Motion Controls Are the Future of Shooters, Says Killzone 3 Dev

[Lionsfan]

They're a gimmick at best with the technology we have right now. I'll always prefer my joy-stick for FPS than Motion Controls.

 

[Direwolf750]

I really really really really REALLY REALLY want the gaming industry to GET THE HELL OVER motion controls already. They don't enrich game-play that much, they are clunky, generally less accurate than a spitball and, once again, there are very few situations in which it enriches game-play.

Please, give us good games. Good story. Good characters. Good mechanics. Good graphics is always a plus too... THAT is what we need more of. We do not need the ability to play motion control point and shoot games. We have had that since the arcade days. Give us new and better, not motion control and the same old crap.

 

[Natdaprat]

This is not totally unbelievable. I mean, think about it. The mouse is the king of FPS games, and that is ultimately a motion controller.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Has anyone here read the Killzone 3 reviews? They say that the move controller with the rifle attachment works really well.

Granted I haven't played it yet, so I can't comment too much, but it seems promising at least.

 

[Daveeo]

Bullshit.

Mouse+Keyboard kicks all the asses.

This!

 

[duchaked]

the title made me laugh

 

[duchaked]

the mouse and keyboard are definitely the most precise BUT...

yeah I won't go there, forget it I'm just gonna go outside and live for a bit before coming back

So much negativity and ignorance....

 

[Defense]

I never tried motion controls on an FPS before, but I'm not going to be bitter about it. I heard Killzone 3 was fantastic with the Move, so I may check it out.

I just read this as:

"Please, please, PLEASE go buy move! We don't want to have wasted out time adding compatibility for it to KZ3 when we could have been doing useful things!"

GG said that it only took them a few days to implement the motion controls.

It'll never happen. Motion control is a lot buggier, and even if it wasn't accuracy when rotating/rotation speed is much more important than accuracy against what's right in front of you because you have less time to react so you have to be more accurate.

Killzone 3 has a lot of options for Move. I heard that putting the bounding box at zero will actually keep the reticule on the center, and you can change the turning speeds with the move.

Surely you judged it because you tried it first?

 

[MoDu]

Settle down folks. I'm pretty sure he's referring to "motion controls are the future" as being so much better than dual analog. Hell, I can't even contest that, nor will anyone who has played a decent FPS on the Wii.

So, stop with the "Mouse+Keyboard kicks all the asses." It's old and true, nobody's going to attack your pc, calm down.

Some points to you all to think about:

- Fear of change. Come on, I know you kick ass at playing FPS because of all these years you've been practising. A new control scheme? Nooooo, change is scary!

- Pointer interface DOES NOT REQUIRE YOU TO STAND UP, OR EVEN KEEPING YOUR ARM IN THE AIR. People, listen to the Wii crow who has been playing like this since 2007. Rest your forearm in your leg and you're all set for hours and hours of not moving and eating cheetos.

- Yes, mouse and keyboard are definitely better at fps games, but I'm not moving a table to living room in front of the couch just to awkwardly play games on my big living room LCD.

- Everyone has different personal sensitivities, that's why the best FPS games on the Wii all have adjustable definitions, just like the best FPS on dual analogs. Learn to size your deadzone and turn speed and you'll be kicking ass in no time.d

 

[THE_NAMSU]

Controllers will stick. True gamers realise that certain aspects of realism make a game too realistic to be a gamke anymore!
I hate all this new touch screen and kinect and move shit...most of all 3D i saw it and it was bull. It's just a way for casual gamers to have fun, not for a true gamer to admire the game as well.

 

[KrazyKain]

ignoring the not so great graphics, the wii has proven this to people who have taken the time to get used to wii remote fps controls

 

[demoman_chaos]

I know how to fix the turning bit, put a 2nd stick on the pointer. Use that 2nd stick to turn and aim with the pointer. Basically just chop a standard controller in half and add motion sensors to each half.

 

[Jonny49]

Second, motion controls are far from a gimmick, and I'm so sick of people constantly spouting that word out of arrogance and ignorance. If something as simple and intuitive as a gyroscope or infrared pointer is a gimmick, than analog sticks are an even bigger gimmick. People have gotten so used to the dualstick setup that they've forgotten how convoluted and confusing it can be for someone who's never experienced it. In my opinion, Metroid Prime 3 has the best controls out of any FPS I've ever played. The first time I picked it up, I immediately understood how to navigate and was thrilled by the ease and responsiveness of quick aiming. The argument that motion controls don't allow you to turn as fast is largely unfounded (it's barely a problem to begin with and it can be fixed with clever use of the current hardware) and, more importantly, entirely irrelevant in a debate over THE FUTURE OF CONTROL. I won't even mention the fact that the pointer is about 10x more natural and immersive!

