute at best.

Yeah, it's a pity that Goldeneye crashed and burned back in '97. /sarcasm

It's not eight years, it's twelve... and it's mainly butt-hurt PC fans (or die-hard PC developers) still bugling about how dual-analog isn't appropriate for FPSes. It's long past time to get over it, really... or at least to realise that different players will have different preferences, and that the choice between dual-analog or single-analog-and-110-button controller is a personal one and not an objective matter of "better".

-- Steve

 

[scotth266]

When it "makes sense"? So in otherwords....They don't even know what they're doing?

More like: "We're not going to force people to tack this onto their games: it's their choice."

 

[Keane Ng]

I just don't want to have to buy the damn thing to get the full experience of a game like Halo, I would welcome seeing it implemented in interesting ways.

 

[Caliostro]

And here we are 8 years later with definite proof that they suck at it and are a very, very inadequate substitute at best.

Yeah, it's a pity that Goldeneye crashed and burned back in '97. /sarcasm [/quote]

A game can be good despite having bad controllers... Silent Hill 2 anyone? Grand Theft Auto Vice City is a brilliant, brilliant game, despite the fact that aiming with a controller is like trying to pick your nose with rubber gloves. Gameplay is a factor, and as far as Goldeneye is concerned, the controllers are terrible, but let's remember 97 was a different year, with far, far lower standards.


That said, fame isn't always a synonym of quality, but merely of popularity.

It's not eight years, it's twelve... and it's mainly butt-hurt PC fans (or die-hard PC developers) still bugling about how dual-analog isn't appropriate for FPSes. It's long past time to get over it, really... or at least to realise that different players will have different preferences, and that the choice between dual-analog or single-analog-and-110-button controller is a personal one and not an objective matter of "better".


-- Steve

According to wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo:_Combat_Evolved], xbox.com [http://www.xbox.com/en-us/games/h/halo/], IGN [http://xbox.ign.com/objects/015/015922.html], etc... All say 2001... So unless your math sucks that bad, 2009 - 2001 = 8. I was referring to the quote in the text saying the original Halo proved "controllers worked", FYI.

And no, till the day they invent a controller with the same sensibility and precision as a mouse, they are objectively worse for shooters, regardless of what the butthurt console crowd forces themselves to believe to try and masquerade the farce that their dear "console" is just a gimped PC with exclusive titles.

And no, don't ramble on about it, it's objective. Take your lumps. The simple design of analogue sticks make them more inaccurate. The mouse copies your movement directly, on a "1:1 scale" if you wish, while the sticks augment your motion in order to compensate for a much smaller room for movement. Meaning you're trying to do the same movement, in a forcefully smaller space. Ever tried speeding up your mouse 100 times? Yeah. There's also the problem that the mouse, again, copies your movement freely, while the analogue simply gives directional inputs. It's the difference between placing somewhere where you want it with your hand, or trying to use a crane. Last, the mouse uses your hand, while the sticks use your thumbs, which are NOT meant for precise motions. And this, is being objective.

 

[Halo Fanboy]

And no, don't ramble on about it, it's objective. Take your lumps. The simple design of analogue sticks make them more inaccurate. The mouse copies your movement directly, on a "1:1 scale" if you wish, while the sticks augment your motion in order to compensate for a much smaller room for movement. Meaning you're trying to do the same movement, in a forcefully smaller space. Ever tried speeding up your mouse 100 times? Yeah. There's also the problem that the mouse, again, copies your movement freely, while the analogue simply gives directional inputs. It's the difference between placing somewhere where you want it with your hand, or trying to use a crane. Last, the mouse uses your hand, while the sticks use your thumbs, which are NOT meant for precise motions. And this, is being objective.

You seem to regard preciseness of controls as a objective marker of quality. Steve made his argument based on preference of control scheme. After all, shooting a real weapon is more akin to lite gun controls than either mouse or thumbstick.

 

[Caliostro]

You seem to regard preciseness of controls as a objective marker of quality. Steve made his argument based on preference of control scheme. After all, shooting a real weapon is more akin to lite gun controls than either mouse or thumbstick.

Precision is everything when it comes to aim. And your argument in favor of lite guns isn't all that wrong. Lite guns were, in fact, better for aiming. Why don't they exist anymore? Because they sucked dong to walk around in... In fact, you couldn't. Litegun-games were limited to railshooters, which were amazing back in the days scenarios were limited, fairly uninspired and boring by nature, so walking around wasn't that interesting. That said, the mouse offers a relatively close level of aim-control with the addition of a much better level of movement-control. Controllers can battle, and indeed become a matter of preference, in the area of movement control, but when it comes to aiming, it's not even a contest.

And I wasn't arguing preferences. I was arguing his statement that "neither are objectively better", which is a fallacy.

 

[T'Generalissimo]

I always find this sort of announcement kind of weird. It does kind of make sense for them to say something about Natal, but it just comes across to me as "We aren't going to intentionally make bad design decisions when we make Halo. This still includes decisions about control methods."

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

And I wasn't arguing preferences. I was arguing his statement that "neither are objectively better", which is a fallacy.

Of course, if you look at Anton's post you'll see he was comparing a gamepad with the mouse & keyboard. Not analog stick and mouse.

The superiority of one or the other is a matter of opinion and may be different with genre.

 

[Chipperz]

*snip the PC elitist douchebaggery*

Piss off, troll. You can't claim that someone is wrong in a matter of opinions.

On Topic - I like this news. Hopefully it'll curb some of the "SKY IS FALLING! MICROSOFT ARE ONLY MAKING CASUAL GAAAAAAAAAMES!" crowd for long enough for the rest of us to get a breather, and it's given Natal a bit of respectability.

 

[oppp7]

Is anyone even excited about Natal?
OT: I wish more companies would try to make the motion sensors make sense rather than shoehorn them into the games.