Five inherent problems with motion control
Wednesday, October 3rd, 2007 at 11:22am by Andrew
In just 10 months, Nintendo’s Wii has given the gaming industry much to think about. The sales have been phenomenal, but many long-time gamers are struggling to find games that fit their existing habits. Many of the Wii success stories are about games that were designed from the ground up with Wii in mind. Developers who are taking existing games and trying to make them into Wii games are running into some walls with the control scheme. It’s up to consumers to purchase the games from the developers who get it right. As for the ones who don’t, we simply wonder “what happened?”
1. Inaccuracy
The Wii Remote is a wonderful piece of technology, but it’s not perfect. Moving the remote too quickly for a gesture makes it hard for the system to pick up on what the gesture is supposed to be. When you’re moving the pointer through 3D space, without the system having any way of reading the space around it, you’re relying solely on the remote’s sensors to be 100% accurate, and after 10 months of playing Wii games, it’s plain to see that it’s not 100%. No matter how close to 100% it gets, gamers have been used to button precision for decades. Buttons are 100%. Another problem lies with the Wii’s pointing device. Many have compared it to a mouse, but the key difference is that you cannot lift your hand to reset the remote to a “default” position, like is easily done with a mouse. In addition, lighting differences in different homes make it difficult for the Wii Remote to work properly. Candles near the television, or sunlight streaming through an open window can make the Wii practically unplayable.
HOW TO FIX IT: This will come in time if Nintendo continues down the motion control path for its next console. As Nintendo studies the remote and how consumers use it, they will get the feedback necessary to improve the accuracy of the remote for the next generation of the technology. Perhaps Nintendo will release a more reliable Wii Remote later in the life of the existing console, but to do so would require them to admit that the original was flawed. That is unlikely to occur. Only if the new revision is couched in a new design, or some other tangible positive, would Nintendo take this approach. Nintendo had very little market research on which to base their original design and technology for the Wii Remote, and it shows. Next time out, you can bet that Nintendo will take care of many of these difficulties.
2. It’s All Relative
Everyone uses button controllers the exact same way, but motion controllers are different. People have different arm sizes, leading to longer or shorter swings of the remote in a golf game, or shorter, quicker strikes in a boxing game. People move the remote at a variety of speeds and this leads back to the first problem. This is also a problem for gameplay habits. When playing Metroid Prime 3, I was supposed to pull the remote toward me, but it was already next to me, so I’d have to push it out first, which confused the game. Sometimes when ripping an energy shield from a Space Pirate, I would yank the nunchuck back to me, but unfortunately a second too early. By the time the game was ready for me to yank the nunchuck back, it was already in the “yanked” position. When playing WarioWare, I constantly have to remind my guests to stand an additional foot back from the TV and aim slightly lower, toward the sensor bar. I have seen very few first-timers get the pointing games right on the first try.
HOW TO FIX IT: Developers need to write code that accounts for these discrepancies. I have yet to see a game that properly deals with this. Perhaps in future revisions of the Wii’s firmware, the system could ask for the arm length of its primary players, giving developers the variables they need to properly implement swinging motions into their games. Other motion sensing calibration techniques could be utilized as well to gauge the gameplay habits of the system’s owners. Some of the inaccuracies I’ve seen in Wii games are no fault of the technology, but of lazy programming. In most other software design fields, this would not be acceptable. If Nintendo intends to prioritize the user interface, as seems to be the case with both Wii and DS, this needs to be improved.
3. Tired Arms
Recently the developers of Rygar have said they intend the game to be physically taxing. Is this a good thing? Many gamers have said they don’t want to be tired after playing games for 20 minutes. The counterargument, of course, is Wii Sports - a game which by its very name and intent is physically taxing. Some microgames in WarioWare are taxing, some are not. Some of the minigames in Rayman are taxing, some are not. Which does the gaming community prefer? Are we playing standing up, or sitting down?
HOW TO FIX IT: Market research. Determine what types of gamers want to play games that require physically taxing movement and make games for them. If the typical Metroid gamer doesn’t want to wipe sweat from his brow, don’t make Metroid games that require taxing movements. The types of motions that a player must make to succeed in the game must be fun to that gamer, and not uncomfortable. The fishing minigame in Zelda: Twilight Princess felt very out of place because it was extremely taxing compared to the rest of the motions in that game. Not all physically taxing motion games are a bad thing; they simply have to appeal to the right kinds of people.
