The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
[Kinect][Move] Preliminary Analyses by one of the "Core"
Maginomicon
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I'm working on a set of ongoing preliminary analysis posts for both Kinect (at the time still called Project Natal, funny how nothing's changed) and Move.
Summaries of their features and other observations are included, such as why Move has a magnetometer and why Kinect desperately needs a controller (a very specific controller) if it's going to have any luck with the so-called "core".
NOTE: Requires some reading. (heaven forbid)
Kinect (Part 1)
Kinect (Part 2)
Move
[EDIT]Okay, so maybe I was a little harsh, so I've removed the caution signs.[/EDIT]
Summaries of their features and other observations are included, such as why Move has a magnetometer and why Kinect desperately needs a controller (a very specific controller) if it's going to have any luck with the so-called "core".
NOTE: Requires some reading. (heaven forbid)
Kinect (Part 1)
Kinect (Part 2)
Move
[EDIT]Okay, so maybe I was a little harsh, so I've removed the caution signs.[/EDIT]
Maginomicon on
0
Posts
As for the suggestion of improving Kinect by having a controller for it, I see a few problems. It goes completely against the "no controller" message they are trying to get across. As you say, if they used a standard 360 controller, then you lose all arm and hand tracking functionality. I don't buy the problem of 360 controllers accidentally being flung around - the number of wii remotes thrown around by accident was quite minor. Of course, if you use the 360 controller in one hand, it could work, but holding controllers designed for two hands in only one is not comfortable.
And if you have Kinect specific controllers, then you have the problem of segmenting an already segmented market - it would essentially be a peripheral for a peripheral.. The market penetration would just not be big enough to be worth supporting.
As for what you say about Move, there's been a few sources that the two wand games in the sports games do support a wand+nav/DS3 combo as an option. It wouldn't make sense to block off almost half the content on that disc unless a second wand is purchased. Given all that, I'd say it's far more likely the nav does have accelerometers than not.
It's bulky, and has no lanyard or even a loop to attach one to. That doesn't bode well for the idea.
Tell that to Sony, that's exactly what they're doing (not to say it's a good idea). The controller I described is such that they can be identical, one in each hand. This controller would be a pittance for Microsoft to make.
Odds are it's still autopiloted though. Actually, given the package's price I wouldn't be entirely surprised if they locked off content unless you had a second move controller. It's not like it's unheard of. Some of the multiplayer games in WiiSports Resort (Nintendo, mind you) simply would not run unless you had more than one WiiMot+ connected.
That's multiplayer though, so people already have to have a second wii remote. Singleplayer content on the disc being unavailable with what comes packed in would be pretty terrible.
Videogames... something originally called a "niche" by the public... such that we now come to call it "core" gaming... is becoming a niche again... because it's of all things... not popular anymore.
When I say niche I am referring to a Kinect specific after-market sub controller. Add-ons traditionally do not do well, but an add-on for an add-on? Dead on Arrival.
PlayStation Eye? Add-on
PlayStation Move? Add-on for an add-on
Which is why the Move/Eye pack-in is available from day 1, avoiding this problem.
On the first day of playing Move, you'll require the Eye.
On the first day of playing Kinect, you won't need anything else. Different circumstances.
Anyway, I'm going to stay out of this thread until at least someone else replies to it. Can't really have great discourse if it's just two of us.
EDIT: Also, what's this: Haven't played Wii Sports Resort, then?
I have. That game didn't use true one-to-one in any of its subgames. They only used tilt control to give the illusion of one-to-one.
So no then. Next time play Frisbee and sword fight.
But honestly, I think half the people who want 1:1 don't really understand what it will mean. Do we want a sword fighting game where we have to swing the sword in a complete arc at the exact speed and angle required? 1:1 is mostly a bullet point on the back of a box, it doesn't automatically make anything better and certainly doesn't mean something will necessarily be more fun.
I mean, why else would you think it needs to be calibrated? You set it down so it can reset its readings and proceed on a 1:1 basis from there. In fact that's one thing a lot of people complained about, that you have to calibrate often to get that sort of precision.
Go to the frisbee subgame, and while standing up, hold the WiiMot+ so that it's pointing off at 45 deg above level. Now crouch. If the Frisbee on screen didn't move down with you, it's not even trying for 1:1, just an illusion of it.
Still not convinced? Try smooth sideways movements left and right of at least 1m while keeping the WiiMot+ facing the same direction (This works smoothest if you use your knees or whole body to do the shifting instead of just your arm, as your arm pivots around your shoulder).
Now do the same thing in the swordfighting duel subgame. Again, the sword on screen will barely move (any small movements can be attributed to not pointing it in the same direction while you're moving).
Calibration is needed because the gyroscope itself has an exponentially-increasing margin of error for direction (those 0.0001% deviations really add up if you're calculating them every millisecond). Over time, its original direction for "forward" shifts.
Even though Move and Kinect can potentially do complete 1:1 motion, it doesn't mean they will. Tiger Woods 11, say - what benefit would there be in me being able to swing the club horizontally? Or hold it behind my back?
Crouching would mean you could putt the small frisbee closer to the ground, allowing you better short-range precision. (That said, the subgame's target goals are too large for this to matter in the slightest. Even in real frisbee golf, the goals are baskets roughly 1m off the ground. Example video here)