Support NeoGAF

[Alx]

Yeah I'd only seen in from the spraypaint onwards, but the stuff at the start suggests you can use it as a pointer too.
I've no idea how it knows which direction it's pointing relative to the screen.

It doesn't know the pointing per se, but it knows the absolute position of the ball (with the camera) and the inclination of the wand (with internal sensors), so it can deduce its pointing direction relative to the camera (juste like for the wii, it cannot know where the screen is, unless you tell it through a calibration procedure).

 

[Graphics Horse]

It doesn't know the pointing per se, but it knows the absolute position of the ball (with the camera) and the inclination of the wand (with internal sensors), so it can deduce its pointing direction relative to the camera (juste like for the wii, it cannot know where the screen is, unless you tell it through a calibration procedure).

That's the thing though, the Motion+ can be easily recalibrated by aiming it within range of the sensor bar, but the Sony one would need something else to avoid building up inaccuracies on the upwards axis.
It could be that the camera sees more than a simple circle, and can tell how it's aimed just by looking at it.

 

[TTP]

Anyway now that I think about it, you could absolutely use the wand by pointing toward the camera, ball forward. It's just a change of coordinates.

And yes there are sensors inside the wand for motion measurement, that's how the 1:1 is made possible. The ball only allows to detect the "line of sight" between the wand and the camera, and maybe the distance. Everything else is measured by internal sensors.

Not the distance apparently.

Going by what the patent says, the distance between the ball and PS Eye is measured via ultra sound. Ultra sound is also used to determine distance between the two balls (looks like every dildo has an ultra sound "mic"). This is how the bow demo was possible I think. Even if one of the balls (the one "flexing the cord") was kinda hidden to the camera, the eye could still "hear" its distance.

Luckily, I don't have dogs. :lol

 

[cakefoo]

The Ultrasound Dildo Motion Controller will be a hit with moms and moms-to-be.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

Not the distance apparently.

Going by what the patent says, the distance between the ball and PS Eye is measured via ultra sound. Ultra sound is also used to determine distance between the two balls (looks like every dildo has an ultra sound "mic"). This is how the bow demo was possible I think. Even if one of the balls (the one "flexing the cord") was kinda hidden to the camera, the eye could still "hear" its distance.

Luckily, I don't have dogs. :lol

As per demos in the past, the distance between the ball and the PSEye can be further determined by the software tracking the relative perceived size of the ball as it moves through space. Since the size of the ball will be a known quantity, the measurement of it's perceived size vs. it's actual size can be used to measure it's place in 3D space. In motion, as the ball appears to get bigger, it is determined to be getting closer, as the ball is getting smaller, it is determined to be moving away from the camera.

So actually, there is likely some data redundancy here for helping to determine depth with precision. The addition of sonar-type measurement probably does a lot to help with accuracy, especially from greater distances from the camera.

 

[gofreak]

There's generally a lot of redundancy and overlap in the data provided by different sources here. I guess it mashes it all up to come up with the most accurate 'answer' for xyz position/rotation etc.

That's the thing though, the Motion+ can be easily recalibrated by aiming it within range of the sensor bar, but the Sony one would need something else to avoid building up inaccuracies on the upwards axis.
It could be that the camera sees more than a simple circle, and can tell how it's aimed just by looking at it.

One thing in the patent was that the 'bulb' may have array of leds inside that create known variations in the appearance of the surface of the bulb, which might help (alongside the internal sensors) in determining the 'pointing' angle of the controller (e.g. if rotated in one way you'll see more of the bulb with certain surface detail than if rotated in a different way). I'm not sure if the implementation they're going to use will have this, but it's a possibility.

On a different note, a short comment from someone at SCE Canada about their motion control strategy:

http://www.niagarafallsreview.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1601216

"Our strategy will be to build the (motion controller) functionality into our high-definition lineup of software, in addition to making games specifically for the device. It will ensure that we don't have just an abundance of mini-game collections."