4. Overzealous Developers
With Wii’s success, the library of games now has a glut of titles that use poor implementation of motion control. Sometimes the developers want to do too much and assume that the player will adapt to the control scheme. Games that require the player to adapt to the control scheme rarely do well for themselves. Why does a game like Prince of Persia really need motion control? Does Madden do too much? Is motion sensing control truly a superior scheme in Metal Slug? All of these issues are debatable, but the topic remains an issue: how much motion control is too much? Do developers know when to stop?
HOW TO FIX IT: Eventually developers will see what types of Wii games sell and will make games that function similarly. We’ve seen lots of fishing, golfing, and bowling games on Wii already, based on the success of Wii Sports. This is good marketing (regardless of the quality of these games), and will eventually lead to success for these developers. By comparison, the DS was filled with awful touch screen games in the first year. The problem never really went away from the DS, but you did eventually see a few successful formulas emerge after the first year, and these were adapted into other titles by competing developers. One hopes that in time Wii will follow suit and we’ll see developers begin to understand how to use motion sensing to make games BETTER, not just different.
5. Marketing
Wii has made it difficult to demonstrate new products to potential consumers. In brick-and-mortar stores, there are demo kiosks for major consoles, even the PC platform, but for Wii we only see a video, with a pleasant-faced woman talking about how much fun you COULD be having with the system if you were lucky enough to own one. With online retail, consumers are faced with the problem that the motion sensing aspect of gameplay cannot be demonstrated through videos or screenshots. Nintendo has solved this problem by showing videos of people playing and enjoying the product, intertwined with videos of the game itself. This is a sufficient, but somewhat problematic marketing technique, because it doesn’t focus on the product itself, rather on the consumer.
HOW TO FIX IT: I would certainly not try to convince you that Nintendo has had a marketing problem over the past year, but in the future Nintendo’s strategy may not be as successful. Once the idea of Wii is firmly implanted into consumers’ brains, they will want to see less of people playing the system, and more of what types of software is available. Unfortunately, without any kind of a physical demonstration, there is no way to avoid having to show the person playing the game. Nintendo is still selling Wii on the potential of great future products, as evident by the apparent lack of need to demo current software. There will come a time when the majority of potential customers will have already experienced Wii Sports and will be ready to move onto new software, but will be unable to play the software in stores, instead relying on video.
October 3rd, 2007 at 12:02 pm
One of the major problems as I see it (not noted in the article) is what happens when the pointer goes off screen.
How to fix it: I think they could track the remote based on relative tilt data for a brief moment until the IR comes back into view. It would not be 100% accurate, but good enough to provide a bit of a “cushion” for a split second. It would certainly be better than freezing up, or continuously moving in the same direction. Once the IR is back in view, they could use that as an opportunity to recalibrate the tilt, until such a time when it is needed again.
Of course this solution would only work for games that primarily have you pointing at the screen (FPS), and only as a stop-gap, but that’s all I really intended it for.
Obviously this is all speculation on my part. I’m not sure how technically feasible it would be, but it seems plausible.
October 3rd, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Good read! My personal comments:
“1. Inaccuracy“: I’ve found that Nintendo has no problem admitting a flaw in their original design, once they have a solution for it… just look at the DS Lite or the new straps and “jackets” for the Wii mote.
“2. It’s All Relative“: Many of the innacuracy problems I have with some games (like Tiger Woods PGA Tour or Metroid Prime 3) have been solved by simply switching the location of the sensor bar. Just remember to change the location in the Wii Settings menu accordingly also.
“3. Tired Arms“: I play most Wii games standing up, even Metroid Prime 3. The only exception is Excite Truck. But I think it is psychological… I just get more into the game when I approach the supposed position of the game I’m playing!
“4. Overzealous Developers“: Just like Nintendo taught developers with New Super Mario Bros that they don’t have to force the implementation of the touchscreen functionality or the use of the second screen, they should teach them that they don’t have to force the use of the Wiimote into their games, or at least that it’s OK to keep its use to a minimum for certain games. I think Nintendo will do that with Super Smash Bros Brawl.
