Share this article:
 Digg.com Facebook Google Bookmarks N4G Gamerblips del.icio.us Reddit Slashdot.org StumbleUpon A man of grace as always. It most definitely is a sign that they're copying the Wii's idea, and I can't blame them, looking at the Wii's impressive sales.
I just wish Sony had made a little more effort on their model to make it different to the Wii remote.
Overall though I think the Wii has had a very positive effect on the industry, despite all the Wii bashing that hardcore gamers love; it's brought (along with the mums and dads) new gamers to the scene, pumped money into the industry (and Nintendo itself ofc) and led the way into what I think will be the next step of gaming. Always a man of class. Others can take a leaf out of Shigeru's book. No suprise there! Nintendo have always invented the best controllers and everybody else has always followed suite. Sony are still copying SNES controller three generations down the line! He's right, motion controls are validated now more than ever.
To be honest, they aren't even a commercial threat unless proven otherwise.
1. When are they coming out and at what price? The answer is probably 'never' and 'much monies'. M+ is here right now.
2. How do you feasibly play action games on the (like Uncharted or Gears, both defining games), there is no analog stick or enough inputs to do anything good. The Wiimote however has it all covered.
3. Where are the games? When Nintendo showed M+ they had swordplay and jet skiing, the others have nothing but poor concepts. Can't speak for Sony's product, but MS released a statement yesterday that games can use a controller and Natal at the same time. Plus Bungie, Rare, Lionhead and Epic have had the technology for months now, so you'll see games from them. Also, all controller types can co-exist. Motion control is definitely here to stay. Just add it to control pads, analogue sticks, flight sticks, steering wheels and all the other types like guitars and dance mats etc. Incredibly cool guy. but didnt sony bring out the eye toy first ages ago? Definetly. After all Microsoft's and Sony's motion controllers are only add-ons after all (unlike Nintendo's Wiimote) so it's not like motion controllers will replace traditional ones, as Microsoft even said themselves in the other article. One word: WaveBird
Nintendo copied an MS idea from YEARS ago quite why people take offence to the oppurtunity to own a console with a novel controller AND decent games i'll never know
afterall, the wii is litte more than a gamecube in terms of performance, with a novel controller. lets see how the proper consoles implement it first before getting all het up. i personally look forward to having extra control options in a game based upon movement etc.
mook It's no huge surprise, Nintendos have often been the innovators of the console word (more often than not in fact).
However, I can't help thinking that mookistar is correct - the Wii is little more than a Gamecube with a different control method. Now we get to see what the powerhouses of the console world can do with similar tech. That said, as the PS3 and 360 don't have these controls methods from the outset, they may well become footnotes in the consoles life - just like the EyeToy is...
A very real concern as far as I'm concerned. Nintendo haven't been "right all along". For Sony and Microsoft these motion controls...
*Will no doubt be used much more effectively
*Be more of a side role than a main control scheme
All Sony and Microsoft want is a bit of the casual market. I doubt they're changing their control schemes completely and making a bunch of Wii Fit like games. It's good if they become footnotes in the consoles life IMO.
As for Nintendo "innovating" I believe they innovated with the DS, and it turned out well. Regarding the Wii, it wasn't so much innovation for the sake of innovation, but more 'taking a huge risk' just because they had failed to be competitors for the last two generations. It was a make or break generation for them IMO.
I don't see how Nintendo have always been innovators either. Aside from the Wii/DS they haven't done much that has made me think "wow, innovation". I personally think that MS will struggle making Natal a success as it is too advanced for todays market. Sony have been a bit more cautious with their offering, and I believe it offers a more sensible bridge between the wii-mote and Natal.
Sonys motion controller just seems more viable for todays style of games, with it being a physical item and it having buttons.
But that's just my opinion and Natal may be the 2nd coming, but until I see the tech morking well with interesting games, then I have every right to be cynical. Then you must have spent your gaming life stumbling around in the dark... So if these controllers aren't crucial, then who is going to bother supporting them?
How much set-up and effort would it require to not only stand in front of a camera (which are known to be fussy), but also for the player to focus on using a controller too?
The only thing Microsoft had to show for it was really an Eyetoy rip-off and some sort of sequel to 'Hey You Pikachu!'. These announcements have about as much impact as the Vitality Sensor Nintendo showed to be honest.
-
Ever heard of the Power Glove?
In any case, the Wii is still the first console to use it as standard. »
So if these controllers aren't crucial, then who is going to bother supporting them?
How much set-up and effort would it require to not only stand in front of a camera (which are known to be fussy), but also for the player to focus on using a controller too?
