Sony Explains Why Controller-Free Gaming Won't Work
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
I swear the Eyetoy creator )Richard Marks) was talking about his experience back on the ps2 with the eyetoy? This isn't some random guy you know, he actually demoed the core Kinect technology on the ps2 in 05' (made by some company in Israel I believe)before MS bought the tech and fixed it up a bit.Nouw said:
Yeah, Sony turned down this tech b/c they know the limitations with it.
Main Highlights
00:23-00:28 ("This isn't our tech btw, its made by an Israely company...")
08:10-08:25 ("This is a demo of a guy batting a ball around...this is very early work...this is running on the PS2 btw...")
I, at least, have the decency not to call people out on it, unless they publicly display it.The Bandit said:
So they just *happened* to point out the flaws in a system they designed years ago a day before Kinect is released?
Hmm...
Sony! You're not exactly in a position to attack Microsoft for making a crappy gimmick! The Move might work, but it will be pointless. You can't change all of your main franchises over to Move-only controls, since that would cut sales from people who haven't bought one. That means that the only Move games will be shovelware and the occasional well-designed third party game which will undersell because everyone will already have traded in their Move by then.
Nintendo has the advantage, because everyone who has bought a Wii has all of the motion controls already. They don't have to choose between making the game good or trying to force the controls into the games and alienating customers who don't want to buy it.
Hmm...
Sony! You're not exactly in a position to attack Microsoft for making a crappy gimmick! The Move might work, but it will be pointless. You can't change all of your main franchises over to Move-only controls, since that would cut sales from people who haven't bought one. That means that the only Move games will be shovelware and the occasional well-designed third party game which will undersell because everyone will already have traded in their Move by then.
Nintendo has the advantage, because everyone who has bought a Wii has all of the motion controls already. They don't have to choose between making the game good or trying to force the controls into the games and alienating customers who don't want to buy it.
Ugh. I see so much hate from Sony.
Personally, I'm on their side. I cannot stand the Kinect. IT's a horrible piece of hardware, and I can see how even the MOVE is beating it in sales, though I dislike it as well.
If they were wrong, the Wii wouldn't have taken first place in sales. Even if Sony copied them, they copied what apparently was a winning strategy.
I hate to admit that such gimmicks sell millions, but it's a truth.
Personally, I'm on their side. I cannot stand the Kinect. IT's a horrible piece of hardware, and I can see how even the MOVE is beating it in sales, though I dislike it as well.
If they were wrong, the Wii wouldn't have taken first place in sales. Even if Sony copied them, they copied what apparently was a winning strategy.
I hate to admit that such gimmicks sell millions, but it's a truth.
Yugi: Wait, did you just make a crappy peripheral?
Micro$oft: Yeah, so?
Yugi: Well isn't that a rip off for the customers?
Micro$oft: Screw the customers, I have money!
Micro$oft: Yeah, so?
Yugi: Well isn't that a rip off for the customers?
Micro$oft: Screw the customers, I have money!
Fair enough. They must have patched it as I do remember them habing to fix the issue of it not being able to read actions from a sitting player. And from what I've seen from the two games I've seen that would really benefit from being able to "lean backwards to dodge" instead opting for just "blocking motions", I though he was right. My bad, I'll go slap him upside the head today for lying.Accridition said:
That's the point they're trying to get acrossJewrean said:
Again, the Move and Wii started development around the same time (some time in 2001), but at least someone here has actually noted down why the technology of the Move is more advanced.cocoro67 said:I tried out the Move when they were demonstrating it at the shopping center near my school.Jumplion said:I have EyeToy: Antigrav, it was fun when I played it as a kid
As for the video, while he didn't explicitly mention Kinect, it's obvious that it's being referenced.
I think that we really need to concentrate on regular motion controls for now since we can barely get those to work half the time to begin with. While I do want Kinect to succeed in some points (and the other half of me wants it to fail so that Microsoft will shut the hell up), it's probably best to work the kinks out of regular motion controls for now.
Though the Move, for as much flak as it's getting for being a "ripoff" of the Wii (which, in essence, it is), it is sort of an intermediate between the Wii and Kinect in that is has both a controller and a camera, effectively doubling it's possibilities.
I for one can't wait to see what either of these controllers will put out. Maybe it'll be crap, maybe it'll be gold, but I'm always optimistic with new technologies.
It is much, MUCH better than the Wii in horsepower and calibration.
Though I have to admit they probably just bought a Wii and said "Okay we need to find flaws in this and make the same thing only better"
Wii 2.0 HD = Move
Imagine it whis way. The Wii is based mainly on the technology in the controller. The Kinect is based on tracking motion with a camera. The Move is those 2 idea put together.
And I also don't see why people who slag off the Move saying it's unoriginal, yet people don't slag off the Kinect because it's unoriginal (Please, you've mentioned the EyeToy over and over again, yet some people don't seem to have put 2 and 2 together)
Ignoring the obvious bashing occurring here, he's also just ACHING to push their annoying 3D agenda when it's perfectly viable without the expensive 3d technology:
Of course, they can still make some money off of cheap plastic holders and glasses for the controls and sensor, but clearly this is possible without the ridiculous expense of their 3d glasses.
I suppose that the 3d won't work for more than one person, but at the same time, the immersiveness that one person can have is much greater. So I guess that's the one drawback. Ah well. Still, this stuff is silly.
Of course, they can still make some money off of cheap plastic holders and glasses for the controls and sensor, but clearly this is possible without the ridiculous expense of their 3d glasses.
I suppose that the 3d won't work for more than one person, but at the same time, the immersiveness that one person can have is much greater. So I guess that's the one drawback. Ah well. Still, this stuff is silly.
Yeah I know, I didn't say anything that implied otherwise. I was just saying that I love how they're the ones that have this massively ongoing campaign against the other ones like they're a fucking political party or something.Megacherv said:
You realize that this is the beginning of the end for the keyboard and mouse. Now we just have to figure how to safely beam light directly into our retinas and get rid of the monitor.