“5. Marketing“: When I saw that my local BestBuy finally installed a Wii kiosk (just about a month ago!), I was puzzled to see that they had Wii Sports as a demo, instead of a more recent game like Metroid Prime 3… even though they didn’t have ANY Wiis for sale yet! Why demo Wii Sports, which is aimed to consumers who have yet to buy the Wii, instead of trying to seduce both the consumers who don’t have a Wii plus the ones who already have it by demoing a new game?? That’s what they do with the other two consoles! The result is a lost sale: those of us who already have it won’t be enticed to buy a new game for it, and those that loved the new experience won’t be able to find a Wii in the store anyway! Don’t these retailers think about how they merchandise their expensive setups?!?
October 3rd, 2007 at 12:24 pm
Thanks, Andrew.
October 3rd, 2007 at 12:30 pm
Good analysis, but I do not agree with all these problems.
1. Inaccuracy. Until today I do not see a real problem with this. Maybe some games could have better accuracy in some ways, but mostly this is a programming issue. The Wii hardware have some limitations, true, but I believe some developers out there will come out with better solutions each time.
2. It’s All Relative. For me this is not a problem, is just how things are. The main sensor in the Wii Remote (the accelerometer) only senses movement and speed, as a developer know how tall or how long are the arms of the person playing is useless. You can’t improve the response knowing that. You can improve your software if you know how strong the player is, but to do so you need a much better accelerometer that the Wii Remote have.
3. Tired Arms. For me this is not a problem neither. Let the consumers choose what they want to play, but also let the developers do what they want to do too. As a developer I like to develop a great game that I love to play, if some kind of gamers don’t like my game is because is not for them.
4. Overzealous Developers. True. But developers not always have the last word.
5. Marketing. Right now the best marketing for the Wii is the people. Nothing ever will be better. You can install a lot of kiosks but unless you have one in every corner a lot of people will miss that. What Nintendo have to do is create a community, integrate that community within the Wii and the DS, and let the people talk and enjoy the experience.
October 3rd, 2007 at 1:08 pm
You’re welcome, Kelly.
BTW, for those unclear, Andrew = DrewMG.
October 3rd, 2007 at 1:45 pm
I am constantly amazed at how similar the Wii’s path is when compared to the DS path. After about a year into the DS’ lifecycle, people were complaining about poorly implemented touch screen controls, games forcing the use of the touch screen, developers not fully grasping the hardware’s potential and mini-game compilations.
I think that Nintendo’s disruption of the market is causing growing pains. Once developers get their heads wrapped around the console, the fun will really begin.
October 3rd, 2007 at 1:55 pm
For me, the DS began to really take off when Canvas Curse was released. That remains to me the best example of how, in some cases, stylus control can be far superior than d-pad.
I’ve not seen a game for Wii that does the same yet. Prime 3 is the closest it’s gotten.
October 3rd, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Edar is right, most of these problems are not so much flaws as personal “niggles” with the interface.
Basically what it comes down to is, the Wii-mote can NOT read your mind. It is an input device, just like a controller with buttons. It is PROGRAMMED. It reads data it accumulates from its sensors. Some learning is required and in many cases, god forbid, some practice. I have found that with some practice, the “inaccuracy” disappears. For me, part of the fun of the Wii is learning what the machine wants, or rather, what its programmed to recognize. Much like pulling off combos in a game like Mortal Kombat, practice yields good results. Due to the complexity of motion versus a button, it may SEEM inaccurate, but its not. The “sloppiness” of the controls is derived from the inherent sloppiness of each persons individual motions. This is a challenge I enjoy, learning to control my body to ensure accurate input. You can’t simply flail (the motion equivalent of button mashing) and expect to have any semblance of control. Much like you have to practice a golf swing to hit a golf ball successfully, it only makes sense you may have to practice a “swing” of the remote to get the desired result. I expected this from the wii-mote and its delivering as anticipated.
October 3rd, 2007 at 2:35 pm
“For me, part of the fun of the Wii is learning what the machine wants, or rather, what its programmed to recognize.”
If Nintendo is going to create a controller that invites you to do what comes naturally (swing a bat, a racket, etc) then I should think that having to conform to what the machine wants is an inherent flaw. The machine is telling you that you can play by swinging a racket, but what it really means is that you can play by swinging a racket within these particular parameters. I would argue that it takes you out of the game, when you have to think about your motions in the terms of how a computer could understand them.
