Resident Evil Creator Predicts Ten Years Before Motion Controls are "Mainstream"

[maddawg IAJI]

I predict that they will be mainstream with the casual gamers upon launch. As for the hardcore gamers, who have been gaming for a bit over a decade (at least) now, they will never replace the controller.

For the most part, we've replaced the joystick--in favor of the D-pad--and then the D-pad, in favor of the analogue stick. These are still controllers, they just add a new component (at least in the Wii and Move cases; kincect does completely rely on motion controls). Are you sure the streamlined ease and variety offered with motion controls will never catch on?

Positive. Look at the strongest and most praised games on the Wii. Super Mario Galaxy, Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess, Super Smash Bros Brawl. Most of the strongest games, on the only Motion Controlled Console, don't require much motion control and in some cases, can easily be replaced by a controller from the Gamecube. Even my cousin, who is a casual gamer, barely plays games that require the use of Motion controls.

The only person that I know, who utilizes the Wii's motion control, uses them for Rail Shooters and First Person shooters like Call of Duty. First person shooters can easily be said to be more enjoyable on a Computer or Console. Rail Shooters on the other hand are more enjoyable with the Wii Zapper according to this said person, so he is using the same system that Arcade's use.

Motion controls won't catch on to the average dedicated gamer. They are a fad and will most likely die out.

 

[starwarsgeek]

Positive. Look at the strongest and most praised games on the Wii. Super Mario Galaxy, Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess, Super Smash Bros Brawl. Most of the strongest games, on the only Motion Controlled Console, don't require much motion control and in some cases, can easily be replaced by a controller from the Gamecube. Even my cousin, who is a casual gamer, barely plays games that require the use of Motion controls.

The only person that I know, who utilizes the Wii's motion control, uses them for Rail Shooters and First Person shooters like Call of Duty. First person shooters can easily be said to be more enjoyable on a Computer or Console. Rail Shooters on the other hand are more enjoyable with the Wii Zapper according to this said person, so he is using the same system that Arcade's use.

Motion controls won't catch on to the average dedicated gamer. They are a fad and will most likely die out.

The Mario games in particular demonstrate why motion controls are good. They can provide a variety of control styles within the same game to augment the experience. Mario Galaxy itself has several different uses: The standard remote+nunchuck for the majority of controls, a simple flick for attacks, pointing at the screen for aiming the second attack, using the remote like a joystick in levels with Mario riding a giant orb, and rotating it left and right to steer a bird in one level. Add in New Super Mario Bros. Wii's NES style controls and quick mapping with a simple shake, and these two games demonstrate the strength of motion controls: the variety.

I think its the next step in controller technology, not a phase. Imagine how much the controls are going to catch on when they are more precise and more FPS's start using them. Ideally, this will provide the quick aiming of a PC-shooter, with the controlled character movement of an analogue stick. They aren't going to remain in the usually-shoddy condition that games not made by Nintendo, Capcom, and Sega mostly demonstrate. The technology will improve, the developers will learn how to better use the new possibilities, and console gaming will be better because of this in the long run.

 

[poiuppx]

I predict they ALREADY ARE MAINSTREAM. People can ***** all they want to, but the sales figures and market penetration of the Wii has made certain newer gamers are growing up with THIS as their main mode of control scheme. That's part of why Microsoft and Sony are getting onboard... there's a whole slew of new gamers over the past 4 years who know motion controls first, d-pads and the like second. We can complain till we're blue in the face, but unless you plan on getting all those kids out of the hobby, you damn well better live with the fact motion control is here to stay.

 

[Delusibeta]

I predict that all the next gen systems (bar the PC) will have motion controls as standard. That's four years, tops.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Positive. Look at the strongest and most praised games on the Wii. Super Mario Galaxy, Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess, Super Smash Bros Brawl. Most of the strongest games, on the only Motion Controlled Console, don't require much motion control and in some cases, can easily be replaced by a controller from the Gamecube. Even my cousin, who is a casual gamer, barely plays games that require the use of Motion controls.