Dunno how much a guy at SCE Canada would actually know about their strategy, but anyway..

 

[PjotrStroganov]

There's generally a lot of redundancy and overlap in the data provided by different sources here. I guess it mashes it all up to come up with the most accurate 'answer' for xyz position/rotation etc.



One thing in the patent was that the 'bulb' may have array of leds inside that create known variations in the appearance of the surface of the bulb, which might help (alongside the internal sensors) in determining the 'pointing' angle of the controller (e.g. if rotated in one way you'll see more of the bulb with certain surface detail than if rotated in a different way). I'm not sure if the implementation they're going to use will have this, but it's a possibility.

On a different note, a short comment from someone at SCE Canada about their motion control strategy:

http://www.niagarafallsreview.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1601216



Dunno how much a guy at SCE Canada would actually know about their strategy, but anyway..

Thought of that too. And I guess the internal sensors would be responsible for the super precision, constantly error correcting the signal.

 

[Graphics Horse]

One thing in the patent was that the 'bulb' may have array of leds inside that create known variations in the appearance of the surface of the bulb, which might help (alongside the internal sensors) in determining the 'pointing' angle of the controller (e.g. if rotated in one way you'll see more of the bulb with certain surface detail than if rotated in a different way). I'm not sure if the implementation they're going to use will have this, but it's a possibility.
.

Interesting, just thought about this and an electronic compass, or possibly three of them, might be a good way to do it, if they're responsive enough.
You'd only need to calibrate it when you set the system up for the first time, or when you move it.

Combine measurements of gravity with magnetic north, and you can read the exact angle in 3 dimensions, with the camera left mostly for 3D positioning.

 

[gofreak]

Thought of that too. And I guess the internal sensors would be responsible for the super precision, constantly error correcting the signal.

Relying wholly on internal sensors, or at least the ones likely to be used, us what produces errors that accumulate..it's the presense of some external observer (like a camera) that lets you avoid that. If you have both an external and internal observer they can reinforce each other. I guess the camera has some way to observe pointing angle, the internal sensors obviously has its way of measuring that, and though neither might be perfect, they can help each other come to a more accurate answer.

What was demoed at the conference seemed to suggest they had 'pointing angle' sorted though, possibly most obvious with the flashlight part of the demo. He was changing the pointing angle of that thing quite significantly over more than a few seconds (which would be long enough for significant errors to show if they were present), the flashlight seemed to match the angle the wand was pointing at pretty perfectly throughout as far as I can see. Marks specifically went out of his way to say it was 'true 3D pointing" which tracked the movement and angle of pointing.

 

[Raist]

Thought of that too. And I guess the internal sensors would be responsible for the super precision, constantly error correcting the signal.

Nah, it's the other way around. It's the camera and microphones that constantly correct the signal since they almost always provide a reference point, not the accelerators/gyros.

 

[Graphics Horse]

Nah, it's the other way around. It's the camera and microphones that constantly correct the signal since they almost always provide a reference point, not the accelerators/gyros.

It's the reference point of angle, rather than position, which isn't clear how it's done.
Are there any downsides to piezoelectric compasses?

 

[PjotrStroganov]

Figures yeah.

 

[bengraven]

This is seriously the coolest thing I've ever seen in my entire life.

 

[Raist]

It's the reference point of angle, rather than position, which isn't clear how it's done.
Are there any downsides to piezoelectric compasses?

What do you mean, reference point of angle? Is that, holding the wand verticaly vs horizontaly ?

 

[gofreak]

What do you mean, reference point of angle? Is that, holding the wand verticaly vs horizontaly ?

He's talking about it not being clear how the camera is observing at what angle the wand is pointing at, as opposed to the wands x/y position.

And no, it's not totally clear. There's some clues from the patent about how they might be doing it, but it wasn't immediately obvious from the stage demo. But whatever they're doing, however they're doing it, it does seem to work as there was accurate 3D pointing going on in a continuous way for long enough to see errors if it wasn't working properly.