October 3rd, 2007 at 3:01 pm
I liked that Twilight Princess came with a calibration screen, so that you could be sure that aiming at the screen with your weapon actually corresponded to your television size and distance from the screen.
In playing Metriod, however I have not noticed a huge discrepancy between where I want to aim and where I’m actually aiming. One thing I do not like is in the FPS perspective, you have to point off the screen in order to turn. This makes turning a corner imprecise and unnatural.
October 3rd, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Great article. I love my Wii, but it definitely does have some limitations!
A few semi-related comments that passed through my mind while reading:
(1) Do PS3 graphics have room to improve over the games we’ve seen so far? Most people say yes, that developers will squeeze more out of the system as they become familiar with the hardward.
How does that relate to Wii? With experience and time to discover what the new motion sensing hardware is capable of (and what it’s true limitations are), developer’s should also see a great deal of improvement in providing accurate controls for Wii games.
The Wii might not be powerful enough to poll the controller for true 1:1 motion sensing, or the sensors may not be accurate enough… but it’s too early make that judgement just yet unless you’ve had first-hand experience developing for the system.
(2) Although poor/faulty coding is easily seen in many of the Wii games available now, there also is some burden on the gamer to learn how to interact with the game properly.
Wii Sports Boxing one example. Many people hated the game because the control scheme did not follow their expectation of 1:1 control over movement. While the controls are far from perfect, they are still functional and work well enough once you learn the correct motions to use. Timing your movements correctly (for example, in Metroid Prime) is also the user’s responsibility… although more robust coding should make this learning process easier!
(3) “Nintendo is still selling Wii on the potential of great future products, as evident by the apparent lack of need to demo current software.”
I’m picking nits again, but this is only true from a “gamers” perspective. Wii is selling like hotcakes because of Wii Sports - the system selling demo that has made millions of non-gamers purchase their very own Wii. While you might be waiting for the next big game, potential for future products is only icing on the cake to the majority of Wii owners.
If want to talk about selling on potential, then discuss the PS3. That system definitely has the most potential, but is virtually untapped as of yet. When the PS3 starts to hit it’s stride (probably next year some time?) gamers the world over will have reason to celebrate.
(4) Remember the immense amount of shovelware that accompanied the PlayStation? I never appreciate the original PS, because there were too much crap games in between the gems… Right now I have a similar feeling with the Wii. There are too many games trying to turn a quick buck, and too few that really consider what would be a successful and well designed game for the system at hand. How many PS2 ports has the Wii seen already, and how many more are in development? It’s shameful!
:p
October 3rd, 2007 at 4:04 pm
“If Nintendo is going to create a controller that invites you to do what comes naturally (swing a bat, a racket, etc) then I should think that having to conform to what the machine wants is an inherent flaw.”
I think your viewpoint may be flawed. I don’t think Nintendo is simply inviting us “to do what comes naturally”. I think they are offering the potential for a more natural control method. For example, swinging a remote is a hundred times closer to swinging a golf club than pushing a button is, even given the fact that you have to swing the remote a certain way. After all. I would LOVE to be able to hit a fast pitch base ball with consistency in real life, but standing at the plate and swinging a bat isn’t quite that simple. I agree, there needs to be some simplification for the wii-mote, and there is, but to expect it to work 100 percent for every user is absurd to me. I expect to meet the game console half way. If I make an effort to learn the appropriate motion, (you cant expect to swing the remote like in tennis for a golf swing) then the Wii remote should make an effort to recognize that motion. I’m just saying, the wii seems to be doing its half just fine. If gamers are will to do their half (attempt to approximate the motion the wii is looking for) then it works great and makes for a fantastic experience. The only people I see having real problems are experienced gamers who expect the same responses as they got from a button. This is a major paradigm shift and its hard for some gamers to cope.
Other “niggles” I have with your perspective:
“Moving the remote too quickly for a gesture makes it hard for the system to pick up on what the gesture is supposed to be”
This is no different than pushing buttons with poor timing, too fast, or too slow. Many games require an action to complete before they will recognize a new input, this isn’t unique to motion controls. As I said, the remote is an input device that needs to be understood and used correctly. Moving it “too quickly” is an example of not using it correctly. If you’re not using it correctly, it seems silly to expect it to function as designed.