The difference between a controller+buttons and motion controls is that motion controls, for the majority of the time, are utterly useless. Not in the sense that they don't work, but that you don't need them. An analog-stick and buttons are there for practical uses. A to jump, B to crouch, X for action, Y for inventory. Right analog for movement, left for camera. They work, plain and simple and they work for almost everything (RTS games are the exception).

Also, Metroid Prime 3 is a bad example. For one thing it has lock-on and while it has combat in it, it's not as combat heavy as something like Halo or COD is. MP3 is more of a first-person adventure. Also, you seriously underestimate the importance of turning quickly, since we're talking about shooters, which usually have online multiplayer.

 

[Rack]

I know how to fix the turning bit, put a 2nd stick on the pointer. Use that 2nd stick to turn and aim with the pointer. Basically just chop a standard controller in half and add motion sensors to each half.

That would work, but you'd be better off disabling motion controls for firing from the hip and only using them when you're using iron sights. That kind of motion control would really enhance the game. If we get those kind of controllers I could believe in motion controls being the future, but the Metroid Prime system is just a huge step backwards for the sake of a gimmick.

 

[IamSofaKingRaw]

I'll be interested to see the statistics of how many online players are using Move instead of the controller, and also how well those using Move will do.

I think that they probably put the Move controls AND the 3D in under pressure from Sony, but I think it is a mistake (or even a bad MOVE. HAH!)

Its amazing reading the comments of a majority of people here that HAVE NOT even played the open beta with the Move. I have, and I can testify that you can actually do really well with it. I'm talking coming first place with the most kills by a long-shot well. Add to this that I'm playing with DS3 players too and you can see how , much truth GG speaks when they advertise the Move with there game

 

[Racecarlock]

You know what i'm really tired of seeing around here? People touting their preferred control methods as though they are better for everyone. A mouse and keyboard aren't "Just better" for fps controls, they're "Just Better" for FPS controls FOR YOU. That doesn't make a game pad a horrible controller for everyone. Just because you prefer a control method doesn't make it the best control method. In fact, no control method is "The Best" because not everyone prefers the same control methods. Motion controls may work better for some people, but that doesn't mean I should have to switch over and like it (although no one has told me I should yet). Can't we all just accept that some people prefer game pads to keyboards or motion controls to mouses or keyboards to game pads or whatever other combinations of those you can think of? And if not, how come?

 

[Tom Phoenix]

On consoles? Absolutely. The gamepad has always been a rather compromised control scheme when it came to FPS games. It is "good enough" that most people would rather use it than have to deal with the complexities of PC gaming, but it is incapable of matching the speed and accuracy of a mouse. This is beacuse the gamepad has always been primarily a 2D input device. Motion controls are the first proper 3D input device on consoles. As such, there is no question they will eventually replace the gamepad as the primary input device for FPS games.

On PCs? I....seriously doubt it. For one thing, the mouse and keyboard combo works perfectly fine and doesn't really need replacement. Not to mention that it is available right from the start, so you don't need a special peripheral to play an FPS game. And for another, motion controls are more suitable for consoles, since you have plenty of space to work with. Since PCs are used up close most of the time, it would just end up awkward if you tried to use motion controls.

 

[Electrogecko]

There were (are) attempts to create dedicated gaming gear, but most people use keyboard and mouse - because it's comfortable, universal and well, we haven't came up with anything better.
It's outdated and created when there were no games? Hey, so are your hands. Chop them off, they're of no use today - how can you use something invented millions of years ago?

My point remains valid despite your clever observation, and I'm pretty sure you agree.

snip

In my opinion, Metroid Prime 3 has the best controls out of any FPS I've ever played.

The control may add a sense of tactile response, sure, but they were by no means accurate. The game had a huge reliancy on lock on, (as did red steel 2), because turning and aiming is impossible. Motion controls would certainly be the most responsive and accurate of all controls, if we had a full 360 screen enclosure, that allowed easy navigation in all directions.