 

[Raist]

He's talking about it not being clear how the camera is observing at what angle the wand is pointing at, as opposed to the wands x/y position.

And no, it's not totally clear. There's some clues from the patent about how they might be doing it, but it wasn't immediately obvious from the stage demo. But whatever they're doing, however they're doing it, it does seem to work as there was accurate 3D pointing going on in a continuous way for long enough to see errors if it wasn't working properly.

Yeah so again, just to make it clear, let's take an example.

You hold the wand vertically, and go to a horizontal position, pointing with a 45° angle to the left and towards the screen (in the x,z plane) for instance. Something like that?

 

[Graphics Horse]

Yeah so again, just to make it clear, let's take an example.

You hold the wand vertically, and go to a horizontal position, pointing with a 45° angle to the left and towards the screen (in the x,z plane) for instance. Something like that?

Yep, the other two axes are easy as the accellerometers will detect gravitational pull, but the x,z plane can't be done that way.
I'm not totally sure I get your example, so imagine holding your arm out and holding the stick in any way you choose, then walking around the stick so it rotates but doesn't move.

 

[UntoldDreams]

He's talking about it not being clear how the camera is observing at what angle the wand is pointing at, as opposed to the wands x/y position.

And no, it's not totally clear. There's some clues from the patent about how they might be doing it, but it wasn't immediately obvious from the stage demo. But whatever they're doing, however they're doing it, it does seem to work as there was accurate 3D pointing going on in a continuous way for long enough to see errors if it wasn't working properly.

I thought we already knew the SIXAXIS was built with gyroscopes which are accurate to millimeters to handle rotation. It would have to be calibrated to the TV end to end.

 

[gofreak]

I thought we already knew the SIXAXIS was built with gyroscopes which are accurate to millimeters to handle rotation. It would have to be calibrated to the TV end to end.

Well, the problem we were discussing was that internal sensors usually have errors that build up over periods of continuous motion, such that they need to reset or recalibrate every couple of seconds.

So we were pondering how the camera might detect rotation of the wand to help correct and reinforce confidence in the data reported by the internal sensors. There's a number of possibilities but we won't be able to say for sure until Sony talk more about it or we get our hands on it. I'm reasonably confident in saying whatever solution they have 'works' based on the demos, but knowing how is always nice

 

[Kinitari]

Alright, for a change of subject -

Would it be possible for a game to use these controllers without taking away too much from the game resources? Basically, I would love to play something along the lines of Oblivion with this, without having to have it look like a Wii game. What are the chances of my dream being realized?

 

[gofreak]

For the wand stuff alone I would guess the resource usage is very tiny, I remember Richard Marks talking about how even a tiny percentage of Cell would let them do a huge amount more in a real application than they could do on PS2 with more compute-intensive things like head tracking - and bear in mind that the image processing required for the tracking they're doing here is likely far far simpler than head tracking. They could probably use that reserved SPU for this stuff too.

I don't think you need worry about PS3 games starting to look like Wii games

 

[Raistlin]

As per demos in the past, the distance between the ball and the PSEye can be further determined by the software tracking the relative perceived size of the ball as it moves through space. Since the size of the ball will be a known quantity, the measurement of it's perceived size vs. it's actual size can be used to measure it's place in 3D space. In motion, as the ball appears to get bigger, it is determined to be getting closer, as the ball is getting smaller, it is determined to be moving away from the camera.

So actually, there is likely some data redundancy here for helping to determine depth with precision. The addition of sonar-type measurement probably does a lot to help with accuracy, especially from greater distances from the camera.

Considering the resolution of the camera, I'm not sure the data would be particularly useful as a redundancy for precision depth calculations.

Dunno how much a guy at SCE Canada would actually know about their strategy, but anyway..

If he's working on SW for it, he'd have at least a partial view of the strategy.

 

[Raist]

Yep, the other two axes are easy as the accellerometers will detect gravitational pull, but the x,z plane can't be done that way.
I'm not totally sure I get your example, so imagine holding your arm out and holding the stick in any way you choose, then walking around the stick so it rotates but doesn't move.