“Everyone uses button controllers the exact same way”
Except that they don’t. Everyone holds controllers differently, motion or otherwise. Ever notice how some people complain their hands cramp on a PS2 controller, while others love it? Same exact thing on a gamecube or xbox controller. Is the controller broken because someones hand cramps? Of course not, yet many gamers love/hate certain control configurations.
“Developers who are taking existing games and trying to make them into Wii games are running into some walls with the control scheme.”
Not all of them. RE4 was fantasic, actually improving on the original. Twilight princess wasn’t half bad either. Admittedly some are having problems, but I don’t think the hardware is the issue.
“The Wii Remote is a wonderful piece of technology, but it’s not perfect.”
Should it be? Is any controller? You state the obvious as if its a problem.
“This is also a problem for gameplay habits.”
So a problem with the hardware is how you play games personally? We as gamers have developed our habits based on existing technology and controller design. I think its safe to assume that if controllers change, so will our habits. Theres nothing to say our current habits are “correct” rather than just a reaction to the way current games work.
“I have seen very few first-timers get the pointing games right on the first try.”
Again, should you get a new game right on your first try? I don’t think so. In fact, I’ve had the same situation with games like Mario party and Wario ware. The difference is that they DO get it right on their second try. Unlike a button controller that might take an hour or two for a new gamer to get to do what they want. I see this as a dramatic improvement.
My point is simple, if you come at the wii expecting results similar to old style controllers (as you clearly do), you may be disappointed. If you approach it with an open mind for new gaming opportunities and are willing to slightly alter you existing play styles, unburdened by expectations of “button-like” performance, you’ll likely be pleasantly surprised. After all, buttons are incredibly limiting, but that adds to the predictability. This can be a good or bad thing. If you like limits and predictability, the Wii may be a challenge.
October 3rd, 2007 at 4:13 pm
@ejamer,
“there also is some burden on the gamer to learn how to interact with the game properly.”
This is exactly what I’ve been saying. In my estimation, this adds to the realism. Not just any motion will do. You need to make the correct motion. You can’t expect it to recognize a horizontal swing if you are swinging it vertically. To that end, they have to program in a set a parameters for whats acceptable and whats not. As gamers, its important to understand this so that we are not disappointed by expecting the impossible.
October 3rd, 2007 at 5:54 pm
“but to expect it to work 100 percent for every user is absurd to me.”
Every time I hit a button on the remote, it responds. Every time. It doesn’t matter how slow or fast I hit it. The same cannot be said of my swings in Wii Tennis. This is the crux of my argument.
“I’m just saying, the wii seems to be doing its half just fine”
If you think there is no room for improvement in the motion detection, then I would argue that you are far too forgiving. The Wii is doing its half just fine, some of the time, but not all of the time. It is not up to the user to compensate for the hardware failing to take every possible movement into consideration. It is up to the programmers and the hardware designers to figure out how to get the game to respond to the users motions despite the wide variation of motion types.
“This is no different than pushing buttons with poor timing, too fast, or too slow. Many games require an action to complete before they will recognize a new input, this isn’t unique to motion controls.”
As I said earlier, a button press is accurrate 100%. If you are refering to combinations of the d-pad and buttons, then perhaps your point is valid, but if a single horizontal swing does the same thing in one game that a press of the B button does in another game, then the game that has less than 100% accuracy is inherently flawed. It’s not a matter of how you look at it when you’re looking for the same thing out of both experiences. What you seem to be saying to me is that instead of trying to fault the Wii Remote for being flawed, I should simply accept that it is, and adjust my gameplay style. It is this mindset that I cannot wrap my brain around. When Nintendo releases the exact same game for it’s button-oriented platform and it’s motion sensing platform, I should hold the game up to the same standards, and if I cannot get the motion sensing version to respond appropriately 100% of the time using the instructions given, I chalk this up to hardware and software failure, not a failure to adjust.
“My point is simple, if you come at the wii expecting results similar to old style controllers (as you clearly do), you may be disappointed.”
They are both video games. I refuse to lower my expectations for the response of the input device in motion sensing games simply to avoid being disappointed.
