BioWare: Motion Controls Will Make Games Better
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
How is it so many industry figures have mistakenly got the notion in their head that motion controls = more immersive? They're nothing of the sort! Motion controls break immersion, by lengthening the disconnect between our input and the actions of our avatars - we're still looking at a screen, but now we're vaguely waving our hands about and hoping the game interprets our flailing correctly instead of quickly pressing a button and seeing the outcome in a split second.
This is a stupid fad that I am opposed to with every fiber of my being; if I wanted to move around, I'd go outside damn it!
This is a stupid fad that I am opposed to with every fiber of my being; if I wanted to move around, I'd go outside damn it!
in a smiler interview bioware said "yay microsoft yay sony yay ok now please dont shoot are children?"
hahaha this is basically what i got out of it.Random Argument Man said:
really, im not close minded, and i will not reject the idea, but i think they are right when it has yet to really reach a full potential, and i think breaking it back down to what can it really DO, and rethink it, the motion controls could be a joy to have, especially with rag doll physics =]
Huh.
A hybrid.
Alright, I am skeptic as the next, but there's an idea. Instead of just using the controller to "scroll" through messages (or weapon selections, etc), utilize the motion controls to flip through it, ala Minority Report. That would be somewhat cool. Actually, this Taffer would like that.
Though please leave the actual gaming tied to the controller.
/shrug
A hybrid.
Alright, I am skeptic as the next, but there's an idea. Instead of just using the controller to "scroll" through messages (or weapon selections, etc), utilize the motion controls to flip through it, ala Minority Report. That would be somewhat cool. Actually, this Taffer would like that.
Though please leave the actual gaming tied to the controller.
/shrug
As others have mentioned this just draws my mind back to the recent Extra Punctuation explanation of why motion controls are counter-productive in terms of immersion. I have the same issue with the "dead space" on triggers of 360 and PS3 controllers. Normal cutscenes can have an immersion effect when well written/pretty/ect. When I played ME2 I always pay that little bit more attention during cutscenes just in case there was a trigger option, which I always took. They drew me further into the rich story woven into the game.
But when I consider adding motion controls to this I can't help but feel that this is a bad idea as apprehension creeps into my mind. My imagination conjures images of a yelp of surprise, a wild flail and then a growl of frustration. When I opted to introduce that merc to free fall I watched my instant reaction to the symbol on the screen with a smile upon my face. And when I try to picture the same with motion controls I just can't see it working so fluidly.
But when I consider adding motion controls to this I can't help but feel that this is a bad idea as apprehension creeps into my mind. My imagination conjures images of a yelp of surprise, a wild flail and then a growl of frustration. When I opted to introduce that merc to free fall I watched my instant reaction to the symbol on the screen with a smile upon my face. And when I try to picture the same with motion controls I just can't see it working so fluidly.
What if you're a bad actor?
What if you just want to relax when playing games?
If Bioware adapted a way to determine your posture using button presses, that would be much better.
What if you just want to relax when playing games?
If Bioware adapted a way to determine your posture using button presses, that would be much better.
Motion controls are not necessarily waving your arms around.
The concept of motion controls is alright in the sort of idealistic view. If developers ever ever get it to work properly without arms flailing and won't force it onto gamers who don't want it, it will be a good thing.
Also, I lost a bit of respect for half of the people I know who commented here.
I mean, seriously, what's the backlash? What is wrong with simply saying "We think motion controls will be pretty interesting"? They didn't say "Now all of our games are motion controls", did they?
The concept of motion controls is alright in the sort of idealistic view. If developers ever ever get it to work properly without arms flailing and won't force it onto gamers who don't want it, it will be a good thing.
Also, I lost a bit of respect for half of the people I know who commented here.
I mean, seriously, what's the backlash? What is wrong with simply saying "We think motion controls will be pretty interesting"? They didn't say "Now all of our games are motion controls", did they?