Warning, tl;dr post incoming.

Here's my take on it (not necessarily your example, but what looks to be possible and how it could work).

It's clear that the ball helps track the movements and position in the x,y plane. It's a no-brainer and been clearly shown in the patents anyway. Now, could depth be tracked (at least partially) by the camera as well? The perceived size vs it's "real size" (which could be coded in the software) might help track the position in the z plane. If the ball has a diameter of 5cm IRL, maybe the camera can measure its perceived size. Now I'm not sure the resolution of the camera would be enough to track subtle movements, but it might help to give some general reference points and correct errors.

Some people mentionned that the glowing ball might use an array of leds. Let's say that the PSeye sees it as a perfect circle (again, with a known size) if you hold the wand vertically. If you start pointing at the screen (leaning forward), it will look like an ellipse. This could also help in determining the relative position of the wand. Same stuff in case of your example. But yeah this is just speculation because we don't know if there really is an array of leds in there, and its shape.

Simple rotations or angles can be tracked by the gyros. If the ball's position does not change at all, the camera won't help. However, it's a really simple movement with not many variables and since the position (in 3D space) of the controller does not change, the gyro's precision might be more than enough.

Now if you do a more complex movement in 3D space, the gyros might not be accurate enough and errors will accumulate over time (which is WMP's biggest problem if you don't use the pointer function). The big advantage here is that the light ball permanently helps as a reference point as long as it is not hidden to the PSeye.
Let's say you hold the wand vertically, and move it to point directly towards the screen so its position in the x plane doesn't change one bit. If you combine the data from the gyro (which might be a little inaccurate) with the change in the y plane, you have both start and end points with the camera, plus the rotation/speed from the gyros. If the camera cannot track the z position at all, the combination of both the gyros and the camera should work. Because you have a start point, an end point, and the movement which has been used to get from one to another. So I imagine the exact z position can be deduced from both sets of data. It all relies on calculations however, and not an absolute detection of the z position, which can not be determined either by the camera or the gyros.

That's where the ultrasonic stuff kicks in (if it's used. They didnt mention it at all in the demo, but since it was described in the patent filing I doubt they took it out). Used alone, it should be enough to determine the z position. That said, I'm not sure a small change could be picked up by the microphones. But again, if you combine this with the stuff I've mentionned above, it could allow a great precision.
Now there's a last point with that ultrasonic stuff. Since the PSeye has an array of mics, it might even help to track more than just the z position. Much like the pointing function of the wiimote. The nature of the triangle formed by the 2 leds and the wiimote camera can be used to determine the position in all three planes.
Now the spacing between the mics is rather small, and the use of sound should be less precise and more prone to artifcats than the IR leds/camera used for the Wii. So I'm not sure it does work like this for the Sonywand.

All in all, this controller uses a large variety of devices which could provide overlapping data, and that's why it looks so precise IMO.

 

[loosus]

All I have to say is that it looks like Sony is going to end up doing Zelda better than Nintendo is. That demo by Sony is pretty much exactly how Zelda should've ended up being.

 

[gkryhewy]

All I have to say is that it looks like Sony is going to end up doing Zelda better than Nintendo is. That demo by Sony is pretty much exactly how Zelda should've ended up being.

jesus christ, what a thread :lol

 

[Graphics Horse]

Simple rotations or angles can be tracked by the gyros. If the ball's position does not change at all, the camera won't help. However, it's a really simple movement with not many variables and since the position (in 3D space) of the controller does not change, the gyro's precision might be more than enough.

This is fine, but lets say you pick up the the controller and hold it vertically, how does the ps3 know which side the controller's face buttons are on? It could be the ultrasound I guess, and I'm not really sure how quickly gyro errors become a problem.

 

[gofreak]

Considering the resolution of the camera, I'm not sure the data would be particularly useful as a redundancy for precision depth calculations.