The only thing Microsoft had to show for it was really an Eyetoy rip-off and some sort of sequel to 'Hey You Pikachu!'. These announcements have about as much impact as the Vitality Sensor Nintendo showed to be honest.
-
I've said it before on another thread, this will be mainly backed by MS and their internal studios, Rare and Lionhead are just two of them. It's down to third parties if they want to utilise it or not. It basically comes down to imagination, I can see RTS games benefiting and games such as Mass Effect and Fable using the voice recognition. »»
So if these controllers aren't crucial, then who is going to bother supporting them?
How much set-up and effort would it require to not only stand in front of a camera (which are known to be fussy), but also for the player to focus on using a controller too?
The only thing Microsoft had to show for it was really an Eyetoy rip-off and some sort of sequel to 'Hey You Pikachu!'. These announcements have about as much impact as the Vitality Sensor Nintendo showed to be honest.
-
A serious question. Do you really see yourself talking to a TV? And do you realise how difficult it would be to develop a game that required a decent vocabulary, such as an RPG? That recent RTS voice recognition game worked because you could follow set orders, but an RPG.... It 'aint going to happen. Not for a long time. It sounds like a brilliant idea in theory, but in practice I have serious doubts.
Other questions I have to ask are:
How would you take cover in FPS's? How would you quickly select different weapons? Would you really want to duck and jump, rather than press a button? What happens when you enter a tank or helicopter? What about climbing a ladder? Throwing a grenade? Etc, etc....
And that is just the most popular gaming genre of the present time. Other genres like RPG's, racing and sport will offer their own problems.
Expect simple mini games. Oh, and a one on one chat with a child.... D-pad - Game & Watch/NES
4 face button (diamond layout) - SNES
Soulder buttons - SNES
Rumble Pak - N64
Analog Stick - N64
Wireless Controller - GameCube (WaveBird)
All this innovation over the years has massively influenced the 360 and PS3 pads used today. I don't see any inovation from SONY or Microsoft. I think the majority of the people here are missing a huge point of why the Wii was so successful. Everyone keeps talking about how "proper consoles" (aka the 360 and the PS3) will destroy the Wii (or at the very least tap into the same market) now that they have motion control.
Motion control is a part of the success, but it is not the only reason. The Wii was meticulously designed to be suitable for everyone - its success is a combination of creating easily accessible/addictive games and pure marketing.
Think about it... The Wii was designed to be small and plain - something most mother's won't mind sitting on a living room TV stand and doesn't take up much room (compared with a router, etc...). It consumes relatively little power in comparison to its competitors. And it costs less - which in some cases makes it almost an impulse buy.
Nintendo spent time marketing the Wii to mothers and women's groups before it was released - making it a something parents approved of and in turn something they would buy. They used women as ambassadors to other women - similar to how one child sees another child's toy and wants it. And once that happened it essentially went viral.
Most of us don't realize it, but Nintendo even advertises in multiple ways to different audiences. They have standard commercials on channels and times you would suspect (Comedy Central, G4 and other younger skewing channels). They also advertise games during the day on shows like Oprah (to attract a different audience) with familiar faces like Jennifer Anniston and Beyonce. I've even seen advertisements that looked like infomercials clearly aimed at getting senior citizens to buy a Wii.
While the motion controls are an important part of Nintendo's resurgence, Nintendo's real success comes at expanding the market and getting the attention of people Sony and Microsoft never considered. Its like Nintendo is looking at a whole cake, while Sony and MS are worried about fighting over a single piece.
MS and Sony can release anything they want, but if they are not expanding their market (which they won't with current console designs, games and advertising messaging) they will not beat the Wii. You're right, it's not just the super casual titles/motion control that have done the job for Nintendo.
Their advertising has been spot (if somewhat cringe enducing). And before the wii was released, it wasn't this must have peace of technology on the horizon that was going to trounce the ps3/360. It had some buzz built up in the press and the fringes of casual/core gamers which spread to a more mainstream audience, due to the different control scheme.
And during the first six months or so, the console was significantly cheaper. With cheaper games, and games that a mother would feel happy buying for her kids (although this isn't anything new for Nintendo games).
I posted something the other day, that if MS/Sony want to really grab the mainstream, they will need to make better looking, sleeker, quieter and more reliable consoles. Because the wii is tiny and barely noticeable and the 360/PS3 actually look pretty shitty.
They don't have to be a revolution in design, just clean lines etc. Or if getting all the tech in a small unit is a problem, they could have a small drive that you put the disk in in front of the telly, which is linked to the main 'innards' of the console hidden away behind it.
This does sound very clumsy, but you get the idea. | 