“If you approach it with an open mind”
I wouldn’t have bought a Wii the day of release if I didn’t have an open mind, and I don’t particularly appreciate the insinuation that if I believe there’s room for improvement in motion sensing, it is because I am not open to new ideas.
“buttons are incredibly limiting”
I would choose the word reliable.
“If you like limits and predictability, the Wii may be a challenge.”
It is not my responsibility as a gamer to rise to the challenge of compensating for poor design.
“disappointed by expecting the impossible.”
I never expected the impossible, and I never claimed disappointment that the Wii Remote wasn’t perfect. I’m simply pointing out that there is room for improvement. Button-input devices have had 20 years to improve. It’s not out of the question that this new type of input could use some polish over time.
October 3rd, 2007 at 6:38 pm
“Every time I hit a button on the remote, it responds. Every time. It doesn’t matter how slow or fast I hit it.”
You’re dodging the issue. What if a game requires you to hit A then X then Y. If you hit them in the wrong order, or with the wrong timing, the results won’t be what you want. You know this is true. And the wii-mote is far more in depth than even a 3 button combo.
“If you think there is no room for improvement in the motion detection”
I’m not saying there’s no room for improvement. I’m saying the things you discuss are not “inherent problems with motion control”. You wrote the article. Not me. Are you simply saying the Wii-mote has room for improvement? Cuz if thats your point, then I agree.
“if a single horizontal swing does the same thing in one game that a press of the B button does in another game, then the game that has less than 100% accuracy is inherently flawed.”
Here, it comes to your perspective. What is a horizontal swing? My guess is, if you do it “right”, it will work. This could be compared to not pressing the button down far enough to register. But maybe I don’t WANT to push it all the way down, is what you’re essentially saying. I’m saying you have to. The programmers have to make some assumptions in order to program whether its buttons or motion. As a gamer, its your job to understand those assumption and adhere to them.
“It’s not a matter of how you look at it when you’re looking for the same thing out of both experiences.”
Thats the whole point. If you are looking for the same thing out of both experiences, you ARE looking at it wrong. The Wii does not offer the same experience as a button-only controller. If thats what you want, the Wii may not be for you.
“What you seem to be saying to me is that instead of trying to fault the Wii Remote for being flawed, I should simply accept that it is, and adjust my gameplay style.”
No, I’m saying that the nature of the Wii-mote is unable to meet the expectations you’re leveling at it. You want it to perform like a button. It can’t. It won’t. I want my SUV to perform like sports car. Is my SUV flawed or my expectation?
“When Nintendo releases the exact same game for it’s button-oriented platform and it’s motion sensing platform, I should hold the game up to the same standards,”
I don’t agree. First, I recognize new technology takes time to perfect.
Again, I’ve never claimed the wii-mote is perfect. Its not. It needs some work. However, I disagree that its inherently flawed. Knowing this, it will take time to see its full potential. Games with standard controller have had plenty of time to work out the kinks. I’m much more strict with the use of analog stick because they are a mature technology. Likewise, you’re a new writer on Infendo, so I understand you’re still working out the kinks.
“I wouldn’t have bought a Wii the day of release if I didn’t have an open mind, and I don’t particularly appreciate the insinuation that if I believe there’s room for improvement in motion sensing, it is because I am not open to new ideas.”
Well, you certainly don’t seem open to the idea that maybe your perspective needs some work. You can’t seem to get that I’m not saying the Wii doesn’t need improvement. It does. Theres a big difference between “needs improvement” and “inherently flawed”.
“I would choose the word reliable.”
Buttons ARE reliable. No question. Thats what I was getting at. Human motion is inherently unreliable. Does that make it flawed? Or more natural? Can you throw a football in the exact same spot every time? I doubt it. The fact that this translates accurately to the Wii-controller adds authenticity. For me, this is a good thing.
“I never expected the impossibleand I never claimed disappointment that the Wii Remote wasn’t perfect”
Well, your gripe was that it was not 100%.
“after 10 months of playing Wii games, it’s plain to see that it’s not 100%.”
A motion controller detects a wide range of HUMAN motion. Human motion is not 100% perfect. So to expect a controller to translate something that is less than 100% with 100% perfection is expecting the impossible. Thats why I mentioned performing the motion “correctly”. Like it or not, this will ALWAYS be a requirement for motion controls to function. Yes, its a higher standard to be met than button controllers, but theoretically, it can yield more advanced results.