To a certain depth it could be used.

Although I don't see why you would if using ultrasonics that could always provide you with an accurate measurement.

Of course you can use such techniques for guesstimating the depth of other objects in a scene, but when talking about the wands, I don't see much need for a 'visual backup' if ultrasonic emitters/detectors are there.

 

[Raistlin]

That's where the ultrasonic stuff kicks in (if it's used. They didnt mention it at all in the demo, but since it was described in the patent filing I doubt they took it out). Used alone, it should be enough to determine the z position. That said, I'm not sure a small change could be picked up by the microphones.

Small changes should have no issue being picked up by the microphone. There's nothing special about the mic in this regard, other then supporting a high enough frequency. All that's needed for precision distance measurements is a sufficient sampling rate so the TOA is accurate enough.

To a certain depth it could be used.

Although I don't see why you would if using ultrasonics that could always provide you with an accurate measurement.

Of course you can use such techniques for guesstimating the depth of other objects in a scene, but when talking about the wands, I don't see much need for a 'visual backup' if ultrasonic emitters/detectors are there.

Agreed. I should have mentioned that I don't think it's actually needed ... the sonar techniques should be more than sufficient.

 

[Raist]

This is fine, but lets say you pick up the the controller and hold it vertically, how does the ps3 know which side the controller's face buttons are on? It could be the ultrasound I guess, and I'm not really sure how quickly gyro errors become a problem.

Yeah, I guess the ultrasonic stuff should help. If there really is a LED pattern inside the sphere, it could help as well.
As for errors, yeah I don't know how fast/bad it accumulates.

Small changes should have no issue being picked up by the microphone. There's nothing special about the mic in this regard, other then supporting a high enough frequency. All that's needed for precision distance measurements is a sufficient sampling rate so the TOA is accurate enough, and a high enough frequency for the actual audio (the physical size of the wave directly impacts range resolution).

Agreed. I should have mentioned that I don't think it's actually needed ... the sonar techniques should be more than sufficient.

Yeah well I don't really know. It's all relative I guess. But if you stand 3 meters away from the PSeye, are the microphones sensitive enough to pick up a 1 cm difference? No idea. We'd have to ask bats how precise ultrasounds can be

And yeah, if the camera can track it to a certain point as well, it's maybe not really required. However, the more reference points/data you have, the more precise you will be.
I think it's the main strenght of this controller. A lot of reference points and overlapping data.

 

[Wollan]

Looking at the video again, a killer launch title would be LittleBigPlanet.

You size the objects quickly with your motes, you paint textures on your levels, you cut objects, you sculpt 3D clay objects... etc. Then you add gameplay elements like stretching stuff and what not.

 

[ImNotLikeThem]

Watching that again, I think some people are getting a completely wrong idea about the FPS section. It's kind of hard to describe very well, but it's not working the way some people want it to be, and itsn't really doing anything that the Wii remote couldn't be doing either.

Basically, what is happening is the same thing that is happening in any other part of the little room demo, but more specifically the flashlight part. He can move freely around the room pointing at different things, at different angles, but the camera is always at the back of the room, so that the only thing on screen moving is the wand/racket/flashlight/etc. When they switch to the "fps" mode, the camera is just placed at the back of the gun instead. Notice he didn't turn all the way around.
An fps would not work like that, because he is physically limited to the space directly in front of the camera, and wouldn't be able to walk around the level without falling back on the Wii remote style curser "push" camera. To aim and move, he has to physically be moving around the room to get the camera to track like that, and have the cursor stay centered in the screen during the FPS parts.

 

[Wollan]

I don't think anyone here misunderstood that part.

Actually, people have been discussing that one of the Wiimote's flaws is a lack of a second analog (which would ideally be used for fps positioning, full turn). The Sonymote has an analog stick on the remote itself seemingly which would be the answer to the wiimote/fps problem.

In a fps game, you would use the pointer functionality for on-screen/cone precision while you would otherwise move around like with any dual stick gamepad.