Thank you.Quad08 said:
I think it's mostly because of thoughts like this: "There's that impediment of a controller but hardcore gamers are never going to give that up." In my experience, it's been motion controls that are the impediment. Until I can actually feel the resistance of the soon-to-be-dead merc's shoulder pushing back against my hand, motion controls will never truly add more to immersion than a regular controller. Sure, they're an interesting concept in theory, but in practice, they haven't really let us to do anything that we couldn't already do with a controller. They don't allow us to interact with the video game any better; they just alter the required movements to make our characters act the way we want them to.JourneyThroughHell said:
Saying that motion controls add to immersion more than regular controls is kind of like saying that asking your spouse to pick up groceries in person, as opposed to over the phone, makes you more of an active participant in the grocery shopping process. In reality, you're still not the one doing the shopping. Likewise, being able to make the motion of pushing a guy out of a window doesn't actually turn you into Commander Shephard; you're still ordering Shephard to do something instead of taking the role of Shephard and doing it yourself.
In this sense, 3D, motion controls, and hell, even rumble packs are the same. They're not meant to allow you to interfere with the events happening on-screen any better; they're meant to slightly alter your perception of your interaction with said events.
Mr Zeschuk needs to actually wake up and play Mass Effect - or any other game - with a controller so he can understand that standard controllers are immersive enough as they are and have been in use long enough for it to become 2nd nature anyway.
Forcing me to jerk my hands forward in the aforementioned Mass Effect 2 example won't make that scene any better. And what if it were full 1:1 control and I just happen to push a few degrees off and miss the merc? Now I've made Shepherd look like a pillock who can't even aim at point blank range.
Forcing me to jerk my hands forward in the aforementioned Mass Effect 2 example won't make that scene any better. And what if it were full 1:1 control and I just happen to push a few degrees off and miss the merc? Now I've made Shepherd look like a pillock who can't even aim at point blank range.
Motion Controls aren't bad...IN THEORY. In reality, it all goes back to the Power Glove for the NES. Motion Controls as we have are responsible for a lot of equipment breakages and injuries - not to mention the rag the Wii has gotten. We're a long way off from having a good motion controller.
"On the Silly News Network Next:
BioWare joins the games industry's suicide club."
Wii sold a lot of consoles, apparently not so many games. Why is that?
Personally I was sick of the Wii Zelda game after an hour of playing.
Wavin my hands around is not immersive.
The thing is, I do not need to "feel like I am the character" to feel the immersion. In fact I most games are by themselves not immersive, if "being in the action" is what constitute immersion.
what I mean is that most games only let you say what a script lets you say. You might have a lot of options, but still they are all scripted. to "be in the action" I would have to be able to say whatever I wanted to whomever I wanted, and get logical replies.
But there are technical limitations to that, just as motion controllers have so many immersion breaking limitations too.
And let us not forget, that when we become the "actor" we will be ourself, and act how we usually would within the laws of the game. Where as if I play an RPG I get a lot of options to choose from, options i never knew existed.
Maybe I never would have thought about pushing him, but was shocked to find that my character did so?
BioWare joins the games industry's suicide club."
Wii sold a lot of consoles, apparently not so many games. Why is that?
Personally I was sick of the Wii Zelda game after an hour of playing.
Wavin my hands around is not immersive.
The thing is, I do not need to "feel like I am the character" to feel the immersion. In fact I most games are by themselves not immersive, if "being in the action" is what constitute immersion.
what I mean is that most games only let you say what a script lets you say. You might have a lot of options, but still they are all scripted. to "be in the action" I would have to be able to say whatever I wanted to whomever I wanted, and get logical replies.
But there are technical limitations to that, just as motion controllers have so many immersion breaking limitations too.
And let us not forget, that when we become the "actor" we will be ourself, and act how we usually would within the laws of the game. Where as if I play an RPG I get a lot of options to choose from, options i never knew existed.
Maybe I never would have thought about pushing him, but was shocked to find that my character did so?