Yeah, I thought that it was universally agreed upon that motion controls were inferior to traditional "push button, get results" controls. I've never heard otherwise. Even PS4 people thought that the motion controls they have were dumb.
It isn't. Only stupid people believe the "Grr! Motion bad" shit. Motion controls are a tool, it's how you use that tool that matters. Look at how many people praise VR or gyro aiming in shooters compared to tacked on waggle gimmicks of the Wii era. Big difference.
What if the tool's worse than a preceeding tool?
I already mentioned VR.
I've experienced gyro aiming in shooters like Star Fox and Splatoon, for the WiiU. It was horrible. Heck, even gyro STEERING was horrible. Even trying to aim in first person for the Wii, in the Metroid Prime collection, was only fun and doable in short bursts. It puts a strain on your arm and wrist to continually aim around the screen.
Motion Controls are good at specific things. They aren't better or worse than traditional controls over all. It all depends on the context and their implementation. Far too often, people assume Motion controls are bad regardless of implementation or context. That's the crowd I'm talking about. The idiots who think all motion sucks regardless.
Perhaps you probably haven't gotten used to it. Most people who play Splatoon and Metroid Prime will tell you motion controls are the way to go for aiming.
Yeah, that's possible. Doing a quick search for "motion controls splatoon" says that most people use motion controls, even pro splatoon players.
It's also popular with PC gamers who use the Steam/PS4/Switch Pro controllers. It's even starting to catch on with PlayStation gamers as well. It really makes the Xbox Controller's lack of a motion sensor look jarring when you think about it.
While motion controls are better now compared to back then, they were in our faces from 2006-2012 (Wii)/13 (Kinect is guilty of this). Not to mention most of the games had bad or forced motion controls that were almost never 1-to1. Then you had Nintendo forcing it down our throats 95% for the sake of "innovation" without giving of us any other control options. While most third party publishers/developers gave you some actual options for controls sceme if you did not like the motion controls. I've said this before, but only Wii games with good to great motion controls are: Red Steel 2, No More Heroes 1 & 2, Mad World, Sin and Punishment Star Successor, Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, Mario Kart, and some racing game with motorized robotic bugs I can't think of at the moment. The Switch has gyro controls, but their optional and not stuffed down our throat. The best use of it was that workout game. I'll give credit for Nintendo being the most useful when it comes to motion controls. Otherwise most people want to sit on their ass and play with a control or KB & M. Somebody already mentioned the stuff with PSVR, so I feel no need to repeat that part.
I will defend that if a game necessitates the use of required motion controls, then I feel it should stay that way. I feel developers should make games how they intend players to play it, rather than try and Moddy cuddle them all the time.
Except that's a complete lie. It wasn't that they were "shoved into our face" (they weren't), it's that they existed at all, because gamers are snobbish like that. The moment the Wii came out people threw tantrums about it being motion-based despite the majority of players being fine with it. No, if anything the worst examples didn't try to use them enough because that would rely on actual DESIGN. Same thing with the Kinect and Move; most people wrung their hands about it for years and didn't even try. They were, for lack of a better term, creative cowards.
Removing options does not make the experience better. If you design the Wii for backwards compatibility with the Gamecube controls and already have the classic controller in mind, then you have failed. Especially when its done "for our own good" as the justification. This is more so a problem with most of the Nintendo 1st party games. And having options ain't cuddling, it's called using some damn common sense. Nintendo more or less admitted this mistake when the Wii U and the Switch came out without actually publicly saying it.
Just so we're clear, I personally never hated motion controls at the start. By the time of 2011, I got sick and tired of them. Even with the improvements. Yes, you had people that were snobbish. Yes, you had many developers that creative cowards or lazy (Nintendo being one of them too). When you start throwing out control options out of the window for the sake of "innovation", you're being exclusive. What about people who have disabilities or are handicapped a certain way. Nintendo all about being inclusive, yet here they were saying "If you do no like the motion controls; too bad, deal with it". That is an exclusive attitude no matter how you slice or how nice or noble they try to present it as. They might as well be flipping off the consumer right then and there. It's why I have a harder time going back to my Wii some of the time, depending on the game.
Except they WERE shoved in our faces.
Truth.
Except ARMS sold over 2 million copies though, and its getting a character in Smash Bros. soon.
That's more a you problem than the Wii Remote.
Options are good, but only if the games' mechanics still work well with those options. There are many things that a traditional controller just wouldn't be nearly as good at as a motion-based control scheme, and if a game is designed around a motion-based control scheme, then the former is more than likely to occur.. The reason a lot of Wii motion controls were "forced" is because again, the Wii Remote's lack of buttons, so developers had to use waggle as a workaround to compensate. I do agree that games like NSMB Wii and DKCR should've supported the Classic/GameCube controller as those are arguably a better fit for these types of games.
They didn't "walk that back" There's still many games on the Switch designed with motion in mind, or at least support it in some way.
pretty much; basically every shooter on the Switch uses them because it doesn't make any sense to ignore them. They're basically a standard now so people have gotten used to just implementing them. It's like still trying to make a big deal of analog controls with the PS3 when that had been standard for over a decade
My friend that is as hardcore a Zelda fan as anyone just couldn't take the game and its motion controls and it's the only Zelda he hasn't beaten.
But does any shooter force you to use gyro aiming?
This one is a bit more understandable as the Joy-Con have all the inputs found on the Pro Controller, even a grip that makes it a more traditional controller as well.
they were horrible? or are you just bad at videogames?