The only person that I know, who utilizes the Wii's motion control, uses them for Rail Shooters and First Person shooters like Call of Duty. First person shooters can easily be said to be more enjoyable on a Computer or Console. Rail Shooters on the other hand are more enjoyable with the Wii Zapper according to this said person, so he is using the same system that Arcade's use.

Motion controls won't catch on to the average dedicated gamer. They are a fad and will most likely die out.

The Mario games in particular demonstrate why motion controls are good. They can provide a variety of control styles within the same game to augment the experience. Mario Galaxy itself has several different uses: The standard remote+nunchuck for the majority of controls, a simple flick for attacks, pointing at the screen for aiming the second attack, using the remote like a joystick in levels with Mario riding a giant orb, and rotating it left and right to steer a bird in one level. Add in New Super Mario Bros. Wii's NES style controls and quick mapping with a simple shake, and these two games demonstrate the strength of motion controls: the variety.

I think its the next step in controller technology, not a phase. Imagine how much the controls are going to catch on when they are more precise and more FPS's start using them. Ideally, this will provide the quick aiming of a PC-shooter, with the controlled character movement of an analogue stick. They aren't going to remain in the usually-shoddy condition that games not made by Nintendo, Capcom, and Sega mostly demonstrate. The technology will improve, the developers will learn how to better use the new possibilities, and console gaming will be better because of this in the long run.

Only if it comes out strong with a good list of games that shine on above the shovel-ware. Look at the history of the PS3. Remember it's launch? A high price tag mixed in with the fact that the strongest game they had was Resistance. That nearly killed the PS3 before it even left the gate and the same thing could happen to the Motion controlled consoles. So far, I have yet to see anything coming out for Kinect or Move that seems appealing and with launch day for the Kinect three months away, that's a pretty bad sign.

If the strongest thing they have on Launch day is a game where you torture a kid named Milo, then I'm not really interested. It'll be several months before someone decides to make a game for it that may interest me a bit and even then, I doubt it'll interest me enough to spend 300 dollars on the Kinect or Move to buy it.

On a side note, everything you said about Mario Galaxy could have been done with the Play-Station controller. Motion Controls just aren't that appealing to me and I'm not gonna be anywhere near a Best Buy or Wal-Mart when those things hit the shelves.

 

[DTWolfwood]

head tracking 3D is what i want. No glasses just an algorithm for rendering an image base upon where your head is and how you see the image. It tricks u into thinking its 3D. (not sure if they can do this without some kind of polarizing lens for 2+ ppl) They can do that couple with full motion tracking without the tremendous input lag, I'll be completely on board with it.

Until then...this is nothing more than a mere curiosity at best

 

[T_ConX]

I don't thing 'mainstream' is the right word, because they already are. Maybe 'acceptable to the Hardcore contingent' would more accurate, that in ten years motion control will finally offer the level of refinement and precision that standard controllers offer.

 

[starwarsgeek]

Only if it comes out strong with a good list of games that shine on above the shovel-ware. Look at the history of the PS3. Remember it's launch? A high price tag mixed in with the fact that the strongest game they had was Resistance. That nearly killed the PS3 before it even left the gate and the same thing could happen to the Motion controlled consoles. So far, I have yet to see anything coming out for Kinect or Move that seems appealing and with launch day for the Kinect three months away, that's a pretty bad sign.

If the strongest thing they have on Launch day is a game where you torture a kid named Milo, then I'm not really interested. It'll be several months before someone decides to make a game for it that may interest me a bit and even then, I doubt it'll interest me enough to spend 300 dollars on the Kinect or Move to buy it.

On a side note, everything you said about Mario Galaxy could have been done with the Play-Station controller. Motion Controls just aren't that appealing to me and I'm not gonna be anywhere near a Best Buy or Wal-Mart when those things hit the shelves.

To be fair, Kinect and Move won't be the best cases to judge the future of motion-controlls. They aren't just motion controllers, they're also mid-life console addons...just take a look at how well the Sega CD and Nintendo DD worked. The problem with Move and Kinect isn't rooted in the lack of interesting games, the lack of interesting games is probably rooted in developers realizing how well an expensive mid-life console upgrade is going to work.