“It’s not out of the question that this new type of input could use some polish over time.”
Again, I agree, it can use some polish. I think you should decide what your point is. Is the Wii-mote inherently flawed? Or does it simply need some polish?
I’ll agree wholeheartedly with the polish. It needs it. Game designers REALLY need it. If that had been the thrust of your article, I would be here patting you on the back for making some good points, but it wasn’t.
October 3rd, 2007 at 7:27 pm
I agree with most of your points, and agree that perhaps the title of the article is misleading. Several of the problems I discussed in the article pertain to the motion sensing abilities of the Wii Remote, not necessarily motion sensing in general.
The crux of the article is that the Wii Remote needs work, and that it doesn’t work quite as well as Nintendo would currently have you believe.
“Can you throw a football in the exact same spot every time? I doubt it.”
You’re talking about the difference between a video game (a simulation) and reality here, and I don’t think it’s fair to put them up against the same measure. To use your comparison, if you throw a football with the exact same amount of force, into the exact same wind every time, then yes, it will land in the same spot. What I can physically accomplish as a player, and what the computer will recognize are two different things. If I make a throwing motion exactly the same (which I understand is impossible) then I should expect the Wii Remote to react the same every time, and based on my 10 months of playing Wii games, this is not happening. Much of it comes down to poor decisions in game design, such as communicating to the player when a motion is appropriate, and how quickly the motion should be made. The kind of speed one uses when swinging a golf club is not appropriate when swinging the Wii Remote due to the limitations of the device, but I do not see software telling the user this.
“Thats the whole point. If you are looking for the same thing out of both experiences, you ARE looking at it wrong.”
If this is the case, then Nintendo is sending some mixed messages out there by releasing and licensing games that are released on both Gamecube and Wii. Should I be looking for vastly different experiences when playing Twilight Princess or RE 4 on Wii as opposed to Gamecube? Certainly there’s a difference, but what does that difference entail? Revolution or not, we are still talking about video games here - computer programs that react to input and give you a result on a screen. If the input is unreliable, then there is a problem.
Really, I think you and I are going around in circles arguing about different sides of the same coin. This article started out as an attempt to list genres that wouldn’t work better with motion control, and I came to the conclusion that I couldn’t name five genres that wouldn’t work better with PROPERLY IMPLEMENTED motion controls. Unfortunately, so far on the Wii, I have seen very few instances of properly implemented motion control, which led me to the topic we see above.
October 3rd, 2007 at 7:37 pm
@Used Cisco — Your first post went up while I was still writing, but yeah, I agree with much of what you said.
Learning to make motions that will consistently be interpreted correctly is just part of the challenge for some games. When programmers and designers provide tight, well thought-out control schemes, the onus then shifts to the player to take advantage of those controls.
For example, the difference between a lob and bullet pass in Madden ‘08 may take a bit of practice… but is something that can be learned and used consistently with just a bit of practice. Reviewers who complained that the controls were impossible obviously weren’t interested in having to finetune their movements - but their laziness does not make the game *broken*. In fact, if anything the controls are closer to a real football simulation in this case than just holding down buttons…
A similar argument can be made for issues people have with timing, or with spacing (when there isn’t enough room to push the remote forward or pull it back). In this case, the solution depends partly on learned behavior from the players and partly on programmers creating robust control schemes.
Unfortunately, there are also some well-documented “8 out of 10″ cases, where players are unable (even with practice) to make the motion controls work consistently. In those cases, something is wrong with either the design or the programming.
If players cannot intuitively grasp how the controls actually work (as is the case with Wii Sports Boxing) then the designers may need to look for a better set of motion controls to use in their game. Designing a good control scheme requires more effort from the developers than simply mapping actions to a couple of buttons… but the payoff is immensely more satisfying when done correctly.
If motions are not being captured correctly, that is a programming error. Unfortunately, learning to take advantage of the Wii remote (and accessories) does take some time. As programmers gain experience and create libraries of code that can be reused and improved upon, this should continually improve until the only limitation left is the Wii hardware.
One thing that we can all agree on: there is definite room for improvement.
