Analyst: PlayStation Motion Controller better than Natal (Hardcore gamers)

"Natal appeared to me to be a technological solution in search of a problem," said Doug Creutz. "I had a very hard time envisioning playing Modern Warfare 3 using Natal," he said, adding, "By contrast, I had a very easy time envisioning it (and enjoying it) using Sony's control/motion capture scheme."

Creutz stated that Microsoft is likely trying to snag some of the Wii's casual marketshare -- "a difficult proposition given that you're essentially asking casual gamers to upgrade twice during the cycle," according to Creutz -- while Sony's device caters more to the core gaming demographic.

Read more here.

And yet another "expert" is unable to comprehend that Natal is not going to replace the standard 360 gamepad.

And yet another "expert" is unable to comprehend that Natal is not going to replace the standard 360 gamepad.

PBSnipes

So why would a core gamer buy it?

Or rather: What good is it to a core gamer? That's the issue they discuss there.

...why were those two even compared? :?

lmao

He had a hard time "envisioning" it? That's lol worthy.

I would love Natal to be incorporated into TV's and DVR's

Ditching the remote control for motion control and voice activation would be sweet

As for its use in games I would have to try it first

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

And yet another "expert" is unable to comprehend that Natal is not going to replace the standard 360 gamepad.

Filthybastrd

So why would a core gamer buy it?

Or rather: What good is it to a core gamer? That's the issue they discuss there.

arent "core gamers" the ones that laugh at all motion controll?

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

And yet another "expert" is unable to comprehend that Natal is not going to replace the standard 360 gamepad.

johnnyblazed88

So why would a core gamer buy it?

Or rather: What good is it to a core gamer? That's the issue they discuss there.

arent "core gamers" the ones that laugh at all motion controll?

No, core gamers recognize that controllers like the Wii-mote are quite handy for fx. fps games.

...why were those two even compared? :?

Verge_6

Two of the three major competitors in the console gaming market both show new motion sensing concepts during the largest gaming convention of the year, and you wonder why someone would compare them... really?

Both devices should go a long way to streamline the rts genre on consoles though.

Putting fanboyism and my own opinions aside, I have one question for this 'analyst': Is he a formerly a game designer? What games have he designed? And if the answer to the two mentioned questions are no and none, what on earth does he know about design?

I think its pretty clear that Natal is going to be used primarily for casual games. I think this guy is comparing apples and oranges. MS still has the standard controller, Natal is just another possible controller that they can use. For instance, the Wii motion controls are great for some games, but for others, you can still use the classic dual analog. It's just giving the devs options.II_Seraphim_II

I think MS is shoe horning their design with the "no controller" concept. I mean yeah that's neat but there are things that a gamers movements just can not do, and thus a controller (be it Nintendo's Wiimote or Sony's concept controller) comes in as a major advantage IMHO. Both Nintendo and Sony seem to have a distinct advantage with their design (not that Natal does have it's own neat advantages).

So why would a core gamer buy it?

Or rather: What good is it to a core gamer? That's the issue they discuss there.

Filthybastrd

Outside of the Natal-specific games and features? Because you can still use it to augment "normal" games. In the case of MW3, maybe you'll use hand gestures to direct your teammates or open doors, or maybe they'll implement a Killzone 2-esque sniping system (ie Natal would track the movement of the 360 gamepad). Maybe they'll put head-tracking in Forza 4/PGR 5. And further down the line (ie with the Xbox 3), maybe we'll see Milo-esque characters in a BioWare RPG or The Simes-type game.

People need to realize Natal has the potential to be more than just waggle controls sans the controller.

One man's opinion. I tend to agree with the line of thinking he has, being partial to buttons and all, but we haven't gotten our hands on either to see how well either works. So it is all conjecture.

The biggest thing (IMHO) that NATAL has going for it over Sony's offering is the obvious focus the gaming division, and even MS as a whole are putting into the product. Sony has a poor track record of supporting their addons (PSeye/Eyetoy, PS2 HDD) and I'm not nearly convinced yet that they will put enough emphasis on the wand to insure there will be compelling games from varied publishers and across genres to entice mass market adoption. We don't know that NATAL will gain huge market penetration either, but I'm impressed at this early stage the backing MS seems to be putting behind it.

I guess in my opinion if NATAL were to fail, I believe MS would take it as a huge blow. Whereas I see Sony's offering to be more about covering bases and hedging bets rather than a new focus for them.

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

So why would a core gamer buy it?

Or rather: What good is it to a core gamer? That's the issue they discuss there.

PBSnipes

Outside of the Natal-specific games and features? Because you can still use it to augment "normal" games. In the case of MW3, maybe you'll use hand gestures to direct your teammates or open doors, or maybe they'll implement a Killzone 2-esque sniping system (ie Natal would track the movement of the 360 gamepad).

People need to realize Natal is more than just waggle controls sans controller.

MS specifically sold the idea of Natal as a controller-less way to play games, why do people (not just you, I've noticed many doing this) change that concept by inserting exactly what their whole sales pitch said it would not have?

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

So why would a core gamer buy it?

Or rather: What good is it to a core gamer? That's the issue they discuss there.

-RPGamer-

Outside of the Natal-specific games and features? Because you can still use it to augment "normal" games. In the case of MW3, maybe you'll use hand gestures to direct your teammates or open doors, or maybe they'll implement a Killzone 2-esque sniping system (ie Natal would track the movement of the 360 gamepad).