And, no, you can't use the Sony controller as a joystick

 

[MasterV]

I don't know. Even if someone makes the perfect motion control system, if the devs themselves can't be arsed to sit down and work to produce quality games, they'll still be looking for excuses. If they can't manage with something as simple as the Wiimote/soon the Move, how does he expect to do 100s of times more work for something waaaay more sophisticated?

 

[ActionDan]

Hah, haha....No.

 

[Risingblade]

Not as long as we are all too lazy to use them...

 

[Megacherv]

I just don't like Kinect because of the lack of buttons...it just seems weird...if they add some sort of controller that's like a glove but has buttons on the palm, then it would make sense. People who try and convince me say that Kinect is better than the Move (which I'm hopefully getting on release) because it has no controller, but that's the disadvantage. It relies on certan actions that may not always respond, or voice commands, or sometimes just movements done when you're playing a game with a controller (I wouldn't pay £130 just to give commands to my teammates in Ghost Recon, when I can do that with the controller)

If it were the time that games could be controlled by thought, then something like Kinect and controller-free gaming would be perfect, but now, it just seems strange.

If Kinect ends up being fantastic and proves me wrong, I'll accept that, but I'm sticking to my Move with Time Crisis, Ape Escape (hopefully) and Kung-Fu Rider. I don't in any way want Motion controls to replace the gamepad, god no, but if it's done well, and developers take time to use newer, more sophisticated hardware, I think they could work as a good addition.As

this guy

said, some games have demonstrated their potential, we need to just try things out more.

 

[Sephychu]

...Ten Years until motion controllers are 'mainstream'...

Eh?

Ho-kay, whatever man.

 

[FinalHeart95]

When used correctly, motion controls are great, but there are some problems with them.

1) Inaccuracy
I believe this is best shown in a game like Madden 08. In Madden 08 (don't know about the new ones), you have the flick the Wii remote back to snap the ball. To throw a pass you have to flick it forward. The problem with this comes in the game thinking you're flicking the remote forward immediately after passing when you're really just steadying the controller because it's perpendicular to the ground after you snap. This happens a lot. A lot of FPS games have aim issues as well. Supposedly, the Wii Motion Plus helps this a lot, but I have no experience with this so I can't say. This should be the thing fixed first and foremost before anything else. If the game doesn't know what the hell you're doing, how are you supposed to enjoy the game at all?

2) Poor implementation
If you're going to use motion controls, USE THEM CORRECTLY. Don't just throw them in for no reason, make sure they actually enhance the experience. This is the main problem with a lot of Wii games. They throw in motion controls because it's almost an obligation, and then the controls turn out to be shit! Although Twilight Princess is a great game, it feels like it falls victim to this. There really is no need for motion controls in that particular game, a button press would suffice.

3) Getting sore now...
In Medal of Honor Heroes 2, you need to hold your controller steady pretty much the entire time. You will get cramped. This game doesn't have problems 1 or 2, but it certainly has this one. You shouldn't have to stretch before playing a game, and it really shouldn't strain you. Sure there are games like Wii Fit where that's the point... but are exercise games really "games"? They make keeping track of exercise easier sure, but they aren't really "fun". So, other than those, you should be comfortable while playing a game, not needing a break every 30 minutes or you'll throw out your shoulder.

Once these are fixed, motion controls will be great. There are some examples of games that follow all of these rules, the one that comes to mind is Warioware: Smooth Moves. It's pretty accurate overall, the implementation is great, and you aren't sore because it's a bunch of 5 second mini-games. If these problems are addressed for all games, then motion controls could become mainstream, even within the core gaming community. So it really isn't out there to say that the problems could be addressed in 10 years.