 

[sykoex]

Any chance of them adding a speaker to the remote? (preferably of higher quality than Wiimote's tinny ones)

As shown by Silent Hill: Shattered Memories, there's some really cool applications for that.

 

[gofreak]

Yeah I don't think anyone was suggesting 'move the wand to move around'. Until you have a holodeck or something where you can walk around 'on the spot' without actually needing a great amount of physical space, an analog stick or something will always be more practical (though I suppose you could treat another wand as a giant analog stick if you really wanted).

 

[Wollan]

I haven't seen any hint of that (speaker that is).

Yeah I don't think anyone was suggesting 'move the wand to move around'. Until you have a holodeck or something where you can walk around 'on the spot' without actually needing a great amount of physical space, an analog stick or something will always be more practical (though I suppose you could treat another wand as a giant analog stick if you really wanted).

That's the Wiimote's problem though.
The remote is the 'giant analog stick' (this is how current Wii fps games work). It just doesn't work as well people originally hoped (you're pushing the screen around), gamepad players today would slaughter them due to the speed at which they move at.

The answer (which I and many others have suggested for a couple of years now) is by having a second analog. You would then use the remote for just fine aiming.

You can also have dual-wield aiming since you would be using 2x Sonymotes.

 

[Kapsama]

So I know I might be a little late in saying this, but to this day I'm not aware of any 3rd party devs taking sufficient advantage of the Wii-mote in a innovative way, so why in Earth is Sony so eager to send their new toy to devs?

 

[Raist]

So I know I might be a little late in saying this, but to this day I'm not aware of any 3rd party devs taking sufficient advantage of the Wii-mote in a innovative way, so why in Earth is Sony so eager to send their new toy to devs?

Because the original Wiimote had a very limited potential, maybe.

 

[SSJ1Goku]

Any chance of them adding a speaker to the remote? (preferably of higher quality than Wiimote's tinny ones)

As shown by Silent Hill: Shattered Memories, there's some really cool applications for that.

Could you name off some games or game ideas that the E-motion could use it for?

 

[sykoex]

Could you name off some games or game ideas that the E-motion could use it for?

MGS6 Codec calls?

While we're at it, why not stick a mic in there for multiplayer.

 

[Raist]

MGS6 Codec calls?

I don't see the advantage over using a BT headset.

 

[Kinitari]

Could you name off some games or game ideas that the E-motion could use it for?

A game where you wield a talking sword with sharp wit and hilarious commentary.

 

[sykoex]

I don't see the advantage over using a BT headset.

Less convenience, you need to pair it. With a speaker you're using the thing you already have in your hand.

 

[SSJ1Goku]

A game where you wield a talking sword with sharp wit and hilarious commentary.

:lol This idea actually kind of sold me on it

 

[Concept17]

I were impressed by the Sony REMote.

If it's used for Gamers Game, I will support it. If it's just for casual thing...it's without me.
I have the same opinion about the natal.


Games for Gamers = YEAH
CAsual Game like nintendo = Oh NOES !

Pretty much. MS seemed to just want to create casual/family games with natal, whereas ut seems Sony want to incorporate it into both casual and more traditional games... which imo is the winning formula.

Lets just hope they can pull it off.

 

[Rocket Punch]

I don't think anyone here misunderstood that part.

Actually, people have been discussing that one of the Wiimote's flaws is a lack of a second analog (which would ideally be used for fps positioning, full turn). The Sonymote has an analog stick on the remote itself seemingly which would be the answer to the wiimote/fps problem.

In a fps game, you would use the pointer functionality for on-screen/cone precision while you would otherwise move around like with any dual stick gamepad.

So, if I understand correctly the sonymote, assuming it has 2 analog sticks (one in each wand) would allow for free look/turn and character movement much like the dualshock scheme for fps. But what would the pointer function of the wands be good for then? For centering your aim? You don't need a waggle like controller for this type of set up. It's basically reverting back to the dualshock controller.