People need to realize Natal is more than just waggle controls sans controller.

MS specifically sold the idea of Natal as a controller-less way to play games, why do people (not just you, I've noticed many doing this) change that concept by inserting exactly what their whole sales pitch said it would not have?

The ideas are'nt bad though.

I'm still more for the "wii-motes" but the ideas are quite ok.

The ideas are'nt bad though.

Filthybastrd

I agree, I'm not saying PB has bad ideas. I'm just pointing out that they haven't yet said anything about changing their original sales pitch, which is to play with your own body as the controller (i.e. no actual standard controller will be needed). That's all I'm saying.

If they can use Natal to make some sort of sport game where you can make your own animations - that would be pretty cool.

Maybe use it in freethrows in an NBA game, your own shooting animation.. etc.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"]

...why were those two even compared? :?

-RPGamer-

Two of the three major competitors in the console gaming market both show new motion sensing concepts during the largest gaming convention of the year, and you wonder why someone would compare them... really?

"Natal appeared to me to be a technological solution in search of a problem," said Doug Creutz. "I had a very hard time envisioning playing Modern Warfare 3 using Natal," he said, adding, "By contrast, I had a very easy time envisioning it (and enjoying it) using Sony's control/motion capture scheme."

Creutz stated that Microsoft is likely trying to snag some of the Wii's casual marketshare -- "a difficult proposition given that you're essentially asking casual gamers to upgrade twice during the cycle," according to Creutz -- while Sony's device caters more to the core gaming demographic.

Read more here.

fourseamer4

And I have an ever easier time seeing myself playing it with a regular controller.

MS specifically sold the idea of Natal as a controller-less way to play games, why do people (not just you, I've noticed many doing this) change that concept by inserting exactly what their whole sales pitch said it would not have?

-RPGamer-

I'm not saying there won't be Natal-only games, rather I'm saying there are games where Natal-only controls are not a feasible alternative to the good ol' 360 gamepad. Maybe I just lack creative vision, but I don't see how one could, to use the analysts example, play a game like Call of Duty with Natal-only controls. However, I can see how one could use Natal in conjunction with a standard gamepad to improve the experience.

[QUOTE="johnnyblazed88"]

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

So why would a core gamer buy it?

Or rather: What good is it to a core gamer? That's the issue they discuss there.

Filthybastrd

arent "core gamers" the ones that laugh at all motion controll?

No, core gamers recognize that controllers like the Wii-mote are quite handy for fx. fps games.

[QUOTE="-RPGamer-"]

MS specifically sold the idea of Natal as a controller-less way to play games, why do people (not just you, I've noticed many doing this) change that concept by inserting exactly what their whole sales pitch said it would not have?

PBSnipes

I'm not saying there won't be Natal-only games, rather I'm saying there are games where Natal-only controls are not a feasible alternative to the good ol' 360 gamepad. Maybe I just lack creative vision, but I don't see how one could, to use the analysts example, play a game like Call of Duty with Natal-only controls. However, I can see how one could use Natal in conjunction with a standard gamepad to improve the experience.

Oh don't get me wrong PB I totally agree how it does not seem very feasible. I mean I can think of tons of things that just won't work with something like Natal b/c there is content in games that a player can't emulate in real-life movements, and therefore a button or something similar is needed.

Example:

Picture you're MC and you're running and gunning your way through something (let's not even talk about how turning around would work), now jump. Does MC only jump the horrible foot off the ground that you just did, or does he fly through the air like usual. If it's the former than that would be disappointing considering we know he exceeds human ability. However, if it's the later what exactly do you do and how into the game would you be if the virtual jump was still going long after you landed? (Ifsome of youdon't like Halo, replace MC with Mario same exact concept).

I just wonder if MS will back pedal on it's selling point of no controller needed. Should be interesting.

Who gives a damn about motion controls anyway?

And yet another "expert" is unable to comprehend that Natal is not going to replace the standard 360 gamepad.

PBSnipes

With all the support Natal is getting from casual and hardcore devs, this guy is bonkers.Toriko42

After watching E3 Id say thats pretty obvious really.

NATAL is great and I cant wait to try it, but for shooters, its not going to work without a controller.

And dont say you can use a 360 controller, becuase that defets the point of NATAL.

What sony has though is a very accurate controller which can be used as a gun, bow and arrow, sword, with a proper HD console (unlike the wii).

Plus since sony is using a camera body tracking can be easily implemented. I can actually see games like Elder scrolls 5, COD MW2 ect using this. And it would be great.

"Natal appeared to me to be a technological solution in search of a problem," said Doug Creutz. "I had a very hard time envisioning playing Modern Warfare 3 using Natal," he said, adding, "By contrast, I had a very easy time envisioning it (and enjoying it) using Sony's control/motion capture scheme."

Creutz stated that Microsoft is likely trying to snag some of the Wii's casual marketshare -- "a difficult proposition given that you're essentially asking casual gamers to upgrade twice during the cycle," according to Creutz -- while Sony's device caters more to the core gaming demographic.

Read more here.

how come natal is getting all the hype then?

What I don't understand with Natal, is they keep bringing up the scenario where "Imagine you are playing Halo. You have the controller in your hand and if you want to look around all you would have to do is move your head."

If you wanted to look to your right wouldn't that mean looking to you right? That means you are no longer looking at the TV screen but at a wall in your room. How is that helpful in a video game because you won't be able to see anything on the TV screen, unless you can buy 4 TVs in your house put them on every wall and have a full 360 view.