You're looking down a tunnel in games, you need to shift your view as easily as possible, and aim simultaneously. Motion controls are certainly the best for rail shooters.

Regular shooters: no. Just no.

Once again, we have no idea what the limitations of a high-end motion controller will be next year, let alone in the years beyond, which, from what I understand, are not excluded from this developer's argument. Also, there's absolutely no reason why a motion controlled shooter has to have a slower turning speed than one that is gamepad controlled. With adjustable sensitivity, turning speed can be infinitely modified to suit the player regardless of the controller type. Besides, I see no reason why the controller's orientation can't simply take over for the pointer once it goes off-screen, or even be the dominant argument for a game's turning function. Motion controls have potential for a wider range of turning speeds than an analogue stick, which is confined to a relatively small range of motion, ever could.

Also, while I found turning in MP3 to be slightly slower than most games, it really wasn't that significantly so, and if you find aiming without lock on to be difficult, (some enemies in the game couldn't even be locked on to) it's due to a lack of coordination and/or stability in your wrist that some would say should be reflected in a game where you're aiming a gun.

The difference between a controller+buttons and motion controls is that motion controls, for the majority of the time, are utterly useless. Not in the sense that they don't work, but that you don't need them. An analog-stick and buttons are there for practical uses. A to jump, B to crouch, X for action, Y for inventory. Right analog for movement, left for camera. They work, plain and simple and they work for almost everything (RTS games are the exception).

Also, Metroid Prime 3 is a bad example. For one thing it has lock-on and while it has combat in it, it's not as combat heavy as something like Halo or COD is. MP3 is more of a first-person adventure. Also, you seriously underestimate the importance of turning quickly, since we're talking about shooters, which usually have online multiplayer.

So we should stop trying to improve our controllers because we're complacent with the current one? There is absolutely nothing that a 360 controller can do that a controller with implemented motion compatibility can't do. All those functions you mentioned would have more inputs to chose from which would give developers more freedom to produce unique experiences.
See my above reply for the point on turning speed.

 

[Rack]

So we should stop trying to improve our controllers because we're complacent with the current one? There is absolutely nothing that a 360 controller can do that a controller with implemented motion compatibility can't do. All those functions you mentioned would have more inputs to chose from which would give developers more freedom to produce unique experiences.
See my above reply for the point on turning speed.

No, but if the replacement is fundamentally flawed then we shoud keep looking. The accelerometers in a current gen motion controller are an order of magnitude less reliable than an analogue stick, getting even digital movement out of them is a pain in the ass. The pointer is really accurate and works great for aiming but it's a clumsy and uncomfortable way to turn. In a game where aiming is key it can provide a competitive advantage but we shou;d be looking for a replacement that is more comfortable, intuitive and immersive than dual analogue and motion controls are nowhere near that level yet.

 

[MoDu]

No, but if the replacement is fundamentally flawed then we shoud keep looking. The accelerometers in a current gen motion controller are an order of magnitude less reliable than an analogue stick, getting even digital movement out of them is a pain in the ass. The pointer is really accurate and works great for aiming but it's a clumsy and uncomfortable way to turn. In a game where aiming is key it can provide a competitive advantage but we should be looking for a replacement that is more comfortable, intuitive and immersive than dual analogue and motion controls are nowhere near that level yet.

Millions and millions of people disagree with your "fundamentally broken" premise. And motion controls don't work around a accelerometer, they work around 3 accelerometers, 3 giroscopes and another form of 3d localization (IR pointer on the Wii, color ball and camera on PS3).

Don't get me wrong, I logged far too many hours Perfect Dark's Multiplayer, but Wii fps are so much more immersive, confortable and fast!

For comparison's sake, checking the MoH2 Wii, which supports all kinds of controller inputs (wiimote pointer, classic controller, zapper), you'll see the best ranked players all use either wii pointer or zapper.

Geez, even with that clunky zapper, which was NOT made for an FPS' full controll, people are better than with a dual analog setup.

Of course, the controls on that game are good and can be tuned. And it has very little lag or slow frame-rate, both of which Red Steel was a serious ofender.

BTW, in MoH: wii, you can adjust your snipper rifle's zoom by moving your wiimote closer or farther away from the TV. It's intuitive, works great and fast. Interface 101: the least buttons, the better, as long as it's intuitive.