If you argue that the pointer would be to maintain the reticule on a target while turning with the analog stick don't you think that would feel unnatural? You don't shoot while turning, after all. At least not in real life. It would be at least disconcerting, if not totally unrealistic. You also lose button access since you would only have access to a trigger button since your thumb would be busy turning your character with the analog stick.

What you perceive as a flaw is really just the natural limitation that humans have in that we need to look (forward ahead) at what we are shooting and turn accordingly as required.

 

[Kapsama]

I don't see the advantage over using a BT headset.

So that your dirty friends can handle an easily cleaned remote rather than a bluetooth headset?

 

[Raistlin]

Yeah well I don't really know. It's all relative I guess. But if you stand 3 meters away from the PSeye, are the microphones sensitive enough to pick up a 1 cm difference? No idea. We'd have to ask bats how precise ultrasounds can be

I'd have to look into the specifics for acoustic systems, but let's just say I have some experience in general ranging theory and application ;-)

Since we are talking about using this for very small absolute ranges, the pulse duration can quite short and still produce the needed acoustic energy. With that short pulsewidth comes high range resolution.

And yeah, if the camera can track it to a certain point as well, it's maybe not really required. However, the more reference points/data you have, the more precise you will be.
I think it's the main strenght of this controller. A lot of reference points and overlapping data.

In general, I agree. I just think that in the case of ranging specifically, it is not needed. Sonar will produce FAR more resolution than a camera every could, and since it is producing absolute data points (wand is a Tx, PSeye is Rx), not relative ones like gyros and accelerometers, there are no error accumulation considerations.

 

[Wollan]

So, if I understand correctly the sonymote, assuming it has 2 analog sticks (one in each wand) would allow for free look/turn and character movement as in the double shock scheme for fps, then what would the pointer function of the wands be good for then? For centering your aim?

Imagine that the crosshair is loose on the screen (to be controlled by pointer functionality) while the image frame is being moved by the second analog stick.

You also lose button access since you would only have access to a trigger button since your thumb would be busy turning your character with the analog stick.

You always have your thumb(s) on the stick(s) in any gamepad fps game. You quickly remove them to press the reload button or whatever function. This is standard and works.

 

[Kinitari]

So, if I understand correctly the sonymote, assuming it has 2 analog sticks (one in each wand) would allow for free look/turn and character movement much like the dualshock scheme for fps. But what would the pointer function of the wands be good for then? For centering your aim? You don't need a waggle like controller for this type of set up. It's basically reverting back to the dualshock controller.

If you argue that the pointer would be to maintain the reticule on a target while turning with the analog stick don't you think that would feel unnatural? You don't shoot while turning, afterall. At least not in real life. It would be at least disconcerting, if not totally unrealistic. You also lose button access since you would only have access to a trigger button since your thumb would be busy turning your character with the analog stick.

What you perceive as a flaw is really just the natural limitation that humans have in what we need to look (forward ahead) at what we are shooting and turn accordingly as required.

You could use a combination - 1 stick for turning with analog the other for point and shooting. Or if you wanted, use both analogs and skip the point and shooting all together.

I shoot while turning all the time, sometimes you gotta shoot on the run!

Every shooting game I've played in... I don't remember how long uses triggers for shooting. For precisely this reason.

 

[fortified_concept]

Because the original Wiimote had a very limited potential, maybe.

Actually that wasn't wiimote's real problem. It's that the devs couldn't find anything innovative to do with it. Waggle moves just replaced button pushing in 99% of the non casual games. Noone in this thread or the Natal thread seems to be able to explain how that'll change with the two new devices.

Having said that, Natal looks like it's the epitome of casual gaming, not even waggle can reach it. It's like an Eye Toy with better movement detection which lacks buttons and sticks which means that it can be used only for party and tamagochi-type games.

I have absolutely no faith in these two. Not only they'll be used exclusively for casual gaming but they'll have limited adoption because they're add-ons. And I'm fine with it.