Working with motion controls is a paradigm shift that requires gamers, programmers, and designers to approach new control schemes with an open mind. It’s no surprise the first generation of games using motion controls are less than perfect. Hopefully that will improve over time…
October 3rd, 2007 at 8:10 pm
@drewMG,
Well, your most recent comment seems to be close enough to being on the same page that anything further on my part would be beating a dead horse. I think we understand each other at the very least, and thats really the idea afterall.
@ejamer,
I’m with you 100%
I would like to add that even with all the polish I think is needed, what I’ve seen to this point on games like Wii-Sports/Play, TP, RE4, MP3, Strikers, Rabbids, Elebits, Trauma Center, Dragon Blade and others really has me hopeful. These games and others have me more jazzed about gaming then I’ve been in years. I honestly have trouble going back to dual analogs, particularly for shooters. When playing Halo 3 I constantly feel myself wishing I could just shoot where I’m pointing, to the point that it hinders my enjoyment of the game. Admittedly, there is a LOT of shovelware on wii and headed to wii, but those games’ quality have nothing to do with any problems of the hardware.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:29 pm
Couldn’t agree more about the Wii controls being perfect for First Person Shooter games!
It’s been a long time since console FPS have caught my interest. After playing CounterStrike almost non-stop for a year, going back to analog sticks seemed ludicrous… While Wii controls aren’t perfect, they do seem to be the next evolutionary step (and a heck of a lot better than dual analogs) for a console FPS.
Here’s hoping that Medal of Honor: Heroes 2 lives up to the recent hype. *fingers crossed*
October 3rd, 2007 at 10:37 pm
@ejamer,
If you haven’t played RE4 Wii yet, do so immediately. I loved the cube version and still own it, but the Wii version is a vast improvement. This game is the poster child for Wii-makes but I would give anything for another RE game with controls/graphics similar to RE4 and a new storyline.
October 4th, 2007 at 9:02 am
FWIW, I really appreciate you guys taking the time to read and comment on my posts. Like cisco said earlier, I’m a new writer here. It’s really fun to get feedback on my columns. Even if it leads to a heated discussion. (seems like a lot of those have been popping up since I became active)
Thanks again.
October 4th, 2007 at 9:36 am
@Andrew:
Well written editorials deserve comments.
@used cisco:
I purchased RE4 for Wii after missing it on the last gen consoles, and loved it. Every semi-serious gamer who hasn’t played RE4 before should try it on the Wii!
That said, how did people feel about the control scheme? While they did a great job porting the game, I thought that the gesture-based knife action and remote shaking during cutscenes could have been better. (Neither addition was bad, but both could have been improved by using more specific motion controls.)
On the other hand, RE4 probably deserves a bit of slack because it gets so much right even though the game wasn’t originally designed for the Wii. Also, it is one of the first direct comparisons to show how much better the Wii controls are for aiming/shooting when compared to control schemes for the GameCube/PS2 versions of the game.
October 4th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
@ejamer,
I LOVED the control scheme. I really wish more games would use it. Admittedly, not being able to run and shoot limits the level design a bit, but I really liked it.
As for the “real time” events. I hear what you’re saying, but they are really just simple translations of the original game that required 1 of 2 button combinations. (A+B) or (L+R), or A to run. So yeah, it seems janky, but the original version was janky in the same way. I would like to see it done with more possibilities than just the two, and a sequence of timed events like 4 or 5 events in a row to make it more challenging. That would be pretty cool. I still get tense when I think about pounding the button to cut the rope as Del Lago sinks to the bottom of the lake, and just when I thought I had finished. I remember the first time that happened, I bout shit my pants. But that was nothing compared to the time I was idly shooting bass in the lake and WHAM Del Lago snapped me right off the F-ing dock! That didn’t happen to me on the cube (i didn’t sit there shooting fish for 5 minutes) version but I’m assuming it was there as well.
October 4th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
This is the first infendo editorial in a long time that I could read without hearing sucking and slurping sounds. Is that too graphic.
Great post Andrew. If you really want to get pissed, play Harry Potter 5 on 360/PS3/PS2 and then play it on Wii.
October 5th, 2007 at 7:35 pm
Nicely written.
Tired arm… why does Wii Boogie come to mind. *LOL*