 

[starwarsgeek]

I just don't like Kinect because of the lack of buttons...it just seems weird...if they add some sort of controller that's like a glove but has buttons on the palm, then it would make sense. People who try and convince me say that Kinect is better than the Move (which I'm hopefully getting on release) because it has no controller, but that's the disadvantage. It relies on certan actions that may not always respond, or voice commands, or sometimes just movements done when you're playing a game with a controller (I wouldn't pay £130 just to give commands to my teammates in Ghost Recon, when I can do that with the controller)

If it were the time that games could be controlled by thought, then something like Kinect and controller-free gaming would be perfect, but now, it just seems strange.

If Kinect ends up being fantastic and proves me wrong, I'll accept that, but I'm sticking to my Move with Time Crisis, Ape Escape (hopefully) and Kung-Fu Rider. I don't in any way want Motion controls to replace the gamepad, god no, but if it's done well, and developers take time to use newer, more sophisticated hardware, I think they could work as a good addition.As

this guy

said, some games have demonstrated their potential, we need to just try things out more.

I completely agree with you. I'd hate to see the gamepad controllers die out. That said, I also think wiimote/move--if more developers use it well--could be the evolution of the gamepad. Kinect...while interesting technology...I just don't see as an important step in gaming.

 

[BlumiereBleck]

It actually sounds possible

 

[Girl With One Eye]

Hopefully I'll be dead by then.

On a serious note, as long as gamepad controllers still exist I'll just ignore it and wait for it to go away. [sub]or KILL IT WITH FIRE[/sub]

 

[Rad Party God]

Interesting.

Maybe motion controls are, at the moment, just in it's diapers, they're pretty much what the NES controller was 20 years ago, we don't quite "get" there yet, but they have a lot of potential.

 

[SelectivelyEvil13]

I just don't like Kinect because of the lack of buttons...it just seems weird...if they add some sort of controller that's like a glove but has buttons on the palm, then it would make sense. People who try and convince me say that Kinect is better than the Move (which I'm hopefully getting on release) because it has no controller, but that's the disadvantage. It relies on certan actions that may not always respond, or voice commands, or sometimes just movements done when you're playing a game with a controller (I wouldn't pay £130 just to give commands to my teammates in Ghost Recon, when I can do that with the controller)

If it were the time that games could be controlled by thought, then something like Kinect and controller-free gaming would be perfect, but now, it just seems strange.

If Kinect ends up being fantastic and proves me wrong, I'll accept that, but I'm sticking to my Move with Time Crisis, Ape Escape (hopefully) and Kung-Fu Rider. I don't in any way want Motion controls to replace the gamepad, god no, but if it's done well, and developers take time to use newer, more sophisticated hardware, I think they could work as a good addition.As

While I probably will not be getting the Move, I most certainly will not be stepping anywhere near Kinect (lest those steps be the motion control setup to resubscribe to Live, the cheats! )

With the technology at hand, motion controls with a supplement controller already have their work cut out for them to make the input practical and responsive enough to be worth the bother; Kinect outright limits itself through strict reliance upon motion. Again, with the given technological limits, this in turn limits the functionality of what you can do with the games to make it not only work, but to be fun. If some convoluted method of input to direct a game's protagonist to perform more than basic move (be it a combination of movement and voice direction for example), by the end of the user's effort it would become distracting, annoying, and probably a lot less effort than pressing a few buttons.

The cost alone of Kinect for this restricted manner of playing games makes me a bit cynical and questioning whether or not an additional motion-controller add-on of some sort will be eventually revealed as the Kinect "experience enhancer"to accomodate more games, while netting more money in a latter addition instead of upfront and increasing the introductory cost. But hey, that's just the not-so-trusting side in my head plotting.

I believe motion controls will have a future, and I truly give credit to Mr. Mikami for not being so naive as to say something along the lines of "Kinect is the future and the future is NOW!!!" Motion controls, as technology and responsiveness improves, will probably be great when implemented properly for the appropriate games. The key is that in all likelihood, they will only be conducive for a certain type of games while the controller, also advancing with time mind you, will be the perfect component for the other games. When response time is required, a flick of the arm is not nearly as efficacious as a button-twitch, limiting motion controls from many multiplayer games of a competitive nature.